Search results

In April 2012, JPMorgan Chase & Company was struggling with large losses that had the potential to damage the reputation of the company, of its Chairman, Jamie Dimon, and of its Chief Investment Officer, Ina Drew. The losses arose from large credit derivative trades in the London office that Dimon described as “bad strategy … badly executed … poorly monitored”.

This case examines the importance of liquidity to financial markets, using the dramatic volatility of mutual fund flows in 2008 as an example. While the case is targeted to MBA students in an investments or portfolio management course, it is also appropriate for an advanced undergraduate course. It is written from the perspective of a fund manager who has experienced significant redemptions in 2008 and is considering whether or not to use ReFlow Management LLC's “liquidity provision” service. The case requires students to examine the nature and magnitude of mutual fund trading costs; how fund flows may induce additional trading, and how ReFlow's innovative service attempts to resolve these issues. Through this analysis, students will better understand what is meant by the term “liquidity” and how liquidity, or a lack thereof, can negatively impact portfolio performance.

In the (A) case, Jason Phillips, Chief Financial Officer of a soup manufacturing business, is given the task of maximizing the value of the firm twelve months after the case is set. Although he does not want to break any legal rules, Jason is interested to see whether accounting and real action choices can be used to enhance the company's financial position and increase its perceived value to investors. The case permits him to select from a menu of options, including decisions on product pricing, inventory levels, accounts receivables, leasing or purchasing a new machine and valuation or sale of securities. These choices are fed into an Excel spreadsheet which adjusts financial projections and accounting disclosures accordingly.

In the (B) case, Ben Kerr, Chief Investment Officer at one of Dragon's main competitors, considers the financial statements produced by Dragon to unravel any earnings management behavior and establish a true value for the company. Although the case can be focused on the accounting consequences of real decisions, a richer discussion is obtained when considering the ethical angles of the decision process. In particular, how much “earnings management” should be pursued and what types of behaviors are simply going to be unraveled by investors?

Students will explore: the concepts of “legal” earnings management as compared to true value optimization; whether sophisticated investors misled by such behaviors; and the management of information flows to investors.

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.

In the (A) case, Jason Phillips, Chief Financial Officer of a soup manufacturing business, is given the task of maximizing the value of the firm twelve months after the case is set. Although he does not want to break any legal rules, Jason is interested to see whether accounting and real action choices can be used to enhance the company's financial position and increase its perceived value to investors. The case permits him to select from a menu of options, including decisions on product pricing, inventory levels, accounts receivables, leasing or purchasing a new machine and valuation or sale of securities. These choices are fed into an Excel spreadsheet which adjusts financial projections and accounting disclosures accordingly.

In the (B) case, Ben Kerr, Chief Investment Officer at one of Dragon's main competitors, considers the financial statements produced by Dragon to unravel any earnings management behavior and establish a true value for the company. Although the case can be focused on the accounting consequences of real decisions, a richer discussion is obtained when considering the ethical angles of the decision process. In particular, how much “earnings management” should be pursued and what types of behaviors are simply going to be unraveled by investors?

Students will explore: the concepts of “legal” earnings management as compared to true value optimization; whether sophisticated investors misled by such behaviors; and the management of information flows to investors.

1. Probabilistic calculations of cost, and profit/loss using standard probability functions

2. Decision tree to find the expected monetary value (EMV) of different options.

3. Monte Carlo simulation for risk analysis.

4. Risk analysis in project management.

Learners will be able to understand and apply the following: how to approach uncertainty in business decisions using probabilistic calculations of cost, and profit/loss using standard probability functions; how to address uncertainty in business decisions by looking forward and reasoning backward, using the decision tree technique and the EMV of different decisions; how to analyse the risk inherent in business decisions by incorporating probability distributions for all critical variables in the form of Monte Carlo simulation; and appreciation of strategic considerations in risk analysis as it applies to project management

The case describes the challenge facing Vilas Birari, the owner and chief executive of Harsh Constructions, a construction company headquartered in Nasik, India. Birari had to decide on the bid for a construction project in September of 2021, during the COVID-19 (COVID) pandemic. Due to successive waves of the pandemic, the state and federal governments announced lockdowns intermittently, causing uncertainty in costs related to labor, material and project completion. The dilemma before Birari was how to set a bid price that was not so low as to incur a loss and not so high as to lose the bid to competitors. The uncertainty made Birari’s decision-making complex. The case invites students to help Birari find an optimum bid price by using various quantitative techniques, such as Monte Carlo simulation and decision trees.

This case is intended for students of management at a master’s level, in an elective course on management science, which is often also known as decision science. This compact case can be positioned in the second half of the course, when exploring risk management using computer simulation as a tool. The case serves both as an introduction to using simulation to manage uncertainty as well a contrast with simpler methods that are covered earlier in the course.

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

CSS 7: Management Science.

Three months into his first job as an IT consultant, newly minted MBA Phil Lee was wondering whether he had made a horrible mistake. Initially, he had been thrilled with his employer, Orion Information Technology Consulting, and the prospects for his professional future. He had specifically requested to work on projects in emerging markets, and his bosses had responded by flying him halfway around the world to New Delhi to meet with the head of procurement of a luxury property developer, Kirat Housing Development Society (KHDS). Lee thought the reason for the meeting was slightly unusual: Orion was planning to make a bid to supply building management software for KHDS's newest luxury tower, and this meeting would be the “pre-bid” negotiation. Lee wasn't totally sure what they'd even be discussing, as the tender already provided full details on exactly what modules would be required and even included specific penalty clauses for delays.

