Uncommon Health From Commonwealth

Posted by Sanjeev Pandiya On Sunday, January 22, 2012

The Economics of Corruption I was barely ten, but the memory is very clear. There was this news headline about how a huge mansion had come up in the middle of Bihar’s poorest district, shortly after someone finished his tenure as Defence Minister. The amount (speculated upon) stuck in my mind; at a time when the only car in town, the HM Ambassador, used to cost Rs.18,000, the mansion was estimated at Rs.20 cr. Today, nobody remains: not the Minister, not his trade mark white Ambassador, not even his mansion (I think). Bihar is now a better place, although I don’t know so much about that particular district. Politicians don’t usually make good investors, especially politicians who have misused power to get money. Most people first make money, and then find power. That is why we are mostly talking about moneyed people (mis)using power, like bosses in corporate life. However, in the case of politicians, who get where they are because they are purveyors of power, there is then no controlling their greed, once they start to get their hands on the money. It takes a long time, and a very sophisticated politician, who has been in power for very long, before they bring their corrupt instincts under control. The rapaciousness of the earlier Congress Govts, which reached their nadir under Indira Gandhi (ironically, the flag-bearer of Socialism) has been replaced by the gentler versions of Rajiv’s and now Sonia’s governance-focused Govts. Believe me, things will get a lot better under Rahul; I wish he would get married….I worry about the next generation of Gandhis!! That is why it takes time for a democracy to evolve; it is accompanied by the growth of ‘political brands’. In the US, the Kennedys, the Bushes, the Clintons, etc have dominated US democracy, while in India, we have the Gandhis, the Scindias, the Karunanidhis, etc. Wherever a politician gets entrenched, corruption will tend to fall; his thirst for money satiated, he starts to focus on governance. In UP and Tamil Nadu, we have seen this in fast forward. The second tenures of new powers are always lower on the corruption co-efficient, especially if they have lost power once. There are 2 ways to bring down corruption: one, build checks and balances through evolution, or the growth of independent institutions like the media and the judiciary. This, however, has created its own set of strange bedfellows: with the media getting concentrated in the hands of a few, you have newer versions of corruption like ‘paid news’, etc. Two, as ‘political brands’ start to dominate the scene, they will slowly change focus from money/ corruption to governance. It will be a long, slow, almost invisible process, but you will see it happen over a long time. That is why I wish Rahul would get married…. The most hysterical estimates on CWG expenditure put the numbers at $15 bn spent, and about $2 bn stolen. That is about 12%, which is about 10% in the hands of the politician, nett after the middleman’s share. As a % of GDP, it is about the same as the alleged mansion-in-the-middle-of-a-district-in-Bihar. The point is, where does the money go, and does it really do any significant harm to the economy? Oh yes, these are emotive issues at a personal level, which is why they sell a lot of newspapers; but does this do any real, long-term, structural harm? This kind of money has to stay invisible, and that is its biggest priority. So it must be spent as soon as possible; either as consumption, or in real assets, or siphoned abroad, where it lies, profitless, in some Swiss Bank, reducing the cost of international capital. All possibilities have a salubrious effect on their respective economies, which is why some pretty rich and otherwise sensible countries don’t mind keeping ‘dirty money’ in their banks. The rather large amount of black money lying in Indian real estate, has helped keep leverage low, and arrested bubble collapses. A lot of this money is thanks to corruption. The lower leverage improves the debt quality of mortgage lenders like HDFC, besides reducing the cost of capital indirectly. Rentals are always below the cost of mortgage finance, making it easier for those who cannot afford housing. As the old saying goes: “fools build houses, and the wise stay in them”. Benami real estate ends up in the hands of drivers and personal staff (like the driver of the BJP politician, who owns a flat in the Adarsh Housing Society). Benami agricultural land, another favourite investment, is used for sugar cultivation in various North Indian states, creating jobs for landless labourers. In any case, benami holdings have a certain attrition rate as the politician gets older, dies or loses power, whichever is earlier. That is the key selling point of the Swiss Private Bankers. When this kind of money is spent on conspicuous consumption, the economy goes ‘balle balle’. India becomes great and shining, and the moolah is spread across the political class: workers, minions, tractor and jeep owners, paid voters, paid crowds, paid media…in short, a Jawaharlal Nehru Scheme that pretty much covers the entire economy. The 2G Scam is not very different. The money made is real, although just a fraction of the revenues lost by Govt. The mistake the breathless media is making, is in the valuation of the spectrum diverted for personal gain. These values are imputed based on current valuation of spectrum-in-short-supply; if supply were to expand suddenly by the release of such extra spectrum into the open market, prices would drop substantially. But the acquisition values of the cos subsequently taken over, do indicate accurately the kind of money that got made. This, we are agreed, adds upto $10bn, which is 5 times more than the CWG. So what economic impact does such corruption have? At one level, it delayed the consolidation of the Indian Telecom market, creating competition where there would have been none. It allegedly gave some unfair advantage to RCom perhaps, but it doesn’t seem to have been much help. RCom will suffer more damage now to its financial credibility just when it goes into the 3G launch, than it could have ever hoped to gain from cornering spectrum, through fair means or foul. Fragmenting markets, and limiting monopoly power is a laudable objective for regulators generally; except in this case, it was being done by artificially supporting weak players, who sought unfair advantage through corrupt means. But really, how is it any different from the artificial support systems devised by previous Govts for sick public sector units. Right now, in the same Telecom sector, the PSU telcos are running losses of an annualised amount, which equals what the 2G Scam must have given away to the new private telcos…and this is PER YEAR. The economic impact of this, therefore, should be the same as the cost of keeping NTC alive every year. Corruption, therefore, is income like any other. It ranks abreast of Govt wastage, which is a far bigger number. At worst, it is like an indirect tax on the value of goods and services, reducing demand and economic activity in some parts of the economy. It does, however, show up as savings and consequently, investment (into real estate, primarily), so we don’t really know whether the net economic effect is really negative. It increases the Gini co-efficient (the indicator of income inequality), which is politically and socially undesirable. Worse, it is linked to power and hence, is a payoff to the pursuit of power. If we show greater tolerance to the number of affairs that a film star has, it is simply because it seen as driven by ‘democratic’ choice rather than ill-gotten gains. But the former is stealing, and the latter is adultery…both rank the same in St. Peter’s diary!

