AMSI INDIA

FW: Analysis Beyond Consensus - Annual Report Analysis - Tata Chemicals

2009-12-08T22:50:00.000+05:30

Credits : Edelweiss

Accounting policy highlights

n Tata Chemicals, in FY09, availed the option of capitalising/deferring foreign exchange difference on long term monetary items provided by the recent amendment in AS 11. Consequently, INR 2.4 bn (net of tax) was accumulated under the "foreign currency monetary translation difference account" and will be amortised over the next two financial years or earlier.
n Total foreign exchange items (loss; net) expensed and capitalised during the year aggregate INR 3.3 bn. With the INR appreciating ~ 8.7% against the USD, a part of these losses could be recouped if the related foreign currency items are still outstanding.
n Redemption premium on FCCBs was charged to the share premium account in FY05, the year of issue of FCCBs, and the exchange difference on the redemption premium is adjusted annually in that account. Consequently, net profit for FY09 was higher by
INR 103.3 mn, comprising INR 64.1 mn and INR 39.2 mn (both, net of deferred tax) in respect of redemption premium and exchange difference on redemption premium otherwise chargeable up to FY08, respectively.
n During the year, two United Kingdom-based investment subsidiaries changed their reporting currency from GBP to USD. Consequent to the change, exchange loss is lower and profit is higher by INR 1.5 bn.

Financial highlights
n Tata Chemicals' borrowing cost increased 185.7% to INR 4.0 bn in FY09 (FY08: INR 1.4 bn). Borrowing cost, as a proportion of total income, has consistently increased from 0.9% in FY05 to 3.2% in FY09 (FY06: 1.2%, FY07: 1.6%, FY08: 2.1%).
n Net profit margin (excluding profit on sale of investments) has halved from 10.4% in FY06 to 5.2% in FY09 (FY07: 8.6%, FY08: 7.2%) primarily due to rising interest cost burden.
n FY09 net profit includes write-back of liabilities aggregating INR 889.5 mn and provision for diminution in the value of investments aggregating INR 555.86 mn.
n Market value of quoted investments stands at INR 5.7 bn vis–a-vis book value of INR 2.0 bn.
n A United Kingdom-based subsidiary recognised impairment loss aggregating INR 1.5 bn due to closure of operations of a plant in Netherlands. Impairment loss aggregating INR 318.4 mn in respect of cement-cash generating unit, charged in earlier year, was written back, considering the improvement in margins.
n Tata Chemicals' net worth increased by INR 10.5 bn, of which, INR 7.0 bn is due to foreign currency translation reserve (recognised in respect of General Chemicals & Industrial Products). With the appreciation of the INR against the USD, a portion of this increase will be written back.

n Cash conversion cycle decreased 16.2 days to 15.1 days (FY08: 31.3 days) due to lesser inventory and receivables days, partially offset by lower payables days.
n Contingent liabilities include disputed claims against company (statutory and others) aggregating INR 3.0 bn, ~ 6.6% of net worth.
n Goodwill on consolidation stands at INR 56.2 bn (FY08: INR 46.5 bn), ~ 123.8% of net worth. Goodwill increased by INR 9.7 bn. With no major acquisition during the year, we believe the increase in goodwill is due to restatement at depreciated INR.
n Un-hedged foreign currency exposure for liabilities (net) stands at INR 970.1 mn, 2.1% of net worth.
n The company has entered into currency forward contracts to buy USD aggregating INR 13.0 bn, interest rate swaps aggregating INR 9.1 bn, currency swaps aggregating INR 28.0 bn, long position in currency call options aggregating INR 3.3 bn, and natural gas forward contracts aggregating INR 356.1 mn.

_________________________________________________________________
New Windows 7: Find the right PC for you. Learn more.
http://windows.microsoft.com/shop

Full text of Anil Ambani's AGM address (RNRL) on 28 July 2009

2009-07-29T23:59:00.000+05:30

THIS STATEMENT IS DESTINED TO CREATE HISTORY IN CORPORATE GOVERNANCE...............
Every Investor,Corporate Manager or student........must learn.......
Where a Chairman of a company listed in India has the courage,Where the mind is without fear......
(very soon other Stakeholders and Chairman of RIL will also respond.......more Milestones in the History of Corporate Governance)

