Why would an M&A deal be financed partly through a revolver?
I was reading about the Twitter deal, and WSJ says the financing is as follows:
The debt package includes $6.5 billion in term loans, a $500 million revolving line of credit, $3 billion in secured bonds and $3 billion in unsecured bonds, according to public disclosures. To pay for the deal, Mr. Musk also needs to come up with roughly $34 billion in equity. To help with that, he received commitment letters in May for over $7 billion in financing from 19 investors including Oracle Corp. co-founder and Tesla Inc. then-board member Larry Ellison and venture firm Sequoia Capital Fund LP.
I'm a bit confused on what a revolver's purpose is for in this case. Is it to help with PMI costs and other operating costs post merger? Not actually there for the purpose of the acquisition itself?
Because a revolver is the cheapest form of debt, however there is limitations to the size of what a revolver can be. Given it’s assets or AR
Got it. Thanks.
You don't usually fund the purchase price with RCF. This is to be drawn post Tx (if you cannot meet minium cash)
Magnam ad dolores tempore labore nobis minima culpa. Perferendis doloribus cum ipsam voluptatem quos. Quia ducimus sapiente impedit voluptatibus et est ut. Et ratione labore corrupti molestiae ut quia. Esse voluptatem sequi est beatae.
Et odio natus dolor. Aut qui itaque totam rerum dolorem ipsa. Aut nisi ad ipsam veritatis ipsum consequuntur.
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...