SEBI’s whirlwind regulatory changes leave a messy trail

SEBI’s knockout punch to mutual fund distributors in August 2009 has left a trail of tribulation across all intermediaries in the mutual fund industry. We put together the actions and their impact to highlight why even a raging bull market has failed to enthuse the fund industry

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) abolished entry loads in August 2009, in what it thought was an investor-friendly move. But consider how a slew of thoughtless actions that followed this move have bludgeoned the mutual fund industry and every one of its intermediaries until assets under management are dwindling rapidly.

The starting point was of course, the distributors who were suddenly left without a business. Without fees, it made no sense for them to dish out free advice, while investors, who were unused to paying for advice, weren’t willing to start now. SEBI couldn’t care less, beyond regulators loftily pronouncing that “distributors must charge customers” and “investors must learn to pay”.
When a few hundred crore rupees began to be pulled out, SEBI swung into action to make the situation worse. It started its infamous turf battle with the insurance regulator to stop mutual fund assets flowing to unit-linked-insurance products. The result: legislation that put the finance ministry in charge of sorting out squabbles between regulators. Also, hundreds of distributors have shut shop and are looking for alternative business avenues.

In July 2009, just before the ban on entry loads, SEBI exempted micro SIP investments upto Rs50,000 from having to submit PAN numbers. This translated into higher volumes under SIP without any significant addition to the overall Assets Under Management (AUM) of fund companies. An unintended consquence was that Registrar & Transfer Agents (RTA) were burdened with additional work and no commensurate increase in income.

In December 2009 came a circular asking for stricter and more detailed Know Your Customer (KYC) documentation for “prevention of money laundering”. This happened when SEBI realised that some mutual funds did not even know their customer and were entirely dependent on distributors not even RTAs.

This triggered huge documentation efforts between RTAs and channel distributors — the top 20 distributors account for 4.78 lakh unique investors with a minimum of three documents (a/c opening, KYC, PAN ) consisting of 65–180 pages each (4.78 crore records). While the process was being completed, commissions to the tune of Rs100 crore were withheld, angering the distributor community even further.

Interestingly, all this was left to a few RTAs to handle — it is interesting that the entire capital market boom since 1990 has not led to increased competition in the RTA segment — Karvy remains the dominant player, with three or four others picking up the rest. SEBI has never tried to find out why this business does not attract more participants.

Incidentally, SEBI’s fatwa meant that to comply with KYC norms, old and inadequate customer data, with older funds such as UTI Mutual Fund had to be obtained afresh, with identification (photo, phone and address) and put in a standard format for easy access. We learn that RTAs coped with this by procuring third-party screening software to aid in this process.

In March 2010 SEBI decided to attack trail commissions and permit investors to change distributors without a no-objection certificate. It decided that in case of any change in the broker code, no trail commission would be paid to both brokers — the one who lost a customer as well as the one who gained a customer. This immediately triggered a virtual war to grab customers by hook or by crook — it only led to RTAs being choked by reams of paper requesting a change in broker code. The apparent lack of clarity between SEBI and the industry body Association of Mutual Funds in India (AMFI) didn’t help matters either. The misinterpretation of the rule unleashed trading in customer data. Only after AMFI issued a subsequent clarification did the volumes subside.

Many other proposals introduced by SEBI, such as shrinking of NFO allotment time from 30 days to five days or extending the ASBA facility to mutual funds, although for the benefit of investors, led to confusion because the industry and intermediaries were never given enough time to set up robust implementation processes.

One example is SEBI’s decision in June 2010 to switch from AMFI certification for mutual fund distributors to certification by the National Institute of Securities Management (NISM) which has been set up by SEBI and is now scouting for revenue opportunities. The certification leads to the issue of a certification number or code. Since older IFAs (independent financial advisors) are unlikely to get an NISM code, it has created an additional process for fund intermediaries to manage NSIM and AMFI codes.

