Warren Buffett says his guiding principle is to “be fearful when others are greedy and greedy when others are fearful.” There’s certainly plenty of fear out there, and thus plenty of opportunities to get greedy. Greed, however, does not necessarily translate into wealth.
In “Beyond Fear and Greed: Capitalizing on Opportunities in the Current Crisis,” we draw on our two years of research into more than 2,500 major corporate failures and our related consulting work to describe the landmines that companies are mostly like to hit as they try to capitalize on the turmoil that has roiled many markets since the summer of 2008. We also lay out a process for stress testing new business strategies, ensuring that greed does not send you down the wrong path and increasing the chances that you’ll pick a highly prosperous road.
This white paper summarizes current trends in mergers and acquisitions (M&As) within the residential real estate brokerage industry. It notes that M&A activity declined significantly from 2006-2010 due to the housing market downturn. The paper predicts a slow recovery in both housing and M&As from 2010-2012. Key factors that will impact M&As include available capital for deals, management talent needed to integrate acquisitions, and personal/emotional issues for sellers considering a sale. Buyer valuations of firms are affected by competition, sales professional retention, and deal structure/terms will be less favorable if the price is higher.
The document provides guidance on effective marketing practices during economic downturns. It recommends consistently using multiple marketing channels, such as advertising, direct mail, public relations, and personal contact, to build brand awareness over time. Studies show companies that maintained or increased their marketing expenditures during recessions gained market share and experienced higher sales in subsequent years compared to companies that cut back on marketing.
Steve Dow, partner at Sevin Rosin Funds in Dallas, told the New York Times in 2006 that “the VC model is broken.” A recent survey from executive search firm Polachi Inc. polled more than 100 venture capital executives, 70% of which were partners or managing partners. It found that a majority, 53% of respondents, indicated the venture capital industry is “broken.” With a less than receptive IPO market and the credit markets tightening down on M&A activities, VCs are finding few exits for their existing investments. PE shops are faced with refinancing over $300 billion of LBO debt over the next two years. Endowments and pension funds that serve as the limited partners firms are reassessing their investment in the entire asset class and are hamstrung by the denominator effect. Will this funding gap affect the US’ ability to develop new technologies and create new jobs? Many ask, “Why aren’t there more Googles” and “What will be the next big thing?” Personal computers were the catalyst in the 1980s, the internet was the catalyst in the 1990s and social networking has been a catalyst in recent years, but what will be the growth driver in the next decade? With this background, this presentation will discuss the golden years of private equity, the current environment and what the future holds for this industry and entrepreneurial activity.
The Miasmic Asian Capital Jungle and the Tranquil Bamboo Innovator GroveKoon Boon KEE
This document summarizes a weekly column exploring investment opportunities in Asia by identifying resilient companies ("Bamboo Innovators") that can compound value over the long run. It profiles the Indonesian pharmaceutical company Kalbe Farma, which survived the 1997 Asian Financial Crisis. The column discusses Kalbe Farma's business model and transformation under its CEO Dr. Boenjamin Setiawan. While highlighting the limitations of only analyzing numbers, it aims to present companies as case studies to enhance understanding of sustainable business models. The document announces the upcoming launch of "The Moat Report Asia", a monthly report that will provide in-depth analysis of undervalued Asian companies with strong moats.
This document discusses the potential of compound businesses, specifically franchises, as an investment strategy during economic downturns. It notes that the current financial crisis has led many to lose jobs and retirement savings, but that owning a business like a franchise can provide steady income and be a better investment than other options. The document uses a hypothetical model of a multi-unit franchise owner to illustrate how the income and equity in such businesses can grow steadily over time through reinvestment of profits. It argues that franchising in particular offers a lower risk way to benefit from business ownership compared to starting an independent business.
This document discusses how owning a franchise business may be a better investment than traditional assets like savings accounts, stocks, bonds, and real estate in the current economic crisis. It presents data on the performance of these traditional assets versus franchise businesses over the past 5 years. The document argues that franchising offers a way for individuals to generate wealth and achieve economic recovery faster than government bailouts. It promotes the concept of "Wealth 3.0" which is owning compounding franchise businesses as a superior strategy to compound interest from traditional investments.
Workshop 1: Wide Moat Analysis: In Search of Compounding Stocks in Uncertain ...Koon Boon KEE
This document contains a series of workshops and presentations on value investing and detecting accounting fraud. It discusses identifying "moat" companies that can withstand crises, and avoiding "pump and dump" schemes carried out by insider traders called "Zhuang Jia." It recommends investing only in areas you have strong expertise and knowledge, using examples like buses or potato chips. Focusing on resilient businesses like Yutong Bus that performed well long-term compared to indexes and other investments. The overall message is on developing independent critical thinking to identify quality businesses rather than falling for get-rich-quick strategies.
This white paper summarizes current trends in mergers and acquisitions (M&As) within the residential real estate brokerage industry. It notes that M&A activity declined significantly from 2006-2010 due to the housing market downturn. The paper predicts a slow recovery in both housing and M&As from 2010-2012. Key factors that will impact M&As include available capital for deals, management talent needed to integrate acquisitions, and personal/emotional issues for sellers considering a sale. Buyer valuations of firms are affected by competition, sales professional retention, and deal structure/terms will be less favorable if the price is higher.
The document provides guidance on effective marketing practices during economic downturns. It recommends consistently using multiple marketing channels, such as advertising, direct mail, public relations, and personal contact, to build brand awareness over time. Studies show companies that maintained or increased their marketing expenditures during recessions gained market share and experienced higher sales in subsequent years compared to companies that cut back on marketing.
Steve Dow, partner at Sevin Rosin Funds in Dallas, told the New York Times in 2006 that “the VC model is broken.” A recent survey from executive search firm Polachi Inc. polled more than 100 venture capital executives, 70% of which were partners or managing partners. It found that a majority, 53% of respondents, indicated the venture capital industry is “broken.” With a less than receptive IPO market and the credit markets tightening down on M&A activities, VCs are finding few exits for their existing investments. PE shops are faced with refinancing over $300 billion of LBO debt over the next two years. Endowments and pension funds that serve as the limited partners firms are reassessing their investment in the entire asset class and are hamstrung by the denominator effect. Will this funding gap affect the US’ ability to develop new technologies and create new jobs? Many ask, “Why aren’t there more Googles” and “What will be the next big thing?” Personal computers were the catalyst in the 1980s, the internet was the catalyst in the 1990s and social networking has been a catalyst in recent years, but what will be the growth driver in the next decade? With this background, this presentation will discuss the golden years of private equity, the current environment and what the future holds for this industry and entrepreneurial activity.
The Miasmic Asian Capital Jungle and the Tranquil Bamboo Innovator GroveKoon Boon KEE
This document summarizes a weekly column exploring investment opportunities in Asia by identifying resilient companies ("Bamboo Innovators") that can compound value over the long run. It profiles the Indonesian pharmaceutical company Kalbe Farma, which survived the 1997 Asian Financial Crisis. The column discusses Kalbe Farma's business model and transformation under its CEO Dr. Boenjamin Setiawan. While highlighting the limitations of only analyzing numbers, it aims to present companies as case studies to enhance understanding of sustainable business models. The document announces the upcoming launch of "The Moat Report Asia", a monthly report that will provide in-depth analysis of undervalued Asian companies with strong moats.
This document discusses the potential of compound businesses, specifically franchises, as an investment strategy during economic downturns. It notes that the current financial crisis has led many to lose jobs and retirement savings, but that owning a business like a franchise can provide steady income and be a better investment than other options. The document uses a hypothetical model of a multi-unit franchise owner to illustrate how the income and equity in such businesses can grow steadily over time through reinvestment of profits. It argues that franchising in particular offers a lower risk way to benefit from business ownership compared to starting an independent business.
This document discusses how owning a franchise business may be a better investment than traditional assets like savings accounts, stocks, bonds, and real estate in the current economic crisis. It presents data on the performance of these traditional assets versus franchise businesses over the past 5 years. The document argues that franchising offers a way for individuals to generate wealth and achieve economic recovery faster than government bailouts. It promotes the concept of "Wealth 3.0" which is owning compounding franchise businesses as a superior strategy to compound interest from traditional investments.
Workshop 1: Wide Moat Analysis: In Search of Compounding Stocks in Uncertain ...Koon Boon KEE
This document contains a series of workshops and presentations on value investing and detecting accounting fraud. It discusses identifying "moat" companies that can withstand crises, and avoiding "pump and dump" schemes carried out by insider traders called "Zhuang Jia." It recommends investing only in areas you have strong expertise and knowledge, using examples like buses or potato chips. Focusing on resilient businesses like Yutong Bus that performed well long-term compared to indexes and other investments. The overall message is on developing independent critical thinking to identify quality businesses rather than falling for get-rich-quick strategies.
The bankruptcy of the large South Korean shipping company Hanjin has had global effects that ripple through supply chains. Small businesses are particularly vulnerable when large retailers have priority for limited cargo space on remaining ships. One small hobby shop owner expects his holiday shipments may be delayed, jeopardizing a crucial sales period. While globalization and outsourcing have increased profits for large corporations, they also increase interconnectivity so that disruptions in one area can spread widely. Effective communication is needed to coordinate partnerships and mitigate risks from such bankruptcies that are outside any one company's control.
