Citizens' Issues
Public Interest Exclusive
SC refuses to quash nomination of sitting SC judge for International Court of Justice

Refusing to quash the petition, the three-member Supreme Court bench questioned if there was any public interest involved in the issue

The Supreme Court of India has refused to quash the candidature of justice Dalveer Bhandari, the third senior-most judge of the apex court, to the International Court of Justice (ICJ). A petition was filed stating that the nomination of a sitting judge has compromised the independence of the judiciary.

PTI reported that bench of justices Altamas Kabir, J Chelameswar and Ranjan Gogoi initially wanted to outrightly dismiss the plea for quashing justice Bhandari’s nomination for ICJ, but later allowed counsel Prashant Bhushan, for the petitioner, to withdraw it, treating it as “dismissed as withdrawn”.

The bench also questioned the petitioner’s locus standi and wondered if there was any public interest involved in the issue. “What is the interest of public? He (petitioner) is not a contender so what is the public interest involved here,” the bench asked.

Adv Bhushan, however, persisted with his argument and cited the nine-judge constitution bench ruling in the Advocate-on- Record Association case, wherein it was ruled that appointment to the judiciary shall not be influenced by any executive interference. He also contented that in case Justice Bhandari fails to get elevated to the ICJ, he will have to come back and join as a judge which would impinge upon his judicial independence.

According to PTI, the bench was not impressed with the argument and said the international posts have different set of rules and it would have been more appropriate if the petitioner had questioned the legalities of the rules framed by the Government of India in nominating a person to the post. “You should have questioned the vires of the rules in choosing a person. This is purely a question connected with international and not municipal laws,” the bench remarked.

Attorney General GE Vahanvati, in his brief intervention, sought dismissal of the petition on the ground that it was frivolous and deliberately filed a day before the nomination and argued that justice Bhandari’s nomination to the ICJ was a matter of prestige to the entire country.

According to news reports, petitioner, Rahul Srivastava, a law student, in his petition had stated that, “As a matter of principle, selection of a sitting judge of the highest court of the land by the government creates a grave situation of conflict of interest and compromises the independence of the judiciary. The independence of the judiciary is part of basic structure of the Constitution of India. Selection to post like that of a judge of the ICJ, by its very nature, involves heavy lobbying on part of the government,” the petition said. “Many of the important cases dealt by a judge of this court involve the Union of India as either the petitioner/appellant or as a respondent.”

The petitioner also stated that the government in its reply to a RTI (Right to Information) query has refused to divulge any information about the selection process of justice Bhandari as nominee for ICJ.

Delhi-based RTI activist, Subhash Agrawal, had filed an RTI application with ministry of external affairs (MEA) seeking information on the rules and procedures to elect nominee made by India to the post of ICJ.

The MEA, in its reply, revealed that, “The Government of India does not recommend candidates for nomination to the ICJ. However, Government of India is at liberty to forward names of potential candidates for the consideration of Indian National groups in Permanent Court of Arbitration. However, Government of India is at liberty to forward names of potential candidates for the consideration of the Indian National Group in the Permanent Court of Arbitration.”

In another query raised by Mr Agrawal asking whether the PMO’s approval has been sought in the selection process, the ministry said that, “As the elections to the vacancy in the ICJ have only been announced in the United Nations on 19th January, and the elections would be held on 27th April, the procedure for canvassing support for the Indian candidate to the election is presently going on. Canvassing for support for the elections involves sensitive dealings with the governments of foreign countries. Our lobbying efforts and electoral strategy is essentially a confidential process.

Consequently, the process of decision making of the Government of India, if revealed even before the elections are held, might seriously compromise our ability to lobby strongly and effectively for the choice of Indian National Group.”
The selection of ICJ Judge will be held, tomorrow—27 April 2012.

The bench also pointed out that the issue of nomination was in public domain since December 2011 but the petitioner chose to approach the court only at the last hour.

User

Small rally in the offing? Thursday Closing Report

Close above the previous day’s high may result in a rally

 

The expiry day induced volatility saw the market fluctuating in and out of the green for a major part of the trading session. While selling pressure in post-noon trade pushed the market lower, a minor recovery in late trade helped the indices pare their losses. Yesterday we had mentioned that the Nifty may see a reversal if the index closes above its previous day’s high, we continue to maintain that trend. The National Stock Exchange (NSE) saw a huge volume of 72.52 crore shares.

The market opened with a marginal uptick on upbeat global cues. US stocks closed higher on positive earnings report from Apple and assurances from the Federal Reserve that it would take necessary steps, as and when necessary, to boost the economy. The optimism supported gains in Asia in morning trade today. The Nifty opened 13 points higher at 5,215 and the Sensex rose 40 points to resume trade at 17,191.

