time warner case study answers

Time Warner Company: Case Study Analysis Case Study

Introduction.

The current case describes the problem of technology obsolescence and the inability to sell services due to technological progress. Time Warner Cable is a large company serving approximately 16 million customers in New York, Southern California, Texas, the Midwest, and the Carolinas (Baye & Prince, 2021). The company provides cable television services, which were popular before the development of certain technologies. Today, companies such as Netflix offer the viewer a convenient subscription option without the need for cable TV, but only the Internet. Thus, the company’s sales began to fall as people switched to an alternative and more convenient option.

In addition, Google and YouTube have begun to take a stand as they offer an ad-free alternative actively. All this led to the fact that the company began to be forced out of the market, which would inevitably lead to bankruptcy. Moreover, it is worth mentioning that modern services offer to watch them on all devices of the client, which is also a significant advantage. If one orders specific channels on cable TV, then the price will be significantly higher. Thus, subscription services win even in terms of price.

As a result, one may notice that the competition could lead to a price war creating a level of 0 profits. Not surprisingly, in such cases, management has to come up with an exit strategy. For a more effective evaluation of this process, it is necessary to consider its definition. The exit strategy implies the most efficient, low-cost, and painless exit from the company’s current market (Soundaian, 2019). It includes retaining as many of the positives you have gained during the performance. An effective exit can be undertaken in several ways, such as selling assets at an above-average price, a profitable merger, or a profitable takeover of the business. However, it is worth noting that the exit strategy does not affect the overall negative aspect of exiting the market, namely the termination of activities, which always incurs losses.

Talking about how low prices need to be to get out of the market, one should consider the rule of profitability. It includes the ratio of income and expenses, and as long as there is a minimum profitable income value, one should not exit the market. In addition, the company needs to take into account the immediate financial reserve, namely, when the exit from the market occurs before the profit ratio is negative (Pehrsson, 2020). It should be done in order to avoid the financial difficulties that can be encountered with a risky exit. Thus, the recommendation for the pricing policy includes such low price indicators that the minimum profit is maintained. However, prior to the exit, it is necessary to leave a margin of profit values ​​for a smoother transition.

To conclude, one might notice that technological progress may not be beneficial for some companies and businesses. It includes cases where advances in technology result in a company not being able to afford to provide relevant services. In order to avoid such a situation, it is necessary to carry out analytical activities and, depending on the need, implement new developments. In this case, Time Warner was faced with the fact that the competitors offered better options both in terms of price and in terms of service efficiency. As a result, the company was unable to exist in the market, and a merger took place, which affected development and profitability.

Baye, M., & Prince, J. (2021). Managerial economics and business strategy . McGraw-Hill Education.

Pehrsson, A. (2020). Competitive international strategy: Key implementation issues . Routledge.

Soundaian, S. (2019). Strategic marketing management . MJP Publisher.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2023, November 20). Time Warner Company: Case Study Analysis. https://ivypanda.com/essays/time-warner-company-case-study-analysis/

"Time Warner Company: Case Study Analysis." IvyPanda , 20 Nov. 2023, ivypanda.com/essays/time-warner-company-case-study-analysis/.

IvyPanda . (2023) 'Time Warner Company: Case Study Analysis'. 20 November.

IvyPanda . 2023. "Time Warner Company: Case Study Analysis." November 20, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/time-warner-company-case-study-analysis/.

1. IvyPanda . "Time Warner Company: Case Study Analysis." November 20, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/time-warner-company-case-study-analysis/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Time Warner Company: Case Study Analysis." November 20, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/time-warner-company-case-study-analysis/.

• Strategic Recommendation for AOL Time Warner
• RKO Warner Video Inc. Incentive Compensation Plan
• Time Warner Company Analysis
• Case Study: Southwestern University Traffic Problems
• Valve Corporation as a "Boss Free" Company
• Microsoft Tying Arrangements: Case Study
• Accounting Fraud: Case Study
• Spotify's Issues of Operational Activities and Organizational Design

• Search Search Please fill out this field.
• Company News

AT&T and Time Warner Merger Case: What You Need to Know

Representatives from AT&T ( T ) and Time Warner are in Washington this week testifying before a three-judge panel at the D.C. Court of Appeals. The Justice Department, which sued both companies in November to block the deal, argued that the merger would lead to “higher prices and less innovation for millions of Americans.” 

But wait. Weren't AT&T and Time Warner just in court? And didn't that merger already happen? In this article, we break down everything you need to know about the AT&T and Time Warner merger case.

Why Are AT&T and Time Warner in Court?

AT&T first announced plans to merge with entertainment company Time Warner back in 2016. The $85 billion deal solicited strong words from then-presidential candidate Donald Trump, who claimed the merger would put "too much concentration of power in the hands of too few."

After Donald Trump was elected U.S. President, his Justice Department filed a lawsuit against AT&T and Time Warner to block the proposed merger. That lawsuit landed in the courtroom of Judge Richard Leon, a George W. Bush appointee, in a U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. After a six-week trial, Judge Leon sided with AT&T and Time Warner on Jun. 12, 2018, giving the companies the green light to complete their merger. Three days later on Jun. 15, 2018, AT&T announced that it had acquired Time Warner .

For a brief two months, the legal dust seemed to have settled — that is, until the DOJ decided to appeal to the U.S. District Court's decision on Aug. 6, 2018. Now, representatives from AT&T, Time Warner, and the DOJ are making their cases before a three-panel judge in the Washington D.C. Court of Appeals. To be clear, the merger has already happened. That means the DOJ is effectively asking the D.C. Court of Appeals to "unmerge" the two companies seven months after they combined operations.

The March lawsuit and December appeal brought forward by the DOJ mark the first time in several decades that the U.S. government has intervened in a merger. But a successful merger would mean that one of the world's largest wireless and telecommunications companies would combine with one of the world's largest media and entertainment companies.

Why Are AT&T and Time Warner Teaming Up?

Time Warner is one of the largest media and entertainment companies in the world, controlling a number of popular brands including TNT, TBS, CNN, and HBO, as well as the Warner Bros. line of enterprises.

If AT&T's acquisition of Time Warner was to go through, the telecommunications titan would be able to market Time Warner's massive pool of content to other cable companies and consumers. It would also aim to collect usage data regarding viewership of the content, with the ultimate goal being able to construct a digital advertising arm to compete with major rivals like Facebook ( FB ) and Google ( GOOG ).

Because of the size of the two companies and their broad reach across many different areas of business and culture, the merger would have a profound effect across the U.S. According to a recent report from the Washington Post ; detractors argue that it could lead to higher prices and harm competition in the industry.

AT&T could coerce other cable companies to pay more for the rights to carry popular television shows and channels. This would likely mean an increase in cost to the consumer. The Justice Department believes that this process might add $436 million in extra fees to cable subscribers each year.

For its part, AT&T argues that prices for cable services would actually decrease as a result of newly generated economic efficiencies. AT&T claims that even if there were increases for the reasons the Justice Department has argued, those would be capped at 45 cents per month per customer.

Why Does the Department of Justice Care?

Besides the major business implications of the AT&T-Time Warner merger, the antitrust lawsuit will have much broader implications for the world of mergers and acquisitions (M&As) in general. Indeed, the case would be a bellwether for future mergers and acquisition deals.

