1 | P a g e

The effects of acquisitions on key

external stakeholders of the acquired

company.

Elizah Bouderij – 10278613

2 | P a g e

ABSTRACT

Acquisitions are common in business nowadays. In the media almost daily you hear

or read about acquisitions between large companies. But you hear little to nothing

about the effects on the external stakeholders of the acquired company, such as

suppliers, customers and competitors.

Since the focus in the literature is on the acquiring companies and it connected

companies it would be interesting to study the effects that acquisitions have on the

external stakeholders (the customers and suppliers) of the acquired company. In the

literature possible (subjective) effects are described on suppliers and customers.

The aim with this paper is to discuss the effects of acquisitions for the key external

stakeholders. Do they experience any effects/ changes, and what are these effects/

changes as a result of the acquisition?

Based on the obtained data we can classify some effects. In this study these effects

are divided into three categories; financial effects, relational effects and positional

effects. Suppliers and customers experience both positive and negative effects, such

as higher discounts on orders, deals sold out soon and higher price discounts on

products.

3 | P a g e

CONTENT

1. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 5

1.1 BACKGROUND.................................................................................................................................... 5

1.2 PROBLEM DISCUSSION ...................................................................................................................... 6

1.3 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES ...................................................................................................................... 7

1.4 STRUCTURE OF THE STUDY ................................................................................................................ 7

2. LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................................................. 8

2.1 ACQUISITIONS ................................................................................................................................... 8

2.1.1 DEFINITIONS OF ACQUISITIONS .............................................................................................. 8

2.1.2 TYPES OF ACQUISITIONS…………………………………………………………………………………………………… 8

2.1.3 MOTIVES OF ACQUISITIONS………………………………………………………………………………………………. 8

2.2 KEY STAKEHOLDERS ......................................................................................................................... 11

2.3 RELATIONSHIP COMPANY AND STAKEHOLDERS .............................................................................. 13

2.4 THE EFFECTS OF AN ACQUISTION (IN GENERAL) .............................................................................. 14

2.5 THE EFFECTS ON KEY STAKEHOLDERS OF THE ACQUIRED COMPANY .............................................. 16

3. METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................... 21

3.1 RESEARCH APPROACH ..................................................................................................................... 21

3.2 DATA COLLECTION ........................................................................................................................... 21

3.3 DATA ANALYSIS ................................................................................................................................ 24

3.4 RESEARCH CREDIBILITY .................................................................................................................... 24

3.5 RESEARCH ETHICS ............................................................................................................................ 24

4. EMPIRICAL FINDINGS ........................................................................................................... 25

4.1 HISTORY OF THE ACQUIRED COMPANY ........................................................................................... 25

4.2 THE ACQUISITION ............................................................................................................................ 26

5. ANALYSIS .............................................................................................................................. 28

5.1 THE EFFECTS ON THE SUPPLIERS ...................................................................................................... 28

5.2 THE EFFECTS ON THE CUSTOMERS .................................................................................................. 31

5.3 OVERVIEW ....................................................................................................................................... 33

4 | P a g e

6. DISCUSSION EN CONCLUSION ................................................................................................ 33

6.1 RESULTS .......................................................................................................................................... 33

6.2 LIMITATIONS ................................................................................................................................... 35

6.3 SUGGESTION FOR FURTHER RESEARCH .......................................................................................... 35

6.4 CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................................. 36

7. REFERENCES.......................................................................................................................... 37

7.1 ARTICLES ......................................................................................................................................... 37

7.2 WEBSITES ........................................................................................................................................ 40

8. EXHIBIT ................................................................................................................................ 41

8.1 INTERVIEW QUESTIONS .................................................................................................................. 41

8.2 EMAIL SUPPLIERS ............................................................................................................................ 45

5 | P a g e

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

According to several trend reports acquisitions are still booming these days. In

today’s economy many companies are involved in acquisitions. The latest report

shows that year 2015 was a record year. Value increased 28 per cent from 2014

Globally, M&A activity reached a volume of $6.1 trillion, beating the record of 2007.

The top-performing countries by value were the United States, China, the United

Kingdom, Ireland, the Netherlands, Hong Kong and Australia, with each beating their

achievements of 2014. The year's largest deal was worth $160 billion. Many market watchers have predicted that 2016 will still be a powerful year for

merger and acquisitions, largely stimulated by a series of smaller deals.

Figure 1: Zephyr (2015). Zephyr is a database of M&A, IPO, private equity and venture capital

deals with links to detailed financial information on companies (www.zephyrdealdata.com).

Prior research shows that acquisitions affect not only the two companies but also the

stakeholders of a company (customers, suppliers and rivals). In every acquisition

there are both positive and negative implications for key stakeholders. Shareholders,

customers, employees and communities are all impacted (in their own way). From

the television or papers we almost daily hear about acquisitions. But very rarely we

hear the effects on the stakeholders.

6 | P a g e

And looking at the yellow line in 2015 (number of deals) this means many

stakeholders are affected by this huge number of acquisitions.

1.2 Problem discussion

Considering the numbers of acquisitions that have appeared in 2015 and in all those

years before, you might think it is all positive. Take all these acquisitions, at least two

companies per acquisition are involved. This means that there are still more

stakeholders involved (employees, suppliers, rivals etc.) Much is described about the

acquiring companies and the internal stakeholders. According to Siegel (2008)

acquisition may cause employee anxiety, stress, role conflicts (employees are not

being treated equally and fairly, management turnover, and cultural clashes, these

are just some of the potential effects. These effects are also identified by Olah

(2011). When employees are acquired, their lives are filled with a certain amount of

uncertainty. They may not remain employed. There may be different processes and

procedures that govern their work. There may be new expectations and other

changes that will cause anxiety levels to rise. Uncertainty about the future of their

retirement plan money. The effect of acquisitions on top level management may

actually involve a "clash of the egos". There might be variations in the cultures of the

two organizations. Under the new set up the manager may be asked to implement

such policies or strategies, which may not be quite approved by him (Butler et al.

2012).

The effects of acquisitions on the external stakeholders of the acquired company are

less described in the literature. Holtström (2000 and 2003) studied the effect of

acquisitions on the connected companies of the acquired company (external

stakeholders). These connected companies are in this case the suppliers and

customers. The effect that an acquisition has on the network, i.e. companies and

organizations in the surrounding environment, might mean that the co-operation

between the ‘new’ company and their former customers and suppliers will be either

stronger or weaker than before (Holtström, 2000). From his point effects that appear

due to an acquisition might be many. There are only a few possible and subjective

effects described in his paper. According to Holtström (2000) not only customers and

suppliers will be effected as external stakeholders, but most probably also

7 | P a g e

competitors of the acquired company. Studies have not taken into account the effect

on competitors of the acquired companies. But the companies’ position on the market

will probably change (stronger or weaker position) as an outcome of the acquisition.

The acquisition might create substantial market power and might enable the acquired

firm to control prices.

As mentioned by Holtström effects that appear due to an acquisition might be many,

however in his papers there are only a few possible and subjective effects described

(for customers and suppliers). And because his studies are the only ones in this area,

we do not know what the actual effects are due to acquisitions. He also mentioned

that rivals will probably also experience effects of an acquisition. This is not further

discussed in his paper. It is crucial to know all effects on the external stakeholders of

the acquired company. This because many acquisitions take place worldwide and

with each acquisition several stakeholders are involved. The company can (before

and/ or during the acquisition) take into account these effects concerning the

stakeholders.

1.3 Research objective/ question The aim of this study is to identify the effects of an acquisition on the key external

stakeholders of the acquired company.

The research question is what are the effects of an acquisition on the key external

stakeholders of the acquired company (customers, suppliers and rivals).

