Restaurant Brands New Zealand Limited logo

Despatch of Offer Document and Target Company Statement

M&A11 December 2018RBDConsumer Discretionary

RECOMMENDED
OFFER

6 December 2018

Partial takeover offer by Global Valar,

S.L. (a subsidiary of Finaccess

Capital, S.A. de C.V.) for ordinary

shares in Restaurant Brands

New Zealand Limited

for NZ$9.45 cash

per share.

Financial Adviser:

IMPORTANT

If you are in doubt as to any aspect of this Offer, you should

consult your financial or legal adviser.

If you have sold all your shares in Restaurant Brands New

Zealand Limited, you should immediately hand this Offer

Document and the accompanying acceptance forms to the

purchaser or the agent (e.g. the broker) through whom the

sale was made, to be passed to the purchaser.

Restaurant Brands New Zealand Limited’s target company

statement, together with an Independent Adviser’s Report

on the merits of the Offer either accompanies this Offer or

will be sent to you within 10 Working Days and should be

read in conjunction with this Offer.

RECOMMENDED OFFER
1

SECTION PAGE

1. LETTER FROM THE CEO OF FINACCESS CAPITAL

...........................................................................................................................................................................2

2. REASONS WHY YOU SHOULD ACCEPT THE OFFER

...................................................................................................................................................................4

3.

SUMMAR

Y OF THE OFFER

.....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................8

4. HOW TO ACCEPT THE OFFER

...............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................11

5. TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE OFFER

.......................................................................................................................................................................................................13

6. SCHEDULE

..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................28

CONTENTS

RECOMMENDED OFFER
2

LETTER FROM THE CEO OF FINACCESS CAPITAL

6 December 2018

Dear Shareholder,

PARTIAL TAKEOVER OFFER FOR RESTAURANT BRANDS AT NZ$9.45 CASH PER SHARE

Finaccess Capital, S.A. de C.V. (Finaccess Capital) is pleased to present to you this recommended

1


partial takeover offer in relation to Restaurant Brands New Zealand Limited (Restaurant Brands).

Our NZ$9.45 cash per share offer is in respect of 75% of the fully paid ordinary shares in Restaurant

Brands (the Offer). The Offer is being made by our subsidiary, Global Valar, S.L. (the Offeror).

We believe the Offer is a compelling opportunity for shareholders to realise significant value for

their investment in Restaurant Brands, with the offer price of NZ$9.45 cash per share representing

a 24.3% premium to Restaurant Brands’ last close price prior to announcement of our proposal and

a 26.1% premium to the 12 month VWAP

2

at that time.

Each of Restaurant Brands’ independent directors and Stephen Copulos

3

(who is a non-executive

director) recommend that you accept our Offer in the absence of an unmatched superior proposal

and subject to the Independent Adviser’s Report continuing to conclude that our Offer consideration

of NZ$9.45 cash per share is within or above the Independent Adviser’s valuation range of NZ$8.15

to NZ$8.92 per share. Further details of the recommendation is set out in the target company

statement that accompanies this Offer Document (or will be sent to you within 10 Working Days).

Included within the target company statement is the Independent Adviser’s Report, including the

Independent Adviser’s valuation range.

We have entered into a separate agreement with Mr Copulos, Restaurant Brands’ largest shareholder

with a current shareholding of approximately 8.5%. As part of this agreement, Mr Copulos has

agreed to accept our Offer for all of the Restaurant Brands shares he holds or controls, subject to

directors of Restaurant Brands not withdrawing or qualifying their recommendation of our Offer.

Furthermore, all other directors intend to accept our Offer in respect of all of the Restaurant Brands

shares that they hold or control, in the absence of an unmatched superior proposal.

The Offer is subject to a 75% minimum acceptance condition. The 75% minimum acceptance

condition can be waived, in which case the Offer will remain conditional on acceptances being

received that result in us holding or controlling more than 50% of the voting rights in Restaurant

Brands. This may result in the Offeror holding or controlling an interest in Restaurant Brands

between 50% and 75%. We have chosen not to make a full takeover offer because we believe

there are a number of benefits from Restaurant Brands maintaining its current New Zealand Stock

Exchange (NZX) and Australian Securities Exchange (ASX) listings. By remaining a public company,

Restaurant Brands will have access to capital to fund future growth while also providing existing

shareholders an opportunity to continue participating in the business over the long-term.

1 Restaurant Brands directors unanimously recommend that shareholders accept the Offer in the absence of an unmatched superior proposal and subject to the Independent Adviser’s Report

continuing to conclude that the Offer consideration is within or above the Independent Adviser’s valuation range.

2 VWAP means the volume weighted average price at which Restaurant Brands’ shares have traded on the New Zealand Stock Exchange main board for the relevant period. VWAP is calculated

as the total dollar value of shares traded on-market, divided by the total volume (or number) of shares traded on-market during the period referred to. VWAPs have been calculated up to and

including close as of 17 October 2018 (being the last trading day prior to Restaurant Brands’ announcement of Finaccess Capital’s non-binding indicative proposal).

3


Mr Copulos, and certain of his related entities, ha

ve agreed to accept the Offer pursuant to a lock-in deed with the Offeror and Finaccess Capital, which is summarised in clause 8.1 of the

Schedule to the Offer Document.

RECOMMENDED OFFER
3

We believe that we are uniquely placed to help assist Restaurant Brands through its next phase of

growth and deliver value to all shareholders. Finaccess Capital is a growing investment company

focused on supporting strong brands in attractive end-markets, working to maximise their potential

and creating value over a long-term horizon. We are not a typical financial investor or private equity

fund looking to make a short-term profit. Instead, we aim to become long-term operating partners,

leveraging our significant consumer retail experience and helping talented management teams

execute their growth strategies.

Our senior leadership’s extensive consumer retail experience stems from their long-term leadership

roles with Grupo Modelo, S.A.B. de C.V. (one of the largest brewing companies in the world

with iconic brands including Corona and Modelo, now part of Anheuser-Busch InBev SA/NV).

Additionally, our majority investment in AmRest Holdings SE, which operates approximately 2,000

casual dining and quick service restaurants including KFC and Pizza Hut branded restaurants,

provides us with directly relevant experience and knowledge. We believe this makes us a natural

partner for Restaurant Brands.

We recognise Restaurant Brands’ impressive historical growth track record, including through

organic store roll-outs as well as significant bolt-on acquisitions. Throughout our engagement with

Restaurant Brands, we have been highly impressed by the Restaurant Brands management team,

and it is our intention to leverage our significant resources to fully support their future business

development and growth initiatives, both within New Zealand as well as internationally. We believe

that together we can create value for all Restaurant Brands shareholders.

This Offer Document sets out the details of the Offer, including relevant information you will need to

take into account before making a decision to accept the Offer for all or part of your shareholding.

We believe this Offer represents a compelling opportunity, and encourage you to accept.

Yours sincerely,

Finaccess Capital, S.A. de C.V.

José Parés Gutiérrez

Chief Executive Officer

RECOMMENDED OFFER
4

REASONS WHY YOU SHOULD ACCEPT THE OFFER

#1 THE OFFER PRICE REPRESENTS A MATERIAL PREMIUM

TO THE RESTAURANT BRANDS SHARE PRICE

The Offer price of NZ$9.45 cash per share represents an attractive premium of:

• 24.3% to the last closing share price of Restaurant Brands on 17 October 2018, the trading day

prior to the announcement of Finaccess Capital’s initial non-binding indicative proposal;


23.2% to the three month VWAP prior to announcement of the proposal;

• 23.1% to the six month VWAP prior to announcement of the proposal; and


26.1% to the 12 month VWAP prior to announcement of the proposal.

#2 RESTAURANT BRANDS’ DIRECTORS RECOMMEND

SHAREHOLDERS ACCEPT THE OFFER

Each of Restaurant Brands’ independent directors and Stephen Copulos (who is a non-executive

director) recommend that shareholders accept the Offer in the absence of an unmatched superior

proposal and subject to the Independent Adviser’s Report continuing to conclude that the Offer

consideration is within or above the Independent Adviser’s valuation range.

#3 THE OFFER PRICE IS ABOVE THE INDEPENDENT

ADVISER’S VALUATION RANGE

The Independent Adviser has valued Restaurant Brands shares at NZ$8.15 to NZ$8.92 per share.

Our Offer consideration of NZ$9.45 cash per share is above that valuation range.

NZ$10.00

NZ$8.50

NZ$9.50

NZ$8.00

NZ$7.00

NZ$9.00

NZ$7.50

NZ$0.00

NZ$9.45

NZ$7.60NZ$7.49NZ$7.67NZ$7.68

Last CloseTakeover Offer Price

Source IRESS

Offer Price: NZ$9.45 cash per share

12 Month VWAP 3 Month VWAP 6 Month VWAP

24.3%

Premium

26.1%

Premium

23.2%

Premium

23.1%

Premium

RECOMMENDED OFFER
5

#4 STEPHEN COPULOS HAS AGREED TO SELL ALL

(SUBJECT TO SCALING) OF HIS RESTAURANT BRANDS

SHARES TO THE OFFEROR

Stephen Copulos is Restaurant Brands’ largest shareholder and a non-executive director, with a

current shareholding of approximately 8.5%.

Mr Copulos has agreed to accept our Offer for all of the Restaurant Brands shares he holds

or controls, subject to the directors of Restaurant Brands not withdrawing or qualifying their

recommendation of our Offer.

His support is a significant endorsement of this Offer and contributes meaningfully to the

acceptances required to reach the Offeror’s targeted 75% shareholding.

#5 THE OFFER REPRESENTS A SIGNIFICANT PREMIUM TO

RESTAURANT BRANDS’ PREVIOUS TRADING RANGE

NZ$10.00

NZ$9.00

NZ$8.00

NZ$7.00

NZ$6.00

NZ$5.00

NZ$4.00

Source FactSet

Offer Price: NZ$9.45 cash per share

18-Oct-18: Finaccess Capital’s non-

binding indicative proposal announced

Feb-17Oct-16Jun-17Oct-17Feb-18Jun-18Oct-18

RECOMMENDED OFFER
6

#6 THE OFFER VALUES RESTAURANT BRANDS AT AN

ATTRACTIVE MULTIPLE

The Offer values Restaurant Brands at an attractive multiple of:

• 14.1x EV/FY2018 EBITDA

4

;

• 13.6x EV/last 12 month EBITDA

5

; and

• 13.1x EV/FY2019 forecast consensus EBITDA

6

.

Source: Company filings, FactSet

#7 FINACCESS CAPITAL IS A LONG-TERM INVESTOR WITH

AN OPERATIONAL FOCUS AND EXTENSIVE TRACK

RECORD IN THE CONSUMER RETAIL SPACE

Finaccess Capital is a growing investment company focused on supporting strong brands in

attractive end-markets, working to maximise their potential and creating value over a long-term

horizon. Our business is part of Grupo Finaccess S.A. de C.V., which includes several other

companies and holds assets in Mexico, the US, Europe and Asia.

With no finite fund life, Finaccess Capital aims to become a long-term operating partner, leveraging

its senior leadership’s extensive consumer retail experience, including from their long-term roles

with Grupo Modelo, S.A.B. de C.V. (one of the largest brewing companies in the world with exports

to more than 180 countries and iconic brands including Corona and Modelo, now part of Anheuser-

Busch InBev SA/NV). Our investment approach is based on the core belief that any business’

success is predicated upon developing, retaining and supporting talented management teams.

Finaccess Capital will also aim to leverage its directly relevant experience gained from its majority

investment in AmRest Holdings SE, which operates approximately 2,000 casual dining and quick

service restaurants in 26 countries (with a focus on Europe, Russia and China) and a portfolio of

brands including KFC, Pizza Hut, Burger King and Starbucks (as well as several owned brands).

4 Refers to enterprise value (EV) divided by underlying earnings before interest, tax, depreciation, amortisation and non-trading items (EBITDA).

5 Based on EBITDA for 12 months to 10 September 2018 (per Restaurant Brands’ half year accounts released 18 October 2018).

6 Based on FY2019 forecast FactSet consensus EBITDA as at 17 October 2018 (the trading day prior to announcement of Finaccess Capital’s non-binding indicative proposal).

RECOMMENDED OFFER
7

#8 FINACCESS CAPITAL WILL SUPPORT RESTAURANT

BRANDS’ GROWTH AGENDA

Restaurant Brands has achieved admirable growth historically, both through organic store roll-outs

as well as significant bolt-on acquisitions. In order to continue growing and creating shareholder

value, Restaurant Brands will need to invest further in the business.

Given its long-term investment horizon, Finaccess Capital is focused on investing in high quality

businesses that can act as platforms for future growth and capital investment.

Finaccess Capital has been highly impressed by Restaurant Brands’ management team and we

intend to leverage our significant resources to fully support their future business development and

growth initiatives, both within New Zealand as well as internationally.

We believe that together we can create value for all Restaurant Brands shareholders.

#9 ACCEPTING SHAREHOLDERS WILL HAVE CERTAINTY OF

CASH, WITH NO BROKERAGE PAYABLE

A successful Offer will provide accepting shareholders with certainty of cash for some or all of their

investment in Restaurant Brands (subject to the level of acceptance and any scaling in accordance

with the Takeovers Code).

Accepting shareholders will also not be charged brokerage under this Offer. Shareholders selling

their Restaurant Brands shares on the NZX or ASX through a share broker may be charged

brokerage.

RECOMMENDED OFFER
8

SUMMARY OF THE OFFER

ConsiderationNZ$9.45 per fully paid ordinary share (Share(s)) in Restaurant

Brands in cash.

Partial Offer

The Offer is for 75.00% of the Shares.

The Offer is subject to receipt by the Offeror of acceptances

which will result in the Offeror becoming the holder of 75.00%

of the Shares. The Offeror is able to waive this condition and, if

it does so, the Offer will be conditional on the Offeror receiving

sufficient acceptances that would result in the Offeror acquiring

at least 50.01%

7

of the Shares (in this case, the Offer will result,

if it becomes unconditional in all respects, in the Offeror holding

between 50.01% and 75.00% (inclusive), of all the Shares in

Restaurant Brands).

As at the date of this Offer Document, neither the Offeror nor

Finaccess Capital holds or controls any Shares.

Opening date

6 December 2018

Closing date

The Offer closes at 11.59 p.m. on 12 March 2019 (unless the

Offer is extended in accordance with the Takeovers Code).

Scaling of acceptancesYou may ACCEPT the Offer in respect of any number of your

Shares. However, if you accept more than 75.00% of your

Shares into the Offer, your acceptance may be subject to

scaling in accordance with the Takeovers Code.

Details of the scaling process are set out in clause 4 of the

Offer Terms. In summary, any Shares you accept into the Offer

in excess of 75.00% will only be taken up by the Offeror in

order to ensure that the Offeror holds 75.00% on completion

of the Offer. This would only occur if some shareholders have

not accepted the Offer (or have accepted in respect of less

than 75.00% of their Shares). Any shareholders who accept in

excess of 75.00% of their Shares will have their acceptance in

respect of that excess scaled on a pro rata basis.

7 Both references to “50.01%” in this paragraph have been rounded up to two decimal places.

RECOMMENDED OFFER
9

Payment date

You will be paid in accordance with clause 2.2 of the Offer

Terms. At this stage, it is anticipated that you will not be paid

until after the Closing Date.

However, if the Offeror declares the Offer unconditional before

the Closing Date you will be paid within five Working Days of the

latest of the date on which your acceptance is received by the

Offeror, the date on which the Offer becomes unconditional or

the first specified closing date.

Directors’ recommendation

Each of Restaurant Brands’ independent directors and Stephen

Copulos

8

(who is a non-executive director) recommend that

you accept the Offer, in the absence of an unmatched superior

proposal and subject to the Independent Adviser’s Report

concluding, and continuing to conclude, that the consideration

under this Offer is within or above the Independent Adviser’s

valuation range for the Shares.

Conditions

The Offer is conditional on the conditions contained in clauses

5.1 to 5.4 of the Offer Terms.

Other than the minimum acceptance conditions referred to in

the summary of the Offer above, the material conditions of the

Offer are summarised below:

(a)


T

he Offeror receives all necessary consents required

under the Overseas Investment Act 2005 and the Overseas

Investment Regulations 2005 for the Offeror to complete the

acquisition of Shares in accordance with this Offer.

(b) The consent of Kentucky Fried Chicken International

Holdings LLC, Pizza Hut International LLC and Taco Bell

Corp, to the acquisition of Shares in accordance with this

Offer, becomes unconditional in all respects.

(c) No material adverse change occurs between the Notice

Date and the time that the Offer is declared unconditional by

the Offeror.

(d) Restaurant Brands conducts its business, and each of

its subsidiaries and joint venture entities conducts their

business, in the ordinary course of business, in a manner

materially consistent with the manner in which such business

has been conducted in the 12 months prior to the Notice

Date.

8 Mr Copulos, and certain of his related entities, have agreed to accept the Offer pursuant to a lock-in deed with the Offeror and Finaccess Capital, which is summarised in clause 8.1 of the

Schedule to the Offer Document.

RECOMMENDED OFFER
10

Lock-in deed

Finaccess Capital has entered into a lock-in deed with Stephen

Copulos, a director of Restaurant Brands, and certain interests

associated with Stephen Copulos

9

(the Copulos Interests) who,

in aggregate, own 8.52% of the Shares.

Under the lock-in deed:

(a) each of the Copulos Interests has agreed to accept, and

Stephen Copulos has agreed to procure that each of the

Copulos Interests accept, the Offer in respect of all of their

respective Shares (subject to scaling in accordance with the

terms of the Offer); and

(b)

neither Stephen Copulos nor any of the Copulos Interests

will make any public statement indicating a lack of

support for, or endorsement of, the Offer or supporting,

recommending or endorsing a different transaction to the

Offer.

10


This is a summary of the Offer. The detailed terms of the Offer are set out on pages 13 to

27 of this Offer Document.

9 See the definition of Copulos Interests in clause 9.2 of the Offer Terms for the names of these interests.

10 This does not prevent Stephen Copulos, in his capacity as a director of Restaurant Brands, from recommending a superior proposal in certain circumstances. Details are set out in the summary of

the Pre-Bid Agreement in clause 10.3 of the Schedule to the Offer Document.

RECOMMENDED OFFER
11

HOW TO ACCEPT THE OFFER

How to acceptTo ACCEPT this Offer, you should either:

(a) ACCEPT the Offer online at www.rbdtakeover.co.nz; or

(b) complete the relevant Acceptance Form and,

if applicable, the Specified Holder Certificate

accompanying this Offer, in accordance with the

instructions set out in the applicable form.

If you wish to ACCEPT this Offer, the relevant completed

Acceptance Form and, if applicable, Specified Holder

Certificate must be received, online or by other specified

means, by the Offeror before or post marked no later than

11.59 p.m. on 12 March 2019 (unless the Offer is extended in

accordance with the Takeovers Code).

Which Acceptance Form to

complete

(a)

If you hold your Shares in a CHESS holding (Australian

shareholders), please complete the GREEN Acceptance

Form;

(b)

For all other holders of Shares, please complete the WHITE

Share Acceptance Form.

The Offer Document you receive will be accompanied by the

relevant Acceptance Forms, with your holdings of Shares (as

recorded by Restaurant Brands at 5.00 pm on 4 December

2018) already completed

Specified Holder Certificate

If you hold Shares on behalf of more than one person, then:

(a) you are a “Specified Holder”; and

(b)


y

ou must complete the Specified Holder Certificate for the

Offer and return it with your Acceptance Form as outlined

above.

The Specified Holder Certificate sets out the number of

“Specified Persons” on whose behalf you hold Shares, the

number of Shares you hold on behalf of those Specified

Persons, and the respective number of Shares you accept into

Offer on behalf of those Specified Persons.

If you fail to complete the Specified Holder Certificate, your

acceptance in respect of the Offer is invalid.

ScalingYou may ACCEPT this Offer for all or some of your Shares.

Your acceptance may be subject to scaling in accordance

with clause 4 of the Terms and Conditions of the Offer.

Please refer to the Summary of the Offer for an overview of how

scaling works under this Offer.

RECOMMENDED OFFER
12

Address for acceptance

Return the Acceptance Form to Global Valar, S.L.:

Online:

Complete your relevant Acceptance Form at

www.rbdtakeover.co.nz. You will require your CSN/Holder

Number and relevant Acceptance Number to complete your

online acceptance. The CSN/Holder Number and Acceptance

Number can be found on the Acceptance Form sent to you.

By email:

Email a scanned copy to:

applications@linkmarketservices.co.nz

If you do this, please use “RBD Takeover Acceptance” as the

subject line of the email for easy identification.

By post:

Global Valar, S.L.

C/- Link Market Services Limited

PO Box 91976

Victoria Street West

Auckland 1142

By hand delivery:

Global Valar, S.L.

C/- Link Market Services Limited

Level 11, Deloitte Centre

80 Queen Street

Auckland 1010

By facsimile:

Fax it to Global Valar, S.L.

C/- Link Market Services Limited

+64 9 375 5990

If you have sold all of your

Shares

Please hand or send this Offer Document and all enclosures

(including the Acceptance Form(s) and, if applicable,

Specified Holder Certificate(s)) immediately to the purchaser

of your Shares or the broker through whom you made the sale

requesting that this Offer Document and all enclosures be

forwarded to the new Shareholder.

If you have sold some of

your Shares

Please alter the total holding on the relevant Acceptance Form

and, if applicable, Specified Holder Certificate, and deliver the

amended and completed forms as described above.

If you have lost your

Acceptance Form(s)

or Specified Holder

Certificate(s)

Please contact Link Market Services Limited on +64 9 375

5998 or applications@linkmarketservices.co.nz and they will

send you a new Acceptance Form(s) and/or Specified Holder

Certificate(s).

WebsitePlease go to www.rbdtakeover.co.nz for information about how

to make an online acceptance of this Offer.

RECOMMENDED OFFER
13

TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE OFFER

1 THE OFFER

1.1 Offer: The Offeror offers to purchase 75.00% of the Shares (the Specified Percentage),

including all rights, benefits and entitlements attached thereto on, after, or by reference to

the Notice Date, subject to the terms and conditions set out in this Offer Document and

to the Takeovers Code. As at 6 December 2018, the Specified Percentage represents

124,758,523 Shares (that number, or any lesser or greater number that may result from an

issue or buyback of Shares, is referred to as the Specified Number in this Offer Document).

The Offeror may end up holding less than the Specified Percentage, but more than 50% of

the Shares, in circumstances where:

(a)

the Offeror does not receive sufficient acceptances that would result in the Offeror

holding the Specified Percentage of the Shares;

(b)


the Of

feror waives the minimum acceptance condition in clause 5.1(a) (which relates to

the Offeror receiving sufficient acceptances such that the Offeror would end up holding

the Specified Percentage of the Shares); and

(c) the Offer becomes unconditional in all other respects, including that the minimum

acceptance condition set out in clause 5.1(b) is satisfied (which relates to the Offeror

receiving sufficient acceptances such that the Offeror would end up holding more than

50% of the Shares).

1.2

Offer Period:

This Offer is dated 6 December 2018 (Offer Date) and will remain open

for acceptance until 11.59 p.m. on 12 March 2019 (the Offer Period), unless the Offer is

withdrawn in accordance with the Takeovers Code and every person is released from every

obligation incurred under the terms of it, or the Offer lapses in accordance with its terms.

The Offeror may extend the Offer Period in accordance with the Takeovers Code. The time

the Offer expires is referred to in this Offer Document as the Closing Date.

1.3

Acceptance Form and Specified Holder Certificate: The enclosed Acceptance Form and

Specified Holder Certificate comprise part of this Offer.

2 OFFER CONSIDERATION

2.1

What you will be pa

id: The consideration offered by the Offeror is NZ$9.45 per Share

payable in cash, subject to any adjustment in accordance with clause 6.

2.2

When you will be paid: The consideration payable to each holder of Shares who accepts

this Offer (each an Acceptor) will be paid within five Working Days after the latest of:

(a) the date on which this Offer becomes unconditional;

(b) the date on which the Acceptor’s acceptance is received by the Offeror; and

(c) 12 March 2019.

As a

t the Offer Date, the Offeror intends that the Offer will only be declared unconditional

following the Closing Date but it reserves its right to declare the Offer unconditional earlier.

RECOMMENDED OFFER
14

2.3 Non-payment of consideration: If the consideration is not sent to an Acceptor within the

period specified in clause 2.2, the Acceptor may withdraw their acceptance of the Offer by:

(a) giving written notice to the Offeror of the Acceptor’s intention to withdraw acceptance of

the Offer; and

(b)


no less than fiv

e Working Days after giving notice under clause 2.3(a), giving written

notice to the Offeror withdrawing the Acceptor’s acceptance of the Offer,

provided that the Acceptor does not receive the consideration for their Shares before

written notice is given under clause 2.3(b).

3


ACCEPT

ANCE OF THIS OFFER

3.1

How to

accept the Offer: To accept this Offer, an Acceptor must do one of the following:

(a)

Online acceptance:

complete the relevant Acceptance Form and, if applicable, the

Specified Holder Certificate online at www.rbdtakeover.co.nz. The Acceptor will be

required to provide its CSN/Holder Number and Acceptance Number (which are set out

in the Acceptance Form sent to each Acceptor);

(b)


CHESS holdings (GR

EEN Acceptance Form): If the Acceptor’s Shares are held in a

CHESS holding, the Acceptor must either:

(i)

instr

uct the Acceptor’s Controlling Participant (as defined in the ASX Settlement

Operating Rules) directly (this is the Acceptor’s share broker). If an Acceptor does

this, the Acceptor will need to sign and return the GREEN Acceptance Form to the

relevant Controlling Participant; or

(ii)


authorise the Of

feror to contact the Acceptor’s Controlling Participant on the

Acceptor’s behalf, which can be done by signing and returning the GREEN

Acceptance Form in the manner specified above. By returning the GREEN

Acceptance Form the Acceptor will be deemed to have authorised the Offeror to

contact the Acceptor’s Controlling Participant directly via CHESS system. Neither

the Offeror nor the Registrar will be responsible for any delay incurred by this

process.

If

an Acceptor is a broker or Controlling Participant, the Acceptor must initiate

acceptance in accordance with the requirements of the ASX Settlement Operating

Rules.

(c)

Other means of acceptance (WHITE

Acceptance Form): complete the acceptance

in accordance with the instructions printed on the WHITE Acceptance Form and, if

applicable, the Specified Holder Certificate and deliver that WHITE Acceptance Form

and, if applicable, Specified Holder Certificate to the Offeror so as to be received not

later than 11.59 p.m. on the Closing Date, to:

(i)


By email:

applications@linkmarketservices.co.nz

(ii)

By post:

PO Box 91976, Victoria Street West, Auckland, 1142

(iii)

By hand:

Level 11, Deloitte Centre, 8 Queen Street, Auckland 1010

pro

vided that any Acceptance Form or, if applicable, Specified Holder Certificate

received after the Closing Date that is post marked on or before the Closing Date will be

deemed for the purposes of this Offer to have been received by the Closing Date. No

acknowledgment of the receipt of acceptances will be given.

RECOMMENDED OFFER
15

3.2 Shares held on behalf of other persons:

(a) If an Acceptor holds Shares on behalf of more than one person, the Acceptor is a

“Specified Holder” and MUST complete the Specified Holder Certificate for the Offer.

The completed Specified Holder Certificate must be returned to the Offeror with the

relevant Acceptance Form (or as soon as practicable thereafter), in accordance with

clause 3.1, so as to be received by the Offeror not later than 11.59 p.m. on the Closing

Date. Failure by a Specified Holder to complete a Specified Holder Certificate means

that the Specified Holder’s acceptance is invalid. All Specified Holder Certificates sent

to the address for acceptance set out in clause 3.1(c) will be deemed to have been

provided to both the Offeror and the Registrar.

(b)

Clause 3.2(a) applies regardless of:

(i) whether the holdings are direct or indirect;

(ii) whether the Specified Holder is a custodian or not; and

(iii) the particular arrangements between the Specified Holder and the person on

whose behalf the Specified Holder holds Shares.

(c) An Acceptor does not need to complete and return a Specified Holder Certificate if the

Acceptor holds Shares for itself or on behalf of only one other person.

3.3


Acceptance Forms and Specified Holder Ce

rtificates: The Offeror may, in its discretion:

(a)

trea

t any Acceptance Form as valid even if it does not comply with clause 3.1, or is

otherwise irregular;

(b)

rectify an

y errors in, or omissions from, any Acceptance Form to enable that form to

constitute a valid acceptance of this Offer and to facilitate registration of the transfer of

the relevant Shares to the Offeror, including inserting or correcting details of the Shares

held by the Acceptor and filling in any blanks; and

(c)


subject to the T

akeovers Code:

(i)

trea

t any Specified Holder Certificate as valid even if that Specified Holder

Certificate does not comply with any instructions on the Specified Holder

Certificate; and

(ii)


rectify an

y errors in, or omissions from, any Specified Holder Certificate to enable

that certificate to comply with rules 14B to 14D of the Takeovers Code and to

facilitate the taking up of Shares in accordance with rule 14E of the Takeovers

Code.

3.4


Persons who may accept:

The Offer is open for acceptance by any person who holds

Shares, whether acquired before, on or after the Offer Date, upon production of satisfactory

evidence of such person’s entitlement to those Shares. A holder of Shares may accept this

Offer in respect of all or any of their Shares. Each acceptance must be free of all conditions

of acceptance of any nature whatsoever.

3.5


Acceptor

’s representations and warranties: Each Acceptor represents and warrants that:

(a)

it is the sole leg

al and beneficial owner of the Shares in respect of which it accepts this

Offer, or it is the legal owner and has the necessary capacity and authority to accept

this Offer in respect of those Shares; and

RECOMMENDED OFFER
16

(b) legal and beneficial title to all those Shares in respect of which it accepts this Offer

will pass to the Offeror free of all liens, charges, mortgages, encumbrances and other

adverse interests or claims of any nature whatsoever; and

(c)


accepting the Of

fer in the manner contemplated by the Acceptance Form and, if

applicable, the Specified Holder Certificate submitted by the Acceptor will not cause

the Offeror to breach any law in delivering the consideration specified in clause 2.1.

Acceptance of this Offer constitutes a representation and warranty by the Acceptor to

the Offeror that title to the Shares to which the applicable acceptance relates will pass

to the Offeror on the basis described in this clause 3.5 and that the Acceptor has full

power, capacity and authority to sell and transfer all Shares in respect of which they

accept this Offer.

3.6


Specified

Holder’s representation and warranty: Each person who completes and returns

a Specified Holder Certificate represents and warrants to the Offeror that the Specified

Holder Certificate is true and correct and has been duly completed and executed. Any

person who does not complete and return a Specified Holder Certificate represents and

warrants that that person does not hold Shares on behalf of more than one person.

3.7


Joint Holders:

Despite anything to the contrary in an Acceptance Form or Specified Holder

Certificate, if an Acceptor is a joint holder of Shares (whether or not as trustee of a trust)

and the Acceptance Form and/or Specified Holder Certificate is signed by one or some, but

not all, joint holders, then the Acceptor represents and warrants to the Offeror that:

(a)


the holder(s) w

ho has/have signed the Acceptance Form and/or Specified Holder

Certificate do(es) so on behalf of and as duly authorised agent(s) for the joint holder(s)

who has/have not signed, that such authority has not been revoked, and that the

acceptance and/or certificate is binding on the joint holder(s) who has/have not signed

the Acceptance Form and/or Specified Holder Certificate; and

(b)

if the Acceptor holds the relevant Shares as a trustee of a trust, the instrument

constituting the trust permits the execution of the Acceptance Form and/or Specified

Holder Certificate in the manner in which it was executed.

3.8 Procurement by brokers: The Offeror may choose to engage the services of one or more

Primary Market Participants (as defined in the NZX Participant Rules) or other financial

advisory firms (Brokers) to contact holders of Shares. If the Offeror chooses to do this, the

key terms of engagement will be as follows:

(a)

f

or each completed and valid Acceptance Form procured by a Broker, the Offeror may

pay to the Broker a handling or procurement fee in respect of the Shares that are the

subject of the Acceptance Form (Procurement Fee). The amount of the Procurement

Fee will be 0.75% of the consideration payable by the Offeror under this Offer to the

relevant Acceptor in respect of the Acceptance Form received. The Procurement Fee

will be subject to a minimum amount of $25 and a maximum amount of $500 for a single

Acceptance Form inclusive of GST, if any;

(b)


the Brok

er will be paid, and will receive, the Procurement Fee solely in connection with

its services to the Offeror and must not, directly or indirectly, pass any or all of the

Procurement Fee on to any Acceptor, or share the Procurement Fee with any Acceptor;

RECOMMENDED OFFER
17

(c) the payment of a Procurement Fee to a Broker in respect of an Acceptance Form

procured by that Broker is in all respects conditional on the Shares, that are the subject

of that Acceptance Form, being validly transferred to the Offeror. No Procurement Fees

will be payable if this Offer is not declared unconditional by the Offeror. In addition, the

Acceptance Form must be delivered to the Offeror in accordance with clause 3.1 and,

unless the Offeror in its sole discretion determines otherwise, must be stamped by the

Broker (and only that Broker);

(d)

Brokers are precluded from receipt of any Procurement Fee in respect of Shares in

which they or their associates have relevant interests;

(e)


the Of

feror may, in determining the Procurement Fee payable to a Broker, aggregate

and/or disregard any acceptance of this Offer procured by that Broker if the Offeror

believes that a party has structured holdings of the Shares for the purpose or with the

effect of enabling parties to take advantage of the arrangements summarised in this

clause 3.8; and

(f)

the Offeror will determine, in its sole discretion, any disputes relating to the payment

of a Procurement Fee. The determination of the Offeror will be final and binding on all

parties, to the extent permitted by law.

4


SCALING

OF ACCEPTANCES

4.1


How th

e Offeror treats acceptances: The Offeror will purchase:

(a)

all of

the Shares of each Acceptor who accepts the Offer for the Specified Percentage

of their Shares;

(b)

w

here an Acceptor accepts the Offer in respect of a lesser number of Shares, such

lesser number of Shares; and

(c)

w

here an Acceptor has accepted the Offer for more than the Specified Percentage

of their Shares, such number of Shares as results from scaling the acceptance in

accordance with clause 4.2,

pro

vided that, in each case, the Offer becomes unconditional.

4.2

What happens to su

rplus acceptances: Where the Offeror has received acceptances

from certain Acceptors (each a Surplus Acceptor) for more than the Specified Percentage

of those Acceptors’ Shares (those Shares in excess being Surplus Shares), then in

accordance with the Takeovers Code:

(a)

the Offeror must take up from each Acceptor the lesser of:

(i) the number of that Acceptor’s Shares that represents the Specified Percentage of

the Shares held by that Acceptor; and

(ii)


the n

umber of Shares in respect of which the Acceptor has accepted the Offer;

and

(b)


if

the number of Shares that the Offeror takes up under clause 4.2(a) is less than the

Specified Number, then the Offeror must take up, from each Surplus Acceptor, Shares

which bear the same proportion to that Acceptor’s Surplus Shares, as the balance of

the Shares required by the Offeror to acquire the Specified Number bears to the total of

all the Surplus Shares.

RECOMMENDED OFFER
18

4.3 What happens if there are no surplus acceptances: If the Offer is accepted in respect of

the Specified Percentage of Shares or less, then the Offeror must take up all of the Shares

of each Acceptor who accepts the Offer.

4.4 Specified Holders: Where the Offeror receives one or more Specified Holder Certificates,

the Offeror will take up Shares in accordance with rule 14E of the Takeovers Code and

clauses 4.2 and 4.3 will apply accordingly.

11


4.5 Appointment of attorney: If the Offer is accepted in respect of more Shares than the

Specified Percentage, each Acceptor irrevocably appoints the Offeror its attorney to amend

the number of Shares specified in that Acceptor’s Acceptance Form and, where applicable,

the Specified Holder Certificate so as to reflect any scaling and apportionment undertaken

in accordance with this clause 4. This may reduce the number of Shares taken up from the

relevant Acceptor.

5


CONDITIONS OF TH

IS OFFER

5.1 Minimum acceptance condition: This Offer, and any contract arising from acceptance of

it, is conditional on:

(a) the Offeror receiving acceptances by no later than the Closing Date in respect of such

number of Shares that would, upon this Offer becoming unconditional and the Shares

being transferred to the Offeror, result in the Offeror holding or controlling 75.00% of the

voting rights in Restaurant Brands; and

(b)

if the condition in clause 5.1(a) is waived by the Offeror, then (in accordance with

rule 23 of the Takeovers Code) the Offeror receives acceptances by no later than the

Closing Date in respect of such number of Shares that would, upon this Offer becoming

unconditional and the Shares being transferred to the Offeror, result in the Offeror

holding or controlling more than 50% of the voting rights in Restaurant Brands.

5.2


Overse

as Investment Act: The Offer, and any contract arising from acceptance of it, is

conditional on the Offeror obtaining all consents required under the Overseas Investment

Act 2005 and the Overseas Investment Regulations 2005 for the Offeror to complete the

acquisition of Shares in accordance with this Offer on terms that are usual for the granting

of such consents.

5.3


Y

um! consent: The Offer, and any contract arising from acceptance of it, is conditional on

the consent of Kentucky Fried Chicken International Holdings LLC, Pizza Hut International

LLC and Taco Bell Corp, to the acquisition by the Offeror of up to 75.00% of the Shares,

becoming unconditional in all respects.

11 In broad terms, rule 14E provides that where a Specified Holder holds Shares on behalf of more than one person (each person being a Specified Person), in certain circumstances the Offeror

must treat the Specified Person (and not the Specified Holder) as the Surplus Acceptor for the purposes of scaling calculations. For example, a Specified Person will be treated as a Surplus

Acceptor where that Specified Person accepts the Offer (through the Specified Holder) for more than the Specified Percentage of the Shares held by the Specified Holder on behalf of the

Specified Person. The Takeovers Code provides that an acceptance under the Offer by a Specified Holder who has not provided a Specified Holder Certificate in accordance with rule 14B of the

Takeovers Code is invalid.

RECOMMENDED OFFER
19

5.4 Further conditions of the Offer: This Offer, and any contract arising from acceptance of

it, are subject to the conditions that, except as otherwise agreed in writing by the Offeror,

during the period from the Notice Date until the time that the Offer is declared unconditional

by the Offeror:

(a)

no Material Adverse Change occurs;

(b) no dividends, bonuses or other payments or distributions (within the meaning of the

Companies Act 1993) of any nature whatsoever (including, for the avoidance of doubt,

by way of share buyback, redemption or cancellation or any other form of capital

reduction) are authorised, declared, paid or made upon or in respect of any of the

Shares;

(c)


no shares

, performance rights, convertible securities or other equity securities of any

nature (including options, rights or interest in any ordinary shares) of Restaurant Brands

or any of its subsidiaries or joint venture entities (together the RBD Group), are issued,

agreed to be issued or made the subject of any option or right to subscribe except:

(i)


f

or the issue of Shares to Russel Creedy and Grant Ellis, respectively, on vesting of

their performance rights in accordance with vesting arrangements fairly disclosed

to Finaccess Capital prior to the Notice Date; or

(ii)


pur

suant to a transaction between Restaurant Brands and wholly owned

subsidiaries of Restaurant Brands, or between wholly owned subsidiaries of

Restaurant Brands (Intra-Group Transaction);

(d)


there is no altera

tion of the rights, benefits, entitlements and restrictions attaching to any

of the Shares;

(e)


there is no altera

tion to the constitutional documents of any member of the RBD Group,

other than amendments that are of a formal or technical, and not of a substantive,

nature;

(f)

no member of the RBD Group disposes, or agrees to dispose, or grants any person any

option to acquire, right to acquire, first right of refusal or pre-emptive rights in respect of,

or, except as permitted by clause 5.4(g), grants any person any other adverse interests

in respect of, the whole or a substantial part of the RBD Group’s business or property;

(g)


no member of

the RBD Group grants a security interest, or agrees to grant a security

interest, in respect of the whole or a substantial part, of the RBD Group’s business or

property, except for the granting of a security interest over property acquired in the

ordinary course of business;

(h)


R

estaurant Brands remains listed on the NZX, the Shares remain quoted on the NZX

and ASX, and the Shares are not suspended from trading on the NZX or ASX for more

than five trading days;

(i)

no liquidator, receiver, receiver and manager, statutory manager or similar official is

appointed in respect of any member of the RBD Group or any of their respective

assets, and no resolution is passed for any amalgamation (other than pursuant to

an Intra-Group Transaction) of any member of the RBD Group, and none of them is

involved in any merger, share buyback or scheme of arrangement;

(j)

no member of

the RBD Group seeks orders in respect of, or becomes the subject of,

any scheme of arrangement under Part 15 of the Companies Act 1993;

RECOMMENDED OFFER
20

(k) Restaurant Brands conducts its business, and each member of the RBD Group

conducts its business, in the ordinary course of business, in a manner materially

consistent with the manner in which such business has been conducted in the 12

months prior to the Notice Date;

(l)

no member of the RBD Group acquires an interest in “sensitive land” (including

“residential land”) for the purposes of the Overseas Investment Act 2005;

(m) no member of the RBD Group changes, or agrees to change, the remuneration or

any other material terms of employment of any existing director, officer, employee, or

consultant where the aggregate impact of all such changes would result in a cost to the

RBD Group in excess of $1,000,000;

(n)


no member of

the RBD Group settles or offers to settle any action, dispute, issue, claim,

litigation, prosecution, or other form of proceeding, where:

(i) the aggregate settlement amount exceeds $5,000,000; or

(ii) the settlement involves the imposition of an injunction against, or restriction on, any

member of the RBD Group undertaking any business activity, where that injunction

or restriction will have a material impact on the business of the RBD Group;

(o)


no member of

the RBD Group guarantees, provides an indemnity for, provides security

in respect of, or otherwise accepts liability in respect of, the obligations or liabilities

of any person who is not a member of the RBD Group except for the provision of

indemnities to directors and employees of the RBD Group (to the extent permitted by

the Companies Act 1993);

(p)


R

estaurant Brands does not enter into a “major transaction” for the purposes of the

Companies Act 1993 or any agreement or arrangement to which NZX Listing Rules 9.1

or 9.2 apply (or would apply but for the granting of any waiver or ruling by NZX);

(q)


there is no temporar

y restraining order, preliminary or permanent injunction or other

order issued by any regulatory authority or any court of competent jurisdiction in New

Zealand or elsewhere or other legal restraint or prohibition making implementation of

this Offer, or any aspect of it, void, unenforceable or illegal; and

(r)


no board resolution or shareholder

s’ resolution of any member of the RBD Group is

passed to do or authorise the doing of any act or matter referred to in any of sub-

clauses (a) to (q) (inclusive).

5.5

Eac

h of the conditions in clauses 5.1 to 5.4 is a separate condition, and acceptance of this

Offer by each Acceptor shall constitute a contract between that Acceptor and the Offeror

subject to each such condition. This Offer will only proceed if all conditions in clauses 5.1 to

5.4 are satisfied or, to the extent permissible, waived.

5.6


Eac

h of the conditions set out in clauses 5.1 to 5.4 is for the benefit of the Offeror and, other

than the conditions in clauses 5.1(b) and 5.2, may be waived, in whole or in part, by the

Offeror and on such terms as it decides, in its sole discretion. Any waiver or consent given

by the Offeror in respect of any matter or thing shall apply only in accordance with its terms

and shall not constitute a waiver or consent in respect of any similar matter or thing. The

conditions in clause 5.1(b) and 5.2 cannot be waived.

RECOMMENDED OFFER
21

5.7 To the extent required by the Takeovers Code, where any condition set out in clauses 5.1

to 5.4 requires a determination as to whether a matter is or could reasonably be expected

to be material or not, is adverse or not, is onerous or not, is long-term or not, is normal or

not, is in the ordinary course of business or not, is consistent with past practices or not, or

is of a formal or technical (and not substantive) nature or not, before the condition may be

invoked, such determination must be made by a suitably qualified expert nominated by the

Offeror who is independent of, and not an associate of the Offeror.

5.8


T

he latest date on which the Offeror can declare this Offer unconditional is 20 Working Days

after the Closing Date. The latest date by which the Offer is to become unconditional based

on the Closing Date as at the Offer Date is 5.00 p.m. on 9 April 2019 (Unconditional Date).

If the Offer does not become unconditional by the Unconditional Date, it will lapse and all

Acceptance Forms and, where applicable, Specified Holder Certificates will be destroyed.

5.9

Without limiting clause 5.10, the Offeror may not allow the Offer to lapse or invoke a

condition in clause 5.4(a), 5.4(k), 5.4(m) or 5.4(n) or clause 5.4(r) (to the extent that clause

5.4(r) relates to clause 5.4(a), 5.4(k), 5.4(m) or 5.4(n)) in respect of, or in reliance on, any

matter or circumstance:

(a)

fairly disclosed in the Disclosure Materials; or

(b)

fair

ly disclosed by Restaurant Brands to NZX in the 24 months prior to the Notice Date;

or

(c)

actuall

y known by José Parés Gutiérrez or George Lyall of Finaccess Capital on the

Notice Date.

5.10

Notwithstanding an

y other term of the Offer, the Offeror may not allow the Offer to lapse:

(a)


in unreasonab

le reliance on a condition of the Offer; or

(b)

in reliance on a condition tha

t restricts Restaurant Brands’ activities in the ordinary

course of Restaurant Brands’ business during the period that begins on the Notice Date

and ends on the Unconditional Date.

6


CHANGE IN CIRCUMST

ANCES

6.1

Dividends and distributions: If, on or after the Notice Date:

(a) Restaurant Brands declares or pays any dividend or makes any other distribution to its

shareholders; and

(b)


the Of

feror waives the condition contained in clause 5.4(b),

then, at the Offeror’s election, either:

(a)

the Acceptor

s will be bound to pay to the Offeror an amount equivalent to that dividend

or the value of that other distribution paid or payable to them or received or receivable

by them in respect of the Shares taken up from them under the Offer; or

(b)

the cash considera

tion which would otherwise have been paid to such Acceptors will be

reduced by an amount equivalent to that dividend or the value of the other distribution

paid or payable to them or received or receivable by them in respect of the Shares

taken up from them under the Offer.

RECOMMENDED OFFER
22

6.2 Issues of securities: If, on or after the Notice Date:

(a) any shares, convertible securities or other securities of any nature of Restaurant

Brands or any member of the RBD Group by way of bonus issue, are issued, agreed

to be issued or made the subject of any option or right to subscribe (except in the

circumstances referred to in clause 5.4(c)(i) and (ii); and

(b)

the Offeror waives the condition contained in clause 5.4(c),

the Acceptor

s will be bound to transfer any such securities or other rights and interests

to the Offeror and the consideration per relevant Share provided for under clause 2.1 will

be reduced to take account of such issue. This clause 6.2 does not apply to the issue of

Shares to Russel Creedy and Grant Ellis, respectively, on vesting of their performance rights

in accordance with vesting arrangements fairly disclosed to the Offeror prior to the Notice

Date.

6.3

Consolidation or subdivision of Shares: If, on or after the Notice Date, all or any of the

Shares are consolidated or subdivided, then:

(a) this Offer will be interpreted to take into account that consolidation or subdivision and

will be deemed to be for the Shares resulting from that consolidation or subdivision;

(b)


the considera

tion per Share provided for under clause 2.1 will be increased or reduced,

as the case may require, in proportion to that consolidation or subdivision; and

(c)

the Acceptor

s will be bound to transfer those consolidated or subdivided Shares to the

Offeror on the basis of the consideration so increased or reduced.

6.4

Issues of new Shares: If Restaurant Brands makes any issue of shares to any person on or

after the Offer Date other than by way of bonus issue and the condition contained in clause

5.4(c) is waived by the Offeror, then this Offer will be deemed to extend to and include those

shares and the consideration payable for them will be as provided in clause 2.1.

