- In the first part, you are asked to analyze the IPO deals assigned to you randomly, and
fill in the related properties of these deals. This part will have 30% weight in your total
homework score. You can find below a sample table that you are asked to fill in.
Your assignments are attached in the file named “ipo-deals.xlsx”
Size ($ /
Underwriter Date of
Telecommunication $ 7.3
- In the second part, you are given the company list of S&P 500 and BIST stock indexes in
“index_list.xlsx”. These lists are provided to you as a sample, but you are not restricted
with these two indexes, or with any index. You can recommend any other company that
is listed/not listed on any stock exchange.
For this part of the homework, you are asked to propose a merger of two companies, or an
acquisition of one company by any other company, considering the benefit it may provide to
any of these companies, and/or the synergy that may come up after the acquisition.
You are supposed to fill the following table regarding your proposition:
Parent Company Target Company
Type of the
Name Sector Definition Mcap Name Sector Definition Mcap Synergies
“Achieving synergies is the fundamental rationale for M&As, and it is generally believed that a
combination of businesses will create value only if the value of synergies is positive. IBs have
become more involved in the kinds of detailed, bottom-up estimations of synergies that are
needed to produce a successful transaction. There are synergies when the value and
performance of the merged entity are more than the sum of the two original entities taken
Synergies can be either revenue or cost synergies, as illustrated by two simple equations:
• 2 + 2 = 5. On the revenue side, the goal of the transaction is to cross-sell the products
and services of one company to the customers of the other or to develop and sell more
products and services or both.
• 2 + 2 =3. On the cost side, the combination of two firms permits the reduction of
operating costs and expenditures.”
There can be several reasons for generating an m&a deal as the most general ones are listed
Critical criminology has gained traction in recent years, with its devotion to questioning the definitions of crime and measurements of official statistics, its critical view of agents, systems, and institutions of social control, and the connections with social justice and policy change (Carrington & Hogg, 2002). Theories of critical criminology are rooted in the structure of society, focusing on power systems and inequality. This paper will focus on labeling theory and crimes of the powerful, as they have a certain dichotomy regarding public vs. private criminality. With labeling theory, those in power have the authority to decide what is the “norm” and what is the “other,” ostracizing the “other” from the rest of society. The stigmatization of public shaming for the common citizen is carried out in all aspects of public life – the labeled individual is looked down on by family, peers, community, and employers, and it is very hard for them to shake the label (Denver et al., 2017; Kroska et al., 2016). Regarding crimes of the powerful, those in power have the privilege to escape stigmatization and consequences of illegal actions. Those in power protect their own through deciding what is illegal or not, and deciding the consequences for illegal actions. These crimes occur in private and are often underreported and under prosecuted, allowing the powerful to escape consequences. Critical analysis will address these dichotomies, challenging theoretical assumptions and criminal justice practices to advocate for structural change. Labeling Theory Background Labeling theory discusses the structural inequalities within society that explain criminality. It can be traced back to Mead’s theory of symbolic interactionism in 1934, which discusses the importance of language regarding informing social action through processes of constructing, interpreting, and transmitting meaning (Denver et al., 2017, p. 666). From there, labeling theory was further developed with Lemert’s distinction between primary and secondary deviance in 1951, which explained how deviance of an individual begins and continues (Thompson, 2014). Finally, and perhaps most influentially, we have Becker’s labeling theory of deviance in 1963, which is the version of the theory that will be guiding this discussion in the essay (Paternoster & Bachman, 2017). In Becker’s labeling theory, he describes crime as a social construct:>GET ANSWER