The opening figure of the Nifty was its intraday high while the Sensex’s high was at 17,193, seen in initial trade. Volatility associated with the expiry day was evident since the opening bell, keeping on both sides of the neutral line.

Strong selling pressure, as the European indices were mostly in the negative, pushed indices to their day’s lows at around 2.40 pm. At the lows, the Nifty fell to 5,179 and the Sensex went back to 17,084. 

While the benchmarks recovered from the lows, they closed in the negative for the second day in a row. The Nifty settled 13 points down at 5,189 and the Sensex lost 21 points to end the session at 17,131. 

The advance-decline ratio on the NSE was 627:1029.

The broader indices underperformed the Sensex today; the BSE Mid-cap index dropped by 0.31% and the BSE Small-cap index declined by 0.41%.

In the sectoral space, BSE IT (up 0.41%); BSE Fast Moving Consumer Goods (up 0.25%); BSE TECk (up 0.22%) and BSE Metal (up 0.05%) were the gainers. The main losers were BSE Power (down 1.46%); BSE Realty (down 0.89%); BSE Auto (down 0.84%); BSE PSU (down 0.57%) and BSE Bankex (down 0.43%).

The top gainers on the Sensex were Coal India (up 2.79%); Jindal Steel (up 2.04%); TCS (up 1.68%); Reliance Industries (up 1.24%) and ITC (up 1.02%). The laggards were led by GAIL India (down 3.62%); Hero MotoCorp (down 3.16%); Hindalco Industries (down 2.96%); Tata Power (down 2.74%) and Bajaj Auto (down 2.67%).

The Nifty was led by Kotak Mahindra Bank (up 3.16%); TCS (up 2.33%); ACC (up 1.87%); Coal India (up 1.76%) and ITC (up 1.55%). The key losers were Tata Power (down 3.73%); GAIL India (down 3.66%); Hero MotoCorp (down 3.10%); BPCL (down2.95%) and IDFC (down 2.76%).

Markets in Asia received a boost from the Fed assertion to take necessary steps to help the economy grow. The gains were also supported by better-than-expected earnings reports. Meanwhile, Jiang Jianqing, chairman of China’s largest lender Industrial and Commercial Bank of China (ICBC) said that the monopoly of state-owned banks in the country needs to be dismantled in order to provide liquidity to private banks.

The Hang Seng advanced 0.79%; the Jakarta Composite gained 0.40%; the KLSE Composite added 0.02%; the Nikkei 225 rose 0.01%; the Straits Times was up 0.06% and the Seoul Composite rose 0.10%. On the other hand, the Shanghai Composite fell 0.09% and the Taiwan Weighted declined 0.55%. At the time of writing, the key European indices were in the red and the US stock futures were in the negative.

Back home, foreign institutional investors continued to be net sellers of equities on Wednesday, selling stocks totalling Rs340.84 crore. On the other hand, domestic institutional investors were net buyers of shares aggregating Rs40.70 crore. 

Sesa Goa will begin exploration later this week at its Liberian iron ore project that is estimated to hold reserves of over 1 billion tonnes, a top company official said. Last year, the company had acquired 51% stake in Western Clusters, which is developing the project for about $90 million (Rs 411 crore). This was the first overseas acquisition of the Vedanta group miner. The stock declined 0.56% to Rs184.95 crore on the NSE.

Adhunik Metaliks plans to sell the entire stake in its subsidiary Neepz V Forge (India), the company said in a filing to the BSE. The subsidiary has forging and machining facilities at Aurangabad in Maharashtra to manufacture automotive products. It supplies to Tata Motors, Ashok Leyland, Mahindra & Mahindra, John Deere, Escorts, Dana Spicer among others. Adhunik settled at Rs44 on the NSE, up 1.15% over its previous close.

Kalpataru Power Transmission has formed a 50:50 joint venture with Gestamp Solar Steel SL of Spain to manufacture solar steel structures. The joint venture company, Gestamp Kalpataru Solar Steel Structures, is setting up a manufacturing and galvanizing plant with planned capacity of 50,000 MTs per annum for solar steel structures in Mehsana district, Gujarat. Kalpataru Power fell 3.28% to close at Rs98.85 on the NSE.

