Academic Integrity: tutoring, explanations, and feedback — we don’t complete graded work or submit on a student’s behalf.

Kunla Ltd and Cann Ltd intend to merge. The following were observed just before

ID: 2798639 • Letter: K

Question

Kunla Ltd and Cann Ltd intend to merge. The following were observed just before the merger announcement.

Kunla Ltd

Cann Ltd

Market price per share

GH¢ 400

Number of shares

Market value of firm

GH¢ 800,000,000

GH¢ 200,000,000

The proposed merger will create GH¢50,000,000 in synergies. Kunla Ltd intends to pay GH¢ 130,000,000 cash for Cann Ltd.

What is the cost of the merger to Kunla Ltd?

Compute the NPV of the merger.

The managers of these firms have proposed to merge to diversify their activities and to reduce risk. Should you pay a premium for the merged firm?

What convincing reasons can these managers give for the proposed merger?

What roles do investment banks play in facilitating M&A deals?

Kunla Ltd

Cann Ltd

Market price per share

GH¢ 400

GH¢ 200

Number of shares

2,000,000 1,000,000

Market value of firm

GH¢ 800,000,000

GH¢ 200,000,000

Explanation / Answer

Acquirer : Kunla Ltd and Target: Cann Ltd

Standalone Value of Kunla Ltd = PV(A) = GH¢ 800,000,000 and Standalone Value of Cann Ltd = PV(B) = GH¢ 200,000,000.

Synergistic Gains from Merger = GH¢50,000,000

Cash Paid by Kunla for Cann's Equity = GH¢ 130,000,000

Therefore, Cost of Acquisition to Kunla = Cash Paid - PV(B) = GH¢ 130,000,000 - GH¢ 200,000,000 = - GH¢ 70,000,000. This means that Kunla is actually making a gain of GH¢ 70,000,000 by purchasing Cann at a discount (price less than) to Cann's market value.

Therefore, Acquisition NPV to Kunla = Syngergistic Gain + Gain from Buying Cann Cheap = GH¢ 50,000,000 + 70,000,000 = GH¢ 120,000,000.

The stated reason by the manager's for merging is to diversify firm activity and reduce risk might make sense if Cann has established operations in fields which are yet untouched by Kunla. A merger gives Kunla ready access to Cann's expertise, markets, customers, technology, operational knowhow, labour, fixed assets, intellectual property rights and more in this particular field, thereby ensuring a successful diversification of operation for Kunla. Diversification through inorganic means (by starting a new business instead of acquiring an existing one) might prove to be costly and difficult for Kunla owing to high entry barriers, regulatory restrictions, high existing competition and more. The merger makes even more sense when we consider the fact that Kunla might actually buy Cann at a price less than its market value. This could be due to multiple reasons such as availability of other similar acquisition targets, poor operational or financial health of the target, rogue or tarnished management team at the target, depressed margins and/or stock prices of the target, lack of product innovation or offerings by the target, declining market share, revenue or margins of the target and more. Paying a premium if all of these conditions are true is not advisable. It might be if the benefits of diversification to Kunla outweigh the potential losses of acquiring a poor performing firm like Cann.

Since, Kunla is trying to acquire Cann at a discounted price it might be possible that Cann has not been performing well in terms of its operations and financials. In such a scenario, the merger is sensible only if the revenue increment and cost reduction synergies of the merger outweigh the potential downsides of merging with a poorly performing company like Cann.