Drawing on data from the past 5 years of performance of bank interest rates, the Dow Jones Average Index performance, growth in real estate median housing market and owning select franchise concepts; Dr. Robert Needham, presents "The Magic of Compound Businesses" vs "The Magic of Compound Interest".
This document provides a summary of key topics that will impact CFOs in 2016, including the economy, taxes, deals and accounting/financial reporting. It discusses expectations for low global economic growth and high debt levels. On taxes, it mentions potential tax reform in the US and abroad. For deals, it suggests that 2016 may be a challenging year following strong M&A activity in 2015. The accounting section previews new rules that may be issued by the FASB.
3M was founded in 1902 in Two Harbors, Minnesota by five entrepreneurs hoping to mine and sell corundum, a mineral used in grinding wheels. However, their initial product failed in the market. Despite this setback and other struggles, the founders persevered and began producing sandpaper instead, which was more successful. This early period planted the seeds of innovation at 3M through persistence in the face of challenges.
This document discusses the differences between periods of economic and market conditions. It notes that in the 1970s, inflation-adjusted returns hit -75%, while the 1980s-90s saw the emergence of new technologies that drove wealth creation. Currently, interest rates are at historic lows, making equities relatively more appealing. The author argues that distinguishing periods when fundamental factors are truly different is important for investment decisions. Sometimes markets reflect collective madness, while other times data shows a real change. Investors need to recognize differences in economic environments.
The document discusses various topics covered in the March issue of the journal "Inside Enterprise", including entrepreneurship, interviews with business leaders, and articles exploring social entrepreneurship. It provides an overview of the different sections in the issue, thanks contributors and readers, and invites others to get involved by writing for the publication or attending upcoming events.
The document discusses how companies that achieve the top position ("top dog") in their sector tend to underperform relative to other companies in that sector over time. It finds that on average, the top dog in each sector lags the sector average by 3.5% in the following year, 3.9% over 3 years, and 3.3% per year for the next decade. This "too big to succeed" phenomenon may be partly due to increased scrutiny from competitors, politicians, and the public when a company becomes the sector leader. The document also finds some evidence that top dog underperformance is worse during periods of larger government spending and regulation.
Business week baby boomer economy.7 23_09guest0e39643
The document discusses how the economic downturn has significantly impacted spending habits of Baby Boomers. Many major companies that relied heavily on Boomer consumers are struggling as Boomers cut spending and focus more on saving. Mercedes-Benz, Starwood Hotels, and other brands are scrambling to adapt their marketing and offerings to appeal to younger generations and a leaner Boomer economy focused on value and budget-friendly options. The downturn accelerated trends of frugality that were expected as Boomers approached retirement, but the speed and depth of changes have caught many companies off guard.
The document discusses the history of Bausch + Lomb, which was founded in 1853 through a handshake agreement between John Jacob Bausch and Henry Lomb and grew to be a successful American company. However, in the 1990s the company lost its vision and spirit under "professional managers" more focused on numbers than innovation, leading to financial issues and an eventual sale to a private equity firm in 2007. There are now concerns that a potential future sale being explored could be bad for the company's Rochester headquarters and employees.
The document provides a list and brief profiles of 20 CEOs that a panel of business school professors identified as the best American CEOs of all time. It summarizes each CEO's accomplishments and impact. The CEOs span various industries and time periods, from Henry Ford in the early 20th century to Oprah Winfrey today. For each one, it highlights what made them successful leaders and how they helped grow major companies.
DealMarket DIGEST Issue 113 // 18 October 2013CAR FOR YOU
The weekly Dealmarket Digest provides a concise summary of private equity news and trends from various sources. This issue discusses American family offices increasing direct investments in private equity deals, advice for working with private equity investors, Warburg Pincus raising funds focused on energy deals, private equity moving into mining industry deals, and a family office stepping up venture capital investments.
This document provides a summary and analysis of identity programs and rebranding efforts of several major corporations in 1997-1998. It discusses new logos and identities created for Dow Jones, Meritor, Visteon, Solutia (formerly Monsanto's chemicals division), The Hartford (dropping "ITT" from its name), Bell Atlantic, Credit Suisse, British Airways, and US Airways. The author analyzes how each new identity communicates the company's strategic direction and positioning in the market.
The document profiles the top 10 black-run companies on the 2009 Inc. 500 list. It provides background information on the founders and CEOs of each company, including their motivations for starting their businesses and how they have grown their companies over time. The companies represent a variety of industries such as real estate, consulting, tax services, and facilities management.
DealMarket DIGEST Issue 115 // 01 November 2013CAR FOR YOU
The summary provides an overview of the key topics covered in the document:
1) Some tech startups are choosing IPOs over acquisition offers from larger tech companies in order to retain control and achieve higher valuations.
2) Pension funds are seeking less traditional private equity investments that can generate returns as some buyout funds from the boom era have underperformed.
3) M&A activity is gaining momentum globally as corporate confidence increases, with over a third of executives planning acquisitions in the next year.
Nick Rodelli has joined the Center for Financial Research and Analysis (CFRA) to lead their new Legal Edge research service focusing on analyzing how potential legal issues and decisions could impact companies' earnings and share prices. Rodelli believes the market often misprices stocks by not properly accounting for litigation risks and opportunities. He provides several examples where court cases could positively impact World Wrestling Entertainment, American Express and Qualcomm or negatively affect MasterCard and Sherwin-Williams. Rodelli's legal analysis aims to help investors identify underpriced and overpriced stocks.
- Productivity gains in American businesses in the early 2000s were actually losses, as companies prioritized short-term gains over long-term sustainability. To boost productivity statistics, many fired employees and shipped goods from existing stockpiles rather than prioritizing customers, quality, and innovation.
- The focus on "shareholder value" and quarterly performance led CEOs to cut costs through mass layoffs while rewarding themselves handsomely. This undermined company cultures and destroyed trust between management and employees.
- By 2008, many formerly great American companies had been hollowed out, with experienced workers laid off and important tacit knowledge lost. Overworked remaining employees faced stagnant wages as corporate profits soared, contributing
This document discusses lessons from CEOs on making mergers and acquisitions successful. It notes that while M&As often failed in the 1970s, they have now become important strategies for growth. However, cultural differences can cause M&As to fall apart. When integrating acquired companies, priorities include addressing employee uncertainty, having open communication, and representing all shareholders rather than just the original company. Overall, the document emphasizes that every organization approaches restructuring differently based on their strategic goals and industry.
Transcript: Alternatives for a Distressed Company in Apparel and RetailExpert Webcast
The discussion includes the process of bidding for, financing and acquiring distressed companies in the Apparel and Retail space is competitive and complex. The panel addressed the strategies and tips for success from the perspectives of an investment banker, a deal and bankruptcy lawyer, a turnaround executive, a lender and a tax accountant.
Learning from MistakesAnalyzing the external environment is a cr.docxsmile790243
Learning from Mistakes
Analyzing the external environment is a critical step in recognizing and understanding the opportunities and threats that organizations face. And here is where some companies fail to do a good job.
Consider the example of Salemi Industries and the launch of its product, Cell Zone, in 2005. Although it tried to carefully analyze its potential market, it misread the market’s demand for the product and paid a steep price for its mistake.1 Mobile phone usage was sharply increasing, and its founder observed that patrons in places such as restaurants would be annoyed by the chatter of a nearby guest having a private (but loud!) conversation. Salemi Industries interpreted this observation as an opportunity to create the Cell Zone: a “commercial sound resistant cell phone booth that provides a convenient and disturbance-free environment to place and receive phone calls … with a design feature to promote product or service on its curvilinear outer shell,” according to the firm’s website.
Salemi Industries’ key error was that it failed to take into consideration an emerging technology—the increasing popularity of text messaging and other
35
nonvoice communication technology applications and how that would affect the sales of their product. For example, the Pew Internet & American Life Project estimated that the number of text messages that were sent each day would soar from 500,000 in 2001 to 4 billion in 2009. In addition to this technology shift, the target locations (restaurants) were not interested in or willing to give up productive square footage for patrons to hold private conversations. Not surprisingly, the firm has sold only 300 units (100 of them in college libraries), and Salemi Industries has lost over $650,000 to date.
Discussion Questions
1. What is the biggest stumbling block for Cell Zone?
2. Are there other market segments where Cell Zone might work?
Successful managers must recognize opportunities and threats in their firm’s external environment. They must be aware of what’s going on outside their company. If they focus exclusively on the efficiency of internal operations, the firm may degenerate into the world’s most efficient producer of buggy whips, typewriters, or carbon paper. But if they miscalculate the market, opportunities will be lost—hardly an enviable position for their firm. As we saw from the Cell Zone example, misreading the market can lead to negative consequences.
In Competing for the Future, Gary Hamel and C. K. Prahalad suggest that “every manager carries around in his or her head a set of biases, assumptions, and presuppositions about the structure of the relevant ‘industry,’ about how one makes money in the industry, about who the competition is and isn’t, about who the customers are and aren’t, and so on.”2 Environmental analysis requires you to continually question such assumptions. Peter
36
Drucker labeled these interrelated sets of assumptions the “theory of the business.”3 The sudd ...
- Black & Decker pursued an international expansion strategy during the 1950s-1960s by setting up wholly owned subsidiaries in other countries that were given autonomy to operate. This decentralized structure made sense given Black & Decker's monopoly in the power tools market at the time.
- In the 1980s-1990s, increased competition from large retailers put pressure on Black & Decker's prices. The company responded by further centralizing control over subsidiaries and engaging in cost-cutting measures to lower prices.
- By the 1990s, it was clear that Black & Decker needed to make larger strategic changes beyond just cost-cutting to address the competitive environment.
The bankruptcy of the large South Korean shipping company Hanjin has had global effects that ripple through supply chains. Small businesses are particularly vulnerable when large retailers have priority for limited cargo space on remaining ships. One small hobby shop owner expects his holiday shipments may be delayed, jeopardizing a crucial sales period. While globalization and outsourcing have increased profits for large corporations, they also increase interconnectivity so that disruptions in one area can spread widely. Effective communication is needed to coordinate partnerships and mitigate risks from such bankruptcies that are outside any one company's control.
Drawing on data from the past 5 years of performance of bank interest rates, the Dow Jones Average Index performance, growth in real estate median housing market and owning select franchise concepts; Dr. Robert Needham, presents "The Magic of Compound Businesses" vs "The Magic of Compound Interest".
This document provides a summary of key topics that will impact CFOs in 2016, including the economy, taxes, deals and accounting/financial reporting. It discusses expectations for low global economic growth and high debt levels. On taxes, it mentions potential tax reform in the US and abroad. For deals, it suggests that 2016 may be a challenging year following strong M&A activity in 2015. The accounting section previews new rules that may be issued by the FASB.
3M was founded in 1902 in Two Harbors, Minnesota by five entrepreneurs hoping to mine and sell corundum, a mineral used in grinding wheels. However, their initial product failed in the market. Despite this setback and other struggles, the founders persevered and began producing sandpaper instead, which was more successful. This early period planted the seeds of innovation at 3M through persistence in the face of challenges.
This document discusses the differences between periods of economic and market conditions. It notes that in the 1970s, inflation-adjusted returns hit -75%, while the 1980s-90s saw the emergence of new technologies that drove wealth creation. Currently, interest rates are at historic lows, making equities relatively more appealing. The author argues that distinguishing periods when fundamental factors are truly different is important for investment decisions. Sometimes markets reflect collective madness, while other times data shows a real change. Investors need to recognize differences in economic environments.
The document discusses various topics covered in the March issue of the journal "Inside Enterprise", including entrepreneurship, interviews with business leaders, and articles exploring social entrepreneurship. It provides an overview of the different sections in the issue, thanks contributors and readers, and invites others to get involved by writing for the publication or attending upcoming events.
The document discusses how companies that achieve the top position ("top dog") in their sector tend to underperform relative to other companies in that sector over time. It finds that on average, the top dog in each sector lags the sector average by 3.5% in the following year, 3.9% over 3 years, and 3.3% per year for the next decade. This "too big to succeed" phenomenon may be partly due to increased scrutiny from competitors, politicians, and the public when a company becomes the sector leader. The document also finds some evidence that top dog underperformance is worse during periods of larger government spending and regulation.
Business week baby boomer economy.7 23_09guest0e39643
The document discusses how the economic downturn has significantly impacted spending habits of Baby Boomers. Many major companies that relied heavily on Boomer consumers are struggling as Boomers cut spending and focus more on saving. Mercedes-Benz, Starwood Hotels, and other brands are scrambling to adapt their marketing and offerings to appeal to younger generations and a leaner Boomer economy focused on value and budget-friendly options. The downturn accelerated trends of frugality that were expected as Boomers approached retirement, but the speed and depth of changes have caught many companies off guard.
The document discusses the history of Bausch + Lomb, which was founded in 1853 through a handshake agreement between John Jacob Bausch and Henry Lomb and grew to be a successful American company. However, in the 1990s the company lost its vision and spirit under "professional managers" more focused on numbers than innovation, leading to financial issues and an eventual sale to a private equity firm in 2007. There are now concerns that a potential future sale being explored could be bad for the company's Rochester headquarters and employees.
The document provides a list and brief profiles of 20 CEOs that a panel of business school professors identified as the best American CEOs of all time. It summarizes each CEO's accomplishments and impact. The CEOs span various industries and time periods, from Henry Ford in the early 20th century to Oprah Winfrey today. For each one, it highlights what made them successful leaders and how they helped grow major companies.
DealMarket DIGEST Issue 113 // 18 October 2013CAR FOR YOU
The weekly Dealmarket Digest provides a concise summary of private equity news and trends from various sources. This issue discusses American family offices increasing direct investments in private equity deals, advice for working with private equity investors, Warburg Pincus raising funds focused on energy deals, private equity moving into mining industry deals, and a family office stepping up venture capital investments.
This document provides a summary and analysis of identity programs and rebranding efforts of several major corporations in 1997-1998. It discusses new logos and identities created for Dow Jones, Meritor, Visteon, Solutia (formerly Monsanto's chemicals division), The Hartford (dropping "ITT" from its name), Bell Atlantic, Credit Suisse, British Airways, and US Airways. The author analyzes how each new identity communicates the company's strategic direction and positioning in the market.
The document profiles the top 10 black-run companies on the 2009 Inc. 500 list. It provides background information on the founders and CEOs of each company, including their motivations for starting their businesses and how they have grown their companies over time. The companies represent a variety of industries such as real estate, consulting, tax services, and facilities management.
DealMarket DIGEST Issue 115 // 01 November 2013CAR FOR YOU
The summary provides an overview of the key topics covered in the document:
1) Some tech startups are choosing IPOs over acquisition offers from larger tech companies in order to retain control and achieve higher valuations.
2) Pension funds are seeking less traditional private equity investments that can generate returns as some buyout funds from the boom era have underperformed.
3) M&A activity is gaining momentum globally as corporate confidence increases, with over a third of executives planning acquisitions in the next year.
Nick Rodelli has joined the Center for Financial Research and Analysis (CFRA) to lead their new Legal Edge research service focusing on analyzing how potential legal issues and decisions could impact companies' earnings and share prices. Rodelli believes the market often misprices stocks by not properly accounting for litigation risks and opportunities. He provides several examples where court cases could positively impact World Wrestling Entertainment, American Express and Qualcomm or negatively affect MasterCard and Sherwin-Williams. Rodelli's legal analysis aims to help investors identify underpriced and overpriced stocks.
- Productivity gains in American businesses in the early 2000s were actually losses, as companies prioritized short-term gains over long-term sustainability. To boost productivity statistics, many fired employees and shipped goods from existing stockpiles rather than prioritizing customers, quality, and innovation.
- The focus on "shareholder value" and quarterly performance led CEOs to cut costs through mass layoffs while rewarding themselves handsomely. This undermined company cultures and destroyed trust between management and employees.
- By 2008, many formerly great American companies had been hollowed out, with experienced workers laid off and important tacit knowledge lost. Overworked remaining employees faced stagnant wages as corporate profits soared, contributing
This document discusses lessons from CEOs on making mergers and acquisitions successful. It notes that while M&As often failed in the 1970s, they have now become important strategies for growth. However, cultural differences can cause M&As to fall apart. When integrating acquired companies, priorities include addressing employee uncertainty, having open communication, and representing all shareholders rather than just the original company. Overall, the document emphasizes that every organization approaches restructuring differently based on their strategic goals and industry.
Transcript: Alternatives for a Distressed Company in Apparel and RetailExpert Webcast
The discussion includes the process of bidding for, financing and acquiring distressed companies in the Apparel and Retail space is competitive and complex. The panel addressed the strategies and tips for success from the perspectives of an investment banker, a deal and bankruptcy lawyer, a turnaround executive, a lender and a tax accountant.
Learning from MistakesAnalyzing the external environment is a cr.docxsmile790243
Learning from Mistakes
Analyzing the external environment is a critical step in recognizing and understanding the opportunities and threats that organizations face. And here is where some companies fail to do a good job.
Consider the example of Salemi Industries and the launch of its product, Cell Zone, in 2005. Although it tried to carefully analyze its potential market, it misread the market’s demand for the product and paid a steep price for its mistake.1 Mobile phone usage was sharply increasing, and its founder observed that patrons in places such as restaurants would be annoyed by the chatter of a nearby guest having a private (but loud!) conversation. Salemi Industries interpreted this observation as an opportunity to create the Cell Zone: a “commercial sound resistant cell phone booth that provides a convenient and disturbance-free environment to place and receive phone calls … with a design feature to promote product or service on its curvilinear outer shell,” according to the firm’s website.
