Because secretly, we all want the dole

Atanu Dey has an interesting post where he outlines the three lessons of development economics:

  1. Economic policies matter
  2. The objectives of the policymakers matter in the choice of economic policies
  3. The public determines what policies the politicians choose

He concludes:

The problem is that the general population does not know the basics of good economic policies. That’s the great challenge we face.

 

People need to know because if they did know, the policymakers would know that they cannot fool the public any more of their self-serving policies. That would bring about the conditions for the policymakers to choose good policies.

However, I feel that decades of socialism has corrupted the Indian soul. Deep within us, we know that current policies are setup to enrich those in power. And we also know what is to be done. But we don’t force our policymakers to make those changes because we, as a nation, are morally bankrupt. We are happy fighting between ourselves for the scraps that are thrown at us. And secretly, we all want the dole.

Source: Three Lessons of Development Economics, or Why Utsav Mitra is Mistaken

 

A brief history of Banking

Today we’ll talk a little about the history of banking…how modern banks as we know them came about. We shall also cover the important types of banks and the role of a central banking authority. As with last week, the source of a lot of this information is the book ‘An Introduction to Global Financial Markets’ by Stephen Valdez.

Background

European Central BankIn a lot of ways, modern banking owes its origins to the Italian merchants of the 13th, 14th and 15th centuries. The merchants would sit in open air benches, called ‘banco’ in Italian, to do their money lending business, hence giving us the word ‘bank’. If the business went into liquidation, the bench would be officially broken, giving us the word ‘bancorupto’ or bankrupt! These  bankers were very advanced for their times, they used to do business with traders as far away as London, experimented with marine insurance, had book entry for money instead of physically transporting it and even double entry book keeping systems. Banknotes were invented in the UK by goldsmiths. Goldsmiths has secure vaults of gold and silver coins and would give out receipts for deposits and borrowings backed by gold coins. In fact, for a period of about 150 years goldsmiths were synonymous with bankers in the UK!

Types of banks

Commercial banks

These banks are involved in classic banking activities – taking deposits from investors in return for interest payments and lending money to individuals/businesses. Some commercial banks are into retail banking i.e. catering to the general public and small businesses. Some are into wholesale banking catering to large businesses and institutional investors. Wholesale banking usually involves lesser volumes of transactions than retail banking but the transactions are generally of much higher value.

Merchant and Investment banks

Merchant or Investment banking is the business of ‘helping people raise money’. These banks advice their clients on issues related to merging with or acquiring other companies, issuing new bonds or equity and deciding on the best way to raise capital. If the clients want to raise capital by issuing bonds or equity, these banks help them zero in on the right price, assist in selling the issue to investors and sometimes also underwrite the issue – i.e. buy the securities issued if investors do not.

In the UK, the terms Merchant banking and Investment banking are used interchangeably and mean the same. However, in the US, Merchant banking is used to the practice of applying the banks own capital in takeover/merger activities.

We will talk in more detail about Investment banking activities like Merger and Acquisitions (M&A), Initial Public Offerings (IPO) and underwriting in the coming weeks.

A bank’s balance sheet

English: Detail from Government. Mural by Elih...

A bank’s liabilities would include the shareholders equity plus any retained profits, customer deposits (the largest figure) and other borrowings (for e.g. bonds issued). The liabilities are money borrowed from others that the bank needs to repay at some point. Assets represent how this borrowed money has been utilized. The money may be held as cash reserves, invested in short term securities like money market funds (available at short notice), invested in other securities like Treasury bills, or may be in the form of property or equipment that cannot be easily liquidated. The balance sheet shows what the bank is worth at a particular point in time as the difference between the assets and liabilities will give the profit or loss for that period.

