Search results

The case presents a lot of information, directly and via references and Web-based links, about the economic consequences of the virus. Several themes are evident: As an opening theory-base, the decades-long stakeholder versus shareholder debate is invoked – but does this extend beyond “stakeholders” to the “public good”? There are contexts (generally wars) in which governments are empowered to instruct private companies to engage in the public good – but how far should/must they voluntarily go? The underlying macro-economic issue is: where will we get the capital? Central banks have not recovered from the 2008 global financial crisis and have limited “ammunition” to address the anticipated economic problems introduced by the virus. The case presents data on selected financial metrics (interest rates, debt levels, risk pricing, etc.) and outlines the conventional stimulatory steps used: lowering short-term rates (monetary policy) and investment in assets (fiscal policy) and the less-conventional Quantitative Easing “QE”.

The coronavirus appears to herald a devastating blow to lives and to the world economy – its impact is yet unknown, but likely to be comparable to war and pestilence of biblical proportion. This case focuses on the possible economic trajectories as a consequence of the virus, with emphasis on bailing-out (restructuring) struggling companies and restoring jobs. Within the framework of a world desperately in need of capital, it raises questions about accountability and responsibility. Should retrenched workers in restaurants, banks and airlines feel the consequences of their poor career choices? Must shareholders (read pensioners) shoulder losses to support the public good? Ought governments bail-out whole industries – using tax-payer money? Or do we allow central banks to conjure-up billions and hope for the best? The case does not attempt to provide answers to these questions but presents several vignettes and offers a context in which participants can debate the merits of these problems.

MBA and Exec-ed.

Teaching Notes are available for educators only.

CSS: 1 Accounting and Finance.

This case focuses on the business rescue of South African Airlines. SAA, four times rated the best airline in Africa (SAA, 2019), was already insolvent when in early 2020 COVID-19 decimated the world. The state-owned airline, which had last made profits in 2011, continued to lose millions of passengers to competitors over the next decade and, despite bailouts of more than R40bn, entered Business Rescue in December 2019, still owing creditors more than R26bn. To the surprise of many, Public Enterprises minister Pravin Gordhan was determined to rescue the airline. In May 2021, the business rescue practitioners handed SAA back to the interim board and Thomas Kgokolo (CA) (MBA) was appointed interim CEO. In June 2021, Gordhan announced a “born again” SAA, “almost ready to take off” and promised no more bailouts. But, with several billion rand outstanding to complete the rescue plan, a grounded fleet, unresolved labour problems, an critical but unnamed “strategic-equity partner” and a largely unvaccinated country entering its third COVID wave – what were the chances?

Within the framework of a country desperately in need of jobs and short of capital, the case raises questions about ethics, accountability, responsibility, management, economics and strategy. Should retrenched workers in airlines feel the consequences of their unfortunate career choices? Ought government’s bail-out already failed industries? Should governments run airlines? What sources of funds are available? Have all the necessary requirements for “restructuring” to succeed been satisfied?

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

CSS 11: Strategy.

MBA, Exec-ed.