When analyzing a business case, MBA students tend to extrapolate by concluding that whatever a successful company did was effective, and whatever a failed company did was wrong. At the heart of the problem is the classical confusion between correlation and causality. This case demonstrates the pitfalls of such thinking through a parable, in which an alien who descended to earth concluded that lying on a hospital bed causes a person to die. It then provides several concrete examples of business analysis so students can discuss whether we can attribute commercial success to various practices or "visions" of a company. Finally, it suggests a choice-centered approach to case studies on how to draw a meaningful conclusion through observations (as opposed to rigorous statistical analysis). The suggestions include clarifying the purpose of case analysis, framing the central question as a choice, considering trade-offs, identifying external conditions, and going beyond a particular company. The final part is an appendix, which goes beyond business cases by discussing similar confusions in war, art, health, and education, and scientific methods in natural sciences and economics.

This case chronicles the rise of Meituan Dianping, the third largest company in China's hyper competitive e-commerce industry. Best known for its food delivery service, the company was changing the lives of hundreds of millions of consumers and millions of merchant through a suite of smartphone apps. To reach this point, the company had gone through several live or die competitive battles including the so called "Thousand Groupon War". Well positioned to ride the fast-growth wave of China's service e-commerce, there was no room for complacency. Competition was fierce and so was the pressure coming from merchants and consumers spoilt for choice. What strategies should the company implement to sustain long-term growth in the fast-evolving market?

In November 2019, almost a year after it went public, Tencent Music Entertainment Group ("TME") announced its third quarter financial results. Market investors had had high expectations for TME since it was the strategic music arm spun out by Tencent Holdings Limited ("Tencent"), one of the world's most valuable technology, gaming and social media companies. When TME made its debut on the New York Stock Exchange in late 2018, many individual investors were mystified by its "music-centric social entertainment" business model. Was it just the Chinese version of Spotify, which operated the world's most popular music app? Or was it a truly different business model which might generate more lucrative and diversified business revenue than its international counterparts? Some market analysts and investors also wondered if TME presented a more attractive investment opportunity than similar music streaming platforms in the world, including the global leader Spotify. As the global and domestic market became more competitive, how could TME sustain its competitive advantage by leveraging its synergies with Tencent's dominant position in social networking? Would TME's atypical music and social entertainment business model be easily replicated by its industry rivals or adopted beyond the music industry? What role would music streaming platforms play in driving the growth of the music industry and how would it affect the ecosystem of the global entertainment industry?

In Hong Kong as elsewhere in the world, Uber operates in a grey area. Thousands of passengers are using Uber service in the crowded city on a regular basis; many drivers make money through Uber by providing quality service and idle vehicles. On the other hand, taxi drivers have voiced strong oppositions to Uber on the ground of unfair competition and unlawful businesses, and staged several protests that were widely reported. Officially, Uber service is illegal in Hong Kong, as the government clarified explicitly that Uber drivers broke the law by offering car hiring services without any license or third-party insurance. The public is often puzzled: Uber seems such a nice thing that benefits both passengers and drivers, especially because the traditional taxies have such a poor quality and are often unavailable during peak hours. Why shouldn't we allow a healthy competition from a new and promising business model that seems to benefit everybody except the competitors? Isn't competition a good thing in general? So the question is, should the government allow Uber to operate legally? This case enables the instructor to go through the uniqueness of the taxi industry and the necessity to regulate the traditional taxi industry. The case provides evidence of what will happen if the industry is deregulated. Once the uniqueness of the industry is illuminated, the instructor can guide the students to discuss whether Uber's new business model is able to overcome the two major problems of the traditional taxi industry: adverse selection and tragedy of the commons. This case can be used for courses that cover public policy at both MBA and the UG levels. It can also be used for an economics course. Finally, the case can be used to discuss the new business models.

In early 2003, an outbreak of SARS in Hong Kong led to a plunge in inbound travel to the city. Many local travel agencies started hosting below-cost inbound tours, dubbed "zero-fee tours", for mainland Chinese tourists. They make a profit by bringing these tourists to shop in designated retail outlets that charge them inflated prices but offer lucrative commissions to tour operators. Zero-fee tours first caught the public's attention in October 2006 when a group of tourists were abandoned at a pier because they spent too little while shopping. Then in June 2010, a tourist died of a heart attack after a heated argument with a tour guide over a shopping arrangement. Despite preventive measures implemented by the industry association, tourist complaints keep increasing and high-profile cases in which tour guides insult or even fight with tourists continue to happen. Trendy Travel Limited is a local travel agency that hosts regularly priced inbound tours. Facing strong market demand for zero-fee tours, it would like to understand the business model of zero-fee tours: what is the driving force, is it sustainable, and what are the impacts to the company and the entire industry? It also wants to determine how to position its inbound tour business in the short and long term.

The Coca-Cola Company ("Coca-Cola") announced a plan in September 2008 to acquire China's biggest domestic juice manufacturer, China Huiyuan Juice Group Limited ("Huiyuan"). This acquisition will boost the market share of Coca-Cola from 12.7% to 20.2% in the country's juice market that year. Because Huiyuan-branded fruit juice is one of China's home-grown prominent brands, this news has triggered a public outcry rooted in patriotic nationalism against Coca-Cola's acquisition. Local juice manufacturers have also protested, claiming that Coca-Cola's enhanced market position would drive them out of business. China's antitrust officials plan to conduct a public hearing in late December 2008. Coca-Cola's senior executives are mulling over the best strategies to convince the authorities that this acquisition benefits the consumers and the society at large. Factors of considerations may include the rationale of regulatory control of M&A, synergies of the merging companies, and the potential effects of merging on competition, consumer interests and industry development. (Note: Case B covers the ruling by China's antitrust authorities on Coca-Cola's case and its implications for foreign companies trying to expand business in the country through acquisition of top domestic brands.)

The Coca-Cola Company (Coca-Cola) announced a plan in September 2008 to acquire China's biggest domestic juice manufacturer, China Huiyuan Juice Group Limited (Huiyuan). This acquisition will boost the market share of Coca-Cola from 12.7 percent to 20.2 percent in the country's juice market that year. Because Huiyuan-brand fruit juice is one of China's prominent homegrown brands, this news has triggered a public outcry rooted in patriotic nationalism against Coca-Cola's acquisition. Local juice manufacturers have also protested, claiming that Coca-Cola's enhanced market position would drive them out of business. China's antitrust officials plan to conduct a public hearing in late December 2008. Coca-Cola's senior executives are mulling over the best strategies to convince the authorities that this acquisition benefits the consumers and the society at large. Factors of considerations may include the rationale of regulatory control of M&A; synergies of the merging companies; and the potential effects of merging on competition, consumer interests, and industry development. (Note: Case B covers the ruling by China's antitrust authorities on Coca-Cola's case and its implications for foreign companies trying to expand business in the country through acquisition of top domestic brands.)