Bailout v/s bankruptcy- Which one is better?

Nov 16, 2011

In this issue:
» Why big US banks should be broken up into smaller ones...
» IPO process to be overhauled to check price manipulation
» Indian FMCG retail could touch US$100 billion by 2025
» Does India deserve a better credit rating?
» ...and more!
----------------------------- Now get free daily updates on Global Economy! -----------------------------

Will Italy be able to get back on its feet again?

Will Euro die faster than the Dollar?

Will China now replace US as the new superpower?

Know all that's going on in the global markets through the free daily financial e-column The Daily Reckoning.

Authored by Bill Bonner, a three-time New York Times best-selling author, the Daily Reckoning is published in 3 languages and is read by millions of people across the globe.

Sign up now for free updates on global markets!


We are living in times when bailouts are very common across the globe, including our own country. In simple terms, a bailout is a situation where in a failing business is saved from bankruptcy by capital infusion, usually by the government. Back in 2008, when the Indian markets crumbled on the back of the US financial crisis, the government bailed out many sectors that were adversely impacted. Ditto is the case in the European Union (EU) and the US. In order to salvage the euro, the EU is bailing out highly indebted economies like Greece, Ireland and Portugal. In 2008, the US had bailed out banks, investment banks and the automakers. The list is indeed quite long.

In more recent times, there has been a lot of hoopla about whether Kingfisher Airlines, which is facing a serious cash crunch, should be bailed out or not. Of course, we believe that market forces should decide whether a business should survive or shut down. After all, bailing out a business means using public money to save a private enterprise. Society cannot operate on the principle of privatised profits and socialised losses. Moreover, bailouts send out the wrong signals. They incentivise businesses to be reckless, that no matter what they do, the government is always going to come to their rescue. Of course, there is no denying that there can be times when bailouts may be necessary. But they should be reserved only for such rare cases wherein there is a threat of a system-wide collapse.

Going back to the case of Kingfisher Airlines, another question that arises is whether the airline company is right in asking for a bailout. We don't think so. The simple reason being that tomorrow if the company were to make record profits, will it be willing to share those with the taxpayer? Certainly not! How then can it expect to be bailed out using the very same taxpayer's money? Nevertheless, there is a section of society out there that favours a bailout of the embattled firm. For us though, the choice has been clear right from day one. Please do not get us wrong. We are not against the firm and we believe that Kingfisher Airlines is one of the better airlines around. But we have issues with any firm being bailed out. As the developed world has shown, a bailout only amounts to kicking the can down the road and does not solve the real problem. Thus, for a full blown recovery, either a restructuring or a complete elimination of the issue at hand is required.

According to you, should failing businesses be bailed out or allowed to go bankrupt? Share your comments with us or post your views on Facebook page / Google+ page.

 Chart of the day
In the Indian pharmaceutical industry, there have been about 4,000 product launches on an average over the last four years. However, with only 1,400 new launches for the first nine months of 2011 (up till September), the show has been dismal. A remarkable increase in competition and a decreasing pipeline of new molecules are being cited as some of the main reasons for this decline. Since every molecule has about 30-40 competitors, pharma companies will now have to focus more on product differentiation. As such, those companies that lack product development capability will be adversely affected.

Data source: Business Standard
*Figure upto September, 2011

Anyone who has dabbled a bit in Economics would know that monopolies are generally bad for an economy. They are capable of artificially reducing supplies and thus, increasing the price so that exorbitant profits can be made. But the recent crisis in the US has shown that besides being seekers of unfair amounts of profit, monopolies also pose systemic risks to an economy. Well, the US financial sector may not exactly be monopolistic but the fact remains that it is extremely concentrated with assets of five institutions comprising half the industry's total assets. Thus, breaking up these big banks into still smaller ones may be the right thing to do as far as the stability of the US banking system is concerned. This point was highlighted by one of the presidents at the US Federal Reserve. "I believe that too-big-to-fail banks are too-dangerous-to-permit," he is believed to have said. Well, we couldn't have agreed more. But the big question is whether the vested interests would let this happen at all.

