Showing posts with label Future Retail. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Future Retail. Show all posts

Wednesday, May 18, 2022

How Reliance got the Keys. What Mukesh Ambani did at Future Retail can be a B-School Case Study

How Reliance got the Keys. What Mukesh Ambani did at Future Retail can be a B-School Case Study

#suprioghatak #amazon #relianceretail #futureretail

Amazon’s claim to ownership rests primarily on paper. Reliance has legal arguments of its own too, based on another set of contracts. But with one key difference—Reliance also owns the keys to the building.

In terms of legal brilliance it would be hard to top what Amazon had done. But that was before we understood what Reliance did. Because that is just something else altogether. And it makes for an even better story. Let's find out what happened on the night of February 25.

The fight over Future Retail’s assets had a surprise finale — when a billionaire just took over the shopping aisles.

In the unexpected climax, Mukesh Ambani decided who gets to own the assets of Future Retail Ltd. not in an arbitration tribunal in Singapore or in a courtroom in New Delhi, but in a shopping aisle.

Future Retail had been subleasing store space from Reliance Industries Ltd. It was operating only on Ambani’s endurance as Future couldn’t come up with the rent. But with Amazon continuing to block Reliance’s $3.4 B purchase of Future’s assets, Ambani decided to make the acquisition a fact of life. He terminated the leases and is taking control of the properties.

It was a dramatic epilogue to a three year old narrative. Amazon initially helped Future by investing $192 M in Future Coupons Private Limited, a gift voucher unit of founder Kishore Biyani for him to use the funds to steady the debt-laden Indian retailer.

The 2019 deal's condition was that assets in the 1,500 stores pan India wouldn’t be sold to Ambani, who owns India’s largest retail empire. Biyani did exactly that after Covid-19 decimated operations. Amazon began proceedings against Future for breach of contract. The Reliance deal was on hold until Ambani decided he has had enough. 

Future Retail was living under a rock. Its bailout by Ambani was a commercial deal and not a humanitarian mission. It was Future’s job to take care of all its stakeholders, most importantly the creditors.

And where’s Amazon in all this? It has learned the hard way that taking on Ambani on his home turf was impossible. So Amazon offered an out-of-court settlement over its funds invested in Future Coupons Pvt. Ltd. which had been its first move in the drama. Amazon couldn’t have rescued Future Retail as India’s draconian foreign direct investment (FDI) rules were a big roadblock. So it did the next best thing. It funded privately held Future Coupons indirectly holding some control over Future Retail.

That control proved to be fragile. After agreeing to Reliance’s deal, Future wanted to come out of the contract with Amazon. Its independent directors complained to Competition Commission of India (CCI) that Amazon had deliberately misled the true nature of the Future Coupons deal, which effectively put Amazon in the driver’s seat at Future Retail, violating India’s 2018 FDI law. CCI promptly suspended its earlier approval of Amazon’s investment, and the Delhi High Court halted the Singapore arbitration panel’s work.

But if Future with a net worth of negative $280 M was betting that Reliance would wait patiently as it sorted out its legal troubles with Amazon, it misjudged the situation. 342 of its large stores and 493 of smaller outlets — constituting 55% to 65% of retail revenue — have so far received termination notices of sub-leases from Reliance entities.

It’s dishonest for Future to now appear shocked, that Amazon is moving in before concluding the formal purchase. Possession is nine-tenths of the law. Amazon had given Future an option in January for a further $914 M bailout, but Future's independent directors found it inadequate, given the astronomical debt. Now it’s for Future’s 2025 dollar bondholders to figure out if they’ll be made whole. Trading around 60 cents to the dollar through the stealth acquisition, it doesn't indicate any creditor confidence.

How does a physical takeover work? There’s inventory, furniture, lighting and point-of-sale equipment, all pledged to creditors.

There’s nothing left at Reliance to discuss. The outcome is this. On the urging of Future Retail, the Indian judiciary put a bullet through the arbitration law, never allowing it to settle a simple commercial dispute. The consequences are for Future — and India — to bear.

When faced with heavyweight opponents, the odds of enforcing a contract in the country are slim. Nobody should complain if foreigners are skeptical of India’s growth in “ease of doing business." But then, it’s a fast-modernizing market of 1.4 B consumers. Amazon can’t give up on it. It alleged that Future was trying to remove the “substratum of the dispute" by transferring its stores to Reliance in a “clandestine manner." It informed the Supreme Court that truce talks had failed. It’s hard to say if Amazon’s continued protests will discourage Future's lenders from blessing the change of control — or if it’s already too late for that.

As for Future, it doesn’t have much. Going defunct is a feature of capitalism. But the humiliating manner in which an Indian pioneer of modern retail got ripped apart store by store for the wrong choices it made should be a case study.