Reliance Anil Dhirubhai Ambani Group (R-Adag) chairman Anil Ambani
addressed the annual general meeting of Reliance Natural Resources
Limited (RNRL) in Mumbai today. RNRL is currently engaged in a bitter
court battle with elder brother Mukesh Ambani's Reliance Industries
Limited over the use of gas from the Krishna-Godavari basin. Following
is the chairman's speech:
My dear fellow Reliance Natural Resources shareowners,
A warm welcome to each one of you to the 9th Annual General Meeting of
our company. It has been a little over three years since we first came
together to write a new chapter in our company's growth and evolution.
In this time, our shareowner family has grown to over 26 lakh members,
adding over 6 lakh new members since the demerger in 2005. We are now
the second largest shareholder family in the country, after our group
company Reliance Power, which has a shareholder base of 37 lakh members,
by far the largest in India.
Performance Review
The company's accounts for the year ended March 31, 2009, along with the
directors' report, letter to shareowners, and management discussion and
analysis have been circulated to you.
With your permission, I would like to take them as read.
The gas supply contract with Reliance Industries Ltd (RIL) is our
company's primary asset and contributes most of its value, affecting the
very basis for its creation. Accordingly, I propose today to comment
extensively on recent developments in this matter, covering four main
areas:
1. RIL's dishonourable conduct in persistently refusing to honour the
gas supply contract.
2. The exorbitant profits RIL is seeking to make at the cost of the
power and fertiliser sectors in the country.
3. The apparently biased and partisan role of the petroleum ministry,
and
4. The reality of the gas demand-supply scenario in India and its
implications on long-term pricing.
The Founder's Dream
At the outset, I am happy to note that Reliance Industries Limited
(RIL), a company founded by my father, the late Shri Dhirubhai Ambani,
with which I was associated for nearly 25 years and which is still very
close to my heart, has started the production of natural gas from KG
basin recently - although seven years after discovery, and with huge
time and cost overruns.
Nonetheless, my heartiest congratulations to the RIL team for achieving
this marvellous feat, and realising one of Dhirubhai's life-long dreams.
This significant domestic gas production in India will broadbase our
energy basket and contribute to our long-term energy security.
Gas Supply From RIL
Last year, when we met at the AGM, I shared with you the history behind
the creation of RNRL.
To recap briefly, our company was created through a demerger of RIL and
was to be responsible for the supply and transportation of gas from the
various gas fields of RIL to our group companies for power and other
projects.
This arrangement was approved, by all of you, as shareholders of RIL.
To ensure that the benefits of the gas business were rightfully enjoyed
by the over two million shareholders of RIL, they were all allotted
shares - free-of-cost - in the new company, Reliance Natural Resources.
Despite the binding commercial agreement that exists between RIL and
RNRL for the supply of gas, it is unfortunate that RIL has tried every
trick in the book - and, apparently, several outside the book - to back
out of its solemn, legal, and contractual obligations.
Following the failure of our every attempt at talks and conciliation for
nearly 18 months, we had no option but to approach the Bombay High Court
to ensure that RIL fulfils its gas supply obligations to our company.
I am happy to report that the hon'ble Bombay High Court has delivered
three judgments in the past two years on this matter, and in each one of
them, our stand has been vindicated, and RIL's claims summarily
dismissed.
Most recently, the division bench of Bombay High Court in its judgment
of 15 June 2009 has categorically ruled that
1. The RNRL application is maintainable, meaning our claims against RIL
are totally justified.
2. The quantity of gas to be supplied by RIL to RNRL is 28 million cubic
metres (plus another 12 in case RIL does not supply gas to NTPC), and
shall be binding.
3. The sale price of gas shall be US $2.34 per mmbtu.
4. The tenure of gas supply shall be for the full 17 years.
5. Parties to enter into a bankable gas supply agreement within 30 days.
6. The corporate restructuring MoU between the two groups is upheld,
benefiting over 15 million shareholders.
I would specially like to mention here that the Bombay High Court gave
this verdict AFTER hearing the government of India for over six months
on the interpretation of its production-sharing contract (PSC) with RIL.
Clearly, the hon'ble high court's order is a body blow to RIL.
In the last five weeks, there has been a spate of motivated and
misleading reports, even official statements from certain quarters, not
to mention an unnecessary legal intervention by the petroleum ministry
in the hon'ble Supreme Court - to sow the seeds of confusion and take
away from the clear and comprehensive nature of the Bombay High Court
verdict.
Outraged by this vicious and false propaganda, several of you have
approached me to urgently clarify these issues at the AGM today and
dispel the lies, myths, and untruths being propagated by vested
interests.
Let me, therefore, directly deal with your questions, concerns, and
doubts on this very critical matter affecting the very foundation of
your company.
Question: The petroleum ministry says that the two brothers are fighting
over something that doesn't belong to them? That this is a private
battle over a sovereign national asset. That the KG basin gas belongs to
the government and people of India.
Answer: I am sorry to say that facts are deliberately being twisted to
suggest that the corporate agreement between RIL and RNRL amounts to a
private division of sovereign national assets.
This bogey of sovereign ownership is being raised with the sole purpose
of attempting to bail out RIL and help them renege on their contractual
commitments. The fact is, we are not claiming any rights to the
ownership of the KG basin gas fields. We are claiming gas only from
RIL's lawful share or its rightful entitlement of production of gas
under the PSC.
More importantly, our claim is entirely in line with the government's
own stand on the floor of Parliament, not once or twice, but on at least
15 different occasions in the past three years.
To quote just one instance, on April 22, 2008, in a specific reference
to the RIL-RNRL corporate dispute, the government told Parliament in a
written answer, and I quote: "As per the PSC, the contractor - that is,
RIL - is entitled to sell its participating share of gas in cost
petroleum and profit petroleum."
Simply put, if RIL is entitled to sell its share of gas, as provided for
in the PSC and as confirmed by the government in Parliament on so many
occasions, where does the question then arise of our corporate agreement
carving up national assets or property?
Clearly, this bogey is being raised by those seeking to help RIL at any
cost, for reasons that no one can fathom...
Q: Why has the petroleum ministry's role suddenly escalated in the
RIL-RNRL gas dispute?
A: I am as surprised by this escalation as all of you and most other
observers. Even as recently as 2 July 2009, two weeks after the Bombay
High Court had delivered its judgment, the government told Parliament in
a written answer that the court case between RIL and RNRL is, and I
quote: "a commercial matter between two companies".
The petroleum ministry has publicly sought to justify its escalated
intervention on the ground that it didn't know the terms of the RIL-RNRL
gas arrangement till recently when they were revealed during the course
of the Bombay High Court hearings. I'm afraid this stand is contrary to
facts on record.
The petroleum ministry has been in possession of all relevant details of
the RIL-RNRL gas supply agreement for at least three years, that is,
since 2006, if not earlier. In April 2006, RIL provided all details of
the gas supply arrangements to the petroleum ministry. This is a matter
of official record.
In June 2006, three years before the Bombay High Court delivered its
judgment, RNRL submitted full details of its gas supply aqreement with
RIL to the petroleum ministry. This again is a matter of official
record.
The Bombay High Court order of June 2007 outlined all terms of the gas
supply agreement, including the initial supply of committed quantities
of gas, and the sharing of option gas. Way back in September 2007, when
the empowered group of ministers (herein after referred to as cabinet
sub-group for convenience) met, it took note of the full details of the
gas supply agreement between RIL and RNRL. The Union minister for
petroleum was an integral part of the cabinet sub-group and represented
the petroleum ministry's point of view. The cabinet sub-group actually
went further, and recognising the rights of the parties, categorically
recorded that its decisions were "without prejudice to the NTPC vs RIL &
RNRL vs RIL cases which are sub-judice".
This has been reiterated, reinforced, and restated twice in the cabinet
sub-group meetings, in October 2008 and January 2009, as per the minutes
filed by the government in the Bombay High Court. In other words, the
cabinet sub-group has consistently and rightly stated that its decisions
would not affect the rights of RNRL and NTPC against RIL, and the
court's decisions would be binding.
Through this entire period, the petroleum ministry was a party to, and
concurred with, this decision, and did not make any attempt to question
the corporate restructuring agreement between RIL and RNRL. It is only
now, after the adverse verdict of the Bombay High Court against RIL,
that the petroleum ministry has suddenly decided to intervene in this
purely corporate dispute.
Apparently, the petroleum ministry has used its discretion and not even
thought it fit to take the approval, I am informed, of the cabinet.
This, remember, is a matter which involves two of India's largest
business houses, over 15 million shareholders, global implications for
the energy business, and three unambiguous judgments of the Bombay High
Court.
Yet, the petroleum ministry has unilaterally gone ahead and taken a
stand which runs contrary to that of the cabinet sub-group - apparently
without even consulting it - even though that group represented the
broader, collective wisdom of several other ministers, including, inter
alia, the ministers of finance, law, power, and fertilisers! At least on
the face of it, quite unusual and puzzling!
There are some other curious aspects of the manner in which this case is
apparently being handled. I have been informed that the ministry of law
and justice has issued written instructions to all ministries, by a
circular dated 3.11.2008, that in all sensitive matters, "written
submissions/affidavits should be filed in the Supreme Court only after
the same are vetted/approved by the department of legal affairs,
ministry of law and justice."
Based on all public comments of the petroleum ministry, it clearly
considers this to be a sensitive matter. Nonetheless, it has reportedly
chosen not to take the requisite approval of the ministry of law and
justice. Maybe, technically, it has the powers to go ahead on its own,
but given the several inter-ministerial deliberations that had already
taken place on the subject and the substantial issues involved, would it
not have been more appropriate and transparent to at least consult the
law ministry? Quite the contrary, it appears!
According to media reports, the petroleum ministry, in an unprecedented
step, reportedly wrote to the law ministry earlier this month, and
simply informed them that copies of SLPs/affidavits would be made
available by the advocates of the petroleum ministry, and the same
should be filed in the Supreme Court!
Not just that, the petroleum ministry further instructed the law
ministry that no counsel should be instructed to appear in the matter
without their prior approval, as the matter was "sensitive".
Also, according to further media reports today, the senior government
law official who represented the petroleum ministry before the Bombay
High Court informed it that:
- submissions should be confined to the grievances as an aggrieved party
arising out of the judgment of the Bombay High Court.
- the challenge to the MoU should only be in to the gas sale agreement
and not to other matters
- the final SLP was not shown to him! Clearly, his advice was not
followed!
Finally, it has been brought to my attention that one of the senior
advocates of the petroleum ministry, who I have no doubt is a most
accomplished person with the highest degree of legal expertise, is the
same person who sent a formal complaint to Sebi [the Securities and
Exchange Board of India] in October 2007 against the Reliance Power IPO
and me personally. It's a different matter that Sebi and the hon'ble
Supreme Court allowed the IPO to proceed, overruling all complaints.
Media reports further suggest that some officials in the petroleum
ministry had observed that the services of this learned senior advocate
should not be considered "due to inadequate understanding and
presentation of cases before the Hon'ble high court...", but this was
overruled and he still represents the petroleum ministry!
Maybe all just an accident? Or a coincidence?... I leave it to your
judgment!
It doesn't stop here... it actually gets better... sorry, worse!
Frankly, if the petroleum ministry is genuinely aggrieved - and if they
honestly believe that RIL has violated the terms of the PSC by allegedly
trying to divide national property - why don't they exercise their
powers and terminate the PSC, and take back the ownership of the gas
fields from RIL, when the provisions exist for them to do so?