M&A is a major area, with over $409 billion in deals announced so far in 2018 alone. This is a jump of two-thirds over the same time last year. It's also part of a broader trend: from 2010 to 2016, the number of proposed mergers that were passed along to the federal government for approval climbed by 58%.

Regulators are largely concerned with protecting competition and the consumer when it comes to cases such as these. Although it is a simplistic way of viewing complicated mergers, antitrust regulators tend to consider prices for the consumer as a measure of the health of competition. If a merger causes prices to go up, that could be bad for consumers and may warrant additional regulatory scrutiny.

"You’re in a situation where two entities are bidding for an asset, and this kind of action can obviously influence the outcome of those actions,"  AT&T chief executive Randall Stephenson said after the DOJ appeal : "But who knows whether that’s behind this.”

Why Does President Trump Care?

From candidate to the president-elect to the president of the U.S., Donald Trump has had no problem sharing his disapproval of cable network CNN. On the campaign trail, President Trump spoke about the merger, saying that "as an example of the power structure I'm fighting, AT&T is buying Time Warner and thus CNN, a deal we will not approve in my administration because it's too much concentration of power in the hands of too few."

However, over the past several months, AT&T has worked to woo the Trump administration. The telecommunications company donated $2 million in cash toward the presidential inauguration and Stephenson personally called Trump in January 2018. For his part, Trump has yet to suggest that he supports the merger.

Regarding the DOJ's Jun. 12 decision, Stephenson wouldn't comment on whether the decision was political or not, although he feels as though the law is on his side. If the merger is officially blocked, AT&T would be required to pay Time Warner $500 million in a so-called "reverse break-up fee" — but Time Warner stands to lose more. The company would lose out on an $85 billion acquisition, which would have gone directly to its shareholders and executives.

• Terms of Service
• Editorial Policy
• Privacy Policy
• Your Privacy Choices

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

In Retrospect

How the AOL-Time Warner Merger Went So Wrong

By Tim Arango

• Jan. 10, 2010

A decade ago, America Online merged with Time Warner in a deal valued at a stunning $350 billion. It was then, and is now, the largest merger in American business history.

The Internet, it was believed, was soon to vaporize mainstream media business models on the spot. America Online’s frothy stock price made it worth twice as much as Time Warner’s with less than half the cash flow.

When the deal was announced on Jan. 10, 2000, Stephen M. Case, a co-founder of AOL, said, “This is a historic moment in which new media has truly come of age.” His counterpart at Time Warner, the philosopher chief executive Gerald M. Levin, who was fond of quoting the Bible and Camus, said the Internet had begun to “create unprecedented and instantaneous access to every form of media and to unleash immense possibilities for economic growth, human understanding and creative expression.”

The trail of despair in subsequent years included countless job losses, the decimation of retirement accounts, investigations by the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Justice Department, and countless executive upheavals. Today, the combined values of the companies, which have been separated, is about one-seventh of their worth on the day of the merger.

To call the transaction the worst in history, as it is now taught in business schools, does not begin to tell the story of how some of the brightest minds in technology and media collaborated to produce a deal now regarded by many as a colossal mistake.

How did it happen?

The romance between Mr. Case and Mr. Levin, they said in interviews with The New York Times, began in the fall of 1999 at a celebration of the 50th anniversary of the People’s Republic of China at Tiananmen Square.

MR. LEVIN I was seated for some reason in front of Steve Case and his wife and so we had a little chitchat. It was a stunning evening to be a part of that history. But this next thing that registered on me was that they seem to have a very sweet relationship and I liked that, and we had some fun, joked around, and so from a personality point of view we talked.

MR. CASE There was all kinds of hoopla and parades in Tiananmen Square and a state dinner at the Hall of the People, and I remember Jerry had decided to have the Time Warner board meet in China that week and they were on a trip but they also attended some of these functions, so at these different functions I talked to various Time Warner board members, but I don’t think I had any direct conversations with Jerry about the merger until probably a month later.

MR. LEVIN We’re now back in the United States and I think Steve Case called me on the phone and in that conversation more than alluded to putting the companies together. I had my traditional script and quasi-legal background that when someone calls you on the phone, make sure they understand you’re not for sale, which we certainly weren’t, and decline any overture, which I did over the phone.

In fact, Mr. Case and his team, including Robert W. Pittman, the company’s president, had been plotting for months about how to use its high-priced stock to make a big acquisition. The company hired the investment bank Salomon Smith Barney, and its top media banker Eduardo Mestre, to consider various targets.

MR. MESTRE It was one of the highlights of my career because I remember vividly sitting down with the AOL executives and going through with them their vision of how to combine AOL with a more traditional company in creating what at that time was going to be perceived as a company of the future.

MR. PITTMAN It was a very heady time because 1999 was the first year the thesis that everybody was going to be on the Internet and every business was going to be on the Internet and it was going to be a primary means of communication finally was accepted; 1999 was the year it sort of kicked in, and I think when it kicked in people started saying, “O.K., what’s the big dream, what’s the big idea, what do we need to do now?”

We were actually deep in discussions with eBay to buy eBay and add them, had a little bit of discussion with Larry Probst over at Electronic Arts, and Steve had an idea that we should merge with Time Warner and me and a couple other people said there’s no chance that’s ever going to happen and I sort of paid no attention to it.

Meanwhile, Mr. Levin was thinking deeply about how to transform Time Warner for the digital age.

MR. LEVIN We were emerging from not just old media but from an analog world into a digital world, and philosophically people were beginning to understand that the digital world was a transformational universe.

Before AOL, Mr. Levin, prodded by Gordon Crawford, senior vice president at Capital Research Global Investors in Los Angeles, then the largest institutional shareholder of Time Warner, discussed a merger with Yahoo’s founder, Jerry Yang.

MR. CRAWFORD I was involved in putting the two of them together and kind of following the course of those discussions over the year, and over the course of 1999 those discussions morphed from the discussion of a partial stake to a full merger, and then in the late fall Jerry Yang decided he did not want to pursue it any further and I think terminated the discussions.

Shortly after Mr. Case’s initial phone call to Mr. Levin, the pair met for dinner and wine at the Rihga Royal, a hotel in Midtown Manhattan.

MR. LEVIN Steve and I met at a hotel for several hours. The idea was not to talk about any transactional detail but to talk about philosophy and values, and it was several hours. I took away the fact that he had good values, which was important to me — that his company was a real company.

MR. CASE Initially, he was a little reluctant, just thinking it through, but did agree that it made sense for us to meet. So a week or two later we met and had dinner at a hotel in New York, and we were talking about what this company might be together and some of the benefits that could accrue strategically as well as how the company together might have a broader impact on society, and that kind of led to a series of discussions.

Both sides assembled negotiating teams, and alerted a handful of top executives and bankers. At Time Warner, Mr. Levin kept only a small circle of people in the loop, including Richard D. Parsons, the company’s president.

MR. PARSONS Jerry came into my office and said that he had been talking with Steve, who he had gotten to know on a trip that he had taken abroad to China. And Jerry and Steve had gone and met, had a few dinners after that, and he said we have been talking to Steve about this and that he thought this was something we ought to do and him and Steve were sort of going down the road to see how it could work and he wanted to get my views.

Fundamentally I thought it was a good idea.