Salemi Industries’ key error was that it failed to take into consideration an emerging technology—the increasing popularity of text messaging and other
35
nonvoice communication technology applications and how that would affect the sales of their product. For example, the Pew Internet & American Life Project estimated that the number of text messages that were sent each day would soar from 500,000 in 2001 to 4 billion in 2009. In addition to this technology shift, the target locations (restaurants) were not interested in or willing to give up productive square footage for patrons to hold private conversations. Not surprisingly, the firm has sold only 300 units (100 of them in college libraries), and Salemi Industries has lost over $650,000 to date.
Discussion Questions
1. What is the biggest stumbling block for Cell Zone?
2. Are there other market segments where Cell Zone might work?
Successful managers must recognize opportunities and threats in their firm’s external environment. They must be aware of what’s going on outside their company. If they focus exclusively on the efficiency of internal operations, the firm may degenerate into the world’s most efficient producer of buggy whips, typewriters, or carbon paper. But if they miscalculate the market, opportunities will be lost—hardly an enviable position for their firm. As we saw from the Cell Zone example, misreading the market can lead to negative consequences.
In Competing for the Future, Gary Hamel and C. K. Prahalad suggest that “every manager carries around in his or her head a set of biases, assumptions, and presuppositions about the structure of the relevant ‘industry,’ about how one makes money in the industry, about who the competition is and isn’t, about who the customers are and aren’t, and so on.”2 Environmental analysis requires you to continually question such assumptions. Peter
36
Drucker labeled these interrelated sets of assumptions the “theory of the business.”3 The sudd ...
- Black & Decker pursued an international expansion strategy during the 1950s-1960s by setting up wholly owned subsidiaries in other countries that were given autonomy to operate. This decentralized structure made sense given Black & Decker's monopoly in the power tools market at the time.
- In the 1980s-1990s, increased competition from large retailers put pressure on Black & Decker's prices. The company responded by further centralizing control over subsidiaries and engaging in cost-cutting measures to lower prices.
- By the 1990s, it was clear that Black & Decker needed to make larger strategic changes beyond just cost-cutting to address the competitive environment.
This document summarizes a report written by experts at Heidrick & Struggles on accelerating organizational performance. It discusses how industries are being disrupted at a faster pace due to digital innovation. It also notes that many institutions are failing to adapt to changes in the environment. The report identifies 13 factors that can either drive or impede acceleration. It also outlines four capabilities that leaders need to develop in order to mobilize, execute, and transform their organizations with agility. The document examines what differentiates high-performing organizations and provides a framework for developing an agenda to improve acceleration.
1
3
Simon Property Group
Angel Bloodworth
Strategic Planning for Organizations MGT450
University of Arizona
14 March 2022
Achieving a high level of financial stability while operating a profitable company is one of the most challenging tasks a business can face. After all, any firm facing cash flow and budgetary challenges will eventually collapse if these issues are not handled as soon as possible. One organization that has been having financial issues recently is Simon Properties Group. The company's financial woes, which partly has been caused by Covid-19, have damaged the company's reputation, and the public is slowly losing trust in the company's capabilities. Additionally, the fear of bankruptcy has adversely affected the company's long-term creditworthiness. This paper necessitates an analysis of Simon Properties Group, including its leadership, potential competition, and a recent news item posing a challenge to its strategy.
Organization
Established in the United States, Simon Property Group is a real estate investment trust specializing in outlet malls, retail malls, and lifestyle complexes. The company was founded in 1982 and currently has its headquarters in Indianapolis, Indiana. The Simon Property Group was founded in Indianapolis by brothers Herbert and Melvin Simon, who started by developing strip malls in the city. The company has locations around Europe, North America, and Asia, where the firm serves thousands of people every day and earns millions of dollars in sales each year. The company's portfolio includes properties that have gained national and international attention - assets that have proven to be the preferred destination for retailers (Jie & Jianwei, 2021). Simon is also known for its strong financial position, a senior management team that has been in place for many years and is highly regarded, as well as its innovative mindset, which is reflected in the company's history.
The industry
The corporation operates in the real estate business. Real estate has a lengthy history in the United States. The federal government sold and gave the property to private individuals for their own use after the Revolutionary War when it was no longer under the control of England. As the nation grew westward, this practice continued, most notably with the passage of the Homestead Act in 1862, which authorized individual ownership of U.S. property in return for maintaining and developing the area for at least five years (Katzler, 2017). Through the Homestead Act, the United States government granted more than 300 million acres of public land to private landowners, laying the groundwork for the real estate industry, which is currently worth $203.1 billion.
Mission and Vision
The company’s mission is to become the top retail real estate developer, owner, and manager globally.
The company's vision statement is that it wants to be the unchallenged leader in the business.
Values and purpose
Integrity, innovati ...
1
3
Simon Property Group
Angel Bloodworth
Strategic Planning for Organizations MGT450
University of Arizona
14 March 2022
Achieving a high level of financial stability while operating a profitable company is one of the most challenging tasks a business can face. After all, any firm facing cash flow and budgetary challenges will eventually collapse if these issues are not handled as soon as possible. One organization that has been having financial issues recently is Simon Properties Group. The company's financial woes, which partly has been caused by Covid-19, have damaged the company's reputation, and the public is slowly losing trust in the company's capabilities. Additionally, the fear of bankruptcy has adversely affected the company's long-term creditworthiness. This paper necessitates an analysis of Simon Properties Group, including its leadership, potential competition, and a recent news item posing a challenge to its strategy.
Organization
Established in the United States, Simon Property Group is a real estate investment trust specializing in outlet malls, retail malls, and lifestyle complexes. The company was founded in 1982 and currently has its headquarters in Indianapolis, Indiana. The Simon Property Group was founded in Indianapolis by brothers Herbert and Melvin Simon, who started by developing strip malls in the city. The company has locations around Europe, North America, and Asia, where the firm serves thousands of people every day and earns millions of dollars in sales each year. The company's portfolio includes properties that have gained national and international attention - assets that have proven to be the preferred destination for retailers (Jie & Jianwei, 2021). Simon is also known for its strong financial position, a senior management team that has been in place for many years and is highly regarded, as well as its innovative mindset, which is reflected in the company's history.
The industry
The corporation operates in the real estate business. Real estate has a lengthy history in the United States. The federal government sold and gave the property to private individuals for their own use after the Revolutionary War when it was no longer under the control of England. As the nation grew westward, this practice continued, most notably with the passage of the Homestead Act in 1862, which authorized individual ownership of U.S. property in return for maintaining and developing the area for at least five years (Katzler, 2017). Through the Homestead Act, the United States government granted more than 300 million acres of public land to private landowners, laying the groundwork for the real estate industry, which is currently worth $203.1 billion.
Mission and Vision
The company’s mission is to become the top retail real estate developer, owner, and manager globally.
The company's vision statement is that it wants to be the unchallenged leader in the business.
Values and purpose
Integrity, innovati ...
...how quickly venture backed
technology companies market capitalization changed (grew) and whether there had
been a change in the “Time To Market Cap” during different periods of history. November 2014
A secondary buy-out occurs when one private equity firm acquires a business from another private equity firm, rather than from the original owner. The document discusses how secondary buy-outs have become more common, accounting for 25-30% of all buy-outs. It presents perspectives on why secondary buy-outs are occurring more frequently, such as pressure for existing private equity funds to exit investments. The document also outlines key issues that can arise for management teams during a secondary buy-out, such as conflicts of interest, signaling to new investors, changes to equity structure and incentives, and tax implications. It provides tips and lessons learned from an executive who led a company through a secondary buy-out process.
Five Things Dictating How Bad It Will Be Coming Out of the Pandemic - Cash is...Ron Crabtree
Cash reserves will be crucial for businesses struggling to recover from the pandemic. The shutdown led to a build up of outdated inventory that may not sell until next year. Many retailers may never reopen due to financial difficulties, leaving vacant buildings. However, the document suggests on-demand local manufacturing of seasonal goods could help fill the need and utilize empty facilities. Improved technology and understanding of offshoring costs make this strategy more viable now compared to the past. Support through crowdfunding and public-private partnerships may help provide necessary cash for innovative solutions during the recovery period.
This document summarizes a journal article about addressing human resource issues in mergers and acquisitions. It begins by noting that while M&As are increasingly used for growth, most fail to achieve their goals due to neglected HR issues. It then presents a three-stage model for systematically addressing HR throughout the M&A process. Key points include identifying HR issues in pre-acquisition, post-acquisition integration, and post-integration stages. Attention to cultural differences, talent retention, and clear communication are highlighted as especially important for M&A success. The role of HR professionals in guiding a people-focused approach is also discussed.
Mergers & Acquistitions New Rules of AttractionNovember 15th .docxARIV4
Mergers & Acquistitions: New Rules of Attraction
November 15th 2014 From The Economist print edition
Weblink - http://www.economist.com/news/business/21632675-latest-boom-dealmaking-appears-more-sensible-its-predecessors-valuations-areThe latest boom in dealmaking appears more sensible than its predecessors. But valuations are creeping into the danger zone
RUCE WASSERSTEIN was probably the most famous mergers and acquisitions (M&A) banker on Wall Street in the 1980s and 1990s. Yet "Bid 'em up Bruce", who died in 2009, was ambivalent about his trade. The best rainmakers were capable men, he once wrote, but dealmaking also attracted "hustlers and swaggering mediocrities". And whereas takeovers made the business world more dynamic, they also led to "pain, dislocations and blunders".
