Circus Oz was Australia's premier international circus, having performed in 26 countries on five continents. In early 2002, Circus Oz enjoyed its strongest financial position since its founding in 1977, making a profit and sitting on a surplus of AUD$1,169,313. Although in recent years the company had increased the percentage of revenue generated from the box office, more than 60% of its funding still came from the Australia Council, its largest government sponsor. Linda Mickleborough, general manager of Circus Oz, was pondering how to respond to a recent offer by the Australia Council to fund a new position, director of development, at Circus Oz. The Australia Council was strongly encouraging the circus to hire development professionals to expand its funding from corporate donors. As an enticement, the council offered to underwrite the cost of the position for two years. Mickleborough had found the ideal candidate. The decision, however, was still a difficult one. Circus Oz had relatively flat salaries, reflecting deeply held egalitarian and democratic values. These values were central to the company's creative process, culture, and aesthetic. The suggested salary of the development director position was more than two times the highest salary currently paid to any employee at Circus Oz. Such a large salary disparity might wreak havoc on the company's morale and culture.

AOL investor Fred Grant was surprised and disappointed by the January 10, 2000 announcement of the AOL Time Warner merger. He had been fortunate enough to buy AOL at $40 in October 1999, just prior to the stock's rapid rise to $95 in mid-December. Although just days prior to the merger announcement the stock had settled to $73, by February 2, 2000, it had suffered another decline--to $57 per share. Although many observers spoke in glowing terms of the enormous synergies between Time Warner's premier content, advertising, and cable distribution channels and AOL's Internet brand, marketing savvy, and subscriber base, analysts predicted that growth for the merged company would be in the 15%-20% range, one-half of what Grant expected for his AOL holdings. Analysts also warned of the management and execution risks associated with the enormous and unprecedented combination of Internet and traditional media businesses. Finally, Grant was concerned about the implications of AOL Time Warner's use of the purchase rather than pooling method to account for the deal. Why wouldn't the company use pooling accounting, as had other companies for large stock deals such as NationsBank-BankAmerica and Travelers-Citicorp? Would goodwill's dampening effect on earnings hurt the market valuation of the new company? As Grant watched his AOL stock slide in the days following the merger announcement, he wondered whether he should sell his shares or, as some analysts suggested, use these new lows as a buying opportunity.