個案總覽

During the 1980s, leveraged buyouts (LBOs) and the private equity (PE) firms responsible for carrying them out revolutionized both investment and management in the U.S. Between 1980 and 1989, buyout activity in the U.S. surged from $1 billion per year to $60 billion. There was widespread agreement that the PE industry created enormous value, but who exactly was it creating that value for? PE firms claimed that LBOs not only benefitted investors, but also the target companies, which became leaner and more focused as PE firms turned them around. But critics argued that on balance, the PE industry left target companies foundering under mountains of debt as investors realized huge returns. In this case study, students will grapple with PE's complex legacy while learning its history. The case will trace PE's two main ingredients (the limited partnership and the LBO), examine the auspicious conditions of the 1980s that brought them together, and discuss the experiences of two very different early players in the PE field-KKR and Bain Capital.

This note describes a collection of 26 teaching case studies and 5 expository notes on the history of financial crises from 1720 to 2008. The note also summarizes a semester-length course design based on these materials. The purpose of this collection is to advance pedagogy and research in the field of financial crises.

The case introduces a classic digital disruption process applied to a secular sector, wealth management. It explains the current challenges of this industry, which has undergone severe changes following the recent financial crisis. It shows that even an industry for which the main key success factor has been the personal relationship and trust between the client and its advisors, is not resilient to digitalization. The change is driven by technology and rapidly changing consumer habits. Based on the story of Personal Capital - one of the companies on the very forefront of these changes, the case shows how Fin techs can play a part in wealth management and in the long run changes the landscape of the industry thereby disrupting large and well established incumbent players. The case goes in detail to understand if the strategies pursued by Personal Capital: -to position itself as a tech augmented human platform. -To aim at mass affluent market and sizeable accounts; -To consider adjacent sectors such as provision of mortgages and insurance as the next expansion opportunities; are the right strategies to pursue in this market. Furthermore, it researches the financial implications of the strategies also in comparison with the competition in that field. At the same time the case tries to position the financial performances of the companies into a broader development of the industry and competitive forces. The case concludes with multiple dilemmas translated into imminent decisions that need to be taken: What is the right strategy for further market expansion and growth? Should Personal Capital be sold to a large incumbent based on current valuation or go for another round of financing to stay independent? The underlying fundamental question being: do we believe that the new players can take the space of the traditional player and or will they lose the battle against those powerful institutions?

Toronto-based financial technology (fintech) start-up Koho Financial Inc. (Koho) offered millennial consumers a new way to manage their money with no fees. Koho challenged traditional banking institutions by providing typical banking services digitally. In November 2019, the company had recently secured its series B funding round, bringing the total amount raised to US$57.5 million. Now, with expectations from its investors and growing competition, Koho had to develop new strategies to ensure its leading position. Should Koho continue competing directly with traditional banks, or should the company invest in new technologies and compete with other fintech start-ups? How could Koho acquire more customers? How would the changing fintech regulatory environment affect Koho's strategy?

Toronto-based financial technology (fintech) start-up Koho Financial Inc. (Koho) offered millennial consumers a new way to manage their money with no fees. Koho challenged traditional banking institutions by providing typical banking services digitally. In November 2019, the company had recently secured its series B funding round, bringing the total amount raised to US$57.5 million. Now, with expectations from its investors and growing competition, Koho had to develop new strategies to ensure its leading position. Should Koho continue competing directly with traditional banks, or should the company invest in new technologies and compete with other fintech start-ups? How could Koho acquire more customers? How would the changing fintech regulatory environment affect Koho’s strategy?

Britannia Chemicals was under pressure from investors to improve its financial performance because of the accumulation of the firm's common shares by a well-known corporate raider. Earnings had fallen to 180 pence per share at the end of 2017 from around 250 pence per share at the end of 2016. The manager of Merseyside Works, a production plant owned by Britannia Chemicals, thus believed the time was ripe to obtain funding from corporate headquarters for a modernization program for her plant-at least she had believed this until her controller presented her with several questions that had only recently surfaced. This A case presents a go/no-go project evaluation regarding improvements to a polypropylene production plant. It explores aspects related to identifying incremental cash flow implications of investment decisions and evaluating related financial criteria, including impact on earnings per share, payback, and net present value, and internal rate of return.

