Search results

Infrastructure finance.

II MBA/Executive MBA (Project Finance, Infrastructure Finance).

It is generally believed that the economy of India is on the threshold of achieving significant growth in the coming years. The availability of adequate infrastructure facility will play a key role in realizing this growth potential. To accelerate the process of creating infrastructure capacity, the Government of India has opened up many infrastructure sectors for private sector investment. Creation of international standard airport facilities is an important component of such new infrastructure creation. This case study presents the initial development and financing closure of Bengaluru International Airport Limited (BIAL), the first major private sector airport in India. In retrospect, it is generally felt that BIAL was an important milestone in the privatization of airports in India. The blueprint for the greenfield PPP airport in Hyderabad was closely modelled on the BIAL project. The experience gained in the development of BIAL also played a major role in subsequent brownfield PPP airport expansion projects in Mumbai and Delhi.

The goal of this case study is to illustrate the complexities that exist in the process of infrastructure development and financing. This following are the expected learning outcomes:

• The importance of using an appropriate project structure.

• The prevalence of early returns to project sponsors as compared to lenders.

• The process of achieving financial closure.

• Analyzing project risks and returns.

The importance of using an appropriate project structure.

The prevalence of early returns to project sponsors as compared to lenders.

The process of achieving financial closure.

Analyzing project risks and returns.

Teaching notes.

In the wake of the December 2015 Paris COP21 (Conference of Parties), and India's announced renewable energy commitments, Reliance Power is reviewing its renewable energy investments to arrive at a long term strategy for the role of renewable energy in its power generation portfolio and the financing of renewable projects. The case reviews the Indian government's policies to promote renewable energy; the evolution of the renewable energy sector; and Reliance Power's financing of renewable energy investments. The case requires identification of alternative long term strategies and their financing implications. This case serves as an introduction to renewable energy from the perspective of Reliance Power, a large private power generator of the country. These projects also provide a learning opportunity for Reliance Power to deal with fast evolving renewable technologies.

The Mercini Lady Case is a modern statement of the law on the rights of the buyer in a sale contract. The seller has to supply goods in conformity with description, of merchantable quality and fit for the stated use. These rights, the ‘implied conditions’, however, can be ousted by express terms in the contract. The Court of Appeal judgement of the UK keenly considered that the exclusion clause should be interpreted in its business sense. However, it sided with precedence established over hundred years that the exclusion clauses take away valuable rights of the buyer and must be strictly and technically constructed.

Greenko, a renewable power generating company investing in biomass, small and medium hydro power and wind power projects, had projected to achieve 1GW (Giga Watt = 1000 Mega Watt) of installed capacity by March 2015. The company had been financing its projects with debt from Indian banks and financial institutions on a project finance basis and it had to now decide whether to refinance the project finance debt with an international bond issue of USD 550 million. The case provides an opportunity to discuss the public policy and financing aspects of renewable energy in India.

Communication Solutions (CS), a woman-owned business, experienced fast growth at its inception, and then found itself slowing after the mid-2000s recession. The firm provides consulting services, primarily to government agencies. The owners have brought the business to sales of about $10.5 million in 2012, but revenues declined following that peak year because of cutbacks in government spending and founder Jennifer Madison’s detachment from the business. Even though they recognize that it may not be an ideal time to sell, they are tired of running the business and want to sell now, as long as they can pay off their debts.

This case was researched through multiple interviews with Mark and Jennifer, who provided all of the financial data and background. All financial statements given in the case provide actual CS numbers. The name of the company and the names of the owners have been changed, at their request to disguise the company. At the time this case was written, the owners were in negotiation with a potential bidder, and did not want their names or their company name to be used. Market information and information about comparable companies was researched using publicly available financial data bases.

