Linking Up: Vertical Integration Makes a Comeback

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Linking Up: Vertical Integration Makes a Comeback Linking up: Vertical integration makes a comeback Transactions up and down the supply chain become more appealing to acquirers As horizontal deals become more challenging due to consolidation, dealmakers increasingly consider opportunities to go vertical. Vertical mergers have been stealing some conglomerate with a network of retail Will the trend of vertical transactions of the thunder from horizontal deals of locations, it could result in health continue in the coming months and late. As horizontal targets become harder insurance and other medical services at years despite these headwinds? In which to come by, some acquirers are focusing lower prices to consumers. types of situations are vertical deals most on companies up or down the supply appealing, and when do they not make chain from them—presenting both new Before these combinations can be sense? In order to answer these and opportunities for expansion and a new consummated, however, they must be other pressing questions on the subject, set of challenges. approved by antitrust authorities. Vertical we spoke with four leading experts. mergers have recently drawn greater Some of the most significant vertical scrutiny by the government, causing integrations penned recently also have would-be acquirers to second-guess the power to transform whole industries. their intentions as court actions play out. Contents Take the US$69bn tie-up between M&A advisors may also be hamstrung in pharmacy operator CVS Health and their ability to counsel clients regarding The upside of verticality 2 insurance giant Aetna, announced the types of cases the U.S. Justice in December 2017. By creating a Department elects to challenge. Seeking approval 6 1 I Linking up: Vertical integration makes a comeback The upside of verticality The experts Mergermarket Several high-profile vertical integration deals have been done recently in sectors such as healthcare and media. What have been the main drivers of this trend, and do you expect Logan Breed it to continue? Partner, Hogan Lovells Mark McCareins, As for main drivers, there are many industries and Kellogg School sectors that are clogged from a consolidation of Management standpoint. Whether it's grocery chains, consumer packaged goods companies, airlines, banks, or Cathy Leonhardt others, they have all seen a significant amount of Managing Director, PJ Solomon consolidation over the last twenty years or so. As a result, the ability to achieve regulatory clearance in horizontal deal has become increasingly difficult in concentrated markets. Put another way, when there is a four-firm market, and the deal would decrease Mark McCareins the four players to three, the government will be Professor of Business Law, hard-pressed to give a quick clearance. Kellogg School of Management In response, firms have started looking outside the box, and vertical integrations have been one Jeff Swearingen opportunity they are now considering in greater Managing Director, Edgemont Capital numbers. In the last 18 to 24 months, there has been a significant upswing in interest for many American businesses in exploring vertical alliances. One example is Boeing's recent acquisition of a major parts supplier—a deal likely prompted as much by the company needing to grow but having no one to acquire as the need to compete on the global stage. After all, there are a lot of efficiencies to be gained 2 I Linking up: Vertical integration makes a comeback by becoming more vertically integrated, as well as the chance to control one’s "In healthcare, several of the destiny by integrating major suppliers into production chains. To the best of vertical transactions involving my knowledge, the government has payers happened after they tried not challenged that Boeing acquisition, which is just one example of many deals a horizontal transaction." of a vertical nature that are either in the hopper or will be announced. Jeff Swearingen, Edgemont Capital Jeff Swearingen, In healthcare, we have seen a tremendous Edgemont Capital amount of horizontal consolidation many of them look to change the typical across the payer-provider continuum, healthcare delivery and reimbursement and several of the vertical transactions model. Of the attention-grabbing involving payers happened after they transactions announced over the last tried a horizontal transaction. If you 12 to 18 months, the buyers have been will recall, there are five big payers: a very small group of extremely large, UnitedHealthcare, Cigna, Aetna, Anthem well-capitalized providers and players in and Humana. Similar to what Mark said, the retail space. In the case of a CVS or four of the five tried to merge, which Wal-Mart, those companies were looking would have resulted in just three players, to leverage their retail footprint and but the Justice Department stepped in, presence, while Optum/UnitedHealthcare blocking the deals on antitrust grounds. and Humana were already very large That's what