Suchergebnisse

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to investigate the payment of percentage cash from total payment in a REITs mergers and acquisitions (M&A) transaction.Design/methodology/approachThis study applies a heteroskedastic‐consistent regression model to analyze the relationship between the percentage of cash paid during M&A transactions and other determinants such as sources of funds, geographical proximity and percentage sought by acquirer.FindingsThe results of empirical analysis show that REITs with internal corporate funds tend to pay larger percentage of cash versus other forms of payments within M&A deals. Moreover, geographical proximity and intra‐industry REITs M&A has no significant effect on the form of payment. And finally, the larger the percentage sought by the acquirer, the less percentage of cash paid in a REITs M&A deal.Practical implicationsThe paper mainly shows that internal funding is a significant factor in determining the percentage of cash versus stocks (or any other form of payment) when completing a merger. This highlights the importance of a REIT to manage its short‐term liquidity and cash specifically. Also, this shows the applicability of pecking order theory on the REITs industry.Originality/valueThe paper researches the cash as a method of payment in REITs M&A, an industry with its specific characteristics.

Renewed anthropological attention to money and finance is welcome. However, recent attention to the ghosts in the financial machine neglects the infrastructures of payment that make finance possible. Following professionals and policymakers into the clearance and settlement of payments – the means of value transfer – affords insight into an industry hotly contested by new entrants and by a few critics who find in its business model a defiance of market logic. The tolls and fees of private payment infrastructures pose challenges to critical analyses of capitalism as well as to the public interest in payment, even as they are essential to the forms and functions of value transfer. Everyday exchanges are tolled, large-scale transfers are not: the article suggests that payment is a pressing political concern, as well as an analytical one.

Renewed anthropological attention to money and finance is welcome. However, recent attention to the ghosts in the financial machine neglects the infrastructures of payment that make finance possible. Following professionals and policymakers into the clearance and settlement of payments – the means of value transfer – affords insight into an industry hotly contested by new entrants and by a few critics who find in its business model a defiance of market logic. The tolls and fees of private payment infrastructures pose challenges to critical analyses of capitalism as well as to the public interest in payment, even as they are essential to the forms and functions of value transfer. Everyday exchanges are tolled, large-scale transfers are not: the article suggests that payment is a pressing political concern, as well as an analytical one.

Practices of paying wages as shares of output in Bangladesh have been limited to harvest and post-harvest labour markets only. In the case of reaping, it is a share of unthreshed paddy; while payments in grain (as shares) are observed for the combined act of reaping, threshing and winnowing. The paper provides a rationale for the existence of such practice. (DÜI-Sen)