畢業(yè)論文外文翻譯-我國企業(yè)跨國并購財(cái)務(wù)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)分析及防范—以中國移動(dòng)并購巴科泰爾為例

1、我國企業(yè)跨國并購財(cái)務(wù)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)分析及防范一以中國移動(dòng)并購巴科泰爾為例外文翻譯cross-border mergers and acquisitions:the european-us experience1 factors motivating cross-border acquisitionsin her extensive discussion of the merger and acquisition process mcdonagh bengtsson (1990) proposes that the following factors motivate many companies to

2、acquire foreign firms: the desire to spread products and diversify risks geographically; to gain back-up products; to exploit synergies; and to attain economies of scale however, she cautions that workforce problems, poor facilities, as well as social and technological differences may expose the acq

3、uiring company to new risks. other studies in the area of cross-border acquisitions attribute the pattern of acquisitions to several competing factors, both favorable and unfavorable. the discussion that follows surveys a sampling of these factors, examining first the favorable acquisition variables

4、 (i.e. variables that appear to influence the finrts concerned with cross-border deals), then the unfavorable ones. we pay particular attention to those factors more directly related to the countries under study.1 favorable acquisition factorsalthough there are a number of factors that favor acquisi

5、tion activity, we focus on those that seem to affect cross-border acquisitions between the us and the eu these factors include exchange rates, diversification, and economic conditions in the home country, as well as technology and human resources-1 1 1 exchange ratescurrent and forecasted future exc

6、hange rates affect the home cuitency equivalent of acquisition prices, as well as the present value of future cash flows accruing to the acquired firm; therefore, the dominant effect in any particular case is ultimately an empirical question. existing studies, predictably, arrive at different conclu

7、sions concerning the role of exchange rates. for example, froot and stein (1991) propose that, while there is a relationship between the exchange rates and acquisition activity, there is no evidence that a change in the exchange rate improves the position of foreign acquirers relative to their us co

8、unterparts they contend that when the dollar depreciates, the us becomes a cheaper place for any firm to do business foreign or domestic in addition, they downplay the relationship between foreign acquisitions and exchange rates, arguing that improved capital mobility leads to equalized, risk-adjust

9、ed returns on international investments. goldberg (1993) reaches different conclusions. she finds that a depreciated us dollar reduces fdi in american businesses. she also contends that the reverse holds true, that is, if the dollar is strong, one observes an increase in foreign acquisition of us fi

10、rms and a downward trend in us acquisitions of foreign firms. however, harris and ravenscraft (1991) present empirical evidence that is in contrast togoldberg's findings. in particular, they contend that a depreciated dollar increases the number of foreign acquisitions of us firms-1.1.2. diversi

11、ficationthis argument is based on the empirical observation that the covariance of returns across different economies, even within the same industries, is likely to be smaller than within a single economy. it follows that the prospective acquiring company must first decide on its desired levels of r

12、isk and return. only then should it attempt to identify countries, industries, and specific firms that fall within its risk class. in addition, by acquiring ongoing foreign concerns, companies may be able to circumvent tariff and non-tariff barriers, thereby improving their risk-return tradeoff by l

13、owering the level of unsystematic risk.71.1.3. economic conditions in the home countryfavorable cyclical conditions in the acquiring firm's home country should facilitate cross-border acquisitions as a means for increasing demand and levels of diversification. on the other hand, adverse economic

14、 conditions, such as a slump, recession, or capital market constraints, may cause prospective acquiring firms to concentrate on their domestic business while postponing any international strategic moves-1.1.4. acquisition of technological and human resourcesif a firm falls behind in the level of tec

15、hnological knowledge necessary to compete efficiently in its industry, and it is unable or unwilling to obtain the required technology through research and development, then it may attempt to acquire a foreign firm which is technologically more advanced in their study, cebenoyan et al. (1992) suppor

16、t this point, showing that the expansion into new markets through acquisitions allows firms to gain competitive advantage from the possession of specialized resources12 unfavorable acquisition factorsthe factors discussed thus far generally tend to encourage firms to make crossborder acquisitions. i

17、n contrast, there are other variables that often appear to restrain cross-border combinations. these include information asymmetry, monopolistic power, as well as government restrictions and regulations.1.2.1 in formation asymmetry.roll (1986) contends that information about a prospective target fir

18、m (e.g. marketshare, sales, cash flow forecasts) is crucial in the decision-making process of an acquiring firm. if the necessary information is not available, roll (1986) argues that the prospective acquiring firm may be forced to delay or discontinue its plans, eventhough the foreign firm appears

