Study Notes
Do takeovers improve economic efficiency?
- Level:
- A-Level, IB
- Board:
- AQA, Edexcel, OCR, IB, Eduqas, WJEC
Last updated 21 Mar 2021
A study note looking at some of the arguments for and against the statement that takeovers help to improve economic efficiency.
Key points:
- Many takeovers are driven by managerial motives
- Most mergers / takeovers are cleared on competition grounds – but the Three-O2 Merger was blocked by European Commission (May 2016)
- Market structure following a takeover is perhaps less important than the actual behaviour of firms in terms of pricing, non-price competition etc.
- Horizontal integration is most likely to raise concerns about the concentration of market power
- But most industries are contestable with a threat of fresh competition + some disruptive smaller entrants
Arguments in support - benefits from takeovers
- Economies of scale from horizontal integration (productive efficiency)
- Higher supernormal profits lead to increased R&D spending and more innovation (dynamic efficiency)
- Firms with monopoly power still face competition in contestable markets (charging allocatively efficient prices)
Counter-arguments
- Increased market power can lead to X-inefficiency (managerial slack, waste)
- Risks of diseconomies of scale (rising long run AC)
- Many takeovers fail to achieve forecast cost gains
- Growing number of de-mergers points to limited impact of takeovers on overall economic efficiency
You might also like
X-Inefficiency
Study Notes
UK Steelmakers seek government help
24th September 2015
Uber's surge pricing and economic models
28th January 2016
Three-O2 Merger Plans Under Scrutiny
5th February 2016
Tesco Goes for External Growth with Booker Takeover
27th January 2017
Are ticket touts economically efficient?
31st October 2017
Lifting productivity growth via immigration
2nd May 2018
UK Economy - Policy Focus - Labour Productivity
Topic Videos