An Asset Class Called Governance

Posted by Sanjeev Pandiya On Sunday, January 22, 2012

The Case For Selling Gold Against Something For almost a decade, Gold has been the ‘trade of the decade’. Buy the dull metal against almost anything: stocks, currencies, debt, anything but ‘precious commodities’, i.e. commodities in short supply, because India/ China are big incremental users of it. The relative movement of Gold has always been with lower risk/ volatility and it has always given higher risk-adjusted returns. Importantly, Gold was the best place to be in, during the desperate days of late 2008- early 2009. Does it deserve such a standing in the world of Investment? It has no productive use; the only feature that speaks for it, is that its (incremental) supply is not in the hands of man. If some alchemist could suddenly find a way to produce Gold, it would have disastrous consequences for the world economy. The USD used to be the world’s ‘gold’ for a while, until fiscal and monetary indiscipline by the custodians of the Dollar’s reputation, brought about this current pass. So has Gold reached bubble territory? A ‘bubble’ happens when asset prices rise, with a corresponding rise in debt levels, used to buy/ hold the asset. In case of Gold, its prices are rising at a time when worldwide leverage is falling, especially in the developed countries. So the most important defining condition of bubble territory is not met. Hence, you should not expect a sudden collapse in the price of Gold, like it happened in the mid-eighties. But you can expect (and should be prepared for) a slow letting out of air, as its relative movement to some other assets (principally currencies) shows a drop in outperformance. This might even look like a price drop, especially if you think nominally (i.e. in terms of the home currency, say, Euro/ Rupee), but it will not be a bubble collapse. Gold does well when Governance does not. When Nixon delinked the USD from Gold, he gave unlimited cheque-writing powers to the US Fed. The powers got progressively misused, but there was some tolerance, until Greenspan happened. Then came ‘helicopter Ben’, who may have had no intentions of actually dropping Dollar bills from helicopters, but was forced to virtually do the same, since he took over as Governor at the Fed. It took almost a generation, 30 years, for its reputation to catch up, but the USD today is a shadow of its former self, in terms of credibility vs Gold. Has US fiscal and monetary credibility reached its nadir? Is it time to buy this ‘value pick’ called US credibility? Is the US so chastened, that it will give up its entitlements, stop running a (Budget) deficit and get its public debt in order? Already, individual Americans are behaving better, domestic savings are up and private sector leverage is falling, but it will take time to work away the excesses of the past. The US Govt, however, continues to try and spend its way out of trouble. It is trying to replace falling private (domestic) demand, with more debt-fuelled Govt spending. Even as tax revenues fall, and the Govt Revenue Deficit balloons, its Public Debt ratio is doubling in the next 3 years. Yet, the US Govt is not ready to clamp down because its Bond markets have not revolted…yet! So the drunkard is still at the bar, quaffing his 14th peg, and asking for more. The bartender is worried on both counts: can this customer pay his bills, and can he stand steady enough to go home? At some point in time, the bartender will call in the bouncers, usually the foreign country that is subscribing to the deficit in the bond markets. China puts in 8% of its 55% savings rate, into US bonds. That is not a small amount, even though it is reducing steadily. Which brings me to the central question of this column. Gold has to be sold, simply because it has gone up for too long. Maybe it has still not gone too far, but it has gone up for too long….it should be time to worry now! So where in the world has Governance reached its nadir? That would be the country/ currency to buy, against Gold. Let me try a hypothesis: it could be Greece, maybe Argentina (which has twice gone to the cleaners). Who else has a bankrupt Govt, no tax revenues, huge Govt spend and banana republic politics……all set to change!!! In effect, if Bihar was a separate country with its own currency, that is what I am looking for…I would be buying Nitish Kumar’s governance! To make the picture even clearer, I am looking for “the next Indonesia”. Remember Indonesia in 1997: a tinpot dictatorship, huge spending imbalances (both private and public), large real estate investments, all funded with short-term foreign borrowings. The result: food riots, and a currency that went to nothing. An 83% drop in nominal currency rates against the USD, led to a monthly 83% drop in GNP, and a cumulative 43% drop in per capita GDP. Interest Rates went to 65%: in other words, a Great Depression that ensured that the economy in 2005 was still smaller in PPP terms, than it was in 1997. No ageing population, no structural deficiency in demand, yet enormous political and economic upheaval, that will stay embedded in the psyche of its populace (and its politics) for at least a generation to come. India went through something much smaller, but similar in 1991. Remember the Loan Melas of the 80’s and the subsequent NPA crisis of India’s banking sector? From that nadir, which hit us 20 years back, we now claim to have one of the most stable banking sectors in the world, a level of prudence that you don’t see elsewhere in Indian business/ politics. So great disasters create huge psychological scars, which create sudden, corrective behaviours in populations: nobody even whispered about Indonesia, 10 years after the Asian Crisis in 2008. The US saw Paul Volcker in the Fed, shortly after the 1982 recession. The hardliner Guv, who took Fed Funds rates to 14% to combat inflation down from 12.8% to 3.5% is an example of how human behaviours can change dramatically and diametrically (opposite). The profligacy of Indonesia, has been replaced by fiscal and monetary prudence, even as the “next thing to Gold, i.e the USD” is a picture of fiscal and monetary imprudence. These contradictions have been captured in the concept of the “historical process” enunciated by George Soros. One of the behavioural rules of “the historical process” is that every (behavioural) trend reaches an irrational crescendo before completely dying out, or reversing ‘permanently’. The Nazism of Germany was followed by democracy for the next 3 generations. Lebensraum is now a dirty word in Germany. The Berlin Wall came down under one of the most Stalinist leaders of Communism, one who spent his entire life in the KGB. For a generation, India (and Asia) has been terrified of a Forex crisis, which has pushed up savings rates and the propensity to export (forex) surpluses, either through capital flight or through Central Bank investments. So what is the answer to the questions I have posed at the beginning of this column? I do have an (instinctive) answer, but I want to arrive at it through a structured process of exploring all viable alternatives. Somewhere among the basket cases of Govt imprudence lying around the world, is a country that is going to come back very strongly. That country has some intrinsic competitiveness, but has got ‘caught in the crossfire’. Either it was growing, investing into Capex at the wrong time, and suffered an asset-liability mismatch, which has driven it to insolvency (Iceland? Ireland?) Or it had too much savings, and lent it to the wrong part of the world (Austria? China? Japan?) Such a country would be now gritting its teeth and putting in place an attitude towards savings and investment (or borrowing and consumption), that will see its governance improve dramatically. It would help if the said country was currently in serious crisis, because its currency/ bond markets would be reflecting that. Otherwise, there is no point in taking a contrarian position on Gold (i.e. sell it). If you buy Gold, at least you will be rich(er) in Dollar terms; so what if the currency is discredited by the end of the decade? You can always shift to the US and enjoy yourself…. Until next time then! Sanjeev Pandiya teaches, trades and writes. spandiya@hotmail.com. Dying, dying….debt!!! The Destiny of Japan Let’s see now…Japan now sells more adult diapers than baby diapers. It total population peaked in 2004, its working population peaked in 2009 and it has 40,000 people above the age of 100. Its population is set to drop by 40 mn people (30%) by 2050. That same 25% is the proportion of the population above 65. Total debt, household, private and public combined is running at a whopping 530% of GDP, up from a bad enough 387% in 1989. At 1.4% Interest cost, it means that 7.4% of GDP goes for Interest payments, while household savings, that big generator of worldwide surpluses, is down to 2% of GDP. In fact, it is expected to enter dissavings by 2014, as retirees start to pull in their savings. A banker once told me that one of the indicators of (corporate) Bankruptcy is the no of CFOs a co has had in the last 3 years. If we use the same ratio for Japan, it has seen 7 Finance Ministers in the last 3 years. Even our Real Estate cos have not done as well… Now look at Govt finances. 