n late March, $2008,$ Indian car maker Tata Motors purchased Jaguar Land Rover $($JLR$)$ from Ford Motor Company, paying $$2\mathrm{.}3$ billion for the acquisition $($Ford had paid $$5\mathrm{.}3$ billion for the two brands: $$2\mathrm{.}5$ billion for Jaguar in $1989$ and $$2\mathrm{.}9$ billion for Land Rover in $2000).$ The market wasn't impressed and Tata Motor$$s stock fell over the course of $2008$ as a result of the announcement $($from a market capitalization of $$6\mathrm{.}93$ billion the day before the announcement to $$1\mathrm{.}72$ billion at the end of the year, a $75\%$ drop in a period when the broader market fell $33\%).$

After the merger, Tata chose not to integrate. Instead, it let JLR operate as an independent company. Tata set targets and offered support in emerging markets but did not directly control JLR$$s operations.

This strategy of avoiding a potentially difficult cultural integration appears to have paid off: Tata's decision not to integrate JLR worked out extremely well. But, what risks are run when a new acquisition operates largely independently?