Since the corporate agreements between RIL and RNRL have been known to
them for three years, what have they been waiting for? Why are they
belatedly rushing to the Supreme Court, challenging commercial contracts
between two corporate entities?
Q: Why is the petroleum ministry's stance different now than it was in
the Bombay High Court?
A: I wish I knew... Before the Bombay High Court verdict, the ministry
did not ask for cancellation or annulment of the MoU! In fact, during
the high court hearing, the petroleum ministry made certain submissions
regarding its views on gas supply, and its interpretation of the PSC,
which ran completely contrary to their earlier stated positions on the
issue.
However, when our counsel requested the court's permission to
cross-examine the ministry's officials, the latter quickly withdrew all
their affidavits... Again, on the face of it, appears quite unusual...
and puzzling!
Q: Could the petroleum ministry then be intervening because the high
court judgment affects the government's interests adversely?
A: Not at all. The fact is that the Bombay high court has delivered not
one but three judgments on the issue, each one of which, including the
most recent one delivered on June 15, fully protects the government's
interests and revenues. This is also completely consistent with our own
legal position.
What is being deliberately distorted is that, as per the PSC, there is a
clear distinction between the sale price of gas, which is to be fixed by
the contractor (RIL), and the price to be adopted for determining the
government's royalty and share of production, normally referred to as
valuation, which is approved by the government.
This is not our interpretation of some very complex legal clauses - this
is the view of the government itself, consistently affirmed on the floor
of Parliament! On 30 August 2007, the government told Parliament in a
written answer and I quote: "As per the PSC signed by the government
under the New Exploration Licensing Policy (NELP), the operators have
the freedom to market the gas in the domestic market on an arm's length
basis. The government does not fix price of gas. The role of the
government is to approve the valuation of gas for the purpose of
determining government take."
Again, the government told Parliament on 27 November 2007 that "[it]
does not fix the price of gas". The Bombay High Court, too, has upheld
this legal position, and said that as long as the government gets its
royalty and share of production on the basis of the government-approved
price for valuation, they have no concern with the sale price at which
the contractor [RIL] sells the gas.
The government's approved gas price is thus not a sale price - it is a
price the government has fixed for valuing its own share of profit
petroleum. To illustrate: the situation is similar to that of stamp duty
on property transactions. Just like stamp duty is based on the
government's reference rate and has no relationship to the actual sale
or purchase price, the government-approved price of gas is a reference
rate that is used to calculate the government's share of profit
petroleum, but does not become the sale price.
It is just like when you buy a flat at a price of Rs10 lakh, the
registrar of properties may value the flat at Rs20 lakh and charge stamp
duty on Rs20 lakh. But the registrar does not go on to say that you must
pay Rs20 lakh to the seller - and the registrar certainly does not go
and file a case in the Supreme Court to make you pay Rs20 lakh! But this
is exactly what the petroleum ministry's stand means!
It has contended before the Supreme Court that it will not only value
the gas, but also fix the gas sale price that RNRL must pay RIL, even
though in Parliament it has repeatedly said that "government does not
fix the price of gas!" For the record, I want to emphasize that
government does not stand to lose a single rupee, even if RIL sells at a
lower than the approved valuation price to any party.
And here is the most mystifying part, something very few people are
aware of. Going by the petroleum ministry's determined opposition to the
Bombay High Court's judgment, it will be fair to assume that this is
their way of protecting the financial interests of the government.
Appears far from it... very far indeed!
As per the terms of the PSC, if RIL gets a higher sale price from us
based on the price the petroleum ministry wants to fix for the first few
years, 99% of all revenues and profits will go to RIL, and only a measly
1% will accrue to the government! Of the initial revenue of Rs50,000
crore, RIL gets almost all, i.e. Rs49,500 crore vs the government's
Rs500 crore. Makes you wonder why the petroleum ministry is pushing so
hard for higher gas prices, when 99% gains will go to RIL!
The irony is that even RIL's own international partner in the KG D-6,
Niko Resources, has written to the government that as per the PSC, the
petroleum ministry has no powers to fix the sale price! Other global
petroleum industry majors, including BP and Shell, have made a similar
formal submission to the government, arguing that any attempt to fix the
price would violate the market freedom provided under the PSC. RIL had
itself opposed this position earlier, but now, for obvious reasons, is
finding great virtue in toeing the petroleum ministry's line!
Q: If all this is true, then why is the petroleum ministry behaving in
this partisan manner?
A: What people say is that RIL is apparently firing from the shoulders
of the petroleum ministry to renege on its contractual commitments to
NTPC and RNRL. It is worth emphasizing that we are not the sole victims
of RIL's machinations. There is also government-owned NTPC, India's
largest power utility and a navaratna. People say there is a history to
the RIL-RNRL dispute - the corporate restructuring, and so on. But so
far as the RIL-NTPC dispute is concerned, obviously there is no ego, no
emotions, no family, and no corporate restructuring - it is plain and
simple corporate greed.
This is a unique case in the history of independent India where the
actions of one arm of the government, that is, the ministry of
petroleum, is ostensibly harming the interests of another, ministry of
power's jewel-in-the-crown NTPC - all for the sake of a monopolistic gas
producer, RIL.
NTPC has been fighting RIL for supply of gas from KG-D6 fields.
Initially, RIL had willingly and voluntarily quoted to supply gas to
NTPC at US $2.34 per unit, in a global competitive bid, and the dispute
was only as regards certain terms and conditions of the agreement.
Now, based on the petroleum ministry's revised stand, RIL has told the
courts that it cannot supply gas at the earlier contracted price of US
$2.34 even to NTPC! Like any other unbiased observer of this unfolding
crisis of credibility, I am deeply dismayed by this apparently partisan
and biased approach of the petroleum ministry in favour of RIL, which is
hurting not just RNRL, but also the government-owned NTPC.
NTPC's case against RIL has been going on for nearly three years in the
Bombay High Court, and if RIL's current delaying tactics are allowed to
persist, it will continue for much longer.
Q: Has the petroleum ministry always behaved like this?
A: Definitely not. It is evident that the apparently biased stance
commenced in 2006, coinciding with changes in the ministry. I am not
trying to cast any aspersions on the integrity or motives of individuals
here - I am sure they have good reasons for their stance. I am sure all
private companies in India wish that if they made commercial decisions
they wished to get out of, they too had a saviour to help bail them out
- as is the case for RIL!
Q: Will this intervention by the petroleum ministry have any long-term
implications for the business environment in India?
A: The petroleum ministry's stance is, in effect, that it will solely
decide:
- who should sell gas
- to whom,
- at what price
- and in what quantity,
- and when
- without any heed to commercial considerations or contractual
provisions!
In complete reversal to the entire direction of economic reforms, being
implemented by our respected prime minister, Dr Manmohan Singh, the
petroleum ministry is regrettably pursuing a different path, seeking
perhaps a return to the command-control elements of the dismantled
'licence-permit raj'!
Through its intervention, the ministry is aiming to rewrite the PSC
after nearly 10 years, and also seeking to cancel a contract between
third-party corporate entities! What, then, is the sanctity of a
contract, which is the fundamental cornerstone of any law-abiding,
market-driven economy? And will this not set a precedent, allowing any
ministry to alter any contracts in future at will?
Clearly, the petroleum ministry's unfortunate intervention in a
corporate commercial dispute in this manner, if permitted to continue,
will erode investor confidence, and thwart the government's efforts to
attract investments into India. This will also, naturally, have adverse
policy implications for private investments in all natural resources,
which are subject to similar considerations.
Q: What about RIL? Why is it not honouring its commitments?
A: I am deeply shocked and saddened by RIL's conduct in this matter, and
its blatant refusal to honour a bona fide commercial agreement. Let's
remind ourselves that RIL is no ordinary company. It is India's largest
private-sector company - a proud creation of India's greatest
entrepreneur, my late father, Shri Dhirubhai Ambani. What it does, the
signals it sends out, have relevance not just for its own business
partners but for India at large. And what RIL has been communicating in
the last few years is that it has no regard for its own solemn word, no
time for values, no respect for the sanctity of contracts. And, most of
all, no morality in its headlong pursuit of corporate greed.
The most important word for Shri Dhirubhai Ambani was TRUST and that
word has, unfortunately, gone missing.
RIL has shown no inclination, desire, or urgency to comply with the
judgments of the Bombay High Court, even though none of them has been
stayed by a higher court. Indeed, the actions of RIL have resulted in
existing customers with stranded assets filing a spate of unnecessary
petitions in the Supreme Court, even though we have made it clear that
there will be no disruption of gas supply to any existing or
priority-sector user if gas is supplied to RNRL in the interim as prayed
for by us in the Supreme Court.
Q: But why should RIL supply gas to RNRL at a preferential price lower
than the price of US $4.20 per mmbtu based on a private family
settlement, when others are paying that higher price?
A: There are no preferential or low prices. The price of US $2.34 was
not decided by two brothers on the dinner table. Nor is it part of some
private family arrangement. The price of US $2.34 was approved by RIL's
board of directors nearly five years ago and has been duly recorded in
the commercial agreements signed by RIL as a properly constituted legal
corporate entity, with all relevant authorisations. All these facts are
recorded in the recent order of the Bombay High Court.
The proposed gas supply arrangements were also part of the publicly
disclosed and widely circulated demerger scheme:
- approved by RIL's board,
- approved by over 2 million shareholders of RIL,
- approved by the Bombay High Court,
- after receiving the central government's no-objection certificate.
In other words, everybody, including the petroleum ministry, had an
opportunity to raise objections against the de-merger scheme, but they
didn't do so.
Secondly, ours is not some arbitrary price that came from nowhere. This
price was discovered in an international competitive bid floated by the
government-owned NTPC in 2004, in which RIL voluntarily and
unequivocally agreed to supply gas at US $2.34; a price that was
authorised by the RIL board.
RNRL's gas supply agreement with RIL, finalised at the same time as the
RIL-NTPC agreement, was based on this competitive arm's length price,
discovered through a full-fledged competitive global bid.
Unfortunately, the later price discovery of US $4.20 by RIL (for
valuation purposes) is completely flawed. The formula was never approved
by the petroleum ministry prior to the orchestrated tender by RIL where
participants were invited to bid on a nominated basis. The formula as
constructed is not rational, and does not pass on any real benefit to
the consumer, even if the crude price was to drop from US $60 or US $30!
Moreover, the price has been decided for only five years, and it is
unlikely that any new investments in greenfield power projects would
materialise on the basis of a five-year contract and, more importantly,
on a very high gas price.
NTPC, the largest and most experienced power utility in India, with all
its financial strengths, has not gone ahead with the construction of the
2600MW Kawas and Gandhar expansion projects as it does not have assured
gas supply contract and is finding it unviable to accept gas at a
delivered price of nearly US $7 per mmbtu (including transportation
costs).
Any price for valuation determined for a short-term commitment of five
years based on needs of plants sitting idle, and desperate for gas at
any price, cannot have any relevance for long-term, fixed price, 17-year
gas supply contracts on take-or-pay basis, for setting up greenfield
power and fertiliser projects involving investments of tens of thousands
of crores.
Q: But isn't US $4.2 the right price for domestic gas, given the
scarcity of gas in India?
A: This entire concept of scarcity of gas in India is actually a myth -
in the long run. The gas production in the country is set to double to
over 200 million cubic metres of gas per day in the near future, based
on further production from RIL's KG-D6 fields alone. In addition, there
will be production from gas reserves already found by various other
