Saturday, February 14, 2009

Death for Pandher, Koli

Saturday, Feb 14, 2009


Surinder Koli.

Ghaziabad (U.P.): A special court on Friday awarded the death sentence to businessman Moninder Singh Pandher and his domestic help Surinder Koli for the rape and murder of a 14-year-old girl, one of 19 victims in the sensational Nithari serial killings.

Special CBI judge Rama Jain termed the crimes committed by 55-year-old Pandher and 38-year-old Koli the “rarest of rare” deserving capital punishment.

While counsel for the victim’s family Khalid Khan described the verdict as a “slap in the face of the CBI,” which gave a clean chit to Pandher, the businessman’s son, Karandeep Singh, said his father was innocent and he would appeal against the judgment in the Allahabad High Court.

The court on Thursday convicted Pandher and Koli under various Sections of the Indian Penal Code for murder, rape, criminal conspiracy and destruction of evidence.

In its final arguments on Friday, the CBI sought the death penalty for Koli but left to the court the quantum of punishment for Pandher as the agency had no charges against him in this case.

The judge said: “No more penalty could be awarded to the accused persons; otherwise, they deserve more punishment as their act of murder and rape in this particular case was beyond all the canons of humanity.” After the verdict, Pandher broke into tears while Koli remained unmoved.

‘Remorseless’

Earlier, during final arguments, CBI counsel argued that Koli had no right to live in society because even today he was remorseless. “He continues to be a threat to society,” Mr. Ahluwalia said. — PTI

SEBI relaxes takeover norms

Saturday, Feb 14, 2009

MUMBAI: The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) on Friday eased takeover norms for companies whose boards have been superseded by the government, under which suitors need not make an open offer.

SEBI amended the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations, 1997, allowing companies a special status in the bidding process. following the scam tainted Satyam was taken over by the Government in January. This would help the newly appointed board find a bidder as well as a realistic bidding price for the company.

These regulations may be called the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) (Second Amendment) Regulations, 2009, and it has come into force from Friday.

In the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations, 1997, (i) in regulation 25, after sub-regulation (2A), a new sub-regulation has been inserted, namely, (2B). “No public announcement for a competitive bid shall be made after an acquirer has already made the public announcement pursuant to relaxation granted by the Board in terms of regulation 29A”.

Further, in the same regulation, after regulation 29, the following regulation has been inserted, namely, “Relaxation from the strict compliance of provisions of Chapter III in certain cases. 29A:

The board may relax any or more of the provisions of this Chapter, subject to such conditions as it may deem fit, if it is satisfied that

(a) the Central Government or State government or any other regulatory authority has removed the board of directors of the target company and has appointed other persons to hold office as directors for the time being for orderly conduct of the affairs of the target company;

(b) such directors have devised a plan which provides for transparent, open, and competitive process for continued operation of the target company;

(c) the conditions and requirements of the competitive process are reasonable and fair;

(d) the process provides for details, including the time when the public offer would be made, completed and the manner in which the change in control would be effected; and

(e) the provisions of this Chapter are likely to act as impediment to implementation of the plan of the target company”.

Takeover

In business, a takeover is the purchase of one company (the target) by another (the acquirer, or bidder). In the UK, the term refers to the acquisition of a public company whose shares are listed on a stock exchange, in contrast to the acquisition of a private company.

Friendly takeovers

Before a bidder makes an offer for another company, it usually first informs that company's Board of Director. If the board feels that accepting the offer serves shareholders better than rejecting it, it recommends the offer be accepted by the shareholders.

In a private company, because the shareholders and the board are usually the same people or closely connected with one another, private acquisitions are usually friendly: if the shareholders agree to sell the company then the board is usually of the same mind or sufficiently under the orders of the shareholders to cooperate with the bidder. This point is not relevant to the UK concept of takeovers, which always involve the acquisition of a public company.


