<span>Vinny might be able to force the completion of the project. If the two had a written agreement that has not been violated or made conditionally null, then Spud could be legally obligated to complete the project, dependent on the interpretation of the contract by the court.</span>
The answer to your question is c
Answer:
a. The shareholders will want to tender their shares.
c. The gain will be $25.31 million – $23.44 million = $1.87 million.
Explanation:
a. The value of the firm is 1.25 million shares* 15= $18.75 million.
Increase in value, 18.75*135% = $25.31 million, so now this is the value of the firm
If 50% of the shares are bought for $18.75 Million, you will buy 0.625 million shares, so the total amount that will be paid is $11.72 million.
Now, the money against shares will be borrowed as collateral. This means that the new value of the equity will be $25.31 million – $11.72 million = 13.59 million.
1.25 million shares are there so now the price of the share will be = $10.87 million ($13.59 million/$1.25 million = $ 10.87 million).
b.The price of the shares has decreased from $13.59 to $10.87 after the tender offer, everyone will want to tender their shares for $18.75.
c. Supposing everyone tenders the shares and you will buy at $18.75 per share, you will pay $23.44 (18.75 per share *1.25 million shares) to acquire the company and it will be worth $25.31 million.
The gain will be $25.31 million – $23.44 million = $1.87 million.
Yes , Judy and Kristy have an enforceable binding contract
Explanation:
Kristy Johnston, Judy Olsen, and Joyce Johnston, their mother, owned real estate as common buyers. After Joyce died, she left Kristy her one-third share in the house. Kristy sent Judy a letter in 2009 promising Judy to purchase or sell Judy's share in the property.
Judy accepted the sale bid from Kristy. Kristy then tried to refuse Judy's approval and to cancel her bid for sale. Judy lodged a Kristy lawsuit.
The court granted the summary judgment to Judy finding that a contract had been drawn up between the letters exchanged between Judy and Kristy which satisfied the frauds ' status. The Supreme Court ruled that the district court decided out that an enforceable arrangement was established by exchanging letters from the parties.