players like GSPC and ONGC. Besides, RIL has so far explored only 4% of
its total fields in KG-D6. The balance 96% area is still to be explored,
and given past finds, it is reasonable to expect similar huge
discoveries of reserves in the future.
In a few years, India will become a gas-surplus nation, provided
contractors are subject to an independent process of assessment and
verification, which prevents the hoarding, under-reporting or
sub-optimal production of gas. A gas price of US $4.2 is exorbitant and
can in no way be justified.
One must bear in mind that gas prices in the international market have
crashed by as much as 80% in the last few months. Yet, that seems to
have made no difference to the petroleum ministry's push for even higher
prices in India, much to the detriment of power and fertiliser
consumers.
The situation seems even more bizarre if one looks at other markets in
the world. In the Middle East, gas prices are currently ruling at US
$1.5, or just under one-fourth of the delivered price in India. India
now has among the highest short-term gas prices in the world, nearly 30%
higher than even in the UK and the US, where short-term prices are
currently hovering around US $3.5.
In our view, it would be against public interest to price gas in India
for any user above US $1.50. Natural gas should, in fact, be priced
substantially lower than US $2 for all power and fertiliser customers.
Of course, it is strange that in a democratic country like India, we
have to pay for a domestic resource like gas in dollars when the end
users of this resource, the millions of power and fertiliser consumers
in this country, pay for it in rupees.
The simple fact is that RIL has a short-term monopoly, and to perpetuate
this monopoly, and earn disproportionate profits at the cost of the
people, RIL is spreading misinformation in the public domain to ensure a
higher price for its gas.
It is a huge scandal that at the price of US $4.20, RIL wants to make
super-normal profits of over Rs50,000 crore, which will ultimately be
paid for by hundreds of millions of end consumers in the power and
fertiliser sector. People wonder if the petroleum ministry realises that
its efforts to make this the uniform price for all users will benefit
only one monopolistic supplier, RIL, at the expense of the whole
country!
As per analyst reports, the entire KG basin has been declared
commercial, when only 4% of it is actually being exploited, thus
profiting RIL for many, many years to come.
Q: What will be the impact of a gas price of US $4.2 for the country?
A: The burden of the higher gas prices will eventually be borne by
hundreds of millions of power and fertiliser consumers. The higher gas
price demanded by RIL increases the cost of power for consumers by as
much as Re1 per unit.
The story does not end there. The real price of gas is not US $4.20, but
close to US $7 per mmbtu, because the delivered price to bulk consumers
would include a huge additional component of transportation costs. At
these delivered prices, while some limited stranded power capacities may
function, I'm afraid it will not be possible to achieve the prime
minister's vision of 'power for all by 2012' - and all this, for the
sake of enriching one corporate entity, RIL.
I may add that there is a strong case to revisit the issue of
transportation costs for KG-D6 gas, probably the highest in the world,
by the PNGRB, the pipeline regulator. Presently [sic], these are pegged
at a prohibitive US $1.25, or 30% of the base gas price! Further, with
new tax breaks recently announced, the entire cost of setting up the gas
pipeline network has been allowed to be written off in the very first
year - a special and unique benefit not given to any other
capital-intensive sector.
For end users in both power and fertilisers, who ultimately pay for the
pipeline network, it is only fair that the benefits of these tax breaks
be passed on, and gas transportation costs be brought down to near zero.
I hope the regulators in gas and power sectors such as PNGRB, CERC, and
SERC, will examine this aspect more carefully.
Ironically, these transportation costs do not even go to RIL and its
millions of shareowners, but to a company called Reliance Gas
Transportation and Infrastructure Limited (RGTIL). In 2005, when I was
the vice-chairman and managing director of RIL, RGTIL was a 100%
subsidiary of RIL. But soon after I resigned, it ceased to be a
subsidiary; having been sold to the promoters of RIL for a princely sum
of Rs5 lakh and turned into a privately held company.
As many of you are shareholders of RIL as well, just like me, we should
all note that this company is no longer owned by RIL, but by RIL's
promoters.
Q: Won't RIL suffer huge losses at a low gas price of US $2.34?
A: The production cost of KG basin gas is only Rs43, or 89 cents, as
submitted by RIL to the petroleum ministry. Therefore, at a price of US
$2.34 applicable to NTPC and our company, RIL makes a profit of over
100% on its cost of production, which translates into over Rs30,000
crore just from NTPC and us over the lifetime of our contracts.
Accordingly, there is no question of RIL suffering a loss - it will
still make good profits at US $2.34 as confirmed by RIL's counsel in the
Bombay High Court. The problem is it wants to make super-normal profits
- talk of greed vs need!
I would also like to take this opportunity to comment on the capital
expenditure claimed to be incurred by RIL on the KG-D6 fields. Based on
the way the PSC is structured, all of us who buy gas from RIL are
effectively paying for the entire capital expenditure. This is because
as per the PSC, RIL is entitled to first recover its entire capital
expenditure from the revenues from sale of gas, before even the
government gets any meaningful share. The more RIL claims to have spent
on capital expenditure:
- the more we have to pay for gas,
- the less the government gets as its share from the revenues,
- and the more delayed is the timing when the government gets its
revenues.
Clearly, this mechanism embedded in the PSC requires complete
transparency and independent validation of the capital expenditure
claims of RIL - because all of us, a billion Indians, are paying for it!
It may be noted that each and every expenditure of Rs150 crore or more
made by any arm of the government goes to the cabinet committee of
economic affairs for approval. RIL's capital expenditure of nearly
Rs45,000 crore, as confirmed in Parliament by the petroleum minister
just yesterday, is nearly 33% of India's total defence budget. Yet, such
mega expenditure was cleared by a management committee of four,
comprising one junior official each from the petroleum ministry and
director-general of hydrocarbons, and two representatives of the
contractor [RIL].
The budgeted expenditure of RIL for peak production of 40 mmscmd in 2004
was only Rs12,000 crore, which should not have exceeded Rs20,000 crore
when the production was doubled to 80 mmscmd. However, it is shocking
that the capital expenditure has actually gone up by Rs25,000 crore to a
staggering Rs45,000 crore when the output became 80 mmscmd.
Expert analysis shows that if this was gold-plating of costs, the
government could have lost upwards of Rs30,000 crore. When we raised
this issue with the ministry, it appointed a so-called independent
expert to examine the matter. In his testimony, he said, and I quote:
"It has not been possible to study perhaps a few of important documents
which now appear relevant to the exercise. The most important is the
production-sharing contract between government and the operator."
In other words, by his own admission, the expert didn't even read the
terms of the PSC before putting his stamp of approval on RIL's capital
expenditure. I don't know what would be the right term to describe this
elegant audit arrangement - co-option, co-operation, collaboration, or
just collusion... I hope some of our esteemed public accountability
bodies like [the] comptroller and auditor-general (CAG) and Central
Vigilance Commission (CVC) will examine all relevant facts and take
appropriate action against the guilty persons, if indeed they find that
huge losses have been caused to the public exchequer.
Q: What has been the fallout of RIL's conduct on gas-based power in
India?
A: RIL's refusal to honour its binding contractual commitments has
delayed power projects of national importance of 12000MW by five years.
Committed investments to the tune of over Rs50,000 crore have been held
to ransom by RIL. As a result, major power cuts, especially in northern
India, have become commonplace, causing grave hardship to hundreds of
millions of consumers.
Contrary to the myths and rumours that are being deliberately spread by
RIL, we are not seeking to take away the gas for any ulterior,
unidentified, or selfish purpose. We intend to use all the gas for the
generation of clean, green, and affordable power, a priority that has
been duly accepted and endorsed by the government.
If the gas supply contract had been honoured, we would have by now
brought on stream up to 8,000MW Dadri project, overcoming the huge
deficit of power which has afflicted Delhi and large parts of northern
India in the last few years. Let me also add that in January 2009, gas
linkage to our Dadri and other power projects was approved by the
cabinet. Therefore, RIL is solely responsible for the delays in setting
up of these greenfield power projects, including Dadri.
Q: Isn't all this ultimately the fallout of the family dispute?
A: Let me state that the court cases are not a personal fight. There is
no ego... only pain, hurt and emotion... a desire for fairness and
justice. The court cases were essential to enforce the gas supply
agreements and thereby protect and enhance value for over 80 lakh
shareholders of our group and crores of power consumers in the country.
This is in line with the philosophy of our founder chairman Dhirubhai
Ambani, who insisted that we must work for the welfare of our
shareholders. Indeed, we would have acted in the same manner if it were
any other supplier of gas who was denying us our binding gas supply
arrangements.
Let me also remind you that RIL's commitment to supply gas for our power
projects at Dadri and elsewhere dates back to as early as January 2004 -
more than five years back, and much before the reorganisation in 2005.
This was announced in RIL's own media release issued at the time.
In October 2004, a joint board meeting of RIL and Reliance Energy was
held, wherein the directors of RIL reiterated their commitment to the
supply of gas from KG Basin to the Dadri project. So, this is entirely a
corporate dispute - and not at all a personal one.
Q: Wouldn't it have been better if the two companies had resolved this
dispute out of court?
A: We have repeatedly approached RIL in good faith, to sit down together
and amicably arrive at a mutually acceptable solution in the larger
public interest of a rapid implementation of our power projects. But RIL
is only interested in dragging and delaying issues - and does not want a
settlement at any cost.
To give just one example, I offered to personally meet at a time and
place of the Bombay High Court's direction, at an hour's notice, and sit
across the table with my respected elder brother to amicably resolve all
issues. Unfortunately, RIL informed the court that it was not convenient
for him to participate in any such discussions.
Last month, we addressed several letters to RIL to meet and arrive at a
workable agreement as per the high court judgment. RIL refused to
cooperate and instead sent us a letter on July 1, declining to
participate in any such discussions.
Current Status
Our company was formed solely for the supply of gas from RIL to our
group companies for power and other projects. Hence, the gas supply
contracts are critical for the future of RNRL.
Unfortunately, RNRL will become a shell company if the gas supply
contract is not honoured, as has also been observed by the Bombay High
Court in their judgment. Accordingly, we are determined to take all
legal steps for the implementation of this agreement.
The case against RIL in this matter is now before the hon'ble Supreme
Court. We are taking all necessary steps to have the matter finally
decided in the most accelerated time frame possible.
I have full faith in the judiciary of the country and I am confident
that we will, with the support and prayers of our 26 lakh shareowners
and the infinite grace of god, succeed in our endeavour to have the gas
supply agreements with RIL fully implemented. The truth shall prevail.
Before I conclude, I want to thank, on behalf of our over 26 lakh
shareowners, the Bombay High Court for protecting their rights and
giving a clear, comprehensive, and categorical verdict on a corporate
dispute of great national importance.
The corporate restructuring of the Reliance Group, blessed by my
respected mother, Kokilaben, was aimed at enhancing value for millions
of our shareholders and give [sic] concrete shape to our founder
Dhirubhai Ambani's 'well-head to wall-socket' strategy for the Reliance
Group. Over the past five years, I have made every possible effort to
resolve the outstanding issues with RIL so that we can all focus on
realising our founder's dream. But, unfortunately, without any success.
On its part, RIL has repeatedly shown that it will, sadly, stop at
nothing to deny us and our millions of stakeholders what is legitimately
theirs.
As you might be aware, I have recently written to prime minister
Manmohan Singh, on this subject. Dr Singh is globally respected for his
sense of fairness, transparency, and, above all, honesty. I am confident
that he will support the cause of truth and justice, and ensure
neutrality of the government in a purely commercial dispute between two
corporate entities.
Thank you, ladies and gentlemen, for your time, patience, and attention
and overwhelming support to the cause of truth and justice.

