Search results

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.

In recent years Lehman Brothers, one of the five largest investment banks in the United States, had grown increasingly reliant on its fixed income trading and underwriting division, which served as the primary engine for its strong profit growth. The bank had also significantly increased its leverage over the same timeframe, going from a debt-to-equity ratio of 23.7x in 2003 to 35.2x in 2007. As leverage increased, the ongoing erosion of the mortgage-backed industry began to impact Lehman significantly and its stock price plummeted. Unfortunately, public outcry over taxpayer assumption of $29 billion in potential Bear losses made repeating such a move politically untenable. The surreal scene of potential buyers traipsing into an investment bank's headquarters over the weekend to consider various merger or spin-out scenarios repeated itself once again. This time, the Fed refused to back the failing bank's liabilities, attempting instead to play last-minute suitors Bank of America, HSBC, Nomura Securities, and Barclay's off each other, jawboning them by arguing that failing to step up to save Lehman would cause devastating counterparty runs on their own capital positions. The Fed's desperate attempts to arrange its second rescue of a major U.S. investment bank in six months failed when it refused to backstop losses from Lehman's toxic mortgage holdings. Complicating matters was Lehman's reliance on short-term repo loans to finance its balance sheet. Unfortunately, such loans required constant renewal by counterparties, who had grown increasingly nervous that Lehman would lose the ability to make good on its trades. With this sentiment swirling around Wall Street, Lehman was forced to announce the largest Chapter 11 filing in U.S. history, listing assets of $639 billion and liabilities of $768 billion. The second domino had fallen. It would not be the last.

This case covers the period from the sale of Bear Stearns to JP Morgan to the conversion into bank holding companies by Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, including the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy and the sale of Merrill Lynch to Bank of America. The case explains the new global paradigm for the investment banking industry, including increased regulation, fewer competitors, lower leverage, reduced proprietary trading, and-potentially-reduced profits.

In early 2006, the anticipated expansion of package delivery services in China provided a great opportunity for the two package delivery giants FedEx and UPS. It was unclear which of these firms would make the most of this opportunity. An analysis of financial performance suggests that UPS is the better performer. On the other hand, the FedEx stock price performance has been far stronger. This apparent conflict highlights the fact that stock prices reflect anticipated future performance and new information. A teaching note and instructor and student spreadsheets are available.

Cara Pils is the private label beer brand of Colruyt, the biggest supermarket retailer in Belgium. As a true private label brand, Cara Pils has never been advertised. In 2015, Colruyt undertook an initiative to reposition its numerous private label brands under two larger private label brands. Unexpectedly, customers were incensed by this initiative, came out in droves and took the matter to social media hoping to lament the demise of their beloved brand. This case study investigates the roots of this strong brand attachment and the consequences for its brand management.

This case is built on primary (one in-depth interview and two focus group) as well as secondary data sources (previous research and web information).

This case is designed to be used in a marketing management or brand strategy course for students that already followed an introduction to marketing course or for students at a master level.

This case should provide the basis of discussions on the topics of brand management, private-label brands, repositioning strategy, brand portfolio management, brand architecture, brand equity, brand elements, brand nostalgia, and consumers’ relationships with brands.

Learning outcomes are as follows: understanding the difference between brand identity and brand image; applying various segmentation tools; understanding the appeal of the aspirational brand and its consequence on private and public consumption; exploring the strategic options available to a brand facing a brand appropriation; exploring the pros and cons of opposing a brand appropriation; and developing a plan for the implementation of this strategy.

This case will help students understand the difference between the brand identity that the brand owners intend and the brand image that consumers actually perceive.

This case is designed to be used in marketing management, brand strategy or consumer culture course. Specifically, the case is designed for college seniors or master students with basic strategic marketing training. It should provide the basis of discussions on the topics of brand management, consumer culture, brand portfolio management, international marketing, repositioning strategy, brand architecture, brand equity, brand assets, brand appropriation and consumer relationships with brands.

Teaching Notes are available for educators only. Please contact your library to gain login details or email support@emeraldinsight.com to request teaching notes.

CSS 8: Marketing

The case is written based on publicly available data from primary sources like the company’s annual reports and presentations and from secondary sources, as indicated in the references.

Barnes & Noble Inc. (B&N), one of the oldest and largest American retail booksellers founded in 1917, was facing a grim business situation underpinned by a fall in demand, a change in consumer preference and stiff competition. After almost a century of being in the business, B&N was experiencing a fall in market share and weak stock market performance. In 2019, the company was sold to Elliot Advisors – a hedge fund – for US$638m. With the appointment of new chief executive officer (CEO) James Daunt in August 2019, a man known for the turnaround of similar businesses, B&N expected its business’s revival and reorganization strategy to turn profitable. Its long-term strategy of beating competitors with its offerings’ sheer volume and low prices was no longer viable. The turmoil was compounded by top management crises with the repeated changes and ousting of several CEOs in a short span, alongside the COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent lockdowns in 2020 and 2021. Daunt was considering how to overcome the crisis and act fast to reposition the company and regain the loyalty of its customers. Was there more that the company could do to improve the company’s position and restore profitability?