In August 2010, SEBI asked all fund houses to facilitate smoother shift of mutual fund units between two demat accounts. This not only meant that AMCs would have to shoulder additional costs, but it would also increase activity at the RTA’s end. Various participants have pointed out discrepancies in this system, with several intermediaries submitting their own challenges in dealing with the requirement in its current form. Similarly, in order to check fraudulent activities by some distributors, SEBI asked fund houses not to accept third party cheques for mutual fund subscriptions. This is under implementation, requiring fund branches to track investor applications with investor cheques to corroborate the investment.

SEBI followed this with a killer blow to the distributor community, when it introduced tedious and intrusive know your distributor (KYD) norms. These didn’t go down well at all with some distributors, who felt they were being treated like common criminals, particularly questioning the extent of verification as demanded by SEBI. Moneylife’s article on this matter (see here: http://www.moneylife.in/article/78/9202.html) generated significant interest from the distributor community.

The problem is that each time SEBI introduced a change, without enough thought or discussion, the industry began to invest in systems and processes, only to have the regulator move on to another change. Or worse, the investment was wasted because investors were unimpressed by the change.
One good thing that has come out of all this mess is the facility of consolidated account statements on a monthly basis. This service provides the investor with the ability to track his mutual fund investments across all fund houses under a single roof. This may also reduce the costs and efforts at the RTAs’ end as it will eliminate the need for daily confirmations. 

With SEBI mulling more regulatory changes for the industry, any move without involving the industry participants will only create more headaches for all the players in the industry.

  • Like this story? Get our top stories by email.

    User 

    COMMENTS

    a

    1 decade ago

    one man's ego(mr Bhave's) is kiling mf industry..

    market has grwon from 8000 to 20000.and MF industry AUM has decreased...........

    Hari Baldawa

    1 decade ago

    ITS PURE NONSENSE the way Bhave thinks of MF business and it is PURE INSULT the way DNA Money editor ( I didn't care to get this guy's name) has published, on Oct 9th, the interview of Mini Menon of Bloomberg UTV. These two guys will get their pants wet with dirty smell, if they take guts to get a new small investor into Mutual funds. These guys don't have the noble idea behind MFs, which can benefit each and every person, rather than talking and publishing big nonsense figures.

    If the SEBI was capable of controlling properly, then the investment figure should have been at least double of what has been printed big in DNA money and number of investors should have be more than 5 times. Collecting 65000 crores is ashaming with the investable wealth available with HNIs, NRIs, Wealth Mangers, FIIs etc.. who were directly benefited. This wealthy investing circle is well knowledgeable, organised and have excellent tools and resources to access Mutual funds. What about others? Can Bhave give the comparative report and justify how many small and fresh investors have entered into mutual fund investments? What is the use of making impractical policies, just to prove that they are too smart and they know all. IFAs, distributors and AMCs are not nikmaas or fools to raise unnecessary issues.

    It is easy to think of big figures and big blahs.. blahs ..... sitting in AC office with materialistic and wealthy environment and take decisions to please them, but who is there for small and uninitiated investors. Please note, IFAs and DISTRIBUTORS ARE ENTREPRENEURS ON FOOT, who are serving noble purpose to broaden investment reach by taking financial, mental and physical risks. The foolish power misusing leaders sitting in AC offices should properly understand the long term importance of these guts and challenges for the benefit our country and citizens.

    There are so many important issues which needs to be simplified at the earliest. One of the most urgent issue is making common applications, formalities and routine matters in simple format to serve all all funds. The organised distributors serving wealthy and regular investors get compensated for this complexities, but others drag this heavy burden in silence.

    Mobiles and so many common utility products are reached every person, then what is short in mutual funds to acheive this. Does Bhave and his team have ever overdriven their brains to understands this missing link? Mr. Gopal tried to fight for this and SEBI has made him behave like untouchable.

    REPLY

    Madhusudan Thakkar

    In Reply to Hari Baldawa 1 decade ago

    During same period ULIPs of Life Insurance companies have shown BIG growth at the cost of mutual funds.Why our policy makers are silent on Lakhs of Crores remaining IDLE in savings bank account.

    Paressh

    1 decade ago

    There are number of investors currently investing in mfs through distributors way.And AMCs have to pay something them.Its indirectly affecting their revenue.They have to maintain ihe required infrastructure,salaries to there staffs and so on.....If they can't provide sufficient resources it will definitely affect the returns and in turn harm the investors more than that of current entry load of 2.25%.

