Has SEBI gone completely wrong here?

May 14, 2010

In this issue:
» Higher capital requirements from mutual funds
» Agriculture sector has staged a quick recovery
» RBI not intervening in Rupee movements
» US$ 11 bn debt fund for India's infrastructure
» ...and more!

---------------------------- Crash Proof Your Portfolio Now! ----------------------------
This message requires your urgent attention... because if you choose to act on it, you could not only save a lot of money when the next crash hits the stock market but actually profit from it.
But you need to act on this now. This opportunity will disappear forever in the next few days...
Click here for full details...

One great feature of capitalism is that it unleashes human potential. It is the closest thing to a meritocracy. But not always. There is a tendency for power to concentrate. For the wealthy to get wealthier. It is here that that role of regulators becomes critical. To ensure a level playing field. To promote as much competition as possible.

Stock markets are integral to a capitalist economy. And we admire India's stock market regulator, SEBI's initiatives in promoting transparency and competition. SEBI is now proposing higher capital requirements for mutual funds, investment banks and brokers. The minimum net worth requirement for mutual funds used to be Rs 100 m. It has now been increased five times to Rs 500 m.

The apparent reason is that mutual funds will be able to absorb more losses if they have higher capital. But we think SEBI has got it completely wrong this time. Quantity does not always assure quality. After all, weren't all the firms that caused the global financial crisis, very large? We think, by hiking the net worth requirement, SEBI will create a high entry barrier. One that only the wealthy can cross. Not necessarily the most talented. It will end up promoting a rich boys' club beyond the reach of many. But this is just our view. Tell us what you think of this move by SEBI.

 Chart of the day
Monsoon rains may come 10 days early this year, a former chief of India's meteorological department says. Given how important the monsoons are for India's agriculture and in turn its economy, we hope he is right. We also decided to see how accurate the predictions of the met department have been over the last several years. As today's chart of the day shows, the met department's predictions have usually been correct. But they do get it wrong from time to time. Like last year. Hopefully, their prediction of 98% normal rains this year will come good. We wonder though, when will India be stop being so dependent on the whims of the weather gods.

Source: PTI

Decoupled it may not be but it is certainly unruffled. This description, courtesy the Financial Times, sits rather lightly on the economy of Asia ex-Japan. And why not. The economies of the developed world have gone into a long snooze. Whereas Asia, ex-Japan, is behaving as though the crisis never happened.

But isn't the difference in the two economic zones baffling? After all, even the developed world unleashed stimuli just as quickly as the Asian economies. The difference perhaps lies in the manner in which the consumers of the two zones behaved. Developed economies had overleveraged consumers and overleveraged governments. However, these concerns are not anywhere close to being equally big in emerging Asia. Thus, when either the governments or the consumers or both loosened their purse strings, growth followed.

Furthermore, even penetration levels of a lot of goods and services are abysmally low in emerging Asia. This provides a further fillip to growth. However, things are gradually beginning to heat up. Supply is failing to catch up with demand at the same time the Asian central banks are adopting a loose monetary policy approach. They may have to tighten up a bit more or else inflation and asset bubbles could rear up their heads yet again. From a long term though, Asia's future does look as bright as ever, especially in China and India.

Globally, banks are now reporting their performance for FY10. The focus has once again shifted to entities in emerging markets. Interestingly, Economist has published a report on how banks in emerging economies could face the same set of problems as their global peers. The report at the outset acknowledges the inherent strength of Indian, Chinese and Brazilian banks. Be it their improved efficiency, better asset quality or larger size. But it also points out that their attempt to expand globally may come at a high cost.

The BRIC-originated banks are seen as the engines of growth for global economy. At the same time, the crisis in the West has done a lot of good to their reputation. Primarily, because they are gatherers of large savings rather than givers of large loans like their peers in the West. But they are also expected to face as much resistance in establishing a global presence as did the American and European banks. As it is, globalization of banking is no more a sought-after model as it once used to be.

It is India's biggest need of the hour and its biggest bane, both at the same time. Infrastructure, or the lack of it, is perhaps India's biggest bottleneck at this moment. From power to roads, and from ports to sanitation, everything is in a state of disarray. The good news is that as per a recent report, the government is planning to set up a large US$ 11 bn debt fund dedicated to India's infrastructure needs. While the specifics are still being worked out, the basic idea is slated to be the refinancing of lending institutions. While the thought surely seems noble, what remains to be seen is how far the government carries through with this idea on a consistent note.

Gone are those days when the RBI felt compelled to intervene regularly in the forex markets. What else would explain the fact that the RBI has stayed on the sidelines from December 2009 to March 2010. This is its longest hiatus since mid 2006. The central bank now intends to intervene only if there is considerable volatility in the rupee. Even speculative activities fuelling gyrations in the currency would be strong enough reason for the central bank to step in. However, the RBI is not particularly concerned with the rupee levels. Or whether the Indian unit has been strengthening or weakening.