End
Credits : Analysts and media

India Inc investment bails out US companies: Report

2009-06-23T22:00:00.000+05:30

Small and medium enterprises are the saviours.

Our Bureau

New Delhi, June 18 Direct investments by Indian firms in the US are bailing out companies on the brink of closure and generating more employment.

This is according to a report released by the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI) and Ernst and Young titled 'India Contributes to Employment, Capital Growth and Tax Revenues in the US: Direct Investments by Indian Companies in 2007-09'.

However, as the US moves towards a stringent policy of granting H-1B visas, India Inc's appetite for investing in the US will be affected.

Speaking at the official release of the report on Thursday, Dr Amit Mitra, Secretary-General, FICCI, said: "Indian investments are critical at a time when the US is moving towards a policy of protectionism." According to him, small and medium enterprises of India are saving US companies that are closing down.

Mr Nico Derksen, National Coordinator, Outbound Tax Advisory Services, Ernst & Young, said, "There's a growing acceptance in the US regarding companies buying US firms."

He added that Indian acquisitions were also preferred because they bring in fewer management changes. However, the fact that H-1B visas have gone down from 1,95,000 during the George Bush administration to 65,000 currently is a cause of concern.

Furthermore, Dr Mitra said that the controversy about H-1B visas being granted to India has been "blown out of proportion".

In addition to the release of the report in India, FICCI will also be taking 12 parliamentarians to the US to meet the US Secretary of State, the Secretary of Commerce and other top politicians in US Congress to discuss economic issues with regard to outsourcing.

The FICCI forum of parliamentarians will meet professors from Yale and Harvard universities before going to Washington D.C. The forum will also present the FICCI-Ernst & Young report to the dignitaries they meet in the US.

According to the report, in the financial years 2007-08 and 2008-09, Indian companies made 143 acquisitions across various sectors in the US. The report was made on the basis of public records and according to the values of the deals that were disclosed. India Inc has had deals worth $5,392 million during the financial years 2007-08 and 2008-09.

Credits: Analysts

FW: Fund Managers can become farmers: Jim Rogers

2009-06-15T12:42:00.000+05:30

LESSONS FROM A SAGE-A RENOWNED COMMODITIES BULL
DISSILLUSIONED WITH AMERICA

*Even if you are outright bearish, don't short the market. Stocks could
touch crazy levels, but they may be in currencies which are worthless. *

*Indeed, a sovereign default and currency turmoil could rattle world markets
in a year or two. In a chat with ET, global investor Jim Rogers says cotton,
silver and sugar can be hot picks. Read on. *

*At one stage we were inundated with gloomy forecasts, which were further
reinforced by the IMF and World Bank. And then suddenly stocks surged —
something most were not prepared for. How risky is the market today? *

Central banks all over the world have printed huge amounts of money, and the
real economy is not strong enough for all this money to be absorbed... so,
it's going into stocks and real assets such as commodities. It's a mistake
what they are doing. It's giving short-term pleasure, but there's long-term
pain as we are going to have much higher inflation, much higher interest
rates and a worse economy down the road.

The American bond market is already beginning to go down dramatically as
people realise that the American government has to sell huge amount of
bonds, and secondly, there is going to be inflation, serious inflation, as
it was always in the past when you had governments printing huge amounts of
money.

*Stocks are rising even as fiscal deficit is widening. Somewhere it has to
snap... *

It's going to snap. Later this year, next year, we are going to have
currency problems, maybe even a currency crisis. I don't know with which
currency — maybe with the pound sterling, maybe with the US dollar, who
knows. It maybe with something none of us have at the moment. When you have
a currency crisis, stocks will be affected, many things will be affected. It
is not sound, what's happening out there in the world.

In the 1930s, we had a huge stock market bubble which popped. And then
politicians started making many mistakes. They became protectionist. They
made solvent banks take over insolvent banks and then both banks failed in
the end.

They are doing many of the same mistakes now. What's different this time is
that we are printing huge amounts of money which they did not print at that
time. So, we are going to have inflation this time.

*What do you do? No politically-elected government can afford so much pain,
unemployment and hardships... *

America could have. America just had an election. The guy was elected in
November and he could have come in the beginning of a four-year term and
said the guys before me were hopeless idiots. They ruined things. We have to
solve this problem. We have to take some pains now. But don't worry, we will
get through this pain, and in two to three years or four years, things would
be fine. And he could have been re-elected.

If the pain comes in 2010, 2011 or 2012, there will be nobody he can blame.
Especially, if things go bad later, the opposition will say, wait a minute,
2009 looked good. The next guy is going to say you did it... But you are
right. It's very difficult for an elected government. You have a
newly-elected government in India. Whenever you have a new government they
can take some of the pain.

*You recently said that you would invest in China and Sri Lanka but not in
India. Aren't you betting on the new government in India? *

I was trying to make a point that if anyone wants to invest in this
particular part of the world, the best place would be Sri Lanka. Because it
looks like the 30-year war is coming to an end.

Throughout history, if you go to a place after the war ends you usually find
everything as very cheap, everyone is demoralised, people are just depressed
and there are enormous opportunities if you have energy.

In my view, investing in Sri Lanka in May 2009 is probably a better bet than
Pakistan, Bangladesh, India or some of the other countries nearby. Let's
hope the new Indian government does something. I have heard wonderful things
from Indian politicians for 40 years.

And rarely do they produce. It's not the first time that the Congress party
has been in the power. If they mean it, India's going to be one of the
greatest development stories in the next 20 years. But I don't know if they
mean it.

*What kind of reforms? *

Why isn't the currency convertible, why isn't foreign capital encouraged,
why isn't foreign expertise encouraged, why is it so protectionist? Why are
farmers only allowed to own five hectares? India should be the greatest
farming nation in the world. You have the soil, the weather, you have
everything and yet an Indian farmer can own only five hectares.

How can an Indian farmer compete with a guy in Ireland who can own 1,000
hectares or a guy in Brazil who can own 5,000 hectares? Smart people don't
become farmers. Because what's the future? Whenever prices start going up,
Indian politicians ban futures trading, as if futures trading makes prices
go up. It's the craziest and the most absurd thing in the whole world.
Prices go up because there is a reason for prices to go up.

*Last year you were buying only Chinese stocks. Why? *

The market collapsed in October-November. That's when I bought more Chinese
shares. I have not bought any Chinese shares since then. I have not bought
shares anywhere in the world since then. My way of participating in what's
going on now is to buy commodities.

In my view, commodities are the only place where fundamentals are improving.
Farmers can't get loans for fertilisers now, even though inventories of food
are the lowest in decades. Nobody can get a loan to open a mine. So, you
will have supplies of everything continuing to decline.

*What else are you looking at while investing?*

There are some industries in India that would do exceedingly well in the
next few years, one of which is water. You have a horrible water problem.
China also has a horrible water problem. So, I bought water companies in
China. There are some great opportunities if America falls off the face of
the earth. China is spending hundreds of billions of dollars to solve the
agricultural problem.

So, I am buying agricultural stocks and water stocks in China. There are
other industries in India which have a great future. I am very bullish on
Indian tourism. Wherever I go for speeches around the world I tell people,
if you have to go to one country in your lifetime, you should go to India.

Your government is going to re-build the military, they say. So, there's
going to be great opportunities here. Also, they may build the
infrastructure. So, I see many opportunities in India.

*The possibility of a sovereign default in the developed world could further
depress sentiments. You think it's possible? *

In 1918, the UK was the richest and the most powerful country in the world.
Within one generation it was in shambles, within two-and-a-half generations
it defaulted. The UK defaulted in 1970s and had to be bailed out by the IMF.
Many of the countries in the developed world are in serious trouble right
now.

Iceland has already defaulted. I think there could be a currency crisis
because of sovereign debt problems later this year, next year or 2011.
Developed nations have defaulted before. Remember the Asian crisis. It was a
default of one kind or the other. It has happened before and it will happen
again.

*Are you worried about any particular market or region? *

I am glad that I have no investments in the UK. Neither long, nor short. I
am convinced that it's in trouble. I am worried about the US. I have sold
nearly all of my US dollars. I always had some as I am an American citizen.
But I see serious problems developing there. Those two of the big developed
countries are the ones that I see with the most likely problems.

But the problem is that it never works that way. Everybody is sitting here
watching the UK and US and it may happen in say Portugal or some place we
haven't thought of and it will come suddenly to surprise us all.

*If US unemployment touches the 10%-mark, it would further impact retail
sales. How bad could this be for Asia? *

Let's pick on China for a minute. If you sell to Wal-Mart in the US and if
you are a Chinese supplier you know there is a problem. And you are going to
be suffering. Any company that deals with the West is going to have
problems. On the other hand, companies that are in the water-treatment
business in Asia will care less if the West disappears. They are too busy
making money, too busy going to work everyday.

*What kind of commodities will smart money chase? Can money be made in
crude? *

I own gold but think silver is better right now. Natural gas is cheaper than
oil right now, but I own them all. If you want to buy crude, you should
probably buy cotton. Because all farmers in the US are planting corn to turn
into energy. That means they are not going to plant any cotton. The best way
to play crude oil is to buy cotton.

Right now, there are huge subsidies around the world for farmers to plant
corn, maize, for instance, so that they can be converted into energy. If
energy prices go higher, there will be even more of that.

If everybody plants his fields with soya, corn or palm oil to turn it into
oil or energy then no one is going to plant cotton.

And you can make a lot more money in cotton than oil. Between oil and gold,
buy cotton. Between oil and gold buy silver. The other way to invest in oil
is to buy sugar as everybody is converting a lot of sugar into energy.
Silver is so much cheaper on a historic basis. And gold is near its all-time
high. Silver is 75% below its all-time high. So, I would suspect that silver
and cotton are going to do better than gold and oil.

*Global population is close to its peak and genetically-modified crops will
increase productivity. What makes you so bullish on agriculture? *

It doesn't matter. The world has been consuming more than it produced. Food
inventories are at a multi-decade low. And we haven't had any bad weather.
We had isolated cases of droughts and things. That may never happen again.
But if it does, the prices of food would go through the roof.

