Search results

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.

Alice Monroe, a 30-year-old married mother of two, was an admissions officer at the Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern University. She was just completing her first year of service at Northwestern and qualified for the university's 403(b) retirement plan. It was early October 2017, and she had until the end of the month to decide if and to what extent she would participate in Northwestern's retirement plan–that is, how much of her salary should she put into the retirement plan, and into which mutual fund or funds should she allocate her savings?

The case includes background on defined contribution and benefit plans as well as mutual funds. It goes into detail about Northwestern's retirement plan, including data on the performance of 15 of the plan's core mutual funds. The case also provides each fund's strategy, Morningstar Rating and Morningstar Category, expense ratio, assets under management, turnover rate, and historical performance for the last 10 years.

Using modern portfolio theory (diversification and risk-return trade-off) and with an understanding of mutual fund fees and the tax advantages of retirement savings, students will decide how much Alice should invest and in which mutual funds.

This case explains marketing process for follow-on equity offerings, the direct and indirect costs of issue, and the long-run performance of equity issuers. Students use analysts' projections from which to estimate the intrinsic value of the company's share—including the cost savings from the VEBA and financial improvements over the next several years. It is appropriate for use in corporate finance courses covering the topics of capital raising, equity financing, capital structure, costs of financing, funding alternatives, investment banking, and valuation. It presents the classic profile on an equity issuer—a firm whose stock price has risen to new heights in recent months. Will the issue lead to additional value that creates opportunities for shareholders, or is it a sign the firm is overvalued? The case explores the thinking of a prominent investment manager who had accumulated a large stake in Goodyear and who did not see the need for Goodyear to make an equity issue at this time. The company's position was that the high stock would allow it to further strengthen its balance sheet and pursue international growth opportunities. Students are asked to decide what the investor should do with respect to the current offer—buy, sell, or hold.

IFCI Limited-a non-banking financial corporation in India was struggling with issues of negative Capital Adequacy Ratio and high non-performing assets till 2007. The company had not done any business for a decade until 2007. July, 2007 was the time when Atul Rai joined the company as the CEO. This case revolves around the various strategic initiatives taken by Rai and his team to help the firm turnaround. The main focus of the case is on the implementation of some of the key strategic decisions. The case gives opportunity to review IFCI's strategy and make recommendations for future expansion.

Alice Handy, an investment professional with 30 years' experience as head of the University of Virginia Investment Management Company, has opened a new asset management firm targeted at midsize endowments and nonprofit institutions in January 2004. Her business, Investure, LLC, offered outsourced investment services to institutions with $150 million to $1 billion in assets and access to top-performing managers at lower cost than a fund of funds (FoF). Smith College, a prestigious liberal arts college with a nearly $1 billion endowment, is interested in increasing its current allocation to private equity. Handy and her partner are preparing to meet with Smith's trustees in an attempt to win Smith College as Investure's first client. The case presents three different approaches to private equity investing: direct investment through a traditional limited partnership, investment through a FoF, or investment through Investure's outsourced model. The class discussion presents an opportunity to evaluate advantages and shortcomings of each approach, introduce key terminology, and discuss the current trends in the private equity market. Students are given the cash inflows and outflows for a representative investment in a venture capital fund of the type Handy hopes to invest in on behalf of Smith College. The main analytical task requires students to evaluate the expected gross and net returns generated by the representative investment under each of the different approaches and fee structures.

This case was written for an early class in courses on entrepreneurial finance, venture capital, or private equity. It can also be used in specialized courses for fund trustees interested in alternative assets.

Gary Parr, deputy chairman of Lazard Freres & Co. and Kellogg class of 1980, could not believe his ears. “You can't mean that,” he said, reacting to the lowered bid given by Doug Braunstein, JP Morgan head of investment banking, for Parr's client, legendary investment bank Bear Stearns. Less than eighteen months after trading at an all-time high of $172.61 a share, Bear now had little choice but to accept Morgan's humiliating $2-per-share, Federal Reserve-sanctioned bailout offer. “I'll have to get back to you.” Hanging up the phone, Parr leaned back and gave an exhausted sigh. Rumors had swirled around Bear ever since two of its hedge funds imploded as a result of the subprime housing crisis, but time and again, the scrappy Bear appeared to have weathered the storm. Parr's efforts to find a capital infusion for the bank had resulted in lengthy discussions and marathon due diligence sessions, but one after another, potential investors had backed away, scared off in part by Bear's sizable mortgage holdings at a time when every bank on Wall Street was reducing its positions and taking massive write-downs in the asset class. In the past week, those rumors had reached a fever pitch, with financial analysts openly questioning Bear's ability to continue operations and its clients running for the exits. Now Sunday afternoon, it had already been a long weekend, and it would almost certainly be a long night, as the Fed-backed bailout of Bear would require onerous negotiations before Monday's market open. By morning, the eighty-five-year-old investment bank, which had survived the Great Depression, the savings and loan crisis, and the dot-com implosion, would cease to exist as an independent firm. Pausing briefly before calling CEO Alan Schwartz and the rest of Bear's board, Parr allowed himself a moment of reflection. How had it all happened?

An analysis of the fall of Bear Stearns facilitates an understanding of the difficulties affecting the entire investment banking industry: high leverage, overreliance on short-term financing, excessive risk taking on proprietary trading and asset management desks, and myopic senior management all contributed to the massive losses and loss of confidence. The impact on the global economy was of epic proportions.