1.4 Structure of the study

The paper is structured as follows; In the following section, we review the literature

on acquisitions (motives and types of acquisitions, etc.), key external stakeholders of

a company and the possible effects of an acquisition. Then data collection will be

retrieved through interviews with external stakeholders and it will be analysed. The

collected data will then be assessed against the theory. In the last section of this

paper a discussion for open gaps and conclusion will be provided.

8 | P a g e

2. Literature review In this chapter the theoretical framework, which my research is based upon is

presented. We begin by discussing acquisitions, followed by the key stakeholders.

Then the effects on the stakeholders due to acquisitions will be discussed, Lastly, a

summary is presented of our theoretical findings.

2.1 Acquisitions

2.1.1 Definition of Acquisition

An acquisition is when one business is purchased by another one and then no new

company is formed. Such purchase may be of 100%,or almost 100%, of the assets or

ownership equity of the acquired entity (www. wikipedia.org).

According to Schnitzer (1996) there are two general types of acquisitions: friendly

and hostile. When the board of directors and managers of the target company agree

an acquisition from the acquiring firm, it is called a friendly acquisition. The top

managers of the target firm will keep their positions within the newly created firm. In

contrast, a hostile takeover takes place in a situation when the acquired firm resists

an acquisition from others; in this case the top managers in the target firm may lose

their jobs after the hostile takeover (Schnitzer, 1996).

Whether a purchase is observed as being a "friendly" one or "hostile" depends on

how the acquisition is reported to and welcomed by the target company's board of

directors, employees and shareholders (www. wikipedia.org).

2.1.2 Types of Acquisitions From the view of business structure and the relationship between two companies,

according to Gaugham (2005), there are four important categories of acquisitions:

horizontal, vertical, conglomerate and cross-border. Each type has its own features

and nature.

9 | P a g e

Horizontal Acquisitions

Here one company acquires another one from the same business field. The

companies involved in a horizontal acquisition produce the same goods or services.

For example, an acquisition of one energy producer by its larger rival would be a

horizontal acquisition. This kind of acquisition is the most popular (Brealey et al.,

2006). Horizontal acquisitions may occur from the possible side effects on

competition in the same industry. Horizontal acquisitions usually happen between

small or immature companies and when there is no dominant leader. An example of

Horizontal acquisition is: Walt Disney Company acquired Lucasfilm (October 2012). Vertical Acquisitions

Vertical acquisitions refer to the vertical integration of two companies, which operate

in the same production line. For example, an acquisition of one oil refining company

by an energy producer. Specifically speaking, there are two major categories of

vertical acquisitions which are forward integration (the acquirer expands forward of

the ultimate consumer) and backward integration (the buyer expands backward to

suppliers of raw materials) (Brealey et al. 2006). An example of this kind of is Google

and Motorola Mobility Holdings (June 2012). Conglomerate Acquisitions

This is a combination of two companies which do business in various fields (Brealey

et al.2006). There are three groups of conglomerate acquisitions: product extension

mergers, geographic market extension mergers and the other conglomerate mergers.

The first type is when two companies acquire in related businesses in order to

broaden the product lines. The second one take place when two companies, which

have no overlapping businesses, merge in different geographic areas. The last type

refers to a pure conglomerate acquisition in different business fields.

Cross - Border Acquisitions

Cross-border acquisitions refer to acquisitions across national boundaries and

involving significant cash flow into other countries (Sudarsanam, 1995). It seems that

cross-border acquisitions have an increasing trend over the past couple of years due

to the globalization and the development of internet. With the arrival of globalization,

companies prefer to seek a competitive area that is worldwide in scale in order to

10 | P a g e

have customers worldwide. Cross-border acquisitions can be divided as horizontal,

vertical and conglomerate.

2.1.3 Motives acquisitions

Acquisitions play an important role in the majority of companies’ strategies. The

motives for acquisitions can be indicated as the acquirer’s corporate and business

strategy objectives, which are varied in different companies. Empirical evidence has

presented many possible motives. According to Shi et al. (2012) reasons for a

company to engage in acquisitions are achieving economies of scale, scope, market

share, prestige, survival, and other outcomes crucial to temporary or sustained

competitive advantage. In the article by Holtström (2000) reasons for companies to

join in an acquisitions are, to reduce risk and increase company effectiveness in both

production and distribution. Holtström believes that acquisitions could be to

strengthen the market position of the acquired and the acquiring company, increase

company growth in present and developing markets, and diversification – developing

into new businesses. The reason according to Seth (1990) is market power “the

ability of a market participant or group of participants to control the price, the quantity

or the nature of the products sold, thereby generating extra-normal profits”. Also

creating a better environment for development and improving managerial efficiency;

a company may prefer to acquire a target to improve managerial efficiency by

reorganize its operations (Copeland et al., 2005). Another important point why

acquisitions occur according to Seth et al. (2000) is synergies; It refers to acquire

with the resources of two separate firms and thus it contributes to the value of the

newly combined firm greater than that of two separate unities. One important source

of synergy is from the transfer of some valuable intangible assets, such as know-

how, between targets and acquirers (Seth et al., 2000). The synergy motive creates

shareholders value for the acquirer and the acquired or the new company.

Specifically speaking, according to Chatterjee (1986), there are three types of

synergy creation: operational synergy, financial synergy and collusive synergy.

11 | P a g e

2.2 Key Stakeholders In the literature there is much written about the stakeholders of a company.

According to Mitchell et al (1997) there is not much argument/ discussion on what

kind of entity can be a stakeholder. People, groups, neighborhoods, firms, services,

associations, and also the natural environment is qualified as actual or potential

stakeholders. Freeman's (1984) definition of stakeholder is: "any group or individual

who can affect or is affected by the achievement of the organization's objectives".

There are many types of stakeholders:

• Primary stakeholders are the persons or groups that stand to be straightly

affected (positively or negatively), by actions of a firm

• Secondary stakeholders are persons or groups that are indirectly affected (both

positive and negative), by actions of a firm (often external stakeholders).

• Key stakeholders, are the persons or groups who might belong to both or neither

of the first two stakeholders, are those who

can have a positive or negative effect by an

action, or who are essential within or to a firm

engaged in an effort.

In this study we focus only on the key external

stakeholders (outside the company). To

further narrow the external stakeholders we

use Porters five forces model.This is a

framework to analyze level of competition within an industry and business strategy

development. Threat of entry: Newcomers to an branch of industry bring new

capacity to obtain market. These newcomers can become rivals. Powerful suppliers & buyers: Suppliers can apply bargaining power on contestants in an industry by

raising prices or reducing the quality of purchased goods and services. Customers

likewise can urge on down prices, demand better quality, and play competitors off

against each other. Substitute products: The existence of products outside of the

domain of the common product boundaries (Competitors).

12 | P a g e

Jockeying for positions: Rivalry among existing competitors takes the familiar form

of jockeying for positions – using methods like price competition and product

introduction (Porter, 2008).

It is important for a company to find a position in the industry (among its

stakeholders) where the company can influence them in its favor. And mentioned by

Cartwright and Schoenberg (2006) acquisitions appear to provide at best a mixed

performance to the broad range of stakeholders involved.

In this paper we focus on the customers and suppliers. This because these

stakeholders play a central role in Porter’s framework. But also in Porter´s Value

chain (1985), see below:

This framework focuses on how inputs are transformed into outputs acquired by

consumers. Porter outlines a chain of activities common to all companies and he

divided them into primary activities and support activities (see the table below.

In Porter’s Value chain customers and suppliers play an important role. Mainly with

the primary activities. These activities connect directly to the physical creation, sale

and support of a product/ service. They consist of the following: Inbound logistics – the processes connected to receiving, storing and distributing

inputs internally. relationships with suppliers are an important element in creating

value.

13 | P a g e

Operations – these activities change inputs into outputs and are sold to the

customers.