 

 

User

Two and half years later, there are murmurs of SEBI bungling on the entry load ban

AMFI chief HN Sinor has admitted that SEBI and AMFI had made a costly error in banning entry load for mutual funds. Remember, fund companies had welcomed the ban, as had mainstream media

In a recent interview with Economic Times the Association of Mutual Funds of India (AMFI) chairman HN Sinor has admitted that Securities Exchange Board of India (SEBI) made serious a policy mistake of banning entry loads on mutual funds. He said, “One mistake SEBI made was to implement the entry load ban in a cut-and-dry manner.” Moneylife foresaw the mutual fund industry decline, especially with distribution largely getting affected. (Mutal Fund turmoil: Can SEBI be held accountable?).

Mr Sinor hopes there will be a ‘review’ for rolling back the entry load ban. This a volte face by the fund industry. In a conversation with Moneylife, several AMCs had welcomed the move made in August 2009. Mr Sinor now says, “In those days SEBI and AMFI felt the Indian enterprise was very smart and would find a way to come around it. But after two years, I realise, we’ve not been able to adjust our business model to the entry load ban. We need to dispassionately review the (entry load ban) decision once again. We have to expand this industry, and for doing that if we have to bite the bullet, we should bite the bullet.” So, at least the AMFI chief has admitted to what Moneylife has been pointing for so long. Will SEBI take heed, especially since its current chief, UK Sinha was against the ban when he was heading UTI Mutual Fund.

The resultant entry load ban has claimed many causalities, most notably the small distributors and even a reputed asset management company—Fidelity. With one single swipe in August 2009, without much discussion, SEBI changed the mutual fund industry, for the worse. Mr Sinor has admitted that Fidelity’s exit has posed a dilemma for the regulators. He said that the confidence level is very low in the industry. “After Fidelity’s decision to move out and the quick exit of four CEOs, even we’re a little worried. If officials desert the industry like this, we have a big problem at hand”, the AMFI chief openly admitted.

All this QED for us. Moneylife had written about the implications of SEBI’s actions on Fidelity, and what it means for the industry (Fidelity’s exit, a slap on SEBI’s face). We had also pointed out that with the ban on entry-load, small distributors have got squeezed out (Can relationship managers of banks replace independent financial advisors?), and because of this, banks have monopolised distribution of MF schemes. We had written recently in Moneylife magazine, citing recent data from Computer Age Management Services (CAMS) which showed that over the 11-month period (from April 2011-February 2012), banks have managed to corner 40% of SIP accounts and 30% of non-SIP accounts, when compared to Independent Financial Advisors (IFAs) who could manage only 8% of SIP accounts and 11% of non-SIP accounts. Mr Sinor pointed out that out of the 16,000 odd advisors, only 185 (independent distributors) are earning reasonable amount of money. He further says, “If you look at the commission pay-outs of distributors, there are just about 200 distributors who draw gross revenue of over Rs 1 crore. Of the 200, the top-20 are institutions and banks.” He even admits that mis-selling has happened because of the entry load ban. He adds, “This environment is pushing them (distributors) to do something which is not right.” Despite banks cornering the distribution market, mis-selling did not stop and they continued to indulge in questionable practices in mutual fund selling which Moneylife as been pointing out. (Banks receive NFO commission under the garb of ‘bank charges’) and (Now, banks blamed for continuous equity mutual fund outflows!).

According to Mr Sinor, “Distributors are not finding it worthwhile to sell mutual funds. Manufacturers are finding it difficult to expand or penetrate beyond 20 cities. It does not make a business case for manufacturers to go and sell the product in Timbuktu to collect just Rs 5-Rs10 lakh of investments.” The entry load ban has further accelerated the decline of equity culture and number of investors. In order to tackle this, our regulators and the government have come up with the half-baked Rajiv Gandhi Scheme, instead of tackling the root problem of the issue: distribution. We had written about the Rajiv Gandhi scheme here (Budget measures will leave small investors cold).

Without much empathy for the small distributor, the National Institute of Securities Markets (NISM), a certification provider which was set up by SEBI, has gone further and doubled the certification fees required by advisors to distribute mutual funds, thus increasing their costs of doing business. We had written about this here (Revised mutual funds requirements will hurt independent distributors, enrich NISM. SEBI is not really bothered about the small distributor, even after all these years.

Moneylife was the first to come up with a position paper addressing the issues facing investors in India, especially the decline in investor population. Position Paper on Issues faced by Retail Investors: an insight into declining participation of the retail investor

It may be remembered that the fund industry too was to blame for charging huge upfront costs to the unit holders including, foreign junkets, in order to sell funds. Instead of controlling these practices, SEBI has gone to the other extreme by banning upfront commissions and dozens of concomitant rules, which were hailed as pro-investor by the mainstream media, putting a halo around the head of CB Bhave when he retired. Will SEBI review the entry load ban now that Mr Sinor has spoken up, possibly with the tacit encouragement by the SEBI top brass? Or will it come up with another half-baked scheme as Mr UK Sinha did sometime last year?

