Become a Financial Modeling & Valuation Analyst (FMVA)®. Enroll today to advance your career!
Login to your new FMVA dashboard today!

Pre-Offer Defense Mechanism

A preemptive strategy used by a target company to protect itself from a possible bidding offer from a would-be acquirer

What is Pre-offer Defense Mechanism?

Pre-offer defense mechanism is a general term for a broad group of defensive strategies in M&A transactions. Essentially, the pre-offer defense mechanism is a preemptive strategy undertaken by a target company to protect itself from a possible bidding offer from a would-be acquirer in a hostile takeover.


Pre-Offer Defense Mechanism


Objectives of Pre-offer Defense Mechanisms

The goal of pre-offer defensive strategies is to minimize the probability of a hostile takeover by increasing the financial burden on a potential bidder (e.g., increase total acquisition costs of a deal), making a target company less attractive to a bidder, or setting up various corporate governance restrictions to limit the voting and decision-making power of a hostile bidder. Generally, the pre-offer defense mechanisms are set up much earlier before the actual bid offer for a hostile takeover is made.


Types of Pre-offer Defense Mechanisms

All pre-offer defense mechanisms can be divided into different categories based on the means to achieve the goal of reducing the probability of a hostile takeover. The first category of pre-offer defense strategies primarily deals with corporate securities. Such defense mechanisms include:


1. Poison pill

The poison pill tactic is probably one of the most well-known defensive strategies. The main idea of the strategy is the dilution of the company’s shares and the concentration of power around the existing shareholders. There are two types of poison pill strategy:


2. Flip-in poison pill

The flip-in poison pill is a provision in the corporate governance allowing the current shareholders of a target company the purchase of the additional shares at a discount. Generally, the discount for the purchase of additional shares is significant.


3. Flip-over poison pill

The flip-over poison pill is a provision that allows the shareholders of a target company purchasing the shares in the acquiring company at a discounted price.


4. Poison put

Essentially, the poison put defensive strategy is a variation of the poison pill strategy. Under the poison put strategy, the target company issues bonds to investors that can be redeemed prior to the maturity date at a discount price. Note that the bonds can be redeemed before their maturity date only after the submission of a hostile bid.


The second category of pre-offer defensive mechanisms includes strategies known as shark repellents. The shark repellents do not impact the shareholders of the target company but creates challenges in corporate governance for a potential bidder or increases the total acquisition costs. Examples of shark repellents are:


1. Golden parachutes

Golden parachutes are referred to as clauses in the employment contracts of the target company’s managers that award the managers substantial benefits and/or bonuses if the contract is terminated. The goal of the golden parachute is to put a bigger financial burden on a potential hostile bidder.


2. Supermajority provisions

They are the amendments in the corporate charter of a target company that require a substantially large percentage of shareholders (generally between 70% to 90%) to approve important corporate matters such as an acquisition of a company. The supermajority provisions modify the generally accepted majority provisions that require the approval from only more than 50% of the company’s shareholders. Generally, the amendments aim to increase the total cost of acquisitions.


3. Staggered board of directors

A staggered board of directors is a practice in the corporate governance in which the board is divided into separate groups with different service terms. Such a governance structure implies that the whole board of directors cannot be replaced at once. Thus, even if a corporate raider acquires a substantial interest in a target company, it will not be able to exercise its voting power.


4. Strategic incorporation

A company may strategically select the jurisdiction of its incorporation to prevent the possibilities of a hostile takeover. The strategic incorporation strategy involves choosing a jurisdiction with considerable restrictions on merger and acquisition deals. The most notable example of such restrictions is anti-competition laws (in the United States, they are known as antitrust laws).


Additional Resources

CFI is the official provider of the Financial Modeling and Valuation Analyst (FMVA)™ certification program, designed to transform anyone into a world-class financial analyst.

To keep learning and developing your knowledge of financial analysis, we highly recommend the additional resources below:

  • Control Premium
  • M&A Considerations and Implications
  • Relative Valuation Models
  • Takeover Premium

M&A Modeling Course

Learn how to model mergers and acquisitions in CFI’s M&A Modeling Course!

Build an M&A model from scratch the easy way with step-by-step instruction.

This course will teach you how to model synergies, accretion/dilution, pro forma metrics and a complete M&A model. View the course now!