個案總覽

Consolidated Safety Systems (CSS) was a government contractor that consulted in a variety of areas, serving government and private sector institutions. CSS was co-founded by Jolanda Janczewiski and Dennis Lauchner. The two had grown the company for over 30 years to a large and well-respected name in the government contracting business. The company became employee-owned through an Employee Stock Ownership Plan (ESOP), which had scheduled payouts to the two owners. Dennis has received his payout and had a minimal interest in the business. Jolanda's payouts started in 2017. She recognized that the ESOP had created some issues, including servicing the debt associated with the buyout, creating inequities among legacy employees and new hires, which led her to consider whether the ESOP should continue. Jolanda had become increasingly concerned about the expense of the ESOP, which was only expected to increase more in the future. This might be the time to reverse the ESOP if it looked like it had become too burdensome to CSS both in dollars and in potential dissatisfaction among new employees who did not benefit as much as legacy employees. To reverse the ESOP would involve buying back stock from employees, and to do this, while there were many qualitative considerations, Jolanda also needed to know CSS's value in order to make a fully informed decision. The decision to ESOP or not was complex, with strong pros and cons on both sides of the question.

The Sizable Case presents a decision situation. The case setting is Brussels, early November 2017. Marie Martens was at that time the newly appointed CEO of the start-up company Sizable, which was a specialist in men's undergarment made from eco-friendly bamboo, eucalyptus, and organic cotton. Since its start-up in January 2015, the company had shown high growth potential, and Martens felt confident that by further scaling up the business, Sizable could be leveraged into a position in which it would be highly profitable. Martens was not the only one who had faith in Sizable's attractive prospects. Since March 2015, multiple investors had put their money at stake, either directly as private investors in the company or via the company's three crowdfunding campaigns. In November 2017, Sizable needed 100,000 euros of additional financing. Together with the other members of the management team, Martens had prepared a business plan and proposed prompt action to secure extra funding over the month of November. While the decision to move forward with a new crowdfunding campaign was made, Martens worried about the risks of a fourth round of crowdfunding. Failing would not only mean a lack of funds, but also a stained reputation. Martens wondered how she could make this campaign even more successful than the previous rounds. She had several concerns: first, how would the market react to the change in the management team, with the firm now led by a female CEO; second, whether to use a different crowdfunding platform or rely on one of the platforms used in the past; third, would she be able to deal with investors' typical concerns about break-even and dilution; and finally, what share price would be most appropriate. She had to decide very quickly on these issues since the new crowdfunding round was set to begin before the end of the month.

Student Spreadsheet for Case NA0678

The central theme of this case is corporate restructuring; in particular, its thematic unit is the process of financial stress within an organization. The courses and programs are for undergraduate courses such as Finance iii and Financial Strategy, with emphasis on financial analysis and modeling; for postgraduates such as the Masters in Finance in courses such as Financial Analysis and Corporate Finance; in the MBAs in the Financial Management course. These last three courses at the graduate level, although they contemplate financial analysis and modeling within their dynamics, would focus on the evaluation of restructuring alternatives. Likewise, this case can be applied to different executive education programs related to crisis management in family businesses, financial issues in general, and crisis management. In general, the case provides a situation for management decision-making in the process of financial stress, supported by financial modeling tools.

Spreadsheet supplement for case AN0081.

Litigation finance-also referred to as third party litigation funding-was in its relative infancy as an asset class when Jay Greenberg and Max Volsky made a platform-play in the space. Seven years later, the market was far from "mainstream," but nonetheless had grown significantly, as had the litigation financing platform they founded, LexShares. They faced a cross-roads on what came next for LexShares-whether 1) to continue on with a focus to grow its platform marketplace for legal cases that outside investors could invest in; or 2) put a relatively larger focus on building their own asset management arm that sourced, chose, and invested in hand-picked cases for outside investors in a fund capacity. Greenberg knew that (2) might seriously encroach on (1), and was fraught with missteps shown through past unsuccessful platform transitions-but the potential upside provided by (2) had the potential to be nothing short of company-changing.

