Research On The Government Intervention, The Characteristics Of M&A And The Performance Of M&A

As strategic pivots of the transformation of economic development mode, the adjustment of industrial structure and the competition of participating in international culture, cultural industries have been increasingly valued for its huge economic potential and cultural penetration. With the continuous development of cultural industries, it will affect all walks of life gradually and penetrate into every corner of people’s lives. It will play an increasingly large role in economic development. However, in its early stage the cultural industries in China started relatively late and still faces many problems, such as:flawed business mode caused by long term institutional management, mismatch between cultural resources and cultural capital, irrational industrial structure, low concentration of scaled market, the development of cultural enterprises scattered and low effect of industrial clustering, and the weak overall competitiveness of the industry and so on. Therefore, various cultural enterprises put forward the strategy of M&A under the background of cultural industries being raised to a national strategic level. Based on the important ideological attribute of cultural industries and the great importance attached by government, this paper put attention to make theoretical analysis and do some empirical research on the cultural industries’ characteristics and performance of M&A under the government intervention.Through this study, it found that because of different nature of ownerships and different considerations of the development of cultural enterprises, interventions to cultural enterprises from the central control and local control are different. The central government made more local M&A but less inter-province M&A; for local governments, vice versa, they prefer inter-province M&A to local M&A. In order to seek high efficiency and obtain more cultural innovation resources, local government intervention in cultural enterprises mergers and acquisitions tends to break regional division. In terms of payment methods, the central government-controlled companies are more inclined to use non-cash means (such as stocks) and cultural enterprises controlled by local governments prefer to pay in cash.Furthermore, the study of government intervention and performance of M&A found that cultural enterprises controlled by the central government for local M&A performance is better than the performance of off-site M&A; remote control of local government’s M&A performance is superior to local enterprises’inter-province mergers and acquisitions Performance. Integrated performance of local M&A conducted by central government controlled cultural enterprises is significantly better than the performance of local M&A cultural enterprises controlled by local governments; The performance of off-site M&A conducted by local government-controlled cultural enterprises is superior to the performance of off-site M&A conducted by central government-controlled cultural enterprises. This was further evidence of the central government does not act as a’supporting hand’role to the local M&A, while the local government play a’supporting hand’role in promoting the efficiency of resource allocation of local cultural enterprises. Cash payment is better than the non-cash payment on the impact of performance of M&A.