7

METHOD OF SETTL

EMENT

7.1

Nominated method payment: If:

(a) this Offer is declared unconditional; and

(b) an Acceptor’s relevant Acceptance Form is in order (or the Offeror rectifies any errors

or omissions in or from the relevant Acceptance Form or otherwise accepts the relevant

Acceptance Form as valid under clause 3.3); and

(c)

where applicable, the Specified Holder Certificate is received and is in order (or the

Offeror rectifies any errors or omissions in or from the Specified Holder Certificate or

otherwise accepts the Specified Holder Certificate as valid under clause 3.3),

depending on the method of

payment elected by the Acceptor, either a cheque for the

cash amount payable to the Acceptor will be posted to the Acceptor by ordinary mail to

the address contained in the Acceptor’s Acceptance Form or the cash amount will be

electronically transferred to the bank account identified in the Acceptor’s Acceptance Form,

by the date specified in clause 2.2.

RECOMMENDED OFFER
23

7.2 No nominated method of payment: If:

(a) an Acceptor does not nominate a method of payment; or

(b) an Acceptor, having nominated an Australian bank account, does not complete the

GREEN Acceptance Form (which relates to CHESS holdings); or

(c) an Acceptor does not provide sufficient details to the Offeror for the Offeror to make an

electronic funds transfer to the Acceptor’s nominated bank account,

the Offeror will pay the amount payable to the Acceptor by electronic funds transfer to any

bank account that the relevant Acceptor has advised to Restaurant Brand’s share registrar

(such as for dividend payments), or failing that, by cheque. An Acceptor who has received a

cheque as a result of the operation of this clause 7.2 may subsequently provide the Offeror

with sufficient details to make an electronic transfer to that Acceptor’s nominated bank

account (whereupon any cheque payable to that Acceptor will be cancelled).

7.3

Interest: In no circumstances will the Offeror be liable to pay interest on any payment due

to an Acceptor.

8 NOTICES

8.1

Notices giv

en to Restaurant Brands, the Takeovers Panel and NZX:

(a)

dec

laring this Offer unconditional;

(b)

ad

vising that this Offer is withdrawn in accordance with the Takeovers Code;

(c)

ad

vising that a term or condition of this Offer has been waived; or

(d)

ad

vising that this Offer has lapsed in accordance with its terms or the Takeovers Code,

will, in eac

h case, be deemed to be notice to all Restaurant Brands shareholders when so

given.

8.2

Notice of

any variation of this Offer will be sent to Restaurant Brands, the Takeovers Panel,

NZX and, except where not required in accordance with the Takeovers Code, to each of

Restaurant Brands’ shareholders under this Offer.

9

FURTHER INFORMA

TION AND MISCELLANEOUS

9.1


Schedule:

Further information relating to this Offer, as required by Schedule 1 of the

Takeovers Code, is set out in the Schedule to this Offer and forms part of this Offer

Document.

9.2


Definitions: In this Of

fer Document, unless the context indicates otherwise:

Acceptance Form

means:

(a)

the w

hite acceptance and transfer form relating to the Shares that is enclosed with, and

forms part of, this Offer Document; and

(b)

the green acceptance and transfer form relating to the Shares in a CHESS holding that

is enclosed with, and forms part of, this Offer Document;

RECOMMENDED OFFER
24

Acceptor means a holder of Shares who has accepted this Offer in accordance with its

terms;

Closing Date means 11.59 p.m. on 12 March 2019 or on such other date to which the Offer

Period is extended in accordance with the Takeovers Code;

Copulos Interests means Eyeon QSR Pty Limited, Eyeon No 2 Pty Limited, Copulos

Superannuation Pty Limited, PC Nab Pty Limited, Eyeon Investments Pty Limited and

Copulos Foundation Pty Limited;

Disclosure Materials means:

(a) the Disclosure Letter dated 25 November 2018 between Restaurant Brands and the

Offeror; and

(b)


the written inf

ormation, documents and responses listed in the Disclosure Letter

and made available to the Offeror or its representatives by Restaurant Brands or its

representatives before 25 November 2018 in the virtual data room established by

Restaurant Brands.

Finaccess Capital means Finaccess Capital, S.A. de C.V.;

Independent

Adviser means Grant Samuel & Associates Limited;

Independent

Adviser’s Report means the independent adviser’s report prepared by the

Independent Adviser in relation to the Offer (as amended or updated from time-to-time and

including any supplementary or replacement report);

Material Adverse

Change means a matter, event or circumstance that occurs or becomes

known to the Offeror after the Notice Date (each a Specified Event) which has, has had, or

is reasonably likely to have the effect of:

(a)

diminishing the consolidated net tangible assets of Restaurant Brands and each

of its Related Companies (together, the RBNZ Group) taken as a whole by at least

$30,000,000 against what it would reasonably have been expected to have been but for

such Specified Event (either individually or when aggregated with other matters, events

or circumstances of a similar kind or category); or

(b)

diminishing the consolidated earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and

amortisation of the RBD Group for the then current 52-week period (that is, if the matter,

event or circumstance occurs on or before 25 February 2019, the 52 week period

ending 25 February 2019 (FY2019) or, if the matter, event or circumstance occurs

after 25 February 2019 but prior to 25 February 2020, the 52 week period ending 25

February 2020 (FY2020)) by at least $10,000,000 against what they would reasonably

have been expected to have been but for such Specified Event (either individually

or when aggregated with other matters, events or circumstances of a similar kind or

category) but disregarding matters, events or circumstances which have a one-off or

non-recurring impact and the results of which are felt by the RBD Group only in FY2019

or FY2020 (as applicable),

RECOMMENDED OFFER
25

in each case, determined after disregarding matters, events or circumstances:

(a) resulting from changes in general economic or political conditions (including changes

in foreign exchange rates, interest rates or commodity prices), the securities market in

general or law;

(b)

fairly disclosed to NZX or to Finaccess Capital prior to the Notice Date;

(c) done or not done at the written request or with the written acknowledgement and written

approval of the Offeror, including any consequences reasonably foreseeable as a result

of such matters;

(d)

resulting solel

y from the actual or anticipated change of control of Restaurant Brands

contemplated by this Offer;

(e)

resulting from changes in generally accepted accounting principles; or

(f) resulting from the implementation of IFRS 16;

Notice Date

means 26 November 2018, being the date on which the Offeror served or

caused to be served on Restaurant Brands a notice in writing pursuant to rule 41 of the

Takeovers Code;

NZX

means NZX Limited and, where the context requires, the main board financial market

that it operates;

NZX Listing Rules means the main board listing rules of NZX;

Offer means the offer for the Specified Percentage of Shares as set out in this Offer

Document;

Offer Date

means 6 December 2018, being the date of this Offer Document specified in

clause 1.2;

Offer Document means this offer document dated 6 December 2018;

Offer Period means the period beginning on the Offer Date and ending at the Closing Date;

Offer T

erms means the Terms and Conditions of the Offer set out on pages 13 to 27 of the

Offer Document;

Offeror

means Global Valar, S.L.;

Record Date

means 4 December 2018, being the record date for the purposes of the Offer;

Registrar means Link Market Services Limited, the registrar for the Offer;

Related Company

has the meaning, in relation to a company, given to that expression

in section 2(3) of the Companies Act 1993, provided that, for this purpose, references

to “company” in that section will extend to any body corporate wherever incorporated or

registered;

Restaurant Brands means R

estaurant Brands New Zealand Limited;

RECOMMENDED OFFER
26

Share(s) means a fully paid ordinary share in Restaurant Brands;

Specified Holder Certificate means the certificate, that is enclosed with, and forms part of,

this Offer Document, that must be signed by a person that holds equity securities on behalf

of more than one person;

Specified Percentage means 75.00%, subject to any adjustment in accordance with rule

9(7) of the Takeovers Code (if applicable);

Takeover Notice means the Offeror’s notice, under rule 41 of the Takeovers Code of its

intention to make a partial takeover offer for Restaurant Brands;

Takeovers Panel means the takeovers panel established by the Takeovers Act 1993;

Unconditional Date means 9 April 2019, but this may change (as permitted by the

Takeovers Code) if the Closing Date is extended in accordance with the Takeovers Code;

and

Working Day has the meaning given in section 2(1) of the Companies Act 1993.

9.3 Interpretation: In this Offer Document:

(a) any reference to the Takeovers Code means the takeovers code approved in the

Takeovers Regulations 2000, as amended by any applicable exemption granted by the

Takeovers Panel under the Takeovers Act 1993;

(b) except as expressly defined in this Offer Document, or where the context requires

otherwise, terms defined in the Takeovers Code have the same meaning in this Offer

Document;

(c)

references to amounts of dollars, NZD and $ are to New Zealand currency and to times

are to New Zealand time;

(d) headings are for ease of reference only and will not affect the interpretation of this Offer

Document or any Acceptance Form or Specified Holder Certificate;

(e)


ref

erences to any statutory provision are to statutory provisions in force in New Zealand

and include any statutory provision which amends or replaces it, and any by-law,

regulation, order, statutory instrument, determination or subordinate legislation made

under it;

(f) the singular includes the plural and vice versa;

(g) all percentages in the Offer (including the Specified Percentage and in the Schedule)

are rounded to two decimal places; and

(h)


a ref

erence to “fairly disclosed” means a disclosure in writing to Finaccess Capital or

NZX (as applicable) in a manner, and in sufficient detail, so as to enable a reasonable

bidder to identify and reasonably assess the nature, scope and significant implications

of the relevant matter, event or circumstances.

RECOMMENDED OFFER
27

9.4 Takeovers Act and Code prevail: If there is any inconsistency between the terms and

conditions of this Offer and the provisions of the Takeovers Act 1993 (including any

exemption granted under it) or the Takeovers Code, the provisions of the Takeovers

Act 1993 or the Takeovers Code (as the case may be) will prevail to the extent of that

inconsistency.

9.5

Cheques, documents and transfers: All cheques, electronic funds transfers, Acceptance

Forms, Specified Holder Certificates and other documents to be delivered, sent or

transferred by or to any person will be delivered, sent or transferred at that person’s own

risk.

9.6

Variation: This Offer may be varied by the Offeror in accordance with the Takeovers Code

or any exemption granted by the Takeovers Panel under section 45 of the Takeovers Act

1993.

9.7 Governing law and jurisdiction: This Offer and any contract arising from it shall be

governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of New Zealand, and the parties to

any such contract submit to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the Courts of New Zealand.

RECOMMENDED OFFER
28

SCHEDULE

INFORMATION REQUIRED BY SCHEDULE 1 OF THE TAKEOVERS CODE

The information required by Schedule 1 of the Takeovers Code and not stated elsewhere in this

Offer Document, is set out below. Where any information required by Schedule 1 is not applicable,

no statement is made regarding that information. The following matters are stated as at the Offer

Date.

1

DATE OF OFFER

The date of the Offer is 6 December 2018.

2

OFFEROR

AND ITS DIRECTORS

2.1

T

he Offeror is Global Valar, S.L.

2.2 The registered office of the Offeror is situated at:

Plaza P

ablo Ruiz Picasso 1,

Planta 43

Madrid 28020

Spain

Email: jpares@finaccess

.mx

2.3

T

he names of the directors of the Offeror are:

(a)

Rafael Gordon Arce;

(b)


Eduardo Zamar

ripa Escamilla; and

(c)

J

osé Parés Gutiérrez.

2.4

The following persons will become controllers of an increased percentage of voting

securities in Restaurant Brands as a result of the acquisition under this Offer:

(a)


Gr

upo RBNZ S.A. de C.V. (Grupo RBNZ) (a company incorporated in Mexico), which

holds 99.86% of the voting rights in Global Valar;

(b)

Finaccess Capital (a compan

y incorporated in Mexico), which holds 100% of the voting

rights in Grupo RBNZ;

(c)


Gr

upo Finaccess S.A. de C.V. (Grupo Finaccess) (a company incorporated in Mexico),

which holds 100% of the voting rights in Finaccess Capital;

(d)

Grupo Far-Luca S.A. de C.V. (Grupo Far-Luca) (a company incorporated in Mexico),

which holds 64% of the voting rights in Grupo Finaccess

12

; and

(e) Carlos Fernández González (a Mexican citizen), who holds 100% of the voting rights in

Grupo Far-Luca and who ultimately controls Finaccess Capital and the Offeror.

12 No person, other than Grupo Far-Luca, holds more than a 5% voting interest in Grupo Finaccess.

RECOMMENDED OFFER
29

3 TARGET COMPANY

The target company is Restaurant Brands New Zealand Limited.

4 OFFER TERMS

All of the terms and conditions of the Offer are set out in the Offer Document to which this

schedule is attached.

5 PARTICULARS OF VOTING SECURITIES SOUGHT

5.1 The table below sets out particulars of the Shares sought by the Offeror under this Offer:

Number of

Shares

Percentage of

Total Shares

13


The total number of Shares on issue in Restaurant Brands as

at the Offer Date (Total Shares).

14


124,758,523100%

The number of Shares that the Offeror already holds or

controls in Restaurant Brands as at the Offer Date.

00.00%

The number of Shares that the Offeror would hold or control

in Restaurant Brands after successful completion of the Offer,

provided that the 75% minimum acceptance condition in

clause 5.1(a) of the Offer Terms is satisfied.

15

93,568,892

(i.e., the

Specified

Number)

75.00%

(i.e., the

Specified

Percentage)

The number of Shares that the Offeror would hold or control

in Restaurant Brands after successful completion of the Offer

where the 75% minimum acceptance condition in clause 5.1(a)

of the Offer Terms is waived by the Offeror but the Offeror

satisfies the non-waivable minimum acceptance condition set

out in clause 5.1(b) of the Offer Terms.

16


62,379,26250.01%

17

The number of Shares that is the aggregate of the number

of Shares that the Offeror would hold or control in Restaurant

Brands after successful completion of the Offer together

with the number of Shares held or controlled by the Offeror’s

associates.

18


93,568,89275.00%

5.2

T

he information in the table above assumes that:

(a)

the Shares are the onl

y class of voting security in Restaurant Brands;

(b)

252,000 Shares are issued to Russel Creedy and 126,000 are issued to Grant Ellis upon

the conversion of their respective performance rights (which is expected to occur on or

before the Record Date, as contemplated by the Pre-Bid Agreement and described in

further detail in clause 10.3(g) of this Schedule); and

(c)

other than the conversion of performance rights referred to in (b) above, there is no

change to the number of Shares on issue in the period between the Offer Date and

successful completion of the Offer.

13 All percentages are calculated based on the relevant number of Shares being divided by the number of Total Shares (multiplied by 100 and rounded to two decimal places).

14 The calculation of the Total Shares has been calculated as at the Offer Date and as noted in paragraph 5.2(b) of the Schedule. This assumes that Shares have been issued to Russel Creedy and

Grant Ellis, respectively, on vesting of their performance rights, as referred to in clause 5.4(c)(i) of the Offer Terms and contemplated by the Pre-Bid Agreement.

15


Because

the Offeror does not hold or control any Shares, this number and percentage is also the number and percentage of Shares sought by the Offeror under the Offer.

16


It should be noted that the Of

feror could end up holding between 50.01% (rounded up to two decimal places) and 75.00% of the Shares.

17

This percentage has been rounded up to two decimal places.

18


The Of

feror does not have any associates (as that term is defined in the Takeovers Code) who hold or control any Shares. It is also assumed that the 75% minimum acceptance condition is

satisfied.

RECOMMENDED OFFER
30

6 OWNERSHIP OF EQUITY SECURITIES OF RESTAURANT BRANDS

6.1 The table below sets out a statement of the number, designation and percentages of equity

securities of any class of Restaurant Brands held or controlled by:

(a)


the Of

feror;

(b)

an

y related company of the Offeror;

(c)

an

y person acting jointly or in concert with the Offeror;

(d)

an

y director of any of the persons described in paragraphs (a) to (c); and

(e)

any other person holding or controlling 5% or more of the Class, to the knowledge of

the Offeror.

NameCategory

description

Number

of Equity

Securities held

or controlled

Type of Equity

Security

Percentage of

class of Equity

Securities

Stephen Copulos

19

Person holding or

controlling 5% or

more of Shares

10,630,819Shares8.52%

6.2

Except for those persons who are specified in the statement made above as holding or

controlling equity securities of Restaurant Brands, no person referred to in paragraphs (a)

to (d) above holds or controls equity securities of Restaurant Brands.

7 TRADING IN RESTAURANT BRANDS EQUITY SECURITIES

None of the persons referred to in sections paragraph 6.1(a) to (d) above have acquired or

disposed of any equity securities in Restaurant Brands in the six month period ending on

the date of this Offer Document.

8 AGREEMENTS TO ACCEPT OFFER

8.1

The Offeror, Finaccess Capital, Stephen Copulos (who is a director of Restaurant Brands),

and the Copulos Interests have entered into a lock-in deed dated 25 November 2018 (the

Lock-In Deed). Under the Lock-In Deed, each of the Copulos Interests has irrevocably

agreed to accept, and Stephen Copulos has irrevocably agreed to procure that each of the

Copulos Interests accept, the Offer in respect of:

(a)

the Shares held (directl

y or indirectly) by each of the Copulos Interests as at the date of

the Lock-In Deed (being, in aggregate, 10,630,819 Shares, which represent 8.52% of

the Shares on issue); and

(b)

any other Shares acquired by Stephen Copulos and/or any of the Copulos Interests on

or after the date of the Lock-In Deed, (together, the Copulos Shares).

19 HSBC Custody Nominees Australia Limited holds Shares as custodian on behalf of Eyeon No 2 Pty Limited (1,585,482 Shares) and PC Nab Pty Limited (2,117,853 Shares). Citibank N.A.,

New Zealand Branch (Citibank NZ) holds Shares as custodian on behalf of Eyeon QSR Pty Limited (5,198,817 Shares), Copulos Superannuation Pty Limited (862,937 Shares) and Eyeon

Investments Limited (662,686 Shares). For all of these entities, Stephen Copulos is either the sole director or whose only other director is accustomed to act in accordance with Stephen

Copulos’ directions, instructions or wishes. In addition, 203,044 Shares are held by Citibank NZ as custodian for Copulos Foundation Pty Limited. Stephen Copulos has the power to exercise, or

to control the exercise of, the right to vote attached to those Shares held by Copulos Foundation Pty Limited.

RECOMMENDED OFFER
31

The material terms of the Lock-In Deed are as follows:

(a) Subject to the Offer being made by the Offeror on the terms attached to the Lock-

In Deed, the Copulos Interests will accept the Offer in respect of all of the Copulos

Shares.

(b)

The Copulos Interests must accept the Offer by the later of the date which is two

Working Days after date of despatch of the Offer and the date on which the Offer is

received by the Copulos Interests. The Copulos Interests may delay their acceptance

of the Offer for up to seven Working Days if Restaurant Brands announces that it has

received a superior proposal and has provided the Offeror with an opportunity to match

it.

(c)

Acceptance of the Offer by the Copulos Interests is subject to the condition that the

directors of Restaurant Brands do not withdraw or qualify their recommendation that all

Restaurant Brands shareholders accept the Offer or the directors of Restaurant Brands

otherwise indicate that Restaurant Brands shareholders should not accept the Offer.

(d)

None of Stephen Copulos or the Copulos Interests will dispose of, encumber or deal in

any way with any of the Copulos Shares (or any interest in them), except to accept this

Offer.

(e)

None of Stephen Copulos or the Copulos Interests will:

(i)

enter into any discussions or negotiations relating to the possible disposal of the

Copulos Shares or provide any information of any nature to a third party for the

purposes of encouraging or facilitating a competing transaction;

(ii)


mak

e any public statement indicating a lack of support for, or endorsement of,

the Offer or supporting, recommending or endorsing a different transaction to the

Offer; or

(iii) directly or indirectly, engage in, initiate, solicit, continue or encourage any

proposals or approaches or offers from, or discussions or negotiations with, any

person in relation to a competing transaction.

(f)


T

he restrictions summarised in paragraph (e) do not prevent Stephen Copulos from

taking certain actions in his capacity as a director of Restaurant Brands, provided that

such actions do not breach the Pre-Bid Agreement (see clause 10.3(h) and (i) of this

Schedule for more detail).

(g) The Lock-In Deed will automatically terminate if:

(i) the Offer lapses; or

(ii) the Offer is withdrawn in accordance with the Takeovers Code.

(h) Each of the Copulos Interests may exercise and/or control the exercise of all voting

rights (as defined in the Takeovers Code) attached to their respective Copulos Shares in

whatever manner it sees fit until such time as the Offer is declared unconditional.

(i)

Eac

h of the Copulos Interests and Stephen Copulos will be entitled to terminate the

Lock-In Deed if the Offeror has not made the Offer on or before 31 December 2018 or if

there is a change in recommendation as contemplated in paragraph (c) above.

8.2

Other than as disclosed in paragraph 8.1, no person has agreed conditional or

unconditionally to accept the Offer as at the Offer Date.

RECOMMENDED OFFER
32

9 ARRANGEMENTS TO PAY CONSIDERATION

9.1 The Offeror has arrangements in place to pay the consideration to be provided on full

acceptance of the Offer and to pay any debts incurred in connection with the Offer

(including debts arising under rule 49 of the Takeovers Code).

9.2


A sta

tement setting out the rights of each holder of Shares under rule 34 of the Takeovers

Code is set out in clause 2.3 of the Terms and Conditions of the Offer.

10 ARRANGEMENTS BETWEEN OFFEROR AND RESTAURANT BRANDS

10.1 Finaccess Capital and Restaurant Brands entered into a confidentiality agreement dated 16

July 2018 under which Finaccess Capital agreed to keep confidential information disclosed

to it by Restaurant Brands in connection with its evaluation of a potential transaction

involving the acquisition of the Shares.

10.2

Kentucky Fried Chicken International Holdings LLC, Pizza Hut International LLC and Taco

Bell Corp. (together, Yum! Brands), Finaccess Capital and Restaurant Brands entered into

an agreement dated 19 November 2018 under which the relevant Yum! Brands’ subsidiaries

have conditionally granted consent to the acquisition by the Offeror of up to 75.00% of the

Shares under this Offer (the Yum! Consent). The Yum! Consent is conditional upon:

(a)


the sa

tisfaction of Yum!’s franchisee due diligence requirements in respect of the

Offeror and Finaccess Capital; and

(b)

Finaccess Capital and R

estaurant Brands entering into formal agreements relating to

the ownership of Restaurant Brands, and the operation and development of Restaurant

Brands’ KFC, Pizza Hut and Taco Bell businesses after completion of this Offer.

10.3

Finaccess Capital, the Offeror and Restaurant Brands entered a pre-bid agreement dated

25 November 2018 relating to the Offer (the Pre-Bid Agreement). The material terms of the

Pre-Bid Agreement are as follows:

(a)

T

he Offeror will:

(i)

send the T

akeover Notice not later than 8.00am New Zealand time one Working Day

after the date of the Pre-Bid Agreement; and

(ii)

make the Offer as soon as reasonably practicable and, in any event, not later than

20 Working Days after sending the Takeover Notice.

(b)


T

he Offeror’s obligations referred to in (a)(i) above are conditional on the Independent

Adviser’s Report concluding that the consideration under this Offer is within or above

the Independent Adviser’s valuation range for the Shares, none of the conditions in

clause 5.4 of the Offer Terms being triggered and there being no unremedied breach

by Restaurant Brands of its obligations under the Pre-Bid Agreement or the Takeovers

Code.

RECOMMENDED OFFER
33

(c) Restaurant Brands will:

(i) make an agreed public statement on signing of the Pre-Bid Agreement;

(ii) prepare a target company statement within an agreed timeframe; and

(iii) procure that its board of directors unanimously recommend that shareholders

accept the Offer, in the absence of an unmatched superior proposal and subject to

the consideration under the Offer being within or above the Independent Adviser’s

valuation range for the Shares.

(d)

Restaurant Brands must procure that each director of Restaurant Brands (other than

Stephen Copulos) accepts the Offer in respect of any Shares which they own or control,

except where there is an unmatched superior competing proposal for Restaurant

Brands.

(e)

If, after the Offer is made, a matter or circumstance arises which will, or is likely to, result

in a breach or non-satisfaction of a condition in clauses 5.4(a) to (q) of the Offer Terms,

the Offeror must not invoke the condition until it has remained in breach or unsatisfied

for a period of five Working Days.

(f)

In relation to the condition in clause 5.2 of the Offer Terms (Overseas Investment Office

consent):

(i)

the Offeror and Restaurant Brands will co-operate with one another in relation to

obtaining the consent under the Overseas Investment Act 2005; and

(ii)

the Of

feror will not withhold its approval to the terms of any consent or conditions

of consent granted by the Overseas Investment Office (OIO) if the terms and

conditions imposed are the standard terms or conditions of consent available on

the OIO website as at the date of the Pre-Bid Agreement.

(g)

Restaurant Brands will ensure that performance rights (each of which entitles the holder

to receive one Share) held by Russel Creedy and Grant Ellis will vest on the Record

Date.

(h)

R

estaurant Brands will not:

(i)

solicit, or eng

age in talks in relation to, a competing transaction to acquire control,

or a material part of the business, of Restaurant Brands; or

(ii)

mak

e available non-public information about the business of Restaurant Brands to

any third party in relation to such a competing transaction,

e

xcept in relation to an unsolicited competing transaction where the board of

Restaurant Brands determines that a failure to engage in such talks or provide non-

public information would be likely to constitute a breach of the fiduciary or statutory

duties owed by the directors of Restaurant Brands. This obligation applies from the date

of the Pre-Bid Agreement until that agreement is terminated or the Offeror fails to match

a competing superior proposal.

(i)

Restaurant Brands will notify the Offeror if Restaurant Brands receives a competing

transaction (including any inquiries to initiate negotiations or requests for non-public

information that could lead to a competing transaction).

(j)

If

Restaurant Brands receives a competing transaction that the board of Restaurant

Brands considers is a superior proposal to the Offer, the Offeror will have the

opportunity to match any such competing transaction. The board of Restaurant Brands

must consider any such counter proposal made by the Offeror. If the board considers

RECOMMENDED OFFER
34

that the Offeror’s counter proposal is no less favourable to the Restaurant Brands

shareholders than the relevant competing transaction, then the Offeror and Restaurant

Brands will implement the Offeror’s counter proposal and the board of Restaurant

Brands will recommend that proposal to shareholders (in the absence of any new

superior proposal).

(k)


R

estaurant Brands has agreed to waive all of its rights, and not make any claim against,

any director, shareholder, officer, employee or representative of Finaccess Capital and

each of its Related Companies, in connection with any breach of any representations,

covenants, and warranties of Finaccess Capital (and any member of the Finaccess

Capital group) in the Pre-Bid Agreement, or any other act or omission in connection with

the Pre-Bid Agreement or the Offer, except in the case of wilful misconduct or fraud.

(l)


R

estaurant Brands must pay the Offeror a reimbursement sum of NZ$7,000,000 (plus

GST, if any) where:

(i)

Restaurant Brands fails to issue the public statement referred to in paragraph (c)(i)

above;

(ii) any director of Restaurant Brands fails to recommend the Offer, makes other

adverse comments in relation to the Offer or (other than Stephen Copulos) fails to

accept this Offer, other than as a result of:

(A)

the Independent Adviser concluding that the consideration under this Offer

does not fall within or above its valuation range for the Shares;

(B)


a failure of

any of the conditions set out in clauses 5.2 (Overseas Investment

Act), 5.3 (Yum! Consent) or 5.4(q) (no restraining orders) of the Offer Terms; or

(C) the Offeror breaching the Pre-Bid Agreement;

(iii) a competing transaction is announced prior to the Closing Date and is successfully

implemented within 12 months of that announcement;

(iv) Restaurant Brands, with the intention of frustrating this Offer, solicits or encourages

a person to acquire 10% or more of the Shares and that person does not accept

the Offer;

(v)


the Pre-Bid Agreement is ter

minated after the Offeror fails to match a competing

superior proposal for Restaurant Brands; or

(vi) any of the Copulos Interests fails to accept the Offer in accordance with the Lock-

In Deed.

(m)


T

he Offeror must pay Restaurant Brands a reimbursement sum of NZ$7,000,000 (plus

GST, if any) where:

(i)


the Of

feror fails to give the Takeover Notice or make the Offer; or

(ii)

the Of

feror fails to meet its payment obligations to shareholders under the Offer.

(n)


T

he Offeror will not delist Restaurant Brands from the NZX or ASX within 12 months after

completion of this Offer, except where the Offeror becomes entitled to compulsorily

acquire the remaining Shares under Part 7 of the Takeovers Code as a result of a

takeover offer that complies with the requirements summarised in paragraph (o).

RECOMMENDED OFFER
35

(o) If the Offeror makes a further takeover offer for Restaurant Brands within 12 months after

completion of this Offer (Follow-On Offer), the Offer of the Follow-On Offer must be

at least NZ$9.45 per Share, subject to an adjustment on a pro-rata basis to reflect any

increase or decline (if any) in the S&P/ NZX 50 index between the date of completion

of this Offer and the date that the Offeror gives the notice of intention for the Follow-On

Offer.

(p)


Finaccess Capital will guarantee the ob

ligations of the Offeror under the Pre-Bid

Agreement.

10.4

R

estaurant Brands and the Offeror executed a disclosure letter dated 25 November 2018

relating to the ability of Restaurant Brands to make fair disclosures to the Offeror in relation

to certain conditions set out in clause 5.4 of the Offer Terms and for the purposes of

relevant corresponding provisions of the Pre-Bid Agreement.

10.5 Other than as disclosed in paragraphs 10.1 to 10.4, no agreement or arrangement (whether

legally enforceable or not) has been made, or is proposed to be made, between the

Offeror or any associates of the Offeror, and Restaurant Brands or any related company of

Restaurant Brands, in connection with, in anticipation of, or in response to, this Offer.

11


ARRANGEMENTS BETWEEN OFFEROR,

AND DIRECTORS AND SENIOR MANAGERS

OF RESTAURANT BRANDS

11.1

Under the Pre-Bid Agreement:

(a) Each of Finaccess Capital and the Offeror has agreed to waive all of its rights, and not

make any claim against, the directors and employees (which would include the senior

managers) of Restaurant Brands, or any Related Company of Restaurant Brands in

connection with any breach of the Pre-Bid Agreement or any other act or omission

in connection with the Pre-Bid Agreement or the Offer, except in the case of wilful

misconduct or fraud.

(b)

Finaccess Capital and the Offeror have each undertaken to ensure that, for seven years

after completion of the Offer, the constitutions of Restaurant Brands and its subsidiaries

provide for each company to indemnify each of its current and former directors and

officers against any liability incurred by that person in his or her capacity as a director

or officer of that company.

(c)

Prior to the Closing Date, Restaurant Brands may, with Finaccess Capital’s prior consent

(not to be unreasonably withheld), enter into arrangements to secure directors’ and

officers’ insurance for a period of up to seven years from completion of the Offer and

pay all premiums required.

11.2


T

he directors and senior managers of Restaurant Brands are not parties to the Pre-Bid

Agreement. However, they are able to personally enforce the provisions summarised in

paragraph 11.1 under the Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017.

11.3


T

he Yum! Consent contemplates that the Offeror will use commercially reasonable

endeavours to ensure that Russel Creedy is retained as chief executive officer of the

Restaurant Brands group for at least three years following completion of the Offer.

RECOMMENDED OFFER
36

11.4 Other than as disclosed in paragraphs 11.1 to 11.3, no agreement or arrangement (whether

legally enforceable or not) has been made, or is proposed to be made, between the Offeror

or any associates of the Offeror, and any of the directors or senior managers of Restaurant

Brands or of any related company of Restaurant Brands, in connection with, in anticipation

of, or in response to, the Offer.

12


FINANCIAL

ASSISTANCE

No agreement or arrangement has been made, or is proposed to be made under which

Restaurant Brands or any related company of Restaurant Brands will give (directly or indirectly)

financial assistance for the purpose of, or in connection with, the Offer.

13


INTENTIONS

ABOUT MATERIAL CHANGES IN RESTAURANT BRANDS

13.1

If

the Offer is declared unconditional, the Offeror intends:

(a)

to suppor

t the management of Restaurant Brands to implement their existing strategy;

20


and

(b) to support the continued assessment of the dividend policy of Restaurant Brands

against the other capital requirements in the business on an ongoing basis, subject to

circumstances at the time and maintaining future flexibility to preserve and maximize

shareholder value. The Offeror does not currently intend to ask the board of directors

of Restaurant Brands to promote a change in Restaurant Brands’ dividend policy in the

near term.

21

13.2 The Offeror has advised Restaurant Brands that, while it currently does not envisage

any future equity capital raising being required in the near to medium term, any larger-

scale initiatives unable to be funded from existing business cash flows will require an

assessment of capital sources at the relevant time. The Offeror considers that would include

consideration of both debt and equity capital, noting that the Offeror does not currently

intend to significantly lever Restaurant Brands.

13.3

As set out in the summary of the terms of the Pre-Bid Agreement in paragraph 10.3:

(a) the Offeror has agreed that the Offeror take steps to not delist Restaurant Brands from

the NZX or the ASX within 12 months of completion of this Offer, other than where the

Offeror acquires all of the Shares; and

(b)


in the e

vent the Offeror makes a Follow-On Offer within 12 months of completion of this

Offer, the Offeror has agreed that any Follow-On Offer would not offer consideration

less than the consideration under this Offer, subject to a reduction on a pro-rata basis

to reflect any increase or decline (if any) in the S&P NZX 50 index between the date of

completion of this Offer and the date that the Offeror gives the notice of intention for the

Follow-On Offer.

20 The most recent summary of Restaurant Brands’ strategy is set out in the May 2018 Investor Presentation: http://nzx-prod-s7fsd7f98s.s3-website-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/attachments/

RBD/317419/278497.pdf

21


The Restaurant Brands dividend policy is set out on page 6 of the Restaurant Brands Dividend Reinvestment Plan Offer Document: http://www.restaurantbrands.co.nz/files/documents/dividend-

reinvestment-plan-offer/.

RECOMMENDED OFFER
37

13.4 Except as set out above, the Offeror does not currently intend to make material change

to:

(a) the business activities of Restaurant Brands or any member of the RBD Group;

(b) the material assets of Restaurant Brands or any member of the RBD Group; or

(c) the capital structure of Restaurant Brands (including its dividend policy, equity or debt).

13.5 Although the Offeror reserves the right to make changes to the intentions expressed

above, there is no other information known to the Offeror about the likelihood of changes to

Restaurant Brands or any member of the RBD Group that could reasonably be expected to

be material to the making of a decision by an offeree to accept or reject the Offer.

13.6


T

he statements made in this paragraph 13 are consistent with any information that has been

given by the Offeror to any regulatory body (in New Zealand or in an overseas jurisdiction)

in relation to the Offer.

14


PRE-EMPTION CLAUSES IN REST

AURANT BRANDS’ CONSTITUTION

T

here is no restriction, in the constitution of Restaurant Brands, on the right to transfer any

Shares that would have the effect of requiring the holders of Shares to offer the Shares for

purchase to members of Restaurant Brands or to any other person before transferring those

securities.

15

ESCALATION CLAUSES

No agreement or ar

rangement (whether legally enforceable or not) has been made, or is

proposed to be made, under which:

(a)

an

y existing holder of Shares will or may receive in relation to, or as a consequence of,

the Offer any additional consideration or other benefit over and above the consideration

set out in the Offer; or

(b)

an

y prior holder of Shares will or may receive any consideration or other benefit as a

consequence of the Offer.

16


CLASSES OF SECURITIES

No repor

t is required under rule 22 of the Takeovers Code (which, if the offer is for more

than one class of financial products, requires a report by an independent adviser on

the fairness and reasonableness of the consideration and terms of the offer as between

different classes of financial products).

RECOMMENDED OFFER
38

17 CERTIFICATE

To the best of our knowledge and belief, after making proper enquiry, the information

contained in this Offer Document is, in all material respects, true and correct and not

misleading, whether by omission of any information or otherwise, and includes all the

information required to be disclosed by the Offeror under the Takeovers Code.

Signed by the persons named below or their respective agents authorised in writing.

Rafael Gordon Arce Eduardo Zamarripa Escamilla José Parés Gutiérrez

Director Director and Chief Financial Officer Director and Chief Executive Officer

Global Valar, S.L Global Valar, S.L. Global Valar, S.L.

RECOMMENDED OFFER
39

RECOMMENDED OFFER
40

NOTES

RECOMMENDED
OFFER

6 December 2018

Partial takeover offer by Global Valar,

S.L. (a subsidiary of Finaccess

Capital, S.A. de C.V.) for ordinary

shares in Restaurant Brands

New Zealand Limited

for NZ$9.45 cash

per share.

Financial Adviser:

IMPORTANT

If you are in doubt as to any aspect of this Offer, you should

consult your financial or legal adviser.

If you have sold all your shares in Restaurant Brands New

Zealand Limited, you should immediately hand this Offer

Document and the accompanying acceptance forms to the

purchaser or the agent (e.g. the broker) through whom the

sale was made, to be passed to the purchaser.

Restaurant Brands New Zealand Limited’s target company

statement, together with an Independent Adviser’s Report

on the merits of the Offer either accompanies this Offer or

will be sent to you within 10 Working Days and should be

read in conjunction with this Offer.

RECOMMENDED OFFER
1

(Please specify number)

(Please specify number)

OFFER BY GLOBAL VALAR, S.L. FOR SHARES IN

RESTAURANT BRANDS NEW ZEALAND LIMITED

SHARE ACCEPTANCE FORM

SHAREHOLDER (TRANSFEROR)

CSN / HOLDER NUMBER: XXXXXXXXX

ACCEPTANCE NUMBER: XXXXXXXXX

NUMBER OF SHARES

HELD AS AT [XX/XX/XXXX]: XXXXXXXXX

ACCEPT ONLINE AT WWW.RBDTAKEOVER.CO.NZ

Please select the applicable option below to confirm the number of ordinary shares in Restaurant

Brands New Zealand Limited (Restaurant Brands Shares) in respect of which you accept the

partial takeover offer by Global Valar, S.L. (Offeror) (Transferee) dated 6 December 2018 (Offer).

I, AS HOLDER OF THE ABOVE SHARES

ACCEPT the Offer in respect of ALL of the Restaurant Brand Shares I hold,

subject to scaling.

ACCEPT the Offer in respect of the FOLLOWING NUMBER of Restaurant

Brand Shares, subject to scaling:

Note:

1 You may accept the Offer in respect of all or any of the Restaurant Brands Shares held by

you. Your acceptance may be subject to scaling, as set out in clause 4 of the Terms and

Conditions of the Offer Document.

2 If you do not tick an option above, or the number of Restaurant Brands Shares to which this

Acceptance Form relates is otherwise unclear for any reason, you will be deemed to have

accepted the Offer in respect of all the Restaurant Brands Shares held by you and to

have ticked the first box above.

PLEASE REFER TO THE INSTRUCTIONS BELOW FOR DIRECTIONS ON COMPLETING THIS

ACCEPTANCE FORM.

IF YOU HOLD YOUR SHARES IN A CHESS HOLDING, YOU MUST COMPLETE THE GREEN

ACCEPTANCE FORM.

BY SIGNING THIS ACCEPTANCE FORM THE TRANSFEROR HEREBY:

(a) irrevocably accepts the Offer for the Restaurant Brands Shares described above held by the

Transferor on the terms and conditions of the Offer;

(b) subject to the terms and conditions of the Offer, transfers such Restaurant Brands Shares to

the Transferee and gives the warranties contemplated by the Offer; and

(c) as set out in this form, appoints the Transferee the attorney of the Transferor.

Sample only please do not

complete this form

RECOMMENDED OFFER
2

SIGNATURES

For an INDIVIDUAL HOLDER, JOINT

HOLDERS, or ATTORNEY

For a COMPANY / BODY CORPORATE

Signed by the Transferor(s):Signed by the Transferor(s):

SignatureSignature

SignatureSignature

Dated and executed the

.......................................................................................................day of ..................................................................................................................................................20...................

ALL JOINT HOLDERS MUST SIGN

--

METHOD OF PAYMENTS (please tick one)

Payment will be made in New Zealand dollars (NZD) either by cheque or by electronic transfer

directly into the Transferor’s bank account. Please select a Method of Payment by ticking the

appropriate box below.

CHEQUE (NZD ONLY) ELECTRONIC TRANSFER

Note: If you do not select a Method of Payment, or the details that you provide are not sufficient

to effect an electronic transfer you will be paid to the account that you have previously provided to

Restaurant Brand’s share register or by cheque.

Electronic Transfer Details: Please complete the details below if you wish to be paid by

electronic transfer.

New Zealand Bank Account

Name:

............................................................................................................................................................................Bank: ..........................................................................................................................................................................................................

- - -

Bank/Branch Account Number Suffix

Australian Bank Account

Name:

............................................................................................................................................................................Bank: ..........................................................................................................................................................................................................

BSB Number Account Number

Overseas Bank Account (Not New Zealand or Australia):

Country:

.........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Account Name: ..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Bank Name: ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Bank Address: .............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Swift Code: ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Sort Code/ BSB Code: ...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Account Number: ...............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Other Information: ...............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

(Overseas Transferors to provide any other information required to effect an electronic transfer to them)

Sample only please do not

complete this form

RECOMMENDED OFFER
3

NOTES AND INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETION

1 TO ACCEPT THE OFFER: Complete and sign this form where marked “Signed by the Transferor(s)”.

Companies must sign in accordance with the Companies Act 1993.

2 RESTAURANT BRAND SHARES HELD BY SPECIFIED HOLDERS: If your Restaurant Brands Shares are

held through a nominee or another person who holds Restaurant Brands Shares on your behalf, advise that

person that you wish to sell your Restaurant Brands Shares and instruct that person to complete, sign and

return this Acceptance Form and the Specified Holder Certificate to the Transferee in accordance with the

instructions set out below.

3 METHOD OF PAYMENT: You should select a Method of Payment. You should take particular care to provide

all information that is required to make an electronic transfer to you or to send a cheque to you, as the case

may be. If you elect to be paid by electronic transfer you will need to make your own arrangements with your

bank to ensure that your designated account is capable of receiving a funds transfer in New Zealand dollars.

If you do not select a Method of Payment or you do not provide sufficient details so that an electronic funds

transfer can be made to your bank account, payment will be made by electronic funds transfer to the NZ

dollar account that you have previously provided to Restaurant Brand’s share register (such as for dividend

payments) or, failing that, by cheque. Neither the Transferee nor Link Market Services Limited has any

responsibility to verify any such details.

4 JOINT HOLDERS: If the Restaurant Brands Shares are registered in the names of joint holders, every one of

the joint holders must sign the form.

5 RESTAURANT BRAND SHARES HELD BY NOMINEES: If your Restaurant Brands Shares are held through

a nominee, advise your nominee that you wish to sell all or a part of your Restaurant Brands Shares and

instruct your nominee to complete accordingly, sign and return the form to the Transferee in accordance with

the instructions set out in this form. The Specified Holder Certificate attached to this Acceptance Form will

also need to be signed and returned.

6 POWER OF ATTORNEY: If this form is signed under a power of attorney, the relevant power of attorney must

be submitted with the form for noting and return, and the certificate printed below must be completed. Where

such power of attorney has already been noted by Link Market Services then this fact must be stated under

the signature of the attorney.

7 ON COMPLETION: Either email, mail or hand deliver this Form as provided for below as soon as possible, but

in any event so as to be received not later than 11:59pm on the closing date for the Offer (which, at the date of

the Offer, is 12 March 2019, but which may be extended in accordance with the Takeovers Code).

Global Valar, S.L. c/- Link Market Services Limited

Mail: PO Box 91976, Victoria Street West, Auckland 1142

Delivery: Level 11, Deloitte Centre, 80 Queen Street, Auckland 1010

Scan & Email: applications@linkmarketservices.co.nz

Online: www.rbdtakeover.co.nz

8 PREVIOUS SALE: If you have sold all your Restaurant Brands Shares, please pass this Acceptance Form

together with the Offer documents to your share broker or the purchaser(s) of those Restaurant Brands

Shares. If you have sold part of your shareholding, record that fact on this Acceptance Form by amending the

number of Restaurant Brands Shares noted as being held by you on the fact of this Acceptance Form.

9 SALE OF PART HOLDING ONLY: If you want to accept the Offer for part of your holding only, please specify

the number of shares you wish to sell in the space provided.

10 INTERPRETATION: In this form references to the Transferor in the singular shall include the plural.

IF YOU ARE IN ANY DOUBT ABOUT THE PROCEDURE FOR ACCEPTANCES, PLEASE CALL

LINK MARKET SERVICES.

Sample only please do not

complete this form

RECOMMENDED OFFER
4

BY THE TRANSFEROR’S EXECUTION OF THIS FORM, THE TRANSFEROR HEREBY enters into a Power of

Attorney in favour of the Transferee as follows:

As from the date of beneficial ownership, and title, to my/our Restaurant Brands Shares passing to the Transferee

in accordance with the terms of the Offer, I/we hereby irrevocably authorise and appoint the Transferee (with

power of substitution by the Transferee in favour of such person(s) as the Transferee may appoint to act on its

behalf) as my/our attorney and agent to act for me/us and do all matters of any kind of nature whatsoever in

respect of or pertaining to the Restaurant Brands Shares and all rights and benefits attaching to them as the

Transferee may think proper and expedient and which I/we could lawfully do or cause to be done if personally

acting as a legal or beneficial owner of the applicable Restaurant Brands Shares.

POWER OF ATTORNEY: If this Acceptance Form is signed under a power of attorney, the certificate of non-

revocation printed on this Acceptance Form must be completed by the party holding the Power of Attorney

and signing this Acceptance Form. If you are an individual fill out the certificate of non-revocation of power of

attorney for individual. If you are a body corporate fill out the certificate of non-revocation of power of attorney for

body corporate. In either case, the relevant instrument appointing the attorney must be submitted for noting and

return.

ONLY COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING SECTION IF THE ACCEPTANCE FORM

IS SIGNED UNDER A POWER OF ATTORNEY AND

YOU ARE AN INDIVIDUAL:

CERTIFICATE OF NON-REVOCATION OF POWER OF ATTORNEY FOR INDIVIDUAL

I

(full name of attorney) ...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

OF (place and country of residence), ..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

(occupation), .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................certify:

1 That by deed dated

............................................................................................................(date of instrument creating the power of attorney)

(full name of donor (individual or corporate)), of

.............................................................................................................................(place and country of

residence/registered office) appointed me his / her / its attorney.

2 That I have not received notice of any event revoking the power of attorney.

SIGNED at

.......................................................................................this ..........................................................................day of ..................................................................................................................................20 ................................

Signature and Name of Attorney

Sample only please do not

complete this form

RECOMMENDED OFFER
5

ONLY COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING SECTION IF THE ACCEPTANCE

FORM IS SIGNED UNDER A POWER OF ATTORNEY

AND YOU ARE A BODY CORPORATE:

CERTIFICATE OF NON-REVOCATION OF POWER OF ATTORNEY FOR BODY CORPORATE

I

(full name of attorney) ...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

OF (place and country of residence), ..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

(occupation), ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................certify:

1 That by deed dated ..............................................................................................................(date of instrument creating the power of attorney)

.............................................................................................................................................................................................................................(full name of donor (individual or corporate)), of

...................................................................................................................................................................................................................(place and country of residence/registered office)

appointed as attorney

..................................................................................................................................(full name of body corporate holding power of

attorney), a body corporate having its registered office/principal place of business at

................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

(address of registered office or principal place of business), and I am authorised to give this

certificate on its behalf. The capacity in which I give this certificate for the attorney is as director/

officer/other.

2 That I have not received notice of any event revoking the power of attorney and to the best of

my knowledge and belief no such notice has been received by

.........................................................................................................................................................

(full name of body corporate holding power of attorney), or by any employee or agent of that

body corporate.

SIGNED at

.......................................................................................this ..........................................................................day of ..................................................................................................................................20 ................................

Signature and Name of Attorney

SIGNATURES: Sign this certificate where marked. Companies must sign in accordance with the Companies Act

1993 or other applicable law. If you hold Restaurant Brand Shares jointly with others all joint holders must sign

this Certificate.

Sample only please do not

complete this form

RECOMMENDED OFFER
6

OFFER BY GLOBAL, VALAR, S.L. FOR SHARES IN

RESTAURANT BRANDS NEW ZEALAND LIMITED

SPECIFIED HOLDER CERTIFICATE

You MUST complete this Specified Holder Certificate (Certificate) if you intend to accept the

Offer and you hold shares (Restaurant Brands Shares) in Restaurant Brands New Zealand

Limited (Restaurant Brands), on behalf of more than one person.

If you hold Restaurant Brands Shares on behalf of more than one person and do not complete

and return this Certificate to Global Valar, S.L. (the Offeror) so that it is received no later than

11:59pm on 12 March 2019, unless extended in accordance with the Takeovers Code (Closing

Date), any Acceptance Form that you return in respect of your Restaurant Brands Shares will

be invalid and you will be deemed not to have accepted the Offer in respect of any of your

Restaurant Brands Shares.

For the purposes of this Certificate and the Takeovers Code:

• you are a Specified Holder if you hold Restaurant Brands Shares on behalf of more

than one person (regardless of whether the holdings are direct or indirect, whether you

are a custodian or not, and regardless of the particular arrangements between you and

those you hold Restaurant Brands Shares on behalf of);

• each person on whose behalf you hold Restaurant Brands Shares is a Specified

Person; and

• the Specified Percentage is 75.00% of the Restaurant Brands Shares (subject to

adjustment in accordance with rule 9(7) of the Takeovers Code, if applicable).

Capitalised terms that are not otherwise defined in this Certificate have the meaning given to them

in the Document that accompanies this Certificate.

Further information regarding this Certificate is provided under the ‘Questions and

Answers’ heading below.

COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING DETAILS:

Name of Specified Holder: ..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Your CSN / Holder number (as stated on the enclosed Acceptance Form:

.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Enter the total number of Restaurant Brands

Shares that you hold on behalf of Specified Persons

Enter the total number of Specified Persons on

whose behalf you hold those Restaurant Brands Shares

If you hold Restaurant Brands Shares on behalf of more than 10 Specified Persons, please attach to this

Certificate a schedule containing the required Pool A Table and Pool B Table information in respect of those

additional Specified Persons.

Sample only please do not

complete this form

RECOMMENDED OFFER
7

POOL A TABLE – Complete the below Pool A Table only for the Specified Persons on whose

behalf you either:

(a) are not accepting the Offer in respect of any of the Restaurant Brands Shares that you hold

on that Specified Person’s behalf; or

(b) are accepting the Offer for less than or equal to the Specified Percentage (75%) of the

total number of Restaurant Brands Shares that you hold on behalf of that Specified Person.

Specified

Person

Total number of Restaurant

Brands Shares that you

hold on behalf of the

Specified Person (A)

Number of the Restaurant

Brands Restaurant Brands

Shares that you hold on

behalf of the Specified

Person in respect of which

you are accepting the

Offer (B)**

Percentage that the

number of the Restaurant

Brands Shares in

respect of which you

are accepting the Offer

is of the total number of

Restaurant Brands Shares

you hold on behalf of the

Specified Person*** ((B ÷

A) x 100)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

TOTAL

* You do not need to name the Specified Person.

** If you are not accepting the Offer in respect of these Restaurant Brands Shares, write ‘nil’.

*** If this percentage is greater than the Specified Percentage (75%) then the Specified Person should not be

included in this Pool A Table, but should instead be included in the Pool B Table.

Sample only please do not

complete this form

RECOMMENDED OFFER
8

POOL B TABLE – Complete this Pool B Table only for the Specified Persons on whose behalf

you are accepting the Offer for more than the Specified Percentage (75%) of the total number of

Restaurant Brands Shares that you hold on that Specified Person’s behalf.

Specified

Person

Total number of Restaurant

Brands Shares that you

hold on behalf of the

Specified Person (A)

Number of the Restaurant

Brands Shares that you

hold on behalf of the

Specified Person in

respect of which you are

accepting the Offer (B)

Percentage that the

number of the Restaurant

Brands Shares in

respect of which you

are accepting the Offer

is of the total number of

Restaurant Brands Shares

you hold on behalf of the

Specified Person** ((B ÷

A) x 100)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

TOTAL

* You do not need to name the Specified Person.

** If this percentage is less than or equal to the Specified Percentage (75%) then the Specified Person should not

be included in this Pool B Table, but should instead be included in the Pool A Table.

SIGN HERE

By signing this Certificate you represent, warrant, and certify that you hold Restaurant Brand

Shares as a Specified Holder on behalf of Specified Persons, that the information in this

Certificate (including any schedule attached to this Certificate) is true and correct, and that this

Certificate has been duly completed and executed.

DATED AND SIGNED

....................................................................................this ................................................................................day of ..................................................................................20 ................................

Daytime phone number should Link Market Services need to contact you in relation to this

Certificate:

....................................................................................................................................................................................

Sample only please do not

complete this form

RECOMMENDED OFFER
9

POWER OF ATTORNEY: If this Certificate is signed under a power of attorney, the certificate

of non-revocation printed on this Certificate must be completed by the party holding the Power

of Attorney and signing this Certificate. If you are an individual fill out the certificate of non-

revocation of power of attorney for individual. If you are a body corporate fill out the certificate

of non-revocation of power of attorney for body corporate. In either case, the relevant instrument

appointing the attorney must be submitted for noting and return.

ONLY COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING SECTION IF THE SPECIFIED HOLDER

CERTIFICATE IS SIGNED UNDER A POWER OF ATTORNEY AND

YOU ARE AN INDIVIDUAL:

CERTIFICATE OF NON-REVOCATION OF POWER OF ATTORNEY

I

(full name of attorney) .........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

OF (place and country of residence), ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

(occupation), ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................certify:

1 That by deed dated ............................................................................................................(date of instrument creating the power of attorney)

............................................................................................................................................................................................................(full name of donor (individual or corporate)), of

............................................................................................................................................................................................................(place and country of residence/registered office)

office) appointed me his / her / its attorney.

2 That I have not received notice of any event revoking the power of attorney.

SIGNED at

.......................................................................................this ..........................................................................day of ..................................................................................................................................20 ................................

Signature and Name of Attorney

SIGNATURE(S) FOR AN INDIVIDUAL/

ATTORNEY/TRUSTEE

SIGNATURE(S) FOR A COMPANY

Sample only please do not

complete this form

RECOMMENDED OFFER
10

ONLY COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING SECTION IF THE SPECIFIED HOLDER

CERTIFICATE IS SIGNED UNDER A POWER OF ATTORNEY AND

YOU ARE A BODY CORPORATE:

CERTIFICATE OF NON-REVOCATION OF POWER OF ATTORNEY FOR BODY CORPORATE

I

(full name of attorney) ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

OF (place and country of residence), .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

(occupation), ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................certify:

1 That by deed dated ..........................................................................................................(date of instrument creating the power of attorney)

............................................................................................................................................................................................................(full name of donor (individual or corporate)), of

............................................................................................................................................................................................................(place and country of residence/registered office)

office) appointed as attorney.

............................................................................................................................................................................................................(full name of body corporate holding power of

attorney), a body corporate having its registered office/principal place of business at

...............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

(address of registered office or principal place of business), and I am authorised to give this

certificate on its behalf. The capacity in which I give this certificate for the attorney is as director/

officer/other.

2 That I have not received notice of any event revoking the power of attorney and to the best of

my knowledge and belief no such notice has been received by

..............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

(full name of body corporate holding power of attorney), or by any employee or agent of that

body corporate.

SIGNED at

.......................................................................................this ..........................................................................day of ..................................................................................................................................20 ................................

Signature and Name of Attorney

SIGNATURES: Sign this certificate where marked. Companies must sign in accordance with the Companies Act

1993 or other applicable law. If you hold Restaurant Brand Shares jointly with others all joint holders must sign

this certificate.

Sample only please do not

complete this form

RECOMMENDED OFFER
11

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

Do I need to complete this Certificate?

If you hold your Restaurant Brand Shares on behalf of more than one person (e.g. as a trustee

corporation, nominee company, or bare trustee) then you are a Specified Holder for the purposes

of the Takeovers Code and each person on whose behalf you hold Restaurant Brand Shares is a

Specified Person.

If you are a Specified Holder, you MUST complete this Certificate and return it to Global Valar S.L.

(Offeror) with your Acceptance Form so that it is received by the Offeror by no later than 11:59pm

on the Closing Date (12 March 2019, unless extended in accordance with the Takeovers Code).

You must complete this Certificate regardless of:

• whether the holdings are direct or indirect;

• whether you are a custodian or not; or

• the particular arrangements between you and the Specified Person.

You do NOT need to complete and return this Certificate if you hold Restaurant Brand Shares:

• for yourself or in a joint holding (unless you jointly hold Restaurant Brand Shares on

behalf of more than one person);

• on behalf of only one other person; or

• if you are the trustee of a discretionary family trust (see below).

Do I need to complete this Certificate if I am a trustee of a family trust?

If you are a trustee of a discretionary family trust and the trust deed or governing document for

the trust does not provide the beneficiaries of the family trust with any beneficial interest in the

Restaurant Brand Shares held by the trustee or trustees of the trust (other than as discretionary

beneficiaries), then you do NOT need to complete and return this Certificate. If the trust

arrangements are such that separate beneficiaries of the trust can direct the trustees as to

whether to accept the Offer for that beneficiary’s portion of the Restaurant Brand Shares, then this

Certificate must be completed and returned to the Offeror if the Offer is accepted.

What happens if I fail to complete and return this Certificate by 11:59pm on the Closing

Date?

If, as a Specified Holder, you fail to complete this Certificate and return it to Global Valar with your

Acceptance Form so that it is received by the Offeror by no later than 11:59pm on the Closing

Date (12 March 2019, unless extended in accordance with the Takeovers Code), any Acceptance

Form that you return in respect of the Restaurant Brand Shares you hold will be invalid and you

will be deemed not to have accepted the Offer in respect of any of those shares, and you will be

in breach of Rule 14B of the Takeovers Code.

Sample only please do not

complete this form

RECOMMENDED OFFER
12

Why is this Certificate required?

This Certificate is required under Rules 14A to 14D of the Takeovers Code.

The Offer is an offer for 75% (Specified Percentage) of the Restaurant Brand Shares. If the Offer

is accepted in respect of more Restaurant Brand Shares than are sought by the Offeror, the

scaling provisions in Rules 12 and 13 of the Takeovers Code determine the number of Restaurant

Brand Shares that the Offeror must take up from each shareholder of Restaurant Brands who has

accepted the Offer in excess of the Specified Percentage of their Restaurant Brand Shares.

In order to ensure that persons who have their Restaurant Brand Shares held for them by another

person are not unfairly prejudiced by those scaling provisions, Rule 14E of the Takeovers Code

requires the Offeror to ‘look through’ the holding of a Specified Holder and treat Specified

Persons as if those Specified Persons held the Restaurant Brand Shares directly, based on the

information that is required to be disclosed in this Certificate.

How/where do I deliver this Certificate?

Either mail, deliver or email this Certificate attached to the Acceptance Form (as provided for

below) so that it is received by the Offeror on or before 11:59pm on the Closing Date (12 March

2019 unless extended in accordance with the Takeovers Code).

MAIL: Place the completed and signed Certificate and Acceptance Form in the enclosed prepaid

envelope and send by post to the following address:

Global Valar, S.L.

C/- Link Market Services Limited

PO Box 91976

Victoria Street West

Auckland, 1142

DELIVER: Deliver the completed and signed Certificate and Acceptance Form to Global Valar, at

the following address:

Global Valar, S.L.

C/- Link Market Services Limited

Level 11, Deloitte Centre

80 Queen Street

Auckland, 1010

NOTE: These offices are only open on weekdays during normal business hours (8.30 am to 5.00

pm).

EMAIL: Email the completed and signed Certificate and Acceptance Form to Global Valar at

applications@linkmarketservices.co.nz. (Please use ‘Global Valar Acceptance’ in the subject line

for easy identification).

IF YOU ARE IN DOUBT ABOUT HOW TO COMPLETE THIS CERTIFICATE OR THE

PROCEDURE FOR ACCEPTANCE, PLEASE CALL LINK MARKET SERVICES.

Sample only please do not

complete this form

RECOMMENDED OFFER
1

OFFER BY GLOBAL VALAR, S.L. FOR SHARES IN

RESTAURANT BRANDS NEW ZEALAND LIMITED

GREEN ACCEPTANCE FORM

(ONLY USE FOR CHESS HOLDINGS)

SHAREHOLDER (TRANSFEROR)

CSN / HOLDER NUMBER: XXXXXXXXX

ACCEPTANCE NUMBER: XXXXXXXXX

[CONTROLLING PARTICIPANT]

NUMBER OF SHARES

HELD AS AT [XX/XX/XXXX]: XXXXXXXXX

ACCEPT ONLINE AT WWW.RBDTAKEOVER.CO.NZ

Please select the applicable option below to confirm the number of ordinary shares in Restaurant

Brands New Zealand Limited (Restaurant Brands Shares) in respect of which you accept the

partial takeover offer by Global Valar, S.L. (Offeror) (Transferee) dated 6 December 2018 (Offer).

I, AS HOLDER OF THE ABOVE SHARES

ACCEPT the Offer in respect of ALL of the Restaurant Brand Shares I hold,

subject to scaling.

ACCEPT the Offer in respect of the FOLLOWING NUMBER of Restaurant

Brand Shares, subject to scaling:

Note:

1 You may accept the Offer in respect of all or any of the Restaurant Brands Shares held by

you. Your acceptance may be subject to scaling, as set out in clause 4 of the Terms and

Conditions of the Offer Document.

2 If you do not tick an option above, or the number of Restaurant Brands Shares to which this

Acceptance Form relates is otherwise unclear for any reason, you will be deemed to have

accepted the Offer in respect of all the Restaurant Brands Shares held by you and to

have ticked the first box above.

To accept the Offer you may either:

(a) directly instruct your Controlling Participant to accept the Offer on your behalf; or

(b) sign and return this Acceptance Form to the address shown overleaf so the Offeror, or

Link Market Services Limited, can contact your Controlling Participant on your behalf

and relay your instructions.

If your Controlling Participant acts on your instruction CHESS will send you a confirmation

notice

PLEASE REFER TO THE INSTRUCTIONS BELOW FOR DIRECTIONS ON COMPLETING THIS

ACCEPTANCE FORM.

(Please specify number)

(Please specify number)

BY SIGNING THIS ACCEPTANCE FORM THE TRANSFEROR HEREBY:

(a) irrevocably accepts the Offer for the Restaurant Brands Shares described above held by the

Transferor on the terms and conditions of the Offer;

(b) subject to the terms and conditions of the Offer, transfers such Restaurant Brands Shares to

the Transferee and gives the warranties contemplated by the Offer; and

(c) as set out in this form, appoints the Transferee the attorney of the Transferor.

Sample only please do not

complete this form

METHOD OF PAYMENTS (please tick one)
Payment will be made in New Zealand dollars (NZD) either by cheque or by electronic transfer

directly into the Transferor’s bank account. Please select a Method of Payment by ticking the

appropriate box below.

CHEQUE (NZD ONLY) ELECTRONIC TRANSFER

Note: If you do not select a Method of Payment, or the details that you provide are not sufficient

to effect an electronic transfer you will be paid to the account that you have previously provided to

Restaurant Brand’s share register or by cheque.

Electronic Transfer Details: Please complete the details below if you wish to be paid by

electronic transfer.

New Zealand Bank Account

Name:

............................................................................................................................................................................Bank: ..........................................................................................................................................................................................................

- - -

Bank/Branch Account Number Suffix

Australian Bank Account

Name:

............................................................................................................................................................................Bank: ..........................................................................................................................................................................................................

BSB Number Account Number

Overseas Bank Account (Not New Zealand or Australia):

Country:

.........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Account Name: ..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Bank Name: ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Bank Address: .............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Swift Code: ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Sort Code/ BSB Code: ...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Account Number: ...............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Other Information: ...............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

(Overseas Transferors to provide any other information required to effect an electronic transfer to them)

RECOMMENDED OFFER

2

SIGNATURES

For an INDIVIDUAL HOLDER, JOINT

HOLDERS, or ATTORNEY

For a COMPANY / BODY CORPORATE

Signed by the Transferor(s):Signed by the Transferor(s):

SignatureSignature

SignatureSignature

Dated and executed the

.......................................................................................................day of ..................................................................................................................................................20...................

ALL JOINT HOLDERS MUST SIGN

--

Sample only please do not

complete this form

RECOMMENDED OFFER
3

NOTES AND INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETION

1 TO ACCEPT THE OFFER: Complete and sign this form where marked “Signed by the

Transferor(s)”. Companies must sign in accordance with the Companies Act 1993.

2 RESTAURANT BRAND SHARES HELD BY SPECIFIED HOLDERS: If your Restaurant

Brands Shares are held through a nominee or another person who holds Restaurant Brands

Shares on your behalf, advise that person that you wish to sell your Restaurant Brands

Shares and instruct that person to complete, sign and return this Acceptance Form and the

Specified Holder Certificate to the Transferee in accordance with the instructions set out

below.

3 METHOD OF PAYMENT: You should select a Method of Payment. You should take

particular care to provide all information that is required to make an electronic transfer to

you or to send a cheque to you, as the case may be. If you elect to be paid by electronic

transfer you will need to make your own arrangements with your bank to ensure that your

designated account is capable of receiving a funds transfer in your chosen currency. If

you do not select a Method of Payment or you do not provide sufficient details so that an

electronic funds transfer can be made to your bank account, payment will be made by

electronic funds transfer to the NZ$ account that you have previously provided to Restaurant

Brand’s share register (such as for dividend payments) or, failing that, by cheque. Neither

the Transferee nor Link Market Services Limited has any responsibility to verify any such

details.

4 JOINT HOLDERS: If the Restaurant Brands Shares are registered in the names of joint

holders, every one of the joint holders must sign the form.

5 RESTAURANT BRAND SHARES HELD BY NOMINEES: If your Restaurant Brands Shares

are held through a nominee, advise your nominee that you wish to sell all or a part of your

Restaurant Brands Shares and instruct your nominee to complete accordingly, sign and

return the form to the Transferee in accordance with the instructions set out in this form. The

Specified Holder Certificate attached to this Acceptance Form will also need to be signed

and returned.

6 POWER OF ATTORNEY: If this form is signed under a power of attorney, the relevant

power of attorney must be submitted with the form for noting and return, and the certificate

printed below must be completed. Where such power of attorney has already been noted

by Link Market Services then this fact must be stated under the signature of the attorney.

7 CHESS HOLDINGS: If you hold your Restaurant Brands Shares in a CHESS Holding, to

accept the offer you can either:

(a) Instruct your Controlling Participant (as defined in the ASX Settlement Operating Rules)

directly – normally your share broker. If you do this, you will need to return this GREEN

Acceptance Form to your Controlling Participant.

(b) Authorise the Offeror to contact your Controlling Participant on your behalf, which

you can do by signing and returning this GREEN Acceptance Form. By signing and

returning this Form you will be deemed to have authorised the Offeror to contact your

Controlling Participant. Neither the Offeror nor Link Market Services will be responsible

for any delays incurred in this process.

Sample only please do not

complete this form

RECOMMENDED OFFER
4

8 ON COMPLETION: Either email, mail or hand deliver this Form as provided for below

as soon as possible, but in any event so as to be received not later than 11:59pm on the

closing date for the Offer (which, at the date of the Offer, is 12 March 2019, but which may

be extended in accordance with the Takeovers Code).

Global Valar, S.L. c/- Link Market Services Limited

Mail: PO Box 91976, Victoria Street West, Auckland 1142

Delivery: Level 11, Deloitte Centre, 80 Queen Street, Auckland 1010

Scan & Email: applications@linkmarketservices.co.nz

Online: www.rbdtakeover.co.nz

9 PREVIOUS SALE: If you have sold all your Restaurant Brands Shares, please pass

this Acceptance Form together with the Offer documents to your share broker or the

purchaser(s) of those Restaurant Brands Shares. If you have sold part of your shareholding,

record that fact on this Acceptance Form by amending the number of Restaurant Brands

Shares noted as being held by you on the fact of this Acceptance Form.

10 SALE OF PART HOLDING ONLY: If you want to accept the Offer for part of your holding

only, please specify the number of shares you wish to sell in the space provided.

11 INTERPRETATION: In this form references to the Transferor in the singular shall include the

plural.

IF YOU ARE IN ANY DOUBT ABOUT THE PROCEDURE FOR ACCEPTANCES, PLEASE CALL

LINK MARKET SERVICES.

BY THE TRANSFEROR’S EXECUTION OF THIS FORM, THE TRANSFEROR HEREBY enters

into a Power of Attorney in favour of the Transferee as follows:

As from the date of beneficial ownership, and title, to my/our Restaurant Brands Shares passing

to the Transferee in accordance with the terms of the Offer, I/we hereby irrevocably authorise and

appoint the Transferee (with power of substitution by the Transferee in favour of such person(s)

as the Transferee may appoint to act on its behalf) as my/our attorney and agent to act for me/us

and do all matters of any kind of nature whatsoever in respect of or pertaining to the Restaurant

Brands Shares and all rights and benefits attaching to them as the Transferee may think proper

and expedient and which I/we could lawfully do or cause to be done if personally acting as a

legal or beneficial owner of the applicable Restaurant Brands Shares.

Sample only please do not

complete this form

RECOMMENDED OFFER
5

POWER OF ATTORNEY: If this Acceptance Form is signed under a power of attorney, the

certificate of non-revocation printed on this Acceptance Form must be completed by the party

holding the Power of Attorney and signing this Acceptance Form. If you are an individual fill out

the certificate of non-revocation of power of attorney for individual. If you are a body corporate

fill out the certificate of non-revocation of power of attorney for body corporate. In either case, the

relevant instrument appointing the attorney must be submitted for noting and return.

ONLY COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING SECTION IF THE ACCEPTANCE FORM

IS SIGNED UNDER A POWER OF ATTORNEY AND

YOU ARE AN INDIVIDUAL:

CERTIFICATE OF NON-REVOCATION OF POWER OF ATTORNEY FOR INDIVIDUAL

I

(full name of attorney) ...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

OF (place and country of residence), ..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

(occupation), .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................certify:

1 That by deed dated

............................................................................................................(date of instrument creating the power of attorney)

(full name of donor (individual or corporate)), of

.............................................................................................................................(place and country of

residence/registered office) appointed me his / her / its attorney.

2 That I have not received notice of any event revoking the power of attorney.

SIGNED at

.......................................................................................this ..........................................................................day of ..................................................................................................................................20 ................................

Signature and Name of Attorney

Sample only please do not

complete this form

RECOMMENDED OFFER
6

ONLY COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING SECTION IF THE ACCEPTANCE

FORM IS SIGNED UNDER A POWER OF ATTORNEY

AND YOU ARE A BODY CORPORATE:

CERTIFICATE OF NON-REVOCATION OF POWER OF ATTORNEY FOR BODY CORPORATE

I

(full name of attorney) ...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

OF (place and country of residence), ..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

(occupation), ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................certify:

1 That by deed dated ..............................................................................................................(date of instrument creating the power of attorney)

.............................................................................................................................................................................................................................(full name of donor (individual or corporate)), of

...................................................................................................................................................................................................................(place and country of residence/registered office)

appointed as attorney

..................................................................................................................................(full name of body corporate holding power of

attorney), a body corporate having its registered office/principal place of business at

................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

(address of registered office or principal place of business), and I am authorised to give this

certificate on its behalf. The capacity in which I give this certificate for the attorney is as director/

officer/other.

2 That I have not received notice of any event revoking the power of attorney and to the best of

my knowledge and belief no such notice has been received by

.........................................................................................................................................................

(full name of body corporate holding power of attorney), or by any employee or agent of that

body corporate.

SIGNED at

.......................................................................................this ..........................................................................day of ..................................................................................................................................20 ................................

Signature and Name of Attorney

SIGNATURES: Sign this certificate where marked. Companies must sign in accordance with the Companies Act

1993 or other applicable law. If you hold Restaurant Brand Shares jointly with others all joint holders must sign

this Certificate.

Sample only please do not

complete this form

RECOMMENDED OFFER
7

OFFER BY GLOBAL VALAR, S.L. FOR SHARES IN

RESTAURANT BRANDS NEW ZEALAND LIMITED

SPECIFIED HOLDER CERTIFICATE

You MUST complete this Specified Holder Certificate (Certificate) if you intend to accept the

Offer and you hold shares (Restaurant Brands Shares) in Restaurant Brands New Zealand

Limited (Restaurant Brands), on behalf of more than one person.

If you hold Restaurant Brands Shares on behalf of more than one person and do not complete

and return this Certificate to Global Valar, S.L. (the Offeror) so that it is received no later than

11:59pm on 12 March 2019, unless extended in accordance with the Takeovers Code (Closing

Date), any Acceptance Form that you return in respect of your Restaurant Brands Shares will

be invalid and you will be deemed not to have accepted the Offer in respect of any of your

Restaurant Brands Shares.

For the purposes of this Certificate and the Takeovers Code:

• You are a Specified Holder if you hold Restaurant Brands Shares on behalf of more than

one person (regardless of whether the holdings are direct or indirect, whether you are a

custodian or not, and regardless of the particular arrangements between you and those you

hold Restaurant Brands Shares on behalf of);

• each person on whose behalf you hold Restaurant Brands Shares is a Specified Person;

and

• the Specified Percentage is 75.00% of the Restaurant Brands Shares (subject to

adjustment in accordance with rule 9(7) of the Takeovers Code, if applicable).

Capitalised terms that are not otherwise defined in this Certificate have the meaning given to them

in the Document that accompanies this Certificate.

Further information regarding this Certificate is provided under the ‘Questions and

Answers’ heading below.

Sample only please do not

complete this form

RECOMMENDED OFFER
8

COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING DETAILS:

Name of Specified Holder: ..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Your CSN / Holder number (as stated on the enclosed Acceptance Form):

.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Enter the total number of Restaurant Brands

Shares that you hold on behalf of Specified Persons

Enter the total number of Specified Persons on

whose behalf you hold those Restaurant Brands Shares

If you hold Restaurant Brands Shares on behalf of more than 10 Specified Persons, please attach to this

Certificate a schedule containing the required Pool A Table and Pool B Table information in respect of those

additional Specified Persons.

Sample only please do not

complete this form

RECOMMENDED OFFER
9

POOL A TABLE – Complete the below Pool A Table only for the Specified Persons on whose

behalf you either:

(a) are not accepting the Offer in respect of any of the Restaurant Brands Shares that you hold

on that Specified Person’s behalf; or

(b) are accepting the Offer for less than or equal to the Specified Percentage (75%) of the

total number of Restaurant Brands Shares that you hold on behalf of that Specified Person.

Specified

Person

Total number of Restaurant

Brands Shares that you

hold on behalf of the

Specified Person (A)

Number of the Restaurant

Brands Restaurant Brands

Shares that you hold on

behalf of the Specified

Person in respect of which

you are accepting the

Offer (B)**

Percentage that the

number of the Restaurant

Brands Shares in

respect of which you

are accepting the Offer

is of the total number of

Restaurant Brands Shares

you hold on behalf of the

Specified Person*** ((B ÷

A) x 100)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

TOTAL

* You do not need to name the Specified Person.

** If you are not accepting the Offer in respect of these Restaurant Brands Shares, write ‘nil’.

*** If this percentage is greater than the Specified Percentage (75%) then the Specified Person should not be

included in this Pool A Table, but should instead be included in the Pool B Table.


Sample only please do not

complete this form

RECOMMENDED OFFER
10

POOL B TABLE – Complete this Pool B Table only for the Specified Persons on whose behalf

you are accepting the Offer for more than the Specified Percentage (75%) of the total number of

Restaurant Brands Shares that you hold on that Specified Person’s behalf.

Specified

Person

Total number of Restaurant

Brands Shares that you

hold on behalf of the

Specified Person (A)

Number of the Restaurant

Brands Shares that you

hold on behalf of the

Specified Person in

respect of which you are

accepting the Offer (B)

Percentage that the

number of the Restaurant

Brands Shares in

respect of which you

are accepting the Offer

is of the total number of

Restaurant Brands Shares

you hold on behalf of the

Specified Person** ((B ÷

A) x 100)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

TOTAL

* You do not need to name the Specified Person.

** If this percentage is less than or equal to the Specified Percentage (75%) then the Specified Person should not

be included in this Pool B Table, but should instead be included in the Pool A Table.

SIGN HERE

By signing this Certificate you represent, warrant, and certify that you hold Restaurant Brand

Shares as a Specified Holder on behalf of Specified Persons, that the information in this

Certificate (including any schedule attached to this Certificate) is true and correct, and that this

Certificate has been duly completed and executed.

DATED AND SIGNED

....................................................................................this ................................................................................day of ..................................................................................20 ................................

Daytime phone number should Link Market Services need to contact you in relation to this

Certificate:

....................................................................................................................................................................................

Sample only please do not

complete this form

RECOMMENDED OFFER
11

SIGNATURE(S) FOR AN INDIVIDUAL/

ATTORNEY/TRUSTEE

SIGNATURE(S) FOR A COMPANY

POWER OF ATTORNEY: If this Certificate is signed under a power of attorney, the certificate

of non-revocation printed on this Certificate must be completed by the party holding the Power

of Attorney and signing this Certificate. If you are an individual fill out the certificate of non-

revocation of power of attorney for individual. If you are a body corporate fill out the certificate

of non-revocation of power of attorney for body corporate. In either case, the relevant instrument

appointing the attorney must be submitted for noting and return.

ONLY COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING SECTION IF THE SPECIFIED HOLDER

CERTIFICATE IS SIGNED UNDER A POWER OF ATTORNEY AND

YOU ARE AN INDIVIDUAL:

CERTIFICATE OF NON-REVOCATION OF POWER OF ATTORNEY

I

(full name of attorney) .........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

OF (place and country of residence), ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

(occupation), ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................certify:

1 That by deed dated ............................................................................................................(date of instrument creating the power of attorney)

............................................................................................................................................................................................................(full name of donor (individual or corporate)), of

............................................................................................................................................................................................................(place and country of residence/registered office)

office) appointed me his / her / its attorney.

2 That I have not received notice of any event revoking the power of attorney.

SIGNED at

.......................................................................................this ..........................................................................day of ..................................................................................................................................20 ................................

Signature and Name of Attorney

Sample only please do not

complete this form

RECOMMENDED OFFER
12

ONLY COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING SECTION IF THE SPECIFIED HOLDER

CERTIFICATE IS SIGNED UNDER A POWER OF ATTORNEY AND YOU

ARE A BODY CORPORATE:

CERTIFICATE OF NON-REVOCATION OF POWER OF ATTORNEY FOR BODY CORPORATE

I

(full name of attorney) ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

OF (place and country of residence), .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

(occupation), ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................certify:

1 That by deed dated ..........................................................................................................(date of instrument creating the power of attorney)

............................................................................................................................................................................................................(full name of donor (individual or corporate)), of

............................................................................................................................................................................................................(place and country of residence/registered office)

office) appointed as attorney.

............................................................................................................................................................................................................(full name of body corporate holding power of

attorney), a body corporate having its registered office/principal place of business at

...............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

(address of registered office or principal place of business), and I am authorised to give this

certificate on its behalf. The capacity in which I give this certificate for the attorney is as director/

officer/other.

2 That I have not received notice of any event revoking the power of attorney and to the best of

my knowledge and belief no such notice has been received by

..............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

(full name of body corporate holding power of attorney), or by any employee or agent of that

body corporate.

SIGNED at

.......................................................................................this ..........................................................................day of ..................................................................................................................................20 ................................

Signature and Name of Attorney

SIGNATURES: Sign this certificate where marked. Companies must sign in accordance with the Companies Act

1993 or other applicable law. If you hold Restaurant Brand Shares jointly with others all joint holders must sign

this certificate.

Sample only please do not

complete this form

RECOMMENDED OFFER
13

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

Do I need to complete this Certificate?

If you hold your Restaurant Brand Shares on behalf of more than one person (e.g. as a trustee

corporation, nominee company, or bare trustee) then you are a Specified Holder for the purposes

of the Takeovers Code and each person on whose behalf you hold Restaurant Brand Shares is a

Specified Person.

If you are a Specified Holder, you MUST complete this Certificate and return it to Global Valar S.L.

(Offeror) with your Acceptance Form so that it is received by the Offeror by no later than 11:59pm

on the Closing Date (12 March 2019), unless extended in accordance with the Takeovers Code).

You must complete this Certificate regardless of:

• whether the holdings are direct or indirect;

• whether you are a custodian or not; or

• the particular arrangements between you and the Specified Person.

You do NOT need to complete and return this Certificate if you hold Restaurant Brand Shares:

• for yourself or in a joint holding (unless you jointly hold Restaurant Brand Shares on

behalf of more than one person);

• on behalf of only one other person; or

• if you are the trustee of a discretionary family trust (see below).

Do I need to complete this Certificate if I am a trustee of a family trust?

If you are a trustee of a discretionary family trust and the trust deed or governing document for

the trust does not provide the beneficiaries of the family trust with any beneficial interest in the

Restaurant Brand Shares held by the trustee or trustees of the trust (other than as discretionary

beneficiaries), then you do NOT need to complete and return this Certificate. If the trust

arrangements are such that separate beneficiaries of the trust can direct the trustees as to

whether to accept the Offer for that beneficiary’s portion of the Restaurant Brand Shares, then this

Certificate must be completed and returned to the Offeror if the Offer is accepted.

What happens if I fail to complete and return this Certificate by 11:59pm on the Closing

Date?

If, as a Specified Holder, you fail to complete this Certificate and return it to Global Valar with your

Acceptance Form so that it is received by the Offeror by no later than 11:59pm on the Closing

Date (12 March 2019, unless extended in accordance with the Takeovers Code), any Acceptance

Form that you return in respect of the Restaurant Brand Shares you hold will be invalid and you

will be deemed not to have accepted the Offer in respect of any of those shares, and you will be

in breach of Rule 14B of the Takeovers Code.

Sample only please do not

complete this form

RECOMMENDED OFFER
14

Why is this Certificate required?

This Certificate is required under Rules 14A to 14D of the Takeovers Code.

The Offer is an offer for 75% (Specified Percentage) of the Restaurant Brand Shares. If the Offer

is accepted in respect of more Restaurant Brand Shares than are sought by the Offeror, the

scaling provisions in Rules 12 and 13 of the Takeovers Code determine the number of Restaurant

Brand Shares that the Offeror must take up from each shareholder of Restaurant Brands who has

accepted the Offer in excess of the Specified Percentage of their Restaurant Brand Shares.

In order to ensure that persons who have their Restaurant Brand Shares held for them by another

person are not unfairly prejudiced by those scaling provisions, Rule 14E of the Takeovers Code

requires the Offeror to ‘look through’ the holding of a Specified Holder and treat Specified

Persons as if those Specified Persons held the Restaurant Brand Shares directly, based on the

information that is required to be disclosed in this Certificate.

How/where do I deliver this Certificate?

Either mail, deliver or email this Certificate attached to the Acceptance Form (as provided for

below) so that it is received by the Offeror on or before 11:59pm on the Closing Date (12 March

2019 unless extended in accordance with the Takeovers Code).

MAIL: Place the completed and signed Certificate and Acceptance Form in the enclosed prepaid

envelope and send by post to the following address:

Global Valar, S.L.

C/- Link Market Services Limited

PO Box 91976

Victoria Street West

Auckland, 1142

DELIVER: Deliver the completed and signed Certificate and Acceptance Form to Global Valar, at

the following address:

Global Valar, S.L.

C/- Link Market Services Limited

Level 11, Deloitte Centre

80 Queen Street

Auckland, 1010

NOTE: These offices are only open on weekdays during normal business hours (8.30 am to 5.00

pm).

EMAIL: Email the completed and signed Certificate and Acceptance Form to Global Valar at

applications@linkmarketservices.co.nz. (Please use ‘Global Valar Acceptance’ in the subject line

for easy identification).

IF YOU ARE IN DOUBT ABOUT HOW TO COMPLETE THIS CERTIFICATE OR THE

PROCEDURE FOR ACCEPTANCE, PLEASE CALL LINK MARKET SERVICES.

Sample only please do not

complete this form

---

1
RESTAURANT BRANDS NEW ZEALAND LIMITED

Ta rget Company

Statement

In response to a partial takeover

offer by Global Valar S.L.

THIS IS AN IMPORTANT DOCUMENT AND REQUIRES YOUR URGENT ATTENTION.

If you have any questions in respect of this document or the Offer,

you should seek advice from your financial or legal adviser.

10 December 2018

Contents
01Chairman’s letter

03Section 1: Why you should accept the Offer – summary

04Section 2: Why you should accept the Offer – detail

06Section 3: Other factors for you to consider

13Section 4: Frequently asked questions

16Section 5: Takeovers Code Disclosures

28Appendix A: How scaling works – a worked example

29Appendix B: Independent Adviser’s Report

97Glossary

99Directory

Restaurant Brands Target Company Statement

1
CHAIRMAN’S LETTER

Chairman’s letter

Introduction

Global Valar S.L. (“Global Valar”), a subsidiary of

Finaccess Capital S.A. de C.V. (“Finaccess Capital”), has

made a partial takeover offer for 75% of the fully paid

ordinary shares (“Shares” or “Restaurant Brands Shares”)

in Restaurant Brands New Zealand Limited (“Restaurant

Brands”) (the “Offer”).

This letter forms part of Restaurant Brands’ Target

Company Statement in response to the Offer. The Target

Company Statement is required by the Takeovers Code

and includes the Directors’ recommendation, as well as an

Independent Adviser’s Report prepared by Grant Samuel

& Associates Limited (the “Independent Adviser”) on the

merits of the Offer. You should read this Target Company

Statement, including the Independent Adviser’s Report,

carefully and in full when considering whether to accept

the Offer. Capitalised terms used in this Target Company

Statement have the meanings given to them in the Glossary.

Directors’ unanimous recommendation

The Board’s analysis of the Offer was led by the

Independent Directors, Ted van Arkel (Chairman),

Vicky Taylor, Hamish Stevens and David Beguely. The Board

sought advice from Macquarie Capital (New Zealand)

Limited as financial adviser and Harmos Horton Lusk

Limited as legal adviser, and carefully considered the

Independent Adviser’s Report, minority protections and

a range of other factors, including those in Sections 1 to 4

of this Target Company Statement.

The Board unanimously recommends that you

should ACCEPT the Offer for all of your Shares,

in the absence of a Superior Proposal which

Global Valar does not match.

The Independent Directors intend to ACCEPT

the Offer for all of the Shares that they hold or

control, in the absence of a Superior Proposal

which Global Valar does not match.

You should, when deciding whether to accept the

Offer, consider your own individual circumstances,

views on value and the merits of the Offer

and investment time horizons. If  you have any

questions, you are encouraged to seek your own

independent financial, taxation or legal  advice.

Major Shareholder support

Interests associated with Stephen Copulos (a non-executive

Director of Restaurant Brands), which together own 8.52%

of the Restaurant Brands Shares (and together represent

the largest holding of Restaurant Brands Shares), have

agreed to accept the Offer for all of their Shares.

Key features of the Offer

The full terms and conditions of the Offer are set out in

Global Valar’s Offer Document, which accompanies this

Target Company Statement.

The key features of the Offer are as follows:

1. The Offer is a partial takeover for up to 75% of

Restaurant Brands Shares.

2. The Offer price is NZ$9.45 cash per Share (the

“Offer  Price”).

3. The Offer is subject to certain conditions, including:

(a) Global Valar receiving acceptances for 75% of

the Restaurant Brands Shares. This condition

may be waived by Global Valar and the Offer will

then become conditional on Global Valar receiving

acceptances for at least 50.01% of the Restaurant

Brands Shares. Global Valar is not obliged to waive

this condition;

1

(b) the consent of the New Zealand Overseas

Investment Office;

(c) the conditional consent of the Yum! Franchisors

to the Offer becoming unconditional in all respects;

and

(d) no material adverse change occurring between

26 November 2018 and the time that the Offer is

declared unconditional by Global Valar.

Your acceptance of the Offer may be scaled  down

Under the terms of the Offer, you can accept the Offer for

some or all of your Restaurant Brands Shares.

The Offer is a partial offer. If you accept the Offer for up

to 75% of your Restaurant Brands Shares and the Offer

becomes unconditional, you will be guaranteed to sell

those Shares to Global Valar under the Offer. If you accept

the Offer for more than 75% of your Restaurant Brands

Shares and the Offer becomes unconditional, the number

10 December 2018

Dear Restaurant Brands New Zealand Limited Shareholder

1

If Global Valar waives the 75% minimum acceptance condition, the Offer is conditional on Global Valar

receiving acceptances for more than 50% of Restaurant Brands’ Shares. However, for the sake of simplicity,

this has been reflected in this Target Company Statement as 50.01% of the Restaurant Brands Shares.

Restaurant Brands Target Company Statement2
CHAIRMAN’S LETTER

of Shares acquired from you under the Offer may be

subject to scaling. Accordingly, the Board considers that

there is a reasonable prospect that you will remain as a

Shareholder in Restaurant Brands after the Offer, even if

you accept the Offer for all of your Shares.

Further explanation of the scaling mechanism is set out

in Section 4 of the Target Company Statement and a

worked example is included in Appendix A of this Target

Company Statement.

Outcomes of the Offer

If the Offer is successful, Global Valar will hold between

50.01% and 75% of the Restaurant Brands Shares. This

will result in a corresponding reduction in the liquidity of the

Shares on the NZX Main Board and ASX.

As the majority shareholder in Restaurant Brands, Global

Valar will be able to determine the composition of the

Restaurant Brands Board. Control of the Board will allow

Global Valar to, amongst other things, influence or control

Restaurant Brands’ strategy and change the company’s

dividend policy. In this regard, Global Valar has advised

the Board that Global Valar intends to support Restaurant

Brands’ existing strategy and does not intend to change

Restaurant Brands’ dividend policy in the near term. Global

Valar has also agreed with the Yum! Franchisors that Global

Valar will use commercially reasonable endeavours to

maintain a high level of continuity in the Restaurant Brands’

senior management team, including using commercially

reasonable endeavours to retain Russel Creedy as Chief

Executive Officer for at least three years.

For further information about the potential outcomes of the

Offer, the implications of those outcomes and Global Valar’s

intentions for Restaurant Brands, see Sections 3 and 4 of

this Target Company Statement.

Ongoing minority Shareholder protections

If the Offer is successful, the Companies Act, Takeovers

Code and the provisions of the NZX Listing Rules will

continue to provide various protections for minority

Shareholders, including restrictions on transactions with

related parties (including Global Valar), limitations on the

issue of new Shares and the requirement for a minimum

number of Independent Directors.

For further information about minority protections, see

Part B of Section 3 of this Target Company Statement.

Acceptance and timing

If you wish to accept the Offer, use the acceptance form

that accompanied Global Valar’s Offer Document and

carefully follow the instructions on that form. If you do

not wish to accept the Offer, you do not need to take any

further action. For more information about your options in

respect of the Offer, see the Frequently Asked Questions

in Section 4 of this Target Company Statement.

If you are considering accepting the Offer, there is no

advantage in accepting the Offer early. The Offer must

remain open until 12 March 2019, acceptances are

irrevocable, and shareholdings for scaling purposes will

be assessed on the closing date (and not, for example, on

the date of acceptance). In addition, it is possible that new

information relevant to the Offer (for example, if a Superior

Proposal eventuates) may arise after the date of this Target

Company Statement. Accordingly, the Directors suggest

that Shareholders who are considering accepting the Offer

should do so towards the end of the Offer period.

Conclusion

The Board considers that the Offer provides an attractive

opportunity for Shareholders to accelerate the realisation of

some of the future value of their Restaurant Brands Shares

in cash now. Accordingly, on behalf of the Directors, I would

like to reiterate our support for the Offer. We recommend

that you ACCEPT the Offer for all of your Shares in the

absence of a Superior Proposal which is not matched by

Global Valar. Accepting the Offer for all of your Shares

maximises your opportunity to sell Shares under the Offer.

On behalf of the Directors, I thank you for your support of

Restaurant Brands.

Yours faithfully,

Ted van Arkel, Chairman

Restaurant Brands New Zealand Limited

SECTION 1: WHY YOU SHOULD ACCEPT THE OFFER – SUMMARY
Section 1:

Why you should accept the Offer – summary

In arriving at this recommendation, the Directors have considered many factors, including the Offer

Price, the partial nature of the Offer, key conditions of the Offer, potential outcomes of the Offer, the

likelihood of a competing transaction and Global Valar’s intentions after the Offer. The key reasons

for the Directors’ recommendation are summarised below.

Further details are set out in Section 2 of this Target Company Statement. Additional factors for

Shareholders to consider are set out in Section 3 of this Target Company Statement and Section 4

sets out the answers to certain Frequently Asked Questions. The Directors strongly encourage you to

take account of Sections 2 to 4, and the merits of the Offer addressed in the Independent Adviser’s

Report, when considering your options in respect of the Offer.

The Board unanimously recommends that you

ACCEPT the Offer for all of your Shares in the

absence of a Superior Proposal which is not

matched by Global Valar.

1.

The Offer Price is attractive and represents a material premium

to the market price of Restaurant Brands Shares prior to the

announcement of the Offer.

2.

The Offer Price of NZ$9.45 per share is substantially above the

upper end of the Independent Adviser’s value range of NZ$ 8 .15

to NZ$8.92 per share.

3.

The Offer provides an opportunity for Shareholders to realise

some of the future value of at least 75% of their Restaurant

Brands Shares now for cash.

4.

Finaccess Capital supports Restaurant Brands’ existing

growth strategy.

5.

Competing transactions are unlikely.

3

Restaurant Brands Target Company Statement4
SECTION 2: WHY YOU SHOULD ACCEPT THE OFFER – THE DETAIL

1. The Offer Price is attractive and represents

a premium to Restaurant Brands’ trading

prices on the NZX and ASX

Offer Price premium

The Offer Price of NZ$9.45 cash per Share

represents:

(a) a premium of 24.3% to the closing price of

NZ$7.60 on 17 October 2018, the last trading

day before Restaurant Brands announced Global

Valar’s indicative proposal to make the Offer; and

(b) a premium of 23.1% to the New Zealand volume

weighted average price for the six months ended

17 October 2018.

2


Restaurant Brands Shares listed at NZ$2.20 in

May 1997. Restaurant Brands Shares have closed

below the Offer Price every day since listing.

Comparison against other change of control

transactions

NZ$9.45 per Share values Restaurant Brands’

earnings favourably when compared with other

comparable change of control transactions. The Offer

Price of NZ$9.45 per Share implies a ratio of EV

3

to

underlying EBITDA

4

for last 12 months to 26 February

2018 of 14.1x.

5

This compares favourably to the

average for this ratio of recent precedent comparable

transaction multiples of 8.8x EV to historic EBITDA.

6


No brokerage costs payable

No brokerage costs will be charged on the transfer

of your Restaurant Brands Shares to Global Valar

if you accept the Offer. In contrast, if you sell your

Restaurant Brands Shares on the NZX or ASX

markets you may incur brokerage charges.

Post-Offer Share price

If the Offer does not succeed, the Board considers

that it is likely that the price for Restaurant Brands

Shares will decline to levels more in line with (or

potentially below) the price prior to Restaurant Brands’

initial announcement of Finaccess Capital’s indicative

proposal to make the Offer.

For more information about the potential post-Offer

Share price if the Offer succeeds, see Part A of

Section 3 of this Target Company Statement.

Section 2:

Why you should accept the Offer – the detail

2

Six month value weighted average price as at 17 October 2018 is NZ$7.68.

3

Restaurant Brands considers that EV (enterprise value) is the best valuation metric for comparing transaction

multiples. It represents the total purchase price paid for a company (including outstanding debt balances and cash)

and allows for comparisons of transactions even though companies may have differing capital structures.

