Showing posts with label Basix. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Basix. Show all posts

Tuesday, November 30, 2010

Rogue Micro-Finance Companies: Naxalites have no confusion who they are.


 “WARANGAL: Taking a tough stand against micro finance institutions (MFIs), the Maoists have asked MFI managements to close their operations in villages immediately in the wake of series of suicides by women.
Maoist party KKW (Karimnagar-Khammam-Warangal) secretary Sudhakar warned MFIs of dire consequences if they do not call it quits. In a statement here on Friday, he said agents and representatives of MFIs are humiliating rural women and insulting their family members because of which several villagers have committed suicide.

He termed the government ordinance on MFIs as a sham since agents continue to collect loan instalments from women forcibly. He also warned SKS Finance chief Vikram Akula, Share Finance company owner and member of Rajya Sabha V Hanumantha Rao, L&T, Swayamkrushi, Chaitanya MFIs' owners of serious consequences.”   Times of India

Maoists or Naxalites also called the Naxals is a loose term used to define groups waging a violent struggle on behalf of landless labourers and tribal people against landlords and others. They aim to fight oppression and exploitation to create a classless society. 

 The above quotes are their cry for annihilation of class enemy, which in this case are micro-finance institutions (MFIs).  From their statement, it is clear that they are not against all MFIs in particular, but only the biggies. They loath these biggies so much so that they warned them to shut shop in Andhra Pradesh or suffer dire consequences. 
 
On the other hand, the biggie MFIs shrug off the blame to “Rogue MFIs”  for the present crisis in the industry: “Dr Akula admitted there were “rogue” elements operating in the microfinance market and they needed to be checked. Do not destroy the entire industry because of the actions of a few rogue players,” he said”. Wall Street Journal - livemint.com
 
“Mr Alok Prasad, CEO,MFIN, pointed to some fly-by-night, small-time moneylenders who are working under the garb of MFIs and giving the sector a bad name. These are unregistered players who are not RBI-regulated NBFCs. The government should go after them rather than come after registered MFIs, Prasad said” www.karmayog.org

 “On the harassment allegedly caused to the public by MFIs, Mr Mahajan said that there are many other companies which are pretending to be MFI, but are not registered”.  Deccan Chronicle

Notice, the biggie MFIs are careful not to name these rogue elements, creating doubts who they are. Are then these biggie MFIs scapegoats for a problem caused by a minuscule clutch of rogue MFIs? Or are Naxalites simply targeting MFIs just because of ideological revulsion. We researched and came across some interesting industry statistics in a blog administered by Ramesh Arunachalam, a MFI practioneer, called Candid Unheard Voice of Indian Microfinance:

This data reveals that just 6 large NBFC MFIs accounted for a whopping 95% of all active MF borrowers in the country. Despite a gripping monopoly within the industry, Vikram Akula in his interview to CNBC-TV18 10 days ago hinted of further industry consolidation - a euphemism for mergers and acquisitions viz swallowing up the smaller players by the biggies. This leaves us with the question, just who are these biggies? Ramesh Arunachalam's statistics prove helpful again: 

So the biggie MFs are SKS, Spandana, SHARE, BASIX, Asmitha and Trident who accounted for 94.7% of the total active borrowers. These 6 MFIs added a whopping 12.20 million clients in the last 5 years ending March 2009. Of these, as much as 9.76 million clients were added in the last two years. So it is readily apparent that the same 6 biggies are the dominant, fast growing and large scale institutions, operating under the RBI regulatory framework. So dominant that there cannot be any widespread  MFI induced suicides, without their involvement. 2.07 crore households were given loans as per the available data as of 2009. But the total households of AP, as per the same source, are 1.6 crore and the poor households 25 lakh. This means the loans were given more than eight times the number of poor. In other words, MFIs were engaging in multiple lending in a significant way. - indebting the not-so-poor segments and pulling them into the vortex of poverty.

Devinder Sharma in his blog gives us an insight to the scale of profiteering:
"Dainik Jagran, the largest selling newspaper in India (it is in Hindi), has carried today (Nov 27, 2010) an interesting report that should serve as an eye-opener. It says that the Ministry of Finance had a couple of days back held a discussion on microcredit in which a document detailing the profits earned by the MFIs was placed before the members. The details are shocking, and show how the MFIs have been extracting their pound of flesh in the name of poverty eradication.
 An analysis of 13 major non-banking MFIs shows that the profits these firms accumulated by charging exorbitant interest from the poor borrowers had swelled from Rs 677.3 crore in 2007-08 to Rs 3776.93 crore in 2009-10. In other words, their profits had multiplied by 5.5 times over a period of two years. Since the MFIs have failed to expand the borrower base, it is quite evident that the profit increase is based on the interest amount they have managed to garner.
So while the poor took the fatal route to escape the humiliation that comes with coercive recovery of outstanding loans, the MFIs have made it rich. Bandhan Microfinance has broken all records. Its profits swelled by 34 times in two years. Some of the other players -- SKS Microfinance, Ujjivan Microfinance, BSS Microfinance, Share Microfinance, Sampada Safurti, and Grameen Financial -- have also managed to collect huge profits.
The 100 odd cases booked by the Andhra Pradesh police for coercive practice and abetting suicides overwhelming come from staff of this group of six. Further, these are the same MFIs the Naxalites singled out to target.
Quite a series of coincidences,  you would say! Still consider this. These statistics further indicate that 2007-2009 was the period these 6 biggies of the MFI industry historically clocked their fastest growth - growth almost in geometric proportion. 
How dangerous such a pace of blistering growth was brought home in 2005-2006, even when MFIs were clocking one-twentieth of this pace. The industry then experienced the Krishna crisis, wherein they attracted similar charges as they are today. To disarm public ire and backlash against them, they then came up with a tactic of evolving a voluntary Code of Conduct that among other things promised reducing their interest rates, avoidance of multiple lending and adoption of coercive recovery practices.
Since this Code was merely meant to be tactical and not a serious commitment, they instead upscaled their past misdemeanors, more so as these Biggies were all planning to go public through the IPO route. As they transformed themselves to for-profit institutions, they began to give more and more representation within their governing boards to private equity (PE) firms and venture capitalists. Since the latter had huge financial stakes in this class of MFIs, they begun to slave drive MFI managements to higher and higher Return over Assets (RoA) ratios to enable better valuations of their shares on listing so that they could exit with mind boggling profits. As a result, the objective of facilitating social capital was jettisoned lock-stock-and-barrel as these MFI biggies went berserk on an over-extended profiteering spree that placed increased reliance on more and more coercive recovery practices. These MFIs became solely lending enterprises, niche bank operators competing primarily with money lenders.
In identifying the rogues in the MFI industry, we need to keep these statistics and history in mind to understand the present MFI crisis in order to better understand plausibility. While the MFIs and their apologists hardly deny that this had been the case, what they desperately try is to erase the taint of these biggies being the cause of the  suicides of their borrowers. MFIs mercurial growth has been accounted by piggy backing on images of them being Messiahs of the Poor. Once this mask is removed, and they are exposed as a form of disguised moneylenders, they end up fighting for their basic survival as they are currently. So it becomes important for them to absolve themselves from charges that link them to inducing suicides.

The Suicide Cover-Up
We have in one of our archive postings (read here) exposed how the industry’s spin doctors attempted absolve the industry from charges of inducing suicides by borrowers. Even Vijay Mahajan, the president of the microfinance industry association, has been bluntly critical of MFIs as quoted in the New York Times: "In their quest to grow, they kept piling on more loans in the same geographies…That led to more indebtedness, and in some cases it led to suicides."

A week ago, I reacted to a posting in the blog of Consultative Group to Assist the Poor (CGAP), a World Bank offshoot, titled Crisis by Invitation. The author was Narasimhan Srinivasan, whose profile suggests that he had been a development banker (with RBI and NABARD) and now an international consultant to IFAD, World Bank, ADB, Gates Foundation, DFID, CGAP and many others on development finance and rural development. He has authored the State of the Sector - Microfinance India Report, brought out by Access Development Services for the last three years, 2008, 2009 and 2010. Srinivasan as an industry apologist in this post also ridicules the charge of MFI induced suicides.  My reaction to his post was not published by CGAP, presumably because it was inconvenient to these MFI biggies. Consequently I take the opportunity to publish it in this blog:
 Mr. Srinivasan

 The extracts from your post:




Despite the above, your post incredibly concludes: "Suicides were linked to microfinance in some of the media. While suicides are extreme decisions, the symptom of excessive burden of debt in some cases is not the real cause."
It is of course possible that all cases booked by the police of AP may not be linked to MFIs though prima facie it may look to the contrary.  The courts will determine that and we should await the process of law before making definitive comments. However the logical consistency of the extracts of your post does suggest a high plausibility of MFI induced suicides in most of the cases booked by the Andhra Police.
"AP has an average of 2000 farmer suicides each year—if 54 suicides as reported in some papers are attributed to MFIs- what are the remaining attributed to? Do we need laws restricting some other sectors of the economy for the other suicides?"