28% of revenue goes to Interest, at an average Interest rate of 1.4%. If the rate doubles, the Govt is now spending 56% of its revenue on Interest; at 40%, you are a basket case equivalent to Argentina, Greece or Zimbabwe. Quite simply, the zero interest rate regime is a one-way street; like the famed Hotel California of yore, “you can check out any time you like, but you can never leave”. So how do you get out of a mess like this? I fancy myself as a turnaround expert, but I can’t see a civilised solution to this mess. The Austrian (school) economist would prescribe debt destruction on an unprecedented scale, or a ‘reset’, wherein the savers who ‘invested’ the excess savings (say, 400% of the 530% of GDP outstanding as debt) just see a gargantuan (sovereign) default. There are many ways of doing this: • Inflate away the debt. This seems obvious and to many, the only solution. The only problem with this, is that a sudden 400% inflation (assuming the same human activity in the economy, with some 400% of GDP added to the stock of money) will have a multiplier. So the actual inflation seen may go into the 1000s, which will completely erode the credibility of Govt, raising Interest Rates into the stratosphere. Once that happens, Interest Rate increases will far outstrip the Inflation Rates, creating a vicious spiral, that will go out of control, Zimbabwe (and Argentina) style. Remember, I am compressing all the above numbers into a short time frame just for ease of understanding. This will actually have to be stretched over at least a decade, if not more, to bring down the average annual inflation indicators to sensible numbers. Exactly when the number gets past the red line, triggering panic among Japanese savers/ investors is the dangerous end-game that is awaiting some legendary Finance Minister….a Bismarck to young Japan, a Hitler to old Japan. • Otherwise, after Bismarck….Hitler! I say Bismarck, because one of the lesser things he is known for is the creation of the Welfare State, which started this business of robbing the unborn voter/ Peter to pay the ageing voter/Paul. If the country just initiated the voting reform of disenfranchising the aged voter (above 65, say), that would be a start. From there to the fascism of Hitler. Just shoot the problem, or send it to the gas chambers of Auschwitz…the savers of Japan, who are now mostly over 65, have trusted the Govt with their money. If you want to default, and still remain in power, you have to do away with your creditor. The $20 trn that needs to be defaulted on by a $5 trn economy, belongs to a set of people who have been saving 32% of GDP for the last 35 years. They have already been getting near zero interest, so they are used to being gypped for the last 20 years at least. Now, when they start asking for their principal back, why not just shoot them? One way of doing that is to make medical services very expensive (with steep service taxes, otherwise the Doctors will take over the Govt), and take away State funding. People might choose to die quietly in their homes. If they come out on the streets, use the principle of patriotism to promote hara kiri (or was it kamikaze) for the country. Ok, this train of thought is not for a family magazine, so I shall desist…but not before making the point that debt destruction is best done with death and destruction!!! • Demonetisation is a dangerous game, and would need a long-term co-ordinated effort that would need a visionary in power. First, you issue new currency at a ratio that is unfavourable to the accumulated stock of money, i.e. the savers. Then, you keep issuing new money, which keeps the inflation rate high, but back it up with high taxes (especially indirect taxes). For God’s sake, don’t spend the money now; smaller Govt and no further highways to Hokkaido! That will put the Govt back into a surplus, with which it will pay back its accumulated mountain of debt (now reduced to a molehill). The Fx markets will figure it out, and the currency will go through a huge shock, the minute the markets figure out the debt (and currency destruction) strategy of the BoJ. A generation of young Japanese will live through a ‘soft Depression’, with high taxes and low real incomes. They will take care of their now-in-penury older generation, praying they die, but unable to kill them because of high real estate prices (which will go through the roof, during the demonetisation). Family ties will be closer, glued together by the high prices of real assets. Inheritance will be the only hope of the young, for home ownership. • Last, and the most likely….something that nobody expects….nothing!!! This might just turn out to be much ado about nothing! Outsiders are going to town about debt destruction, assuming street riots and civil war. But that is the Western paradigm, where money matters a lot, savings even more, simply because consumption and lifestyle is the objective of life. But in a world where saving is habitual, the marginal utility of savings is zero (and therefore, the marginal disutility of dissavings is also almost nothing). Inside Japan, life goes on as usual. Young Japan continues to save, corporate Japan continues to run up large Current Account surpluses and the Govt continues to run deficits and borrow with impunity. Interest Rates might well go even lower, shocking the Western trading floors into covering their Yen and JGB shorts yet again. The best way to understand that is to look at India, a country of continental proportions with myriad cultures interacting with each other, in the same way that the world economy functions. If the Jains of Jaipur are inveterate savers, the Punjabis of Lajpat Nagar are inveterate consumers/ borrowers. Now look at debt destruction, when it periodically happens in India. Jaipur is at the receiving end of every scam, from Harshad Mehta, to CRB, Prudential Capital, Ketan Parekh, et al. It periodically contributes a fifth of the scam losses every few years; the rest is provided by Gujaratis. Inside Jaipur, there are these ‘domestic defaults’, as big jewellers routinely go bust or decamp with private savings from the black money market. So what happens? Nothing… Some newspapers see an increase in circulation, the dust settles down and everything goes back to ‘normal’. The city returns to saving for the next blowout. The key point that economists are missing here, are the different behavioural reactions to the same stimulus. A debt default is a big deal in an economy (like US/ Europe) where savings are short, but it is not a big deal in an economy which not only has a large stock of savings, but also a continuous flow of savings to replace the stock lost due to debt destruction. Ask the Jaipur Jain whether he remembers the many scams where Jaipurians have lost money. This is incomprehensible to Western thinkers, but is easier to understand by us Indians. The Indian Govt has been forever looting its citizens (remember Indira Gandhi’s Loan Melas, the NPA crisis and 16% inflation), without much loss of credibility. It has forever had low international