Stocks
SEBI insists that Coal India allow investors to withdraw their bids on a trivial mistake in prospectus!

In Coal India’s prospectus, two figures have got altered. SEBI, whose decisions are often biased and whimsical, has insisted that investors must be allowed to withdraw their bids on such a negligible mistake

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), whose decision-making has always attracted charges of inconsistency, bias and whimsicality, is probably out to redeem itself. It is out to show that it is a stickler for rules and willing to throw the rulebook at even large public sector companies.

Therefore, in a bizarre instruction, it has also forced Coal India Limited (CIL) to give all investors, including the institutional bidders, the option to withdraw their bids for a trivial mistake in the prospectus. CIL was asked to issue advertisements in newspapers to make the small correction but part of the ad is an offer to investors to withdraw their bids just because two figures got interchanged.

Consequently, at a time when the Disinvestment Ministry and CIL should be celebrating the extraordinary success of a 12-time oversubscription of a gigantic Rs15,000-crore issue, that too only to retail investors, they are smarting under what is considered SEBI's rigid stance.

Coal India today issued a notice to investors, which essentially corrects one typographical error. The figure under 'accretion in stock' and that under 'other income' for the quarter ended 30th June 2010 got inadvertently inter-changed. So accretion in stock should read as Rs54.45 million instead of Rs31,945 million and other income should read the opposite. While the numbers seem huge, there is no change in total income figures or the summary statement of profit and loss.

In any case, it is clear that it was a tiny slip.

Stunningly, for such a minor error, SEBI has asked CIL to not only issue a correction advertisement, but also asked it to give investors an option to withdraw their shares for this correction. According to sources, SEBI was acting on a complaint received from an investor.

In ads issued today, CIL has said, "In view of the above kindly note that Bidders (including QIB bidders), if they so desire, may withdraw their bids." The request for such withdrawal will have to be made before 5pm today before the retail issue closes.

It is another matter that this correction is hardly going to affect the subscription of CIL, unless the original complaint itself was mischievously designed to disrupt the disinvestment process. However, so strong is the momentum for buying good stock that investors whom Moneylife spoke to this morning were unconcerned.



We also learn that there were discussions at the highest level of the government to allow CIL to issue a correction without the offer of withdrawal, but SEBI refused to budge. The question is, was SEBI adhering to the highest standards of fairness and discipline or was it being stubborn to send a signal to the government that it cannot be 'influenced'? There will always be two opinions on the issue. But two facts are abundantly clear. One, the mistake is inconsequential. It is not an omission but a mere typographical error with no material impact on profitability numbers.

More pertinently, public sector companies, ever since the disinvestment programme began in 1991, have not followed the normal disclosure rules. It may be remembered that Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited (MTNL) was listed even without a prospectus! Even today, government companies are listed with a floating stock that is way below the mandatory 10% applicable to all companies. Interestingly, SEBI has not implemented the minimum shareholding norm ever, despite the occasional warning by the previous SEBI chairman.
 

User

COMMENTS

arun adalja

7 years ago

i will be obliged if somebody can get the figure of withdrawl of application in the retal category by the mistake from merchant bankers and sebi s action.

Shibaji Dash

7 years ago

If the contents of the bulky IPO application forms are amenable to careful study and understanding as in the case of Mr. Jim, let me point out with all respect and in all polieness that Mr. Jim is an exception to the rule of average. The crux of the issue is how come stock and income could be interchanged. All the waters of the Ganges will not be adequate to wash such casual and irreverant explanation like " small clerical' error.

REPLY

Jim

In Reply to Shibaji Dash 7 years ago

Mr. Shibhaji, what i understand from your reply is that every average retail investor sources the IPO form, reads the 25 -30 pages, analyses the IPO valuation and then decides whether he should invest in the IPO or not. I wish the Indian retail public would one day arrive at that stage. But sadly that is not the case right now. I am associated with the Financial Industry and day in and day out I see how people invest. Sadly for IPO's they dont even take the entire application form. They just take the first page and leave. Just to refer, if you look back six to eight months there were hardly any subscription, leave aside over-subscription in the IPO's that hit the market.

Shibaji Dash

7 years ago

May be as Ms. Dalal says the mistake was "clerical' ( clerks are an extinct tribe)and inconsequential. She would know better and I would trust her. But it's hard to digest that what SEBI did was nit picking. They did their duty. And Coal India reaffirmed its credibility by giving the option to withdraw. how could the merchant bankers fail to distinguish between stock and income? A mistake that a school student of commerce stream would not commit.Merchant bankers and Accountants are always ' barbarians at the gate' unless rapped in the knuckle in each event of a 'mistake' , 'clerical or otherwise.Ohm, Satyam!

