并购的外文翻译
关于并购的若干知识
关于并购的若干知识并购的基本概念并购的内涵非常广泛，一般是指兼并(Merger)和收购(Acquisition)。
兼并(Merger)又称吸收合并，指两家或更多的独立企业、公司合并组成一家企业，通常由一家占优势的公司吸收一家或更多的公司。
收购(Acquisition)指一家企业用现金或有价证券购买另一家企业的股票或资产，以获得对该企业的全部资产或某项资产的所有权，或获得对该企业的控制权。
与并购意义相关的另一个概念是合并(Consolidation)。
合并是指两个或两个以上企业合成一个新的企业，合并完成后，多个法人变成一个法人。
并购的实质是在企业控制权运动过程中，各权利主体依据企业产权所作出的制度安排而进行的一种权利让渡行为。
并购活动是在一定的财产权利制度和企业制度条件下进行的，在并购过程中，某一或某一部分权利主体通过出让所拥有的对企业的控制权而获得相应的收益，另一或另一部分权利主体则通过付出一定代价而获取这部分控制权。
企业并购的过程实质上是企业权利主体不断变换的过程。
并购的类型按照不同的划分标准，并购有如下不同的类型：1.按照被并购对象所在行业来分，并购分为横向并购、纵向并购和混合并购。
横向并购又称水平并购，是指为了提高规模效益和市场占有率，生产或经营同类或相似产品的企业之间发生的并购行为。
纵向并购又称垂直并购，是指为了业务的前向或后向的扩展而在生产或经营的各个相互衔接和密切联系的公司之间发生的并购行为。
混合并购是指在生产技术和工艺上没有直接的关联关系，产品也不完全相同的企业间的并购行为。
2. 按照并购的动因分，并购可分为：(1)规模型并购，通过扩大规模，减少生产成本和销售费用。
(2)功能型并购，通过并购提高市场占有率，扩大市场份额。
(3)组合型并购，通过并购实现多元化经营，减少风险。
(4)产业型并购，通过并购实现生产经营一体化，构筑相对完整的产业链，以提高行业利润率。
3.按照并购后被并购企业法律状态来分，并购有三种类型：(1)新设法人型，即并购双方都解散后成立一个新的法人。
企业并购英语怎么说
企业并购英语怎么说企业并购英语怎么说
merger and acquisition
企业并购相关英语词汇
pension parachute 企业收购
purchase 收购
merger 合并
corporate combination 公司合并
asset acquisition 财产收购
stock acquisition 股权收购
acquired company 被收购公司
企业并购相关英语句子
A merger between the two banks.
两家银行的合并。
The firm was taken over by a multinational consulting firm.
这家公司被一个跨国咨询公司收购。
The steel trusts merged various small businesses.
钢铁企业联合兼并了许多小企业。
A German firm launched a takeover bid for the company.
一家德国公司试图收购这家公司。
Enterprise merger has double effects to the market competition. 企业合并对市场竞争具有双重效应。
精彩推荐
企业英语培训/。
企业并购外文翻译文献
企业并购外文翻译文献(文档含中英文对照即英文原文和中文翻译)外文:Mergers and Acquisitions Basics :All You Need To KnowIntroduction to Mergers and AcquisitionsThe first decade of the new millennium heralded an era of global mega-mergers. Like the mergers and acquisitions (M&As) frenzy of the 1980s and 1990s, several factors fueled activity through mid-2007: readily available credit, historically low interest rates, rising equity markets, technological change, global competition, and industry consolidation. In terms of dollar volume, M&A transactions reached a record level worldwide in 2007. But extended turbulence in the global credit markets soon followed.The speculative housing bubble in the United States and elsewhere, largely financed by debt, burst during the second half of the year. Banks,concerned about the value of many of their own assets, became exceedingly selective and largely withdrew from financing the highly leveraged transactions that had become commonplace the previous year. The quality of assets held by banks through out Europe and Asia also became suspect, reflecting the global nature of the credit markets. As credit dried up, a malaise spread worldwide in the market for highly leveraged M&A transactions.By 2008, a combination of record high oil prices and a reduced availability of credit sent most of the world’s economies into recession, reducing global M&A activity by more than one-third from its previous high. This global recession deepened during the first half of 2009—despite a dramatic drop in energy prices and highly stimulative monetary and fiscal policies—extending the slump in M&A activity.In recent years, governments worldwide have intervened aggressively in global credit markets (as well as in manufacturing and other sectors of the economy) in an effort to restore business and consumer confidence, restore credit market functioning, and offset deflationary pressures. What impact have such actions had on mergers and acquisitions? It is too early to tell, but the implications may be significant.M&As are an important means of transferring resources to where they are most needed and of removing underperforming managers. Government decisions to save some firms while allowing others to fail are likely to disrupt this process. Such decisions are often based on the notion that some firms are simply too big to fail because of their potential impact on the economy—consider AIG in the United States. Others are clearly motivated by politics. Such actions disrupt the smooth functioning of markets, which rewards good decisions and penalizes poor ones. Allowing a business to believe that it can achieve a size “too big t o fail” may create perverse incentives. Plus, there is very little historical evidence that governments are better than markets at deciding who shouldfail and who should survive.In this chapter, you will gain an understanding of the underlying dynamics of M&As in the context of an increasingly interconnected world. The chapter begins with a discussion of M&As as change agents in the context of corporate restructuring. The focus is on M&As and why they happen, with brief consideration given to alternative ways of increasing shareholder value. You will also be introduced to a variety of legal structures and strategies that are employed to restructure corporations.Throughout this book, a firm that attempts to acquire or merge with another company is called an acquiring company, acquirer, or bidder. The target company or target is the firm being solicited by the acquiring company. Takeovers or buyouts are generic terms for a change in the controlling ownership interest of a corporation.Words in bold italics are the ones most important for you to understand fully;they are all included in a glossary at the end of the book. Mergers and Acquisitions as Change AgentsBusinesses come and go in a continuing churn, perhaps best illustrated by the ever-changing composition of the so-called Fortune 500—the 500 largest U.S. corporations. Only 70 of the firms on the original 1955 list of 500 are on today’s list, and some 2,000 firms have appeared on the list at one time or another. Most have dropped off the list either through merger, acquisition, bankruptcy, downsizing, or some other form of corporate restructuring. Consider a few examples: Chrysler, Bethlehem Steel, Scott Paper, Zenith, Rubbermaid, Warner Lambert. The popular media tends to use the term corporate restructuring to describe actions taken to expand or contract a firm’s basic operations or fundamentally change its asset or financial structure. ···································································································SynergySynergy is the rather simplistic notion that two (or more) businesses in combination will create greater shareholder value than if they are operated separately. It may be measured as the incremental cash flow that can be realized through combination in excess of what would be realized were the firms to remain separate. There are two basic types of synergy: operating and financial.Operating Synergy (Economies of Scale and Scope)Operating synergy comprises both economies of scale and economies of scope, which can be important determinants of shareholder wealth creation. Gains in efficiency can come from either factor and from improved managerial practices.Spreading fixed costs over increasing production levels realizes economies of scale, with scale defined by such fixed costs as depreciation of equipment and amortization of capitalized software; normal maintenance spending; obligations such as