Credit Ratings, but its Govt borrowing program has never seen a hiccup. Even its international borrowing programmes has found NRI savers in the worst of times. The ratings did not matter. Sanjeev Pandiya teaches, trades and writes. spandiya@hotmail.com. Unlikely Winners When Doing Nothing Is Better Than Doing It Wrong So onto China, which is much easier to deal with. It is just a larger version of Japan. If Greece could be ignored, simply because it was 2.6% of European GDP, Japan can be ignored in tomorrow’s developing picture of the world economy, simply because their remaining 90 mn population will be just 1% of the world’s 8 bn people. So whether Japan sorts itself out or not, it will not matter by 2050. China has everything that Japan has, but king-size. In Dollar terms, its economy has just beaten Japan to become No.2 in the world. Its huge pool of savings (55% savings rate compared to Japan’s peak of 32%) has already created enough trouble around the world; its Fixed Asset formation has swamped the world with excess capacity, its trillion dollar surpluses will create tsunamis when they come onto the currency markets. It is ageing prematurely, although thankfully, without the welfare state entitlements of the West. The problems it has created are not too old, but it can just look at Japan to see how it will all end, if it continues with its current trajectory. It has to get its domestic consumption up, because there are simply not enough people in the rest of the world to consume what it can produce. Just think of what would happen if we take current trends to their logical conclusion. Suppose all of China’s people, 14% of world population, were to shift into manufacturing. With manufacturing set to go below 15% of world economic output, and assuming that Chinese productivity is at the world average, we would have a world swamped permanently with Chinese goods. Now just assume a doubling of Chinese productivity (which is not very far away), and we have the same situation as I have outlined above. So if Chinese consumption does not pick up, the country most hit will be China itself. That is just Japanese history repeated with bigger consequences. To promote a consumption oriented economy, China will have to first build its services sector, which calls for a cultural change. Remember, these services will have to be non-tradeable services, otherwise we will end up with the same glut in worldwide (service) output that we have in manufacturing. But non-tradeable services cannot be increased by Govt fiat, which is what China has traditionally been doing. The roadside entrepreneurship that you see in India, where every new colony in Delhi already has a milk supply, an electrician/ plumber and quack doctor, before anybody has even started living there, is completely missing in China. There is no concept of ownership of assets, and private ‘enterprise’ at the lowest level is missing. This is what shows up in the GDP numbers. The momentum that Indian growth has, is internally driven and funded, with Udupi restaurants providing employment, income and a self-generating savings rate, enough to take care of capital costs. In a village economy, a single Udupi restaurant will multiply itself every 5 years, thereby generating a 20% growth rate after depreciation and notional interest. Chinese investment is mostly state-funded and ‘mandated’. That is why its growing parts look so good, while India’s growing parts look so chaotic. On every office block in Shanghai, there is no defacing paint that shows you how much of the building has been built by adding to banking NPAs; in India, you see entrepreneurial ‘jugaad’ everywhere, which must be done to keep the cost of assets within the purchasing power of people; there is no Bank NPA to fund the difference. India will never see a Xanadu come out of the wilderness, like you see Chinese cities come up in the provinces for no apparent logical reason. There is an ‘evolutionary’ process to India’s development: a Lavassa can only come up in Maharashtra, not in Bihar. At the same time, there will always be many Indias, but there may only be 2 Chinas: the one we see and the one we can’t. In this worldwide scan. I am going to ignore the resource economies (Russia, Australia, Canada, Brazil, Chile, South Africa), because their fundamentals are dependent on the growth and stability of India and China. Governance does matter, especially in Russia, Brazil and Chile, where improvements (in governance) will telescope economic growth coming from new resource finds and better exploitation of old ones. I fear that these economies will be prone to sudden bouts of volatility coming from the pulls and pressures of commodity price movements, which will exacerbate the movement of gold prices. Even if they do well, it will be with very high volatility, making the ride no fun at all. Which brings me to the last and most important region: Asia. I have already mentioned that I am looking for the next Indonesia, so it is obvious that it (Indonesia) qualifies. Singapore is just a ‘broker’ to Asia’s trade and investment flows vis-à-vis the rest of the world. The Middle East will be rendered irrelevant because of Clean Tech, which has already become an inexorable ‘big trend’ that will destroy anybody who tries to resist. The cost of energy will go to zero; any country that has not prepared for that, will see its economy marginalised. The survivors will be those who have the people to build on free, clean energy, and use it to build a 21st century economy. That is one of the reasons why I have ignored any economy that is entirely dependent on non-renewable resources, e.g. Chile and Russia. With zero cost energy, recycling will become so viable that commodity prices of virgin resources will be capped. God is probably Indian, he just got lost in the melee of the Kumbh Mela. With the background of the Commonwealth Games, it might sound ironical to talk about Indian Governance actually improving. But just think about it: about Rs.10,000 cr wasted on the Games (out of about Rs.30,000 cr actually spent) is actually very quickly recovered by the Govt cutting down on Energy Subsidies of Rs.30,000 cr per annum. Diesel and LPG will contribute another Rs.20,000 cr, besides the Rs.100,000 cr ‘windfall’ from Telecom. The Govt has got out of a range of (economic) activities that used to contribute to leakages back in the bad old days: how much money used to leak in the building of an airport/ port/ road, etc. Today, a chunk of this is in private hands. Can you imagine a world class airport like the Delhi/ Mumbai/ Bangalore airports, ever being built by the Govt? If you thought the Govt did a good job with the Delhi Metro, watch what Mumbai is doing with its JV in the Mumbai Metro with Reliance ADAG… The RTI has ensured that numbers are real, otherwise, there used to be the hyperbole that political parties would mouth about the country being taken to the cleaners: hypothetical numbers, like the estimated Rs.20,000- 70,000 cr of ‘revenues’ lost because of 2G, as if that is the amount of money given as bribes. The important ‘big trend’ is: that the Govt is getting out of business. From an Indira Gandhi Govt that wanted to get into banking, to a Sonia Gandhi Govt that is getting out of even the provision of basic Infrastructure and city building, we’ve come a long way, haven’t we?! Rural Telecom infrastructure is now in the hands of the new private telcos, and the public sector telcos are going bankrupt, have you noticed? Agricultural markets are now impacted by grain trading models run by private companies, not the Food Corpn. Believe it or not, I dream that Govt corruption will actually be marginalised if we get 2 generations of good governance. The UID Project will reduce corruption and leakages, cleaning up the food subsidy model that we have been following. Next will follow the Fertiliser Subsidies, and we are on our way. Govt will not get smaller, but it will do other things: provide regulation, for example. Individuals will still make their money, but the wastage embedded in the Govt actually ‘doing’ things rather than regulating them, will be reduced. And growth will take care of the rest….

