Search results

Wildcat Capital Investors is a small real estate private equity company. Its MBA intern, Jessica Zaski, is asked to develop a financial model for the purchase of Financial Commons, a 90,000 square foot office building in suburban Chicago. By simple metrics, the property seems to be a good value, but with credit conditions tight, Jessica must consider whether outside investors would be comfortable with the risks of investing in the midst of a severe commercial real estate downturn. Wildcat is designed to give students exposure to both the quantitative and qualitative aspects of investing in commercial real estate through a private equity structure. Beyond the numbers, the case allows for a discussion of the process of finding suitable real estate investments. The importance of the simultaneous negotiations that Wildcat must have with the seller, the lender, and the outside investor can be emphasized.

By working through the financial models, students will take a given set of assumptions and analyze the cash flows expected to be received by the equity partners of Financial Commons. With a given deal structure, the students can then model the cash flow to both outside equity investors and Wildcat, learning the mechanics of private equity. The model will allow students to investigate how the variations in the underlying assumptions affect returns to the property and to the investors.

Aurelia Dimas had been sent to investigate the various properties being offered by the State of California in the form of a sale-leaseback agreement. The opportunity was perfect for her firm, Orrington Financial Partners, which had recently expanded its fixed-income portfolio to include real estate. The wide range of offerings in the Golden State Portfolio provided both diversification and stability over a period of decades. She had spent the last week walking the halls of each and every building to see the offering first hand. Now the task of valuing the portfolio rested on her shoulders.

By reading and analyzing this case, students will be exposed to real estate valuation and understand the issues with a sale-leaseback investment. The objectives are obtained by requiring students to justify how and why they make adjustments to the cash flow forecasts provided to them by a real estate advisory firm, explain their methodology for arriving at a specific value for a piece (or a portfolio) of commercial property, and debate the pros and cons of a sale-leaseback structure.

Read any news report on the housing market, and inevitably it will include facts or figures from the real estate data giant Zillow.com. The company initially set out to solve two key economic frictions in the real estate industry information asymmetry and the principal-agent problem by empowering users to access real-time housing data and eliminating the need for realtors. The company soon realized, however, that American homeowners and buyers were not willing to give up the traditional real estate agent model and changed course. In the end, Zillow decided to join rather than replace the middlemen in the real estate industry.

Marketing.

The case should ideally be discussed in an advanced second year MBA course or towards the end of a first year course where the students are already exposed to the basics of marketing. The case works well in courses on destination marketing, strategic marketing, campaign management, entrepreneurship. It also works well with executives, the case discussion affording the instructor an opportunity to illuminate the complexity of designing and implementing marketing strategy.

Two young MBAs, each with a marketing specialization working in a bank, left their jobs and started their own company by buying a rubber plantation business from another businessman. The businessman was one of the co-owners of the “Ocean World Water Park” theme park (amusement park) close to Bhubaneswar-Cuttack twin city. The amusement park had good potential as it was located in an area with exponential growth of young executives having high disposable incomes. But the business performed poorly because of management ineffectiveness. The case explores the possibility of a turnaround.

The case: sensitizes students about the commercial implications of their marketing decisions by giving them adequate data to work on evaluating the revenue and profit impact of marketing initiatives on business; and helps them to understand that promotional variables are not independent in nature and hence separating the impact of one promotion when a large number of initiatives are operational, is not very dependable. Though the case provides a particular way of attempting to solve the problem, it does not lead to unique solutions.

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

This case covers the framework and process to determine fair value as specified in International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) 13. It illustrates an instance in which auditors interpret the concept of fair value to be consistent with other principles in standards such as the principle of prudence in the conceptual framework. In addition, a lot of the discussion in the case is applicable to accounting education in any regulatory jurisdictions given the convergence of US generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) and IFRS 13. In addition, while fair value accounting may have been designed to give investors more useful information, in practise it could involve highly subjective judgement and the resulting implementation may be affected by incentives of different stakeholders. The CK Tang’s case provides an excellent opportunity to discuss incentives of varies parties in determining the fair value in financial reporting decisions. In short, this case could be a good jumping-off point to talk about management and auditors’ incentives in financial reporting in general.

Publicly available information (e.g. financial reporting standards, corporate announcements and reports, news reports) was used as the basis for this case.

The case centres on an iconic Singaporean integrated retailing and property landlord entity: Tang holdings. As part of its succession planning, the company’s founding family decided to take its listing arm, C.K. Tang Limited (CK Tang hereafter), private in May 2006. The Tang brothers, who represented the controlling family, initiated several attempts to delist the company. The minority shareholders of CK Tang were unhappy that the offer price was below the net asset value of the company. The minority shareholders also highlighted that the reported fair value of the flagship Tang Plaza complex understated its highest and best use and might not possibly comply with International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) 13.

The case can be used for class discussions with undergraduate students or master students in intermediate accounting courses.

A senior analyst has recently completed an on-site visit to the Las Vegas properties of MGM Mirage. She must value the enterprise after her preparation of projected financial statements. Assumptions for these statements come from a combination of standard account relations delineated in the case and from specific company projections that must be gleaned from MGM's MD&A. This case introduces students to pro forma financial statements and their relevance to cash flow and earnings-based valuation. Tools relevant to spreadsheet modeling can also be introduced. The case precedes MGM's announced acquisition of Mandalay Bay Corporation in 2004.

In early 2018, Diana Mulhall was undertaking a career change that would eliminate the need for frequent business trips to Toronto. As a result, she wondered whether she should sell her condo in the heart of the Canadian city or keep it as a rental property to generate income for herself. The housing market in Toronto was booming, so Mulhall believed that the condo would fetch top dollar as a sale. She also thought it would be easy to attract tenants if she kept it as a rental. She had invested in rental property before but never outside of her hometown of Chicago, so Mulhall needed to identify the key risks associated with being a landlord in Toronto.

The case is appropriate for courses in financial accounting and reporting, audit and assurance, forensic accounting, accounting practice and regulations and corporate governance. After studying the case, students should be able to explain the concept of control and power under IFRS; explain the concept of economic; discuss audit committee and external auditor independence issues and ways to strengthen auditor’s independence; assess the usefulness of the new extended audit report; and evaluate the role of gatekeepers such as financial analysts, audit committee, external auditor, institutional investors and regulators in enhancing the quality of financial reporting.

This case focuses on the accounting policy choices of the foreign associates of AirAsia Berhad. AirAsia Berhad is a phenomenal success, from a debt laden company to having been voted as World’s Best Low-Cost Airline in the annual World Airline Survey by Skytrax for eight consecutive years from 2009 to 2016 and the World’s Leading Low-Cost Airline in the annual World Travel Awards for four consecutive years from 2013 to 2016. In June 2015, an analyst report was leaked, and it led to heated discussion and exchanges in the market. The report questioned the non-consolidation of AirAsia Berhad associates. The share market also reacted. Various players in the market came into foray with their statements and opinions on the merit of the accounting policy choice by AirAsia Berhad. Whose views actually reflect the nature of accounting policy choice that is true and fair? Are these gatekeepers attesting to the accounting crux of substance over form?

Senior undergraduates; MBA; EMBA

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: 1: Accounting and Finance

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.

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.