interest expense, lease payments, and long-term union, customer, and vendor contracts; and taxes. These costs are fixed in that they cannot be altered in the short run. By contrast, variable costs are those that change with output levels. Consequently, for a given scale or amount of fixed expenses, the dollar value of fixed expenses per unit of output and per dollar of revenue decreases as output and sales increase.To illustrate the potential profit improvement from economies of scale, let’s consider an automobile plant that c an assemble 10 cars per hour and runs around the clock—which means the plant produces 240 cars per day. The plant’s fixed expenses per day are $1 million, so the average fixed cost per car produced is $4,167 (i.e., $1,000,000/240). Now imagine an improved assembly line that allows the plant t o assemble 20 cars per hour, or 480 per day. The average fixed cost per car per day falls to $2,083 (i.e., $1,000,000/480). If variable costs (e.g., direct labor) per car do not increase, and the selling price per car remains the same for each car, the profit improvement per car due to the decline in averagefixed costs per car per day is $2,084 (i.e., $4,167 – $2,083).A firm with high fixed costs as a percentage of total costs will have greater earnings variability than one with a lower ratio of fixed to total costs. Let’s consider two firms with annual revenues of $1 billion and operating profits of $50 million. The fixed costs at the first firm represent 100 percent of total costs, but at the second fixed costs are only half of all costs. If revenues at both firms increased by $50 million, the first firm would see income increase to $100 million, precisely because all of its costs are fixed. Income at the second firm would rise only to $75 million, because half of the $50 million increased revenue would h ave to go to pay for increased variable costs.Using a specific set of skills or an asset currently employed to produce a given product or service to produce something else realizes economies of scope, which are found most often when it is cheaper to combine multiple product lines in one firm than to produce them in separate firms. Procter & Gamble, the consumer products giant, uses its highly regarded consumer marketing skills to sell a full range of personal care as well as pharmaceutical products. Honda knows how to enhance internal combustion engines, so in addition to cars, the firm develops motorcycles, lawn mowers, and snow blowers. Sequent Technology lets customers run applications on UNIX and NT operating systems on a single computer system. Citigroup uses the same computer center to process loan applications, deposits, trust services, and mutual fund accounts for its bank’s customers.Each is an example of economies of scope, where a firm is applying a specific set of skills or assets to produce or sell multiple products, thus generating more revenue.Financial Synergy (Lowering the Cost of Capital)Financial synergy refers to the impact of mergers and acquisitions on the cost of capital of the acquiring firm or newly formed firm resulting from a merger or acquisition. The cost of capital is the minimum return required by investors and lenders to induce them to buy a firm’s stock orto lend to the firm.In theory, the cost of capital could be reduced if the merged firms have cash flows that do not move up and down in tandem (i.e., so-called co-insurance), realize financial economies of scale from lower securities issuance and transactions costs, or result in a better matching of investment opportunities with internally generated funds. Combining a firm that has excess cash flows with one whose internally generated cash flow is insufficient to fund its investment opportunities may also result in a lower cost of borrowing. A firm in a mature industry experiencing slowing growth may produce cash flows well in excess of available investment opportunities. Another firm in a high-growth industry may not have enough cash to realize its investment opportunities. Reflecting their different growth rates and risk levels, the firm in the mature industry may have a lower cost of capital than the one in the high-growth industry, and combining the two firms could lower the average cost of capital of the combined firms.DiversificationBuying firms outside a company’s current prima ry lines of business is called diversification, and is typically justified in one of two ways. Diversification may create financial synergy that reduces the cost of capital, or it may allow a firm to shift its core product lines or markets into ones that have higher growth prospects, even ones that are unrelated to the firm’s current products or markets. The extent to which diversification is unrelated to an acquirer’s current lines of business can have significant implications for how effective management is in operating the combined firms.·················································································A firm facing slower growth in its current markets may be able to accelerate growth through related diversification by selling its current products in new markets that are somewhat unfamiliar and, therefore, mor risky. Such was the case when pharmaceutical giant Johnson &Johnson announced itsultimately unsuccessful takeover attempt of Guidant Corporation in late 2004. J&J was seeking an entry point for its medical devices business in the fast-growing market for implantable devices, in which it did not then participate. A firm may attempt to achieve higher growth rates by developing or acquiring new products with which it is relatively unfamiliar and then selling them in familiar and less risky current markets. Retailer JCPenney’s acquisition of the Eckerd Drugstore chain or J&J’s $16 billion acquisition of Pfizer’s consumer health care products line in 2006 are two examples of related diversification. In each instance, the firm assumed additional risk, but less so than unrelated diversification if it had developed new products for sale in new markets. There is considerable evidence that investors do not benefit from unrelated diversification.Firms that operate in a number of largely unrelated industries, such as General Electric, are called conglomerates. The share prices of conglomerates often trade at a discount—as much as 10 to 15 percent—compared to shares of focused firms or to their value were they broken up. This discount is called the conglomerate discount or diversification discount. Investors often perceive companies diversified in unrelated areas (i.e., those in different standard industrial classifications) as riskier because management has difficulty understanding these companies and often fails to provide full funding for the most attractive investment opportunities.Moreover, outside investors may have a difficult time understanding how to value the various parts of highly diversified businesses.Researchers differ on whether the conglomerate discount is overstated.Still, although the evidence suggests that firms