REPLY

Ravindra Shetye

In Reply to Shibaji Dash 7 years ago

You can ust the merchant bankers not to make a mistake on the lower side when claiming their fees.

AP Agrawal

7 years ago

SEBI was correct. Those for whom the error is inconsequential, should not bother, those for whom it might be should get a fair chance to take an informed decision and for those who prepare these documents, it should be an eye opener. How can merely numbers or success of an offer or effect on it may bend the rules. It is better to have a hard precedent than a bad precedent.

Jim

7 years ago

Lot of investors do not even bother to go through the bulky application form of the IPO form. How many investors actually care to read the financial statements of the company when (and after) it listed on the bourses. What matters is factors like market sentiments, herd mentality, brokers advice etc. SEBI should have just asked CIL to advertise in all the national and regional newspapers across India about the typo error. There was no need to ask CIL to give the witdrawal option..

arun adalja

7 years ago

sebi is correct for the action but we have to analyse the issue why the thing came when the issue is over?who is responsible for this mistake?merchan bankers lead managers etc all are responsibe if yes why they are not punished?they must fine heavily and that money is given as a discount to investors as they have to go under mental worries.

REPLY

ashok

In Reply to arun adalja 7 years ago

mental worries for two figures interchanged?
put your money in FD. Bhave will be happy since Sebi has done nothing to expand india's investor base

oriental

7 years ago

yes ma'm,

your point taken.
but sebi has acted as per the letter of the law! how, then she can be faulted?

recently, in the similar case of va tech wabagh, they were asked to offer the refund option to the investors, by sebi.

i think the spirit of transparency and lawfulness must be upheld at all costs.

the behemoth cil should not be allowed to get away under other pretexts.

REPLY

Ishfaq Hussain

In Reply to oriental 7 years ago

have you been tracking sebi's "spirit of transparency and lawfulness" in nsdl and cb bhave case?

Ravindra Shetye

7 years ago

I do not think it was a tiny slip. Can you accept a similar slip in Tata Motors for example. No one will withdraw and many would not have noticed the slip since for most it is like a lottery. Moreover an ad giving the option to withdraw safeguards CIL on legal front. I do not agree with your views on this.

REPLY

ramchandra gadgil

In Reply to Ravindra Shetye 7 years ago

After seeing some of the comments here, I looked for the Coal India advt confident that Moneylife has reported selectively. Found it in the Indian Express courtesy a librarian friend. Clearly it is just a typographical error and given the size of the issue a tiny matter that did not hide law suits or involve contingent liabilities. Clearly SEBI is over reacting. As a lawyer i believe SEBI may want to consider the aspect of mens rea -- or guilty mind -- at least when it comes to typos that do not affect the bottomline or mis-state liabilities.
Even as an investor I think the matter is indeed "trivial".
Maybe the outgoing SEBI chairman wants to tell the government that he is not answerable to them anymore? Or maybe he is simply upset that he isn't getting a second term. (more likely)
Given SEBI's general level of inefficiency, I certainly think there is more to this than meets the eye. Especially when so many known culprits get away without even a warning on consent cases. That these can be 'fixed' is well known in legal circles.
Funnily, only moneylife and Mint seem to have reported it yesterday. Amusing to see that SEBI has ensured white wash in that paper -- also a big mountain of a mole hill.

Kulkarni

7 years ago

It is not clear why sucheta is agitated when the steps taken by SEBI is purely in the interest of the investors. We must appreciate SEBI for showing guts and treating govt and other issuers on par. I thing you are wrong this time sucheta.

REPLY

Manohar

In Reply to Kulkarni 7 years ago

The point is such "guts" from regulators is always selective and motivated. If you have been reading moneylife you would be aware of the larger picture. what, for instance, do you know about sebi's "guts" in case of quiet consent orders it is issuing to "settle" cases. in whose interest ?

Nadkarni

In Reply to Manohar 7 years ago

Kulkarni, don't be so foolish and naive about Indian regulators. "Purely in the interest of investors"! My foot. I was an investor of Global Trust Bank which was raped by the promoters, the ZEE group and Ketan Parekh. What did your great regulators RBI and SEBI do about them? The then RBI governor bailed out his the petty banker from his home state AP, Sebi slept over its so-called investigations regarding Ketan Parekh and ZEE. Finally, I read only in Moneylife how the ZEE group was let off only with a warning, possibly days after the current chairman took over! I don't think anybody other than Sucheta reported this. Grow up Kulkarni, the regulators are not there to act in the interest of investors. They are there to act in favour or against big guys and also on personal likes, dislikes, whims and motivation as this article has hinted.

