India

Daily India: A Golden Future? and more

In this briefing:

  1. A Golden Future?
  2. Bandhan Bank To Buy GRUH: A Pricey Bank/NBFC Deal
  3. Uranium – About to Enter Its Own Nuclear Winter
  4. Asian Frontier Monitor: One Belt New Road – Here Comes America
  5. A Pricey Deal in Hindsight, Walmart? India Reviews Policy – Amazon, Walmart May Need to Rejig Model

1. A Golden Future?

The ability to have stable prices has great value.

According to Edward Gibbon, the decaying Roman Empire exhibited five hallmarks: 1) concern with displaying affluence instead of building wealth; 2) obsession with sex; 3) freakish and sensationalistic art; 4) widening disparity between the rich and the poor; and 5) increased demand to live off the state. Most DMs and many EMs display similar symptoms today because fiscal and monetary policies, the foundation of both ancient and modern societies, are identical: increasing welfare outlays by artificially inflating the money supply. The Roman Empire took more than four centuries to destroy what the Republic had built in the previous five centuries because clipping and debasing coins inflated currency supplies slowly. Entering debits and credits in the books of commercial and central banks is much more efficient. 

2. Bandhan Bank To Buy GRUH: A Pricey Bank/NBFC Deal

Screenshot%202019 01 09%20at%205.40.22%20pm

Bandhan Bank (BANDHAN IN) (“BBL”) and Gruh Finance (GRHF IN) (“GRUH”) announced together on January 7th that their respective boards have considered and approved a Scheme of Amalgamation where Bandhan Bank will be the acquiring entity and GRUH Finance will become the acquired entity. All media sources suggest it was something of a surprise to GRUH personnel and management.

The exchange ratio has been set at 568 Bandhan Bank shares per 1000 GRUH Finance shares. 

Following the announcement, the shares of Bandhan Bank and GRUH Finance have declined by 4.8% and 16.4% respectively. The deal is trading at a gross/annualised spread of 10%/13+% assuming a deal completion date in late September as of Tuesday’s close (but not assuming any dividends). 

The deal is conditional on receiving approvals from the Reserve Bank of India (RBI), Competition Commission India (CCI), National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) and other relevant regulatory authorities. 

Data Point

Data in the Data Point

The Deal
Scheme of Amalgamation
Acquiring Entity 
Bandhan Bank Ltd 
Acquired Entity
GRUH Finance Ltd 
Terms 
Exchange ratio of 568 Bandhan Bank shares for every 1000 GRUH Finance shares 
Conditions

Receipt of Approvals from the Reserve Bank of India (RBI), Competition Commision India (CCI), National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Ahmedabad Bench and Kolkata Bench, Securities and Exchange Board of India BSE Limited, the National Stock Exchange of India Limited and other regulatory authorities as may be necessary.  

75% Shareholder approval by each company’s shareholders will be required as well. Bandhan’s result is a foregone conclusion. GRUH’s is not.

Dividends?
Not mentioned.
Source: Company Announcements

Indicative Timeline

Date

Event

7 Jan 2019
Announcement Date
30 Apr 2019
RBI Approval
8 May 2019
CCI Approval
30 Sep 2019
Possible Close Date

Note that Indian Schemes of Amalgamation also require 75% shareholder approval from all combining parties. The vote for Bandhan shareholders is a foregone conclusion as the promoter Bandhan Financial Holdings has 82.3%. The GRUH vote is not certain but HDFC has 57.8% of the 75% required. 


This deal is really pricey, and some shareholders of Bandhan Bank who will get diluted have voted with their feet. It is a pretty great exit from GRUH for HDFC. While the prima facie evidence suggests that the deal was done to appease the RBI and get closer to the promoter shareholder limit required in October last year, the shareholder structure and CEO Ghosh’s own personal history suggests that neither the 40% rule nor the salary freeze are real hurdles (though the branch opening freeze may be something BBL wants to lift).