pursuing a more focused corporate strategy are likely to perform best, there are always exceptions.Strategic RealignmentThe strategic realignment theory suggests that firms use M&As to makerapid adjustments to changes in their external environments. Although change can come from many different sources, this theory considers only changes in the regulatory environment and technological innovation—two factors that, over the past 20 years, have been major forces in creating new opportunities for growth, and threatening, or making obsolete, firms’ primary lines of business.Regulatory ChangeThose industries that have been subject to significant deregulation in recent years—financial services, health care, utilities, media, telecommunications, defense—have been at the center of M&A activity because deregulation breaks down artificial barriers and stimulates competition. During the first half of the 1990s, for instance, the U.S. Department of Defense actively encouraged consolidation of the nation’s major defense contractors to improve their overall operating efficiency.Utilities now required in some states to sell power to competitors that can resell the power in the utility’s own marketplace respond with M&As to achieve greater operating efficiency. Commercial banks that have moved beyond their historical role of accepting deposits and g ranting loans are merging with securities firms and insurance companies thanks to the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999, which repealed legislation dating back to the Great Depression.The Citicorp–Travelers merger a year earlier anticipated this change, and it is probable that their representatives were lobbying for the new legislation. The final chapter has yet t o be written: this trend toward huge financial services companies may yet be stymied by new regulation passed in 2010 in response to excessive risk taking.The telecommunications industry offers a striking illustration. Historically, local and long-distance phone companies were not allowed t o compete against each other, and cable companies were essentially monopolies. Since the Telecommunications Act of 1996, local and long-distance companies are actively encouraged to compete in eachother’s markets, and cable companies are offering both Internet access and local telephone service. When a federal appeals court in 2002 struck down a Federal Communications Commission regulation prohibiting a company from owning a cable television system and a broadcast TV station in the same city, and threw out the rule that barred a company from owning TV stations that reach more than 35 percent of U.S.households, it encouraged new combinations among the largest media companies or purchases of smaller broadcasters.Technological ChangeTechnological advances create new products and industries. The development of the airplane created the passenger airline, avionics, and satellite industries. The emergence of satellite delivery of cable networks t o regional and local stations ignited explosive growth in the cable industry. Today, with the expansion of broadband technology, we are witnessing the convergence of voice, data, and video technologies on the Internet. The emergence of digital camera technology has reduced dramatically the demand for analog cameras and film and sent household names such as Kodak and Polaroid scrambling to adapt. The growth of satellite radio is increasing its share of the radio advertising market at the expense of traditional radio stations.Smaller, more nimble players exhibit speed and creativity many larger, more bureaucratic firms cannot achieve. With engineering talent often in short supply and product life cycles shortening, these larger firms may not have the luxury of time or the resources to innovate. So, they may look to M&As as a fast and sometimes less expensive way to acquire new technologies and proprietary know-how to fill gaps in their current product portfolios or to enter entirely new businesses. Acquiring technologies can also be a defensive weapon to keep important new technologies out of the hands of competitors. In 2006, eBay acquired Skype Technologies, the Internet phone provider, for $3.1 billion in cash, stock, and performance payments, hoping that the move would boosttrading on its online auction site and limit competitors’ access to the new technology. By September 2009, eBay had to admit that it had been unable to realize the benefits of owning Skype and was selling the business to a private investor group for $2.75 billion.Hubris and the “Winner’s Curse”Managers sometimes believe that their own valuation of a target firm is superior to the market’s valuation. Thus, the acquiring company tends to overpay for the target, having been overoptimistic when evaluating petition among bidders also is likely to result in the winner overpaying because of hubris, even if significant synergies are present. In an auction environment with bidders, the range of bids for a target company is likely to be quite wide, because senior managers t end to be very competitive and sometimes self-important. Their desire not to lose can drive the purchase price of an acquisition well in excess of its actual economic value (i.e., cash-generating capability). The winner pays more than the company is worth and may ultimately feel remorse at having done so—hence what has come to be called the winner’s curse.Buying Undervalued Assets (The Q-Ratio)The q-ratio is the rat io of the market value of the acquiring firm’s stock to the replacement cost of its assets. Firms interested in expansion can choose to invest in new plants and equipment or obtain the assets by acquiring a company with a market value less than what it would cost to replace the assets (i.e., q-ratio＜1). This theory was very useful in explaining M&A activity during the 1970s, when high inflation and interest rates depressed stock prices well below the book value of many firms. High inflation also caused the replacement cost of assets to be much higher than the book value of assets. Book value refers to the value of assets listed on a firm’s balance sheet and generally reflects the historical cost of acquiring such assets rather than their current cost.When gasoline refiner Valero Energy Corp. acquired Premcor Inc. in 2005, the $8 billion transaction created the largest refiner in NorthAmerica. It would have cost an estimated 40 percent more for Valero to build a new refinery with equivalent capacity.Mismanagement (Agency Problems)Agency problems arise when there is a difference between the interests of incumbent managers (i.e., those currently managing the firm) and the firm’s shareholders. This happens when management owns a small fraction of the outstanding shares of the firm. These managers, who serve as agents of the shareholder, may be more inclined to focus on their own job security and lavish lifestyles than on maximizing shareholder value. When the shares of a company are widely held, the cost of such mismanagement is spread across a large number of shareholders, each of whom bears only a small portion. This allows for toleration of the mismanagement over long periods. Mergers often take place to correct situations in which there is a separation between what managers and owners (shareholders) want. Low stock prices put pressure on managers to take actions to raise the share price or become the target of acquirers, who perceive the stock to be undervalued and who are usually intent on removing the underperforming management of the target firm.Agency problems also contribute to management-initiated buyouts, particularly when managers and shareholders disagree over how excess cash flow should be used.Managers may have access to information not readily available to shareholders and may therefore be able to convince lenders to provide funds to buy out shareholders and concentrate ownership in the hands of management.From: Donald DePamphilis. Mergers and acquisitions basics:All you need to know America :Academic Press. Oct，2010，P1-10翻译:并购基础知识：一切你需要知道的并购新千年的第一个十年,预示着全球大规模并购时代的到来。
