個案總覽

Now a public company, Tesla Motors has grown from an IPO and partnerships with Daimler and Toyota. Telsa has forgone the traditional dealership business model to sell directly to the public creating a unique customer experience. Now faced with negative press and reports from analysts that Tesla vehicles are too expensive, Elon Musk must decide what the next steps for Tesla Motors are.

Dr. Barrett Rollins, Chief Scientific Officer of the Dana Farber Cancer Institute, attempts to engender cross-scientist collaboration by applying project management principles to medical research. The resulting innovation, Integrative Research Centers, are novel in this field and present a substantial challenge to the Institute's culture, which had previously allowed faculty scientists complete autonomy over their research. Center leaders are required to develop a business plan, adhere to agreed-upon performance metrics, and undergo regular progress reviews conducted by a peer-led oversight committee. In the "A" case, the Center for Nanotechnology in Cancer, a new but crucial center in the program, had failed to meet almost all of its objectives in the first year, and a heated dispute between two faculty members in the center had complicated matters significantly. The "B" case outlines the decisions Rollins took in terms of leadership and other strategic matters, and shows how the Center is performing a year after its initial disappointing progress.

Most management teams are caught off guard when their company becomes the target of a takeover. However, P's management team had seen it all from the other side before and knew just what to do. They viewed this challenge professionally. After declining the €9.50 bid, Portugal Telecoms board formed a special committee to lead the defense strategy. However, the board also confirmed it was not saying no to a deal: We wo't defend at any price. We will do what is right for shareholders, stated Zeinal Bava, P's CFO.

In February 2007, Sonaecom revised their bid to €10.50 per share. Less than one week later, the PT Board wrote to its shareholders maintaining the rejection of this new offer. So far, most shareholders had not manifested their views publicly. PT had been fighting hard for its independence. But would economic conditions be right for Sonaecom's takeover bid to succeed? What would it take to convince shareholders to accept? PT's international roadshow was reaching an end. How would investors react to all this information? Was it time for PT to sit down with Sonaecom?

In March 2007, more than a year after Sonaecom had announced its original takeover bid for Portugal Telecom (PT), things had progressed: new investors had come along, the authorities had approved the deal, both parties were holding roadshows, and finally Sonaecom increased its offer price to€10.50. The day before the final shareholders' meeting (2 March 2007), when the votes would be counted, everyone was doing their own numbers. According to the company's bylaws, votes cast by a single shareholder whose shares exceeded 10% of the share capital would not be counted. Sonaecom's offer was conditional on the removal of this restriction. The removal of this restriction had to be approved by two-thirds of the shareholders present at the AGM. After that, for the offer to be successful, Sonaecom would have to have the support of at least 50.01% of PT's shareholders to its €10.50 per share offer. This was one of the largest deals ever in the Telecoms sector, and investors from around the world were placing their bets on who was going to win the battle.

Case A of this series sets the scene for the largest merger and acquisition (M&A) deal in the telecom industry in Brazil and Latin America. Cases B to F follow on by relating the events up to the deal's conclusion. The sequencing of this story creates a sense of urgency for readers and forces them to take position on different questions at different times. Events began in 2003 when a 50:50 joint venture (JV) between Portugal Telecom (PT) and Spain's Telefónica acquired 60% of Vivo, the leading Brazilian mobile operator. In the subsequent years, Vivo experienced double-digit annual growth, as it reaped the benefits of its own heavy investments and booming consumer demand. In May 2010, Telefónica made a €5.7 billion cash bid for PT's share of the JV. According to Telefónica, this was a full, fair and final offer. How would PT's board regard the bid? On the one hand, it represented a 100% premium on Vivo's pre-announcement stock price. On the other hand, it was a terrible blow to the PT Group's international aspirations. Moreover, the occasionally conflicting views of the general public and the government had the potential to complicate matters further. Lastly, this deal also had important international implications. The case shows how: a) corporate governance practices vary across countries, including environments where there are dual-class shares; and b) the role of corporate governance in ensuring that managers undertake activities that maximize shareholder value as well as serving the needs and strategy of the company. The case also allows for an in-depth analysis of a variety of strategic, organizational, financial and economic issues related to growth strategies through JVs and M&As. The key focus of the case is on the links between finance and strategy.

