|
| Disclosures on subsidiary performance a black hole for firms | |
| Shobhana Subramanian / Mumbai December 29, 2008, 0:57 IST | |
Reliance Life Insurance is among the top four private sector life insurance companies in the country. The new business premium that it collected from people grew at a remarkable195 per cent in 2007-08 to Rs 2,751 crore. How profitable is the venture? A company spokesperson said they aren’t talking about the bottom line right now, though he adds that financial analysts are in the know. After some persuasion, he discloses that the company turned in a loss of Rs 700 crore in 2007-08.
Other insurance firms such as HDFC Standard Life are more transparent and report the results in the balance sheet — the loss it posted in 2008-09 was Rs 243 crore. But not all companies are generous with numbers these days — they’re willing to share details of their core operations, but many of them are reluctant to let shareholders get even a glimpse of newer ventures. They do part with the revenue and profit figures, a much-needed description of the dynamics of the business and where it is headed is often missing.
Take Firstsource, a BPO services firm that acquired the US-based MedAssist in 2007-08, for example. The management is reluctant to reveal revenues or profits for the subsidiary though analysts estimate this outfit could be accounting for at least a fourth of the firm’s total revenues. Moser Baer, which recently placed around 6.5 per cent of the equity in its photovoltaic subsidiary with a clutch of private equity players for around Rs 400 crore, is also tight-lipped about how the business is shaping up. Since Moser’s core business of optical media and home entertainment hasn’t been doing too well, it’s important to know how the photovoltaic venture is faring. But conversations with the management haven’t yielded much.
Multiplex operator PVR ventured into film production last year through PVR Pictures. The management asserts that films will be an important revenue stream but will not share details of how revenues are shared between itself and co-producers, or even what the profits from a particular film have been. Since some of the funding for films is believed to have come from the parent firm, it’s only fair that shareholders are told the full story. But PVR remains tight-lipped, which is not encouraging because the firm’s core business isn’t exactly on a roll.
That’s true for retailer Shoppers Stop, which has 19 per cent in Hypercity. True, the law may not require it to reveal how Hypercity is shaping up but then Shoppers has an option to raise its stake to 51 per cent by December 2008. If it chooses to up its stake, shareholders will be affected because the accounts of Hypercity will then be consolidated with those of Shoppers. There’s little point in telling shareholders what Hypercity is all about after buying the stake.
It’s not that shareholders don’t understand that the competition can make use of information divulged by companies. But shareholders need to be taken into confidence about businesses that may be somewhat different from the core operations.
InfoEdge, for instance, could talk more about its matrimonial or real estate sites because they work very differently from the core job portal and the profits or losses from these ventures are material to the company.
Broadcasters running channels in different genres could also be more open. Many managements prefer to discuss only flagship channels in detail, leaving shareholders to figure out how the other channels are faring. For instance, we know very little about the financials of NDTV Profit, which until recently was part of NDTV. IBN18 Broadcast, too, has an option to acquire a 50 per cent stake in Viacom18, a joint venture between TV18 and Viacom. However, little is known about the channels such as Colors or MTV, which these two firms run.
|
|
Content Guide