Outbound logistics – activities that bring the product/ service to the customer, like,

storage and distribution systems.

Marketing and sales – the processes that are used to persuade customers to buy

your product/ service instead of your competitors.

Service – activities related to maintaining the value of your product/ service to your

customers, once it has been purchased.

Support activities support the primary functions above. For example, supporting

marketing and sales with other activities.

As already mentioned above suppliers and customers play a critical role in Porter’s

framework as well as in Porters Value chain. Another conclusion is that they are

affected the most from acquisitions.

2.3 The relationship between a company and its stakeholders

For a company relationships with stakeholders are important. Stakeholders can

influence/ impact companies as a result of various sources of power, urgency or

legitimacy (Mitchell et al. 1997). Power is defined as the extent to which a

stakeholder has or can obtain access to powerful, utilitarian or normative means to

apply their will. Urgency is defined as 'the degree to which stakeholder claims call for

immediate attention' (Mitchell et. al, 1997). The definition of legitimacy is taken from

Suchman (1995) who defines legitimacy as 'a generalized perception or assumption

that the actions of an entity are desirable, proper, or appropriate within some socially

constructed system of norms, values, beliefs, and definitions'. The more attributes the

stakeholder has, the more interest he gets from managers. In other words the

greatest priority will be given to stakeholders who have power, legitimacy and

urgency. Additionally, company policies, processes and procedures have an effect on

stakeholders, forming the basis of a relationship that can perhaps contribute to the

company’s success, a resource for the company. Because stakeholders are affected

14 | P a g e

by and can affect company practices, companies develop good stakeholder- related

practices because it is in their best interests (Waddock, 2006) Additionally, such

practices represent ways of developing long-term relationships with stakeholders.

Also good stakeholder practices can potentially bring a basis for the type of valuable,

rare, inimitable and non- substitutable resource that serves as a source of

competitive advantage (Barney 1991; Barney et al. 2001).

An acquisition can affect the relationship between the company and its key

stakeholders. It is important to study the effects per stakeholder. This (for the

company) to keep a good relationship, create value and to anticipate other players,

reactions to your actions. If you know the effects, you can look forward into the

business (Brandenburger & Nalebuff, 1997).

According to Håkansson (1994) a company has relationships mainly with two types of

divisions: actors that act as resource providers (suppliers) and actors using a

resource (customers of products or services) provided by the company.”

Therefore, In this study we only focus on these stakeholders.

2.4 The effects of an acquisition (in general)

Capital Structure and Financial Position

As mentioned in the article by Picado (2014) an acquisition obviously has longer-term

effects for the acquiring company than it does for the target company in an

acquisition.

For the acquirer, the impact of an acquisition transaction depends on the deal size

relative to the company’s size. The larger the acquired company, the bigger the risk

to the acquirer. A company may be able to resist the failure of a small-sized

acquisition, but the failure of a huge purchase may seriously put in danger its long-

term success (Picado, 2014).

The acquirer’s capital structure will change, depending on how the deal of the

acquisition was formulated. An all-cash deal will substantially decrease the acquirer’s

cash holdings. But as many companies rarely have the cash available to make full

15 | P a g e

payment for a target company, acquisitions are often financed through debt. While

this additional debt increases a company’s indebtedness, the higher debt may be

filled up by the additional cash flows contributed by the acquisition. Many acquisitions

are also financed through the acquirer’s stock (Picado, 2014)

Market Reaction and Future Growth

Another effect mentioned in the article by Picado (2014) is the reaction of the market

by an announcement of an acquisition, this can be either positive or negative. This

depends on the perception of the participants in the market about the merits of the

deal. In most cases, the acquired company’s shares will increase to a level close to

that of the acquirer’s offer.

There are cases in which the acquired company may trade below the announced

offer price. This generally occurs when part of the purchase consideration is to be

made in the acquirer’s shares and the stock sinks when the deal is announced.

There are number of reasons why an acquirer’s shares may decline when it

announces an acquisition. Market participants may think that the price tag for the

purchase is too high. Or investors believe that the acquirer is taking on too much debt

to finance the acquisition.

An acquirer’s future growth prospects and profitability should ideally be improved by

the acquisitions it makes. Analysts and investors often focus on the “organic” growth

rate of revenue and operating margins – which excludes the impact of an acquisition

– for such a company.

In incidents where the acquirer has made a hostile bid for a company, the

management of the acquired company may recommend that its shareholders turn

down the deal. One of the most common reasons for such refusal is that the target’s

management believes the acquirer’s offer significantly undervalues it

16 | P a g e

2.5 The effects of an acquisition on key stakeholders of the acquired company There has been some attention in the literature dedicated to evaluating the effects of

acquisitions on connected companies/ external stakeholders. Holtström (2000 and

2003) studied the effect of acquisitions on the connected companies of the acquiring

and acquired company. These connected companies are in this case the suppliers

and customers. According to Holtström companies interact with a market because

they have something that is required by other actors in the market and/or they

interact with the market because they need something provided by other actors in the

market. Close co-operation in a network between companies and their stakeholders

is important. Competition in the market is getting harder. Due to shorter product life

cycles, there is a need to reach the market more quickly. Due to interaction between

companies a relationship is developed between them, and relationships are social

exchange processes where trust is of importance (Holtström, 2000). It is not only

important to have a strong position within the network in which they operate, but also

to build relationships with external stakeholders. External stakeholders are affected

by activities who are carried out in/by a company. Companies must therefore apply

some level of adaptation to effects/ reactions from outside the company. As already

mentioned by Brandenburger & Nalebuff to anticipate to other players, reactions to

your actions. If you know the effects, you can look forward into the business. If one

company acquires another company, what are the effects on the suppliers and

customers of the acquired company? The new goals of the acquired company, such

as gaining greater market share, entering into a new geographical or business

market, etc., can bring along possible effects for its customers and/ or suppliers

(Tunisini, A and Bocconcelli, R). In the article by Holtström (2000) some of the

suppliers might have been suppliers to both companies, and they now have only one

customer instead of two. Relationships with suppliers can be terminated, they can be

replaced. In the article by Tunisini and Bocconcelli these changes in relationships

have produced different re-actions by different stakeholders of the acquired

company: - Positive re-actions: stakeholders have chosen to invest more into the relationship

and to strengthen it;

17 | P a g e

- Problematic re-actions: conflicts have emerged that produced the weakening or the

terminating of the relationship. The problematic re-actions are related to different motivations. In most cases the

increased degree of formalization generated problems to stakeholders. They may not

get used to such formalization, they are used to informal relationships. Very often,

lower intensity in social exchange created problems to stakeholders used to personal

contacts. Another possible effect according to Holtström (2003) is the frequency or

volume of sales/ purchase can change. Especially suppliers that are more reliant on

the acquired firm for sales revenue (i.e., suppliers that face potentially higher costs of

switching output to another industry or customer) experience significantly larger

reductions in cash flow margins subsequent to the acquisition (Fee and Thomas,

2003). Also acquired companies may conspire with rivals to reduce purchases to

market levels and thereby lower input prices at the expense of their suppliers.

Effects on customers resulting from acquisitions are mostly negative in their eyes.

Customers satisfaction depends on the price and quality of the company, and the

ability to meet expectations. In 50% of the acquisitions, customers gave the company

lower marks in at least one of the three categories. Customers thought they got better

service or prices from only 29% of the acquisitions. "Customers are increasingly

frustrated because they perceive they have a lack of choice" (Bloomberg).

