1. What was Perrigo's main defense against Mylan? Why was so much reliance given to this tactic? Speculate as to why shareholders accepted Perrigo's board and management's arguments.
2. How did corporate inversions undertaken by each firm impact the outcome of the hostile takeover attempt? Be specific.
3. identify the takeover tactics and defenses employed by Mylan and Perrigo, respectively. Explain why each may have been used.
4. What does the reaction of investors to the breakup of the deal tell you about what they were thinking?
5. Under what circumstances does the combination of a poison pill and a staggered board make sense for the target firm's shareholders? Be specific.
6. Using the information in this case study, discuss the arguments for and against encouraging hostile corporate takeovers. Why might a hostile takeover of Mylan be justified?
7. Explain why a friendly approach often is preferred to a hostile takeover. Be specific.
8. Explain what caused the share prices of both firms to fluctuate wildly when the results of the tender offer solicitation were made public. Be specific.
9. Explain how a backend merger works and what it means to "squeeze out" the remaining Perrigo investors.
10. Both Mylan and Perrigo fought aggressively to ward off unwanted suitors. As such, both could be accused of trying to entrench senior management and their boards of directors. Do you believe that the actions of both firms were consistent with the best interests of their shareholders? Explain your answer.

Answers in the form of Case Study with Abstract,Conclusion and Reference