Wednesday, April 01, 2009

Take a pill to kill five ailments

By Muneeb Faraaz

A single pill that contains five life-saving drugs to combat bad cholesterol, high blood pressure and clotting at one go, has come closer to reality after passing its first big test.

Scientists announced that polypill, the once-a-day wonder tablet that combines cholesterol-lowering statin, aspirin and three BP lowering drugs was as effective as the drugs taken separately and had no major side effects.

The Indian and Canadian scientists, who announced their finding in the medical journal, The Lancet, on Tuesday, believe that patients suffering from or at risk of cardio-vascular diseases would better adhere to such a combination as it involved taking only one pill instead of five.

The study tested polypill on 2,053 Indians aged 48-80 years who did not have heart disease but had a single risk factor like raised BP, diabetes, obesity or smoking. It concluded that if the pill was given to this population, it would reduce the risk of heart disease by 62% and stroke by 48% because of the fall in their BP and bad cholesterol levels.

Conducted across 50 Indian centres, the study by researchers from McMaster University in Hamilton and St John’s Medical College in Bangalore confirmed in principle that these medicines were safe and tolerable when taken together and are still effective when combined in one fixeddose pill.

Lead investigator, Dr Salim Yusuf, said, “The thought that a single pill could reduce multiple cardiovascular risk factors could revolutionize heart disease prevention. Before this study, there were no data about whether it was even possible to put five active ingredients into a single pill.’’

“We found that it works. The next step would be a major trial of the polypill among people with clear risk of cardiovascular disease. We will further develop appropriate combinations of BP lowering drugs with statins and aspirin,’’ Dr Yusuf added.

Even as the world hailed the magic bullet pill, practising doctors in India weren’t as excited about polypill. Senior consultant (cardiology) at Indraprastha Apollo hospital, Dr Deepak Natarajan, said the pill would not allow flexibility to doctors in modifying drug combinations to suit individual patients.

“In India, generic drugs don’t cost much. So polypill would actually benefit western countries where drug prices are high,’’ he said.

Dr Natarajan said another danger with polypill was unnecessary medication. “For instance, doctors prescribing polypill might subject a patient to strong BP lowering drugs though he might just suffer from high cholesterol.’’

Said Dr Anoop Misra from Fortis, “My real fear is that healthy patients with a single risk factor would start imagining that popping a pill would protect them against heart diseases. They will then give up what is most crucial in preventing CVD — regular exercise and a healthy diet.’’

Local Congmen out to defeat ‘outsiders’ in AP

By M H Ahssan

The delimitation factor and the Congress imposing ‘outsiders’ in several constituencies have combined to brew a lethal combination for the ruling party. By preliminary estimates, in at least 50 assembly and half-a-dozen Lok Sabha constituencies, the local leaders and their followers have decided to ensure the defeat of the official Congress nominees.

In most of these constituencies, the Congress has sidelined local leaders who have worked in the area for years and instead, given tickets to rank outsiders who in many cases are not even members of the party. “Therefore, unlike the rebel who contests as an independent against the official candidate, our leaders are not contesting the polls, but silently working for the defeat of the official Cong re s s n o m i - nees,” one leader said.

One reason for plotting the defeat of the official candidates is that if the outsider nominee does manage to win, then he would claim that the seat as his own in the future elections. “The only way we can ensure that our leader gets back the seat is to defeat the official candidate,” said followers of a leader from the city who has been denied a ticket for the assembly.

Take the Shadnagar assembly seat, the Congress has nominated Pratap Reddy, who is hardly known in the party circles, while denying the ticket to K Srinivas Goud, a staunch party worker and a sarpanch of Kottur village. Goud and his men are working for the defeat of Pratap. “Shadnagar is basically a BC-dominated seat. If Pratap Reddy wins, in the future, he would have the first right to stake claim to the seat and our leader and the BCs would have to forget contesting,” Goud’s followers said.

Similarly, the Congress has thrust outsiders in the Malkajgiri Lok Sabha constituency and Ambarpet assembly seats. While Sitting Siddipet MP Sarve Satyanarayana has been fielded from the Malkajgiri LS seat, minister Md Fareeduddin has been moved from Medak to the Amberpet assembly constituency. “While there may be other reasons for pitting Fareeduddin, a weak outsider, against BJP’s G Kishan Reddy, disappointed local aspirants and their followers in both the seats are fiercely against the official candidate’s victory,” said a leader.

Rajya Sabha MP and veteran city leader V Hanumantha Rao (VHR) had tried very hard for the Malkajgiri Lok Sabha seat. However, he was unsuccessful. Sources said VHR does not want to contribute a bit to the victory of these two candidates and has reportedly turned down many telephone requests from chief minister Y S Rajasekhara Reddy to campaign for Fareeduddin in Amberpet, a seat where the MP lives and wields enormous clout.

