0611 db1

Examiners report
DB1 June 2011

General Comments The format of the examination remained unchanged from previous examination. Thus, Section A consisted of twenty objective test questions that were divided equally between the Financial Strategy and the Risk Management elements of the examination paper. Section B consisted of three questions relating to the Financial Strategy element and Section C consisted of three questions relating to the Risk Management element. Candidates were required to attempt all questions in Section A and a total of three questions from Sections B and C, including at least one from Section B and one from Section C. This report deals with the performance of candidates in Sections B and C of the examination paper. Specific Comments Question One The first question in Section B was an investment appraisal problem. This was a popular question which was, on the whole, well answered. The first part required candidates to prepare calculations showing the net present value and internal rate of return of a project. Many candidates were well prepared for calculating the net present value and marks awarded were often high. Calculating the internal rate of return, however, posed more problems and some candidates struggled when carrying out the interpolation necessary to derive an approximate figure. The second part of the question required candidates to comment on the recommendation to abort the project. Most candidates managed to make the point the net present value was positive and the internal rate of return was higher than the cost of capital, therefore acceptance of the project would enhance shareholder wealth. Few, however, mentioned the fact that the margin of safety of the project was not high and that the reliability of underlying estimates should be checked before a final decision is made. The final part of the question required candidates to comment on the two methods of investment appraisal used in the first part of the question and to explain which, if any, is superior. Although most candidates managed to describe the basic features of each of the two methods, few managed to identify the flaws in the internal rate of return method. This method ignores the scale of the investment and gives priority to projects with a higher percentage rate of return. It is, therefore, not directly concerned with maximising the absolute wealth of shareholders. The internal rate of return method also has difficulty in dealing with projects that have unconventional cash flows. Question Two This question concerned a business that is considering the acquisition of another business in a different industry. This was not a very popular question and, although some candidates managed to score high marks, the general standard of answers was not high. The first part of the question required a brief discussion of the case for and against business diversification through acquisition. Most candidates managed to make the point that it can result in greater stability of cash flows, which may, in turn, help the business to survive over the longer term. Few, however, raised the issue as to whether diversification by a business will provide benefits to shareholders that they cannot achieve more cheaply themselves by holding a diversified portfolio of investments. The second part of the question required various calculations to be carried out that were connected to the proposed acquisition. These calculations were sometimes carried out well with a few candidates scoring maximum marks. However, the majority struggled with the rate of exchange for the shares of the two companies and the total number of shares that needed to be issued to finance the takeover. This second part carried more than half the total marks of the question and so a poor attempt at this part usually meant a low mark overall.
Examiners report DB1 - June 2011
The final part of the question required a discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of shareholders in a target company receiving the bid consideration in the form of cash rather than shares. Most candidates made a reasonable attempt at this part and were able to make some useful points. Question Three Question three was concerned with the effect of competing financing options on the returns to shareholders. The first part of the question required candidates to undertake various calculations to demonstrate the differential effect of equity and debt when used to finance the expansion of a business. Most candidates were able to calculate the likely impact on future income and earnings per share under the two different sources of finance without much difficulty. They were often unable, however, to calculate the level of gearing associated with each option. The main problem was usually in deriving the total equity for use in the gearing formula. The second part of the question required candidates to calculate the level of operating profit at which the level of earnings per share would be the same under each financing option. This proved to be beyond the reach of many candidates and a significant number did not even attempt this part. Fortunately for these candidates, it did not carry a large number of marks and so it was still possible to gain reasonable marks for the question as long as the remaining parts were answered well. The third and final part of the question required candidates to evaluate each of the financing options from the perspective of an existing shareholder. Although most managed to make a few points, the general standard of discussion was not high. The issue of risk and return was rarely mentioned in relation to each financing option and the problem of dilution of shareholder control was too often ignored. Question Four This question was concerned with the views of Modigliani and Miller (MM) concerning the capital structure debate. It was clear that candidates were generally ill prepared for this type of question. It proved to be an unpopular choice and marks awarded were generally low. The first part of the question required candidates to outline the views of MM concerning capital structure. This was rarely well answered, although a few managed to score high marks. It was disappointing to see such a lack of preparation for such a question. The views of MM on capital structure are an important element of the syllabus and the question posed was very straightforward. Candidates were only required to outline the MM views. The second part of the question required candidates to identify two limiting assumptions of the MM (including taxes) viewpoint. This was often better answered than the first part but only carried a small proportion of the total marks available. The final part required candidates to calculate the equilibrium price of a share in a company based on the MM (including taxes) view. This was a more demanding part and, given the performance of candidates in the previous two parts, it was not surprising to find that it was either answered badly or was left unanswered. Question Five Question five was concerned with currency risk. This type of question is rarely a popular choice although it does attract a small group of candidates with a good understanding of the topic. As a result some of the scores for this question were very high. The first part of the question required candidates to show the effect of three different options for dealing with currency risk. The first option was to use a forward exchange contract. Most managed to make a reasonable attempt at this part, although dealing with the premium created problems for some. The second option was to use a currency option and, again, some floundered when dealing with the premium. The final option was to do nothing and most managed to calculate the financial effect of this option.
Examiners report DB1 June 2011
The second part of the question required a discussion of the results of the calculations carried out in the first part. Most candidates managed to make some reasonable points and the overall level of performance was satisfactory. The final part required a discussion of the nature of futures contracts and how they could be used to hedge the risks faced by the UK company in the question. Most candidates were able to set out the main features of a futures contract and therefore started this part well. However, few managed to explain how the UK company could use futures contracts to help deal with the risk that it faced. Currency future contracts occur mostly through the Chicago Mercantile Exchange and are drawn up for a particular currency against the US dollar. As the company wishes to protect itself against exchange rate movements in the US dollar, it would not be able to sell US future dollars as they do not exist. Instead the company would have to but sterling futures now and then close its position when the dollar receipts became due. Question Six Question six was concerned with the role and nature of audit committees. This proved to be a popular question although marks awarded were rarely high. The first part of the question required candidates to explain the role of the audit committee in a public listed company. This part was reasonably well answered. Most candidates were able to identify the committees key responsibilities such as monitoring the integrity of the financial statements, reviewing the effectiveness of internal controls and reviewing the independence and effectiveness of the auditors. Other duties, however, such as the development of policies concerning non-audit services, recommending the appointment or removal of external auditors and approving the terms of auditor engagement were rarely mentioned. The second part of the question concerned the issues and problems relating to the audit committee. Although this part carried the majority of marks, it was less well answered. Most candidates were able to identify only one or two issues, which were often not well discussed. On occasions, answers revealed confusion in the minds of candidates over the composition of the committee and its relationship to the board of directors.
Examiners report DB1 June 2011

0611 db1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

0611 db1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

0611 db1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Examiners report

DB1 June 2011

Examiners report DB1 - June 2011

Examiners report DB1 June 2011

Examiners report DB1 June 2011

You might also like