個案總覽

The case offers a unique perspective into franchising as a business model for growth and a reduced-risk entry path to entrepreneurship, with an application in the Singapore self-storage market. In 2011, Jes Johansen, a Swedish national, sensed an opportunity to innovate self-storage in Singapore: smaller facilities, with smaller rooms, located closer to the customer and at a higher price per m2, resulting in a smaller rental bill but much higher convenience. He had seen the concept implemented in Hong Kong by a colleague, Kevin Chang, under the StoreFriendly brand name. Jes decided this might be the opportunity he had been looking for. After convincing Kevin to become his partner, Jes set up StoreFriendly Singapore. After testing and implementing the concept in a single first outlet, proving the value proposition and getting a bit of traction, he decided to accelerate growth through an original franchise system. Over two years StoreFriendly grew to ten franchises and two owner-operated branches. In 2015, SingPost, as part of a broad logistics diversification, approached him to acquire StoreFriendly. With a catch: they wanted to own all the outlets directly...

Core Curriculum Readings in Finance cover the fundamental concepts, theories, and frameworks in finance. This reading presents an overview of corporate governance, focusing on for-profit businesses that are privately owned by dispersed investors-that is, not owned by a government or by a single owner. The Essential Reading covers the varied mechanisms that address two essential types of conflicts of interest that occur in corporations, both of which arise from the common feature of dispersed ownership: 1) conflicts between managers and owners, and 2) conflicts between controlling and non-controlling owners. The reading provides a foundation for further study in the general topic of corporate governance. The Supplemental Reading briefly reviews topics such as "stakeholder" vs. "shareholder" models of corporate governance, the role of creditors in governance, and the important but distinct non-finance goals served by corporate governance.

This exercise places the reader in the position of an investor, who, before 2017, had invested for almost 20 years. Since the financial crisis in 2008-09, this investor had stayed away from the US market. The investor's return from the previous year stood at a mere 2 per cent. Given that many political events would likely occur in 2017, the investor hoped to revise their investment strategies at the time by developing a more internationalized portfolio. Specifically, the investor was considering how to allocate capital among the existing 10 broker-recommended exchange-traded funds traded on the Singapore stock exchange and two exchange-traded funds in alternative assets traded in the US market. The investor also needed to provide additional cash flows for the education of their two daughters from year two onward for a total of four years. The investor was also willing to reshuffle the investment portfolio to put more weights into the US market. However, before making the revised investment decision, the investor needed to consider the expected returns and risks.

This case examines the investment strategy decisions of a student portfolio management team in April 2017. The case is designed to provide a context for an introduction to the intuition of the Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM) and practical estimation methods. Students are invited to make investment recommendations based on the risk-return characteristics of a set of stock-investment alternatives. The case discussion surrounds the tension with respect to the relevant measure of risk and the method for estimating benchmark returns. The case equips students with the materials for estimating a CAPM-based benchmark for each security using market data.

Student spreadsheet for case UV7617

Brian Patterson was the lead developer of a large office project in Moscow when the global financial crisis hit. His project, which had looked like it would be jaw-droppingly profitable just months before, was suddenly thrown into turmoil, and he faced trouble on all fronts. His local development partner wanted to sell in order to shore up its failing balance sheet, his world-class anchor tenant suddenly reneged on its pre-lease agreement, the contractor was running months behind schedule, and the project's bank was looking for any excuse to pull the construction loan. Just months earlier, the project pro forma had projected hundreds of millions of dollars in profit. Suddenly there were serious questions around whether the project could even be completed. And if it could, what rent and cap rate values could be assumed to determine if it made sense to continue development? Patterson needed to make some assumptions to determine whether or not to accept a sale offer that had been drudged up by his local partner. And if he decided to turn down the sale offer, he needed to find a way forward through a maze of (i) diverging interests amongst his partners and (ii) project development problems. As the economic and financial system faced global turmoil and threatened collapse, Patterson had to decide whether to keep developing the project - at significant risk to both the project and his personal career - or to sell for a modest profit and live to fight another day.

Havilah Merchants Nigeria Ltd. is Nigeria's leading one-stop shop for outfitting libraries and archives. It serves three primary market segments: (i) public university libraries, (ii) multi-national companies in the oil and gas industry and (iii) banking industry. Over the years since its incorporation in 1995, Havilah has successfully executed many library and archive projects, and its products and services have become the benchmark in the local industry for quality. Yet, in 2015, despite their operational successes, Lanre Adesuyi, the founder and CEO of Havilah, and his management team are at a crossroad. While the business is profitable, with a fairly strong order backlog, their expansion to date has consumed their cash, leaving them with no working capital to fund the projects in the pipeline. Unless changes are made, they run the risk of stagnating, and in doing so, disappointing their customers and diminishing their brand. After careful consideration of several options to raise more funds - such as increasing the bank borrowing or issuing stock - Havilah's management team has decided to focus instead on generating more cash within their value chain. Specifically, the management team was deliberating whether Havilah could work with its customers and suppliers to reduce the working capital requirements and alleviate the cash flow pressures. On other words, could Havilah harness untapped cash potential from its value chain? The case examines several potential modifications to the terms of Havilah's engagements with its varied customers (universities, banks and multinational oil and gas companies) and suppliers of books and shelving materials, and attempts to quantify the potential effects these value chain initiatives could have on Havilah's cash position.

Spreadsheet supplement for case 216076.