4

Enterprise Value divided by underlying EBITDA (Earnings before interest, tax, depreciation, amortisation, significant

items, associates and minority interest).

5

FY18 EBITDA includes earnings from Starbucks New Zealand, which was sold in FY19. The historic EV / EBITDA

multiple of 14.1x was calculated using an enterprise value of NZ$1,333.1 million and an FY18 EBITDA of NZ$94.4

million. Enterprise value is calculated as equity value of NZ$1,175.4 million plus net debt of NZ$157.7 million as at

26 February 2018. The equity value is calculated as the NZ$9.45 Offer Price per Share times the Shares on issue

of 124,380,523 as at 26 February 2018. This differs to the historic EV / EBITDA multiple of 13.9x provided in

the Independent Adviser’s Report, which uses an enterprise value of NZ$1,316.2 million and an FY18 EBITDA of

NZ$94.4 million. The difference in enterprise value is due to the use of FY19 net debt of NZ$137.1 million (forecast

net debt as at completion) and 124,768,523 shares on issue which represents the fully diluted Shares post vesting of

performance rights held by Russel Creedy and Grant Ellis.

6

Source: Grant Samuel Independent Adviser’s Report in relation to the Offer, page 30.

5
SECTION 2: WHY YOU SHOULD ACCEPT THE OFFER – THE DETAIL

2. The Offer Price of NZ$9.45 per Share

is substantially above the upper end of

the Independent Adviser’s value range of

NZ$8.15 to NZ$8.92 per Share

The Independent Adviser has assessed the value of

Restaurant Brands Shares (including a premium for

control) to be in the range of NZ$8.15 to NZ$8.92

per Restaurant Brands Share. The Offer Price of

NZ$9.45 cash per Restaurant Brands Share is

substantially above the upper end of this range.

The Independent Adviser’s Report is included as

Appendix B to this Target Company Statement.

3. The Offer provides an opportunity for

Shareholders to realise some of the future

value of at least 75% of their Restaurant

Brands Shares now for cash

In recent years Restaurant Brands has successfully

achieved a number of milestones, including the

acquisition of its Australian and Hawaiian operations.

As a result of these growth initiatives, the company

has experienced strong Share price appreciation.

Restaurant Brands has a number of further growth

opportunities available to it. However, the execution

of Restaurant Brands’ future growth plans could

take a number of years to achieve and involves

execution risks.

The Directors believe the Offer, which allows

Shareholders to sell at least 75% of their Restaurant

Brands Shares for NZ$9.45 cash per Share, provides

an attractive opportunity for you to realise some of the

future value for your Restaurant Brands Shares now.

The partial nature of the Offer means that there is a

reasonable prospect that you will continue to hold

Shares after completion of the Offer (even if you

accept the Offer for all of your Shares). For more

information about Restaurant Brands’ future strategy,

and the factors that may influence the future value of

your ongoing investment in Restaurant Brands, see

paragraph 4 below and Part A of Section 3 of this

Target Company Statement.

4. Finaccess Capital supports Restaurant

Brands’ existing growth strategy

In recent years, the Restaurant Brands Board has

adopted and pursued an international growth strategy,

including the acquisition of KFC stores in Australia and

Pizza Hut and Taco Bell stores in Hawaii, Saipan and

Guam. Restaurant Brands has also stated that

it is actively investigating acquisition opportunities

in the mainland of the United States of America.

Global Valar has confirmed to the Board that

Global Valar intends to support Restaurant Brands’

management to continue to execute the existing

strategy. Global Valar has also agreed with the Yum!

Franchisors that Global Valar will use commercially

reasonable endeavours to maintain a high level

of continuity in the Restaurant Brands’ senior

management team, including using commercially

reasonable endeavours to retain Russel Creedy

as Chief Executive Officer for at least three years.

Finaccess Capital, which is Global Valar’s indirect

holding company, has a successful track record. It

acquired a majority shareholding in European quick

service restaurant operator AmRest Holdings S.E.

(“AmRest”) in 2016 and has supported a growth

strategy that has seen an increase in AmRest’s

store numbers, EBITDA and share price. For more

information, see Part A of Section 3.

5. Competing transactions are unlikely

Since Restaurant Brands’ announcement on

18 October 2018 to NZX and ASX of Global Valar’s

indicative proposal to the make the Offer, and

up to ASX market close on 28 November 2018

(being the last practicable date before the date

of this Target Company Statement), no competing

transaction has emerged.

Your Directors do not believe that a competing

transaction is likely to emerge during the

Offer period.

Restaurant Brands Target Company Statement6
1. What is this Section?

1.1 Section 3 of this Target Company Statement was

prepared by the Independent Directors and addresses

a number of the factors, additional to those set out

in Section 2. The Independent Directors encourage

you to take these factors into account when

considering the Offer.

1.2 This Section is presented in two Parts:

(a) Part A: Factors which may influence the future

value of your Restaurant Brands Shares; and

(b) Part B: Post-Offer minority Shareholder

protections.

Part A: Factors which may influence the future

value of your Restaurant Brands shares

2. The value of your remaining Shares

2.1 If Global Valar receives acceptances to the Offer for

more than 75% of the Restaurant Brands Shares,

acceptances to the Offer will be subject to scaling.

As a result, the Independent Directors believe that

there is a reasonable prospect that Shareholders who

accept the Offer (even Shareholders who accept for

all of their Shares) will continue to hold Restaurant

Brands Shares after completion of the Offer.

2.2 If you accept the Offer for some or all of your

Restaurant Brands Shares, the total value of your

investment in Restaurant Brands is:

(a) the value you receive for the sale of the

Restaurant Brands Shares under the Offer at

NZ$9.45 per share; plus

(b) the value of any Restaurant Brands Shares that

you continue to hold after the Offer.

2.3 Restaurant Brands Shares traded on NZX in the

range of NZ$6.48 to NZ$8.04 per share during the

12 months prior to the initial announcement of Global

Valar’s indicative proposal to make the Offer. There is

a risk that the Share price, after the Offer completes,

may retreat to levels more closely in line with (or

potentially below) that historial range.

2.4 Ultimately, the Share price and the value of your

remaining Restaurant Brands Shares after completion

of the Offer will be determined by the factors which

usually affect market prices of listed company shares,

including general economic and market factors, as

well as factors specific to Restaurant Brands including

post-Offer business strategy, dividends, debt levels,


capital structure, share trading liquidity and future

change of control events. Some of these factors are

discussed below.

3. Business strategy

Global Valar support for existing strategy

3.1 If the Offer is completed, Global Valar will control the

composition of the Board and, as a result, will control

Restaurant Brands’ post-Offer business strategy.

3.2 In recent years, the Restaurant Brands Board has

adopted and pursued an international growth strategy,

including the acquisition of KFC stores in Australia

and Pizza Hut and Taco Bell stores in Hawaii, Saipan

and Guam. Restaurant Brands has also stated that

it is actively investigating acquisition opportunities in

the mainland United States of America.

3.3 Global Valar has confirmed to the Independent

Directors that Global Valar intends to support

Restaurant Brands’ management to continue to

execute the existing strategy, and the Independent

Directors believe the success of that strategy

over the past few years was key to Global Valar’s

decision to make the Offer at NZ$9.45 per

Restaurant Brands Share.

3.4 Consistent with this, Global Valar has also agreed

with the Yum! Franchisors that Global Valar will

use commercially reasonable endeavours to

maintain a high level of continuity in the Restaurant

Brands’ senior management team, including using

commercially reasonable endeavours to retain Russel

Creedy as Chief Executive Officer for at least three

years (see paragraphs 3.11 to 3.16 below).

3.5 Restaurant Brands’ ability to continue to successfully

implement its growth strategy after the completion

of the Offer will be fundamental to the future value of

Restaurant Brands Shares. The Independent Directors

are unable to assess the likelihood of this occurring,

but note that the existing growth strategy of AmRest

was accelerated after the investment in that company

by Finaccess Capital, which is the indirect parent

company of Global Valar.

Finaccess Capital’s investment in AmRest

7


3.6 AmRest, which is listed on the Warsaw, Madrid,

Barcelona, Bilbao and Valencia Stock Exchanges, is

the largest independent chain restaurant operator

in Central and Eastern Europe. The company is also

developing its operations in Western Europe, Russia

and China.

Section 3:

Other factors for you to consider

7

Source: Finaccess Capital.

SECTION 3: OTHER FACTORS FOR YOU TO CONSIDER

7
SECTION 3: OTHER FACTORS FOR YOU TO CONSIDER

8

Source: Finaccess Capital. Figures calculated as at 30 October 2018.

9

PLN designates Polish złoty, which is the Polish currency.

3.7 Finaccess Capital first acquired a 32% shareholding

in AmRest in August 2015. Finaccess Capital

subsequently increased its shareholding to 61%

in 2016, before decreasing its shareholding to 56%

in 2017 because of a sale of AmRest shares to

AmRest management.

3.8 Finaccess Capital has advised the Independent

Directors that, since first investing in AmRest:

8

(a) AmRest’s network has increased from

approximately 850 stores to approximately

2,000 stores;

(b) adjusted EBITDA has increased from PLN

467 million

9

in FY15 to PLN 689 million in FY17

(with consensus forecast adjusted EBITDA of

PLN 809 million in FY18), representing annual

growth of approximately 20%; and

(c) the share price has increased over 130%

(equivalent to an effective annual return of

approximately 30%).

3.9 The success of AmRest after Finaccess Capital’s

investment is not a guarantee that the same will occur

for Restaurant Brands under Global Valar majority

ownership. However, it indicates to the Independent

Directors that Finaccess Capital has experience as a

majority owner in a listed company, with a track record

of supporting an international growth strategy.

Change of strategy

3.10 It is possible that the post-Offer Board could change

Restaurant Brands’ strategy in the future (for example,

to adjust to changing economic conditions). As any

future change in strategy cannot be known now, the

Independent Directors are unable to assess the

impact on value and risk profile of any change.

Yum! requirements

3.11 Certain subsidiaries of Yum! Brands Inc (referred

to collectively in this Target Company Statement as

“Yum!”) are the franchisors of the KFC, Pizza Hut and

Taco Bell brands operated by Restaurant Brands.

3.12 Under franchise arrangements between the Yum!

Franchisors and Restaurant Brands, the consent of

the Yum! Franchisors is required prior to Global Valar

acquiring control of Restaurant Brands under the

Offer. As a result, consent of the Yum! Franchisors

is an Offer condition.

3.13 Certain subsidiaries of Yum! Brands Inc, Global Valar

and Restaurant Brands have entered into a conditional

consent letter, under which the Yum! Franchisors have

conditionally consented to Global Valar acquiring

control of Restaurant Brands under the Offer (“Yum!

Consent Letter”).

3.14 The conditions to the Yum! Consent Letter are the

satisfaction of the Yum! Franchisors’ franchisee due

diligence requirements in respect of Finaccess Capital

and Global Valar, and the Yum! Franchisors, Finaccess

Capital and Restaurant Brands entering into formal

agreements to give effect to requirements recorded

in the Yum! Consent Letter.

3.15 Those requirements have implications for Restaurant

Brands’ future business strategy, including the

following:

(a) Finaccess Capital must use commercially

reasonable endeavours to ensure a high level

of continuity of Restaurant Brands’ senior

management and use commercially reasonable

endeavours to ensure that Russel Creedy remains

as Chief Executive Officer of Restaurant Brands

for at least three years after completion of the

Offer. During that period, Finaccess Capital must

ensure that Russel Creedy is not engaged or

employed by any of Finaccess Capital’s affiliated

companies.

(b) Restaurant Brands must comply with specified

new store development obligations for KFC and

Pizza Hut in New Zealand.

(c) If Restaurant Brands reaches an agreement

with the relevant Yum! Franchisor in relation to

the operation of Taco Bell in New Zealand and

Australia, Restaurant Brands will be required to

satisfy new store development obligations for

Taco Bell in these territories.

(d) Restaurant Brands must maintain operational

separation from AmRest (excluding certain

administrative functions).

3.16 The Independent Directors are comfortable with

Restaurant Brands agreeing to the matters in

paragraph 3.15. In accordance with its existing

growth strategy, Restaurant Brands would have

agreed the same or substantially similar new store

development obligations with the relevant Yum!

Franchisor even if Global Valar had not made

the Offer.

Restaurant Brands Target Company Statement8
SECTION 3: OTHER FACTORS FOR YOU TO CONSIDER

10

Source: Finaccess Capital as at 30 October 2018.

4. Dividends and imputation credits

4.1 Restaurant Brands’ current dividend policy is to

pay dividends having regard to all relevant factors,

including financial performance, cash flow, capital

requirements and the availability of imputation

credits. Restaurant Brands’ dividend policy does not

guarantee the payment of dividends or commit to any

timing or quantum of dividends.

4.2 Restaurant Brands paid total dividends (interim and

final) of NZ$0.28 per Restaurant Brands Share in

respect of FY18. Restaurant Brands has not paid an

interim dividend in respect of the current financial year,

FY19, because of the Offer. Restaurant Brands will not

pay the interim dividend if the Offer is successful.

4.3 Global Valar has confirmed to the Independent

Directors that it does not currently intend to promote

a change to Restaurant Brands’ dividend policy in

the near term. Global Valar has also stated that, after

completion of the Offer, the dividend policy will “need

to continue to be assessed against other capital

requirements in the business on an ongoing basis,

with Shareholder value from a dividend needing to be

considered relative to potential value creation from

reinvesting the funds within the business.”

4.4 Consistent with Global Valar’s statement above,

the Independent Directors believe that Global Valar

will focus on growth, rather than dividend yield.

Accordingly, there is a reasonable prospect that,

if the Offer is successful, Global Valar will prioritise

Restaurant Brands’ use of available cash to fund

acquisitions and store roll-outs by Restaurant Brands

over the payment of dividends at pre-Offer levels.

4.5 If the Offer is successful, Restaurant Brands will lose

the balance of imputation credits in its imputation

credit account. This may reduce Restaurant Brands’

ability to pay dividends to Shareholders in a tax

effective manner (i.e. by attaching imputation credits

to dividends paid) in the short to medium term.

5. Debt levels and capital structure

5.1 Global Valar has advised the Independent Directors

that it does not intend to significantly lever Restaurant

Brands (i.e. increase Restaurant Brands’ debt) and

that its investment philosophy is based on ensuring

portfolio companies have a responsible level of

leverage (i.e. debt).

5.2 Global Valar has also advised the Independent

Directors that Global Valar does not envisage any

future equity capital being required from Restaurant

Brands Shareholders in the near to medium term,

although any large-scale initiatives which are unable

to be funded from business cashflow would require

an assessment of capital sources at the relevant time.

This would include consideration of both debt and

equity capital, having regard to the matters set out

in paragraph 5.1.

5.3 The Independent Directors understand from

Finaccess Capital that:

10


(a) on investing in AmRest, Finaccess Capital set

a maximum target leverage ratio of net debt /

EBITDA at 3.2x; and

(b) despite borrowing to fund growth, AmRest

remains within the target leverage ratio.

6. Liquidity

6.1 Share trading liquidity is the ability to buy or sell

Restaurant Brands Shares in reasonable quantities

and within a short timeframe without materially

affecting the share price.

6.2 Liquidity is affected by the quantity of trades through

NZX and ASX, which is influenced by the number of

Shares which are available to trade (often referred

to as “free float”). A decrease in free float means

that fewer Shares are available to trade, which can

reduce liquidity.

6.3 The Independent Directors consider that currently

there is a reasonable level of liquidity in the market

for Restaurant Brands Shares. In the 12 month period

prior to 17 October 2018, 28,387,443 Restaurant

Brands Shares traded through NZX and 65,662

traded through ASX.

6.4 The recent levels of liquidity are supported by a

current free float of approximately 91% (being

all of the Restaurant Brands Shares, other than

those owned by interests associated with Stephen

Copulos) and the inclusion of Restaurant Brands in

the S&P/NZX50 index.

6.5 If the Offer is completed, the free float of Restaurant

Brands Shares (the Shares available for trading

through the market) will decrease to between 25%

and 49.99% depending on the outcome of the Offer.

This is likely to result in a decrease in liquidity and

Restaurant Brands Shares being removed from the

S&P/NZX50 index.

9
SECTION 3: OTHER FACTORS FOR YOU TO CONSIDER

6.6 A decline in liquidity may have a negative influence

on the market price of Restaurant Brands Shares and

may limit your ability to sell your Restaurant Brands

Shares after completion of the Offer at a price that

you are prepared to accept.

6.7 That said:

(a) at a Share price of NZ$7.60 per Share, being

the closing price on the NZX on the day prior to

the initial announcement of the partial takeover

proposal, a 25% free float implies approximately

NZ$236 million of Shares available to be traded;

and

(b) given the scaling mechanism described in Part

A, the Independent Directors consider that there

is a reasonable prospect that Restaurant Brands

will have several thousand Shareholders after

completion of the Offer.

6.8 These factors may assist to support future liquidity

in the market for Restaurant Brands Shares.

7. Future control transactions

Finaccess Capital will determine the future control

of Restaurant Brands

7.1 If the Offer is successful, Global Valar will become

the majority Shareholder in Restaurant Brands and

will determine the future control of the company.

No change of control transaction (such as a full

takeover offer by a third party or a takeover by way

of scheme of arrangement promoted by a third party)

affecting Restaurant Brands can be successful unless

that transaction is supported by Global Valar.

Yum! requirements

7.2 Under the Yum! Consent Letter (see paragraph 3.13

above), Finaccess Capital and the Yum! Franchisors

have agreed that the consent of the Yum! Franchisors

is required to:

(a) a change of control of Restaurant Brands after

completion of the Offer; and

(b) changes of control of Global Valar and certain of

its holding companies, as well as certain transfers

of minority shareholdings in those companies.

7.3 The requirements in paragraph 7.2(b) provide the Yum!

Franchisors with a veto over future transactions which

result in a change of control of Restaurant Brands, as

well as certain other share transfers within the Global

Valar holding company structure. These requirements

could have negative implications for remaining

Shareholders in Restaurant Brands after completion

of the Offer, as breaches of those requirement may

give rise to deemed defaults under the franchise

arrangements between Restaurant Brands and the

Yum! Franchisors.

7.4 However, the Independent Directors do not consider

this to be a material risk for the following reasons:

(a) after completion of the Offer, Global Valar will

own between 50.01% and 75% of the Restaurant

Brands Shares. Global Valar’s interests will be

aligned with other Shareholders in maintaining

the Yum! Franchisor franchise arrangements, as

Global Valar will bear the greatest proportionate

economic impact of any disruption to those

arrangements;

(b) as noted in paragraph 3.7, Finaccess Capital is

currently a 56% Shareholder in AmRest, which is

also a significant operator of brands franchised

by certain subsidiaries of Yum! Brands Inc. This

heightens Finaccess Capital’s commercial

interests in maintaining a good relationship with

the Yum! Franchisors by complying with, and

ensuring that Global Valar complies with, the Yum!

Consent Letter requirements; and

(c) under the Yum! Consent Letter, Finaccess Capital

has a 30 day cure period to remedy breaches of

the provisions referred to in paragraph 7.2 above.

Finaccess Capital may increase its control of

Restaurant Brands

7.5 After waiting 12 months from the completion of the

Offer, Global Valar is entitled to acquire an additional

5% shareholding in Restaurant Brands in each

12 month period, by way of on-market and off-market

transactions, under the “creep” provisions of the

Takeovers Code. There are no pricing restrictions on

these transactions.

7.6 Importantly, unless certain limited exceptions apply,

Global Valar could not make any “creeping” acquisition

of Restaurant Brands Shares at any time while

Global Valar was in possession of inside information

(non-public price sensitive information) concerning

Restaurant Brands.

7.7 In addition to “creeping” acquisitions, Global Valar is

entitled to make a follow-on takeover offer at any time

after completion of the Offer. Finaccess Capital has

agreed that it will not do so within 12 months after

the completion of the Offer at a price below NZ$9.45

per Restaurant Brands Shares adjusted up or down

in proportion to any change in the S&P/NZX50 index

after completion of the Offer (for example, a 10%

decline in the S&P/NZX 50 index would result in a

Restaurant Brands Target Company Statement10
SECTION 3: OTHER FACTORS FOR YOU TO CONSIDER

10% decrease in the NZ$9.45 “floor price” and a 10%

increase in the S&P/NZX 50 index would result in a

10% increase in the NZ$9.45 “floor price”). After the

expiry of that period, Finaccess Capital will be free to

make another takeover offer at any price.

7.8 The Board of Restaurant Brands may waive the

prohibition on Global Valar making a takeover

offer at a price below the “floor price” during the

first 12 months after completion of the Offer. While

Restaurant Brands is listed by NZX (see paragraphs

8.3 to 8.9 below), any persons who are appointed as

Directors of Restaurant Brands to represent Global

Valar will be “interested” in any proposed waiver and

will be unable to vote on the Board decision.

7.9 If Global Valar increases its holding of Restaurant

Brands Shares to 90% or more, whether as a

result of a “creeping” acquisition or a takeover offer,

Global Valar is entitled, within a specified period,

to compulsorily acquire the remaining Restaurant

Brands Shares. If Global Valar chooses not to do so

then, within a specified period, remaining holders of

Restaurant Brands Shares can require Global Valar

to purchase those Shares.

7.10 The compulsory acquisition price will depend on

the manner in which Global Valar increased its

shareholding to 90% or above. In some cases (for

example, if Global Valar increased its shareholding

to 90% or above as a result of “creeping” acquisition),

the compulsory acquisition price must be a

cash sum certified as fair and reasonable by an

independent adviser.

Part B: Post-Offer minority Shareholder protections

8. Shareholder protections

8.1 After completion of the Offer, if you continue to hold

Restaurant Brands Shares you will have the benefit of

various legal protections for minority Shareholders.

8.2 This Part B is intended to be a general (and

non-exhaustive) high level summary of certain of

those legal protections. It is not legal advice. If you

have any questions about your legal rights as a

holder of Restaurant Brands Shares, you should

seek your own legal advice which is specific to

your circumstances.

Ongoing NZX and ASX listings

8.3 Many of the Shareholder protections described in 

this Part B arise under the NZX Listing Rules.

To ensure that you continue to enjoy those protections,

Global Valar has agreed that, for 12 months after

completion of the Offer, it will not take steps to de-list

Restaurant Brands from the NZX except where Global

Valar becomes entitled to compulsorily acquire the

remaining Shares in Restaurant Brands as a result of

a takeover offer that complies with the minimum price

commitment described in paragraph 7.7.

8.4 After the 12 month period referred to in paragraph

8.3 it is possible that Global Valar could seek for the

Board to apply to NZX for delisting of Restaurant

Brands. However, Global Valar has informed the

Independent Directors that it would only look to delist

Restaurant Brands by moving to 100% ownership

and would not intend to have minority investors in an

unlisted business.

8.5 Ultimately, delisting, and the conditions of delisting,

are at NZX’s discretion. The Independent Directors

understand that, where a company is delisting from

NZX and not moving to another recognised stock

exchange (e.g. ASX), NZX usually requires, as a

pre-condition to delisting, that the delisting be

approved by an ordinary resolution of the minority

shareholders.

8.6 Finaccess Capital has also agreed that it will not take

steps to delist Restaurant Brands from ASX within

12 months after completion of the Offer. It is

possible that, after that period, the Board may

seek to de-list Restaurant Brands from ASX. The

Independent Directors understand that this would not

require Shareholder approval.

8.7 Global Valar has informed the Independent Directors

that Global Valar believes there to be a number

of benefits from Restaurant Brands maintaining

its current listings, including access to capital to

fund future growth while also providing existing

Shareholders an opportunity to continue participating

in the business over the long term.

8.8 The Board of Restaurant Brands may waive the

prohibition on Global Valar taking steps to de-list

Restaurant Brands from NZX and/or ASX during the

first 12 months after completion of the Offer. Any

persons who are appointed as Directors of Restaurant

Brands to represent Global Valar will be “interested” in

any proposed waiver and will be unable to vote on the

Board decision.

8.9 Restaurant Brands’ constitution requires the company

to comply with the NZX Listing Rules.

New NZX Listing Rules

8.10 NZX has implemented new Listing Rules which will

come into effect on 1 January 2019. Accordingly, this

Part B summarises the position under the current and

new NZX Listing Rules.

11
SECTION 3: OTHER FACTORS FOR YOU TO CONSIDER

9. Governance protections

Requirement for New Zealand resident Directors and

Independent Directors

9.1 Under the current NZX Listing Rules, the Board

must have at least two Directors who are resident in

New Zealand and at least two Independent Directors

(or, if there are eight or more Directors, three or

one-third of the board, rounded down).

9.2 Under the new NZX Listing Rules, the Board

must have at least two Directors who are resident in

New Zealand and at least two Independent Directors.

Directors’ duties

9.3 Under the Companies Act 1993, all Directors,

including any Global Valar representatives who are

appointed as Directors of Restaurant Brands, owe

the same duties to Restaurant Brands.

9.4 Amongst other duties, all Directors, in their capacity

as Directors, must act in good faith and in the best

interests of Restaurant Brands.

Prohibitions on interested Director voting

9.5 Under the current and new NZX Listing Rules,

Directors must not vote on a Board resolution in

respect of a matter on which a Director is interested.

A Director will be interested in a matter in various

circumstances, including:

(a) if the Director is a party to, or may derive a

material financial benefit from, the matter;

(b) if the Director has a material financial interest

in another party to the matter; and

(c) if the Director is a director or officer of another

party to, or person who may derive a material

financial benefit from, the matter.

9.6 The two exceptions to the above rule are that a

Director may vote on:

(a) a matter in which a Director is interested if, under

the Companies Act, the matter requires Directors

to sign a certificate (for example, a “best interests”

certificate for the issue of Shares or a solvency

certificate for the authorisation of a dividend); or

(b) the approval of Director indemnities granted

under the Companies Act.

10. Shareholder oversight

Major transactions

10.1 Under the Companies Act, a “major transaction”

requires shareholder approval by special resolution.

10.2 In broad terms, a major transaction is the sale or

purchase of assets having a value in excess of 50% of

the pre-transaction market value of Restaurant Brands’

gross assets. Importantly, the major transaction rules

are entity specific: a transaction by a subsidiary of

Restaurant Brands will not require major transaction

Restaurant Brands Shareholder approval under the

Companies Act.

10.3 If a major transaction is approved by Shareholders,

those Shareholders who vote all of their Restaurant

Brands Shares against the major transaction have

minority buyout rights, being the right to require

Restaurant Brands to acquire their Shares for a fair

and reasonable cash price.

Related party transactions

10.4 Under the current and new NZX Listing Rules,

Restaurant Brands must not enter into a “material

transaction” (or series of related transactions) with

a “related party” without Shareholder approval by

ordinary resolution. The related party cannot vote on

this resolution. Global Valar will be a related party of

Restaurant Brands after completion of the Offer.

10.5 “Material transactions” include asset sales or

purchases having a value of more than 10% of

Restaurant Brands’ average market capitalisation

and service arrangements where the annual gross

costs is more than 1% of Restaurant Brands’ average

market capitalisation. In addition, the issue of

securities having a market value of more than 10%

of Restaurant Brands’ average market capitalisation

is also a “material transaction”.

Annual meetings

10.6 Restaurant Brands must continue to hold annual

meetings.

10.7 Under the current NZX Listing Rules, Restaurant

Brands must hold each annual meeting in

New Zealand.

10.8 Under the new NZX Listing Rules, Restaurant Brands

must hold each annual meeting in New Zealand,

or Australia (if Shareholders can participate in

the meeting by audio, audio and visual, and/or

electronic means).

Restaurant Brands Target Company Statement12
SECTION 3: OTHER FACTORS FOR YOU TO CONSIDER

11. Anti-dilution protection for minorities

NZX Listing Rules restrictions on share issues

11.1 Under the current and new NZX Listing Rules,

Restaurant Brands must not issue Restaurant Brand

Shares without Shareholder approval by ordinary

resolution unless an exception applies. A Shareholder

(e.g. Global Valar) cannot vote on a resolution to

approve the issue of Shares to itself.

11.2 Under the current NZX Listing Rules, the key

exceptions to the Shareholder approval requirements

are for:

(a) renounceable rights issues; and

(b) placements of up to 20% of Restaurant Brands’

share capital in a 12 month period.

11.3 Under the new NZX Listing Rules, the key exceptions

to the Shareholder approval requirements are for:

(a) renounceable or accelerated rights issues; and

(b) placements of up to 15% of Restaurant Brands’

share capital in a 12 month period.

11.4 Placements of new Restaurant Brands Shares

are still subject to the related party transaction

rules summarised in paragraph 10 above as well

as the Takeovers Code restrictions described in

paragraph 12 below.

11.5 In addition, if Global Valar has Board representation

(which the Independent Directors understand is

intended) the NZX Listing Rules prohibit a placement

of Restaurant Brands Shares solely to Global Valar

without Shareholder approval.

Governance requirements

11.6 Under the Companies Act, to issue Shares, the Board

must resolve, and Directors must certify, that the

price for the issue and the terms of the issue are

fair and reasonable to Restaurant Brands and to all

existing Shareholders.

12. Restrictions on Global Valar increasing

its shareholding

Takeovers Code restrictions

12.1 Under the Takeovers Code, after completion of the

Offer, Global Valar cannot increase its shareholding

in Restaurant Brands, except by way of one of the

following:

11


(a) another takeover (including by way of a scheme

of arrangement);

(b) with prior Shareholder approval by ordinary

resolution (on which Global Valar cannot vote); or

(c) the “creep” rules summarised below.

“Creep” rules

12.2 The Takeovers Code’s “creep” rules are referred to in

paragraph 7 above. To re-iterate, after a “stand down”

period of 12 months after completion of the Offer,

Global Valar may acquire, on or off market, up to 5%

of Restaurant Brands’ Shares in each 12 month period.

However, Global Valar would still be subject to usual

insider trading restrictions.

13. Shareholder information

Annual reports

13.1 Under the current NZX Listing Rules, Restaurant

Brands must prepare, and make available to

Shareholders, an annual and a half-year report.

13.2 Under the new NZX Listing Rules, Restaurant Brands

must prepare, and make available to Shareholders, an

annual report. This is also a Companies Act obligation.

13.3 The annual report must include audited consolidated

financial statements for Restaurant Brands.

Continuous disclosure

13.4 Under the current and new NZX Listing Rules,

Restaurant Brands must immediately disclose

price sensitive information to NZX, subject to

certain limited exceptions.

11

There are also a number of exemptions that would permit Global Valar to temporarily increase its shareholding

in certain circumstances, provided it reduced that shareholding within a specified time period.

13
1. What are my options?

1.1 You have four options in response to the Offer.

You can:

(a) reject (i.e. not accept) the Offer;

(b) accept the Offer for all of your Restaurant Brands

Shares;

(c) accept the Offer of some, but not all, of your

Restaurant Brands Shares; or

(d) sell your Restaurant Brands Shares on the NZX or

ASX (or off market) at any time if you do not wish

to hold them or participate in the Offer.

1.2 If you accept the Offer for more than 75% of your

Shares, your acceptance may be subject to scaling.

Scaling is discussed in further detail in paragraph

4 below and in Appendix A of this Target Company

Statement.

2. How do I accept or reject the Offer?

2.1 If you wish to accept the Offer, use the appropriate

acceptance form that accompanied Global Valar’s

Offer Document, and carefully follow the instructions

on that form. If you accept the Offer, your acceptance

is irrevocable. This means that you cannot withdraw

your acceptance or change your mind (for example,

if you wished to consider other options for your

Restaurant Brands Shares) once you have accepted

the Offer.

2.2 If you wish to reject (i.e. not accept) the Offer, you do

not need to take any action.

3. What are the key dates?

What is the time frame for accepting the Offer?

3.1 You have until the end of the Offer period to decide

whether or not to accept the Offer.

3.2 At the date of this Target Company Statement, the

Offer period will end on 11:59pm on 12 March 2019,

being 60 working days after the date of the Offer.

3.3 If Global Valar satisfies the minimum acceptance

condition in the period that begins 5 working days

prior to the closing date of the Offer, the Offer period

is automatically extended for 10 working days from

the date on which the condition is satisfied. This

provides Shareholders who have not accepted the

Offer further time to consider doing so.

When is my shareholding assessed for the purposes

of scaling?

3.4 Your shareholding is assessed for the purposes of

scaling on the closing date of the Offer (and not, for

example, on the date of the Offer or the date of your

acceptance). Therefore, accepting the Offer early will

not affect the scaling of your acceptance.

When will I be paid if I accept the Offer?

3.5 If you accept the Offer, Global Valar will not pay

you for any Restaurant Brands Shares to be acquired

from you under the Offer until the Offer has closed.

As noted above, the closing date is 12 March 2019,

being 60 working days after the date of the Offer.

3.6 You should also be aware that the Offer may remain

conditional for up to 20 working days after the Offer

has closed, to provide Global Valar with time to satisfy

outstanding conditions (such as Overseas Investment

Office consent).

3.7 Global Valar will not pay you for any Restaurant Brands

Shares to be acquired from you under the Offer until

after the Offer becomes unconditional.

3.8 Accordingly, accepting the Offer early during the Offer

period will not result in early payment to you.

4. Will my acceptance of the Offer be scaled?

Can I sell all of my Shares to Global Valar under

the  Offer?

4.1 The Offer is a partial takeover offer. Global Valar is

offering to purchase only up to 75% of the Shares in

Restaurant Brands. Global Valar will only acquire and

pay for Shares under the Offer if Global Valar declares

the Offer unconditional.

4.2 You may accept the Offer for any number of your

Restaurant Brands Shares, but you are only certain

of being able to sell up to 75% of your shareholding.

There is no guarantee that you can sell more than

75% of your Restaurant Brands Shares under the

Offer. If you accept the Offer for more than 75% of

your shareholding, your acceptance may be subject to

scaling in accordance with the Takeovers Code.

4.3 If Global Valar receives acceptances for between

50.01% and 75% of the Restaurant Brands Shares

and declares the Offer unconditional, Global Valar will

acquire all the Restaurant Brands Shares you accept

into the Offer. Your Restaurant Brands Shares will not

be subject to scaling.

Section 4:

Frequently asked questions

SECTION 4: FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

Restaurant Brands Target Company Statement14
SECTION 4: FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

How does scaling work?

4.4 If Global Valar receives acceptances for more than

75% of the Restaurant Brands Shares and you accept

the Offer for more than 75% of your Restaurant

Brands Shares, your Restaurant Brands Shares will

be subject to scaling.

4.5 Scaling involves two steps. First, Global Valar will take

up the lesser of:

(a) 75% of all the Restaurant Brands Shares held by

each accepting Shareholder; and

(b) the full number of Restaurant Brands Shares for

which a Shareholder accepted the Offer, where

that number is equal to or less than 75% of the

Shareholder’s total shareholding.

4.6 Second, if necessary to achieve the total 75%

shareholding in Restaurant Brands that Global Valar

wishes to acquire, Global Valar will acquire further

Restaurant Brands Shares from those Shareholders

who accept the Offer for more than 75% of their

shareholdings, calculated on a proportional basis to

the total excess acceptances.

4.7 A worked example of the scaling mechanism is set out

in Appendix A to this Target Company Statement.

If I accept the Offer for no more than 75% of my Shares,

will I be subject to scaling?

4.8 No. You can accept the Offer for up to 75% of your

Restaurant Brands Shares without being subject to

scaling. For example, if you hold 1,000 Shares, you

may accept the Offer for 750 Shares or fewer Shares

without your acceptances being scaled down.

If I accept the Offer for more than 75% of my Shares,

how many Shares will Global Valar purchase from me?

4.9 If you accept the Offer for more than 75% of your

Restaurant Brands Shares, at completion of the Offer,

Global Valar must purchase at least 75% of your

Shares. Whether, and the extent to which, Global Valar

purchases further Restaurant Brands Shares from you

will depend on the total number of acceptances to the

Offer that Global Valar receives (see the answer to the

question “

How does scaling work?” above).

If you accept the Offer for all of your Restaurant

Brands Shares and the Offer is subject to scaling you

will not be able to sell all of your Restaurant Brands

Shares under the Offer.

5. What are the potential outcomes of

the Offer?

5.1 There are three potential outcomes of the Offer:

12


(a) Global Valar receives acceptances to the Offer

for less than 50.01% of the Restaurant Brands

Shares or does not otherwise declare the Offer

unconditional; or

(b) Global Valar receives acceptances to the

Offer for between 50.01% and 75% of the

Restaurant Brands Shares and declares the

Offer unconditional; or

(c) Global Valar receives acceptances to the Offer for

more than 75% of the Restaurant Brands Shares

and declares the Offer unconditional.

5.2 These outcomes are discussed below.

What happens if Global Valar does not receive

acceptances for more than 50.01% of Restaurant

Brands Shares or does not otherwise declare the

Offer unconditional?

5.3 If Global Valar does not receive acceptances to the

Offer for 50.01% or more of the Restaurant Brands

Shares or if the Offer is not otherwise declared

unconditional, the Offer will lapse. No Restaurant

Brands Shares will be acquired from you (or any other

Shareholder) under the Offer and you will not be

paid for any Restaurant Brands Shares for which you

accept the Offer.

What happens if Global Valar receives acceptances 

for between 50.01% and 75% of Restaurant Brands

Shares?

5.4 The Offer is conditional on Global Valar receiving

acceptances for at least 75% of the Restaurant

Brands Shares. Global Valar is able to waive

this condition and, if it does so, the Offer will be

conditional on Global Valar receiving acceptances for

at least 50.01% of the Restaurant Brands Shares.

5.5 If Global Valar receives acceptances to the Offer for

between 50.01% and 75% of the Restaurant Brands

Shares and declares the Offer unconditional:

12

If Global Valar waives the 75% minimum acceptance condition, the Offer is conditional on Global Valar

receiving acceptances for more than 50% of Restaurant Brands’ Shares. However, for the sake of simplicity,

this has been reflected in this Target Company Statement as 50.01% of the Restaurant Brands Shares.

15
SECTION 4: FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

(a) Global Valar will acquire all of the Restaurant

Brands Shares that have been accepted into

the Offer. Accepting Shareholders will not be

subject to scaling or pro-rata adjustment of their

acceptances. The final percentage shareholding in

Restaurant Brands owned by Global Valar will be

between 50.01% and 75% – determined by the

level of acceptances to the Offer by Shareholders.

(b) Restaurant Brands will remain listed on the NZX

and ASX and the Restaurant Brands Shares will

continue to be quoted on, and tradeable on, the

NZX and ASX. See paragraphs 6 and 8.3 to 8.6

of Section 3 for more information.

(c) At a shareholding of between 50.01% and 75%,

Global Valar will have effective, but not absolute

control of Restaurant Brands:

(i) Global Valar will be able to pass an ordinary

resolution (a resolution requiring a bare

majority of the votes cast) by itself. This will

allow Global Valar to control the composition

of the Board of Restaurant Brands. Control of

the Board will allow Global Valar to, amongst

other things, determine Restaurant Brands’

business strategy, change the company’s

dividend policy and approve certain changes

to the company’s capital structure. For further

information see paragraphs 3 and 4 of

Section 3.

(ii) Global Valar will also have significant

influence over special resolutions (a resolution

requiring a 75% majority of the votes cast)

and, depending on the degree to which

other Shareholders vote on the resolution,

may be able to determine the outcome of

special resolutions. Special resolutions are

required for major transactions, changes to

the constitution and certain other matters. For

further information about major transactions

see paragraph 10 of Section 3.

(d) The price of Restaurant Brands Shares on the

NZX and ASX may fall below the price that

prevailed before Restaurant Brands announced

that Finaccess Capital was considering making a

partial takeover for Restaurant Brands. For further

information see Part B of Section 3.


What happens if Global Valar receives acceptances for

more than 75% of Restaurant Brands Shares?

5.6 If Global Valar receives acceptances for more than

75% of the Restaurant Brands Shares and declares

the Offer unconditional, Global Valar will become the

holder of 75% of the Restaurant Brands Shares:

(a) Shareholders who have accepted the Offer for

more than 75% of their Restaurant Brands Shares

will have their acceptances scaled in accordance

with the Takeovers Code and Global Valar will

acquire from accepting Shareholders the number

of Restaurant Brands Shares determined under

the scaling process.

(b) Restaurant Brands will remain listed on the NZX

and ASX and the Restaurant Brands Shares will

continue to be quoted on, and tradeable on, the

NZX and ASX. See paragraphs 6 and 8.3 to 8.6

of Section 3 for more information.

(c) In addition to being able to control the composition

of the Board of Restaurant Brands as described

in paragraph 5.5(c)(i) above, Global Valar will also

be able to pass special resolutions by itself.

(d) The price of Restaurant Brands Shares on the

NZX and ASX may fall below the price that

prevailed before Restaurant Brands announced

that Finaccess Capital was considering making a

partial takeover for Restaurant Brands. For further

information see Part B of Section 3.

Restaurant Brands Target Company Statement16
SECTION 5: TAKEOVERS CODE DISCLOSURES

This Section 5 sets out the information required by Schedule 2 of the Takeovers Code in relation to the Offer. Where any

information required by Schedule 2 to the Takeovers Code is not applicable, no statement is made regarding that information.

1. Date

1.1 This Target Company Statement is dated

10 December 2018.

2. Offer

2.1 This Target Company Statement relates to a partial

takeover offer by Global Valar S.L. to purchase 75%

of the fully paid ordinary shares in Restaurant Brands,

for a cash purchase price of NZ$9.45 per Restaurant

Brands Share.

2.2 The Offer is due to close at 11:59pm on 12 March

2019.

2.3 The full terms of the Offer are set out in Global Valar’s

Offer Document dated 10 December 2018, which

accompanies this Target Company Statement.

3. Target company

3.1 The name of the target company is Restaurant Brands

New Zealand Limited.

3.2 The postal address of Restaurant Brands is:

PO Box 22-749

Otahuhu

Auckland

New Zealand

3.3 Restaurant Brands’ website is at:

http://www.restaurantbrands.co.nz.

3.4 The contact email address of Restaurant Brands is

investor@rbd.co.nz.

4. Directors of Restaurant Brands

4.1 The names of the Directors of Restaurant Brands are:

(a) Eduard Koert (Ted) van Arkel (Chairman)

(b) Stephen Copulos

(c) David Ernest Beguely

(d) Hamish William Stevens

(e) Victoria Ann Taylor

4.2 The Board has determined that Ted van Arkel,

David Beguely, Hamish Stevens and Victoria Taylor

are Independent Directors for the purposes of the

NZX Listing Rules. Stephen Copulos is a

non-executive Director.

5. Ownership of equity securities of

Restaurant  Brands

Ownership interests of Directors and Senior Managers

of Restaurant Brands

Restaurant Brands Shares

5.1 The only class of equity securities on issue in

Restaurant Brands is Restaurant Brands Shares.

The number and the percentage of Restaurant Brands

Shares held or controlled by each Director or Senior

Manager of Restaurant Brands, or their associates,

is set out in the following table. For the purposes of

this Target Company Statement, the Directors have

determined that the Senior Managers of Restaurant

Brands are Russel Creedy (Chief Executive Officer)

and Grant Ellis (Chief Financial Officer).

Section 5:

Takeovers Code Disclosures

17
SECTION 5: TAKEOVERS CODE DISCLOSURES

13

Stephen Copulos controls his Restaurant Brands Shares through: (a) HSBC Custody Nominees Australia Limited as custodian for Eyeon No 2 Pty

Ltd (as to 1,585,482 shares); (b) HSBC Custody Nominees Australia Limited as custodian for PC Nab Pty Ltd (as to 2,117,853 shares); (c) Citibank

N.A., New Zealand Branch as custodian for Eyeon QSR Pty Ltd (as to 5,198,817 shares); (d) Citibank N.A., New Zealand Branch as custodian for

Copulos Superannuation Pty Ltd (as to 862,937 shares); (e) Citibank N.A., New Zealand Branch as custodian for Eyeon Investments Pty Ltd (as to

662,686 shares); and (f) Citibank N.A., New Zealand Branch as custodian for Copulos Foundation Pty Ltd (as to 203,044 shares).

14

David Beguely controls his Restaurant Brands Shares through Tiakarete Pty Ltd as trustee of the Tiakarete Superannuation Fund, of which he is

the beneficial owner.

15

Russel Creedy is the registered holder and beneficial owner of 571,601 Restaurant Brands Shares. Russel Creedy’s spouse, Linda Creedy, is

the registered holder and beneficial owner of 20,399 Restaurant Brands Shares. Linda Creedy may be an associate of Russel Creedy for the

purposes of the Takeovers Code.

16

Grant Ellis is the registered holder and beneficial owner of 194,529 Restaurant Brands Shares. Along with Ian Lewington and Lynley Lewington,

he is also an owner as trustee of 8,682 Restaurant Brands Shares held by JBWere (NZ) Nominees Limited as custodian for the Lewington

Business Trust. Grant Ellis has no beneficial interest in the Restaurant Brands Shares held by JBWere (NZ) Nominees Limited as custodian for

the Lewington Business Trust.

17

New Zealand Central Securities Depository Limited holds Restaurant Brands Shares as a custodian and bare trustee. It is not the beneficial

owner of Restaurant Brands Shares.

18

See footnote 13.

Name of Director

or Senior Manager

DescriptionNumber of Restaurant Brands

Shares held or controlled

Percentage of total

Restaurant Brands Shares

Ted van ArkelDirector160,6090 .13%

Stephen Copulos

13

Director10,630,8198.52%

David Beguely

14

Director50,0000.04%

Russel Creedy

15

Senior Manager

(Chief Executive Officer)571,6010.46%

Grant Ellis

16

Senior Manager

(Chief Financial Officer)

2 0 3 , 2110 .16 %


No other ownership of equity securities

5.2 Except as set out above, no other Director or Senior Manager, or their associates, holds or controls any equity securities

of Restaurant Brands.

Ownership interests of substantial product holders of Restaurant Brands

5.3 The table below sets out the number and the percentage of Restaurant Brands Shares held or controlled by any other

person holding or controlling 5% or more of the Restaurant Brands Shares, to the knowledge of Restaurant Brands.

The information in this table relating to New Zealand Central Securities Depository Limited is based on information as at

23 November 2018 which was provided by New Zealand Central Securities Depository Limited on 26 November 2018.

Name of substantial product holdersNumber of Restaurant Brands

Shares held or controlled

Percentage of total

Restaurant Brands Shares

New Zealand Central Securities Depository Limited

17

70,078,074 56 .17 %

Stephen Copulos

18

10,630,8198.52%

5.4 Except as set out in the table above, to Restaurant Brands’ knowledge no other person holds or controls more than 5%

of a class of equity securities of Restaurant Brands.

Issues of equity securities

5.5 Except as set out in paragraphs 5.6 to 5.8, Restaurant Brands has not, in the two year period ending on the date of this

Target Company Statement, issued any equity securities to Directors or Senior Managers or their associates.

Restaurant Brands Target Company Statement18
Performance rights

5.6 In August 2017, Restaurant Brands issued to Russel Creedy 252,000 performance rights and to Grant Ellis 126,000

performance rights. Each performance right entitled the holder to one Restaurant Brands Share if the closing price

for Restaurant Brands Shares was or exceeded NZ$10.00 for 40 consecutive trading days within a prescribed period

(if certain other conditions were satisfied) or, in the event of a takeover, at the discretion of the Board.

5.7 All performance rights vested on 4 December 2018. On that date, as recorded in the table under paragraph 5.8, Restaurant

Brands issued to Russel Creedy 252,000 Restaurant Brands Shares and to Grant Ellis 126,000 Resturant Brands Shares.

Restaurant Brands Shares

5.8 The following Shares of Restaurant Brands have, during the two year period ending on the date of this Target Company

Statement, been issued to Directors or Senior Managers or their associates.

