CIMA F3 Exam With Confidence Using Practice Dumps

A: Reduce the annual dividend to a more sustainable level

Price controls are expected to be long-term and have cut annual profit from $3bn to $1bn. Continuing to pay a $1.5bn dividend would rely on running down cash and reserves, which is not sustainable. A rational response is to reset the dividend to a level that can be covered by ongoing earnings in the new regulatory environment.

B: Review costs and staffing to find savings

With revenues capped, GDE’s main lever to protect profitability and cash flow is cost efficiency. A thorough review of operating costs and staffing can help offset some of the profit reduction, which supports long-term shareholder value and the ability to pay dividends in future.

C: Seek new revenue streams outside the price controls

Since core electricity prices are constrained, diversifying into related goods and services that are not regulated (e.g. energy services, maintenance contracts, renewables consulting, etc.) is a sensible strategic response. This can grow earnings without breaching the price cap.

Why not D or E?

D: Rights issue to maintain historical dividend levels would mean issuing equity essentially to fund dividends, which destroys shareholder value and signals poor financial discipline.

E: Bringing in a private equity investor is not an obvious or necessary response here; private equity would demand high returns and major restructuring, and it doesn’t directly address the regulatory profit squeeze in the way cost control and new revenue lines do.

Advantages of a debt-funded cash offer vs a share exchange:

A. Shareholder control will remain with AB’s current shareholders.

B. More of the synergistic benefits will accrue to AB’s current shareholders.

D. EPS will increase (no dilution of equity; if synergies materialise, earnings are spread over the same number of shares).

Answer: A, B, D

CIMA F3 examines acquisition financing choices under Financial Policy Decisions and Mergers and Acquisitions, with a particular focus on how cash offers versus share exchanges affect shareholder wealth, control, gearing and earnings. The key issue from the perspective of Company AB’s shareholders is whether the method of financing enhances shareholder value without undermining the firm’s optimal capital structure.

A debt-funded cash offer involves Company AB raising debt to pay cash to the shareholders of Company DC. In contrast, a share exchange issues new equity, diluting existing ownership.

Option A is an advantage.

CIMA F3 highlights that a cash offer allows existing shareholders to retain control, because no new shares are issued. With a share exchange, ownership and voting power are diluted as DC’s shareholders become part-owners of the combined company.

Option B is an advantage.

Under a cash offer, all future synergies accrue to AB’s existing shareholders. F3 explains that with a share exchange, synergy benefits are shared with the target’s shareholders through their new equity stake. Therefore, a debt-funded cash offer concentrates the upside of synergies with the acquirer’s shareholders.

Option D is an advantage.

CIMA F3 notes that debt financing can lead to EPS growth, provided the return on the acquisition exceeds the cost of debt. Because no new equity is issued, earnings are spread over the same number of shares, and financial gearing magnifies returns to equity holders.

The remaining options are not advantages:

C (Gearing will increase) is a consequence, not an advantage. Since AB is already at its optimum capital structure, higher gearing increases financial risk.

E is incorrect; increasing WACC would reduce shareholder value, not enhance it.

Pre-acquisition:

Company X: earnings = $50m, P/E = 10 → value = 50 × 10 = $500m; shares = 100m → price = $5

Company Y: earnings = $15m, P/E = 10 → value = 15 × 10 = $150m; shares = 50m → price = $3

Combined earnings = 50 + 15 = $65m

Post-acquisition assumptions:

Earnings increase by 10% → 65 × 1.10 = $71.5m

Combined P/E remains 10 → total market value = 71.5 × 10 = $715m

We want X’s new share price to be 10% higher than $5 → target price = $5.50.

Share price = total value ÷ total X shares after issue:

5.50=715Total shares⇒Total shares=7155.5=130m5.50 = \frac{715}{\text{Total shares}} \Rightarrow \text{Total shares} = \frac{715}{5.5} = 130\text{m}5.50=Total shares715​⇒Total shares=5.5715​=130m

X currently has 100m shares, so must issue 30m new shares to Y’s shareholders.

Y has 50m shares → each Y share must get:

30m50m=0.6 X shares per Y share\frac{30m}{50m} = 0.6 \text{ X shares per Y share}50m30m​=0.6 X shares per Y share

Check options:

B: 3 X for 5 Y → 3/5 = 0.6 X per Y ✔

So that exchange ratio gives exactly 30m new X shares and hence a 10% increase in X’s share price.

Correct answer: B – 3 shares in Company X for 5 shares in Company Y.