05 November 2019

Divestment - an out of the box idea

I have a piece in today's Economic Times on an out of the box idea for disinvestment of public sector undertakings. I believe that the tradational thinking of selling in strategic lots is over-hyped and a transparent system of a stock market sale, albeit with a time lag, is the best way forward. The accepted wisdom is that a strategic sale to the highest bidder would maximise value fo r the govt. and thus for the tax payer. While this is correct, given the background of past privatisations, there is another method of selling in small lots and yet obtaining maximum value.

The process I recommend would have the following benefits a) no charge of crony capitalism b) a pure auction method of sale to all investors c) improves corporate governance and disclosures in the interim d) unleashes the full force of animal spirits in the markets and the economy e) improves prices of PSUs today itself f) allows PSUs to raise capital today itself for any expansion with low dilution g) gives a chance to domestic and global investors to keep dry powder of money when the sale happens g) tax payer/govt get maximum value maximisation h) the best bidder based on fierce competition gets to run the company.

Caveats: for strategic industries, a fit and proper test would be required after any acquirer acquires say 5% stake. Also, it is important to dramatically improve disclosures of the PSUs so that investors do not stay away because they don't know what they are buying.

Here is the link to the piece and the full text reproduced below.

"After nearly two decades of attempts at privatisation, just a handful of companies have been truly privatised till now. Many of those handful have been mired in litigation, not just because labour protested, but because there were more than whispers of crony capitalism. The conspiracy theories were even more muddy than the reality, making privatisation a bad word.

Because of the legacy issues, the Modi government 1.0 was cautious. Some neither-man-nor-beast-privatisations were carried out. These included mechanisms like selling exchange traded funds with underlying public sector stocks. The problem with these was that the government maintained full control over the companies, thus failing to unlock the potential of efficiencies of privatisation. As a result, the privatisation premium was not realised by the government and there was no improvement of corporate governance in the companies.

As citizens, as consumers, we have paid the price of public sector monopolies or even non-monopolies. Older readers of this paper would remember the 8 year wait to get a landline phone connection. Even more recently, the funding of Air India has resulted not just in tens of thousands of tax payer money being wasted, but also in second order harm like the collapse of Jet Airways. It’s hard for private sector to compete with a competitor who just got a multi-billion dollar gift from the tax payer, and a gift which ensured poor records on every metric of flying or service.

In almost all sectors except banking, and just a handful of others, the government should exit business completely. After the corporate tax rate cuts, this will be the next big bang reforms of this government. By all accounts, the Modi government 2.0 is keen on pushing this agenda and has the full political spine to carry this out without a whiff of scandal. This piece discusses some ideas of how to maximise value for all – government, taxpayer, consumer and importantly the animal spirits of corporate India, which could use some fillip.

This author recommends a multi step process to maximise value for India’s economic growth. First, comply with the law on minimum public shareholder. Every listed public sector undertaking (PSU) must first achieve a 10% public shareholding and then a 25% public shareholding. Since most PSUs are already compliant with the first milestone, it could be achieved quickly for the remaining handful of companies. The second milestone could be set at say one year from today. No complicated means of divestment is necessary. The intention can be announced today and a time bound divestment should be carried out in the open markets of stock exchanges. So an announcement to divest say 0.1% per day for a period of 100 days would serve the purpose instead of an unnecessarily complex process seeking bids. This could be announced today, so that the divestment is completed from day 365 to day 465. The timeline would give domestic and international funds time to garner the necessary funds to keep their powder dry and apply at the appropriate time. The advance notice and the gradual sale would ensure that the best price is unlocked for the government.

This without more action, will of course be inadequate, because the idea is to privatise and not to be merely compliant with the law on public shareholding of PSUs. For that, the government should adopt a means of divestment not yet tried out. First the same advance notice for a staggered sale over the market place, but with a longer timeline and with larger quantities available for sale. So an announcement and terms of sale should be announced today for sale after say 2 years. At the end of 730 days, the government will divest 1% per day, every single day till the government holding becomes zero. This method has the benefit of setting the terms of the sale today, so no one can allege that a sale was carried out to favour one business entity. It also allows domestic and international players to prepare to purchase the company and allows a bidding war in a fiercely competitive manner through the transparent exchange market. This process is likely to increase the value today itself and not after 730 days. As people see the value being unlocked and see the opportunity to get a piece of the pie, they are likely to start buying the PSU shares starting immediately. The increased valuation would improve the dull valuations of all stocks and in particular PSU stocks. The higher valuation today will also ensure that the assets are not sold at a fraction of their fair market value, like many PSU stocks are today valued. The higher valuation would also allow the PSUs to accept more equity capital and invest in expansion. This could drive both demand side and supply side of the economy.


-->
While theoretically the concept of a strategic sale of say 70% in one go is attractive as it may offer a better price, it comes with many burdens. The first is the allegation of selling out to a specific buyer by setting terms which are onerous, and thus acrimonious litigations to which the government is a party. Second, buyers come in with scepticism as they have a take-it-or-leave-it approach. Third, a gradual improvement of governance and disclosure norms over a period of 2 years is likely to improve confidence in the numbers put out by the company, a process not available with a strategic outright sale. Fourth, while a strategic sale may make sense if one company is being sold per year, it is not an ideal way to sell 200 or more PSUs at one go. For this to work, the government must carry out a very detailed process analysis and state the terms of sale, improve corporate governance by adding credible people on the boards of the PSUs and figure a way to minimise labour protests through providing alternate employment where necessary. Additionally, there is no reason the same process cannot be conducted for unlisted PSUs as well, with additional disclosures."

No comments: