個案總覽

By 2006, Hungary had experienced more than 15 years of transition from central planning to free markets. The reform process had involved several distinct phases. The initial leap to the market, with its widespread privatizations, included a dramatic deregulation with a guillotine procedure. A more refined process of regulatory impact assessments (RIAs) followed this period. A newly empowered competition office sought to strengthen the extent of competition within markets dominated by a single firm or a small group of firms. The goal of EU membership was a consistent driver of the reforms as early as 1991, since the EU model was compulsory for EU members. These years had been turbulent, and the transition was not yet complete. In 2006, Hungary faced the challenge of a fiscal deficit that was 9.5 per cent of GDP, and responded by raising corporate tax rates from 16 per cent to 20 per cent as an attempt to close the fiscal gap. However, Hungary was in an intense competition with Poland, the Czech Republic and Romania to attract opportunities. Tax rates were an important element in this competition, but so were the regulatory impediments and distortions that still remained in the economy. How to create a rapidly growing economy was a question at the forefront of public policy debate. A 2006 Financial Times article discussed this dilemma.

Many nations have created geographically distinct areas with special features designed to attract foreign investment. In deciding where to locate various operations, businesses today must investigate the benefits and incentives offered by a plethora of special economic zones (SEZs) throughout the world. The business location decision involves a comparison of many alternative sites, each with its own set of incentives. Many small nations have put in place minimal corporate tax rates as a way of gaining some revenue by attracting head office functions, particularly those tasks related to finance. This government revenue may be only a very small percentage of a corporation's international profit; nevertheless, it may form a significant portion of the tax haven's income. Many businesses make their international location decisions so as to accumulate their taxable profits in tax havens. Apart from these zero-tax regimes, countries impose a wide range of corporate profit tax rates. A business can often find a country with a tax rate lower than both the country where it was incorporated and the country where it wishes to invest. By funneling profits to a zero-tax or even a lower tax jurisdiction, a business is able to minimize its aggregate tax payments. Although recent international agreements have sought to limit these practices, opportunities are still available for tax minimization. Tax havens, as well as SEZs, can play an important role in business location decisions.

In 2001, the Dabhol Power Company (DPC) ceased operations following several years of bitter acrimony between the state of Maharashtra and the foreign owners. GE and Bechtel each owned 10 per cent of the equity, the Maharashtra State Energy Board (MSEB) owned 15 per cent and Enron owned 65 per cent. The Overseas Private Insurance Corporation (OPIC), a U.S. government agency, had lent $138 million and also had provided insurance against political risk for some of the other 19 foreign lenders. The lengthy and convoluted experiences of the Enron Dabhol power project are described in detail in Andrew Inkpen's case Enron and the Dabhol Power Company, Thunderbird Case # A07020008. The purpose of India's Negotiations Concerning the Dabhol Power Company 2001-2005 is to discuss the negotiation between the various foreign investors and the government of India in an attempt to reactivate the Dabhol project. Ultimately, in 2005 a settlement was negotiated. This case adds a further dimension to the case by Andrew Inkpen, and it can be taught most effectively as a sequel to that case.

This case presents a summary of U.S. trade and investment sanctions in effect as of 2006. The case examines in detail the U.S. sanctions against Cuba, and it discusses the challenges and opportunities that these sanctions have created for Cuba's largest foreign investor, Sherritt International. The discussion concerning Sherritt presents the wide array of forces that impact a business that is contemplating trade or investment with a country against which sanctions have been imposed. In spite of U.S. sanctions, Sherritt International, based in Canada, developed profitable businesses in Cuba, in mining, oil and gas, hotels and food processing. The U.S. policies, while imposing costs, also reduced the competition that Sherritt would otherwise have faced. The ability to work with the Communist government gave Sherritt a strong competitive advantage and a protected market. Sherritt had positioned itself with a first mover advantage if sanctions were lifted.