3. Uranium – About to Enter Its Own Nuclear Winter

Figure%201

  • Quantifying nuclear statistics with substantial discrepancies
  • LT contracts & speculative hoarding driving recent 40% spot price increase
  • Primary/secondary Uranium supplies currently 112% of 2017 demand
  • Uranium supply deficits extremely unlikely before 2022
  • Global Uranium demand to fall 25-40% by 2050
  •  Primary Uranium sector LT SELL

We have independently audited global nuclear construction statistics in order to determine future Uranium demand.  Although near-term statistics match those in the public domain, long-term demand determined via construction pipeline illustrates substantial discrepancies.  Compiling planned plant construction, operational extensions, nameplate upgrades, versus decommissioning announcements/events, and in many cases, public policy inertia; has led us to believe that despite historical primary supply shortages, global nuclear demand peaked in 2006.

Since plateauing and despite strong Chinese growth, nuclear power generation has fallen <2% over the past two decades, a decline that is predicted to accelerate as a number of developed and developing nations pursue other energy options.

The macro-trend not replacing existing nuclear infrastructure means (dependent on assumptions), according to our calculations, global uranium demand will decrease between 20 to 40% by 2050.

As opposed to signifying a fundamental change in underlying demand, we believe that recent Uranium price increases are the result of producers closing primary operations, and substituting production with purchases on the spot market to meet long-term contract obligations.  In addition, hedge funds are buying physical uranium in order to realise profits on potential future commodity price increases.  Critically, we determine that primary and secondary supplies are more than sufficient to meet forecast demand over the next four to five years; before taking into account substantial existing global uranium stocks, some of which are able to re-enter the spot market at short notice.

4. Asian Frontier Monitor: One Belt New Road – Here Comes America

Opic%20portfolio%20composition

In our third report in the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) or One Belt One Road (OBOR) series, we examine a brand-new US strategic initiative to finance emerging markets economies, including OBOR, African, and Latin American countries.

The on-going trade war between China and the US makes the issue very political. Rightfully so, we believe the creation of the International Development Finance Corporation (“IDFC”) could be politically-motivated, but IDFC is no competition to the BRI as the latter deploys much greater funding (about USD40bn a year).

However, we see the merits of IDFC and the positive effects on Emerging Asia. After all, more competition for influence and more fund flow will help fund projects, and, perhaps, help reduce poverty (if good governance is observed). We also expect IDFC’s USD60bn fund to create more investable projects for institutional investors and lower funding cost for countries that need large infrastructure funding and countries that have been suspicious of the BRI such as India, Indonesia, the Philippines, Vietnam, and Sri Lanka.

5. A Pricey Deal in Hindsight, Walmart? India Reviews Policy – Amazon, Walmart May Need to Rejig Model

Screen%20shot%202019 01 08%20at%2012.28.18%20pm

Would Wal Mart Stores (WMT US) have paid USD16 bn last year for Flipkart, a leading online Indian retailer, if the recent clarification on India’s policy on FDI in e-commerce were in place back then? Foreign owned online retailers in India ( Amazon.com Inc (AMZN US) , Wal Mart Stores (WMT US) and Alibaba Group Holding (BABA US)  ) will need to rejig their operating models and may face prospects of slower growth and even more distant breakeven targets, if the Indian Government is indeed determined to enforce its policy that e-commerce ‘Marketplaces’ operate only as platforms for third party vendors. Unsurprisingly, Amazon.com Inc (AMZN US) and Wal Mart Stores (WMT US) have reportedly teamed up to lobby the government on these regulations. 

The Indian Government had posted a one-page circular on Dec 26th giving further clarifications to its existing policy on foreign owned e-commerce entities. The detailing of policy specifics seems to be an attempt to enforce the existing policy restrictions on foreign owned online retailers; compliance has so far been sketchy. India do not allow majority foreign ownership in multi brand retail stores and online retailers are allowed to operate only as ‘Marketplaces’ and not as B2C entities. With national elections due in next few months, the Government cannot ignore demands from domestic lobby groups to reign in free play by deep pocketed foreign operators that have been hurting local retailers.

In the detailed note below, we present (1) an overview of the regulatory framework and restrictions under which online retailers operate in India (2) the updated policy and its impact on operating models of Amazon and Walmart in India (3) expectations for India’s e-commerce players. Also, there is a likely gainer from all these – a listed Indian player aspiring to trump global majors in India’s online retail turf.

Get Straight to the Source on Smartkarma

Smartkarma supports the world’s leading investors with high-quality, timely, and actionable Insights. Subscribe now for unlimited access, or request a demo below.