On June 8, 2020, Sembcorp Marine Ltd. (SCM) announced a S$2.1 billion recapitalization plan to be followed by a demerger from Sembcorp Industries Ltd (SCI). SCM’s business had been significantly affected by the COVID-19 pandemic and a collapse in oil prices, resulting in a critical need for liquidity. The recapitalization would be done through a rights issue. The demerger would be conducted through a subsequent share distribution of SCI’s stake in the recapitalized SCM to SCI’s shareholders.<br><br>The case seeks to provide a reasonable valuation of SCM based on its past financial performance and other relevant market information. It also analyzes the rationale of the demerger and the impact of the demerger on shareholders of SCM and SCI.

This case explores the corporate finance issues arising from the privatization of Li & Fung Limited (Li & Fung, prior stock code: 494.HK) in May 2020. A public announcement was made earlier in March of the same year, while its closing stock price surged by 88.0%, from HKD0.50 to HKD0.94, the following trading day. Such price movement reflected the market expectation of successful execution of the privatization proposal. The case seeks to highlight the considerations of Li & Fung in deciding on privatization, from a corporate finance perspective. Through the case, students will grapple with the practical questions of how controlling shareholders of a listed company should balance their own interests and the interests of disinterested shareholders in the market in formulating a privatization deal. There are always some signals that indicate a listed company may have a plan for privatization. Shareholders need to be alert to certain signals that may possibly indicate a good opportunity for speculation. Li & Fung is a good example for students interested in investment.

Lidya CEO Tunde Kehinde must size up options for the expansion of his novel lending practices that drastically reduce the credit cycle in his developing Nigeria, and determine if expansion into Eastern Europe will prove successful or disastrous.

China's peer-to-peer (P2P) lending industry had over 3,000 platforms at its height in 2015. China Risk Finance (CRF) was one of the country's P2P success stories. With over 1 million borrowers using CRF's platform, it raised $60 million in its 2016 IPO on the New York Stock Exchange. Yet the pace of P2P's rise spooked financial regulators, sparking a crackdown on the industry that would lead to its demise in China. This B case tracks CRF's tumultuous attempts to salvage its business in the face of sudden and sweeping changes to the rules governing its industry as well as the lengths to which the Chinese government went to ensure the stability of its financial system, even at the expense of its development.

Students were provided with the financial data for 10 major companies listed on the New York Stock Exchange in 2019. They were also given a list of 10 major industries. As an exercise, students were then asked to identify which company operated within which industry. The exercise would test the students' understanding of how a company’s financial data can be specific to a particular industry. Using only financial figures, could the student identify within which industry each company operated?

Luckin Coffee Inc. (Luckin), an emerging growth firm that aimed to become the market leader in the coffee industry in China, had quickly grabbed market share by using freebies and discounts to entice cost-conscious Chinese consumers to try its products. Luckin sold its coffee and snacks through a proprietary mobile app, and customers either picked up their orders from strategically located stores or had them delivered. By the end of 2019, Luckin had served 40 million customers from its 4,500 stores. While the path to Luckin's goal was clear, investigations revealed that key executives and board members had allegedly defrauded investors by distorting revenue and expense figures and engaging in related-party transactions that channeled resources out of the company. The accounting scandal led to further investigations, penalties from Chinese regulators, and a drop in the company's share price and valuation, which went from $12 billion to below $1 billion within 11 months of listing. By August 2020, the company had been delisted from the Nasdaq exchange, its board composition had been changed, and it had been placed under the supervision of "light touch" provisional liquidators in the Cayman Islands. Was there a chance that Luckin could survive the scandal and its investors could recoup their funds? What could the company do to restore investor confidence and regain its path to becoming the market leader in the Chinese coffee industry? What were the implications of the accounting scandal to current and future listings on US stock exchanges?

Equity Bank and CEO Dr. James Mwangi must find a way to advance from their hard-fought ascension to second largest bank in Kenya by toppling financial giant Safaricom. Doing so means developing a new strategy and tackling technological frontiers no institution in the country has yet faced.

