Search results

Stanley Cirano owns two retail shopping centers in suburban Chicago. With interest rates near all-time lows in late 2015, Cirano believed it was an opportune time to consider the debt financing of his properties. Although the properties were similar in many respects, the lenders willing to lend against each property were offering noticeably different terms. Cirano had to consider not only the interest rate and size of each potential loan, but also the various fees, potential prepayment penalties, and variations in recourse to make the best decision for each property.

With interest rates near all-time lows in late 2015, Stanley Cirano knew it was an opportune time to consider the financing on his portfolio of commercial real estate. Cirano Properties was the general partner on three separate private equity investments of retail shopping centers in suburban Chicago. The first, Brookline Road Shopping Center, had been acquired in 2006 and had been managed through the financial crisis and real estate downturn. The property was performing well and Cirano wondered whether it made sense to refinance or sell. The second property, Columbus Festival Plaza, had been acquired in a 2010 bankruptcy auction. Although the property had needed a good amount of capital improvements, Cirano was proud of the growth in net operating income he had been able to generate. The final property, Deerwood Acres, had been developed by Cirano himself after acquiring the property in 2013 from the previous owner, who had been operating a go-cart track and drive-in theater on the land. Cirano expected great things from the property, though his lease-up had been slower than anticipated.

Although the three properties had different levels of performance and presented different management issues, they all shared the fact that they were all significantly financed, in part, with debt. As the properties were acquired at different times, Cirano had simply selected what seemed like reasonable financing at the time. With his concern that interest rates would soon be rising, Cirano thought it made sense to take a holistic view of his portfolio, consider what debt options were available to him, and make a sound strategic decision on the financing of all his assets at the same time.

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.

An estimate of the fair rate of return on capital is a critical input into tariff regulation. A too high estimate will lead to high tariffs for consumers; a too low estimate will not provide adequate incentives for investment. The Airport Economic Regulatory Authority of India has issued a consultation paper for finalizing the norms and procedure for estimating the fair rate of return. It now needs to reconcile the differing view and approaches of different stakeholders.

This case was a real-life situation faced by the author. Names were changed, so students would not know that the author was the protagonist. The case had been developed over several years as a capstone to the capital budgeting section of an MBA finance course and an advanced undergraduate course.

Trey and Lauren Gallo were considering the purchase of a vacation condo that also generated rental income. The current owners were willing to sell at a lowball offer of $605,000 as the pandemic entered its 13th month. The Gallos felt they needed to act fast to get this deal. However, the risks were extraordinary, as the pandemic had reduced rental income by 50% and borders had just recently closed. The case provides all data needed to compute rental revenues, capital expenditure, operational expenditures and financing costs. Students are expected to compute the NPV and IRR of free cashflows. Students will compute and evaluate the cost of capital using the condo’s projected debt structure, a choice of several proxy betas and a project risk premium. The case also uses extensive sensitivity analysis. This case differs from corporate capital budgeting problems because it evaluates both levered and unlevered cashflows, and the cashflows include savings from personal use. The case has been successfully used in MBA finance courses and advanced undergraduate finance courses. The case can be used as a capstone case for capital budgeting or a comprehensive exam in undergraduate, MBA and executive programs. The case questions can also be spread throughout a course to cover the topics of financial statement forecasting, free cash flows, capital budgeting, cost of capital and sensitivity analysis.

Earlier versions of this case have been used in an advanced undergraduate corporate finance course and MBA finance courses. The case is generally used as a capstone to the material on capital budgeting. Students should have already covered material on financial statements, loan cashflows, levered and unlevered cashflows, CAPM, proxy betas, weighted average cost of capital, NPV and IRR. This case is also appropriate for courses in real estate finance and personal finance.

In mid-1992, Christine Olsen, the chief financial officer (CFO) of this large CAD/CAM equipment manufacturer, must decide on the magnitude of the firm's dividend payout. A subsidiary question is whether the firm should embark on a campaign of corporate-image advertising and change its corporate name to reflect its new outlook. The case serves as an omnibus review of the many practical aspects of the dividend decision, including (1) signaling effects, (2) clientele effects, and (3) finance and investment implications of increasing dividend payout.

This case is a relatively straightforward exercise in valuing a potential acquisition target. The case affords students an opportunity to use both discounted cash flow and multiples in their analyses. In addition, at the instructor's discretion, students can do a simple valuation of an option contract and analyze currency choice in a debt issue. The latter two objectives arise if the case is used as an examination. Case Exhibit 1 poses the relevant questions for student preparation.

The case can be taught in an introductory corporate finance course or to more experienced students or executives to spur a discussion about share repurchases and corporate financial strategies in general. If used in an introductory course, the case is most effective if preceded by a traditional dividend class. It follows a portfolio manager of Johnson & Associates, Mark Johnson, who is reviewing his holdings, including his position in AutoZone in early 2012. A prominent shareholder, Edward Lampert, had begun liquidating his position in AutoZone, and Johnson is concerned that Lampert's reduced position could lead the company to stop using share repurchases as a method of distributing cash flows to shareholders. The case lists a number of alternative uses for the cash flows and asks students to assume Johnson's role as an analyst and assess the likely impact of those alternatives on AutoZone's stock price.

32-year-old Heather Wilson was about to become a property investor. After years of painstaking savings, she had finally reached agreement to purchase her first buy-to-let property, a 1 bedroom flat in London's sought-after Kensington and Chelsea neighborhood. She looked forward to a lifetime of building wealth through property investments. Of course, some of the income the property would generate would be owed to Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs (HMRC). But such was the nature of life. Unfortunately, the tax laws had only recently become less favorable for property investors, but Wilson expected to negotiate a lower purchase price as a result and so she felt confident that her investment remained solid.

In March 1997, the board chair of this small steel mill is pondering how to finance the growth of his firm: either with an initial public offering of equity or a private placement of 8-year senior notes with warrants. The task for the student is to sort out the comparative advantages and disadvantages of each alternative—including valuing the possible securities—and recommend a course of action.