Making the Deal

The deal was sealed at a dinner in early January at Mr. Case’s house in McLean, Va. The transaction was spun to the world as a merger of equals, but in reality AOL, with its more valuable stock, was acquiring Time Warner. AOL would own 55 percent of the new company and Time Warner, 45 percent. But the new board would have an equal number of AOL and Time Warner directors. Mr. Levin would be chief executive, and Mr. Case would be chairman.

Over a weekend, the two sides conducted due diligence, with teams of lawyers camped out in two law offices in Manhattan.

Miraculously, news of the deal did not leak during the talks, and word trickled out only hours before the announcement on Jan. 10, 2000.

Over that weekend, Mr. Levin and Mr. Case began notifying more of the executives. Among these were Don Logan, then head of Time Inc., and Ted Leonsis, a division president at AOL. Many executives, including Timothy A. Boggs, then head of government relations at Time Warner, found out about the deal the day of the announcement in an 8 a.m. conference call. (Mr. Boggs is now associate rector at St. Albans Parish in Washington. Mr. Logan owns a minor-league baseball team in Birmingham, Ala., and Mr. Leonsis is an owner of the Washington Capitals and the Washington Wizards.)

None were pleased with the news.

MR. LOGAN Dumbest idea I had ever heard in my life.

MR. LEONSIS I was one of the loudest advocates for not doing the deal.

MR. BOGGS Just real regret and dread. My job was to make the case for this deal to governments around the world and to get all the regulatory clearances that were needed and to work with our antitrust lawyers to get those clearances to make the case to Congress and the media, to some extent, about this merger, and I was just frankly stunned and a bit knocked back on my heels by the prospect of securing all of those approvals.

I knew and I loved Time Warner. I saw it as a company with a vision and a set of values, and I saw AOL in a much less favorable light, much more opportunistic, made up of folks who were really trying to merely exploit the market they were in as opposed to developing something that was enduring, and I was very leery about this deal.

The announcement was hailed as a momentous coming of age for the Internet and the triumph of the New Economy.

MR. MESTRE If you go back and read what was written in The Journal and what was written in The Times about this transaction, you would have thought that it was the second coming of the Messiah. I’m sure that if one were to read those today one would find it amusing, maybe dated, but it was, for financial reporting, it was as soaring and this is the great epiphany-of-life kind of journalism and you read it and it brought tears to your eyes.

Nina Munk, of Vanity Fair, wrote the book “ Fools Rush In : Steve Case, Jerry Levin, and the Unmaking of AOL Time Warner.”

MS. MUNK I had one of my sources who told me he was listening to the radio on his way into work that morning when the deal was announced and he practically drove off the road. The Wall Street Journal, I think, had 19 or 20 separate articles on the intricacies of the deal and what it meant. The word “transformative” was used again and again, and we really believed with the rare exception of a very small number of skeptics, we really believed that this deal captured a transformation and that it spoke to a new direction that the world was taking.

But some wanted to talk fashion: Mr. Levin showed up to the press conference without a tie, while Mr. Case dressed up.

MR. LEVIN What most people don’t recall is that I had stopped wearing a tie and jacket for quite some time. Once we had a music company in our building, I thought it was a constraint to wear a tie and jacket, so it wasn’t planned but it was kind of a refreshing symbol. I was extremely happy — “high,” I was going to say — on an emotional high because I think when you actually announce something, it’s the reflection of the news coming back at you. It makes it real. It puts it out on the stage. It validates what was internal before.

MR. CASE The day of the announcement was bittersweet, frankly. On the one hand, obviously, it was an exciting time in bringing together the leading Internet company and the leading media company to create a new company that really had the potential to lead in this new century. At the same time, I recognized that my role was going to change.

It was a moment of achievement after a decade or in some cases, in our case two decades, of trying to prove that this concept had real merit, suddenly the Internet had arrived and we’re beginning this new century with a combination of these two great companies.

On the steps of a church on the Upper West Side of Manhattan, Tim Armstrong, then an executive at an upstart called Google and now AOL’s chief executive, read about the deal.

MR. ARMSTRONG I couldn’t believe it. I just remember reading the deal and thinking the world had changed.

The deal took a year to be approved by regulators. Robert Pitofsky, then the head of the Federal Trade Commission, allowed the deal to go forward, even as the F.T.C.’s own economists warned the deal did not make financial sense. It was the most significant media case to come before the commission, according to Mr. Pitofsky, since 1964, when CBS bought a big league baseball team.

MR. PITOFSKY Now we have large communications cases, but at the time it was probably the biggest. There was CBS-New York Yankees; that would be the closest you could come to something like this.

Our economists at the time said this deal doesn’t make economic sense. I didn’t see it that way, and I don’t think the other commissioners did, but the economists immediately saw it didn’t make financial sense.

First Signs of a Clash

The optimism surrounding the deal was brief. In May of 2000, the dot-com bubble began to burst and online advertising began to slow, making it difficult for AOL to meet the financial forecasts on which the deal was based. The world began moving quickly to high-speed Internet access, putting AOL’s ubiquitous dial-up service in jeopardy.

The companies had another problem: both sides seemed to hate one another.

MR. PARSONS I remember saying at a vital board meeting where we approved this, that life was going to be different going forward because they’re very different cultures, but I have to tell you, I underestimated how different.

MR. LEONSIS The news release that they showed us and the positioning was that AOL would be the crown jewel, and I’d say, “Well if we’re the crown jewel, why are all our best and most important people leaving here and going to New York?” In fact, if we were the crown jewel, you would go and take all of the best, most talented people at Time Warner and bring them here.

In the summer of 2001, Alec Klein, then a reporter at The Washington Post, received an anonymous phone call.

MR. KLEIN He tells me that someone had been suspended at AOL, a midlevel executive, and he tells me very little more than that and then hangs up on me.

So I’d call so-and-so, and that person would say, “I don’t know anything, but why don’t you try these three other people?” and I kept doing this. Eventually I called the guy and I said: “Hi, this is Alec Klein of The Washington Post.” And the first thing out of his mouth was, “How did you find me?” I realized, here is the anonymous tipster who had first called me.

I persuaded him to meet me, and when we met he started to tell me more about what was going on and I started to meet other people through him and it started to grow into this network of different sources, all of whom had these secret documents from AOL.

Mr. Klein’s work uncovered that AOL had been improperly inflating its advertising revenue, and his stories that were published in 2002 prompted investigations by the S.E.C. and the Department of Justice. Eventually the company paid hefty fines and was forced to restate past earnings.

The accounting scandal became a rallying cry for the Time Warner side. In 2003, Mr. Case stepped down as chairman. Today he runs his own private investment firm.

MR. CASE For whatever reason, right or wrong, I had become kind of a magnet for a lot of anger and frustration, particularly with the Time Warner employees and also with shareholders and if we really were going to get the company on the right track and really capitalize on the promise of the merger, probably the best thing I could do was step aside and get out of the way.

Mr. Levin, whose son Jonathan was murdered in 1997, had announced his retirement in December 2001. Today, he runs a holistic healing center in Santa Monica, Calif.

MR. LEVIN When 9/11 occurred, it was obviously an emotional experience for everyone. For me, it was more personal because of the death of my son and probably never having really achieved any resolution.