The fact that stock markets have ceased to be the most preferred means for raising capital is not lost on the regulator. A few days ago we had written about the stock markets around the world seeing fewer listings and new issuances. The Indian IPO (Initial Public Offering) market has also been the victim of unrealistic pricing and the focus on 'listing gains' which rarely do enough to reward shareholders in the long run. In addition, inadequate compliance with KYC (know your customer) rules have deterred potential capital issuers and investors. The first half of the financial year 2011-12 (FY12) saw 30 companies raising funds to the tune of Rs 50 bn through IPOs. The government's own disinvestment plans have gone awry due to resistance to approach capital markets. SEBI (Securities & Exchange Board of India) is therefore now considering expediting the clearance of IPO offer documents. Companies will have a one-year time to come out with public offers from the date of SEBI clearance. Also, the KYC guidelines will be eased for better compliance. With such policies and better checks in place, the Indian capital markets could certainly serve companies and investors a lot better.

India has been a land of dualities where the affluent urban India residing in cities and towns co-exist with the much larger rural India made up of rustic villages. The stark economic divide led the FMCG industry to focus more on the consuming urban India which accounts for a major share of 66% of the overall consumer good sales. However growing rural prosperity from government sponsored employment programs and rising farm income is slowly changing equations. Picture this, consumer goods such as biscuits, toilet soaps, washing powder, packaged tea and iodised salt contributed more than 40% to overall category sales in FY11. As per market research agency Nielsen, rural India is driving growth in more than 50% of the large consumer good categories.

The per-capita expenditure in rural market is half that of the urban market. But with 150 million households, rural India is nearly three times bigger than urban India holding immense potential demand. Nielsen has forecasted rural FMCG sales to leapfrog from the current US$ 12 bn to US$ 100 bn by 2025. As per the research agency, factors such as higher demand for premium products, brand consciousness and shift from occasional to regular consumption will be the future demand drivers in rural India. FMCG companies have been scrambling to grab a share of the growing clout of rural India. But companies such Hindustan Unilever Ltd (HUL) and ITC Ltd which have developed a strong rural network have a distinct advantage.

In the world of crisis, every country is worried about its credit rating. Be it France or US or the crisis hit PIIGS (Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece and Spain). Everyone is worried. Even India. Don't worry, unlike others India is not worried that it would be downgraded. Instead what it wants is for agencies like Moody's to upgrade its credit rating. Currently India's domestic debt and foreign debt are rated as Baa3 (moderate risk) and Ba1 (questionable credit quality) respectively. But these ratings were assigned way back in 2004. The Indian government argues that a lot has changed since. The country has shown growth and resilience even through the current global crisis. At the same time, the government has shown commitment towards reforms. The latter of course is questionable as the government has just 'talked' about reforms and has not really 'carried out' any reforms. But the former point definitely holds true. India certainly deserves some credit for its resilient growth, even if it is just in the form of a credit rating. Not that the ratings have helped any country much but it definitely adds to the 'feel good' factor.

In the meanwhile, the Indian stock markets were trading in the red after opening on a weak note. At the time of writing, the BSE Sensex was down by 154 points (0.9%). Barring FMCG, all sectoral indices were trading in the negative. Red marks were seen across entire Asia with China (down 2.5%) and Hong Kong (down 2.4%) being the top losers.

 Today's investing mantra
"Much success can be attributed to inactivity. Most investors cannot resist the temptation to constantly buy and sell." - Warren Buffett

Today's Premium Edition.