By 2006, in spite of lack a of significant reforms, the Russian banking system had recovered from the 1998 crisis, and its indicators such as capital, assets, and loans greatly exceeded the levels prior to 1998. The Russian economy had expanded rapidly, largely as a result of higher energy prices. However, many analysts were concerned about the large role played by oil and gas, and feared that energy exports were keeping the value of the ruble so high that non-energy manufacturing was being hurt. V. Bank had survived the 1998 crisis, and was considered one of the top 25 banks. In spite of this progress, its financial reports emphasized a series of concerns. Furthermore, Russia's political situation seemed precarious, as illustrated in the Khodorkovsky crisis, as a result of which Gazprom and the Yukos assets returned to majority state ownership. Some analysts pointed to a revival of authoritarian and arbitrary state intervention, and debated the possibility of a liberal political reaction in Russia similar to the Orange Revolution in the Ukraine.

Hugo Chavez often pointed to Simon Bolivar as the model for his political philosophy, centered on Bolivar's vision of a unified and independent Latin America. In 1998, Chavez ran in the presidential election, on a platform that opposed what he termed the savage neoliberalism of the 1990s. Chavez's speeches in the presidential election campaign emphasized the importance of national sovereignty and economic justice. As president, Chavez passed a new Hydrocarbons Law to enhance the share oil revenue that would be owed to the government; he created a new government-owned bank; he introduced a radical land reform law; and he encouraged takeovers by the government and employees of privately-owned factories. Venezuela sold oil to Cuba at reduced prices in return for professionals, especially doctors who created health missions in many low-income areas. Chavez sought to foment socialist anti-American revolutions throughout Latin America. In the context of this socialist agenda, analysts expected that Venezuela's economy would experience serious challenges in the coming years. The combination of high inflation, fiscal pressure, and slow growth would be a boiling political cauldron in which violent opposition could ferment.

For the first five years, Malaysia's Multimedia Development Corporation (MDC) pursued its original mission and vision, seeking to create a research and design corridor (Multimedia Super Corridor - MSC) that would be at the leading edge of the new economy. However, many analysts criticized key elements of the MDC. Some analysts feared that civil servants lacked the technical capability. Others feared the MDC lacked the ability to encourage a risk-taking culture. Many pointed to the lack of entrepreneurial activity. Stan Shih concluded that there were simply not enough knowledge workers in Malaysia. By 2003, the MDC had shifted its focus to the development of labor-intensive IT-related activities at the low end of value chains, taking advantage of Malaysia's low costs and its geographical position as a potential Asian hub. This is a supplement to Malaysia's Multimedia Development Corporation (A), product 9A98G001.

Hugo Chavez often pointed to Simon Bolivar as the model for his political philosophy, centered on Bolivar's vision of a unified and independent Latin America. In 1998, Chavez ran in the presidential election, on a platform that opposed what he termed the "savage neoliberalism" of the 1990s. Chavez's speeches in the presidential election campaign emphasized the importance of "national sovereignty" and "economic justice." As president, Chavez passed a new Hydrocarbons Law to enhance the share oil revenue that would be owed to the government; he created a new government-owned bank; he introduced a radical land reform law; and he encouraged takeovers by the government and employees of privately-owned factories. Venezuela sold oil to Cuba at reduced prices in return for professionals, especially doctors who created health missions in many low-income areas. Chavez sought to foment socialist anti-American revolutions throughout Latin America. In the context of this socialist agenda, analysts expected that Venezuela's economy would experience serious challenges in the coming years. The combination of high inflation, fiscal pressure, and slow growth would be a boiling political cauldron in which violent opposition could ferment.

Citigroup had become too complex for investors to understand, and so share values stagnated. Furthermore, over the period 2000 to 2005, many divisions within Citigroup were charged with illegal or unethical behavior. It seemed that Citigroup had simply become too large and complex for central management to prevent inappropriate decisions on the part of various groups scattered throughout the world. It appeared that Citigroup needed a new corporate culture to guide globally decentralized decision-making. Meanwhile, Citigroup undertook a substantial expansion in China. However, many other giant financial institutions were also expanding in China, intensifying competition. By 2006, analysts throughout the world were becoming increasingly concerned about the possibility of rapid inflation in China, and the government of China shared this concern.

An abstract is not available for this product.

