In November 2020, Paul Dietrich was wrapping up his busy harvest season for the 1,100 acres of farmland he currently operated. Although the fall harvest season demanded much of Dietrich’s time and attention, he simply could not ignore an investment opportunity that had been presented to him. A local farmland owner was selling a 150-acre parcel of farmland that adjoined some land parcels already owned by Dietrich. Dietrich estimated that a competitive bid would need to be at least CA$20,000 per acre and the bid would need to be made immediately. He sat down to consider both short-term and long-term impacts on his cash flows.
In November 2019, John Fowler, founder and principle of consulting firm Blaise Ventures (Blaise) had been listening to a conference call where the management of Canopy Growth Corporation (Canopy) had reported its financial results for its second quarter ended September 30, 2019. Cannabis companies faced a wide array of complex financial reporting issues, and Fowler felt that being able to understand these issues and explain them to clients was critical to Blaise’s success. Armed with Canopy’s second quarter financial statements and select financial statement note disclosures, he set out to analyze the issues present in the company’s most recent results.
In the winter of 2019, the Brazilian entrepreneur and founder of Insolar was proud of what he had accomplished in the five years since the company’s launch. His vision to democratize access to solar energy in Brazil was finally starting to become a reality. Insolar had installed solar panels that were providing a sustainable energy source to 5,000 residents in the favelas of Rio de Janeiro. The company had also founded an institute to train low-income residents on the installation of solar panels and was continuously designing new innovations to increase the institute’s impact. The founder was ready to make an additional investment and expand the Insolar brand. He had just received word from his research and development team that the final version of his most recent project, the solar kit, would be complete within the next year. However, he still had reservations about launching the product and had to make some key decisions before it could be ready for the market. What would be his next steps on the path to democratize solar energy?
In early January 2019, a recent Ivey Business School graduate logged into her online trading account to review her portfolio’s performance. As she scanned her investments, she paused at one stock in particular. It was time to make a decision regarding one of her most volatile stocks—Valeant Pharmaceuticals International Inc., recently renamed Bausch Health Companies Inc. The pharmaceutical company was once celebrated for its innovative business approach. However, both its stock price and reputation as one of Canada’s most valuable companies had plummeted in recent years, after accusations of price gouging and investigations for fraud by the US Securities and Exchange Commission. Overburdened with significant amounts of debt from a spree of acquisitions, the company was also scrutinized by investors and regulators for using non-GAAP accounting metrics for its financial statements. The recent graduate wondered if she should hold out hope that the stock would return to its historic highs, or if she should cut her losses and divest the stock.
In 2016, the general manager of Stone Rock Golf & Country Club (SRGCC) in Ainslie, Ontario, was considering an opportunity to grow the club’s weddings and special events business. SRGCC, a popular 18-hole golf course in a small town, was owned and operated by four local families, who ran the business according to their family values and their sense of loyalty and pride in their community. Since the golf industry had recently experienced a significant decline, the manager believed that increased investment in the weddings and special events business would help to strengthen and diversify SRGCC’s revenues. He was considering three different options, from modest to quite substantial: (1) focus on the immediate capital need of renovating the outdated maintenance facility; (2) make a large investment that included adding a new space for weddings and special events, expanded parking, and a new maintenance facility; or (3) do nothing and maintain the status quo. To complete the entire renovation, the club would require an investment of close to $1 million as well as approval from the four families. How could he build a case to increase SRGCC’s revenues and convince both his banker and the board of directors to accept his choice?
In 2017, the president and co-owner of MacKinnon Industries was considering the opportunity to diversify his business and bring a former family business back into the MacKinnon family. With an extensive background in acquiring and managing manufacturing businesses, he now had an opportunity to purchase Corkford Brewery Inc. (Corkford Brewery). The deal included the land, building, and equipment, as well as four successful brands from Tanzer Brewing Company, which owned Corkford Brewery. MacKinnon wanted to evaluate the financial viability of the business venture under three different potential operating scenarios, assess the potential of adding ciders to the product mix, and consider the price that he would be willing to pay to acquire the business.
Kroeker Farms Ltd. (Kroeker) had 500 acres of organic hemp in 2016 and planned to expand to 1,100 acres in 2017. Kroeker was one of the largest producers of potatoes in Manitoba, and hemp had become an important part of the crop rotation on its certified organic land. The agronomist responsible for all non-vegetable crops was looking at two equipment investment options because the equipment currently used for hemp was already at its maximum capacity. The first option was to invest in a new technology—a camera cultivator along with a new air seeder, which had to be imported from Europe. The second option was to simply invest in a larger version of the row-cropping equipment that had been used successfully for hemp on the farm. With the next seeding term approaching quickly, in Spring 2017, he needed to make this decision as he knew if he chose the new technology option, shipping from Europe would add additional logistical and timing concerns.