Recent Articles

All Good Things Come to an End... April 8, 2020
Why your favourite e-letter won't reach you every week day.
A Safe Stock to Lockdown Now April 2, 2020
The market crashc has made strong, established brands attractive. Here's a stock to make the most of this opportunity...
One Stock that is All Charged Up for the Post Coronavirus Rebound April 1, 2020
A stock with strong moat is currently trading near 5-year lows.
Sorry Warren Buffett, I'm Following This Man Instead of You in 2020 March 30, 2020
This man warned of an impending market correction while everyone else was celebrating the renewed optimism in early 2020...

Equitymaster requests your view! Post a comment on "Bailout v/s bankruptcy- Which one is better?". Click here!

35 Responses to "Bailout v/s bankruptcy- Which one is better?"


Nov 16, 2011

I m not against bail out or Kingfisher, but if we will give such support to kingfisher now then in future some other company may ask such support.At that time you can't neglect them too. in this way our money (tax payers money)is not used for our own necessity.



Nov 16, 2011

Surely agreeing with u as no bailout should be given to any of the firm let it be any private firm or public firm. As it creates the situation where all will have the tendency to survive themselves without taking care of how the firm will survive. This creates the selfishness among all which is not good for society as tax payers money can not be wasted for bailout. If any one is dying & there is no hope for his recovery we also with utmost attachment also with brave heart take the decision to let him die same approach should be made applicable in case of firm & companies.
Even a layman running a business knows the breakeven he will achieve in particular time & if he does not he will have to rethink of his business & will have to stop doing the same business does Government of any country helps him bailing out then why any company.

Only the Bankruptcy will create the more efficient company due to the end point of reaching in case of failure.


Alok Nigam

Nov 16, 2011

Was KFA not aware of Air India or concept of Level Playing Field when they ventured into this business? It would be more appropriate and appreciated if KFA Management was to accept their mistakes in misreading the Competition and Customer and their Business Strategy rather than now blame it on all other factor's except 'MISMANAGEMENT'. What is the guarantee that you will not be in same spot again. Sorry Mr Mallya you got to get your house in order first.If you or your Team did not see it coming then you must take the blame for it now. No comment on the PM statement in your support.



Nov 16, 2011

Bailout v/s bankruptcy given the choice bankruptcy is a preferred one even the Government of India must adapt to bankruptcy for its own PSU's. There are many advantages, 1) The employees will put serious efforts to save the organisation from making losses.2) Taxpayers money will be used for better purposes. 3) Tax rates will come down. 4) People will willingly pay taxes hence tax evasion will be less. 5) Government will get more money to put for better use. 6) Restructuring is a good system but it depends on the integrity and capability of the management. It has its own merits and demerits. In case of Kingfisher it will not work. Better they make their own arrangement.


saby chacko

Nov 16, 2011

The agencies doing the market survey is always wrong with regard to consumption pattern of rural and urban people of Kerala state in india.There is hadly any difference between urban area and rural area in most parts of Kerala! I suppose only Hindustan lever is the only company sensible enough to market their products wisely in kerala. Rest of all the companies in India are a laggard in this case, they hadly understand the realities of the sytem in state, the consumption pattern of the people in this state, etc.



Nov 16, 2011

Bankruptcy is better. The airline should not be bailed out. If the present management is incapable of managing the business properly, let them put it on the block let a better credible management take over the business.




Nov 16, 2011

kingfisher should be allowed to bail out.I agree with your write up on this issue.


Raghavendra Bejugam

Nov 16, 2011

I agree no bail out to KingFisher Airlines..


sunilkumar tejwani

Nov 16, 2011

it is very easy for a the mighty and rich to get bailout packages at the drop of a hat. As is well known the political connections of promoters of Kingfisher Airlines,
the self serving politicians are likely to oblige. "cause their very own survival hinges on the election funding of the rich and elite. Shame on such poor governance.



Nov 16, 2011

If there is a company that doesn't deserve any help from tax payer. its King Fisher, full of sosha than performance.

<<Prev    Next>>
Equitymaster requests your view! Post a comment on "Bailout v/s bankruptcy- Which one is better?". Click here!