Search results

Groupon, an online coupon company, was one of many companies that considered an initial public offering (IPO) during what might be a second technology/internet/social media IPO boom in 2011. Some companies chose to postpone their IPOs, while others took advantage of the media attention focussed on technology companies, and in particular, social media firms. Should investors hop on the tech IPO bandwagon, or hold off to better evaluate the long-term prospects of tech companies, and in particular social media companies? Would the valuation of Groupon justify an investment in IPO shares?

The case was researched from secondary sources, using Groupon's IPO filing information, news articles about the IPO and industry research sources, such as IBIS World.

This case is appropriate for an advanced undergraduate or MBA corporate finance or investment elective. Most introductory finance classes do not have the time to cover later chapters in a finance textbook, where information about IPOs is generally found. It could also be used at the end of a core finance course, where the instructor wanted to introduce this topic through a case study of a hard-to-value internet-based company to illustrate the difficulties in setting IPO prices. The case could also be used in an equity analysis class, an entrepreneurial finance class or an investment class, to spur discussion about valuing an internet company and choosing appropriate investments for pension fund investing. This case could also be used in a strategy class, focussing on the five forces question, and eliminating the valuation question.

There is a great deal of literature about IPOs and their long-term performance. An excellent source is Jay R. Ritter's research, http://bear.warrington.ufl.edu/ritter, which has a longer time period and more data than could be contained in this case. IPO puzzles include persistent undervaluing of IPOs; in other words, the offer price is lower than, and sometimes substantially lower than, the first day close price. A second issue is the generally poorer long-run performance of companies after their IPO when compared to similar firms that did not do an IPO.

This case can be used to help students achieve the following objectives: To project financial statements and assemble different pieces of financial information to create a valuation model (objective #1, create), To calculate a value for Arcor shares, supporting the estimated value with the chosen assumptions and methodologies (objective #2, evaluate), To draw connections between four different approaches to valuation (DCF, EVA, RV and VI), contrasting them and weighting their advantages and limitations (objective #3, analyze), To examine the relationship between forecasted financial statements and valuation (objective #3, analyze), To discuss the calculation of the Weighted Average Cost of Capital in a new situation as is an emerging economy, with the corresponding country-risk adjustment (objective #4, apply), To discuss the sources of value creation in a family-owned private company in a developing economy (objective #4, apply), To understand the dilemma that the head of a company was facing, identifying the three possible financing alternatives discussed in the text as follows: corporate bonds, earnings reinvestment and an IPO (objective #5, understand). To recall basic facts, as the main character’s opinion on the direction of the local economy or the fact that Arcor already complies with the information requirements of a public company (objective #7, remember).

This case is based on the valuation of the world’s largest candy maker, Arcor S.A.I.C., originally a Latin American company, which remains a private family business. The key problem presented by the case is the use of different valuation approaches to price Arcor shares, in view of a possible Initial Public Offer. The case illustrates the application of four main valuation approaches as follows: Discounted Cash Flow (DCF), Economic Value Added (EVA), Relative Valuation (RV) and Value Investing (VI). Additionally, it includes a fundamental analysis of eight years of historical financial information and the preparation of forecasted financial statements. Set in a developing economy, the Arcor case introduces the complexities of calculating the cost of capital with the inclusion of country risk, as well as the financial analysis distortions caused by an environment of high inflation.

The Arcor case is appropriate to be used in graduate courses of Corporate Finance, Valuation or Private Equity.

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

CSS 1: Accounting and Finance.

This case discusses Qihoo 360's free business model, how it used this free model to overpower competitors, and how the model evolved over time. Qihoo 360 is a company that took just six years to become a company listed on the New York Stock Exchange (with a market value of over US$ 2 billion). At Qihoo 360's Initial Public Offering (IPO) at the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE), Qihoo's founder Zhou Hongyi reflected on how Qihoo's free business model had brought its current success and speculates on its future challenges.

The authors used both secondary data and field interviews when preparing this case. After reading through various company reports, competitor information, and financial filings, the authors interviewed five top manager team (TMT) members of Qihoo 360, three TMT members of its competitors, and two partners of venture capital investors who have invested in these companies in Beijing or Shenzhen during the last three years. The authors collected 347 media reports related to these companies in Chinese covering seven years of history. This long span of data collection improves the interpretation of the company and helps construct the storyline of the case.

