Case studies

Founded in 2004, OPPO has experienced the boom of the Chinese mobile phone market, the trend of mobile Internet and the prosperity of the smartphone market. While adjusting its business structure based on changes in the market environment, it has transitioned itself from an audio device manufacturer to a smart-phone manufacturer that offers hardware, software, and service.

This case study focuses on OPPO's evolution and strategy, and provides an insight into its history, competition, and strategic choices based on whether or not OPPO should release a feature phone with a foldable display at the MWC 2019, and discusses the core competitiveness that helped OPPO succeed against the market downturn. This case study helps students understand the development of corporate strategies and the process of building core competitiveness in the microcompetition in the red ocean market. We also wish to help students understand how to come up with the most appropriate decision-making framework and conduct a critical analysis on the issues based on the internal and external factors of their businesses while they make strategic decisions. When it comes to different dimensions and indicators coming to contradictory conclusions in particular, what should the manager of a business do to make the correct strategic decision?

The tech giants Alibaba and Tencent compete on many fronts. This case focuses on three areas where they have competed very hard: new retailing, mobile payment, and ride-hailing. At the beginning of 2018, Alibaba and Tencent were gathering retail investments in bids to battle each other for shoppers' digital wallets. Key to the battle is China's mobile payment market, worth more than 200 trillion RMB, where Alibaba and Tencent are going head to head. The giants are not only directly competing in the payment platform area but also extensively fighting in other areas, such as ride-hailing, where they invested in and supported Didi and Kuaidi, respectively. To enhance understanding, this case also briefly goes through the history of the two giants. The purposes, methods, and consequences of their platform competition deserve an in-depth discussion

The case focuses on the establishment and development of LYFEN, a Chinese leisure food brand. LYFEN created a business model of “small packaging + store.” Through accurate analysis of consumer habits, it quickly became one of the major brands in China's leisure food industry. In the process of entrepreneurship, it grasped the economic opportunity during SARS and quickly bought a large number of stores at low prices, laying the foundation for the rapid development of the follow-up. At the same time, its active practice of introducing information construction also further improved the business's competitiveness. Case B mainly focuses on the external and internal environment of LYFEN after 2015. According to estimates made in 2014, LYFEN's online sales were supposed to double, but LYFEN was gradually falling behind the competition.

This case is mainly about the development journey of Tujia, a unicorn in China's accommodations-sharing sector, as well as the development status of the sector. On December 1, 2011, Tujia.com—China's first medium- and high-end vacation apartment booking platform—was formally launched, and it announced the first round of capital injection in less than half a year after its launch. It completed D and D+ round of financing on August 3, 2015, securing $300 million with an estimated value exceeding $1 billion. The completion of this financing round meant that Tujia formally entered the $1 billion club composed of “unicorn” Internet companies. In June 2016, it announced the strategic M&A of Mayi; in October 2016, it announced its strategic agreement with Ctrip.com and Qunar.com for the M&A of their apartment and homestay businesses. The completion of these transactions manifested the matrix with the four major platforms Tujia, Mayi, Ctrip, and Qunar. Since then, Tujia has become the absolute pacesetter in China's online accommodations-sharing sector.

In 2007, Best Buy was the leading electronics retailer in the United States with more than 941 stores, revenue totaling $31 billion, and a market cap of $21 billion. In 2005, Best Buy had adopted a new business model, culture, and customer-segmentation template called Customer Centricity. This move created volatility in the price of Best Buy stock because of the higher-than-expected employee costs that went with this new way of doing business and the difficulty of executing the old and the new business models simultaneously while the new model was rolled out. Best Buy responded to Wall Street's short-term focus in a myriad of ways. It first asked for investor patience, and stressed the strong operating results achieved in Best Buy stores operating under the new model. But in June 2007, after the stock dropped again, the CEO knew he had to decide whether to open more Best Buy stores, increase the company's dividend, or increase the stock-repurchase program.

This short case could be handed out at the end of class discussion on “J&L Railroad” [UVA-F-1053] in preparation for the following class, or if students are more experienced with hedging and option pricing, the instructor may choose to cover both cases in a single class period. It is the companion case to “J&L Railroad” [UVA-F-1053], and presents more technical issues regarding the hedging problem by requiring students to understand option-pricing principles. The board likes the CFO's hedging recommendations, but it wants a more careful analysis of the bank's prices for its risk-management products: the caps and floors. Besides demanding an understanding of option pricing, this case puts particular emphasis on the calculation and use of implied volatility.

The learning outcomes of this study are to recall the fundamental concept of revenue management in the hotel industry (remembering); explain the various performance measures used to evaluate room revenue in hotels (understanding); use revenue management strategies to improve room revenue in hotel operations (applying); and examine and evaluate the optimal solution for revenue enhancement, considering factors such as capacity management, duration control and differential pricing (analyzing).

This case study delves into the challenges faced by Hotel King’s Cross, a business hotel located in Pune, Maharashtra, in the year 2022. A week before Christmas Eve, Soham Dande, the hotel’s revenue manager, sought a meeting with Rohan Chopra, the director of sales and marketing, to discuss “revenue optimization for the hotel.”

During their meeting, Dande mentioned that the hotel had fallen behind its budgeted room sales targets for 2022 across various metrics, such as room booking nights, occupancy percentage, average room rate and revenue per available room. Furthermore, the hotel was trailing behind its competitors. The situation was compounded by the management’s decision to raise the targets for 2023 by 5%–7%, factoring in upcoming events, competitive performance and pandemic-related losses over the past two years. Chopra faced the dilemma of formulating an action plan to achieve the ambitious 2023 targets and establish Hotel King’s Cross as a market leader.

Students undertaking executive development programs and graduate-level courses in non-profit hospitality and tourism management, as well as revenue management courses in the executive MBA, management development and graduate MBA programs, may all benefit from this case study.

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

CSS12: Tourism and hospitality.

The Home Depot case is a great story. It's about entrepreneurship, growth, CEO leadership, and the dramatic impact, good and bad, a CEO can have on a company's growth culture, strategy, and performance. Home Depot had faced market growth challenges for the last seven years as it tried in numerous ways to reignite its growth engine. The case explores the growth strategies of CEOs Bernie Marcus, Arthur Blank, and Blank's successor Bob Nardelli, a former GE executive. After examining Home Depot's growth history, the case challenges students to devise a growth strategy for the company under a new CEO.

Tiffany & Company was the leading U.S. luxury jewelry brand, generating more than $2.6 billion in revenue through 167 retail outlets globally and from catalogue and Internet sales. For nearly 170 years, Tiffany had managed its brand. In February 2007, a hedge fund, Trian Fund Management LP, announced that it had bought a 5.5% stake in Tiffany, and became its largest shareholder. Trian believed that Tiffany was undervalued and stated that it wanted to help the company “improve its earnings per share by addressing various operational and strategic issues.” In response, Tiffany began to consider different actions to increase shareholder value.

TourAmerica is negotiating a master contract with Voyager Inn International (Bethesda) for hotel rooms during the 1995 tourist season. Issues under consideration include number of rooms during peak, mid-, and off-periods, room rates, breakfast prices, and the cost of ancillary services. While the hotel manager is evaluated on the basis of several criteria, including adjusted daily rates, occupancy rates, and food and beverage profitability, and is also provided with a utility scheme to facilitate trade-offs among the criteria, TourAmerica uses an effective cost per registrant (adjusted for intangibles). These two approaches provide an opportunity to contrast measurement schemes and to justify the use of utility functions. This case is a role-play exercise and must be used in conjunction with “Voyager Inn International” (UVA-QA-0463).