Customers to the two companies may also have been purchasing from both

companies and now they buy from one. Customers of both companies face a broader

product pallet, This lessening the need to turn to other companies for the

complementary assortment (Holtström, 2003). Another effect for customers may be

that the company becomes a preferred choice for large customers, each buying

more. The acquired company is now focusing more on large and geographically

spread customers. The company could have grown past some of its prior customers,

and the customers might consider the new company as being too big to do business

with. Important is to observe how closely the customers and suppliers (external

stakeholders) have been working together with the acquired company. The effect that

an acquisition has on the network, i.e. companies and organizations in the

surrounding environment, might mean that the co-operation between the ‘new’

18 | P a g e

company and their former customers and suppliers will be either stronger or weaker

than before (Holtström, 2000). Probably the supplier with a single relationship to one

of the companies faces an insecure and unstable future, being known only to one of

the companies. The supplier with relationships with both of the companies faces a

situation known and this might be an improved position. Also the position of

customers can change, from a strong negotiation position to a weak(er) negotiation

position. Also the market might become more concentrated and the alternatives for

customers would be fever. Many times the customers' needs are not considered by

acquired companies. Companies are chosen based on value, product, service, and

reputation. An acquisition can lead to changes in service or product availability. A

company and customer builds customer relationships over time. Many times with

acquisitions, some of the support people you have known for years will become

collateral losses (Ehow.com). Not only customers and suppliers will be effected as

external stakeholders, but most probably also competitors of the acquired company

(Holtström, 2000). The companies’ position on the market will likely change (stronger

or weaker position) as an outcome of the acquisition. The acquisition might create

substantial market power and might enable the acquired firm to manage and control

prices, and this will probably have an effect on its competitors. To identity the effects more clearly we divided them into three categories. This to

compare the effects with our findings:

- Financial effects: the literature shows that customers, suppliers and

competitors experience these effects as key external stakeholders of an

acquisition. Financial effects have to do with costs (purchasing products),

orders (sales volume) and prices (control prices and the price of products). In

the literature these effects are described as an economic impact. This means

a financial effect that something, especially something new, has on

a situation or person (Cambridge Business English Dictionary). According to

Holtström (2003) this can be the change in frequency or volume of sales/

purchase.

- Relational effects: business relationships exist between the acquired company

and its external key stakeholders. When the company is acquired some effects

are experienced, this is already mentioned in the literature. The relationship

19 | P a g e

will become stronger or terminate. According to Håkansson and Snehota

(1995) business relationships have three layers, activity links, resource ties

and actor bonds. The first consists of technical, administrative and other

activities that connect internal activities between the two parties. Resource ties

are ties that connect the various resource elements between the parties

(technical, material and knowledge resources). Actor bonds is about how the

two parties perceive, evaluate and treat each other. For this research we will

use these layers in relational effects. With the suppliers we expect to see

effects on these layers.

- Positional effects: These are effects on the position of the stakeholder in

relation to the acquired company (network position). Effects that are

mentioned in the literature are related to the negotiating position and the

market position of the key external stakeholder (stronger or weaker after the

acquisition). It is possible that the acquisition might create market power for

the acquired company.

We summarized the effects described in the literature below:

Financial effects Relational effects Positional effects

Suppliers * Frequency or volume of

sales/ purchase can

change (orders) * Larger reductions in cash

flow margins * Lower input prices

* The relation may

terminate (replaced) or

become stronger (actor

bonds),

* Co-operation between

the acquired company and

its suppliers will be either

stronger or weaker than

before (resource ties -

ties that connects the

various resource elements

between two companies),

* Suppliers

that are more

reliant on the

acquired

company

experience a

weaker

position

(negotiating

position)

20 | P a g e

Customers * The market might become

more concentrated * The alternatives for

customers would be fever,

lack of choice. This brings

higher costs. * Change in service and

prices

* The acquired company is

now focusing more on

large and geographically

spread customers. The

company could have

grown past some of its

prior customers * Co-operation between

the acquired company and

its customers will be either

stronger or weaker than

before (resource ties),

* From a strong

negotiation

position to a

weak(er)

negotiation

position.

Competitors * The acquisition might

create substantial market

power and might enable the

acquired firm to control

prices, and this will

probably have an effect on

its competitors (prices),

* Not mentioned in the

literature

* The position

compared to

the acquired

company on

the market will

probably

change

(stronger or

weaker position)

With this research we want to investigate of the effects mentioned in the literature are

correct and if these effects are all the effects external stakeholders experience

(completeness of the literature).

21 | P a g e

3. METHODOLOGY

In this chapter we explain how the research was conducted. We begin with the

discussion of the research strategy where we explain the reasons for our choice of

research design and method. We then explain the data collection method and how

the interviews were conducted. Lastly we discuss research credibility, research ethics

and the limitations of this thesis

3.1 Research approach

The purpose of this study is to identify the effects of acquisitions on the key

stakeholders of the acquired company. The theoretical framework is developed prior

to the data collection. This research approach is called a deductive approach. To be

able to answer the research question: what are the effects of an acquisition on the

key external stakeholders of the acquired company (customers, suppliers and rivals),

we need an understanding of the current and past organizational setting. The classification of the research purpose is explanatory where the focus is on

studying a situation in order to explain the relationships between variables. In this

case the company is acquired, what are the effects on the key external stakeholders

as a result of the acquisition.

The research will be carried out as a qualitative case study at a large health and

beauty retail company in the Netherlands. A case study is an “empirical investigation

of a particular contemporary phenomenon within its real life context” and often used

in an explanatory study (Saunders et al. 2009). In this paper a multi method

qualitative research approach, where more than one data collection method, will be

used. Company documentation (secondary data) and Interviews (primary data) is

what I will use to answer the research question.

3.2 Data collection The literature review highlighted the possible effects of an acquisition on suppliers

and customers of the acquired company. I want to investigate this phenomenon

further at an acquired company with experiences with all key external stakeholders.

Therefore, we performed a case study of an acquired retail company.

22 | P a g e

A.S. Watson

A.S. Watson is the world's largest health, beauty & lifestyle retailer with over 10,000

stores operating 20 retail brands in 33 markets worldwide. The year 2002 A.S.

Watson expanded into the Netherlands with the acquisition of Kruidvat and also

adding a number of different brands to its portfolio, ICI Paris XL and Trekpleister. For

this research we only focus on the chain Kruidvat. We will interview the key

stakeholders of Kruidvat, this to get a clear picture of the effects of the acquisition.

Many key external stakeholders of A.S. Watson have long been involved with the

company. The customers and suppliers chosen for the interviews have been in

contact with the company before and after the acquisition. They both have good

knowledge and insight of the company. The stakeholders are divided in large,

average and small suppliers as well as loyal and ordinary customers. This to get a

clear picture of the effects per stakeholder. Below you can find a list of the key stakeholders who will be selected for an interview: 1.Suppliers

We will use a heterogeneity sample, the suppliers are divided into three groups; large

(of the top 5 suppliers of A.S. Watson), average and small suppliers. These suppliers

also deliver all kinds of products, from Beauty and Health to Fashion and Intellectual

products. Also they all did business with A.S Watson before the acquisition. This

allows us to examine the effects by supplier. Have small suppliers experienced more

effects? And are there any difference (between small and large suppliers) in what

effects they experience? The interviewees were all owners or sales directors of the companies. 1 Large supplier Henkel/ Schwarzkopf Supplier Beauty Care

1 Average supplier LTG Europe BV Supplier Electronics

1 Small supplier Kalshoven Productions Supplier Intellectual/ Books

23 | P a g e

2. Customers

We divided the group customers into two groups; loyal and ordinary customers. We

will also interview different age groups, this because the acquisition is already a few

years ago. The customers must have experienced this period (before and after the

acquisition). The customers will be interviewed at the Kruidvat stores.

