Ross's Corporate Finance (11th Edition): Notes — Part VIII: Special Topics in Corporate Finance — Chapter 29: Mergers and Acquisitions

• Capital Structure Adjustment and Share Repurchases Target firms often issue bonds to pay dividends—a transaction known as leveraged recapitalization. A share repurchase refers to using proceeds from debt issuance to buy back shares. Both transactions help deter takeovers in several ways. First, the increased debt generates a larger tax shield, thereby raising the stock price. A higher stock price reduces the target’s attractiveness to bidders. However, this stock-price increase presupposes that the firm’s pre-recapitalization debt level was below its optimal level; thus, leveraged recapitalization is not suitable for all target firms. Consultants emphasize that low-leverage firms with stable cash flows are the “ideal prey” for acquisitions. Second, as part of the capital restructuring, management issues new securities, thereby increasing its voting control prior to any potential acquisition—making hostile takeovers more difficult. Third, firms appearing on their balance sheets to hold substantial cash reserves are often perceived as highly attractive takeover targets. As part of the recapitalization, the target may distribute cash as dividends or repurchase shares, thereby reducing its appeal as a takeover candidate. • Exclusive Self-Tender Offers Exclusive self-tender offers stand in contrast to target-tender offers. In an exclusive self-tender offer, the firm makes a tender offer to purchase a specified number of its own shares—not from target shareholders, but from other shareholders. • Asset Restructuring To alter its capital structure, a firm may also sell existing assets or acquire new ones to avoid takeover. Target firms typically divest—or spin off—assets for two main reasons. First, the target may hold a conglomerate of diverse business lines whose combined operation is inefficient. Separating these divisions into distinct entities may enhance overall value. Post-divestiture, the firm’s stock price may rise, thereby diminishing its attractiveness to bidders. Second, the bidder may be interested only in a specific segment of the target. By selling that division, the target can reduce the bidder’s interest. Although this strategy may help avoid acquisition, it harms target shareholders’ interests if that division is more valuable to the target than to the buyer. Experts commonly refer to such a sale as either a “crown jewel” or a “scorched-earth” strategy. While some target firms divest assets, others acquire new ones—for two principal reasons. First, the bidder may closely resemble the target. Adding unrelated businesses may therefore reduce the target’s appeal. Yet because the bidder could simply resell those newly acquired businesses, purchasing new assets may not constitute an effective defensive tactic. Second, antitrust laws prohibit mergers intended to reduce competition. A target might acquire another firm and anticipate that—if the bidder were to acquire that newly acquired division—it would violate antitrust statutes. Nevertheless, this strategy is not guaranteed to succeed, since bidders can disclose in filings submitted to the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) their intention to divest unrelated businesses. 29.9 Do Mergers Create Value? Event studies—a methodology used to estimate abnormal stock returns around the announcement date of a merger (including the day of announcement and several days before and after). Abnormal stock returns are typically defined as the difference between the actual return on a given stock and the return on a market index or a matched control group of stocks.

Understanding Corporate M&A in One Minute

Structural design refers to the process by which the buyer or seller reorganizes the target enterprise across dimensions—including assets, finance, taxation, personnel, and law—to craft a more market-acceptable 'product' prior to final closing. Why is structural design necessary in corporate M&A? This necessity stems from the intrinsic nature of M&A transactions. Unlike commodity trading or fund lending—which generally involve standardized attributes—in which parties need only negotiate key terms such as specifications, quantities, prices or amounts, interest rates, and maturities—enterprises are not standardized products but dynamic, open systems. Although decades of large-scale M&A activity have yielded accumulated experience—e.g., empirical methodologies in financial valuation, asset appraisal, and tax assessment—the quantifiability and precision of M&A transactions still leave considerable ambiguity. Structural design aims to clarify this ambiguous space as much as possible, helping both parties identify a mutually acceptable equilibrium of interests. Setting objectives means outlining the profile of the intended acquisition target—for example, its industry, asset size, production capacity, technological capability, and market share. Based on these clearly defined objectives, one conducts market searches to identify potential acquisition candidates and performs preliminary comparisons among viable options.

H.B. Fuller Rejects Ancora’s Latest Acquisition Bid, Plans to Consider Selling Noncore Businesses

Oct 19, 2026

H.B. Fuller rejected Ancora's $1.2-1.4 billion offer for its building adhesives business, citing undervaluation. The company now plans to review and potentially separate noncore segments less integral to its strategy.

WSJ

2026-04-08

H.B. Fuller CEO Purchases $295,103.60 in Stock

2026-04-10

H.B. Fuller President Acquires Additional 14% Stake

2026-04-12

H.B. Fuller Receives Moderate Buy Consensus from Analysts

2026-04-12

Does H.B. Fuller (FUL) CEO Share Buying Clarify or Complicate Its Margin-Focused Investment Narrative?

2026-04-14

H.B. Fuller VP Receives Phantom Units and Discloses Option, RSU Holdings