In the Telangana region, local Congress leaders are said to be working for the defeat of official Sircilla assembly seat nominee G Manjula, who defected from the TDP recently. For Husnabad assembly, the Congress has fielded Pravin Reddy of Husnabad who is hardly known to local leaders. For the Nalgonda LS seat, the Congress has nominated G Sukhender Reddy over DCC president Mallesh Goud. Sukhender had quit the TDP and joined the Congress just a few days before his nomination was announced. In all these instances, a silent revolt is brewing in the Congress.

In Nagarkurnool LS constituency, the candidature of Mandha Jagannatham, who shifted loyalties from the TDP, has not gone down well with the local leaders. In the Andhra region, the Congress has imposed outsiders in Visakhapatnam (D Purandeshwari), Bapatla (Panabaka Lakshmi) and Balasouri (Narasaraopet). “Why should we work for a non-local,” is the common refrain.

Israel rushes to India's defense

By M H Ahssan

Israel emerged as India's number one defense partner last week when it was revealed that New Delhi had signed a US$1.4 billion deal with the country to purchase a 70 kilometer shore-based and sea borne anti-missile air defense system.

This is among the bigger defense deals between the two countries and the biggest military joint venture by India with a foreign country, overtaking the India-Russia BrahMos cruise missile project.

A senior defense official said the total value of the deal was over $2 billion, with one portion valued at $600 million being hived off to the state-controlled Defense Research and Development Organization.

This makes Israel India's biggest defense supplier, clocking over a billion dollars in new contracts in 2007 and 2008 to overtake Russia.

Russia has been supplying India with $875 million in defense equipment every year. Other main Indian defense partners are Sweden, Britain and France, with the United States an emerging competitor.

"We have a very special defense relationship with India," Israeli Major General Udi Shani, director of the Defense Ministry's Sibat export agency, was quoted as saying recently.

Last August, New Delhi inked a $2.5 billion deal with Israel Aerospace Industries Ltd (IAI) and Rafael to jointly develop a new and advanced version of the Spyder surface-to-air missile system.

In May this year, India should receive the first of three new Phalcon Airborne Warning and Control Systems (AWACS) developed for the Indian Air Force by IAI. The three "eyes in the sky" Phalcons priced at $1.1 billion will be mounted on Russian-delivered Ilyushin-76 aircraft. The deal was inked in March 2004 and has been delayed due to problems in technical integration.

Talks are underway for the purchase of another three AWACS.

India also recently purchased aerostat radars from Israel to spot surreptitious guerilla attacks, such as the one in Mumbai last November where the attackers used dingy boats to infiltrate the city. That deal is valued at $600 million.

The radars will be stationed at strategic points along the western border to issue advance warning against incoming enemy aircraft and missiles.

It is estimated that in the past decade India and Israel have signed defense deals valued at over $10 billion. This is not going to slow down, either.

IAI officially announced the latest defense contract with India last week, more than a month after it was inked. In a statement the company said that "early disclosure was liable to cause material difficulties in execution of the contract, and even result in its cancelation".

There have been allegations of kickbacks in the India-Israel deal, which is a usual accusation that follows any big defense contract. Particularly vitriolic have been the anti-American, anti-Israeli left parties in India.

Both IAI and Rafael have been under federal investigation in India since 2006 for alleged irregularities relating to former defense minister George Fernandes, former navy chief Sushil Kumar and the purchase of a Barak anti-missile ship defense system six years ago. The issue is yet to be resolved.

Political meaning is being attached to the revelation of the sale, given that general elections in India are scheduled for next month. The Congress Party's coalition government headed by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has been under pressure to show evidence of stronger security measures in the wake of the Mumbai strikes.

The deal was signed on February 27 - right before the general elections were announced in India and the model code of conduct that debars government moves to implement decisions that may influence voters came into effect.

Security is one key electoral issue in the wake of repeated terror attacks in India in the past few years. However, most observers agree there is an emerging political and military consensus that India's security framework has to be shored up to guard against non-state players in Pakistan launching repeated attacks.

Following the Mumbai attacks that killed nearly 200 people, Indian intelligence agencies have been speaking about rogue terror elements in Pakistan firing nuclear-tipped ballistic missiles at Indian cities.

Last month, India conducted its third successful missile intercept test in Orissa, as part of an indigenous plan to build a defense system against incoming ballistic missiles by 2010, which is more powerful than the anti-missile system being procured from Israel.

An effective ballistic missile defense (BMD) system is considered to be a key weapon in thwarting threats of rogue elements firing stolen nuclear-tipped missiles at India from Pakistan or Bangladesh, a possibility heightened by the bold Mumbai strikes.

India has also been holding talks with the United States, Israel and Russia to hasten the BMD deployment in the past few weeks. The first BMD test was in November 2006, followed by another in December 2007.

After failing the first trial, the new version of the 290km-range supersonic BrahMos cruise missile, which apparently is capable of delivering nuclear warheads, was successfully test fired in Rajasthan's Pokhran range twice last month.

In the context of India's war against terror, Israel, with its expertise in radars and missiles, will be a key player.

Tuesday, March 31, 2009

India up Sir Creek without a paddle

By Sudha Ramachandran

Among the many victims of the terrorist attacks in Mumbai in November last year was a possible resolution to the India-Pakistan dispute over Sir Creek.