    Paressh

    1 decade ago

    I think Mr. Bhave is carring some bad mutual funds,may be advised by any of the advisor.

    Madhusudan Thakkar

    1 decade ago

    During recent interview with Mini Menon of Bloomberg UTV[The excerpts of this is published in today's DNA] Bhave has also once again justified ban on entry loads by giving frivolous arguments. There appears to severe disconnect between people like him and Media[Except Money Life] and people who are at ground Zero. .Why are MPs silent on this issue? why there is no serious discussion in Parliament?.When we talk of "retail participation" in India's growth story. How will common man participate without distributor.Earning 1-2% commission is CRIME in our country.

    Roopsingh

    1 decade ago

    http://bit.ly/9i3Pa2
    This link of economic times article clearly states what SEBI official Mr VAidhyanathan thinks about IFAs-he quoted them as BARKING DOGS-
    he is man who looks to matters concerned to MF and FII investments-so we can guess what is cooked in SEBI by such people who try to be dearer to FII by easing norms for their dollors and treat their country brothers as barking dogs-

    Roopsingh

    1 decade ago



    If Mr Vaidhyanathan sitting in AC ofice and calling IFAs and its upporters as dogs-then he must be sent to get applications directly from MF investors and his salary should be banned-
    the new law shaould be that he will get his FEES from invetsors on business procured by him-even if this looks funny-then he should be incentivised for AUM accumulated in all amc'x every month-the month in which fund outflow is more then inflow-he should not be paid a penny-If this type of rule is formulated for all concerned officials who are MIS regulating the MF industry-then ONLY HE AND HIS COORDINATES will realise the real situation-
    If he is so confident of his IDEALOGY-he should accept this challenge -IF HE CANT ACCEPT_HE SHOULD APPOLOGISE for calling IFAS as DOGS-
    To read this-pl visit recent interview of Mr Vaidhyanathan published in ECONOMIC TIMES where he quoted IFAs as barking dogs-

    sameer

    1 decade ago

    What is to be said or done SEBI / AMFI are here to stay as a manager / damager only to make things easy for investors. If all the distributor paid STT(sebi transaction tax) out of the brokerage / incentive we all could by peace with sebi / amfi. We all must understand that there is more than meets the eye.There is something that we all are not aware of for sudden measure for mutual fund and insurance industry.We all cannot take this sudden change and were thing will end up, as financial products are sold not purchased in India.

    sunnny

    1 decade ago

    Now a days if investor comes to me who is not willing to pay fees or less than my threshhold,
    I gave them name and address of Mr.Bhave stating that he is your maseeha and willing to help you going out of way.
    The extent of direct damage he has done to distributors is really bad but more so indirect damage he has done to retail investors is very big. the impact will be really bad.
    No one is willing to service them as there is no compensation left for him.
    Mr. Bhave please read basic economics or a book called WORLD IS FLAT.... Any way no point in breaking head on stone who is not going to listen.

    Madhusudan Thakkar

    1 decade ago

    According to today's "Mint" C B Bhave has written to finance ministry that asking to appoint his his successor a MONTH BEFORE he steps down.One of the potential candidate is U.K Sinha,chairman of UTI.Past experience shows that people from UTI & LIC are pragmatic and understand ground reality.Damodaran and G.Bajpai were from UTI and LIC and under them mutual fund industry grew by leaps and bounds. LET US HOPE FOR THE BEST.

    REPLY

    sunnny

    In Reply to Madhusudan Thakkar 1 decade ago

    Mr. MT--- Dont forget the root of the whole problem is damodaran and not bhave.
    He is the one without too much thinking given a no load invesment option to the investor who wants to go direct.
    what a stupidity if distributor wants to discount his copensation then it is ill legal and called as passbacks or kickbacks and the same investor can go to mf and buy without any price. very funny...
    I think damodaran should be blamed for the problem.
    And funniest part is now he is now on the ING board which is a amc itself

    Deepak R khemani

    In Reply to Madhusudan Thakkar 1 decade ago

    I don't think that is possible as Mr. Sinha has already been appointed as chairman of SEBI although if it were to happen then it would be great for the IFA Community and the mutual fund industry as a whole

    Madhusudan Thakkar

    In Reply to Deepak R khemani 1 decade ago

    Deepak Ji is high time that AMFI is dismantled.It has remained silent on" EMOTIONAL ATYACHAR" of distributors.

