Search results

Wall Street hedge fund manager Kim Meyer is considering investing in an SFA (slate financing arrangement) in Hollywood. Dave Griffith, a Hollywood producer, is pitching for the investment and has conducted a broad analysis of recent movie data to determine the important drivers of a movie’s success. In order to convince Meyer to invest in an SFA, Griffith must anticipate possible questions to maximize his persuasiveness.

Students will analyze the factors driving a movie’s revenue using various statistical methods, including calculating point estimates, computing confidence intervals, conducting hypothesis tests, and developing regression models (in which they must both choose the relevant set of independent variables as well as determine an appropriate functional form for the regression equation). The case also requires the interpretation of the quantitative findings in the context of the application.

This case examines the causes and consequences of the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy during one of the most fascinating weekends in financial history. It's about the commercial paper market, a major funding market served by Lehman Brothers, and the events that led to “breaking the buck” on money market funds. It also examines the CDS market where Lehman was such a big player, the potential impact that CDSs had on the crisis, and the notion and validity of the too-big-to-fail hypothesis.

In October 2008, in the midst of a financial crisis, Anthony Keating, investment manager at the Boston private bank Billingsley, Blaylock, and Montgomery, was searching for an investment strategy to recommend to his high-net-worth clients. Traditional investments in the equity markets were being decimated, and Keating’s clients would be looking to him for ideas. Inspired by the success of Paulson and Co., Keating began to explore the possibility of entering a trade that would profit as homeowners defaulted on their mortgages. The more Keating learned about the trade, the more he realized that he needed to know about mortgage-backed securities and credit default swaps. The case provides instructors with a chance to introduce these financial instruments, while at the same time providing lessons applicable to students interested in value investing or real estate finance.

After reading and analyzing the case, students will be able to:

• Explain how home mortgages are securitized into financial instruments that are traded in public markets

• Describe how credit default swaps can be used to speculate on the value of an underlying financial instrument

• Identify potential mispricing across related financial instruments

• Understand the potential risks and rewards of various financial investment strategies that look to capitalize on defaults on subprime mortgages

Explain how home mortgages are securitized into financial instruments that are traded in public markets

Describe how credit default swaps can be used to speculate on the value of an underlying financial instrument

Identify potential mispricing across related financial instruments

Understand the potential risks and rewards of various financial investment strategies that look to capitalize on defaults on subprime mortgages

January 27, 2005, was an extraordinary day for Gillette's James Kilts, the show-stopping turnaround expert known as the “Razor Boss of Boston.” Kilts, along with Proctor & Gamble chairman Alan Lafley, had just orchestrated a $57 billion acquisition of Gillette by P&G. The creation of the world's largest consumer products company would end Kilts's four-year tenure as CEO of Gillette and bring to a close Gillette's 104-year history as an independent corporate titan in the Boston area. The deal also capped a series of courtships between Gillette and other companies that had waxed and waned at various points throughout Kilts's stewardship of Gillette. But almost immediately after the transaction was announced, P&G and Gillette drew criticism from the media and the state of Massachusetts concerning the terms of the sale. Would this merger actually benefit shareholders, or was it principally a wealth creation vehicle for Kilts?

To understand the factors that persuaded shareholders of both P&G and Gillette to merge their companies, the valuation metrics involved in determining the merger consideration, compensation packages for key managers, and the politics (internal, local government, and regulatory) that impact major mergers.

The case features WaterHealth International India (WHIN) – a subsidiary of WaterHealth International (WHI) Inc. WHIN was launched in 2006 with the vision to “be the leader in providing scalable, safe, and affordable water solutions to underserved populations through an innovative business model.” The company incorporated a Build-Operate-Transfer model with decentralized production and distribution. Following a successful pilot project, WHIN installed its WaterHealth Centers in 175 sites throughout rural India by 2009, and attracted a $15 million investment from the International Finance Corporation to further expand its operations in India. Mr Vikas Shah, the Chief Operating Officer of the company, is faced with the issue of assessing scalability and sustainability of the company's business model. He needs to examine and evaluate the company's value proposition, resources and capabilities, and decide how to generate economic value while maintaining a focus on its social vision. The latter entails an ability to create shared value for stakeholders as an important contributor toward the company's sustainability. Additionally, Mr Shah is evaluating alternative public-private partnerships in terms of their suitability for the Indian context and viability to drive profitability.

