※ The companies mentioned in the document will be referred to as following:
Doosan Enerbility→Enerbility, Doosan Bobcat→Bobcat, Doosan Robotics→Robotics
What is the rationale for still proceeding the Bobcat spin-off from Enerbility and merger with Robotics?
The stated objective of transferring Bobcat to Robotics is to secure investment capacity for Enerbility. Aren’t there other alternatives to raise capital, such as securing loans with Doosan Bobcat shares as collateral or rights offering?
Has the option of selling Bobcat to raise capital been considered?
How has the spin-off ratio and merger ratio changed compared to the original proposal?
Couldn’t the company have applied this revised approach from the beginning?
The Financial Supervisory Service suggested valuation analysis of Bobcat using Discounted Cash Flow(“DCF”) or Dividend Discount Model(“DDM”). Were these analysis methods conducted?
It has been stated that this reshaping plan will reduce Enerbility’s debt and enhance its financial capacity, yet there are concerns that the debt ratio will increase. Wouldn’t this mean worsening of the company’s capital structure?
Wouldn’t it be more beneficial for Enerbility to retain Bobcat as a subsidiary and continue to receive dividends?
Is the purpose of this business reshaping to strengthen Doosan Corporation’s influence over Bobcat?
[Robotics-Bobcat] Is there a plan for the Company to reinstate the share swap between Robotics and Bobcat in the foreseeable future?
[Robotics-Bobcat] Has the potential acquisition of Robotics by Bobcat been evaluated?