企业并购的风险分析外文翻译.doc

有关企业并购的毕业论文外文翻译原文： security vendors say mergerwill give them more financial heft last month, secure computing corp agreed to acquire messaging security vendor cipher trust inc. for $273.6 million. the merged company will sell a range of enterprise gateway security appliances handle threats at the network edge and at the application level . john mcnulty，ceo of san jose-based secure computing and jay chaudhry, founder and ceo of alpharetta, ga.-based cipher trust, spoke with computerworld about their plans. excerpts follow: why did secure computing and cipher trust join forces? mcnulty: we just see a great opportunity to establish an enterprise gateway security company.and the senior team at secure had been stretched as the company has grown. chaudhry: there are some 800 security start-ups. most of them are doing point pr-oducts, and customers are getting tired of it.these companies bring a lot of innovation because of their focus. but they dont quite have the financial strength or scale to be viable players. cipher trust and secure computi-ng combined will keep the focus and innovation of a start-up, but our size and financial st-rength is that of a large company.how do you expect microsofts entry into the security tools business to affect your plans?mcnulty: microsoft clearly is a huge factor. but microsofts expertise is at the desktop.that is not an area we play in. its where you see the likes of symantec, mcafee and trendmicro. that is where microsoft is going to have the biggest impact. microsoft doesnt sell appliances. so this is not something that we fear.what about the moves by network equipment vendors like cisco to get into the security business?chaudhry: if you look at where the ciscos of the world are playing, its at the network level. but if you look at the application gateway level, that is a newly emerging marketand so is the web gateway market.our belief is that with our focus and with our innovation, we are going to be moving forward with some leading-edge solutions.do you agree with analysts who say users now will be more interested in integrated products than best-of-breed tools?chaudhry: in the last six or seven years, there has been a debate over best-of breed vs. integrated products . some companies have been making a big deal about best of breed. i think both approaches have issues.were seeing customers out there who have 10 to 15 boxes doing just the enterprisee-mail gateway. so they do want an integrated solution, but they arent willing to take chances with second-and third-tier solutions. where the market is moving is where you need the best-of breed technology. but if you can deliver it in an integrated solution, that is when you win. how have the threats that users face changed in recent years?mcnulty: most of the things we are intensely worried about today didnt exist 10 years ago. the threat has changed from the kid in the basement trying to impress his friends by defacing a web site to organized crime and to very competent