The Effects of Geographic Distance on the Foreign Acquisition Activity of U.S. Firms

170 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Spatial geography and control in foreign acquisitions (2012, methodology): “Ragozzino (2009) argues that acquirers find it easier to gather information about target firms through informal channels if the targets are physically proximate.”
The effects of linguistic distance and lingua franca proficiency on the stake taken by acquirers in cross-border acquisitions (2015, background): “The literature on acquisitions has focused on geographic distance (e.g., Ragozzino, 2009) and cultural distance (e.g., Malhotra, Sivakumar & Zhu, 2011).”
Do cross-border mergers and acquisitions increase short-term market performance? The case of Chinese firms (2017, background): “However, existing studies tend to focus on the impact of geographic and cultural distance on cross-border M&As (Chakrabarti & Mitchell, 2013; Ragozzino, 2009) without explicitly taking political risk into account.”
Effects of Industry- and Region-Specific Acquisition Experience on Value Creation in Cross-Border Acquisitions: The Moderating Role of Cultural Similarity (2015, result): “, Håkanson and Dow, 2012) suggests that geographic distance can be detrimental to acquisition performance by hampering information flows and communication (Ragozzino, 2009), we controlled for the same in our study.”