If there is climate change taking place, the best way to participate is
through agriculture or through agriculture products. There are many positive
things happening. Right now, there is a shortage of everything in
agriculture — seeds, fertilisers, tractors, tractor tyres. We have a
shortage of farmers because farming has been a horrible business for the
past 30 years.

*What kind of a market are you witnessing now? *

It's a bear market rally. I was going to say I don't think S&P 500 will see
new highs. But I have to quickly temper that by saying against the dollar
because the S&P 500 could triple from here if they print enough money and
the value of the US dollar collapses, then S&P could go to 50,000, Dow Jones
can go to 1,00,000.

Which is one reason why I am not shorting stocks right now. Because there is
a possibility of this sort of a thing. There is a possibility that stocks
could go through unheard of levels, but would be in worthless currency.

*That naturally brings us to the debate on a new international reserve
currency *

Several countries have raised the issue once again. The US dollar is
terribly flawed right now. Something has to be done to the US dollar and
something will be done just as something was done about the pound sterling.
After World War II, people stopped using the pound sterling and converted to
the dollar for many reasons. Something's going to be done about the dollar.

We are much closer to be doing something about it or will be forced to do
something about it. India was forced to change in 1991 and the world will be
forced to change the currency situation in the foreseeable future.

*There is already an underlying fear that this mountain of cash will chase
assets and eventually force central banks to mop up liquidity. How do you
think this would play out? *

I know they all say, 'Don't worry, we will reverse gears and take the excess
liquidity out in time.' I don't believe them for a minute. No one has ever
done it that way. When central bankers started trying to, it caused so much
pain that they quickly reversed or have got rid of that central banker and
put somebody else in.

I just don't think they could do it. That's why I am worried about the bond
market and the inflation. If all central banks do it together, that's going
to lead to higher unemployment, riots in the streets, civil unrests.

*Your track record as an investor has been more than impressive. But in
todays market can you replicate your performance of the past 20 years? *

One can. I probably cannot as I am not spending enough time at it. But it
can be done. There are going to be people who we will read about in 20 years
having made legendary fortunes starting now. In the 1930s, there were people
who built huge fortunes and laid the foundations like Templeton.

He started in the 1930s. He saw opportunities and took advantage. These are
people who saw great advantages and opportunities in the 1930s, acted and
became fantastic successes. There may be somebody out there now. I don't
know who she is. Maybe she is in Brazil,China or India.

*What will you tell a confused fund manager who seeks your advice? *
Become a farmer. The world has tens of thousands of hotshot fund managers
right now. If I am correct, the financial community is not going to be a
great place to be in for the next 30 years. We have many periods in history
when financial people were in charge, we had many periods when people who
produced real goods were in charge — miners, farmers, etc.

The world, in my view, is changing and is shifting away from the financial
types to producers of real goods, and this is going to last for several
decades as it always has. This may sound strange but it always happens this
way. Ten years from now, it may be farmers who will drive the Lamborghinis
and the stock brokers will drive tractors or taxis at best

Credits : Analysts

FW: Duggal's India Hedge Fund Eliminates Bullish Bets on Elections

2009-05-15T23:01:00.000+05:30

May 15 (Bloomberg) -- Sanjiv Duggal, the HSBC Holdings Plc
asset manager who predicted the rebound in Indian stocks this
year, said the hedge fund he manages has eliminated bullish bets
on equities due to the uncertain outcome of the elections.
India's ruling Congress party-led coalition and the main
opposition-led group may have each failed to secure enough votes
to form a government, based on exit polls after a five-week
election that ended May 13.
"The risk is high from a market perspective, and that's
why we've taken down our exposure," Singapore-based Duggal, who
oversees $4 billion of Indian equities, the world's largest such
holding outside the nation, said in an interview yesterday.
"The risk near-term is predominantly election driven."
Duggal's Halbis India Alpha Fund, with assets of more than
$90 million, was at its most bullish level in March, before a
rally in the nation's stocks began. Its net exposure -- the
difference between bets that stocks would rise and wagers they
would fall -- was at the maximum of 40 percent. The portfolio
has brought down its net exposure to "zero" because of
"uncertainty over election results," he said.
Indian stocks fell yesterday after exit polls indicated no
single political party will win enough votes to form the next
government ahead of the official count on May 16.

Recent Rally

Speculation that a coalition led by the opposition
Bharatiya Janata Party, called the National Democratic Alliance,
might win the elections contributed to the market's recent rally,
Duggal said. The benchmark Sensitive Index, or Sensex, climbed
57 percent in dollar terms from its March 9 low to May 12.
"The risk-reward is not favorable in the near term,"
following "the fastest 50 percent rally" in India since 1991,
when the nation started opening its economy to the world, Duggal
said.
"Three to four months ago, market participants were
expecting the worst case scenario," which was a government that
wasn't led by either the governing United Progressive Alliance
or the National Democratic Alliance, he said.
Government spending, which was increased ahead of the
election, will also likely slow, Duggal said.
Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh may need support from
regional parties to continue ruling the world's largest
democracy.
Six television networks forecast the ruling alliance led by
Singh's Congress party may emerge just ahead of its chief rival.
CNN-IBN predicted Congress and its allies will get as many as
205 seats compared with a maximum 185 for the opposing coalition.
Star News-Nielsen and News X gave the Congress-led bloc 199
seats to 191 for the BJP-led group.

Previous Elections

Duggal said he predicted five years ago that the BJP-led
block was unlikely to get re-elected, contrary to market
expectations. "This time around, it's a lot tougher to take a
call," he said.
There's a less than 10 percent chance that the Third Front,
a loose coalition of smaller parties including the Communists,
would win the elections, Duggal said.
After the last elections, the Sensex plunged 11 percent on
May 17, 2004, as investors feared that Communist allies in the
new government would slow the pace of reforms.
The Halbis India hedge fund will reassess its portfolio
after the elections, depending on the outcome, he said. It's set
to attract funds from existing and new clients, following
withdrawals in the fourth quarter of last year.
"Given the volatility in the market, we are a lot more
active in managing our positions compared with the first 18
months of the fund's life," he said. "We're not expecting
outflows going forward."
The fund, which targets a gross annual return of 20 percent,
gained 13 percent this year.

FW: SCS IN: Satyam Computer Services: Govt. appoints new Board - UNDER REVIEW - India - 7pp

2009-01-14T12:40:00.001+05:30

Reason for Report: Company Update
New board a positive but a long haul ahead
The Central Government has appointed a new Board of Directors for Satyam
superseding the previous Board. The new appointees include Deepak S.
Parekh, Chairman of HDFC, Mr. Kiran Karnik, former President of NASSCOM
and Mr. C. Achuthan, Director at the National Stock Exchange & former
member of SEBI. While we believe this is a first step to help stabilize
the business, securing new business and improving PE it will ultimately
depend on the new executive management appointed and assessment of
liabilities post investigation. We are placing the stock Under Review
until the financial numbers have been restated. Investors should not
rely on our past recommendations, price objectives or earnings
recommendations.

Board's priorities: Financial stability, new leadership
The Board outlined the immediate steps as a) finalizing the appointment
of an independent accounting firm within next 2 days, to restate
accounts for past years b) ascertaining true assets/liabilities and
managing working capital c) to appoint a new CEO & CFO, likely
external.

Government/Board to boost liquidity/business continuity
Quoting the Secretary of the Department of Economic Affairs, CNBC
reported that the government. would consider temporary direct/indirect
support as necessary to support Satyam. The government is also likely to
appoint additional Board members soon. PwC's fate would be decided only
post a shareholder meeting, with the possibility of two auditors in the
interim.

Some stability, but new business likely a challenge
Swift action by the government, industry peers exercising caution on
poaching clients & employees and challenges of transition, could help
Satyam retain annuity revenues, likely about 50% of revenues. However,
we believe clients will be cautious of granting new projects, as many
have multiple vendors (e.g. Satyam shares clients such as GE and Citi
with TCS. HCL Tech recently closed the Axon deal in SAP) and many
clients are also undergoing consolidation.

Mitali Ghosh Pratish Krishnan Prasad Deshmukh

credits; wellwishers ,DSPML
Pl visit www.ml.com

Pl visit www.indiancas.blogspot.com for views of Indian Chartered Accountants

FW: Indian IT Services : Satyam debacle to help other top tier players

2009-01-12T19:59:00.001+05:30

J.P. Morgan Research Asia Pacific Equity Research ________________________________
Indian IT Services: Satyam debacle to help other top tier players

We believe that Satyam's debacle today would be positive for top tier Indian IT players as this
would lead to business from Satyam being diverted to other Indian offshore players and/or MNCs
(Accenture/IBM). We believe that this would be viewed as a company specific issue and hence most
customers would likely shift work to Indian players only that have higher expertise in offshore.
Having said that, it does raise issues on corporate governance practices in India overall across all
sectors and hence we believe that work would move to only the top tier players - we believe Infosys
remains the most significant gainer followed by TCS and Wipro.

* * In terms of financial impact, Satyam's disclosure today indicates revenues of Rs 21
billion for 2QFY09. This implies annual run-rate of Rs 84 billion or US$ 1.9 billion. We believe
that most of this work (~70-80%) could get shifted. This would imply US$ 1.5 billion of offshore
work available. Assuming 75% of this goes to offshore players, we believe that Infosys/TCS/Wipro
could potentially gain US$ 250-300 m of annual revenues in FY10E. This would mean a positive revenue
impact of 6%/5%/4% for our revenue estimates of Infosys/TCS/Wipro. Given a potentially lower
profitability of this business, it would increase our FY10 EPS estimates by 3-4% for all these
players.

* * On a technical basis, this would make the remaining investors move money from Satyam to
top tier players. We believe Infosys would be the biggest beneficiary of this move.

* * While near-term offshore business is expected to be weak, we continue to expect offshore
players to gain market share in a slowdown and are positive on Infosys/TCS on a 12-month investment
view.