NamePositionNumber of

Restaurant Brands

Shares issued

Reason for issueConsideration

per share

Date of

transaction

Grant EllisSenior Manager

(Chief Financial

Officer)

196Issue of Shares on

reinvestment of dividends

under Restaurant Brands’

Dividend Reinvestment Plan

NZ$7.79

19

22 June 2018

Russel CreedySenior Manager

(Chief Executive

Officer)

252,000Issue of Shares under

Restaurant Brands’

Performance Rights Plan

Nil4 December

2018

Grant EllisSenior Manager

(Chief Financial

Officer)

126,000Issue of Shares under

Restaurant Brands’

Performance Rights Plan

Nil4 December

2018

6. Trading in Restaurant Brands

6.1 Except for the Share issues disclosed in paragraph 5.8, no Director or Senior Manager (including their associates) has

acquired or disposed of any equity securities of Restaurant Brands during the six month period before ASX market close

on 28 November 2018 (being the latest practicable date before the date of this Target Company Statement).

6.2 No Restaurant Brands Shares were acquired or disposed of during the six month period before ASX market close

on 28 November 2018 (being the latest practicable date before the date of this Target Company Statement) by any

person holding or controlling 5% or more of Restaurant Brands Shares as at the date of this Target Company Statement

(excluding share acquisitions and disposals by New Zealand Central Securities Depository Limited, which holds Shares as

a custodian and bare trustee).

7. Acceptance of Offer

7.1 The table below sets out, as at the date of this Target Company Statement, the name of every Director, Senior Manager

and associate of a Director or Senior Manager who has advised Restaurant Brands that he or she intends to accept the

Offer, and the number of Restaurant Brands Shares in respect of which the person intends to accept the Offer.

Name DescriptionNumber of Restaurant Brands Shares in respect

of which the person intends to accept the Offer

Ted van ArkelDirector160,609

Stephen Copulos Director10,630,819

20

David BeguelyDirector50,000

21

19

See footnote 16. These Shares were acquired for the Lewington Business Trust. Grant Ellis has no beneficial interest in

the Restaurant Brands Shares held by JBWere (NZ) Nominees Limited as custodian for the Lewington Business Trust.

20

See footnote 13.

21

See footnote 14.

SECTION 5: TAKEOVERS CODE DISCLOSURES

19
7.2 Ted van Arkel and David Beguely intend to accept

the Offer absent a Superior Proposal which is not

matched by Global Valar.

7.3 Global Valar, Finaccess Capital, the Copulos Interests

and Stephen Copulos (who is a Director of Restaurant

Brands) have entered into a lock-in deed dated 25

November 2018 under which the Copulos Interests

agreed to accept the Offer (“Lock-in Deed”). The

Lock-in Deed is summarised in paragraphs 11.2 and

11.3. A full copy of the Lock-in Deed was attached to

the substantial product holder notice filed by Global

Valar with NZX on 26 November 2018.

8. Ownership of equity securities of Global Valar

8.1 Neither Restaurant Brands, nor any Director, Senior

Manager or any of their associates, holds or controls

any equity securities of Global Valar or any related

company of Global Valar.

9. Trading in equity securities of Global Valar

9.1 Neither Restaurant Brands, nor any Director, Senior

Manager or any of their associates, has acquired or

disposed of any equity securities of Global Valar or any

related company of Global Valar during the six month

period before ASX market close on 28 November

2018, being the latest practicable date before the

date of this Target Company Statement.

10. Arrangements between Global Valar and

Restaurant Brands

10.1 Except as set out below in this paragraph 10,

no agreement or arrangement (whether legally

enforceable or not) has been made, or is proposed

to be made, between Global Valar or any associates

of Global Valar and Restaurant Brands or any related

company of Restaurant Brands in connection with, in

anticipation of, or in response to, the Offer.

Confidentiality Agreement

10.2 On 16 July 2018, Finaccess Capital and Restaurant

Brands entered into a confidentiality agreement

under which Finaccess Capital agreed to keep

confidential information provided by Restaurant

Brands in connection with its evaluation of a potential

transaction involving the acquisition of shares.

Pre-Bid Agreement

10.3 Finaccess Capital, Global Valar and Restaurant

Brands have entered a pre-bid agreement

dated 25 November 2018 relating to the Offer

(the “Pre-Bid Agreement”). The material terms of

the Pre-Bid Agreement are as follows:

(a) Global Valar was required to:

(i) send the Takeover Notice to Restaurant Brands

not later than 8.00 am one business day after

the date of the Pre-Bid Agreement; and

(ii) make the Offer as soon as reasonably

practicable and, in any event, not later

than 20 business days after sending the

Takeover Notice.

(b) Restaurant Brands was required to:

(i) make an agreed public statement on signing

of the Pre-Bid Agreement;

(ii) prepare this Target Company Statement within

an agreed timeframe; and

(iii) procure that the Board unanimously

recommended that Shareholders accept the

Offer (subject to the consideration under the

Offer being within or above the Independent

Adviser’s valuation range for the Shares and

there being no unmatched Superior Proposal).

(c) Restaurant Brands must procure that each

Director of Restaurant Brands (other than

Stephen Copulos) accepts the Offer in respect of

any Shares which he/she owns or controls, except

where there is an unmatched Superior Proposal.

(d) Restaurant Brands must not:

(i) solicit, or engage in talks in relation to, a

competing transaction to acquire control,

or a material part of the business, of

Restaurant Brands; or

(ii) make available non-public information about

the business of Restaurant Brands to any

third party in relation to such a competing

transaction,

except in relation to an unsolicited competing

transaction where the Board determines that

a failure to engage in such talks or provide

non-public information would be likely to

constitute a breach of the fiduciary or statutory

duties owed by the Directors of Restaurant

Brands. This obligation applies from the date

of the Pre-Bid Agreement until the agreement

is terminated or Global Valar fails to match a

Superior Proposal.

(e) If a matter or circumstance arises which will, or is

likely to, result in a breach or non-satisfaction of

certain conditions in clause 5.4 of the terms of

the Offer, Global Valar must not invoke its right to

terminate the Pre-Bid Agreement for such breach

or non-satisfaction of those conditions unless

SECTION 5: TAKEOVERS CODE DISCLOSURES

Restaurant Brands Target Company Statement20
they remain breached or unsatisfied for a period

of two business days after Global Valar’s notice

of breach.

(f) In relation to the condition in clause 5.2 of the

terms of the Offer (Overseas Investment Office

consent):

(i) Global Valar and Restaurant Brands will

co-operate with one another in relation to

obtaining the consent under the Overseas

Investment Act 2005; and

(ii) Global Valar will not withhold its approval to

the terms of any consent or conditions of

consent granted by the Overseas Investment

Office (“OIO”) if the terms and conditions

imposed are the standard terms or conditions

of consent available on the OIO website as

at the date of the Pre-Bid Agreement.

(g) Restaurant Brands must notify Global Valar

if Restaurant Brands receives a competing

transaction (including any inquiries to initiate

negotiations or requests for non-public

information that could lead to a competing

transaction).

(h) Restaurant Brands must provide Global Valar with

the opportunity to match any Superior Proposal,

which will be duly considered by the Board of

Restaurant Brands.

(i) Restaurant Brands must pay Global Valar a

reimbursement sum of NZ$7,000,000 (plus

GST, if any) where:

(i)

Restaurant Brands fails to issue the public

statement referred to in paragraph (b)(i) above;

(ii) any Director of Restaurant Brands fails to

recommend the Offer, makes other adverse

comments in relation to the Offer or (other

than Stephen Copulos) fails to accept this

Offer, other than as a result of:

(A) the Independent Adviser concluding that

the consideration under this Offer does

not fall within or above its valuation range

for the Shares;

(B) a failure of any of the conditions set out in

clauses 5.2 (Overseas Investment Office

consent), 5.3 (Yum! consent) or 5.4(q)

(No restraining orders) of the terms of the

Offer Terms; or

(C) Global Valar breaching the Pre-Bid

Agreement;

(iii) a competing transaction is announced prior

to the closing of the Offer and is successfully

implemented within 12 months of that

announcement;

(iv) Restaurant Brands, with the intention of

frustrating this Offer, solicits or encourages a

person to acquire 10% or more of the Shares

and that person does not accept the Offer;

(v) the Pre-Bid Agreement is terminated

after Global Valar fails to match a Superior

Proposal; or

(vi) any of the Copulos Interests fail to accept the

Offer in accordance with the Lock-in Deed.

(j) Restaurant Brands is not required to pay a

reimbursement sum to Global Valar if the Offer

becomes unconditional.

(k) Global Valar was required to pay Restaurant

Brands a reimbursement sum of NZ$7,000,000

(plus GST, if any) if it failed to give the Takeover

Notice or make the Offer in accordance with the

Pre-Bid Agreement.

(l) Global Valar must pay to Restaurant Brands

a reimbursement sum of NZ$7,000,000 (plus GST,

if any) if it fails to meet its payment obligations to

Shareholders under the Offer.

(m) Global Valar will not delist Restaurant Brands

from the NZX or ASX within 12 months after

completion of this Offer, except where Global

Valar becomes entitled to compulsorily acquire

the remaining Restaurant Brands Shares

under Part 7 of the Takeovers Code as a result

of a takeover offer which complies with the

requirements summarised in paragraph (n).

(n) If Global Valar makes a further takeover offer

for Restaurant Brands within 12 months after

completion of this Offer (“Follow-On Offer”), the

offer price of the Follow-On Offer must be at least

NZ$9.45 per Share, subject to an adjustment on

a pro-rata basis to reflect any decline or increase

(if any) in the S&P/NZX 50 index between the

date of completion of this Offer and the date that

Global Valar gives the notice of intention for the

Follow-On Offer.

(o) Restaurant Brands has agreed to waive all

of its rights, and not make any claim against,

any director, shareholder, officer, employee or

representative of Finaccess Capital and each

of its related companies, in connection with any

breach of any representations, covenants, and

warranties of Finaccess Capital (and any member

of the Finaccess group) in the Pre-Bid Agreement,

SECTION 5: TAKEOVERS CODE DISCLOSURES

21
or any other act or omission in connection with

the Pre-Bid Agreement or the Offer, except in the

case of wilful misconduct or fraud.

(p) Finaccess Capital guarantees the obligations of

Global Valar under the Pre-Bid Agreement.

Disclosure Letter

10.4 Restaurant Brands and Global Valar have signed

a disclosure letter dated 25 November 2018 relating

to the ability of Restaurant Brands to make fair

disclosures to Global Valar in relation to certain

conditions set out in clause 5.4 of the terms of the

Offer and for the purposes of relevant corresponding

provisions of the Pre-Bid Agreement.

Yum! Consent Letter

10.5 Kentucky Fried Chicken International Holdings LLC,

Pizza Hut International LLC and Taco Bell Corp.,

Finaccess Capital and Restaurant Brands have

entered into a letter agreement dated 19 November

2018 under which the Yum! Franchisors gave

conditional consent to the acquisition by Global Valar

of up to 75% of the Restaurant Brands Shares under

the Offer (the “Yum! Consent Letter”).

10.6 The consent of the Yum! Franchisors in the Yum!

Consent Letter is conditional on:

(a) the satisfaction of the Yum! Franchisors’

franchisee due diligence requirements in respect

of Global Valar and Finaccess Capital; and

(b) Finaccess Capital and Restaurant Brands entering

into formal agreements relating to the ownership

of Restaurant Brands, and the operation and

development of Restaurant Brands’ KFC, Pizza

Hut and Taco Bell businesses after completion

of this Offer.

10.7 The key requirements for the formal agreements

contemplated by the Yum! Consent Letter are

summarised in paragraphs 3.13 to 3.16 and 7.2 to 7.4

of Section 3 of this Target Company Statement.

11. Relationship between Global Valar and

Directors and Senior Managers of

Restaurant  Brands

11.1 Except as set out in this paragraph 11, no agreement

or arrangement (whether legally enforceable or not)

has been made, or is proposed to be made, between

Global Valar and any associates of Global Valar, and

any Director or Senior Manager of Restaurant Brands

or any related company of Restaurant Brands in

connection with, in anticipation of, or in response to,

the Offer.

Lock-in Deed

11.2 Under the Lock-in Deed each of the Copulos

Interests has irrevocably agreed to accept, and

Stephen Copulos has irrevocably agreed to procure

that each of the Copulos Interests accept, the Offer

in respect of:

(a) the Shares held (directly or indirectly) by each

of the Copulos Interests as at the date of the

Lock-in Deed (being, in aggregate, 10,630,819

Shares, which represent 8.52% of the Shares on

issue); and

(b) any other Shares acquired by Stephen Copulos

and/or any of the Copulos Interests on or after

the date of the Lock-in Deed,

(together, the “Copulos Shares”).

11.3 The material terms of the Lock-in Deed are as follows:

(a) Subject to the Offer being made by Global Valar

on the terms attached to the Lock-in Deed,

the Copulos Interests must accept the Offer in

respect of all of the Copulos Shares.

(b) The Copulos Interests must accept the Offer by

the later of the date which is two working days

after date of despatch of the Offer and the date

on which the Offer is received by the Copulos

Interests. The Copulos Interests may delay their

acceptance of the Offer for up to seven working

days if Restaurant Brands announces that it has

received a Superior Proposal and has provided

Global Valar with an opportunity to match it.

(c) Acceptance of the Offer by the Copulos Interests

is subject to the condition that the Directors of

Restaurant Brands do not withdraw or qualify

their recommendation that all Restaurant Brands

Shareholders accept the Offer or the Directors

of Restaurant Brands otherwise indicate that

Restaurant Brands Shareholders should not

accept the Offer.

(d) None of Stephen Copulos or the Copulos Interests

will dispose of, encumber or deal in any way with

any of the Copulos Shares (or any interest in them),

except to accept this Offer.

(e) None of Stephen Copulos or the Copulos

Interests will:

(i) enter into any discussions or negotiations

relating to the possible disposal of the

Copulos Shares or provide any information

of any nature to a third party for the

purposes of encouraging or facilitating

a competing transaction;

SECTION 5: TAKEOVERS CODE DISCLOSURES

Restaurant Brands Target Company Statement22
(ii) make any public statement indicating a lack

of support for, or endorsement of, the Offer

or supporting, recommending or endorsing

a different transaction to the Offer; or

(iii) directly or indirectly, engage in, initiate, solicit,

continue or encourage any proposals or

approaches or offers from, or discussions or

negotiations with, any person in relation to a

competing transaction.

(f) The restrictions summarised in paragraph (e) do

not prevent Stephen Copulos from taking certain

actions in his capacity as a Director of Restaurant

Brands, provided that such actions do not breach

the Pre-Bid Agreement.

(g) The Lock-in Deed may be terminated by the

Copulos Interests if the Directors of Restaurant

Brands withdraw or qualify their recommendation

that all Restaurant Brands Shareholders accept

the Offer or the Directors of Restaurant Brands

otherwise indicate that Restaurant Brands

Shareholders should not accept the Offer.

(h) The Lock-in Deed will automatically terminate if:

(i) the Offer lapses; or

(ii) the Offer is withdrawn in accordance with

the Takeovers Code.

(i) Each of the Copulos Interests may exercise

and/or control the exercise of all voting rights

(as defined in the Takeovers Code) attached

to their respective Copulos Shares in whatever

manner it sees fit until such time as the Offer

is declared unconditional.

Pre-Bid Agreement

11.4 Under the Pre-Bid Agreement, Global Valar and

Finaccess Capital have agreed:

(a) to ensure that, for seven years after the closing

date of the Offer, the constitutions of Restaurant

Brands and its subsidiaries provide for each

company to indemnify each of its current and

former directors and officers for liability incurred

by that person in his or her capacity as a director

or officer of the company;

(b) that, prior to the closing date of the Offer,

Restaurant Brands was, with Finaccess Capital’s

prior consent (not to be unreasonably withheld),

permitted to enter into arrangements to secure

directors’ and officers’ run-off insurance for a

period of up to seven years from the closing date

and pay all premiums required;

(c) each of Finaccess Capital and Global Valar has

agreed to waive all of its rights, and not make any

claim against, the Directors and employees (which

would include the Senior Managers) of Restaurant

Brands, or any related company of Restaurant

Brands in connection with any breach of the

Pre-Bid Agreement or any other act or omission

in connection with the Pre-Bid Agreement or

the Offer, except in the case of wilful misconduct

or fraud.

11.5 The Directors and Senior Managers of Restaurant

Brands are not parties to the Pre-Bid Agreement.

However, they are able to personally enforce the

provisions summarised in paragraph 11.4 under

the Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017.

Yum! Consent Letter

11.6 The Yum! Consent Letter contemplates that Global

Valar will use commercially reasonable endeavours

to ensure that Russel Creedy is retained as Chief

Executive Officer of the Restaurant Brands group for

at least three years following completion of the Offer.

12. Agreement between Restaurant Brands and

its Directors and Senior Managers

12.1 Except as set out in this paragraph 12, no agreement

or arrangement (whether legally enforceable or

not) has been made, or is proposed to be made,

between Restaurant Brands or any related company

of Restaurant Brands and any Directors, Senior

Managers, or their associates, of Restaurant Brands or

its related companies, under which a payment or other

benefit may be made or given by way of compensation

for loss of office, or as to their remaining in or retiring

from office in connection with, in anticipation of, or in

response to, the Offer.

Performance rights vesting letters

12.2 On 25 November 2018, Restaurant Brands entered

into letter agreements with each of Russel Creedy

(Restaurant Brands’ Chief Executive Officer) and Grant

Ellis (Restaurant Brands’ Chief Financial Officer) under

which Restaurant Brands agreed that performance

SECTION 5: TAKEOVERS CODE DISCLOSURES

23
rights previously issued to each executive would vest,

and Restaurant Brands would issue Shares to each

executive, if Global Valar gave the Takeover Notice

and if the relevant executive remained employed by

Restaurant Brands on the record date for the Offer.

12.3 Further background to, and terms of, the letter

agreements are summarised in paragraphs 23.5

to 23.9.

Run-off insurance

12.4 On 25 November 2018, the Board of Restaurant

Brands approved run-off insurance cover, for a period

of seven years, for Directors and Senior Managers.

Directors’ fees

12.5 It is intended that an aggregate sum of NZ$20,000

will be allocated from the existing total pool

of directors’ fees (currently NZ$475,000 per

annum – as approved by shareholders at the most

recent Annual Shareholders’ Meeting) to pay each

Independent Director an ad hoc fee to reflect

the significant increase in Independent Director

workload in connection with the Offer.

13. Interests of Directors and Senior Managers

of Restaurant Brands in contracts of Global

Valar or its related companies

13.1 Except as set out in paragraph 11 above, no Director

or Senior Manager, or their associates, has an

interest in any contract to which Global Valar, or any

related company of Global Valar, is a party. Except

as set out in paragraph 13A.2, Restaurant Brands

is unable to quantify the monetary value of the

interests described in paragraph 11.

13A. Interests of Restaurant Brands’ substantial

security holders in material contracts of

Global Valar or its related companies

13A.1 Other than the Lock-in Deed described in paragraph

11 above, no person who, to the knowledge of the

Directors or the Senior Managers holds or controls

5% or more of any class of equity securities of

Restaurant Brands, has an interest in any material

contract to which Global Valar, or any related

company of Global Valar, is a party.

13A.2 If the Copulos Interests accept the Offer for all of

their Restaurant Brands Shares, as required to do

so by the Lock-in Deed, and sell 75% of the Shares

held by the Copulos Interests at NZ$9.45 per Share

under the Offer, the Copulos Interests will receive, in

aggregate, NZ$75,345,929.

13A.3 Restaurant Brands is unable to quantify

the monetary value of the other aspects of the

Lock-in Deed.

14. Additional information

14.1 In the opinion of Restaurant Brands’ Directors

and to the best of their knowledge, no additional

information is required to make that information in

the Offer Document correct or not misleading.

15. Recommendation

15.1 Your Directors unanimously recommend that

Shareholders ACCEPT the Offer for all of their

Shares in the absence of a Superior Proposal which

Global Valar does not match. Accepting the Offer for

all of your Shares maximises your opportunity to sell

Shares under the Offer.

15.2 The details of the Directors’ recommendation, and

reasons for it, are set out in the Chairman’s Letter

and Sections 1 and 2 of this Target Company

Statement. Further factors which influenced the

Directors’ recommendation are set out in Sections

3 and 4, and in the Independent Adviser’s Report.

You are encouraged to read each of those Sections

and the Independent Adviser’s Report carefully and

in full.

15.3 Before deciding whether to accept the Offer,

you should also consider your own individual

circumstances, views on value and the merits of

the Offer and investment time horizons.

15.4 If you have any questions, you are encouraged to

seek your own independent financial, taxation or

legal advice.

15.5 Your Directors’ interests in Restaurant Brands Shares

are disclosed in paragraph 5 above.

SECTION 5: TAKEOVERS CODE DISCLOSURES

Restaurant Brands Target Company Statement24
16. Actions of Restaurant Brands

16.1 Except for the arrangements summarised in

paragraph 10 above, there are no material

agreements or arrangements (whether legally

enforceable or not) of Restaurant Brands or any

related company of Restaurant Brands entered

into as a consequence of, in response to, or in

connection with, the Offer.

16.2 There are no negotiations underway as a

consequence of, in response to, or in connection

with, the Offer that relate to, or could result in:

(a) an extraordinary transaction, such as a merger,

amalgamation or reorganisation, involving

Restaurant Brands or any of its related

companies;

(b) the acquisition or disposition of material assets

by Restaurant Brands or any of its related

companies;

(c) an acquisition of equity securities by, or

of, Restaurant Brands or any of its related

companies; or

(d) any material change in the issued equity

securities of Restaurant Brands, or the

policy of the Restaurant Brands Board

relating to distributions of Restaurant Brands.

For discussion of Restaurant Brands’ dividend

policy after completion of the Offer, see

paragraph 4 of Section 3 of this Target

Company Statement.

17. Equity securities of Restaurant Brands

17.1 As at the date of this Target Company Statement,

Restaurant Brands has 124,758,523 Restaurant

Brands Shares on issue. All Restaurant Brands Shares

are fully paid.

17.2 Restaurant Brands has no options, or rights to acquire

equity securities, on issue.

17.3 Subject to certain conditions in the constitution of

Restaurant Brands and the NZX Listing Rules and

the ASX Listing Rules, each Restaurant Brands Share

confers upon the holder the right to:

(a) an equal share in dividends authorised by the

Restaurant Brands Board;

(b) an equal share in the distribution of surplus assets

on liquidation of Restaurant Brands;

(c) participate in certain further issues of equity

securities by Restaurant Brands; and

(d) cast one vote on a show of hands or the right to

cast one vote per share on a poll, at a meeting

of Shareholders on any resolution, including a

resolution to:

(i) appoint or remove a director or auditor;

(ii) alter Restaurant Brands’ constitution;

(iii) approve a major transaction;

(iv) approve an amalgamation involving Restaurant

Brands; and

(v) put Restaurant Brands into liquidation.

18. Financial information

18.1 Every person to whom the Offer is made is entitled

to obtain from Restaurant Brands a non-electronic

copy of Restaurant Brands’ most recent annual report

(being the annual report for the 52-week period

ended 26 February 2018) and half-year report (being

the half-year report for the 28-week period ended

10 September 2018) by making a written request to:

Restaurant Brands New Zealand Limited

PO Box 22-749

Otahuhu

Auckland

New Zealand

18.2 An electronic copy of the annual report and half-year

report is also available on Restaurant Brands’ website

at http://www.restaurantbrands.co.nz/.

Forfeiture of Australian tax losses

18.3 If the Offer is successful, all of the Restaurant Brands

group’s Australian carried forward revenue losses will

be forfeited and it is likely that all of, or the majority

of, the Restaurant Brands group’s Australian carried

forward capital losses will be forfeited. This will mean

those losses will not be available to set-off against

future income or capital gains.

18.4 Australian carried forward capital losses can only

be set-off against future capital gains. Australian

carried forward revenue losses and the majority of 

the Australian carried forward capital losses are

ring-fenced to one Australian group company and

there is currently limited ability to utilise those losses.

No other information

18.5 Other than as set out in this Target Company

Statement and the Independent Adviser’s Report:

(a) there have been no known material changes

in the financial or trading position, or prospects,

of Restaurant Brands since the 2018 annual

report; and

SECTION 5: TAKEOVERS CODE DISCLOSURES

25
(b) there is no other information about the assets,

liabilities, profitability and financial affairs of

Restaurant Brands that could reasonably be

expected to be material to the making of a

decision by Shareholders to accept or reject

the Offer.

19. Independent advice on merits of the Offer

19.1 Grant Samuel & Associates Limited is the Independent

Adviser who has provided a report under rule 21 of

the Takeover Code (“Independent Adviser’s Report”)

in relation to the merits of the Offer. A copy of the full

Independent Adviser’s Report is set out in Appendix B

to this Target Company Statement.

20. Asset valuations

20.1 No information provided in this Target Company

Statement refers to a valuation of any asset of

Restaurant Brands.

21. Prospective financial information

21.1 The Independent Adviser’s Report contains

prospective financial information in relation to

Restaurant Brands. The principal assumptions on

which the prospective financial information is based

are set out in the Independent Adviser’s Report.

21.2 In considering the prospective financial information

contained in the Independent Adviser’s Report, you

should note that the information was prepared for

internal management purposes only. It was not

prepared for, or with the intention of giving, public

guidance as to Restaurant Brands’ future financial

performance. Accordingly, the basis of preparation of

the prospective financial information, while appropriate

for internal management purposes, may differ from

the basis which would be adopted when prepared for

external reporting purposes.

21.3 Other than the prospective financial information

referred to above, this Target Company Statement

does not refer to any other prospective financial

information about Restaurant Brands.

22. Sales of unquoted equity securities under

the Offer

22.1 There are no unquoted equity securities that are

subject to the Offer.

23. Market prices for quoted equity securities

under the Offer

Market prices

23.1 The Restaurant Brands Shares are quoted on the

NZX Main Board and ASX.

23.2 The closing price on the NZX Main Board and ASX

of Restaurant Brands Shares on:

(a) 28 November 2018, being the latest practicable

working day before the date on which this Target

Company Statement is sent by Restaurant Brands,

was NZ$8.53 on the NZX Main Board and

AU$7.33 on the ASX; and

(b) 23 November 2018, being the last day on which

NZX and ASX was open for business before the

date on which Restaurant Brands received the

Takeover Notice, was NZ$8.45 on the NZX Main

Board and AU$7.26 on the ASX.

23.3 The highest and lowest closing market prices of

Restaurant Brands Shares on the NZX Main Board

and ASX (and the relevant dates) during the six

months before 23 November 2018 (being the last day

on which NZX and ASX was open for business before

the date on which Restaurant Brands received the

Takeover Notice), were as follows:

(a) the highest closing market price of Restaurant

Brands Shares was NZ$8.70 on the NZX Main

Board on 5 November 2018 and AU$8.05 on

the ASX on 22 June 2018; and

(b) the lowest closing market price of Restaurant

Brands Shares was NZ$7.37 on the NZX Main

Board on 15 October 2018 and AU$6.89 on

the ASX on 13 August 2018.

Dividend and Dividend Reinvestment Plan

23.4 On 22 June 2018 Restaurant Brands paid a final

dividend for the 52-week period ended 26 February

2018 of NZ$0.18 per Share and issued 751,180

Restaurant Brands Shares under its Dividend

Reinvestment Plan.

Vesting of performance rights

23.5 On 28 August 2017, Restaurant Brands announced

that it had established a Performance Rights

Plan for Russel Creedy and Grant Ellis. Under the

Performance Rights Plan Restaurant Brands issued

to Russel Creedy 252,000 performance rights and to

Grant Ellis 126,000 performance rights.

SECTION 5: TAKEOVERS CODE DISCLOSURES

Restaurant Brands Target Company Statement26
Each performance right entitled the holder to

one Restaurant Brands Share if the closing price

for Restaurant Brands Shares was or exceeded

NZ$10.00 for 40 consecutive trading days within

a prescribed period (if certain other conditions

were satisfied).

23.6 Under the terms of the performance rights, the

Board of Restaurant Brands had the discretion to

take certain actions if there was a change of control

transaction, including early vesting. The Offer, if

completed, will be a change of control transaction.

23.7 Accordingly, the Board of Restaurant Brands has

resolved to exercise its discretion and deemed the

performance rights to have vested on 4 December

2018. On that date, Restaurant Brands issued to

Russel Creedy 252,000 Restaurant Brands Shares

and to Grant Ellis 126,000 Resturant Brands Shares.

23.8 Russel Creedy and Grant Ellis have each agreed with

Restaurant Brands that:

(a) they will not deal with their Shares during the

Offer period, except to accept the Offer, and will

not deal with any remaining Shares for 10 trading

days after completion of the Offer;

(b) if the Offer is not completed or if Russel Creedy

or Grant Ellis ceases to be an employee of

Restaurant Brands prior to completion of the

Offer, Russel Creedy or Grant Ellis (as applicable)

must:

(i) transfer his Shares (less any Shares sold under

the Offer, if applicable) back to Restaurant

Brands for no consideration; and

(ii) if he sells Shares under the Offer, pay the

gross proceeds of sale to Restaurant Brands;

and

(c) if the Offer is completed and Russel Creedy

or Grant Ellis ceases to be an employee of

Restaurant Brands within 10 trading days

after completion of the Offer, Russel Creedy

or Grant Ellis (as applicable) must transfer his

remaining Shares back to Restaurant Brands

for no consideration.

23.9 The restrictions summarised in paragraph 23.8 only

apply to Shares issued to Russel Creedy and Grant

Ellis as a result of the vesting of their respective

performance rights.

No other distributions or changes to equity securities

23.10 Other than:

(a) the dividend referred to in paragraph 23.4;

(b) the issue of Restaurant Brands Shares under

the Dividend Reinvestment Plan referred to in

paragraph 23.4; and

(c) the issue of Shares to Russel Creedy and Grant

Ellis under the Performance Rights Plan,

during the six month period before 23 November

2018 (being the last day on which NZX and

ASX was open for business before the date on

which Restaurant Brands received the Takeover

Notice), Restaurant Brands did not issue any

equity securities, make any changes to any equity

securities on issue, or make any distributions, which

could have affected the market prices of Restaurant

Brands Shares.

Imputation credits

23.11 If the Offer is successful, Restaurant Brands will lose

the balance of imputation credits in its imputation

credit account. This may reduce Restaurant Brands’

ability to pay dividends to Shareholders in a tax

effective manner (i.e. by attaching imputation credits

to dividends paid) in the short to medium term.

No other information

23.12 Except as set out in this Target Company Statement,

there is no other information about the market price

of Restaurant Brands Shares that would reasonably

be expected to be material to the making of a

decision by Shareholders when making a decision

to accept or reject the Offer.

24. Other information

Partial offer

24.1 The Offer is a partial takeover offer for up to 75% of

the Restaurant Brands Shares. Global Valar cannot

acquire more than 75% of the Restaurant Brands

Shares under the Offer. If Global Valar receives

acceptances for more than 75% of the Restaurant

Brands Shares, acceptances will be scaled in

accordance with the Takeovers Code. Accordingly,

there is a reasonable prospect that you will remain

a Shareholder after completion of the Offer, even if

you accept the Offer for all of your Shares.

SECTION 5: TAKEOVERS CODE DISCLOSURES

27
SIGNED by:

Ted van ArkelHamish Stevens

Russel CreedyGrant Ellis

24.2 If all Shareholders accept the Offer for all of their

Restaurant Brands Shares, each Shareholder will, at

completion of the Offer, sell 75% of their Restaurant

Brands Shares and retain 25% of their Restaurant

Brands Shares.

Rounding

24.3 All percentages referred to in this Target Company

Statement are rounded to two decimal places unless

otherwise stated.

Minimum acceptance condition

24.4 If Global Valar waives the 75% minimum acceptance

condition to the Offer, the Offer is conditional on

Global Valar receiving acceptances for more than

50% of Restaurant Brands’ Shares. However, for

the sake of simplicity, this has been reflected in

this Target Company Statement as 50.01% of the

Restaurant Brands Shares.

Reliance on Information

24.5 In preparing this Target Company Statement,

Restaurant Brands has relied on the completeness

and accuracy of information provided to it by or

on behalf of various persons, including Finaccess

Capital, Global Valar and New Zealand Central

Securities Depository Limited.

25. Approval of Target Company Statement

25.1 This Target Company Statement has been unanimously

approved by the Directors.

26. Certificate

26.1 To the best of our knowledge and belief, after

making proper enquiry, the information contained

in or accompanying this Target Company Statement

is, in all material respects, true and correct and not

misleading, whether by omission of any information or

otherwise, and includes all the information required

to be disclosed by Restaurant Brands under the

Takeovers Code.

SECTION 5: TAKEOVERS CODE DISCLOSURES

Restaurant Brands Target Company Statement28
APPENDIX A: HOW SCALING WORKS – SA WORKED EXAMPLE

When is the Offer subject to scaling?

The Offer is a partial takeover offer to purchase 75%

of all of the Restaurant Brands Shares on issue. If the

Offer is declared unconditional, Global Valar will acquire

up to 93,568,893 Restaurant Brands Shares (75% of

124,758,523, assuming no Share are issued prior to

completion of the Offer).

If Global Valar receives acceptances for between 50.01%

and 75% of the Restaurant Brands Shares and the

Offer becomes unconditional, Global Valar will acquire all

Restaurant Brands Shares that have been accepted into the

Offer. Acceptances of the Offer will not be subject to scaling.

If Global Valar receives acceptances for more than

93,568,893 Restaurant Brands Shares (more than 75%

of the Restaurant Brands Shares) and the Offer becomes

unconditional, acceptances of the Offer will be scaled. Under

the Takeovers Code a two-step process is applied to calculate

any necessary scaling, as summarised in this Appendix A.

A Shareholder who accepts the Offer for only 75% of

its shareholding (or for a lesser number of Restaurant

Brands Shares) will not be subject to any scaling if the

Offer is successful.

Description of two-step scaling mechanism

Step 1

At Step 1, Global Valar must take up from each accepting

Shareholder the lessor of:

• 75% of all of the Restaurant Brands Shares held by that

accepting Shareholder; or

• the full number of Restaurant Brands Shares for which

that shareholder accepted the Offer, where that number

is equal to or less than 75% of the Shareholder’s total

shareholding.

At the end of the Step 1 calculations, Global Valar is

then able to determine the total number of Restaurant

Brands Shares still required to achieve 75% ownership

of Restaurant Brands (being 93,475,337 Restaurant

Brands Shares).

Example: At the time of scaling, Restaurant Brands will

have 124,758,523 Restaurant Brands Shares on issue.

If Shareholders accepted the Offer for 100,000,000

Restaurant Brands Shares (assuming that every

accepting Shareholder accepts the Offer in respect

of all of their Restaurant Brands Shares), 75,000,000

Restaurant Brands Shares will be acquired under the

Step 1 calculations (being 75% of the 100,000,000),

with a further 18,568,893 Restaurant Brands Shares still

being required to achieve a shareholding of 93,568,893

Restaurant Brands Shares.

Step 2

At Step 2, Global Valar determines:

• the number of Restaurant Brands Shares for which it

received acceptances which were not taken up at Step 1

(the “Surplus Shares”); and

• the total number of additional Restaurant Brands Shares

it needs to take up in order to achieve 75% ownership of

the Restaurant Brands Shares.

The additional Restaurant Brands Shares referred to above

are acquired from the Shareholders who accepted the

Offer for more than 75% of their Restaurant Brands Shares

(termed “Surplus Acceptors”).

Global Valar will take up Restaurant Brands Shares from

each Surplus Acceptor on a proportionate basis relative

to the total number of Surplus Shares. That proportion is

calculated as follows:

(Total number of Restaurant Brands Shares

required to achieve 75% ownership post Step 1)

(Total number of Surplus Shares)

Example: Shareholders accepted the Offer for

100,000,000 Restaurant Brands Shares (assuming that

every accepting Shareholder accepted the Offer for all of

their Restaurant Brands Shares), and Global Valar took up

75,000,000 Restaurant Brands Shares at Step 1. This left

25,000,000 Surplus Shares held by Surplus Acceptors.

Accordingly, the proportion of each Surplus Acceptor’s

Surplus Shares taken up by Global Valar at Step 2 is

calculated as follows:

18,568,893

= 74.28%

(100,000,000-75,000,000)

Therefore, Global Valar must take up from each Surplus

Acceptor 74.28% (rounded to two decimal places) of that

Surplus Acceptor’s Surplus Shares.

In this example, assuming a Shareholder accepts the

Offer for its entire shareholding of 1,000 Restaurant

Brands Shares, that shareholder will have 750 Restaurant

Brands Shares acquired at Step One, and a further 185

Restaurant Brands Shares acquired in Step Two (rounded

down to the nearest Share). That Shareholder would then

be left with 65 Restaurant Brands Shares following the

close of the Offer.

Appendix A:

How scaling works – a worked example

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT
Appendix B:

Independent Adviser’s Report

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





RESTAURANT BRANDS NEW ZEALAND LIMITED


INDEPENDENT REPORT IN RELATION TO THE TAKEOVER OFFER FROM

FINACCESS CAPITAL

Grant Samuel confirms that it:


§ has no conflict of interest that could affect its ability to provide an unbiased report; and

§ has no direct or indirect pecuniary or other interest in the proposed transaction considered in this report, including

any success or contingency fee or remuneration, other than to receive the cash fee for providing this report.


Grant Samuel has satisfied the Takeovers Panel, on the basis of the material provided to the Panel, that it is independent

under the Takeovers Code for the purposes of preparing this report.





GRANT SAMUEL & ASSOCIATES LIMITED


NOVEMBER 2018

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT




TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 Executive Summary ______________________________________________________________________ 1

2 Terms of the Offer _______________________________________________________________________ 4

2.1 Background _______________________________________________________________________ 4

2.2 Finaccess Capital ___________________________________________________________________ 5

3 Scope of the Report ______________________________________________________________________ 7

3.1 Purpose of the Report _______________________________________________________________ 7

3.2 Basis of Evaluation _________________________________________________________________ 7

3.3 Approach to Valuation ______________________________________________________________ 8

4 Overview of the Global Fast Food Restaurants Industry __________________________________________ 9

4.1 Overview of Global Market ___________________________________________________________ 9

4.2 Overview of Major Global Fast Food Restaurant Chains ___________________________________ 10

4.3 Overview of Brands Franchised by Restaurant Brands New Zealand _________________________ 12

5 Profile of Restaurant Brands _______________________________________________________________ 16

5.1 Overview of Operations ____________________________________________________________ 16

5.2 Background and History ____________________________________________________________ 16

5.3 Consolidated Financial Performance __________________________________________________ 17

5.4 Financial Performance by Division ____________________________________________________ 20

5.5 Financial Position _________________________________________________________________ 22

5.6 Cash Flow _______________________________________________________________________ 23

5.7 Capital Structure and Ownership _____________________________________________________ 24

5.8 Share Price Performance ___________________________________________________________ 24

6 Valuation of Restaurant Brands ____________________________________________________________ 26

6.1 Methodology _____________________________________________________________________ 26

6.2 Summary ________________________________________________________________________ 26

6.3 Earnings Multiple Analysis __________________________________________________________ 29

7 Merits of the Global Valar Offer ____________________________________________________________ 34

7.1 The value of the Global Valar Offer ___________________________________________________ 34

7.2 The timing and circumstances surrounding the Offer _____________________________________ 35

7.3 Outcomes of the Global Valar Offer ___________________________________________________ 35

7.4 Implications for RBD Shareholders if the Global Valar Offer is Successful _____________________ 37

7.5 Other Merits of the Global Valar Offer _________________________________________________ 37

7.6 Risks and Benefits of an investment in RBD _____________________________________________ 38

7.7 Other Factors ____________________________________________________________________ 39

7.8 Likelihood of alternative offers _______________________________________________________ 40

7.9 Acceptance or rejection of the Global Valar Offer ________________________________________ 40

APPENDIX A - Qualifications, Declarations and Consents _________________________________________ 41

APPENDIX B – Recent Transaction Evidence ___________________________________________________ 44

APPENDIX C – Comparable Listed Companies __________________________________________________ 49

APPENDIX D – Valuation Methodology Descriptions ____________________________________________ 60

APPENDIX E – Interpretation of Multiples _____________________________________________________ 63







RESTAURANT BRANDS NEW ZEALAND LIMITED


INDEPENDENT REPORT IN RELATION TO THE TAKEOVER OFFER FROM

FINACCESS CAPITAL

Grant Samuel confirms that it:


§ has no conflict of interest that could affect its ability to provide an unbiased report; and

§ has no direct or indirect pecuniary or other interest in the proposed transaction considered in this report, including

any success or contingency fee or remuneration, other than to receive the cash fee for providing this report.


Grant Samuel has satisfied the Takeovers Panel, on the basis of the material provided to the Panel, that it is independent

under the Takeovers Code for the purposes of preparing this report.





GRANT SAMUEL & ASSOCIATES LIMITED


NOVEMBER 2018

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT




GLOSSARY

TERM DEFINITION

Code The Takeovers Code

Companies Act Companies Act 1993

DCF Discounted Cash Flow

EBIT Earnings before interest and tax

EBITDA Earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation

Finaccess Capital

Finaccess Capital, S.A.d.e.C.V

Global Valar Global Valar S.L.

FY15 Financial year ended 2 March 2015

FY16 Financial year ended 29 February 2016

FY17 Financial year ended 27 February 2017

FY18 Financial year ended 26 February 2018

FY19F Forecast for the financial year ending 25 February 2019

Grant Samuel Grant Samuel and Associates Limited

OIO

Overseas Investment Office

RBD

Restaurant Brands New Zealand Limited















APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





1

1 Executive Summary

On 26 November 2018 Restaurant Brands New Zealand Limited (RBD) announced that it had received a notice

of intention to make a Takeover Offer from Finaccess Capital, S.A.de C.V (Finaccess Capital) to acquire up to

75% of the issued capital of RBD for a cash consideration of $9.45 cash per share (the Offer). Global Valar

S.L. (Global Valar), a subsidiary of Finaccess Capital, is the acquirer under the Offer. Global Valar has signalled

that it does not want 100% or for the company to be de-listed at this time.

The Offer is conditional on Global Valar receiving acceptances sufficient for it to control 75% of the voting

rights in RBD. This condition may be waived by Global Valar provided it has received acceptances sufficient

for it to control at least 50.01 % of the voting rights in RBD.

The possible outcomes of the Offer are:

Global Valar achieves acceptances less than 50.01%.

In this circumstance no shares will be acquired by Global Valar and the shareholding structure of RBD will

remain unchanged. If Global Valar is not successful in achieving the 50.01% minimum threshold at its current

offer price it may or may not choose to increase the offer price. If Global Valar chooses to increase its current

offer price while the Global Valar Offer is still open, the increased value will be available to all shareholders

even if they have already accepted the current offer price. Any increased price would also be available to

the locked up shareholders.

Global Valar achieves acceptances greater than 50.01% but less than 75%

In these circumstances assuming the Offer becomes unconditional:

§ Global Valar will proceed to acquire all of the shares that have been accepted into the Glob al Valar Offer.

Accepting shareholders will not be subject to scaling or pro-rata adjustment of their acceptances. Global

Valar will become the cornerstone shareholder in RBD with a shareholding of between 50.01% and 75%.

The final percentage owned by Global Valar will be a function of the level of acceptances from all

shareholders. The liquidity of RBD shares will be reduced, and the free float will be reduced. The closer

the Global Valar shareholding approaches the 75% limit, the more the liquidity in RBD shares will

contract;

§ At a shareholding of between 50.01% and 75% Global Valar would have effective but not absolute

control of RBD. Global Valar would be able to control the Board and therefore key decisions affecting

the business such as strategy, dividend policy, appointment of Directors, acquisitions and divestments

and capital programmes. With a shareholding greater than 50% Global Valar would be able to dictate

the outcome of ordinary resolutions put to shareholders, unless it is disqualified from voting under NZX

Listing Rules or the Takeovers Code. It would not be able to control but would have significant influence

over special resolutions (those resolutions requiring 75% of votes cast in respect of the resolution).

Special resolutions often relate to transformational events such as major transactions or changes to the

constitution. There are protections for minority shareholders in the NZX Listing Rules and the

Companies Act; and

§ RBD must continue to have at least two independent directors on the board of RBD. Global Valar will

be able to determine the identities of those independent directors. At the time of the preparation of

this report, Finaccess Capital have given no information as to whom the independent directors will be.

Global Valar receives acceptances greater than 75%

In these circumstances assuming the Offer becomes unconditional, Global Valar is not permitted to acquire

more than 75% of the issued shares in RBD under the construct of the Global Valar Offer. In the case of

excess acceptances, Global Valar is required under Rule 12 of the Takeovers Code to take up from each

offeree the lesser of:

§ 75% of a shareholders’ shares accepted into the Offer; and

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





2

§ all of the shares in respect of which the shareholder has accepted into the Offer.

If the number of shares acquired under this mechanism is less than the total percentage sought (75% in this

case), then Global Valar will acquire further shares from accepting shareholders, who accepted for more than

75% of their shares, pro rata to the total shares accepted into the Offer by accepting shareholders, who

accepted for more than 75% of their shares.

If the Global Valar Offer is successful at any level over the 75% threshold (recognising that it is highly unlikely

that acceptances representing exactly 75% will be received), RBD shareholders who accept the Global Valar

Offer for their entire shareholding will not be able to sell all of the accepted shares into the Global Valar Offer

as excess acceptances will be scaled back. The table below shows examples of various levels of total

acceptances to the Global Valar Offer, and the implications for accepting shareholders:

NUMBER AND % OF SHARES ACCEPTED INTO THE GLOBAL VALAR OFFER THAT WOULD BE ACQUIRED BY GLOBAL

VALAR

The table above shows that if acceptances in respect of greater than 75% of RBD’s shares then a shareholder

who accepts shares into the Global Valar Offer will only have certainty that 75% of their shares would be

acquired under the Global Valar Offer. The level of scaling increases as the overall acceptance level increases

e.g. if all RBD shareholders accept the Global Valar Offer for all of their shares, Global Valar will only acquire

75% of each shareholder’s shares.

All shareholders are treated equally in a partial offer regardless of their shareholding size . Accordingly, there

is no certainty what proportion of shares an accepting shareholder will be able to sell if the Global Valar Offer

is successful. Accepting shareholders, who accepted for more than 75% of their shares, could end up with

small and potentially uneconomic parcels of shares. This is a less appealing feature of partial offers.

If the 75% acceptance threshold is met in the last 5 working days of the Offer period, the Offer period is

aut omatically increased by 10 working days.

Importantly, shareholders may choose to accept none of their shares, some of their shares, or all of their

shares into the Offer. There is no requirement to accept all the shares at the Offer.

As the Global Valar Offer is a partial offer there is no certainty what proportion of each accepting

shareholder’s, who accepted for more than 75% of their shares, shares in RBD will be bought if the Global

Valar Offer is successful. All that is certain is that if the Offer becomes unconditional, shareholders will be

% OF SHARES THAT ARE

TENDERED INTO THE OFFER

% OF SHARES TENDERED

INTO THE OFFER THAT WILL

BE ACQUIRED BY GLOBAL

VALAR POST SCALING

EXAMPLE:

NUMBER OF SHARES THAT

WILL BE ACQUIRED BY

GLOBAL VALAR UNDER THE

OFFER, ASSUMING A

SHAREHOLDER HAS AND

TENDERS 1,000 RBD SHARES

EXAMPLE:

NUMBER OF SHARES

OWNED AFTER THE GLOBAL

VALAR OFFER HAS CLOSED,

ASSUMING A SHAREHOLDER

HAS AND TENDERS 1,000

SHARES

50.01% 100.00% 1,000 -

55.00% 100.00% 1,000 -

60.00% 100.00% 1,000 -

65.00% 100.00% 1,000 -

70.00% 100.00% 1,000 -

75.00% 100.00% 1,000 -

80.00% 93.75% 938 62

85.00% 88.24% 882 118

90.00% 83.33% 833 167

95.00% 78.95% 789 211

100.00% 75.00% 750 250

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





3

able to sell at least 75% of the shares they currently own if they accept all their shares into the Global Valar

Offer and the Global Valar Offer is accepted by shareholders at 50.01% or greater of the issued shares in

RBD. Given that excess acceptances will be scaled down it is almost certain that if the Global Valar Offer

achieves acceptances greater than 75%, accepting shareholders who accept for more than 75% of their

holdings will not be able to sell all of their shares into the Global Valar Offer. This lack of certainty is

problematic for communications with shareholders but is in line with the rules of the Takeovers Code.