If you have some grounding in psychology, you would appreciate that this phenomenon of suicides is rather a complex subject and could be triggered by a variety of factors - both internal and external to the victim and acting in combination. It is usually triggered out of difficulty in coping with despair that includes financial difficulties, troubles with interpersonal relationships etc. It can be also triggered by low blood pressure or mental disorders like depression, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia or substance abuse. It can also be triggered by such factors like humiliation or related to culture. It can be associated with ideology or a military strategy as in the case of suicide bombings or Japanese hara-kiri.
All individuals entertain thoughts of suicide at some point of their lives, though only a few succumb to the thought. There are accordingly individuals with high suicide risk profiles and cultures like Tamil Nadu and Andhra were suicide rates are higher than the national average. Further though poverty may not be a direct cause, it can increase the risk of suicide, as it is a major risk group for depression. Now if you acknowledge that “the exponential growth and high concentration in AP was not accompanied by the required SENSITIVITY in dealing with vulnerable people”, it seems to me that you are accordingly implicitly accepting the reality of MFI induced suicides. The latter are akin to a woman raped ending her life or a student publicly caned ending his life due humiliation.
The manner the MFI as an industry and their spin doctors approached the charges of suicides, they antagonized public opinion. If MFIs first condemned these incidents, compensated victims and brought their collection agents to book, they would have redeem themselves in the eyes of the public. Instead what we see is MFIs in a state of denial and countering arguments that on the face of it appears puerile. SKS gave Rs 4.5 crore life cover for its former CEO. And the insensitive manner MFIs are dealing with client suicide is what puts off the public - the differential values MFIs place on life!
But then this is only the way MFIs sees this whole crisis - the poor not in the radar at all but only the business- here’s your extract: “What is at stake is not only Rs 167 billion ($3.8 billion) in microl-oans in AP, but also the future of microfinance in India. While Rs 52.5 billion ($1.1 billion) is the exposure of MFIs that will be directly affected by restrictions on collections, visits to the borrowers and bundling of weekly installments in to monthly installments, the damage potential is deeper.”
Please remember that MFI growth was on piggy backing on the false image of being the Messiahs of the Poor, once this mask is stripped off, you lay exposed and find that you are in the verge of extinction. 

If Naxalites Are After You, Then You Must Be The Enemy Of The People.

In the seventies, as a little boy in the boarding of one of best known private schools in the country at Bangalore, I had gone to Kerala for the first time to spend the summer holidays with my cousins.  And as I traveled from the railway station to my aunt’s house, we came across a large crowd looking at a head strung up on a pole. My aunt covered my eyes and spared me the gruesome sight.
The only explanation by Aunt gave was that these were Naxals, bad people who love to kill plantation owners and the rich. And this was the impression I carried all through my education career and the initial working days In the late eighties, now a consultant with a donor, I went to Munar, a plantation hill station in Kerala for an evaluation study.  When in Kerala, you must visit the local “toddy shop” to eat fish to be washed down with freshly tapped toddy. There we met an old man, fairly drunk and we got talking. He told me that he was a Naxalite in his younger days and he has annihilated many class enemies including beheading one and putting it on a pole. Why do this ghastly act? I found myself asking him. With no remorse he retorted: 
“Leave alone wage exploitation, how would you react when the estate owner comes to take your wife, daughters for enjoyment by him and his friends in their booze parties. When my youngest daughter, age 12, the apple of my life, came back traumatized with extensive bleeding and bruises died, after her cremation, I knew what exactly I had to do.”    

One may disagree with their violent methods, but not even the government disagrees that the Naxals usually fight a valid cause, even as they crack down on them. And if Naxals have declared MFI biggies as their class enemy, we know there cannot be smoke without fire. This is why biggie MFIs these days walked with a security armed with AK 47s!

  







Sunday, November 14, 2010

SKS Micro-Finance Drifting into a firm Bear Grip


As expected, bears hammered the SKS script from Rs 992 levels at the start of the week to Rs 919.85 closing this week. When we started this campaign, SKS traded around the Rs 1010 range. Accordingly, if 100 SKS shares were sold at the time of our first posting, this would have realized a profit of a cool Rs 90,000 by now. 

Technicals however show a mixed signal, suggesting that the script maybe range bound in price movement this week. However, being a new script with little price movement history, reading too much into technicals may not be advisable. Last Monday and Thursday saw bulls trying to break out on double the daily average volumes. Despite this, if SKS entered up losing over net 7% during the week indicates huge selling pressure, suggesting the share increasingly falling under a firm bear’s grip. The very fact that the bull charge was not sustained uniformly throughout the week is perhaps yet another indicator  - bulls left to marshal their resources for a charge in sporadic spells. 
Bulls perhaps realize that they are badly trapped in this script and hoping to exit at higher levels. However, from Rs 910 downwards, we are entering the first of the series stop loss zones. Accordingly, bear’s are in with an opportunity this week to create panic selling that could see high volumes. As and when these stop loss points are triggered, we could witness a blood bath for bulls. The flow of bad news doesn’t seem to stop for micro-finance companies, This not only put a big question on their future earnings but also financial solvency as a going business.  

The latest news flows are as follows:

1.  Micro-finance companies, including SKS are running scared, so much that they have closed down their websites. Official website of one of the largest microfinance institution in India, Spandana Spoorthy Financial Limited has been “out of order”  for the last few weeks. The website of Share Microfin Limited was also ”down” this week. Both these institutions are based out of the Indian state of Andhra Pradesh, which has come under severe stress since the issue of microfinance ordinance, by the state government. The official website of SKS Society, a sister concern of SKS Micro-finance, was also hacked prior to its initial public offering in the month of April this year. (Read more here) 

2.  SKS Micro-finance is playing down its identity and going into preservation mode. At its modest office in a residential colony in Warangal district, India’s largest microfinance company has taken down its board. At its head office in upmarket Begumpet in Hyderabad, it hung a cloth mesh in front of its plush, six-storey glass building, ostensibly to protect it from the public ire over suicides. (Read more here)

3.  TV5 News a regional Telugu news channel has broadcast a news report yesterday alleging that more microfinance clients have committed suicides and that the ordinance has been ineffective in reigning in micro finance institutions. (Read more here). This may provoke the High Court to be less lenient towards the stay plea of MFIs against the Andhra Ordinance. Even worse, as long as Telegu TV and print media keep the focus on suicides and MFIs, repayment prospects of loans will suffer. As this situation extends weeks and month, it can lead to cash flow problems that could lead to MFIs being unable to pay staff salaries and layoffs, which in turn can accentuate collection of loan amounts.

4.  For the first time, Naxals have thrown their hats into the ring and kidnapped field staff of micro-finance companies. (Read more here). From now on micro-finance tycoons like Vikram Akula (SKS), Uday Kumar (Share) comes immediately under the radar of Naxals and we could expect from now on see their likes moving with AK47 armed security cordon. It would be sensational if Naxals manage to kidnap one of these MFI tycoons and in Al Qaeda style make them confess their crimes against public on tape. Vikram Akula in his book Fistful of Rice had admitted that he faced death threats from Naxals. Accordingly, the Naxal threat is no empty threat to be taken lightly and as long as it persists, MFI staff will be hesitant to visit villages and use strong arm tactics that affect loan repayment again. 