For many decades, the automobile industry had played a major role in Canada's economy. A large portion of Canadian jobs depended on the auto industry, both directly and indirectly. However, by 2005, Canada faced serious globalization threats. Analysts were stating that in the future the number of automobile-related jobs in Canada would depend upon the international competitiveness of Canadian plants. To continue to increase wages would raise Canadian production costs so far above the levels in Mexico, China and other emerging nations, that the assemblers would shift production to low-cost jurisdictions. Meanwhile, the Big Three were losing market share to their non-union competitors, especially Toyota and Honda.

For many decades, the automobile industry had played a major role in Canada's economy. A large portion of Canadian jobs depended on the auto industry, both directly and indirectly. However, by 2005, Canada faced serious globalization threats. Analysts were stating that in the future the number of automobile-related jobs in Canada would depend upon the international competitiveness of Canadian plants. To continue to increase wages would raise Canadian production costs so far above the levels in Mexico, China and other emerging nations, that the assemblers would shift production to low-cost jurisdictions. Meanwhile, the Big Three were losing market share to their non-union competitors, especially Toyota and Honda.

Several new developments were threatening the success of Big Pharma. The patents on well-known blockbusters were reaching expiry, and generic manufacturers were eagerly waiting to produce lower-priced copies. Throughout the world, governments were taking a more active role in determining the prices at which drugs could be sold. The expansion of government insurance programs was adding to the complexity of the marketing challenges. Another change involved a shift towards direct-to-customer advertising, including the proliferation of information on the Internet, in addition to the traditional process of sales visits to family doctors. Research funding had doubled since 1991, but the number of new drugs emerging each year had fallen by half. The research and development process was also changing dramatically. Whereas blockbuster drugs had been developed as general treatments for common conditions, it was becoming increasingly apparent that not all patients reacted in the same ways to these drugs, and some - although a very small percentage - suffered serious side effects. This reality was expected to lead to the creation of a much larger number of niche drugs, each one targeted at a narrower group of patients. Related to this development was the growth of biopharma in which new biotech companies were creating drugs that could attack specific cells. Some analysts felt that Big Pharma was in a peculiar predicament in that profits were still very large, and this served as a barrier to necessary changes in strategy.

General Motors (GM) had a history of bold strategies in a wide variety of areas, including the creation of Saturn, the development of global operations, and the formation of strategic alliances with Fiat, SAIC, and Daewoo. Nonmarket strategies included pursuing government financial assistance, coping with new environmental regulations, and agreeing to very expensive health care and pension schemes. Meanwhile, GM had failed to create strategies to compete effectively with foreign automakers. By 2005, many of GM's strategic decisions seemed to have been inappropriate. Some that were undertaken for short-term gain had disastrous long-term consequences, and GM performed poorly compared with other global automakers. Many strategies had seemed disconnected, lacking an overall vision or purpose: GM was facing a serious crisis. In 2005-2006, GM introduced several new strategies. Whether these strategies could achieve sustainable profitability, or whether they would also bring undesirable consequences, was a subject of importance to employees, shareholders, and governments throughout the world.

General Motors (GM) had a history of bold strategies in a wide variety of areas, including the creation of Saturn, the development of global operations and the formation of strategic alliances with Fiat, SAIC and Daewoo. Non-market strategies included pursuing government financial assistance, coping with new environmental regulations, and agreeing to very expensive health care and pension schemes. Meanwhile, GM had failed to create strategies to compete effectively with foreign automakers. By 2005, many of GM's strategic decisions seemed to have been inappropriate. Some that were undertaken for short-term gain had disastrous long-term consequences, and GM performed poorly compared with other global automakers. Many strategies had seemed disconnected, lacking an overall vision or purpose. While students may discuss each strategic decision and understand why GM acted as it did, nevertheless, students can see that the compendium of strategic decisions had moved GM into a serious crisis. In 2005-2006, GM introduced several new strategies. Whether these strategies could achieve sustainable profitability,or whether they would also bring undesirable consequences, was a subject of importance to employees, shareholders, and governments throughout the world.