COMMENTS

Nishi Rotkar

5 years ago

i think SEBI has appointed Mr. ranade as advocate on full time basis for this forum. now coming to his courier boy statement. my view is even a job of courier boy bcomes most important in industry which has tiny presence & penetration. compared to other financial inst. like insurance, banks & post offices mf industry has not even 10 % reach. AMC offices r located only big cities. even if u consider the presence of CAMS & KARVY centres, which r closeing one after other in every month, still the reach is very limited & negligible. it is the small distributor who works without any support of AMC or CAMS / KARVY in small cities & towns. im distributor frm wardha city where threre is not a single office of any AMC & cams/ karvy. in such places job of courier boy is also important. too much has been discussed abt entry load, i think it is the high to think beyond this. let the Growth, penetration, reach , retail participation be the issues which is to be look after. otherwise this shrinking & sinking industry is going to die soon.

REPLY

Keshav B Bhat

In Reply to Nishi Rotkar 5 years ago

Mr Nisi Rotkar, yes what you said is true, Unfortunately lot of chindi chores are still supporting Mr BAVE and company's mooves which has ruined the whole MF industry. In mumbai local trains you will find a lot of people talking about the share market as if they are the experts... but if you see they even do not buy a singe share of any company... but raise a fear in the minds of common people..who try to save and get a better returns....

madhav ranade

5 years ago

i am not saying selling MF is courier boy's job ....

i am saying the people who r doing it .... out of that 90 % are doing only courier boy's job ....

i hope u get the difference ....

it is a tough job .... but only 10 % of the people r doing it the right way ... with knowledge, understanding etc ....

others just collect the form and deposit it ....

pl meet 5 MF advisors at random .... and ask him the AUM fig of 5 top selling funds .... within +/- 20 % accuracy wl do ....

they wl not know ....

THAT IS THE STATE OF AFFAIRS ....

REPLY

Keshav B Bhat

In Reply to madhav ranade 5 years ago

Mr RANADE, can you identyfy your proffessio...
Rather than calling every IFA a corrier boy..If u have any self respect you will do it

madan

In Reply to Keshav B Bhat 5 years ago

he is a nuclear scientist
and everybody else is a fool

kartika

5 years ago

Mutual fund/financial awareness is very low .I don't understand why Mr.Ranade thinks it is courier boy job.I don't belong to distributors but I have witnessed pain and pleasures, greed and mis-selling of mf.Selling 5000 rs fund which is minimum amt required for most of the funds is still very difficult it is often compared with life insurance or ULIP , people dont understand what is mutual fund and how they are differing from ULIP and plz verify figures not less than 80 % educated people dont understand NAV and significance ,It is very difficult to sell mutual fund in smaller cities where people think agents get not less than 25-35% of the investment as commission,.attempts to explain adds to problem/suspicion of investors
Exception of very few people believe
that it is very high commission driving this agent to canvas about mf/ financial awareness .Second thing is abt market ,.people think ,.it is better to invest in LIC traditional plan than market .MF ULIP financial planning are nothing but cheating so better to stick to LIC grand father ,father ,brothers friends did same .I shouldn't dare to market related instruments .People with this type of mindset are not receptive for non-equity mfs.This is very common experience .Large no .of people still not applying for PAN because they fear income tax dept ,and most of these people have earning less than 20000-30000/month.so forget abt investment in mf .Govt has done nothing for making people financially aware and if mf agent makes attempt people go to reject mf outrightly as they very pre-occupied and scared.They prefer FD/PPF /Post /GOld /real estate.Few people have burnt their fingers in equity trading so they are reluctant to invest in equity and other mf.Even with 2.25 % commission it was and it is difficult to sell in most part of country.this is the reason why mf did nt have penetration .MF AUMs are contributed from metros and not from other cities.Do you think it is courier boy job,it is difficult to earn 4000 rs/m even with entry load forget abt office and employing office/delivery boy
Distributors on their part push equity related mf for greed , for liking etc that is why IFA driven AUM debt figures are too less compared to equity
Regulatory changes are not happening only in India .they are all over with diverse models .What Mr Bhave did was not his own decision , he implemented his part in overall broad
financial regulation reforms.
Personally I am happy with whatever structure is laid down by sebi in 2009.but it was too fast and without taking ground realities into consideration.Good that many who were behind easy money left the distribution but serious people suffered.They need to be incentivised for their services .Distributors in smaller cities /less AUM must be given additional benefit for expanding reach and spreading financial awareness ,it is like social justice the way income tax slabs do.Mis-selling happened and happen at large distributors mainly at banks .Glance at commission given will give idea.They should be banned from getting current upfront also .they can have trail only.If banks are interested in distribution they must have different set up for mf even for insurance .Rms call you for investments only because they have access to ur bank account balance ,it is against the RBI guidelines but nobody cares and mis-selling , so they should be banned from entry load as well as current up fronts even transaction charges , same is applicable to big distributors .
I suggest,