Bairong CEO Felix Zhang, in launching his credit scoring start-up that incorporates 74,000 variables per individual, found strong initial success. However, the shifting regulatory environment, growing breadth of competitors, difficulties in retaining top talent, and uncertainty around the accumulation and protection of data that fuels the company all threaten the company's stability during its IPO. Defining exactly how his firm will make its mark, and remain indispensable amongst a massive and ever sharpening FinTech landscape, will test Zhang's abilities at the helm and make or break his corner of the industry.

This case helps individuals learn about different types of investment strategies. It presents three different people with varying risk tolerances and investment objectives and provides information about the investment strategies they adopt.

This case presents a situation where the company Carter + Smith (C+S), which receives U.S. dollars to finance a Colombian pesos project, decided to create a hedge to cover the risk of an ex- change rate fall (revaluation of the COP against the USD). However, shortly after, there was a sharp rise in the exchange rate (devaluation of the peso), and this generated significant losses in the Non Delivery Forwards (NDF) contracts.

On May 12, 2020, Vedanta Resources Limited, representing the London, United Kingdom company Vedanta Group, expressed its intention to buy all public shares of its Indian subsidiary Vedanta Limited and to delist it from all stock exchanges in India and New York. The chair of Vedanta Group explained that the decision to delist was largely driven by a strategy to simplify the group structure. The indicative offer price of ₹87.5 per equity share represented a premium of 9.9 per cent over the closing market price of ₹79.6 on the previous day. However, there was some doubt that minority shareholders would find the offer attractive. The final exit price, which would be determined through the reverse book-building process, was likely to increase. Exactly what amount Vedanta Resources Limited was willing to pay was a key factor in the quest for a successful delisting. Two other important considerations were the additional amount of borrowing required and future debt servicing constraints.

several companies competing to win the mandate to manage F&M's assets. Investure's approach is to pool the assets of "like-minded" institutions and significantly increase their allocations to PE. Miller and his team are preparing to meet with the F&M board's investment committee to describe Investure's services and approach to investment management. This case is designed to introduce students to AA and the distinctions among PE, hedge funds, and private capital within this asset class. It focuses primarily on why PE is a difficult asset class to manage and describes several channels available to small endowments like F&M to access PE. The case introduces students to the core vocabulary of PE investing and limited partnership agreements. To make the concepts and terms more concrete, it provides a simple exercise that asks the students to calculate the expected internal rate of return (IRR) on an investment made through a traditional limited partnership (primary fund commitment) and a fund of funds and compare those to Investure's approach. Students must evaluate and discuss the feasibility and attractiveness of each alternative to F&M. In doing so, the case creates an opportunity for students to discuss the current trends and issues many E&Fs confront as they attempt to increase allocations to PE. The case is appropriate for use in an introductory or early class in courses focusing on PE, venture capital (VC), and entrepreneurial finance, as well as in specialized courses for fund trustees interested in AA. The case can be used for the following purposes: 1. To introduce students to AA and how they differ from public equities and fixed income.

Spreadsheet supplement for Case UV8202

In 2000, Eaton Corporation was a broadly diversified industrial conglomerate. But its strategy was evolving and its focus was narrowing around "power management" and more recently on "intelligent power," the use of digitally enabled products and services designed to enhance efficiency and reliability. To implement this transition, Eaton had acquired more than 70 companies and divested another 50. Such active portfolio management required Eaton to regularly assess the prospects of each business unit-the profit and growth potential-and to explore opportunities to enhance its capabilities through acquisitions. In January 2020, Eaton got an offer from Danfoss, a Danish conglomerate, to buy its hydraulics business for $3.3 billion. Recently appointed CEO Craig Arnold must decide whether this deal makes sense strategically and financially. In particular, he must decide if $3.3 billion is a fair price for the firm's hydraulics business. This abridged version is shorter than the original version (HBS Case #221-006) and does not contain the appendix that explains and derives the formulas for the WACC using the capital asset pricing model (CAPM).