In 2017, the International Finance Corporation (IFC) faced the first big investment decision in its new Scaling Solar project. Founded in 1956, IFC was an international investment body with national governments as shareholders, whose mission was to promote economic development. It achieved this primarily through debt financing, which allowed the organization to use covenants to exercise close stewardship of its investments. Beginning in the late 1990s, the organization's mission had evolved to foreground environmental and social sustainability in its development projects. Scaling Solar, launched in collaboration with the World Bank, would be one of IFC's marquis projects in promoting a sustainable energy future. In this case, students will review the history of IFC (a pioneer in the burgeoning field of impact investing), explore the uses of debt as an instrument for development financing, consider how sustainability fits into the impact investing framework, and evaluate a potential new investment in solar power in Zambia.

In 2018, Thailand's Bank of Ayudhya (known as Krungsri), was considering whether to participate in the first issue of a new financial instrument from the International Finance Corporation (IFC), known as a gender bond. Building on the success of the Green Bond program at promoting investment in sustainable businesses, IFC intended the Gender Bond to encourage local banks to lend to woman-owned businesses. IFC was offering Krungsri substantial investment support with the bond, but getting the new instrument past Thai regulators and making sure that the proceeds were used properly presented substantial risk for the bank. Should Krungsri pull the trigger on its first Gender Bond?

In 2020, Triodos Investment Management (Triodos) was a globally active impact investor. It believed the true purpose of investing was to generate social and environmental impact alongside a healthy financial return. Triodos viewed sustainable finance as a driving force in the transition to a more sustainable world. Yamaha Music was a candidate that Triodos was evaluating for inclusion in its investment universe. Henk Jonker, Triodos Investment Management's head of research, decided to pose the challenge to Clarissa Diaz, a Triodos researcher. Yamaha had a positive impact on people (made music, produced musical instruments and provided musical education), but Diaz had to evaluate the company´s supply chain against Triodos's approach to establish if the company's production process was sustainable and contributed to the environment. Diaz had to weigh the controversial ESG issues that merited the exclusion of Yamaha with the company's financial valuation, innovative products and future potential. Students must decide whether Triodos should exclude or invest in Yamaha. If the decision is to invest, they must decide if active engagement is needed on the controversial ESG issues. Students will conduct real ESG research and a portfolio investment analysis. They will also have the opportunity to reflect on the values and leadership implications of a proactive financial sector that drives corporate transformations toward a greener and prosperous society. Investors integrating ESG criteria into their portfolios will find this case useful because they would have to determine whether to exclude or engage with companies that do not fully meet their ESG standards. The case focuses on the nuances of sustainable finance's decision making.

iQIYI Inc. (爱奇艺), which promoted itself as the "Netflix of China," was one of the three largest entertainment streaming platforms in mainland China. It was listed on the Nasdaq (NASDAQ: IQ) after being spun-off from Baidu Inc. (百度) (NASDAQ: BIDU). In April 2020, Wolfpack published a research report on iQIYI, accusing it of inflating revenue numbers, among other things. The report claimed iQIYI's revenue in FY2019 was overstated by 27% to 44%, equivalent to CNY8bn to 13bn. One of the accusations was that iQIYI recorded more than its own share in revenue, and included a large portion of its membership subscriptions bundled with services offered by its business partners.

The case describes a capital budgeting dilema for a new the finance of a new product in a technology firm: Swimmer's headphones. By reviewing a series of emails and attachments, we learn that the protagonist, the recently hired Financial Manager responsible for presenting the decision to the board of directors must construct a capital budgeting valuation model that explicitly incorporates the project risk factors and then make a recommendation to the board.

Spreadsheet supplement for case AN0085.

