Blackout: August 14, 2003

Thomas R. Eisenmann; Ryland Matthew Willis

Case | HBS Case Collection | March 2004 (Revised June 2004)

Blackout: August 14, 2003

by Thomas R. Eisenmann and Ryland Matthew Willis

Abstract

On August 14, 2003, an electricity blackout cascaded throughout the northeastern United States and Canada. Describes the structure, technology, and economics of the electric utility industry and how gradual deregulation beginning in the 1970s placed unprecedented, and unintended, stress on the transmission grid. Discusses the government's role in trying to mitigate congestion along transmission lines and facilitate improved planning and operational coordination through the establishment of independent system operators and regional transmission organizations. Also describes the recent financial performance of the electricity industry, the potential costs of modernizing the U.S. transmission infrastructure, and the role of political contributions in shaping regulation.

Keywords: Technology; Performance Improvement; Infrastructure; Energy Sources; Business and Government Relations; Networks; Emerging Markets; Failure; Economics; Utilities Industry; Canada; Northeastern United States;

Format: Print

23 pages

Educators Purchase

Citation:

Eisenmann, Thomas R., and Ryland Matthew Willis. "Blackout: August 14, 2003." Harvard Business School Case 804-156, March 2004. (Revised June 2004.)

Baroo CEO Lindsay Hyde was facing unrest from the board of her pet services startup in August 2017. One board member (and lead investor) was alarmed that Baroo’s growth was slowing while its appetite for funding was accelerating. Hyde wanted to hit the gas and continue expanding to new cities, which meant she needed to raise venture capital. How could she convince the board and potential investors that the business opportunities were too good to pass up and an infusion of capital could help her steer Baroo through the speed bumps?

Baroo CEO Lindsay Hyde must secure venture capital funding if she wants to save her pet services startup. If she is unable to finance a series A, she will need to sell or shut down.

In 2016, senior management at Moz, a venture capital-backed startup providing software tools for digital marketing professionals, must decide how to address a looming cash flow crisis precipitated by failed efforts to broaden its product line. Seattle-based Moz had originally focused only on search engine optimization (SEO) software. Aiming to accelerate growth, over the past three years the startup had launched products targeted at content marketers, social media marketers, and small local businesses. Adoption of these new products had been disappointing, and the resource drain and distraction of launching them had reduced the growth of Moz's core SEO product. Management was wrestling with whether to either: 1) shut down or sell the new products; or 2) double down on the new products, funding further investment in them by selling the core SEO business or milking it as a "cash cow."

Faculty & Research

Blackout: August 14, 2003

Abstract

Citation:

About the Author

More from the Author