Problems of Plenty

Posted by Sanjeev Pandiya On Sunday, January 22, 2012

The Challenges Before Reliance Saudi Arabia has set up a Desalination project producing 800 cu km of water per day. This came at a cost of $3.4 bn, and its 28 Desalination plants use the oil energy equivalent of 1.5 mn bpd. 50% of the cost of the water is actually the cost of energy, another 35% would be the cost of capital. By 2030, India has a looming water deficit of 6900 cu. km per day at current levels of growth in usage. At current prices, water would find a market at about Rs.1-3 per litre in domestic and industrial markets, while the rest can be left for agriculture. Going by the Saudi numbers, it would take about $30 bn to convert India’s domestic and industrial water markets to Desalination. Add piping and transportation, and we are looking at about $60-100 bn max. The cost of energy and the cost of capital could be brought down by a co that decides to charge off this huge investment to revenue. Such a co would sit at the heart of India’s economic growth. If the co decides to invest in Solar plants at Rs.13 cr per MW, it would need another $30 bn to reduce the cost of water by half. Put it all together, and we are looking at a game plan for nearly a $100 bn, with an impact on the Indian economy of about 2-3 times what telecom has done. More than the investment capability, such a co would need to move Govt and get the Regulator’s support. The business would be domestic, would need high-quality project management skills and the ability to manage complex logistics and financing. Only Reliance can do it, I can’t think of anybody else in India who would even think of doing something so transformational. I wish Dhirubhai had lived longer; he had just the ability to pull off something so audacious. Yet look at what it is actually doing. A late (re)-entrant into Telecom, down $5 bn and trying to catch up with a pack of global Telecom players already spread out over many countries, with far superior brands. If Reliance uses the regulator to try and bend the rules, the resultant PR backlash could prove suicidal for both the co and the Govt that it manipulates. In Retail, it was a good idea to buy the Real Estate (while competition was leasing it) and use its enormous cash pile to muscle its way into what looked like a big industry. At the moment, the jury is out on whether Retailing is really a need in a country with high infrastructure costs and low spending power per person. If somebody is just sitting there with free Real Estate, waiting for retail spends to rise, he would have garnered an unassailable position in the business, should it ever take off. On the other hand, we are not yet sure that Organised Retail will ever take off in the manner that it has in the US and Europe. Have Money, Will Use/ (Lose) It. This is a simple encapsulation of one of the major laws of human behaviour. The clause in brackets is the automatic, ‘normal’ way to go after the first state of existence has been achieved. You make money, because you do something right; and then you do something with the (resultant) money that has NOTHING to do with what you were doing right in the first place. Reliance made its money from oil and petrochemical assets: its main forté being project management, financial engineering and managing the cost of capital, and of course, handling the Govt interface. Its weaknesses has been its HR and the ability to attract (and retain) talent, build brands and generally, deal with intangible assets. Quite simply, Reliance (like most big cos) fails at decentralised businesses which are light on assets and heavy on ‘spend’. A business like water or Solar would need one-time Project Management skills, good financial engineering and the ability to manage the cost of capital. In other words, these businesses would operate from Reliance’s strengths, rather than its weaknesses. If all these are in place, the resultant assets would sit at the heart of the economy, competing with other more expensive options (like coal-based Thermal assets). If Reliance throws its weight behind these two ‘big trends’ it would be saved the following problems: • The Sumo Wrestler’s Problem: if you are too big, people don’t like you anyway. For the same reason that Blue Line/ DTC buses are disliked on Delhi roads, Reliance’s attempts to muscle into anybody else’s domain, will see a PR backlash. We have already seen this in Retail, and (I think) we will see it in Telecom. • The Governance of Reliance: Water and Solar are vacant areas, where Reliance’s muscle power will be welcomed. Their ability to ‘harness’ Govt policy, will be seen as good for the country and they will be seen as a ‘gentle giant’ (like the Tatas). MDA has once said that the problems of India are the problems of Reliance; in fact, Reliance would be spearheading India’s movement in Clean Tech, achieving parity with China’s ambitious move into green energy. As the biggest user of green energy, the water sector would see the development of a water market, dominated and ‘managed’ by Reliance. • From a Doing Co to a Platform Co: with such huge size, it cannot retain flexibility, like the Sumo Wrestler above. Therefore, it should harness markets and create infrastructure to do things, rather than try and make things or sell services to people. Telecom qualifies as a platform business, but the management of brands is a decentralised activity, at which Reliance is unlikely to be the best. • Underperformance: some of the best money managers in the world are distinguished by a unique ability: to write cheques back to their investors when they can’t find proper avenues for investing their vast hordes of cash. At Reliance, that does not mean Dividend payouts, but certainly Buybacks should be considered. That would be a very good way to consolidate control and even take the co private, if need be. At least, the stock price will not underperform. There is no precedent in history for a co that accounts for >4% of GDP in a major economy, actually outperforming that economy. • The Alligator in the water: for any foray to make a difference to the giant’s P & L and cashflows, Reliance would have to scale up to a significant size. The probability that it will do this too soon and too much, is very high. That will destroy the fundamentals of any business that it gets into; but most of the damage will be to itself. The exception would be a concept business like Solar, where the only risk is technological…and that can be passed off to the Govt. It is most likely that Reliance will now underperform its past track record of creating wealth. Certainly, even if Reliance the co remains the largest private organisation for a long time to come, Reliance the stock will definitely underperform the markets, especially if it tries to reinvest its cash in new businesses, in trying to compound its earnings growth. In a perverse way, the younger Ambani’s now discredited strategy of spreading himself too thinly on the ground, with partial stakes in concept businesses & immature industries, could be the way to go, if RIL must hold onto its cash. Maybe then RIL should look at turning into a PE Fund, where it buys management teams and backs small cos in immature businesses. There is nothing about RIL that points to them being able to beat the markets, but this could be a last resort. History has no precedent, where a co the size of Reliance has CHOSEN to shrink in size, only so that it can manage itself better. Warren Buffet runs Berkshire Hathaway at $180 bn, but that is in the US economy. Besides, Berkshire has decentralised management, which will stand independently, even if Warren (and the earlier holding structure of Berkshire) is no more. This cannot be said of Reliance.