Case A of this series sets the scene for the largest merger and acquisition (M&A) deal in the telecom industry in Brazil and Latin America. Cases B to F follow on by relating the events up to the deal's conclusion. The sequencing of this story creates a sense of urgency for readers and forces them to take position on different questions at different times. Events began in 2003 when a 50:50 joint venture (JV) between Portugal Telecom (PT) and Spain's Telefónica acquired 60% of Vivo, the leading Brazilian mobile operator. In the subsequent years, Vivo experienced double-digit annual growth, as it reaped the benefits of its own heavy investments and booming consumer demand. In May 2010, Telefónica made a €5.7 billion cash bid for PT's share of the JV. According to Telefónica, this was a full, fair and final offer. How would PT's board regard the bid? On the one hand, it represented a 100% premium on Vivo's pre-announcement stock price. On the other hand, it was a terrible blow to the PT Group's international aspirations. Moreover, the occasionally conflicting views of the general public and the government had the potential to complicate matters further. Lastly, this deal also had important international implications. The case shows how: a) corporate governance practices vary across countries, including environments where there are dual-class shares; and b) the role of corporate governance in ensuring that managers undertake activities that maximize shareholder value as well as serving the needs and strategy of the company. The case also allows for an in-depth analysis of a variety of strategic, organizational, financial and economic issues related to growth strategies through JVs and M&As. The key focus of the case is on the links between finance and strategy.

Case A of this series sets the scene for the largest merger and acquisition (M&A) deal in the telecom industry in Brazil and Latin America. Cases B to F follow on by relating the events up to the deal's conclusion. The sequencing of this story creates a sense of urgency for readers and forces them to take position on different questions at different times. Events began in 2003 when a 50:50 joint venture (JV) between Portugal Telecom (PT) and Spain's Telefónica acquired 60% of Vivo, the leading Brazilian mobile operator. In the subsequent years, Vivo experienced double-digit annual growth, as it reaped the benefits of its own heavy investments and booming consumer demand. In May 2010, Telefónica made a €5.7 billion cash bid for PT's share of the JV. According to Telefónica, this was a full, fair and final offer. How would PT's board regard the bid? On the one hand, it represented a 100% premium on Vivo's pre-announcement stock price. On the other hand, it was a terrible blow to the PT Group's international aspirations. Moreover, the occasionally conflicting views of the general public and the government had the potential to complicate matters further. Lastly, this deal also had important international implications. The case shows how: a) corporate governance practices vary across countries, including environments where there are dual-class shares; and b) the role of corporate governance in ensuring that managers undertake activities that maximize shareholder value as well as serving the needs and strategy of the company. The case also allows for an in-depth analysis of a variety of strategic, organizational, financial and economic issues related to growth strategies through JVs and M&As. The key focus of the case is on the links between finance and strategy.

Case A of this series sets the scene for the largest merger and acquisition (M&A) deal in the telecom industry in Brazil and Latin America. Cases B to F follow on by relating the events up to the deal's conclusion. The sequencing of this story creates a sense of urgency for readers and forces them to take position on different questions at different times. Events began in 2003 when a 50:50 joint venture (JV) between Portugal Telecom (PT) and Spain's Telefónica acquired 60% of Vivo, the leading Brazilian mobile operator. In the subsequent years, Vivo experienced double-digit annual growth, as it reaped the benefits of its own heavy investments and booming consumer demand. In May 2010, Telefónica made a €5.7 billion cash bid for PT's share of the JV. According to Telefónica, this was a full, fair and final offer. How would PT's board regard the bid? On the one hand, it represented a 100% premium on Vivo's pre-announcement stock price. On the other hand, it was a terrible blow to the PT Group's international aspirations. Moreover, the occasionally conflicting views of the general public and the government had the potential to complicate matters further. Lastly, this deal also had important international implications. The case shows how: a) corporate governance practices vary across countries, including environments where there are dual-class shares; and b) the role of corporate governance in ensuring that managers undertake activities that maximize shareholder value as well as serving the needs and strategy of the company. The case also allows for an in-depth analysis of a variety of strategic, organizational, financial and economic issues related to growth strategies through JVs and M&As. The key focus of the case is on the links between finance and strategy.