The role of the Central bank

In many countries, though not all, there is a central bank which oversees all the other banks and also serves as the market maker for the country’s economy and manages the government’s money. In some countries there is a separate authority other than the central bank for regulation. In general, the central bank plays the following roles –

  1. Serves as a supervisor of the banking system
  2. Maintains the economic health of the country
  3. Issues bank notes
  4. Serves as a banker to the government
  5. Acts as a ‘lender of last resort’

The Central bank often mandates that all banks report their profit/losses, liquidity and any large exposures to it at regular intervals. It also has rules pertaining to the minimum amount of cash reserves that banks should maintain, called the liquidity ratio. Often, the Central bank requires banks to deposit a ‘balance of reserves’ with it. The idea behind this is that the banks should be able to repay investors even if a certain percentage of borrowers default on their loans. Thus, the banks should maintain a healthy capital ratio i.e. the ratio between its borrowing (capital) and lending.

Central banks maintain the economic health of the country by regulating interest rates. The concept is – as interest rates are raised, loan payments go up and so does the cost of borrowing money. Therefore, people have less money to spend and the price of goods has to be lowered to attract buyers. This leads to a recession like scenario.  Conversely, when interest rates are lowered, loan payments come down and the cost of borrowing is reduced. So, people go out and spend more. This boosts the economy and stimulates growth.

Central banks help governments raise money by handling government issues like bonds. The cumulative sum of money owed by governments by borrowing is called the national debt. Economists compare the national debt to the national income as a ratio to measure the country’s economic situation. For this purpose, the figure for Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is used as equivalent to the national income.

Finally, Central banks also help other banks temporarily when they meet problems with their liquidity. Though, given the current global economic problems, the term ‘lender of last resort’ has come to mean simply, the rescuer of banks in big trouble who are too big to fail!

 

[stockquote]SHALPAINTS[/stockquote]

The Sahara India Pariwar Saga

Here’s yet another turn in Sahara-SEBI war. Subrata Roy, CEO and group chairman of Sahara Group has approached the Supreme Court to postpone the hearing scheduled for April 22. That’s when Justice K.S. Radhakrishnan is expected to consider SEBI’s petition to detain Subrata Roy and directors Ashok Roy Choudhary, Ravi Shankar Dubey, and Vandana Bhargava to initiate contempt proceedings against them.

English: At home of Subrata Roy Sahara

Sahara Group was instructed by the Supreme Court in August 2012 to refund ₹24,000 crore to investors in 3 months, along with 15% interest. The charge on Sahara Group, its CEO, promoters and directors is that the firms Sahara India Real Estate Corp. Ltd. (SIRECL) and Sahara Housing Investment Corp. Ltd. (SHICL) raised funds through optionally fully convertible debentures (OFCD) without complying with prudent disclosure and investor protection norms such as notifying investors when their deposit matures or KYC norms. Moreover, majority of investors in Sahara’s scheme come from rural villages and small cities who were attracted by the interest rate but have no idea what OFCD means.

SEBI argues that under the guise of Residual Non-Banking Corporations (RBFC) distributing OFCDs, the firms were running regular deposit schemes and para-banking activities – a breach of SEBI regulations and the Companies Act. An OFCD scheme runs only 10 days while Sahara has been collecting money for years – from over 23 million people. That too in a highly irresponsible manner as their investor records show – incorrect names and addresses, no nominee record, etc. In effect, if an investor does not come to Sahara with debenture papers, the money will stay in Sahara’s pockets – an observation made by courts too.

SIRECL had collected ₹19,400.87 crore from investors by March 2008 and SHICL ₹6,380.50 crore. With the 15% interest, Sahara must pay back over ₹38,000 crore to investors. The company claims 86% of the funds have already been refunded except ₹5,120 crore which they have paid to SEBI on the court’s order.

Since Sahara has failed to make further expected payments to SEBI and their investor records show bizarre gaps that could mean they are bogus, SEBI has passed an attachment order on bank accounts and assets associated with SIRECL and SHICL. Sahara has filed an appeal with Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT) to appeal on this issue on April 20.