However, before academics get busy, creditors need to find out where the shopping racks and the cash machines are kept. It’s their collateral, after all, and the comprehensive lesson of this contest has been that everyone should grab what they can. While stocks last.

Updates as of Now

State Bank of India has written to Future Retail Ltd. seeking accountability on the company's stores taken over by Mukesh Ambani-controlled Reliance Industries Ltd. SBI reiterated that the lenders have rights over stock, moveable fixed assets in all the outlets of the company, and in the case of its sale, the entire proceeds will need to be used to settle their dues.

Reliance Projects & Property Management Services Ltd. had taken over 835 sub-leased stores of Future Retail after voiding the lease agreements, the company had informed exchanges in March. These included 342 large-format stores including Big Bazaar, Fashion@Big Bazaar, and 493 small outlets such as Easy Day and Heritage. Reliance Group also took over 112 Future Lifestyle Fashions Ltd. stores.

After Reliance took over the stores, Bank of India on behalf of the lenders had issued a public notice warning people against dealing with Future Group's assets. In the notice, the bank had highlighted that lenders have rights over the group's assets owing to the loans they had extended, and any sale without their consent would be subject to legal proceedings.

The lenders are not sure if the value determined nearly two years ago would still hold since significant deterioration has taken place since. Even if the sale were to be concluded now, lenders are unlikely to recover a large part of their Rs 30,000 cr dues against Future.

(Inspired by Andy Mukherjee) 

 

To be continued

Sunday, January 16, 2022

Amazon Fined Rs. 200 cr - The Deal To Buy Future Retail Suspended - The 10-point Cheat Sheet

This comes amidst a bitter legal battle between Amazon and Future Group over the latter's proposed ₹ 24,713 cr deal with Reliance Retail.

The Competition Commission of India (CCI) suspended its approval for Amazon's deal to acquire a stake in retailer Future Coupons Pvt. Ltd. and imposed a Rs. 202 cr penalty for hiding facts and making false statements while seeking regulatory approvals in 2019.

The Amazon-Future Coupons deal approval shall be kept in abeyance.

The 10-point Cheat Sheet to this Big Story

1. Amazon suppressed the actual scope of the deal and made false statements while seeking approvals to invest in Future Group. CCI considers it necessary to examine the deal afresh.

2. This comes amidst a bitter legal battle between Amazon and Future Group over the latter's proposed Rs. 24,713 cr deal with Reliance Retail - the country's largest retailer in terms of revenue.

3. In 2019, Amazon had entered into a deal worth Rs. 2,000 cr with Future Group. As part of the deal, Amazon had acquired 49 per cent stake in Future Coupons - the promoter firm of listed Future Retail - which also owns 7.3 per cent equity in Future Retail through convertible warrants.

4. Future Retail would be able to place its products on Amazon's online marketplace. Additionally, Amazon had the right to buy into the flagship Future Retail after 3-10 years.

5. In August 2020, Reliance Retail Ventures said that it will acquire the retail and wholesale business, and the logistics and warehousing business of Future Group for Rs. 24,713 cr.

6. Amazon objected to Future's deal with Reliance, saying that it was a violation of a non-compete clause and a right-of-first-refusal pact it had signed with Future. The terms agreed in its 2019 deal of buying the 49 per cent stake in Future's gift voucher unit prevents the parent company - Future Group, from selling its Future Retail business to certain rivals, including Reliance.

7. Future Group complained to the antitrust body that Amazon had concealed facts over their deal. In June, the CCI sought an explanation from Amazon saying it hid factual aspects of the transaction by not revealing its strategic interest in Future Retail while seeking approvals.

8. While approving the deal in November 2019, CCI had also mentioned that the order shall stand revoked if, at any time, the information provided by the acquirer was found to be incorrect.

9. Earlier this week, Amazon had warned the antitrust body that revoking its 2019 deal with the Future Group would send a negative signal to foreign investors and allow Reliance to further restrict competition.

10. The CCI order will potentially dent Amazon's attempts to block the sale of Future's retail assets to Reliance Retail. The ruling could also have far-reaching consequences for Amazon's legal battles with Future.

To be continued   

Wednesday, November 18, 2020

Amazon can own Future Retail Ltd. only by violating India’s laws

Amazon can own Future Retail Ltd. (FRL) only by violating India’s laws. As it blocks Reliance’s takeover, it finds itself in legal jeopardy by securing indirect hold in FRL.

Future Group has the right to sell its assets to whom it wants. If Amazon has indirect control over FRL, it has breached India’s FDI rules.

It has bypassed mandatory government approvals and is now open to action by ED and SEBI.

By not disclosing its attempt to obtain control over FRL, it has violated FDI rules and mandatory SEBI regulations requiring it to make an open offer to FRL shareholders.

FDI in multi-brand retail (MBR) is allowed with stringent conditions like using 50 percent of the investment for back-end infrastructure, mandatory local sourcing of goods and services, etc. Most important, government permission is a mandatory requirement for such investment.