Several new developments were threatening the success of Big Pharma. The patents on well-known blockbusters were reaching expiry, and generic manufacturers were eagerly waiting to produce lower-priced copies. Throughout the world, governments were taking a more active role in determining the prices at which drugs could be sold. The expansion of government insurance programs was adding to the complexity of the marketing challenges. Another change involved a shift towards direct-to-customer advertising, including the proliferation of information on the Internet, in addition to the traditional process of sales visits to family doctors. Research funding had doubled since 1991, but the number of new drugs emerging each year had fallen by half. The research and development process was also changing dramatically. Whereas blockbuster drugs had been developed as general treatments for common conditions, it was becoming increasingly apparent that not all patients reacted in the same ways to these drugs, and some - although a very small percentage - suffered serious side effects. This reality was expected to lead to the creation of a much larger number of niche drugs, each one targeted at a narrower group of patients. Related to this development was the growth of biopharma in which new biotech companies were creating drugs that could attack specific cells. Some analysts felt that Big Pharma was in a peculiar predicament in that profits were still very large, and this served as a barrier to necessary changes in strategy.

In the early 2000s, De Beers Consolidated Mines has successfully managed the global diamond industry for many decades, propping up prices at all stages of the value chain, reducing price volatility and increasing consumer demand. By the end of the 20th century, however, a series of forces threatened De Beer's role and profitability. New diamond mining firms were selling their production on the open market rather than through De Beers' Central Selling Organization. The new competitors were attempting to grade, polish and cut diamonds outside of the De Beers value chain. Some retailers were purchasing shares in new mines in order to create their own value chain. New technology offered the possibility of creating synthetic diamonds that would be indistinguishable from diamonds created by natural forces. Governments were threatening antitrust actions. Meanwhile, an illicit trade in conflict diamonds was supporting revolutionary groups and disrupting the market. De Beers now had to decide whether to maintain its traditional functions or to embark on a new strategy. In particular, De Beers contemplated a shift into the retail jewelry business in a joint venture with France's Moet Hennessy-Louis Vuitton luxury goods corporation that would sell De Beers-branded diamond jewelry.

De Beers Consolidated Mines has successfully managed the global diamond industry for many decades, propping up prices at all stages of the value chain, reducing price volatility and increasing consumer demand. By the end of the 20th century, however, a series of forces threatened De Beer's role and profitability. New diamond mining firms were selling their production on the open market rather than through De Beers' Central Selling Organization. The new competitors were attempting to grade, polish and cut diamonds outside of the De Beers value chain. Some retailers were purchasing shares in new mines in order to create their own value chain. New technology offered the possibility of creating synthetic diamonds that would be indistinguishable from diamonds created by natural forces. Governments were threatening antitrust actions. Meanwhile, an illicit trade in "conflict diamonds" was supporting revolutionary groups and disrupting the market. De Beers now had to decide whether to maintain its traditional functions or to embark on a new strategy. In particular, De Beers contemplated a shift into the retail jewelry business in a joint venture with France's Moet Hennessy-Louis Vuitton luxury goods corporation that would sell De Beers-branded diamond jewelry.

For General Motors (GM) China, 2004 brought a wide variety of new challenges that added to an already complex business environment. Industry structure was changing quickly, demand and supply projections for motor vehicles had promised substantial increases in sales and profits but suddenly optimism faded. China's membership in the World Trade Organization created expectations of a level playing field for foreign investors, but major barriers remained, including continuing government intervention, competition from government-owned assembly firms, arbitrary rules such as sector-specific credit restrictions and violation of intellectual property with the copying of foreign automobile designs and false-branding of parts. Meanwhile, inflation was increasing and the government was unsure whether and how to use monetary and fiscal policies. This is an abridged version of GM in China, product 905M07.

For General Motors (GM) China, 2004 brought a wide variety of new challenges that added to an already complex business environment. Industry structure was changing quickly, demand and supply projections for motor vehicles had promised substantial increases in sales and profits but suddenly optimism faded. China's membership in the World Trade Organization created expectations of a level playing field for foreign investors, but major barriers remained, including continuing government intervention, competition from government-owned assembly firms, arbitrary rules such as sector-specific credit restrictions and violation of intellectual property with the copying of foreign automobile designs and false-branding of parts. Meanwhile, inflation was increasing and the government was unsure whether and how to use monetary and fiscal policies. This is an abridged version of GM in China, product 9B05M007.