Tiffany & Co.--1993

W. Carl  Kester; Kendall  Backstrand

Case | HBS Case Collection | December 1994 (Revised June 1995)

Tiffany & Co.--1993

by W. Carl Kester and Kendall Backstrand

Abstract

The restructuring of Tiffany's retailing agreement with Mitsukoshi Ltd. in 1993 exposed Tiffany to substantial yen/dollar exchange rate volatility that it had not previously faced. This new exposure requires Tiffany to establish risk management policies and practices. Management must determine whether to hedge, what the objective of hedging ought to be, how much exposure to cover, and what instruments to use. Teaching Objective: To introduce students to the problems of risk management in a relatively uncomplicated administrative situation.

Keywords: Restructuring; Currency Exchange Rate; Management Practices and Processes; Risk Management; Agreements and Arrangements; Situation or Environment;

Format: Print

12 pages

Educators Purchase

Citation:

Kester, W. Carl, and Kendall Backstrand. "Tiffany & Co.--1993." Harvard Business School Case 295-047, December 1994. (Revised June 1995.)

In March 2013, Apple Computer has a very large cash balance, and is under pressure to return cash to shareholders. Hedge fund manager David Einhorn thinks Apple can "unlock value" by issuing perpetual preferred stock, dubbed iPrefs. Henry Blodget, CEO of Business Insider, disagrees, saying "you can't just wave your magic wand and make something of nothing." This short case is designed to support a discussion of "perfect" markets and the Modigliani-Miller capital structure irrelevance propositions. The case focuses on two questions: (1) From a shareholder's perspective, how is Apple's cash different from cash in a bank or money market account? (2) Can Apple create significant value for shareholders by splitting each common share into an iPref plus a common share?

Case | HBS Case Collection | January 2018 (Revised December 2018)

Capital Allocation at HCA

W. Carl Kester and Emily R. McComb

In early 2017, HCA Holdings, an investor-owned hospital management company, faced a strategically important capital allocation decision. After the exit of its private equity sponsors in 2016, HCA had to determine how best to allocate its substantial annual free cash flows among several competing alternatives. Equity analysts and some mutual fund investors were clamoring for the company to initiate regular quarterly dividends, while some other hedge fund investors were eager to see more share repurchases. Other choices being advocated by various parties included reducing leverage to improve HCA's credit rating to investment grade, spurring growth by initiating a major acquisition program or reinvesting heavily in existing markets to enhance HCA's strong competitive position. These choices had to be made in the face of uncertainty about the future of healthcare regulation and tax policy following the 2016 U.S. presidential election and in the context of its closest publicly traded peers struggling with heavy debt burdens. HCA's capital allocation choices would be crucial to its ability to provide high quality health care to patients, implement its corporate strategy, and deliver value to shareholders.

Keywords: capital allocation; cash distribution policy; dividends; Share Repurchases; growth strategy and execution; growth investing; Capital expenditures; debt management; Debt reduction; debt policy; hospital management; investor-owned hospital chains; Capital Budgeting; Capital Structure; Cash Flow; Corporate Finance; Decision Choices and Conditions; Health Industry; United States;

Citation:

Kester, W. Carl, and Emily R. McComb. "Capital Allocation at HCA." Harvard Business School Case 218-039, January 2018. (Revised December 2018.) View Details

Cite View Details Educators Purchase

Faculty & Research

Tiffany & Co.--1993

Abstract

Citation:

About the Author

More from the Author