收购和并购英语作文初中
收购和并购英语作文初中收购和并购（Mergers and Acquisitions，简称M&A）是商业领域中常见的战略行为，通常用于企业扩大规模、增强竞争力或实现战略转型。
以下是一篇参考范文，旨在介绍收购和并购的概念、原因、影响以及相关的风险和挑战。
---。
The Dynamics of Mergers and Acquisitions。
In the dynamic realm of business, mergers and acquisitions (M&A) serve as pivotal strategies employed by companies to expand their footprint, fortify their market position, or navigate strategic transformations. M&A involves the consolidation of two or more entities, often resulting in a synergistic alliance that can catalyze growth and innovation. This essay delves into the intricacies of M&A, exploring its rationales, impacts, as well as the attendant risks and challenges.Rationales for M&A:Companies embark on M&A endeavors for multifarious reasons, chief among them being the quest for market dominance and the pursuit of operational efficiencies. Through mergers or acquisitions, firms can harness complementary resources, technologies, or distribution channels, thereby augmenting their competitive advantage. Additionally, M&A enables organizations to diversify their product portfolios, penetrate new markets, or capitalize on emerging trends, fostering sustainable growth in an ever-evolving business landscape.Impacts of M&A:The ramifications of M&A reverberate across diverse stakeholders, ranging from shareholders and employees to consumers and regulators. Shareholders often anticipate enhanced shareholder value post-M&A, driven by synergies, economies of scale, or strategic alignments. Conversely, employees may grapple with uncertainties stemming from organizational restructuring, cultural integration, orworkforce redundancies. Furthermore, consumers may witness changes in product offerings, service standards, or pricing dynamics, prompting apprehensions or opportunities contingent upon the acquirer’s post-merger strategies. From a regulatory perspective, M&A transactions are subject to stringent antitrust laws and regulatory scrutiny aimed at safeguarding market competition and consumer interests.Risks and Challenges:Despite the tantalizing prospects, M&A ventures are fraught with inherent risks and challenges that demand meticulous due diligence and strategic foresight. Integration complexities, cultural clashes, and post-merger dissonance often pose formidable hurdles impeding the seamless assimilation of disparate entities. Moreover, overvaluation, synergistic overestimation, or unforeseen market fluctuations can precipitate financial setbacks or shareholder disillusionment. Legal entanglements, regulatory impediments, and geopolitical uncertainties further exacerbate the risk landscape, necessitating adept risk mitigation strategies and contingency planning.Case Studies:Illustratively, the landmark acquisition of WhatsApp by Facebook exemplifies the strategic imperatives underpinning M&A transactions in the digital age. Facebook’sacquisition of WhatsApp, a leading messaging platform, not only fortified its user base but also facilitated synergistic cross-platform integrations, propelling Facebook’s foray into the burgeoning realm of mobile messaging. Similarly, the merger between Exxon and Mobil in the oil and gas sector epitomizes the consolidation trend aimed at enhancing operational efficiencies, optimizing resource utilization, and bolstering market competitiveness amidst fluctuating commodity prices and geopolitical uncertainties.Conclusion:In summation, M&A represents a quintessential strategic tool wielded by businesses to navigate the complexities of a globalized marketplace, catalyze growth, and unleashsynergies that transcend organizational boundaries. However, the efficacy of M&A hinges on astute strategic planning, meticulous due diligence, and adept integration managementto mitigate risks and maximize stakeholder value. By discerning the underlying rationales, understanding the intricate dynamics, and learning from historical precedents, businesses can navigate the M&A landscape with sagacity and resilience, charting a course towards sustainable growthand competitive advantage in an increasingly interconnected world.--。
并购的类型动机与形式
并购的类型、动机与形式引言并购（Merger and Acquisition，简称M&A）是指一个公司通过购买另一个公司的股权或资产而实现对被购买公司的控制。
并购有多种类型、动机和形式，本文将对这些方面进行介绍和解析。
一、并购的类型1.1 水平并购水平并购是指两个或多个在同一行业或产业中经营的公司进行合并。
水平并购的目的是为了扩大市场份额、提高市场竞争力和实现规模经济效益。
例如，某汽车制造公司并购了另一家汽车制造公司，以增加其市场份额并减少竞争。
1.2 纵向并购纵向并购是指一个公司在供应链的某个环节上收购或合并另一个公司，以实现整合和提高运营效率。
纵向并购通常发生在上下游企业之间，例如某个零售公司收购了供应商，以控制供应链并减少成本。
1.3 跨界并购跨界并购是指两个或多个在不同行业或产业中经营的公司进行合并。
跨界并购的目的是借助相关领域的专业知识和技术，进入新的市场和产业。
例如，某家电子公司并购了一家医疗设备制造公司，以拓展其业务范围和市场份额。
1.4 集团并购集团并购是指母公司通过收购子公司或附属公司的股权或资产，进一步扩大其业务规模和控制范围。
集团并购通常旨在实现资源整合、提升管理效能和实现协同效应。
二、并购的动机2.1 市场拓展市场拓展是一种常见的并购动机，即通过收购来进入新的市场或扩大现有市场份额。
这种动机可以让公司在竞争激烈的市场中获得更多机会和资源。
例如，一家本地电信公司收购了国外的通信运营商，以进一步扩大其国际业务。
2.2 资源整合资源整合是指通过并购来整合各种资源，例如生产设施、供应链、研发能力、品牌价值等。
通过资源整合，公司可以实现成本优势、提高效率和创造更多价值。
例如，一家农产品加工公司收购了一家农场，以确保原材料供应并降低生产成本。
2.3 技术创新技术创新是许多高科技公司进行并购的主要动机之一。
通过收购具有先进技术和专业知识的公司，可以加速产品研发、提高创新能力，从而保持竞争优势。
merge and acquisition 操作流程 中常用到的英文
merge and acquisition 操作流程中常用到的英文一、并购流程1. Merger and Acquisition Planning：确定并购的目标、目标公司的背景调查、并购的可行性分析、并购后的影响评估等。
2. Due Diligence：对目标公司进行详尽的尽职调查，包括财务、法律、税务、市场、技术等方面的调查。
3. Negotiation：与目标公司进行并购价格的谈判，确定最终的交易价格和交易条款。
4. Contract Signing：签署并购合同，完成交易。
5. Integration Planning：制定并购后的整合计划，包括人力资源、财务、运营、市场等方面的整合策略。
二、常用英文术语1. Merger：合并2. Acquisition：收购3. Target Company：目标公司4. Buyout：全资收购5. Asset Sale：资产出售6. Stock Purchase：股份购买7. Private Placement：私募股权8. Go-Shop：再融资过程9. Term Loan：定期贷款10. Bridge Loan：过桥贷款11. Valuation：估值12. Due Diligence：尽职调查13. Negotiation：谈判14. Contract Signing：合同签订15. Integration Planning：整合计划16. HR Integration：人力资源整合17. Finance Integration：财务整合18. Operations Integration：运营整合19. Market Integration：市场整合20. Post-Merger/Acquisition Review：并购后审查三、并购后的整合与评估并购后的整合与评估是并购流程中至关重要的一环，包括人力资源整合、财务整合、运营整合和市场整合等方面。
MERGERS AND ACQUISITIONS【外文翻译】