computer experts trying to steal and to commit crimes.the fbis most recent report said that the cost of fraud on the internet to american businesses was $67 billion. thats just the tip of the iceberg, because its only the amount that people want to own up to. signature-based defenses designed to prevent trouble after the horse has escaped the barn are ancient technology.jaikumar vijayan，security vendors say merger will give them more financial heftj，computerworld，2006(22)2：introductionreal estate finance institutions as well as the mortgage banking landscape have undergone a profound restructuring since the late 1980s. the industry continues tochange rapidly. this change is driven by technological innovation, deregulation, and an increasing competition within the sector triggered by non-bank financial intermediaries (see bank for international settlements, 2001; belaisch et al., 2001;smith and walter, 1998). individual real estate institutions have increasingly responded to these developments by climbing aboard the mergers and acquisitions (m&a) treadmill. consolidation activity among mortgage banks and other real estate the current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at finance institutions has increased significantly during the last decade, and particularly within the last three years. despite the consolidation, hardly any empirical research analyses the value implications of m&a activity in the real estate finance sector up to now.to uncover the capital markets reaction to the announcements of m&a transactions in the real estate finance industry, we study a data set of 69 international transactions that occurred between 1995 and 2002. our findings suggest that mergers and acquisitions between real estate finance institutions create value on average. significant positive cumulated abnormal returns can be observed for the target firms, while shareholder value is neither created nor significantly destroyed on the part of the acquiring companies. this result contrasts with empirical evidence from us bank m&a during the 1990s.we start our analysis by providing a short review of the extensive prior research on m&a in the related financial institutions sector. section three presents the data sample and the statistical methodology that we employed. in section four we discuss the results. section five summarizes the findings and draws conclusions.prior researchevidence on the wealth effects of real estate finance mergers is very limited. in a sample of real estate investment trust (reit) transactions that took place between 1977 and 1983 allen and sirmans (1987) found an increase in shareholder wealth upon the announcement of a merger both for the acquired and acquiring firms. however, this positive assessment does not hold over time. based on a sample of reit mergers in the period between 1988 and 1994, campbell et al. (1998) found large negative returns for the acquirers. campbell et al. (2001) analyzed the stock market reaction to 85 reit mergers and observed significantly negative but small stock market returns.journal of property investment & financevol. 