Thus, Amazon avoided Indian regulations. First, there was an agreement between listed FRL (where FDI would not have been possible) and Future Coupons Ltd. (FCL) (where FDI is allowed) that gave the latter effective veto power over the former.

In step two, Amazon invested Rs 1,430 cr for a 49 percent stake in FCL which owned a 9.82 per cent stake in FRL), giving itself effective veto power over FCL. Thus, Amazon obtained veto powers and control over a MBR company where FDI is not permitted without government approval.

On August 12, 2019, FRL entered into a shareholders’ agreement with the KB Group (Future Group founder Kishore Biyani, family members, private limited companies controlled by him) and FCL. This provided special rights to FCL, which held convertible warrants in FRL. Crucially, it said that retail assets of FRL could not be licensed, transferred or alienated without the approval of FCL. In particular, it gave FCL a veto over sale of FRL’s assets to competitors, notably Reliance.

FCL, having obtained this veto over FRL, entered into a shareholders agreement with Amazon and KB Group. Here, it was agreed that Biyani and his firms would be required to vote in the same manner as Amazon in matters concerning the sale of retail assets and sale of assets to restricted persons (read Reliance Retail). The agreement also said that Biyani and his nominated directors could not even place a proposal on these issues in front of the FRL board; further the FRL board also cannot even consider proposals on these issues without Amazon’s consent.

In effect, with a tiny indirect stake in FRL and no board position in the listed retail company, Amazon gained indirect control over the pioneer in organized retail.

The amendments made to the articles of association of FCL do not reflect the fact that Amazon had gained control. Moreover, the articles of association of FRL have never been amended.

Had the disclosure of these actions been made, the Enforcement Directorate would have been forced to step in. The term control in the Foreign Exchange Management Act (non-debt instrument) Rules clearly covers control rights taken through shareholder agreements. FDI laws in India allow FCL to hold shares of FRL only as long as FCL is owned and controlled by Indian residents.

Similarly, SEBI would have required Amazon to make an open offer to acquire 26 percent of FRL from shareholders at an approximate price of Rs. 550-600 per share.

That has not happened. Instead, Amazon used a transaction with FCL to stall a scheme of arrangement (the merger of group firms and sale of assets to Reliance Retail for Rs 25000 cr) which has been considered by the Board of FRL to be in the interest of all stakeholders. Reliance agreed to acquire the assets of Future in a slump sale in August this year.

Not only did Amazon get an emergency arbitration award in Singapore, it also wrote to SEBI and other authorities to delay the deal. This prompted FRL to file a suit in Delhi High Court asking for issuance of directions barring Amazon from interfering with its contract with Reliance.

Rights being asserted are way beyond shareholders rights. They say they will decide with whom FRL can and cannot do business. Amazon has no voting rights or Board position but says that you dare not take a decision without me on saving yourself.

In any case, Amazon’s shareholder agreement with FCL categorically claims that its investment is not in FRL and it does not seek to assume any control over FRL. Either this is true or this is subterfuge to deceive the regulators.

Future group was racking up losses even before the pandemic struck. It defaulted on payment of Rs 10,000 cr. It owes banks and financial institutions Rs 18,000 cr and Rs 7500 cr to vendors and suppliers. The deal with Reliance would have helped all stakeholders and prevented a painful bankruptcy.

Future is going through an adverse financial situation. It is not able to pay its vendors and is facing a lot of problems primarily with working capital. It is strapped of cash. So if Reliance takes over Future, it will also take over their liabilities. It is not just good for Future but also for the lenders. In addition what Reliance is going to do is to invest in Future Enterprise Ltd which is going to scale up the brand.

As a listed company, FRL’s rights to reorganize itself cannot be stalled by anyone, including the promoters, if it has the approval of the requisite majority of shareholders and creditors.

Amazon has claimed that it had arranged a rescue deal for Future group. But the bottom line is that Amazon cannot invest directly in and rescue FRL from bankruptcy under current FDI laws. By trying to impose conditions on FRL such as issuing a list of restricted persons is just a means of stifling competition.

Restricted persons is not minority rights. It is anti-competition rights.

If it won’t get ownership of FRL, Amazon is trying to scuttle competition from owning the same company.

Sunday, November 15, 2020

Amazon asks SEBI to probe Future Retail for insider trading

Amazon has asked India’s market regulator SEBI to investigate Future Retail Ltd. for insider trading, as it seeks to prevent its business partner from becoming part of rival Reliance’s empire. 

The US giant has been pressing SEBI to review Reliance’s August deal to buy retail, logistics and other assets from Future Group for $3.4 billion including debt.

Amazon argues it had a 2019 agreement with Future which prevented Future group’s retail assets from being sold to certain parties including Reliance Industries Ltd. 