Various other macroeconomic indicators have also begun to form the basis for RBI's intervention. These are the dollar's performance against global majors and movement of Asian currencies. India's monetary policy when assessing rupee volatility would also have a bearing. Thus, it appears that the central bank's tolerance for volatility in the rupee has increased. This means that Indian corporates may have to brace themselves for possibly more fluctuations in the forex market. The RBI certainly does not want to participate as actively as it once did.

Some good news for people reeling under food inflation. In a confidence boosting announcement, the agriculture minister, has said that India will be in a position to export sugar and wheat next year. After the worst monsoon in 37 years, this would mean that the agriculture sector has staged a quick recovery and supply would outstrip demand. However, all this would depend on a normal monsoon this year. While food inflation has been increasing week on week, a timely start of the monsoons would act as a trigger for cooling of food prices.

Meanwhile, the BSE-Sensex languished deep in the red today despite sporadic attempts to recoup its losses during the day. At the time of writing, the BSE-Sensex was trading 120 points below the dotted line. Profit booking amongst metal, energy, realty, banking and auto sectors resulted in the plunge. As for global markets, most other Asian markets ended the day lower, while the European markets are also currently trading in the red.

 Today's investing mantra
"In the stock market the more elaborate and abstruse the mathematics the more uncertain and speculative are the conclusions we draw there from." - Benjamin Graham

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 "Has SEBI gone completely wrong here?". Click here!

81 Responses to "Has SEBI gone completely wrong here?"

a mukherjee

May 15, 2010

Off late SEBI has been changing policies regarding Mutual Funds at the drop of a hat.

It started with entry loads being abolished which was indeed a progressive move, curtailing the amount of expenses that the fund houses could charge to open and closed ended schemes etc etc. No one denies that these changes are required and long term positive for the consumer.

However of late a few of its changes have left the customer bewildered and the industry floundering.

1. The current networth requirement is a case in point

2. Also the case of removing trail commissions of assets that have moved from one distributor to another due to customers instructions. In this case the point remains as to why would the new distributor would want to contunously advice the clients on old investments if the bare minimum of trail commissions are also removed. Additionally, if there are no trail commissions, it would mean that the new distributor / advisor can only make revenues if they churn the portfolio by getting the customer to invest into newer schemes. Doesn't it go against the spirit of wanting to reduce churn in the customers portfolio in the first place????

What has to be kept in mind is that regulatory changes are to be introduced over a period of time and in a manner that is conducive to the benefits accruing the customer while giving industry space and time to realign itself to these changes.

If regulatory changes come once a month, very soon it will be a case of only the truly rich and resourceful being able to survive in the industry and not necessarily the more talented and deserving people who might not be so resourceful.


Jai Ganesh

May 15, 2010

The SBI has got it wrong this time. Size does not give any assurances against misselling or inappropriate management of funds. It is better to do away with this filmsy rule.



May 15, 2010

sebi is wrong.this will ensure only the big players can survive.but there is also one concern if a fund is small ,if some of the major holders withdraw ,how will the fund cope up and what will happen to the remaining investors


Vijay D Chauhan

May 15, 2010

equitymaster team - should you have not disclosed your conflict of interest in this matter. it is simple - the promoter of your company ajit dayal also has a small fund house. and if its aum is any indication, then perhaps he will not be able to raise funds to meet the new norms. hence you feel the need to slam this move from sebi. i am not saying you should not give your view, but please also reveal the conflict of interest. be honest and truthful .... for once.



May 15, 2010

on one side Sebi is trying to bring parity on other hand such a step. SEBI seems in a mood to make life of AMCs misrable. MF are investor friendly products but lately varous moves by sebi has resulted in reduced retail spread.


sv choksi

May 15, 2010

Sebi working hard for investor protection.In this context,I do not see any wrong doing by the regulator.



May 15, 2010

One who knows about the sharemarket knows All the Mutual Funds are useless. Those who don't know the market are interested in MF and investing in it. So, whatever the SEBI's stand is ... it wont affect the serious investor.



May 15, 2010

I think market will be more volatile and risky as more funds / liquidity available, mutual funds will use the same for selective scripts / groups of their interests and concerns, because after mutual funds are watched / controlld by government authorities and experiance have shown that they are looking after their interest only and not for small investors.


som deo

May 15, 2010

the decision of SEBI is laudable for enhancing the networth requirement of intermediaries in the market, it was long awaited.Also laudable is the decision of asking the QIBs to pay upfront payments so that grey market is controlled to a great extent. The Sebi further needs to take further measures to rationalise the issue of shares on bookbuilding basis. Any listing of 5per cent before the issue price should be taken note of and the investors,particularly small ones, should have the choice to recall their investment.This will control the unscrupulous issuers on the fancy of the market.



May 15, 2010

This move of SEBI does indeed discourage meritorious entrepreneur from entering into the financial market and it also promotes might og big investors and fund houses

<<Prev    Next>>
Equitymaster requests your view! Post a comment on "Has SEBI gone completely wrong here?". Click here!