|
March
23, 2007
IPOs:
Get Real, Get Ranked
In
a
move that could significantly affect the manner in which initial
public offerings ("IPOs") would be made, the Securities
and Exchange Board of India ("SEBI") has directed the
following:
-
stricter
norms with regard to disclosures of the land banks of real
estate companies making an IPO ("Issuer
Companies"),
and
-
the
grading of IPOs has now been made mandatory.
Real
Estate IPO Disclosures
Background
In
order to make themselves more attractive in the eyes of the
investors, real estate Issuer Companies may resort to such forms
of market valuation of their land banks so
as to depict exaggerated valuations. It has been observed that
usually these land banks, which are disclosed in the offer
documents, may include future projections and lands which are not
entirely conveyed in favor of a real estate Issuer Company.
The
same could be apparently inferred by observing the share price
movements of some of the prominent real estate companies that have
recently been listed on the stock exchange(s). The equity shares
of some of these companies are currently trading at a price which
is lower than their IPO price. SEBI
Directive: With
a view to ensuring
greater transparency, SEBI has directed that a real estate
sector Issuer Company shall henceforth have to provide specific
disclosures pertaining to its land bank in its offer documents,
with special emphasis on the status of the ownership of these
lands. SEBI has also directed that only present or current valuations of the land banks should be disclosed in the offer documents. Moreover, whether the agreements pertaining to such land parcels have or do not have a revocation clause shall have to be disclosed as well. Additionally, all such agreements with regard to the land bank will have to be made available for scrutiny and inspection. Further, to ensure constant monitoring, SEBI has directed continuous disclosures in this regard at the post-listing stage as well.
Implication:
-
It
has the potential
to be an effective investor
protection measure as it would reduce the chances of innocent
investors being lured into buying shares of a company which
does not in fact own,
or is yet to own,
the large land banks it claims to have in its offer documents.
-
On
the other hand, it imposes an additional
responsibility for the Issuer Companies as well as the
merchant bankers, to ensure full disclosure with
regard to both
true valuation and the status of ownership of the
land banks.
Mandatory grading
of IPOs
Background
On
April 24, 2006, SEBI, through Circular
SEBI/CFD/DIL/DIP/21/2006/24/4, had introduced IPO grading for
Issuer Companies, at the option of such Issuer Companies. The
Issuer Company could choose from any of the credit rating agencies
registered with SEBI and the credit rating agency, being an
independent and impartial body, would assess the IPO and compare
it to other Indian listed companies. Further, the grading would be on
a scale of 1-5, where grade 1 stands for the least
favorable and grade 5 as the most favorable. This grade would then
have to be disclosed in all the offer documents with respect to
the issue by the Issuer Company.
This
grading however, should
not be confused with an investment recommendation, as
it does not take into account the price of the issue.
Further,
the service charges of the credit rating agency were borne by SEBI
and paid from the investor protection fund maintained in this
regard. This definitely added to the authenticity and reliability
of the grading.
SEBI
Directive:
SEBI
has, with immediate effect, made grading of IPOs mandatory, and
the Issuer Company will now
have to bear the charges of the credit rating agency
performing the grading of its IPO.
SEBI
also stated that it would be reviewing this policy in the times to
come, in order to create a scenario where the equity shares of a
company would be graded rather than only
for the purpose of a one-time public issue.
Implications:
-
The
grading will now aid the retail investors, who lack the
knowledge, skill and expertise to interpret the bulky and
complex data contained in the offer documents, in their
investment choices.
-
Such
grading, however,
being based only on the "fundamentals" of a
company and
which does not take into account the price of the issue at
all, is insufficient and could be confused with an investment
recommendation such as "buy" or "avoid" by
these retail investors.
-
If
the concept of assessing and grading the total equity shares
of a company, as opposed to grading of a specific one-time
issue, were to be effectuated, it may also
result in an unfair or inaccurate grade. It is
quite likely that there may be instances where an Issuer
Company may do exceptionally well or conversely, may not do so
well, post-issue.
Since
this directive has come in so recently, one will have
to wait and watch the market and the general
reaction to the same.
Sources:
|
|
|
You can
direct your queries or comments to the authors
|
|