Hot Markets, Momentum and Investor Sentiment in UK Acquisitions
16 Pages Posted: 27 Jan 2004
Date Written: January 2004
Abstract
We examine the links between hot markets and momentum in explaining merger waves using a sample of 881 UK acquisitions from 1985 to 2000. We find evidence of short run positive abnormal returns (or merger momentum) in both hot and cold markets. We find evidence of long run reversal. The post acquisition abnormal returns are negative over three years for the whole sample. We also find an interesting pattern in the long run reversal. Mergers announced in hot markets have higher announcement period abnormal returns than mergers announced in cold markets consistent with momentum. Over a one year horizon there is a reversal in the abnormal returns consistent with investor sentiment: mergers announced in hot markets have lower negative returns than mergers announced in cold markets. Interestingly, the abnormal returns over three years show a further reversal and are higher for mergers announced in hot markets than for those announced in cold markets.
Keywords: Irrational investors, Long-run underperformance
JEL Classification: G34
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?
Recommended Papers
-
Why Has IPO Underpricing Changed Over Time?
By Tim Loughran and Jay R. Ritter
-
Why Has IPO Underpricing Changed Over Time?
By Tim Loughran and Jay R. Ritter
-
A Review of IPO Activity, Pricing and Allocations
By Jay R. Ritter and Ivo Welch
-
A Review of IPO Activity, Pricing, and Allocations
By Ivo Welch and Jay R. Ritter
-
Why Don't Issuers Get Upset About Leaving Money on the Table in Ipos?
By Tim Loughran and Jay R. Ritter
-
Underpricing and Entrepreneurial Wealth Losses in Ipos: Theory and Evidence
-
Common Stock Offerings Across the Business Cycle: Theory and Evidence
By Hyuk Choe, Ronald W. Masulis, ...
-
IPO Market Cycles: Bubbles or Sequential Learning?
By Michelle Lowry and G. William Schwert
-
IPO Market Cycles: Bubbles or Sequential Learning?
By Michelle Lowry and G. William Schwert