This case has the potential to be used in a variety of classes, depending on what the instructor wishes to emphasize. The author uses the case as a valuation case in a corporate finance class (suitable for undergraduates or MBAs), allowing students practice in discounted cash flow valuation and comparable multiples valuation. It could be used in an investments class which teaches business valuation, particularly in teaching valuation using market multiples. The case could be used in an entrepreneurial finance class. The author uses this case to illustrate the difficulties of business valuation with messy (but real) data.

This case explores small business valuation and exit strategies for founders. Students can put themselves in the position of small business owners who are ready to exit. Students should value the firm using discounted cash flow and multiples valuation, which includes making assumptions about the future growth of the firm. While there is likely to be reasonable agreement on the “as is” valuation, there may be great variation concerning the assumptions and valuations of the company as it could be. Students can discuss (and implement) adjustments made when using large company comparables to value a much smaller company.

This case describes the coal-procurement process of a small electric utility. The manager of the production fuel department must decide how much coal to purchase from each vendor and how to allocate the purchased coal among the utility's three coal-burning plants. The situation can be modeled and solved as a linear program. Sensitivity analysis can be used to help formulate a strategy for negotiating with the vendors and to address other special issues.

In early 2017, after launching its successful “Greenhouse-in-a-Box” pilot project in India with fifteen smallholder farmers, Kheyti, a non-profit agricultural technology (AgTech) social enterprise, was struggling with several decisions in developing and growing its business. Kheyti was launched in 2015 to help smallholder farmers battle poverty and income variability by providing affordable technologies bundled with services. Over eighteen months, the team had developed a low-cost and modular greenhouse product to which it added financing, inputs, training, and market linkages to create a comprehensive “full-stack” solution for small farmers. The pilot project was a success in many ways, but Saumya, Kheyti's co-founder and head of product, was concerned that it revealed shortcomings that could severely affect the viability and scalability of Kheyti's solution.

Saumya had some important decisions to make. Should Kheyti redesign the product from scratch, or find other ways to reduce the cost for early adopters? Should it rely on upfront revenues from sales of the greenhouse, or consider developing an innovative financing or contract farming model? Kheyti's dwindling cash reserves meant that these decisions were urgent and critical. The path chosen now would determine whether the startup would move beyond the pilot stage and achieve its vision of serving 1 million farmers by 2025.

The case describes the policies followed by the Government of India to attract private investments for Oil & Gas exploration. This case is based around observations made by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India on some of the petroleum sharing contracts and the remedial measures suggested by a committee appointed by the Government. The case describes how such contracts are structured elsewhere and raises issue about how such contracts can be structured and managed by the state.

Pricing of natural gas in India suffers from asymmetry because of the presence of limited suppliers having byzantine contracts. The oligopolistic market combined with price regulation results in welfare losses, and market failure. We argue that for the sake of long-term development of natural gas sector in fast developing economies like India, the long-run marginal cost (LRMC) seems to be the most suitable pricing policy. In the case analysis, we present a theoretical framework of calculating LRMC while acknowledging that the conditions necessary for a ‘first-best world’ rarely exist. We conclude that it is very much possible to gradually move from the existing ad-hoc pricing mechanism to a more robust LRMC regime that takes into account not just the production cost but also a scarcity premium as well as any externalities resulting from the natural-gas fuel cycle. The outcome based on our model compares very well with the one from the Rangarajan Committee's formula that got the government's nod recently for fixing of price of indigenously produced natural gas, to be effective from 01st April 2014.

In February 2015, Suzlon had just completed its financial and asset restructuring, following financial default after rapid growth through debt financed acquisitions in the financial boom ending in 2008. The restructuring resulted in a significant decrease in the promoter's equity stake. Suzlon now has to decide how to respond to an offer by the DilipSanghvi Group, promoters of Sun Pharma, to acquire a large equity stake in Suzlon for Rs. 1,800 crore. If Suzlon were to accept the offer then both the existing promoters and the DilipSanghvigroup would have the same stake of about 22% each. The case will help students examine the need to align financing and business strategy on the same plane. It will also help them understand details about restructuring of financial and business strategy in the face of financial distress.