Narendra Doshi

7 years ago

R Bala's comments are the way to go.

REPLY

Sunder

In Reply to Narendra Doshi 7 years ago

As usual Bala's comments are extreme and sweeping. I read him more for amusement

R Balakrishnan

In Reply to Sunder 7 years ago

Sundar, the point is that the regulators NEVER punish the merchant bankers enough to hurt them. It is a cosy nexus between the regulator and the merchant banker. And now, they have imported 'compounding'. This is what makes me angry. And I am glad that I provide you amusement.

Madhusudan Thakkar

7 years ago

This is all drama-bazi by SEBI

R Balakrishnan

7 years ago

The bigger issue is that of the lead managers, who do shoddy work, reflecting the caliber of ownership and employment. The bankers should also be barred for a few years from the capital markets, for such errors. Here, the error is trivial, but in cases like Vatech Wabag etc, the error was material. SEBI should demnostrate that it is not hand in glove with the investment bankers. Ban a few of them for five to ten years and the quality can improve.

Demand-supply mismatch might push up aluminium prices

Growing demand — both domestic and global — and China’s decision to curb output will impact prices of the metal

Global aluminium prices are likely to go up in the wake of growing demand at domestic and international fronts, coupled with China's step to slash production of the metal. According to Harbor Intelligence, a global consulting firm specialising in forecasts for commodities, aluminium prices could touch $2,700 per tonne in the first half of the next year.

But inventory levels and demand for aluminium will be the determining factor for prices. In the last month, inventories of the metal have dropped by 1.7% to 72,050 tonnes. However, after the continuous decline in the second week of October, London Metal Exchange (LME) inventories grew by 3,950 tonnes to 4.3MT.

BL Bagra, director, National Aluminium Company Limited (NALCO), in a recent interview, has said that due to low interest rates and warehouse charges, many companies have found it profitable to hold on to stocks. He also added that interest rates will be stable and large aluminium inventories will be seen till at least the beginning of 2011.

"Currently aluminium prices are about $2,300 per tonne which is slightly on (the) higher side," an analyst with Systematix Shares & Stock (I) Ltd told Moneylife, preferring anonymity. "I don't see prices going significantly up," he added.

Alcoa, the largest US aluminium producer, predicts that global aluminium demand will increase by 6% per year over the next decade.

Inventories of aluminium at the LME are steady at around 4.5 million tonnes (MT), which is much more than last year's inventories, shows LME data. Taking note of rising inventories, Alcoa curtailed its production by 20% to 25% in June.

According to Brook Hunt, a leading research firm, global oversupply of aluminium is seen at 1.5MT and 2.1MT in 2011 and 2012, respectively. Supply is set to exceed demand by 1.3MT this year and supply should match demand, at least in the next two years, added the firm.

"Inventory level in the global market is around 10MT-11MT and global aluminium consumption is somewhere close to 35MT... it means about 30% (of) yearly consumption is lagging in inventories," added the analyst from Systematix.

India's demand for aluminium is likely to grow in double-digits in the coming months as the metal's main consumers - the auto and construction sectors - are seeing high demand for their products. India's aluminium production in April-August rose 6.4% to 6,52,941 tonnes.

"Aluminium prices may show a slight drop in the short-term if the dollar is firm," said an analyst from a Mumbai-based research firm. "A weak dollar may push up prices of aluminium as it makes the base metal more attractive to non-dollar buyers," he added.

China's recent energy rationalisation programme would cut aluminium production in the country. Essence Securities Co has said that aluminium companies in Shanxi and Guizhou, which account for 6% of China's production, were told to cut capacity for four months.

The policy is being implemented in every part of China, says Essence. According to media reports, China's Jiaozuo Wanfang Aluminium Manufacturing plans to cut electrolytic aluminium capacity by 1,40,000 tonnes due to electricity shortages. The company produces 4,20,000 tonnes of aluminium every year.

Aluminum Corporation of China, China's largest aluminium producer, also says that supply would be more than demand and it expects global aluminium production to grow by 12% to 42.28MT this year, and consumption to grow by 20% to 41MT.

"China consumes 40% of global aluminium production. If Chinese companies are slashing their output significantly, then it will help Indian aluminium production," added the analyst who spoke to Moneylife.

