Journal of Business Ethics 7 (1-2):81 - 87 (1988)

Abstract
Except for a small clutch of academic shark-defenders, everyone seems to know that hostile takeovers are wrong, destructive of people and industries, and damaging to the long-term competitiveness of corporate America. But analysis of the takeover process, absent insider trading, fails to identify any injury that is not replicated elsewhere in the business system. Current suggestions for remedying the situation seem inadequate, ill-fitted to the problem, or hostile to the entire capitalist system. Could it be that it is that system as a whole, or the assumptions underlying it, that is at fault?
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/BF00382001
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 70,008
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Hostile Takeovers—An Analysis Through Just War Theory.Michael Kinsella - 2017 - Journal of Business Ethics 146 (4):771-786.
FOCUS: Risks in Business Ethics and Venture Capital.Yves Fassin - 1993 - Business Ethics, the Environment and Responsibility 2 (3):124–131.
FOCUS: Risks in Business Ethics and Venture Capital.Yves Fassin - 1993 - Business Ethics, the Environment and Responsibility 2 (3):124-131.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
71 ( #161,834 of 2,505,154 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #416,587 of 2,505,154 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes