18. Which of the following statements is true?
a. A 10% increase in sales has a smaller impact on cash flow than a 10% reduction in cost of sales.
b. A 10% increase in sales has the same impact on cash flow than a 10% reduction in cost of sales.
c. A 10% increase in sales has a larger impact on cash flow than a 10% reduction in cost of sales.
d. A 10% increase in sales has a smaller impact on after-tax profits than a 10% reduction in cost of
sales.
e. None of the above
Short Essay Examination Questions
THE UNRELENTING ALLURE OF THE “TRANSFORMATIVE” ACQUISITION —
MICROSOFT BUYS LINKEDIN IN ITS BIGGEST DEAL IN HISTORY
____________________________________________________________________
KEY POINTS: FINANCIAL MODELS
• Enable the rapid consideration of alternative scenarios by changing key assumptions underlying valuation,
deal structuring and financing issues,
• Help define the range of risks associated with an investment, but
• Sometimes aid and abet managers in crossing the fine line between “reimagining” how their business can
compete and hyperbole.
____________________________________________________________________________
The good news, bad news about financial models is that they can be used to evaluate a wide range of alternatives.
Generally, this capability is highly useful because it gives senior management a look into the future without having
to commit substantial resources to a bet on a highly uncertain outcome. But it is critical to remember that financial
models are in effect sophisticated high speed calculators that can lull management into a false sense of security. If
given a set of optimistic assumptions, we should not be surprised that we get a rosy outlook. This can be especially
seductive when management is frustrated with their inability to improve their firm’s current operating performance
and boost its share price.
Enter the “transformational deal:” those intended to enable a company to fundamentally change the way it does
business. Often highly risky, they push the acquirer into new areas with which it is largely unfamiliar, requiring the
acquirer to climb rapidly a steep learning curve. In the tech sector, “transformational deals” often are precedent
setting, with little historical comparisons to assess likely future performance. They require management to place a
bet on new products still in the concept stage to be sold in markets that are often poorly understood or largely
undefined and requiring execution skills seldom found in large bureaucratic firms.
These concerns notwithstanding, Microsoft made its most ambitious move in years when it announced on June
13, 2016 that it would acquire LinkedIn in an all-cash deal valued at $26.2 billion, almost 9 times LinkedIn $2.9
billion annual revenue. By far the largest in the firm’s history, the takeover combines Microsoft, a leading maker of
software, and LinkedIn, the world’s largest business oriented social networking site. While dwarfed by Facebook,
the largest and most profitable of social networks, LinkedIn is the most widely used site for people to promote their
professional skills and accomplishments.
were eye-popping at the time, Microsoft’s acquisition of LinkedIn topped these transactions by paying almost $61
dollar per user for LinkedIn ($26.2 billion/.433 billion users). To be fair, Microsoft believed it was playing catch up
as the digital world moves away from the firm’s traditional software business to cloud computing in which users rent
software accessible via the internet. Management may have viewed the price paid as justifiable as this acquisition
could ultimately “save” the firm.