Riskless Risk

Posted by Sanjeev Pandiya On Sunday, January 22, 2012

When What You See Is NOT What You Get I stumbled upon this thought when I was sitting at a seminar, where this doyen of Indian Finance was being feted for his sterling career with one of the best industrial houses in the country. At one point, he remarked, “we do not speculate….”. He was talking about Market Risk, and as you know, nobody believes more than me, that this is predictable, manageable and profitable…….exactly what most people think it is not. The reason that dabbling in markets is called “speculation” is that most people expect very little predictability in what you do. In my lexicon, speculation is what you do when you have no idea where you are going. It is like equating my trade with that of quacks. I feel like an astrologer who gets all his predictions right, and then has to explain the failures of his brethren. Speculation is like driving blind; forecasting is the job of the strategist and Risk Manager, jobs that fall squarely in the domain of the CFO at a company. In markets, the trader has to forecast, or else he is speculating. The astrologer who looks at the world through the eyes of his parrot is definitely speculating, but that should not give astrology a bad name. Yet, people give the whole community a bad name. Sure, there are more quacks in the markets than anywhere else, but the few spectacular exceptions should prove that there is some strength in the argument that Risk Management works. That is the other way to look at it. Risk management, like the principles of good driving, does reduce Risk. Look at the chart of any equity, commodity, currency and tell me this: • Do you see a repeating pattern of ups and downs? • Can you link significant events to the ups and downs, with or without a time lag? • Are those significant events predictable? For example, if there is an uptick in Balrampur Chini, is it linked to sugar/ethanol prices? The stock chart of Balrampur would look fairly ‘unpredictable’ if you do not have background data on sugar production, forward prices, acreage under cane and a few other important variables? • Despite all the ups and downs, is there a ‘Sigma distribution’ possible? That is, is it possible to locate a price range from the chart, that gives you a 95% (you choose the probability) chance of seeing higher stock prices? Similarly, is there a price range from which you can see that there is a 75% probability that you would see lower prices? Take these prices, and recalculate the Forward P-E, P/BV, P/S and P/CE, and see whether the Sigma chart makes more sense? • Set yourself a ‘trading rule’ that allows you to set your portfolio ‘buy’ at the lower end of prices, and the portfolio ‘sell’ at the higher end of the price range. • Does any of this sound like speculation? Yes, it is a bumpy, emotionally uncomfortable ride, mainly because we as human beings are not evolved for handling volatility; also, we care too much about money, second only after sex (and sometimes not even that). So besides all the above ‘technical’ skills, you also need the emotional construction of a person who can survive, even enjoy the roller-coaster ride of markets. The people who are actually ‘born right’, are built so, through multiple accidents of fate. Yes, the emotional make-up has to be intrinsic, and can sometimes be developed by training and education, but along with that, you need many fortuitous accidents that allow you to pick up the ‘technical skills’ needed for good Risk Management. In my case, I have located one huge weakness in my emotional make-up: I need to fill my day with activity, preferably social activity, to prevent me from coming back to the markets, and ‘over-watering’ my investments. Warren Buffet says so very clearly, “let time hang heavily on your hands”. Like in agriculture, once you have got the mix right, any further incremental activity erodes value rather than adds to it. Yet, having been born hunters, we use all our excess energy to range around, trying to ‘push things’. Such extra energy might be a good idea in the world of labour, but is a terrible idea in the world of Risk Management. So lets get back to the point that I set out to make. The use of the word ‘speculation’ denotes a helplessness against understanding complexity; the human mind seeks a ‘perfect’ link between effort and reward. That is why manufacturing cos, which are used to ‘doing things’, find it so uncomfortable to live with the uncertainty of markets (commodity, Fx, debt, equity). That makes them prime customers for volatility-reducing products like Insurance, derivatives and the like, where the financial markets take these ‘risks’ off them, and live off the fat of the land. That is the cause of much heartburn just now, because financial markets have failed in their ‘risk reduction’, and have actually added to risk because of their activities, with the real economy having to take up the burden. Much of the trouble that non-Finance people face when they deal with the financial markets, comes from this anthropological construction of ‘just wanting’ our ‘just’ reward: it creates this unhappy picture of widows and orphans, and clumsy CFOs of big manufacturing cos, who have been ‘deceived’ by the financial markets. Their ‘just’ efforts have been destroyed, and their rewards taken away by the rising Yen or the falling Euro. And they have this mental image of the ‘happy speculator’ who is swimming on Miami Beach, just because of a single but accurate trade on the Euro, Yen or whatever. Almost all the financial security in my life has come from reading 3 up-down Sugar cycles right. For the rest, I have just held a mediocre job in a not-very-understanding set of companies. It would look like ‘speculation’ has been good for me, even as I have spent almost ALL my time and energy on obeying my masters. But if I die richer than my masters, it will not be for lack of obeying them; it will be for the thoughts that I carry as I go to the bathroom, or the ideas I get when I am driving….!!! ‘Speculation’ does not account for serendipity, but ‘research/ analysis’ does. To give up on understanding complexity, is to be unfaithful to the mandate that an employer gives to you, when he trusts you with the management of a company. We do not have the right to decide WHAT creates value, and whether it suits us and our mental make-up. If it creates outstanding, well-differentiated companies, it should be done; and if one person cannot do it, another one should be found to do it. To limit the definition of your business, simply because it makes you uncomfortable, is to limit the (value-creation) potential of your company: if your shareholder were to find out, he would not look at you kindly. Do we speculate when we drive? Don’t we take on unknown risks (of that child crossing the road, or the teenager swaying through traffic)? Yes, every driver uses the same tools (clutch, brake, accelerator), speaks the same language, but has markedly different safety track records. And yes, 85% of drivers think they are good (drivers), just as 85% of investors think they will make money in the markets. But it is the remaining 15%, from which the successes emanate; the rest are plain ‘speculators’!!! The result: you have ‘speculative’ markets, and ‘dangerous’ Delhi roads…with very confident investors and very ‘good’ drivers!.

