Skip Navigation


Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization Advance Access originally published online on August 19, 2005
Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 2005 21(2):330-358; doi:10.1093/jleo/ewi012
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
21/2/330    most recent
ewi012v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (5)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gilson, R. J.
Right arrow Articles by Schwartz, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2005. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oupjournals.org

Understanding MACs: Moral Hazard in Acquisitions

Ronald J. Gilson

Stanford University, Columbia University, and European Corporate Governance Institute

Alan Schwartz

Yale University

The standard contract that governs friendly mergers contains material adverse change (MAC) and material adverse effect (MAE) clauses; these clauses permit a buyer to costlessly cancel the deal if such a change or effect occurs. In recent years, the application of the traditional standard-like MAC and MAE term has been restricted by a detailed set of exceptions that curtails the buyer's ability to exit. The term today engenders substantial litigation and occupies center stage in the negotiation of merger agreements. This article asks what functions the MAC and MAE term serve, what function the exceptions serve, and why the exceptions have arisen only recently. It answers that the terms encourages the target to make otherwise noncontractable synergy investments that would reduce the likelihood of low value realizations, because the term permits the buyer to exit in the event the proposed corporate combination comes to have a low value. The exceptions to the MAC and MAE term impose exogenous risk on the buyer; the parties cannot affect this risk and the buyer is a relatively superior risk bearer. The exceptions have arisen recently because the changing nature of modern deals makes the materialization of exogenous risk a more serious danger than it had been. The modern MAC and MAE terms thus respond to the threat of moral hazard by both parties in the sometimes lengthy interim between executing a merger agreement and closing it. The article empirically examines actual merger contracts and reports results that are consistent with the analysis.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Journal of ManagementHome page
R. Ragozzino and J. J. Reuer
Contingent Earnouts in Acquisitions of Privately Held Targets
Journal of Management, August 1, 2009; 35(4): 857 - 879.
[Abstract] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.