Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Check this out from the text book:

 

  Quote
The results can defy logic. At a company pursuing a major acquisition, we participated in a discussion about whether the deal's likely earnings dilution was important. One of the company's bankers opined that he knew any impact on EPS would be irrelevant to value, but he used it as a simple way to communicate with boards of directors. Elsewhere, we've heard company executives acknowledge that they , too, doubt that the impact of EPS is so important - but the also use it anyway, "for the benefit of Wall Street analysts." Investors also tell us that a deal's short-term impact on EPS is not that important. Apparently everyone knows that a transactions short-term impact on EPS doesn't matter, yet they all pay attention to it.
Posted

More:

 

  Quote
In a survey of 20 UK board members who had served on the boards of both exchange-listed companies and companies owned by private-equity firms, 15 of 20 respondents said that private-equity board provided more value. Their answers suggested two key differences. First, listed-company directors are more focused on risk avoidance than value creation. Second, private-equity directors spend on average nearly three times as many days on their roles as do those at listed companies.

 

Source of that quote: Voice of Experience: Public versus Private Equity, V. Acharya, C.Kehoe and M. Reyner

 

 

Sorry....nothing new here

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...