Loyal customers 35 - 50 years

(4 customers)

51 - 65+ years

(4 customers)

Ordinary customers 35 - 50 years

(4 customers)

51 - 65+ years

(4 customers)

Per group (loyal and ordinary) eight customers were interviewed. The age of the

respondents varies from 37 to 82 years. The customers come to the store once a

week on average, a single twice a week. Also most of the interviewees are customers

of Kruidvat for a long-time, and are familiar with the acquisition (75% are familiar).

The interviews For this research semi-structured interviews are the preferable choice. This to ask for

attendant question to attain full knowledge about the effects. It also allows the

respondents to discuss and raise issues that may not have considered. Questions

will be asked in Dutch and will be recorded with the consent of the respondent. The

interviews were conducted face-to-face and by mail. Two different interviews are

drawn up, one for each stakeholder. This because the literature already has shown

that the effects on stakeholders are different.

The layout of the interviews are practically the same. The first few questions are

asked with the purpose to get a clear picture of the supplier and customer. The

following questions relate to the effects mentioned in the literature (financial effects,

relational effects and positional effects). The last questions are asked for additions

related to the effects and new insights. The interviews can be seen in appendix 1.

24 | P a g e

3.3 Data analysis

We use a multi method approach to analyse the result of both primary and secondary

data. The semi-structured interviews that were used were in-lined with the theoretical

framework, which is used as a guide in our analysis. The results and analysis

answers my research question “ What are the effects of acquisitions on key external

stakeholders of the acquired company?” 3.4 Data credibility

A proper research design is important to reduce the possibility of obtaining wrong

answers (Saunders et al, 2009). The reliability refers to which the data collections

and analysis technique will yield consistent findings (Saunders et al, 2009). To

increase reliability and reduce risk of subject and/or participant bias, I informed the

participants about the nature of the outputs to which the research was intended to

lead, and I also told that they were anonymous. I gathered secondary data about the

company before conducting interviews. I was also well familiar with the literature

before I started the interviews. Validity on the other hand, refers to whether the

findings are really what they appear to be about (Saunders et al, 2009). To maximize

this, I conducted test interviews on peers to see what kind of answers I could expect.

As a result, I made some reformulations of the questions. Also to ensure validity in

the analysis I compared results from different participants/ respondents to ensure I

obtained consistent findings. At least, to increase validity, my conclusions are based

on supporting literature regarding the issue studied. 3.5 Research ethics

The ethical consideration of this research design is not to expose the respondents to

embarrassment, harm or other types of difficulties (Saunders et al., 2009). All the

respondents have voluntarily agreed to be interviewed and they were all informed

about the anonymity of the thesis.

25 | P a g e

4. Empirical findings This chapter describes the company I have chosen. First the secondary data of the

acquired company is presented. This gives a brief historical view of the organization.

At last we present the results from the interviews.

4.1 History of the acquired firm

The first Kruidvat was opened in 1975 by Dick Siebrand. The company is a retail,

pharmacy and drugstore chain. Kruidvat is an important and the large market player

in the field of Health and Beauty.

Only eight years after its foundation the 100th store was opened. In 1992 Kruidvat

extended to the Belgian market and also in Belgium it is a large market player.

26 | P a g e

Kruidvat offers a cheap, varied and high-quality range of Health & Beauty articles,

added with non-industry related products (toy, clothes, electronics, etc.). The

company is also known for its surprising actions, perfumery department and its own

(discount) diaper line. The company now employs more than 15,000 employees in various positions.

Kruidvat has now more than 860 stores in the Netherlands and 200 stores in

Belgium. It employs more than 15,000 employees in various positions and has 3

million customers per week. The headquarter is located in Renswoude with its main

distribution centre in Heteren. In addition to Kruidvat itself, Kruidvat Holding also owned ICI Paris XL and

Trekpleister in the Netherlands and Belgium. It also holds 50% of Rossmann in

Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic in addition to Superdrug in the United

Kingdom. 4.2 The acquisition

In 2002 Hutchison Whampoa Limited (Hutchison) has, through its wholly owned

subsidiary A.S. Watson, acquired one of Europe's leading Health & Beauty retail

businesses, the Kruidvat, for approximately € 1,300 million.

The addition of the Kruidvat improves A.S. Watson 's presence in Europe, its leading

market position, its earnings growth, and in addition provides synergies with ASW's

existing operations.

The Kruidvat stores, in combination with A.S. Watson 's existing personal care

stores, makes A.S. Watson one of the world's largest health and beauty chains.

According to Mr. Canning Fok, Hutchison's Group Managing Director, "Kruidvat was

chosen for its exceptional reputation and market leader position. It is an excellent fit

for our expanding retail business, giving us a more diversified portfolio and better

geographical balance. The acquisition also provides us with many opportunities for

synergies pan Europe and Asia."

Ian Wade, Group Managing Director of A.S. Watson said, "A.S. Watson is proud to

add the Kruidvat to the personal care retail family. Kruidvat has a similar business

27 | P a g e

culture and store format as A.S. Watson and we believe this will provide strong

synergies between us."

With the addition of the Kruidvat Group in 2002, ASW's European portfolio expanded

from nine to twelve countries. The acquisition provides a strong platform for

continued expansion into the European health and beauty market.

Dick van Hedel, Chief Executive Officer of Kruidvat Group called the acquisition, "a

rarity in today's business world, the acquisition of a company by a shareholder with

significant strategic value," adding that, "the experience and global strength of

Whampoa Limited (Hutchison) will help Kruidvat achieve new heights."

A.S. Watson (ASW)

With history dating back to 1828, A.S. Watson has evolved into an international retail

and manufacturing business in Asia and Europe, with over 12,000 stores operating

13 retail brands in 24 markets worldwide.

Each year Deloitte publishes a report “global powers of retailing”. This report

identifies the 250 largest retailers around the world based on their performance

(geographic region, e-commerce activity and other factors). In the report of 2016 A.S.

Watson is on place fifty.

(Deloitte: Global powers of retailing 2016, Published on Jan 16, 2016)

28 | P a g e

A.S. Watson has one of the world's largest portfolio of retail formats, retail brands

and geographical presence. Supported by a global family of over 110,000 staff, the

Group is also a member of the world renowned multinational conglomerate Hutchison

Whampoa Limited, which has major interests in ports and related services; property

and hotels; retail; infrastructure; energy and telecommunications in over 50 countries.

5. Analysis In this chapter the effects of the acquisition on the external key stakeholders will be

analyzed.

5.1 The effects on the suppliers

Small Supplier

Financial effects according the small supplier are higher discounts on orders. There

remains little margin left for the supplier and therefore they earn less on orders.

Also bonuses on products and turnover are higher now than before the acquisitions.

The growth bonus is calculated on the turnover and varies between the 2 - 3,75 % (a

year). In addition they also have to pay 1% advertising fee.

And A.S. Watson has the appointment with suppliers if they pay the invoices for

orders within the payment term that they receive a discount (varies per supplier, often

1% - 3%).

Also, another financial effect mentioned by the small supplier is that buyers of

Kruidvat do not always respond to offers. They are waiting for a reply, and send

multiple reminders to the buyer department. He said: “no is also an answer, I then

can present the offer to third parties”.

The effect of an acquisition on sales is also mentioned by Holtström (2003), he says

the frequency or volume of sales/ purchase can change. And in the case of the small

supplier this indeed changed in a negative way. The supplier appointed the

decrease in orders multiple times as an effect of the acquisition.

Another effect appointed by the respondent is the relationship. The relation and

contact between Kruidvat and its supplier is less personal and less direct. Kruidvat

29 | P a g e

takes less time for personal conversations with its suppliers. The buyers are hard. As

already mentioned, they react sometimes not at all on offers/deals, even after several

reminders. This change in relationship is also described in the paper by Tunisini and

Bocconcell, The small supplier is used to the informal relationship. An effect of the

acquisition is lower intensity in social exchange and this created problems. Conflicts

have emerged that produced the weakening of the relationship. Co-operation between A.S. Watson and its small supplier is become less intensive.