19、to be an attractive target. in contrast, stoughton (1988) argues that information effects are not always harmful. he points out that the prospective acquirer may be able to obtain information about the target firm that is not available to other market participants.122. monopolistic powerif a firm en

20、joys monopolistic power (a difficult prospect in the us, due to antitrust laws), then entry into the industry becomes more difficult for potential competitors, domestic or foreign. moreover, a monopolist is much more likely to resist a takeover attempt. other barriers to entry that make cross-border

21、 acquisitions especially difficult within a monopolistic environment include extensive outlays for research and development, capital expenditures necessary to establish greenfield production facilities, and/or product differentiation through a massive advertising campaign 1.2.3. govern me nt restric

22、tions and regulationsmost governments have some form of takeover regulations in place. in many instances, government approval is mandatory before an acquisition by a foreign firm can occur. in addition, there may exist government restrictions on capital repatriations, dividend payouts, intracompany

23、interest payments, and other remittances. scholes and wolfson (1990) for example, discuss periods in the us where regulatory events discouraged acquisition activity; they cite the william's amendments and the tax reform act of 1969 as significant legal and regulatory changes that contributed to

24、a significant showdown in merger activity in the 1960s. in addition, scholes and wolfson (1990) argue that there was a similar impact resulting from changes in us tax laws in the 1980s, because those changes increased transaction costs in acquisitions involving us sellers and foreign buyers on the o

25、ther hand, dewenter (1995) contends that her empirical findings in the chemical and retail industiy contradict scholes and wolfson (1990). she concludes from her findings that the us tax regime changes in the 1980s provide no explanation for the level of foreign acquisition activity. however, one mu

26、st note that while dewenter (1995a) only examined two industries, representing approximately 16% of foreign acquisition activity during 1978-89, scholes and wolfson (1990) examined activity from 1968 through 1987 and included a large number of industries in their study. this discussion of the variab

27、les that influence cross-border acquisitions, both positively and negatively, suggests that whereas there exists a substantial measure of added complexity in mergers involving firms in different countries, some fundamental aspects of merger analysis remain unchanged that is, a merger or acquisition,

28、 cross-border or domestic, can be treated in the framework of a capital budgeting decision, where the main variables to be estimated are the future cash flows, the acquisition price, and the costs of financing the transaction. therefore, it stands to reason that, at a macroeconomic level, one should

29、 include both the exchange rates and the cost of financing the acquisition. exchange rates affect both the current price of the target as well as the future cash flows. the cost of financing the acquisition with a mix of debt and equity (i.e. the yields on long-term debt and stock prices) should als

30、o play an important role. this is true even though most multi-national corporations have access to global financial markets and will, ceteris paribus, raise funds where the cost of capital is the lowest.author: r j. kish.ndt i onei 1 i ty: amari caoriginate form: journal of multinational financial m

31、anagement 1998(8)434 - 43譯文1歐洲、美國的跨國并購經(jīng)驗(yàn)1.激勵(lì)跨國并購的因索mcdonagh bengtsson(1990)在關(guān)于合并和收購過程的廣泛討論屮，提出下列 激勵(lì)很多公司收購?fù)鈬镜囊蛩兀旱谝?，傳播產(chǎn)品和地理上分散風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的愿望; 第二，獲得支撐的產(chǎn)品;第三，充分發(fā)揮i辦同作用,最后達(dá)到經(jīng)濟(jì)規(guī)模。然而，她警 告說，勞動(dòng)力問題，設(shè)施問題，還有社會(huì)和技術(shù)弟異等等都可能暴露公司新的危機(jī)。 在跨國并購地區(qū)的其他的研究?jī)又谛纬墒召從Ｊ降膸讉€(gè)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)因索，包括冇利的 與不利的。下面的討論調(diào)查的第一次檢查有利獲取變量(即變量出現(xiàn)影響該公司 的有關(guān)跨境交易)的這些因素的取樣，然