drove Aetna, Humana and and well-capitalized companies in the others to look for a different strategy. healthcare space. There just aren't many firms of that size and scale out there From the payer’s perspective, the with the capabilities to pursue large underlying premise of these vertical vertical transactions, although when transactions is the belief that they must they do happen, they are by definition either get bigger or become directly transformative and headline-grabbing. involved in the provision of care in order to effect change in the healthcare Cathy Leonhardt, My focus is the retailing industry, which has industry. Healthcare is clearly on PJ Solomon seen vertical integration only in very specific everyone's mind, as the percentage of instances. I’ll point out some examples GDP consumed by it continues to grow. from recent years. The first area that has Moreover, people who look at the data seen activity is in luxury branded goods, in say we're just not getting the return on which companies use acquisitions to shore investment in healthcare expenditures in up portions of their supply chain. This is terms of life expectancy. driven by a scarcity of raw materials and a high importance placed on quality. In the A lot of the vertical deals in healthcare handbag market, brands such as Hermes have been headline-grabbing, not only and LVMH have purchased foreign firms because of their size, but due to how dealing in alligator and crocodile leather, 3 I Linking up: Vertical integration makes a comeback control, as well as the opportunity for greater consistency and messaging. A third example has to do with the large brands investing in manufacturing that is closer to home. Brands have historically outsourced the majority of their manufacturing to Asia and other parts of the world to access lower labor costs. The assumption was that brands, particularly within apparel, would no longer own manufacturing. However, we’ve seen this trend begin to reverse in recent years as a result of the growth of fast fashion, in which speed-to-market and the frequency of delivery to stores and the consumer have become critical. We’ve also been seeing situations in which large retailers prefer to own particular capabilities and can amortize purchases across a large sales base. Home Depot, which is one of the biggest retailers in the Western hemisphere, acquired US Home Systems, which had been a provider of its kitchen and bath products. Similarly, it made for instance. While not multi-billion-dollar an investment in The Company Store, giving transactions (and typically less than $100 it direct sourcing capabilities in home textiles million), these are very specific to the that it previously did not have. companies’ supply chains. Finally, as Amazon has accustomed The second example involves major consumers to same- and next-day delivery Western brands that expanded through its increasingly verticalized logistics internationally to China, Japan, or other platform, many retailers are beginning to mega markets outside their home market. use M&A transactions as a tool to catch up. In a lot of instances, they did so through Target recently acquired grocery-delivery joint venture or distribution agreements startup Shipt, which will allow customers to with local partners. Over the past 10 years, order groceries and other goods online and many of these brands have bought back have them delivered directly to their homes their partnership arrangements to control from nearby Target stores. This followed activities, particularly in major markets their earlier acquisition of a company called and key product categories. This unifies Grand Junction, which also manages local the brand and gives brand owners more and same-day deliveries. 4 I Linking up: Vertical integration makes a comeback to directly, negotiate with and effectively "If the chance [for a vertical offer their own insurance product. deal] presents itself with respect Mark McCareins, I would say that for smaller firms in less- to a portfolio company, I think Kellogg School concentrated markets, it might be more of Management challenging to start looking at vertical they'd seize upon it." deals. If I'm not a market leader with a lot of intellectual capital and resources, Mark McCareins, Kellogg School I might be a little leery about doing a vertical deal. At the same time, I might also be leery about doing a horizontal Mergermarket In addition to the vertical mega- deal, as I may not have the in-house deals, are you seeing interest in capability and resources to effectively vertical integration transactions manage the transaction and make it work. lower in the market? Mergermarket Could vertical transactions be an Jeff Swearingen, There is interest in the healthcare space, effective strategy for, say, private Edgemont Capital but to a much more limited extent. What equity-owned platform companies? we typically see from a middle-market perspective is continued horizontal Mark McCareins, I think private equity is simply looking consolidation at the level of hospital Kellogg School for good opportunities right now.
