If this slowdown in the IPO market continues, then there shall be significant impact on the fund raising abilities of Indian corporates. This will also have impact on the ability of exits for private equity funds
New Delhi: Despite bullish stock markets so far this year, four companies have refrained from coming out with initial public offers (IPOs) worth over Rs700 crore, letting their regulatory approvals lapse, reports PTI.
The companies which have let their regulatory approvals lapse include Micromax Mobiles, Pride Hotels, Betul Oil and Tara Jewels. These public issues were to raise about Rs701 crore, according to an analysts.
“The year 2012 has started on a very positive tone for the capital markets, with elevated mood of the sentiment and significant foreign institutional investment (FII) inflows,” SMC Global Securities strategist and head of research Jagannadham Thunuguntla said.
“Despite such positive momentum in the secondary market that momentum could not spill-over on to the IPO markets and about four IPOs were already called off so far this year,” he added.
Interestingly, there are at least 10 other companies who have valid approval in hand and are left with just two months in their validity period of one year from the date of approval.
These companies include Marck Biosciences, Tijaria Polypipes, Tara Health Foods, Embassy Property Developers, Dev Procon, VRL Logistics, Lokmat Media, Aravali Infrapower, Joyalukkas India and Semantic Space Technologies. The total amount that is expected to be raised by these 10 IPOs is to the tune of about Rs4,210 crore.
“The government’s disinvestment programme is also in “wait-and-watch” mood, the IPO market is not getting the kind of momentum that is expected to happen. If this slowdown in the IPO market continues, then there shall be significant impact on the fund raising abilities of Indian corporates. This will also have impact on the ability of exits for private equity funds,” he added.
Tara Jewels was the first company that failed to launch its Rs50 crore IPO before the regulatory approval lapsed on 3rd January, followed by Pride Hotels which failed to bring its Rs125 crore IPO till 12th January, Micromax Informatics could not come out with its Rs426 crore public offer which expired on 13th January and Betul Oil is the latest addition to the list after the approval for its Rs100 crore public issue expired on 18th January.
Last year, 29 companies, including Reliance InfraTel, Lodha Developers, Ambience, Glenmark Generics and BPTP, axed their IPO plans. The aggregate amount supposed to be raised by those 29 IPOs was to the tune of Rs32,398 crore.
Commercial strings are always part of the deal. Reliance Communication’s loan was made easier by its power arm’s October 2010 order for $10 billion worth of energy equipment from Shanghai Electric Group, a deal also financed by Chinese state banks
Last week it was announced that Reliance Communications, the mobile telecom arm of the Reliance Anil Dhirubhai Ambani Group (R-ADAG) in India had received a loan from three Chinese banks. Normally a loan by three banks to a large conglomerate would not be unusual. After all it happens all the time as part of regular business practices. This is what banks are supposed to do. They assess risk. If they find the borrower credit worthy, they make the loan. But this is loan is not ordinary. It is between two large emerging markets. The company involved is one of the largest in India. It is controlled by one of India’s best connected businessmen, Anil Ambani. Nor are the banks average, they are owned by the Chinese government.
Anil Ambani’s Reliance Communications had a $1.2 billion convertible bond, due to be repaid at the start of March 2011. This was a problem. Reliance has a reported debt of $7 billion. Since shares in his telecom, infrastructure, power and financial services company shares have fallen since the bond was issued in 2007, more than half last year alone, few holders elected to convert and the bond has to be repaid in full. Loans from traditional lenders like US and European banks would have been difficult due to economic conditions in Europe, India’s high interest rate and the falling rupee. But these problems are not of interest to Chinese banks. Their business model is a bit different.
Joseph Nye, an American professor at Harvard , coined the expression “soft power” 20 years ago. He defined it as “the ability to get what you want through attraction rather than coercion or payments.” Chinese state-owned firms are not necessarily out for profits. Part of their mission is directly related to extending “soft commercial power”.
The Reliance loan worked for this objective on several levels. First and most importantly for the Chinese is that it helped to establish a relationship. All emerging markets are relationship-based systems as Mr Ambani knew well. Like the elder Ambani, the Chinese use it for their profit. In a society with few rules and less transparency large networks of networks of family, friends, classmates, and especially (Communist) Party connections are a necessity.
The Communist Party is especially involved with its state-owned business specifically its state-owned banks. In his book, “The Party”, Financial Times correspondent Richard McGregor writes that the bosses of China’s 50-odd leading companies all have a “red machine” sitting on their desks that provides an instant (and encrypted) link to the Communist Party’s leadership. Commercial enterprises for Chinese state-owned companies are a “continuation of politics by different means”
This is not to say that there is not a very definite commercial side to state directed moves by state-owned companies. No doubt Reliance’s loan was made easier by its power arm’s October 2010 order for $10 billion worth of energy equipment from Shanghai Electric Group, a deal also financed by Chinese state banks.