We had a board meeting scheduled for the 3rd of October, which was right after 9/11, and I said we can’t have a board meeting, we’re supposed to be in New York. And most people, particularly the AOL people, said business has to go forward and I was just emotional and got very upset. I then went to some Wall Street presentation — and I made quite a few of them — and when I was making my normal presentation, someone raised their hand and asked, can you give us the margin deterioration that will occur from all the extra spending on account of 9/11. I thought the question was out of line; I not only said it was out of line, I really emotionally went after the person asking the question, got up and walked out.

The Deal Unwinds

Many investors and employees lost millions of dollars, but no one lost more than Ted Turner, who at the time was the largest individual shareholder in the combined company.

MR. TURNER I’d like to forget it. That’s what goes through my mind. I almost didn’t do this interview because I didn’t want to dig it up again. Let it pass into history.

The Time Warner-AOL merger should pass into history like the Vietnam War and the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. It’s one of the biggest disasters that have occurred to our country.

I lost 80 percent of my worth and subsequently lost my job. We looked it up to see if I was the biggest loser of all time because I lost about $8 billion. But I don’t think I was the biggest loser of all time. I think at one point Microsoft stock went down more than that for Bill Gates. I think he’s the biggest winner and the biggest loser. I was in the top three or four of all time.

Jeffrey L. Bewkes, the current chief of Time Warner, once dressed down Mr. Case in a meeting, saying, according to Mr. Klein’s reporting: “The only division that’s not performing is yours. Every one of us is growing, making the numbers. The only problem in this construct is AOL.”

MR. BEWKES I really have a strong point of view that it has never been an issue of culture at Time Warner. I know you’re going to have people, for various reasons that they have individually, say there was the issue of culture at Time Warner. I think that in fact the employees at AOL and Time Warner worked together quite well to try to make the most of the merger, but they didn’t solve the business fundamental challenges at AOL anymore than was solved at Yahoo, MSN, Lycos or I.A.C.

The enduring debate is whether the deal collapsed because the concept was flawed at the start, or because the cultures were too different and the execution of the merger was a failure.

MR. CASE It was a good idea, but the execution of it wasn’t what it needed to be, and I accept responsibility for that. Everybody involved, I think, needs to accept responsibility for that, but that doesn’t take away from the core strategic value of the idea.

MR. LEVIN I used to think at the time it was a clash of cultures and a misreading of the dot-com bubble, but I now upon reflection believe that the transaction was undone by the Internet itself.

I think it’s something that no one could have foreseen, and to this day, whether Apple is going to dominate entertainment or whether Amazon is going to dominate publishing, all the old business plans are out the window. How do you get paid for content? And the consumer has access to everything and now it’s going to be on a handheld device, so what I call the rolling thunder of the Internet started actually to eat its own, which was AOL. AOL was the Google of its time. It was how you got to the Internet, but it was using some old media business ideas that were undone by the Internet itself, and that’s why Google came along.

MR. PARSONS The business model sort of collapsed under us, and then finally this cultural matter. As I said, it was beyond certainly my abilities to figure out how to blend the old media and the new media culture. They were like different species, and in fact, they were species that were inherently at war.

Brought to you by:

The $85.4 Billion Merger of AT&T and Time Warner: Valuation Analysis

By: Xiaokang Zhao, Zhichuan Frank Li

On October 22, 2016, U.S. telecom operator AT&T Inc. and television media giant Time Warner Group announced that AT&T Inc. would acquire Time Warner Group for $107.50 per share, using half cash and…

• Length: 11 page(s)
• Publication Date: Nov 26, 2019
• Discipline: Finance
• Product #: W19651-PDF-ENG

What's included:

• Teaching Note
• Educator Copy
• Supplements

$4.95 per student

degree granting course

$8.95 per student

non-degree granting course

Get access to this material, plus much more with a free Educator Account:

• Access to world-famous HBS cases
• Up to 60% off materials for your students
• Resources for teaching online
• Tips and reviews from other Educators

Already registered? Sign in

• Student Registration
• Non-Academic Registration
• Included Materials

On October 22, 2016, U.S. telecom operator AT&T Inc. and television media giant Time Warner Group announced that AT&T Inc. would acquire Time Warner Group for $107.50 per share, using half cash and half stock, to a total equity value of $85.4 billion. Although the chief executive officers from both companies were very confident about the future prospects for their shareholders once the transaction was approved and completed, there was much controversy surrounding the acquisition. A portfolio manager with a significant portion of her investment portfolios tied up in AT&T Inc. equity wondered if the price was fair. She needed to make a thorough valuation analysis to ensure that she could anticipate the future value of the merged firm and mitigate any possible loss in value for her investors.

Learning Objectives

This case is suitable for both postgraduate- and undergraduate-level courses in business administration, as the first case study for beginners in the area of business valuation. It is mainly applicable to discussions of the time value of money, stock valuation, and corporate value assessment in courses on financial management, corporate valuation methods, analysis of corporate business activities, and asset assessment. After working through the case and assignment questions, students will be able to explain the mechanisms of the popular mergers and acquisitions valuation methods; analyze and understand the assumptions of various mergers and acquisitions valuation methods; and compare applicable conditions of various mergers and acquisitions valuation methods and their advantages and disadvantages.

Nov 26, 2019 (Revised: Feb 4, 2020)

Discipline:

Geographies:

United States

Industries:

Ivey Publishing

W19651-PDF-ENG

We use cookies to understand how you use our site and to improve your experience, including personalizing content. Learn More . By continuing to use our site, you accept our use of cookies and revised Privacy Policy .

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Case Study on Time Warner Inc.

NOTE: THIS IS AN INDIVIDUAL REPORT, PREPARED AFTER MEDIA IN AN INTERNATIONAL CONTEXT’S (MMC 3200) GROUP PRESENTATION Time Warner Inc., a multi-national media conglomerate that competes with other global media conglomerates, such as The Walt Disney Company, Comcast, Viacom and CBS Corporation. Headquartered in New York City, it consists portfolios of television/movie production, home box office screening and general entertainment and information channels. Time Warner Inc. was formed through the mergers of various mass media companies, such as television networks and motion picture production in America. The company had undergone spun offs for the past decades as well. This case study will discuss on the merger and acquisitions, as well as diversification of Time Warner Inc., type of mergers that this company had taken for the past decades and its marketing tactics and methods to make Time Warner Inc. as one of the competing media conglomerates in the mass media market.

Related Papers

Jesus Boticario

arXiv (Cornell University)

Mario De Lorenzo

Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research

Badr Alshammari

Reliability and performance quality measures computed so far are deterministic in nature. They represent one operating state (a snapshot of the system conditions) in which the required demand and generation and transmission capacities are known with 100% certainty. In this paper, a general and coherent formulation is presented, which can be used to account for the randomness associated with the load level as well as the availability of generation and transmission capacities. The general probability formulation can be used to calculate various reliability indices and quality measures. The paper describes the new approach for computing probabilistic evaluation (expected value) of the reliability indices and performance quality measures and presents illustrative applications. The methodology used in this paper constitutes a new line of research in the probabilistic reliability evaluation of a system where the derived system-wide performance quality indices are capable of classifying an...