In case of SIP if person is ready to invest for long e.g with 2000 /m then first aprrox rs 1500 should be given to
distributor as upfront 1.3% [with current norm up -front +trail of 1st yr],upfront of next 5 yrs [not more than that] and every month investor will get less expense ratio for next 5 yrs ,he must get free SIP switch if scheme is not performing. Trail will continue as existing.it will make distributors's urgent need to fulfill ,more long term money will come .People will not churn for brokerage. SIP money If investor decides to discontinue he will loose initial upfront which in other way he was getting back.so it will add seriousness on his part,AMC will get more money and for long term good for fund management part.
it will be win win situation for Distributors/investors/AMCs .
There is no need to change for lumpsum investments ,upfront/entry loads to be given only to IFAs in smaller cites ./with AUM but with serious attitude [parameters can be defined ]
Lastly Govt should take initiative to raise level of financial awareness .People either don't invest if they invest they don't invest with understanding.
People don't read document before signing
e.g Mr Ranade said he can not ask how much trail commission his distributor is getting ,around 0.8 %
first thing is 0.8% definitely mal-practice No AMC gives officially, others get 0.3 to 0.5 % second thing is I doubt Mr Ranade has ever read Common application form.Investor's sign is required that he is aware of commission and disclosures from ARN holder.If aware investor like Mr.Ranade i.e. above average investor does not know how much his distributor earning and signing docs,what do you expect from common people who are least informed and how IFAs dealing with them.

REPLY

MADHAV RANADE

In Reply to kartika 5 years ago

next time i meet my advisor .... i wl definitely ask him to confirm how much trail commission he is getting .....

i felt that a trail commission is a function of how much total business advisor is bringing and a percentage of that ... it has nothing to do with individual clients ......

Roopsingh solanki

5 years ago

I just want to ask people like Mr madhav ranade who looks like an advocate of CB Bhave why they want this sysytem of No entry load to remain?what was harm when dual system was for investors 2and half yrs back?investors had choice to invest directly and save entry load in those times and those willing to invest through brokers had to pay entry load-in a democratic country like India both choices were available,then why so hasty move of complete abolition of entry load?after 30 months every one asking why there are no ques for purchase by investors in AMCs after saving of 2.25%?and why ther are are ques for redemption now?can Mr Ranade answer this ?this forum has become useless after irrational and long arguements given to brain wash the readers.
Just bring the dual system back and the debate should be over after that.

REPLY

madhav ranade

In Reply to Roopsingh solanki 5 years ago

in a democratic country, courier boys r free to quote their charges and collect same from investors ... why 2 % ... they can ask even 5 % ....

why do they need automatic deduction and payment from MF companies ...

because they fear that they can not justify and collect directly from investing public .....

finally ... how much anyone wl pay to drop a cheque in MF office .....

Roopsingh

In Reply to madhav ranade 5 years ago

Thanks Mr Ranade for advicing the forum that there should not be dual system-i dont object to your idea-as things are not under advsors control-but atleast we have contributed negatively by not canvassing MF business since abolition of entry load-why we should bother for the upliftment of equity culture when we are not rewarded for our efforts-and please note even a courier boy chargers more then Rs 5 for just delivery of a small cover-then why MF advisors should get hardly 5 Rs for a 1000 Rs SIP and take further botheration of servicing the client-is ordinary courier boy more educated then MF advisor?then why same level of renumeration for both persons<-by the way cam Mr Ranade tell us what job he does and why his income should not be linked to his performance every week he works for fulfilling his duty?why not link salaries of SEBI office berarers with their performance ?

R Nandy

In Reply to madhav ranade 5 years ago

Mr Ranade,thanks for the effort in upholding the rights of the small investor.

The current regulation is very progressive with a sustainable trail commission of 0.5% .In fact I think even the trail commission should be reduced for people directly investing with the fund houses as no distributor is involved in this case.In other words the expense ration of the direct investor should be less the trail commission compared to the investors going through distributors.In the current scenario the direct investor can be credited with 0.5% of his AUM as units into his account .