外文翻译原文MERGERS AND ACQUISITIONSMaterial Source:Quantitative Corporate Finance [M]. New York, N.Y.: Springer, c2007. Author:John B. Guerard , Jr. and Eli Schwartz.As an effective means of resource allocation, Merger &Acquisition plays a very important role in the process of enterprises’growth . It can rapidly enlarge the enterprises’ scales and improve their core competence, as well as their market share through this way of external growth. Listed companies are the most active ones among those enterprises who involved in M&A.A company can grow by taking over the assets or facilities of another firm .The various methods by which one firm obtains or “marries into” the business, assets, or facilities of another company are mergers, combinations, or acquisitions.1 These terms are not used rigidly. In general, however, a merger signifies that one firm obtains another by issuing its stock in exchange for the shares belonging to owners of the acquired firm, or buys another firm with cash. Company X gives some of its shares to Company Y shareholders for the outstanding Y stock. When the transaction is complete, Company X owns Company Y because it has all (or almost all) of, the Y stock. Company Y’s former stockholders are now stockholders in Company X. In a combination, a new corporation is formed from two or more companies who wish to combine. The shares of the new company are exchanged for those of the original companies. The difference between a combination and a merger lies more in legal distinctions than in any discernible differences in the economic or financial result. In practice, the terms merger or combination are often used interchangeably.An acquisition usually refers to a transaction in which one firm buys the major assets or the controlling shares of another company. On occasion, one corporation has purchased another corporation’s subsidiaries.An acquisition differs from a merger in that generally (but not always) cash is used rather than an exchange ofsecurities.A firm which either by the exchange of securities or purchase owns or controls subsidiary companies but does not engage in activities of its own is called a holding company. The holding company differs from a parent company in that the parent company has production functions of its own whereas a holding company exists mainly to control or coordinate its subsidiaries.No new net financial holdings are created in the economy by any of the forms of merger or acquisition [Mossin (1973)]. If the transaction involves an exchange of st ock, the supply of shares of one company’s stock is eliminated and is replaced by the shares of the surviving company. If the transaction is financed by cash, cash holdings by individuals go up, but cash held by corporations goes down; the supply of outstanding securities in the hands of the public goes down, but the amount held by corporations rises. If a corporation floats new securities to obtain funds to finance its acquisition, the process is slightly roundabout, but the net results are the same. One section of the public surrenders its cash for new corporate securities; another group gives up a different issue of securities for cash.A few studies have examined the long-term financial performance of firms involved in M&A. Ravenscraft and Scherer (1989) found that the financial performance of target firms deteriorated during the post-merger period compared to that of the pre-merger period. Herman and Lowenstein (1988) examined the post-takeover performance of hostile takeovers and found contradictory results for takeovers in different time-periods. Both these studies used primarily2 accrual accounting variables, which could be affected by the accounting choices for consolidation of financial statements. Healy, Palepu and Ruback (1992) examined post-merg er performance using the “median operating cash flow return on actual market value for 50 combined target and acquirer firms in years surrounding mergers completed in the period 1979 to mid-1984” and found that“the merged firms have significant improvements in post-merger asset productivity relative to their industries leading to higher operating cash flow returns .There is a strong positive relation between post-merger increases in operating cash flows and abnormal stock returns at merger announcements, indicating that expectations of economic improvements underlie the equity revaluations of the merged firms.” The study also found that “Although cash flow performance improves on average, a quarter of the sample firms have negative post-merger cash flow cha nges.”The reader probably expects the stockholders of acquired firms to earn positive,and highly significant excess returns. After all, merger premiums rose to 25-30 percent during the 1958-1978 period [Dodd and Ruback (1977)]. What about the acquiring f irms? If the acquired firms’stockholders profit handsomely from a merger, should not the acquiring firms stockholders lose? Are mergers zero-sum events? Is wealth created by mergers? Let us examine much of the empirical evidence. Mandelker (1974) put forth the Perfectly Competitive Acquisitions Market (PCAM) hypothesis in which competition equates returns on assets of similar risk, such that acquiring firms should pay premiums to the extent that no excess returns are realized to their stockholders. The PCAM holds that only the acquired firms’ stockholders earn excess returns. However, Mandelker studied mergers of 241 acquiring firms during the 1948-1967 period, and found that acquiring firms’ stockholder earned 5.1 percent during the 40 months prior to the mergers, but excess returns decreased by 1.7 percent in the 40 months following the merger. Positive net excess returns (3.7 percent) were earned by the acquiring firms in the Mandelker study. Thus, Mandelker found no evidence that acquiring firms paid too much for the acquired firms. Moreover, the acquired firms’ stockholders realized excess returns of 12 percent for the 40 month period prior to the merger, and 14 percent for the seven-month period prior to the merger.The Mandelker results have been substantiated by much of the empirical literature. Dodd and Ruback (1977) found that successful acquiring firms’ stockholders gained 2.8 percent in the month before the merger announcement during the 1958-1978 period, whereas the successful acquired firms’ stoc kholders gained 20.9 percent excess returns. Dodd and Ruback found that the acquired firms’ stockholders gained 19.0 percent even if the merger was unsuccessful, whereas the acquiring firms’ stockholders gained less than one percent. The empirical evidence for the 1973-1998 period is consistent, from 20 months prior to the merger to its close, the combined firms’ stockholders gain approximately 1.9 percent [Andrade, Mitchell, and Stafford (2001)]. Moeller, Schlingemann, and Stulz (2003) analyzed 12,023 mergers during the 1980-2001 period and found a 1.1 percent gain to acquiring firms shareholders.Mergers may enhance stockholder wealth; however, whereas Andrade, Mitchell, and Stafford further found that the target, or acquired stockholders gained about 23.8 percent for the 20 month period, consistent across the decades of the 1973-1998 