5.  The Microfinance Institutions Network, a self-regulatory body of a clutch of 44 NBFC MFIs, has asked Rs 1,000 crore in the form of business continuity facility, a euphemism for emergency money, to ensure survival. Rumours are circulating that some MFIs are so cash strapped that they soon would not be able to pay staff. (Read more here).This news in particular can’t be good for bulls. Even if a tier-III MFI files for bankruptcy, the news can trigger bear hammering of SKS script to Rs 300 levels. MFIN said liquidity with MFIs had almost dried up, with collections during the past month having fallen a dramatic 50-90 per cent. MFIN felt this could be addressed if banks set up a Rs 1,000-crore liquidity easing channel. "Obviously, banks will price their loans based on the risk assessment," said Alok Prasad, chief executive officer of MFIN. He said an increase in bank rates would put a spanner in the plans of MFIs to reduce rates for borrowers. MFIs also seem wary of approaching the banks for new loans. "There are no requests for new loans from the MFIs," said the managing director of State Bank of Hyderabad, Renu Challu. No new microfinance loans were being given in Andhra Pradesh, which accounts for a third of the total outstanding of about Rs 30,000 crore. Read more here. Pinched by bank funding drying up, leading microfinance firm Basix has cut its advances to a third in the past month. In the past month, Basix has disbursed only Rs 100 crore against the up to Rs 300 crore it would have otherwise done. Read more here.

6.  The State government’s decision to review the operations of micro finance institutions has opened quite a can of worms as it exposed them, including SKS of charging usurious rates.  Contrary to what MFIs say, they are in fact charging very high interest. Most companies impose an interest rate of 30 per cent on a population that is largely poor. Countering criticism of their high interest rates, MFIs had claimed that the interest was 24 per cent, but the affidavits they have had to provide at the time of registration have exposed this as a lie. Interest rates are as high as 36 per cent and more. (Read more here). 

7.  The Micro-finance Bill, which was ready, is now to be re-formulated again, taking into account the recent developments in Andhra Pradesh. Within the Congress, there is a strong move to cut MFIs to size and instead promote NGO-SHG-bank linkage as the flagship development programme of UPA II (NREGA being the flagship development programme of UPA I). If this is accompanied by the withdrawal of priority lending status to MFIs, this will sound the death bells for MFIs in this country. 

To what extent MFIs are pushed to the walls is indicated by the fact that these MFIs are registering themselves in the districts despite their public opposition to the Andhra Ordinance.  The ordinance issued by the AP government halted all MFI operations until they register with the district authorities. In our archive post, Vijay Mahajan, the high priest of micro-finance admitted that days of business as usual is over and the need for MFIs to adopt a new business model if they want to exist. Read more here  


UPDATE: 18/11: JP MORGAN OUTLOOK


• We believe that the headwinds for SKS and the MFI industry are still not over – we cut our estimates by ~25-35% for FY11-13 and reduce our PT by 30% to Rs 700. The stock is still expensive at 1yr fwd PB of 2.6x, and we think the issues with the sector are quite deep. Despite Tuesday`s 12% correction and the possibility of a technical bounce notwithstanding, we maintain our (still) contrarian UW, and don’t believe that it’s too late to exit the stock.

• Deep earnings cut, by 25-35%. Our key earnings changes capture the AP situation on multiple fronts: a) a drying up of disbursements in the state b) margin pressures from rising fund costs, lower yields and negligible securitization, c) higher credit costs from one-time losses in AP and d) lower opex as we see inevitable cost cutting in AP.

• Non-AP issues still not significant. We have not captured any issues outside AP. Media reports (ET, 14 Nov) suggest that MFIs are cutting rates in West Bengal (SKS’ second biggest state), but we think it’s a bit early to start capturing that in our earnings. Government intervention in states outside AP, however, remains a risk to our earnings forecasts.

• Too early to write off business model. The microfinance business model is being challenged in public debates on multiple fronts – efficacy in poverty alleviation, impact of high interest rates on borrowers, existence of over-leverage among borrowers, to name a few. We think MFIs could continue to exist, and profitably so, though aggressive overregulation is a risk to that assumption.

• Cut TP, retain UW, still too expensive. Our new Dec-11 PT (Sep-11 earlier) share is based on a 3-stage Gordon Growth Model and implies a PT of Rs700 vs Rs1000 earlier. We think SKS is still very expensive at 2.6x 1-yr fwd PB–we think the risk reward still favours the private banks given better scalability and earnings visibility. Maintain UW. 

Key risks: Court ruling against AP ordinance (it’s still in court) or that AP ordinance does not convert into law from Centre.
Centre.

Saturday, November 13, 2010

For Micro-Finance survival, they need to muzzle their Spin Doctors and listen more to their High Priest

 
 Spin-doctor, a expression that became a part of our lexicon in the 1980s,  is commonly used to describe PR experts as well as political or corporate representatives whose job it is to put a 'positive spin' on events or situations. Sometimes companies give them a more sophisticated designation - image transformation strategists that are often synonymous with re-branding functions. Described often as Goebbels children, they are adept at the art of controlling the direction of an event or issue through which they cherry pick sides of it they want to show while not shedding light on the rest. In practical terms, spin is manifested as dissimulation, lying, deceiving, vexing and confounding with the intention of deflecting attention, foiling or pre-emptive blocking.
A string of suicides in Andhra Pradesh that put micro-finance under the spotlight, triggered a backlash because of which, MFIs found themselves reduced to fighting for their basic survival. No surprise here to find a variety of spin-doctors functioning as their apologists, fending off and neutralising any criticism that the industry faces currently, almost oblivion to the fact their support is to a slow sinking Titanic. Two of the industry’s most high profiled spin-doctors are Vineet Rai and Sasi Thumulurai. This is how they profile themselves as authors of their articles:
Vineet Rai,  Founder and Chairman of Intellecap.  He is also founder of Aavishkaar, an investor in commercially viable enterprises that also have a social impact, which recently won a G20 award.

Sasi Thumuluri, employed with Habitat for Humanity International as Global Business Strategy Manager, based in Washington DC. He is microfinance professional with over a decade of experience in India and abroad. He follows the sector and keeps particular interest in India story. He is also a director of Trident Micro-finance. He has studied the business of microfinance in over 30 countries and has a good grasp of its details.

Two of the most significant spins in this debate are those related to suicides and interest rate. In this post, we bust these spins.

SUICIDES

Vineet Rai (Read more here) 

“How come farmers in Vidharbha were committing suicide when no Microfinance was taking place? Or why do people who have no debt commit suicide (10.8 Indians per lakh )...The government has complained that too many poor borrowers find themselves subject to coercive collection practices by MFIs. It knows that its SHG members sometimes "double-dip" by taking on additional loans from the commercial lenders, and it sees that they tend to repay MFIs faster. However, there are explanations other than coercion that might explain that. MFI loans are more expensive than SHG loans, so a customer with two loans outstanding might reasonably choose to repay the MFI loan first.”

 Sasi Thumuluri (Read more here, here & here)

“True, it is not possible to judge from here the merits of the links between microfinance and reported suicide cases. One simple thought – how can 30-40 people from 30-40 completely distinct locations take such an extreme step all at once in a span of 2-3 weeks when everything seems fine since last 15 years that microfinance existed in the state and more of the same practices and competition existed for more than 3 years now?

It is hard to fathom how these organizations might have turned into goons and killers overnight! Media and politics are traditionally linked in India, so does in many countries, and it is not surprising that both sing the same song around such monsoon weddings!”

“It is hard to believe that someone would end his/her life for less than Rs. 100 ($2). Even for someone with 5 loans of similar nature total interest obligation does not seem worth one’s life......It is certainly plausible though that some of the bereaved families have borrowed large sums from informal sources too and the total obligation of payments exceeded their capacity.

Most MFIs conduct business with groups of women who meet in weekly intervals for making repayments and applying for new loans. Such meetings are usually held in open places in the presence of 20-40 women, and often men and children watch over. In a scenario like this the scope for applying strong-arm tactics seems like a remote possibility. As noted above since many households in the state have access to about 2 or more MFIs it is unlikely that a client would put up with any such coercive actions exhibited of an “x” MFI, nor could “x” MFI resort to such practices openly, else they lose business to competition. So, it sounds like a distant likelihood that anyone would have to resort to suicide as a respite from MFIs. In rare occasions though peer pressure could lead to someone resorting to such extreme end.”

“While it is difficult to pin-point how much of this is the result of MFIs’ own doing, one would be tempted to wonder at this juncture – what exactly is the purpose of MFIN’s and Sa-Dhan’s being? ...Why has there been no representation from these bodies with the government of AP to present its side of the story before such a harsh action was taken? Why did no one come out to challenge the allegations and protect the sector?"

