個案總覽

This fictionalized case explores an increasingly common challenge for private equity firms in the 21st century: how to drive shareholder returns via strategic repositioning and operational improvements, and not rely solely on financial engineering. Set in the "100-day planning workshop", a full-day conference typically held shortly after a deal closing, the case follow Sarah Chiang, VP at New York-based private equity firm Cahill Freeman Partners as she convened management, board, and industry advisors to examine important questions. The deal itself was a bold "twofer", a simultaneous leveraged buy-out and merger of the $1.7 billion Dallas-based Foster Industries and the $1.3 billion Cleveland-based SmartServices-in the outsourced facilities management (OFM) space. Despite a strong investment thesis and financing scenarios, the deal faced substantial strategic, governance, and managerial challenges. How would they pursue growth and margin when the two companies had different business models? How would they trim costs? Did management need outside support to execute? Did it make sense to reorganize company across its sprawling footprint? What about the social issues-at every level up to and including top management-between two companies that were fierce rivals for years? And finally, what should the PE firm and management prioritize as the best use of cash-reinvestment, acquisitions, or returning cash to shareholders? The investment committee saw a perfect deal on paper, but was this indeed the "perfect deal" or did it have the potential to turn into the "perfect storm"?

In early 2016, ChimpChange Limited, a financial technology (fintech) start-up, had started operations in California and already had more than 80,000 customers. The company needed capital to acquire more customers in order to become cash-flow positive, as was the case with most start-ups. ChimpChange Limited should have been able to attain the break-even number of customers within another year or so, but it needed capital to execute a marketing campaign to attract these customers. It had already undergone several series of funding rounds. At this point, should it return for a series C funding round or should it raise funds through an initial public offering (IPO)? If it were to opt for an IPO, where should this take place?

Spreadsheet supplement for case KEL553.

The case covers events leading to the hostile bid for AkzoNobel by PPG in 2017, the market response that it prompted, and Akzo's takeover defenses including the divestment of a division and large cash payout. Various scenarios (as a standalone; after an asset sale) are considered for the valuation of AkzoNobel, as is the rationale behind the various takeover bids by PPG. The role of activists in triggering the takeover process is highlighted. Alternative payout mechanisms (capital repayment, dividend payment, share buyback) are discussed.

Student spreadsheet for case IN1577

In early April 2017, the newly-appointed business account manager at the Confederation Bank of Canada's branch in London, Ontario, was reviewing a long-term loan request for CA$1,500,000. The president of Yates Control Systems (YCS), an engineering company focused on providing automation solutions for manufacturing companies, had requested the loan to fund the purchase of a new facility for her company as part of a strategic expansion plan. YCS's president was a long-time client of the bank and was expecting a decision to be made about the loan within the next few days; otherwise, YCS's expansion could be delayed. However, the bank manager would have to ensure that granting the loan request would be financially feasible for the bank and that YCS's $50,000 line of credit, not used in several years, would still be sufficient.

In August 2018, Felicia Wong, Chief Investment Officer at 88 Capital, the investment arm of a Hong Kong family office, was considering investing in a bike-sharing company. The bike-sharing business was booming in China, with the two dominant players Mobike and ofo rapidly expanding. Mobike had been acquired for US$3.4 billion by Meituan Dianping, a food delivery company. ofo also had unicorn status with a roughly US$3 billion valuation. The bike-sharing industry could potentially disrupt the transportation industry. Bikes had the advantage of being able to bypass gridlocked streets and were more environmentally sustainable than private cars. In addition, the use of bikes promoted a healthier lifestyle and offered a prospective solution to the last mile problem for commuters who used public transport. But despite the many advantages of using dockless bikes, the practice brought about problems as these bikes were parked indiscriminately on pedestrian walkways and pedalled on busy roads. The industry also had too many players in China. In addition, bike-sharing companies were not yet profitable. Companies had prioritised gaining market share over making profits to increase the value of their respective platforms. It was expected that the industry would become more valuable should city planners approve plans to redesign transport networks to accommodate bikes. As at August 2018, the low rental fees and high capital expenditures were proving to be unsustainable. Mobike was the largest player in China and were likely to survive the industry's consolidation phase. The firm had strategic partnerships to help it reach critical mass and improve its service offerings. Wong wondered if it was worth investing in Mobike at this stage.

In December 2015, the new government in Argentina lifted capital controls, leading to a sudden drop in the value of the Argentine peso. This depreciation of the peso had the potential to significantly affect companies that exported goods to Argentina. One such company was Bajaj Auto Limited (Bajaj Auto), an Indian exporter of motorcycles to Argentina. On December 18, 2015, Bajaj Auto's shares dropped 2.43 per cent and lost over US$212 million in market capitalization. The market was reacting to concerns that exports from the world's fourth-largest manufacturer of two-wheelers, Bajaj Auto, might be hurt in Argentina, where it was the market leader with over 30 per cent of the market share. Following the 30 per cent decline of the peso on December 16, 2015, there was uncertainty about the future of the currency. What caused Argentina to lift currency controls and float the peso? Why had the Argentine peso depreciated so sharply, and what was its future course? Moreover, how would this affect Bajaj Auto and how could it handle such a crisis?

