An abrupt departure from maximum financial flexibility occurred in 2017. In July, BC company entered a bidding contest for DEF company, a major oil company in Malaysia. After a brief but frenetic bidding battle, BC company succeeded in buying DEF company in August 2017. The price of almost RM8 billion made the merger the largest in Malaysia's history and represented a premium of 77% above DEF company's pre-acquisition market value. With the acquisition, BC company had virtually doubled its size and significantly increased its orientation toward undifferentiated commodity products. Both BC company stock price and industry analysts responded negatively to the acquisition. Major concerns included the high price that BC company had paid and the question of how DEF company would contribute to BC company's strategic objectives.

The issue i found in this case study is below this

BC company high price to acquisition DEF company and BC company had paid and the question of how DEF company would contribute to BC company's strategic objectives.

Is it correct?

How to elaborate and argument on this case study since this is an issue

there may have any problem if BC company high price to acquisition DEF company?

Financial benefit from DEF company to BC company is it really worthy?

Would the shareholder happy?

(more argument) (elaborate) (how to critical analysis) (go in deep)

Or Is that any issue in the case study?