24 no. 1, 2006emerald group publishingdirk schiereck and markus mentz 8译文：企业并购的风险分析摘要世界五次大规模并购浪潮充分促进了企业的成长和壮大。但企业兼并失败的比率非常高。本文中，在企业兼并的动因分析的基础上，我们进一步深入分析企业兼并的风险以启发盲目实施兼并的中国企业。关键词：并购动因，风险，规模经济，范围经济自20世纪初，世界五次大型并购浪潮充分促进了企业的成长和壮大。目前世界上几乎所有的大型企业都通过并购成长起来。目前，尽管一些中国企业采取兼并使他们尽快变得更强更大，但我们认为许多大打折扣的企业并购在中国和其他国家不应该被遗忘。美国的经验表明，至少有一半以上的兼并活动是不成功的。然而，鉴于西方企业兼并的历史，在企业兼并的动因分析的基础上，进一步深入分析企业兼并的风险以启发盲目实施兼并的中国企业。1.企业并购的动因西方企业并购的历史,经历了从主横向兼并到主纵向兼并和主混合合并的发展过程，发生在20世纪80年代和90年代的最后两个合并浪潮曾提出了多样化的趋势，三种类型没有区别清楚。尽管西方学者到海外并且深入研究了企业兼并问题，但到现在为止，还没有形成系统的理论框架。在这里，根据西方企业并购的历史，我们主要分析了企业并购的主要动因。1.1规模经济效应所谓规模经济是指，在指定的技术条件下，单位产品的平均成本将随着产出规模的增加而减少。经济规模效应的主要根源在以下几个方面。首先，随着产出规模的增加，固定费用分摊更多的产出，即单位变动成本不改变，单位平均成本将随着产出的增加而减少。其次，随着产出规模的增加，劳动分工更加仔细，当一个人反复做同一工作，他们必将积累经验和提高劳动技能，相应地也会提高劳动生产率。第三，企业规模的增加可以提高企业的信用等级和企业市场地位，并加强企业与供应商和消费者的议价能力。第四，随着企业规模的增加，“大规模储备”可以减少。在工业生产中，由于设备故障和预定服务的需求，适当的设备储备可以确保生产过程的来连续和设备的定期维修和故障设备的更换。然而，储备所需的设备没有改变企业在一定范围内的规模。一个需要某些特殊设备的大型企业，与只使用一个特殊设备的小型企业一样，他们都需要一套备用设备，以确保持续生产。事实上，一些企业实行横向合并，以获得大范围的规模经济效应。1.2交易成本所谓交易成本是指需要支付给市场机制组织的成本，其中包括金钱，时间和精力的交易支出。一般的交易成本可分为两类。一个是谈判成本，包括搜寻成本，信息成本和谈判签订交易合同，协议支付。另一种是合同价，是指为防止一方打破合同或协议的项目所支付的费用成本。关于交易成本的原因，威廉姆森从三个方面做了分析。一个是人类有限的理性思考，也就是因为人们会受不完全信息和知识缺乏的影响，因此他们不能客观，准确地分析和判断事物，使交易双方不能事先签署一个完整的合同终止以上两种行为。二是人类的机会主义国际工商管理杂志2008年4的97行动，即人们可能会为实现自己的利益最大化而采取损害别人利益的行动。不完全合同的存在，将进一步加剧人们的机会主义行动。三是资本的特殊性，即在不影响资本价值的前提下可以用于不同的目的和不同的用户。在交易活动或彼此的控制中，交易一方或双方有一个高度相互依赖性，这样的交易就有高度的资本特殊性。高度的资本特殊性使拥有特殊资本的一方很难退出交易，因为特殊资本用于其他方面时，他的价值会达到下限值。很明显，内部市场交易（即垂直并购）可以充分节约交易成本。在实践中，一些企业实行纵向合并只是为了节约大范围的交易成本。1.3范围经济效应范围经济效应是指由该企业在同一时间提供多方面的产品或服务（不包括垂直合并）诱发的有关费用比由该企业生产的每一个产品或服务引起的成本较低的情况。范围经济效应的产品基于一种或几种在同一时间可以由多方面的产品或服务共享的资源，如技术、生产线、销售渠道、品牌、信誉、管理和文化资源。在实践中，一些企业实行多元化并购只是为了获取更大程度的范围经济效应。1.4分散风险当企业提供多种的非相关产品或服务，生命周期、依赖资源、使用技术、涉及的细分市场的不同，以及国家政策的变化和国际市场波动的影响，使风险在不同的产品或服务中多元化。在实践中，一些企业实施非相关的混合并只是为了分散风险。1.5提升企业核心竞争力去年合并浪潮发生在20世纪80年代和90年代，其合并的主要动因是提高企业核心竞争力。 20世纪70年代以来，信息技术的快速发展，企业面临的环境更加复杂，即使是那些在市场上占据领先地位的大型企业，也要面临一些不知名的小企业或者其他国有企业的强大竞争。在此背景下，更多的企业合并是从企业发展战略考虑合并的效果，其目的是获得长期发展的企业核心竞争力。1.6经理的动因为了追求个人利益最大化，企业经理们倾向于通过并购迅速扩大企业规模。因为企业规模的迅速扩大，不仅可以提高管理人员的收入，也能提高管理人员的社会地位，使企业始终拥有雄厚的抗风险能力和权利与地位的更大保障。在实践中，只是因为如此，一些企业合并后可以得到经理的支持。2.从企业合并的动因看企业兼并的风险我们主要依据企业兼并的历史分析了企业并购的动因，从企业并购的动因来看，企业兼并风险的主要根源有以下几个方面。2.1并非所有的横向兼并都可以产生规模经济效应。 （1）规模经济效应只存在于专业行业。这些行业的特征包括固定成本比例高，这样，规模的增加可以使更多的产出分摊固定成本。然而，在一些零星工业中，专业技能是企业的优越资源，如厨师餐饮业的烹饪技能，咨询顾问在咨询业的知识掌握等等，这些行业几乎都有没有规模经济效应。这可以给为什么第一次大规模的合并浪潮以横向为主，在西方历史上主要的合并是在汽车制造业，钢铁，石油集中，化工等传统产业以很好的解释。进一步说，由于技术进步，固定费用已经在很大程度上减少了，但这些高固定成本的传统产业是在规模经济效应的基础上使产生的横向兼并效应大幅度减少。日本丰田公司的长期实践证明，形成昂贵固定费用的住要原因是企业采用专业的技术和管理模式，而新的技术和管理模式可以充分减少或避免许多固定的费用。 80年代以来，丰田通过在汽车装配过程减少制造、机械装配时间和批量生产管理费用来减少日常管理开支，另外计算机辅助设计的应用也大大减少了固定成本和新的汽车设计过程的直接成本。（2）经济规模效应的产生有特定的范围。当某些企业取得了最佳规模，横向兼并不能降低单位产品分摊的固定费用。 （3）当企业规模大，劳动力成本始终较高。美国国家统计办公室统计数据表明，有超过500名员工的公司比小公司支付的平均工资的高35以上，因为工人在大公司比在小公司更容易建立工会和具有更强的谈判能力。 （4）随着规模的扩大，劳动分工更加精细。虽然这有利于提高劳动生产力，但精细的分工，使工人长期从事单一和重复的工作，难免产生无聊的情绪，降低生产效率，提高离职的比率。 （5）横向兼并容易受到管理层的限制。由于管理范围的限制，管理层一定会增加，这不仅增加了管理费用，而且还容易导致信息失真，降低