The case uses primary and secondary data, i.e. interviews with company representatives, company reports, presentations, and consulting papers.

The case is written for graduate (and advanced undergraduate) students that enroll in classes with a focus on emerging markets, sustainability, innovation, and entrepreneurship. Examples are courses in Entrepreneurship and Innovation (especially those that include one or more sessions on the social dimensions) as well as those in Inclusive Growth and Sustainable Development.

Captain Joseph Brunetti was given the assignment to provide his superior officer an analysis of what to expect when the US Army implemented its new process to evaluate the performance of noncommissioned officers (NCOs), called sergeants. Brunetti had about 104 sergeants in his unit. The US Army created a new process in 2015 to evaluate sergeants to overcome the deficiencies in the Army’s old process, now 28 years old. Under the old process, almost every sergeant was rated at the highest levels, making it nearly impossible for the US Army to know whom to promote to higher ranks. Under the old process, very little counseling took place, so NCOs were not given guidance on how to develop themselves. Raters and senior raters (SRs) were not held accountable for their work in performance management, either. Under the new process, which included a forced distribution form of ranking, SRs had to offer counselings as well as options for future assignments. Brunetti, who had only limited experience in rating sergeants anyway, had to prepare for his boss what was called an “operations report” outlining what the organization could expect with the changeover to the new process and what may need attention as the process would continue in subsequent years.

This case has been developed from actual experiences and the assignment given to Brunetti also happened as described in the case. Since many of the individuals in the case are still employed by the US Army, the names of the individuals and the company units in this case have been disguised. Even so, the events of the protagonist’s tours of duty prior to the assignment described in this case did occur, but some of the locations within the USA have been changed. The other persons quoted from public documents or otherwise referenced in the articles are the actual persons so identified. The old NCOERs in Exhibit 3 are as these were written but the personally identifiable data about the individuals have been blackened out.

This case is suitable for both undergraduate and graduate courses in human resource management and especially on the topical material on performance management and performance appraisal. The case can also be used in both undergraduate and graduate courses in general management, for modules on human resource management. The Relevant Theory section below is centered on human resource management.

This relevant theory which undergirds this case centers on the broad concept of performance management and on performance appraisal instruments. The case underscores the important concept that performance management has to be more than “completing the appraisal form.”

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.

On October 6, 2011, President Barack Obama publicly scolded Bank of America for developing a new revenue stream: a $5 monthly fee for all Bank of America debit card holders, which the bank had announced a month earlier. It was a strategy for replacing lost “swipe fee” revenue following the passage of the Dodd-Frank Act and accompanying Durbin Amendment, which capped swipe fees at 21 cents per transaction. This was the culmination of three tumultuous years for the world's largest financial services firm, but would not be the end of its public affairs challenges.

The president's public critique of Bank of America came in response to and helped exacerbate consumer anger about the bank's monthly fee, changes across the banking sector, and general discontent with Wall Street. Bank of America's situation was complicated further by ongoing legal action following acquisitions of Merrill Lynch and Countrywide, which hurt the firm's shareholders and led to large-scale employee layoffs.

In this case study, students will be challenged to analyze how Bank of America could have better managed the competing interests of different stakeholders, including shareholders, employees, regulators, customers, and the public.

A Wall Street Journal article states, “At PepsiCo, Inc., cola was king, but it is quietly being dethroned.” PepsiCo is composed of three lines of business: soft drinks, restaurants, and snack foods. Using data from comparable pure-play companies, the student is asked to compute divisional costs of capital and see if they can be reconciled with the company's reported cost of capital, 11%.