The two countries were apparently making progress towards resolving their differences on demarcating a boundary along the creek when the terrorist attacks happened. An angry India suspended the composite dialogue with Pakistan, scuttling the possibility of the two sides hammering out a mutually acceptable solution to their conflicting claims.

As a result, India and Pakistan will not be able to meet the May 13 deadline to submit to the United Nations a mutually acceptable claim on the limits of their continental shelves at Sir Creek. They are now expected to file separate claims to the UN.

Sir Creek is a 96-kilometer estuary that runs between the marshes of the Rann of Kutch in the Indian state of Gujarat and the Pakistani province of Sindh, opening into the Arabian Sea. The India-Pakistan boundary along this creek has not been demarcated.

The dispute over Sir Creek goes back a century; it predates the creation of India and Pakistan. Before the 1947 independence, it was a bone of contention between the rulers of Sindh and Kutch. An agreement reached in 1914, which was followed up with a map finalized in 1925, kept the dispute dormant for several decades. But the dispute came alive in the 1960s, with Pakistan claiming over half of the Rann of Kutch.

A verdict given by an international tribunal in 1968 upheld India's claim to around 90% of the Rann of Kutch. The Sir Creek section of the boundary was not considered by the tribunal.

While the India-Pakistan dispute over Sir Creek does not trigger the kind of passionate debate that divided Kashmir does in the two countries, it has been an important flashpoint. It was in the Rann of Kutch that the 1965 India-Pakistan war began. And it was here that an Indian Air Force MIG-21 shot down a Pakistani surveillance aircraft in August 1999. What is more, the haziness of where the boundary lies has resulted in hundreds of fishermen from both countries straying into hostile waters unintentionally and being taken into custody.

The dispute over Sir Creek involves two issues - demarcation of the India-Pakistan boundary along Sir Creek and demarcation of the maritime boundary from the mouth of the creek seawards into the Arabian Sea.

As for the boundary along Sir Creek, Pakistan says that this should run along the creek's eastern bank, defined by a "green line" that is represented on the 1914 map. That is, it lays claim to the entire creek.

India points out that the "green line" is only an indicative line and argues that the boundary should be defined by the "mid-channel" of the creek as shown on the map drawn up in 1925.

India cites the Thalweg doctrine in international law, which states that river boundaries between two states will run through mid-channel, to bolster its position. Pakistan has countered this argument by pointing out that the Thalweg doctrine applies to navigable water bodies. Sir Creek, it has maintained, is not navigable. But India insists that that the creek is navigable during high tide.

Sir Creek itself has little value. It is a marshy wasteland. But where the boundary line runs through it will determine how much Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) one country will lose or gain. If the boundary line runs along the Eastern Bank as claimed by Pakistan, India will lose several hundred square kilometers of continental shelf. It is the prospect of finding substantial reserves of oil in the continental shelf that made the two sides inflexible in their positions.

But that changed thanks to a move by the United Nations, which pushed the two sides to look for a compromise. The UN Convention on Law of the Sea set May 13, 2009, as the deadline for signatories to claim maritime rights over territorial waters, contiguous zones, EEZs and the continental shelf.

Parties to a dispute such as the one over Sir Creek have until May to make a mutually acceptable claim on the limits of the continental shelf, failing which the UN would declare disputed areas as "international waters".

This put pressure on India and Pakistan to move to resolve the Sir Creek dispute. Talks on Sir Creek made progress since the start of the composite dialogue in early 2004. India and Pakistan agreed to a joint survey of the region last year. The maps the two sides drew up following the survey were in agreement with each other. According to a report in the Indian Express, India and Pakistan had come "excruciatingly close" to an agreement on a boundary through Sir Creek. With the fixing of a land boundary almost done, the two sides were "a significant step closer to defining the maritime boundary".

India and Pakistan were due to discuss the next steps on Sir Creek on December 2 and 3 last year. That did not happen. Terrorists attacked Mumbai on November 26. An angry India called off the talks and the composite dialogue. The dialogue remains in a state of suspension.

With talks called off, the chances of India and Pakistan resolving differences on Sir Creek by the May deadline and filing mutually acceptable claims on their respective continental shelves are slim.

With the deadline a little over a month away, the two countries are now preparing to file their individual claims to around 250 square miles of area. Since these will be conflicting claims, neither will be able to use the resources here.

While both India and Pakistan stand to lose since neither will be able to use the resources, it is India that is the greater loser as Pakistan had come around to accepting India's viewpoint. After the survey, Pakistan is said to have accepted that Sir Creek was navigable, which means it would have in all likelihood agreed to the creek being divided mid-channel as India wanted, had the talks continued.

While the dispute over Sir Creek has survived for decades, it is among the less politicized disputes between India and Pakistan and as a result was more amenable to settlement.

A settlement was close at hand and could have well gone in India's favor. Did India shoot itself in the foot by suspending the composite dialogue?

Shooting in the Dark: How Much Is Satyam Worth?