When considering the options outlined above, RBD shareholders should also consider the following: 


§

the Offer price of $9.45 per share is above Grant Samuel’s assessed value range for RBD shares. In Grant

Samuel’s opinion the full underlying value of RBD shares is in the range of $8.15 - $8.92 per share. This

value represents the value of 100% of the equity in RBD and therefore includes a premium for control;

§

the Offer price of $9.45 per share implies a premium of 24.3% relative to the closing price of $7.60 per

share on 17 October 2018 – being the last trading day prior to the announcement of the Finaccess

Capital indicative proposal to make the Offer, and a premium of 23% over the volume weighted average

share price (VWAP) over the 30 trading days prior to the announcement of $7.69 per share. The

premium is similar to the average premium for control generally observed in successful takeovers of

other NZX listed companies;

§

under a partial offer the actual premium over the closing price before the Offer was announced is less

as not all shares will be accepted into the Offer. Assuming 75% of shares are accepted into the Offer

and the share price after the Offer closes reverts to the 1 month VWAP (calculated prior to the Offer

being announced), the weighted average share price

1

is $ 9.01 which is a premium of 18.6% over the

$7.60 pre -Offer share price;

§

if the minimum acceptance levels are not achieved, theoretically Global Valar could elect to increase

the price it is prepared to pay for RBD during the offer period or in any subsequent offer. However,

there is no certainty that a revised offer would be tabled. Unless a revised offer from Global Valar or a

competing takeover offer from another party is made, in the short-term RBD’s shares are likely to trade

at levels below the Offer price of $9.45 per share; and

§

acceptance of the Offer is a matter for individual shareholders based on their own view as to value and

future market conditions, risk profile, liquidity preference, portfolio strategy, tax position and other

factors. In particular, taxation consequences will vary widely across shareholders. Shareholders will

need to consider these consequences and, if appropriate, consult their own professional adviser(s).

Section 2 sets out a summary of the terms and conditions of the Offer and an overview of Global Valar and

its intentions for managing RBD which will be important for shareholders who may become minority

shareholders in a company controlled by Global Valar.

A detailed assessment of the merits of the Offer is outlined in section 7 of this report. Grant Samuel’s opinion

is to be considered as a whole. Selecting portions of the analyses or factors considered by it, without

considering all the factors and analyses together, could create a misleading view of the process underlying

the opinion. The preparation of an opinion is a complex process and is not necessarily susceptible to partial

analysis or summary.



_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

1

Calculated as 75% of the Offer price and 25% of the 1 month VWAP of $7.69

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





4

2 Terms of the Offer

2.1 Background

On 18 October 2018 RBD announced that it had received an indicative proposal to make a Takeover Offer

from Finaccess Capital through its subsidiary Global Valar to acquire up to 75% of the issued capital of RBD

for a cash consideration of $9.45 cash per share. The formal notice of intention to make a Takeover Offer

was received on 26

th

November 2018.


The Offer is subject to several key conditions that are set out in the Takeover Notice, including:

§

approval from the New Zealand Overseas Investment Office (OIO); and

§

Yum! Brands, Inc., (Yum!) consent to the Offer becoming unconditional in all respects.


In addition the Offer will not be completed unless the following usual conditions are satisfied or waived by

Global Valar:

§

no restraining order, injunction or other order that would prevent or prohibit the t ransaction issued by

any court of competent jurisdiction or regulatory agency;

§

no m aterial adverse change occurs or is discovered, announced, disclosed or otherwise becomes known

to Global Valar;

§

none of the following occurs:

• no subdivision of the RBD shares;

• no other changes to or repurchase of the RBD shares;

• no new shares issued other than in relation to the Performance Rights issued to the CEO and CFO;

• no performance rights, convertible securities or other equity securities by any RBD Group member;

• no dividends are paid;

• there is no sale of the whole or a substantial part of RBD’s businesses or properties;

• no security interest granted in respect of the whole or substantial part of RBD’s businesses or

properties ;

• no change to the Constitution of any member of RBD; and

• no insolvency event occurs in relation to RBD.


The full list of conditions to the Offer are set out in the Takeover Offer Document.


RBD and Global Valar have entered into a pre-bid agreement which sets out the responsibilities of both

parties leading up to the making of the Takeover Offer by Global Valar. The pre-bid agreement provides for,

amongst other matters:

§ Global Valar cannot terminate the agreement for breach or non-satisfaction of certain Offer conditions

if the relevant matter or circumstance had been:

• fairly disclosed in Finaccess’s due diligence;

• fairly disclosed to NZX in the last 24 months; or

• actually known by Global Valar on the date of the agreement.

§ Following receipt of Global Valar’s Takeover Notice, RBD is required to:

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





5

• prepare a target company statement to be sent to the RBD shareholders with the Offer;

• procure its board of directors to unanimously recommend that shareholders accept the Offer,

subject to the Independent Adviser’s Report concluding that the Offer price is within or above Grant

Samuel’s valuation range for the shares and there being no “unmatched superior proposal”; and

• procure that each director (other than Mr. Stephen Copulos) accepts the offer within two business

days of the offer being made. Interests associated with Stephen Copulos have entered into a

separate lock-in deed to accept the Offer.

§ The pre-bid agreement also contains certain exclusivity arrangements to apply until the end of the

Offer. In summary, during the exclusivity period:

• No Shop. RBD must not solicit any competing transaction or any proposal that may reasonably be

expected to encourage or lead to the making of a competing transaction;

• No Talk. RBD must not enter into discussions or negotiations in relation to, or which would

reasonably be expected to lead to, a competing transaction;

• No Due Diligence. RBD must not provide or make available to a third party any non-public

information relating to RBD in relation to, or which would reasonably be expected to lead to the

making of, a competing transaction;

• Notification. If RBD receives a potentially competing transaction, or any request to do anything

referred to in the no due diligence provisions (as described above), RBD must notify Global Valar

within two business days; and

• Matching Right. If RBD receives a competing transaction which the board of RBD concludes is a

superior proposal, RBD must give Global Valar five business days to provide an equivalent or better

proposal to the terms of the superior proposal. If Global Valar does not exercise its matching rights,

then the exclusivity period ends and either Global Valar or RBD may terminate the pre -bid

agreement.

§ RBD is not required to comply with its “no talk” and “no due diligence” obligations if it receives an

unsolicited bona fide competing transaction and the directors, acting in good faith and having

considered legal advice, determine that:

• failing to respond to such competing transaction would be likely to constitute a breach of the

fiduciary or statutory duties owed by a director to RBD or its shareholders; and

• the bona fide competing transaction may result in a superior proposal.

2.2 Finaccess Capital

In 2012 Anheuser Busch InBer, the world’s biggest brewery acquired the remaining 49.8% of Mexico’s Grupo

Modelo for US$20 billion, adding Corona, the top selling imported beer in the United States to its brands.

Grupo Finaccess was founded by Mr. Carlos Fernández following completion of the transaction. Carlos

Fernández is the majority shareholder of Grupo Finaccess. The founder and former owner of Grupo Modelo

was Carlos Fernández’s great uncle. Fina ccess Capital is one of five divisions of Grupo Finaccess which invests

in businesses across different sectors to create value over the long term. It has a strong presence in the

casual dining and quick service restaurant sector, as well as in real estate in Europe and Asia. Finaccess

Capital major investments in publicly traded companies include:

§ ̃56% stake in AmRest, a European fast-food and casual dining restaurant operator listed on the Polish

stock exchange (approximate US$2.6 billion market cap); and

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





6

§ ̃18% stake in Inmobiliaria Colonial, a Spanish real estate business listed on the Spanish stock exchange

(approximate US$4.8 billion market cap).

Finaccess Capital has given the following undertakings to Yum! in regard to the future operations of RBD:

§ to operate RBD as a standalone business and maintain operational separation between RBD and

AmRest;

§ to maintain a high level of continuity in the senior management team of RBD; and

§ continue a focus on Yum! brands and committing to certain development obligations imposed by Yum!

which RBD management are comfortable with.

Finaccess Capital has given the following undertakings to RBD in regard to the future operations of RBD:

§ for 12 months after the completion of the takeover, agreeing not to de-list RBD unless it makes a full

takeover offer for all of the RBD shares (and as a result, Global Valar becomes entitled to compulsorily

acquire the remaining RBD shares under the Takeovers Code); and

§ if such takeover offer is made by Global Valar for all of the RBD shares in the 12 months following

completion of the Takeover Offer, the Offer price will not be less than $9.45 per share, subject to

adjustment for any percentage change upwards or downwards, in the NZX 50 index during that period.





APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





7

3 Scope of the Report

3.1 Purpose of the Report

The Directors of RBD have engaged Grant Samuel & Associates Limited (Grant Samuel) to prepare an

Independent Adviser’s Report to assess the Offer. Grant Samuel is independent of RBD and Global Valar and

has no involvement with, or interest in, the outcome of the Offer.

Rule 21 of the Takeovers Code requires the Independent Adviser to report on the merits of an offer. The

term “merits” has no definition either in the Takeovers Code itself or in any statute dealing with securities or

commercial law in New Zealand. While the Takeovers Code does not prescribe a meaning of the term “merit”,

the Panel has interpreted the word “merits” includes both positives and negatives in respect of a transaction.

A copy of this report will accompany the Target Company Statement to be sent to all RBD shareholders. This

report is for the benefit of the shareholders of RBD. The report should not be used for any purpose other

than as an expression of Grant Samuel’s opinion as to the merits of the Offer. This report should be read in

conjunction with the Qualifications, Declarations and Consents outlined at Appendix A.

This report has been prepared without taking into account the objectives, financial situation or needs of

individual RBD shareholders. Accordingly, before acting in relation to their investment, shareholders should

consider the appropriateness of the advice having regard to their own objectives, financial situation or needs.

Shareholders should read the Target Company Statement issued by RBD in relation to the Offer.

Whether to accept or not to accept the Offer is a matter for individual shareholders based on their views as

to value and business strategy, their expectations about future economic and market conditions and their

particular circumstances including risk profile, liquidity preference, investment strategy, portfolio structure

and tax position. Shareholders who are in doubt as to the action they should take in relation to the Offer

should consult their own professional adviser.

Similarly, it is a matter for individual shareholders as to whether to buy, hol d or sell securities in RBD outside

of the Offer. These are investment decisions upon which Grant Samuel does not offer an opinion and are

independent of a decision on whether to accept or not to accept the Offer. Shareholders should consult their

own professional adviser in this regard.

3.2 Basis of Evaluation

Grant Samuel has evaluated the Offer by reviewing the following factors:

§

the terms of the Offer;

§

the impact of the Offer on the ownership and control of RBD;

§

the estimated value range of RBD and the price of the Offer when compared to that estimated value

range;

§

the likelihood of an alternative offer and alternative transactions that could realise fair value for RBD

shareholders;

§

the likely market price and liquidity of RBD shares in the absence of the Offer;

§

any advantages or disadvantages for RBD shareholders of accepting or rejecting the Offer;

§

the current trading conditions for RBD;

§

the likely market price of RBD shares after the Offer closes;

§

the timing and circumstances surrounding the Offer; and

§

the attractions and risks of RBD’s business.

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





8


3.3 Approach to Valuation

Grant Samuel has estimated the value range of RBD with reference to its full underlying value. In Grant

Samuel’s opinion the price to be paid in the context of a full takeover that may result in a change of control

should reflect the full underlying value of the company. In the context of takeove r offers, the support for

this opinion is twofold:

§

the Code’s compulsory acquisition provisions apply when a single shareholder or group of associated

shareholders acquires 90% or more of the voting rights in a Code company.

§

Where rule 57 of the Code requires the price payable on compulsory acquisition to be determined, the

Code seeks to avoid issues of premiums or discounts for minority holdings by providing that a class of

shares is to be valued as a whole with each share then being valued on a pro rata basis. In other words,

a minority shareholder is allocated its share of the full underlying value. Grant Samuel believes that the

appropriate test for fairness under a full or partial takeover offer where the offeror will gain control is

the full underlying value, prorated across all shares. The rationale for this opinion is that it would be

inconsistent for one group of minority shareholders, those selling under compulsory acquisition, to

receive a different price under the same offer from those who accepted the offer earlier; and

§

under the Code a single shareholder, or group of associated shareholders, can only acquire 20% or more

of the voting rights in a Code company if an offer to acquire shares is made to all shareholders of the

company or if non-associated shareholders give their approval to the acquisition by an ordinary

resolution. As a result, a controlling shareholding (generally accepted to be no less than 40% of the

voting rights) cannot be transferred to another owner without the acquirer making an offer on the same

terms and conditions to all shareholders (unless non- associated shareholders pass on ordinary

resolution approving the transfer). One of the core foundations of the Code is that all shareholders be

treated equally. Any control premium that is implied by an offer is available to all shareholders under

a takeover offer (in a scenario where an offeror will gain control), regardless of the size of their

shareholding or the size of the offeror’s shareholding at the time the offer is made.


Accordingly, Grant Samuel is of the opinion that not only because shares acquired under a compulsory

acquisition scenario are required to be valued at a price equivalent to full underlying value, but because the

control premium (if any) is available to all shareholders, the share price under either a full or partial takeover

offer where the offeror will gain control should be within or exceed the prorated full underlying valuation

range of the company.

RBD has been valued at fair market value, which is defined as the estimated price that could be realised in

an open market over a reasonable period of time assuming that potential buyers have full information.

Grant Samuel’s opinion is to be considered as a whole. Selecting portions of the analyses or factors

considered by it, without considering all the factors and analyses together, could create a misleading view of

the process underlying the opinion. The preparation of an opinion is a complex process and is not necessarily

susceptible to partial analysis or summary. For the avoidance of doubt, Appendices A to E form part of this

report.



APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





9

4 Overview of the Global Fast Food Restaurants Industry

4.1 Overview of Global Market

2


RBD operates in the global fast food restaurants industry. During 2017, it was estimated that global fast food

restaurant industry revenue was approximately US$650 billion across approximately 783,000 restaurants and

approximately 540,000 enterprises, employing 11.9 million people. The industry is typically segmented

based on the main type of food served. The primary segments are outlined below:

OVERVIEW OF PRIMARY SEGMENTS OF THE GLOBAL FAST FOOD RESTAURANTS INDUSTRY

SEGMENT INDUSTRY REVENUE % PRIMARY BRANDS PRIMARY PRODUCTS

Burger 46.7% McDonald’s, Burger King Burgers, french fries

Chicken 13.5% KFC, Chick-fil -A Chicken, chicken salads, chicken wraps

Snack 11.8% Starbucks, Dunkin’ Donuts Coffee shop, ice cream shops, smoothie bars

Sandwich 10.8% Subway, Panera, Arby’s Sandwiches, soups, salads

Pizza 9.6%

Pizza Hut, Domino’s, Papa

Johns

Pizza, salad, pasta

Other 7.6% - La tin American, Chinese, hot dogs

Revenue in each country is driven by the size of the population and per capita income. Developed areas of

the world with above-average levels of disposable income account for the largest proportion of revenue -

North America is the largest market representing approximately 35% of total industry revenue. Other

developed regions also have high concentrations of industry revenue, with Europe accounting for an

estimated 13.5% of industry revenue. Oceania, which includes Australia and New Zealand, comprises 2.2%

of industry revenue. Within many of these developed regions, the industry is considered to be in a mature

stage of its economic cycle and close to reaching market saturation. A breakdown of industry revenue by

product segment and geographic region is depicted below:

INDUSTRY REVENUE BY PRODUCT SEGMENT (%) INDUSTRY REVENUE BY BUSINESS LOCATION (%)













The global fast food restaurant industry is characterised by a low level of market share concentration (i.e. it

is highly fragmented) with the industry’s four largest players accounting for less than 35% of total revenue.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

2

Source: IBIS World Industry Report on Global Fast Food Restaurants Industry dated January 2018.

Burger

46.7%

Chicken

13.5%

Snack

11.8%

Sandwich

10.8%

Pizza

9.6%

Other

7.6%

North

America

34.8%

Europe

13.5%

South East Asia

7.5%

South

America

7.0%

Oceania

2.2%

Rest of

World

7.4%

North Asia

27.6%

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT









TS

$!.!!4%/0//1/0*0%(*1)!.+"/%*#(!B(+0%+*.!/01.*0/,.+2% %*# %2!./!.*#!+"1%/%*!* "/0

"++ $+%!/0+1/0+)!./=

$!#(+("/0"++ .!/01.*0%* 1/0.5%/"+.!/00++*0%*1!0+!4,* 3%0$#(+(!+*+)%#.+30$=

+*/1)!./,!* %*#+*/)(((141.%!/E%*(1 %*#!0%*#+10F:%/(/+!4,!0! 0+%*.!/!=%/%*#%*0!.*0%+*(

!4,*/%+*+"B/! "/0"++ $%*/%/!4,!0! 0++*0%*1!0+!0$!,.%).5 .%2!.+"%* 1/0.5#.+30$

/!)!.#%*#!+*+)%!/%*.!/%*#(5 !)* )+.!"/0"++ +,0%+*/= %0%+*((5: !)* "+."/0"++ %/

!4,!0! 0+%*.!/!%*(%*!3%0$0$!!4,*/%+*+"$!(0$5)!*1+,0%+*/:* //+)!+"0$!+*!.*/+2!.

0$!$!(0$.%/'///+%0! 3%0$"/0"++  %//%,0!=

* 1/0.5.!2!*1!%/"+.!/00+%*.!/!0***1(%/! 

.0!+"U=X_,==0+LZVY%((%+*+2!.0$!"%2!5!./0+USUU=$!"+((+3%*#$.0/$+3/0$!$%/0+.%(* 

"+.!/00.!* %*%* 1/0.5.!2!*1!<




 

  

=A


>



I9G1 -1$ 2*!%*-'*'./** ./0-)/#$).

$!)&+.#(+("/0"++ .!/01.*0$%*/E+. !.! 5*1)!.+"+10(!0/F.!/1)).%/! !(+3<



   

 

 

=FG >

  



 

PT135* 3%$.%20!WW:[VW

PU+*( >/1.#!.+*( >/+.,+.0%+*VZ:UWT

BH/-0&.)&/-0&.*-+*-/$*)GM7GFM

BI #$& )0(6GF7IML

PX1.#!. %*#1.#!.!/01.*0.* /

*0!.*0%+*(TY:ZYZ

BK$55 0/$550(6FK7LIM

PZ+)%*+>/%66+)%*+>/%66

*=TW:[XY

P[1*'%*>+*10/*'1*'%*>.* /.+1,

*=TU:XV[

P\/'%*+%*/*'1*'%*>.* /.+1,

*=Z:\[U

PTS 1*0.+0$!./%66%66.%20!Z:XSS

BFF* ''/# -= 3$)>0(6K7MIN

PTU!* 5>/1.#!.!* 5>/+.,+.0%+*Y:YVW

.*0)1!(!/!.$

XTX

XTU

XUW

XVZ

XXU

XYV

XZZ

YT\

YVW

YXT

YY[

Y[W

ZSS

ZT[

ZVY

S

TSS

USS

VSS

WSS

XSS

YSS

ZSS

[SS

USS[ USS\ USTS USTT USTU USTV USTW USTX USTY USTZ UST[ UST\ USUS USUT USUU

%/0+.%(USS[BUSTZ

U=Y_,==

+.!/0USTZBUSUU

U=X_,==

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





11

The following comments are relevant when reviewing the table above:

§

Subway is the largest fast food restaurant chain globally with approximately 45,000 outlets in over 100

countries. The Subway brand is privately owned and is estimated to generate approximately US$18.8

billion in revenue per annum;

§

McDonald’s Corporation is the world’s largest fast food chain (by revenue) with more than 37,000

outlets. Approximately 85% of its outlets are franchisee owned;

§

Starbucks Corporation is the largest coffee chain in the world with more than 28,000 outlets;

§

Yum! Brands Inc. (Yum!) is a fast food conglomerate with more than 45,000 outlets under the KFC, Pizza

Hut and Taco Bell brands. The right to operate these brands is franchised to numerous franchisees

around the world;

§

Burger King is the second largest burger chain in the world behind McDonald’s. It is owned by US-listed

company Restaurant Brands International Inc. Restaurant Brands International also owns the Tim

Hortons and Popeye brands;

§

Domino’s operates pizza stores in the US and internationally. Approximately 90% of the sites are

franchisee owned. Domino’s is a key competitor of Pizza Hut;

§

Dunkin’ Donuts and Baskin Robbins are owned by Dunkin Brands Group Inc. Dunkin’ Donuts specialises

in doughnuts and Baskin Robins specialises in cakes; and

§

the following graph shows the number of stores globally for the world’s largest quick service restaurant

chains. Brands franchised by RBD are shaded in red.

NUMBER OF GLOBAL OUTLETS – TOP 12 BRANDS BY OUTLET NUMBERS



44,834

37,241

28,218

21,487

16,767

16,748

14,856

12,538

7,982

7,500

6,849

6,634

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

40,000

45,000

50,000

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





12

4.3 Overview of Brands Franchised by Restaurant Brands New Zealand

An overview of the brands franchised to RBD are provided below:

4.3.1 KFC



Contribution to RBD

FY18 Revenue – NZ$471m (64% of total)

Number of stores (as at February 2018) – 155 (49% of total)

Global Outlets

21,487 outlets in 131 countries and territories (as at 31 December 2017)

Ownership

Yum! (listed)

Business Model

Franchised (97%)

History

KFC was founded in Corbin, Kentucky by Colonel Harland D. Sanders, an early developer of the quick

service restaurant business and a pioneer of the restaurant franchise concept. The Colonel perfected

his secret blend of 11 herbs and spices for Kentucky Fried Chicken in 1939 and signed up his first

franchisee in 1952.

Brand Concept

KFC restaurants offer fried and non-fried chicken products such as sandwiches, chicken strips, chicken-

on -the -bone and other chicken products. KFC restaurants also offer a variety of entrees and side items

suited to local preferences and tastes. Restaurant decor throughout the world is characterized by the

image of the Colonel.

Historical Growth in

Global Outlets

3



Competitors

KFC has the leading position in the global chicken segment. Its primary competitors are the other large

fast food chains such as McDonald’s and Burger King.







_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

3

Source: Yum! Annual Reports (2010 – 2017).

16,853

17,401

18,198

18,875

19,420

19,952

20,604

21,487

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

20102011201220132014201520162017

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





13

4.3.2 Pizza Hut



Contribution to RBD

FY18 Revenue – NZ$113m (15% of total)

Number of stores (as at February 2018) – 81 (26% of total)

Global Outlets

16,748 outlets in 106 countries and territories (as at 31 December 2017)

Ownership

Yum! (listed)

Business Model

Franchised

History

The first Pizza Hut restaurant was opened in 1958 in Wichita, Kansas, and within a year, the first franchise

unit was opened. Today, Pizza Hut is the largest restaurant chain in the world specialising in the sale of

ready-to-eat pizza products.

Brand Concept

Pizza Hut operates in the delivery, carryout and casual dining segments around the world. Outside of the

U.S., Pizza Hut often uses unique branding to differentiate these segments. Pizza Hut features a variety

of pizzas which are marketed under varying names. Each of these pizzas is offered with a variety of

different toppings suited to local preferences and tastes. Many Pizza Hut outlets also offer pasta and

chicken wings, including approximately 5,900 stores offering wings under the WingStreet brand in the

U.S . Outside the U.S., Pizza Hut casual dining restaurants offer a variety of core menu products other than

pizza, which are typically suited to local preferences and tastes. Pizza Hut units feature a distinctive red

roof logo on their signage.

His torical Growth in

Global Sites

4



Competitors

Pizza Hut’s predominant competitor is Domino’s. Domino’s currently has ̃14,900 outlets globally which

is slightly behind Pizza Hut. However, Domino’s has been growing faster than the Pizza Hut brand

globally, especially outside of the US market.

To a lesser extent, Pizza Hut also competes against independent pizza chains. The pizza market has

lower barriers to entry and is more competitive than the chicken market.





_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

4

Source: Yum! Annual Reports (2010 – 2017).

13,432

13,747

14,357

14,967

15,605

16,063

16,409

16,748

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

18,000

20102011201220132014201520162017

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





14

4.3.3 Taco Bell



Contribution to RBD

FY18 Revenue – NZ$96m (13% of total)

Number of stores (as at February 2018) – 37 (12% of total)

Global Outlets

6,849 outlets in 27 countries and territories (as at 31 December 2017)

Ownership

Yum! (listed)

Business Model

Franchised (90%)

History

The first Taco Bell restaurant was opened in 1962 by Glen Bell in Downey, California, and in 1964, the first

Taco Bell franchise was sold.

Brand Concept

Taco Bell specialises in Mexican-style food products, including various types of tacos, burritos,

qu esadillas, salads, nachos and other related items. Taco Bell offers breakfast items in its U.S. stores.

Taco Bell restaurants feature a distinctive bell logo on their signage.

Historical Growth in

Global Sites

5



Primary competitors

Taco Bell’s primary competitor, especially in the US market is Chipotle Mexican Grill. Outside of the US

the Taco Bell brand is relatively underdeveloped. In Hawaii, Taco Bell’s only competitor in the Mexican

Quick Service Restaurant (QSR) segment are Taco Del Mar. Taco Bell’s segment market share in Hawaii

is high at approximately 90%.







_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

5

Source: Yum! Annual Reports (2010 – 2017).

5,896

5,945

5,980

6,053

6,206

6,407

6,604

6,849

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

20102011201220132014201520162017

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





15

4.3.4 Carl’s Jr.



Contribution to RBD

FY18 Revenue – NZ$35m (5% of total)

Stores (as at February 2018) – 19 (6% of total)

Global Outlets

1,616 outlets in approximately 28 countries and territories (as at 31 December 2017)

Ownership

Privately held (CKE Restaurants)

Business Model

Franchised (95%)

History

In 1941, Carl N. Karcher and his wife Margaret founded the predecessor of Carl’s Jr. in Los Angeles after

they purchased a hot dog cart. In 1945, the Karchers moved to California to open their first Carl's Drive-

In Barbecue with hamburgers on the menu.


Brand Concept

Carl’s Jr. offers a limited menu of breakfast, lunch and dinner products featuring charbroiled burgers,

chicken tenders and other related items. Carl’s Jr. features a distinctive smiling star on their logo.

Primary competitors

Carl’s Jr. primarily competes against McDonald’s and Burger King in New Zealand (and to a lesser extent

Wendy’s). KFC is also a primary competitor in New Zealand, although it operates in a different market

segment.

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





16

5 Profile of Restaurant Brands

5.1 Overview of Operations

RBD operates fast food restaurants in New Zealand, Australia, Hawaii, Saipa n and Guam. As at 18 November

2018, the company operated a total of 283 outlets across the KFC, Pizza Hut, Taco Bell and Carl’s Jr. brands.

RBD employs approximately 8,000 people and serves 120,000 customers daily across its operations. RBD is

headquartered in Auckland, New Zealand. A breakdown of the number of outlets by brand and geography

is outlined below:

BREAKDOWN OF RBD OPERATED OUTLETS BY BRAND AND LOCATION (AS AT 18 NOVEMBER 2018)

NEW ZEALAND AUSTRALIA

SAIPAN, HAWAII &

GUAM

TOTAL

KFC 94 61 - 155

Pizza Hut 29 - 45 74

Taco Bell - - 36 36

Carl’s Jr. 18 - - 18

Total 141 61 81 283

5.2 Background and History

The following table provides a summary of the key events since RBD was established in 1997:

TIMELINE OF KEY COMPANY EVENTS

1997

- RBD formed to acquire the New Zealand operations of the KFC and Pizza Hut brands.

1998

- RBD secured New Zealand Franchise for Starbucks Coffee, opening its first store in Parnell, Auckland.

2000

- Acquisition of Eagle Boys pizza business in New Zealand. Stores were subsequently rebranded to Pizza Hut.

2002

- Acquisition of 51 Pizza Hut stores in Victoria, Australia

2008

- Sale of Pizza Hut business in Victoria, Australia.

2011

- Pizza Hut starts selling a number of its smaller regional stores to independent franchisees.

- Acquired the New Zealand Franchise for Carl's Jr.

2012

- Carl’s Jr. commenced store roll out in New Zealand.

2014

- Acquired 7 additional Carl’s Jr. stores in Auckland.

2016

- Acquisition of QSR Pty Ltd, which owns 42 KFC stores in New South Wales, Australia.

2017

- Acquisition of Pacific Island Restaurants Inc., which owns 37 Taco Bell stores and 45 Pizza Hut stores in Hawaii,

Guam and Saipan.




APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





17

5.3 Consolidated Financial Performance

The historical financial performance of RBD for the years ended February 2015 to 2018 (FY1 5 to FY1 8), and

the forecast for the year ending to 25 February 2019 (FY19F), is summarised below:


RBD SUMMARY FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE (NZ$ MILLIONS)

Source: RBD and Grant Samuel analysis


Commentary in relation to historical financial information.


The following points are relevant when reviewing the table above:

§

RBD acquired 42 KFC stores in New South Wales in April 2016. D uring FY18, RBD acquired a further 18

stores in New South Wales across three transactions. In March 2017, RBD acquired US based Pacific

Island Restaurants, adding a further 82 stores under both the Pizza Hut and Taco Bell brands. The

decline in store numbers in FY19 reflects the sale of Starbucks Coffee New Zealand during the financial

year ;

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

6

Cost of sales in RBD’s Annual Report includes depreciation and amortisation expenses. This is shown in depreciation and amortisation

below.

YEAR END FEBRUARY

2015A 2016A 2017A 2018A 2019F

New Zealand 359.5 387.6 400.0 421.4 419.4

Australia

- -

97.2 151.8 195.4

Hawaii - - - 167.5 183.7

Store sales 359.5 387.6 497.2 740.8 798.5

Change in store revenue %

7.8% 28.3% 49.0%

7.8%

Other revenue 13.1 16.5 20.4 25.5 28.7

Total revenue 372.6 404.1 517.5 766.3 827.2

Cost of sales

6

(289.8) (314.3) (402.8) (601.3) (649.9)

Gross profit 82.8 89.8 117.1 164.9 177.3

Gross margin %

22.2% 22.2% 22.5% 21.5%

21.3%

Marketing and distribution expenses (21.2) (23.2) (30.9) (43.0 )

(47.7 )

General and administration expenses (12.8) (13.8) (17.2) (27.5) (30.7 )

Operating expenses (34.0) (37.0) (48.1) (70.5) (78 .4)

Normalised EBITDA 48.7 52.8 69.0 94.4 98.9

EBITDA margin % 13.1% 13.1% 13.3% 12.3% 12.4%

Depreciation & amortisation (16.6) (18.3) (24.5) (31.9) (33.9)

Normalised EBIT 32.1 34.5 44.5 62.5 65.0

Non-trading items 1.3 (0.5) (5.1) (4.8) (1.6)

EBIT 33.4 34.1 39.4 57.8 63.4

Financing expenses (1.0) (1.0) (2.3) (5.6) (6.9)

Taxation expense (8.6) (9.0) (11.1) (16.7) (15.8)

NPAT 23.8 24.1 26.0 35.5 40.7

Number of owned stores

New Zealand 181 173 170 171 142

Australia - - 42 61 62

Hawaii - - - 82 83

Total stores 181 173 212 314 287

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





18

§

RBD’s gross margins have remained relatively stable during the historical period, ranging between

21.5% and 22.5%;

§

the decline in EBITDA margin percentage from FY17 to FY18 was in part attributable to the acquisition

of Pacific Islands Restaurants Inc. which had lower operating margins;

§

non- trading items consist of acquisition costs, amortisation of franchise rights, store closure costs,

impairments and other expenses not related to the trading business;

§

financing expenses have increased over the historical period as RBD has raised additional debt to f und

acquisitions; and

§

in New Zealand continued same store sales growth from KFC has been offset in part by less than stellar

performances from Pizza Hut and Carl’s Jr. KFC generates 75% of New Zealand revenue and 87% of

EBITDA.

RBD’s current performance reflects the following attributes:

§

KFC organic growth and refurbishment programme;

§

acquisitions have been a significant driver of earnings growth over the last few years and this growth

strategy is expected to be continued into the future with a number of potential acquisition

opportunities in both Australia and the US. These potential, but not certain, acquisitions have been

discussed with Yum! which has indicated its support. The successful track record of acquisitions is likely

to be one of the key attractions of RBD to Global Valar;

§

the Taco Bell and KFC franchises enjoy relatively high margins. The acquisition of Taco Bell stores in

Hawaii and Guam should enable RBD to expand this franchise into other existing jurisdictions in which

it operates;

§

establishing Carl’s Jr. as a new brand in the New Zealand market has been more difficult and taken

longer than expected to reach a level of acceptable earnings;

§

in New Zealand RBD has been able to operate all four franchises from one central head office generating

significant economies of scale; and

§

the first in-line (i.e. not free standing DriveThru) KFC in Fort St, Auckland has been very successful in

terms of both the capital cost to develop and turnover per square metre. RBD is looking to expand the

number of in-line KFC stores, initially in New Zealand.

Future outlook.

§

RBD has nearly doubled the size of the business through acquisitions of franchisee businesses in New

South Wales and Hawaii, Guam and Saipan over the last two financial years;

§

it has established a record of consistently growing revenues both from existing businesses through new

stores and major refurbishments and through acquisitions to a point where today RBD is a multi brand

international business;

§

RBD is in discussions with Yum! about the Taco Bell brand in New Zealand and Australia;

§

in Australia there are over 600 KFC outlets with all but 50 operated by franchisees of Yum!. The 50 Yum!

owned stores are all in New South Wales and present an acquisition opportunity for RBD. In addition

there are another 90 stores in New South Wales operated by independent franchisees; and

§

in Hawaii major store transformations are underway with both Pizza Hut and Taco Bell along with the

development of new stores and some acquisitions. RBD is also seeking expansion opportunities on the

US mainland.

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





19

Principal assumptions in relation to FY19F.

The FY19 forecast is based on management’s current forecasts, including:

§ actual results for the nine operating periods to 5 November 2018 plus management’s forecast for the

four operating periods to 25 February 2019;

§ Starbucks Coffee New Zealand sold at the end of October 2018;

§ average annual foreign exchange rates of US$0.66 per NZD and A$0.91 per NZD;

§ net debt at the end of FY19 of NZ$137.1 million; and

§ capital expenditure of NZ$47.0 million, including four new stores opened across the portfolio and a

number of store refurbishments.

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





20

5.4 Financial Performance by Division

The historical financial performance for each division is summarised below:

5.4.1 New Zealand

The financial performance of the New Zealand operations from FY15 to FY18, and the forecast for FY19, is

summarised below:

FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE OF NEW ZEALAND OPERATIONS (NZ$ MILLIONS)

§

the New Zealand business continues to deliver consistent growth, driven by the strength of the KFC

brand. KFC’s same store sales growth was 6.2% in FY18 and 4.1% in Q1 of FY19. New in-line stores are

expected to provide growth opportunities in high foot traffic CBD areas;

§

the Pizza Hut New Zealand Master Franchise Agreement was finalised in June 2018 with RBD becoming

the Master Franchisee for the Pizza Hut brand in New Zealand for the next 10 years. Under the new

arrangement RBD steps into the position of franchisor for existing independent franchisees and receives

a share of the franchise fees payable to Yum!. A further 10 of RBD’s owned Pizza Hut stores are forecast

to be sold to franchisees in FY19;

§

RBD sold Starbucks Coffee New Zealand at the end of October 2018. The sale reflects the non-core

nature of the brand with management focus being better spent on KFC and other growth initiatives

across the group; and

§

RBD’s focus for Carl’s Jr. has been to improve EBITDA margins. EBITDA margins have increased from

1.3% in FY16 to 5.7% in FY18 and the EBITDA margin is forecast to increase to 6.0% in FY19. Margin

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

7

Normalised EBITDA means EBITDA before non-trading items

8

Normalised EBIT means EBIT before non-trading items

YEAR END FEBRUARY

2015A 2016A 2017A 2018A 2019F

KFC 265.0 282.5 296.5 319.6 334.3

Pizza Hut 48.4 44.9 40.5 41.1 36.5

Starbucks 26.1 26.8 26.7 25.8 16.0

Carl’s Jr. 20.1 33.4 36.3 34.9 32.6

Store sales revenue 359.5 387.6 400.0 421.4 419.4

Change in store revenue % 9.2% 7.8% 3.2% 5.4% (0.5%)

Other revenue 13.1 16.5 20.4 25.3 28.6

Total revenue 372.6 404.1 420.4 446.7 447.9

Total expenses (323.9) (351.3) (362.9) (383.7) (383.2)

Normalised EBITDA

7

48.7 52.8 57.5 63.0 64.8

EBITDA margin % 13.1% 13.1% 13.7% 14.1% 15.4%

Depreciation & amortisation (16.6) (18.3) (19.8) (18.3) (18.7 )

Normalised EBIT

8

32.1 34.5 37.7 44.7 46.1


Number of RBD owned stores

KFC 91 91 92 94 96

Pizza Hut 46 39 35 36 28

Starbucks 26 25 24 22 -

Carl’s Jr. 18 18 19 19 18

Total 181 173 170 171 142

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





21

improvement has been assisted by a revised menu and growth in sales revenue. The decline in store

numbers during FY19 reflects the permanent closure of a store due to major road works near the site.

5.4.2 Australia

The financial performance of the Australian operations from FY17 to FY18, including the forecast for FY19 is

summarised below:

FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE AUSTRALIAN OPERATIONS (NZ$ MILLIONS)

§ since the acquisition of 42 KFC stores in April 2016, RBD has added a further 19 stores (18 stores

acquired and one new store build). KFC Australia has consistently delivered strong same store sales

growth. Same store sales growth in FY19 is supported by the rollout of delivery to 20 stores by year

end, scheduled price increases for selected products and a number of refurbishments and upgrades.

5.4.3 Hawaii

The financial performance of the Hawaii (including Guam and Saipan) operations for FY18, and the forecast

for FY19, is summarised below:

PERFORMANCE HAWAII OPERATIONS (NZ$ MILLIONS)

YEAR END FEBRUARY

2017A 2018A 2019F

KFC sales revenue 97.2 151.8 195.4

Change in store revenue %

n.a. 56.2%

28.7%

Total expenses

(85.7) (135.1)

(172.0)

Normalised EBITDA

11.5 16.7

23.4

EBITDA margin %

11.8% 11.0%

12.0%

Depreciation & amortisation

(4.7) (6.9)

(8.3 )

Normalised EBIT

6.8 9.8

15.1


Number of owned stores

KFC 42 61 62

YEAR END FEBRUARY

2018A 2019F

Pizza Hut 72.0 78.3

Taco Bell 95.5 105.5

Store sales revenue 167.5 183.7

Change in store revenue % n .a. 9.7%

Other revenue 0.2 0.2

Total revenue 167.7 183.9

Total expenses (151.3) (168.3)

Normalised EBITDA 16.3 15.6

EBITDA margin % 9.7% 8.5%

Depreciation & amortisation (6.7) (6.9 )

Normalised EBIT 9.7 8.6


Number of owned stores

Pizza Hut 45 46

Taco Bell 37 37

Total 82 83

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





22

§

the Hawaii operations commenced in March 2017 following the acquisition of Pacific Island Restaurants.

The acquisition provided RBD with access to the Taco Bell brand which has exhibited strong same store

sales growth and customer loyalty. RBD is currently awaiting consents to refurbish stores that have

been underinvested in and to build new Taco Bell stores. The consenting process in Hawaii is very

protracted; and

§

the Hawaii business has experienced a period of operational and customer disruption in the Pizza Hut

brand as a result of the recently implemented POS and website upgrades. There have also been some

trading headwinds in FY19, particularly rising wage and commodity prices. RBD management believe

that these pricing pressures are also being felt by its competitors in the market.

5.5 Financial Position

The financial position of RBD as at February 2017 and 2018 and 5 November 2018 is summarised below:

RBD - FINANCIAL POSITION (NZ$ MILLIONS)

AS AT FEB 2017 FEB 2018 5 NOV 2018

Inventories 8.7 12.6 10.1

Trade & other receivables 4.3 8.8

10.5

Creditors & accruals (50.4) (67.5)

(62.2 )

Provision for employee entitlements (2.0) (2.5)

(16.3 )

Income tax payable (3.6) (4.2)

(3.1 )

Net working capital (43.1) (52.8 )

(61.0)

Intangible assets 84.4 246.3

257.8

Property, plant & equipment 124.4 157.2

159.9

Deferred income (6.2) (9.8 )

(8.9)

Deferred tax asset 10.3 15.0

16.1

Other assets/(liabilities) (1.6) 2.4

-

Net operating assets 168.2 358.3

363.9

Net debt 23.9 (156.7)

(14 1.7)

Net assets 192.1 201.6

222.2

STATISTICS


Shares on issue at period end (million) 122.8 123.6

124.4

Net assets per share $1.56 $1.63

1.79

Gearing

9


(14.2%) 43.7%

38.9%

Source: RBD and Grant Samuel analysis

§

RBD has a negative net working capital position as it receives revenue in cash at the point of sale and

pays employees on a weekly basis and suppliers on varying longer terms. The increase in the negative

net working capital position is the result of the increase in the size of the business;

§

intangible assets primarily relates to goodwill paid upon business acquisitions. The large increase in the

intangible asset balance from February 2017 to February 2018 related to the acquisition of Pacific Island

Restaurants Inc . and further KFC stores in Australia;

§

property, plant and equipment primarily consists of leasehold improvements and restaurant fit out

costs; and

§

deferred income relates to non-routine revenue from suppliers and landlords and is recognised in profit

or loss over the life of the associated contract.


_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

9

Gearing is net borrowings divided by net assets plus net borrowings.

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





23

5.6 Cash Flow

RBD’s cash flows from F15 to F18 is summarised below:

RBD SUMMARY CASH FLOW (NZ$ MILLIONS)

Source: RBD Financial Statements

§

RBD’s net operating cash flows have increased as the business has grown its store network and

underlying profitability;

§

the purchase of SR Pty Ltd comprising 42 KFC stores in New South Wales, Australia for A$82.4 million

was completed during F17, and the purchase of Pacific Island Restaurants for US$105 million was

completed during F18;

§

RBD raised NZ$94 million in new e-uity capital through an underwritten entitlement offer during F17

to fu nd the ac-uisition of Pacific Island Restaurants Inc . Share issue costs of $2.7 million have been

netted off the gross proceeds of the share issue above;

§

a portion of these funds remained on deposit at the end of F17 pending the settlement of the Pacific

Island Restaurant Inc ac-uisition; and

§

RBD’s dividend payout ratio has ranged between 80-85% of underlying NPAT (i.e. excluding non-trading

items) between F16 and F18.


YEAR END FEBRUARY

2015A 2016A 2017A 2018A

Normalised EBITDA 48.7 52.8 69.0 94.4

Tax

(9.2) (10.6)

(13.5) (15.8)

Interest

(1.0) (1.0)

(2.3) (5.6)

Movement in working capital (and other items) (3.3)

3.6

(0.2) (0.4)

Non-trading items

1.3 (0.5)

(5.1) (4.8)

Net operating cash flow 36.5 44.3 47.9 67.8

Business ac-uisitions

(10.4) - (63.9) (147.5)

Net purchase of property, plant I e-uipment

(19.8) (16.5) (12.4) (22.3)

Purchase of intangible assets

(2.8) (1.7) (3.7) (4.8)

Landlord contributions received

- 2.8 1.0 1.2

Net investing cash flow (33.0) (15.3) (79.0) (173.3)

Net drawdownA(repayment) of borrowings

14.4 (9.9) 30.7 64.7

Net proceeds from share issue

- - 91.1 -

Dividends paid (17.1) (19.6) (22.6) (23.7)

Net financing cash flow (2.6) (29.4) 99.2 40.9

Net cash flow 0.8 (0.5) 68.1 (64.6)

Opening cash 0.8 1.6 1.1 70.4

Cash balances of ac-uired businesses - - 1.5 4.6

F gainsA(losses) - - (0.3) (0.2)

Closing cash 1.6 1.1 70.4 10.1

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





24

5.7 Capital Structure and Ownership

RBD has the following securities on issue:

§

124,380,523 ordinary shares; and

§

a total of 378,000 performance rights granted to Russel Creedy (CEO) and Grant Ellis (CFO) entitling the

holders to one ordinary RBD share subject to vesting criteria options over unissued ordinary shares. We

understand that the performance rights will vest (and the associated shares will be issued) on the record

date for the Offer.


As at 2 November 2018, RBD had approximately 7,220 registered shareholders. The top 10 shareholders

own approximately 40.4%

of the ordinary shares on issue:

RBD - MAJOR SHAREHOLDERS AS AT 2 NOVEMBER 2018

NUMBER OF SHARES (000S) PERCENTAGE

Copulos, Stephen 10,631 8.6%

Craigs Investment Partners (private wealth) 6,318 5.1%

Hobson Wealth Partners Ltd. (private wealth) 6,090 4.9%

Fisher Funds Management 6,0 20 4.8%

First NZ Capital (private wealth) 4,027 3.2%

Diab Investments NZ Ltd. 3,500 2.8%

Euro Pacific Asset Management LLC 3,326 2.7%

Guardians of New Zealand Superannuation 3,273 2.6%

Grandeur Peak Global Advisors LLC 2,840 2.3%

Columbia Wanger Asset Management LLC 2,710 2.2%

Top 10 Shareholders 50,261 40.4%

Other Shareholders 74,120 59.6%

Total Shares 124,381 100.0%

NZX Research

5.8 Share Price Performance

5.8.1 Liquidity

The following table shows the volume of RBD shares traded in the 12 months prior to the announcement of

the partial takeover proposal on 18 October 2018:

RBD - SHARE PRICE HISTORY

TIME PERIOD LOW HIGH VWAP VOLUME (000S)

1 month $7.25 $7.87 $7.69 6,722

3 months $7.25 $7.87 $7.68 15,414

6 months $7.05 $8.15 $7.67 34,239

12 months $6.46 $8.15 $7.47 53,249

NZX Company Research


APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





25

5.8.2 Share Price Performance

The share price and trading volume history of RBD shares since the beginning of 2015 is depicted below:

RBD SHARE PRICE PERFORMANCE SINCE BEGINNING OF 2015


Source: NZX Company Research

RBD’s share price against the NZX50 Capital Index is shown below:

RBD RELATIVE PERFORMANCE VERSUS THE NZX50 CAPITAL INDEX


Source: Capital IQ

RBD has significantly outperformed the NZX50 Capital Index since the beginning of 2015 with its shares up

by more than 67% versus the Index prior to the announcement of the partial takeover proposal on 18 October

2018.


0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

$0.00

$1.00

$2.00

$3.00

$4.00

$5.00

$6.00

$7.00

$8.00

$9.00

$10.00

Jan

-

15

Mar

-

15

May

-

15

Jul

-

15

Sep

-

15

Nov

-

15

Jan

-

16

Mar

-

16

May

-

16

Jul

-

16

Sep

-

16

Nov

-

16

Jan

-

17

Mar

-

17

May

-

17

Jul

-

17

Sep

-

17

Nov

-

17

Jan

-

18

Mar

-

18

May

-

18

Jul

-

18

Sep

-

18

Nov

-

18

Monthly Volume

Share Price

Monthly Volume (RHS)Share Price (LHS)

0%

50%

100%

150%

200%

250%

Jan

-

15

Mar

-

15

May

-

15

Jul

-

15

Sep

-

15

Nov

-

15

Jan

-

16

Mar

-

16

May

-

16

Jul

-

16

Sep

-

16

Nov

-

16

Jan

-

17

Mar

-

17

May

-

17

Jul

-

17

Sep

-

17

Nov

-

17

Jan

-

18

Mar

-

18

May

-

18

Jul

-

18

Sep

-

18

Nov

-

18

RBLNZX50 Capital Index

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





26

6 Valuation of Restaurant Brands

6.1 Methodology

6.1.1 Overview

Grant Samuel’s valuation of RBD has been estimated on the basis of fair market value as a going concern,

defined as the estimated price that could be realised in an open market over a reasonable period of time

assuming that potential buyers have full information. The valuation of RBD is appropriate for the acquisition

of the company as a whole and accordingly incorporates a premium for control. The value is in excess of the

level at which, under current market conditions, shares in RBD could be expected to trade on the share

market. Shares in a listed company normally trade at a discount of 15% - 25% to the underlying value of the

company as a whole, but the extent of the discount (if any) depends on the specific circumstances of each

company.