32、后是不利的因素取樣。我們要特別注意 這些因素更直接關(guān)系到國家的。11有利的并購因素雖然有很多冇利于并購活動(dòng)的因索，我們把關(guān)注的焦點(diǎn)放在那些可能影響美 國和歐盟之間跨國并購的那些因素。這些因素包括匯率、多?；?、在自己國家的 經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展?fàn)顩r以及技術(shù)和人力資源等。1.1.1匯率目前和預(yù)測(cè)未來外匯匯率的影響木國貨幣相當(dāng)于收購價(jià)格，收購公司應(yīng)累 算的未來現(xiàn)金流量的現(xiàn)值，因此，在任何一個(gè)特定情況的主導(dǎo)作用是實(shí)證研究的問 題。在現(xiàn)有研究成果的基礎(chǔ)上，可以預(yù)料到關(guān)于匯率作用不同的結(jié)論。例如,froot 和stein (1991)指岀,盡管并購活動(dòng)與匯率有一定的關(guān)系，但是根據(jù)他們?cè)诿绹耐?行顯示，沒有證據(jù)能證明

33、人民幣匯率的變動(dòng)能捉高跨國收購地位。他們聲稱，當(dāng) 美元的貶值,我們變成任何一個(gè)國內(nèi)或是國外公司做生意更便宜的地方,。除此z 外，他們淡化了跨國收購和匯率制度之間的關(guān)系，認(rèn)為資本流動(dòng)的提高導(dǎo)致平等和 貼現(xiàn)率的國際投資冋?qǐng)?bào)。歌德堡(1993)卻有不同的結(jié)論。她發(fā)現(xiàn)美元的貶值降低 了在美國的外商直接投資。她還認(rèn)為，相反的才是真理，那就是，如果美元強(qiáng)會(huì)增 加外國公司收購美國公司的活動(dòng)，美國公司收購?fù)鈬緞t會(huì)呈現(xiàn)下降趨勢(shì)。然 而，harris和ravenscraft( 1991)提出了與goldberg相反的實(shí)證證據(jù)。特別是，他們認(rèn) 為美元貶值會(huì)增加外方收購美國公司的數(shù)量。1.1.2多樣化這個(gè)爭(zhēng)論是基

34、于實(shí)證的觀察，在不同的經(jīng)濟(jì)環(huán)境的哪怕同一個(gè)行業(yè)里，協(xié)方 差的回報(bào)也口j能是比在一個(gè)單一的經(jīng)濟(jì)環(huán)境下小。它的意思是，潛在收購的公司 必須首先要確定其預(yù)期的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)和冋?qǐng)?bào)。只有這樣它才能嘗試確定國家、行業(yè)、企 業(yè)內(nèi)的特定風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。在通過獲取持續(xù)的外交關(guān)系，公司可以躲避關(guān)稅壁壘和非關(guān)稅 壁壘，從|何通過降低罪系統(tǒng)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的水平來提高他們的交易風(fēng)險(xiǎn)回報(bào)。1.1.3本國的經(jīng)濟(jì)條件收購公司在祖國擁冇的良好的周期性條件應(yīng)該作為一種減少需求和降低多 樣化水平的手段來促進(jìn)跨國并購。另一方面，不良的經(jīng)濟(jì)條件，如在暴跌、經(jīng)濟(jì)衰 退或資本市場(chǎng)約束的條件下，可能導(dǎo)致潛在收購公司集中精力在他們國內(nèi)的業(yè)務(wù) 而推遲任何國際戰(zhàn)略遷移。1.

35、1.4并購技術(shù)和人力資源的培養(yǎng)如果一個(gè)公司的冇效競(jìng)爭(zhēng)所必要科技水平落后于其行業(yè)水平,而且它不能或 不愿去獲取并發(fā)展它需要的技術(shù)和研究，那么它可能試圖并購那些技術(shù)更加先進(jìn) 的外國公司。在他們的研究中，cebenoyan et al (1992)支持這個(gè)觀點(diǎn)，即通過并購?fù)?展新市場(chǎng)使公司能從獲得被并購公司擁冇的專門的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)優(yōu)勢(shì)。1. 2不利的并購因素到目前為止討論的因索，一般傾向于鼓勵(lì)企業(yè)進(jìn)行跨境并購。相反，還有 其他的變數(shù)，經(jīng)常出現(xiàn)抑制跨境合并。這些包括信息不對(duì)稱、壟斷權(quán)力，以及政府 約束和規(guī)則。1.2.1信息不對(duì)稱。roll (1986)認(rèn)為，有關(guān)一個(gè)潛在目標(biāo)公司(如市場(chǎng)份額，銷售，現(xiàn)金流預(yù)測(cè))