    Deepak R Khemani

    In Reply to Deepak R khemani 1 decade ago

    Sorry guys typo, it should read CHAIRMAN OF AMFI in the above para and not chairman of SEBI, sorry again

    sunny

    1 decade ago

    exceelent very good

    RAMESHKUMAR GP

    1 decade ago

    THERE IS LOT OF SIMILARITY B/W MR BHAVE &MR KALMADI ,BOTH ARE EGOISTIC ,CORRUPT ,SELFISH PERSONS ,THEY HAVE DONE EVERYING FOR THEIR SELF INTEREST BY MISUSING &MISGUIDING INVESTOR/PUBLIC.ITS A CURSE THAT WE ARE VICTIMS OF THESE BUROCRATES&POLITICIANS.

    sameer

    1 decade ago

    Its time the finances ministry needs to get a new think tank for SEBI.. Every new person as SEBI head only wants to out perfome the other.

    REPLY

    RAMESHKUMARGP

    In Reply to sameer 1 decade ago

    sameer its one fool wants to out perform other fool in this we all victims .

    fundResearch

    1 decade ago

    Please go through this link

    http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/opin...

    REPLY

    Roopsingh

    In Reply to fundResearch 1 decade ago

    Mr Fundresearch-i know what kind of news are highlighted in economic times-they fully ""EDIT" the comment and dont put it if that does not suit them-they put only those comments which are favourable to them-they are a sold out magazine to Ad agencies and vested interest-i have several times tried to put comments in economictimes-but my all hard efforts to put my emotions get evoparated because my comment does not suit to editor-it is like SARKARI MEDIA-it is never comparable with MONEYLIFE_so pl dont dare to paste such useless links-

    Madhusudan Thakkar

    In Reply to Roopsingh 1 decade ago

    Media has spared no efforts to paint entire distributor community as villains. Like word "Secular" the word Distributor is twisted by media in showing that they are on side of people.I agree with Roopsingh Ji that Moneylife is the only journal/site which understands ground reality.Please inform other friends to visit this site for "TRUE PICTURE"

    nishi rotkar

    In Reply to fundResearch 1 decade ago

    i think some of the comments on this article are sponsored by SEBI.

    fundresarch, i dont know what kind of research u have done on mutual funds.
    the link u have given is from economic times. i have posted a comment on that article, but they have no guts to post it.

    3 fold rise in AMCs profit is due to exploitation of unorganised distributor community. if u cut the salary / wages of employees in any company by 1/3 or 1/4 ur profits is going to rise by many folds.

    but the rise in profit of the AMCs does not indicate that ALL IS WELL.

    monil daru

    1 decade ago

    IFA MUST DEMAND FOR THE UP FRONT BROKERAGE AGAIN & MUST FIGHT FOR IT WITH A UNIQUE WAY.PLEASE DECLARE THE MF INDUSTRY AUM BEFORE & AFTER AUGUST 2009 & TILL AUGUST 2010.

    SEBI’s sordid double standards

    SEBI’s rejection of MCX-SX’s application to start equity trading, not only stifles much-needed fresh thinking, competition and innovation, but draws attention to SEBI’s own sordid ethical standards

    That the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) rejected MCX Stock Exchange's (MCX-SX) application to launch the equity segment was no surprise. Nor is the MCX-SX's decision to fight back. The regulation of demutualised bourses remains a contentious issue, despite being referred to several committees. But it is obvious that the narrow and illiquid Indian capital market urgently needs to get rid of a score of defunct, parasitic, regional bourses and permit fresh thinking, competition and innovation which MCX-SX can inject. Whether this happens or not will be decided by the courts, but there are some intriguing angles to the entire controversy.