Surfaces and Interfaces

Masoumeh Ghalkhani

Joseph De Freitas

Photochemistry and …

Andrew MacLellan

Jerzy Kojkol

Lawren Lanon

Tòan Ngô Quốc

2007 IEEE Particle Accelerator Conference (PAC)

Sami Tantawi

RELATED PAPERS

Anil Kumar Birru

Physical Review B

tomoaki kameda

Geologia Colombiana

Uwe Altenberger

Probability and Mathematical Statistics

Alessio Sancetta

Jurnal Psikologi Udayana

putu nugrahaeni widiasavitri

Journal of Business Economics and Management

Vanessa Yanes Estévez

physica status solidi (c)

Marius Pustan

Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance

Diego Prior

hjhjgfg freghrf

AMPeak 2024 Asset Management Conference

Martin Boettcher

Vasbetonépítés

Szilárd Kanizsár

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Time Warner

• Harvard Case Studies

Harvard Business Case Studies Solutions – Assignment Help

In most courses studied at Harvard Business schools, students are provided with a case study. Major HBR cases concerns on a whole industry, a whole organization or some part of organization; profitable or non-profitable organizations. Student’s role is to analyze the case and diagnose the situation, identify the problem and then give appropriate recommendations and steps to be taken.

To make a detailed case analysis, student should follow these steps:

STEP 1: Reading Up Harvard Case Study Method Guide:

Case study method guide is provided to students which determine the aspects of problem needed to be considered while analyzing a case study. It is very important to have a thorough reading and understanding of guidelines provided. However, poor guide reading will lead to misunderstanding of case and failure of analyses. It is recommended to read guidelines before and after reading the case to understand what is asked and how the questions are to be answered. Therefore, in-depth understanding f case guidelines is very important.

Harvard Case Study Solutions

porter’s five forces model

STEP 2: Reading The Time Warner Harvard Case Study:

To have a complete understanding of the case, one should focus on case reading. It is said that case should be read two times. Initially, fast reading without taking notes and underlines should be done. Initial reading is to get a rough idea of what information is provided for the analyses. Then, a very careful reading should be done at second time reading of the case. This time, highlighting the important point and mark the necessary information provided in the case. In addition, the quantitative data in case, and its relations with other quantitative or qualitative variables should be given more importance. Also, manipulating different data and combining with other information available will give a new insight. However, all of the information provided is not reliable and relevant.

When having a fast reading, following points should be noted:

• Nature of organization
• Nature if industry in which organization operates.
• External environment that is effecting organization
• Problems being faced by management
• Identification of communication strategies.
• Any relevant strategy that can be added.
• Control and out-of-control situations.

When reading the case for second time, following points should be considered:

• Decisions needed to be made and the responsible Person to make decision.
• Objectives of the organization and key players in this case.
• The compatibility of objectives. if not, their reconciliations and necessary redefinition.
• Sources and constraints of organization from meeting its objectives.

After reading the case and guidelines thoroughly, reader should go forward and start the analyses of the case.

STEP 3: Doing The Case Analysis Of Time Warner:

To make an appropriate case analyses, firstly, reader should mark the important problems that are happening in the organization. There may be multiple problems that can be faced by any organization. Secondly, after identifying problems in the company, identify the most concerned and important problem that needed to be focused.

Firstly, the introduction is written. After having a clear idea of what is defined in the case, we deliver it to the reader. It is better to start the introduction from any historical or social context. The challenging diagnosis for Time Warner and the management of information is needed to be provided. However, introduction should not be longer than 6-7 lines in a paragraph. As the most important objective is to convey the most important message for to the reader.

After introduction, problem statement is defined. In the problem statement, the company’s most important problem and constraints to solve these problems should be define clearly. However, the problem should be concisely define in no more than a paragraph. After defining the problems and constraints, analysis of the case study is begin.

STEP 4: SWOT Analysis of the Time Warner HBR Case Solution:

• Pest analysis

SWOT analysis helps the business to identify its strengths and weaknesses, as well as understanding of opportunity that can be availed and the threat that the company is facing. SWOT for Time Warner is a powerful tool of analysis as it provide a thought to uncover and exploit the opportunities that can be used to increase and enhance company’s operations. In addition, it also identifies the weaknesses of the organization that will help to be eliminated and manage the threats that would catch the attention of the management.

This strategy helps the company to make any strategy that would differentiate the company from competitors, so that the organization can compete successfully in the industry. The strengths and weaknesses are obtained from internal organization. Whereas, the opportunities and threats are generally related from external environment of organization. Moreover, it is also called Internal-External Analysis.

In the strengths, management should identify the following points exists in the organization:

• Advantages of the organization
• Activities of the company better than competitors.
• Unique resources and low cost resources company have.
• Activities and resources market sees as the company’s strength.
• Unique selling proposition of the company.

WEAKNESSES:

• Improvement that could be done.
• Activities that can be avoided for Time Warner.
• Activities that can be determined as your weakness in the market.
• Factors that can reduce the sales.
• Competitor’s activities that can be seen as your weakness.

OPPORTUNITIES:

• Good opportunities that can be spotted.
• Interesting trends of industry.
• Change in technology and market strategies
• Government policy changes that is related to the company’s field
• Changes in social patterns and lifestyles.
• Local events.

Following points can be identified as a threat to company:

• Company’s facing obstacles.
• Activities of competitors.
• Product and services quality standards
• Threat from changing technologies
• Financial/cash flow problems
• Weakness that threaten the business.

Following points should be considered when applying SWOT to the analysis:

• Precise and verifiable phrases should be sued.
• Prioritize the points under each head, so that management can identify which step has to be taken first.
• Apply the analyses at proposed level. Clear yourself first that on what basis you have to apply SWOT matrix.
• Make sure that points identified should carry itself with strategy formulation process.
• Use particular terms (like USP, Core Competencies Analyses etc.) to get a comprehensive picture of analyses.

STEP 5: PESTEL/ PEST Analysis of Time Warner Case Solution:

Pest analyses is a widely used tool to analyze the Political, Economic, Socio-cultural, Technological, Environmental and legal situations which can provide great and new opportunities to the company as well as these factors can also threat the company, to be dangerous in future.

Pest analysis is very important and informative.  It is used for the purpose of identifying business opportunities and advance threat warning. Moreover, it also helps to the extent to which change is useful for the company and also guide the direction for the change. In addition, it also helps to avoid activities and actions that will be harmful for the company in future, including projects and strategies.

To analyze the business objective and its opportunities and threats, following steps should be followed:

• Brainstorm and assumption the changes that should be made to organization. Answer the necessary questions that are related to specific needs of organization
• Analyze the opportunities that would be happen due to the change.
• Analyze the threats and issues that would be caused due to change.
• Perform cost benefit analyses and take the appropriate action.

PEST FACTORS:

• Next political elections and changes that will happen in the country due to these elections
• Strong and powerful political person, his point of view on business policies and their effect on the organization.
• Strength of property rights and law rules. And its ratio with corruption and organized crimes. Changes in these situation and its effects.
• Change in Legislation and taxation effects on the company
• Trend of regulations and deregulations. Effects of change in business regulations
• Timescale of legislative change.
• Other political factors likely to change for Time Warner.

