個案總覽

A middle-aged investor, living in India, is looking for a pension plan as he wants to retire within 10 to 12 years and start his own consultancy. His financial advisor suggests four investment plans, each a mix of equities and bonds with different risk elements. An investment that has more equity also has more risk but higher returns. Inflation, equity markets, bond trends, interest rates, portfolio returns and likely annuities all have to be analyzed. Annual contributions and the accumulation of corpus fund at the time of maturity also have to be considered. The investor wants to ensure that his pension plan will generate the annuities required to support his retirement but is still unsure which plan to choose.

Aqua Logistics Limited, one of India’s leading logistics and supply chain management companies, suffered from poor financial management and was witnessing slowing demand in the industry. The company had significant financial debt to banks and financial institutions. Owing to such difficulties in managing its operations in a largely fragmented industry, the firm — with its strong network in multimodal transport and in the third-party logistics model of delivery — was a good target for companies seeking to consolidate their position in the industry. An acquiring firm, however, would want to answer several questions. What were the possible value drivers of Aqua Logistics Limited? From where would the synergistic gains be realized through an acquisition? How much should be offered for the acquisition?

The Banco Espírito Santo (BES) case covers issues related to bank strategy, safety and soundness, the role of conglomerates, and problems related to family control. The setting is Europe, following the financial crisis of 2007-09, and its efforts to create a single banking market. It illustrates the lack of transparency inherent in conglomerates that have banks 'embedded' in them, the additional opacity associated with family control, the problems of tracking cross-border risk exposures even under market integration funds in the EU and the Eurozone, and the associated systemic risks.

This case allows students to learn the principles of capital budgeting in a global context. It features a power company in Brazil that is a subsidiary of AES Corporation. A new-to-the-firm manager is assigned his first big project: to evaluate and defend the case for investing in a 500 MW thermal power plant. He must present his findings to the Global Valuation Review team, including a recommendation for the project and a bid price for the upcoming government auction. The manager must build three different valuations: a base case, an optimistic scenario, and a pessimistic scenario.

In 2011, Suntech Power, the world's largest solar panel manufacturer, found itself in a highly problematic position. Recent developments in the Chinese solar power industry had negatively impacted the company's operations. As the industry had matured, the demand for Suntech Power's products had become highly volatile. Changing policy regulations, the ambiguous financial structure of the firm and a shift in consumers' perceptions of the product were only some of the issues that further compounded the problem. As a result of these changing dynamics within the global solar power industry, the company's share price had plummeted by roughly 90 per cent. To remedy the problem, in May 2011, the founder and chief executive officer of Suntech Power hired a new chief financial officer and they faced the arduous task of turning the company around. How should they tackle changing political and economic conditions? What decisions needed to be made to maintain the position of the company in the global solar energy market?

In 2011, Suntech Power, the world’s largest solar panel manufacturer, found itself in a highly problematic position. Recent developments in the Chinese solar power industry had negatively impacted the company’s operations. As the industry had matured, the demand for Suntech Power’s products had become highly volatile. Changing policy regulations, the ambiguous financial structure of the firm and a shift in consumers’ perceptions of the product were only some of the issues that further compounded the problem. As a result of these changing dynamics within the global solar power industry, the company’s share price had plummeted by roughly 90 per cent. To remedy the problem, in May 2011, the founder and chief executive officer of Suntech Power hired a new chief financial officer and they faced the arduous task of turning the company around. How should they tackle changing political and economic conditions? What decisions needed to be made to maintain the position of the company in the global solar energy market?

Ian Lee, Whirlpool's VP for North Asia, had been negotiating a possible acquisition with Jackie Jin, the chairman of a leading Chinese appliance manufacturer named Hefei Rongshida Sanyo Electric Company (Hefei Sanyo), for almost six months when suddenly Hefei Sanyo's stock price jumped 25% in the first two weeks of May 2013. The sudden price increase not only increased the likely acquisition price for an ownership stake in Hefei Sanyo, but also meant that Whirlpool had lost the luxury of both time and secrecy. Lee had to quickly decide how to structure a deal that enabled Whirlpool to acquire controlling ownership position (>50%) in the state-owned enterprise (SOE)-something that had not been done before; how much to pay for the stake; and how to ensure commercial, regulatory, and political approval for the deal.