period, the acquiring firms’ stockholders lost about 3.8 percent, during the corresponding 20 month period. For the largest merger in U.S. history prior to 1983,Ruback (1982) found that DuPont lost 9.89 percent ($789 million of stockholder wealth) in the month prior to the merger announcement whereas Conoco stockholders gained 71.2 percent ($3201.2 million) for the two-month period prior to the successful DuPont merger announcement.Do mergers affect the firms’ operations? Hall (1993) found that research and development (R&D) activities were not impacted significantly by mergers. Hall found no lessening of R&D spending. Healy, Palepu, and Ruback (1992) reported that mergers seeking strategic takeovers outperformed financially-motivated takeover. Strategic takeovers generally involved friendly takeovers financed with stock whereas financial takeovers were hostile takeovers involving cash payments. During the 1979-1982 period , for the 50 largest mergers, Healy, Palepu, and Ruback found that strategic takeovers made money for the acquiring firms whereas financial takeovers broke even. Acquiring stockholders of strategic acquisitions made 4.4 percent for five years post-merger, assuming no premiums paid, whereas financial takeovers earned the acquiring stockholders 1.1 percent. The premiums paid in financial takeovers were higher (45%) than in strategic takeovers (35%), and the synergies were lower in financial takeovers. Trimbath (2002, p. 137) found “no significant merger effect on net profit, operating profit, or market value” when analyzing firms purchased by Fortune 500 firms during the 1981-1995 period. Mergers generate a net gain for stockholders in the U.S. economy, but one prefers to be a stockholder in the acquired, rather than the acquiring, firm.Mergers and acquisitions have been a major source of corporate growth and economic concentration during the past 125 years. The empirical evidence is mixed; most acquired firms’ st ockholders profit handsomely with excess returns exceeding 25 percent whereas acquiring firms’ shareholders earn excess returns of only about 1 to 1.50 percent.Although mergers, combinations, and acquisitions are exciting events of great interest to the financial community, there is much uncertainty that whether M & A improves the operating performance of listed companies. Therefore, we need to further research.译文并购资料来源:定量公司财务管理[米].纽约，纽约州：斯普林格委，2007作者：小盖哈约翰B和礼施瓦茨作为资源配置的有效手段，并购在企业成长的过程中起着非常重要的作用。
并购的概念和相关理论
并购的概念和相关理论一、并购的概念和种类1.并购概念群——收购、兼并、合并和接管通常所谓的收购与兼并（Acquisition and Merger，M&A）包括相互联系和时有交叉的四个概念。
收购（Acquisition）的英文原意是“获得”，有广义和狭义之分。
广义的收购泛指任何购买行为。
狭义的收购概念是指买方企业从卖方企业购入资产或股权以获得对卖方企业控制权的行为。
股权收购既可以是完全收购也可以是部分收购。
在完全收购中，收购者购买被收购企业的所有股本。
部分收购时，收购者获得控制权，股份额通常高于50%，低于100%。
收购后，买方企业和卖方企业仍然存在，通常也不改变名称。
兼并（Merger）是指两个企业结合成一个新的经营整体。
法律上，它包括吸收兼并和新设兼并。
吸收兼并（Subsidiary Merger）是指一个企业获得另一个企业的控制权，从而使两个企业结合成一个新的整体，目标公司成为母公司的子公司或子公司的一部分；新设兼并（Statutory Merger）是指两个企业融合为一个新的整体。
例如，A、B两公司，合并后，A公司继续存在，B公司解散，此为吸收兼并，即A公司兼并了B公司；兼并后，A、B公司均解散，成立一家新的C公司，此为新设兼并，即两家公司合并了。
合并（Consolidation）可以发生在两个或两个以上企业之间。
虽然参与企业的实际地位可能存在差别，存在起主导作用的企业，但不存在买方和卖方的划分。
合并以后，原来的企业全部整合为一家新的企业。
通常，当合并的公司规模比较接近时，会使用“合并”一词；而当两家公司规模相差悬殊时，则使用“兼并”一词。
吸收兼并是典型的兼并；新设兼并不存在买方与卖方的划分，两个企业的地位大体上是平等的，更接近合并的本来含义。
在收购业务中，买方企业和卖方企业在交易过程中和交易完成后的地位是完全不同的，存在明显的主导方，买方掌握了卖方的控制权，符合“获得”（Acquisition）的本来含义。
并购的名词解释
并购的名词解释并购是指企业之间通过合并、收购等方式进行资源整合，实现规模扩张和转型升级的经济行为。
在当今社会，随着经济全球化的深入和市场竞争的加剧，并购在企业发展中扮演着越来越重要的角色。
本文将就并购的定义、种类、动机、影响、风险等方面进行探讨。
首先，我们可以从定义角度来解释并购。
并购，全称为企业并购 (Mergers and Acquisitions)，是指一个企业或者一个集团通过收购其他企业的股权或者资产，或者与其他企业合并，从而实现企业规模的扩张。
并购可以是两个同类型企业之间的合并，也可以是一个企业收购另一个企业。
如今，大型企业通过并购的方式来实现市场份额的扩大，以及在行业中的主导地位的确立。
其次，对于并购的种类来说，有并购合并、收购两种主要方式。
并购合并指的是两个或多个企业为了实现各自的利益，通过整合资源、优势互补而合并为一个新的企业。
而收购则是对一个企业进行股权或资产的购买，从而使得被收购企业成为收购方的子公司或附属机构。
接下来，我们来探讨一下企业进行并购的动机。
首先，企业进行并购能够快速实现规模的扩张，提高企业的市场份额和竞争力。
其次，并购可以帮助企业获得先进的技术和研发能力，以推动企业的技术创新和产品升级。
此外，通过并购，企业还可以获取更广泛的市场渠道和客户资源，降低运营成本，提高效率。
然而，并购也伴随着一系列的影响和风险。
首先，对于被并购企业来说，可能面临人员裁员、组织重组、文化冲突等问题，可能导致员工离职率增加和业务下滑。
其次，对于实施并购的企业来说，也需要承担整合难度大、管理层协调困难、市场风险不确定性等风险。
此外，行业监管的压力、并购所需的资金投入等也是企业在并购过程中需要面对的挑战。
最后，我们来看一下并购在世界经济中的影响。
并购活动对于企业家精神的激活和市场经济的发展起到积极的推动作用。
通过并购，大企业可以更加灵活地进行资源配置和运营，提高企业生产和运营效率，推动市场竞争的加剧。
并购的名词解释定义是什么
并购的名词解释定义是什么并购是指的是两家或者更多的独立企业，公司合并组成一家企业，通常由一家占优势的公司吸收一家或者多家公司，那么并购一词是怎么解释的呢？下面是店铺为你整理并购的意思，欣赏和精选造句，供大家阅览!并购的意思并购，意即合并与收购(Mergers and acquisitions，缩写 M&A)，是企业战略、企业财务及管理的术语，指不使用创建子公司或者合营公司的方式，通过购买，售卖，拆分以及合并不同公司或者类似的实体以帮助企业在其领域，行业或者产地等方面快速成长。
实际操作中，“合并”以及“收购”之间的区别越来越小。
并购(Merger and Acquisition，即M&A)的内涵非常广泛，一般是指兼并(Merger)和收购(Acquisition)。
兼并—又称吸收合并，即两种不同事物，因故合并成一体。
指两家或者更多的独立企业，公司合并组成一家企业，通常由一家占优势的公司吸收一家或者多家公司。
收购—指一家企业用现金或者有价证券购买另一家企业的股票或者资产，以获得对该企业的全部资产或者某项资产的所有权，或对该企业的控制权。
与并购意义相关的另一个概念是合并(Consolidation)——是指两个或两个以上的企业合并成为一个新的企业，合并完成后，多个法人变成一个法人。
并购动因产生并购行为最基本的动机就是寻求企业的发展。
寻求扩张的企业面临着内部扩张和通过并购发展两种选择。
内部扩张可能是一个缓慢而不确定的过程，通过并购发展则要迅速的多，尽管它会带来自身的不确定性。
具体到理论方面，并购的最常见的动机就是——协同效应(Synergy)。
并购交易的支持者通常会以达成某种协同效应作为支付特定并购价格的理由。
并购产生的协同效应包括——经营协同效应(Operating Synergy)和财务协同效应(Financial Synergy)。
在具体实务中，并购的动因，归纳起来主要有以下几类：1.扩大生产经营规模，降低成本费用通过并购，企业规模得到扩大，能够形成有效的规模效应。
并购阶段概况的文献综述
并购阶段概况的文献综述并购（Mergers and Acquisitions）是指一家公司通过收购另一家公司的股权或资产，或者与另一家公司合并来实现业务战略目标的行为。
并购活动的频繁发生使其成为了现代商业中的重要现象。
本文将对并购阶段概况进行文献综述，以探讨并购活动在不同阶段的特点和影响。
一、并购活动的阶段1. 策略规划阶段并购活动通常始于公司的战略规划阶段。
在这个阶段，公司会通过分析市场和竞争环境、评估自身资源和优势，并制定相应的发展战略。
公司会考虑自身的业务领域、市场定位和未来发展方向，从而确定是否需要通过并购来实现战略目标。
2. 目标筛选阶段一旦公司决定通过并购来实现战略目标，下一步就是确定适当的并购目标。
在这个阶段，公司会对潜在的目标公司进行充分的调研和分析，包括财务状况、商业模式、市场地位和管理团队等方面的情况。
公司还会考虑目标公司与自身的业务互补性和整合难度，从而筛选出最适合的并购目标。
3. 谈判阶段一旦确定了并购目标，公司就会开始与目标公司展开谈判。
在谈判阶段，公司需要就价格、交易结构、股权转让和员工待遇等方面与目标公司进行协商。
公司还需要与监管部门和股东进行沟通，确保交易的合规性和顺利性。
4. 尽职调查阶段一旦双方达成初步协议，就需要进行尽职调查。
在这个阶段，公司会对目标公司的全部资产、负债、法律事务和商业情况进行全面的调查和审核。
通过尽职调查，公司可以更全面地了解目标公司的实际情况，规避潜在的风险和问题。
5. 合同签署阶段在完成尽职调查之后，双方可以签署正式的并购协议。
并购协议通常包括交易价格、交易结构、股权转让和员工待遇等方面的内容。
通过签署并购协议，交易正式落实，双方开始筹备后续的交易流程。
6. 政府批准阶段在协议签署之后，公司需要向相关监管部门提交并购申请，并等待政府的批准。
在一些情况下，特别是涉及行业垄断和国家安全的并购案例中，政府可能会对并购进行调查和评估，以确保交易不会对市场和国家利益产生不利影响。
跨国并购名词解释
跨国并购名词解释跨国并购指的是一家公司从一个国家购买或合并另一家公司，使其业务跨越国界。
这种交易可以在同一行业内进行，也可以涉及不同行业的公司之间的交易。
以下是一些与跨国并购相关的名词解释：1. 并购（M&A）：并购是指一家公司通过购买或合并另一家公司来扩大自己的业务规模。
并购可以是国内的，也可以是跨国的。
2. 跨国公司（MNC）：跨国公司是指在多个国家拥有业务和子公司的公司。
通过并购，公司可以扩大其在不同国家和地区的业务。
3. 目标公司（target company）：目标公司是指被并购或收购的公司。
被并购的公司的股权和资产将会转移到收购方。
4. 收购方（acquirer）：收购方是指发起并购或收购的公司。
收购方一般具有较强的财务实力和资源，通过并购扩大业务规模和市场份额。
5. 利益相关方（stakeholder）：利益相关方是指在并购交易中可能受到影响或对交易结果有利害关系的各方，包括收购方、目标公司的股东、员工、供应商和客户等。
6. 股权收购（equity acquisition）：股权收购是指收购方通过购买目标公司的股票或股权来完成并购交易。
7. 兼并（merger）：兼并是指两家或多家公司合并成为一家新的公司。
在跨国并购中，兼并往往需要协调不同国家的法律和监管要求。
8. 反垄断审查（antitrust review）：反垄断审查是指政府部门对并购交易进行的调查和审查，以确保交易不会导致市场垄断或不正当竞争。
9. 并购财务顾问（M&A financial advisor）：并购财务顾问是一家专业机构或个人，为并购交易提供财务建议和支持，包括估值、尽职调查和交易结构等方面的服务。
10. 跨国并购金融法律顾问（cross-border M&A legal advisor）：跨国并购金融法律顾问是一家专业的法律事务所或个人，为并购交易提供法律咨询和服务，包括交易文件的起草、合规性审查和跨国法律事务管理等方面的支持。
几个并购术语（英汉对照及解释）
几个并购术语（英汉对照及解释）战略性并购（Strategic M&A）战略性并购通常是指并购企业通过并购实现对目标企业（被并购企业）的长期战略性持股。
通过战略性并购，并购企业可以扩大市场份额、增加企业的业务能力，获得并购的协同效应。
根据并购企业与被并购企业所处的行业是否相同，战略并购可以进一步分为横向并购、纵向并购和混合并购。
财务性并购（Financial M&A）财务性并购的并购方通常是私募股权公司或者其他财务投资人，它们并购的目的不是为了对被并购企业的长期持股，而是为了对其进行资产重组，然后以较高的价格出售并退出持股，在短期内实现投资收益。
财务性并购通常以杠杆并购的方式进行。