From these extracts, it is obvious both Vineet and Sasi admit the reality that often the poor borrow from multiple sources exceeding their repayment capacity. The Centre for Micro Finance at IFMR Research, with funding from the Banker’s Institute for Rural Development at NABARD, conducted a household survey of 1,920 households in rural Andhra Pradesh to understand their access to and use of financial services. They found 28% of households with an MFI loan outstanding had multiple MFI loans outstanding, and 82% had at least one more loan from a formal source.

Vineet goes on to acknowledge that these borrowers tend to repay MFIs faster but rules out coercion as a reason for this by rather cleverly floating the argument that there could be other explanations such as the interest rates of MFI being more expensive and as such these loans accorded more priority by borrowers. But the problem with this type of argument is that if  there is  good reason to suspect over-indebtedness exists and it is getting worse, and that sufficient client protection are not in place, logically we would have expected plausibility of MFI coercive pressure to be rather high. Dr. M S Sriram, perhaps one of the best known researchers of this industry confirms this may be the case when in an article in May 5 2010 prophetically warns:

“Is there a bubble being created? Are most microfinance institutions chasing the same customer? Are we pushing the customer — the poor woman — into a debt trap? Would this lead to suicides? We have to realise that these are not issues of today, but issues of yore.”

Vineet’s strategy may appear equally clever when he asks, “How come farmers in Vidharbha were committing suicide when no Microfinance was taking place? Or why do people who have no debt commit suicide (10.8 Indians per lakh)”

But the fact is that though the country have witnessed before farmer suicides as in Vidharbha, this time it appears  that it is by mostly by traders and women, the primary target of MFIs, that makes the latter the natural suspects.


With such overwhelming high plausibility, why would the likes of Vineet and Sasi still pursue their line of spin denying suicides? We need to know their background to know where they are coming from.
Vineet's company Aishkaar’s microfinance fund has investments in five MFIs, of which Chennai-based Equitas Microfinance earned it an IRR (internal rate of return) of 160 per cent on exit this September! Sasi belongs to and have financial interests in the MF industry.
Obviously, their intent is just to cast enough doubts to make the claim of MFI induced suicides appear less credible. The micro-finance industry grew at a tremendous rate on the back of their carefully crafted image as Messiahs of the Poor. Take this away and gone is their growth, and the industry reduced to fighting for their basic existence, as they are at present.

Sasi on the other hand, incredibly tries to create an impression that it is as if it the first time the  micro-finance industry faces such charges of inducing suicides. Incredible because he profiles himself as one who follows the sector, keeps particular interest in the India story, a director of Trident Micro-finance that operates in India and having a good grasp of its details. However, that’s exactly what he does.With such a profile, can Sasi actually feign ignorance about Krishna (Andhra Pradesh), Nizamabad (Andhra Pradesh), Kolar (Karnataka) and Idukki (Kerala)? These crises signaled that everything is not well with the models pursued by MFIs in the country.
Apparently,  Sasi pretends ignorance of  the APMAS document - Voice of People on the Lending Practices of Microfinance Institutions of Krishna and Guntur Districts of Andhra Pradesh that firmly indicts microfinance institutions in a series of charges, including inducing suicides. Read more here. Various Telugu daily newspapers and electronic media have in the past several years, highlighted the negative implications of MFIs, including the suicides they induce.  A few months back the NDTV showed news clipping of the cremation of a farmer who committed suicide unable to stand the continuous harassment at the hands of micro-finance goons. NDTV had carried a Bhubaneshwar dateline story on March 19, 2010, "Orissa: Loan driving farmers to suicides". The report reported:
"In 2009, 43 farmers in Orissa committed suicide. It was a year that saw a massive farm loan waiver by the UPA government and also a record investment of over Rs 1400 crore in farm credit by the state government. But they were all small farmers who couldn't access institutional loan and had to borrow from microfinance NGOs at an exorbitant rate of interest. Many, even the state government, suspect it's this exploitative loan network that may have driven loan farmers to commit suicide.” 


 
The allegation of media-political conspiracy by Sasi is simply yet another example of a well thought rhetorical tactic of diverting attention away from the embarrassing association of MFIs to suicides. Why is it a red herring? Politicians instinctively can sense public mood and this is the reason why across the political spectrum there exists a consensus that MFIs need to be reined in. If media such as Wall Street Journal, CNN-IBN, TimesNow etc have reversed their perception of MFIs it is because they have done their own investigations. If they are giving increasing coverage space, it is because of their practice of a recursive feedback loop i.e. if a story gets traction it produces more stories that in turn drive more traction.
The State Human Rights Commission is shortly expected to publish its reports and many NGO and human rights activists are trying to investigate these suicides. As and when these are published, there would be more embarrassment for the MFI industry. The Gender Unit of SERP (Society for Elimination of Rural Poverty) has already come out with a report listing the victims of microfinance institutions in Andhra Pradesh. Out of the 123 alleged cases of harassment that the report lists out, there are 54 death cases. Read more here.  And as for Sasi's puzzled indignation on why MF’s association such as MFIN and Sa-Dhan’s were muted in their defence of the industry, it is most probably that they saw no purpose to defend the indefensible. The knowledge of MFI suicides is common knowledge to all those who follow Andhra development.
[Note at the time of writing, Channel 9 broke the news that MFI suicides are continuing and that the Naxalites have joined the backlash against MFIs by kidnapping their field staff.]

INTEREST RATES
Vineet Rai (Read more here)

 “When we discuss profits in micro-finance it seems to me that making profits is very easy - "Charge interest and make profits".  Here are some facts that may clear that myth – The ROE for SKS was negative till 3 years back ( after 8 year of Operations) and Basix ROE was sub 10% till two years back. Most other MFI use to dream of breaking even.... The margin between all costs and defaults and lending cost is such that bottom line would continue to increase ... initially faster compared to the asset growth (efficiency of scale) and over time in line with asset growth. Final interest would come down ( as has happened but the investors coming late is assuming that the company is large enough and safe enough to give me a lower but safe return)”.

 
The table providing the RoE of various micro-finance institutions in the country illustrates why microfinance is the envy of commercial banks and the reason more and more players are rushing into the sector just as bees are attracted to honey. It also clearly illustrates why Vineet may not be telling us the whole story. It is left to Vijay Mahajan, described as the father of micro-finance in India, to complete the story as he did in an interview to Forbes:
 “It is largely due to exuberant growth with exorbitant profits and no reduction of interest rates that regulators and society [are] taking such an adverse view of this sector. All these years, we have told everyone that as we cut costs through scale and efficiency, we will pass on the benefits to the consumers. The regulators tolerated our interest rates on that promise. We let them down because we did the first, but we’re not doing the latter. Instead we have made extra normal profits."

Sasi Thumuluri (Read more here)

“The truth is MFIs do charge higher rates than banks and very few, if any, charge more than 36%, all inclusive...Now, let us assume that MFIs reduce the interest rates to 7.5% flat (half of the original rate) which translates into approx. 15% effective rate, close to commercial bank lending rates. The interest obligation ends up to be Rs. 62.5 ($1.25) per month or Rs. 15 ($0.38) per week. So, it sounds like the argument is essentially about the difference of Rs. 62.5 ($1.25) per month or Rs. 15 ($0.38) per week per average MFI loan. It is hard to believe that someone would end his/her life for less than Rs. 100 ($2). Even for someone with 5 loans of similar nature total interest obligation does not seem worth one’s life. Based on this logic the real problem seems to lie somewhere else, certainly not in interest rates per se."

The State Review of MFIs makes nonsense of Sasi’s spin of interest rates as reported by Deccan Chronicle on the basis of individual MFI affidavits filed with the government:

“L&T has given loans to 5,903 people in Adilabad district to the tune of Rs 185.10 crore, at an interest rate of 59.53 per cent. Spandana lent Rs 50.30 crore in Anantapur district with an interest rate of 31 to 34.42 per cent and Fulltron charged 36 per cent interest. The MFI giant, SKS, is still charging 31 per cent interest on old loans while it has reduced it by two per cent for new loans. In East Godavari, the Mahila Adarsh Seva Society charged 38 per cent and GP Mass Finance Ltd. also charged 38 per cent interest on loans. In Kadapa, Trident Microfin and Bharathiya Samudradhi Finance charged 32 per cent interest, and Share Microfin charged 30 per cent. Basix charged 34.40 per cent interest on Rs 31.66 crore worth of loans that it disbursed.

