This is an academic study and was written only to make a contribution to the scientific debate on corporate governance. The authors did not conduct the study on behalf of a third party and none of the authors received any funds from any party mentioned in this paper. We also did not receive any information or communications from Preussag's management. We are grateful to Michel Habib, Martin Wallmeier, an anonymous referee, and the jury members of the JFE ECGI Clinical Paper Competition, especially Steve Kaplan and Claudio Loderer, for their comments. Christoph Schneider acknowledges the support of a DekaBank scholarship.
How Preussag Became TUI: A Clinical Study of Institutional Blockholders and Restructuring in Europe
Article first published online: 25 AUG 2008
© 2008 Financial Management Association International.
Volume 37, Issue 3, pages 571–598, Autumn 2008
How to Cite
Dittmann, I., Maug, E. and Schneider, C. (2008), How Preussag Became TUI: A Clinical Study of Institutional Blockholders and Restructuring in Europe. Financial Management, 37: 571–598. doi: 10.1111/j.1755-053X.2008.00025.x
- Issue published online: 25 AUG 2008
- Article first published online: 25 AUG 2008
This article has been cited by:
- 1Business portfolio restructuring: a comprehensive bibliometric review, Scientometrics, 2015, 102, 3, 1921, , ,
- 2From patchwork to theory development: mapping and advancing research about business portfolio restructuring, Management Review Quarterly, 2014, 64, 3, 157, , ,
- 3Swiss banking secrecy: the stock market evidence, Financial Markets and Portfolio Management, 2012, 26, 1, 143, , ,
- 4Hedge fund activism: insights from a French clinical study, Applied Financial Economics, 2011, 21, 16, 1225, , ,