台灣企業結合行為績效實證分析

An Empirical Analysis of Mergers： Operating Performance and Profitability in Taiwan

10.6342/NTU201702297

何佳毅

結合 ； 併購 ； 經營績效 ； 廠商競爭 ； 公平交易法 ； Consolidation ； Mergers And Acquisitions ； Operating Performance ； Fair Trade

國立臺灣大學經濟學系學位論文

2017年

碩士

林惠玲

繁體中文

企業間的結合行為，對於廠商而言，一般可藉由規模經濟或是範疇經濟獲得經營效能的提升，但也可能導致產業結構改變，進而影響到社會整體福利，故此各國對於結合行為皆有其競爭主管機關予以監控，顯示企業的結合行為是一不可忽視的產業經濟研究區塊。 　　本文利用公平會91年至100年間114件公開上市上櫃公司結合個案資料進行實證研究，旨在觀察廠商結合前後之經營績效變化，主要的實證結果如下：(1)廠商結合後1年，無法辨別出廠商結合後之績效好壞；而在結合後1至4年，平均而言結合變數對於營業毛利率有出現顯著下降的現象，但實證結果發現廠商績效可透過其他變數來改善廠商獲利情形。(2) 採取垂直整合的廠商，在結合後績效顯著提升，產生範疇經濟現象；而水平結合廠商則會有毛利率上升現象，顯示水平結合後的廠商，因為規模擴充，而使得廠商在成本議價、包裝、運輸的營業成本降低。 (3)資本額大小對於毛利率、ROE、ROA皆顯著為正，確有規模經濟與營運效率，且平均而言，小廠在結合後的表現較大廠佳；市佔率對於股東權益報酬率有正向影響，顯示市佔率大的廠商其利用自有資本來獲得利潤的能力較市佔率低的廠商有效率。(4)產業別方面，半導體與光電業在結合後的績效指標出現衰退現象，在本研究中，較無法解釋此現象，可能表示這些產業需要技術集中來取得優勢，在新興競爭者的出現，除了在廠商規模的擴充結合，也需要依靠投注資金在技術研發等方面來進行產能的轉換擴充；金融業則出現毛利率上升的顯著趨勢。總結而言，結合變數的表現不如預期，廠商在結合後沒有出現顯著績效改變方向，但考量其他變數，則發現產業別、總體經濟的影響明顯，或是部分變數結果顯示樣本期間可能需要觀察更長期資訊，以利觀測資本使用情形。

From firms’ perspective, mergers may improve firms’ performance through economics of scale or economics of scope. However, mergers may cause the centralization of market structure and have an impact on social welfare. In view of this, any merger that crosses specific threshold should be submitted to the fair trade commissions. These facts show that mergers have been a noticeable activity, and have been a crucial subject in Industrial Economy. 　　This study use the research sample of mergers not prohibited by FTC between 2002 and 2011, examining the post-merger operating performances. The results show：(1)After a year of merger, the effect of merger is not significant. After 1 to 4 years of merger, mergers have a negative impact on firms’ gross rate. (2)Vertical integration has a positive effect on firms’ performance, showing that the existence of economic of scope. Horizontal integration has a positive effect on gross rate, showing that firms can reduce their operating costs. (3) Asset size has a significantly positive effect on firms’ performances, proving the existence of economic of scale. Moreover, small firms have better improvement on performances after mergers than large firm. (4)Industry-type plays an important role in firms’ performances. In semiconductor and optoelectronics industry, the post-merger performances have a descending trend. It may be caused by the characteristic of technology centralized characteristics and emergence of competitors. On the other hand, the gross rate of financial industry improve after mergers. In conclusion, overall, there are no significant trend in the operating performance after mergers; however, after considering other explanatory variables like industry-type and macroeconomic environment, these variables have evident influence on performance, moreover, the results of some explanatory variables show that the longer sample period is considerable.