There are so many variations in the interest collected by the MFIs. There is no uniformity, said Mr R. Subramanyam, principal secretary, rural development department. Insurance premium, processing charges and administrative charges are added on to the cost of the original loan and in some cases these additions make up 20 to 30 per cent of the loan. ...When borrowers fail to pay one EMI, the additional interest is calculated at double or triple the interest rate. The interest continues to remain the same until the principal amount is paid off. More often than not, the final interest rate works to nearly 50 per cent”

Interest rates accordingly could be actually anywhere between 50-100% or more and not as Sasi painted at a benign 15% effective rate. The Indian Express in their article, "Andhra’s Small Debt Trap"  further makes mincemeat of Sasi’s claim that even a five-loan interest obligation seems illogical for borrower’s to end their lives through publishing an investigative case study. Extracts of this are provided below: 

“On October 4, unable to pay back the five loans she had taken, 23-year-old Bandaru Padma jumped into the village well along with her two children. The total outstanding against her name was Rs 79,000. She had taken loans from Share Microfin, Spandana, SKS, Basix and L&T,” says Padma's father Balaiya. But none of the villagers knew of the interest they were being charged. 

All I know is I have to pay a weekly amount of Rs 250 for 50 weeks on a loan of Rs 10,000, says Satyamma. She’s not sure which MFI she has borrowed from.  Villagers say they have been hit by a series of crop failures since 2001 and so took loans from the MFIs since their procedures are easier than those of other agencies. Of the 150 families in the village, 147 have taken loans. What’s surprising is that all these 147 families have taken multiple loans—six or seven from four or five MFIs. The small Chennaipally village now faces a debt of over Rs 40 lakh.  

We have had SHGs in the village for several years now and it started with simple chit funds. Then people from SKS Micro-finance came and offered us loans of Rs 5,000. All we had to do was furnish a photocopy of our ration card. Even before that loan was cleared, Share Microfin MFI came and offered Rs 10,000 as loan. They were followed by L&T, Spandana Sphoorti and Basix. Within a year or two, all the 147 families had taken multiple loans amounting to nearly Rs 1 lakh or more says village sarpanch Siddhiramulu. A majority of the villagers took the second loan from the same MFI to clear the first loan and make a few household purchases. Then they took the third loan from another MFI to clear the second loan”

To make their arguments look superficially convincing, spin-doctors like Sasi, to buttress their case, accordingly take to logical simplification in order to prevent understanding of the actual ground situation complexity. The excellent blog posting “Andhra Pradesh’s Animal Farm: Debt traps, life insurance and death bonuses” provides a list of factors for the poor falling into microfinance debt traps, that makes it evident that the issue is not as simple as the industry’s spin doctors like to portray: 
  • Prior indebtedness: if the poor are already in debt before they come to an MFI, which is likely, the new loan will be an additional burden unless interest rates are sufficiently low (which in AP they weren’t).
  • Business failure: (assuming a client actually use their MFI loan for business purposes) micro businesses fail regularly. MFIs’ clients operate in highly volatile economic environments, which are usually already saturated at the lower end, creating a high risk of entrepreneurial failure and thus deeper debt.
  • Consumption borrowing needs borrowing: some borrowers make unwise decisions, but many are so poor that they must use loan funds to cover the costs of immediate survival needs, such as rent, food or medical assistance. The interest paid on their loan can effectively increase the cost of those bills by 1.5 to 2 or more. 
  • Unsustainable, excessive or dishonest interest rates – there comes a point where, no matter how profitably a loan is used, the interest becomes too large to be covered by business proceeds; lower rates would mean more profits retained by the poor and less debt burden. High rates may be “sustainable” for MFIs but unsustainable for borrowers. Additionally, MFIs often hide the real interest cost by quoting flat interest rates or charging hidden fees (see Times of India on this).
  • Graduated lending: offering a larger loan to a borrower at the end of a completed loan cycle is not bad per se. But in many cases MFIs require borrowers to take larger loans, leaving the poor with the only choice of taking on greater debt or exiting the programme.
  • Skewed repayment cycles: in some cases, MFIs such as Grameen operate repayment modalities for their loans, which require large lump-sum payments (for instance loan fees) at the end of the loan cycle. This creates a bottleneck in borrowers’ finances, which often leads them to borrow at higher interest rates from other sources and use the next MFI loan to repay the temporary loan, which in turn must be repaid with fees, and so on.
  • Multiple borrowing and multiple lending: most overindebted poor are indebted to more than one creditor and must balance the repayments to all creditors. While a client may be ‘performing’ well on one loan, she or he may be in arrears on another, making her or him subject to higher interest rates as a punishment and harassment from that lender’s agents.

WHIFF OF FRESH AIR: HONESTY AND PRAGMATISM BY THE HIGH PRIEST OF MFI

"I believe in Schumpeterian creative destruction. Its time has come. The present MFI model has to go.... It wasn't just about giving loans. It was also about creating livelihood mechanisms, which would build capacity among the poor to repay their loans easily, and leave them better off than before" 
This is Economic Times quoting Vijay Mahajan, considered the high priest of Indian microfinance. The paper noted that this statement was ironic for a man also presiding over the Micro-finance Institutions Network (MFIN), an industry coalition, and is currently engaged in dousing the fire in Indian microfinance - cajoling bankers, assuaging governments, building confidence and seeking a shift in stratagems.  The article continues:
“The starting point of the Basix model is risk-mitigation. The usual risk-mitigation tools aren't accessible to the poor," explains Mohammed Riaz, head of the north Indian operations of Basix. Breadwinners of the family or cattle die. Crops fail. Nature ravages. Sickness debilitates. One stray incident can wipe out the net worth of a family.

Basix, along with insurer Aviva, pioneered micro-insurance in India, in 2002. Riaz, an old Aviva hand, joined Basix three months ago. Basix has also implemented the complex weather index-based crop insurance, in which claims are triggered by an adverse weather event and settled over a geographic area. Today, over 3.5 million of Basix customers hold policies covering life, health, crop and livestock, among others. The livelihood triad, therefore, engenders a type of engagement that builds skills and capacities of individual households. It also strengthens entire communities, rural or urban, through institution and local infrastructure building.”

Support for the Mahajan line for the re-structure of the industry according to Economic Times struck a chord at a recent Mumbai conclave of MFI practitioners. The paper quoted Sundara Rao, country head of Oiko Credit, a global microfinance fund:
“In the next decade, tier-II and tier-III MFIs will have to focus on livelihood mechanisms and then weave microfinance around it”

It is significant that Sundara Rao confines expectations of such a restructure to only tier-II and tier-III MFIs, suggesting perhaps the Mahajan line lacks support of tier-I MFIs. But for these MFIs looking for a new growth path, they have the advantage of looking to a readymade model in Basix, a tier-I MFI:

“The triad rationale: microcredit by itself is of use only to the more enterprising of the poor and to those who live in areas that have a certain threshold of economic activity. For the less enterprising, they have to first learn to cope with risks, through savings, insurance and acquisition of skills. In backward areas, the poor require considerable handholding: input supply, training, technical support, market linkages. Services like Ag/LEDS cannot be delivered to individuals, which mean the people Basix works with have to necessarily coalesce into informal or formal groups, cooperatives, or producer companies. 

The formation and nurturing of such groups require IDS. Basix, therefore, through a bouquet of companies - Bhartiya Samrudhi Finance, the Krishna Bhima Samrudhi Local Area Bank, Indian Grameen Services, the Livelihood School, and the Basix Academy for Building Lifelong Employability (B-ABLE ) - has evolved an entire livelihood ecosystem in its areas of operation. Though rooted in microfinance, it is a completely different play from the neighbourhood MFI.”

Though the Basix model may not be exactly an embodiment of perfection, it is apparently the best that we have and presents a foundation, which could be further build upon. It is a break away from micro lending extended as a standalone function but returns to the appreciation that micro lending is just one mechanism in the toolkit of global poverty alleviation. More significantly, if such a restructure happens, it would signal the return of micro-finance operations with a soul. It’s only with a soul that micro lending can make life easier for the poor. Without it, it becomes a curse for the poor as we are seeing today. For all this to happen, the MFI industry needs to muzzle their spin-doctors and listen to their high priest.

Sunday, October 31, 2010

What’s wrong with Micro-finance Institutions? Practically everything as the case of SKS illustrates



What’s wrong with Micro-finance Institutions? Practically everything as the case of SKS illustrates
When we started out in development a couple of decades ago, we instinctively targeted to reduce the influence of moneylenders, if not eliminate them completely. Why? They were seen as the traditional oppressors and exploiters in society. Their powers often overlapped with those of their caste and traditional village leadership.