Recommended publications
  • Leadership Newsletter Winter 2020 / 2021
    T���������, M���� ��� T����������������� Leadership Newsletter Winter 2020 / 2021 GTCR Firm Update Since the firm’s inception in 1980, GTCR has Technology, Media and Tele- partnered with management teams in more communications than 200 investments to build and transform growth businesses. Over the last twenty years alone, GTCR has invested over $16 billion in approximately 100 platform acquisitions, 30+ 95+ PLATFORMS ADD-ONS including more than 65 companies that have been sold for aggregate enterprise value of over $ $50 billion and another 14 companies that have 25B+ been taken public with aggregate enterprise value PURCHASE of more than $34 billion. In November 2020, PRICE we closed GTCR Fund XIII, the firm’s largest fund to date, with $7.5 billion of limited partner capital commitments. This fund follows GTCR Fund Acquisition Activity Since 2000 XII, which we raised in 2017, with $5.25 billion As of January 15, 2021* of limited partner capital commitments. GTCR currently has 25 active portfolio companies; ten of these companies are within the Technology, Media and Telecommunications (“TMT”) industry. Page 1 / Continues on next page Technology, Media and Telecommunications Group Update Since 2000, GTCR has completed over 30 new platform investments and over 95 add-on acquisitions within the TMT industry, for a total of over 125 transactions with a combined purchase price of over $25 billion. During just the past year, we have realized several of these investments, selling three businesses and completing the partial sale of two additional companies, for a combined enterprise value of over $9 billion. Our TMT franchise includes ten active portfolio companies and one management start-up, which together have completed nearly 30 add-on acquisitions under our ownership, representing approximately $3 billion of GTCR invested capital.
    [Show full text]
  • Make and Buy: Outsourcing, Vertical Integration, and Cost Reduction∗
    Make and Buy: Outsourcing, Vertical Integration, and Cost Reduction∗ Simon Loertscher† Michael H. Riordan‡ University of Melbourne Columbia University November 16, 2017 Abstract Globalization reshaped supply chains and the boundaries of firms in favor of outsourcing. Now, even vertically integrated firms procure substantially from ex- ternal suppliers. To study procurement and the structure of firms in this reshaped economy, we analyze a model in which integration grants a downstream customer the option to source internally. Integration is advantageous because it allows the customer sometimes to avoid paying markups, but disadvantageous because it dis- courages investments in cost reduction by independent suppliers. The investment- discouragement effect more likely outweighs the markup-avoidance effect if the upstream market is more competitive, as is so in a more global economy. Keywords: outsourcing, vertical integration, make and buy. JEL-Classification: C72, L13, L22, L24 ∗We are grateful to the editor (John Asker) and three anonymous referees for comments and sugges- tions that have improved the paper considerably. The paper has also benefitted from comments by Malin Arve, Patrick Bolton, Roberto Burguet, Jacques Cr´emer, Jean de Bettignies, Yassine Lefouili, Hans- Theo Normann, Eric Rasmusen, Patrick Rey, Antonio Rosato, Yossi Spiegel and workshop participants at the 2011 Industrial Economics Conference at Zhejiang University, at the 2013 Kick-off Workshop of the D¨usseldorf Institute for Competition Economics, at Ecole Polyt´echnique in Paris, at Indiana Uni- versity, at the Organizational Economics Workshop at the University of Sydney 2012, the Workshop of Public Private Collaboration 2013 at IESE Business School in Barcelona, the 2013 Canadian Economics Association Meetings in Montreal, the 2014 Australasian Economic Theory Workshop in Canberra, the 2014 Searle Conference on Antitrust Economics in Chicago, and the Conference in honour of Jacques Cr´emer on Advances in the Economics of Organizations and the New Economy in Toulouse in 2016.