    For starters, does India, whose economic growth is attracting so much foreign attention, support entrepreneurship, or do we secretly revel in discrediting our own success stories? Will we ever support open competition or cripple businesses on the whims of self-serving netas and babus?

    On 31st August, MCX launched the Singapore Mercantile Exchange (SMX). It should have been a proud moment, but the domestic war with SEBI cast a dark shadow. On 23rd September, SEBI rejected MCX-SX's application to launch equity trading saying it was 'not fit and proper' and 'dishonest' to boot. Isn't it ironical that India, which ranks a low 84th on Transparency International's corruption perception index, took the high moral ground, to discredit a management that Singapore, which ranks No 3 in terms of transparency, found fit enough to launch its first international, pan-Asian derivatives exchange? Singapore is not alone. MCX runs the multi-asset, multi-access Bahrain Financial Exchange. It is in the process of setting up multi-asset exchanges in Mauritius and Botswana (called Bourse Africa). It also successfully launched, and handed over, the Dubai Gold and Commodity Exchange.

    There are domestic successes as well. The flagship Multi Commodity Exchange (MCX) is by far the market leader in commodity derivatives; MCX-SX was a leader in currency derivatives (jointly regulated by SEBI); it runs the National Spot Exchange Ltd which trades agricultural commodities; the Indian Energy Exchange which trades electricity and IBS Forex, is its inter-bank forex exchange platform. No other exchange group has achieved so much so fast in a competitive environment. And there are no reports of other regulators having problems with MCX either.

    None of this mattered to the SEBI's whole-time member, while rejecting the case of MCX-SX with 68 pages of hair-splitting.

    He found that MCX and Financial Technologies were 'acting in concert'. He discovered that the warrants issued to promoters (for the value they sacrificed by shrinking promoters' capital to meet SEBI's norms) had economic value even though such warrants earned no dividends, have no voting rights and cannot be converted into shares unless SEBI rules change. It is almost as if SEBI knows that its ridiculously low 5% cap on individual shareholding will have to be increased to the 15% or 26% that is permitted in the commodity and currency derivatives markets. Were that to happen, MCX's promoters would legitimately want to convert warrants and enhance their holding. SEBI wants to kill any such possibility.

    Interestingly, the National Stock Exchange (NSE), an opaque and secretive, virtual monopoly basked in high valuations that were possible because the regulator gave it plenty of time for equity dilution without imposing the restriction it did on MCX-SX. But MCX-SX was systematically cornered.

    First, SEBI allowed NSE to subsidise currency derivatives through the high fees charged in the equity segment. MCX-SX suffered huge losses, while the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) simply shut its currency derivatives segment within two months. The newly launched USE (United Stock Exchange) is also boasting market leadership without a revenue model. Neither the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) nor SEBI bothered to explain how they permitted a fourth currency derivatives exchange whose high trading volumes translate into direct losses since, like the NSE, it does not collect transaction charges. What happens when its net worth slips below Rs150 crore? USE must be hoping the Competition Commission will rescue it by ruling in favour of MCX-SX on NSE's predatory pricing.

    When the loss-making MCX-SX was denied permission to launch new segments, it couldn't possibly find new investors and was forced to reduce capital to meet SEBI norms. Stunningly, the idea allegedly came from JN Gupta, SEBI's executive director in charge of secondary markets, who used to be a commodity trader in Kazakhstan before returning to SEBI. The SEBI order simply ignores Mr Gupta's role in 'misleading' MCX-SX into opting for capital reduction.

    If SEBI had higher regulatory standards than Bahrain, Singapore and Dubai, its action against MCX-SX would have somehow seemed plausible. SEBI's actions appear malicious when we see how the same regulator buried the cases against the National Securities Depository Ltd (NSDL) in the IPO (initial public offering) scam of 2006, in order to absolve chairman CB Bhave of taint or even constructive liability in that scam (he was chairman of NSDL then). The SEBI board went so far as to discredit a two-member committee of its own board directors and declared their orders 'void'. In the process, it also ignored a legal opinion by Justice JS Verma, one of India's most respected Chief Justices of the Supreme Court.

    In throwing the rulebook at MCX-SX, SEBI is essentially saying, "show me the person and I will show you the rule."