横向并购（Horizontal Merger）横向并购是指在同一行业中生产相同或者类似产品的企业间进行的并购，并购的目的通常是为了减少竞争、获得规模效益、扩大市场份额、巩固企业的市场地位。
纵向并购（Vertical Merger）纵向并购是指同一产业链上的上下游企业之间进行的并购，并购目的通常是为了加强不同生产环节之间的配合、减少外部市场交易、提高生产的协作化、加速生产过程。
混合并购（Conglomerate Merger）混合并购是指不同地区、不同行业的企业间进行的并购，并购的目的通常是为了多样化经营、分散经营风险。
管理层收购（Management Buyout）管理层收购（MBO）是指公司的管理层向公司的股东（母公司或者个人股东）收购公司的全部或者大部分股权。
管理层收购与其他并购在法律性质方面是类似的，区别在于作为收购方的管理层对公司的经营情况非常熟悉，因此，尽职调查过程常常比较简单，而且股权的出售方向收购方（即公司的管理层）作出的保证也不会像其他并购那样详尽。
杠杆收购（Leveraged Buyout）杠杆收购（LBO）是指在筹措并购费用时只使用较少的自有资金，而使用大量的借贷资金（通过发行债券或者借贷筹集的资金）。
并购名词解释
并购名词解释一、并购（M&A）并购指的是企业并购或合并另一家公司的活动。
通常情况下，被收购的公司会失去独立性，并成为收购公司的一部分。
并购通常是由企业追求经济优势和竞争优势的一种战略决策。
二、收购（Acquisition）收购是指一家公司（收购公司）购买另一家企业的股权或者资产，从而控制这个企业的所有权和资产。
在收购中，被收购公司通常成为收购公司的子公司，它的业务将成为收购公司的重要组成部分。
三、合并（Merger）合并是指两家或更多公司通过协商一起合并成为一家新的公司。
合并通常是平等对待两家公司的股东。
两家企业将整合资源，提高生产效率和降低成本，实现更高的竞争力。
四、收购兼并（Acquisition merger）收购兼并是两种策略的结合。
其目的在于通过收购其他公司来扩展企业的业务，提高企业的生产规模和竞争力。
在这种情况下，企业可以收购整个公司或部分股份。
五、激进收购（Hostile takeover）激进收购通常发生在被收购公司的管理层和股东坚决反对收购的情况下。
在这种情况下，收购公司常常使用各种手段来突破对方的反抗，包括直接向股东发送并购提议、公开宣布收购计划、展开背后收购等手段。
六、管理层收购（Management buyout）管理层收购是被收购公司的管理层从股东手中购买公司股份的活动。
在管理层收购中，管理层成为公司的股东和企业的新所有者，从而控制企业的核心业务和管理权。
七、杠杆收购（Leveraged buyout）杠杆收购是一种通过大量借款来收购企业的战略。
在这种情况下，杠杆买家通常会使用收购公司的资产作为抵押，借款用于支付收购费用和偿还负债。
通过这种方式，收购公司可以在不使用大量资本的情况下完成收购计划，同时也没有资本增值的压力。
第12章-财务管理学(第8版)
4.换股并购估价法
如果并购双方都是股份公司，则可以采用换股并购即股票换股票方 式实现并购，并购公司用本公司股票交换目标公司股东的股票，从 而实现对目标公司的收购。采用换股并购时，对目标公司的价值评 估主要体现在换股比例的大小上。换股比例是指1股目标公司的股 票交换并购公司股票的股数。
最高换 股比例
1.债务和解的方式
以资产 清偿债
务
修改债 务条件
债权转 为股权
2.债务和解的程序
1
提出申请
2
签订债务 和解协议
3
债务和解程 序的终止
12.4.4 企业清算
1.企业清算的概念
企业清算是企业在终止过程中，为终结现存的各种经济关系，对企业 的财产进行清查、估价和变现，清理债权和债务，分配剩余财产的行 为。
01
收入增加
02
成本下降
规模经济效应
纵向整合的经济效应 2
1 4
消除低效率
3 资源互补性
12.1.5 公司并购的价值评估
公司并购的价值评估是指对目标公司的价值进行评估。
成本法 市场比较法
法也称资产基础法，是指以目标公司的资产价值为基础 对目标公司价值进行评估的方法。
在采用公司自由现金流量评估公司价值时，目标公司价值等于以公司 的加权平均资本成本作为折现率对公司自由现金流量折现的现值。
01 零增长模型 02 固定增长模型 03 两阶段增长模型
(2)股权自由现金流量折现模型。
股权自由现金流量(free cash flow to the equity holders,FCFE)是公司 普通股股东所能获得的现金流量。股权自由现金流量与公司自由现金流量的 差异在于其计算涉及税后利息费用和负债净增加额，它是公司自由现金流量 扣除税后利息费用，再加上负债净增加额后的净现金流量，如果存在优先股 ，还需扣除优先股股利。
跨国并购的概念
跨国并购的概念跨国并购（Cross-border Mergers and Acquisitions）指的是一家公司从事并购活动时，以跨越国家界限为目标进行的交易。
在全球化的背景下，跨国并购成为了越来越多公司扩大规模、迅速进入新市场、并获取新技术和资源的一种重要战略。
跨国并购的概念包含了两个方面：跨越国家的范围和并购的性质。
首先，跨国并购意味着交易涉及多个国家，包括目标公司所在国和收购公司所在国。
这样的跨国性质使得并购交易在法律、金融、经营等方面面临各种挑战，需要各方充分协调合作。
其次，并购是指一家公司通过购买另一家公司的股权或资产，实现公司间的合并或重组。
并购的性质可以包括垂直并购、水平并购和集团并购等。
垂直并购是指两个在产业供应链中处于不同环节的公司之间的合并，以优化整个产业链条。
水平并购是指两个在同一产业中处于相同环节的公司之间的合并，以增强市场竞争力。
集团并购则是指通过收购具有相关业务或行业的公司来构建跨国经营的集团。
跨国并购的背后有着多种动因。
首先，跨国并购可以加速市场进入。
通过收购在目标市场已经建立了良好渠道、品牌和客户群的企业，收购方可以迅速进入新市场，减少建立自有渠道和品牌的时间和成本。
其次，跨国并购可以拓展公司的产品或服务线。
通过收购技术或专业知识更加先进的目标公司，收购方可以获取新技术、专利和商业机会，提升自身的产品研发能力和竞争力。
此外，跨国并购还能帮助公司扩大规模，增加收入和利润，提高企业的价值。
然而，跨国并购也存在许多风险和挑战。
首先，不同国家之间的法律制度、经济环境、文化和习俗等差异会对并购活动产生影响。
在决策层面，跨国并购需要充分考虑政治稳定性、法律法规和监管环境，以及目标公司和收购公司的文化差异。
其次，由于并购可能涉及大量的资金，金融风险也是需要关注的因素。
交易结构的复杂性、资金筹集的困难和外汇风险等都需要进行精确的预估和管理。
此外，跨国并购还面临着组织整合问题，包括如何整合不同企业文化、管理制度和人员，以实现合并后的协同效应。
并购及案例的分析全英文版
一、About M&AMerger: combination of two or more corporations. Acquisition: the act of contracting or assuming or acquiring possession of something.Merger refers to an enterprise to take various forms for receiving the property rights of other enterprises, so that the merged party lost the qualifications of a legal person or legal entity economic behavior change.Acquisition refers to an enterprise can through the purchase of shares of listed companies and the companies operating decisions change behaviorIn my opinion, merger is one commercial company could totally control the other company. acquisition is one commercial company own the other company.二、Case：TCL mergers Thomson Background information:1.TCL:TCL Group Co., Ltd. was founded in 1981, is one ofthe consumer electronics business groups worldwide scale, forming a multi-media, telecommunications, home appliances,and parts of the four industry groups, as well as real estate and investment business, logistics and services business group .2.Thomson:Thomson is France's largest state-ownedenterprises, is the world's fourth-largest consumer electronics maker, has four main business direction: content and networking, consumer products, components, patent licensing.About case:TCL mergers ThomsonTTETCL invested 3.149million euros hold67% shares Thomson invested 155.1 million euros hold 33% sharesprogress:July 29, 2004, TCL and France's Thomson jointly funded 470 million euros, of which one hundred million euros TCL3.149 investment accounted for 67% of shares, Thomson invested 155.1 million euros held by 33% of the shares, the establishment of TCL- Thomson Electronics Limited, referred TTE company.Result:By the end of 2004, the European business losses only a few hundred million yuan; by the end of 2005, a loss of 550 million yuan in Europe; the first half of 2006, TCL European business losses rose to 700 million yuan; and 2006 end of 9, TCL in Europe investment accumulated losses reached 203 million euros (about 2.034 billion yuan). TTE Europe's "accumulated losses" has exceeded 3.345 billion yuan, TCL Multimedia in the European business restructuring and contraction of the overall cost more than expectedBy the end of 2004, Europe leads the global TV market, quickly turned to flat-panel TV from CRT TV . European integration has not been good company reacted too slowly, TCL is still a lot of factories around the CRT TV production. When the merger allows Thomson TCL promising more than 10,000 TV 3,4 patents, did not help that much, because they arebasicallytraditional CRT TV. Until 2005, TCL flat-panel TVs began large-scale supply of the market, this time, competitors have begun to cut prices, TCL from product development, supply chain management to the entire system is not adapted to this change. Flat-panel TVs will come to kill so quickly, so TCL- Thomson pace the whole mess.Problem:1, M&A too hastily that the internationalization lack the necessary prudence.2. overestimate the economic benefits of the acquisition, ignoring market trends3. Too many brands, lack of competitive advantage. Undercapitalised cause operational difficulties4. Manage the drawbacks become cross-border M&A "fuse"Fail Reason:1.The integration of core technologies improper2.Overseas M&A trigger funding loophole3.Cultural differences in business managementSuggest：(一)、before M&A—Conduct a comprehensive assessment of precautions1、under the height of strategy to choose the object2、analysis careful financial plan of the target enterprises and own company.3、Assessment of both culture and values4、Formulate and improve the integration plan(二)、after M&A—Conduct active integration1、Strategic Integration2、Financial Integration3、human resources Integration4、Cultural IntegrationConclusion:The average success rate of only 40% of mergers and acquisitions, the success rate of cross-border mergers and acquisitions, only 20% to 30%Mergers and acquisitions of profit opportunities：1、Economies of scale, become the market leader2、To achieve the optimal allocation of resources, resource sharing, combination3、Implement diversification and maintain core competitiveness。
