個案總覽

This case centers around the Air Products' hostile takeover attempt of Airgas in 2010. Air Products argued that its offer of a 38% premium is generous given Airgas' poor performance, which Air Products attributed to underperforming and entrenched managers at Airgas. On the other hand, Airgas' management argued that the company's recent struggles are cyclical and that Air Products' offer grossly undervalues Airgas' long-run potential. How might Airgas' management credibly communicate its conviction to shareholders? Should Airgas shareholders side with Air Products and accept a certain short term return, or should they side with Airgas' management and accept an uncertain but potentially higher long-term outcome? How should the Airgas board balance its responsibilities to short-term versus long-term shareholders?

In spring 2015, Dollar General's CEO Rick Dreiling was looking ahead to retiring at year's end but worried about ensuring continued growth for the company he had built since 2008 into a market leader in the U.S. discount retail world. Dollar General operated over 11,500 stores in 40 states at the start of 2015, but had recently been rebuffed in a tender offer for its leading rival, Family Dollar. Though Dollar General had held talks with Family Dollar as early as 2013, Family Dollar shareholders chose to ignore Dollar General's more lucrative tender offer and the urging of several activist investors and sold their firm to the smaller Dollar Tree chain. Dreiling could not help but revisit some of the key decisions he and the rest of the board had made in their pursuit of Family Dollar. From a governance perspective, he was confident that the Dollar General board had fulfilled its duty to shareholders during the bidding process despite Family Dollar's decision to sell to Dollar Tree. From a strategic perspective, he wondered whether Family Dollar had been the right competitor to buy.

On November 25, 2012, the head of Revenue Recognition at ESol Limited (ESol) India was preparing for a meeting with the company’s sales team at the head office in Bangalore. ESol Limited was a large, U.S.-based multinational information technology corporation, which had moved into India in 2000. Since then, its management had insisted on the need for close monitoring of accounting procedures in strict adherence to Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. Although the sales team had negotiated the Request for Proposal with MoveForward, a large research firm in India handling and processing high volumes of sensitive data, in good faith, the revenue recognition team felt that clauses dealing with penalties, liquidated damages and termination put their company at risk and wished to defer all of the revenue proposed for the contract until these issues were resolved. The friction between the two teams put the entire deal in jeopardy.

In 2013, Pinar Abay was appointed as the CEO of ING Bank Turkey. At 34, she was the youngest bank CEO in Turkey's history. Her appointment raised eyebrows because of her youth and because her career at McKinsey had given her no day-to-day bank management experience. ING, however, wanted a younger leader who could relate to Turkey's young and digitally savvy population. Upon her appointment, Abay determined that major changes were required in operations, personnel and culture. She adopted a variety of innovative approaches to making these changes, ranging from non-traditional hires to sitting for hours in call centers to personally answering customer complaints on Twitter. As Turkey's 12th largest bank, however, ING Turkey lacked scale, so Abay and her team considered a number of non-traditional ways to organize distribution and market the bank to promote growth.

With the encouragement of its overseas parent company, Cochran Consumer Products Inc. (CCPI), the U.S.-based executive team at S. J. Lawson, Inc. (SJLI), was nearly ready to announce the new financial performance measurement focus and economic profit (EP) for the company's product category managers. Currently, the SJLI executive team was finalizing plans for its initial announcement to the subsidiary's five product category managers. The team had received some general guidance from headquarters but it had also been told that because it knew the category managers best, it should develop its own local strategy for introducing the initiative.

Berendsen Island, an outsourced workwear service, uses the standard costing model to determine its profitability. Because the company recently reported a loss, the plant manager and the business controller investigate time-driven activity-based costing in an effort to gain insights into its cost structures. The company also needs to provide a quote to two potential new customers.

Berendsen Island, an outsourced workwear service, uses the standard costing model to determine its profitability. Because the company recently reported a loss, the plant manager and the business controller investigate time-driven activity-based costing in an effort to gain insights into its cost structures. The company also needs to provide a quote to two potential new customers.

Student Spreadsheet for product W15417.

In 2013, London Water, the water system of the City of London, Ontario, has run deficits for eight of the past nine years, leading to significant pressure to pull the organization out of the red. The Water Engineering Division manager knows that something needs to change. Overhauling the rate structure is an attractive option; however, myriad political, economic and environmental issues are at play. Moreover, as steward of one of the city's most important utilities, the manager needs to determine the best course of action, ideally a solution that will work in both the short run and the long run.

In 2013, London Water, the water system of the City of London, Ontario, has run deficits for eight of the past nine years, leading to significant pressure to pull the organization out of the red. The Water Engineering Division manager knows that something needs to change. Overhauling the rate structure is an attractive option; however, myriad political, economic and environmental issues are at play. Moreover, as steward of one of the city’s most important utilities, the manager needs to determine the best course of action, ideally a solution that will work in both the short run and the long run. See supplement case 9B15B010.

Supplement to 9B15B009.

Discusses the power of activity-based costing (ABC) and illustrates its use in several different settings, where full production costs change significantly with its use.

