If we assume the asset value (see the key concept below) to be unaffected by low profit, then a falling share price lowers the valuation ratio and increases the chance of takeover. If the asset value were to exceed the market value, the firm would lay itself open to asset stripping, i.e. a purchaser simply buying the firm to close it down and sell the assets.
The size of the valuation ratio does not in itself provide a complete explanation of takeover activity. There are other reasons for a takeover, for example to eliminate competition. In fact, in many instances, it is found that a relatively high valuation ratio does not in itself deter takeover, and that it is often successful, well-managed firms that become targets for takeovers
The ability of the threat of takeover to act as a constraint upon management can also be questioned on the grounds that potential bidders, like shareholders, do not have all the inside financial information that is available to management. The potential bidder might be unaware that the firm is failing to achieve its potential in terms of present or future profitability. Therefore, although a takeover might be warranted on the grounds that the present management is not achieving the firm’s potential profitability, this might not be realised by outsiders. In other instances it might only be when the firm has been taken over, and the new owners become fully conversant with the company, that they realize they overestimated the firm’s potential. Current management might even attempt to disguise the well-being of the firm by boosting current dividend payments at the expense of future expenditure on research and development. In so doing they increase current share prices although this is likely to be at the expense of long-term growth and profits