Читать книгу Applied Mergers and Acquisitions - Robert F. Bruner - Страница 68

The point of departure in a study of M&A activity is to look at the aggregate activity over the long term: the past 100 years. There are two ways to consider deal activity: in terms of the number of transactions, and in terms of their aggregate dollar value. A focus on the number of transactions, in effect, gives equal weight to all deals—this is an implicit measure of breadth of M&A activity in the United States. Conversely, a focus on the dollar value of all transactions helps to distinguish those episodes dominated by large deals—this might be regarded to be a measure of depth or materiality of sizable deals.

Exhibit 4.1 presents the history of M&A activity in terms of number of deals. Exhibit 4.2 gives M&A activity in terms of constant dollar value.¹ In both exhibits, the data are presented on natural and logarithmic scales—the log scales help to highlight those periods when M&A activity jumped sharply in percentage terms, such as 1895 to 1900 and 1965 to 1970. Exhibit 4.3 considers M&A activity relative to the size of the U.S. economy—this helps distinguish the materiality of successive periods of activity. Exhibit 4.4 presents some notes for the reader on the sources for the data in the graphs.

The first important insight from these graphs is that M&A activity reveals evidence of five periods of heightened merger activity; hereafter, I will call these “waves.” The appearance of waves is not isolated to the United States. A study of M&A activity in the United Kingdom also shows wavelike behavior (see Town (1992) and Resende (1999)). A study by Shugart and Tollison (1984) tested two of the time series—the Nelson and Federal Trade Commission (FTC) series—and concluded that merger activity does not deviate from a random walk—that these waves display no regularity in period or amplitude. Indeed, visually, Exhibits 4.1 to 4.3 lend credence to the irregularity of the waves. Brealey and Myers (1996) have cited the appearance of M&A waves as one of the 10 most important unresolved questions in financial economics. “What we need is a general hypothesis to explain merger waves. For example, everybody seemed to be merging in 1995 and nobody 5 years earlier. Why? … We need better theories to help explain these ‘bubbles’ of financial activity.”² The frustration of Brealey and Myers may be explained in part by the apparent uniqueness of each wave.

EXHIBIT 4.1 Number of U.S. M&A Transactions per Year on Natural Scale and Logarithmic Scale

See Exhibit 4.4 for sources.

EXHIBIT 4.2 Dollar Volume of U.S. M&A Transactions per Year on Natural Scale and Logarithmic Scale

See Exhibit 4.4 for sources.

EXHIBIT 4.3 Dollar Volume of U.S. M&A Activity per Year as a Percentage of U.S. Gross

National Product

Based on constant U.S. dollars, 1996.

See Exhibit 4.4 for sources.