On 30 August 2016, Margrethe Vestager, the European Commissioner for Competition, ordered Ireland to recover €13 billion in illegal state aid (plus interest) that Ireland was alleged to have granted Apple over a decade from 2003. Within months of the ruling, both Tim Cook, CEO of Apple, and Enda Kenny, the Irish Prime Minister, appealed the Commission's judgment to the European General Court in Luxembourg, the EU's second highest court. In mid-July 2020, the General Court returned its verdict and annulled the Commission's ruling giving Commissioner Vestager two months and 10 days to appeal. At the very last minute, the Commissioner announced that she would seek an appeal before the EU's highest court, the Court of Justice of the European Union, citing "errors of law" committed by the lower court. No date has been set for the CJEU to decide on the merits of the appeal. The case explores these events from five analytical pillars: 1) the role of Ireland's low corporate tax rate in attracting FDI; 2) Apple's decision to allocate its earnings to a paper company in Ireland with no physical presence in the country; 3) the repatriation of foreign earnings to the United States; 4) the transfer payments that Apple makes to the USA to pay for R&D; 5) the Commissioner's decision to impose a retroactive tax penalty on a foreign company that acted in accordance with the tax arrangements granted by its host country.

In October 2020, Revlon faced a crossroads. While it had been struggling with high levels of debt before COVID-19, the pandemic had caused it to go further into debt. Unlike other financial crises, many consumers had stopped buying skincare or cosmetics, and sales of Revlon products had fallen. Now, a series of bonds maturing in February 2021 loomed, and Revlon faced a series of options on how to renegotiate its debts with its creditors.

In April 2017, Henry Lubis, an analyst at Megatrends, a global ratings firm, reviewed the analysis he had completed of Lippo Karawaci's EVA (Economic Value Added). He had come to hear that Johannes Seng, CEO of PT Lippo Karawaci Tbk (Lippo Karawaci), Indonesia's largest listed property company by revenue and total assets, had emerged from the annual Board of Directors meeting in March 2017 without obtaining an approval to incur capital expenditure of US$100 million (IDR1.34 trillion ) in 2017. The Board of Directors wanted to assess Lippo Karawaci's shareholder value creation track record, and evaluate whether it was more prudent for the company to focus on growth by expanding its business rapidly through massive capital expenditure, or take measures to achieve a sustainable EVA for its operations. The Board's concern was that Indonesia's improving economic growth was not translating into the expected fillip in the property sector, especially in the residential segment. The case provides an overview of the Indonesian property market as of end-2016, Lippo Karawaci's business profile and consolidated financials, and the market data necessary to compute its EVA and use this metric to assess value creation in its business lines. The recommendation of the company's strategy, i.e., growth versus consolidation, needs to be based on the appropriate cost of capital that incorporates the cost of debt and equity (as opposed to accounting profit that factors in just the cost of debt). Another consideration is the company's EVA track record based on reported debt and core equity (i.e. the sum of equity and retained earnings).

Ant Group (螞蟻集團) was on course to raise HKD273bn in a dual offering on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange (SEHK) and the Shanghai Stock Exchange's (SSE) STAR Market. Pre-IPO, Ant's value as a fintech was estimated at HKD2.43tn. As investors were subscribing en masse, China's central bank and finance regulators published a new draft legislation to regulate "micro-lending business operated by internet." What would have been the largest IPO in history was cancelled just two days before its scheduled listing on 5 November 2020. Ant spun off from its parent, Alibaba. It owns Alipay, one of the two largest digital payment systems in China. Ant diversified into a fintech business that included lending, wealth management, and insurance business lines among others. Ant's lucrative lending business, explosive growth, and business model disrupted the Chinese traditional finance industry. After the new legislation came into effect, Ant's capital reserve ratio for its CreditTech business would have to increase from the current 2% to 30%. This was expected to impact the size and growth of its lending business and therefore its value.

Tayo Oviosu founded Paga in 2009 to make life possible for the millions of Nigerians who operated in a cash-first environment. Paga helped users send money through peer-to-peer transactions, pay utility bills, and store money in a digital wallet. Paga launched a valuable human agent network throughout Nigeria, which enabled the company to build trust with customers and grow its user base significantly. By November 2020, Paga had over 26,000 agents in its network. Oviosu hoped to build on Paga's success by scaling to other countries with similar regulatory and cultural environments to Nigeria, beginning with Ethiopia and Mexico. To do so, Oviosu understood that he would have to be intentional about building a team that both understood Paga's culture but was also authentic to the new market the company was trying to enter. Paga's goal of reaching one billion users globally loomed in the distance, and Oviosu was keen to do his part to help end cash's reign in emerging markets.