The most reliable evidence as to the value of a business is the price at which the business or a comparable

business has been bought and sold in an arm’s length transaction. In the absence of direct market evidence

of value, estimates of value are made using methodologies that infer value from other available evidence.

There are four primary valuation methodologies commonly used for valuing businesses:

§

capitalisation of earnings or cash flows;

§

discounting of projected cash flows (DCF);

§

industry rules of thumb; and

§

estimation of the aggregate proceeds from an orderly realisation of assets.

Each of these valuation methodologies has application in different circumstances. The primary criterion for

determining which methodology is appropriate is the actual practice adopted by purchasers of the type of

business involved. A detailed description of each of these methodologies is outlined at Appendix D.

6.1.2 Preferred approach

Grant Samuel has placed primary reliance on the capitalisation of earnings methodology in determining a

value range for RBD. This is primarily due to the availability of quality information that can be analysed to

determine an applicable multiple range. This information includes the earnings multiples implied from the

prices of comparable transactions and the sharemarket ratings of listed companies.

In addition, a DCF valuation was undertaken as a cross check.

6.2 Summary

Grant Samuel has valued RBD in the range of $1,017 - $1,113 million, which corresponds to a value of $8.15

to $8.9 2 per share. The valuation is summarised below:

RBD - VALUATION SUMMARY ($ MILLIONS)


REPORT SECTION

REFERENCE

VALUE RANGE

LOW HIGH

Enterprise value 1,154 1,250

Less: Net Debt 6.2.1 (137) (137)

Value of equity 1,017 1,113

Shares on issue (millions) 6.2 .2 124.8 124.8

Value per share $8.15 $8.9 2

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





27

The value exceeds the price at which, based on current market conditions, Grant Samuel would expect RBD

shares to trade on the NZX in the absence of a takeover offer or proposal similar to the Offer with Global

Valar. The valuation reflects the strengths and weaknesses of RBD and takes into account the following

factors:

§

KFC is a leading international fast food brand that has demonstrated consistent growth in recent years.

RBD’s KFC business in New Zealand is attractive with strong EBITDA margins. The opportunity to expand

the KFC business in Australia through the acquisition of independent franchisees and Yum! owned

stores in New South Wales is also attractive. RBD also has opportunities to expand into new

geographies including a store rollout program in Hawaii;

§

the Pizza Hut brand operates in a more competitive market with lower barriers to entry than KFC. The

Domino’s brand is growing more rapidly than the Pizza Hut brand globally. This is likely to put further

pressure on sales growth and margins in New Zealand and Hawaii. The opportunity to repurpose Pizza

Hut sites to incorporate to the higher margin Taco Bell stores in Hawaii is an attractive opportunity;

§

Taco Bell is an attractive brand with strong margins. The opportunity to apply the learnings from the

KFC store transformation programme in New Zealand to refresh the Taco Bell stores in Hawaii should

yield improved performance and an attractive return on investment. There are currently discussions

underway with Yum! to potentially bring the brand to New Zealand and parts of Australia;

§

RBD has an established record of expansion through acquisition which has enabled it to achieve high

growth in the four years since 2014:

Revenue +125%

EBIT +105%

NPAT (Reported) +77%

NPAT (Excluding non-trading items) +114%

§ RBD management believe that these growth levels are sustainable given the number of franchisee

chains which could potentially be acquired at reasonably attractive multiples. In addition, there exist

expansion opportunities in each of the three key regions RBD operates in; and

§ RBD has a strong working relationship with Yum!, albeit with normal tensions that exist between

franchisors and franchisees. This has allowed RBD to expand rapidly through acquisition and new store

builds.

6.2.1 Net debt for valuation purposes

For valuation purposes, Grant Samuel has adopted the forecast net debt of $137.1 million at 25 February

2019, being the forecast net debt at the settlement date of the Offer.

6.2.2 Fully diluted shares on issue

The fully diluted shares on issue has been calculated as follows:

RBD – FULLY DILUTED SHARES ON ISSUE AS AT 26 NOVEMBER 2018

MILLION

Shares on issue

124.4

Shares issued on exercise of performance rights

0.4

Fully diluted shares on issue

124.8

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





28

6.2.3 Valuation assumptions

EARNINGS FOR VALUATION PURPOSES

NZ$ MILLION

Forecast FY19 EBITDA for valuation purposes 98.9

Less contribution from Starbucks during FY19 (2.8)

Earnings for valuation 96.1

The earnings for valuation purposes assumes the following:

§ 3% same store sales growth in New Zealand;

§ 3.5% same store sales growth in Australia;

§ the benefit from 19 new stores in Australia purchased in FY18;

§ sales growth of 2.5% in Hawaii and reduction in the Federal Tax rate from 34% to 21%;

§ capital expenditure on new stores and refurbishments of NZ$47 million in FY19; and

§ foreign exchange rates US$0.66 per NZD and A$0.91 per NZD.

6.2.4 DCF Valuation

A DCF valuation as a cross check was undertaken using RBD’s 10 year forecast financial model. Discount rates

of 8.5% to 9.0% were applied to the after tax ungeared cash flows. A terminal growth rate of 2.0% pa was

assumed. The valuation outcome of the DCF analysis was very similar to the capitalisation of earnings

valuation. The DCF valuation which was undertaken as a cross-check was $8.06 - $8.8 2 per share.

10 YEAR MODEL ASSUMPTIONS

New Zealand

§ New Zealand same store growth:

KFC 4.0%

Pizza Hut 3.7%

Carl’s Jr. 3.0%

§ New Zealand store numbers:

KFC new stores

21

Pizza Hut sales to franchisees

21

New Pizza Hut to be sold to franchisees

57

Carl’s Jr. new stores

8

§ New Zealand EBITDA margin:

KFC 20.5%

Pizza Hut 10.6%

Carl’s Jr. 11.0%

Australia

§ Australia same store growth of 3.4% per annum; and

§ EBITDA margin for Australian stores of 15.7%.

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





29

Hawaii (including Guam and Saipan)

§ Hawaii same store growth:

Taco Bell 4.6%

Pizza Hut 1.0%

§ Hawaii new stores:

Taco Bell 11

Pizza Hut 7

§ Hawaii EBITDA margin:

Taco Bell

19.7%

Pizza Hut

9.0%

6.3 Earnings Multiple Analysis

6.3.1 Implied multiples

Grant Samuel’s valuation of RBD implies the following multiples:

RBD – IMPLIED VALUATION MULTIPLES

MULTIPLES VARIABLE ($MILLION) LOW HIGH

Enterprise Value Range ($ millions) 1,154 1,250

Multiple of EBITDA (times)

Year ended February 2018 (normalised)

10

94.4 12.2 13.2

Year ended February 2019 (forecast)

11

96.1 12.0 13.0

Multiple of EBIT (times)

Year ended February 2018 (normalised)

10

62.5 18.5 20.0

Year ended February 2019 (forecast)

11

62.0 18.6 20.1

Grant Samuel has reviewed the multiples having regard to the multiples implied by transactions involving

franchisees of international fast food businesses and the multiples implied by the current share prices of

listed franchisees of international fast food brands. An explanation regarding interpreting the above

mul tiples is included in Appendix E. Grant Samuel’s enterprise value range implies a multiple range of 12.0

to 1 3.0 times forecast FY19 EBITDA.

6.3.2 Transaction Evidence

The valuation of RBD has been considered having regard to the earnings multiples implied by the price at

which franchisees of international fast food businesses have changed hands. Grant Samuel has primarily

focused on franchisees of the major international fast food restaurant chains. The transaction evidence is

summarised below:


_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

10

Adjusted for non-trading items

11

Excludes earnings from Starbucks

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





30

TRANSACTIONS INVOLVING INTERNATIONAL FAST FOOD BRAND FRANCHISEES

DATE TARGET ACQUIRER

IMPLIED

ENTERPRISE

VALUE

(MILLIONS)

EBITDA MULTIPLE

(TIMES)

EBIT MULTIPLE

(TIMES)

HISTORIC FORECAST HISTORIC FORECAST

ASIA PACIFIC

Jun 17 28 KFC stores in Australia Collins Foods A$112.0 7.0 n.a. 10.2 n.a.

May 16

13 KFC stores in Australia Collins Foods A$25.5 5.9 n.a. n.a. n.a.

Mar 16

42 KFC stores in Australia RBD A$82.4 5.5 n.a. n.a. n.a.

Feb 16 Burger King Korea Affinity PE US$171 11.4 n.a. n.a. n.a.

May 14 SRS Korea CVC Capital US$98 5.4 n.a. 8.9 n.a.

Nov 13 44 KFC stores in Australia Collins Foods A$55.6 n.a. 5.5 n.a. n.a.

Aug 13 75% of Domino’s Pizza Japan DPE A$282 10.4 n.a. n.a. n.a.

Aug 13 KFC Indonesia Dyviacom US$492 14.2 15.3 19.3 25.8

Nov 12 SRS Korea DIP Holdings US$138 5.3 n.a. 7.7 n.a.

Aug 12 Crust Gourmet Pizza Retail Food Group A$44.8 n.a. n.a. n.a. 7.0

Feb 12 Pizza Capers Retail Food Group A$30.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. 7.0

Dec 11 KFC Malaysia CVC Capital US$1,038 9.6 9.5 13.8 13.1

Dec 11 Pizza Hut Malaysia CVC Capital US$956 7.0 6.3 10.3 8.8

Oct 11 Burger King NZ Blackstone NZ$155 8.2 7.9 10.5 11.5

Average - Asia Pacific 8.2 9.2 11.5 12.3

UK & EUROPE

Feb 16 Nordic Service Partners LGT Capital SEK 468 7.9 6.0 34.2 16.7

Jul 16 34.3% of AmRest Holdings Finaccess £1,250 13.5 12.0 27.4 23.6

Dec 15 Joey’s Pizza DPE €79 13.2 11.3 n.a. n.a.

Oct 15

Pizza Sprint DPE

€35 10.0 n.a. n.a. n.a.

Jul 15 31.7% of AmRest Holdings Finaccess £770 11.5 10.3 25.1 26.1

Aug 14 Grupo Zena Alsea, SA.B. De CV €270 8.4 n.a. n.a. n.a.

Feb 11 Restauravia Group AmRest Holdings €198 7.4 n.a. n.a. n.a.

Average - UK & Europe 10.3 9.9 28.9 22.1

THE AMERICAS

Oct 16 Pacific Island Restaurants RBD US$105 7.6 n.a. n.a. n.a.

Jan 15

Brazil Fast Food Corp Shareholders US$137 8.1 n.a. 10.1 n.a.

Mar 14

Morgan’s Foods Inc. Apex Restaurants US$50 7.7 n.a. 14.4 n.a.

Nov 11

NPC Restaurant Holdings Olympus Partners US$755 7.5 n.a. 13.7 n.a.

Average - The Americas

7.7 - 12.7 -

Average – All Transactions 8.8 9.5 15.8 16.0

Grant Samuel analysis

12

(see Appendix B)

When observing the table above the following points should be noted:

§

approximately three quarters (19 of 27) of the transactions above involve franchisees for Yum!

restaurant concepts (KFC, Pizza Hut and Taco Bell). Of these transactions, eight transactions involved

KFC only franchisees, two involved Pizza Hut only franchisees and the other nine transactions involved

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

12

Grant Samuel analysis based on company announcements and, in the absence of company published financial forecasts, brokers’

reports. Where company financial forecasts are not available, the median of the financial forecasts prepared by a range of brokers has

generally been used to derive relevant forecast value parameters. The source, date and number of broker reports utilised for each

company depends on analyst coverage, availability and recent corporate activity.

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





31

fran chisees of multiple Yum! brands. Grant Samuel has not focused on transactions involving head

franchisor businesses;

§

the implied EBITDA multiples of the transaction evidence range between ̃5.3 times historical EBITDA

to ̃14.2 times EBITDA reflecting differences in the size of the targets, the growth prospects of the

targets in their primary geographies and the degree of strategic importance of the acquisitions and

synergies. For transactions involving smaller franchisees (i.e. with less than US$40m of EBITDA) the

implied EBITDA multiples typically range between ̃5.5 to ̃8.5 times EBITDA. The transactions

undertaken by Collins Food Limited (the largest KFC franchisee in Australia) during 2016 and 2017 were

at multiples of 5.9 and 7.0 times EBITDA and the two transactions by RBD announced during 2016

implied multiples of 5.5 and 7.6 times EBITDA;

§

smaller transactions that transacted at higher EBITDA multiples include the purchase of a substantial

shareholding in KFC Indonesia by Dyviacom (at 14.2 times), the purchase of Burger King Korea by Affinity

Private Equity (at 11.4 times) and the purchase of a 75% stake in Domino’s Pizza Japan by Domino’s

Pizza Enterprise Limited at 10.4 times. Each of these target companies operated in markets with

significant scope for growth in the store networks and this may explain the higher implied multiples for

these transactions. Two of the smaller transactions at higher EBITDA multiples involved DPE purchasing

independent pizza chains in geographies where Domino’s did not have a store footprint. They were

strategic acquisitions as they expanded their store network rapidly in the markets versus new store

builds;

§

in July 2015 Finaccess Capital acquired a 31.7% shareholding in AmRest Holdings, a fast food restaurant

company operating in Central and Eastern Europe. A year later, Finaccess Capital acquired a further

34.3% stake in the company. The transactions implied EBITDA multiples of 10.3 times and 12.0 times

forecast EBITDA respectively. AmRest is of a similar size to RBD on an enterprise value basis;

§

other large transactions included CVC Capital’s acquisition of Pizza Hut Malaysia and KFC Malaysia in

December 2011 (at multiples of 6.3 and 9.5 times forecast EBITDA respectively). This multiple paid for

Pizza Hut Malaysia is close to the 7.5 times EBITDA Olympus Partners paid for NPC Restaurant Holdings,

the largest Pizza Hut franchisee in the United States;

§ the implied EBIT multiples for the transaction evidence varied significantly and in a substantial

proportion of cases EBIT was not disclosed. Grant Samuel has placed only limited reliance on the implied

EBIT multiples from the transaction evidence in assessing an appropriate capitalisation multiple for RBD;

and

§ each transaction has its own unique set of circumstances. As such it is often very difficult to identify

trends or draw any meaningful conclusions. Further details on these transactions are set out in

Appendix B.

6.3.3 Sharemarket Evidence

The valuation of RBD has been considered in the context of the multiples implied by the share market prices

of listed franchisees of the leading international fast food restaurant brands. While the size and geographies

served by these companies are different, the share market data provides a useful framework within which

to assess the valuation of RBD.

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





32

SHAREMARKET RATINGS OF LISTED FAST FOOD FRANCHISE COMPANIES

13


ENTITY

MARKET

CAP.

(NZ $

MILLIONS)

EBITDA MULTIPLE (TIMES)

14

EBIT MULTIPLE (TIMES)

15


HISTORIC

FORECAST

YEAR 1

FORECAST

YEAR 2

HISTORIC

FORECAST

YEAR 1

FORECAST

YEAR 2

RBD (pre -offer price) 933 11.5 10.8 9.7 17.4 16.1 14.1

RBD (at Offer price) 1,175 14.1 13.3 11.9 21.3 19.8 17.2

ASIA PACIFIC


Berjaya Food Berhad 175 8.3 7.6 6.9 14.7 12.5 11.1

Collins Foods Limited 899 11.3 9.5 8.8 16.5 14.3 13.2

Dominos Enteprises Limited 4,546 18.4* 16.2 14.2 23.2 20.1 17.3

KFC Holdings Japan Limited 575 12.6 n.a. n.a. n.m. n.a. n.a.

PT Fast Food Indonesia Tbk 331 8.8 7.8 6.8 26.2 21.2 16.9

PT Map Boga Adiperkasa Tbk 386 10.9 n.a. n.a. 19.9 n.a. n.a.

PT Sarimelati Kenana Tbk 267 7.2 6.8 5.8 10.4 11.5 10.5

Yum! China Holdings Inc. 19,827 9.6 9.4 9.1 15.4 13.5 12.7

Average - Asia Pacific 10.9 9.5 8.6 18.0 15.5 13.6

UK & EUROPE

AmRest Holdings BV 3,390 17.2 13.2 10.5 38.5* 28.7* 20.2*

DP Eurasia N.V. 383 13.1 11.6 9.1 22.8 17.1 12.7

Domino’s Pizza Group PLC 2,564 13.9 13.3 12.1 16.0 15.6 14.8

Ibersol SGPS , SA 465 5.6 6.1 5.5 11.0 11.1 10.7

Sphera Franchise Group SA 316 13.7 10.7 7.9 18.2 14.9 10.8

Average - UK & Europe 11.6 10.4 8.6 16.7 14.7 12.3

THE AMERICAS


Alsea, SAB de CV 2,823 8.4 8.4 7.3 14.6 14.5 12.2

Arcos Dorados Holdings Inc. 2,311 5.8 6.9 6.1 6.5 11.9 9.0

BK Brasil SA. 1,484 17.0 12.2 9.1 39.4* 28.2* 17.8*

Meritage Hospitality Group 164 10.4 n.a. n.a. 16.2 n.a. n.a.

Prestige Holdings Limited 137 6.5 n.a. n.a. 12.4

n.a. n.a.

Average - The Americas

7.8 9.2 7.5 12.4 13.2 10.6

Average – All companies

9.7 10.0 8.5 16.3 14.9 13.6

Gran t Samuel analysis. n.m. means not meaningful

* denotes outliers

A description of each of the companies above is set out in Appendix C. When observing the table above the

following points should be noted:

§

the implied multiples of the listed comparable companies varies substantially due to differences in the

growth prospects, size , brands and operating margins of each company. In general the larger companies

trade at higher multiples and the companies exhibiting higher EBITDA growth are trading at higher

EBITDA multiples. Historic and forecast year 1 multiples can often be very high as the contribution from

new stores is yet to be fully realised until forecast year 2;

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

13

The companies selected have a variety of year ends. The financial information presented in the Historic column corresponds to the most

recent actual annual result. The forecast column corresponds to the forecast for the subsequent year.

14

Represents gross capitalisation (that is, the sum of the market capitalisation adjusted for minorities, plus borrowings less cash as at the

latest balance date) divided by EBITDA.

15

Represents gross capitalisation divided by EBIT.

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





33

§

Grant Samuel has not focused on Master Franchise businesses. They tend to trade at higher earnings

multiples reflecting the value of their brands and lower capital intensity;

§

Domino’s Pizza Enterprise Limited and Domino’s Pizza Group PLC (Domino’s Pizza UK) are the largest

Domino’s franchisees globally with 2,393 and 1,192 stores respectively. Their higher trading multiples

in part reflect the success of the Domino’s brand globally, which has been growing faster than its

primary rival Pizza Hut and an expectation for further strong growth in earnings for both companies as

they roll out new stores in their existing geographies. DP Eurasia N.V, which operates in Turkey and

Russia is also trading at relatively high multiples reflecting the underdeveloped nature of these markets;

§

AmRest Holdings BV (which is 56.4% owned by Global Valar), Sphera Franchise Group SA and BK Brasil

SA are forecast to achieve strong growth in EBITDA in the next 2 years reflecting the opportunity to roll

out new stores in their target geographies and rising disposable incomes in these markets. The historic

and forecast year 1 trading multiples for these companies are therefore relatively high;

§

Collins Food Limited is a close comparable to RBD in so far that it primarily operates KFC restaurants in

Australia;

§

the multiples are based on closing share prices as at 14 November 2018. The share prices and the

multiples do not include a premium for control. Shares in listed companies normally trade at a discount

to the underlying value of the companies as a whole;

§

the companies selected have varying financial year ends. The data presented above is the most recent

annual historical result plus the subsequent forecast year; and

§

there are considerable differences between the operations and scale of the comparable companies

when compared with RBD. In addition, care needs to be exercised when comparing multiples of New

Zealand companies with internationally listed companies. Differences in regulatory environments,

share market and broader economic conditions, taxation systems and accounting standards hinder

comparisons.

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





34

7 Merits of the Global Valar Offer

7.1 The value of the Global Valar Offer

The value of the Offer can be assessed with reference to a number of factors:

§

Grant Samuel’s assessment of the value of RBD. In Grant Samuel>s opinion the full underlying value of

RBD shares is in the range of $8.1 5 to $8.9 2 per share as set out in Section 6. This value represents the

value of ac-uiring 100% of the e-uity in RBD and therefore includes a premium for control. In Grant

Samuel>s opinion the offer price under a takeover offer where the offeror will gain control should be

within, or exceed, the proBrated full underlying valuation range of the company. The Offer price of

$9.45 per share is above Grant Samuel’s assessed value range for RBD shares. The diagram below

compares the Offer price with Grant Samuel>s assessed value range for RBD shares and the RBD share

price immediately prior to the announcement of the Offer;

GLOBAL VALAR OFFER VERSUS GRANT SAMUEL VALUATION RANGE AND PRE OFFER SHARE PRICE

(NZ$ PER SHARE)


§

the premium implied by the Offer. The Offer represents a premium of 24.3% relative to the closing

price of $7.60 per share on 17 October 2018 being the last trading day prior to the announcement of

the Offer and a premium of 22.9% over the volume weighted average share price (VWAP) over the 30

trading days prior to the announcement of $7.69 per share. Over the longer term the Offer represents

a 23.1% premium to the 6Bmonth WAP. The premium for control is close to the average premium of

control generally observed in successful takeovers of other listed companies. Since the announcement

of the Offer at a price of $9.45 per share, RBD shares have traded in the range of $8.12 to $8.72 per

share; and

§

comparable company and comparable transaction data. The Offer implies multiples of 13.9 times

historical EBITDA and 13.7 times forecast EBITDA for F19. Grant Samuel>s analysis suggests the

historical and forecast EBITDA multiples implied by the Offer are attractive when compared to the

multiples implied by the prices paid for controlling shareholdings in international fast food franchisee

businesses.

$9.45

$8.15

$8.92

$7.60

$0.00

$2.00

$4.00

$6.00

$8.00

$10.00

$12.00

LowHigh

Offer PriceGrant Samuel valuationPre offer share price

(17 Oct 2018)

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





35

7.2 The timing and circumstances surrounding the Offer

The Offer follows an unsolicited approach from Finaccess Capital. RBD commenced negotiating a transaction

with Finaccess Capital culminating in the announced form of the Offer. Finaccess Capital is familiar with the

fast food restaurant industry. It has a majority shareholding in AmRest Holdings BV, which operates

franchised and owned fast food restaurant chains in Central and Eastern Europe including Pizza Hut and KFC.

7.3 Outcomes of the Global Valar Offer

The Offer is su bject to several key conditions. For the Offer to be successful, more than 50.01% of the total

number of voting securities in RBD must be accepted into the Offer. The possible outcomes of the Offer are:

Global Valar achieves acceptances less than 50.01%

In this circumstance no shares will be acquired by Global Valar and the shareholding structure of RBD will be

unchanged. If Global Valar is not successful in achieving the 50.01% minimum threshold at its current offer

price it may or may not choose to increase the offer price. If Global Valar chooses to increase its current

offer price while the Global Valar Offer is still open the increased value will be available to all shareholders

even if they have already accepted the current offer price. Any increased price would also be available to

the locked up shareholders.

Global Valar achieves acceptances greater than 50.01% but less than 75%

In these circumstances assuming the Offer becomes unconditional:

§ Global Valar will proceed to acquire all of the shares that have been accepted into the Global Valar Offer.

Accepting shareholders will not be subject to scaling or pro-rata adjustment of their acceptances. Global

Valar will become the cornerstone shareholder in RBD with a shareholding of between 50.01% and 75%.

The final percentage owned by Global Valar will be a function of the level of acceptances from all

shareholders. The liquidity of RBD shares will be reduced, and the free float will be reduced. The closer

the Global Valar shareholding approaches the 75% limit, the more the liquidity in RBD shares will

contract;

§ At a shareholding of between 50.01% and 75% Global Valar would have effective but not absolute

control of RBD. Global Valar would be able to control the Board and therefore key decisions affecting

the business such as strategy, dividend policy, appointment of Directors, acquisitions and divestments

and capital programmes. W ith a shareholding greater than 50% Global Valar would be able to dictate

the outcome of ordinary resolutions put to shareholders, unless it is disqualified from voting under NZX

Listing Rules. It would not be able to control but would have significant influence over special

resolutions (those resolutions requiring 75% of votes cast in respect of the resolution). Special

resolutions often relate to transformational events such as major transactions or changes to the

constitution. There are protections for minority shareholders in the NZX Listing Rules and the

Companies Act; and

§ RBD must continue to have at least two independent directors on the board of RBD. Global Valar will

be able to determine the identities of those independent directors. At the time of the preparation of

this report, Finaccess Capital have given no information as to whom the independent directors will be.

Global Valar receives acceptances greater than 75%

In these circumstances, assuming the Offer becomes unconditional, Global Valar is not permitted to acquire

more than 75% of the issued shares in RBD under the construct of the Global Valar Offer. In the case of

excess acceptances, Global Valar is required under Rule 12 of the Takeovers Code to take up from each

offeree the lesser of:

§ 75% of a shareholders shares accepted into the Offer; and

§ all of the shares in respect of which the shareholder has accepted into the Offer.

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





36

If the number of shares acquired under this mechanism is less than the total percentage sought (75% in this

case), then Global Valar will acquire further shares from accepting shareholders pro rata to the total shares

accepted into the Offer by accepting shareholders.

If the Global Valar Offer is successful at any level over the 75% threshold (recognising that it is highly unlikely

that acceptances representing exactly 75% will be received), RBD shareholders who accept the Global Valar

Offer for their entire shareholding will not be able to sell all of the accepted shares into the Global Valar Offer

as excess acceptances will be scaled back. The table below shows examples of various levels of total

acceptances to the Global Valar Offer, and the implications for accepting shareholders:

NUMBER AND % OF SHARES ACCEPTED INTO THE GLOBAL VALAR OFFER THAT WOULD BE ACQUIRED BY GLOBAL

VALAR

The table above shows that if acceptances in respect of greater than 75% of RBD’s shares then a shareholder

who accepts shares into the Global Valar Offer will only have certainty that 75% of their shares would be

acquired under the Global Valar Offer. The level of scaling increases as the overall acceptance level increases

e.g. if all RBD shareholders accept the Global Valar Offer for all of their shares, Global Valar will only acquire

75% of each shareholder’s shares.

All shareholders are treated equally in a partial offer regardless of their shareholding. Accordingly, there is

no certainty at this stage what proportion of shares an accepting shareholder will be able to sell if the Global

Valar Offer is successful. In that circumstance accepting shareholders would end up with small and

potentially uneconomic parcels of shares. This is a less appealing feature of partial offers generally.

Under a partial offer the actual premium over the closing price before the Offer was announced is less as not

all shares will be accepted into the Offer. Assuming 75% of shares are accepted into the Offer and the share

price after the Offer closes reverts to the 1 month VWAP (calculated prior to the offer being announced), the

wei ghted average share price is $9.01 wh ich is a premium of only 18.6% over the $7.60 pre -Offer closing

share price.

If the 75% acceptance threshold is met in the last 5 working days of the Offer period, the Offer period is

automatically increased by 10 working days .


% OF SHARES THAT ARE

TENDERED INTO THE OFFER

% OF SHARES TENDERED

INTO THE OFFER THAT WILL

BE ACQUIRED BY GLOBAL

VALAR POST SCALING

EXAMPLE:

NUMBER OF SHARES THAT

WILL BE ACQUIRED BY

GLOBAL VALAR UNDER THE

OFFER, ASSUMING A

SHAREHOLDER HAS AND

TENDERS 1,000 RBD SHARES

EXAMPLE:

NUMBER OF SHARES

OWNED AFTER THE GLOBAL

VALAR OFFER HAS CLOSED,

ASSUMING A SHAREHOLDER

HAS AND TENDERS 1,000

SHARES

50.01% 100.00% 1,000 -

55.00% 100.00% 1,000 -

60.00% 100.00% 1,000 -

65.00% 100.00% 1,000 -

70.00% 100.00% 1,000 -

75.00% 100.00% 1,000 -

80.00% 93.75% 938 62

85.00% 88.24% 882 118

90.00% 83.33% 833 167

95.00% 78.95% 789 211

100.00% 75.00% 750 250

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





37

As the Global Valar Offer is a partial offer there is no certainty what proportion of each accepting

shareholder’s shares in RBD will be bought if the Global Valar Offer is successful. All that is certain is that

if the Offer becomes unconditional, shareholders will be able to sell at least 75% of the shares they

currently own if they accept all their shares into the Global Valar Offer and the Global Valar Offer is

accepted by shareholders at 50.01% or greater of the issued shares in RBD. Given that excess acceptances

will be scaled down it is almost certain that if the Global Valar Offer achieves acceptances greater than

75%, accepting shareholders who accept for more than 75% of their holdings will not be able to sell all

their shares into the Global Valar Offer. This lack of certainty is problematic for communications with

shareholders but is in line with the rules of the Takeovers Code.

7.4 Implications for RBD Shareholders if the Global Valar Offer is Successful

If the Global Valar Offer is successful at any level of shareholding between approximately 50.01% and 75%,

then RBD will remain a listed company with Global Valar owning a cornerstone shareholding and with

effective control over RBD. In these circumstances:

§ under the creep provisions of the Takeovers Code, Global Valar will be able to acquire up to a further 5%

per annum of the outstanding ordinary shares in RBD after one year following completion of the Offer

without making a further partial or full takeover offer for RBD;

§ Global Valar could if it wished, sell down some of its shareholding without the prior approval of RBD

shareholders. Global Valar could not sell its entire shareholding to another party unless either RBD

shareholders approve the transaction in advance or the other party makes a full or partial offer

conditional upon receiving acceptances of more than 50%;

§ the attraction of RBD as a takeover target could be impacted both positively and negatively if the Global

Valar Offer is successful. For any subsequent takeover offer for 100% of the company from another

party to be successful, it would require Global Valar to sell its current, or any increased shareholding, in

RBD to the new offeror; and

§ existing RBD shareholders are highly likely to retain a shareholding in RBD as a consequence of the

partial offer structure.

7.5 Other Merits of the Global Valar Offer

In assessing the other merits of the Global Valar Offer Grant Samuel considered the following factors:

§ Approximately 40.4% of the issued shares in RBD are owned by the top 10 shareholders. Interests

associated with Stephen Copulos have entered into a lock-in deed with Global Valar for their 8.52%

shareholding which requires them to accept the offer. Mr Copulos is a director of RBD. The decisions

of the other top shareholders on whether or not to accept the Global Valar offer could be instrumental

in determining whether Global Valar achieve the 50.01% minimum acceptance level ;

§ the Global Valar Offer is subject to a number of conditions, which may be waived at Global Valar’s

discretion. These discretionary conditions principally relate to material changes to the RBD business

and capital structure but also include the following specific condition:

%oa% a%ar otaining a%% neessar1 onsents re*uire uner the verseas Investment At 2005

an the verseas Investment egu%ations 2005 or %oa% a%ar to om)%ete the a*uisition o

the shares in aorane 0ith the  er3 on terms that are usua% or the granting o suh onsents.

When and if all consents will be obtained is uncertain. The last date for the consents to be received is

20 working days after the Offer closes, unless otherwise agreed by RBD and Global Valar. If all the

necessary regulatory consents are not obtained either by the last date having passed or the relevant

regulator refusing to provide consent, the Offer will lapse and Global Valar will not acquire any shares

in RBD;

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





38

§ whether the Global Valar Offer is successful or not, the RBD share price will in all likelihood, fall below

the Offer price shortly after the Offer closes, reflecting both the success or not of the Offer itself and

the partial offer structure where not all shares held by shareholders are able to be sold into the Offer;

§ The Offer price of $ 9.45 implies a 24.3% premium to the share price on the day before the offer was

announced. As the offer is for only 75% of the shares on issue and assuming that all shareholders accept,

such that each shareholder will be left with 25% of their existing shareholding the actual premium is

less than 24.3% depending on the post offer share price:

IMPLIED PREMIA AT DIFFERENT POST OFFER SHARE PRICES

Post Offer Share Price $7.25 $7.50 $7.75

Implied Premium 17.1% 17.9% 18.8%

§ RBD has agreed to pay Global Valar a reimbursement sum of NZ$7 million (plus GST, if any), if:

• any director of RBD fails to recommend the Offer, makes adverse comments in relation to the Offer

or (other than Stephen Copulous) fails to accept the Offer, other than as a result of:

- Grant Samuel’s independent adviser report concluding that the consideration under the Offer

does not fall within or above its valuation range for the shares;

- a failure of any of the conditions in relation to Overseas Investment Office consent or Yum!

consent; or

- Global Valar breaching the pre-bid agreement.

• a competing transaction is announced prior to the closing of the Offer and is successfully

implemented within 12 months of that announcement;

• RBD, with the intention of undermining or frustrating the Offer, solicits or encourages a person to

acquire 10% or more of the shares and that person does not accept the Offer;

• the pre-bid agreement is terminated after Global Valar fails to match a superior proposal; or

• any of the Couplos interests fail to accept the Offer in accordance with the lock-in deed.

Global Valar is liable to pay a reverse break fee of NZ$7 million (plus GST, if any) to RBD if Global Valar

breaches its obligations to make payment to shareholders who accept the Offer.

§

it is not uncommon for takeover transactions to include a sharing of the “synergy” benefits from an

acquisition between the buyer and the seller. As Global Valar is a financial buyer there are no obvious

operating synergies that should eventuate if the Offer is implemented;

§ RBD shareholders who choose not to vote in favour the Offer may be expecting that Global Valar or

another bidder may make another offer at a higher price. There is no certainty regarding the ongoing

performance of RBD or that a subsequent offer from Global Valar will be forthcoming if the Offer is

rejected by RBD shareholders; and

§ the risks and benefits associated with an investment in RBD are outlined in Section 7.6 below. For those

shareholders wishing to have an equity investment in the fast food restaurant sector there are other

comparable public-market investment opportunities internationally.

7.6 Risks and Benefits of an investment in RBD

If the Offer does not meet the minimum 50.01% threshold RBD will remain as a listed company with no shares

acquired by Global Valar as a consequence of the Offer. If the Offer does meet the minimum 50.01% and the

conditions of the Offer are satisfied the Offer will be completed. In that circumstance shareholders in RBD

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





39

are highly likely to retain a shareholding in RBD, albeit owning smaller shareholdings. The outlook for RBD

with or without Global Valar as a cornerstone shareholder is therefore very relevant to RBD shareholders in

deciding whether to support or reject the Offer. Grant Samuel makes the following observations in respect

of RBD:

§ RBD shareholders will continue to hold their shares and have exposure to the fast food sector and to a

company with a strong record of growth and with identified options to continue to expand in New

Zealand, Australia and the US;

§ the exposure brought by the Global Valar offer may attract new potential buyers. RBD is very heavily

exposed to Yum! through the Pizza Hut, KFC and Taco Bell franchises. Following the disposal of Starbucks

only the Carl’s Jr. franchise will not be under an agreement from Yum!. A bidder for RBD would have to

be confident that Yum! will give its approval to a new controlling shareholder. Finaccess Capital through

its AmRest subsidiary is a Pizza Hut and KFC franchisee in Europe;

§ the fast food market is highly competitive, particularly in pizza, which is primarily a take home/delivery

business and burgers. In New Zealand and to a lesser extent in Australia and the US, KFC has a strong

market position and accordingly enjoys better margins than Pizza Hut;

§ the strength of the KFC brand will underpin the earnings and growth of RBD in the foreseeable future;

§ RBD has identified possible acquisition opportunities in Australia and the US, which if successful would

underpin the strong growth in earnings experienced over the last two years; and

§ RBD has the opportunity to build KFC stores in Hawaii and is in discussion with Yum! about Taco Bell

stores in New Zealand and Australia

A consideration for RBD shareholders is whether, in time, an investment in RBD will yield a higher value

outcome than the Offer. The implied multiple of FY19 EBITDA of 13.1 times is relatively high when compared

with historic transactions of international fast food franchisees. As with any equity investment there are

risks associated with the market in which the company operates. The risks associated with an investment in

RBD include:

§

the fast food market is highly competitive and will remain so. Pizza Hut in New Zealand in particular

has suffered from margin pressure, in part from the larger Domino’s chain;

§

stock markets remain high despite some recent weakness in New Zealand and around the world. Whilst

no immediate corrections are likely, the gradual tightening of the US Federal Reserve Bank in the US

will inevitably lead to pressure on share prices. The Global Valar Offer is at a 24.3% premium to the

price of the RBD shares before the announcement of the indicative proposal to make the Offer;

§

RBD’s relationship with Yum! is a strength as its brands are strong and well supported. Against that,

Yum! as a franchisor is in a strong position to ensure that the franchise agreements are in its best

interest and do not overly enrich the franchisees. It also has significant influence as to who can become

a controlling shareholder of RBD; and

§

RBD has experienced strong growth through its acquisition strategy. On a go forward basis, there is a

risk that the number and quality of future acquisitions varies from RBD’s experience over recent years.

7.7 Other Factors

In Sections 2.2 of this report there is a short list of the operational and governance undertakings given to

both RBD and to Yum!. If the Global Valar Offer is successful, Global Valar will hold between 50.01% and

75.0% of RBD, and in doing so will have a large measure of control. The operational and governance

undertakings provided by Global Valar give remaining minority shareholders, when combined with the NZX

listing rules and the Companies Act, some comfort that Global Valar will continue to operate RBD in a similar

manner as currently.

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





40

RBD is likely to be a less attractive investment proposition to institutional investors due to the much lower

levels of liquidity and a much diminished ability to influence the board of RBD which may be dominated by

Global Valar representatives.

If the Offer is successful, all of the RBD’s Australian carried forward revenue losses will be forfeited and it is

likely that all of, or the majority of, the RBD’s Australian carried forward capital losses will be forfeited. This

will mean those losses will not be available to set-off against future income or capital gains.

7.8 Likelihood of alternative offers

The prospect of an acquisition by Global Valar was announced on 18 October 2018. As noted earlier, the

Global Valar Offer may encourage other bidders to come forward if the Offer does not proceed for whatever

reason. To date, no alternative takeover offers or proposals have been forthcoming.

7.9 Acceptance or rejection of the Global Valar Offer

Deciding whether or not to accept the Offer is a matter for individual shareholders based on their own view

as to value and future market conditions, risk profile, liquidity preference, portfolio strategy, tax position and

other factors. In particular, taxation consequences will vary widely across shareholders. Shareholders will

need to consider these consequences and, if appropriate, consult their own professional adviser(s).


GRANT SAMUEL & ASSOCIATES LIMITED

30 NOVEMBER 2018

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





41

APPENDIX A - QUALIFICATIONS, DECLARATIONS AND CONSENTS

1. Qualifications

The Grant Samuel group of companies provides corporate advisory services in relation to mergers and

acquisitions, capital raisings, corporate restructuring and financial matters generally. One of the primary

activities of Grant Samuel is the preparation of corporate and business valuations and the provision of

independent advice and expert’s reports in connection with mergers and acquisitions, takeovers and capital

reconstructions. Since inception in 1988, Grant Samuel and its related companies have prepared more than

400 public expert and appraisal reports.

The persons responsible for preparing this report on behalf of Grant Samuel are Michael Lorimer, BCA, Simon

Cotter, BCom, MAppFin, F Fin, Christopher Smith, BCom, PGDipFin, MAppFin, and Jake Sheehan, BCom

(Hons). Each has a significant number of years of experience in relevant corporate advisory matters.

2. Limitations and Reliance on Information

Grant Samuel’s opinion is based on economic, market and other conditions prevailing at the date of this

report. Such conditions can change significantly over relatively short periods of time. The report is based

upon financial and other information provided by the directors, management and advisers of RBD. Grant

Samuel has considered and relied upon this information. Grant Samuel believes that the information

provided was reliable, complete and not misleading and has no reason to believe that any material facts have

been withheld.


The information provided has been evaluated through analysis, enquiry, and review for the purposes of

forming an opinion as to the underlying value of RBD. However in such assignments time is limited and Grant

Samuel does not warrant that these inquiries have identified or verified all of the matters which an audit,

extensive examination or “due diligence” investigation might disclose.


The time constraints imposed by the Offer are tight. This timeframe restricts the ability to undertake a

detailed investigation of RBD. In any event, an analysis of the merits of the Offer is in the nature of an overall

opinion rather than an audit or detailed investigation. Grant Samuel has not undertaken a due diligence

investigation of RBD. In addition, preparation of this report does not imply that Grant Samuel has audited in

any way the management accounts or other records of RBD. It is understood that, where appropriate, the

accounting information provided to Grant Samuel was prepared in accordance with generally accepted

accounting practice and in a manner consistent with methods of accounting used in previous years.


An important part of the information base used in forming an opinion of the kind expressed in this report is

the opinions and judgement of the management of the relevant enterprise. That information was also

evaluated through analysis, enquiry and review to the extent practicable. However, it must be recognised

that such information is not always capable of external verification or validation.


The information provided to Grant Samuel included projections of future revenues, expenditures, profits and

cash flows of RBD prepared by the management of RBD. Grant Samuel has used these projections for the

purpose of its analysis. Grant Samuel has assumed that these projections were prepared accurately, fairly

and honestly based on information available to management at the time and within the practical constraints

and limitations of such projections. It is assumed that the projections do not reflect any material bias, either

positive or negative. Grant Samuel has no reason to believe otherwise.


However, Grant Samuel in no way guarantees or otherwise warrants the achievability of the projections of

future profits and cash flows for RBD. Projections are inherently uncertain. Projections are predictions of

future events that cannot be assured and are necessarily based on assumptions, many of which are beyond

the control of management. The actual future results may be significantly more or less favourable.

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





42


To the extent that there are legal issues relating to assets, properties, or business interests or issues relating

to compliance with applicable laws, regulations, and policies, Grant Samuel assumes no responsibility and

offers no legal opinion or interpretation on any issue. In forming its opinion, Grant Samuel has assumed,

except as specifically advised to it, that:

§ the title to all such assets, properties, or business interests purportedly owned by RBD is good and

marketable in all material respects, and there are no material adverse interests, encumbrances,

engineering, environmental, zoning, planning or related issues associated with these interests, and that

the subject assets, properties, or business interests are free and clear of any and all material liens,

encumbrances or encroachments;

§ there is compliance in all material respects with all applicable national and local regulations and laws,

as well as the policies of all applicable regulators other than as publicly disclosed, and that all required

licences, rights, consents, or legislative or administrative authorities from any government, private

entity, regulatory agency or organisation have been or can be obtained or renewed for the operation

of the business of RBD, other than as publicly disclosed;

§ various contracts in place and their respective contractual terms will continue and will not be materially

and adversely influenced by potential changes in control; and

§ there are no material legal proceedings regarding the business, assets or affairs of RBD, other than as

publicly disclosed.

3. Disclaimers

It is not intended that this report should be used or relied upon for any purpose other than as an expression

of Grant Samuel’s opinion as to the merits of the Offer. Grant Samuel expressly disclaims any liability to any

RBD security holder who relies or purports to rely on the report for any other purpose and to any other party

who relies or purports to rely on the report for any purpose whatsoever.


This report has been prepared by Grant Samuel with care and diligence and the statements and opinions

given by Grant Samuel in this report are given in good faith and in the belief on reasonable grounds that such

statements and opinions are correct and not misleading. However, no responsibility is accepted by Grant

Samuel or any of its officers or employees to the extent allowed by law for errors or omissions however

arising in the preparation of this report, provided that this shall not absolve Grant Samuel from liability arising

from an opinion expressed recklessly or in bad faith.


Grant Samuel has had no involvement in the preparation of the Target Company Statement issued by RBD

and has not verified or approved any of the contents of the Target Company Statement. Grant Samuel does

not accept any responsibility for the contents of the Target Company Statement (except for this report).

4. Independence

Grant Samuel and its related entities do not have any shareholding in or other relationship or conflict of

interest with RBD or Global Valar that could affect its ability to provide an unbiased opinion in relation to the

Offer. Grant Samuel had no part in the formulation of the Offer. Its only role has been the preparation of

this report. Grant Samuel will receive a fixed fee for the preparation of this report. This fee is not contingent

on the outcome of the Offer. Grant Samuel will receive no other benefit for the preparation of this report.

Grant Samuel considers itself to be independent for the purposes of the Takeovers Code.

5. Information

Grant Samuel has obtained all the information that it believes is desirable for the purposes of preparing this

report, including all relevant information which is or should have been known to any Director of RBD and

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





43

made available to the Directors. Grant Samuel confirms that in its opinion the information provided by RBD

and contained within this report is sufficient to enable RBD security holders to understand all relevant factors

and make an informed decision in respect of the Offer. The following information was used and relied upon

in preparing this report:


5.1 Publicly Available Information

§ Takeover Notice lodged by Global Valar;

§ RBD’s Annual Reports for the financial years ended February 2015-2018 ;

§ RBD’s Full Year result presentation for the year to 26 February 2018 ;

§ RBD’s Interim Report for the seven periods to 10 September 2018;

§ RBD’s AGM presentation, dated 21 June 2018; and

§ RBD 1H18 Guidance announcement dated 28 September 2017.


5.2 Non Public Information

§ RBD’s monthly management accounts for the nine periods to 5 November 2018;

§ RBD’s Board Papers; and

§ Pre -bid agreement between Global Valar and RBD.

6. Declarations

RBD has agreed that it will indemnify Grant Samuel and its employees and officers in respect of any liability

suffered or incurred as a result of or in connection with the preparation of the report. This indemnity will

not apply in respect of the proportion of any liability found by a Court to be primarily caused by any conduct

involving gross negligence or wilful misconduct by Grant Samuel. RBD has also agreed to indemnify Grant

Samuel and its employees and officers for time spent and reasonable legal costs and expenses incurred in

relation to any inquiry or proceeding initiated by any person. Where Grant Samuel or its employees and

officers are found to have been grossly negligent or engaged in wilful misconduct Grant Samuel shall bear

the proportion of such costs caused by its action. Any claims by RBD are limited to an amount equal to the

fees paid to Grant Samuel.


Advance drafts of this report were provided to the directors and executive management of RBD. Certain

changes were made to the drafting of the report as a result of the circulation of the draft report. There was

no alteration to the methodology, evaluation or conclusions as a result of issuing the drafts.

7. Consents

Grant Samuel consents to the issuing of this report in the form and context in which it is to be included in the

Target Company Statement to be sent to security holders of RBD. Neither the whole nor any part of this

report nor any reference thereto may be included in any other document without the prior written consent

of Grant Samuel as to the form and context in which it appears.

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





44

APPENDIX B – RECENT TRANSACTION EVIDENCE

A brief description of each of the transactions listed in Section 6 is outlined below:

TRANSACTIONS INVOLVING FRANCHISEES OF INTERNATIONAL FAST FOOD BRANDS

ASIA PACIFIC REGION

28 KFC Stores in Australia / Collins Foods Limited

On 26 June 2017, Collins Foods Limited (CFL) announced that it had agreed to acquire 28 KFC restaurants in

Australia from Yum! for a purchase price of A$110.2 million. 14 of the restaurants were located in Tasmania,

8 in South Australia and 6 in Western Australia. For the year ended 20 February 2017 the acquisition portfolio

generated revenue of A$93.7 million and EBITDA of A$15.7 million. The purchase price implied multiples of

7.0 times EBITDA (after G&A expenses) and 6.5 times (before G&A expenses). It was reported that

depreciation was approximately 5% of sales. Applying this percentage implies the acquisition portfolio

generated EBIT of approximately A$11.0 million. The implied EBIT multiple has been estimated by Grant

Samuel at approximately 10.2 times. All of the stores acquired had been upgraded in line with Yum!’s latest

remodelling cycles. The acquisition increased CFL’s Australian KFC stores from 195 to 223 and provided it

with a presence in the South Australian and Tasmania geographies. The implied multiples of this transaction

were in line with similar transactions in Australia.

