Cook

Case Solution for Private Equity Case: Merger Consolidation

Complete Case details are given below :
Case Name :      Private Equity Case: Merger Consolidation
Authors :           Hugh Grove, Tom J. Cook
Source :             North American Case Research Association (NACRA)
Case ID :            NA0030
Discipline :        Finance
Case Length :    10 pages
Solution sample availability : YES
Plagiarism : NO (100% Original work)
Description for case is given below :
The purpose of this case was to determine whether ACE Private Equity Partners, a mid-size private equity fund, should acquire two physical therapy companies in order to develop them for subsequent sale to a larger private equity firm. This situation represented another opportunity for ACE’s general partners to implement their “merger consolidation” investment strategy for their fund investors or limited partners. This investment strategy was to buy several private firms in the same industry, develop them for three to five years with revenue growth and cost saving synergies and, then, sell this larger consolidated company. This investment strategy was summarized by three major tactics: 1) build more valuable companies through growth and consolidation, 2) use arbitrage to buy smaller companies at lower private company EBITDA multiples and, then, sell them as a larger combined enterprise at higher public company EBITDA multiples, and 3) leverage the acquisitions with debt to spread risk and enhance returns.

Click Here to place your order
 
OR
Place your order at casesolutionshub (AT)gmail(dot)com if you want to solve above case.
 
Cordially,
Case Solutions Hub

Case Solution for Exiting AmData Software China Ltd.: Sell Now or Later?

Complete Case details are given below :
Case Name :      Exiting AmData Software China Ltd.: Sell Now or Later?
Authors :           Hugh Grove, Yuhua Hao, Tom J. Cook, Tomas C. Klett
Source :             North American Case Research Association (NACRA)
Case ID :            NA0011
Discipline :        Finance
Case Length :    24 pages
Solution sample availability : YES
Plagiarism : NO (100% Original work)
Description for case is given below :
In March 2008 the CEO had just received a surprising and unsolicited offer from a Japanese company to purchase his AmData Software China company which owns the exclusive mainland China franchise to distribute this U.S. vendor’s software. The Japanese company owns a similar exclusive franchise in Japan. After preliminary negotiations, including a demand by the Japanese company to state the business sale amount in U.S. dollars, the initial $2.5 million offer was raised to $5.5 million. However, this amount was not yet agreed to by both parties and a business valuation analysis would be critical to the key decision of the case: should the CEO sell the company now or continue to develop it for sale at a future date? Such a subsequent sale might be an IPO on one of the Chinese stock exchanges.

Click Here to place your order
 
OR
Place your order at casesolutionshub (AT)gmail(dot)com if you want to solve above case.
 
Cordially,
Case Solutions Hub

Case Solution for Daktronics (E): Dividend Policy in 2010

Complete Case details are given below :
Case Name :      Daktronics (E): Dividend Policy in 2010
Authors :           Thomas J. Cook
Source :             North American Case Research Association (NACRA)
Case ID :            NA0240
Discipline :        Finance
Case Length :    26 pages
Solution sample availability : YES
Plagiarism : NO (100% Original work)
Description for case is given below :
In early March 2010, Bill Ritterath, Chief Financial Officer of Daktronics, Inc., was meeting in his office with Jim Morgan, CEO, and Alered (Al) Kurtenbach, Chairman of the Board, about increasing dividend payments to shareholders. Daktronics was the world’s leading supplier of electronic scoreboards, large electronic display systems, and digital messaging solutions for use in sports, transportation and communications. The company had been going through a difficult period the past three years with the downturn in the national economy and the sudden reversal in the company’s operating and financial performance. Sales were projected by security analysts to fall from a high of approximately $581 million in 2009 to an estimated value of $424 million for fiscal year 2010 ending in May [1]. Stock price had also fallen from a high of $38.66 per share on December 1, 2006 to $7.72 per share on March 3, 2010. But with the economy showing some signs of recovering from the recession, Dr. Kurtenbach thought it was time to review Daktronics’ current dividend policy: “We can afford to return some additional cash to shareholders given our confidence that the company is turning around and business is improving.” Cash balances were growing rapidly and the outlook for future cash flows was positive. In making the decision, Dr. Kurtenbach wanted it to be based on an assessment of the company’s current cash position and future cash flow projections: “I don’t want this dividend to reward short- term holders at the expense of our long-term shareholders” Dr. Kurtenbach asked Mr. Ritterath to make a recommendation at the next Board meeting (in four weeks) on a new dividend distribution, including both the amount and form of the distribution.

Click Here to place your order
 
OR
Place your order at casesolutionshub (AT)gmail(dot)com if you want to solve above case.
 
Cordially,
Case Solutions Hub

Case Solution for Sierra Nevada Brewing Co.: End of Incentives

Complete Case details are given below :
Case Name :      Sierra Nevada Brewing Co.: End of Incentives
Authors :           Tara Ceranic, Ivan Montiel, Wendy S Cook
Source :             North American Case Research Association (NACRA)
Case ID :            NA0156
Discipline :        Business Ethics
Case Length :    12 pages
Solution sample availability : YES
Plagiarism : NO (100% Original work)
Description for case is given below :
Ken Grossman walked into Bill Bales’ office hoping to find an answer. Grossman, the owner of Sierra Nevada Brewing Company was considering the new reality that he was facing, and he brought the dilemma to Bales, his CFO. Grossman had made a commitment to environmental sustainability, the overriding cultural norm of his organization. Initially, the decision to install the five-phase solar array was made expecting California to provide tax incentives that would save the company a substantial amount of money on the installation. Grossman had received word that the company had run up against the “cap” for the State of California, which meant that they would no longer receive any subsidies for green power installments. With one phase of the installation yet to go, the question of possibly putting the money elsewhere kept nagging at Ken. Previous incentives meant the return on their environmental investments had always been fairly rapid, which enabled the company to continue aggressively pursuing their dedication to preserving the natural environment. Now, however, what to do? Finishing the solar array would be costly. Time to payback more than doubled from seven years to fifteen without the incentives from California State. As it stood, the brewery was light years ahead of industry standards and had completed the installation of the majority of the array.

Click Here to place your order
 
OR
Place your order at casesolutionshub (AT)gmail(dot)com if you want to solve above case.
 
Cordially,
Case Solutions Hub