Company A has ND of 20 and EqV of 50, Company B has ND of 10 and EqV of 40. A buys B with 50% debt and 50% cash, what is the resulting EV and EqV of A?
In general, what is the right way of reasoning for these types of questions?
| +445 | Don’t work at UBS - UBS Sucks | 42 | 9h |
| +330 | Article - UBS’ Investment Bank Keeps Losing Ground | 43 | 9h |
| +214 | Should My Intern Get a Return Offer? | 59 | 7h |
| +57 | Getting Laid in IB? | 28 | 12h |
| +56 | F*ck it I'm Going to Med School | 19 | 2d |
| +45 | Living in greenwich as an analyst? | 9 | 13h |
| +32 | STEM student lost in London IB recruiting | 19 | 19h |
| +32 | Intern keeps sleeping at work - what to tell them | 18 | 22m |
| +27 | Nauseous every morning for past 3 years in IB, anyone else? | 20 | 42m |
| +27 | NYC Associate Budget | 9 | 1d |
Career Resources
Get instant access to lessons taught by experienced private equity pros and bulge bracket investment bankers including financial statement modeling, DCF, M&A, LBO, Comps and Excel Modeling.
and if the merger is all in cash or cash+debt does the mkt cap of buyer change?
Assuming no synergies:
Company A has starting EV of 70. Acquires 50 of EV, so pro forma EV is 120. The 50 of acquired EV are financed with 25 of debt and 25 of cash, so net debt increases by 50 [25-(-25)]. Removing pro-forma net debt to derive pro-forma EqV, this results in a pro-forma EqV of 70
I would have said EqV is the same with 70 of ND
I think you forgot to include the 20 of net debt that already existed. So your pro forma net debt is 70 resulting in no change in equity value.
Intuitively that makes sense. Were paying for an asset entirely with net debt (decrease in cash is the same as an increase in debt), so EqV doesn’t change because the increase in TEV is offset by the increase in net debt.
other way to think about it is that if we’re not issuing new shares, EqV shouldn’t change, or else we’d be adding shareholder value from nothing. If we start talking about paying for the asset with stock, then EqV could change.
thanks
I would have said EqV is the same with 70 of ND
Move along with the formula of EV = EqV + ND
Company A buys a $40 equity of B with 20 cash and 20 debt.
EqV 50 + 20 A's old debt -(-20) cash + 20 new debt + 10 B's debt = 120.
On the other side the sum of the productive assets after the merger would be the sum of two EVs 70+50 = 120.
The debt/cash composition of the M&A financing doesn't affect the EV. Just put different cash/debt compositions in the formula above. But fundamentally it's because it will be the same productive assets of companies A and B combined.
Equity value will change subsequently if the assets generate more value than paid or if the debt will amortise faster than assets will depreciate.
Equity will change subsequently if the debt will amortise faster than the assets will depreciate.
And yes, we ignore the equity value of company B, because B's owners basically were substituted by other investors.
Totam nostrum velit perferendis possimus libero libero odit. Suscipit eos qui voluptas. Enim est assumenda dolore sit. Occaecati aut expedita aut cumque. Ut neque et quod saepe distinctio.
Animi aut temporibus dicta et eaque. Quos neque quis quis odit. Aliquam et quia repellat tenetur dolor placeat. Ipsam rem ut sunt sit optio ut temporibus excepturi. Sint est quod minus repellendus praesentium.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...