Case studies

This case was primarily researched using academic research papers, industry reports (Egg Industry Center and others), and finance databases including Standard and Poor’s Capital IQ. Regarding the cost and investment budgets, the case relies mainly on an experiment conducted by the Coalition for Sustainable Egg Supply, updated by the authors of this case.

Eggs produced by cage-free birds, while more expensive than conventionally produced eggs, are gaining in popularity among consumers who want only eggs that are produced more humanely. A number of major distributors, including Whole Foods, McDonalds and Starbucks have pledged to sell only cage-free produced eggs by 2025. Several states including California, Oregon and Michigan have passed laws limiting conventional egg production. The case provides costs and industry information and needed to project free cash flows and risk-adjusted opportunity cost of capital and perform break-even capital budgeting analysis of the two egg production alternatives.

This case is appropriate for graduate corporate finance courses. It is particularly appropriate for agribusiness finance courses. A preliminary exercise was used during the fall 2018 in a land grant university, just after the “Prevention of Cruelty to Farm Animals Act,” also known as Proposition 12, was passed in California in favor of cage-free egg production. The exercise was revised and used in the fall 2019 in the same class. This extended version of the case, was classroom tested in the fall 2020 in an agribusiness finance graduate class, with agricultural economics and business students enrolled.

Srikumar Misra founded Milk Mantra as a milk producing and selling company in the state of Odisha, India in 2010. The company subsequently diversified into milk-based products such as yogurt and cottage cheese and spread its foray into the neighboring states. In 2014, the company had to overcome a few challenges from the macro environment as well as think of a marketing and communication strategy to gain competitive advantage.

The case is based on the primary research and has been developed using interviews of the company representatives and documents made available from the company. Wherever required, written permission has been obtained from the company representatives.

This case could be a part of the Marketing Management course in a graduate/undergraduate program in Business Management. The case could also be a part of a Brand Management or Integrated Marketing Communications course in the same program for specialized subjects such as branding a generic product or brand communications. This case could also be used for a short discussion in a distribution and logistics course.

The specific topics, which could be facilitated through this case, are the 4 Ps of marketing, distribution and marketing strategy. The case also relies on the theories of branding and marketing communication.

In 2007, BP sought and received regulatory approval to expand operations at its Whiting Refinery in northwest Indiana. Had the project gone forward as planned, the refinery would have discharged significantly higher levels of pollutants into Lake Michigan, but would have also contributed to economic development in the region. The result of BP seeking and being granted regulatory approval triggered a firestorm of controversy from multiple segments of society. This case study draws from secondary sources to examine the positions of a variety of stakeholders who influenced BP's decision as to whether or not it should expand its Whiting Refinery. Relevant stakeholders included for analysis are citizen and environmental organizations, political groups, trade associations, BP's employees, and stockholders. The intended target audience for this case is upper-level undergraduate business students studying issues related to business and society, such as corporate social responsibility and sustainable development.