By M H Ahssan

A business magazine recently wrote a cover story about A.M. Naik, chairman and managing director of the US$7 billion engineering conglomerate Larsen & Toubro (L&T). It was titled "The Great Gamble." That's a curious phrase to associate with a solid company and a man who has been with the same organization for the past 44 years and at its helm for nearly 10.

Naik's new sobriquet is courtesy of Satyam Computer Services, a company that has seen a massive fraud orchestrated by founder and chairman B. Ramalinga Raju. When, in mid-December 2008, Satyam announced a US$1.6 billion deal with sister company Maytas, the scrip plunged from Rs200 plus (around US$4) to Rs150 (US$3), a 25% drop. In New York, the ADRs (American Depository Receipts) fell 54%. Naik seems to have seen in this a buying opportunity. Through its investment vehicles, L&T bought 4% of Satyam for around Rs140 (less than US$3) a share.

After that, L&T plunged even deeper. When the full dimensions of the Satyam scandal broke, and the share fell to as low as 12 cents, L&T bought another 8%. Today, it holds 12% of the company and is one of the major bidders vying for the beleaguered firm. But it is probably as clueless as any of the others on the real state of affairs at Satyam. "The problem is that there are so many imponderables," says Ganesh Natarajan, chairman of the National Association of Software and Service Companies (Nasscom) and CEO of Zensar Technologies.

Another bidder -- Tech Mahindra, part of the US$6.7 billion Mahindra Group -- has also burned its fingers through dabbling in the Satyam affair. Rating agency Fitch has withdrawn its coverage of the company after it announced its bid. According to a Fitch statement, "Given the uncertainties regarding the final closure of the (Satyam) transaction, the financing, and consequent financial impact on Tech Mahindra, the agency is unable to take a rating action at the time of withdrawal."

L&T, Tech Mahindra and B.K. Modi's Spice Group have officially announced they are in the race. They have put in expressions of interest (EoIs) as required by the government-appointed Satyam board. They have also lined up the Rs1,500 crore (US$300 million) cash that the board has mandated that all bidders show before they can proceed to the next round.

It is not known how many companies have submitted EoIs; no one else had declared themselves in the fray at the time of writing. There are reported to be some multinational IT majors, private equity players and domestic IT companies. It is unlikely that all will come out in the open given the de-rating of Tech Mahindra and the hammering the L&T scrip has received on the stock markets. According to Calcutta-based daily The Telegraph, "More than 60 entities were reported to have evinced interest after Satyam kicked off the bidding process on March 9. However, the number dropped sharply when the bidders were asked to submit detailed EoIs. An indication to this effect was available when Nasdaq-listed iGate quit the race."

The iGate experience shows some of the difficulties in bidding for Satyam. "Initially, we were interested in Satyam because we felt that it had a lot of good customers and good employees," explains Phaneesh Murthy, CEO of iGate Corp. "Then, because the process was taking too long and, more importantly, we were given to understand that we would not have any new financial information when the auction happens we lost interest. Suddenly, a few days ago, we got a call saying that we would get more financial information but the only way to get that was to put in a formal EoI."

Interest was reignited, but iGate backed out nevertheless. "While there is no one particular reason, it is the totality of concerns like sliding revenues, unknown margins and large liabilities that made us pull out of the race," Murthy told India Knowledge@Wharton after making the decision. "Through market intelligence, we know that there are enough customer exits happening at Satyam. While the value erosion and extent of liabilities were a concern, it was the totality of concerns that influenced our decision. We did not go to the stage of getting formal financials from Satyam's board. However, we had prepared our own model of financials and in that model it was difficult to get a reasonable return for any investor. Our private equity fund partner had no role or influence in our decision to pull out."

Lots of Questions
- Murthy's explanation contains all the questions that Satyam bidders, analysts and the media are asking. In a nutshell:
- How do you value a company whose financials are unknown and whose chairman admits he has been cooking the books for seven years?
- Are there really good customers and good employees? How many have jumped ship and how many more are planning to do so?
- Is the process taking too long?
- What about the huge liabilities that could arise out of the class action suits filed in the U.S.?
- Why are private equity players interested in this deal? Why are multinationals?
- Has the action of the regulators so far been adequate? Conversely, have they been bending over backwards to save Satyam?
- Finally, do we need changes in laws to make future resolution of such situations easier? Does India need an equivalent of Chapter 11 bankruptcy in the U.S.?

Opinions differ widely about possible answers to these questions. Consider valuation. The winner is supposed to end up with a 51% stake in the company through a combination of new shares (31%) and an open offer (21%) to ordinary shareholders. Satyam's current market capitalization at around 90 cents a share is approximately US$600 million. This is the rationale for the US$300 million (the market value of 51%) the board has asked bidders to arrange as a pre-qualification for being allowed to bid. But is 90 cents a share a reasonable price? The stock had a 52-week high (pre-scam) of US$11. It dropped to as low as 12 cents. How do you value such a company? What are bidders paying for?

"Satyam's strong client base and its large workforce," answers Ajay Garg, assistant professor of finance and accounting at the Indian Institute of Management Lucknow (IIML). Adds Kishor Ostwal, managing director of CNI Research, a Mumbai-based stock market analysis and data provider: "The buyer is still getting business close to US$1 billion and, going by IT operating margins, he can earn US$100 million to US$120 million a year. Even as some clients are leaving or contemplating leaving, if Satyam goes into reputed hands with enough IT bandwidth, then retaining existing clients or scouting for new clients should not be a problem. The buyer is just trying to leverage the business and the market cap at which the business is available."

"Valuation models for IT services firms are heavily skewed towards the quality and quantity of their human capital asset base," says Ravi Bapna, associate professor of information systems at the Carlson School of Management and executive director of the Center for Information Technology and the Networked Economy (CITNE) at the Hyderabad-based Indian School of Business. "Thus, Satyam's biggest asset is its high-quality workforce, followed by its order book and related tacit knowledge about its clients' business processes. I would count its physical infrastructure as a distant third, given oversupply in the real estate sector. Unfortunately, post the debacle, the brand is more likely to be viewed as a liability. Unlike physical assets, human capital is not subject to 'lock-in' and can easily be lured by a potential suitor who does not want to take on the associated liabilities. While such a scenario should, under normal circumstances, attract bargain-hunting type valuations, one can never underestimate the hubris factor in the Indian context."

"While it is true that the Satyam name has been hit badly, and employee morale and customer interest is very low, it is certainly not an organization that can be completely written off," says K. Raman, practice head (telecom, media & technology) at the Tata Strategic Management Group (TSMG). "Bidders are looking for an enterprise within which they can create large future value at an extremely attractive valuation today. There is still a reasonably large client base intact within Satyam, new orders are being booked and there are reasonably large acknowledged receivables that the company is looking to collect. All this indicates that if the management falls in place, then one can probably have an entity which is viable on its own going forward.

"Also, the way Satyam's business has been structured in the past may be of interest to certain types of acquirers. For instance, Satyam has typically been more focused than its peers on package implementation and ERP, which can be a good fit for an acquirer who is looking to scale. Similarly, Satyam has a reasonably strong presence in the Indian market especially through its government contracts. This can also be a good stream of revenues going forward."

"Customers are happy with the work that Satyam managers have done for them in terms of sheer capability," says Natarajan of Nasscom. "A lot of mission-critical applications are being done and it is always messy to migrate that to another provider. What the bidder will get is good employees and good customer names. The bidder -- if he comes in quickly and has a credible management team which can talk to employees and customers and show that the company is viable -- can convince them to stay on. But the worry is that in a period of uncertainty, people will obviously not wait forever."

Rewards vs. Risks
The exodus has already begun. The Economic Times says that 3,500 of the 50,000 Satyam employees have left in the past one month. But it also quotes chairman Kiran Karnik (who was roped in by the government to rescue the company) as saying that this was normal attrition and no cause for alarm. The Economic Times also reports that Satyam has lost 46 customers out of its roster of around 600. Those in the process of migrating include Abu Dhabi Bank, Applied Materials, Emerson, Kansas State Bank, Nissan, Sony, State Farm Insurance and Telstra. The Business Standard newspaper estimates current revenues to be around US$1.4 billion to US$1.6 billion, against the US$2 billion plus pre-fraud estimates. Ostwal of CNI puts it at a US$1 billion, and there are skeptics who say the figure could be whittled down even further the longer it takes.

Could the sale process have been speeded up? "The bidding process is going just fine," says Natarajan of Nasscom. "The board just has to get it done as soon as possible. They need to now set a final deadline. Otherwise, it will be a continuing ping-pong battle. Given all the moving parts, the bidding process is as good as it can get." Concurs Garg of IIML: "The government acted quickly when it dissolved the old board and appointed fresh directors in a bid to stabilize the company and restore confidence."

Garg is doubtful, however, that equal alacrity has been shown in the case against the previous Satyam management. "The legal case is taking a very long time," he says. "But that has always has been the norm in India. A lot of frauds and crimes take place because the legal process takes too long to punish the culprits." Adds Ostwal of CNI: "Although the media and others may think that the government and the regulators have acted fast by reorganizing the board of Satyam, initiating the bidding process and arresting the promoters, the fact remains that the case is mired in mystery. This leads one to believe that, as in other cases of financial misdemeanors in the country, this time also the culprits will walk free."

The continuing mystery, says Ostwal, has added to volatility of the Satyam share and given some bidders too much leeway. "It has given enough room for speculation which has helped players in this stock," he says. "It was on record that [L&T's] Naik had said that he knew more than minority shareholders in the case of Satyam, which is against the spirit of the law. Normally, anybody bidding should have been asked to maintain silence for at least a month before the bidding process -- as happens during IPOs (initial public offerings). The varying nature of statements from regulators, the directors of Satyam and interested bidders like [B.K.] Modi who tried to quantify the liabilities arising from the suits in the U.S. have all led to increased volatility and price speculation by operators and people in the know."

Modi of Spice had questioned the market valuation of Satyam; he felt it was much too high. He also told the media about a report from the group's legal advisors, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher of the U.S., which stated that the liabilities arising out of the class action lawsuits could range between US$440 million and US$840 million. In addition, Satyam faces a forgery case filed by U.K.-based mobile solutions firm Upaid, which comes up for a hearing in the U.S. in June 2009. The estimated liabilities of this case could be as high as US$1.1 billion. These numbers far exceed Satyam's current market valuation of US$600 million. "One can really never put a figure on class action suits and this also will get factored in the valuation of the company," says Natarajan. "You should actually be paid to take Satyam," says an equity analyst who does not wish to be quoted. Most research houses have now withdrawn their official coverage of Satyam.

MNCs and Private Equity
Why are multinationals and private equity (PE) players interested in bidding? There is likely to be a three-year lock-in for whoever wins the bid, so PE, in particular, seems an odd contender. "Typically, one does not associate PE players with lock-in periods but, then, three years is really not too long," says Raman of TSMG. "They do stay invested in companies for this period of time." Natarajan has a different explanation. "PE players are probably fronting for larger multinationals," he says. "If PE players come in by themselves and try to get in a team, it may not necessarily be good for the company. What Satyam needs right now is not just money but also a strong management team and stability. There needs to be an umbrella of credibility and trust."

This is something the multinationals could bring; the Indian IT firms, which are respected names internationally, have declared they are not interested. "MNCs would get scale in India, [including] capabilities and customers," says Natarajan. Explains Murthy of iGate: "It will give them a larger footprint and employee base." Adds Ostwal of CNI: "Over the years, as margins in IT hardware and peripherals decreased, big players like IBM and HP have been eyeing different revenue streams. In fact, for IBM, IT services constitute an ever-increasing pie of its total revenues. Satyam would be a perfect fit for IBM, which will give it capabilities and a skilled workforce. It can then leverage those along with its brand to create a huge revenue source. HP, on the other hand, also stands to gain as it can then transfer all its IT services' needs in-house to Satyam and slash costs as well as acquire a new revenue stream." Raman of TSMG agrees. "While both HP and IBM have a large presence in India, they have also stated their intentions of scaling this up further," he says.

New Rules of the Game
The Satyam bidding process has raised some questions that go beyond the company and the fraud its promoter has perpetrated. In order to enable an easier salvage operation, the Securities & Exchange Board of India (Sebi) has changed the rules of the game. For instance, the norm for pricing an open offer is that it should be the average of the past 26 weeks, or two immediately preceding weeks prior to the open offer, whichever is higher. The 26-week price, the higher of the two, is way above current levels. "The floor price for the open offer would have been very high had the rules not been changed, and at that price no bidder would have been attracted," says Garg of IIML. The rule has now been relaxed and the buyer can make the open offer at the same price at which he is issued the new shares. There have been other relaxations to allow the bidding to progress smoothly.

This has been by and large welcomed, particularly as it will apply to similar cases in the future. "The changes made by Sebi are absolutely warranted," says Murthy of iGate. "Otherwise, in such cases, no one can step forward to rescue the company." Ostwal of CNI disagrees. "SOS changes by Sebi are not really warranted," he says. "In fact, it has become a habit with the regulator to make changes on an SOS basis. First were the Promissory Note rules, then the disclosure of pledged shares, and then the Sebi Acquisitions and Takeover guidelines." In his view, some foresight would have made such fire-fighting unnecessary.

What is necessary -- and not just for Satyam-type cases -- is a bankruptcy law like Chapter 11 in the U.S. "I am convinced that India needs a bankruptcy law," says Murthy of iGate. "It does help so many companies to restructure themselves and return. The entire airline industry in the U.S., at some point, has been in bankruptcy. They would not have been able to survive if it had not been for the bankruptcy protection that they enjoy. The asbestos litigation in the U.S. would have killed many companies. But they were able to reorganize themselves under Chapter 11 and come back." Says Natarajan: "We definitely need a bankruptcy law. In fact, the strength of Silicon Valley is that if a company fails, it is allowed to fail fast. Here, shutting down the company or restructuring it financially is quite a problem. India certainly needs to look at the American bankruptcy law and try and create something like that."

Ostwal of CNI disagrees. "India does not require bankruptcy laws at the moment," he says. "India is still an immature market going by the way in which markets and regulators are functioning. Ahead of bankruptcy laws, we require physical settlement in derivatives, we require scrapping of creeping (acquisition of shares by promoters) limits of 5%, we require the 15% acquisition and takeover limits to be raised to 25% and, overall, we require a fair climate for hostile takeovers."

That's a prescription for the future. For today, everyone is keeping their fingers crossed that things get sorted out soon at Satyam. As Murthy of iGate notes: "The longer it takes, the higher will be the erosion in asset value."

Exclusive: The power of your vote

By Sri Sri Ravi Shankar

India's problems are complex. And unfortunately these are compounded by vote-bank politics. Instead of uniting the different sections of society, many politicians divide it to keep their vote banks intact. If people are united, politicians won't be able to get votes through divisive politics. In such a situation, the only way for them to win votes would be through good performance.