This case is suitable for an MBA course or an advanced undergraduate course in strategic management or a technology-oriented entrepreneurship course, focussing on the topic of the free business model, business model innovation, disruptive innovation, and evolution of the business model during the entrepreneurial process.

The Beringer Wine Estates Company has been expanding its market share in the premium segment of the wine industry in the 1990's. After operating as a wholly owned subsidiary of the giant Nestlé food company for almost a quarter of a century, the firm was sold in 1996 to new owners, in a leveraged buyout. For the next year and a half, management and the new owners restructured the firm and expanded through internal growth and strategic acquisitions. With a heavy debt load from the LBO, it seemed prudent for management to consider a significant rebalancing of its capital structure. By paying off a portion of its debt and enhancing the equity account, the firm would achieve greater financial flexibility which could enhance its growth rate and business options. Finally, a publicly held common stock would provide management with another “currency” to be used for enhancing its growth rate and overall corporate valuation. With the equity markets in turmoil, significant strategic decisions had to be made quickly. Should the IPO be completed, with the district possibility of a less than successful after market price performance and these implications for pursuing external growth initiatives? A variety of alternative courses of action and their implications for the financial health of the Beringer Company and the financial wealth of Beringer stockholders are integral components of this case.

Via this case, students are introduced to several alternative methods of valuation, including the valuation based on the “real options” theory. The novelty of the case is the link between valuation and the type of innovation that the company represents. The suggested valuation frameworks, which include both quantitative and qualitative assessments, are applicable not only in the context of an IPO valuation but also in the context of any kind of M&A activity.

This case was prepared mostly via secondary research. All the information about Uber and the industry was collected via publicly available sources. No internal documents of the company were used in the preparation of this case. The primary research consisted of an interview with the protagonist Catherine (whose name is disguised). Other disguised elements in the case include the name of the Value Investor conference organizer (Spyros Spyrou, not his real name), the country of the Value Investor conference (omitted) and the conference venue (Princess hotel, not any actual venue).

In 2019, Uber, the famous ride-sharing company, made waves in financial markets as the most controversial IPO valuation. With a wide range of proposed values, Uber puzzled investors, once again living up to its fame of a rebel and a disruptor. When Uber finally went public in May 2019, its IPO valuation stood at $82.4bn. The heated discussion in the media continued even after the IPO: “Is Uber worth this amount? Is there an upside potential for the investors who bought shares at the IPO price? What if this is a hype and markets are simply embracing higher valuations?”

This case can be used at the undergraduate, graduate (MBA) or executive level in finance-related courses such as Company Valuation or Valuing Innovation, which cover the topic of valuation and specifically the topic of valuing innovative companies.

Set in September 1992, this exercise provides teams of students the opportunity to negotiate terms of a merger between AT&T and McCaw Cellular. AT&T, one of the largest U.S. corporations, was the dominant competitor in long-distance telephone communications in the United States. McCaw was the largest competitor in the rapidly growing cellular-telephone communications industry. Prior to the negotiations, AT&T had no position in cellular communications. This case and its companion (F-1143) are designed to allow students to be assigned roles to play. The case may pursue some or all of the following teaching objectives: exercising valuation skills, practicing strategic analysis, exercising bargaining skills, and illustrating practical aspects of mergers and acquisitions.

The case integrates frameworks on business models, the business model canvas (BMC) and Porter’s generic strategies in the context of the coffee industry in China. The case enables students to construct a Business Model Canvas for competing companies, analyze the canvas to deduce the generic strategy they are pursuing, and formulate recommendations based on this analysis.

The case is derived from secondary sources, including publicly available reports and information about Starbucks and Luckin.

This case looks at Starbucks in China as it faces a fierce Chinese competitor and evolving consumer behavior. Luckin, a Chinese coffee store company, had seen explosive growth since its inception in Beijing in 2017. By late 2019, its number of brick-and-mortar locations surpassed the number of Starbucks’ coffee stores in China, which had entered the Chinese market two decades earlier in 1999. Luckin’s focused on convenience through leveraging technology and reducing costs by limiting physical stores. Although Luckin’s fortunes turned in March of 2020, after an accounting scandal came to light, Luckin’s success suggests that consumers were attracted to its positioning as a “fast coffee pickup and delivery” provider. The case describes Starbucks’ strategy in China, which it sees as an important long-term growth market. It also describes the strategic activities of fast-growing, Chinese coffee company Luckin and discusses Chinese culture and consumer behavior.