并购术语——精选推荐
国际市场上，⼤公司⼤企业的并购可算得上⾮常重要的事情。
下⾯是⼀些有关并购事宜的专⽤词语，⼀起来看看吧，说不定哪天你就⽤上了呢。
1. merger / acquisition：合并/收购That company lives by mergers and acquisitions. They just keep growing and growing.那家公司靠合并和收购为⽣。
他们在不断扩张。
2. takeover：接收/接管I think that company is ripe for a takeover. They have great market share but they're in poor financial condition.我觉得是时候接管那家公司了。
虽然他们仍占有很⾼的市场份额，但他们的财务状况简直糟透了。
3. leveraged buyout：融资收购That leveraged buyout was some smart thinking on your part. We diversified our product line and expanded our market share without laying out any cash.那宗融资收购⾮常成功。
你的主意真不错。
通过这次收购，我们不但使⽣产线得以多元化，⽽且没花⼀分钱就扩⼤了市场份额。
4. crown jewel：拳头部门In our lineup of health care products, the Cosmetics division is our crown jewel.在我们⽣产卫⽣保健产品的⼀系列部门中，化妆品部是竞争⼒的拳头部门。
5. Saturday night special：周末特别收购That announcement sure blindsided them. It was a Saturday night special and we caught them asleep at the wheel.他们看了我们的公告肯定傻了眼。
并购的利与弊英语作文
并购的利与弊英语作文Mergers and acquisitions (M&A) are a common strategy used by companies to grow and expand their business. They can bring about many benefits, but they also come with potential drawbacks. Here's a look at both sides of the coin.Benefits of M&A:1. Market Expansion: M&A allows companies to enter new markets quickly. This can be particularly beneficial for companies looking to diversify their customer base and reduce reliance on a single market.2. Cost Synergies: Combining two companies can lead to cost savings through the elimination of duplicate operations and streamlined processes.3. Access to Resources: M&A can provide access to valuable resources such as technology, intellectual property, and skilled personnel that might be difficult to acquire otherwise.4. Increased Market Power: Larger market share can lead to increased bargaining power with suppliers and distributors, potentially resulting in better terms and higher profit margins.5. Synergy in Operations: The merging of two companies canlead to operational efficiencies, such as improved supply chain management and better product development.Drawbacks of M&A:1. Cultural Integration Challenges: One of the most significant challenges in M&A is integrating the corporate cultures of the two companies. This can lead to employee dissatisfaction and high turnover rates.2. Legal and Regulatory Hurdles: M&A can be a complex process with numerous legal and regulatory requirements that must be met, which can be time-consuming and costly.3. Financial Risk: The financial risk associated with M&A can be substantial, particularly if the acquiring company overpays for the target company or if the integration does not go as planned.4. Loss of Key Talent: Key employees of the acquired company may leave due to the change in ownership, leading to a loss of valuable knowledge and expertise.5. Customer Reaction: Customers may react negatively to a merger or acquisition, particularly if they perceive a change in the quality of products or services.In conclusion, while M&A can offer significant opportunities for growth and expansion, they also come with considerable risks and challenges. Companies must carefully weigh thepotential benefits against the possible drawbacks before embarking on an M&A strategy.。
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。
兼并和收购
当前的问题
一、兼并与收购：全球视野
许多用来解释为什么会发生兼并和收购（并购）的理论已经被提出来了。
效率理论认为，兼并的发生是为了利用经济规模或协同作用。
市场力量理论认为，合并创造了寡头垄断的利益。
代理理论认为并购可以解决代理问题，删除无效的经理，或者也可以作为一种机制，兼并和收购，可能是一个傲慢或帝国大厦动机不明智收购的经理的代理问题的表现。
多样化的福利或税收，也被认为是并购的动机。
虽然没有单一的兼并和收购的凝聚力理论，这些理论大部分已收到至少有一些经验支持。
并购交易的估值短期效应已被记录在众多事件的研究中。
这些研究一致发现积极累积异常的报酬，目标公司股东的股份从15％到40％，取决于研究的时间段和交易类型。
当投标人的异常报酬似乎是接近零，甚至可能略有下降，而联合投标人的目标回报率普遍是正相关，那就意味着并购活动创造了价值。
其他著名的规律，平均目标股价的反应显示着与股票报价相比，购买价更高。
要约收购与兼并相比，敌对与友好相比，那宁愿是优惠多的投标人，而不是单一的投标竞赛。
这些特点，往往对投标人的回报有相反的效果。
因此，投标人的回报往往是较低的股票融资，并购交易，敌对收购，多个投标人的比赛。
另一种已知的规律是并购浪潮。
米切尔和木亨利在1996年以及哈福德在2005年发现，特定行业的合并浪潮在有足够资金流的经济、管理、技术的冲击中发生的。
这表明，当某些行业正处于企业扩张或牛市、资产大规模地调动的过程中，并购活动将会很活跃。
美国经历了六个激烈的并购阶段。
有趣的是每一阶段都发生在一次强烈的经济扩张和强劲的股市上，紧接着股价就会大幅下跌。
第一次并购浪潮发生在二十世纪初，巩固了石油、钢铁、矿业和烟草等行业。
这次并购是为了垄断。
第二次并购浪潮发生在20世纪20年代，当时，以蓬勃发展的股市为导向，巩固通信、公共事业和汽车等行业。
由于反托拉斯法的制定，创造非法垄断，这个期间的大部分并购集中在垂直整合。
不同于前两次浪潮，第三次浪潮发生在20世纪60
年代，其特点是大量的无关的收购以及被称为集团的兼并浪潮。
第四次的并购浪潮发生在20世纪80年代，记忆中这是半身收购、杠杆收购（杠杆收购）、垃圾债券和融资交易。
在此期间，并购交易扭转了过去几十年的企业多元化，消除了产能过剩以及纪律管理差。
在此期间，机构持股通过创建一组大股东而上升，他们承诺增加股值。
20世纪80年代也见证了增值的毒丸和反收购，如收购防御政策修正案。
然而，尽管许多观察家将20世纪80年代与敌意收购联系在一起，这些交易中少于15%的是敌意收购。
在20世纪90年代初的短暂下降后，收购活动再次增加，在20世纪90年代末达到创纪录水平，并迎来第五次并购浪潮。
然而，不同于20世纪80年代的并购浪潮，杠杆和敌意的并购在20世纪90年代颇少见，相反，并购活动通过跨国并购，以服务业的兼并为主，最显见的是电讯、广播、医疗保健和银行。
事实上，在1999年，这三个行业占全球并购价值的三分之一。
在20世纪60年代的企业集团兼并中，出于巩固、协同和战略的考虑，许多在20世纪90年代的兼并被赶
出这些产业。
此外，20世纪90年代后期的并购推动了经济全球化。
在1999年，跨国并购首次突破1万亿美元，占所有并购的三分之一。
通过引入一个共同的货币——欧元，并购在欧洲受到鼓励。
虽然跨境交易只占美国并购的约10%，但是超过30%的欧洲并购涉及跨境交易。
由于国有企业的私有化、放松管制、贸易和资本市场自由化，全球并购的增加趋势也得到了加强。
20世纪90年代的兼并浪潮的另一个显著特点是超过70%的交易与股票挂钩，因为在此期间市场给予公司异常的高值。
第六次并购浪潮在2003年底开始，现今仍在继续。
事实上，在2006年，全球并购交易总额为4万亿美元，打破了之前在2000年创下的3.3万亿美元的记录。
美国和欧洲的公司占了这些交易的近80%。
并购活动的增加部分是由于企业现金的结余和低利率。
与20世纪90年代的浪潮相比，最近的交易中，近75%以现金支付。
许多在此期间发生的交易涉及在同一业务线，寻求削减多余成本，从而通过兼并增加盈利。
在目前的兼并浪潮的另一个主要力量一直是私人股本投资者，他们通常购买公司债务加载它们，然后试图使它们更有效率，在几年之内，使他们能够提供服务的债务和转售利润，另一家公司或通过首次公开募股（IPO）。
在20世纪80
年代收购浪潮发挥重大作用的私人股本杠杆收购，在20世纪90年代几乎消失了。
然而，近年来，私人股本已卷土重来，在世界各地20％的交易中占主导作用。
20世纪90年代中期以来，外国直接投资（FDI）的增加成为了跨国并购背后的原动力。
在企业全球化的时代，跨国并购使企业迅速获取世界各地的业务。
近日，跨国并购，尤其是欧洲公司，已经占到总交易量的约40％。
过去的研究普遍认为，合并后的公司的长期表现是通常小于匹配的同侪团体，但有趣的是，一些研究建议随后的并购在当前浪潮中会更好。
这可能部分是因为所提供的低保费。
从历史上看，合并保费往往达到40％至60％的水平，但他们在最近的浪潮中平均25％左右。
一切都是平等的，这将意味着投标人是不太可能为目标过高付出。
此外，在当前的浪潮中，通过合并索取实实在在的利益，如消除重复操作，可能会导致更好的长期性能。
二、企业多元化战略：成本和协同效益
在本章中，我采取了为什么一些企业追求多元化战略的价值下降，而其他从事战略，却价值增加的问题。
对比两个基本的多元化战略：第一是有针对性的策略，每个企业作为一个独立的公司运行，第二个是一个多元化的战略，这两家公司合并，并成为同一家公司的不同部门。
其主要目的是要理解为什么会发生一些价值下降的兼并，为什么一些价值增加的兼并却不发生。
这个问题有非常具体的动机。
有一个巨大的实证文献和很多休闲观测，这表明多样化或合并对一些企业是价值最大化，对其他企业毁灭最大化。
例如，在1978年，资讯科技及电讯涉及十二个不同行业（3位数的SIC代码级），并平均托宾Q为0.570，这是在所有12个行业低于平均水平。
相比之下，3M是在涉及11个不同行业，与Q比率为2.02。
另一个高度多元化成功的公司的著名的例子是通用电气公司，最近的失败的例子则是在美国在线与时代华纳的合并--在写作时，自2001年一月合并结束以来，该公司的股票已下跌66％。
为了给本章假定的问题提供一个答案，我调查协同作用与从决策权下放所产生的私人利益之间的相互作用。
简单的集合起来提出，CEO的决策权，允许他选
择两个非收缩战略：多元化或重点，并选择非收缩事前和事后各单位的项目。
此外，他们还使CEO捕捉任何他或她负责的项目所产生的总现金流量呈正相关的私人利益。
项目选择需要学习进步，这反过来又意味着他/她有时间和精力花费在研究项目中的项目回报。
该模型的关键假设如下：第一，有一个机构问题，CEO的首选项目与股东的首选项目不同；第二，合并产生协同作用，只有当项目跨部门的协调发生，才会增加预期现金流；第三，合并，建立一个多任务的问题，因为CEO有多个单位调查项目。
这些假设意味着，CEO激励研究，有利于更好的项目，但从他/她的观点出发，他/她总是挑选最好的项目。
此外，在多任务的问题多元化公司的首席执行官面临的暗示，在没有协同效应的情况下，CEO的激励机制调查项目在一个多元化的公司较集中的公司（以下简称，主动效果）。
在此设臵中，它显示一个CEO选择追求协同效应是高价值日益多样化，价值日益关注时，协同效应低。
当协同作用不高也不低，根据参数，CEO可能会追求价值递减的多样化或价值减少的焦点，也就是说，尽管多元化企业价值最大化的事实，也采用集中战略。
可以从以下简单的例子抓住这背后的经济学。
设S是合并的协同收益， BS是CEO从合并中获得的私人利益，C是CEO的私人成本，K 是由股东支付的费用。
如果BS> C，CEO会选择合并，当S> K，合并值增加。
当协同作用足够低S<C/ B，CEO不会合并,这一决定是值足够低的协同作用（S<K）的增加，价值下降为“温和的”S，即K<S<C / B。
如果他/她不合并，合并是足够高的协同作用，下S> K和值减少为“温和的”协同小号值增加，在我们的设臵中即C / B <S <K，当协同收益大于主动的作用和协调成本，合并价值最大化，同时合并是CEO的首选策略时的协同作用，加上从运行一个较大的公司（帝国建设的喜好）的额外的私人利益平衡的主动作用，协调成本和CEO的私人成本之间的战略研究的区别。
至于价值减少兼并的结果，C / B <S<K时，出现一定的鲁棒性问题。
首先，它追求的合并战略，是破坏价值，CEO是为引进稳健优化设计的激励合同，并调整CEO的利益是更昂贵的协同水平上升。
其次，当CEO的权利让他/她只是要合并的建议，向董事会和本决定是否要合并或不，这是表明该委员会将用优化设计，验收规则中值，降低并购是阳性批准根据不同的参数配臵的概率。
这意味着，根据一定的参数，通过值递减策略是从股东的角度来看，事前最佳。