According to Håkansson and Snehota (1995) the relationship between the company

and its suppliers consist of three layers. If we are looking at this, the resource ties

connect less after the acquisitions as they did before. The orders and knowledge is

less needed. A.S. Watson has more options for obtaining these products. The small

supplier does depend on the orders of Kruidvat. The layer called actor bonds is about

how the two parties perceive, evaluate and treat each other. The small supplier

mentioned clearly the difference in treatment before and after the acquisition (less

friendly, direct, etc.) The position towards Kruidvat is, for the small suppliers, not gotten better. This has to

due to the effects mentioned above. They prefer doing business with Kruidvat before

the acquisition. And also mentioned by Holtström, a supplier with a single relationship

to one of the companies faces an insecure future. With the small supplier this is also

the case. The company has a single relationship with A.S. Watson and is more reliant

on A.S. Watson than the other way around. Therefore they experience a weaker

position. A.S. Watson has become bigger after the acquisition and obtained a

stronger position towards its (small) supplier (s) and on the market.

Average Supplier

Financial effects on average suppliers are also noticeable. Bonuses are higher (as

also mentioned by the small supplier) and are settled directly with the invoices/

payments. The supplier also indicates that the financial effects are a combination of

the acquisition and the changed market conditions such as the extremely weak euro,

rising costs and rising CE costs. This supplier does not appoint the effects directly to

the acquisition.

30 | P a g e

The relation (both business and personal) has changed since the acquisition. The

average supplier gives as an example: A deal is a deal! Where there was “coulance”,

we do not see this anymore.

And especially now in these (difficult) times. The supplier had expected more of the

relation with Kruidvat. As the supplier mentioned: “You work and operate together in

the same field, you have to help each other and keep each other alive”.

These above mentioned effects have to do with the actor bonds. This is according to

Håkansson and Snehota (1995) one layer of a business relationship. This is about

how the two parties treat each other. The supplier sees this relationship as a co-

operation but they clearly experienced a negative change/impact.

If we look at the resource ties, the connections between the various elements, there

is not an clear effect after the acquisition. The company needs the average supplier

more than the small supplier. They were before the acquisitions and are after the

acquisition a resource for each other. Also the average supplier is less dependent of

Kruidvat than the small supplier.

Large Supplier

A financial effect according to the large supplier is that there is more focus and

control on the key figures, numbers, Profit and Loss accounts and balance sheet

numbers.

The respondent describes the relation as strictly business based on mutual

dependence. This means the activity links between both parties, the technical,

administrative and other activities connect internal activities between them. They are

also connected by resource ties, such as products, knowledge and advertising. The

supplier cannot mention concrete changes concerning their business relation with

A.S Watson after the acquisition.

Also before the acquisition the large supplier had already relationships with both of

the companies. And mentioned in the article by Holtström (2000) suppliers with

relationships with both of the companies faces a situation known and this might be a

better position. This is definitely the case with the large supplier.

31 | P a g e

The position compared to Kruidvat has changed but this is not an effect of the

acquisition but is due to market conditions and market developments. The acquisition

has resulted in a stronger market position, but Kruidvat is depending on the products

of the large supplier. The supplier is a large player in the market concerning Health

and Beauty. Kruidvat needs these products in its stores.

The large supplier has no preference concerning doing business with Kruidvat before

or after the acquisition.

Below an overview of the most important findings/ effects experienced by suppliers

due to the acquisition.

Financial effects Relational effects Positional effects Suppliers *Higher discounts and

bonuses (all suppliers) *Decrease in orders (small supplier) *Average and large suppliers also appoint market development as a reason

* Small supplier Less direct and less personal. * Average supplier: No “coulance”. * Small & Average: Expected more of the relationship. *Large supplier: No concrete changes

* Small suppliers: Less strong (single relationship). * Small suppliers: Reliant on ASW * Average supplier: Same position (resource for each other) * Large supplier: Same position (still a large player in the market)

5.2 The effects on the customers

If we look at the customers of Kruidvat, we see a lot of loyal customers. They visit the

shop once or twice a week, for years. Some already from the beginning of Kruidvat.

One respondent said: “I started shopping at Kruidvat 40 years ago, as long as I can

remember I come to these stores”.

The customers do experience some effects of the acquisition of Kruidvat. Where the

literature mentioned the alternatives for customers to buy their products (next to

Kruidvat) would be fewer, the customer think there are enough alternatives where

they can buy the same kind of products. Stores that were mentioned by the

customers are Etos and Trekpleister. Etos is a large competitor of Kruidvat but

Trekpleister is also part of the AS Watson group.

32 | P a g e

Kruidvat does well in the eyes of the customers compared to its competitors (DA,

Etos and Action). The stores a highly rated by all the respondents. One customer

said: “Kruidvat is the best store there is”.

Effects mentioned by all the customers are related to the offers and actions Kruidvat

offer. They experience more price discounts and more 1 + 1 actions. However the

stock of these products/ offers are not always well planned (20% of the respondents).

The top deals are often sold out soon and then no longer orderable/ available, this

clearly is a negative effect.

The position of the customers according to this group is still strong. According to the

customers Kruidvat is really listening to them. One customers said “when I come to

the store, the employees are always customer friendly”. The store knows the

customers’ needs and sells these wanted goods through good and sharp deals.

As the literature already mentioned the co-operation between the acquired company

and its customers can become weaker or stronger. In the case of Kruidvat this is

definitely stronger. The store has a strong position in the customers mind but also the

other way around. People are aware of the acquisition and have experienced little

effects. And the effects they experienced are generally all positive.

None of the respondents experienced a change in the focus of Kruidvat on its

customers. This effects is mentioned by Holtström, 2003), it is possible that the

company is now focusing more on large and geographically spread customers. The

company could have grown past some of its prior customers, and the customers

might consider the new company as being too big an actor to do business with. But

this effect is not mentioned by any customer/ respondent.

Below an overview of the most important findings/ effects experienced by suppliers

due to the acquisition.

Financial effects Relational effects Positional effects Customers *The products are

offered with higher price discounts, 1+1 actions *The stock is not always well planned.

*Co-operation is stronger. Kruidvat is listening to its customers. And as a result, good actions!

*The position of the customer is still strong (customer friendly, wanted actions/ products). *The focus is not changed on (more)

33 | P a g e

*Deals are sold out to soon. *Enough alternatives for customers to buy same kind of products

large and geo-graphically spread customers

6. Discussion and Conclusion In this chapter the findings and conclusions will be discussed. Thereafter suggestions

for further research will be proposed.

6.1 Results and discussion

Research of the effects of acquisitions on the external stakeholders of the acquired

company are less described in the literature, however effects on the acquiring

companies and the internal stakeholders has been widely studied.

This research is based on literature, company information and interviews with key

external stakeholders of an acquired company. Our analysis of the interviews of close

stakeholders allows us to see directly if there are any effects of an acquisitions on

external stakeholders en what these effects are. For each stakeholder we have data

from different levels; the suppliers were divided into size and categories and

customers into age and type of customer (loyal or ordinary).

With the use the interviews this thesis has found support that acquisition indeed have

some effects on the company’s key stakeholders.

The research question what are the effects of an acquisition on the key external

stakeholders of the acquired company (customers, suppliers)? can now be

answered.

My research has shown that most of the effects mentioned in the literature are indeed

effects of an acquisition on external stakeholders. The effects experienced most are

the financial effects.

Suppliers appoint high discounts on orders and products. Also bonuses are higher

and are settled directly with the invoices/ payments. A.S Watson has a dominant

34 | P a g e

position with regard to the payments. According to the large suppliers the focus and

control has shifted on key figures, numbers, Profit and Loss accounts and balance

sheet numbers. Unfortunately the financial effects experienced by suppliers are only

negative.