The case is written for undergraduate students enrolled in a business strategy or corporate entrepreneurship course. Given that the case centers on China, it could also be used in international entrepreneurship/business courses.

The various learning outcomes of the case include the following: to provide information and help the students to understand how a start-up business succeeds with the proper branding and marketing; to help understand different marketing theories related to segmentation, targeting, positioning, branding, distribution and marketing process and the frameworks of understanding start-up business marketing with a practical example; to improve analytical skills and help evaluate marketing strategies related to segmentation, targeting, positioning, branding, distribution and marketing in the Indian quick-service restaurant (QSR) business; and to encourage learners to think differently towards solution generation and strategy decisions.

The case portrays the dilemmas related to segmentation, targeting, brand positioning, distribution and start-up business marketing in the context of an Indian QSR. The present case strives to portray the journey of WoW! Momo is a QSR brand in India and highlights the company's branding and marketing challenges. Based on the challenges faced by the company and the decision dilemma pointed out in the case, the readers can get sufficient motivation to generate probable solutions. This was early 2007; Binod Kumar Homagai and Sagar Daryani, bosom friends, were on the verge of finishing their graduate studies in commerce from St. Xavier's College Kolkata. Pursuing Chartered Accountancy or MBA was the common trend as the career option among most commerce graduates then. Still, both Homagai and Daryani thought to be innovative and different in their career options. After a series of discussions, they determined to start with their favorite dish, momos, as an alternative brand proposition that would be opening off from the City of Joy, Kolkata. They managed to arrange a seed capital of INR 30,000 in 2008 and started their venture WoW! Momo. In the financial year 2018–2019, the company's revenue had already crossed INR 1170m, achieved its presence in 11 cities in India, and reached more than 243 outlets. This case has followed the qualitative research methods where in-depth interviews of the founders and stakeholders along with the observation method were used. The case unfolds a systematic solution of dilemmas related to segmentation, targeting, brand positioning, distribution and start-up business marketing in the context of Indian QSR business. This case can also be seen as one of the youth entrepreneurial success stories of Indians.

This case is primarily meant for second-year students in a postgraduate program in business management. The case could also be discussed in an executive development program on marketing/brand management/business strategy.

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

CSS 8: Marketing.

After completion of the case study, the students will be able to appreciate and understand why brands are an essential asset to the company and how they can enhance business value, understand the factors needed to grow brands in the growth stages and evaluate the choices that start-up companies have to grow their brand in competitive and growing markets.

Mamaearth was born as a direct-to-consumer brand in 2016 by a couple who could not find chemical-free, safe products for their child. The company that introduced as a baby-care brand soon consolidated itself to play in the space of personal care category (targeting millennials), and by 2020, it was earning majority of its revenue from skincare. It started by leveraging the power of social media space and online commerce and slowly moved to be a national brand with offline footprint and mass-media communication. In its growth journey, it acquired many brands and launched a few to cater to the specialized needs of its target audience. As the company grew, attracted impressive investors and started clocking profits, it aspired for an initial public offering (IPO). Varun and Ghazal Alagh, the founders of Mamaearth, knew that to refloat an IPO and to grow the company further, they needed to redefine their portfolio and marketing strategy. They had a choice to either invest in building a broader portfolio – organically or inorganically – or expand across geographies. Both were an option, albeit expensive, which could cost Mamaearth its profitability.

This case is intended for discussion in undergraduate and graduate management courses.

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

CSS 8: Marketing.

This case considers the buyout of Panera Bread from the perspective of a private equity fund. In early 2017, KLG Managing Director Tom Denning is considering a leveraged buyout of Panera Bread, a rapidly growing fast-casual restaurant company. A surprising Bloomberg News story signals that the deal process is broadening and KLG will have to act quickly if it hopes to buy Panera Bread. Students assume the role of Tom Denning as he prepares an investment recommendation for KLG's investment committee. In doing so, students are required to consider a very large and expensive investment. Students are challenged to create an investment recommendation by performing due diligence, determining additional questions to ask, and pricing a buyout bid that incorporates an optimal capital structure and meets KLG's return requirements. The Panera Bread case is designed to give students insight into the private equity investment process.