    Why would SEBI be so determined to finish off MCX-SX? MCX has openly accused it of favouring NSE whose high valuation is at a serious risk (not to mention the stunning salaries of its top three executives) when up against a serious competitor. Remember, MCX has beaten NSE in every segment where they have been in direct competition: commodities, currency and energy.

    Then there are the personal relationships. When CB Bhave was desperate to leave SEBI in the early 1990s, under chairman DR Mehta, NSE gave him a berth at NSDL. Mr Bhave was thus in the happy position of writing the statute that ensured that the depository was not entirely under SEBI regulation; he used it to his advantage to expand into other areas without seeking SEBI approval.

    It may be clever to ensure that rules and ethical standards are flexible enough to be twisted at convenience. But sadly, it makes for very dubious regulation.
     

  • Like this story? Get our top stories by email.

    User 

    COMMENTS

    Gaurav

    1 decade ago

    The only person who disagrees with the bias issue seems to be Monika Halan in today's Mint, besides NSE/NSDL spokesperson Ajay Shah. See Monika's piece which seems to directly attack Sucheta Dalal's views: "Those that attempt to manage news do so in a manner that creates impressions." http://www.livemint.com/2010/10/12193836...
    Coming from her, who has lot of credibility, Sucheta should write a proper rebuttal based on facts. Gaurav

    REPLY

    K B Patil

    In Reply to Gaurav 1 decade ago

    On reading Gaurav's comments, I visited the link and read Monika Halan's article. Except saying some goody goody things about the GRREAT Mr. Bhave, she has done nothing to rebut Ms. Sucheta Dalal. I was quite annoyed about the wishy washy article in Mint and promptly commented in Mint about what I thought of the article.

    sucheta

    In Reply to Gaurav 1 decade ago

    Hey Gaurav. Thanks for this posting. And you see to be right about her target. Unfortunately, I don't write rebuttal's to what other journalists think or their seemingly guileless rhetorical questions. I write articles based on facts. That requires homework not some strange agenda.
    regards Sucheta

    Rajesh

    In Reply to Gaurav 1 decade ago

    Is this Monica Halan the same person who used to work for Outlook and was famous for her highest paid ULIPs schemes? Off course later she did an about turn.
    @Gaurav...I think if Monica has the guts to name names of journalist that are writing against her 'favorite' babus, then it would be apt for Sucheta to write.

    Chandresh Shah

    1 decade ago

    This hard hitting article on MCX-SX would have touched many raw nerves in the babudom. We as a country should be ashamed of such malpractices, Excellent. Keep it up

    nkb

    1 decade ago

    the article exposed the relationship between nse and some officers of sebi. So far I have not saw any irruglaraties, violation and dishonesty by mcx in commodities trading. Even RBI and FMC has not found any problem with the worikng of MCX. The government and its insistution should go by procedure and they should remember that law is above the all.

    BARJESH SINGHAL

    1 decade ago

    there should br some regulator to regulate SEBI.

    AJAY DIWAN

    1 decade ago

    I FULLY AGREE WITH AUTHOR. SURPRISINGLY, FINANCE MINISTRY HAS NOT GIVEN ANY REMARKS ON SEBI'S DECISION.

    Naga

    1 decade ago

    1. Calling RSEs as parasite is highly condemnable and without any facts and figures. No PSU Bank has subscribed to their equity though many of them are still profit making and dividend paying. lets not beat somebody because he is weak and may be because i am capable of beating only him . . . .
    2. Salary structure of the employees is an internal matter and it is better left to the stake holders. commenting about it makes us think that there may be some element of a jealousy factor creeping in. when it comes to compensation, only perfomance matters. If the perfomance is not upto the mark, let the shareholders ask the question. not us.
    3. Competition in all forms are most welcome as long as people play by the rule. it helps the investor and brings the cost down for the customer.

