Search results

This case explains marketing process for follow-on equity offerings, the direct and indirect costs of issue, and the long-run performance of equity issuers. Students use analysts' projections from which to estimate the intrinsic value of the company's share—including the cost savings from the VEBA and financial improvements over the next several years. It is appropriate for use in corporate finance courses covering the topics of capital raising, equity financing, capital structure, costs of financing, funding alternatives, investment banking, and valuation. It presents the classic profile on an equity issuer—a firm whose stock price has risen to new heights in recent months. Will the issue lead to additional value that creates opportunities for shareholders, or is it a sign the firm is overvalued? The case explores the thinking of a prominent investment manager who had accumulated a large stake in Goodyear and who did not see the need for Goodyear to make an equity issue at this time. The company's position was that the high stock would allow it to further strengthen its balance sheet and pursue international growth opportunities. Students are asked to decide what the investor should do with respect to the current offer—buy, sell, or hold.

This case is designed to present students with the challenges of formulating a discounted-cash-flow (DCF) analysis for a strategically important capital-investment decision. Analytically, the problem is representative of most corporate investment decisions, but it is particularly interesting because of the massive size of the American Centrifuge Project and the potential of the project to significantly affect the stock price. Students must determine the relevant cash flows, paying close attention to the treatment of input costs, selling prices, timing of investment outlays, depreciation, and inflation. An important input is the appropriate cost of uranium, which some students argue should be included at book value, while others argue that market value should be used. Although the primary objective of the case is to focus on the estimation of cash flows, students are provided with a straightforward set of inputs to estimate USEC's weighted average cost of capital. The case is designed for students who are learning, or need a refresher on, DCF analysis. Because of the basic issues covered, the case works well with undergraduate, MBA, and executive-education audiences. The case also affords the opportunity to explore a variety of issues related to capital-investment analysis, including relevant costs, incremental analysis, cost of capital, and sensitivity analysis. The case is an excellent example of the value of a firm as the value of assets in place plus the net present value of future growth opportunities.

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.

In the summer of 2013, Whitney DeSoto had just been hired as managing director for real assets at the Overton Pension Fund (OPF). Her task was to provide recommendations to the board of trustees to introduce real estate into the fund's portfolio, which to date had been invested solely in stocks and bonds. Combining her knowledge of modern portfolio theory with her institutional expertise in real estate, DeSoto needed to decide what fraction of the fund should optimally be invested in real assets. She then faced the task of deciding whether to invest in public or private real estate. If she thought private real estate belonged in the portfolio, she would need to identify the best investment strategy, the best vehicle, and ultimately the specific investments to recommend.

• Apply modern portfolio theory to the investment decision of an institutional investor allocating its assets between stocks, bonds, and real estate

• Understand the limits of portfolio theory in a real estate context

• Analyze the benefits/costs of investments in both public and private real estate

• Understand the various vehicles in which one can invest in private real estate

• Argue for a set of investments that offer individual benefits/costs relative to a theoretically ideal investment

Apply modern portfolio theory to the investment decision of an institutional investor allocating its assets between stocks, bonds, and real estate

Understand the limits of portfolio theory in a real estate context

Analyze the benefits/costs of investments in both public and private real estate

Understand the various vehicles in which one can invest in private real estate

Argue for a set of investments that offer individual benefits/costs relative to a theoretically ideal investment

It is recommended that this case be taught either just before or just after another Chapter 11 case. Students must to decide whether Horizon Lines should seek Chapter 11 protection or attempt a voluntary financial restructuring. Students have a wide range of financial restructuring alternatives to consider that should give them an appreciation of the advantages and disadvantages faced by a firm choosing to use the bankruptcy court. The case also is best taught to experienced students who understand corporate finance fundamentals and, in particular, grasp the principes of valuation and capital structure.

South Africa had formally introduced a policy of inflation targeting (IT) in February 2000. By December 2001, the governor of the South African Reserve Bank, after reading the latest statistics, was concerned with the disappointing economic data. Economic activity had slowed drastically, to the point that the country appeared to be heading for a recession. The gloomy statistics forced the governor to consider whether the country had pursued the right policy. Persistently high unemployment, one legacy of the apartheid era, meant that South Africa did not have the luxury of waiting for new policies to bear fruit. With the inflation forecast to exceed the mandated target, the governor would have to tighten monetary policy, which would further restrict investment. Was it is time for South Africa to change course?

The case presents a lot of information, directly and via references and Web-based links, about the economic consequences of the virus. Several themes are evident: As an opening theory-base, the decades-long stakeholder versus shareholder debate is invoked – but does this extend beyond “stakeholders” to the “public good”? There are contexts (generally wars) in which governments are empowered to instruct private companies to engage in the public good – but how far should/must they voluntarily go? The underlying macro-economic issue is: where will we get the capital? Central banks have not recovered from the 2008 global financial crisis and have limited “ammunition” to address the anticipated economic problems introduced by the virus. The case presents data on selected financial metrics (interest rates, debt levels, risk pricing, etc.) and outlines the conventional stimulatory steps used: lowering short-term rates (monetary policy) and investment in assets (fiscal policy) and the less-conventional Quantitative Easing “QE”.

The coronavirus appears to herald a devastating blow to lives and to the world economy – its impact is yet unknown, but likely to be comparable to war and pestilence of biblical proportion. This case focuses on the possible economic trajectories as a consequence of the virus, with emphasis on bailing-out (restructuring) struggling companies and restoring jobs. Within the framework of a world desperately in need of capital, it raises questions about accountability and responsibility. Should retrenched workers in restaurants, banks and airlines feel the consequences of their poor career choices? Must shareholders (read pensioners) shoulder losses to support the public good? Ought governments bail-out whole industries – using tax-payer money? Or do we allow central banks to conjure-up billions and hope for the best? The case does not attempt to provide answers to these questions but presents several vignettes and offers a context in which participants can debate the merits of these problems.

MBA and Exec-ed.

Teaching Notes are available for educators only.

CSS: 1 Accounting and Finance.