13 KFC Stores in Australia / Collins Foods Limited

On 19 May 2016, CFL announced that it had agreed to acquire 13 KFC restaurants located around the New

South Wales and Victorian border from the Wright Group for A$25.46 million (plus acquisition costs). The

acquisition on a trailing basis was delivering A$4.3 million in EBITDA (before synergies). The purchase price

implies a multiple of 5.9 times historical EBITDA. The acquisition increased CFL’s KFC restaurants to 178 to

191. The implied multiple is in line with similar transactions in Australia.

42 KFC Stores in Australia / Restaurant Brands New Zealand Limited

On 3 March 2016, RBD announced that it had agreed to acquire QSR Pty Limited (QSR), the largest KFC

franchisee in New South Wales with 42 stores for an enterprise value of A$82.4 million. QSR was generating

in excess of A$100 million in revenue p.a. and over A$15 million p.a. in EBITDA. The purchase price implied

a multiple of approximately 5.5 times EBITDA. The acquisition represented RBD’s first step into the

Australian market. The implied multiple is in line with similar transactions in Australia.

Burger King South Korea / Affinity Equity Partners

On 19 February 2016, Hong Kong based private equity firm Affinity Equity Partners disclosed that it had

agreed to acquire Burger King Korea Ltd from another private equity firm VIG Partners for KRW 210 billion

(equivalent to approximately US$171 million). For the 2015 year, Burger King Korea generated EBITDA of

KRW 18.4 billion (US$15.0 million). The purchase price implied a multiple of 11.4 times historical EBITDA. At

the end of 2015, Burger King Korea had approximately 236 stores.

SRS Korea Co., Ltd. / CVC Capital Partners Limited

On 7 May 2014, private equity firm CVC Capital Partners signed an agreement to acquire SRS KOREA Co. Ltd

(SRS) from DIP Holdings Co., Ltd for KRW 100 billion (equivalent to approximately US$98 million). SRS

operates KFC restaurants in South Korea. SRS’s historical EBITDA was approximately US$18 million and

historical EBIT was approximately US$11 million. The purchase price implies multiples of 5.4 times historical

EBITDA and 8.9 times historical EBIT. CVC Capital Partners has been an active investor in fast food restaurant

chains in Asia including the KFC and Pizza Hut chains in Malaysia.


APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





45

44 KFC Stores in Australia / Collins Foods Limited

On 28 November 2013, CFL announced that it had agreed to acquire Competitive Foods Pty Ltd (Competitive

Foods), a franchisee of 44 KFC restaurants in Australia (consisting 40 in Western Australia and 4 in the

Northern Territory), for A$55.6 million. CFL expected Competitive Foods to generate A$110 million in

revenue and between A$10.0 to $10.3 million of EBITDA in its 2014 financial year (before synergies). CFL

stated that it would invest A$25m in capital expenditure to upgrade the stores to the latest store formats

over a four-year period. The purchase price implied a multiple of 5.5 times forecast EBITDA (before synergies).

The slightly lower EBITDA multiple paid for Competitive Foods versus other transactions undertaken by CFL

is likely attributable to the restaurants requiring significant remodelling capital expenditure. The acquisition

consolidated CFL’s position as the largest KFC franchisee in Australia, increasing its number of KFC restaurants

from 125 to 169. The acquisition also provided an entry into the Northern Territory.

75% of Domino’s Pizza Japan / Domino’s Pizza Enterprises Limited

On 13 August 2013, Domino’s Pizza Enterprises Limited (DPE) announced that it had agreed to acquire a 75%

interest in Domino’s Pizza Japan (DPJ) from Bain Capital for ¥12.0 billion and provide ¥9.0 billion of new debt

funding, implying an enterprise value of ¥25.0 billion (equivalent to approximately A$282 million). DPJ is the

Domino’s Pizza Master Franchisee for Japan and as at 30 June 2013 was the third largest pizza delivery chain

in Japan with 259 stores. The acquisition of DPJ provided DPE with a substantial store growth platform with

a long-term target of 600 stores in Japan. DPJ generated pro-forma revenue of approximately A$252 million

and pro-forma EBITDA of approximately A$28 million for the financial year to 31 March 2013. The purchase

price implied a multiple of 10.4 times historical EBITDA.

PT Fast Food Indonesia / Dyviacom

On 24 April 2013, PT Dyviacom Intrabumi Tbk (Dyviacom) agreed to acquire a 35.84% stake in PT Fast Food

Indonesia Tbk (KFC Indonesia) for IDR 2 trillion (equivalent to approximately US$188 million). At the time of

this transaction KFC Indonesia had approximately 450 stores. The t ransaction price implied multiples of 15.3

times forecast EBITDA and 25.8 times forecast EBIT. As at 31 December 2017 its store network had grown to

628. KFC Indonesia remains listed on the Indonesian stock exchange and is currently trading at multiples of

6.5 times forecast EBITDA and 17.6 times forecast EBIT. The relatively high implied multiples of the 2013

transaction may be explained by the strong historical growth achieved by KFC Indonesia. Since 2013, growth

has slowed down, potentially explaining why the current trading multiples are lower.

SRS Korea Co., Ltd. / DIP Holdings Co., Ltd.

On 14 September 2014 DIP Holdings Co., Ltd (DIP) agreed to acquire the remaining 49.1% stake in SRS Korea

Co., Ltd. (SRS) for KRW 81 billion (equivalent to approximately US$137 million). SRS operates KFC stores in

South Korea. The purchase price implied multiples of 5.3 times historical EBITDA and 7.7 times historical

EBIT.

Crust Gourmet Pizza Bars / Retail Food Group Limited

On 23 August 2012, Retail Food Group Limited (RFG) announced that it had agreed to acquire Crust Gourmet

Pizza Bars (Crust). Established in Sydney in 2001, Crust had 119 outlets at the time of the acquisition

(predominantly in the states of New South Wales and Victoria ). The transaction followed RFG’s acquisition

of Pizza Capers Gourmet Kitchen brand in April 2012 which has 118 outlets (primarily in Queensland). The

purchase price for Crust was equivalent to 7.0 times adjusted FY13 EBIT.

Pizza Capers Pty Limited / Retail Food Group Limited

On 28 February 2012, RFG announced that it had agreed to acquire the gourmet pizza chain Pizza Capers Pty

Ltd (Pizza Capers) for A$30 million. Established in 1996, Pizza Capers had 110 outlets at the time of the

acquisition (predominantly in the state of Queensland). The purchase price was based on a multiple of 7.0

times forecast FY13 EBIT.

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





46

KFC Malaysia / CVC Capital

On 14 December 2011, Johor Corporation and CVC Capital Partners offered to acquire KFC Holdings Malaysia

Bhd (KFC Malaysia) for MYR 3.2 billion (approximately US$1.0 billion). KFC Malaysia operates KFC restaurants

in Malaysia, Singapore, Brunei and India. At the time of the acquisition it owned 644 KFC stores plus 102

stores under the Keai A1amas and asaas brands. Keai A1amas is a chain of restaurants that offer

chicken roasters and light chicken based snacks. asaas is a chain of restaurants that offer Asian cuisines.

The purchase price implied multiples of 9.6 times historical EBITDA and 13.8 times historical EBIT.

QSR Brands Malaysia / CVC Capital

In conjunction with the acquisition of KFC Malaysia, Johor Corporation and CVC Capital Partners acquired

QSR Brands Bhd (QSR Brands) for MYR 1.96 billion (approximately US$620 million). QSR Brands owns and

operates i22a ut stores, primarily in Malaysia. The purchase price implied multiples of 7.0 times historical

EBITDA and 10.3 times historical EBIT.

Burger King NZ / The Blackstone Group

On 17 October 2011, The Blackstone Group (Blackstone) announced that its private equity funds had agreed

to acquire Antares Restaurant Group (Antares) in New Zealand from Anchorage Capital Partners. Antares

has the exclusive franchise development rights for the Burger King brand in New Zealand with 75 restaurants

at the time of the acquisition. For the year ended 31 December 2012 (the first full year post acquisition),

Burger King NZ generated EBITDA of NZ$19.6 million and EBIT of NZ$13.5 million on total revenue of

NZ$174.9 million. It was disclosed in the financial statements that the purchase price was NZ $104.4 million.

At the time of the acquisition, Antares had net debt of NZ $50.7 million which was assumed by the purchaser.

The purchase price implies multiples of 7.9 times 2012 EBITDA and 11.5 times 2012 EBIT.

UK & EUROPE:

Nordic Service Partners Holding AB / LGT Capital Partners

On 29 February 2016, an investor group made a tender offer to acquire the 70.85% stake they did not already

own in Nordic Service Partners Holdings AB (NSP) for approximately SEK 180 million (equivalent to ̃US$55

million). NSP operates restaurants under the Burger King3 TI Fria1s, and KFC brands in Sweden and

Denmark. The purchase price implied multiples of 6.0 times forecast EBITDA and 16.7 times forecast EBIT

(based on the average broker estimate).

Joey’s Pizza / Domino’s Pizza Enterprises Limited

On 16 December 2015, DPE announced the acquisition of oe17s i22a, the largest pizza delivery chain in

Germany, for €79 million (including earnout payments). oe17s i22a was founded in 1988 and had 212 stores

at the time of the acquisition, comprising 209 franchise stores and 3 corporate owned stores. Joey’s Pizza

generated network sales of €135 million and pro-forma underlying EBITDA of €6.0 million. Forecast network

sales and pro forma underlying EBITDA for the 2015 financial year were €143 million and €7.0 million

respectively. The purchase price implied multiples of 11.3 times forecast pro forma EBITDA. The stores were

subsequently rebranded to Domino7s i22a. The relatively high purchase price multiple reflected the

complementary nature of the store network to DPE’s existing operations in Germany.

Pizza Sprint / Domino’s Pizza Enterprises Limited

On 14 October 2015, DPE announced the acquisition of i22a )rint, an independent pizza chain operating in

western France with 89 stores (77 franchised and 12 corporate owned) for initial consideration of €31.5

million plus a further €3.5 million in cash payable in instalments over 18 months based on the satisfaction of

certain criteria. i22a )rint generated normalised EBITDA of approximately €3.5 million in its 2015 financial

year. The acquisition was highly complementary to DPE’s store network in France and increased its store

count from 254 to 330. The purchase price implied a multiple of 10 times historical normalised EBITDA. The

stores were subsequently rebranded to Domino7s i22a.

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





47

AmRest Holdings SE / Finaccess Mexico

On 24 July 2015, Finaccess Mexico, SA de CV (Finaccess) signed an agreement to acquire a 31.71% stake in

AmRest Holdings SE (AmRest) from private equity firm Warburg Pincus for approximately £190 million.

AmRest operates and manages quick service restaurants, primarily in Eastern Europe. As at 31 December

2015, AmRest operated 904 stores comprising 464 KFC stores, 77 Pizza Hut stores, 100 Starbucks stores, 41

Burger King stores, 193 La Tagliatella (Tag) stores, 25 Blue Frog stores and 4 KABB stores. Tag specialises in

Italian cuisines (i.e. pastas and pizzas).

The purchase price implied an enterprise value of approximately £770 million and multiples of 11.5 times

historical EBITDA and 10.3 times forecast EBITDA.

On 12 July 2016, Finaccess agreed to acquire an additional 34.3% stake in AmRest for PLN1.55 billion

(approximately £143 million). The purchase price implied an enterprise value of approximately £1.25 billion

and multiples of 13.5 times historical EBITDA and 12.0 times forecast EBITDA.

Food Service Project, S.L. / Alsea, S.A.B. De C.V.

On 1 August 2014, listed fast food operator Alsea, S.A.B. De C.V. (Alsea) and private equity fund Allia Capital

Partners (Allia) agreed to acquire Food Services Project, S.L. (Grupo Zena) for an enterprise value of €260

million. Alsea acquired a 71.8% stake and Allia acquired the remaining 28.2% stake. In the 12 months to

June 2014 Grupo Zena’s sales were €264 million and its EBITDA was €32 million. At the date of the acquisition

Grupo Zena operated 427 restaurants in Spain under the Domino’s Pizza (127 stores), Burger King (60 stores)

and four of its own brands (240 stores). The purchase price implied a multiple of 8.1 times historical EBITDA

and 10.1 times historical EBIT.

Restauravia Grupo Empresarial S.L. / AmRest Holdings SE

On 11 February 2011, AmRest Holdings SE and the management of Restauravia Grupo Empresarial S.L.

(Restauravia) agreed to acquire Restauravia for approximately €198 million. At the time of the acquisition

Restauravia operated 100 restaurants under its own casual dining brands including the Italian concept

Tagliatella (Tag) and 30 KFC stores in Spain. The company generated revenue of €99 million and normalised

EBITDA of €23.9 million. The purchase price implied a multiple of 7.4 times historical EBITDA. At the time

of the acquisition KFC was underpenetrated in Spain compared to other international fast food brands such

as McDonald’s and Burger King.

THE AMERICAS:

Pacific Island Restaurants Inc. / Restaurant Brands New Zealand Limited

On 26 October 2016, RBD announced that it had agreed to acquire Pacific Island Restaurants, Inc. (PIR), the

franchisee of 37 Taco Bell and 45 Pizza Hut stores in Hawaii, Guam and Saipan, for US$105 million (equivalent

to approximately NZ$150 million). The purchase price implied a multiple of 7.6 times EBITDA for the 12

months to September 2016. The acquisition provided RBD with an entry into the Hawaiian market and an

opportunity to execute an investment programme to progressively refresh PIR’s stores to improve

profitability. At the time of the acquisition Taco Bell had a 91% share of the Hawaii QSR Mexican food market

and Pizza Hut had a 43% share of the QSR pizza market. During 2015, PIR generated total sales of US$121

million, store level EBITDA of US$18.3 million and consolidated EBITDA of US$13.0 million.

Bra zil Fast Food Corp / Controlling Shareholders

On 14 January 2015, the controlling shareholders made a bid to acquire the remaining 25% stake in Brazil

Fast Food Corp. (Brazil Fast Food) for US$36.8 million. Brazil Fast Food operates quick service restaurants in

Brazil. At the date of the acquisition it was the second largest chain in Brazil with 1,257 points of sale

operating under the Bob’s, Yoggi, Doggis, KFC and Pizza Hut brand names. The purchase price implied

multiples of 8.1 times historical EBITDA and 10.1 times historical EBIT.

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





48

Morgan’s Foods Inc. / Apex Restaurant Management, Inc.

n 31 March 2014, Apex Restaurant Management, Inc. signed an agreement to acquire Morgan’s oods Inc.

for US$20.3 million. At the date of the acquisition Morgan’s oods operated 73 stores under the KFC, Taco

Bell and Pizza Hut brands in the states of Illinois, Missouri, hio, Pennsylvania, est irginia and ew York.

The purchase price implied multiples of 7.7 times historical BITDA and 14.4 times historical BIT.

NPC Restaurant Holdings, LLC / Olympus Growth Fund

n 7 ovember 2011, private equity fund lympus Growth und and the management of PC International,

Inc. entered into an agreement to acquire PC Restaurant Holdings, C (NPC) for US$755 million. At the

date of the transaction, PC was the largest franchisee of any restaurant concept in the US with 1,153 Pizza

Hut stores across 28 states. The purchase price implied multiples of 7.5 times historical BITDA and 13.7

times historical BIT.


APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





49

APPENDIX C – COMPARABLE LISTED COMPANIES

SUMMARY

A summary of the comparable listed companies is outlined below:

SUMMARY OF COMPARABLE COMPANIES

COMPANY NAME STORES BY BRAND (%)

PRIMARY INTERNATIONAL

BRAND(S)

PRIMARY GEOGRAPHIES

(% OF STORES)

TOTAL

STORES

16


Asia Pacific

Collins Foods Limited


KFC (95%)

Sizzler (5%)

Australia (82%)

Europe (13%)

Asia (5%)

277

Domino’s Pizza

Enterprises Limited

Domino’s (100%)



Europe (44%)

Australia and New

Zealand (34%)

Japan (22%)

2,393

PT Sarimelati Kencana

Tbk


Pizza Hut (100%) Indonesia (100%) 397

PT Fast Food

Indonesia Tbk

KFC (100%) Indonesia (100%) 628

PT Map Boga

Adiperkasa Tbk


Starbucks (84%)

Other brands (16%)

Indonesia (100%) 384

KFC Holdings Japan

Limited

KFC (100%) Japan (100%) 1,155

Yum! China Holdings

Inc.

KFC (69%)

Pizza Hut (27%)

Other brands (4%)


China (100%) 7,980

Berjaya Food Berhad


Starbucks (70 %)

Kenny Rogers (22%)

Jollibean (8%)

Malaysia (100%) 372

UK & Europe

AmRest Holdings SE

KFC (40%)

Pizza Hut (23%)

Starbucks (18%)

Other brands (20%)

Poland (28%)

Spain (15%)

Germany (14%)

Russia (11%)

France (10%)

Czech Republic (8%)

Other (9%)

Hungary (5%)

1,802

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

16

Store numbers are based on most recent disclosures by companies in their Annual Reports or presentations, or corporate websites.

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





50

DP Eurasia N.V Domino’s (100%)



Turkey (79%)

Russia (21%)

672

Domino’s Pizza Group

PLC

Domino’s (100%) UK (88%)

Europe (12%)

1,236

Ibersol


Pans & Roulette (28%)

Burger King (17%)

Pizza Hut (15%)

KFC (5%)

Other brands (35%)

Portugal (49%)

Spain (48%)

Italy & Angola (3%)

646

Sphera Franchise

Group S.A

KFC (63%)

Pizza Hut (34%)

Other brands (3%)


Romania (100%) 114

The Americas

Alsea, S.A.B. De C.V.

Domino’s (30%)

Burger King (19%)

Starbucks (28%)

Other (24%)




Mexico (68%)

Spain (16%)

Argentina (7%)

Colombia (4%)

Chile (4%)

Other (1%)

3,5 88

Prestige Holdings

Limited

KFC (47%)

Subway (38%)

Other brands (15%)

Trinidad and Tobago &

Jamaica (100%)

122

BK Brasil Operacao e

Assessoria a

Restaurantes S.A


Burger King (100%) Brazil (100%) 736

Arcos Dorados

Holdings Inc.

McDonalds (100%)


Brazil (42%)

Caribbean (16%)

Other Latin America

(42%)

2,1 95

Meritage Hospitality

Group Inc.


Wendy’s (98%)

Other brands (2%)



USA (100%) 254

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





51

A brief description of each of the companies listed in Section 6 is outlined below:


FAST FOOD FRANCHISEES – ASIA PACIFIC


Collins Foods Limited

Collins Foods Limited (CFL) operates fast food restaurants

under the KFC, Taco Bell and Sizzler brands in Australia,

Europe (The Netherlands I Germany), and Asia. As at 28

une 2018, CFL had 275 stores comprising 227 KFC stores

in Australia, 35 KFC stores in Europe, 14 Sizzler stores in

Australia and Asia and 1 Taco Bell in Brisbane. Of the 225

KFC Restaurants in Australia, 138 are located in

ueensland (61% of total), 47 in Western Australia (21%

of total), and the remaining 42 stores are located in other

Australian states (19% of total).

CFL>s priorities are growing its core KFC business in

Australia and Europe through new builds and ac-uisitions

of existing independent franchisees, and continuing to

test the viability of the Taco Bell brand in Australia.

CFL is trading at multiples of 9.5 times forecast EBITDA

and 14.3 times forecast EBIT.

STORES (AS AT 4 OCTOBER 2018)




Domino’s Pizza Enterprises Limited

Domino>s Pi66a Enterprises Limited (DPE) operates fast food

restaurants under the Domino’s brand in Australia, New

Zealand, apan and Europe (Belgium, France, The Netherlands

and Germany). As at 01 uly 2018, DPE had 2,393 stores

consisting 1,942 franchised stores (81%) and 451 corporate

owned stores (19 %). 819 stores (36%) were located in

Australia and New Zealand, 1,054 stores are in Europe and

520 stores are in apan.

DPE is trading at very high multiples of historical and forecast

year 1 earnings. This is because substantial investment in the

rollout of new outlets and geographic expansion in Europe

and apan should result in substantial future earnings growth

.

The scope for growth in apan and Europe is substantial. DPE

is the largest franchisee of the Domino’s brand globally. The

Domino’s brand has been outperforming the Pizza Hut brand

internationally in regards to new store openings.

STORES (AS AT 01 JULY 2018)







Europe

1054

44%

Australia and

New Zealand

819

34%

apan

520

22%

FC

Australia

227

82%

FC

Europe

35

13%

Other

15

5%

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





52

PT Sarimelati Kencana Tbk

PT Sarimelati Kencana Tbk (Sarimelati Kencana)

operates fast food restaurants under the Pizza Hut brand

in Indonesia. As at 31 December 2017, the company had

397 outlets. Sarimelati Kencana recently listed on the

Indonesian stock exchange (in June 2018). Approximately

60% of its stores are restaurant format and 40% are

delivery format. Pizza Hut has a dominant share of the

quic k service pizza market in Indonesia.

Sa rimelati Kencana is trading at multiples of 6.8 times

forecast EBITDA and 11.5 times forecast EBIT.

STORES (AS AT 31 DECEMBER 2017)



PT Fast Food Indonesia Tbk

PT Fast Food Indonesia Tbk (KFC Indonesia) operates

fast food restaurants under the KFC brand in Indonesia.

As at 31 December 2017, KFC Indonesia operated 628 KFC

restaurants. KFC Indonesia’s EBITDA margin of 6.0% is low

relative to other listed KFC businesses which are achieving

closer to 12%.

Fast Food Indonesia is trading at multiples of 7.8 times

forecast EBITDA and 21.2 times forecast EBIT. This is lower

than its peers on an EBITDA multiple basis but broadly in line

on an EBIT multiple basis.

STORES (AS AT 31 DECEMBER 2017)



Java

377

60%

Sumatera

119

19%

Other

131

21%

Pizza Hut

Delivery

160

40%

Pizza Hut

Restaurant

237

60%

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





53


PT Map Boga Adiperkasa

PT Map Boga Adiperkasa (Map Boga) operates 384 fast

food restaurants under the Starbucks, Pizza Marzano,

Krispy Kreme, Cold Stone Cremery and Godiva brands in

Indonesia. 84% of its stores (322) are under the Starbucks

brand.

Map Boga is trading at multiples of 10.9 times historical

EBITDA and 19.9 times historical EBIT. The company is not

followed by any brokers and therefore forecast earnings

are not calculable. Map Boga has achieved consistent

growth in earnings over the past 5 years. The current

trading multiples likely reflect expectations for further

stronger growth in earnings in future periods. The

Starbucks brand has grown strongly in Asian markets.

STORES (AS AT 31 DECEMBER 2017)




KFC Holdings Japan Limited

KFC Holdings Japan Limited (KFC Japan) operates fast food

restaurants under the KFC brand in Japan. There are

currently 1,155

17

stores in Japan.

KFC Japan is trading at a multiple of 12.6 times historical

EBITDA. KFC Japan’s EBITDA margin was just under 4% in

2017, well below its peers in Australia and New Zealand

which are achieving close to ̃12%. KFC Japan’s EBITDA

declined in 2017 as a result of lower store sales. The current

trading multiple likely reflects expe ctation for future

improvement in margins the higher levels. As the company is

not followed by any brokers forecast earnings multiples are

not calculable.


STORES (AS AT 15 NOVEMBER 2018)




_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

17

Source: Yum Brands Inc. website

Starbucks

322

84%

Other

62

16%

KFC

1,155

100%

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





54

Yum! China Holdings

Yum! China Holdings (Yum! China) operates

approximately 7,980 fast food restaurants under the KFC,

Pizza Hut, Taco Bell, East Dawning and Little Sheep brands

in China. Just under 70% of stores are under the KFC

brand and 27% under the Pizza Hut brand. Yum! Chi na

was split off from Yum! in November 2016.

East Dawning is a quick service restaurant brand

specialising in Chinese cuisine. Little Sheep is a hot pot

restaurant.

Yum! China is currently trading at multiples of 9.4 times

forecast EBITDA and 13.5 times forecast EBIT. These

multiples are broadly in line with its peers.

STORES (AS AT 15 NOVEMBER 2018)




Berjaya Food Berhad

Berjaya Food Berhad (Berjaya) operates fast food

restaurants under the Starbucks, Kenny Rogers Roasters

(KRR) and Jollibean brands in Malaysia, Indonesia and

Singapore. Two thirds of stores are under the Starbucks

brand.

Ber yjaya is currently trading at multiples of 7.6 times

forecast EBITDA and 12.5 times forecast EBIT. The

current trading multiples reflect broker expectations for

strong growth due to substantial capital investment in the

store network.

STORES (AS AT 30 APRIL 2018)






KFC

5,488

69%

Pizza Hut

2,195

27%

Other

300

4%

Jollibean

31

8%

KRR

81

22%

Starbucks

260

70%

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





55

FAST FOOD FRANCHISEES – UK & EUROPE


AmRest Holdings SE

AmRest Holdings SE (AmRest) operates fast food

restaurants, primarily under the KFC, Pizza Hut, Burger King

and Starbucks brands in Central and Eastern Europe and

China. AmRest currently has 1,802 stores comprising 716

KFC stores, 406 Pizza Hut stores, 55 Burger King stores, 317

Starbucks stores, 242 La Tagliatella stores, 52 Blue Frog

stores and 4 Kabb stores.

La Tagliatella is an Italian restaurant chain specialising in

pastas and pizzas. Blue Frog is specialises in a menu that is

based on American cuisine. Kabb is a bistro bar specialising

in sandwiches, grilled meat, pasta and rice dishes.

AmRest’s historical forecast year 1 trading multiples are

high due to expectations for strong growth in earnings

driven by strong investment in store network expansion.


STORES (AS AT 15 NOVEMBER 2018)



DP Eurasia N.V

DP Eurasia N.V (Domino’s Pizza Eurasia) operates fast

food restaurants under the Domino’s brand in Turkey and

Russia. As at 30 June 2018, Domino’s Pizza Eurasia had

672 stores comprising 521 in Turkey, 142 in Russia, 6 in

Azerbaijan and 3 in Georgia.

Domino’s Pizza Eurasia is currently trading at multiples of

11.6 times forecast EBITDA and 17.1 times forecast EBIT.

The historical and forecast multiples are high, reflecting

broker expectations for strong growth in the emerging

economies of Turkey and Russia as the Domino’s store

network is expanded in these countries.

STORES (AS AT 30 JUNE 2018)





Pizza Hut

406

22%

KFC

716

40%

Starbucks

317

18%

La Tagliatella

242

13%

Other Brands

brands

121,

7%

Turkey521

79%

Russia

142

21%

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





56

Domino’s Pizza Group PLC

Domino’s Pizza Group PLC (Domino’s UK) operates fast

food restaurants under the Domino’s brand in the UK and

Europe. As at 31 December 2017, 88% of stores were in

the UK and the remainder across Ireland, Norway, Iceland,

Switzerland and Sweden.

Domino’s Pizza UK also has a 33% investment in Domino’s

Pizza Germany. DPE owns the other 67% shareholding in

this company.

Domino’s Pizza UK is trading at multiples of 13.3 times

forecast EBITDA and 15.6 times forecast EBIT. The current

trading multiples are relatively high, likely reflecting

expectations for strong growth in earnings driven

primarily by same store sales growth.


STORES (AS AT 31 DECEMBER 2017)




Ibersol, S.G.P.S., S.A

Ibersol, S.G.P.S., S.A (Ibersol) operates fast food

restaurants under a diverse range of brands including Pizza

Hut and KFC stores in Portugal, Spain, Italy and Angola. As

at 31 December 2017, Ibersol had a total of 646 stores

comprising 147 Pans & Roulette stores, 110 Burger King

stores, 95 Pizza Hut stores, 31 KFC stores and 263 stores

under the company’s other owned brands.

Ibersol is currently trading at a multiple of 6.1 times

forecast EBITDA and 11.1 times forecast EBIT. The trading

multiples are broadly in line with its peers. Moderate

growth is forecast by brokers over the next 3 years.


STORES (AS AT 31 DECEMBER 2017)





UK

1,045

88%

Non -UK

147

12%

Pizza Hut

97

15%

Pans &

Roulette

147

23%

Other

Brands

263

41%

Burger King

110

17%

KFC

29

4%

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





57

Sphera Franchise Group S.A

Sphera Franchise Group S.A (Sphera) operates fast

food restaurants under the KFC, Pizza Hut, Taco Bell and

Paul brands in Romania, Italy and Moldova.

Approximately 63% of stores are under the KFC brand and

34% are under the Pizza Hut brand.

Sphera is currently trading at multiples of 10.7 times

forecast EBITDA and 14.9 times forecast EBIT. Earnings

are forecast to grow strongly in future periods driven by

continued expansion of the store network.



STORES (AS AT 31 DECEMBER 2017)




FAST FOOD FRANCHISEES – THE AMERICAS


Alsea, S.A.C De C.V

Alsea, S.A.C De C.V (Alsea) operates fast food

restaurants under the Domino’s Pizza, Burger King,

Starbucks and various other brands in Mexico, Spain,

Columbia, Argentina and Brazil. Alsea has 3,588 stores

across four business segments:

• Fast service restaurants. 1, 740 stores under the

Domino’s Pizza and Burger King Brands

• Coffee Shops. 1,003 Starbucks branded stores.

• Casual Dining. 568 stores under various brands.

• Family Restaurant. 277 stores under the VIPs brand.

Alsea is trading at multiples of 8.4 times forecast EBITA

and 14.5 times forecast EBIT. The current trading

multiples reflect expectations for further strong growth in

earnings.

STORES (AS AT 15 NOVEMBER 2018)





KFC

72

63%

Pizza Hut

39

34%

Other

3

3%

Starbucks

Coffee

Shops

1,003

28%

Fast Service

1,740

48%

Family

Restaurants

277

8%

Casual

Dining

568

16%

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





58

Prestige Holdings Limited

Prestige Holdings Limited (Prestige) operates fast food

restaurants under the KFC, Pizza Hut, Subway, TGI Fridays

and Starbucks brands in Trinidad and Tobago and Jamaica.

Just under 50% are under the KFC brand and 38% are

under the Subway brand.

Prestige is currently trading at multiples of 6.5 times

historical EBITDA and 12.4 times forecast EBIT. Over the

past 5 years Prestige’s operating earnings have declined

due to contracting margins. This may explain the

relatively low trading multiples. The company is not

followed by any brokers and therefore forecast earnings

multiples are not calculable.

STORES (AS AT 31 DECEMBER 2017)





BK Brasil Operacao e Assessoria a Restaurantes S.A

BK Brasil Operacao e Assessoria a Restaurantes S.A

(BK Brazil) operates fast food restaurants under the

Burger King brand in Brazil. As at May 2018, BK Brazil had

736 stores comprising 594 owned restaurants and 142

franchised restaurants.

BK Brazil is currently trading at multiples of 12.2 times

forecast EBITDA and 28.2 times forecast EBIT. The current

trading multiples reflect broker expectations for strong

growth in earnings as the Burger King brand has grown

strongly throughout Brazil which is a largely undeveloped

market for the Burger King brand.


STORES (AS AT SEPTEMBER 2018)




KFC

57

47%

Subway

47

38%

Other

18

15%

Owned

594

81%

Franchiees

142

19%

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





59

Arcos Dorados Holdings Inc.

Arcos Dorados Holdings Inc. (Arcos Dorados) operates

fast food restaurants under the McDonalds brand in 20

Latin American and Caribbean countries and territories.

As at 30 September 2018, the company operated 2,195

restaurants comprising ̃930 in Brazil, ̃ 520 in North Latin

America (Costa Rica, Mexico and Panama), 350 in the

Caribbean and 390 in Southern Latin America (Argentina,

Chile, Ecuador, Peru and Uruguay).

Arcos Dorados is currently trading at multiples of 6.9 times

forecast EBITDA and 11.9 times forecast EBIT.

STORES (AS AT 30 SEPTEMBER 2018)




Meritage Hospitality Group Limited

Meritage Hospitality Group Limited (Meritage)

operates fast food restaurants under the Wendy’s brand

in the USA. As at 31 December 2017, Meritage operated

249 Wendy’s restaurants and 5 casual dining restaurants

under other brands. The company’s restaurants are

located across 16 states. Meritage has expanded in recent

years as a result of the acquisition of existing Wendy’s

stores throughout the USA. It is trading at multiples of

10.4 times historical EBITDA and 16.3 times historical EBIT.





STORES (AS AT 31 DECEMBER 2017)





Brazil

929

42%

North Latin

America

519

24%

South Latin

America

390

18%

Caribbean

350

16%

Wendy's

249

98%

Other

5

2%

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





60

APPENDIX D – VALUATION METHODOLOGY DESCRIPTIONS

Capitalisation of Earnings

Capitalisation of earnings or cash flows is most appropriate for businesses with a substantial operating history

and a consistent earnings trend that is sufficiently stable to be indicative of ongoing earnings potential. This

methodology is not particularly suitable for start-up businesses, businesses with an erratic earnings pattern

or businesses that have unusual expenditure requirements. This methodology involves capitalising the

earnings or cash flows of a business at a multiple that reflects the risks of the business and the stream of

income that it generates. These multiples can be applied to a number of different earnings or cash flow

measures including EBITDA, EBITA, EBIT or net profit after tax. These are referred to respectively as EBITDA

multiples, EBITA multiples, EBIT multiples and price earnings multiples. Price earnings multiples are

commonly used in the context of the share market. EBITDA, EBITA and EBIT multiples are more commonly

used in valuing whole businesses for acquisition purposes where gearing is in the control of the acquirer.


Where an ongoing business with relatively stable and predictable earnings is being valued Grant Samuel uses

capitalised earnings or operating cash flows as a primary reference point. Application of this valuation

methodology involves:

§ estimation of earnings or cash flow levels that a purchaser would utilise for valuation purposes having

regard to historical and forecast operating results, non-recurring items of income and expenditure and

known factors likely to impact on operating performance; and

§ consideration of an appropriate capitalisation multiple having regard to the market rating of

comparable businesses, the extent and nature of competition, the time period of earnings used, the

quality of earnings, growth prospects and relative business risk.


The choice between the parameters is usually not critical and should give a similar result. All are commonly

used in the valuation of industrial businesses. EBITDA can be preferable if depreciation or non-cash charges

distort earnings or make comparisons between companies difficult but care needs to be exercised to ensure

that proper account is taken of factors such as the level of capital expenditure needed for the business and

whether or not any amortisation costs also relate to ongoing cash costs. EBITA avoids the distortions of

intangible amortisation. EBIT can better adjust for differences in relative capital intensity.


Determination of the appropriate earnings multiple is usually the most judgemental element of a valuation.

Definitive or even indicative offers for a particular asset or business can provide the most reliable support for

selection of an appropriate earnings multiple. In the absence of meaningful offers, it is necessary to infer the

appropriate multiple from other evidence.


The primary approach used by valuers is to determine the multiple that other buyers have been prepared to

pay for similar businesses in the recent past. However, each transaction will be the product of a unique

combination of factors, including:

§ economic factors (e.g. economic growth, inflation, interest rates) affecting the markets in which the

company operates;

§ strategic attractions of the business - its particular strengths and weaknesses, market position of the

business, strength of competition and barriers to entry;

§ rationalisation or synergy benefits available to the acquirer;

§ the structural and regulatory framework;

§ investment and sharemarket conditions at the time; and

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





61

§ the number of competing buyers for a business.


A pattern may emerge from transactions involving similar businesses with sales typically taking place at prices

corresponding to earnings multiples within a particular range. While averages or medians can be determined

it is not appropriate to simply apply such measures to the business being valued. The range will generally

reflect the growth prospects and risks of those businesses. Mature, low growth businesses will, in the

absence of other factors, attract lower multiples than those businesses with potential for significant growth

in earnings. The most important part of valuation is to evaluate the attributes of the specific business being

valued and to distinguish it from its peers so as to form a judgement as to where on the spectrum it

appropriately belongs.


An alternative approach in valuing businesses is to review the multiples at which shares in listed companies

in the same industry sector trade on the sharemarket. This gives an indication of the price levels at which

portfolio investors are prepared to invest in these businesses. Share prices reflect trades in small parcels of

shares (portfolio interests) rather than whole companies and it is necessary to adjust for this factor. To

convert sharemarket data to meaningful information on the valuation of companies as a whole, it is market

practice to add a “premium for control” to allow for the premium which is normally paid to obtain control

through a takeover offer. This premium is typically in the range 20- 35%.


The premium for control paid in takeovers is observable but caution must be exercised in assessing the value

of a company or business based on the market rating of comparable companies or businesses. The premium

for control is an outcome of the valuation process, not a determinant of value. Premiums are paid for reasons

that vary from case to case and may be substantial due to synergy or other benefits available to the acquirer.

In other situations premiums may be minimal or even zero. It is inappropriate to apply an average premium

of 20 -35% without having regard to the circumstances of each case. In some situations there is no premium.

There are transactions where no corporate buyer is prepared to pay a price in excess of the prices paid by

institutional investors through an initial public offering.


Acquisitions of listed companies in different countries can be analysed for comparative purposes, but it is

necessary to give consideration to differences in overall sharemarket levels and ratings between countries,

economic factors (economic growth, inflation, interest rates) and market structures (competition etc.) and

the regulatory framework. It is not appropriate to adjust multiples in a mechanistic way for differences in

interest rates or sharemarket levels.


The analysis of comparable transactions and sharemarket prices for comparable companies will not always

lead to an obvious conclusion as to which multiple or range of multiples will apply. There will often be a wide

spread of multiples and the application of judgement becomes critical. Moreover, it is necessary to consider

the particular attributes of the business being valued and decide whether it warrants a higher or lower

multiple than the comparable companies. This assessment is essentially a judgement.


Discounted Cash Flow

Discounting of projected cash flows has a strong theoretical basis. It is the most commonly used method for

valuation in a number of industries, and for the valuation of start-up projects where earnings during the first

few years can be negative. DCF valuations involve calculating the net present value of projected cash flows.

This methodology is able to explicitly capture the effect of a turnaround in the business, the ramp up to

maturity or significant changes expected in capital expenditure patterns. The cash flows are discounted using

a discount rate, which reflects the risk associated with the cash flow stream. Considerable judgement is

required in estimating future cash flows and it is generally necessary to place great reliance on medium to

long -term projections prepared by management. The discount rate is also not an observable number and

must be inferred from other data (usually only historical). None of this data is particularly reliable so

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





62

estimates of the discount rate necessarily involve a substantial element of judgment. In addition, even where

cash flow forecasts are available the terminal or continuing value is usually a high proportion of value.

Accordingly, the multiple used in assessing this terminal value becomes the critical determinant in the

valuation (i.e. it is a “de facto” cash flow capitalisation valuation). The net present value is typically extremely

sensitive to relatively small changes in underlying assumptions, few of which are capable of being predicted

with accuracy, particularly beyond the first two or three years. The arbitrary assumptions that need to be

made and the width of any value range mean the results are often not meaningful or reliable.

Notwithstanding these limitations, DCF valuations are commonly used and can at least play a role in providing

a check on alternative methodologies, not least because explicit and relatively detailed assumptions need to

be made as to the expected future performance of the business operations.


Industry Rules of Thumb

Industry rules of thumb are commonly used in some industries. These are generally used by a valuer as a

“cross check” of the result determined by a capitalised earnings valuation or by discounting cash flows, but

in some industries rules of thumb can be the primary basis on which buyers determine prices. Grant Samuel

is not aware of any commonly used rules of thumb that would be appropriate to value RBD. In any event, it

should be recognised that rules of thumb are usually relatively crude and prone to misinterpretation.


Realisation of Assets

Valuations based on an estimate of the aggregate proceeds from an orderly realisation of assets are

commonly applied to businesses that are not going concerns. They effectively reflect liquidation values and

typically attribute no value to any goodwill associated with ongoing trading. Such an approach is not

appropriate in RBD’s case.



APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





63

APPENDIX E – INTERPRETATION OF MULTIPLES

Earnings multiples are normally benchmarked against two primary sets of reference points:

§

the multiples implied by the share prices of listed peer group companies; and

§

the multiples implied by the prices paid in acquisitions of other companies in the same industry.


In interpreting and evaluating such data it is necessary to recognise that:

§

multiples based on listed company share prices do not include a premium for control and are therefore

often (but not always) less than multiples that would apply to acquisitions of controlling interests in

similar companies. However, while the premium paid to obtain control in takeovers is observable

(typically in the range 20-35%) it is inappropriate to simply add a premium to listed multiples. The

premium for control is an outcome of the valuation process, not a determinant of value. Premiums are

paid for reasons that vary from case to case and may be substantial due to synergy or other benefits

available to the acquirer. In other situations premiums may be minimal or even zero. There are

transactions where no corporate buyer is prepared to pay a price in excess of the prices paid by share

market investors;

§

acquisition multiples from comparable transactions are therefore usually seen as a better guide when

valuing 100% of a business but the data tends to be less transparent and information on forecast

earnings is often unavailable;

§

the analysis will give a range of outcomes from which averages or medians can be determined but it is

not appropriate to simply apply such measures to the company being valued. The most important part

of valuation is to evaluate the attributes of the specific company being valued and to distinguish it from

its peers so as to form a judgement as to where on the spectrum it belongs;

§

acquisition multiples are a product of the economic and other circumstances at the time of the

transaction. However, each transaction will be the product of a unique combination of factors, including:

• economic factors (e.g. economic growth, inflation, interest rates) affecting the markets in which the

company operates;

• strategic attractions of the business – its particular strengths and weaknesses, market position of the

business, strength of competition and barriers to entry;

• the company’s own performance and growth trajectory;

• rationalisation or synergy benefits available to the acquirer;

• the structural and regulatory framework;

• investment and share market conditions at the time, and

• the number of competing buyers for a business;

§

acquisitions and listed companies in different countries can be analysed for comparative purposes, but

it is necessary to give consideration to differences in overall share market levels and rating between

countries, economic factors (economic growth, inflation, interest rates), market structure (competition

etc.) and the regulatory framework. It is not appropriate to adjust multiples in a mechanistic way for

differences in interest rates or share market levels;

§

acquisition multiples are based on the target’s earnings but the price paid normally reflects the fact that

there were cost reduction opportunities or synergies available to the acquirer (at least if the acquirer is

a “trade buyer” with existing businesses in the same or a related industry). If the target’s earnings were

APPENDIX B: INDEPENDENT ADVISER’S REPORT





64

adjusted for these cost reductions and/or synergies the effective multiple paid by the acquirer would

be lower than that calculated on the target’s earnings;

§

while EBITDA multiples are commonly used benchmarks they are an incomplete measure of cash flow.

The appropriate multiple is affected by, among other things, the level of capital expenditure (and

working capital investment) relative to EBITDA. In this respect:

• EBIT multiples can in some circumstances be a better guide because (assuming depreciation is a

reasonable proxy for capital expenditure) they effectively adjust for relative capital intensity and

present a better approximation of free cash flow. However, capital expenditure is lumpy and

depreciation expense may not be a reliable guide. In addition, there can be differences between

companies in the basis of calculation of depreciation; and

• businesses that generate higher EBITDA margins than their peer group companies will, all other

things being equal, warrant higher EBITDA multiples because free cash flow will, in relative terms,

be higher as capital expenditure is a smaller proportion of earnings.

97
Glossary

TermDefinition

AmRestAmRest Holdings S.E.

ASXthe Australian Securities Exchange

Copulos InterestsStephen Copulos, Eyeon QSR Pty Limited, Eyeon No 2 Pty Limited, Copulos

Superannuation Pty Ltd, PC Nab Pty Limited, Eyeon Investment Pty Limited and

Copulos Foundation Pty Ltd

Directors or Directora director of Restaurant Brands

Finaccess CapitalFinaccess Capital S.A. de C.V., the parent company of Global Valar

Global ValarGlobal Valar S.L., an indirect subsidiary of Finaccess Capital

Independent AdviserGrant Samuel & Associates Limited

Independent Adviser’s Reportthe report prepared by the Independent Adviser on the merits of the Offer under

Rule 21 of the Takeovers Code

Independent DirectorsIndependent Directors of Restaurant Brands for the purposes of the NZX

Listing Rules, being on the date of this Target Company Statement: Ted van Arkel,

Victoria Taylor, Hamish Stevens and David Beguely

NZX NZX Limited

Offerthe partial takeover offer made by Global Valar under the Takeovers Code for

75% of the Restaurant Brands Shares

Offer DocumentGlobal Valar’s Offer Document dated 10 December 2018 which sets out the full

terms and conditions of the Offer

Offer PriceNZ$9.45 cash in respect of each Restaurant Brands Share

Restaurant Brands Restaurant Brands New Zealand Limited or, where the context requires,

the Restaurant Brands group

Restaurant Brands Share

or Share

a fully paid ordinary share in the capital of Restaurant Brands

Senior ManagerRussel Creedy, Restaurant Brands’ Chief Executive Officer, and Grant Ellis,

Restaurant Brands’ Chief Financial Officer, being the persons that the Board has

determined are senior managers for the purposes of the disclosures contained in

this Target Company Statement

Shareholdereach person registered in Restaurant Brands’ Share register as a holder of

Restaurant Brands Shares

GLOSSARY

Restaurant Brands Target Company Statement98
TermDefinition

Superior Proposala bona fide, unsolicited competing transaction (broadly, a proposal to acquire

20% or more of the Shares or all or a material part of the business and/or assets

of the Restaurant Brands group) that the Board, acting in good faith and after

taking account of written advice from its external financial and legal advisers,

determines:

• is reasonably capable of being valued and implemented taking into account

all aspects of the competing transaction (including any timing considerations,

conditions precedent and the identity of the proponent); and

• would, if completed substantially in accordance with its terms, be more

favourable to the Shareholders (as a whole) than the Offer taking into account

all terms and conditions of the competing transaction (including consideration,

form of consideration, conditionality, funding, certainty and timing)

Takeovers Code the Takeovers Code recorded in the Takeovers Regulations 2000 (New Zealand),

as amended, including any applicable exemption granted by the Takeovers Panel

Takeover NoticeGlobal Valar’s notice of intention to make a partial takeover offer for Restaurant

Brands dated 26 November 2018

Target Company Statementthis document together with its appendices

Yum! Franchisorscertain subsidiaries of Yum! Brands Inc which are franchisors of the KFC,

Pizza Hut and Taco Bell brands

Related companyhas the meaning set out in section 2(3) of the Companies Act read as if a

reference to a “company” was a reference to any body corporate wherever

incorporated and, in respect of Global Valar, also means any other person which

is directly or indirectly controlled by Global Valar or any person under common

control with Global Valar

GLOSSARY

99
DIRECTORY

Directory

Board of DirectorsTed van Arkel (Chairman)

Stephen Copulos

David Beguely

Hamish Stevens

Victoria Taylor

Independent Adviser

Grant Samuel & Associates Limited

Legal Adviser

Harmos Horton Lusk Limited

Financial AdviserMacquarie Capital (New Zealand) Limited

Share RegistryComputershare Investor Services Limited

Registered OfficeLevel 3, Building 7

Central Park

666 Great South Road

Penrose, Auckland 1640

Postal Address

PO Box 22-749

Otahuhu

Auckland

Contact Phone Number

+ 64 9 525 8700

Website

http://www.restaurantbrands.co.nz/

Restaurant Brands Target Company Statement100
LETTER FROM THE CHAIRMAN

102
LETTER FROM THE CHAIRMAN

www.restaurantbrands.co.nz

Data sourced from publicly available filings. Our datasets may not be complete. Automated analysis can produce errors. If you believe any data on this page is incorrect, please contact us at hello@nzxplorer.co.nz. For informational purposes only. Not investment advice.