In March 2012, the CEO of Fairbridge Capital considered the pros and cons of the potential acquisition of Thomas Cook India. He believed that Thomas Cook India's two business segments (travel/related services and financial services) had different potential in terms of growth and cash flow generation. Analysts predicted tremendous growth potential in the travel business (although it would require additional investment), while the foreign exchange segment had limited growth potential but generated significant cash flow. Thomas Cook India had changed ownership several times in a short time period, and the stock price had fallen substantially. Would acquiring Thomas Cook India fit the value-investing philosophy rigorously followed by Fairbridge Capital and its parent company, Fairfax Financial? If so, how much should Fairbridge bid? Was Thomas Cook India worth more with two segments or was it better off split into two? Finally, should Fairbridge delist Thomas Cook India or keep it public?

Two engineers founded a start-up for the design and development of Internet of Things and wearable technology products. They received initial seed capital from family in lieu of equity shares. The company developed a product that could be used to search for misplaced items through the user's phone. The product was expected to be ready for mass production in a week. However, in spite of potential huge demand, the company did not have funds for mass production because it used the seed capital on the design and development. The supplier would not produce unless the start-up paid up front. The technology start-up needed to analyze all the available options for funding mass production of its product and choose the most suitable one.

Designed for a course in public finance or in transportation, this case describes the financial crisis that, in 2013, loomed over the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA), the transit system serving Philadelphia and four surrounding counties. The difficulties were predominantly in the system's long-inadequate capital budget, which funded maintenance, repair, and replacement costs for the aging legacy system, but these problems were severe enough that they were threatening day-to-day operations. SEPTA had been forced to delay needed reinvestment in the system for so many years that, absent significant new funding, the SEPTA board and general manager warned that they would be forced to shrink its system dramatically over the next 10 years, reducing service in the city of Philadelphia and nearly eliminating suburban commuter rail service. To ground the discussion, the case provides political and structural background about SEPTA, alongside the recent financial history of both operating and capital budgets, allowing students to understand the nature of the funding difficulties that had historically beset the authority. The case also provides enough information on transit finance to support a more general conversation. Case exhibits include demographic and commuting data for the five counties served by SEPTA; fare and subsidy information by mode of transport; fare elasticity by mode of transport; sources of subsidy in both operating and capital budgets; information about the tax burden in Pennsylvania; the projected consequences of abolishing SEPTA for commuting costs, jobs, and property values; and pros and cons of using different kinds of state funding to finance transit. A brief 2-page sequel describes how proponents were eventually able to win legislative approval for additional funding, and what the legislature ultimately chose as its revenue source. Case number 2047.0

This sequel accompanies Case Number 2047.0. Designed for a course in public finance or in transportation, this case describes the financial crisis that, in 2013, loomed over the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA), the transit system serving Philadelphia and four surrounding counties. The difficulties were predominantly in the system's long-inadequate capital budget, which funded maintenance, repair, and replacement costs for the aging legacy system, but these problems were severe enough that they were threatening day-to-day operations. SEPTA had been forced to delay needed reinvestment in the system for so many years that, absent significant new funding, the SEPTA board and general manager warned that they would be forced to shrink its system dramatically over the next 10 years, reducing service in the city of Philadelphia and nearly eliminating suburban commuter rail service. To ground the discussion, the case provides political and structural background about SEPTA, alongside the recent financial history of both operating and capital budgets, allowing students to understand the nature of the funding difficulties that had historically beset the authority. The case also provides enough information on transit finance to support a more general conversation. Case exhibits include demographic and commuting data for the five counties served by SEPTA; fare and subsidy information by mode of transport; fare elasticity by mode of transport; sources of subsidy in both operating and capital budgets; information about the tax burden in Pennsylvania; the projected consequences of abolishing SEPTA for commuting costs, jobs, and property values; and pros and cons of using different kinds of state funding to finance transit. A brief 2-page sequel describes how proponents were eventually able to win legislative approval for additional funding, and what the legislature ultimately chose as its revenue source. Case number 2047.1