Secondly,many funds have very low AUM due to poor performance and hence a very high expense ratio.They were primarily the products of misselling or investor inertial.SEBI should put a cap on expensive ratio to 2% so that many of they useless funds are closed and merged with bigger funds and there is economy of scale.

R Nandy

5 years ago

I am amazed by the simplistic position taken by Moneylife and the IFA community for the floundering of the MF industry.As has been told by many other people in the forum,the MF industry is floundering like many other industries in India.Situations have been tough after 2008.After 2008 the savings rate in the country has reduced due to high inflation and lower growth of the GDP.Secondly, a lot of HNI money is also moving into real estate and gold.Real estate prices have gone up by almost 30% in Bangalore in the last one year though interest rates are still high. There is no point questioning why these HNIs are investing in real estate rather than MFs.The fact is that the risk to return tradeoff in Equities/MFs are on the higher side.Many large investors have changed their portfolio allocation with overweight position in gold and real estate.

Housing EMIs(even rentals) have also increased due to high interest rate now.Where is the surplus for middle class people to invest in MFs or equities? .Whatever surplus money they have is saved for short and medium term goals in Fixed Deposits.Should they invest in MFs for short and medium term goals?

As has been correctly pointed out by Randade in one of the comments,much of the MF money before the recession in 2008 was speculative money who wanted high returns on a short term basis.The people who are still invested in MFs are there for the long haul.

So,SEBI is not responsible for the position of the MF industry.The ECONOMY is.

Introduction of entry load will not change a thing.It will only result in mis-selling and drive away some serious investors towards other instruments.The short term profit margin of distributors can definitely increase but will be counterproductive in the long run.

Anisha

5 years ago

The number of participants do not determine sensex level, they just determine how much liquidity we can have in the market.

Sensex level is decided by the supply demand of shares primarily based on the company performance. I agree that if we increase demand by increasing number of investors, price may go up, but that is not the correct reflection of market performance...tending towards manipulation with artificial demand. Furtehr retail can't influence as much as the big corporates...most of whom have suffered due to global financial meltdown.

Further, just so that you know, Mutual funds are not expected to crazily beat the market, they follow the market, they almost follow the market. Many of you are talking of 10% returns, think of 2008, before entry load, when sensex dropped to 7000, i.e. 60-70% drop.

Entry load has no meaning, its a method adopted to cheat people so mutual funds get fundings. It promotes misselling, a malpractice that has stopped since banning entry load, thus the reduced volumes. Investing in funds should be strictly based on fund performance, and not some cheating tactics adopted by distributors to get their commission.

Banning entry load i the correct decision in the long run, and it will lead to less fradulent practices, particularly concenring the retailers i.e. the common man

Stany Dsouza

5 years ago

Most of the mutual fund distributors started to sell other financial products. I don't think they will come back again to sell mutual funds even after introducing entry load.

REPLY

MADHAV RANADE

In Reply to Stany Dsouza 5 years ago

" started dabbling in other financial products " .... is the correct statement ....

courier boys cant sell anything to anyone .....

keshavbbhat

In Reply to MADHAV RANADE 5 years ago

Mr Ranade, I think you are egoistic and sick

madhav ranade

In Reply to keshavbbhat 5 years ago

courier boys wont feel hurt .... because i hv told the fact ....

i am not adressing and calling names to 10 % who know their job .....

as regards to what i am .... u r free to hv yr own opinion ... does not bother me at all ......

pankaj kapadia

5 years ago

we debated lot for past 2 1/2 yrs. Just imagine if sensex at 25000. Every party would have been happy. Investor, distributors, amc and regulators as everybody would have met their expectations. The reason why we are displeased is that equity mkt has not delievered past 5 years. .Trail would hv been higher. There would have been no redemptions. AUM would have gone up. Regulators have had retail participation and investor would have made money. Unfortunately sensex is 17000.!!!!

REPLY

madhav ranade

In Reply to pankaj kapadia 5 years ago

u hv hit the nail on the head .....

do u think these jokers ... the courier boys can sell anything to anyone ..... it is people who were buying .... overlooking 2 % since they were making 10 % per qtr .....

and these jokers started thinking that it dawns because they crow .....

i wrote this to moneylife also ... DONT TAKE CREDIT WHEN ITS NOT DUE ......

Anisha

In Reply to madhav ranade 5 years ago

You have hit the nail on your own head and damaged your brain.

The number of participants do not determine sensex level, they just determine how much liquidity we can have in the market.

