Estudo de eventos aplicado para fusões de empresas dos setores de educação, papel e celulose

Abstract

This research has as its main purpose to analyse if Conselho Administrativo de Defesa Econômica (CADE) took the right decision by allowing that Kroton x Anhanguera and Suzano x Fibria mergers occurred. The methodology proposed by Eckbo (1983) affirmed that it was possible to infer if a concentration act was pro-competitive or anticompetitive by how the rival companies’ shares behaved during the news release period. This possibility is due to the fact that if a merger or acquisition is anticompetitive, it may also be beneficial to the rival companies since it is expected that the smaller number of sector players causes a decrease in competition and, by consequence, increases the prices and decreases the amount produced. The inverse occurs if it is pro-competitive due to the new company efficiency increase, it has as a consequence an increase of competitive advantages that is expected to bring more competition to the sector by decreasing the price and increasing the amount produced. This research also seeks to elucidate about possible limitations that this methodology might have when applied in an immature capital market like in Brazil. By the end of the analysis, one can conclude that CADE took a partially correct decision at the Kroton x Anhanguera case because it was approved with restrictions, even though it was right on Suzano x Fibria case. One can also conclude that it is not possible to make a more robust analysis in some sectors because they do not have an adequate amount of opened capital rival companies.