Search results

The case examines a competitive situation in the market for Scotch whisky in Thailand. Two multinationals fight for market share with a complex portfolio of products under the Chivas Regal, Johnnie Walker, and Ballantine brand names. Students must understand a broad array of branding, consumer behavior, pricing, and regulatory issues in order to arrive at recommendations for Chivas Regal to defend against recent gains of Johnnie Walker. The case can be taught with a focus on the Chivas Regal 12 Year product and recommendations for its growth, but also can be taught as a broader portfolio case, with students aligning a portfolio of Chivas and Ballantine products at different quality levels to maximize sales and profit.

Students will understand how category behavior changes in the context of a different culture. Students will gain insight into how consumers balance price/value and image in purchasing choices

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.

The case discusses the operational, strategic, and financial turnaround at Solo Cup, a manufacturer of disposable dining wares. Solo Cup’s troubles were compounded by the acquisition of a larger rival, Sweetheart Company, which had its own problems and presented issues of merger integration that management could not solve. David Garfield, a managing director at turnaround consulting firm Alix Partners, must first recognize Solo Cup’s core competencies in order to determine the appropriate change in strategic course, strip out the assets that no longer support the operations necessary for that strategy, and monetize them in order to rationalize its balance sheet. This case teaches that a three-pronged approach will invariably produce greater results than any one-dimensional turnaround.

Students will learn turnaround techniques necessary to restructure a company operationally, strategically, and financially, and will learn how Alix Partners' relentless focus on “letting data rule” allowed the firm to revive a faltering company.

The case briefly describes the history of Electronic Data Systems (EDS) under Ross Perot and GM before turning to the beginning of a tumultuous decade in the late 1990s. As the turn of the century approached, EDS made critical strategic missteps such as missing opportunities in the Internet space, overlooking the onset of client-server computing, and failing to obtain major Y2K-related projects. The company attempted a turnaround by replacing the CEO with Dick Brown, whose leadership helped streamline the sprawling company. Despite initial successes, Brown's tenure ultimately ended in failure, due largely to his failure to recognize the growing Indian market and his willingness to buy business at the expense of the company's margin. The disastrous multibillion-dollar Navy & Marine Corp Intranet contract typified the type of high-profile transactions that Brown pursued, often boosting EDS's stock price in the short term while eroding its cash flow short term and its profitability over the long term. EDS management went through several stages of the turnaround process: the blinded phase, the inactive phase, and the faulty action phase, until Michael Jordan replaced Brown as CEO and enacted a three-tiered operational, strategic, and financial turnaround.

EDS's near-decade of turnaround efforts takes students through every phase of the turnaround process and demonstrates that even initially successful turnaround efforts can become distracted, rendering them ineffective. The case will show both a failed turnaround and a subsequent successful one, while adding an international component with respect to EDS's overlooking an important, growing Indian market.

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 2009 Wikia was the Internet's largest for-profit provider of hosted open-source wikis, with over a million daily users. After five years of existence, the organization had supported a wide range of exploratory activities, experiencing both success and failure. With approximately $3 million of cash on hand, Wikia turned cash flow positive in 2009, with revenues of approximately $4.5 million, affording it time and flexibility to try new things. Some of the company's employees and investors suggested that Wikia should attempt to expand and market itself more aggressively, but which strategic direction should receive priority? The case presents many of the issues and tradeoffs facing CEO Gil Penchina as he formulates these priorities.

The case seeks to teach students about the general business challenges facing a new firm in the area of Web 2.0, also popularly known as social networking. The case also exposes students to wiki technology and how it facilitates collaborative behavior.