Despite decline in profit in 2009-10, Indian aluminium major NALCO plans a Rs 6,000 crore capacity expansion project. With this expansion, the company would enhance aluminium capacity to 5.7 lakh tonnes and alumina capacity to 29 lakh tonnes. The company sees surge in demand from the auto sector and infrastructure activities in India, Europe and other countries. 

However, Vedanta group's Sterlite Industries, which has contributed considerably to enhance India's aluminium production over the past few years, has put its expansion plan on hold following the environment ministry's order banning bauxite mining in the Niyamgiri hills, Orissa. The company has also decided to defer the start of its aluminium smelter capacity of 1.64MT per annum (mtpa).

Vedanta Resources had committed an investment of over Rs36,000 crore for the expansion project in Orissa.
 

User

COMMENTS

Gautam

7 years ago

Very contradictory report. Auto sector will grow for sure but construction sector is not growing enough. China production cut has little effect. middle east has planned to double the production, They have 7 to 10 % less cost of production on account of power. $2700/ton is not going to happen.

Is SEBI’s action on Coal India too harsh?

In the past, companies have left out significant information like pending litigation against them from their red herring prospectuses. Coal India, however, was pulled up just for a typographical error

Has the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) been unduly harsh with Coal India Ltd (CIL) by asking it to give institutional investors an exit option because of a typographical error? (See: http://moneylife.in/article/81/10190.html).

A look at a few instances where such withdrawal notices had to be posted certainly suggests that is the case.

Moneylife unearthed four instances where SEBI had asked companies to give investors an option to withdraw their subscriptions from Initial Public Offerings (IPOs). They were MBL Infrastructures Ltd, Aishwarya Telecom Ltd, Anu's Laboratories Ltd, Aster Silicates Ltd and VA Tech Wabag Ltd.  In each of these cases, the companies had left out significant information about litigation filed against them or complaints over non-payment. None of them pertained to something as trivial as a typographical error that does not affect the financials of the company.

In December 2009, MBL Infrastructures Ltd issued a notice saying that it omitted some information from its red herring prospectus (RHP) under the 'outstanding litigations and material development' section. The company said it did not mention in the RHP that it had been prohibited by the road construction department (RCD), Jharkhand, from participating in tenders in the state.

In the second instance, while MBL Infrastructures did provide information about a petition filed against it by Jan Kalyan Morcha, an NGO, it did not disclose its admission to certain damages to a road that it had constructed. It also failed to disclose the report and remarks of a five-member committee appointed by RCD pursuant to observations by the Jharkhand High Court to enquire into the reasons for the deterioration of the road.

Aishwarya Telecom claimed that it was a "bona fide mistake" on its part in not disclosing a case filed against it by Jaipur-based EL-Tronics before the District Consumer Forum III, Hyderabad. The company had to add a clarification in its RHP under the 'risk factors' and 'outstanding litigation and defaults' section. Aishwarya Telecom Ltd admitted that it diverted the delivery of the material ordered by El-Tronics to another client to meet "certain business urgencies", due to which El-Tronics filed a case against it.

Anu's Laboratories also failed to disclose information about litigation filed against it by Sunmoom Chemicals Pvt Ltd and had to add the same in its RHP under the 'outstanding litigations and material development' section in May 2008.

This year two companies - Aster Silicates and VA Tech Wabag - had to delay their IPOs due to non-disclosures in RHPs. In July 2010, Aster Silicates had to clarify and provide details of the allegations made by Balwant Jain and Sandip Bhandari against one of its promoters, Mahesh Maheshwari, in its RHP over pledging of shares.

In the case of VA Tech Wabag, it was found that the company provided wrong comparison about its financials and its peers in the RHP. While VA Tech Wabag provided its financials on a consolidated basis, for its peers it provided information on a standalone basis besides adding a note at the end of the table that all figures were on a consolidated basis. This was done with an intention to show VA Tech Wabag in a better position than its competitors.

After SEBI sent a letter, the company had to delete the footnote. However, in the public notice, it said that VA Tech Wabag was not in a position to confirm whether the figures are on a standalone or a consolidated basis.

Looking at the above instances, why was CIL pulled up for a simple typo?

User

COMMENTS

VISHAL

7 years ago

Yes Indeed!

In fact if you see previous years result. You can clearly figure out that error. Also if you compare with consolidation number then also you can figure that error.

So it's just an typing error which can be understood while going through financials of the company.

Narendra Doshi

7 years ago

What about SKS Microfinance very recent IPO & the subsequent removal of its CEO etc?? Could you please inform - Moneylife Digital Team
tks

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)