TRAI-ing to Fail

Posted by Sanjeev Pandiya On Sunday, January 22, 2012

Irregular Regulations That Will Only Make Matters Better The Govt used to try and hold up stock markets by getting the UTI and LIC to buy shares to stem the panic. Next thing you know, the US-64 was brought down to its knees. Then, during the Lehman crisis, the US Govt tried a ban on short-selling. You would have thought that regulators learn from each other, but no, the Germans tried the same thing recently when they tried a ban on short-selling any European currencies/bonds; and brought the house down. The US actually went so far as to break up AT & T into the 5 Baby Bells; as far as I know, AT & T is still among the largest 25 cos in the world. Which makes the following story doubly queer…. Is TRAI trying to hammer down some self-fangled notions about anti-competitive market structures, or is this real regulation? Who benefits? It would be very easy to insinuate that they are victim to some devious corporate warfare game, devised by some Strategy Head who does not understand The Art of War (Sun Tzu). The simple principle recounted in the seminal 3000-year book: in any battle, the DIFFERENTIAL over the crowd is the most important factor deciding the probability of victory, NOT the absolute power. So if there are 100 players with 10 ounces of strength each, then the 101st player with 12 ounces of strength is very valuable; but if there are 10 players with 100 ounces of strength each, then the 11th player with 120 ounces is NOT very valuable. Think about it…..the differential has to be disproportionate to the DISTRIBUTION of strength, not the ABSOLUTE level of strength. If the short message that we get from the TRAI suggestions, is that ‘they are going after Big Telecom’, then they are doing an expectedly ham-handed job of it. Remember the playing field in Telecom just now: there are 2 giant pan-India brands (Bharti/ Vodafone) together accounting for 57% market share, 1 down-market pan-India brand (Reliance), and 3 regional brands (Aircel/ Idea/ Tata, who will probably be bought out) + 2 dying public sector cos. Plus there are sundry others, who are irrelevant, and need to be put out of their misery. Now let us take the TRAI proposals: • Wants to charge for extra spectrum and make it sharable/ tradeable. This is in favour of the biggest players, Bharti/ Vodafone, because they are most likely to have spectrum shortages, especially as they mop up market shares in a post-consolidation marketplace. The one time charges for past allocations will probably be seen as unfair by the Courts; even if they are not, the total hit is a small part of the cashflows being generated by these players. Except to have a short-term effect on stock prices, they will not do any long-term damage to the cos, because they will be a little blip (2 months in case of Bharti) in the EBIDTA streams of the co. • Mobile No Portability to be accelerated. This will be the shocker. When we look back on this, it will be obvious, but we will kick ourselves for not having seen it before. MNP is expected to hit Big Telecom, because the cheaper plans of the upstarts will motivate the high-spenders to switch. But look at actual reality. My (Bharti) phone bills have already dropped 84% over the last 2 years; do I really care about the rest of the 16%? How sensitive am I, to saving the rest of the money? Now I will look to maximise Network quality AND brand sheen. And in the Bharti 98100 customer-set (the most valuable part of Bharti’s post-paid spenders, as any telemarketer will tell you), WHO would want to switch to the Reliance network, for example? The trade-off will be between Network Quality (on which Bharti/ Vodafone will increasingly differentiate themselves from the rest of the breed, with their DIFFERENTIAL cashflows) and brand sheen, which the Bharti/ Vodafone combination has already built. Do a dipstick survey to see if I am making sense. Ask your gardener/ plumber which phone he uses, and whether he would want to keep his no. You will find that the valuable nos are in the 98100/ 98110 series, which are the high-spenders. My phone bills, for example, are 32 times the Indian ARPU of Rs.220, so I must be the kind of customer the telcos are fighting for. Find anybody who spends more than Rs.2000 per month; he is very likely to be from Bharti/ Vodafone and very unlikely to change. But with falling ARPUs, it is very likely that Reliance will lose its price-and-value-sensitive customers, who will find that the Network Quality-at-a-particular-price is a far better value proposition than the poor Network quality + low-end brand at-the-cheapest price that Reliance offers. The short point: MNP will be won by the brand wars, as Network Quality becomes a hygiene factor, with little to choose between the top 3 players. • Wants to link 2G spectrum to 3G prices. Will probably not clear the scrutiny of the courts. As the battle shifts to 3G now, most of the real additional spend will be on data and non-voice products, where Bharti has already reached 17% of total revenues, and Vodafone is at 11%. As this goes to 50%, voice-only players will be squeezed out of the market altogether. • Wants to cap total spectrum. This is back to the Licensing Raj, and reeks of desperation. If we have any justice left in the country, this will not stick, and we already have a pre-emptive approach made to the TDSAT, where I think this issue will get decided. You might as well cap the market share that a firm is entitled to, under anti-competition norms. The other things that the market is saying: • Big Telecom has overpaid for 3G. Sure, it would have helped if they had got it cheaper, but this is not a setback relative to each other, i.e. all the players have paid similar amounts, especially for the all-India spread that they have captured. Even if they have paid 50% extra, it is only 4 months’ EBIDTA for Bharti, and a very significant platform for future consolidation has been obtained. So if there is an overpayment, the premium per unit of EBIDTA flows is lowest in case of Big Telecom. Remember, only Bharti is going to comfortably raise the cash, Reliance is already heavily over-borrowed. That is a big differentiator; we saw the ease with which Bharti was able to raise the Zain war chest. With post-Zain EBIDTA and revenues of $13 bn, and similar Debt: EBIDTA profiles (i.e. 3-4 times), Bharti is now 3.5 times the size of Reliance. If it is able to maintain its ROCE with no further setbacks, its yearly EBIDTA will equal the entire capital stock in Reliance. What does that say for its differential ability to invest in Network Quality, Rural Distribution, solar panels for its cellsites, more towers, and the entire product infrastructure around 3G, besides Digital TV. With stretched Balance Sheets all around, Bharti is the only one with enough free Cashflow to make a go of it. The returns on the incremental Capex will increase, because of the oldest rule of Investment: in an atmosphere of ‘investment famine’, where Mr. Market has turned away from a sector, product profitability will rise to the point where it will be viable to get the growth debt-funded. That is, the higher Risk Premium + the higher cost of debt to an out-of-favour sector, will be serviced by higher product prices/ profitability. If you are looking for examples, the Jute industry is a good one. The market is valuing Bharti at a point where NOTHING is any more expected from it, i.e. at 11 times Forward earnings in an industry where subscriber growth is still coming in at 35%, even the smallest amount of ‘traction’ (i.e. link between customer/ volume growth and revenue growth) will allow Bharti to beat market estimates. What we know well is that when profits are in short supply, investments are well scrutinised and the money spent carefully. The money goes into places where the demand-supply mismatch is maximum; I expect the biggest investments to be made in towers, rural distribution and brand building, and the building of non-voice applications targeted at the rural markets. This will give Bharti a near-monopoly in the vast rural hinterland, with a very secure, high-cost barrier that will secure its cashflows. To get a good fix on what will decide the fate of this bruising battle, take a look at the field, stakeholder-by-stakeholder: 1. Equity Investors: have valued Bharti at 11 times Forward earnings, as compared to 6 for Reliance. Idea is valued at 19 for its M & A potential and its regional/ niche positioning, but Mr. Market does expect Bharti to outperform. 2. Bankers: smarter in general than the typical, marginal retail investor, who is driving stock prices just now. Have taken a long-term view on Bharti, but they don’t seem to treat Reliance the same way. Idea and Vodafone are their other favoured clients. 3. Employees: one look at the website, is enough. 4. Customers: here it gets a little dangerous. Brand sheen can be created with good advertising, like Vodafone has shown spectacularly. This is the big hope for Reliance; if they can reposition their brand with some good advertising, then I will stand corrected. But I don’t think advertising alone can do it; you will also need better customer experience, especially in Network usage. 5. Suppliers: the differentiators have been created by the Bharti outsourcing model. If somebody can beat them at their own game, watch this lot carefully. But with Bharti scaling this ability up in other geographies like Africa, I would expect this broader reach to enhance their competitiveness rather than reduce it. 6. Govt: this really is the joker in the pack. As the Govt’s most effective backdoor Rural Taxation mechanism, I would have expected the Govt to support consolidation in the Telecom sector. Moreover, as the most likely world beater coming out of India, with the potential to touch the lives of the entire planet, I would think that it would be India’s most remembered brand. Sigh….!!! On the one hand, you have China using its diplomatic muscle to speak up for Huawei, while on the other, you have a campaign to systematically weaken the Telecom revolution and those who made it happen. Probably the biggest indicator that there is some substance to what I am saying, it this new development between the Ambani brothers, where RCom is rumoured to be at the centre of the rapprochement between them. The elder Ambani has always been excited about the Telecom business, and had nursed RCom in its early days. If RCom needs cash, this is the only place where it can get it, i.e. from friends and relatives. And this would then need to be evaluated afresh, because the RIL clout would bring in 2 strengths, that RCom has not had until now: • The ability to use the enormous cashflows of RIL to buy its way back into the race. • The ability to ensure a friendly ‘regulatory environment’, the first indications of which can already be seen. A combined Ambani onslaught into the Telecom space, would not be something to laugh at, but they would be starting with a handicap. It would take RCom nearly about Rs.15,000 cr just to draw level with Bharti, starting from their 11% revenue share, and their low-end subscriber base (~17% share). Still, it would necessitate a re-evaluation of the situation, because that would create 3 distinct aspirants for market leadership, and divide the steady-state leadership market share into a 30:20:20 matrix, as opposed to a 40:25:10 matrix just now. The 3rd player is an open seat just now. It has usually gone to an innovation leader or niche dominator, which looks more like Idea/ Tata just now. The Art of War tells us that an ex-price warrior (like RCom) usually retires from the race, outstretched because he tries to do too much (i.e. takes on the market leader) with too thin a resource base. • RIL has not proved itself at winning marketing wars, but is certainly a past master at winning in highly regulated environments, besides having Project and fund-raising skills. Could this turn out to be RIL’s Waterloo? I am sure they will be spending some time thinking about that. The corporate battlefields of the world are peppered with companies that did not know their limitations. The battle for Indian Telecom is now in the international arena, and the brand wars will have to be won in countries where the playing fields may not be fixed. Let us look at some industry trends to understand what is happening. Crisil has estimated that $60 bn will be needed to set up 3G infrastructure. So far, we have had about the same investment ($50-60 bn) invested into 2G, including the Tower business. This has created a market leader like Bharti, earning $3.5 bn in a consolidating market. Industry EBIDTA, net of cash losses, would be about $6-7 bn. For the rest of the investment to make sense, a facile assumption would be that entrenched players have an advantage, and their EBIDTA will double to justify the incoming investment. But the distribution of this EBIDTA growth would be disproportionate; as we can see from the calculation above, Bharti has 22% subscriber share, 32% revenue share and nearly 50% share of EBIDTA. We can speculate that its share of Free Cashflow would be running at 70-80%, making it the most likely contender to dominate the 3G space, and then squeeze out the voice players in the 2G space, especially the discount warriors. I have tried to build a case above, based on the rules of Corporate Strategy. But the joker in the pact would be an ‘irrational’ investment by RIL, to give another lease of life to RCom. That would muddy the waters quite a bit; it would be a bigger setback to Reliance perhaps, than to Bharti, but only time will show that. For the time being, it means that the steady state target 3G shares will be divided among 3 players, with some regional satraps, who will anyway want to be bought out. The industry revenue could double, maybe triple from the current $30 bn. The breakeven point would be a doubling of revenue, but any increase beyond that will be built by the player who builds applications on top of the core telecom revenue (like the Music Download business that sits on the voice business of Bharti). So think education services in the villages, e-degrees and ‘laptop schools’, price and availability information in the villages, and you have ‘traction’. Suddenly, the rural network will become viable, cutting into transport and freight costs, making possible things that were not feasible earlier. The co that thinks non-Telecom applications will be the one to get ahead. The real joker in the pack, (and unseen threat to Reliance) would be a take-off by Zain, followed by a determined Vodafone, using its massive cashflows from other markets, to slug it out in India. The outsider here will be RIL, which has cash, but little knowledge of either technology, marketing or application development. As stock prices go, the industry unattractiveness of Telecom will be gone in a little while, and all boats will soon rise with the tide. There will be some hiccups along the way, like the Vodafone tax case could be a potential setback to Vodafone, while some unknown from Zain would be a setback to Bharti. But it will be interesting times for sure, in Indian Telecom….

