Demonstrates productivity transfers in mergers affect profitability and welfare.
A standard assumption in models of cross-border mergers and acquisitions (M&As) is that highly productive acquirers transfer their productivity level to that of the less productive target. However, our stylized evidence suggests that this is not the case and that the post-merger firm productivity is lower than that of the most productive firm in the M&A. It is an average of the pre-merger productivity levels of both firms. Furthermore, the data also show that M&As also take place among firms that are not the most productive in the market. These observations raise the question under what circumstances M&As become profitable. Based on the Melitz (Econometrica 71(6):1695–1725, 2003) approach, we develop a model of cross-border M&As that permits imperfect productivity transfers between merging firms. With imperfect transfers, (weak) assortative matching in productivity arises for firms in cross-border M&As, without strict productivity ordering. The model rationalizes that M&As occur both in the high- and low-productivity ranges of the market. M&As raise the overall average productivity and welfare. However, the welfare benefits are small(er) if productivity transfers are less than perfect.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Brakman et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: