Crisis-hit banking sector: Who is to be blamed?

Pratip Chaudhuri, former CMD of State Bank of India, says banks are circumspect because once you call up a loan, there is no chance of it ever coming back to health, and obviously valuations of stalled businesses are very low
  • Language
  • App
  • Subscriptions
  • Specials
  • Sign-In
  • Register
GeStepAhead GrowMyMoney SME Special
moneycontrol.com

Home » News » Economy

Mar 15, 2016, 06.53 PM | Source: CNBC-TV18

Crisis-hit banking sector: Who is to be blamed?

Pratip Chaudhuri, former CMD of State Bank of India, says banks are circumspect because once you call up a loan, there is no chance of it ever coming back to health, and obviously valuations of stalled businesses are very low

Like this story, share it with millions of investors on M3

Crisis-hit banking sector: Who is to be blamed?

Pratip Chaudhuri, former CMD of State Bank of India, says banks are circumspect because once you call up a loan, there is no chance of it ever coming back to health, and obviously valuations of stalled businesses are very low

Post Your Comments

Share Cancel

The Vijay Mallya mess has thrown up deeper questions about the health of the banking sector and concerns on whether and why banks aren't going after defaulting borrowers with more aggression? Simultaneously, there is also a fear on the back of public anger with respect to bad loans, whether bankers will become extremely risk averse?

Charan Singh, executive director of UCO Bank , says most of these borrowers don't have any cashflow and selling assets is not easy either.

He also cites the example of the steel sector which is under severe distress. According to him, the situation is such that both buyers and investors are not there in the market. Hence, the only other option is to continue with existing managements, and sell non-core and personal assets, he told CNBC-TV18. He says for SDR to be a success, a lot of different measures will have to be taken.

Meanwhile, Pratip Chaudhuri, former CMD of State Bank of India , refused to get into a discussion on Kingfisher, claiming the matter to be subjudice. However, he explains that banks are circumspect because once you call up a loan, there is no chance of it ever coming back to health, and obviously valuations of stalled businesses are very low.

Former financial services secretary DK Mittal too gave his views on the crisis facing the banking sector. He says there has never been any pressure on banks to fund discoms.

Below is the transcript of Pratip Chaudhuri, DK Mittal and Charan Singh’s interview with Latha Venkatesh and Reema Tendulkar on CNBC-TV18.

Latha: We understand that bankers at the moment, led by State Bank of India (SBI), are grilling several borrowers to ask them to pay quickly whatever dues there are to sell off non-core assets. Can you give us some update on what this meeting is all about?

Singh: Of course, this move is going on, but I do not know how far it will be successful, because these borrowers, they do not have any cash flow and selling of assets are also not a very easy job. So, we are working on that. SBI is taking a lead in that direction and many consortium meetings are held for deciding on what to do with these borrowers. Let us hope that some results will come. We should be able to sell some of the properties which are not in use or some of the assets which can be sold off.

Latha: We understand that most of the companies who were being met, whose promoters the bankers were meeting are steel companies. We had that list of Bhushan , Essar, as well as the smaller steel companies, Visa and companies like that. There are not so many buyers for steel today, since there is such a downturn, so is the intention to sell non-core assets, to sell buildings, office space, other assets?

Singh: In fact, that is true that this steel company, because they are in problem, the sector itself is in a problem, so the buyers are not there. Even the investors are not there. So, we have gone for earlier also, in few cases, but that is also, not materialising because of not getting the investors or the buyers. So, only alternative is that we have to continue either with the existing management and of course sell some of their non-core assets or some of their non-core activities or some of their personal assets and bring some liquidity in the company. So, that is the only alternative left.

I do not know whether how far it will be okay, but now, because the investors in this scenario will not come forward to invest in such companies, so in these cases, I think for implementation of strategic debt restructuring (SDR), we have to look for some market for developing some market for the professionals who can run these companies, the bankers can invest and then we can create some mechanism or some infrastructure who can scout for the management who can run these companies and the bankers, of course, can put in their money behind it.