Micro-savings and revolving loans often worked very well. Self-Help Groups (SHGs) being small and homogeneous, are controlled by members where borrowers themselves play a key role in the development of SHGs. They contribute small savings, regularly attend the meetings and participate in making the rules related to loans, interest rates, repayment schedules and mechanisms. These groups are thus are more likely to be characterised by self-management and self-reliance.

This is until the much-hyped micro-finance institutions (MFIs) burst into the scene.  They started easing out NGOs on the specious argument that we were not equipped with our limited capability to run micro-finance lending programmes. These MFIs operate under these two beliefs:
“Having access to expensive credit is better than no credit” and “the observed rate is where demand equals supply”.
These two beliefs were ironically the very same fulcrum the traditional moneylenders operate around.
The result is an “animal farm” situation where we are now not able to distinguish between “pigs” and “humans” and vice versa. In fact, moneylenders have got a makeover by re-branding themselves as MFIs. A good example is Mohammed Yunus of Grameen Bank who comes from a traditional money-lending caste. And of course, he got the Nobel Prize and so did Al Gore & Pachauri. And thank God, the Nobel Committee did not confer Gandhiji the same distinction, by clubbing him with these scamsters. In India, it is perhaps not a coincidence that Vijay Mahajan, described as the Father of Microfinance, also comes from a traditional money lending community. 
A creature of neo-liberalism, the idea of giving small loans to poor people became the darling of the development world, hailed as the long elusive formula to propel even the most destitute into better lives. And boy the neo-liberals loved it as this rhetoric strongly resonated with their love of the non-state, self-help, fiscally-responsible and individual entrepreneurship beliefs. MFI besides fits very well with the main tenets of neo-liberalism that includes macroeconomic policies focused on eliminating inflation rather than expanding job opportunities; cutting government subsidies - including credit subsidies and opening domestic markets to imports, multinational investors and speculative financiers. The neo-liberal environment encouraged the image of MFIs to be spun as a golden bullet to alleviate poverty, inflating its sense of success and underplaying their lack of holistic vision and action.

Still there were many within the NGO sector, willing to speak out. Michelle C. Schaefer in her feminist blog highlighted the following:
“MFIs overlook several of its realities, including the shame and fear that many poor people associate with debt (suicide rates are high amongst those who cannot repay), illiteracy (not being able to read contracts), the possibility that debt is the last thing poor people need, macroeconomic emergencies and natural disasters — let alone personal illness, deaths within families, dangerous work conditions and spouse brutality.
Micro-finance detractors also list corruption, inflated interest rates, lack of savings services, non-transparent transactions, not reaching the “poorest of the poor” and joint liability amongst its many faults. One Bangladeshi man even describes Yunus as the world’s biggest loan shark.”
In the Indian context, perhaps the best refutation of MFI as poverty alleviation’s golden bullet comes from seasoned MFI consultant, Ramesh Arunachalam: 
 ”Even if you lend at 0%, returns from agriculture would most likely be negative and micro-finance skirts agriculture and most of India’s poor are engaged in agriculture. So, micro-finance cannot and should not be expected to make a serious impact on poverty in India”
Prakash Bakshi, Executive Director, NABARD in an interview to the Economic Times was even more categorical:
 “In a static village economy, there is little scope to have too many petty traders. Two-thirds of the villagers directly live on non-cash-crop agriculture, and another 20% are small-time artisans. The cycle of economic activities for these people range from about six months to one year. None of them generate income to meet weekly repayments, and none of these activities generate a rate of return to afford interest rates of 20-40%.
And if they borrow — and many are compelled to borrow at such interest rates because banks have failed to provide them with credit that they deserve at affordable interest rates — they would never be able to rise from their levels of poverty, and very often just go back a few years in their economic status.”
Findings from several studies converge that poor households do not benefit from micro-finance; it is only non-poor borrowers who benefit. A vast majority of those with starting incomes below the poverty line actually ended up with less incremental income after getting micro-loans, as compared to a control group, which did not get such loans.

The real weakness of MFI is the key assumption of the business model that treats each and every borrower as an entrepreneur. Most poor people do not even have the basic education or experience to understand and manage even low level business activities. They are mostly risk-averse, often fearful of losing whatever little they have, and are struggling to survive.
Well Oiled Racket that makes Poor, Poorer, and the promoters and financiers Multi-Billionaire Tycoons 



According to the Washington Post: "Private capital first began entering the micro-finance arena about a decade ago, but it was not until Compartamos, a Mexican firm that began life as a small non-descript NGO whose public stock disinvestment generated $458 million in 2007, that investors fully recognized the potential for a windfall.
CARE, started a micro-finance institution in Peru in 1997. The initial investment was around $3.5 million, including $450,000 of taxpayer money. But a year ago, Banco de Credito, one of Peru’s largest banks, bought the business for $96 million, of which CARE pocketed $74 million." 
From then on, there was no turning back. Micro-finance ended up a money making machine for almost everyone. Mark Straub in his blog on the rise of the MFI phenomenon in India:
“Collectively, the Indian micro-finance sector raised over $500M in private equity last year alone.  With on-paper valuations of these companies in the hundreds of millions (dollars not Rupees!), and in at least one case over $1 billion, sales of founders’ stock in private secondary sales has created Hyderbadi millionaires seemingly overnight, something unseen in India outside of BPOs, Bollywood and corrupt politicians.

The rise of micro-finance as a venture capital-backed asset class, now poised to see multi-hundred million-dollar initial public equity offerings in the next 12-18 months on the Indian stock exchange.  Well known giants of Indian micro-finance who serve millions of clients – SKS, Spandana, SHARE and Bandhan – as well as upstarts Ujjivan and Equitas, have attracted millions in risk capital from top global venture capital firms and sovereign wealth funds, in several cases transforming themselves from non-profit NGOs to corporations in order to raise capital and attract top management talent.”
Ramesh Arunachalam in a perceptive analysis in Malcolm Harper’s blog, warns against the dangers of this trend of rapid commercialization by drawing an apt parallel with the Satyam:
“MFIs have to manage multiple stakeholders including investors and balance their expectations well. This is also very critical for MFIs especially because of the traditional orientation of the sector and its predominant focus on the low-income customer segment.
The Satyam fiasco happened because the promoter was hugely focused on investors (shareholders) and wanted to create value and wealth for them in an aggressive manner – and he did everything possible (legal and illegal) to bolster performance, quarter on quarter and year on year for almost 7 years. In fact, this aggressiveness, haste and urgency are perhaps what led Satyam to grow unnaturally and eventually fail. As one of the employees of Satyam aptly argues, Mr Raju would always want to take giant steps and go from 100 to 1000 rather than 200."
The IPO of SKS, one of the largest MFIs in India,  saw it over-subscribed by 15 times; their Ten-Rupee share was priced at a premium of Rs 985 - showing how much the market had confidence on their profitability while “banking with the poor”. With earnings per share (EPS) of Rs 32.98 as on 31 March 2010, it trades with a price-earning (P/E) ratio of over 50, given its expanded equity.
Sucheta Dalal explained in her blog how over-priced the SKS script was:
“At the upper price band of Rs 985, the company is demanding a valuation of almost 50 times its FY10 earnings. For a non-banking financial company (NBFC), which has a limited period of operational history and no dividend record, the valuation looks very much stressed.
Although the company in its draft red herring prospectus (DRHP) claims that it has no competitive peers, SE Investments Ltd, a micro-finance lender, is already listed on the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE). SE Investments' EPS stands at Rs1.21 in the first quarter of FY10. The company posted a net profit of Rs17 crore (10 Million is a crore). Based on the EPS of the first quarter of FY10, its P/E works out to 11 (annualized), which is lower than the PE of SKS.  SKS reported a net profit of Rs 174.8 crore on total revenues of Rs 958.9 crore and an operating revenue of Rs 873.50 crore for the year ended 31 March 2010. It had a negative cash flow of Rs 541.20 crore for the year ended March 2010." 
SKS Share is a Trading Bear’s Dream  

The most interesting question is whether SKS can grow 50 times its FY10 revenues during F11 season. The Economic Times gave some vital clues to the answer:
“More than 60 employees of the embattled micro lender, SKS Micro-finance, have each made more than Rs 1 million selling their shares after listing, making a return 29 times their investment in three years. Employees working in various capacities - ranging from an assistant manager to a vice-president - have sold their holdings in at least 130 separate transactions ever since the Hyderabad-based firm listed its shares, data show. 