Click here <https://mm.jpmorgan.com/stp/t/c.do?i=3D0A1-CD&u=a_p*d_255629.pdf*h_-2sk388p> for the
full Note and disclaimers.

Manoj Singla, CFA

Bhavin Shah

Nishit Jasani

Analyst certification: I certify that: (1) all of the views expressed in this research accurately
reflect my personal views about any and all of the subject securities or issuers; and (2) no part of
my compensation was, is, or will be directly or indirectly related to the specific recommendations
or views expressed herein. Important disclosures, including price charts, related to the companies
recommended in this report are available in the PDF attachment, through the search function on J.P.
Morgan's website https://mm.jpmorgan.com/disclosures/company, or by calling this toll free number
(1-800-477-0406).

Credits : wellwishers of Satyam stakeholders,J P Morgan
Please visit blog of indiancas.blogspot.com for important updates for info of Indian Chartered Accountants.

FW: SATYAM (details) : After the moral outrage, what price could be interesting? (Rs25-40)

2009-01-09T14:03:00.000+05:30

Hi,

*Satyam's Founder and Chairman Ramalinga Raju has quit.** In a letter to the
Board and exchanges, he has admitted that:*

- *Satyam over-stated cash assets*: Rs50.4bn out of Rs53.6bn cash assets
are "inflated or non-existent"
- *Satyam over-stated revenues:* In Sep quarter, revenues were reported
as Rs27bn whereas revenues were actually Rs21.12bn
- *Satyam over-stated operating profits:* Real operating profits in Sep08
quarter were 3% of revenues, which were stated as 24% of revenues.
- Satyam also has under-stated liabilities - more details in the attached
release sent to the exchanges.

*Satyam is now India's Enron. Recent chatter on value emerging in the Satyam
stock based on cash per share has been rendered irrelevant. The independence
of the Board was already in question, now the auditors' (PwC) complicity in
what seems to be a multi-year mis-statement of financials will also be
explored. *

*An embarrassing and shocking episode for Indian corporate governance
continues to unravel, surprising all at every step. Legal measures may
follow, and introspection too, by regulators, corporates, auditors, and of
course, by analysts like us. *The 10th January Board meeting now becomes
irrelevant. When there is no cash, how can there be a buy back? And where
did the cash go? Only an investigation can tell.

So much for the "moral outrage", which is the easy way out. *Is there any
way Satyam can be valued now? What about 50,000+ employees (is the count of
employees real?), and hundreds of customers (the large ones are real for
sure); and what about UPaid which had filed a forgery litigation against
Satyam? *

*Book value becomes meaningless, with cash out and asset/debtors unknown or
uncertain. A different approach could be that the business, or SOME PART OF
THE BUSINESS, is real*

- M Cap per employee for Indian IT majors = $100-120k
- Assume a 70% discount for Satyam
- Assume Satyam DOES NOT have 50k+ employees but only 30k in reality
- *Satyam could be valued at = $120k x 0.3 x 30000 = $900m*
- *Remove still unknown (yet to be disclosed) liabilities of $300m
(assumed). Value becomes $600m or about Rs40 per share*

*Based on the declared real EPS for Sep quarter, and a 8x multiple, price
could be Rs25 per share.*

Regards

*Bhavtosh Vajpayee, CFA | Nimish Joshi*
CLSA India

Credits: wellwishers of Satyam stakeholders,CLSA
Visit www.clsa.com

JOKE OF THE DAY- Satyam

2008-12-17T13:50:00.000+05:30

JOKE OF THE DAY

Satyam has won the Golden Peacock Global Award for Excellence in
Corporate Governance for 2008

This award was given in 23rd Sept 2008

Relations Global Rankings (IRGR) rated Satyam as the company with Best
Corporate Governance Practices for 2006 and 2007. It also won the Golden
Peacock Award for Excellence in Corporate Governance from the Institute
of Directors in New Delhi in 2002

Govt. Interventions do not work....a wake up call....poor portfolio managers....research calls......monkey business by investment banks to be blamed....sos to save markets anyway.....

2008-10-17T01:36:00.001+05:30

*Canada
* Interest rate moves - Cut rates by half a percentage point to 2.5%
on Oct 8
Short selling crackdown - Temporarily banned short selling in 13
financial institutions; ban lifted on Oct 8

*US
* Liquidity or lending guarantees - Government to guarantee all senior
debt issued by banks over next three years
Interest rate moves - Cut rates by half a percentage point to 1.5% on Oct
8
Bank deposit guarantees - Increased guarantees to $250,000 from
$100,000 per depositor through the end of 2009; unlimited guarantees on
deposits in accounts that do not bear interest.
Bank recapitalization - Up to $250bn, out of the $700bn rescue
package, will be used to buy preferred stock in banks. Half will be
injected
into nine big banks, the other half into smaller lenders and thrifts.
Asset purchase - Up to $100bn out of the $700bn rescue package is to
be used to purchase troubled bank assets
Short selling crackdown - Temporarily banned short selling in more
than 900 financial companies; ban lifted on Oct 8

*Iceland
* Liquidity or lending guarantees - Asks EUR4bn from Russia to
inject liquidity
Bank recapitalization - Took three largest banks into state ownership
Short selling crackdown - Banned short selling in six financial
institutions

*Ireland*
Bank deposit guarantees - Government guarantees EUR400bn of
liabilities at its six largest Irish owned lenders and foreign-owned banks
that
have a "significant" operation in Ireland

*Italy*
Liquidity or lending guarantees - Up to EUR40bn in treasury bills for
use as refinancing against inferior assets
Bank deposit guarantees - Deposits up to EUR103,000 guaranteed
Bank recapitalization - Emergency measures passed to allow government
to buy non-voting stakes in troubled banks
Short selling crackdown - Shorters must have stock available from
moment placed

*UK*
Liquidity or lending guarantees - Government to guarantee new short
and medium-term debt issues by the banks, backing as much as GBP250bn of
borrowing. Additional GBP100bn available to banks allowing them to swap
illiquid assets for Treasury bills
Interest rate moves - Cut rates half a percentage point to 4.5% on Oct 8
Bank deposit guarantees - Increased level of savings guaranteed to
GBP50,000 from GBP35,000
Bank recapitalization - GBP25bn made available in permanent capital
to raise banks' Tier One capital ratios, which a further GBP25bn
available as a stand-by. RBS and the combined HBOS and Lloyds TSB to take
GBP39bn injections, effectively being part nationalized
Short selling crackdown - Banned short selling in 34 financial stocks
till Jan 16, 2009

*Portugal*
Liquidity or lending guarantees - Government to make as much as
EUR20bn available in guarantees for its banks' financing operations
Short selling crackdown - Banned short selling in eight banks listed
on Euronext Lisbon

*Spain*
Liquidity or lending guarantees - Government to guarantee up to
EUR100bn of bank debt this year, an unspecified further amount for 2009
Bank deposit guarantees - Deposit guarantees increased by five-fold
to EUR100,000
Bank recapitalization - Measures approved allowing the government to
buy bank shares
Short selling crackdown - Banned naked short selling; any short positions
exceeding 0.25% of a stock's market capitalization must be disclosed

*Switzerland*
Interest rate moves - Cut rates half a percentage point to 4.25% on Oct 8
Short selling crackdown - Banned naked short selling

*France*
Liquidity or lending guarantees - Government to provide EUR320bn to
guarantee bank lending
Bank recapitalization - Government set up an entity to provide
EUR40bn to take stakes in companies
Short selling crackdown - Banned short selling in banks and insurance
stocks on Sept 22 for three months

*Belgium*
Liquidity or lending guarantees - To guarantee all new financing by
banks for one year
Bank recapitalization - Injection of EUR4.7bn in Fortis bank for a
49% stake

*Netherlands*
Liquidity or lending guarantees - Government to guarantee EUR200bn in
interbank lending
Bank recapitalization - Government to spend EUR20bn to recapitalize
banks
Short selling crackdown - Banned naked short selling in eight
financial institutions for three months

*Denmark*
Bank deposit guarantees - All bank deposits guaranteed from a $6.5bn
liquidation fund

*Norway*
Liquidity or lending guarantees - To offer four commercial banks up
to $55.4bn in government bonds in exchange for mortgage debt

*Sweden*
Bank deposit guarantees - Deposit guarantees doubled to Skr500,000
($69,000)

*Finland*
Bank deposit guarantees - Deposit guarantees raised to the new
EU-recommended minimum of EUR50,000 from EUR25,000

*Ukraine*
Liquidity or lending guarantees - Offered a handful of banks bailout
packages, with each getting about $300m
Bank deposit guarantees - A 6-month freeze on early withdrawals of
all bank deposits announced on Oct 13

*Austria*
Liquidity or lending guarantees - Government to provide EUR85bn to
guarantee bank lending
Bank deposit guarantees - Unlimited guarantee on bank deposits
Bank recapitalization - Government to inject EUR15bn to boost
bank capital
Short selling crackdown - Short selling beyond a certain volume can
be deemed as market manipulation or insider trading

*Greece*
Bank deposit guarantees - All bank deposits guaranteed; parliament
considers legislation to raise guarantees to EUR100,000 for three years
Short selling crackdown - Regulator to publish a daily account of all
short sales and the number of shares purchased by borrowing

*Saudi Arabia*
Liquidity or lending guarantees - SR150bn ($40bn) made available to
its banks if needed; lowered the reserves ratio of commercial banks to
10% from 13%
Interest rate moves - Cut repo rate by half a percentage point on Oct 12

*Qatar*
Bank recapitalization - Government launched a $5.3bn plan to purchase
shares of listed banks

*UAE*
Liquidity or lending guarantees - Government pledges to inject as
much liquidity into the banking system as necessary
Bank deposit guarantees - All deposits and savings as well as
inter-banking lending are guaranteed

