Search results

The case focuses on two major challenges in deal making in emerging market economies---deal sourcing and negotiation---by focusing on a real (but disguised) Indian private equity deal. In 2010 Surya Tutoring was a fast-growing tutoring academy for high school students aspiring to gain admission to the prestigious Indian Institute of Technology (IIT). Surya’s CEO, R. K. Sharma, wanted to expand its reach beyond Kota (a city of 1 million people in the northern state of Rajasthan), which had become the center of the IIT prep school industry and home to tens of thousands of students studying for the rigorous IIT entrance exam. Sharma knew there was vast untapped potential in the teeming Indian metropolises of Mumbai, Chennai, Delhi, and Bangalore, as well as in foreign markets such as Dubai and Australia. Sharma had received term sheets from two private equity firms willing to finance Surya’s expansion. By the end of the month he needed to decide which to accept: the offer from big bulge bracket fund Blackgem, or the one from ZenCap, a small Indian firm based in Mumbai with which he had become intimately familiar during the past year.

After analyzing and discussing the case, students should be able to:

• Identify the differences between the United States and an emerging market such as India when it comes to deal sourcing, negotiation, and financial contracting

• Value a growth equity transaction in an emerging economy, including financial, contractual, and qualitative (social networks, local knowledge, trust) aspects of the deal

Identify the differences between the United States and an emerging market such as India when it comes to deal sourcing, negotiation, and financial contracting

Value a growth equity transaction in an emerging economy, including financial, contractual, and qualitative (social networks, local knowledge, trust) aspects of the deal

In the fall of 2007 a senior director of product marketing at Qwest in Denver, Colorado, gets an offer to work for an entrepreneurial high-growth venture. The vision is for greater wealth, accelerated business opportunity, more thrill on the job, and faster path to leadership by pursuing a position with a start-up firm. Kiva Allgood has management responsibility in her current position (e.g., manages a high-budget portfolio), with compensation of $145,000 in salary and incentive bonuses up to 100% of base salary. She realizes that she is not prepared for the negotiation because she has only negotiated job offers within large firms. She needs to know what many of these entrepreneurial finance terms mean and to understand whether she is being offered terms and amounts commensurate with the value she feels she will bring to the entrepreneur. She also needs to understand her opportunity cost and the expected value of her options: staying with the current job, starting her own venture, or taking this offer at the entrepreneurial venture. She had no idea there were also so many additional, non-financial factors to take into consideration. With her future on the line, she needs to work through the numbers fast. The entrepreneur gave her five days to come back with a counter offer, which he considered a generous amount of time. In evaluating these questions, students will take Allgood's point of view. The case is based on a real job offer to a real person named Kiva Allgood. The entrepreneur and his firm are fictitious in order to heighten the issues in this situation.

Exposes customary negotiations between a prospective employee and an entrepreneur, taking into account the valuation of the entrepreneurial firm, salary, stock options, ownership percentage, etc.; Examines the difference between considering a position with an entrepreneurial venture and one at a stable corporate organization; Looks at typical compensation criteria for entrepreneurial venture capital-backed firms; Introduces method for assessing an entrepreneur as a prospective future employer.

In recent years Lehman Brothers, one of the five largest investment banks in the United States, had grown increasingly reliant on its fixed income trading and underwriting division, which served as the primary engine for its strong profit growth. The bank had also significantly increased its leverage over the same timeframe, going from a debt-to-equity ratio of 23.7x in 2003 to 35.2x in 2007. As leverage increased, the ongoing erosion of the mortgage-backed industry began to impact Lehman significantly and its stock price plummeted. Unfortunately, public outcry over taxpayer assumption of $29 billion in potential Bear losses made repeating such a move politically untenable. The surreal scene of potential buyers traipsing into an investment bank's headquarters over the weekend to consider various merger or spin-out scenarios repeated itself once again. This time, the Fed refused to back the failing bank's liabilities, attempting instead to play last-minute suitors Bank of America, HSBC, Nomura Securities, and Barclay's off each other, jawboning them by arguing that failing to step up to save Lehman would cause devastating counterparty runs on their own capital positions. The Fed's desperate attempts to arrange its second rescue of a major U.S. investment bank in six months failed when it refused to backstop losses from Lehman's toxic mortgage holdings. Complicating matters was Lehman's reliance on short-term repo loans to finance its balance sheet. Unfortunately, such loans required constant renewal by counterparties, who had grown increasingly nervous that Lehman would lose the ability to make good on its trades. With this sentiment swirling around Wall Street, Lehman was forced to announce the largest Chapter 11 filing in U.S. history, listing assets of $639 billion and liabilities of $768 billion. The second domino had fallen. It would not be the last.

