The Virginia Lottery offered scratcher games for which consumers could instantly win an array of prizes. In the summer of 2007, finance professor Scott Hoover determined that the lottery's website had provided false information about the number of prizes outstanding for some scratcher games. After a ten-month investigation, Hoover and a team of attorneys had gathered evidence to support a specific allegation of fraud. The lottery was selling scratcher tickets for which no grand prizes were possible, yet, its website posted information indicating that grand prizes were, in fact, still outstanding. Hoover and his attorneys worked behind the scenes to seek reform and remedies from the lottery, but those efforts were unsuccessful. He wonders whether he should go public with his allegations and file a lawsuit against the lottery. Several important ethics-related questions are posed. Does Hoover have a moral obligation to inform consumers of the apparent fraud? Should Hoover demand a return of the lottery's alleged illegal gains when those gains have purportedly benefited Virginia's educational system? Are there other approaches that do not involve Hoover going public that might motivate the lottery officials to correct the information?

This case takes place as Señor Sisig has had three years of increasing success. The case highlights founder Evan Kidera, and the business as a whole, in Señor Sisig's efforts to continue the company's success and in pursuing the best growth options. Señor Sisig has received great acclaim in its early years. Founder Evan Kidera feels great pressure to capitalize on the opportunities presented to Señor Sisig as a result of the hard work in those early years, and at the same time does not want to over-stretch Señor Sisig's reach. Beyond maintaining business as usual, Kidera was considering three growth opportunities for Señor Sisig: (1) Add more food trucks, (2) expand operations to package products for sales to food retailers, and (3) open a bricks-and-mortar restaurant.

Watson Children's Shelter (Watson) was a private, independent, charitable non-profit organization located in Missoula, MT, that provided emergency shelter to children. Watson was a licensed emergency care provider, offering a safe, nurturing environment for children who were victims of physical, sexual, and/or emotional abuse, neglect, abandonment, or family crisis. Many of the children arriving at the shelter were severely emotionally disturbed or learning disabled. Other children arrived as victims of secondary abuse, coming from situations in which they observed domestic violence, substance or sexual abuse. Watson was founded in 1977 and had been under the leadership of Fran Albrecht since 1997. Albrecht had an excellent reputation as a leader and manager of this non-profit. It was June 2011 when Albrecht was deciding which of three alternatives to recommend to her Board of Directors, as Watson faced a tough operational situation. Watson and its Board had gone through a time-consuming due diligence process that led them to the decision to expand and build an additional facility. Within a year after the second facility was finished, placements of children had decreased dramatically; where Watson had been turning away approximately two children per week, it now had excess capacity in each facility and even had closed one facility part of the time. Albrecht's research into the decreased placements led her to a policy change by the main referring agency-it was now taking a "family preservation" approach rather than referring directly to an emergency provider such as Watson.It was a case of Albrecht and her Board having done lots of due diligence and then being blindsided by a decision made by an external constituent. She was concerned about the public perception and the impact on her organization and the Board members, as well as other stakeholders, including the children. She knew Watson had to adapt and act quickly, but she was not certain which alternative to take

Describes the early stage development of PowerWater Beverages, a company poised to capitalize on the growing U.S. consumer demand for bottled water and, more specifically, for "pure water". The investors successfully negotiated the exclusive rights and interest in a trade secret and industrial design to produce and distribute a pure distilled oxygenated water, secured commitments from independent representatives who comprised the company's national sales force, and signed contracts with co-packers, suppliers, and distributors. As the CEO, Kent Mawhinney, prepares for a board meeting, he must determine whether his CPA's estimated capital requirements are correct, calculate what the pre and post money valuation for the company, analyze the impact of proposed alternatives, reassess the strength of the opportunity to see if it still makes sense to pursue it, and determine whether other opportunities for PowerWater's distilled, oxygenated water product exist beyond the general market that the core product will target. This case is intended for undergraduate and graduate entrepreneurship, entrepreneurial finance, and finance courses. We realize that this presents a wide range of potential applications for the case but believe that the rich data provided in the case provides adequate information for the case to add value to the aforementioned courses. Professors using this case should have already or should intend to provide students with lectures and assigned readings on how to analyze the feasibility of entrepreneurial ventures. This should include the appropriate tools and models for conducting analyses from an entrepreneurial as well as financial valuation perspective. The author has used the work of Jeffry Timmons and Michael Porter as the basis for discussing this case.