The meeting at KHDS seemed ordinary at first, but quickly took a turn when the assistant to the head of procurement explained that Orion would win the bid if it offered him a $200,000 contract as an “independent consultant.” Lee was stunned. To make matters worse, when he returned to his hotel room he found a gift waiting for him: an expensive-looking diamond pendant.

On his sleepless flight home, Lee's mind raced. Had his bosses known this would happen? Were bribes standard operating procedure? Now that he'd accepted a gift, was he complicit in wrongdoing? Lee didn't want to get fired, but he wasn't sure he could go along with this.

The Case takes place at the headquarters of Genesee & Wyoming, Inc. (GWI), one of the leading short line railroads in the United States. The Case revolves around three executives - Mortimer B. Fuller III, Chairman and CEO, Mark Hastings, CFO and Treasurer, and Alan Harris, Senior Vice President and Chief Accounting Office - and the dilemma over whether to pursue international expansion.

GWI has generally pursued a strategy of diversification through acquisition. However, there are other approaches to diversification, including international expansion. With increasing deregulation and privatization of railroads around the world, GWI and its competitors must weigh the risks of internationalization with the rewards. GWI fears that a failure to move quickly might result in missed opportunities as competitors acquire railroads around the world.

An opportunity has recently arisen in Australia, where the government is selling Australian National Railway. GWI believes Australia might be a good initial foray into the international market given the similarities of the country and its railroad industry to the United States and its railroad industry. The Case asks the question, “Should GWI enter the bidding?”

The case explores information technology (IT) company Mindtree’s journey of 20 years from the time it was founded in 1999 to be different from others, and how it became a target for acquisition by an Indian diversified conglomerate in 2019. It offers insights into developing organizational culture and values in an organization, threats faced by a company when promoters dilute their shareholding, and the strategies followed by the acquirer and the target firm. It also deals with the challenges in the acquisition of a knowledge service digital firm. After working through the case and assignment questions, students will be able to: identify the circumstances under which a company can become a target for hostile takeover; describe motivations of the acquirer firm in an acquisition; distinguish between acquisition and hostile takeover, and discuss salient features of Securities and Exchange Board of India (substantial acquisition of shares and takeover) regulations, 2011; list the defenses a target firm can adopt to ward off hostile acquirer; explore strategies followed by acquirer and target firms; analyze important ingredients of organization culture, and importance of cultural congruence in an acquisition; and discuss challenges faced by an acquirer in India, namely, legal, retention of clients and key people in the target firm particularly in hostile environment.

The case explores how ten IT professionals founded mid-tier IT services company Mindtree in 1999 in Bengaluru, India (home to Infosys and Wipro) to be different from others – by inserting themselves at a higher level in the value chain, being philanthropic as a part of broader business strategy to attract a certain kind of employee and customer. It developed a culture of equality, consideration and respect. Its attrition rate of 12 to 13 per cent was significantly lower than the Industries. Mindtree crossed annual revenue of US$1bn for FY 2019 and was growing at twice the industry’s growth rate. The most attractive part was that its proportion of revenue from digital services was about 50 per cent as compared to 25-35 per cent of other services vendors. With time, the share of promoters/founders declined and increased one investor’s shareholding of V. G. Siddhartha and his related entities. In early March 2019, the promoters’ stake was 13.32 per cent while Siddhartha had 20.32 per cent. Larsen and Toubro (L&T) one of India’s conglomerate entered into a share purchase agreement on March 18, 2019 with Siddhartha to acquire his 20.32 per cent stake. Immediately, L&T asked its broker to purchase up to 15 per cent of share capital of Mindtree at a price not exceeding INR 980 per share (each share of face value INR 10). This would trigger an open offer by L&T to purchase additional 31 per cent shares of Mindtree. The action of hostile takeover bid by L&T evoked emotional criticism from Mindtree founders. Mindtree efforts to defend itself could not materialize. L&T’s stake crossed 26 per cent on May 16, 2019. After Indian regulator SEBI’s approval, L&T’s open offer to buy shares from Mindtree shareholders commenced on June 17, 2019. The case examines motivation of the acquirer firm particularly when it is a conglomerate, and how a well-performing company became a target for hostile takeover. It looks at vulnerabilities of a target firm, and defensive steps a firm can take to fence itself against such takeover. The case also explores how organizational culture is built in a people-oriented business, namely, digital services, and what role it plays in a merger of two firms.

The case is suited for postgraduate students of management, as well as those undergoing executive courses in management.

Teaching notes are available for educators only. Please contact your library to gain login details or email support@emeraldinsight.com to request teaching notes.

CSS 11: Strategy.

In the spring of 2004, Google was one of the most-talked-about IPO ideas since Netscape had gone public in 1995. Bullish investors believed Google could set off a string of successful IPOs following a lull in tech-offering activity since 2000. Executives at Google faced several questions in the following months: Should Google go public? What options did Google have for taking its shares to market? Was the traditional form of book-building necessarily the best course of action? Could a sealed-bid auction (e.g., W.R. Hambrecht's OpenIPO) yield superior results?