The case can be used in strategic management and entrepreneurship classes at undergraduate and postgraduate levels. The case can be used in an investment analysis and management course to teach students the industry analysis technique using Porter’s five forces model.

Sara Lee Corporation's acquisition binge in the 1980s and 1990s left the company with a portfolio of vastly different businesses operating independently of one another. It had experienced rapid top-line growth, but at the same time cash flows had declined. Sara Lee ignored both internal and external warning signs until a major transformation plan became necessary. This case examines the company's multiple turnaround attempts. The learning objective of the case is to analyze “early stage” turnaround efforts by examining how the company found itself in decline, evaluating its attempts to improve its performance, and assessing the turnaround plan.

(1) Learn to identify a specific challenging moment when reading and analyzing a turnaround plan; (2) address the implementation problems of an early stage turnaround and discuss exit options; (3) evaluate when a change of long-held beliefs and decades-long strategy by a company is warranted; (4) evaluate Sara Lee's marketing strategies in light of the disappointed retail and wholesale customers; and (5) show the similarities in traits between turnaround managers and high-growth entrepreneurs.

The learning outcomes of this case are in understanding core concepts of brand management and brand dilution. Assessment of macro-economic risks and proper positioning strategies are the key take-away from this case. The case gives an understanding of how brands are built and positioned, and the pitfalls of poor brand planning and assessment that could lead to brand dilution. The case is useful for highlighting the importance of brand management and the challenges of re-positioning. The discussions would shed light on why it is important to plan and manage spending on marketing for brand building activities, and why brands would suffer when spending is reduced. This case is a teaching case and not a research case. It will help participants assimilate available information in combination with existing academic theories and publications to help develop an accurate assessment and prognosis of the events leading until the point of slicing the case.

Reid & Taylor in 2015 had been reduced to a discounter brand offering extended end-of-season sales when most other competitors have ended their promotions. In the 17 years since its big-budget launch in the Indian market in one of the most memorable brand introductions, Reid & Taylor changed its ambassador twice and repositioned itself thrice. The case would allow participants to delve deeper into aspects of marketing spending, brand management, positioning and advertising effectiveness. The case brings to the fore discussions on marketing, specifically on branding, positioning and its related advertising in the textile sector for a brand that has not been studied in academic literature until the present time. The discussion allows for novelty, involving both forward- and backward-looking assessments and evaluations to help participants better imbibe learnings in brand management and positioning.

The case is suitable for a graduate-level (Master’s level) course in marketing and brand management. This case is suitable for elective courses that discuss positioning and brands.

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

CSS 8: Marketing

International business and/or strategic management.

This case is useful for undergraduate and postgraduate level students majoring in international business management and/or strategic management.

Etihad Airways was established in 2003, in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates (UAE) with the UAE government as sole owner. It is the national carrier of UAE with Abu Dhabi as its centre of operations. Etihad is recognized as a fast-growing player in the aviation industry, and has become one of the dominant international players in the industry in a relatively short time. Etihad's fleet now contains more than 67 planes, with more than 1,300 flights per week to diverse destinations across the Middle East, Africa, Europe, Asia, Australia and North America. The company describes its business strategy as “sustainable growth”. Looking through a practitioner's lens, strategic partnerships have been the critical activities through which Etihad has delivered its strategy. The purpose of this case study is therefore to elaborate on its major and successful partnerships and the critical benefits of these. Secondary data were collected from credible sources including academic studies, relevant Etihad publications and industry reports published by official aviation associations.

Students will be able to understand the theory of strategic partnerships, their roles and benefits and critically evaluate the pre-staging “requirements” of such partnerships. In this case, the specific learning outcome of it is to help students to understand the importance of successful strategic partnerships for Etihad Airlines and how partnership strategies can improve the performance of Etihad Airlines.

Teaching Notes are available for educators only. Please contact your library to gain login details or email support@emeraldinsight.com to request teaching notes.

International business, Accounting and Finance.

Undergraduate and Postgraduate levels (advanced financial accounting, international accounting, other accounting and business courses with an international setting.

The case uses the Asia Pulp & Paper Company’s (APP) entry into the international debt market to highlight the consequences of different business practices between the East (in this case, Indonesia) and the West. On the one hand, it shows that APP was set up as the “front” to access international debt capital; on the other, it reveals the naïvety of Western lenders who parted with their funds without conducting a thorough background research on the financial viability of the company they invested in. The APP debacle is a poignant reminder for market participants and business/accounting students that the divergence of the business settings across countries can make business contractual arrangements tenuous and corporate financial information irrelevant to its users. It also exposes the unique ways of how some Asian countries conduct their business affairs.

The following are the expected learning outcomes: comprehend the impact of differences in culture and ethnic origin on business practices; evaluate the impact of cultural nuances on the legality of contracts in the international business setting; understand the impact of currency fluctuation on the financial position of multinational firms; and be more cautious in conducting business and entering into contracts with foreign firms.

Teaching notes are available for educators only. Please contact your library to gain login details or email support@emeraldinsight.com to request teaching notes.

CCS 1: Accounting and Finance.