This case requires students to evaluate alternative dual-share-class corporate structures that allow companies and entrepreneurs to pursue profit with purpose. The case explores Impact Makers, an IT consulting company based in Richmond, Virginia. While original founders of the firm hold all voting rights, the cash flow rights belong to two nonprofits setting the stage for a Newman's Own model of management consulting. The case discusses whether and how the alternative corporate structure aids the firm's overall strategy to attract top-quality employees, pay them competitive salaries, and provide superior service to its clients while donating 100% of its lifetime value to charitable causes, largely through partnerships with various nonprofit organizations. More importantly, the case asks students to evaluate how such a dual-share-class and dual-purpose company can raise capital to fund continued growth.

The case opens with CEO Michael Pirron reminding himself of all the questions he had run through to execute a strategy to further grow Impact Makers' consulting business both through expanding a menu of services and through conquering new geographical markets. To do either, or both, the company needed a cash infusion. Internal cash was limited, as up to 40% of it flowed to charitable partners, demonstrating Impact Makers' commitment to its mission. Raising debt for a company without fixed assets was challenging and time consuming. Complicating it all was that being structured as a nonstock corporation rendered equity raising difficult. Could Impact Makers raise money to grow and stay true to community values at the same time?

Threadneedle Investments, a leading UK Investment management company, was engaged in strategic discussions about future growth in its retail mutual funds business. The firm's Vice Chairman, Alan Ainsworth, was leading the discussion of strategic alternatives. The following options were being considered: expanding distribution of its funds in the UK by distributing directly; expanding its presence in the UK through the independent financial advisor (IFA)network; and/or building a larger presence in Germany, where Threadneedle was already established. The case takes place in June 2000 and draws much of its rationale and immediacy from the great bull market of the 1990's and the arrival of a new millennium. Investors were looking for new investment media to capture these returns. The case is based on field research including conversations with Mr. Ainsworth and his associates, internal company documents, interviews with experts in the field and library research.

The case aims to understand and analyse the capital structure decisions made by a profit-making, growing organisation which aimed to be India’s premier airline and the market leader. The company that had pursued a high debt policy, to take advantage of the financial leverage that it would get, was now facing problems in an operating environment that proved to be challenging. A decline in operating profit, coupled with high-interest costs and an uncertain environment with cutthroat competition, had caused the company to plunge into losses. Attempts to deleverage by equity infusion were proving to be difficult. The case can be used in MBA, Executive Education and doctoral programmes. The learning objectives of this case are: to analyse the capital structure of the company, to interpret the relationship between financial leverage and risk, to assess the pecking order theory, to analyse the nuances of the aviation sector and the factors influencing the profitability of the companies in the aviation industry, to estimate the risks and the rewards associated with foreign currency loans, to evaluate the magnifying impact of the financial leverage and to propose deleveraging methods like sale and leaseback, debt conversion to equity and devise a revival strategy for the company.

The case discusses the dilemma faced by Naresh Goyal, promoter and chairman of Jet Airways (India) Limited. At the initial stage, Jet Airways, like many other companies in its growth phase, relied on borrowed funds to meet its investment needs. However, over-reliance on borrowed funds with just one equity infusion resulted in a high leverage ratio and an aggressive capital structure. Moreover, the company operated in a sector that was highly regulated, with competition that was cutthroat and a cost structure that was volatile. A high operating risk, coupled with high financial leverage, pushed the company into incurring losses. Having run out of cash, Jet Airways eventually defaulted on loan repayments to its lenders. Facing the eventuality of losing control of the company to lenders or to a strategic investor, Goyal was trying to figure out a way to save the company from insolvency and liquidation. It was becoming increasingly difficult for Goyal to keep Jet Airways, the company he had nurtured like a baby, airborne.

The case can be taught in both online and offline modes of delivery in a 90-minute session. Post-covid, the delivery mode of classes has changed. In online sessions, it may be a challenging task to ensure student participation.

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

CSS 1: Accounting and Finance.

Jim Reynolds Jr. founded Loop Capital in 1997 as an investment bank specializing in bond sales for municipalities. Ten years later, with thirteen offices and almost 100 employees, Loop Capital was a national company and had brokered more than $800 billion of underwritings in equity, tax-exempt, and taxable fixed income markets. In the process of building its municipal finance and equity trading businesses, Loop Capital had developed close relationships with a number of government officials, large institutional money managers, and corporate executives. These customers began asking Loop Capital for help with other financial services, leading the firm to build corporate finance, tax-exempt, and taxable fixed-income platforms so it could offer a wider array of investment services. Municipal and corporate finance as well as equity, taxable, and tax-exempt trading were generating positive cash flow. In a field where failures were frequent, Loop Capital was thriving, and Reynolds saw great but untapped potential in the company's future. Over the past several years, Loop Capital had served as financial advisor to several municipalities that wanted to lease or sell public assets such as airports, toll roads, and seaports. Now he confronted several intriguing questions: Should he launch a $700 million infrastructure fund to invest in the types of deals the firm had helped structure? Did it make sense to invest in order to staff, market, and support the start-up of this new fund? If the fund was launched, should Loop Capital commit to the 1% investment likely to be required as the fund's general partner?

Learn how to start a new financial services firm/investment bank venture Learn how an investment banking firm becomes successful at doing a few things well Assess risks of expanding into a new line of business with a different business model Examine differences between investment banking and fund management, and between high-growth entrepreneurship and lifestyle entrepreneurship Examine the significance, if any, of being a minority entrepreneur