Banking
Banks Cannot Foist Credit Cards on You

Providing unsolicited credit cards, or enhanced credit limits without a customer’s request,...

Premium Content
Monthly Digital Access

Subscribe

Already A Subscriber?
Login
Yearly Digital+Print Access

Subscribe

Moneylife Magazine Subscriber or MSSN member?
Login

Yearly Subscriber Login

Enter the mail id that you want to use & click on Go. We will send you a link to your email for verficiation
Investing in Barbie? A new index reveals most expensive dolls
Earliest Barbies from the late 50s and early 60s are the most valuable, and have shown the greatest value increases over the past 10 years, says a new index launched by justCollecting
 
If you are bored up with investing in stocks, properties, diamonds and luxury cars, here is another option for investors. According to a new index, the 1959-made doll is worth $9,000 in top condition - just ahead of the blonde version of Barbie #1 at $8,250.
 
According to JustCollecting.com, a picture-sharing community for collectors that launched the Barbie index, the brunette version of Barbie provided the best investment since 2005 - up 6.6% a year on average.
 
A justCollecting spokesperson said: "It's the earliest Barbies from the late 50s and early 60s that are the most valuable, and which have shown the greatest value increases over the past 10 years. It's a battle of hairdos at the top. There were twice as many blonde #1s and #2s as brunettes, yet the brunettes are only marginally more valuable. Why? Because more people want to own the blonde versions, as they are seen as the archetypal Barbie hair colour."
 
"In 1967 Mattel encouraged owners to part exchange their old Barbies for one of the new 'Twist N Turn' varieties. That makes pre-1967 dolls especially rare today," justCollecting said in a release.
 
Some of the more infamous Barbies are also valuable, due to their notoriety and the fact they were quickly pulled from the shelves. Pregnant Midge, complete with tiny baby, is worth $100, while Growing Up Skipper, whose breasts grow with a twist of her arm, has a $150 valuation.
 
Most valuable Barbies in the justCollecting Barbie Index
1. Barbie #1 Brunette (1959): $9,000
2. Barbie #1 Blonde (1959): $8,250
3. Barbie #2 Brunette (1959): $8,000 
4. Barbie #2 Blonde (1959): $7,500
5. Roman Holiday Outfit (1959): $5,000
 
Best performing Barbies 2005-2015
1.  Barbie #1 Brunette (1959): up 6.6% per annum to $9,000
2.  Barbie #1 Blonde (1959): up 6.3% pa to $8,250
3. Barbie #2 Brunette (1959): up 5.9% pa to $8,000 
4. Barbie #2 Blonde (1959): up 5.8% pa to $7,500
5. Peaches N Cream (1959): up 5.8% pa to $175
 
Other notable Barbie prices
Ken #1 Brownette (1961): $60
Growing Up Skipper (1975): $150
Pregnant Midge (2002): $100
 
Barbie has been an important part of the toy fashion doll market for over fifty years, and has been the subject of numerous controversies and lawsuits, often involving parody of the doll and her lifestyle.
 
Barbie is a fashion doll manufactured by the American toy-company Mattel, Inc. and launched in March 1959. American businesswoman Ruth Handler is credited with the creation of the doll using a German doll called Bild Lilli as her inspiration.
 

User

No incentive for NBFCs to choose CIC structure over ICs
Since NBFC-ICs are exempted from complying with concentration norms under the new framework, there is hardly any incentive for choosing core investment company-CIC structure over an investment company 
 
Post the revised regulatory framework a systemically important core investment companies (CIC-SI) has more compliance requirement as compared to non-banking financial companies (NBFC) investment company (IC) (together NBFC-IC). The main intent behind the formation of a CIC was to maintain stake in group companies, however under the new framework, since NBFC-ICs are exempted from complying with concentration norms, there is hardly any incentive for choosing CICs over investment company (ICs).
 
On 27 March 2015, the Reserve bank of India (RBI) came up with the revised regulatory framework for non-banking financial companies (NBFCs), which have brought about a plethora of change in the NBFC universe. Under the erstwhile regulations, non-deposit taking NBFCs (NBFC-ND) having asset size of Rs100 crore or more were considered as systemically important and were subject to stringent regulations such as concentration norms, capital adequacy requirement etc. Under the revised framework, the definition of systemic importance has changed increasing the threshold to Rs500 crore from Rs100 crore. Hence, under the new framework, there are two types of NBFC-NDs – 
 
(i) NBFC-NDs with asset size of Rs500 crore or more, i.e., Systemically Important NBFC-ND (NBFC-ND-SI) – These NBFCs shall be governed by the Systemically Important Non-Banking Financial (Non-Deposit Accepting or Holding) Companies Prudential Norms (Reserve Bank) Directions, 2015
 
(ii) NBFC-NDs with asset size of less than Rs500 crore, i.e., Non Systemically Important NBFC-ND (NBFC-ND-Non SI) – These NBFCs shall be governed by the Non-Systemically Important Non-Banking Financial (Non-Deposit Accepting or Holding) Companies Prudential Norms (Reserve Bank) Directions, 2015
 
NBFCs up to an asset size of Rs500 crore are not subject to most of the compliance requirements, which were applicable to them under the erstwhile regulation, in case their asset size was more than Rs100 crore. The change is a major one since it has changed the shape of how things function in the NBFC sector. In light of this change, the article talks about the fate of a core investment companies (CICs) post the revised framework.
 

