National Express rejects takeover bid from First Group (Financial Times, 29 June

National Express rejects takeover bid from First Group (Financial Times, 29 June 2009)
Literature Review

The main emphasis of the paper is on the price impact caused by the announcement of the failed acquisition. On June 29th 2009, the Financial times officially reported that negotiations broke down between the two companies. It is important to discuss the share price movements, abnormal returns, market response or change in shareholder’s wealth. Moreover, if you search news articles on this specific case, it will be worthwhile to discuss the motives of proposed merger, the roles of chief executives and so on.

Below is a brief description of the event:

The Financial Times reported on 29 June 2009 that National Express has rejected an
unsolicited takeover bid from its larger rival FirstGroup in a surprise development likely
to put further pressure on the embattled bus and rail operator. News of the board’s
decision to spurn the offer comes ahead of a crucial trading update on Wednesday and
only a week after the company agreed a deal with bankers to ease restrictions on its
1.2bn debt burden. The future of National Express has been called into question by the
government’s repeated refusal to renegotiate the terms of its East Coast rail franchise
between London and Edinburgh, the most expensive in the industry. Analysts said the
approach from FirstGroup suggested an agreement with the Department for Transport
was imminent.

Literature review
? Put your study into context; help readers to understand the relevance of your current study.
? Compare and contrast with previous findings.
? Not a mechanical account.
? Synthesized and summarized.
? Subsections allowed.
This can be a fairly descriptive review of the relevant literature, but you can o?er a critique
where you think it is appropriate. A good literature review will include an integrated
coverage of the relevant literature with appropriate parts of the literature linked. Your
review should not be a series of unconnected paragraphs each beginning with something
like, ?X (1990) did/said this . . . ?, ?Y (1995) examined . . . ?, etc.

PLACE THIS ORDER OR A SIMILAR ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET AN AMAZING DISCOUNT 🙂