Whether dealmaking is sensible is once more an important question, because M&A are back with a vengeance, after a lull following the financial crisis. Worldwide, $3.6 trillion of deals have been announced this year, reckons Bloomberg, an information provider, approaching the peak reached in 2007. In pharmaceuticals (see next story) and among media firms the activity is frantic. Deals worth more than $10 billion are again common. America and Britain, with their open markets for corporate control, account for a disproportionate share of the action. So do cross-border deals, which have risen from a sixth of activity in the mid-1990s to 43% today.
Long experience of booms and slumps in M&A has made investors wary. Veteran fund managers and academics argue that deals satisfy executives' vanity and enrich their bankers, but destroy value for shareholders. Reflecting this worry, when a firm announces an acquisition its shares have tended to fall, as investors fret that the premium it is paying will exceed the benefit from the synergies it will reap. However, since 2012 acquirers' share prices have generally been stable or have risen, according to McKinsey, a consulting firm. That begs an intriguing and dangerous question. Might this time be different?
On paper, M&A make sense. When two firms combine they can cut duplicated overheads, raising their margins. By adding together their market shares they can gain pricing power over customers and suppliers. By cross-selling each other's product ranges in each other's geographic markets, merging firms can make their combined sales a lot bigger than the sum of their individual ones.
M&A folklore, however, dwells on giant catastrophes, such as the combinations of Time Warner and AOL in 2000 just as the dotcom bubble burst, or Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) and ABN AMRO in 2007, as the subprime crisis struck. Yet some of the world's most successful firms are the result of giant deals. Exxon became the energy industry's top dog thanks to its purchase in 1999 of Mobil, which had an under-appreciated collection of global assets. AB Inbev has done $100 billion of deals over two decades to become the world's biggest brewer, with thirst- ...
Organizational Change and Stress ManagementSource Jeff Moore.docxalfred4lewis58146
This document discusses organizational change and stress management. It begins by identifying forces that drive organizational change, such as changes in technology, competition, and social/economic trends. It contrasts planned, intentional changes from unplanned changes. Sources of resistance to change are then described, including individual factors like fear of the unknown and organizational inertia. Finally, the document outlines approaches to managing change, such as education/communication, participation, facilitation, negotiation, manipulation, coercion, and therapy/support. It concludes by defining stress and its impacts, and contrasting individual vs organizational approaches to managing stress.
Professor Michael E. Porter discusses competitive strategy in the real estate development industry. He argues that the industry has undergone fundamental structural changes that have made it less attractive and profitable than in the past. Increased competition from new entrants, more sophisticated tenants and financial buyers, and increased bargaining power among suppliers have reduced industry profitability on average. However, the industry remains large and fragmented, leaving opportunities for above-average performance. To achieve this, companies must develop a competitive advantage through either lower costs or differentiation, and choose a clear scope within the industry. Simply being opportunistic will no longer lead to success in this changed competitive landscape.
Blue chip stocks refer to well-established, financially sound companies that are leaders in their industries. They typically have a long history of stable and reliable growth, even during economic downturns. Characteristics of blue chip companies include large market capitalization, strong balance sheets, consistent earnings growth, high credit ratings, and paying dividends regularly over many years. Examples of indices that track blue chip stocks are the Dow Jones Industrial Average, S&P 500, and CAC 40.
This document discusses various ethical issues that financial professionals may face, including:
1. Accountants must assign subjective values to assets and estimates, which can tempt them to misrepresent a company's financial health.
2. Commercial conflicts of interest may arise when accountants are pressured to portray companies in a favorable light to secure loans or deals.
3. "Cooking the books" through practices like falsifying revenues, delaying expenses, and hiding losses are ways that companies can deceive shareholders and regulators.
4. There are debates around whether markets can adequately police themselves or if more government regulation of financial reporting is needed to curb corruption and protect stakeholders.
The document summarizes Jim Collins's book "How The Mighty Fall" which identifies five stages of decline for companies: 1) Hubris born of success, 2) Undisciplined pursuit of more, 3) Denial of risk and peril, 4) Grasping for salvation, and 5) Capitulation to irrelevance or death. It provides examples of companies like Motorola and Merck that experienced stages of decline including pursuing growth in new areas at the cost of their core values and denying negative data. The summary emphasizes that great companies can recover from decline by returning to discipline and not grasping for "silver bullet" solutions.
How the Mighty FALL And Why Some Companies Never Give In
Beyond Fear and Greed
1. Beyond Fear and Greed:
Capitalizing on Opportunities in the Current Crisis
By
Paul B. Carroll and Chunka Mui
The Devil’s Advocate Group
T +1.312.563.1292 E chunka.mui@devilsadvocategroup.com W devilsadvocategroup.com
2. The Devils Advocate Group
Warren Buffett says his guiding principle is to “be fearful when others are greedy and greedy
when others are fearful.” There’s certainly plenty of fear out there, and thus plenty of opportuni-
ties to get greedy. Greed, however, does not necessarily translate into wealth. In this article, we
draw on our two years of research into more than 2,500 major corporate failures and our related
consulting work to describe the landmines that companies are mostly like to hit as they try to
capitalize on the turmoil that has roiled many markets since the summer of 2008. We also lay out
a process for stress testing new business strategies, ensuring that greed does not send you
down the wrong path and increasing the chances that you’ll pick a highly prosperous road.
The Opportunity
Even more than most economic downturns, what has been dubbed The Great Reces-
sion is fundamentally changing the business landscape. Many companies, long vener-
ated, are falling by the wayside. Many others, not generally thought of as leaders, are
emerging in dominant positions.
Little-known Golub Capital has raced past mighty GE Capital in lending to small busi-
nesses. New York Life got aggressive and leapfrogged AIG, Hartford Financial Services
and Lincoln National in sales of life insurance and annuities—New York Life’s share of
the U.S. market has jumped to 5.4% from 3.6%. Two builders, Toll and Lennar, are on a
land-buying spree, taking advantage of others’ weakness. In one major deal, Lennar
bought back land it sold in 2007, paying 18% of the earlier price.
Numerous markets will stay depressed or at least uncertain for several more quarters,
or even years, so the change has just begun. Where companies will end up depends on
their strategic choices in response to the crisis.
History is replete with success stories about those who made the most of recessions.
Several of the “robber barons,” including Andrew Carnegie and John D. Rockefeller,
took advantage of the Panic of 1873, which occurred after the bursting of the post-Civil
War railroad bubble. They bought competitors at fire-sale prices and built empires.
Southwest Airlines expanded rapidly in the recession in the early 1980s. Although it was
a small upstart at the time, Southwest became a major force by the end of the decade,
and CEO Herb Kelleher soon became a household name. After 9/11, while other airlines
cut back, Southwest lowered fares and stepped up advertising to gain market share. It
is now the most successful in the industry. Similarly, in the early 1980s, Intel was skat-
ing on the edge of bankruptcy. Yet it responded to horrible problems in the memory-
chip market by making a bold move into microprocessors, where the company soon
won a near-monopoly in the personal-computer market. Since then, Intel has consis-
tently invested in additional capacity during downturns. In the process, it has outdis-
tanced IBM, Sun, Motorola, Advanced Micro Devices and many other formidable com-
petitors—making heroes out of Gordon Moore, Andy Grove and other Intel CEOs.
As Grove has said, “Bad companies are destroyed by crisis. Good companies survive
them. Great companies are improved by them.”
A study of 400 companies in the last recession, by Diamond Management & Technology
Consultants, buttresses his claim about the potential for improvement. It found that
above-average performers increased their stock-market value by a total of $350 billion
Beyond Fear and Greed
1
3. The Devils Advocate Group
and improved their gross margins by 20 percentage points by the time the recession
ended in 2004.
There are, however, also plenty of examples of strong companies that pursued the
wrong opportunities in a crisis—the poorer performers in the Diamond study shed $200
billion of stock-market value in the last recession. And this recession has been far trick-
ier. There’s a saying on Wall Street: Buying stocks in the kind of scary market we’ve
seen over the past year is “like catching knives.” You can buy stocks—or whole com-
panies—but you might lose a hand in the process.
Look at Bank of America’s decision to buy Merrill Lynch. BofA CEO Ken Lewis thought
he got the deal of a lifetime, but now the combination is being referred to as one of the
worst in memory. The mortgage-backed securities owned by the combined company
may lose more than $100 billion. Meanwhile, BofA’s middle-class culture is having trou-
ble absorbing Merrill’s white-shoe brokers. Merrill’s CEO, John Thain, has already lost
his job, and BofA CEO Ken Lewis is very much on the hot seat.
