CIMA F3 Exam With Confidence Using Practice Dumps

The question asks for advantages to the acquiring company (ADC/ABC) of using shares rather than cash to pay for DEF.

C. It incentivises DEF to continue creating value for the combined group

If DEF’s shareholders (and possibly managers) receive shares in ADC, they now own part of the combined business. That aligns their interests with ADC’s existing shareholders and encourages them to help grow the value of the group.

E. The risk of poor future performance of the acquisition is shared with the DEF company shareholder.

If ADC pays with shares, DEF’s shareholders share in both the upside and downside. If the acquisition underperforms, the fall in value is shared instead of all the risk resting on ADC’s original shareholders. That’s an advantage for ADC.

F. It preserves liquidity

Paying with shares means ADC does not need to use up cash or raise new debt. This preserves cash balances and borrowing capacity, which is a clear advantage.

Why not the others?

A (sharing benefits of future growth with DEF shareholders) is actually a cost from ADC’s existing shareholders’ viewpoint – they give away more of the upside.

B dilution of ownership is also a disadvantage, not an advantage.

D a tax saving for ABC – the tax impact is usually more relevant for sellers or when using debt, not typically a direct advantage of share consideration to the acquirer.

A spin-off/demerger normally involves separating a division or subsidiary and giving its shares to the existing shareholders. It doesn’t in itself raise finance (A), it doesn’t introduce new shareholders to the core entity (B), and it does not inherently increase takeover risk (D). Its main advantage is that it allows the market to value the demerged business separately, revealing its “true” value – C is correct.

Under typical takeover regulation and CIMA F3 principles, the following are legitimate post-offer defences:

A. Independent professional revaluation of assets

This is legitimate: providing better information to shareholders to show that the bid undervalues the company.

C. Make a counter-bid for Company A (a “Pac-Man defence”)

This is acceptable if it can be justified as enhancing shareholder wealth.

E. Refer the bid to competition authorities

It is a legitimate defence to challenge the bid on competition/antitrust grounds if it may reduce competition.

In contrast:

B (altering the articles to change acceptance thresholds mid-bid) is a classic frustrating action, usually not allowed without shareholder approval during an offer period.

D (publishing knowingly unrealistic optimistic forecasts) is misleading and not permitted under market and takeover rules.