36、 的信息是并購公司過程中至關(guān)重要的決策過程。如果必要的信息不口j 用,rool(1986)認(rèn)為潛在的收購公司可能會(huì)被迫延遲或屮斷它的計(jì)劃，盡管外國公 司似乎是一個(gè)非常不錯(cuò)的目標(biāo)。相反,stoughton (1988)則認(rèn)為信息效果不一定是 有害的。他指出，潛在的收購方可能可以獲取到目標(biāo)公司其它市場(chǎng)參與者不能獲 取的信息。1.2.2壟斷力量如果一個(gè)公司享有壟斷力量(一個(gè)困難的前景，因?yàn)榉赐欣狗ǚ?,那么潛 在無論是國內(nèi)或國外的的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)者要加入這個(gè)行業(yè)變得更難了。此外，壟斷者更抵 制收購的企圖。在壟斷環(huán)境中的其他成為跨國并購進(jìn)入的主耍障礙包括廣泛研究 與發(fā)展支出，建立綠地的生產(chǎn)設(shè)施、產(chǎn)品差異化通

37、過人規(guī)模的廣告宣傳活動(dòng)等的 資木必要支出。123政府約束和規(guī)則大多數(shù)政府在地方冇某種形式的收購規(guī)則。在許多情況下，政府批準(zhǔn)z前， 強(qiáng)制收購?fù)鈬疽部赡馨l(fā)生。此外，可能存在政府限制資本遣返，股息支出， 公司內(nèi)部利息支付和其他匯款。以scholes和wolfson (1990)為例，討論了在美國 監(jiān)管活動(dòng)阻礙了并購活動(dòng)期間，他們列舉了威廉的修正案，1969年稅收改革法案 作為重要的法律和法規(guī)的變化，促成了在20世紀(jì)60年代并購活動(dòng)明顯攤牌。此外, scholes和wolfson (1990)認(rèn)為在20世紀(jì)80年代美國稅法的改革有一個(gè)同樣的影響, 因?yàn)檫@些變化增加了我們?cè)谑召徑灰字谐杀景ㄙu方和國

38、外買家。另一方 面,dewenter(l995)認(rèn)為她在化學(xué)和零售行業(yè)中的發(fā)現(xiàn)的實(shí)證結(jié)果與scholes和 wolfson的觀點(diǎn)相矛盾(1990)。她總結(jié)了她的發(fā)現(xiàn)，美國在80年代的稅收政策的變 化沒有對(duì)外國投資者并購活動(dòng)的水平提供任何解釋說明。然而，必須注意的是，必 須注意的是，dewenter (1995年)只審查了在1978至1989年間約占16%的海外 收購活動(dòng)的兩個(gè)行業(yè)，而在從1968年到1987年的考察活動(dòng)中，scholes和wolfson (1990)在他們的研究中包括各行業(yè)。對(duì)從積極和消極兩個(gè)方面影響跨國并購的 變量討論顯示，在不同國家的公司涉及相當(dāng)程度的合并屮存在一個(gè)附加的復(fù)

39、雜 性，合并分析的一些基本方面保持不變。也就是說，合并或收購、跨國或國內(nèi)， 如果要估計(jì)的主要因素是對(duì)未來現(xiàn)金流量，收購的價(jià)格，融資的交易成本，那么 經(jīng)處理后都可以在一個(gè)資本預(yù)算決定框架內(nèi)處理。因此，按理說，在宏觀經(jīng)濟(jì)層 面上，人們應(yīng)該包括匯率和融資收購的成本。匯率影響廿標(biāo)廿前以及未來現(xiàn)金流 量的當(dāng)前價(jià)格。在融資方面的債務(wù)和股木組合(即長(zhǎng)期債務(wù)和股票價(jià)格的收益率) 的收購成本也應(yīng)發(fā)揮重要作用。這是真實(shí)的，盡管大多數(shù)跨國公司已經(jīng)進(jìn)入全球 金融市場(chǎng)，并冃在其他條件不變的情況下，會(huì)在募集資金資本成本最低的地方募 集資金。作者：基什國籍：美國出處：跨國公司財(cái)務(wù)管理，第8卷，第四期，1998年11月，43

40、4437原文2mitigating risks in cross-border acquisitionsin the past 20 years, the volume of cross-border acquisitions for corporate assets has increased nearly three times faster than the volume of domestic acquisitions. compared to domestic acquisitions, cross-border acquisitions present greater challe

41、nges for a buyer because of institutions and cultural values that are unfamiliar to a foreign corporation. firms acquiring assets in a foreign country may face different accounting practices and disclosure requirements, which hamper the due diligence process the internalization of assets into the bu