Yet problems can be spotted ahead of time. Our two years of research into 2,500 major
business mistakes of the past quarter-century and our work with consulting clients let
us see, for instance, that the BofA-Merrill deal was wrong-headed. In our blog
(www.devilsadvocategroup.com), we wrote in September 2008 that the BofA-Merrill
deal seemed a lot like the fiasco involving Green Tree and Conseco that we covered at
length in our book, Billion-Dollar Lessons: What You Can Learn from the Most Inexcus-
able Business Failures of the Last 25 Years. Green Tree built a house of cards in much
the same way that the sub-prime lenders did recently, then was purchased by Conseco.
Conseco soon filed for bankruptcy protection, in the third-largest bankruptcy in U.S.
history to that time. Digging into the details, it seemed that Merrill had played the role of
Green Tree, while BofA was in danger of playing the role of Conseco, and that’s cer-
tainly how things would have played out without government intervention. Even with the
unexpected government help, BofA is in for a rough time. We also wrote on our blog
that clothing retailer Steve & Barry’s didn’t seem to have a sustainable business model.
Steve & Barry’s was losing money on the sales of its inexpensive clothing but camou-
flaging the losses with onetime payments from mall operators to open stores in their
facilities. The only way to sustain the fictional profitability was to keep opening stores.
But how long was that sustainable? Obviously, not long enough. Private-equity firm Bay
Harbour Management went ahead and bought Steve & Barry’s out of bankruptcy for
$168 million—then announced three months later that it was liquidating the retail chain.
The question is, how do you identify and eliminate the clearly bad ideas and just focus
on the ones that give you a chance of major success? To put it another way: If someone
writes a front-page piece in the Wall Street Journal about you in two years, how can you
make sure you’re treated like Andrew Carnegie, Herb Kelleher or Andy Grove and not
like Ken Lewis or the folks at Bay Harbour?
In this paper, we will lay out a process that will make it far more likely that you receive
Andy Grove treatment.
The Starting Point
The place to begin is by assembling an array of possible ways to take advantage of the
current uncertainty. These could be acquisitions. These could be moves to expand or-
ganically into new markets. These could be operational exercises to negotiate more fa-
vorable terms with suppliers, bring in fresh talent, change pricing or promotions, and so
Beyond Fear and Greed
2
4. The Devils Advocate Group
on. On the flip side, this could mean taking a hard look at marginal businesses or un-
tenable organizational issues, and acknowledging that the time has come to address
them. This could mean divesting assets, reorganizing businesses, clearing out dead
wood among employees, etc.
Our sense in discussions with numerous executives is that many have a short list of
such strategic moves in their hip pockets, waiting for the right circumstances. It is im-
portant, however, to also take a systematic look to make sure that all plausible options
are considered. There are no lack of suggestions on how to be thorough. We’ve seen
lists of suggestions from Diamond, McKinsey and Accenture on where to cut and where
to invest, and plenty of other firms are out there with ideas, too.
Once you have a good list, you should do a preliminary vetting and build business
cases for at least your half-dozen best ideas. Doing so will help combat the tendency to
become too set, too soon on a single possibility. Setting ideas in opposition to each
other will help insure that only the best survive.
So far, so good. What we’ve described probably differs little from your normal proc-
esses. But now comes the hard part: separating the wheat from the chaff.
Our process begins by looking at whether your strategy is one of the seven that, ac-
cording to our extensive research, most commonly lead to failure. They are: 1) attempts
at synergy; 2) moves into adjacent markets; 3) financial engineering; 4) consolidation of
an industry; 5) rollups; 6) the leveraging of what is expected to be a breakthrough in
technology; and 7) “staying the course”—essentially, continuing to try to build the tradi-
tional business even though the industry may be changing. These seven strategies
aren’t always going to fail. Far from it. These strategies can also produce notable suc-
cesses. Still, anyone pursuing one of these seven strategies needs to be aware of the
red flags that we list in our book that can signal that the strategy is headed toward dis-
aster. You should also run through the “Tough Questions” that are listed in the book and
that are associated with each of those red flags.
We’ll go through three of those seven strategies at some length here because they are
the most likely to be pursued during the sort of recession we’ve experienced. The three
are: moves into adjacent markets; consolidation; and staying the course. We’ll also go
through several mistakes that popped up frequently, regardless of the strategy being
pursued.
Dangerous Strategies
Adjacencies
When companies succeed by moving into markets that they see as adjacent to their
core markets, the reasons tend to be all over the place. But, when companies fail, they
tend to do so for one of four reasons.
First, companies are making the move out of desperation, more because they’re fleeing
their core market than because they’ve found some great opportunity elsewhere. This
will often be the case in a recession, as companies scramble to find some lifeline.
Blockbuster, for instance, should have noticed this red flag before offering to buy Circuit
City for as much as $1.35 billion in the spring of 2008. It’s true that Blockbuster has a
tough road ahead, because of competition from Netflix and because movies will in-
creasingly be downloaded digitally, not rented at a neighborhood store. But that doesn’t
Beyond Fear and Greed
3
5. The Devils Advocate Group
mean it made sense for a renter of movies to think it should start selling electronics
equipment—something we said on our blog, at the time of the offer, long before it be-
came clear that Circuit City was headed for bankruptcy court and now liquidation.
Blockbuster is lucky that the purchase never happened.
Second, companies may overestimate the strengths they bring to that new market. This
is the mistake that Hicks Waldron made as CEO at Avon in the mid-1980s, when he de-
cided that what he called the company’s “culture of caring” prepared it to operate re-
tirement homes and manufacture medical equipment. Waldron had been a senior ex-
ecutive at GE, had turned around liquor maker Heublein and had been the favorite to be
CEO of R.J. Reynolds after it acquired Heublein. He had also, memorably, faced down
Donald Trump when Trump had the odd idea that he should buy Tiffany from Avon so
he could knock out the wall that separated its flagship store from Trump Tower in Man-
hattan and make Tiffany part of the Trump experience. But Waldron’s idea flopped.
Medical equipment and retirement homes were not, in fact, adjacent to Avon’s tradi-
tional door-to-door cosmetic sales. Avon began selling off all its acquired businesses,
taking hundreds of millions of dollars in writeoffs, and Waldron soon retired.
Third, companies may underestimate the complexity of the new market. In the late
1990s, Laidlaw, for instance, thought its experience in operating school buses meant it
could manage ambulance services. Laidlaw found, however, that ambulances were
really a highly regulated medical business, not a transportation business. Laidlaw took
more than $1.8 billion in writeoffs.
Fourth, companies may overestimate their hold on customers. This has happened re-
peatedly and in many industries. In financial services, for instance, Sears incorrectly as-
sumed in the 1980s that its customers would buy stocks through Dean Witter and
would hire realtors from Coldwell Banker, both of which Sears bought so it could set up
financial-services boutiques in its stores. Customers, however, felt no need to buy fi-
nancial tools at the same place where they bought power tools. Sears sold the busi-
nesses in the early 1990s, having wasted years of management time that could have
better prepared it for the onslaught known as Wal-Mart. Ed Brennan, who was the
youngest CEO in Sears history when he took the reins in the 1980s, was pushed into
retirement when his strategy cratered.
Consolidation
When consolidation moves fail, it’s generally because companies focus too much on
the opportunities being acquired and not enough on the problems at the operations be-
ing purchased. It’s now clear that BofA made this mistake in acquiring Merrill Lynch.
BofA’s Ken Lewis was so convinced of the benefits of being a financial supermarket
(just at the time that Citigroup is unwinding its supermarket strategy, while taking huge
losses) that he agreed to buy Merrill after an hour-long conversation with Merrill’s CEO.
Lewis didn’t take the time to understand thoroughly just how troubled Merrill’s portfolio
of mortgage-backed securities was, and it turns out that those securities were incredi-
bly toxic. Lewis also glossed over potential problems that we highlighted at the time
and that several Wall Street Journal stories have since said are occurring—BofA’s bro-
kerage operations have a very different culture than Merrill, so friction has occurred and
many top people have left. We believe there is another shoe to drop, as well. BofA has
said it welcomed the opportunity to move into investment banking through the acquisi-
tion. Yet BofA had tried investment banking on its own and ran away from that market,
kicking and screaming. There is every reason to think BofA will have trouble making a
go of investment banking this time around.
Beyond Fear and Greed
4
6. The Devils Advocate Group
There are three other potential problems with consolidation strategies:
First, consolidation moves may fail because they produce so much complexity that they
produce diseconomies of scale. US Air was solidly profitable until it purchased Pied-
mont in 1986 to become a truly national carrier. But US Air was unprepared for the jump
in size, which led to $3 billion of losses over five years. Among other problems, US Air’s
information systems broke under the stress. On payday, armies of secretaries often had
to type checks manually.
Second, companies may assume they’ll hold on to all customers, even though defec-
tions are inevitable. Many retailers made this mistake when they decided they could
switch to, say, everyday low prices from a strategy of occasional, steep discounts, only
to find that customers hated the switch.
Third, if a company assumes it should be the buyer, it isn’t considering all its options.