Case A of this series sets the scene for the largest merger and acquisition (M&A) deal in the telecom industry in Brazil and Latin America. Cases B to F follow on by relating the events up to the deal's conclusion. The sequencing of this story creates a sense of urgency for readers and forces them to take position on different questions at different times. Events began in 2003 when a 50:50 joint venture (JV) between Portugal Telecom (PT) and Spain's Telefónica acquired 60% of Vivo, the leading Brazilian mobile operator. In the subsequent years, Vivo experienced double-digit annual growth, as it reaped the benefits of its own heavy investments and booming consumer demand. In May 2010, Telefónica made a €5.7 billion cash bid for PT's share of the JV. According to Telefónica, this was a full, fair and final offer. How would PT's board regard the bid? On the one hand, it represented a 100% premium on Vivo's pre-announcement stock price. On the other hand, it was a terrible blow to the PT Group's international aspirations. Moreover, the occasionally conflicting views of the general public and the government had the potential to complicate matters further. Lastly, this deal also had important international implications. The case shows how: a) corporate governance practices vary across countries, including environments where there are dual-class shares; and b) the role of corporate governance in ensuring that managers undertake activities that maximize shareholder value as well as serving the needs and strategy of the company. The case also allows for an in-depth analysis of a variety of strategic, organizational, financial and economic issues related to growth strategies through JVs and M&As. The key focus of the case is on the links between finance and strategy.

Two-party, multi-issue negotiation between lawyers for a divorcing couple over the terms of the divorce, including alimony, child support, and income tax issues. Bill and Ellen Ellsworth are in the midst of a heated divorce. Mrs. Ellsworth instituted a divorce on the grounds of physical and mental cruelty. Her attorney will meet with Mr. Ellsworth's attorney to try to settle out-of-court. The issues with which both sides are primarily concerned are those of alimony, child support, medical insurance, ownership of family residence, custody of the children and visitation rights, division of securities and savings, and legal costs. Both parties want a divorce. This case can be set up as a one-on-one or a two-on-two team negotiation. It is sufficiently complex to make teams worthwhile. Usually used toward the end of a negotiation training course, this case requires extensive preparation and involves a moderate amount of income tax law.

Two-party, multi-issue negotiation between lawyers for a divorcing couple over the terms of the divorce, including alimony, child support, and income tax issues. Bill and Ellen Ellsworth are in the midst of a heated divorce. Mrs. Ellsworth instituted a divorce on the grounds of physical and mental cruelty. Her attorney will meet with Mr. Ellsworth's attorney to try to settle out-of-court. The issues with which both sides are primarily concerned are those of alimony, child support, medical insurance, ownership of family residence, custody of the children and visitation rights, division of securities and savings, and legal costs. Both parties want a divorce. This case can be set up as a one-on-one or a two-on-two team negotiation. It is sufficiently complex to make teams worthwhile. Usually used toward the end of a negotiation training course, this case requires extensive preparation and involves a moderate amount of income tax law.

Two-party, multi-issue negotiation between lawyers for a divorcing couple over the terms of the divorce, including alimony, child support, and income tax issues. Bill and Ellen Ellsworth are in the midst of a heated divorce. Mrs. Ellsworth instituted a divorce on the grounds of physical and mental cruelty. Her attorney will meet with Mr. Ellsworth's attorney to try to settle out-of-court. The issues with which both sides are primarily concerned are those of alimony, child support, medical insurance, ownership of family residence, custody of the children and visitation rights, division of securities and savings, and legal costs. Both parties want a divorce. This case can be set up as a one-on-one or a two-on-two team negotiation. It is sufficiently complex to make teams worthwhile. Usually used toward the end of a negotiation training course, this case requires extensive preparation and involves a moderate amount of income tax law.

Two-party, multi-issue negotiation between lawyers for a divorcing couple over the terms of the divorce, including alimony, child support, and income tax issues. Bill and Ellen Ellsworth are in the midst of a heated divorce. Mrs. Ellsworth instituted a divorce on the grounds of physical and mental cruelty. Her attorney will meet with Mr. Ellsworth's attorney to try to settle out-of-court. The issues with which both sides are primarily concerned are those of alimony, child support, medical insurance, ownership of family residence, custody of the children and visitation rights, division of securities and savings, and legal costs. Both parties want a divorce. This case can be set up as a one-on-one or a two-on-two team negotiation. It is sufficiently complex to make teams worthwhile. Usually used toward the end of a negotiation training course, this case requires extensive preparation and involves a moderate amount of income tax law.