ECONOMICAL:

• Position and current economy trend i.e. growing, stagnant or declining.
• Exchange rates fluctuations and its relation with company.
• Change in Level of customer’s disposable income and its effect.
• Fluctuation in unemployment rate and its effect on hiring of skilled employees
• Access to credit and loans. And its effects on company
• Effect of globalization on economic environment
• Considerations on other economic factors

SOCIO-CULTURAL:

• Change in population growth rate and age factors, and its impacts on organization.
• Effect on organization due to Change in attitudes and generational shifts.
• Standards of health, education and social mobility levels. Its changes and effects on company.
• Employment patterns, job market trend and attitude towards work according to different age groups.

case study solutions

• Social attitudes and social trends, change in socio culture an dits effects.
• Religious believers and life styles and its effects on organization
• Other socio culture factors and its impacts.

TECHNOLOGICAL:

• Any new technology that company is using
• Any new technology in market that could affect the work, organization or industry
• Access of competitors to the new technologies and its impact on their product development/better services.
• Research areas of government and education institutes in which the company can make any efforts
• Changes in infra-structure and its effects on work flow
• Existing technology that can facilitate the company
• Other technological factors and their impacts on company and industry

These headings and analyses would help the company to consider these factors and make a “big picture” of company’s characteristics. This will help the manager to take the decision and drawing conclusion about the forces that would create a big impact on company and its resources.

STEP 6: Porter’s Five Forces/ Strategic Analysis Of The Time Warner Case Study:

To analyze the structure of a company and its corporate strategy, Porter’s five forces model is used. In this model, five forces have been identified which play an important part in shaping the market and industry. These forces are used to measure competition intensity and profitability of an industry and market.

porter’s five forces model

These forces refers to micro environment and the company ability to serve its customers and make a profit. These five forces includes three forces from horizontal competition and two forces from vertical competition. The five forces are discussed below:

• THREAT OF NEW ENTRANTS:
• as the industry have high profits, many new entrants will try to enter into the market. However, the new entrants will eventually cause decrease in overall industry profits. Therefore, it is necessary to block the new entrants in the industry. following factors is describing the level of threat to new entrants:
• Barriers to entry that includes copy rights and patents.
• High capital requirement
• Government restricted policies
• Switching cost
• Access to suppliers and distributions
• Customer loyalty to established brands.
• THREAT OF SUBSTITUTES:
• this describes the threat to company. If the goods and services are not up to the standard, consumers can use substitutes and alternatives that do not need any extra effort and do not make a major difference. For example, using Aquafina in substitution of tap water, Pepsi in alternative of Coca Cola. The potential factors that made customer shift to substitutes are as follows:
• Price performance of substitute
• Switching costs of buyer
• Products substitute available in the market
• Reduction of quality
• Close substitution are available
• DEGREE OF INDUSTRY RIVALRY:
• the lesser money and resources are required to enter into any industry, the higher there will be new competitors and be an effective competitor. It will also weaken the company’s position. Following are the potential factors that will influence the company’s competition:
• Competitive advantage
• Continuous innovation
• Sustainable position in competitive advantage
• Level of advertising
• Competitive strategy
• BARGAINING POWER OF BUYERS:
• it deals with the ability of customers to take down the prices. It mainly consists the importance of a customer and the level of cost if a customer will switch from one product to another. The buyer power is high if there are too many alternatives available. And the buyer power is low if there are lesser options of alternatives and switching. Following factors will influence the buying power of customers:
• Bargaining leverage
• Switching cost of a buyer
• Buyer price sensitivity
• Competitive advantage of company’s product
• BARGAINING POWER OF SUPPLIERS:
• this refers to the supplier’s ability of increasing and decreasing prices. If there are few alternatives o supplier available, this will threat the company and it would have to purchase its raw material in supplier’s terms. However, if there are many suppliers alternative, suppliers have low bargaining power and company do not have to face high switching cost. The potential factors that effects bargaining power of suppliers are the following:
• Input differentiation
• Impact of cost on differentiation
• Strength of distribution centers
• Input substitute’s availability.

STEP 7: VRIO Analysis of Time Warner:

Vrio analysis for Time Warner case study identified the four main attributes which helps the organization to gain a competitive advantages. The author of this theory suggests that firm must be valuable, rare, imperfectly imitable and perfectly non sustainable. Therefore there must be some resources and capabilities in an organization that can facilitate the competitive advantage to company. The four components of VRIO analysis are described below: VALUABLE: the company must have some resources or strategies that can exploit opportunities and defend the company from major threats. If the company holds some value then answer is yes. Resources are also valuable if they provide customer satisfaction and increase customer value. This value may create by increasing differentiation in existing product or decrease its price. Is these conditions are not met, company may lead to competitive disadvantage. Therefore, it is necessary to continually review the Time Warner company’s activities and resources values. RARE: the resources of the Time Warner company that are not used by any other company are known as rare. Rare and valuable resources grant much competitive advantages to the firm. However, when more than one few companies uses the same resources and provide competitive parity are also known as rare resources. Even, the competitive parity is not desired position, but the company should not lose its valuable resources, even they are common. COSTLY TO IMITATE: the resources are costly to imitate, if other organizations cannot imitate it. However, imitation is done in two ways. One is duplicating that is direct imitation and the other one is substituting that is indirect imitation. Any firm who has valuable and rare resources, and these resources are costly to imitate, have achieved their competitive advantage. However, resources should also be perfectly non sustainable. The reasons that resource imitation is costly are historical conditions, casual ambiguity and social complexity. ORGANIZED TO CAPTURE VALUE: resources, itself, cannot provide advantages to organization until it is organized and exploit to do so. A firm (like Time Warner)  must organize its management systems, processes, policies and strategies to fully utilize the resource’s potential to be valuable, rare and costly to imitate.

STEP 8: Generating Alternatives For Time Warner Case Solution:

After completing the analyses of the company, its opportunities and threats, it is important to generate a solution of the problem and the alternatives a company can apply in order to solve its problems. To generate the alternative of problem, following things must to be kept in mind:

• Realistic solution should be identified that can be operated in the company, with all its constraints and opportunities.
• as the problem and its solution cannot occur at the same time, it should be described as mutually exclusive
• it is not possible for a company to not to take any action, therefore, the alternative of doing nothing is not viable.
• Student should provide more than one decent solution. Providing two undesirable alternatives to make the other one attractive is not acceptable.

Once the alternatives have been generated, student should evaluate the options and select the appropriate and viable solution for the company.

STEP 9: Selection Of Alternatives For Time Warner Case Solution:

It is very important to select the alternatives and then evaluate the best one as the company have limited choices and constraints. Therefore to select the best alternative, there are many factors that is needed to be kept in mind. The criteria’s on which business decisions are to be selected areas under:

• Improve profitability
• Increase sales, market shares, return on investments
• Customer satisfaction
• Brand image
• Corporate mission, vision and strategy
• Resources and capabilities

Alternatives should be measures that which alternative will perform better than other one and the valid reasons. In addition, alternatives should be related to the problem statements and issues described in the case study.

STEP 10: Evaluation Of Alternatives For Time Warner Case Solution:

If the selected alternative is fulfilling the above criteria, the decision should be taken straightforwardly. Best alternative should be selected must be the best when evaluating it on the decision criteria. Another method used to evaluate the alternatives are the list of pros and cons of each alternative and one who has more pros than cons and can be workable under organizational constraints.

STEP 11: Recommendations For Time Warner Case Study (Solution):

There should be only one recommendation to enhance the company’s operations and its growth or solving its problems. The decision that is being taken should be justified and viable for solving the problems.