Reema: Then there is the question of whether the collateral as well as the assets are going to be even sufficient to cover the kind of loan. Today we feel a lot of angst that why did the banks not act on the Kingfisher Airlines loan recovery a lot earlier. The loan was restructured back in 2010 and it is five and six years counting and we have still not managed to get the money back. So, two part question. A] There is so many stressed companies today. Has the system now improved? Are we now a lot more alert to prevent another Kingfisher from happening to the current indebted companies? And secondly, do you see another Kingfisher Airlines coming because there are so many companies like which are saddled with very high debt – Jaiprakash Associates has a debt of Rs 75,000 crore., GMR Infrastructure , Adani, all of them have debt in excess of Rs 40,000-50,000 crore?

Chaudhuri: On Kingfisher, it is not right for me to speak on television because the matter is subjudice. But basically, look at this, when you call up a loan, you are putting an end to the activity. So, therefore, whatever chances are there of it coming back to health will not happen. It is like mercy killing. So it cannot come back. So, that is why banks are a little circumspect before applying that extreme medicine. And secondly, under the lender’s liability, you cannot call up a loan till the borrower is serving the interest and the principle. So, you can only call up a loan and call up the facility when the account becomes non-performing. They may be making losses. That today, so many respected companies are making losses, but that is not an adequate ground to call up the loan.

So companies try to fight this problem by taking trade credit or other liquidity measures and only when the situation is irretrievably, it is like a patient being taken for operation. Till there is some hope that the patient can be cured with medicine, many people do not go in for the operation. Operation is the last resort, or I would say late resort. So, that is how it works, because if you colour the loan, the whole thing collapses and for a stalled business, you get much lower valuation.

Latha: I take your point that you do not want to kill a business unless you are absolutely sure it cannot be revived.

Chaudhuri: Not that. Absolutely, that means when there is because you have to look at the worse of the two options. If you allow the unit or if you force the unit to close, what you can possibly recover and what you can possibly recover by giving some doses of oxygen. So, this is a choice between the two and that is a real time choice.

Latha: I agree, but my point is the entire list is now in the public domain. I mean, there are several additions of Credit Suisse giving you the house of debt data from 2012 onwards. For instance Jaiprakash, as Reema alluded to – Rs 63,000 crore gross debt in FY13, Rs 73,000 crore gross debt in FY15 and Rs 75,000 crore gross debt in FY15. I mean, systematically, that is one. I can go on: Adani Power , Rs 41,000 crore became Rs 44,000 crore. My question is in a zillion cases, banks have given more so that the companies do not go under. How much do you ensure that the promoters bring money? It appears that banks are doing much more to save than promoters are doing to save it.

Chaudhuri: No, promoters, since they are in a position, they bring. But if the promoters are not in a position to bring money, what do you do? You ask the unit to close down in which case the option could be worse. It is like a hospital, if the patient does not have money to pay huge bill, what do you do?

Latha: There are innumerable instances of promoters living in style, but companies going sick. It is very obvious from their visual living style, whether it is the Ruia brothers or whether it is Mallya. Their actual style is not showing any reduction. It definitely gives the feeling that promoters have money.

Chaudhuri: That should be a law that if a promoter is under corporate debt restructuring (CDR), he cannot have an expensive car, he cannot have an expensive house. Under which law, do I go and attack the house, under which act?

1 2

Ads by Google

Buy, Hold, Sell ? Hear it first on M3
Crisis-hit banking sector: Who is to be blamed?

See all

Get started using your favorite social network

or

Login using moneycontrol ID

Username
Password

Need help logging in? Reset password.

Don´t have an account? Sign Up

Get started using your favorite social network

or

Simply sign up using this short form

* mandatory

UserName*

Username should be atleast 4 character

Password*

Password should be 8 or more characters,
atleast 1 number, 1 symbol & 1 upper case letter

Alert

Your Password should contain
  • 8 or more characters
  • At least 1 number
  • At least 1 symbol
  • At least 1 upper case letter
Confirm Password*
Email
Already have an account? Login