Two-party, multi-issue negotiation between lawyers for a divorcing couple over the terms of the divorce, including alimony, child support, and income tax issues. Bill and Ellen Ellsworth are in the midst of a heated divorce. Mrs. Ellsworth instituted a divorce on the grounds of physical and mental cruelty. Her attorney will meet with Mr. Ellsworth's attorney to try to settle out-of-court. The issues with which both sides are primarily concerned are those of alimony, child support, medical insurance, ownership of family residence, custody of the children and visitation rights, division of securities and savings, and legal costs. Both parties want a divorce. This case can be set up as a one-on-one or a two-on-two team negotiation. It is sufficiently complex to make teams worthwhile. Usually used toward the end of a negotiation training course, this case requires extensive preparation and involves a moderate amount of income tax law.

Two-party, multi-issue negotiation between lawyers for a divorcing couple over the terms of the divorce, including alimony, child support, and income tax issues. Bill and Ellen Ellsworth are in the midst of a heated divorce. Mrs. Ellsworth instituted a divorce on the grounds of physical and mental cruelty. Her attorney will meet with Mr. Ellsworth's attorney to try to settle out-of-court. The issues with which both sides are primarily concerned are those of alimony, child support, medical insurance, ownership of family residence, custody of the children and visitation rights, division of securities and savings, and legal costs. Both parties want a divorce. This case can be set up as a one-on-one or a two-on-two team negotiation. It is sufficiently complex to make teams worthwhile. Usually used toward the end of a negotiation training course, this case requires extensive preparation and involves a moderate amount of income tax law.

Two-party, multi-issue negotiation between lawyers for a divorcing couple over the terms of the divorce, including alimony, child support, and income tax issues. Bill and Ellen Ellsworth are in the midst of a heated divorce. Mrs. Ellsworth instituted a divorce on the grounds of physical and mental cruelty. Her attorney will meet with Mr. Ellsworth's attorney to try to settle out-of-court. The issues with which both sides are primarily concerned are those of alimony, child support, medical insurance, ownership of family residence, custody of the children and visitation rights, division of securities and savings, and legal costs. Both parties want a divorce. This case can be set up as a one-on-one or a two-on-two team negotiation. It is sufficiently complex to make teams worthwhile. Usually used toward the end of a negotiation training course, this case requires extensive preparation and involves a moderate amount of income tax law.

Two-party, multi-issue negotiation between lawyers for a divorcing couple over the terms of the divorce, including alimony, child support, and income tax issues. Bill and Ellen Ellsworth are in the midst of a heated divorce. Mrs. Ellsworth instituted a divorce on the grounds of physical and mental cruelty. Her attorney will meet with Mr. Ellsworth's attorney to try to settle out-of-court. The issues with which both sides are primarily concerned are those of alimony, child support, medical insurance, ownership of family residence, custody of the children and visitation rights, division of securities and savings, and legal costs. Both parties want a divorce. This case can be set up as a one-on-one or a two-on-two team negotiation. It is sufficiently complex to make teams worthwhile. Usually used toward the end of a negotiation training course, this case requires extensive preparation and involves a moderate amount of income tax law.

Two-party, multi-issue negotiation between lawyers for a divorcing couple over the terms of the divorce, including alimony, child support, and income tax issues. Bill and Ellen Ellsworth are in the midst of a heated divorce. Mrs. Ellsworth instituted a divorce on the grounds of physical and mental cruelty. Her attorney will meet with Mr. Ellsworth's attorney to try to settle out-of-court. The issues with which both sides are primarily concerned are those of alimony, child support, medical insurance, ownership of family residence, custody of the children and visitation rights, division of securities and savings, and legal costs. Both parties want a divorce. This case can be set up as a one-on-one or a two-on-two team negotiation. It is sufficiently complex to make teams worthwhile. Usually used toward the end of a negotiation training course, this case requires extensive preparation and involves a moderate amount of income tax law.

Two-party, multi-issue negotiation between lawyers for a divorcing couple over the terms of the divorce, including alimony, child support, and income tax issues. Bill and Ellen Ellsworth are in the midst of a heated divorce. Mrs. Ellsworth instituted a divorce on the grounds of physical and mental cruelty. Her attorney will meet with Mr. Ellsworth's attorney to try to settle out-of-court. The issues with which both sides are primarily concerned are those of alimony, child support, medical insurance, ownership of family residence, custody of the children and visitation rights, division of securities and savings, and legal costs. Both parties want a divorce. This case can be set up as a one-on-one or a two-on-two team negotiation. It is sufficiently complex to make teams worthwhile. Usually used toward the end of a negotiation training course, this case requires extensive preparation and involves a moderate amount of income tax law.