Often, it’s better to be the seller. We wrote at the time that Yahoo was making this mis-
take when it declined to take Microsoft’s money and run earlier this year—and CEO
Jerry Yang’s intransigence looks far worse now, of course, with Yahoo shares trading at
less than a third of the price Microsoft offered and with Yang’s replacement as CEO.
Staying the Course
The tendency in a recession is for all but the healthiest companies to hunker down and
just try to survive to the other side. But staying the course can be misguided for one of
three reasons:
First, people tend to see the future as a variant of the present even when great change
is about to happen. The CEOs of the three major U.S. car makers, for instance, went to
Congress in November 2008 to ask for a loan based on the idea that they would con-
tinue on their existing paths as they tried to bring high costs under control. They didn’t
seem to realize that they had an opportunity to completely reset their costs by hacking
away at the excessive number of brands they offer, the dealer networks they use, and
so on.
Second, people often evaluate the economics of a possible new business based on the
economics of the existing business, not realizing that the profitability of the existing
business is fading fast. This is the mistake that Kodak made throughout the 1990s
when it couldn’t quite bring itself to switch to digital photography. That new business
offered gross margins that Kodak estimated at 15%, while the traditional business of
selling film, paper and chemicals carried margins of 65% to 80%. Delaying the switch
would seem to be a no-brainer. Yet the change was going to happen whether Kodak
liked it or not, and Kodak misplayed the situation by continuing to invest heavily in a
dying business while ceding many of the new opportunities to others. Just in the past
decade, Kodak has shed more than two-thirds of its employees and lost more than
90% of its stock-market value.
Third, people may be ignoring some of their options—much as can occur when compa-
nies try to consolidate an industry. Pillowtex, for instance, continued its strategy of in-
vesting heavily to make its U.S. plants the most efficient in the country, even though, by
the mid-1990s, it should have been clear that manufacturing of towels, blankets, pil-
lows, etc. needed to be moved offshore to countries with lower wages. Pillowtex filed
Beyond Fear and Greed
5
7. The Devils Advocate Group
for bankruptcy protection twice and liquidated in 2003, wiping out the thousands of
U.S. jobs that the company had hoped to protect.
A recession can, in fact, be a great time to reconsider all options and straighten out
problems with product strategies, with distribution networks, with wages and benefits,
and so on. But companies have to be willing to rethink everything if they’re to get long-
term good out of a crisis.
Common Pitfalls
Leaving aside the particular strategy being pursued, our research found that companies
were most susceptible to seven errors.
First, people tend to underestimate the complexity that comes with scale. While it is
perfectly reasonable to argue for some economies of scale, i.e., that some overhead
costs will drop as a percentage of the total business, companies often don’t account for
the fact that when they double in size they aren’t just doing precisely the same thing
twice as many times. They may be dealing in different markets, with different custom-
ers, different sales channels, and so on. This extra complexity is what tripped up US
Air’s consolidation strategy after it purchased Piedmont.
Second, people tend to overstate the increased purchasing power or pricing power that
comes from growing in size. Doubling or tripling in size feels like a real achievement to
those inside the company, but the outside world may not notice. If the company re-
mains a small part of the industry, it still isn’t going to get much additional purchasing,
pricing, or other power. Loewen Funeral Homes Group increased in size by a factor of
100 in a bit more than a decade, owning more than 1,100 funeral homes by 1998. But
the company never accounted for more than 5% of the U.S. market, so Loewen never
achieved its goal of being able to dominate suppliers. The company filed for bankruptcy
protection and was sold at a distressed price.
Third, people tend to overestimate their hold on customers. Companies sometimes talk
themselves into truly strange ideas about their tight relationships with customers—only
to find out that customers may well head next door when you put a new name on the
door, change the pricing strategy, alter the product mix, etc. A study found that 80% of
executives believe their company has the best product in the market, and that 8% of
customers agree.
Fourth, people tend to rely on semantic games to rationalize sweeping strategic moves.
Any strategy that relies on a turn of phrase—such as saying that railroads were really in
the transportation business, not the railroad business—is open to challenge. This is the
mistake that Avon made when it decided that its “culture of caring” qualified it to run a
medical-equipment company and retirement homes, even though they had nothing to
do with Avon’s core cosmetic sales or its door-to-door sales force.
Fifth, people tend not to consider all options. We all live under the imperative to grow.
We all understand that the survivors are the ones who are rewarded and remembered.
Yet, certain attempts at growth are just a waste of money. Even harder, sometimes sell-
ing the business makes more sense than to hang on and, in the process, fritter away
the value of the business. Just ask Jerry Yang about this point.
Beyond Fear and Greed
6
8. The Devils Advocate Group
Sixth, people tend to overpay for acquisitions. But you didn’t need us to tell you that.
There’s already a wealth of information about the fact that businesses often overpay
when buying other companies and, in spite of that, continue to do so.
Finally, companies often don’t manage risks very well. As we’ve seen in the recent
credit crisis, this is true even for companies that have elaborate processes for measur-
ing and managing risk and that devote an incredible amount of brain power to under-
standing risk.
Part of the problem is that the institutional imperative to keep increasing earnings can
overwhelm attempts to say no to risky opportunities. Citigroup, for instance, suffered
from a real case of Goldman envy. Citigroup saw Goldman making gobs of money trad-
ing for its own account and felt it had to get into the game, too, if it wanted to keep
generating healthy earnings increases—even though Citigroup didn’t have the decades
of experience that Goldman had and was thus putting itself in harm’s way. Interpersonal
dynamics can also make it hard to say no. At Citigroup, for instance, a powerful office
was established to evaluate risks. It was run by a capable person with a good pedigree,
and it seems his heart was in the right place. But he had come up through the ranks
with the two executives who were responsible for finding risks that Citigroup could take
on profitably, and he was friends with the two. The person whose job it was to say no
actually would wait outside his friends’ offices for 45 minutes at the end of the day, so
they could drive home together, according to the New York Times. As you can imagine,
Citigroup’s risk office didn’t say no a lot.
The intricate models that underlie risk evaluation can also be a problem. That’s partly
because they are based on historical information, which, as we’ve learned, doesn’t al-
ways predict the future well. Just because housing prices in the U.S. had never shown a
sustained decline doesn’t mean they couldn’t, if conditions were right. Fannie Mae’s risk
models didn’t even allow for the possibility of price declines, yet home prices plunged.
The other problem with models is that they create a false sense of security. Numerous
news articles have said that the executives running Wall Street firms—smart folks, all—
didn’t entirely understand how they could be making so much money off sub-prime
mortgages and related securities. But the models prepared by Wall Street’s so-called
rocket scientists were so impressive that senior managers convinced themselves that
someone, somewhere understood what was going on and was making sure that any
risks were appropriate.
Our colleague Vince Barabba found an old line of his quoted recently about the danger
of models. Vince—who has held senior strategy positions at major corporations, has
written numerous books and has twice been director of the U.S. census—was quoted
as positing Barabba’s Law. It cautions: “Never say, the model says. . . .”
A Process for Making Viable Strategies Stronger, and Avoiding Strategic
Mistakes
Our research found numerous instances where executives pursued bad strategies even
though many members of the executive team or the board had a strong sense that
trouble was brewing.
We’ll say that a different way: It isn’t enough to know that an idea is probably flawed.
There has to be a method, agreed on ahead of time, for discussing possible problems
and making sure they are given due weight. Otherwise, once a strategy starts to build
Beyond Fear and Greed
7
9. The Devils Advocate Group
momentum it will steamroll any possible objections—just as Citigroup’s short-term
earnings needs pushed aside any attempts to say that risks were too great.
A process that would have headed off a high percentage of the failures we studied is
what we call a “strategy stress test.” Informed by the billion-dollar lessons derived
through our research, the stress test uses debate, role-playing, scenarios and other
analytical tools to bring to the surface not only all the problems that an executive team
could already perceive, but also many that can be off everyone’s radar.
Armed with detailed information about potential problems, the executive team can im-
prove the strategy or, in extreme cases, kill the idea before it costs a lot of money. The
team can also use the information to negotiate a better deal, if an acquisition is in-
volved, or to do a more thorough job of preparing for the integration of a business being
purchased.
The stress test functions in a way that the team can tolerate. It doesn’t make the CEO
or anyone else look bad. The panel that conducts the test acts as a trusted, confidential
adviser who can, at least, preserve the jobs of the CEO, his subordinates and the
board, while perhaps making lots of money for both executives and shareholders.
The stress test can be conducted quickly—in as little as a weekend.
The test provides three main benefits:
First, it creates a forum in which objections can be raised and addressed, before it’s too
late. Often, it’s easy to see the problem. For instance, Blue Circle, one of the world’s
largest cement companies, decided it should sell lawnmowers because cement is used
in homes and, well, homes have lawns. It was easy to see that idea made no sense. The
problem was that there weren’t any means for voicing objections once top management
had set a general direction. Blue Circle stumbled so badly that it went into bankruptcy
proceedings and was then sold.
Second, the panel makes sure executives understand all the assumptions they’re mak-
ing. Florida Power & Light, for instance, decided it could take advantage of its strong
brand and sell life insurance to its customer base—only to find that the utility brand
didn’t extend far enough, because customers didn’t associate electricity with insurance.