Hostile takeovers

If management may not be acting in the best interest of the shareholders (or creditors, in cases of bankrupt firms), a hostile takeover allows a suitor to bypass intransigent management. This enables the shareholders to choose the option that may be best for them, rather than leaving approval solely with management. In this case, a hostile takeover may be beneficial to shareholders, which is contrary to the usual perception that a hostile takeover is "bad."

A takeover is considered "hostile" if:

  • The board rejects the offer, but the bidder continues to pursue it, or
  • The bidder makes the offer without informing the board beforehand

A hostile takeover can be conducted in several ways. A tender offer can be made where the acquiring company makes a public offer at a fixed price above the current market price. Tender offers in the USA are regulated with the Williams Act. An acquiring company can also engage in a Proxy fight whereby tries to persuade enough shareholders, usually a simple majority, to replace the management with a new one which will approve the takeover. Another method involves quietly purchasing enough stock on the open market, known as a creeping tender offer, to effect a change in management. In all of these ways, management resists the acquisition but it is carried out anyway.

The main consequence of a bid being considered hostile is practical rather than legal. If the board of the target cooperates, the bidder can conduct extensive due diligence into the affairs of the target company. It can find out exactly what it is taking on before it makes a commitment. But a hostile bidder knows about the target only the information that is publicly available, and so takes a greater risk. Also, banks are less willing to back hostile bids with the loans that are usually needed to finance the takeover.

Reverse takeovers

A reverse takeovers is a type of takeover where a private company acquires a public company. This is usually done at the instigation of the larger, private company, the purpose being for the private company to effectively float itself while avoiding some of the expense and time involved in a conventional IPO. However, under AIM rules, a reverse take-over is an acquisition or acquisitions in a twelve month period which for an AIM company would:
  • exceed 100% in any of the class tests; or
  • result in a fundamental change in its business, board or voting control; or
  • in the case of an investing company, depart substantially from the investing strategy stated in its admission document or, where no admission document was produced on admission, depart substantially from the investing strategy stated in its pre-admission announcement or, depart substantially from the investing strategy.

Financing a takeover

Funding

Often a company acquiring another pays a specified amount for it. This money can be raised in a number of ways. The company may have sufficient funds available in its account, but this is unusual. More often, it will be borrowed from a bank, or raised by an issue of bonds. Acquisitions financed through debt are known as leveraged buyouts, and the debt will often be moved down onto the balance sheets of the acquired company. The acquired company then has to pay back the debt. This is a technique often used by private equity companies. The debt ratio of financing can go as high as 80% in some cases. In such a case, the acquiring company would only need to raise 20% of the purchase price.


Loan note alternatives

Cash offers for public companies often include a "loan note alternative" that allows shareholders to take part or all of their consideration in loan notes rather than cash. This is done primarily to make the offer more attractive in terms of taxation. A conversion of shares into cash is counted a disposal that triggers a payment of capital gains tax, whereas if the shares are converted into other securities, such as loan notes, the tax is rolled over.

All share deals

A takeover, particularly a reverse takeovers, may be financed by an all share deal. The bidder does not pay money, but instead issues new shares in itself to the shareholders of the company being acquired. In a reverse takeover the shareholders of the company being acquired end up with a majority of the shares in, and so control of, the company making the bid. The company has managemental rights.

Perceived pros and cons of takeover

While perceived pros and cons of a takeover differ from case to case, there are a few worth mentioning.

Pros:

  1. Increase in sales/revenues (e.g. Procter & Gamble takeover of Gillette)
  2. Venture into new businesses and markets
  3. Profitability of target company
  4. Increase market share
  5. Decrease competition (from the perspective of the acquiring company)
  6. Reduction of overcapacity in the industry
  7. Enlarge brand portfolio (e.g. L'Oréal's takeover of Bodyshop)
  8. Increase in economies of scale.

Cons:

  1. Reduced competition and choice for consumers in oligopoly markets. (Bad for consumers, although this is good for the companies involved in the takeover)
  2. Likelihood of job cuts.
  3. Cultural integration/conflict with new management
  4. Hidden liabilities of target entity.
  5. The monetary cost to the company.