*China*
Liquidity or lending guarantees - Reduced the proportion of deposits
that banks must hold in reserve by half a percentage point and waved
a 5% withholding tax levied on interest income
Interest rate moves - Cut rates by 0.27 percentage points to 6.93% on
Oct 8, second cut in a month
Short selling crackdown - Short selling not allowed

*Singapore*
Short selling crackdown - Traders who cannot deliver shares they sell
can face a penalty of 5% of the value of the failed trade

*Indonesia*
Liquidity or lending guarantees - Government to make available
Rp4,000bn ($420m) fro state-owned enterprises to buy back their shares;
banks
no longer have to use mark-to-market valuations for their bond holdings
and the minimum reserve requirement has been reduced from 9.08% of assets
to 7.%
Bank deposit guarantees - Deposit guarantees raised from $10,000
to $200,000

*Australia*
Bank deposit guarantees - Entire deposit base of A$600bn to A$700bn
guaranteed for three years
Asset purchase - Government to double to A$8bn its planned purchases
of residential mortgage backed securities
Short selling crackdown - Banned short selling; but allowed investors
to trade the difference between share prices on dual-listed stocks

*New Zealand*
Bank deposit guarantees - All bank deposits guaranteed

*Russia*
Liquidity or lending guarantees - The government pledges $100bn extra
liquidity to banking sector, followed by $37bn long term loans to the
largest banks and $50bn loans to help the country's debt-laden
companies and banks pay off foreign loans; extended the list of banks that
could take part in its repo auctions to include institutions classified as
having problems

*South Korea*
Interest rate moves - Cut rates by 0.25 percentage points to 5% on
Oct 9
Short selling crackdown - Banned short selling of local stocks and
allowed listed firms to buy back 10 times more of their own shares
than they previously could

*Japan*
Liquidity or lending guarantees - $20bn additional liquidity injection on
Oct 8
Bank recapitalization - Government lifted restrictions on companies
buying back their own shares, and temporarily suspend the sale of
government-owned stocks
Short selling crackdown - No change. Adequate rules in place since
2002

*Taiwan*
Interest rate moves - Cut rates by 0.25 percentage points to 3.25% on Oct
9
Short selling crackdown - Halved the daily limit that share prices can
fall and extended a ban on short selling

*Hong Kong*
Interest rate moves - Cut rates by half a percentage point to 2% on Oct
9, second rate cut in two days
Short selling crackdown - Banned naked short selling

Credits:Portfolio managers,stock brokers,investment bankers,liquidators

-----------------------------------------
****************************************************************

NSDL Investor Awareness Seminars in Mumbai

2008-06-25T23:03:00.000+05:30

National Securities Depository Limited (NSDL), India's first and the largest
depository, holding more than 85% of the securities held in dematerialised
mode in India, will be conducting a series of Investor Depository Meets
(IDMs) in Mumbai. These seminars aim at spreading awareness about the
depository processes and about the safety and benefits of depository system.
These seminars will provide an opportunity to the investors to interact
directly with NSDL as well as its Depository Participants (DPs). Senior
officials from NSDL will be available at these seminars to resolve the
queries of investors. Investors queries on demat, suggestions and feedback
will be solicited. There is no entry fee for attending these awareness
seminars.

Details of these seminars are given below:

1) June 27, 2008 from 6 pm to 8.30 pm
Y.B. Chavan Auditorium
Chavan Centre, Gen. Jagannathrao Bhonsle Marg, Mumbai - 400021

2) June 28, 2008 from 5 pm to 7.30 pm
Parle Tilak Vidyalaya Association's Keshavrao Ghaisas Auditorium,
M. L. Dahanukar College of Commerce
Dixit Road, Vile Parle (East)
Mumbai - 400 057

Warm Regards,

NSDL Marketing & Corporate Communications Team

Tel: 022 - 24994200
Email: relations@nsdl.co.in

Credits:wellwishers

Einstein and Stock markets

2008-05-27T13:40:00.002+05:30

Where markets are headed : Expert viewpoint

Albert Einstein dies and goes to heaven only to be informed that his room
is not yet ready. "I hope you will not mind waiting in a dormitory. We are
very sorry, but it's the best we can do and you will have to share the room
with others" he is told by the doorman. Einstein says that this is no
problem at all and that there is no need to make such a great fuss. So the
doorman leads him to the dorm. They enter and Albert is introduced to all of
the present inhabitants.

"See, Here is your first room mate. He has an IQ of 180!"
"Why that's wonderful!" Says Albert. "We can discuss mathematics!"

"And here is your second room mate. His IQ is 150!"
"Why that's wonderful!" Says Albert. "We can discuss physics!"

"And here is your third room mate. His IQ is 100!"
"That Wonderful! We can discuss the latest plays at the theater!"

Just then another man moves out to capture Albert's hand and shake it. "I'm
your last room mate and I'm sorry, but my IQ is only 70."

Albert smiles back at him and says, "So, where do you think the stock market
is headed?"

Courtesy: Knowledge Share

Wealth Creation for Investors

2008-01-29T22:00:00.002+05:30

INVESTORS CONFERENCE ON "WEALTH CREATION FOR INVESTORS"

organised by The stock exchange,Mumbai

in association with Wirc of Institute of Chartered Accountants of India

Highlights of Investor Conference

Chief Guest : Mr. G.N. Bajpai,Chairman,Securities and Exchange Board of india

Keynote Address: Creating shareholder value

Subjects Speakers

1.Wealth Creation as a Business Strategy - Mr.Tejpavan Gandhok,Country Manager,Stern Stewart India Pvt. Ltd

The EVA approach

2. Wealth Creation,the Mutual Funds Way Mr.Mukarram Bhagat,CEO,Crisil.com

3. Wealth Creation-Through Asset Allocation Mr.Rajan Mehta,ED,Benchmark AMC

4 Panel Discussion by Wealth Creators Panel: Mr.Motilal Oswal,Chairman,Motilal Oswal

-Wealth Creation through Equitiesi Shares & Securities Ltd, Mr.K.R.Choksey Shares & Securities Pvt Ltd,Mr. Chandrakant Sampat,Investor

and Mr.Manoj Alimchandani,Chartered Accountant.

5 Interactive Q& A Sessions Moderator : Mr.Manoj Alimchandani,Chartered Accountant.

Date : Friday,May 10,2002

Time : 3.30 pm to 6.00 pm

Venue : International Convention Hall,The Stock exchange,Mumbai.

The Investors Conference was attended by over 500 participants .

Fwd: Capital Mkts Seminar 11-3-2002

2008-01-29T21:19:00.001+05:30

Annual Post-Budget Seminar on

UNION BUDGET & CAPITAL MARKETS-INVESTORS PERSPECTIVE

SEMINAR HIGHLIGHTS

SUBJECTS SPEAKERS

1. CAPITAL MARKETS-An Overview, Manoj Alimchandani,FCA

Minority & Small Investors Perspective Chartered Accountant

2. Sectoral Analysis & Value Investing Chetan Parikh,MBA(Wharton)

Director,Capitalideasonline.com

3. Tax and Fiscal Issues Jayesh M Gandhi,FCA

Chartered Accountant,Partner, N.M.Raiji&co

4. Mutual Funds-The Road Ahead D.Ravishankar,AIWCA

Director (Risk Solutions),CRISIL

5. Technical Analysis & Market Dynamics- Saumil Trivedi,B.Tech,MS

with case studies Vice President,envestmentz.com

6. Panel Discussion/ Q&A with Interactive All Speakers, Facilitator:

Session on Investment Strategies. Manoj Alimchandani,FCA

Day & Date : Monday, 11^th March, 2002

Timings : 5.00 p.m. to 8.00 p.m. (Fellowship 5.00 p.m. to 5.30 p.m.)

Venue : M.C. Ghia Hall, Kalaghoda, Mumbai-400 001

For Whom : Investors, Analysts, Fund Managers, Capital Market

Participants, Bankers and Employees.

About the Faculty

Mr. Manoj Alimchandani, FCA. Qualified as Chartered Accountant in MERIT LIST in May 1984. Has 17 years experience in various areas of Investments, Securities Management, Capital Market Operations & Corporate Finance including at senior management level experience with a Mutual Fund and a Finance Company as CEO.

Mr. Chetan Parikh-MBA (Wharton) is a Director of Capitalideasonline.com and a regular columnist with Business India.

Mr. Jayesh M Gandhi, FCA is a Chartered Accountant and a Partner of M/s. N.M.Raiji & Co., which is engaged in Audits of major companies. e.g. WIPRO,ICICI and leading asset management companies.

Mr. D. Ravishankar,AIWCA is currently CFO & Director (Risk Solutions)CRISIL & Advisor, Capitalmarkets, Crisil.com. He has wide experience in the mutual fund industry in CHOLAMANDALAM Mutual Fund (as CEO) and GIC Mutual Fund (as Vice-President).

Mr. Saumil Trivedi, B.Tech, MS Vice President, envestmentz.com, has 28 years experience in Industry & Finance with interest in Equity Research and Technical Analysis. Earlier affiliated to DSP Meryll Lynch, he regularly appears on CNBC, India's No.1 Business Channel.

Investors Events- Photo Gallery

2006-12-07T17:24:00.000+05:30

Flash Slideshow

Mission

2006-12-07T17:05:00.002+05:30

Forum for Education of Investors and Consumers and Encourage views for Policy Changes for encouraging Investments in Industry.
Conduct Research on Industry,Capital Market, Companies and Mutual Funds
Propagate Compliance with Best Practices and Transparency, Disclosure and Standards of Good Governance by Companies , Mutual Funds and Regulators
Encourage Fair Treatment to Minority and Small Investors.
Recognise Investor Friendly Companies, Mutual Funds and Insurance Corporations
Create awareness of savings and wealth creation