個案總覽

Spreadsheet supplement for UV6874.

Spreadsheet supplement for case 215025.

Excel spreadsheet for 8B05N16.

Instructor spreadsheet for teaching note product 8B13B025.

Student spreadsheet for product 9B13B025.

Spreadsheet supplement for case 215016.

Spreadsheet Supplement for Product #915527.

Spreadsheet supplement for Case CU312

Spreadsheet supplement for IMB483.

The Indian online retail ("e-tailing") market had seen a flurry of activity. Success stories such as Makemytrip.com and Naukri.com in the travel and job search domains, respectively, were significant catalysts for this new breed of start-ups. Of these start-ups, Flipkart stood out as one of the most successful (and audacious) - more so because of the funding the company managed to secure over a very short period of time as compared to its competitors. The firm was celebrated for its bold stance on growth versus profitability but simultaneously had its share of critics and skeptics. The latest round of venture capital funding had valued Flipkart at US$1.6 billion, nearly eight times sales. In less than two years, the firm had attracted nearly $550 million in venture capital funds and its sales turnover had grown nearly 30-fold. Was Flipkart growing too big too soon? Were these valuations justified?

Instructor spreadsheet for product 8B14N018.

Student spreadsheet for product 9B14N018.

Between 2010 and 2012, SolarCity experienced tremendous growth in an industry that was generally perceived to be struggling. Many other solar start-ups were failing-Solyndra, which had received a $535M loan from the U.S. government, was the highest profile failure, declaring bankruptcy in September, 2011. Lyndon Rive noted, "Investors have been burned so badly from the solar sector. We've faced that stigma while selling our company to investors." Despite that burn, however, SolarCity went forward with an initial public offering (IPO) in December of 2012 at an IPO price of $8.00 per share. By end of the second quarter, 2014, SolarCity operated in 15 states and the District of Columbia and boasted 140,000 customers. It controlled 36 percent of the residential solar market but had never posted a profit-in 2013 it had a net loss of almost $152 million.

Spreadsheet supplement for case SM234.

Spreadsheet supplement for UV6854.

Spreadsheet supplement for UV6854.

Spreadsheet supplement for KEL843.

Excel spreadsheet for students.

Student spreadsheet for W13398.

Student spreadsheet for W14431.