Sahara claims that SEBI has no jurisdiction in the OFCD matter as they are a privately held company and hence answerable only to the Ministry of Corporate Affairs. This argument does not wash with the Supreme Court of India or SEBI.

What of the investors that Sahara accepted money from? Roy claims that none of his 110 million investors have anything to complain about. But reports have come in of strong-arm tactics towards investors who are coming in with their papers and conversion of investments to Roy’s newest venture Q-shop without investor’s consent.

Meanwhile, Sahara Group has acquired acres of land in Delhi, Gurgaon, Mumbai and purchased controlling stakes in hotels abroad with possibly the funds accumulated from SIRECL and SHICL. That’s not a crime but it rightly raises questions for which Sahara doesn’t have convincing answers. Is it the road to doom for Sahara or will Subrata Roy’s entrepreneurial soul find a way out yet again?

 

Indian IT and Contingent Liabilities

Contingent liabilities are serious future obligations like lawsuits, warranties, etc. that may or may not be a problem. For example, if your parents guarantee your home loan, then if you make all your payments on time and do not default on your mortgage, there is no contingent liability on your parents. If you fail to make the payments, your parents will incur a liability.

Maybe its not a problem yet, but it appears the Indian IT companies are getting into riskier contracts in search of revenue. It used be that Indian IT companies were predominantly “body shops”, i.e., most of the contracts were labor based. An hourly or monthly labor rate was assigned to different skill levels and the contract outlined the total labor anticipated and quality of service goals. However, over the last 3-4 years, there has been a significant uptick in “gain sharing” contracts where the service provider obtains a share in the savings when outsourcing creates permanent cost savings. A gain-sharing contract better motivates the provider to innovate and to reduce operating costs.

The problem is that these contracts are not transparent to investors. How much of the anticipated revenue has been booked upfront? What if there are no “gains”? What if provider has a windfall year and the client decides to renegotiate the formula? Also, are investors aware of the risk-mismatch in contracts between what the provider has with its employees and its clients?

Investors should demand greater disclosure of these contingent liabilities before taking revenue numbers at face value.

Conglomerates: Heartbreak hotel?

Conglomerates are companies that either partially or fully own a number of other companies. Sprawling conglomerates litter the Indian landscape: from the Birlas to the Welspun Group, they have a finger in just about every pie.

The case for conglomerates can be summed up in one word: diversification. Because the business cycle affects industries in different ways, diversification results in a reduction of investment risk. A downturn suffered by one subsidiary can be counterbalanced by stability, or even expansion, in another venture.

The core of the idea came from a Harvard Business School proposition that management is management. If you could manage an oil business; you could also manage a movie studio, because the basic fundamental principles were the same. But anybody who has actually managed a business knows that success depends on understanding deeply the industry in which one operates. However, the megalomaniac allure of being everywhere and owning everything is hard to resist. After all, managers are also human, aren’t they?

The case against conglomerates can be summed up in two words: size and complexity. Bigger size slows down decision-making while complexity creates confusion. Diversified companies often allocate capital to keep poorly performing divisions alive. The market would have cut them off, but in a diversified firm, good money is thrown after bad. For investors, conglomerates can be difficult to understand – accounting can leave a lot to be desired and can obscure the performance of separate divisions. Behind every Tata company there is the unlisted and opaque Tata Sons lurking in the background.

So should we break up these behemoths and force them to be independent entities? It depends. Research shows that companies with one division operating in a high-growth industry and another in a low-growth industry will generally do a worse job of allocating capital than one with two divisions operating in industries with comparable growth prospects. It means that the Reliance of yore, the vertically integrated petrochemicals major, is an example of a “good” conglomerate. Whereas the new Reliance, the one that wants to be in every vertical possible, is an example of a “bad” conglomerate.

Forewarned is forearmed!

Sources:
spinoffadvisors
CFO.com

[stockquote]SHALPAINTS[/stockquote]