So far, the employees have sold 1.96 lakh (100,000) shares, accounting for nearly a sixth (or 16%) of what they got through an Employee Stock Purchase Scheme (ESPS) in 2007. Though a comparable macro data on share sale by staff are not available, the number of shares sold immediately after the listing is seen as a high number. They got the shares at an average price of Rs 38 per share and in less than three years time; the same shares were sold at an average price in excess of Rs 1,100 - a cool profit in excess of Rs 1,050. 

SKS has introduced a mix of employee stock options and stock purchase plans since 2007, including one for independent directors. Eligible employees were encouraged to buy their entitlement in the stock purchase scheme, with interest-free loans for a certain time period. 

Under the first stock option plan, only SKS chairman Vikram Akula was allotted 9.45 lakh shares at a price of Rs 49.77 per share in December last year. At the time of filing the offer documents, just before the public offer, Mr Akula held option rights for another 2.68 million shares, accounting for little over 4% of pre-issue share capital. Earlier in February, SKS Microfinance's founder and chairman Dr Vikram Akula sold 9.45 lakh shares at Rs 6 39 per share to Tree Line Asia Master Fund (Singapore) Pte for $12.9 million"
All pretense of altruism was cast aside, and the so-called poster boy of MFI demonstrated his ugly face as a profiteer prompting Sucheta Dalal to comment: 
"Another related fact is that out of the total issue size of 1.68 crore shares, more than half or 55.7% shares are put on sale by Sequoia Capital. According to the DRHP, the key management of SKS Micro-finance has decided to sell their stake in the run-up to the IPO under both stock option and stock purchase plans at a significant premium. Collectively, the transactions would imply a sale of 1.42 million shares or 8.4% of the IPO size. Although the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has approved the transactions and there is nothing illegal about en-cashing investments, this raises a larger question of commitment on the eve of an IPO." 
The selling spree is very likely an indicator of SKS employees’ lack of trust in the company’s near term future. SKS employees, including Vikram Akula, by booking profits, were implicitly stating that they have no confidence that SKS can grow 50 times its FY10 earnings to maintain its present P/E.

If you are an equity trader, this could be interpreted as a clear signal to hammer this script down in the most aggressive way. Particularly so as the Andhra government's clamp down should squeeze its growth in the most profound way, given that 40% of its lending is accounted by this state. While the High Court order put these restrictions on hold and allowed the lenders back in the field this week, close to half of all borrowers are continuing to avoid payments, micro lenders say. Local politicians have joined the issue by telling their constituency not to repay MFI loans. If this situation continues for the next few weeks, it is easy to see it can turn into a repayment crisis that can ring the death bells for many in the industry.

MFI: Return over Capital, Highest in any other Sector 

The moot question is when SE Investments P/E stands at a measly 11, what justifies SKS's whooping 50? It appears to be intricately linked to the allotment pattern. The issue consists of a fresh issue of 74.45 lakh shares with 50.37 lakh shares reserved for retail investors. Qualified Institutional Buyers (QIBs) were allotted one crore (10 million) shares. The company expected to raise Rs 1,427 crore - Rs 1,654 crore through this IPO, which they over-achieved. 

The key to understanding all these numbers is the differential price for QIBs/high value investors and retail investors. While retail investors had to shell out Rs 985 for a SKS ten-rupee share, the latter together with SKS’s existing venture capitalists, including some private equity funds that have stakes in these companies all paid below the listing price and made a killing.
And just who were these QIBs and high profile investors? Big global names like pseudo socialist and financial racketeer, George Soros, pseudo-corporate saint, Narayanan Murthy, the founder of India's, IT giant, Infosys and pseudo-Green Vinod Khosla of Sun Microsystems. Their profiles are sketches below:
George Soros. In 1992, the lead fund, Soros’s Quantum Fund became famous for “breaking” the Bank of England, forcing it to devalue the pound. Soros had bet his entire fund in a short sale on the ultimately fulfilled prediction that the British currency would drop in value, a coup that netted him a profit of $1 billion. In 1997, Soros was also blamed for forcing sharp devaluations in Southeast Asian currencies.

Corporate “saint” Narayana Murthy exhorts “We need to promote commercialisation that can be legal done, ethically sound and sustainably carried forward”. If you take this character seriously then consider this. His investment in SKS quadrupled overnight on allotment of the share!! Saint Narayanan Murthy even outdid old Soros. The shares were acquired by Soros Quantum Fund was for a total sum of Rs 19.08 crore which translates into a price of Rs 636 per share. Soros therefore shelled out more than double than the “Saint” did. Narayana Murthy was also quoted by the media as saying: “A clear conscience is the softest pillow in the world.”  We now have an idea what kind of pillow he sleeps on. That's of course, assuming he has a conscience. 

Vinod Khosla.  His venture company has called cellulosic bio-fuel his “real love” and invested in more than a dozen bio fuel ventures. These bio fuels are one of primary factors responsible for global food inflation and scarcity; increased starvation deaths and nutritional deficiencies; and food riots all over the globe!
Their name association however prompted the market to accord a higher P/E. While these promoters, venture capitalists and QIBs laughed all the way to the bank, the retail investors as usual faces the high risk of their investment eroding in a scam-tainted company a la Enron or Satyam.  Their worst nightmare  is if the script becomes too illiquid to trade.

The good news is that QIBs pre IPO allotment investments are locked in and the likes of Narayanan Murthy are trapped, at least during the next two years statutory period. Nevertheless, far from giving price stability, there are too many floating stocks in SKS that trading bears can target to make a killing in the market.

As for the fate of SKS hapless borrowers, they continue to live in abject poverty.  With MFIs going public, all pretense is off. Now they flaunt their real face - more accountability to private equity investors than to the borrowers (their touted mission) I guess this isn’t new at all as this is borrower’s story all over the world.  Patrick Bond in his blog explains the myth of Grameen Bank and exposure of Mohammed Yunus as a fraud:
“Consider this outlandish claim, made by Yunus as he got started in the late 1970s: ‘Poverty will be eradicated in a generation. Our children will have to go to a ‘poverty museum’ to see what all the fuss was about.’ 

Grameen’s origins are sourced to a discussion Yunus had with Sufiya Begum.  Describing Begum and the first 42 borrowers in Jobra village in Bangladesh, Yunus waxed eloquent. 

But what is the current situation in Jobra? Says Bateman, ‘It’s still trapped in deep poverty, and now debt. And what is the response from Grameen Bank? All research in the village is now banned!’ As for Begum, says Bateman, ‘she actually died in abject poverty in 1998 after all her many tiny income-generating projects came to nothing.’ 
The legendary Malcolm Harper, once the chairperson of Indian MFI - Basix, once said, "Keeping people in debt is profitable to MFI no matter the social or economic status of customer" The case of Bangladesh with the longest and highest outreach in the world certainly validates Harper’s viewpoint.

Interest rates: The Poisonous Fangs of MFIs

MFIs were touted to provide the poor access to affordable credit, reduce poor people’s need to use moneylenders and indebtedness. In short, provide a much kinder, cheaper alternative to the village loan shark.  

Instead, they evolved as the new class of institutionalized loan sharks which neo-liberals gave respectability to. MFIs did of course improve access to micro loans but failed in their touted mission to provide affordable and gentler credit and above all, one that lifted people from the clutches of poverty. Objects of institutional financial sustainability exhort them to charge interest rates and fees high enough to cover the costs of their lending and other services.

In Asia, these MFIs are estimated to charge an annual interest rate varying between 36-70 per cent. If this is considered predatory, then consider the plight of Latin American and African countries where interest rates hover beyond 100%. How do MFIs actually fix their interest rates? They claim it is based on the cost of capital (interest on loans); administrative cost of delivery; bad loan cover, and profits. Let’s look at each one of these: 

Cost of Capital  

Indian MFI’s argue that they incur an average interest between 10-11%, equal to the interest public sector banks charge for lending to them. There are two problems with this argument. Firstly, this is a wrong equivalent. MFIs raise their capital from several sources, including grants and loans at much softer rates. The cost of capital should be the average interest as a weighted function of capital deployed for re-lending activities. 

Secondly, if we accept the argument that all or most of the re-lending activities are sourced from public sector banks, then they are implicitly admitting that their capital for re lending is all accounted from taxpayer’s money. Accordingly, the Indian public and parliament has the right to determine what rates they should be re-lend. In a market economy, MFIs have the choice to accept these recommendations, reject and explore alternative funding sources or shut down their businesses. Cribbing unfortunately is not one of these choices. 

