Search results

This case study will allow students to understand and analyse the process for conducting equity valuation by building a three-statement financial model, to understand and apply the workings of discounted cash flow (DCF) valuation methodology and its components, to apply the concepts related to the calculation of the weighted average cost of capital in the determination of discounting rate, to understand the terminal value calculation and assumptions thereof and to analyse the intrinsic valuation for the target company using the traditional multi-stage DCF model for investment decision-making.

In July 2019, Kapil Agarwal, an equity analyst operating out of Mumbai, India, was carefully looking over the financials of Asian Paints, a leading paints company in India. As an equity analyst, Kapil was constantly on the lookout for fundamentally strong but undervalued companies that could create long-term wealth for his equity fund. To decide upon the right valuation of Asian Paints, Kapil conducted fundamental analysis using the DCF method on the basis of available financial information. This case study puts students in an investment analyst role wherein they forecast financial statements and conduct DCF valuation for Asian Paints to discover potentially undervalued stocks for investment decision-making.

This case study is designed for use in an undergraduate or postgraduate programme in business management, particularly in a course on business valuation or investment management or security analysis.

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

CSS 1: Accounting and Finance.

Controladora Comercial Mexicana, a Mexican retailer, had successfully managed the bankruptcy process and was ready to emerge from its problems, primarily caused by speculation and excessive debt, and begin operations anew. Was the restructured Comerci capable of regaining its position as a premier retailer, and more importantly, was the firm capable of repaying the high level of debt that it carried following bankruptcy reorganization? How strong was the reorganized firm? Had Comerci truly left its problems behind in bankruptcy court, or would history repeat itself? How could Comerci raise funds needed for growth – through additional debt? Though asset sales?

This case was researched using publicly available information, including the company's financial statements, bankruptcy filings, news stories about the bankruptcy and financial data bases (e.g. ISI Emerging Markets, Economática, Capital IQ, etc.) to obtain information about the competitors and from financial analysts.

This case is intended for advanced undergraduate or MBA electives in finance. Students should have a basic understanding of valuation and financing before attempting this case. The case could also be used in a corporate finance or banking class to illustrate bankruptcy and credit risk, or could be used in an international business class to illustrate the differences between USA and international bankruptcies.

The case opens with Martha Stewart's 2005 release from prison following her conviction for obstructing an insider-trading investigation of her 2001 sale of personal stock. The scandal dealt a crippling blow to the powerful Martha Stewart brand and drove results at her namesake company, Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia (MSO), deep into the red. But as owner of more than 90 percent of MSO's voting shares, Stewart continued to control the company throughout the scandal.

The company faced significant external challenges, including changing consumer preferences and mounting competition in all of its markets. Ad rates were under pressure as advertisers began fragmenting spending across multiple platforms, including the Internet and social media, where MSO was weak. New competitors were luring readers from MSO's flagship publication, Martha Stewart Living. And in its second biggest business, merchandising, retailing juggernauts such as Walmart and Target were crushing MSO's most important sales channel, Kmart. Internal challenges loomed even larger, with numerous failures of governance while the company attempted a turnaround.

This case can be used to teach either corporate governance or turnarounds.

Students will learn:

• How control of shareholder voting rights by a founding executive can undermine corporate governance

• The importance of independent directors and board committees

• How company bylaws affect corporate governance

• How to recognize and respond to early signs of stagnation

• How to avoid management actions that can make a crisis worse

• How weaknesses in executive leadership can push a company into crisis and foster a culture that actively prevents strategic revitalization

How control of shareholder voting rights by a founding executive can undermine corporate governance

The importance of independent directors and board committees

How company bylaws affect corporate governance

How to recognize and respond to early signs of stagnation

How to avoid management actions that can make a crisis worse

How weaknesses in executive leadership can push a company into crisis and foster a culture that actively prevents strategic revitalization

This case considers the buyout of Panera Bread from the perspective of a private equity fund. In early 2017, KLG Managing Director Tom Denning is considering a leveraged buyout of Panera Bread, a rapidly growing fast-casual restaurant company. A surprising Bloomberg News story signals that the deal process is broadening and KLG will have to act quickly if it hopes to buy Panera Bread. Students assume the role of Tom Denning as he prepares an investment recommendation for KLG's investment committee. In doing so, students are required to consider a very large and expensive investment. Students are challenged to create an investment recommendation by performing due diligence, determining additional questions to ask, and pricing a buyout bid that incorporates an optimal capital structure and meets KLG's return requirements. The Panera Bread case is designed to give students insight into the private equity investment process.