Students are asked to consider several issues in the case. First, students are asked to explain how Liberator Medical makes money, to evaluate its business strategy for accomplishing this objective, and to evaluate how successful execution of this strategy is likely to be observable from the company's financial performance. Second, students are asked to analyze the company's cash flow situation, and recent financial performance, including its profitability, asset management, and leverage. Third, students are asked to consider the quantitative impact on the company's financial statements of capitalizing and amortizing direct response advertising outlays. Students are also asked to evaluate whether Liberator Medical used accounting methods that were consistent with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). Finally, students are asked to consider the communication and disclosure issues the company faced in responding to analyst criticism of its method of accounting for direct response advertising.

This case provides a context wherein a variety of financial accounting issues can be discussed, particularly those related to the multi-period dependence of accounting accruals. A less direct but nonetheless important issue relates to earnings management and ends up being a central theme of the case. The case focuses on three basic accounting topics-LIFO inventory reserves, the allowance for doubtful accounts, and depreciation policies and assumptions-that span the range of earnings management considerations. It was written as a capstone case for a 90-minute graduate-level introductory financial accounting course. The appropriate audience would be graduate- or undergraduate-level business students, executives, or those studying or working in financial fields. The case lends itself to team-teaching opportunities within accounting, ethics, finance, and leadership.

In 2012, an equity research firm based in California accused Singapore-based Olam International Limited (Olam) of engaging in potentially misleading and dangerous accounting practices. The firm — Muddy Waters Research — further stated that Olam was on the verge of bankruptcy. The primary complaint made against Olam by Muddy Waters was that Olam allegedly made aggressive use of “non-cash accounting gains,” particularly when reporting on Olam’s biological assets. Olam’s share price tumbled after the accusations were made public. Olam defended itself by asserting that it had applied Singapore Financial Reporting Standard (FRS) 41 — Agriculture appropriately and that the fair value gains of the biological assets were justifiably derived. FRS 41, equivalent to International Financial Accounting Standards 41 — Agriculture, required Singapore-listed companies to use fair value in the measurement of biological assets. This case examines the complex challenges that valuators face when presented with different valuation models, the application of financial reporting standards and the fine balance between reliability and relevance in the accounting of assets in the real world.

In 2012, an equity research firm based in California accused Singapore-based Olam International Limited (Olam) of engaging in potentially misleading and dangerous accounting practices. The firm - Muddy Waters Research - further stated that Olam was on the verge of bankruptcy. The primary complaint made against Olam by Muddy Waters was that Olam allegedly made aggressive use of "non-cash accounting gains," particularly when reporting on Olam's biological assets. Olam's share price tumbled after the accusations were made public. Olam defended itself by asserting that it had applied Singapore Financial Reporting Standard (FRS) 41 - Agriculture appropriately and that the fair value gains of the biological assets were justifiably derived. FRS 41, equivalent to International Financial Accounting Standards 41 - Agriculture, required Singapore-listed companies to use fair value in the measurement of biological assets. This case examines the complex challenges that valuators face when presented with different valuation models, the application of financial reporting standards and the fine balance between reliability and relevance in the accounting of assets in the real world.

This case discusses the trajectory taken by a Singapore-based entrepreneur who embarked on a multimillion business venture to turn food waste into energy. The brainchild of Edwin Khew, a veteran in the waste management business, IUT Global was formed in 2005 to set up and operate Singapore's first organic waste treatment plant. IUT's bio-methanisation plant was an ambitious project. Budgeted at $60 million, the plant was designed to process 800 tonnes of food waste and produce 10 megawatts of electricity most of which would be sold to Singapore's national electricity grid. Investors were optimistic that with their state of the art process technology and a ready customer, the plant would generate a steady income stream once it was set up and running. However, from the start of production although less than 10% of food waste in Singapore was being recycled, IUT encountered problems in the collection of food waste needed to feed its plant. It was unable to collect enough food waste and those collected contained a higher percentage of contaminants than projected. Furthermore, food operators resisted the need to separate food waste from solid waste. Unable to meet its production targets, and after three years of losses, in 2011, IUT entered into liquidation, and with it the closure of Singapore's first large scale food waste-to-energy facility. The case explores the following topics: First mover pitfalls in a sustainable energy venture; Analysis of new venture business plans; Implementation challenges for start-ups; Assumption testing/sensitivity analysis in costing of new ventures.

This case discusses the trajectory taken by a Singapore-based entrepreneur who embarked on a multimillion business venture to turn food waste into energy. The brainchild of Edwin Khew, a veteran in the waste management business, IUT Global was formed in 2005 to set up and operate Singapore's first organic waste treatment plant. IUT's bio-methanisation plant was an ambitious project. Budgeted at $60 million, the plant was designed to process 800 tonnes of food waste and produce 10 megawatts of electricity most of which would be sold to Singapore's national electricity grid. Investors were optimistic that with their state of the art process technology and a ready customer, the plant would generate a steady income stream once it was set up and running. However, from the start of production although less than 10% of food waste in Singapore was being recycled, IUT encountered problems in the collection of food waste needed to feed its plant. It was unable to collect enough food waste and those collected contained a higher percentage of contaminants than projected. Furthermore, food operators resisted the need to separate food waste from solid waste. Unable to meet its production targets, and after three years of losses, in 2011, IUT entered into liquidation, and with it the closure of Singapore's first large scale food waste-to-energy facility. The case explores the following topics: First mover pitfalls in a sustainable energy venture; Analysis of new venture business plans; Implementation challenges for start-ups; Assumption testing/sensitivity analysis in costing of new ventures.