What are CICs?

CICs are companies whose assets are largely invested in their group companies either in the form of equity, preference shares or convertibles bonds or loans. We can also say that such companies are simply passive holding companies, meant for maintaining control over their group companies and do not carry on any other financial activity. 
 
On 5 January 2011, the RBI Vide Notification No. DNBS. (PD) 219 / CGM(US)-2011 had issued ‘The Core Investment Companies (Reserve Bank) Directions, 2011, (CIC Directions) wherein a CIC is defined as an NBFC carrying on the business of acquisition of shares and securities and which satisfies the following conditions as on the date of the last audited balance sheet:- 
 
i. it holds not less than 90% of its net assets in the form of investment in equity shares, preference shares, bonds, debentures, debt or loans in group companies;
 
ii. its investments in the equity shares (including instruments compulsorily convertible into equity shares within a period not exceeding 10 years from the date of issue) in group companies constitutes not less than 60% of its net assets as mentioned in clause (i) above; 
 
iii. it does not trade in its investments in shares, bonds, debentures, debt or loans in group companies except through block sale for the purpose of dilute ion or disinvestment; 
 
iv. it does not carry on any other financial activity referred to in Section 45I(c) and 45I(f) of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 except granting of loans to group companies, issuing guarantees on behalf of group companies and investment in:
bank deposits, 
money market instruments, including money market mutual funds 
government securities, and 
bonds or debentures issued by group companies 
 
Under the CIC Directions, only those CICs having asset size of Rs100 crore or more and having public funds, also known as systemically important CICs (CIC-SI) are required to get themselves registered with RBI. The main intent of RBI to regulate the larger CICs was, even though the investments are concentrated in their group companies, with an asset size of Rs100 crore, the CIC-SI are of significant importance to the economy.
 

Compliance Requirement for a CIC-SI

The CIC-SIs are required to maintain a minimum adjusted net worth (ANW- as defined under Para 9(a) of the Regulatory Framework for Core Investment Companies) of not less than 30% of its aggregate risk weighted assets on balance sheet and risk adjusted value of off-balance sheet items as per the last audited balance sheet. Furthermore, it also has to ensure that its outside liabilities at any time does not exceed 2.5 times of its ANW. 
 
Pertinent to note here is that a CIC-SI, which complies with the abovementioned requirement, is exempted from the maintenance of statutory minimum net owned fund (NOF) as required u/s 45-IA (1) (b) of RBI Act, 1934.
 

The Need for CICs

Prior to the revised framework, NBFCs with asset size of Rs100 crore were subject to stringent regulations of the RBI. One of the biggest hurdle that the NBFCs faced was concentration norms, whereby, the NBFCs had to restrict their exposures in the investee company(ies) to the extent allowed by the RBI. Thus, the NBFCs, which were primarily engaged in the business of acquisition of shares and securities i.e. an NBFC-Investment Company (NBFC-IC), were unable to maintain any controlling stake in any company, more particularly its group companies, as the same would lead to a breach in the concentration norms. As a resolution to this problem, CICs, which are simply passive holding companies, meant for maintaining control over their group companies, were introduced.
 

Changes under the Revised Regulatory Framework that effect the Relevancy of CIC

Now that the definition of Systemic Importance has been amended and the threshold has been increased, many NBFCs has become lesser regulated than before. This has ignited a new series of thoughts among the existing CIC-SIs on their business structure, as after the revised framework has come into being the investment company (IC) model has seemed to be more attractive than CICs. 
 
The following table would draw up pros and cons of the IC model and the CIC model –
 
 
The outcome of the above table has been summarised below –
 
1. The NBFC-ICs, irrespective of whether it is an SI or a Non SI, can take unlimited exposure in their group companies and Non SIs are also not required to maintain any minimum capital requirement. On the contrary, a CIC-ND-SI shall have to mandatorily invest upto 90% of its assets in group companies and will also be required to maintain a capital adequacy of 30%. 
2. NBFC-ND-IC has the privilege to borrow more on their owned funds i.e. 7 times as compared to CIC-ND-SI which has to maintain a leverage ratio of 2.5 times at all times. 
 
Clearly, post the revised regulatory framework a CIC-SI has more compliance requirement as compared to NBFC-IC. The main intent behind the formation of a CIC was to maintain stake in group companies. However under the new framework since NBFC-ICs are exempted from complying with concentration norms, there is hardly any incentive for choosing CICs over ICs.
 
(Surbhi Jaiswal works as Manager at Vinod Kothari Consultants Pvt Ltd)

 

User

We are listening!

Solve the equation and enter in the Captcha field.
  Loading...
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email

BUY NOW

The Scam
24 Year Of The Scam: The Perennial Bestseller, reads like a Thriller!
Moneylife Magazine
Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance
Stockletters in 3 Flavours
Outstanding research that beats mutual funds year after year
MAS: Complete Online Financial Advisory
(Includes Moneylife Magazine and Lion Stockletter)