In late 2016, an analyst at Oliver Wyman (OW), was contemplating the high stakes of her new project. European riverboat company Temarca Group (Temarca) had just approached Duke Royalty (Duke) seeking €9.0 million to expand its riverboat fleet at the time. The analyst had to consider the first potential investment for the newly-formed partnership. If a financing decision was made, Temarca would be one of the first investments in Duke’s portfolio. The analyst had to ensure this investment was aligned with Duke’s investment mandate, met the financial criteria, and delivered the targeted returns essential to please keystone investors. Similarly, she knew this deal would be highly scrutinized by the OW partners because Temarca would be OW’s first fully-financed deal with Duke. With all this in mind, the analyst's task was to make a preliminary recommendation to the chief executive officer of Duke and a founding partner of OW about the soundness of the opportunity. She had to decide whether Duke should invest in Temarca or pass on this opportunity.
In May 2014, Julie Hallman was about to assume the presidency of the struggling non-profit arts organization, the Falaise Foundation, which offered a residence for small groups of artists and scholars from around the world to work on creative endeavours at its extensive property in the South of France. The foundation was suffering financially due to a combination of weak fundraising, high operating costs, an ineffective board of trustees, and a murky relationship between the founding family and the foundation. Complicating matters was Hallman’s personal situation: she was the daughter of the foundation’s founder, who had run the organization his own way for decades until health issues forced him to step down. As a documentary filmmaker with a degree in Fine Arts, Julie Hallman had no business background. She had to develop an understanding of the root causes of the foundation’s problems and identify a set of strategies and actions to effect a successful turnaround.
In 2014, a well-reputed innovative technology company had introduced a new operating system and two new smartphone devices with the goal of turning around the company’s slumping hardware sales. Despite positive product reviews in the media, the models did not sell as well as expected. Consequently, the lower demand led to impairment of inventory and supply commitments at various times throughout the following fiscal year. At the end of the fiscal year, the task facing the company’s chief financial officer was deciding whether or not further impairment was required. Because this decision came at a time of significant uncertainty about the company’s future in the competitive marketplace, the task also involved considering the impact of a potential adjustment on the company’s financial statements and on shareholder confidence.
The founder of a cloud computing business needs to determine the costs of providing the company's services to its clients. Students must perform an activity-based costing exercise to determine the cost of the company's two core product offerings and recommend which product should become the company's focus. Students must also consider the treatment of upfront capital costs when determining profitability. To make a decision, students must understand the company, the industry in which it operates and the costing issues involved.
In mid-2013, the executive chairman of Loblaw Companies Ltd. was considering whether it was in his company’s best interest to acquire Shoppers Drug Mart. In December 2012, Loblaw had announced a proposal to create a real estate investment trust to which it would initially transfer approximately 75 per cent of its substantial real estate holdings, thus unlocking value for its shareholders. At the same time, Shoppers’ shares were trading at an historically attractive valuation. On the other hand, competition was heating up with the move of big box stores, such as Wal-Mart and Target, into Canada and the growth of online purchasing. Moreover, new government regulations aimed at decreasing the high cost of drugs had an immediate impact on pharmaceutical companies. With Loblaw’s shares trading near a six-year high, there was now the attractive opportunity to use them as currency to make an acquisition whose potential synergies were estimated to be in excess of $300 million per year. Was this a good time to act on what had been perceived for a number of years as an attractive merger option? Did it make strategic sense? If so, what price should Loblaw pay for Shoppers?
While on a visit to Haiti, a student entrepreneur realized the potential for economic development in a country that was rich in certain resources and virtually unexplored by the private sector. The entrepreneur decided on coffee as a business opportunity and he and his three partners imported their first burlap sack. By November 2011 the product was for sale - a premium coffee from Southeastern Haiti with a brand focused on assisting the redevelopment and sustainability of the Haitian coffee industry. After the product met success, the entrepreneur and his partners were ready to make an additional investment. They believed that a café focused on their own brand of Haitian coffee would be a great way to generate sales and further develop their product offering before pursuing a grocery-store strategy. However, they also knew that such an investment would be risky.
In 2012, the Ontario provincial government announced that after 41 years in operation, the iconic Toronto tourist attraction Ontario Place would be shut down. The immediate closing would save the province and tax payers an estimated $20 million a year and eliminate at least 48 full-time jobs and 600 summer positions in the process. Ontario Place attendance had dropped sharply from an average of three million visitors during the early 1980's, to just over 327,000 in 2010. The Ontario government planned to keep the park closed until 2017 and spend the five years following closure to redevelop the majority of the site. It established an advisory panel empowered with the task of evaluating how to once again make Ontario Place a popular city venue and tourist destination. The advisory panel was expected to submit a full report outlining the best ideas for the Ontario Place revitalization to the provincial government by the end of the summer.