In December 2015, the new government in Argentina lifted capital controls, leading to a sudden drop in the value of the Argentine peso. This depreciation of the peso had the potential to significantly affect companies that exported goods to Argentina. One such company was Bajaj Auto Limited (Bajaj Auto), an Indian exporter of motorcycles to Argentina. On December 18, 2015, Bajaj Auto’s shares dropped 2.43 per cent and lost over US$212 million in market capitalization. The market was reacting to concerns that exports from the world’s fourth-largest manufacturer of two-wheelers, Bajaj Auto, might be hurt in Argentina, where it was the market leader with over 30 per cent of the market share.<br>Following the 30 per cent decline of the peso on December 16, 2015, there was uncertainty about the future of the currency. What caused Argentina to lift currency controls and float the peso? Why had the Argentine peso depreciated so sharply, and what was its future course? Moreover, how would this affect Bajaj Auto and how could it handle such a crisis?

In 2014, Song Weiping, the founder, chair, and major shareholder of the high-end residential property developer Greentown China Holdings Limited (Greentown), based in Hangzhou, China, had started to consider decreasing his involvement in his company. Without any family to provide an obvious successor, Song had to evaluate different ways to leave the business he founded. The alternatives ranged from selling all or part of his holdings to keeping his shares but having someone else manage the company. If he chose to resign his position as chair and remain as a financial investor, he would have to find a suitable successor to act as chief executive officer. If he chose to sell his interest in the company, what criteria should he use to determine the best buyer or buyers? How much should he sell, and how could he determine a fair price?

In 2014, Song Weiping, the founder, chair, and major shareholder of the high-end residential property developer Greentown China Holdings Limited (Greentown), based in Hangzhou, China, had started to consider decreasing his involvement in his company. Without any family to provide an obvious successor, Song had to evaluate different ways to leave the business he founded. The alternatives ranged from selling all or part of his holdings to keeping his shares but having someone else manage the company. If he chose to resign his position as chair and remain as a financial investor, he would have to find a suitable successor to act as chief executive officer. If he chose to sell his interest in the company, what criteria should he use to determine the best buyer or buyers? How much should he sell, and how could he determine a fair price?

This technical note discusses the various financial services segments in which technology solutions have been used to solve problems, including lending, payments, wealth/investment management, insurance, and regulation. For each of the segments, the note identifies key issues facing the segment, why and how fintech might provide an answer to the challenges faced, and the potential difficulties fintech may experience in doing so. For example, in lending, fintechs could solve issues related to access and convenience-without the need for costly infrastructure. The note also discusses the potential advantages/disadvantages of traditional banks over fintechs. Finally, the note describes influential technologies that are used in fintech such as application program interface (API), artificial intelligence (AI), and machine learning.

Spreadsheet supplement to case 219102.

Berkshire Hathaway Inc., a goliath enterprise that had grown tremendously over a half century, had never paid a dividend. The chairman of Berkshire Hathaway inc., advocated an investment policy of reinvesting in existing assets, acquiring diversified assets, and buying back shares in the company, but never paying a dividend. However, in 2017, excess cash and short-term reserves were earning a yield value that was less than the inflation rate, effectively decreasing the real value of the reserves. The company was not finding suitable new acquisitions, and shares in the company were trading above the company's limit for repurchase. Amid public speculation, Buffett began musing that perhaps the best course of action for Berkshire Hathaway Inc. at that point was to pay a dividend after all.

PowerPoint presentation for instructors.

Excel spreadsheet for students.

Student spreadsheet for case W18228.

Berkshire Hathaway Inc., a goliath enterprise that had grown tremendously over a half century, had never paid a dividend. The chairman of Berkshire Hathaway inc., advocated an investment policy of reinvesting in existing assets, acquiring diversified assets, and buying back shares in the company, but never paying a dividend. However, in 2017, excess cash and short-term reserves were earning a yield value that was less than the inflation rate, effectively decreasing the real value of the reserves. The company was not finding suitable new acquisitions, and shares in the company were trading above the company's limit for repurchase. Amid public speculation, Buffett began musing that perhaps the best course of action for Berkshire Hathaway Inc. at that point was to pay a dividend after all.

In 2019, ESL Investments' $5.2 billion offer to purchase Sears Holdings out of Chapter 11 bankruptcy, was accepted, despite opposition from the company's unsecured creditors and other parties. ESL, which was led by Eddie Lampert, had acquired a stake in Sears following its 2005 merger with. Kmart. Lampert was chairman and CEO. During Lampert's ownership, Sears and Kmart shrunk their store base from 5,670 to 687 stores, and over 200,000 employees lost their jobs. Some attributed Sears' woes to a challenging operating environment, others argued that Lampert's actions over the last decade benefitted himself and other shareholders at the expense of other Sears stakeholders. Was a sale of the company to ESL the best outcome?