The Good News In The Bad News

Posted by Sanjeev Pandiya On Sunday, January 22, 2012

Celebrating a Volcanic Eruption The Kyoto Protocol happened because 2003 was the hottest year in Europe in 500 years, and some 40,000 people died because Europe was just not prepared for this kind of heat wave conditions. Well, that was because it happened in Europe. In India, we had the worst drought conditions in 43 years last year, followed by the hottest April in 52 years this year (80 dead already), and we are busy celebrating GDP growth. Forget a Protocol, we don’t even have a Water Recycling policy, that creates a market for that most precious of commodities, the one thing that could create a calamity on an unimaginable scale. Katrina appeared in the US, just when the debate on Global Warming was hotting up, and lots of polls showed that it made a difference. And this, the year in which the Kyoto mandate is to be renegotiated, we have Europe paralysed because of volcanic ash falling from the heavens. I can bet that within the next 5 years, there will be a technology to minutely keep out all aerial debris, whether it be volcanic ash or bird hits, from the engines of aircraft. My faith is in Germany, the most important innovator in Europe. Starting in 2007, Germany quickly built the biggest Solar capacity in the world (followed by Spain this year). China will, as usual, bring forth its brute force once the Govt decides on it. But it was Germany that innovated (Thin Films Solar came from Germany) both the product and the mechanism to produce-your-own solar with its feed-in 2-way tariffs. That is now being copied by India, thank God. Imagine the hottest summer in India in 500 years. We would still be tom-tomming about how our GDP kept growing, how we are no longer dependent on agriculture (in other words, we no longer have to eat). Oh, food prices will go up, but if the GDP is growing, who cares about a few million malnourished children in Madhya Pradesh. So it is just as well that the volcanic ash is spreading over Europe. That is where the Vision for clean, free energy will be made in this year of the post-Kyoto negotiations. That is where there will be a long-term objective of Climate Control (which can only happen with free energy) will be set. It might take a hundred years, but if there is someone on this planet who can think about preventing an asteroid attack, a volcanic disaster or an earthquake, it would have to be Europe. If someone comes up with a plan to control naturally produced Green House Gases (GHG), maybe they have less work to do with man-made GHG. Think of all that methane trapped under the Arctic sheets. India will wait till a water crisis hits us. When it hits us, we will find that we don’t have a Water Recycling industry because we don’t have a Water market. All urban water usage is capable of being recycled upto 6 times, which can reduce our requirement of virgin rain or ground water by upto 85%, but this is theoretical. Surprisingly, it is establishments in islands like London and Singapore who are adopting these technologies, not anyone in Delhi. And of course, the whole of coastal India is open to water desalination. Solar and renewables will pick up in India, if only because China has launched a massive programme, almost 20 times the size of India’s to convert to Clean Energy. India will not do better than anyone else, but will do well by its own terrible standards. So what if it is too late for a few million people. They had no right to be born anyway. Nature may also have learnt that if you want to improve the world, it should give adversity to Europe. The tsunami in India did nothing, except to fill the pockets of those who were sent to distribute blankets. But wait and see. This Icelandic volcanic eruption was really conceived in heaven. It has killed no one I know of, hence it has no victims. Just a few sleepless Germans at various airports, gritting their teeth and taking out the backs of their envelopes to make sure this will never happen again. Had the same thing happened in India, we would not even have noticed the ash in the air till a few planes went down. Then again, we would have blamed it on Pakistan. And spending sleepless nights at airports does nothing to us…we rather enjoy the free snacks! For example, India has excessive Black Carbon clouds, because of soot emissions. China is responsible for 61% of these emissions, while India accounts for 12%. But the Atmospheric Brown Clouds that are specific to South Asia, are resulting in excessive ‘glacier melt’ over the Himalayas, a uniquely Asian problem. That is why nobody is working on Black Carbon emissions, which has already grown to be the 3rd biggest Green House Gas (GHG), after Carbon Dioxide and Methane. I felt a little relieved that China is the major culprit, because that means that some action will be taken on the issue. Had it been India, we would have been fighting for our right to pollute. A country-wise, source-wise analysis finds that the cheapest methods of reducing Black Carbon are to be found in India. The Dollar-cost of reducing GHG is the lowest; if an equitable new Kyoto is found, it will create big profits for India as a whole. Provided we set up a good CER-focused low Carbon economy. Examples are dung burning, coal stoves and household fuels, which not only affect Global Warming, but also public health standards in India. The funny thing is, the Solar cooker will be invented in Germany, sold in India and the CERs will be bought by a German polluter to balance his (Carbon) account books. It is perhaps, not a coincidence that the cheapest Dollar-cost per ton of reducing Carbon is in India; it follows from the rest of the story about our economic productivity. So what kind of disaster would we pray upon India, to hope that India starts to capitalise on its ‘comparative advantage’ in Carbon reduction? No, I don’t want to pray that millions of people die in the next famine; if it is not going to be pain, could it be greed? A stiff Carbon Tax on India, would set off a Carbon Reduction economy, with an efficient CER-issuance mechanism that helps India to capture much of the multilateral (market) transfers of wealth that will happen under the revised Kyoto. The Govt-to-Govt transfers that India is fighting for, may be a pittance compared to what might be possible if the market mechanism works out. Maybe the West should set its innovative minds to doing that; for once, they would be doing India a favour. Because in a unique example, the Black Carbon emitted by South Asia has a very short life, hence will have the maximum salubrious effects on the climate over South Asia (especially affecting monsoon cycles and glacier melt in the Himalayas). All this and Carbon Credits too…. If Black Carbon reduction ranks on par with other GHG reduction, that itself would be an innovation. Suddenly, the innovative genius of Germany would be focusing on Indian dung heaps in Bihar, paid for by the sophisticated polluters of Europe.