    REPLY

    kishore ghiya

    In Reply to Naga 1 decade ago

    Shri naga, i am thankful to you for agrreing to competition, the new small entrants will play by rule or they will be thrown out by the persons who invested or dealt with them.
    RSE have been defunct because of monopoly of two big exchnages and actually they are very much in the market by becoming brokers of two big exchanges the correct word is that because of sebi policy they have become slaves of bse and nse and not having money power to lobby.
    Delhi stock exchange is trying since last 2 years to start trading at national level but it can only be done if they are given national level status and who is stopping ofcouse mr bhave and mr ravinarayan, they cannot stand competition.all rses are daily trading and their percentage of delivery based volume is much higher than main brokers of nse who are busy making money in margin funding. A broker who turns money lender and earn heavy interest.You wnat this big brokers to give you investor service pl forget it their margin funding income and properitory income is mindboggling and theeir LAMBE HATH unless they are chopped nothing will happen.
    Brokers who do properitory trading their names must be put on nse websites and honest fii and mutual fund manager will be first to balck list then and in one year most of their retail investors will leave them to genuine service provider broker.A small neighbourhood chit will be easily exposed and will go out of business. But relaince power ipo lead managers for riggin up grey market and then killing new investor gets no penalty why because biradari apnewala hai na.
    kishore ghiya mob 982527857

    K B Patil

    1 decade ago

    The audacity and partisan behaviour of Mr. Bhave is astounding. Some good news is that MCX is fighting back. When MCX does start the exchange, that will be a resounding slap for Mr. Bhave.

    ram

    1 decade ago

    dear madam, the list of misdeeds is long...
    how to control them, can cbi do something ?
    or it will be brother vs brother

    why not MCX acquire defunct RSE which are available in quantity
    or acquire derecognised RSE and get it recognised

    ur comment on defunct SE ...it is because of sebi's inaction in issuing exit order to already derecogniised 5 SE , must be big boss expecting something to issue / sign exit order

    Why SEBI board is silent and not taking action for not implementing its decision taken on its board meeting held on 4-12-2008 (RSE Exit)

    Why it took 2-3 year to come out with exit policy? Sebi is supposed to be ready with solution/ answer what if any SE fail to demutualise or get derecognised or opt for derecognition but big boss was sleeping ?

    Why RSE demutualised though no business model need be investigated specially when Chidambaram, then FM said where is the need for 3rd SE

    new investors got struck...? or circus of sebi...(demutualised SE) why any one put money when there is no liquidity as well business model?

    bse investors got struck already 4 years but no listing, no self listing inspite of 10n cr paidup capital ?

    NSE vs other RSE (15% vs 5% limit per investor) is it fair ?

    IRDA..?
    NSDL..?
    SATYAM ?
    May be SEBI is planning to make century (100 rank) in Transparency International's corruption perception index .....keep it up sebi ...we indians r proud of u....as u r braking record after records and creating new records

    hope cbi will wake up... or will it be brother vs brother

    RAMESHKUMAR GP

    1 decade ago

    BHAVE &FM (POLITICIANS )PLAYIING HAVOC ,THESE PEOPLE ARE SELFISH &ABSOLUTE CORRUPT &THESE PEOPLE IN POWER ONLY FOR PRO RICH &THEY ARE ACTING AGAINSTSELF EMPLOYED MIDDLE CLASS LIKE US ,WE HAVE TO TEACH THEM NEXT ELECTION &FIGHT JOINTLY IN COURTOF LAW AGAINST THEIR MISDEEDS.

    Sumit

    1 decade ago

    we make corrupt cricketer Md.Azaharuddin MP and kill RTI activists as a usual practice this is Shining India of 21st century.

    i salute the spirit of India.......

    Roopsingh

    1 decade ago

    friends-when Suresh Kalmadi can easily escape any inquiry from PM or or Soniya madam(and can move and take equal adjacent seat to them even after total exposure of CWG-then every one like Bhave can be spared-only thief remained are common street theives who thefts to get bread for hungry kids and which are beaten badly and bravely by police-Mera Bharat Mahan(sirf corruption me)baki sab me Barbad-god dont give next birth to me in such corrupt country

    REPLY

    rahul

    In Reply to Roopsingh 1 decade ago

    SEBI is one of the worst regulator ,otherwise how can they allow brokers to charge such a high interest and why they can't force brokers to pay interest on clients' credit amount.I expect moneylife to take up this issue

    surendra

    In Reply to Roopsingh 1 decade ago

    Kalmadi! my dear this is time for "earn money a lot and give a share for safty"
    But shame on us we people can not decieve to earn.

    v subramanian

    1 decade ago

    A lot of misdeeds of Bhave, SEBI chairman, is getting exposed in the media. But the government does not seem to care about these revelations. Probably people in the government are taken care of by Bhave.