BAD DEBTS

MFIs claim that they are attaining 99-100% repayment.  Such a rate is an envy of any public sector or private banks. So if we take their claims at face value, then bad debts or cost of non-performing assets should be considered negligible.

ADMINISTRATIVE COST OF DELIVERY
 
MFIs argue that the costs of reaching the poorest, most inaccessible borrowers are high, making costs of servicing such lending high. Moreover, transaction costs are high as it costs more to handle 10 loans of $100 than one loan of $1,000. Fair enough. But it also means that if we take into account their touted mission objectives of offering affordable credit to the poor, their present business model fails to align itself to their mission objectives. Either they should change their business model that finds a tighter alignment with their touted mission or they should stop expecting taxpayer’s money to increase poverty and indebtedness in this country.  

A posting in the blog Smart Investor reveals that part of the problem of high administrative costs is traced to the exceptionally high salaries of MFI staff:
“Gurumani was appointed in December 2008; it was supposed to be a five-year term with effect from April 1 last year. At a consolidated salary of Rs 1.5 crore (raised this May to Rs 2 crore for 2010-11) and a performance bonus of Rs 15 lakh per annum, with annual increments of up to a maximum of 100 per cent. The board had the liberty to sanction more. Plus a one-time bonus of Rs 1 crore, paid in April 2009, with a Rs 4-crore life insurance cover.”
This prompted Devinder Sharma, well know food security analyst to comment:
“In any case, we are only talking of the salary and perks of the CEO. What about the other senior MFI functionaries? They too receive bountiful salaries, all derived from the sweat and blood of the poor”
MFIs pretend all the time being highly efficient. If so, they would be the only sector to be an exception. Nevertheless, this pretense comes useful to them to pass on their inefficiencies as high lending costs to their borrowers.

PROFIT MARGINS

MFIs argue that they need a wide spread apart from all costs to provide for contingencies and growth. Fine but the moot question is how much should this spread be?

MFIs further argue that economies of scale and competition will drive interest rates down. This remains only a theoretical argument. "Mexican micro-finance institutions charge such high rates simply because they can get away with it”, said Emmanuelle Javoy, the managing director of Planet Rating, an independent Paris-based firm that evaluates micro lenders!! 

If at all, the average Indian MFI interests rates appear more benign than in Latin America or Nigeria, then it simply because other than factors internal to the MFI industry, the sector faces strong competition from governmental and NGO SHG micro-saving programmes in the absence of which, these MFIs would most probably formed a cartel. Past angry public and government reactions that resulted in a backlash against them, which included the arrests of MFI top leaders, like Uday Kumar of Share Microfinance Ltd as in 2007, keeping their profiteering impulses under check at least to some extent.
  
Sacha Singh in an interesting blog offering a critique of micro-finance has this to say as a summary:
 “An interest charge represents money taken out of clients’ pockets, and it is unreasonable if it not only covers the costs of lending but also deposits “excessive” profits into the pockets of an MFI’s private owners. Even an interest rate that only covers costs and includes no profit can still be unreasonable if the costs are excessively high because of avoidable inefficiencies.”
Since we are aware, just a 0.5% hike in interest rates can crash the stock market, we know to what degree corporate feasibility is sensitive to interest rates. Just how much subsidies did Ratan Tata gets to produce a one-lakh car? Rahul Gandhi estimates this as Rs 66,000!. Notwithstanding this maybe an exaggeration, the likes of Narayana Murthy that now sit on the board of SKS should know better how much subsidies Infosys, the IT company he founded received to make it a global success that it is today - state governments gifting land for a song, power rebates, grants, soft loans, investment allowance, depreciation etc. It is a perversion to think the petty businesses of the poor are viable no matter high the interest rates.
If Blood Diamonds can be banned, why not MFIs?

Not only excessive profits, high salaries or process inefficiencies prompts high MFI interest rates but it also arises from the need of self-inflicted pressures to quickly and aggressively scale-up their lending programmes that in turn, need excessive profits to adequately plough back into their business. While it may or may not be true that in the long-term interests rates may fall drastically as MFIs claim, the old adage reminds us that this means nothing as in the long-term we are all dead. 

But what we know for sure is that in the short and intermediate term, the poor are being exploited by these MFIs, promoters and investors are being catapulted to overnight multi-billionaires, international investors are plundering our foreign exchange from profits made from the blood money of poor who made poorer and more indebted. That is all that matters. 

If it was only exploitation, we may be tempted to take a more charitable view of MFI relevance in society. But combine this with oppressive face, we are left with no option but to seek their ban. A month ago, SKS in the state of Andhra Pradesh was accused of a series of farmer suicides that prompted the state government to introduce new restrictions on the micro-finance industry by seeking to cap lending rates and end coercive means of recovery. Last week alone, Andhra Pradesh police arrested three loan agents of SKS Micro-finance and Spandana Sphoorty Financial Ltd. after borrowers complain that they were illegally pressured by the agents to repay their small loans around $1,300.

It was Shantanu Dutta in his blog that highlighted such acts of oppression is not new:
“Many decades ago, Rabindranath Tagore wrote a short story titled Kabuliwallah, based on the life of the Afghan money lenders who used to do brisk business in undivided India. Largely illiterate, through a complicated maze of signs and symbols, the moneylenders kept meticulous track of who owed them how much, when was pay day and then were there at the right time and place to collect their dues. 

Their interest rates were of course usurious but they provided unsecured loans which their customers not having much collateral to give found beneficial. However defaults on payments were not tolerated and when patience ran out, the Kabuliwallah’s justice was rough and ready. It was during such instance that the Kabuliwallah in Tagore’s story stabbed a client, went to prison and the beginning of the story’s climax begins there.”
For those of us in the field, suicides due to MFI harassment hold no surprise. But we need to question the deafening silence. Where are the voices of the likes of Christian Aid, Oxfam, Action Aid, World Council of Churches, CARE  etc who ostensibly been pursuing the agenda of social justice? Are their hands as bloodied as MFIs or are they too embarrassed to take on their own kind?  For that matter where are the voices of human rights groups - the Amnesty International (now headed by our own Salil Shetty), Human Rights Watch, Human Rights Law Network, People’s Watch etc. In particular, where is the voice of Arundhati Roy, the one book wonder who won the Booker Prize  despite poor plot and atrocious prose who now decided to take up causes on drop of her hat whether Narmada Dam, Naxalism and Kashmir?  Does she have an opinion on MFI suicides or doesn’t she? 

Sadly, it was left to the likes of Wall Street Journal (WSJ) to see shades of the predatory lending crisis in the Andhra suicides:
“Unfortunately, due to the high investor inflows and saturation of this asset class, it looks more like the subprime industry than a financing vehicle for the underprivileged. Using targeted marketing and promises of “easy credit” and “quick cash,” predatory lenders can trap borrowers in a cycle of high interest payments, abusive fees and terms that can lead to home foreclosures, and ultimately devastate borrowers’ financial futures”. 
The Obama Administration clamped down on predatory lending in citadel of capitalism - the US. While the Andhra Pradesh deserves to be complemented in doing the same, the Central Government is dithering, fearing the consequences will affect the image of India as an investment destination. And why should they? If it didn’t affect the US, why should it affect us? Moreover, this government won on the plank of the Aam Adhmi (Common Man). If the Aam Adhmi means anything, the ruling Congress Party at the centre needs to show more resolve by introducing stronger regulation of MFIs, if not banning them outright.

The sooner MFIs are seen as profit enterprises, the better. The longer they pretend they are pro-poor, the longer they discredit the NGO sector that gave birth to a Frankenstein. By 2014, they target to reach 110 million borrowers. Remarkably, despite two decades of operations, if statistics are to be believed, these MFIs currently reach just 20 million people in the country, a good proportionate of them, multiple counted. Yet, they succeed in gaining an attention, so disproportionate to this minuscule reach. Act now to prevent them from becoming an epidemic scourge in the country. Act now, when they are most vulnerable. And how do we know they are vulnerable? Because Vijay Mahajan, the father of MFIs in India tells us so:
“We are facing collapse. Unless something changes on the ground, the industry as we know it is basically gone.”
Mahajan, we have news for you. The day when the likes of you are gone, that will be the turning point for the fight against poverty!