Commercial strings are always part of the deal. For example in Africa and South East Asia Chinese companies are looking for guaranteed supplies of oil or other raw materials. Often this is exchanged for building infrastructure like roads, railways, power plants and bridges that help Chinese companies extract the commodities. The infrastructure is also built by Chinese state firms, which hold four of the top five positions of the world’s largest contractors.
Many of these deals lack transparency, because they may involve bribes. Relationship based systems like China’s are never fond of the rules. In Africa, Chinese projects have been criticized for employing Chinese rather than local labour. When they do employ local labour, they can breach the rules as when managers in Zambia fired on a group of angry workers injuring 13. The Zambian opposition charged that the government had ignored labour law violations in exchange for political funding. Predictably the Chinese were not amused. The company executive complained that it was very difficult to do business in Zambia because “The opposition party always makes a big fuss over small problems.”
Still access to commodities and connections is secondary to profit. Mr Ambani’s loan for an “extended” maturity period of seven years and an “attractive” interest rate of about 5% may not have been such a good deal for the Chinese lenders, but this is not all that important. China National Petroleum Corporation is one of only two companies to win contracts to develop Iraq’s oilfields for the simple reason that the royalties required by the Iraqi government made the deal of questionable value. Maximizing production is more important than profit.
Ultimately though making political concern dominant over profit does cost. If neither the Chinese banks nor Mr Ambani can allocate capital efficiently, the result will in time be a disaster.
(William Gamble is president of Emerging Market Strategies. An international lawyer and economist, he developed his theories beginning with his first hand experience and business dealings in the Russia starting in 1993. Mr Gamble holds two graduate law degrees. He was educated at Institute D'Etudes Politique, Trinity College, University of Miami School of Law, and University of Virginia Darden Graduate School of Business Administration. He was a member of the bar in three states, over four different federal courts and has spoken four languages. Mr Gamble can be contacted at [email protected] or [email protected])
IDFC, REC, L&T Infra, SREI Infra, IFCI and PTC India Financial are your current options. Check the interest rate, rating and buyback terms to help make a decision. There is less chance of higher interest rate offers in this financial year
Depending on your tax bracket you can save maximum of Rs6,180 by investing Rs20,000 in infrastructure bonds qualifying for Section 80CCF deduction. Make a decision based on current offerings of interest rates, ratings and buyback terms. There are variations for these three parameters in all the offers. Don’t pin much hope of better interest rates offered in March. The trend of interest rate is down.
The offers with ‘AAA’ rating are IDFC (Infrastructure Development Finance Company) and REC (Rural Electrification Corporation). IDFC (Tranche2) offers interest rate of 8.70% per annum (p.a.) for 10-year bonds, while REC will give 8.95% p.a. for the same tenure. The difference in the interest paid every year is only Rs50 for investment of Rs20,000. Going for either of the two is a good option, but REC is s better offer at this time for those looking for both safety and returns.
Both the bonds offer buyback option after five years. It means that in case market interest rates are higher than what these bonds currently offer, the customer can sell the bonds back to the company and reinvest the money in another investment earning higher interest. If the market interest rates after five years are down, the customer can remain invested in these bonds till the end of its term.
REC also offers 9.15% p.a. for tenure of 15 years with a buyback option after seven years. IDFC closes for subscription on 25 February 2012 while REC issue closes on 10 February 2012.
SREI Infrastructure Finance (SREI Infra) offers a coupon rate of 8.90% p.a. and 9.15% p.a. for 10 and 15-year term, respectively. Both the terms offers buyback after five years which is an advantage for customers going for a 15-year term. The subscription closes on 31 January 2012 and it enjoys a rating of ‘AA’. While most of these bonds offer minimum investment of Rs5,000, SREI Infra has a Rs1,000 bond and hence is helpful if someone wants to invest less than Rs5,000.
IFCI pays the highest interest amongst all of them. It pays 9.09% p.a. and 9.16% p.a. for 10 and 15 years, respectively. It offers buyback at the end of 5th and 7th year for tenures of 10 years and 5th and 10th year for 15-year bonds. Giving two options for buyback for each of the terms is an incentive for customers. IFCI bonds have rating of ‘A+’. The issue had closing date of 16 January 2012, but it has been extended to 8 February 2012.
PTC India Financial Services (PFS) offers 8.93% p.a. and 9.15% p.a. for 10 and 15 years, respectively. It offers buyback every year after completion of five years for 10 years bond tenure and every year after completion of seven years for 15 years bond tenure. The buyback terms are certainly flexible. Even though the parent company PTC is a government promoted public-private partnership, PFS has been assigned only ‘an A+’ rating. The issue closes on 2 February 2012.
Even though these bonds appear in a demat account, there are restrictions for selling them in the secondary market within the lock-in period of five years.