Sensex level is decided by the supply demand of shares primarily based on the company performance. I agree that if we increase demand by increasing number of investors, price may go up, but that is not the correct reflection of market performance...tending towards manipulation with artificial demand. Furtehr retail can't influence as much as the big corporates...most of whom have suffered due to global financial meltdown.

Further, just so that you know, Mutual funds are not expected to crazily beat the market, they follow the market, they almost follow the market. You are talking of 10% returns, think of 2008, before entry load, when sensex dropped to 7000, i.e. 60-70% drop.

Entry load has no meaning, its a method adopted to cheat people so mutual funds get fundings. It promotes misselling, a malpractice that has stopped since banning entry load, thus the reduced volumes. Investing in funds should be strictly based on fund performance, and not some cheating tactics adopted by distributors to get their commission.

madhav ranade

In Reply to Anisha 5 years ago

what u r saying is all theory .... too bookish .... u dont hv the pulse of indian investors / traders ....

indians need quick returns ....

this is the only land where stock futures r traded ... do u know that ....

i hv just stated reality when i said 10 % returns per qtr ....

u wl see what wl happen to gold funds if they come down or remain steady for 4/5 qtrs .....

better keep out of such boards and such discussions ....

RAJ KUMAR SINGH

5 years ago

CB BHAVE HAD MADE A STATEMENT THAT HE SAVED RS.2600CR FOR INVESTORS. CAN SOMEBODY CALCULATE THE LOSS OF INVESTORS BY NOT LETTING THE MUTUAL FUND MARKET GROW. THE REAL VILLIAN IS THE BANK LOBBY. THEY MISSOLD INSURANCE AND MUTUAL FUNDS AND BLAMED DISTRIBUTORS.SHAME ON REGULATORS AND BANKS.

REPLY

Keshav B Bhat

In Reply to RAJ KUMAR SINGH 5 years ago

Mr Bhave says he has saved so much money of investors... BUT where it has gone... unfortunately he is living in a fools paradise... the mony has never stayed in the pockets of the people who used to save for their better future or to servive in bad times...

PSGulati

In Reply to RAJ KUMAR SINGH 5 years ago

Very good observation

RAJESH

5 years ago

Entry Load shd be reintroduced @ strict 2% and the same shd be given to the Distributor.Even Trail shd be capped @ 0.5% No AMC shd be allowed to pay anything extra for larger volumes to bigger IFAs. Any investor who wants to invest directly can do so without Entry Load. Banks shd not be allowed to do this business. They are the biggest Mis-sellers.
This is the only way to save MF industry. SEBI shd not delay any further or we might have another AMC quitting sooner.

prithvi pal

5 years ago

after going through the pace of market and trend in selling for indivisualdistributor is really a very ruff period for their survival in the presence of banks being corporate distributors, the banning of entry load review is a good step and it can be said "jagai to shei jara der se"

T Kalyanaraman

5 years ago

Reintroducing entry load will be the death knell for the industry. Banning entry load has created a situation of survival of the fittest.

The major culprits who took investors for a jolly good ride are banks and AMCs who were churning out products for their and distributors benefits only - the latest example is capital protection funds where upfront as high as 4.5% was paid. If you look at the performance of some of these funds which matured recently they hardly gave anything to investor. In the first place, if a mundane advisor like me could see the game through how the erudite members of SEBI allowed such schemes to be floated and repeated as series 1, 2 etc by the same fund house at quick intervals?

One good solution can be total ban on entry load with high trail increasing with age.

India has a rural population of 75% who practically live on hand to mouth income. How are you going to convince them to invest in a risky asset class what ever little they save? I would even go the extent of saying that it would be a crime to make a rural earner to part with his money for investment in equity when most of his basic needs would not have been met.

SEBI focuses on IFAs qualification to sell financial products. o they have any system to monitor fund managers qualification, performance and do they appraise them periodically to ensure they remain sharp as ever and are dedicated to their fiduciary capacity?

At the moment the industry needs cleaning up, systems in place to ensure gullible investors are not taken for ride by bank RMs (Money life is full of such stories) and close and careful rating and watching of performance fund managers and ensure there is no broker fundmanager nexus.

Moneylife Digital Team

5 years ago

We see a lot of motivated and ill-informed comments here. We are NOT in favour of going back to the old regime, especially of 2005-07 with 6% incentives and foreign trips for distributors we ourselves had screamed against.
Our only point is that entry load was banned hastily and without discussion by a hotheaded Sebi team. It created chaos and confusion. We had predicted this while mutual fund heads, AMFI and mainstream media were hailing it as a great move. Now industry is doing about turn. That is all.
Sorry for interruption. Discussions may please continue

REPLY

madhav ranade

In Reply to Moneylife Digital Team 5 years ago

dont take credit where it is not due ....