The case focuses on the ill-fated relationship between the LIA, Libya's new sovereign wealth fund, and Goldman Sachs, and the ultimately disastrous $1.2 billion derivatives (elephant) trades the LIA entered into in early 2008 on Goldman's advice. The analysis deals with basic derivative instruments, terminology and concepts (e.g., leverage, counterparty risk) as well as valuation issues both intuitive (e.g., put-call parity, arbitrage-based valuation bounds) and technical (binomial trees, Black-Scholes formula, Monte Carlo simulations, volatility and dividend yield calibration). It also discusses the pricing and hedging of exotic derivatives. Epilogue: In a subsequent lawsuit brought by the LIA, Goldman Sachs was accused of having exploited the lack of finance acumen of LIA staff to lure them into trades whose riskiness they did not understand. In October 2016, a London court ruled against the LIA. Please visit the dedicated case website "https://cases.insead.edu/big-game/" to access supplementary material.

Spreadsheet supplement for case IN1497.

In 2016, Elixir, a financial technology start-up, was developing a social banking application to provide mobile banking to young adults and other underserved banking customers. Elixir had a social finance business model called MillennialMoney, where existing customers had an opportunity to earn referral fees by introducing new customers. For the banks, Elixir provided a novel marketing solution to attract millennial customers. As a technology company in the social finance space, Elixir could use the strategic and operational advice of an experienced banker to help turn this vision into a reality. One such banker had been in discussions with Elixir's chief executive officer and the chair of the advisory board. The banker had been conducting due diligence of the company all summer of 2016 and had even gone on sales calls in Malaysia to see what banks thought about Elixir. Now it was time to make a decision. Should he join the management team of Elixir and invest in the start-up?

Student spreadsheet for case W18632

Profit-making corporations returned cash to investors through dividends or share repurchases. Market participants referred to the fraction of the profits paid to shareholders in the form of dividends as the "payout ratio." However, a large number of firms have never paid a dividend. For instance, over the past decade, more than half of the listed firms in the United States neither paid a dividend nor repurchased shares. For example, only 20 per cent of firms on the Singapore Stock Exchange consistently paid dividends over the past decade, with similar proportions observed in both US and European stock markets. The percentage of dividend-paying firms plummeted to a record low of 17 per cent in 2000. In fact, most of the "new economy" firms such as Amazon, Facebook, and Google, reinvested their entire savings. This note describes rational dividend theories, behavioural dividend theories, and outlines the four categories of dividend strategies followed by firms.

A new analyst has been asked to forecast the upcoming dividends for Singapore Airlines Limited. However, unlike most dividend-paying firms, which typically maintain stable, transparent, and simple dividend policies, Singapore Airlines maintained an opaque, complex, and irregular pattern of dividends. Further, the company did not respond to requests for information about expected dividends or the company's dividend policy. The analyst decided to gather historical data about the company and its competitors to gain insights on Singapore Airlines' dividend policy and to forecast its upcoming dividend.

In 2016, Elixir, a financial technology start-up, was developing a social banking application to provide mobile banking to young adults and other underserved banking customers. Elixir had a social finance business model called MillennialMoney, where existing customers had an opportunity to earn referral fees by introducing new customers. For the banks, Elixir provided a novel marketing solution to attract millennial customers. As a technology company in the social finance space, Elixir could use the strategic and operational advice of an experienced banker to help turn this vision into a reality. One such banker had been in discussions with Elixir’s chief executive officer and the chair of the advisory board. The banker had been conducting due diligence of the company all summer of 2016 and had even gone on sales calls in Malaysia to see what banks thought about Elixir. Now it was time to make a decision. Should he join the management team of Elixir and invest in the start-up?

From humble beginnings in Kerala, India, Mr. PNC Menon built a reputation for quality, detail, and trustworthiness, earning him major construction commissions in the Gulf region. This paved the way for venturing into real estate development in Dubai, UAE. Striving to control quality and schedule, his firm, Sobha Middle East, self-performs a wide range of tasks - an unusual set of choices in the global real estate and construction industry. In mid-2018, the 70 year old entrepreneur and his team are contemplating their longer term strategy, particularly regarding land acquisition, construction strategy, and financing. Is the backward integration model replicable and sustainable? Meanwhile, sitting in Bangalore, PNC Menon's son Ravi Menon, Chairman of publicly listed Sobha India, is facing a typical in-house versus outsource decision. Sobha India had pioneered the backward integration strategy prior to Dubai. Ravi Menon and his team are deciding on the structural system for Sobha Bellahalli complex of 5,000 apartments in Bangalore. Should they deploy a cast in place structural frame or invest in a precast concrete manufacturing plant on site? Additionally, should they purchase local ready-mix concrete or invest in their own mixing and batching plant? The cost and schedule implications will influence bidding strategy in an upcoming land joint venture. Father and son, on both sides of the continent, have a lot to think about.

Spreadsheet supplement for case 219035.

On April 20, 2016, printer and ink maker Lexmark International, Inc. (Lexmark) announced that it was being acquired and taken private by a consortium comprising China-based computer hardware company Apex Technology Co., Ltd. (Apex), as well as private equity firms PAG Asia Capital (PAG) and Legend Capital (Legend). On the same day, Apex formally announced its acquisition of Lexmark for the Chinese capital market. The announcement caused a huge sensation because Apex was a small company compared to Lexmark; Lexmark completed 2015 with US$3.6 billion in revenue—approximately 10 times the revenue of Apex. To raise enough money to pay for the acquisition, Apex had established the consortium with PAG and Legend, and borrowed a large sum of money from its controlling shareholder and banks. Although Apex had ultimately raised enough money to complete the acquisition, its satisfaction over this success soon gave way to pressing questions about financing. In order to dispel the doubts of regulators and the market, Apex needed to decide whether it should adjust its financing plan for the acquisition, and if so, how.