About Stanford GSB

• The Leadership
• Dean’s Updates
• School News & History
• Commencement
• Business, Government & Society
• Centers & Institutes
• Center for Entrepreneurial Studies
• Center for Social Innovation
• Stanford Seed

About the Experience

• Learning at Stanford GSB
• Experiential Learning
• Guest Speakers
• Entrepreneurship
• Social Innovation
• Communication
• Life at Stanford GSB
• Collaborative Environment
• Activities & Organizations
• Student Services
• Housing Options
• International Students

Full-Time Degree Programs

• Why Stanford MBA
• Academic Experience
• Financial Aid
• Why Stanford MSx
• Research Fellows Program
• See All Programs

Non-Degree & Certificate Programs

• Executive Education
• Stanford Executive Program
• Programs for Organizations
• The Difference
• Online Programs
• Stanford LEAD
• Seed Transformation Program
• Aspire Program
• Seed Spark Program
• Faculty Profiles
• Academic Areas
• Awards & Honors
• Conferences

Faculty Research

• Publications
• Working Papers
• Case Studies

Research Hub

• Research Labs & Initiatives
• Business Library
• Data, Analytics & Research Computing
• Behavioral Lab

Research Labs

• Cities, Housing & Society Lab
• Golub Capital Social Impact Lab

Research Initiatives

• Corporate Governance Research Initiative
• Corporations and Society Initiative
• Policy and Innovation Initiative
• Rapid Decarbonization Initiative
• Stanford Latino Entrepreneurship Initiative
• Value Chain Innovation Initiative
• Venture Capital Initiative
• Career & Success
• Climate & Sustainability
• Corporate Governance
• Culture & Society
• Finance & Investing
• Government & Politics
• Leadership & Management
• Markets & Trade
• Operations & Logistics
• Opportunity & Access
• Organizational Behavior
• Political Economy
• Social Impact
• Technology & AI
• Opinion & Analysis
• Email Newsletter

Welcome, Alumni

• Communities
• Digital Communities & Tools
• Regional Chapters
• Women’s Programs
• Identity Chapters
• Find Your Reunion
• Career Resources
• Job Search Resources
• Career & Life Transitions
• Programs & Services
• Career Video Library
• Alumni Education
• Research Resources
• Volunteering
• Alumni News
• Class Notes
• Alumni Voices
• Contact Alumni Relations
• Upcoming Events

Admission Events & Information Sessions

• MBA Program
• MSx Program
• PhD Program
• Alumni Events
• All Other Events
• Operations, Information & Technology
• Classical Liberalism
• The Eddie Lunch
• Accounting Summer Camp
• Videos, Code & Data
• California Econometrics Conference
• California Quantitative Marketing PhD Conference
• California School Conference
• China India Insights Conference
• Homo economicus, Evolving
• Political Economics (2023–24)
• Scaling Geologic Storage of CO2 (2023–24)
• A Resilient Pacific: Building Connections, Envisioning Solutions
• Adaptation and Innovation
• Changing Climate
• Civil Society
• Climate Impact Summit
• Climate Science
• Corporate Carbon Disclosures
• Earth’s Seafloor
• Environmental Justice
• Operations and Information Technology
• Organizations
• Sustainability Reporting and Control
• Taking the Pulse of the Planet
• Urban Infrastructure
• Watershed Restoration
• Junior Faculty Workshop on Financial Regulation and Banking
• Ken Singleton Celebration
• Marketing Camp
• Quantitative Marketing PhD Alumni Conference
• Presentations
• Theory and Inference in Accounting Research
• Stanford Closer Look Series
• Quick Guides
• Core Concepts
• Journal Articles
• Glossary of Terms
• Faculty & Staff
• Researchers & Students
• Research Approach
• Charitable Giving
• Financial Health
• Government Services
• Workers & Careers
• Short Course
• Adaptive & Iterative Experimentation
• Incentive Design
• Social Sciences & Behavioral Nudges
• Bandit Experiment Application
• Conferences & Events
• Get Involved
• Reading Materials
• Teaching & Curriculum
• Energy Entrepreneurship
• Faculty & Affiliates
• SOLE Report
• Responsible Supply Chains
• Current Study Usage
• Pre-Registration Information
• Participate in a Study