    [Show full text]
  • Venture Capital, Private Equity and Real Estate on the Blockchain
    VENTURE CAPITAL, PRIVATE EQUITY AND REAL ESTATE ON THE BLOCKCHAIN Whitepaper July 2018 Contents Preamble ..........................................................3 About Us ...........................................................4 Introduction ....................................................5 The Market .......................................................6 Private Equity ................................................................6 VC Market .......................................................................8 Real Estate – Europe ...................................................9 Real Estate – USA .........................................................10 The L7 Platform ...............................................11 L7 Global Holdings ......................................................11 Our Investment Criteria for Private Equity .............11 Our Investment Criteria for Venture Capital ..........11 L7 Real Estate ................................................................12 L7 Real Estate Europe ..................................................12 Benefits for Investors ...................................................14 Fixed Coupon Payout ...................................................14 Value Proposition ...........................................15 Investment Process ......................................................16 Crowdfunding .................................................17 Level 7 Crowdfunding Platform .................................19 Blockchain Technology ..................................20
    [Show full text]
  • US PE Breakdown Report 1Q 2019
    US PE Breakdown Report 1Q 2019 April 2019 1 Introduction After 2018’s blistering pace of dealmaking, 2019 environment. 1Q 2019 saw just one PE-backed IPO has gotten off to a sluggish start. Poor as GPs instead opted to sell portfolio companies to performance in leveraged loan and high-yield other financial sponsors or strategic acquirers, markets during 4Q 2018 had an adverse impact on continuing recent trends. Market tranquility was the cost of deal financing, causing many GPs to sustained throughout the end of the quarter, so hold off on finalizing deals. These deals often take analysts expect the 1Q lull in exit activity to be months to close, and difficulty securing financing is short-lived. often evident in lower deal flow the following quarter. The deals that did close, however, were at Fundraising—unlike deals and exits—is on pace to elevated multiples similar to what we have match 2018’s annual total with over $40 billion witnessed in recent years. Pricing ought to remain raised in the first quarter. Fewer but larger funds competitive because GPs have record dry powder are closing, pushing median and average fund sizes waiting to be invested, pressuring PE firms to act. even higher. Strategies beyond the vanilla buyout continue to proliferate, with technology focused Exits experienced an even greater downturn than and growth equity funds witnessing massive closes. deals. Public equity price decreases in 4Q 2018 The recent figures also speak to a longer-term likely led to GPs marking down portfolio change whereby GPs headquartered in the Bay companies, though to a lesser extent than seen in Area and Chicago accounting for a swelling portion public indices.
    [Show full text]
  • Energy Fundraising Saw a Significant Decline from the Previous Quarter, Falling to $450 Million
    AMERICAN INVESTMENT COUNCIL 2018-Q2 Private Equity Industry Investment Report Table of Contents Page Executive Summary 3 Business Products & Services 5 Consumer Products & Services 7 Information Technology 9 Financial Services 11 Healthcare 13 Materials & Resources 15 Energy 17 PAGE 2 Executive Summary In the first half of 2018, Business Products and Services (B2B), Consumer Products and Services (B2C), and Information Technology (IT) sectors received more than half of all private equity investment. Fund managers invested $19B in B2C companies, while IT-related companies and B2B companies each received approximately $18 billion in investment during the same period. In addition, fund managers provided $14 billion to Energy companies while businesses in the Financial Services, Healthcare, and Materials and Resources sector secured investments of $11 billion, $11 billion and $7 billion, respectively. Overall, quarterly private equity investment declined to $41 billion from $58 billion in Q2. Only Consumer Products and Services and Healthcare saw increases in investment compared to the previous quarter. Investment rose from $9 billion to $10 billion and from $5 billion to $6 billion in Consumer Products and Services and Healthcare, respectively. Investment in the Information Technology sector experienced the steepest quarterly decline, falling $8 billion to $5 billion in Q2. While investment in Energy companies fell to $4 billion from $10 billion, other sectors—Business Products and Services, Financial Services, and Materials and Resources—saw
    [Show full text]
  • PEI June2020 PEI300.Pdf
    Cover story 20 Private Equity International • June 2020 Cover story Better capitalised than ever Page 22 The Top 10 over the decade Page 24 A decade that changed PE Page 27 LPs share dealmaking burden Page 28 Testing the value creation story Page 30 Investing responsibly Page 32 The state of private credit Page 34 Industry sweet spots Page 36 A liquid asset class Page 38 The PEI 300 by the numbers Page 40 June 2020 • Private Equity International 21 Cover story An industry better capitalised than ever With almost $2trn raised between them in the last five years, this year’s PEI 300 are armed and ready for the post-coronavirus rebuild, writes Isobel Markham nnual fundraising mega-funds ahead of the competition. crisis it’s better to be backed by a pri- figures go some way And Blackstone isn’t the only firm to vate equity firm, particularly and to towards painting a up the ante. The top 10 is around $30 the extent that it is able and prepared picture of just how billion larger than last year’s, the top to support these companies, which of much capital is in the 50 has broken the $1 trillion mark for course we are,” he says. hands of private equi- the first time, and the entire PEI 300 “The businesses that we own at Aty managers, but the ebbs and flows of has amassed $1.988 trillion. That’s the Blackstone that are directly affected the fundraising cycle often leave that same as Italy’s GDP. Firms now need by the pandemic, [such as] Merlin, picture incomplete.