On the other hand the customers are generally more positive. The financial effects

according this group are low prices asked for products and good actions (sales and

discounts).

Other clear effects experienced by the suppliers and customers are the positional

effects:

The position of the supplier compared to Kruidvat is not gotten better (in all cases)

but this depends according the literature to the relationship. According to Holtström

(2000) the large supplier had already relationships with both of the companies

before the acquisition, the small supplier on the other hand with one. The suppliers

position is not only changed by the acquisition but also due to the changing

conditions and market developments (this is not an effect of the acquisition).

The position of the customer is still strong, they feel Kruidvat is really listening to

them. The store knows the customers’ needs and sells these desired goods through

good and sharp deals.

And where Holtström and Bloomberg both mention the lack of choice for alternatives

(where customers can buy the same kind of products), this research shows the

opposite. The customer appointed stores such as Etos, Trekpleister and Action.

Another effect according the literature for customers may be that the company

becomes a preferred choice for large customers, focusing more on large and

geographically spread customers. But none of the respondents experienced a

change in the focus of Kruidvat on its customers

35 | P a g e

6.2 Limitations A limitation of this thesis lies in its generalizability. My survey has been conducted in

the retail sector. The effects may be different to stakeholders of companies operating

in a different sector. Therefore the question arises whether this thesis can be applied

to companies in other sectors. Each sector has its own customers and suppliers that

all experience other effects from acquisitions. Due to less cooperation, another limitation is to conduct interviews with more

suppliers based on my theoretical framework. This to make the research more in-

depth.

The last limitation is that the customers were all interviewed at Kruivat stores in

Arnhem. It is possible that customers from other regions experience other effects.

6.3 Suggestion for further research

Within this thesis we studied the effects of acquisitions on the external stakeholders,

only the customers and suppliers. However, the external stakeholders consist of a

larger group than just these two. This needs to be studied further. Are other key

stakeholders also experiencing effects form acquisitions and what are the effects? A

suggestion is to interview competitors of the acquired company. It would be favorable

to know the effects on this group. As already mentioned in the literature not only

customers and suppliers will be effected as external stakeholders, but most probably

also competitors of the acquired company. I have tried to do research to this group

also but this is unfortunately not succeeded. These competitors did not want to give

information to me as an employee of Kruidvat.

Also interesting is to compare the situation of the key external stakeholders before

and after the acquisition. This to see if there are any noticeable differences or

changes that are an effect of the acquisition. This can be done by conducting

interviews with these groups before the acquisition and again after the acquisition. Last, as a reaction to the acquisition, do stakeholders make strategic choices? And

what are these actions?

36 | P a g e

6.4 Conclusions

This thesis shows that the acquisition of Kruidvat bring some effects. Each group

within the stakeholders of A.S Watson experience effects due to the acquisition.

These effects also vary by group. During the period of the acquisition and after A.S.

Watson has a very important role; dealing with the acquisition and at the same time

dealing with its stakeholders. Important for the company is to retain its relationship

with these groups. Kruidvat is nothing without its suppliers and customers. And to use

this study they will know the effects in advance if they acquire more companies in the

future. They can use this information to prepare for these effects, this may lead to

less effects or less noticeable effects for the stakeholders.

The results of this thesis can also be used by other companies who are acquired.

They can take into account the effects mentioned in this paper to prepare themselves

and their stakeholders for such effects (financial, relational en positional effects). The

cooperation between the acquired company and its stakeholders is very important in

this process. They can cooperate together.

And last, suppliers of acquired companies can also apply the effects mentioned in

this paper. With the results they can prepare themselves for possible changes.

Suppliers can make arrangements with the acquired company such as agreements

on frequency of sales and adjustments in their conditions (margins and bonuses)

before and during the acquisition. Then they will not encounter unexpected effects

and can make strategic choices in time. As mentioned by Brandenburger & Nalebuff

if you know the effects of an acquisition, you can look forward into the business

37 | P a g e

7. References Articles

Öberg, C, Grundström, C and Jönsson, P (2008), “Acquisitions and network identity

change”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 45 No. 9/10, pp. 1470-1500

Teerikangas, S (2012), “ Dynamics of Acquired Firm Pre-Acquisition Employee

Reactions”, Journal of Management, Vol. 38 No. 2, pp. 599-639

Holtström, J,(2000), "Effects on customers’ and suppliers’ due to mergers and

acquisitions", 10th Nordic Workshop on Interorganisational Research

Holtström, J and Öberg, C (2003), “Cross-border acquisitions - Effects on the

acquired companies’ customers and suppliers”, 13th Nordic Workshop on

Interorganizational Research

Shi, W, Sun, J and John, E, (2012), "A Temporal Perspective of Merger and

Acquisition and Strategic Alliance Initiatives: Review and Future Direction". Journal of

Management, Vol. 38 No. 1, 164-209

Håkansson, H, Snehota, I (1995), “Developing Relationships in Business Networks”,

Routledge 11 New Fetter Lane

Olah, M,(2011), “Impact of Merger & Acquisition ACTIVITY ON RETIREMENT

“.Strong Investments, Inc.

Andrade,G, Mitchell, M and Stafford, E (2001), “12 New Evidence and Perspectives

on Mergers”, Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 15, No 2 , pp. 103–12

Mitchell,R, Agle, B and Wood, D (1997). ”Toward a Theory of Stakeholder

Identification and Salience: Defining the Principle of Who and What Really Counts”,

The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 22, No. 4, pp. 853-886

38 | P a g e

Savage,G, Nix,T, Whitehead, C and Blair, J (1991), “Strategies for Assessing and

Managing Organizational Stakeholders”, Academy of Management, Vol. 5, No. 2 pp.

61-75

Waddock, S and Graves, S (2006), “The Impact of Mergers and Acquisitions on

Corporate Stakeholder Practices”, School of Management.

Caniëls, M, Gelderman, C (2007), “Power and interdependence in buyer supplier

relationships:A purchasing portfolio approach”, Industrial Marketing Management,

Vol. 36, Issue 2, p. 219-229

Wang, J (2007), “Motives and Effects of Mergers and Acquisitions”.

Mitchell, R, Bradley, A and Wood, D (1997),” Toward a Theory of Stakeholder

Identification and Salience: Defining the Principle of Who and What Really Counts”,

Academy of Management Review, Vol. 22, No. 4, pp. 853-88

Philips, C, “Negative effects acquisition”, Ehow

Butler, F, Perryman, A and Ranft, A (2012),” Examining the effects of acquired top

management team turnover on firm performance post-acquisition: a meta-analysis”,

Journal of managerial Issues.

Porter, M (2008),”The five competitive forces that shape strategy”, Harvard Business

Review, Vol.86(1), p.78

Brandenburger, Co-opetition 1. Revolutionary Mindset that Redefines Competition

and Co-operation 2. The Game Theory Strategy that's Changing the Game of

Business”, Journal of Marketing, Volume 61, No 2, pp. 92-95.