MFs sre down because market is not giving 10/12 % retrns per qtr ..... during 2003/2007 boom ... MFs were traded like stocks ... buy today ... sell 3 months later at 10 % plus ... NATURALLY NOBODY CARED ABOUT ENTRY LOAD .....

now if entry load is reinstated .... something wl be pushed thru the gullible throats ... but when they wl lose money + 2 % entry load ... they wl not comeback to MFs ever .....

only MF advisors .... courier type who r lying low now .... wl mushroom overnight as they wl get scent of money ....


WATCH OUT .....

Moneylife Digital Team

In Reply to madhav ranade 5 years ago

1. You have not read our post properly
2. Amfi is crying about entry load. That is the context -- not our taking credit. We don't need to.

MADHAV RANADE

In Reply to Moneylife Digital Team 5 years ago

kudos .... what a strategy ....

ask me to keep quiet and u yrself wl continue replying to me .... cheerssssssssssss ....

enjoyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy .....

rahul

In Reply to madhav ranade 5 years ago

you are so quick to type BEFORE reading.
the statement from moneylife states that they are NOT in favour of the old ways.
Why cant you read first cooly?

R Nandy

In Reply to Moneylife Digital Team 5 years ago

'Motivated'? You see motivation in the comments of small investors talking of their rights? Anyone who doesen't agree with you once in a while is motivated,financially illiterate and illinformed? This type of illiberal behaviour really saddens me.

raj

In Reply to Moneylife Digital Team 5 years ago

1. Please note the serious & well versed agents/distributors are still doing good business on Upfront and Trail Commissions.
2. The matured investors are happy with No Entry Load. As they in any case take their Own decision without dependence on any agent/house.
3. Most Agents were and will always interested in Entry Load Commissions and frequent Churning only
4. May be there could be TWO Options:-
one the DIRECT INVESTORS- those who must get their OWN ENTRY LOAD COMMISSION and
Second - who pay for services in the form of entry load to investors.
5. This way all will benefit

raj

In Reply to raj 5 years ago

Please note under 4. Above who pay for services in the form of entry load to INSTEAD OF investors it SHOULD BE AGENTS.

Ravindra K

In Reply to Moneylife Digital Team 5 years ago

LIKED

vijay hede

5 years ago

INCORRECT ASSESSMENT OF THE SITUATION. THE BUSINESS MODEL OF NFO ON THE HEEL OF NFO, HEAVY COMMISSIONS OF 5% PLUS TO DISTRIBUTORS,CHURNING OF PORTFOLIOS BY THE BANKERS AND HAVING A REGULATOR WHO CLEARED UNDIFFERNTIATED SCHEMES LEFT INVESTORS HIGH AND DRY WHEN THE MARKETS TANKED IN 2008. RETAL INVESTORS EXITED LOSING FAITH IN THE MFs AND WISER ONES ARE EXITING AT EVERY HIGH. ENTRY LOADS OR NOT WILL NOT RETRIEVE THE SITUATION.

Vishal Rastogi

5 years ago

Blaming SEBI alone after 2.6 yrs on this issue is not justified, the whole industry is responsible. As some of AMC,s opposed initially, few favoured, few mummered in & off too. Now from that time market had also not supported as such to push it. This slugged MF AUM stagnent or in negative.
According to me now it should be more focus to strenghten IFA's by teaching through media & so to the investor for investing only through AMFI certified Proffessional & pay them a reasonable advisory. This can be also done by stopping Sub-brokers Channel working with corporate channel's & Banks as they do not have any personal caring for clients.

REPLY

manoj

In Reply to Vishal Rastogi 5 years ago

To be fair, moneylife has been the only media entity to blame SEBI vehemently and openly for all 2.6 years - it hasn't started now. he he ... lol

In fact, as an industry person, i can say that our bosses privately agreed, but didnt dare to speak out against SEBI. The disaster is there for all to see.

Moneylife Digital

In Reply to manoj 5 years ago

Not that your bosses supported us in any way. They are gloried clerks

sudin

In Reply to Vishal Rastogi 5 years ago

"only through AMFI certified Proffessional & pay them a reasonable advisory. This can be also done by stopping Sub-brokers Channel working with corporate channel's & Banks"

Who will do this? Sebi, right? And if it doesn't, will you yourself not blame Sebi?
lecturing is easy

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)