This case covers the period from the sale of Bear Stearns to JP Morgan to the conversion into bank holding companies by Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, including the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy and the sale of Merrill Lynch to Bank of America. The case explains the new global paradigm for the investment banking industry, including increased regulation, fewer competitors, lower leverage, reduced proprietary trading, and-potentially-reduced profits.

The case was developed from two 2-h interviews with the Chief Operating Officer of A-Basin, Alan Henceroth; there is no CEO of A-Basin. The second interview was recorded on a Zoom call to provide accuracy of quotations and information. A variety of secondary sources were used in terms of better understanding the current state of the ski industry, as well as its history.

Arapahoe Basin (A-Basin) is a historic, moderately sized, ski area with proximity to metropolitan Denver, Colorado. For over 20 years A-Basin partnered with Vail, allowing skiers to use the Vail Epic Pass, for which A-Basin received some revenue from Vail for each skier visit. The Epic Pass allowed pass holders unlimited days of skiing at A-Basin. More and more skiers were buying the Epic Pass, thus increasing the customer traffic to A-Basin. However, the skier experience was compromised due inadequate parking, long lift lines and crowded restaurants. The renewal of the contract with Vail was coming due, and A-Basin had to consider whether to renew the contract with Vail. The case is framed primarily as a strategic marketing case. The authors use Porter’s five forces model to assess the external environment of A-Basin, and the authors use the resource-based view and the VRIO tool to assess A-Basin’s internal strengths. Both frameworks provide useful analysis in terms of deciding whether to continue A-Basin’s arrangement with Vail or end the contract and pursue a different strategy. In 2019, after consultation with the Canadian parent company Dream, A-Basin made the decision to disassociate itself from the Epic Pass and Vail to restore a quality ski experience for A-Basin’s customers. No other partner had ever left its relationship with Vail. An epilogue details some of A-Basin’s actions, as well as the outcomes for the ski area. Generally A-Basin’s decision produced positive results and solidified its competitive position among competitors. Other ski areas have since adopted a similar strategy as A-Basin. A-Basin’s success is reflected in a pending offer from Alterra, Inc., to purchase the ski area.

The A-Basin case can be used in both undergraduate and graduate strategic (or marketing) management courses. It is probably best considered during the middle of an academic term, as the case requires students to apply many of the theoretical concepts of strategy. One of the best books to enable students to use Porter’s five forces is Understanding Michael Porter by Joan Magretta (Boston: Harvard Business Review Press, 2012). Magretta was a colleague of Porter for many years and was an Editor of the Harvard Business Review. For a discussion of the VRIN/VRIO concept, see Chapter 4 of Essentials of Strategic Management by Gamble, Peteraf and Thompson (New York: McGraw-Hill Education, 2019).

Radio Mirchi is the flagship brand of Entertainment Network India Limited (ENIL). ENIL is the largest private FM radio broadcaster in India. ENIL was able to gain a stronghold in the market due to its strengths of innovativeness and creative content, large operating network, reach among listeners, high quality studio and strong advertisement sales capabilities. The case discusses Radio Mirchi's entry into the Kolkata market in 2003 amidst the competition from three other players—Red FM, Aamar and Power. Kolkata occupied a prime place in the company's growth plans. The case discusses the dilemma faced by the company on developing the entry strategy. Its top management has to decide on the market segment(s) it should target, and the design of the product.

Besides the metrics developed to measure the impact of the video campaign run by the company, the case has serious practical implications for all companies in emerging markets selling budget/low-cost products. Marketing managers can take note of these key performance indicators in evaluating the success of their social media campaigns.More importantly, students need to understand how the campaign managed to integrate uninitiated and less-privileged consumers to the world of social media with aspirational sentiments.