FPL, previously considered to be a very well-managed business, took a $689 million
writeoff to get out of the insurance business in 1991.
Third, the stress test panel makes sure that executives will notice if the environment
changes and undercuts key assumptions. Motorola, for instance, conceived of its Irid-
ium satellite telephone business in the mid-1980s, but it didn’t become operational until
the late 1990s. In the meantime, cellphone service improved greatly—yet Motorola and
Iridium didn’t see that all their assumptions about the potential market had been invali-
dated. Iridium was operational for less than a year before filing for bankruptcy protec-
tion. The system, which cost $5 billion to build, had its assets sold for just $25 million.
Blue Circle, FPL, Iridium and hundreds of other companies used their traditional
strategy-setting processes to try to be careful about avoiding pitfalls, yet failed misera-
bly, so it isn’t enough just to be aware and to try to be cautious. There needs to be a
doublecheck, such as the stress test panel, that operates outside the normal strategy
process.
Beyond Fear and Greed
8
10. The Devils Advocate Group
Here’s how it works:
A panel of three to five people is convened, led by someone who has credibility but
hasn’t been involved in the discussions that produced the potential strategy. That could
mean an independent board member, a retired executive, a consultant, or, in the case of
small businesses, an experienced friend. (It does not mean your investment banker,
who has every incentive to push you toward some kind of deal.) The other panel mem-
bers are chosen mostly for their expertise in asking different types of questions about
strategy, marketing, and a range of other topics. Usually, it’s a good idea to have one
person with some familiarity with the organization and with the industry.
Once the panel is set, ideally it intervenes at three points in the strategy-development
process.
The first panel review happens reasonably early in the strategy-setting process, soon
after the strategic alternatives and their corresponding assumptions and stakeholders
are identified and an initial course of action is chosen. At this point, the panel leads the
executive team through a series of exercises designed to get them to debate each other
and bring out all the tough questions. A key point: The debate is done through role-
playing. That way, executives don’t censor themselves out of fear that disagreeing with
an option supported by the CEO could be a career-limiting move. After the debate, the
panel produces a list of key assumptions, so the executive team can make sure it’s
comfortable with all of them. (The Blue Circle cement/lawnmower error could have been
caught at this point.) The panel also produces a list of open questions where more in-
formation needs to be gathered before a decision is set in stone. (This is where the
electricity/insurance assumption would have been tested and found wanting.) Often,
gathering more information involves looking for what we call “history that fits”—while
the tendency is to look for successful examples of strategies similar to the one being
considered, “history that fits” involves finding examples of similar strategies that failed.
Our database, with its 2,500 failures and counting, typically contains numerous exam-
ples of similar, failed strategies.
The second review happens when the strategy is more fully developed and the strategy
team has a clear hypothesis on key issues such as business models, target markets,
competitive forces and, critically, whether to build, partner for, or acquire the necessary
capabilities. The panel reconvenes and examines the strategy in the context of the red
flags associated with prior failures. It then stress tests each component. The panel, for
instance, considers numerous scenarios to see how they might affect the choice. What
if a key supplier goes out of business? What if the recession is longer than forecast?
What if it’s shorter? And so on. At this point, the panel considers what sort of margin of
safety needs to be built into the strategy. Warren Buffett has long insisted on a belt-
and-suspenders approach to his investing, and some research suggests that acquisi-
tions shouldn’t be pursued unless they work even if the numbers turn out to be 30%
worse than projected.
The final review occurs when the strategy is complete, and the green light is about to be
given. The panel convenes one final time to make sure that management has ad-
dressed all the concerns that have been raised along the way and hasn’t just swept
some aside (a very common occurrence). The final review is particularly important in
situations where acquisitions are involved. In the course of assessing a specific acqui-
sition, dealmakers often get caught up in the desire to complete a deal, sometimes
making unstated compromises against, or even losing the connection with, the motivat-
ing strategy. The panel brings a fresh perspective to these issues, ensuring that poten-
tial red flags are articulated and examined. The panel also helps management con-
Beyond Fear and Greed
9
11. The Devils Advocate Group
struct alarm systems, so executives will notice quickly if some key assumption is turn-
ing out to be untrue. (The alarm systems would have shown Iridium that it was headed
toward serious trouble.)
Frequently, there isn’t enough time to conduct an extended stress test, such as in the
realm of mergers and acquisitions, where deals are opportunistic and time constraints
are significant. For these situations, we’ve developed a short, intensive version of our
review process. For more information, see our paper titled “Perfecting the Art of the
Deal: Applying Strategic Stress Tests to Greatly Increase the Odds of M&A Success.”
The stress test can even be applied to completed strategies, either as a method for
building consensus or identifying implementation hurdles. In one case, a CEO of a ma-
jor insurance company acquiesced to a review of a corporate growth strategy after it
was adopted because the business unit executives responsible for a large part of the
targeted growth expressed misgivings about its viability. The review found numerous
assumptions that were, at best, dubious. For instance, a historical analysis revealed
that no offering from any company in the industry had ever achieved the growth targets
that the strategy required in the unit’s target markets. It also required achieving a mar-
ket share that even the company’s best-performing products had never achieved. As a
result of the review, the CEO eventually scaled back his expectations for the strategy,
avoiding an over-investment in search of unattainable growth that would have crushed
earnings.
Who Should Care About a Stress Test?
The CEO is the obvious candidate to apply the independent test, because he takes
primary responsibility for major strategic decisions. By overlaying a formal review on the
standard strategy development process, CEOs ensure higher quality while maintaining
the option not to proceed. CEOs can also use the review process to build consensus
among their management team and assure their boards of directors that the strategy is
being subjected to rigorous analysis. Contrast this with the typical scenario where, as
one CEO bemoaned, “the only thing harder than starting a major initiative is killing one.”
That’s because CEOs usually expend considerable political capital to launch a major
effort and, as a result, must maintain steadfast commitment or risk losing personal
credibility.
The process can also be applied at almost any other level of the business. The board of
directors should consider using it to broaden its dialogue with management and act as
a doublecheck—lest directors be excoriated the way Lehman Brothers’ board was after
it failed to keep the CEO from running the company out of existence. A colleague who
is on the Intel board says it uses a process like the stress test to structure discussions
with the executive team, and it’s hard to argue with Intel’s success.
Executives below the CEO level can suggest this sort of process as a way of contribut-
ing to the broad discussion of strategy or as a way of protecting themselves from unre-
alistic expectations—the process brings to the surface potential problems, such as
those that inadequate information systems can cause in a merger, rather than have
them be glossed over and have unfair goals set for the CIO. Middle managers can use a
variant of the process to vet their decisions.
Similarly, big private-equity investors can use the process as a doublecheck before
buying troubled companies, so they don’t end up like Bay Harbour Management, the
Beyond Fear and Greed
10
12. The Devils Advocate Group
turnaround fund that thought it was grabbing a bargain when it swooped in to buy
Steve & Barry’s out of bankruptcy, only to be forced to liquidate just a few months later.
Even small investors can benefit from the sort of analysis that goes into the process be-
cause it helps spot problems with corporate strategy. On our blog
(blog.devilsadvocategroup.com), we’ve used the process to identify likely winners and
losers and have had a nearly unblemished record for the past three years. For instance,
we wrote in 2006 that Oshkosh was pursuing a flawed synergy strategy when it decided
to buy a maker of specialized construction equipment and combine it with Oshkosh’s
truck-manufacturing operations. Oshkosh paid $3 billion in cash for the company. Even
before the stock market fell apart last fall, Oshkosh’s market value was less than $1 bil-
lion.
Conclusion
If you can build more constructive contention into your strategy processes or into your
investment analysis, you may still fail. After all, business is a contact sport. Companies
win. Companies lose. But if you can catch your obvious mistakes—and our research
found that almost half of strategy mistakes were obvious ones—then you’ll be much
less likely to fail and that much more likely to succeed.
You will catch some mistakes if you run through our red flags that indicate potential
problems with various strategies—consolidation, adjacency moves, staying the course,
and so on. You’ll catch more potential errors if you also look at the mistakes that were
most common, regardless of the strategy being followed. But, to really be safe, you
can’t just try to be aware of problems. You have to pursue something akin to our stress
test to change the dialogue and make sure that you’ve carefully considered all potential
problems, in a way that gives you a chance to improve or kill a strategic option without
having anyone lose face.
If you can introduce more contention into the dialogue, you’ll not only give yourself bet-
ter chance of succeeding, but, despite the difficult environment, you’ll also sleep better
at night.
Paul B. Carroll and Chunka Mui are co-founders of the Devil’s Advocate Group, an alliance of critical thinkers dedicated
to helping business leaders increase the robustness of their strategies and increase the odds of success. They are also
co-authors of Billion-Dollar Lessons: What You Can Learn from the Most Inexcusable Business Failures of the Last 25
Years. For more information, see www.devilsadvocategroup.com, or contact one of the authors at
paul.carroll@devilsadvocategroup.com or chunka.mui@devilsadvocategroup.com.
Beyond Fear and Greed
11