AOL Time Warner

• Priorities for the GSB's Future
• See the Current DEI Report
• Supporting Data
• Research & Insights
• Share Your Thoughts
• Search Fund Primer
• Affiliated Faculty
• Faculty Advisors
• Louis W. Foster Resource Center
• Defining Social Innovation
• Impact Compass
• Global Health Innovation Insights
• Faculty Affiliates
• Student Awards & Certificates
• Changemakers
• Dean Jonathan Levin
• Dean Garth Saloner
• Dean Robert Joss
• Dean Michael Spence
• Dean Robert Jaedicke
• Dean Rene McPherson
• Dean Arjay Miller
• Dean Ernest Arbuckle
• Dean Jacob Hugh Jackson
• Dean Willard Hotchkiss
• Faculty in Memoriam
• Stanford GSB Firsts
• Certificate & Award Recipients
• Teaching Approach
• Analysis and Measurement of Impact
• The Corporate Entrepreneur: Startup in a Grown-Up Enterprise
• Data-Driven Impact
• Designing Experiments for Impact
• Digital Business Transformation
• The Founder’s Right Hand
• Marketing for Measurable Change
• Product Management
• Public Policy Lab: Financial Challenges Facing US Cities
• Public Policy Lab: Homelessness in California
• Lab Features
• Curricular Integration
• View From The Top
• Formation of New Ventures
• Managing Growing Enterprises
• Startup Garage
• Explore Beyond the Classroom
• Stanford Venture Studio
• Summer Program
• Workshops & Events
• The Five Lenses of Entrepreneurship
• Leadership Labs
• Executive Challenge
• Arbuckle Leadership Fellows Program
• Selection Process
• Training Schedule
• Time Commitment
• Learning Expectations
• Post-Training Opportunities
• Who Should Apply
• Introductory T-Groups
• Leadership for Society Program
• Certificate
• 2023 Awardees
• 2022 Awardees
• 2021 Awardees
• 2020 Awardees
• 2019 Awardees
• 2018 Awardees
• Social Management Immersion Fund
• Stanford Impact Founder Fellowships and Prizes
• Stanford Impact Leader Prizes
• Social Entrepreneurship
• Stanford GSB Impact Fund
• Economic Development
• Energy & Environment
• Stanford GSB Residences
• Environmental Leadership
• Stanford GSB Artwork
• A Closer Look
• California & the Bay Area
• Voices of Stanford GSB
• Business & Beneficial Technology
• Business & Sustainability
• Business & Free Markets
• Business, Government, and Society Forum
• Second Year
• Global Experiences
• JD/MBA Joint Degree
• MA Education/MBA Joint Degree
• MD/MBA Dual Degree
• MPP/MBA Joint Degree
• MS Computer Science/MBA Joint Degree
• MS Electrical Engineering/MBA Joint Degree
• MS Environment and Resources (E-IPER)/MBA Joint Degree
• Academic Calendar
• Clubs & Activities
• LGBTQ+ Students
• Military Veterans
• Minorities & People of Color
• Partners & Families
• Students with Disabilities
• Student Support
• Residential Life
• Student Voices
• MBA Alumni Voices
• A Week in the Life
• Career Support
• Employment Outcomes
• Cost of Attendance
• Knight-Hennessy Scholars Program
• Yellow Ribbon Program
• BOLD Fellows Fund
• Application Process
• Loan Forgiveness
• Contact the Financial Aid Office
• Evaluation Criteria
• GMAT & GRE
• English Language Proficiency
• Personal Information, Activities & Awards
• Professional Experience
• Letters of Recommendation
• Optional Short Answer Questions
• Application Fee
• Reapplication
• Deferred Enrollment
• Joint & Dual Degrees
• Entering Class Profile
• Event Schedule
• Ambassadors
• New & Noteworthy
• Ask a Question
• See Why Stanford MSx
• Is MSx Right for You?
• MSx Stories
• Leadership Development
• Career Advancement
• Career Change
• How You Will Learn
• Admission Events
• Personal Information
• Information for Recommenders
• GMAT, GRE & EA
• English Proficiency Tests
• After You’re Admitted
• Daycare, Schools & Camps
• U.S. Citizens and Permanent Residents
• Requirements
• Requirements: Behavioral
• Requirements: Quantitative
• Requirements: Macro
• Requirements: Micro
• Annual Evaluations
• Field Examination
• Research Activities
• Research Papers
• Dissertation
• Oral Examination
• Current Students
• Education & CV
• International Applicants
• Statement of Purpose
• Reapplicants
• Application Fee Waiver
• Deadline & Decisions
• Job Market Candidates
• Academic Placements
• Stay in Touch
• Faculty Mentors
• Current Fellows
• Standard Track
• Fellowship & Benefits
• Group Enrollment
• Program Formats
• Developing a Program
• Diversity & Inclusion
• Strategic Transformation
• Program Experience
• Contact Client Services
• Campus Experience
• Live Online Experience
• Silicon Valley & Bay Area
• Digital Credentials
• Faculty Spotlights
• Participant Spotlights
• Eligibility
• International Participants
• Stanford Ignite
• Frequently Asked Questions
• Founding Donors
• Location Information
• Participant Profile
• Network Membership
• Program Impact
• Collaborators
• Entrepreneur Profiles
• Company Spotlights
• Seed Transformation Network
• Responsibilities
• Current Coaches
• How to Apply
• Meet the Consultants
• Meet the Interns
• Intern Profiles
• Collaborate
• Research Library
• News & Insights
• Program Contacts
• Databases & Datasets
• Research Guides
• Consultations
• Research Workshops
• Career Research
• Research Data Services
• Course Reserves
• Course Research Guides
• Material Loan Periods
• Fines & Other Charges
• Document Delivery
• Interlibrary Loan
• Equipment Checkout
• Print & Scan
• MBA & MSx Students
• PhD Students
• Other Stanford Students
• Faculty Assistants
• Research Assistants
• Stanford GSB Alumni
• Telling Our Story
• Staff Directory
• Site Registration
• Alumni Directory
• Alumni Email
• Privacy Settings & My Profile
• Success Stories
• The Story of Circles
• Support Women’s Circles
• Stanford Women on Boards Initiative
• Alumnae Spotlights
• Insights & Research
• Industry & Professional
• Entrepreneurial Commitment Group
• Recent Alumni
• Half-Century Club
• Fall Reunions
• Spring Reunions
• MBA 25th Reunion
• Half-Century Club Reunion
• Faculty Lectures
• Ernest C. Arbuckle Award
• Alison Elliott Exceptional Achievement Award
• ENCORE Award
• Excellence in Leadership Award
• John W. Gardner Volunteer Leadership Award
• Robert K. Jaedicke Faculty Award
• Jack McDonald Military Service Appreciation Award
• Jerry I. Porras Latino Leadership Award
• Tapestry Award
• Student & Alumni Events
• Executive Recruiters
• Interviewing
• Land the Perfect Job with LinkedIn
• Negotiating
• Elevator Pitch
• Email Best Practices
• Resumes & Cover Letters
• Self-Assessment
• Whitney Birdwell Ball
• Margaret Brooks
• Bryn Panee Burkhart
• Margaret Chan
• Ricki Frankel
• Peter Gandolfo
• Cindy W. Greig
• Natalie Guillen
• Carly Janson
• Sloan Klein
• Sherri Appel Lassila
• Stuart Meyer
• Tanisha Parrish
• Virginia Roberson
• Philippe Taieb
• Michael Takagawa
• Terra Winston
• Johanna Wise
• Debbie Wolter
• Rebecca Zucker
• Complimentary Coaching
• Changing Careers
• Work-Life Integration
• Career Breaks
• Flexible Work
• Encore Careers
• Join a Board
• D&B Hoovers
• Data Axle (ReferenceUSA)
• EBSCO Business Source
• Global Newsstream
• Market Share Reporter
• ProQuest One Business
• Student Clubs
• Entrepreneurial Students
• Stanford GSB Trust
• Alumni Community
• How to Volunteer
• Springboard Sessions
• Consulting Projects
• 2020 – 2029
• 2010 – 2019
• 2000 – 2009
• 1990 – 1999
• 1980 – 1989
• 1970 – 1979
• 1960 – 1969
• 1950 – 1959
• 1940 – 1949
• Service Areas
• ACT History
• ACT Awards Celebration
• ACT Governance Structure
• Building Leadership for ACT
• Individual Leadership Positions
• Leadership Role Overview
• Purpose of the ACT Management Board
• Contact ACT
• Business & Nonprofit Communities
• Reunion Volunteers
• Ways to Give
• Fiscal Year Report
• Business School Fund Leadership Council
• Planned Giving Options
• Planned Giving Benefits
• Planned Gifts and Reunions
• Legacy Partners
• Giving News & Stories
• Giving Deadlines
• Development Staff
• Submit Class Notes
• Class Secretaries
• Board of Directors
• Health Care
• Sustainability
• Class Takeaways
• All Else Equal: Making Better Decisions
• If/Then: Business, Leadership, Society
• Grit & Growth
• Think Fast, Talk Smart
• Spring 2022
• Spring 2021
• Autumn 2020
• Summer 2020
• Winter 2020
• In the Media
• For Journalists
• DCI Fellows
• Other Auditors
• Academic Calendar & Deadlines
• Course Materials
• Entrepreneurial Resources
• Campus Drive Grove
• Campus Drive Lawn
• CEMEX Auditorium
• King Community Court
• Seawell Family Boardroom
• Stanford GSB Bowl
• Stanford Investors Common
• Town Square
• Vidalakis Courtyard
• Vidalakis Dining Hall
• Catering Services
• Policies & Guidelines
• Reservations
• Contact Faculty Recruiting
• Lecturer Positions
• Postdoctoral Positions
• Accommodations
• CMC-Managed Interviews
• Recruiter-Managed Interviews
• Virtual Interviews
• Campus & Virtual
• Search for Candidates
• Think Globally
• Recruiting Calendar
• Recruiting Policies
• Full-Time Employment
• Summer Employment
• Entrepreneurial Summer Program
• Global Management Immersion Experience
• Social-Purpose Summer Internships
• Process Overview
• Project Types
• Client Eligibility Criteria
• Client Screening
• ACT Leadership
• Social Innovation & Nonprofit Management Resources
• Develop Your Organization’s Talent
• Centers & Initiatives
• Student Fellowships