Skip to main content

Difference between merger, acquisition and amalgamation

The concept of Merger, Acquisition and Amalgamation primarily suggests the compromises and arrangements made by one or more companies in order to form a new separate entity, acquire a subsidiary company or combine two or more companies into one single entity respectively. Such compromises arrangements and amalgamations are talked about in Chapter XV of Companies Act, 2013.

These terms are often used in place of each other but they however are not, Merger is basically combining more than one two equal companies at their own discretion where one company cease to exist, whereas acquisition is a concept in which one entity is wholly acquired or purchased by another entity and Amalgamation on the other hand is an aspect where two or more companies merge in order to form a new entity

 

Differences in these concepts occur on the following fronts:

  1. Number of entities involved

In a merger it requires minimum two entities and only one entity is left after absorption of the target company.

For example: there are two companies A and B, merger of A and B will result into company A or company B.

An Acquisition also requires minimum 2 entities after which the control of one company is handed over to the other by selling them shares and assets of the company.

For example: there are two companies A and B, acquisition of A and B will result into company A as well as company B, but the majority shares and assets will be with either A or B.

Unlike merger and acquisition, amalgamation requires minimum 3 entities as amalgamation of two entities will lead to formation of a third separate entity.

For example: there are two companies A and B, amalgamation of A and B will result into a third new company C.

     2.  Company as a result of these processes

In a merger one of the company who targets, absorbs the targeted company and continues it existence, whereas in acquisition the company that is acquired cease to exist and becomes a part of the company that acquired it. In Amalgamation however, the two entities which amalgamate cease to exist and new entity functions.

    3. Size of the Companies

In a merger both the companies are of the same size and work on same scale, whereas in acquisition large companies acquire small companies. However, in amalgamation, the company and its target company’s sized are same.

   4.Their impact on shares

The company that absorbs the shares if the other company acquires the shares of the absorbed company in a merger, whereas in acquisition the acquiring company buys majority shares of the acquired company. However, in amalgamation shares of the new entity are passed on to the shareholder of previous existing entities.

   5. Treatment of accounts

In a merger as one of the companies cease to exist, the stand-alone financial statements of the company that absorbs shows the performance of both the companies, whereas in acquisition as the parent company had just taken up the other company as a subsidiary, the financial statements of both the companies are separate and their performance can be judged accordingly. However, in an amalgamation as the previous two company doesn’t exist, the performance of the new separate entity will be judged by its own financial statements


Comments

  1. The information in the post you posted here is useful because it contains some of the best information available. Thanks for sharing it. Keep up the good work International Removals Companies London

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Understanding Counterclaims: A Comprehensive Guide

  Understanding Counterclaims: A Comprehensive Guide In legal proceedings, a counterclaim is a vital tool that allows defendants to assert their own claims against the plaintiff. This strategic maneuver not only defends against the plaintiff's allegations but also enables defendants to seek their own relief. In this comprehensive guide, we delve into the intricacies of counterclaims, exploring their purpose, procedures, and implications in various legal contexts. Introduction to Counterclaims Definition A counterclaim is a legal claim brought by a defendant against the plaintiff in response to the plaintiff's initial complaint. It serves as a means for defendants to assert their own rights, defenses, or causes of action arising from the same transaction or occurrence as the plaintiff's claim. Purpose The primary purpose of a counterclaim is to allow defendants to present their side of the story and seek appropriate remedies or relief. By filing a counterclaim, defendants ca...

Title: Understanding "Your Complaint has been Disposed under a Closed Complaint"

  Title: Understanding "Your Complaint has been Disposed under a Closed Complaint" When you receive a notification stating "Your complaint has been disposed under a closed complaint," it signifies the closure of the complaint you filed with the respective entity or organization. This phrase is commonly used by customer service departments, grievance redressal cells, regulatory bodies, or complaint management systems to inform complainants about the resolution status of their complaint. Here's a detailed explanation of what it means and its implications: Disposition of Complaint (0-7 days) : "Disposed" indicates that the complaint has been addressed, reviewed, and resolved by the concerned authority or entity. The closure of the complaint signifies that the responsible party has taken appropriate action to address the issues raised in the complaint. Closure Status (0-7 days) : "Closed complaint" indicates that the complaint resolution process ...

The Doctrine of Alternative Danger

  THE DOCTRINE OF ALTERNATIVE DANGER Although the plaintiff is supposed to be cautious in spite of the defendant’s Negligence, there can also be certain situations when the plaintiff is justified in taking some threat where some unsafe state of affairs has been created by way of the defendant. The plaintiff may appear as puzzled or worried through a hazardous state of affairs created via the defendant and to store his man or woman or property, or now and again to store a third party from such danger, he may take a choice risk. The law, therefore, lets in the plaintiff to come across a choice danger to shop by himself from the chance created via the defendant. If the path adopted by him results in some harm to himself, his motion in opposition to the defendant will now not fail. The judgment of the plaintiff, however, is not rash. The position can be defined by means of the case of Jones v . Boyce . In that case, the plaintiff used to be a passenger in the defendant’s train and inst...