100%(5)5 out of 5 people found this document helpful
This preview shows page 1 - 4 out of 6 pages.
Case Study 2.1 – Mylan Thwarted in Hostile Takeover of PerrigoCase Study 2.1Mylan Thwarted in Hostile Takeover of PerrigoMergers and Acquisitions
2Case Study 2.1 – Mylan Thwarted in Hostile Takeover of PerrigoAbstractThis case study is about the takeover of the Perrigo Co., a maker of stone branded generic drugsby the leading generic pharmaceutical drug maker, Mylan NV. Mylan tried to do a hostile takeover of Perrigo while Teva Pharmaceuticals tired to do the same with Mylan. Neither of themsucceeded as Teva withdrew the bid and Mylan was not able to gather the shares to controlPerrigo Co.
3Case Study 2.1 – Mylan Thwarted in Hostile Takeover of Perrigo1.What was Perrigo’s main defense against Mylan? Why was so much reliance given tothis tactic? Speculate as to why shareholders accepted Perrigo’s board and management’sarguments.Perrigo’s main defense against Mylan was it’s shareholders. Even though Mylanoffered the shareholders $75.00 per share and 2.5 share of Mylan, it was able to gatheronly 40% of shareholding. This tactic was given importance because the hostiletakeover can be done by passing the company and directly offering to the shareholders.And if the shareholders are supporting Perrigo, then it is difficult for Mylan to carry aHostile takeover.2.How did corporate inversions undertaken by each firm impact the outcome of thehostile takeover attempt? Be specific.