    Santhana

    1 decade ago

    Bhave if has any decency should resign. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. He escaped as NSDL chairman for his ommissions and commissions and has been hand in glove with NSE top brass and it is I scratch your back and you scratch mine with them. why then the transaction costs on NSE are the highest in the world. NSE makes super profits, to pay their arrogant bosses multi crore salaries at the cost of investors.

    Rahul

    1 decade ago

    It seems and observed that SEBI is notg protecting Small Investors but it helps particulat exchange and particular set of brokers.

    1. Lot of insider trading , every can see it but SEBI is not able to find any single case

    2. Brokers doing lot of wrong to investors.i.e. selling their demat socks by misusing POA, Lot of delay payment charges(strange if investor makes 1 day delay broker charges 18% interest but broker using investors' money without paying anything), many unexplained charges ,misuse of properietory trading, Bogus research report to distribute stock,warehousing of stock

    list is endless but SEBI not able to do anything. In fact many brokers earn more by default payment charges rather than brokerage. Why can't SEBi ask brokers to pay interest to client for their credit balance?

    Sebi put control on distributors' commision but ultimately big brokers are getting big commission fromAMC under various schemes and expenses reimbursement format

    REPLY

    Roopsingh

    In Reply to Rahul 1 decade ago

    Dear friend-i lost a big amount due to wickedness of my earlier broker India infoline who used to charge illegally 18% and 24% per annum but who used to pressure for selling after 5 days-(it clearly means they were not funding the account holder-and this Kamineys used to levy interest from day one-this is total looting of investor-and they sold my stocks at least rates of 17000 levels-(i kud have 1.5 lacs at present rates)-but these people are hand in gloves with SEBI-and continue their loting interupptedly-i closed my account with them when i felt helpless-but now i have 3 accounts with 3 different brokers-and i feel it is a better in many ways-if one makes harrasment at the critical juncture-we can shift to other broker and avoid losses-i have learned a hard lesson of investing and trusting only one broker-so my advice is that dont stick to one but have some spare broking point-you may take services of BMA wealth creators or Share khan and kick off this bastard India infoline

    rajendra

    1 decade ago

    C.B.Bhave seems to be a great lobbyst, so he is protected from every failure and like suresh kalmadi, is sticking to his chair shamelessly.

    Mirror, mirror on the wall…

    Why CB Bhave’s tenure as SEBI chairman will go down as among the worst in nearly two decades

    By his own admission, Bhave often looks in the mirror to ask: "Am I proud of what this guy did today?" The answer invariably is a resounding yes, Bhave had told this newspaper some time ago. He also said, "Nothing else bothers me, as your conscience will never lie".

    - Business Standard, 14...

    Premium Content
    Monthly Digital Access

    Subscribe

    Already A Subscriber?
    Login
    Yearly Digital Access

    Subscribe

    Moneylife Magazine Subscriber or MAS 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
  • 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

    online financial advisory
    Pathbreakers
    Pathbreakers 1 & Pathbreakers 2 contain deep insights, unknown facts and captivating events in the life of 51 top achievers, in their own words.
    online financia advisory
    The Scam
    24 Year Of The Scam: The Perennial Bestseller, reads like a Thriller!
    Moneylife Online Magazine
    Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance
    financial magazines online
    Stockletters in 4 Flavours
    Outstanding research that beats mutual funds year after year
    financial magazines in india
    MAS: Complete Online Financial Advisory
    (Includes Moneylife Online Magazine)
    FREE: Your Complete Family Record Book
    Keep all the Personal and Financial Details of You & Your Family. In One Place So That`s Its Easy for Anyone to Find Anytime
    We promise not to share your email id with anyone