Hergery, N and McCorristonz, S (2013), ” Horizontal, Vertical, and Conglomerate

FDI: Evidencefrom Cross Border Acquisitions” , Study Center Gerzensee Jenniges , D (2013), “The Determinants of Horizontal and Vertical Cross-border

Mergers”, Department of Economics, University of Kentucky

39 | P a g e

Herger, N and McCorriston, S (2012), “Disentangling Strategies of Multinational

Integration from Cross Border Acquisitions”, European Trade Study Group

Picado, J (2014), “How mergers and acquisitions can affect a company”,

investopedia

Cassiman, B, Colombo, M, Garrone, P and Veugelers, R (2003), “The impact of M&A

on the R&D process: An empirical analysis of the role of technological- and market-

relatedness”, ESE Business School – University of Navarra

Arora, M and Kumar, A (2012), “ A Study on Mergers and Acquisitions - Its impact on

Management and Employees”, www.theinternationaljournal.org, Vol. 01, No 05

Dilshad, M (2013), “Profitability Analysis of Mergers and Acquisitions: An Event Study

Approach”, Cardiff Business School,Cardiff University, Vol. 3, No. 1

Porter, M (1985),” The Competitive Advantage: “Creating and Sustaining Superior

Performance”, NY: Free Press

Tunisini, A and Bocconcelli, R, “Corporate Acquisitions and Market Relationships”,

University of Urbino

Fee, E and Thomas, S (2003), “Sources of Gains in Horizontal Mergers: Evidence

from Customer, Supplier, and Rival Firms”, Michigan State University

40 | P a g e

Websites:

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Mergers+and+Acquisitions http:// www.zephyrdealdata.com http://finance.mapsofworld.com/merger-acquisition/impact.html http://www.b2b-enews.com/issues/vol3/mergers.htm http://smallbusiness.chron.com/different-stakeholders-business-20363.html http://smallbusiness.chron.com/can-company-merger-affect-consumers-37226.html http://smallbusiness.chron.com/happens-employees-acquisition-occurs-33636.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stakeholder_(corporate)

http://www.mergersandacquisitions.in/acquisitions.htm

http://www.ehow.com/info_10045357_negative-effects-acquisition.html

http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etos

http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/DA_%28drogisterij%29

http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Action_%28winkel%29

http://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/102914/how-mergers-and-

acquisitions-can-affect-company.asp

http://www.riverwealthadvisors.com/mergers-and-acquisitions-impact.html

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/economic-impact

http://people.stern.nyu.edu/adamodar/pdfiles/papers/acquisitions.pdf

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2004-12-05/why-consumers-hate-mergers

http://detailhandel.info/index.cfm/branches/persoonlijke-verzorging/drogisterijen/

https://insights.abnamro.nl/visie-op-sector/2014/visie-op-drogisterijen/

41 | P a g e

8. Exhibit Appendix 1. Interview questions.

Interview Suppliers

1. Hoe lang doet uw bedrijf al zaken met Kruidvat? En sinds wanneer heeft u zelf te maken met Kruidvat?

2. Wat is uw functie binnen het bedrijf?

3. Wat voor producten levert u aan Kruidvat?

4. Kruidvat is in 2002 overgenomen door AS Watson, wist u dat?

5. Heeft u door de jaren heen veranderingen ervaren bij de Kruidvat? Zo ja wat voor veranderingen? (voor en na overname)

6. Heeft u op financieel vlak ook effecten ervaren van de overname? Kunt u enkele voorbeelden noemen m.b.t orders, marges op producten en kosten?

7. Als u kijkt naar de zakenrelatie tussen u en Kruidvat. Wat voor een relatie heeft u met Kruidvat? Waar is deze relatie op gebaseerd?

8. Kunt u in de relationele sfeer enkele concrete veranderingen benoemen (voor en na de overname)?

9. Als u kijkt naar uw positie ten opzichte van het Kruidvat. Hoe ziet u uw positie ten opzichte van Kruidvat? Is uw positie veranderd door de overname (onderhandelingspositie)?

42 | P a g e

10. Als u mocht kiezen doet u dan liever zaken met het “oude” Kruidvat of met het Kruidvat na de overname?

11. Heeft u verder nog toevoegingen en/ of vragen m.b.t dit onderzoek?

Interview Customers

1. Wat is uw leeftijd?

2. Hoe lang bent u al klant bij de Kruidvat?

3. Hoe vaak komt u gemiddeld per week bij de Kruidvat?

4. Ziet u zichzelf als een trouwe klant van Kruidvat?

5. Kruidvat is in 2002 overgenomen door AS Watson, wist u dat?

6. Heeft u door de jaren heen veranderingen ervaren bij de Kruidvat? Zo ja wat voor veranderingen?

7. Vindt u dat u nog genoeg alternatieven heeft naast Kruidvat? Andere winkels waar u dezelfde artikelen kunt kopen. Welke winkels zijn dat?

8. Hoe ziet u Kruidvat ten opzicht van Etos, DA en Action?

9. Heeft u door de jaren heen veranderingen in de prijzen/ acties van Kruidvat ervaren?

10. Heeft Kruidvat volgens u haar focus op klanten aangepast of behouden? (breder geografisch, grote klanten)

43 | P a g e

11. Vindt u dat Kruidvat samenwerkt en luistert naar u als klant?

12. Hoe ziet u uw positie als klant ten opzichte van de organisatie Kruidvat? Is uw positie veranderd naar de overname (sterker/ zwakker)? Zo ja wat is er veranderd en in welke mate is uw positie veranderd?

13. Heeft u verder nog toevoegingen en/ of vragen m.b.t dit onderzoek?

Interview Competitors

1.Wat is uw functie binnen het bedrijf?

2. Hoelang werkt u al bij dit bedrijf?

3. Ziet u Kruidvat als één van u concurrenten?

4. Kruidvat is in 2002 overgenomen door AS Watson, wist u dat?

5. Kunt u vertellen hoe u Kruidvat zag als concurrent voor de overname en ziet als concurrent na de overname?

6. Heeft u als concurrent door de jaren heen veranderingen ervaren bij de Kruidvat? Zo ja wat voor veranderingen? (voor en na overname)

7. Hoe ziet u Kruidvat na de overname (als concurrent)? Is dit verandert ten opzichte van voor de overname.

8. Welke partijen zijn volgens u sterke marktspelers in de Retail branche?

44 | P a g e

9. Beschikt Kruidvat volgens u over bepaalde marketpower (het bepalen van en/of de controle hebben over de prijzen van producten)?

10. Welke partij is bepalend in het neerzetten van prijzen en acties? Welke rol voor Kruidvat ziet u hierin?

11. Heeft het bepalen van prijzen en acties door andere partijen ook invloed/ effect op u? En wat voor invloed/effect heeft dit precies op uw bedrijf?

12. Vindt u, als er een zakelijke relatie is tussen uw bedrijf en Kruidvat, dat deze relatie is veranderd na de overname? Hoe ziet deze relatie er uit? en wat is er precies veranderd?

13. Vindt u dat uw positie ten opzichte van Kruidvat is veranderd na de overname? Zo ja wat is er precies veranderd (marktpositie)?

14. Hoe ziet u de positie van Kruidvat ten opzichte van andere marktspelers zoals Etos, DA en Action?

15. Heeft u verder nog toevoegingen en/ of vragen m.b.t dit onderzoek?

45 | P a g e

Appendix 2. Email to suppliers

Beste,

Wij hebben eerder contact gehad aangezien u een leverancier bent van Kruidvat. Dit ging toen over de nog openstaande facturen. Nu ben ik op dit moment bezig met mijn scriptie, de laatste fase van de studie Bedrijfskunde. Ik doe onderzoek naar de effecten van een overname op leveranciers. Ik zou u graag willen vragen om mij te helpen met mijn onderzoek.

In de bijlage vindt u een vragenlijst bestaande uit 11 vragen. Het invullen vergt niet veel tijd en u zou mij daar enorm mee helpen. Uw naam en bedrijf zullen uiteraard niet vermeld worden. U blijft geheel anoniem

Ik hoop van harte dat u de vragen wilt beantwoorden en terug wilt mailen.

Mocht u nog vragen hebben dan kunt u mij altijd mailen of telefonisch bereiken op 06- 46414832.

Alvast bedankt voor uw tijd

Met vriendelijke groet,

Elizah Bouderij

Afdeling debiteurenbeheer- Supplier Management

A.S. Watson (Health & Beauty Continental Europe) B.V.

E-mail: e.bouderij@nl.aswatson.com