Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

“Fifty in five”: The prospects for merger in the electric utility industry

  • Published:
Journal of Regulatory Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

By analyzing four case studies of merger attempts between electric utilities, we conclude that there are not strong incentives for a wave of combinations in the industry. Potential synergy gains do not provide a strong motivation since they are likely already being captured through joint ventures and coordination agreements. Those that still exist would most likely be distributed to rate payers by regulatory decisions. Managerial incentives of the bidder are countered by the desire of target management to remain independent. Potential gains to the financial community from a wave of mergers are large, but the regulatory process provides a dampening of this otherwise strong incentive.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Auerbach, Alan J. ed. 1988. Corporated Takeovers: Causes and Consequences. Chicago:University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Auerbach, Alan J. and D. Reischus. 1988. “Taxes and the Merger Decision”. In Coffee, Jr., et. al., ed. Knights, Raiders and Targets. New York:Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, Laurits R. and William H. Greene. 1976. “Economies of Scale in U.S. Electric Power Generation.” Journal of Political Economy 84:655–676.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coffee Jr., John C. 1988. Shareholders Versus Managers: The Strain in the Corporate Web. in Coffee Jr. et. al., ed. Knights, Raiders and Targets. New York:Oxford University Press. 77–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coffee Jr., John C., Louis Lowenstein, Susan Rose-Acherman. 1988. Knights, Raiders and Targets. New York:Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cook, J. 1989. “Power Goals.” Forbes April 3:16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Easterbrook, F. H. and Daniel R. Fischel. 1981a. “The Proper Role of a Targets' Management in Responding to a Tender Offer.” Harvard Law Review 94:1161, 1199–1201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Easterbrook, F. H. and Daniel R. Fischel. 1981b. “Takeover Bids, Defensive Tactics, and Shareholders' Welfare. The Business Lawyer 36:1733–1750.

    Google Scholar 

  • Easterbrook, F. H. and Daniel R. Fischel. 1982. “Corporate Control Transactions.” Yale Law Journal 91:698–737.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The Electricity Journal. 1989. “Championship Regulatory Wrestling, a Two-Ring Affair.” (April):5–7.

  • The Electricity Journal. 1989. “The PacifiCorp-Utah P & L Merger, Wherein the Merging Companies Ride Into the Sunset, While Others Fuss and Fume.” (January/February):39–42.

  • The Electricity Journal. 1989. “SCE's Pursuit of the ‘Crown Jewel’ of Mergers Raises Focus of Southern California Local Governments, Smaller Competitors.” (January/February):43–47.

  • The Electricity Journal. 1989. “Utah Merger Redux.” April:3–4.

  • The Electricity Journal. 1988, “What FERC said: The Utah-PacifiCorp Merger Decision.” (December): 19–25.

  • Fenn, Scott A. 1987. “Raiders of the Last Ark: Prospects for Mergers and Acquisitions in the Electric Industry.” Public Utilities Fortnightly October 15:9–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fenn, Scott A. 1988. Mergers and Financial Restructuring in the Electric Power Industry, Investor Responsibility Research Center, 1988.

  • FERC. 1988. Utah Power and Light PacifiCorp and PC/UP&L Merging Corporation; Opinion and Order Affirming in Part, Modifying in Part, and Reversing in Part Initial Decision and Conditionally Approving Merger. Order 318, October 26.

  • Fishman, Michael J. 1987. “Preemptive Bidding and the Role of the Medium of Exchange in Acquisitions.” Working Paper Northwestern University.

  • Franks, Julian R., Robert S. Harris, and Colin Mayer. 1987. “Means of Payment in Takeovers: Results for the United Kingdom and the United States.” In Auerbach, ed. Corporate Takeovers: Causes and Consequences. Chicago:221–264.

  • Gilson, Ronald A. 1986. The Law and Finance of Corporate Acquisitions. Foundation Press.

  • Gilson, Ronald A. 1981. “The Structural Approach to Corporations: The Case Against Defensive Tactics in Tender Offers.” Stanford Law Review 33:819–891.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilson, Ronald A., Myron S. Scholes, and Mark A. Wolfson. 1988. Taxation and the Dynamics of Corporate Control: The Uncertain Case of Tax Motivated Acquisition. Coffee Jr. et. al. ed. Knights, Raiders and Targets New York: Oxford University Press. 271–299.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hempling, Scott. 1988. Testimony before the U.S. House of Representatives Subcommittee on Energy and Power, Committee on Energy and Commerce. (Sept. 14).

  • Jensen, Michael C. and Richard S. Ruback. 1983. “The Market for Corporate Control: The Scientific Evidence.” Journal of Financial Economics 11:5–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jarrell, Gregg A., James A. Brickley, and Jeffery M. Netter. 1988. “The Market for Corporate Control: The Empirical Evidence Since 1980.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 2:49–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joskow, Paul L. and Richard Schmalensee. 1983. Markets for Power. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knoeber, Charles R. 1986. “Golden Parachutes, Shark Repellents and Hostile Tender Offers.” American Economic Review 76:155–161.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lambert, R. and D. Larcker. 1985. “Golden Parachutes, Executive Decision-Making, and Shareholder Wealth.” Journal of Accounting and Economics 7:179–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liang, Jonathon R. 1986. “Power Play: Will the Takeover Lightning Strike the Electric Utilities? Barrons (June 2): 8.

  • Luftig, Mark D., Gregory B. Enholm, and Douglas W. Preiser. 1988. The Salomon Brothers 100 Electric Utilities: Company Summaries Salomon Brothers (September).

  • Marine, Henry G. 1965. “Mergers and the Market for Corporate Control.” Journal of Political Economy 73:110–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maugans}, Edgar H.}} 1986}. “The Cleveland Electric-Toledo Edison Affiliation: Stars in the Right Place}.” Public Utilities Fortnightly}} (July 24)}.

  • McLaughlin, Robyn M. 1988. “Investment Banking Contracts in Tender Offers: An Empirical Analysis.” Working Paper, Boston College.

  • Mone, Mario L. 1989. “Legal and Policy Issues to Consider in Electric Utility Mergers and Acquisitions.” NRRI Quarterly Bulletin 10: (March): 141–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neely, Walter P. 1987. “Banking Acquisitions: Acquires and Target Shareholder Returns.” Financial Management 16:66–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Penn, David W. 1988. “Interesting Changes in the American Utilities Business.” Paper presented at the World Electricity Conference, London (November 14, 1988).

  • Schleifer, Andrei and Lawrence Summers. 1987. “Breach of Trust in Hostile Takeovers.” In Auerbach, ed. Corporate Takeovers: Causes and Consequences, Chicago.

  • Stavro, Barry. 1986. “High Voltage Action.” Forbes (May 5): 48.

  • Studness, Charles M. 1987. “PacifiCorp's Acquisition of Utah Power and Light Company.” Public Utilities Fortnightly (October 29): 31–32.

  • Tirello, Edward and Michael Worms. 1988. Electric Utilities: The Case for Consolidation. Shearson, Lehman, Hutton.

  • Vartan, Vartanig G. 1986. “Mergers Seen in Utility Field.” New York Times (Sept 9).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Graduate School of Business, University of Wisconsin - Madison, 1155 Observatory Drive, 53706, Madison, WI, USA

    Dennis J. Ray & Howard E. Thompson

Authors
  1. Dennis J. Ray
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Howard E. Thompson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ray, D.J., Thompson, H.E. “Fifty in five”: The prospects for merger in the electric utility industry. J Regul Econ 2, 111–128 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00165929

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00165929

Keywords

Search

Navigation