The November 8 letter to SEBI alleges Future Retail disclosed to Reliance price sensitive details of an injunction granted by a Singapore arbitrator to block the deal.

The spat is being closely watched as a key test of whether Indian firms, courts and regulators will respect arbitration decisions made as per overseas arbitration rules, and adds to headaches for Amazon in India which is also dealing with antitrust challenges.

It remains to be seen whether Indian courts and regulators will side with Amazon or Future Retail. Future Retail has asked a New Delhi court for an order to restrain Amazon from approaching Indian regulators to block its deal with Reliance. Hearings on the case began on Tuesday.

Thursday, November 5, 2020

Jeff Bezos vs. Mukesh Ambani Battle Royale – Mysterious Facts

In the battle for the Indian retail market supremacy uncomfortable questions are being raised by corporate watchers.


Eight absolutely unknown facts tumbled out of the closet in this battle royale.


1. Has Jeff Bezos disclosed all the Amazon-Future agreements to Future Retail Ltd (FRL) shareholders? No.


Bezos has invested 49 percent in Future Coupons Ltd (FCL), a promoter company of FRL. 51 percent of FCL is held by Kishore Biyani. FCL, in turn, has 9.82 percent holding in FRL.


FCL is controlled by Biyani with his holding of 51 per cent. This is a requirement under India's FDI Regulations.


Bezos cannot hold directly any share in FRL. Apparently, he is compliant with FDI Regulations. But, the reality is different.


In a two-tier structure, Bezos has taken control of FRL, prohibited under FDI Regulations:


(i) Tier 1 is a shareholders' agreement between FRL, FCL and other promoters of FRL – in terms of which, without FCL's consent, FRL cannot transfer its assets or business to any third party and its board cannot consider such a proposal.


(ii) Tier 2 is a shareholders' agreement between FCL, Amazon and other promoters of FRL – in terms which, Bezos has taken over the rights of FCL under the FRL shareholders' agreement.


(iii) Thus, effectively Bezos controls FRL.


These two agreements have never been disclosed to any Indian regulator.


If they are disclosed:


(i) SEBI - Bezos has taken control of FRL. He will be mandatorily required to make an open offer at Rs 500 per share.


(ii) ED - Bezos has invested in and taken control of a multi-brand retail company without Government approval and hoodwinked the Government of India.


2. Has FRL amended its Articles?


Amazon's rights in FCL were carried as part of the amendment to the Articles of FCL.


FRL Articles have not been amended. Had it been proposed to the shareholders disclosing that Amazon will exercise the rights of FCL under FRL shareholders' agreement, the public shareholders would have never approved it.


3. Amazon could not have invested in FRL through FDI route under FDI Policy. Then, how does it have enforceable rights against FRL?


For this, Amazon has gone through the above difficult and complicated structure. 


FRL is engaged in Multi Brand Retail Trade (MBRT); Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) - up to 51 percent - in MBRT is allowed only with prior permission of the government, subject to conditions, including sourcing of materials within India and management control etc.;


Amazon wants to control MBRT space, without any legal hassles; hence, in a complicated manner, it went ahead with the difficult illegal structure; if the veil is pierced and the transaction structure is studied in detail, it will be found illegal.


Amazon has obtained an interim order from the Emergency Arbitrator injuncting the public company, FRL not to proceed with the scheme, in spite of not having any direct shareholding in FRL, shows that the contractual rights are nothing but "control", in violation of SEBI and FDI Regulations.


Bezos has followed a similar investment structure in More Retail; where he invested Rs 4,200 crore;


For FDI violations, the consequence is, apart from annulment of transactions, Bezos is exposed to penalty of up to three times the investment – Rs 5,630 crore x 3 times = Rs 16,890 crore. 


For violation of SEBI Takeover Regulations, apart from penalty, they may also be liable to be prosecuted.


4. How as a foreign company Amazon asserted control over FRL and its Board? And on FRL shareholders?


The assertion shows that Amazon has violated FDI and SEBI Regulations. If Amazon asserts control, it needs to make an open offer.


5. Amazon is asserting control over FRL. Does it violate FDI policy?


Yes.


6. Have all of the agreements been disclosed to regulators – SEBI, ED, etc.?


No – details of transaction selectively provided – to obscure.


Enforcement Directorate, SEBI, Ministry of Company Affairs, and other authorities etc, must direct Amazon to disclose the agreements and details of actual arrangements in and commence inquiry.


7. What is the crux of the SIAC'd Interim Order?


It records that Amazon's entire investment was for its direct interests in FRL.


8. Is Mukesh Ambani a competitor of Bezos?


Bezos cannot carry on multi brand retail in India. He can carry on only market-place e-commerce in India. Yet, his Amazon is referring to Ambani's Reliance as its competitor. Reliance can be Amazon's competitor only if the latter is permitted to do MBRT.