The case deals with a digital media planning activity for a low-cost handset company based in India. TRIVIA International Ltd is a manufacturer and marketer of smart phones and feature phone in the price range of below US$70–100 and US$20, respectively. The phones cater to low-income consumer bracket, which forms the vast microcosm of India. The consumer base is huge, but the purchasing power is very low, so they are at times referred to as the micro-consumer in Bottom of Pyramid approach. To approach this consumer base, Trivia planned a very engaging campaign on social media that yielded positive results, contrary to popular belief that only high-income individuals explore the social media intensively through their smart phones. The chapter ends with a set of recommendations for all digital managers who want to analyse their campaigns effectively via awareness, sentiment and engagement metrics.

The case is meant for all post graduate programs in Business Management, which include the MBAs, Masters in Business Administration and the Executive Development program for managers. The case can also be used in Part Time Business Management programs held over weekends for working professionals. Most likely the students are going to handle this case in their second year of a full-time program or at an advanced level of their career development programs. The subjects so mentioned here were offered as electives or areas of specialization. It is presumed that the students undergoing these courses have basic understanding of marketing management.

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

CSS 8: Marketing.

Desai, a College Student, faced a job search dilemma. Desai applied for two internships – one with a company known for a good culture, Strategic Carrier Logistics (SCL), the other with Thijs Marketing, a company in an industry more familiar and desirable to Desai. After a number of recruitment interactions with both companies, Desai received an offer from SCL and was given two days to decide. Unsure whether Thijs Marketing would make an offer, Desai considered accepting the offer from SCL, but reneging if Thijs eventually offered a job.

The case was developed from primary sources, where “Desai’s” first-hand experience in searching for a job provides the true account of the events noted in the case. The names and demographic information for individuals were changed.

This case study is appropriate for graduate and undergraduate courses in organizational behavior (i.e. decision-making), human resources management (i.e. employee recruitment), and business ethics (i.e. ethical decision-making).

The learning outcomes are as follows:

1. enable students to appreciate how a platform company can navigate through diminishing network effects;

2. enable students to foresee the downside of scaling up a platform business;

3. enable students to appreciate the trade-off between an efficiency-centric and a novelty-centric business model for platform businesses; and

4. enable students to create a platform business model canvas for a company.

The teaching case discusses the dilemma of Akshay Chaturvedi, the founder of Leverage Edu, an artificial intelligence-enabled platform for students seeking admission to foreign universities. It had received nearly US$9.6m in funding until December 2021.

Chaturvedi wanted to make the best use of his funds, but was torn between turning Leverage Edu into an “efficient platform” and transforming it into a “novelty-centric platform”. The teaching note attempts to resolve Chaturvedi’s dilemma by analyzing competitors using the platform canvas model and determining how Chaturvedi could create and use network effects to Leverage Edu’s advantage. The case is based on secondary data that is freely available in the public domain.

This case is intended for MBA Entrepreneurship students taking a platform business elective. It can also be used in faculty and management development programs under the banner “Technology and Platform Businesses”.

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

CSS 3: Entrepreneurship.

Marketing.

The courses in which this case can be used include e-business, e-commerce, digital marketing, retailing and marketing strategy. This case can be used to teach MBA students. This case is also having the equal relevance for the executive programmes.

AaramShop is digitizing the Grocery General Trade ecosystem. There are of millions of neighbourhood kirana stores spread across all the cities of India. AaramShop is bringing these neighbourhood kirana stores online, and making them not only e-commerce-ready but also capable of using technology to take their stores to the next level in terms of service and delivery. The case lists out the issues and challenges faced by AaramShop.

This case challenges the participants to understand the new business model in the e-commerce space. The participants can look at the different angles of the business model proposition, namely, how AaramShop approach delivers on the retailer proposition, consumer proposition and the brands proposition. The participants can also be sensitized about the obstacles in making the business model more successful. These obstacles can be posed by the retailers, consumers or brands. The case will lead to a discussion about the logistics model opportunity available to Aaramshop.com.

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 8: Marketing

The case describes how Radio Mirchi dealt with competition in the Bangalore FM radio market. Radio Mirchi's market share in Bangalore started declining within a few months of its successful launch, following the entry of new competitors in the market. The case discusses strategies adopted by the company to regain its market share and become the market leader. It describes the initial product offering of the channel, why it felt the need to redesign its product mix, and eventually how the company changed its product offering. The focus of the case is on the dilemma faced by the organization while shifting to a new product and service design in the face of emerging competition. The case highlights the importance of continuously monitoring the market environment and developing a keen understanding of the consumers' behaviour for an organization to gain and sustain its leadership position in the marketplace.