42、yer operational structure is further complicated by cultural peculiarities that determine how strategies are formulated and business is con ducted acquiring firms may also encounter legal systems with different protection of property rights, a factor that adds uncertainty to future cash flows the gr

43、eater level of uncertainty in cross-border acquisitions reduces the value of the assets being exchanged (akerlof 1970; stiglitz, 2000) and appears as an explanation to the poor performance of acquirers in cross-border acquisitions (denis et al., 2002; moeller and schlingemann, 2005). in this article

44、, i will analyze different alternatives in which buyers can ameliorate the risks inherent in these transactions this analysis is important for understanding the optimal entry strategies for firms that want to expand their operations in foreign marketsacquiring firms can reduce investment uncertainty

45、 by structuring the payments so they are contingent on performance of the assets. this paper analyzes two alternative contingent payments.first, buyers can pay with stock, sharing the risk of the acquisition with the sellers as they will retain an equity position in the acquirer. second, acquiring f

46、irms can use earn out payments contingent on the performance of the assets being acquired (kohers and ang, 2000).buyers and sellers can operate assets together in an equity joint venture (jv) to improve the exchange of information on the quality of the assets. nanda and williamson (1995) describe se

47、veral jvs that were conceived as a mechanism to exchange information conducive to an eventual acquisition. in a sample of predominantly domestic jvs, mantecon and chatfield (2007) find that jvs can be mechanisms to transfer assets in the presence of valuation uncertainty.the purpose of this article

48、is to understand which of these mechanisms for reducing uncertainty is more beneficial to acquirers of cross-border corporate assets. i hypothesize that the use of earnouts and stock as a method of payment and the formation of equity jvs conducive to acquisitions should be more valuable when investm

49、ent uncertainty is more severe this article contributes to the existing literature by testing this hypothesis in a sample of 30,783 acquisitions announced from 1985 to 2005 this sample involved buyers from 75 nations engaged in 6824 cross border-acquisitions of assets located in 128 countriesthe res

50、ults show that the valuation effects to acquirers in cross-border deals depend on the information obtained about the assets before the acquisition. buyers experienced large gains in the acquisition of assets that were operated in a jv, suggesting that acquirers profited from the information obtained

51、 while jointly operating the assets i hypothesize that these gains should be positively associated with the degree of uncertainty being resolved consistent with this hypothesis, acquirers experienced larger gains in the acquisitions of jvs located in countries with higher levels of investment risk a

52、nd in the presence of higher levels of valuation uncertainty.these results suggest that jvs can be used as a transitional mechanism to reduce the uncertainty associated with cross-border acquisitions in the presenee of severe valuation uncertainties and country investment risksmechanisms to ameliora

53、te investment risk in cross-border acquisitions.although the evidence on the valuation effects to acquirers of cross-border acquisitions remains inconclusive, these buyers face higher levels of uncertainty for several reasons. the due diligence process is complicated by different accounting and disc

54、losure requirements. assimilation of assets is also more difficult because of cultural differences that determine how business is conducted in addition, legal systems with different levels for protection of minority shareholders and enforceability of contracts increase the difficulty to value future

55、 cash flows.how can buyers reduce the uncertainty associated with crossborder acquisitions? reuer (2005) suggests the use of contingent payments and operational relationships. the use of stock as cunency can be a contractual tool to reduce investment risk because it has a contingent-pricing effect (

56、hansen, 1987). the target firm, accepting stock, signals positive information on the value of the acquirer and on the assets being transferred. buyers in tum signal their own quality as they prefer to use their stock when it is overvalued (myers and majluf, 1984). thus, the final market reaction to

57、announcements of using stock in acquisitions depends on the level of asymmetric information about the buyer and the target as well as their relative bargaining position.acquiring firms can also reduce uncertainty by using earnout payments. reuer et al. (2004) find that us firms use more contingent p

58、ayouts when purchasing assets in high-tech and services industries for a sample of 3098 deals in the period 1995-199& kohers and ang (2000) analyze 938 mergers with earnout payments they report that earnouts facilitate the transactions in the presence of high information asymmetries.buyers face

59、higher levels of uncertainty in cross-border acquisitions. this article contributes to the extant literature by analyzing different mechanisms buyers can use to reduce investment uncertainty in a large sample of cross-border acquisitions of assets located in 128 countries. the results from this analysis indicate that buyers experienced lower gains when the assets were located in a different country. the findings suggest that these