As citizens, we must protect our country from those who manipulate issues for their personal gains and who lead by playing vote-bank politics. Those with vested interests support insensible decisions and oppose sensible ones. We have to steer clear of such leaders. We must encourage broad-minded politicians and leaders to come forward and take charge, and to educate and uplift the society - spiritually, morally and socially.

We need leaders who are satya-darshi (truthful), sam-darshi (equanimous), priya-darshi (pleasant), paar-darshi (transparent) and door-darshi (visionary). So, before we elect our leaders, we should examine their qualifications.

We must elect leaders who will do away with policies based on caste, creed, religion and region; who will ensure that every child gets a multi-cultural, multi-dimensional education.

We need leadership with a mission and a vision, leadership with a spirit of sacrifice, compassion and commitment. We must choose leaders who have a long-term vision and short-term plans to achieve it. They should have great personal integrity, and place the country before themselves.

Unfortunately, most of our politicians lack a sense of sacrifice and inclusiveness. Irrespective of the party they belong to, people perceive politicians as insincere. Today, people are fed up of them. This is when apathy sets in among people. They dismiss politics as a whole and withdraw from their basic duty of voting.

Our votes are an important tool to bring about a change in the system; they give us an opportunity to raise our voice against injustice. But many of us have developed a chalta hai attitude, because we fail to see the power of our votes. This attitude is dangerous for the country. By not voting we are encouraging the status quo.

Each one of us must not only vote but also encourage others around us to vote. When good, intelligent and well-educated people don't vote, they play into the hands of politicians, who use money and vote bank politics to seize power. People should not lose hope. Good politicians exist. And they must be given a chance to do the best they can for the country, for its people.

We have seen the shortcomings of capitalism, communism and socialism. Now is the time for humanism and spiritualism. Politics without humanism and spiritualism is bound to be dirty. Many people believe that spiritualism is not for this world, that it is not a practical tool to bring about societal transformation. But that's a misconception. Mahatma Gandhi was spiritual. He conducted satsangs every day and played an important role in bringing freedom for our country.

That is why today we need leaders who have a spirit of sacrifice, and who are spiritual in their outlook, to enter politics.

Post-poll, the prodigals could return home

By Siddharth Bhatia

The United Progressive Alliance is dead. True, there are some partners still holding together and the Congress is still making a brave face of it, but the UPA formation, as it was for five years, is no more. This was an arrangement that came into being after the BJP-led NDA lost the 2004 elections and lasted, with a few hiccups along the way, till now. But just before the elections, that coalition has collapsed.

Though the sudden exit of two key partners, Lalu Yadav and Ram Vilas Paswan precipitated the demise of the UPA, the signs were there much earlier. The Congress got into a fight with many of its partners. Sharad Pawar's naked ambition and his maneuverings to get more seats in Maharashtra provided a clue.Now the PMK in Tamil Nadu has defected to the AIADMK, considerably weakening the coalition. Other, smaller groupings are chafing too. What is left behind cannot be really called the UPA.

A similar problem, on a smaller scale, is being seen with the National Democratic Alliance. Naveen Patnaik craftily parted ways with his decade-old partners the BJP. If the BJP persists with defending Varun Gandhi, they could find Nitish Kumar too decamping. Nitish suddenly sees himself as a prospective Prime Minister-he is not going to risk that chance because of some political upstart who couldn't control his tongue. The BJP's bigger worry is internal warfare which could exacerbate after the polls, especially if the party does poorly in the elections.

Thus, both formations built around national parties are in trouble and the regional parties, big and small are emerging as key players. Some have got together to form a loose confederation, which is in search of a name. Excited political pundits, ever on the lookout for that elusive beast, the non-Congress, non-BJP coalition, have already anointed it as the next government. This has happened before, they tell us - in 1989 and again in 1996 - and could definitely happen again. Is this so? Let us examine the evidence as it stands today.

It is a given that to form any future government, the "Third Front" will have to cobble together 272 seats, which implies that the two big parties between them should get less than that number. But is it as simple as that? Assume that the Congress and the BJP combined do not get more than 250 seats. The rest should theoretically not have a problem forming the majority. But the "rest" includes parties that will not, under any circumstances, come together. Yes, we know that politics makes strange bedfellows, but it is highly improbable that Lalu will sit with Nitish, AIADMK with DMK or Mulayamwith Mayawati. That would leave out between 70-90 members out, whichever way one counts it. The Front would collapse before it is built.

Which leaves open two other possibilities-a Front supported by the BJP or the Congress, from the outside. That too has many precedents, the last one being the Congress supported governments of H D Deve Gowda and I K Gujral. The Congress would be happy to keep the BJP out and the BJP would return the compliment. Such a formation will be a fragile one and may not last for more than two years, if past experience is anything to go by. This is what many, including the stock markets are factoring into their calculations and getting jittery about.

But in all these calculations, the probability - however remote - that the Congress or the BJP would do better than most people give them credit for is rarely considered. The collapse of the two national parties is seen as a foregone conclusion; anti-incumbency, weak organization, lack of any wave in favour of either, public anger all are cited as reasons for their imminent poor performance.

The Congress is dismissed for having not performed during it'sr five years in power and the "India Shining" story, which numbed the NDA into believing that it would win once more, is held out as an example of foolhardy thinking. Indeed, the very fact that the Congress's allies are deserting it is seen as a vindication that the party will perform poorly. The same is the story with the NDA.

But we must consider yet another possibility-that of an entirely new alliance forming after the elections. It may not be the UPA or even the NDA, as we know them, but could have a big, national party at its centre and a different name. All the smaller parties, which have opted out to fight the polls on their own could happily come back if they see their future lies with a big party-led coalition rather than with other smaller parties each of which would be tugging in a different direction. New permutations and combinations could be formed-a PMK-AIADMK formation could easily be incorporated into a new "UPA" as much as the BJD walking back into a new "NDA."

Thus, the pre-poll scenario of every one fighting on their own should not concern us as much as what the post-poll arrangements will be. In politics, tomorrow is always another day.

Post-poll, the prodigals could return home

By Siddharth Bhatia

The United Progressive Alliance is dead. True, there are some partners still holding together and the Congress is still making a brave face of it, but the UPA formation, as it was for five years, is no more. This was an arrangement that came into being after the BJP-led NDA lost the 2004 elections and lasted, with a few hiccups along the way, till now. But just before the elections, that coalition has collapsed.

Though the sudden exit of two key partners, Lalu Yadav and Ram Vilas Paswan precipitated the demise of the UPA, the signs were there much earlier. The Congress got into a fight with many of its partners. Sharad Pawar's naked ambition and his maneuverings to get more seats in Maharashtra provided a clue.Now the PMK in Tamil Nadu has defected to the AIADMK, considerably weakening the coalition. Other, smaller groupings are chafing too. What is left behind cannot be really called the UPA.

A similar problem, on a smaller scale, is being seen with the National Democratic Alliance. Naveen Patnaik craftily parted ways with his decade-old partners the BJP. If the BJP persists with defending Varun Gandhi, they could find Nitish Kumar too decamping. Nitish suddenly sees himself as a prospective Prime Minister-he is not going to risk that chance because of some political upstart who couldn't control his tongue. The BJP's bigger worry is internal warfare which could exacerbate after the polls, especially if the party does poorly in the elections.

Thus, both formations built around national parties are in trouble and the regional parties, big and small are emerging as key players. Some have got together to form a loose confederation, which is in search of a name. Excited political pundits, ever on the lookout for that elusive beast, the non-Congress, non-BJP coalition, have already anointed it as the next government. This has happened before, they tell us - in 1989 and again in 1996 - and could definitely happen again. Is this so? Let us examine the evidence as it stands today.

It is a given that to form any future government, the "Third Front" will have to cobble together 272 seats, which implies that the two big parties between them should get less than that number. But is it as simple as that? Assume that the Congress and the BJP combined do not get more than 250 seats. The rest should theoretically not have a problem forming the majority. But the "rest" includes parties that will not, under any circumstances, come together. Yes, we know that politics makes strange bedfellows, but it is highly improbable that Lalu will sit with Nitish, AIADMK with DMK or Mulayamwith Mayawati. That would leave out between 70-90 members out, whichever way one counts it. The Front would collapse before it is built.

Which leaves open two other possibilities-a Front supported by the BJP or the Congress, from the outside. That too has many precedents, the last one being the Congress supported governments of H D Deve Gowda and I K Gujral. The Congress would be happy to keep the BJP out and the BJP would return the compliment. Such a formation will be a fragile one and may not last for more than two years, if past experience is anything to go by. This is what many, including the stock markets are factoring into their calculations and getting jittery about.

But in all these calculations, the probability - however remote - that the Congress or the BJP would do better than most people give them credit for is rarely considered. The collapse of the two national parties is seen as a foregone conclusion; anti-incumbency, weak organization, lack of any wave in favour of either, public anger all are cited as reasons for their imminent poor performance.

The Congress is dismissed for having not performed during it'sr five years in power and the "India Shining" story, which numbed the NDA into believing that it would win once more, is held out as an example of foolhardy thinking. Indeed, the very fact that the Congress's allies are deserting it is seen as a vindication that the party will perform poorly. The same is the story with the NDA.

But we must consider yet another possibility-that of an entirely new alliance forming after the elections. It may not be the UPA or even the NDA, as we know them, but could have a big, national party at its centre and a different name. All the smaller parties, which have opted out to fight the polls on their own could happily come back if they see their future lies with a big party-led coalition rather than with other smaller parties each of which would be tugging in a different direction. New permutations and combinations could be formed-a PMK-AIADMK formation could easily be incorporated into a new "UPA" as much as the BJD walking back into a new "NDA."

Thus, the pre-poll scenario of every one fighting on their own should not concern us as much as what the post-poll arrangements will be. In politics, tomorrow is always another day.