    [Show full text]
  • New Litigation Document
    Case 20-32564 Document 955 Filed in TXSB on 11/25/20 Page 1 of 66 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION ) In re: ) Chapter 11 ) STAGE STORES, INC., et al.,1 ) Case No. 20-32564 (DRJ) ) Debtors. ) (Jointly Administered) ) SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION OF JOSHUA A. SUSSBERG IN SUPPORT OF THE DEBTORS’ APPLICATION FOR ENTRY OF AN ORDER AUTHORIZING THE RETENTION AND EMPLOYMENT OF KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP AND KIRKLAND & ELLIS INTERNATIONAL LLP AS ATTORNEYS FOR THE DEBTORS AND DEBTORS IN POSSESSION EFFECTIVE AS OF MAY 10, 2020 I, Joshua A. Sussberg, being duly sworn, state the following under penalty of perjury: 1. I am the president of Joshua A. Sussberg, P.C., a partner of the law firm of Kirkland & Ellis LLP, located at 601 Lexington Avenue, New York, New York 10022, and a partner of Kirkland & Ellis International, LLP (together with Kirkland & Ellis LLP, collectively, “Kirkland”).2 I am the lead attorney from Kirkland working on the above-captioned chapter 11 cases. I am a member in good standing of the Bar of the State of New York, and I have been admitted pro hac vice in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas. There are no disciplinary proceedings pending against me. 2. I submit this supplemental declaration on behalf of Kirkland (the “Supplemental Declaration”) in further support of the Debtors’ Application for Entry of an Order Authorizing the Retention and Employment of Kirkland & Ellis LLP and Kirkland & Ellis International LLP as 1 The Debtors in these chapter 11 cases, along with the last four digits of each Debtor’s federal tax identification number, are: Stage Stores, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Healthcare Deals
    AMERICAN INVESTMENT COUNCIL 2018-Q4 Private Equity Industry Investment Report Table of Contents Page Executive Summary 3 Business Products & Services 5 Consumer Products & Services 6 Information Technology 7 Financial Services 8 Healthcare 9 Materials & Resources 10 Energy 11 PAGE 2 Executive Summary In 2018 private equity funds invested approximately $331 billion. Companies in the Business Products and Services (B2B), Consumer Products and Services (B2C) and Information Technology sectors received over $200 billion in investment last year. Fund managers invested $80 billion in B2C companies, while B2B companies received approximately $60 billion in investment. Companies in the information technology sector received $65 billion in investment in 2018. And $50 billion was invested in companies in the Healthcare sector. Investment in the remaining sectors went as follows, Energy companies received $35 billion in investment while businesses in the Financial Services, and Materials and Resources sectors secured investments of $28 billion and $12 billion, respectively. One of the largest investments of the fourth quarter was the buyout of the Refinitiv, a financial markets data provider, which was purchased for approximately $11 billion dollars. PAGE 3 2018 and 2017 Industry Investment 2018 2017 $331 Billion $305 Billion Note: Figures in this report are rounded PAGE 4 Business Products & Services (B2B) Deals Top Deals 2018-Q4 Company Date Investment Value (Bil) Financial Sponsor Sedgwick Claims Management 12/31/2018 $6.70 The Carlyle Group
    [Show full text]
  • Impact of Vertical Integration
    Munich Personal RePEc Archive Impact of Vertical Integration H. Luke, Erin The University of Wisconsin-Whitewater 7 March 2021 Online at https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/106490/ MPRA Paper No. 106490, posted 08 Mar 2021 07:37 UTC 1 Impact of Vertical Integration Erin H. Luke The University of Wisconsin-Whitewater 2021 Abstract Vertical integration is a powerful, and complex business strategy that when used under the right conditions can positively impact an organization. A company’s strategists need to understand what dimensions of integration to use, and the best time to use it. De Beers is a company with a controversial history of being an anti-competitive monopoly. By strategizing into a vertical integrated company De beers has added value to its company by not only targeting the retail, and industrial market, but also the I.T. industry. Forward and backward integration has helped organizations like De Beers maintain control over its inputs and outputs. Rather than just buying all diamond mines, and stock piling the material in order to control the prices, De Beers has embraced change by focusing on new emerging industries. Through vertical strategy and new ownership De Beers is turning its company around in a very competitive luxury industry. Organizations should be aware of the costs of vertical integration when exploring its potential. Bureaucratic costs, and companies becoming too large and inflexible under certain environments can become a problem. Vertical integration is a powerful strategy, but it must always be under scrutiny, and redesigned when the external and internal environment deems change necessary. 2 2 Table of Contents What is Vertical Integration? .......................................................................................................3 De Beers Summary ........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Vertical Integration and Market Structure by Timothy F
    This work is distributed as a Discussion Paper by the STANFORD INSTITUTE FOR ECONOMIC POLICY RESEARCH SIEPR Discussion Paper No. 11-010 Vertical Integration and Market Structure by Timothy F. Bresnahan Jonathan D. Levin Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research Stanford University Stanford, CA 94305 (650) 725-1874 The Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research at Stanford University supports research bearing on economic and public policy issues. The SIEPR Discussion Paper Series reports on research and policy analysis conducted by researchers affiliated with the Institute. Working papers in this series reflect the views of the authors and not necessarily those of the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research or Stanford University. Vertical Integration and Market Structure Timothy Bresnahan and Jonathan Levin* Stanford University March 2012 Abstract. Contractual theories of vertical integration derive firm boundaries as an efficient response to market transaction costs. These theories predict a relationship between underlying features of transactions and observed integration decisions. There has been some progress in testing these predictions, but less progress in quantifying their importance. One difficulty is that empirical applications often must consider firm structure together with industry structure. Research in industrial organization frequently has adopted this perspective, emphasizing how scale and scope economies, and strategic considerations, influence patterns of industry integration. But this research has paid less attention to contractual or organizational details, so that these two major lines of research on vertical integration have proceeded in parallel with only rare intersection. We discuss the value of combining different viewpoints from organizational economics and industrial organization. JEL classification numbers: D23, L14, L22.
    [Show full text]
  • Is Private Equity Having Its Minsky Moment?
    Is Private Equity Having Its Minsky Moment? Matt STOLLER April 16, 2020 Today I‟m going to write about how private equity is reacting to the pandemic and the bailouts. PE is heavily indebted, and therefore is at high risk in a shock. I‟m going to explore PE‟s vulnerability, and how the industry is engaged in a political strategy to repurpose the Federal Reserve to its ends. I‟ll also explore whether their strategy can work. It’s Michael Milken’s Economy In 1993, economists George Akerloff and Paul Romer wrote a paper on the conjoined two crises of 1980s finance. The first was mass junk bond defaults late in the decade, and the second was the savings and loan crisis of deregulated banks going bankrupt en masse as they engaged in an orgy of self-dealing and speculation. The paper was called Looting: The Economic Underworld of Bankruptcy for Profit, and in it, they described how financiers can profit by destroying corporations, using a particular strategy. “Our description of a looting strategy,” they wrote, “amounts to a sophisticated version of having a limited liability corporation borrow money, pays it into the private account of the owner, and then default on its debt.” What Akerloff and Romer were basically talking about was a legal version of the bust-out scene from Goodfellas. In that movie, mobsters took an ownership stake in a restaurant they often frequented, and then used the restaurant‟s credit to buy liquor, which they would move out of the back and sell at half off.
    [Show full text]
  • Vertical Integration in High-Transaction Cost Sectors: the Case of the Bulgarian Pharmaceutical Industry
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Todorova, Tamara Article — Manuscript Version (Preprint) Vertical Integration in High-Transaction Cost Sectors: The Case of the Bulgarian Pharmaceutical Industry Journal of Advanced Research in Management Suggested Citation: Todorova, Tamara (2010) : Vertical Integration in High-Transaction Cost Sectors: The Case of the Bulgarian Pharmaceutical Industry, Journal of Advanced Research in Management, ISSN 2068-7532, ASERS Publishing, Craiova, Vol. 1, Iss. 2 (Winter), pp. 127-138 This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/172498 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen
    [Show full text]