Forums › Ask ACCA Tutor Forums › Ask the Tutor ACCA FM Exams › Mistake in the sum ?
- This topic has 1 reply, 2 voices, and was last updated 13 years ago by John Moffat.
- AuthorPosts
- May 14, 2011 at 12:35 pm #46355
This is a doubt from Q58 page 50, answer 58 page 210 of the BPP revision kit.
1.) How have they calculated the Expected Company Value as seen on the bottom most line of page 210.
2.) Financial factors that affect the Bid: (page211, (b))
” This may indicate that the company possess under utilised assests, or alternatively that it’s assets are over-stated in value. How did they arrive at this conclusion, as in I don’t understand the basis for arriving at such a conclusion.
3.)Relevant Financial Factors relating to SM: ( last heading on page 211)
” The company is ungeared, which is advantageous, as it enables BST to borrow to fun part of the aquisition” – but according to the question BST is geared.
4.) Page 210, under Net Assets, heading:
They say ” The figure may need to be adjusted for increased or decreased market values of assets, particularly SM’s property holdings”. But there is no mention of SM holding any property it is BST that has property holdings mentioned in the question.
5.) Franchise: In the question they say ” SM owns a number of car showrooms . . . . operate the franchise of a well known car manufacturer “. In the answer under the Net assests heading last line, they say ” Here also SM has a franchise generating earnings that will not be reflected in the balance sheet.
What I understood from the line in the question is that SM is a franchisee of a well know manufacturer, and not that they have franchises elsewhere .May 21, 2011 at 1:06 pm #719861) They have used the formula on the formula sheet – Po = do(1+g)/r-g
2) It is strange for the shares of a company to be worth less than the assets are worth. They have made two suggestions as to why it might be the case, but more information would be needed to be sure)
3) The debt ratio in SM is 0. SM is not geared
4) SM owns car showrooms – that is property
5) They do not have franchises elsewhere. However the fact that they have the franchise for the well-known manufacturer is likely to be worth something – they could maybe sell the franchise to someone else. - AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.