Search results

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.

Over the last two decades, Under Armour (UA) has emerged from being the “underdog” in the sports apparel and footwear industry to being a leader in the industry, with a fierce attention to performance and great skill at picking up-and-coming athletes who emerge as superstars. This case underscores its administrative heritage, competitive strategy, and growth potential as a global player in a highly competitive industry. It addresses the tension between being a performance brand while launching lines for women vs technology applications and conflicts between its growth strategy and macro-economic forces. It highlights areas in which it has succeeded against macro-economic forces and where it has not.

The research relies primarily on secondary sources and countless studies of UA and its major competitors. Primary research is based on databases, videos of UA’s Chief Executive Officer, Kevin Plank, and articles from Bloomberg to The Baltimore Sun (UA’s headquarters) on the history, growth and future of UA. It also includes observations and site visits to one of its signature brand house stores as well as intensive research and directed studies with students in the USA and China.

The case can be applied to undergraduate, graduate or executive business classes in: business policy and strategy; general management; (sports) marketing; leadership or organisational behaviour classes.

In 2013, Under Armour had $2.3 billion in sales yet only $500 million came from its women’s apparel, and the company was ready to expand into the female market segment. The “I Will What I Want” global women’s marketing campaign was the largest Under Armour had ever run. Founder Keven Plank and his team launched the campaign on a multichannel platform, with social media at its core. The campaign’s success surpassed what Plank had imagined, and he is left wondering where to take Under Armour’s advertising and marketing next. This case has been used successfully in a marketing course and would be suited for any class with a focus on interactive media, technology, and multichannel marketing.

The case traces the development of Lululemon Athletica (Lulu) from founder Chip Wilson's first post-yoga euphoria in 1997 through the sale of all his shares in 2015. Officially founded in 1998, Lulu was built on the foundation of its “miracle” figure-enhancing yoga pants made from a proprietary stretch fiber. The case outlines Wilson's early experience in technical performance wear, which gave him the expertise needed to launch the Lululemon brand with its premium-priced, fashion-designed product line targeted at upscale women. The case also highlights the retailing and promotion approach that drove Lulu's first decade of success. The snapshot of how the Lulu brand cult was born and diffused provides the backdrop for assessing whether the brand has already hit its peak or whether it can sustain the explosive growth that effectively created the athleisure category. To aid in this determination, the case presents two competitors as comparative foils (Under Armour and Athleta) to contextualize Lulu's growth prospects.

The Lululemon case highlights the importance of the competitive frame of reference when positioning a brand and describes how this may differ for the three competitors. The case also allows for a discussion of the challenges of maintaining the congruence of a retail brand with a diverse product line. This struggle is unique to retailers who must fit ever-varied product assortments (not just a single product line) under the umbrella of a single brand proposition, and is particularly relevant to vertically integrated brands such as Lululemon.

The case traces the development of the Under Armour (UA) brand, product, and market growth under CEO and founder Kevin Plank from its inception in 1996 through 2016. UA provides a cohesive case study of how to launch and sustain a consumer brand even in the face of its third-party manufacturing approach, which gives its apparel no patentable design or fabric technologies. The case uses UA's brand and advertising development as a backdrop for the current pivotal issue of how to target women to sustain growth. UA's stated goal is to build a $1.9 billion women's business by 2019.

In laying out UA's growth and competitive moves, the case lets students analyze broadcast, social media, and other digital advertising campaigns in view of the company's brand development and strategic targeting. The case also highlights the importance of leveraging brand heritage and historical differentiation while respecting key nuances when extending into new markets (i.e., moving from a predominantly male-driven audience to female). It also allows an exploration of how to use consumer insight and broader cultural attitudes and trends to support extending a position into new markets.

MBA students Tim Joyce and Brandon Cornuke had what they believed was a great product concept: a body powder that could be delivered in an aerosol spray. Current market-leading powders such as Gold Bond and Johnson's Baby Powder involved messy application, as they were only available in “dump-on” form. Worse, because powders deposited on top of the skin didn't adhere to it, they tended not to last long. Joyce and Cornuke believed an aerosol powder spray would solve these problems. They called their product concept Dry Goods. However, taking Dry Goods from idea to reality presented some serious challenges. How would two students without access to a lab be able to research and develop a complex chemical/physical process like aerosol delivery, let alone manufacture it once they had a proven prototype? To address these problems, the two entrepreneurs sought out a contract manufacturing partner. After identifying a number of options, Joyce and Cornuke had to decide which partner offered them the best chances of success, given their goals and financial constraints.

Students will learn about the process of hiring a contract manufacturing partner to produce a new packaged good for a startup.

Hasn’t everyone at some point felt as if the universe was conspiring against his or her success? This case narrative tracks the story of Emmett Taylor, an operations manager for a bottling company, as a snow and ice storm bears down on his southeastern U.S. plant. Taylor is already plagued by stress caused by all facets of his life-family, work, and personal health-and this storm is no exception. The story offers an opportunity to discuss time, energy, and priority management; individual behavior from a type-A personality; work-life balance; organizational behavior; and leadership. This case is a suitable substitution for the classic best-selling Darden case “John Wolford” (UVA-OB-0167).

The learning outcomes are as follows: developing an understanding of financial statement analysis among students; students would be able to calculate various ratios, understand their meaning and interpret them to take a financial decision; and exploring the relationship between financial leverage and risk.

Amtek Auto is a leading auto-components manufacturer established in 1988 which entered into bankruptcy in through the order of Reserve Bank of India in 2017. The company started with a humble beginning and later on the promoter decided to expand exponentially both through organic as well as inorganic growth in past 15 years. To grow a company kept on taking debt which made it riskier and deteriorated its financial position over a period. The case covers a 10-year timeline from 2008 to 2017. It gives an opportunity to analyze its financial statements to understand how its decisions shaped its performance

The case aims for students to take a comprehensive view of the financial statement analysis of Amtek Auto including the following: vertical and horizontal analysis; comprehensive ratio analysis including liquidity, profitability, leverage and turnover ratios with special emphasis on debt as a double-edged sword; analysis of Armtek Auto’s financial performance over a period of 10 years.

Teaching Notes are available for educators only.

CSS 1: Accounting and Finance.

This is the fourth in a series of articles about case research, writing, teaching, and reviewing. In this article, the protagonist, Prof. Moore, consults experienced case teachers and learns many different approaches to use in the classroom. The article is written as if it were a case; it is fictitious.

The Constitution of India guarantees freedom of speech and expression to its citizens. This freedom is not absolute and the State can impose reasonable restrictions. Of late, certain incidents have shown this freedom to be under threat. The case highlights some of such events. It makes the readers think about the importance of this right, reasonableness of restrictions, and the measures needed to protect it.