Asahi India Glass Limited faces a situation encountered by many growing companies after having funded its diversification from retained earnings and debt, both in rupees and foreign currency. An over-reliance on borrowed funds without a matching infusion of equity has plunged the company into losses. To reduce its need for financial leverage, the company has issued equity shares on a rights basis, which has helped but is insufficient to reduce its debt burden. The company's management is seeking alternatives to further deleverage the company's capital structure but is finding it difficult due to losses in the recent past, the adverse operating environment created by the global economic crisis and a slowdown in the major segments in which it operates.

Olam International, a publicly listed firm, was a leading agri-business with an integrated supply chain. To sustain growth, the company took on large amounts of debt to fund acquisitions and other capital expenditures. A hedge fund issued a Sell recommendation, highlighting the problems facing the company, including several years of negative free cash flows. The heated exchange between Olam and the hedge fund led to a government investment fund, Temasek Holdings, first backing Olam, and then eventually offering to buy out the minority shareholders. This scenario presents an excellent opportunity to apply the discounted cash flow analysis and relative valuation techniques to evaluate Temasek’s offer.

This case examines the delisting choice of Saint Gobain Sekurit India Limited ("SGSI"), a French-owned Indian company, listed on the BSE Limited ("BSE"). On June 4, 2010, and August 19, 2010, the Indian central government enacted legal amendments, increasing the minimum public shareholding required to be maintained by listed companies to 25%. Companies that were listed on any stock exchange in India as on June 4, 2010 were given until June 3, 2013 to increase their public shareholding to 25%. The French promoters of SGSI, who held 85.77% of the company, faced a difficult choice - should they dilute their own shareholding in the company to maintain SGSI's listing on the BSE (a legacy from the previous owners of the company) or voluntarily delist from the BSE? On the face of it, continued listing does not provide SGSI with meaningful benefits - they had rarely raised money from the public, and their global profile does not substantially benefit from being listed on an Indian exchange. Further, continued listing meant that Saint Gobain would face dilution costs. On the other hand, delisting transactions could be expensive predominantly owing to the fact that the delisting price is determined by a reverse book-building process that vests significant bargaining power with ordinary shareholders. Further, delisting transactions have been known to be particularly unpredictable for foreign promoted companies in India. The promoters of Saint Gobain had to make an informed decision - whether to dilute (to be) or delist (not to be).

The weather team at Nephila Capital Ltd. (Nephila) was in the midst of the weather market's busy winter renewal period. The list of weather risk transfer contracts that needed to be analyzed and priced seemed to be growing by the minute, and one team member is devising a plan to price each deal on its own merits of risk/reward. The counterparty's bid would reflect the willingness of the contracting party to pay for a weather hedge, and none would pay more than the bid amount. Nephila wanted to meet the needs of each counterparty, but only if Nephila earned a requisite return on capital. If the bid amount were not high enough to be attractive to Nephila, the team would need to convey that news to the counterparties. Did these new deal opportunities offer something more to Nephila beyond their individual numbers?

In June 2015 William A. Ackman, the CEO and Founder of New York Hedge Fund Pershing Square Capital, reflects on the success of the fund he has spent over a decade building. Since its inception in 2004, Pershing Square's assets under management had grown from $500 million to well over $18 billion. Ackman is now considering a sizable new portfolio position and must decide how he should raise capital to undertake this new investment. This choice is affected by the recent launch of his new, $6 billion closed-end vehicle, Pershing Square Holdings, as well as the firm's lengthening investment horizon. Although always activist in nature, Ackman and his fund had in recent years become substantively involved in the management of portfolio companies, often working to drive shareholder value by improving operating performance.