You are sitting in your office when you hear Marcus Svenson, the Finance Director, speaking on the telephone. You can hear only Marcus' side of the conversation:
"Hello, I would like to speak to Sally Walker please. It is Marcus Svenson here. (pause)
Hi Sally, you contacted me six months ago to discuss a job opportunity that you thought I'd be suitable for. I said that I didn't wish to pursue it at that time because I was committed to Wodd. Things have changed since then and I would like to be considered for a finance directorship in another company. (pause)
Yes, I'm still with Wodd. (pause)
Yes, I realise that there was an unfortunate story in the business press about the problems that the weak USD is causing us, but there was very little that I could do to prevent that. (pause)
I am sorry to hear that. I had hoped to move on." (sound of telephone hanging up and door opening)
Marcus discovers that you are sitting at your desk and realises that you would have heard his side of the call.
"Please don't tell anybody what you heard. Would you regard it as unethical to respect my privacy?
I suspect that the CEO knows that I am thinking of leaving. He commented on the need for Board members to be loyal to Wodd at the last Board meeting. But don't you agree that the shareholders can better protect themselves against currency fluctuations than the directors?
The crazy thing is that I suspect that the Chairman will dismiss me next month. If that happens, I get a year's salary as a severance package. That will really annoy the shareholders. How can I justify accepting the severance package if I am effectively being dismissed for failing to manage Wodd's finances properly?
I need to explain at the next Board meeting why it would have been difficult to evaluate the risk of the USD weakening. According to an article I read, it has been picked up as a serious problem for us. How would you advise me to explain that?"
Reference Material:
Reference Material:
Wodd's Chief Executive, Peter Sorchi has stopped you in the corridor:
"This weak USD is really causing us some serious problems. I think that it is only a matter of time before the stock market starts to get nervous and I am worried that our share price will fall in the near future. Thank goodness it does not appear to have fallen by much so far.
I would like to brief the Board on two main issues tomorrow. Firstly, what can we do as a Board in order to minimise the negative impact of the weak USD on our share price? Secondly, we know the identities of the key investment analysts who deal with our industry. Would it be a good idea for us to brief them? Please also consider the ethical issues arising from both of these topics as well as the more technical matters.
Please let me have a copy of your briefing notes in advance. I need to be able to sound convincing at the meeting. I'll also have my secretary refer you to a really helpful blog."
SIMULATION
Hello
I have attached a news article
Arrfield does not set the price for aviation fuel sold at our airports, but we do receive a percentage of the revenues earned by the fuel companies.
I need your help to prepare for a Board meeting to discuss this matter Please write a paper covering the following
* Firstly, explain the impact that the criticisms voiced by the environmental campaigners will have on the frequent PESTEL analysis that Arrfield's Board conducts.
[sub-task (a) = 34%
* Secondly, evaluate the commercial logic of Arrfield's strategy of basing charges for non-aeronautical services (such as fuel sales and retail activities) on percentages of the revenues generated by the companies that operate at its airports
[sub-task (b) = 33%)
* Thirdly, recommend with reasons whether Arrfield should attempt to justify strategic decisions to its shareholders when the commercial logic of those decisions is not immediately obvious
[sub-task (c) = 33%}
Thanks
Romuald Marek
Chief Finance Officer
Requirement 1
The criticism from the environmental campaigns for sale of cheap fuel at the Arrfield airports is not a good sign but the prices of the fuel are not set by the Arrfield. In most of the countries the fuel prince are regulated through Oil and Gas regulatory authorities. As the Arrfield airports are providing the facilities to airlines to refill fuel at the airport which is necessary for the flying of the plane on commission bases, it contribute a significant portion of profit of the Arrfield.
The environmental campaigners criticism is on the usage use of fuel which cause carbon emissions. The Govt, of the Norland may set the price of the fuel in Norland and regulate the prices of the fuel in Norland. After the criticism Govt, of Norland may think to not allowing the fuel companies to pass the cheap fuel import to the airlines. This may be hostile of the Arrfiled business. Many airline may choose the Norland for the flight operation due to gaining advantage of cheaper fuel refill.
As the airlines are buying more fuel which makes the plane heavier and burn more fuel which harm to the environment is a great concern. This could lead to legal and environmental litigation and penalties. The reputation risk is also here if corrective actions are not taken by Arrfield.
Requirement 2
As the Airfield also rely heavily on the non-aeronautical revenues to make profits and the it increase from a substantial percentage in 2020 as to the preceding year. The fuel companies operate in Arrfied airports which is intrinsic in the airport business. It will be difficult for the Arrfield to provide the fuel by itself. It is worthwhile that the Arrfieid earning commission without involving the fuel operations.
As the Norland is being liked by the airlines for refueling its plane is good for the Arrfield to make profit. Arrfield earn commission as much as the airline buy fuel from fuel companies. But by decreasing the price of the fuel it is also worth mentioning that the Arrfield commission is also remains at lower side.
There are three elements in the scenario: 1- Higher sale higher commission. 2- Sale at lower price lower commission. 3-Reputational and environmental risk involved.
Requirement 3
The shareholders are major stakeholders of the company. They are key players have high amount of power and high level of interest. The Arrfield must communicate true affairs of the business to its shareholders. If the commercial logic of decision are not obvious then the poor understanding of the affairs may lead to chaos. The managers are representative of the shareholders and should do everything in the best interest of the shareholders. If they will make the decisions which are not logically understandable then, the shareholders may lose their trust in the management.
The shareholders must not be justified to the shareholder if they are not commercially valuable. Whether or not the decisions are profitable these may be communicated to shareholders which represent true picture of the decisions breach of CIMA ethical principles.
Save North Forest!
North Forest is located in an area of outstanding natural beauty that also includes a number of small towns and villages. Many local residents moved into the area after retiring and were attracted by the opportunity to breathe fresh air and be surrounded by beautiful views. In doing so, we have brought wealth into a local economy that was struggling because there was little employment to encourage younger people born in the area to stay.
Wodd plans to destroy North Forest in order to fuel a power station that will, in itself, spoil the view as well as polluting the atmosphere.
Globally, vast areas of forests are cleared every year for commercial exploitation. This creates untold risks for the planet because trees are responsible for giving us breathable air.
Local residents are working together with Green Marland, Marland's largest environmental campaigner, to draw attention to the damage that Wodd is threatening to inflict on this area.
We ask you to write to the Government planning department to ask it to refuse to issue a permit for this development. We also ask you to sign our online petition and to consider joining us in peaceful and non-violent direct action against the bulldozers in the event that our efforts to block the granting of a Government permit should fail.
Peter Sorchi, Wodd's Chief Executive has stopped you in the corridor:
"We signed a memorandum of understanding with the Bravadorian Government last night. Effectively, we are now the new owners of a forest in a new continent for us. It has already made it onto the business pages in the press.
Once the formalities are completed, we will be entering into new commercial territory. Our surveyors have looked at the first area that we intend to develop and there is a lot more hardwood than we first expected. That is good news in a way because it can be sold at a premium, but we don't have any experience of selling hardwood and we are hardly going to pulp it for MDF or paper. I need you to identify the changes that we will have to make and to recommend how best to manage them.
The funding arrangements are still being worked out. Bravador's banks are not in a position to fund a transaction of this size and none of the other banks that we have approached are prepared to lend to us. We will need to raise additional equity. I realise that we would normally make a rights issue, but I think that it would be simpler and cheaper to suspend the dividend for a year, which would cover most of the purchase price in itself. Please advise me on the advantages and disadvantages of doing that.
It would be ideal if you could let me have a briefing paper on both of these matters urgently."
Reference Material:
