Why Do Some Companies Survive While Others Fail?

  • 📰 FT
  • ⏱ Reading Time:
  • 75 sec. here
  • 8 min. at publisher
  • 📊 Quality Score:
  • News: 50%
  • Publisher: 51%

BUSINESS News

COMPANY SURVIVAL,STOCK MARKET,INVESTMENT

A look at the longevity of companies on the stock market and the factors that contribute to their success or failure.

How many companies stand the test of time? Remarkably few, to judge by the average span of quoted companies on the stock market. Just over 1 per cent of the 1,513 UK-listed companies in 1948 still existed 70 years later, according to an analysis by two Cambridge professors. Roughly half of US public companies traded for 10 years or fewer over the past century, says Morgan Stanley. To be sure, a delisting does not necessarily mark the end of a company’s existence as a distinct entity.

Private equity deals are a case in point. And a majority of delistings are due to takeovers, which can be lucrative for selling shareholders. But shortlived companies are mostly poor investments. The majority of companies that survived less than 20 years on the US stock market had negative compound returns, according to Hendrik Bessembinder, a finance professor at Arizona State University. Bankruptcies, late filing and other regulatory failings account for about 40 per cent of departures from the US market since 1976. It is unclear why some companies have staying power. When oil major Shell explored this question as part of a long-term planning exercise conducted in 1983, it studied examples such as Japan’s Mitsui, the US’s DuPont and Stora Enso, a Finnish-Swedish paper and pulp manufacturer that started out as a mining company in 1288. These survivors had little in common bar traits such as cohesiveness, tolerance and financial conservatism. Small companies are highly vulnerable to setbacks. But above a certain size, scale provides limited protection. Larger, older companies tend to tie up resources in existing operations rather than potential growth opportunities, notes Rita McGrath from Columbia Business School. Moreover, established companies’ succession plans often demonstrate a “see-saw” problem. Visionary leaders are replaced with loyal lieutenants. Though skilled at dealing with operational challenges, they tend to stick to their predecessors’ strateg

We have summarized this news so that you can read it quickly. If you are interested in the news, you can read the full text here. Read more:

 /  🏆 113. in AU
 

Thank you for your comment. Your comment will be published after being reviewed.
Please try again later.

Australia Australia Latest News, Australia Australia Headlines