Set in 1999, this case allows students to put themselves in the positions of both Airbus and Boeing as Boeing considered how to respond to Airbus's decision to announce its plans to proceed or not with the $10 billion development of the world's first commercial superjumbo jet, the Airbus A3XX. Boeing was considering a development effort to “stretch” its 747 jumbo jet into a larger superjumbo version, the 747-X. At the time, the two companies’ widely available 20-year forecasts for jumbo- and superjumbo-jet demand were particularly divergent. In light of this very public “agreement to disagree,” Boeing could pursue several alternatives, all of which were related to Airbus's decision about whether or not to develop the A3XX. This case presents an opportunity for students to make a real downstream decision. It was prepared as a final exam for an introductory decision analysis course involving subjective probability assessment, decision tree modeling, simulation, real options, and game theory. In the analysis of this case, a student is expected to utilize ideas from all five of these areas.

This case reviews the financial performance of the Fidelity Magellan Fund up to mid-1995. In essence, the Magellan Fund has managed to “beat the market” over time under three different fund managers despite its enormous size ($51 billion at the date of the case). The tasks for the student are to assess the adequacy of this performance, evaluate its likely sources, and opine on its sustainability. The case affords the opportunity to consider the appropriateness of various possible benchmarks in a risk-return framework and to assess the reasonableness of the efficient-markets hypothesis. The case can be used in an introductory finance course to present general information about equity markets and the behavior of large, sophisticated money managers.

Groupon, an online coupon company, was one of many companies that considered an initial public offering (IPO) during what might be a second technology/internet/social media IPO boom in 2011. Some companies chose to postpone their IPOs, while others took advantage of the media attention focussed on technology companies, and in particular, social media firms. Should investors hop on the tech IPO bandwagon, or hold off to better evaluate the long-term prospects of tech companies, and in particular social media companies? Would the valuation of Groupon justify an investment in IPO shares?

The case was researched from secondary sources, using Groupon's IPO filing information, news articles about the IPO and industry research sources, such as IBIS World.

This case is appropriate for an advanced undergraduate or MBA corporate finance or investment elective. Most introductory finance classes do not have the time to cover later chapters in a finance textbook, where information about IPOs is generally found. It could also be used at the end of a core finance course, where the instructor wanted to introduce this topic through a case study of a hard-to-value internet-based company to illustrate the difficulties in setting IPO prices. The case could also be used in an equity analysis class, an entrepreneurial finance class or an investment class, to spur discussion about valuing an internet company and choosing appropriate investments for pension fund investing. This case could also be used in a strategy class, focussing on the five forces question, and eliminating the valuation question.

There is a great deal of literature about IPOs and their long-term performance. An excellent source is Jay R. Ritter's research, http://bear.warrington.ufl.edu/ritter, which has a longer time period and more data than could be contained in this case. IPO puzzles include persistent undervaluing of IPOs; in other words, the offer price is lower than, and sometimes substantially lower than, the first day close price. A second issue is the generally poorer long-run performance of companies after their IPO when compared to similar firms that did not do an IPO.

This case examines issues surrounding the choice of financing arrangements for the acquisition of Radiologix in July 2006. The case follows Mark Stolper, the CFO of RadNet, as he considers how to raise the $363 million in funds necessary to finance the acquisition. When completed, the combined firms will be the largest private diagnostic-imaging provider in the United States. When Stolper joined RadNet in 2003, he confronted a company with “too much debt, and the wrong kind of debt.” His goal is to finance the acquisition in a way that further enhances the financial strength and operating flexibility of the company. Given the large size of funding required, the firm is unlikely to be able to fund the entire transaction with first-lien or bank debt. His financial advisors differ in their recommendations for how to raise the remaining funds—one suggests using second-lien debt, and the other, high-yield debt.

The purpose of the case is to familiarize students with frequently encountered types of debt financing that are used to finance mergers and acquisitions and other corporate transactions. The case provides information on the distinctions among first-lien, second-lien, and high-yield debt in relation to their price, availability, flexibility of covenants, repayment ease, and composition of likely investors. The case is designed for use in courses that cover corporate financing, M&As, and debt financing.

Monsanto is facing an uncertain near-term financial outlook, and this case challenges students to generate an operating forecast (income statement and balance sheet operating accounts). The case naturally lends itself to sensitivity analysis related to sales growth assumptions. Suitable for MBA and undergraduate learners, it covers the basics of forecasting without introducing the complexities associated with financing. A teaching note is available.

This case traces Under Armour from its founding in 1996 through 2008 when the company entered the hyper-competitive non-cleated athletic footwear market. In 1996, with an innovative product and locker room access to college and pro players, Kevin Plank started Under Armour. He turned a struggling t-shirt company into a dominant player capturing 75% of the performance apparel market. In 2006, Under Armour successfully entered the athletic footwear market with a line of football cleats. Under Armour was the first company to disrupt Nike's dominance of the football cleat market by gaining 25% of the market within a year of introduction. In 2008, Under Armour entered the non-cleated athletic footwear market with a cross-trainer sneaker line and a $4.4 million Super Bowl ad. Unlike prior introductions, Nike responded aggressively to Under Armour's move into sneakers. Despite increased sales, Under Armour's costs increased, and profits and stock price decreased. The case concludes by asking students to evaluate Under Armour's next move. An extensive exhibit provides an overview of the athletic footwear industry in 2008.