1. 林惠玲、陳正倉（2004），「廠商合併行為與其生產力之研究－臺灣製造業廠商之驗證」，《經濟論文叢刊》，32，頁534-571。
   連結：
2. 林彩梅、張曉楨、邱士傑（2009），「中小型企業對越南投資與併購發展之研究」，《多國籍企業管理評論》，3(1)，頁41-65。
   連結：
3. 梁雅琴（2008），《公平交易法結合管制與其績效之實證分析》，國立台灣大學經濟學研究所碩士論文。
   連結：
4. Andrade, G., M. Mitchell and E. Stafford (2001), “New Evidence and Perspectives on Mergers.” Journal of Economic Perspectives, 15, 103-120.
   連結：
5. Arrow, K.J. (1975), “Vertical Integration and Communication.” Bell Journal of Economics, 6, 173-183.
   連結：
6. Becker, M. J. and S. Thomas (2011), “Changes in Concentration Across Vertically Related Industries.” Unpublished working paper, University of Pittsburgh.
   連結：
7. Bhalla, P. (2011), “Determinants of Mergers and Acquisitions of Firms in the Indian Financial Sector: An Empirical Analysis.” IUP Journal of Business Strategy, 8(3), 7-23.
   連結：
8. Campa, J. and I. Hernando (2006), “M&As performance in the European financial industry.” Journal of Banking & Finance, 30(12), 3367-3392.
   連結：
9. Damodaran, A. (2005), “The Value of Synergy.” Working Paper, New York University.
   連結：
10. Dietrich, A. and G. Wanzenried (2011), “Determinants of bank profitability before and during the crisis: Evidence from Switzerland.” Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, 21(3), 307-327.
    連結：
11. Gugler, K. and F. Szücs (2016), “Merger externalities in oligopolistic markets,” International Journal of Industrial Organization, 47, 230-254.
    連結：
12. Healy, P. M. , K.G. Palepu and R. S. Ruback (1992), “ The Market for Corporate Control: The Science Evidence.” Journal of Financial Economics, 11, 5-50.
    連結：
13. Langlois, R. N. and P. L. Robertson (1989), “Explaining Vertical Integration: Lessons from the American Automobile Industry.” The Journal of Economic History, 49(2), 361-375.
    連結：
14. Mcguckin, R. H. and S. V. Nguyen (1995), “On Productivity and Plant Ownership Change: New Evidence from the Longitudinal Research Database.” The RAND Journal of Economics, 26(2) , 257-276.
    連結：
15. Monteverde , K. and D. J. Teece (1982), “Appropriable Rents and Quasi-Vertical Integration,” Journal of Law and Economics, 25, 321-328.
    連結：
16. Mueller, D. C. (1969), “A Theory of Conglomerate Mergers.” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 83(4), 643-59.
    連結：
17. Nielsen, J. F. and R. W. Melicher (1973), “A Financial Analysis of Acquisition and Merger Premiums.”, Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 8(2), 139-148.
    連結：
18. Ravenscraft, D. J. and F. M. Scherer (1989), “The Profitability of Mergers.” International Journal of Industrial Organization, 7(1), 101-106.
    連結：
19. Rashid, A. and N. Naeem (2017), “Effects of mergers on corporate performance: An empirical evaluation using OLS and the empirical Bayesian methods.” Borsa Istanbul Review, 17(1), 10-24.
    連結：
20. Scherer, F.M. and D. Ross (1990) “Industrial Market Structure and Economic Performance. ” Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
    連結：
21. Sheen, A. (2014), “The Real Product Market Impact of Mergers.” The Journal of Finance, 69(6), 2651-2688.
    連結：
22. Stahl, J. C. (2016), “Effects of Deregulation and Consolidation of the Broadcast Television Industry,” American Economic Review, 106(8), 2185-2218.
    連結：
23. Weston, J. F. and K. S. Chung (1983), “Do Mergers Make Money?” Mergers and Acquisitions, 18(3), 40-9.
    連結：
24. Willaimson, O. E. ( 1983), “Organization Form, Residual Claimants, and Corporate Control.” The Journal of Law and Economics, 26(2), 351-366.
    連結：
25. 王若葦（1981），「企業合併及其績效之研究」，《工業簡訊》，11(2)，頁11-18。
26. 中華經濟與金融協會、台灣併購與私募股權協會（2016），《企業併購的第一堂課》，臺北市：日月文化。
27. 吳美麗（1994），《臺灣製造業購併前後購併綜效與經營績效之實證研究》，私立淡江大學管理科學研究所碩士論文。
28. 李宗黎、林蕙真（2007），《會計學新論》，下冊，406，臺北市：証頁。
29. 孫克難（1989a），「企業合併獎勵措施的成效調查與分析(上)」，《企銀季刊》，12(4)，頁28-42。
30. 孫克難（1989b），「企業合併獎勵措施的成效調查與分析(下)」，《企銀季刊》，13(1)，頁56-62。
31. 陳正倉、林惠玲、陳忠榮、莊春發（2014），《產業經濟學》二版，臺北市：雙葉書廊。
32. 游景翔（2003），《廠商合併行為與其生產力之研究》，國立台灣大學經濟學研究所碩士論文。
33. 楊勝淵（1997），《台灣企業購併實質效益之研究》，國立成功大學國際企業研究所碩士論文。
34. 廖振盛（2004），「銀行購併行為與經濟效率分析－兼論購併對象差異的影響」，《台灣銀行季刊》，55(4)，頁1-25。
35. Adelman, M. A. (1961), “The Antimerger Act, 1950-60.” American Economic Review, 51(2), 236-44.
36. Boone, J and J. Weigand (2000), “Measuring Competition in the Dutch Manufacturing Sector: How are Cost Differentials Mapped into Profit Differentials.” CPB Working Paper No. 131.
37. Clarke, R (1985), “Industrial Economics.” Oxford, OX, UK ; New York, NY, USA : B. Blackwell.
38. Farrell, J. and C. Shapiro (1990), “Horizontal Mergers: An Equilibrium Analysis.” The American Economic Review, 80(1), 107-126.
39. Feroz, E., S. Kim, I. Levin, R. Raab and J. Griffith (2002), “Do mergers improve managerial performance? A data envelopment analysis approach.” Working Paper, University of Minnesota-Duluth.
40. Gugler, K.,D. C. Mueller, B. B. Yurtogl and C. Zulehner (2003), “The effects of mergers: an international comparison.” International Journal of Industrial Organization, 21(5), 625-653.
41. Kiymaz, H. and H. K. Baker (2008), “Short-Term Performance, Industry Effects, and Motives: Evidence from Large M&As.” Quarterly Journal of Finance and Accounting, 47(2), 17-44.
42. Mueller, D.C. (1995) “Mergers: Theory and Evidence, in Mergers, market, and public policy (Ed.).” Mussati, Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic, pp. 9–43.
43. Shepherd, W. G. (1997), “The Economics of Industrial Organization: Analysis, Markets, Policies.” 168-173, N.J: Prentice Hall.