By Arun Natarajan, Partner at Power Quill, The Editorial Services Company.
According to newly listed NDTV's
filing with the stock exchange , at the time of listing, promoters Prannoy Roy (Chairman) and Radhika Roy (Managing Director) together (and equally) hold a 54.78% stake - or "voting rights" as the filing puts it - in the company.
There's nothing new about fights between Venture Capitalists and the founders of start-ups they've invested in. What's new about Businessworld magazine's detailed description of the battle between The View Group and Tracmail founder Adi Cooper is that such fights have now broken out in India's BPO sector. BW indicates that it is not just Tracmail. Similar battles are also being fought at other early-to-market call center firms like Epicenter and Infowavz as well.
According to the article, since Tracmail started out in 1999 - well before the BPO sector became a VC-darling - Cooper did not have too much of a choice about which VC to go with. So, he took "latched on to what was available" by selling "a hefty 50% stake" to The View Group for a "mere $7-8 million".
"Over the past two years, every time Cooper tried to replace his current VCs with investors who had a longer time horizon and bigger resources, The View Group would simply not agree on the price," the article says. The last straw was a three-way merger between Tracmail and two of its North America-based alliance partners (Webhelp and Spheronomics). "Spheronomics came in with north American management to boost the sales pipeline. That did not happen. So, in effect, with a North American cost structure and no incremental sales, the company has bled further," an unnamed Tracmail executive says in the article.
What's the latest position at Tracmail? According to the BW article, several members of Tracmail's senior management team (including the COO, CFO and CTO) have quit the company - with Chairman Cooper himself preferring to spend "most of his time at home" - the company's prospects don't seem too bright.
BW and its correspondent Snigdha Sengupta deserve kudos for coming up with such a rare and in-depth article on issues facing venture-backed BPO companies. The main negative in the article was that it did not contain any comments from either Cooper or The View Group. The reader is left to assume that the warring parties refused to speak to BW. It would have been better if the article told readers as much in the article itself.
Click Here to read the full article.
The supposedly new emphasis of providing economic reforms with a "human face" was the most important part of Dr. Manmohan Singh's comments after he was sworn in as India's Prime Minister. At least according to all the English-language TV news channels and newspapers that I looked at.
What is this "human face" business? Only something that is bad needs to be "reformed" right? The socialist economic system that the Congress Party bestowed on the country during its first 45-years in power, has been proved a failure all over the world.
And therefore, this bad - and ugly - system needs to be reformed. Which is what Dr. Singh started out to do in 1991.
So, again, what is this human face that Dr. Manmohan Singh was talking about? How exactly do the "poorest of the poor" benefit by the Government of India owning Air India and Ashoka Hotels? How can a "human face" (whatever it might mean) alter this? Sadly, none of the media outlets bothered to ask Dr. Singh.
Probably all the reporters have prepared themselves to hear Dr. Singh use such meaningless words often to keep the communist parties happy. (Meaningless words for a meaningless ideology. Nice.)
Admist all the natak and Politically Correct speak about "human faces", I was pleasantly surprised to encounter a column by Sunil Jain, in Business Standard, pointing out some uncomfortable facts (for the commies) about our great Public Sector Undertakings (PSUs).
Some extracts from the column:
"Over the past 57 years, the country's economic policies have been held hostage to the interests of PSUs, and this causes enormous efficiency losses, not just for the economy, but even for the common man. But since PSUs have become synonymous with the national flag, even though less than 6 per cent of the country's work force is employed by them, few dare protest."
"Till around the time it was privatised, no one except VSNL was allowed to provide international calls; once the monopoly was broken, call rates fell from around Rs.80 a minute four years ago to Rs.8-9 now."
"In the case of the oil PSUs, similarly, while it is important to allow them to benefit from the rising oil prices, the deal worked out is completely lopsided and anti-consumer. The PSUs are paid on what's called an international price parity formula which sounds fine, but apart from the international price, this includes a 20 per cent import duty and the freight and insurance on the petroleum products as well!"
"PSU interests are once again raising prices for the common man (in the telecom field). The Access Deficit Charge of Rs.5,250 crore levied on all long distance calls, for instance, has substantially hiked STD and ISD rates. Where does this money go? To a PSU, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, which uses the money, interestingly, to keep its cellular call rates lower than those of the private sector competitors. So, not only is the common man in the remotest part of Laloo Prasad Yadav's Bihar paying 40 per cent more every time he calls up his brother in Patna, it also distorts competition."
Ah! After too much of election-time NDTV, it is refreshing to hear from sane - and politically-incorrect - voices.
Comrade. Comrade. Comrade. Comrade. Comrade. Comrade. Comrade.
On Tuesday, May 18 (the day Sonia Gandhi decided not to aspire for Prime Ministership), I was stunned to watch a NDTV reporter chasing Jyoti Basu (Communist Party leader and former Chief Minister of West Bengal) all the way to his car for seeking Basu's comments on Sonia's descision. The stunning part was that the reporter kept addressing Basu as "comrade" (almost 10 times) during the "chase interview".
The same day, I was - stunned again - to see NTDV's Political Editor Rajdeep Sardesai interviewing a Congress Member of Parliament outside 10 Janpath with his arm placed around the MP's shoulder!
On Monday, news anchor Vishnu Shom was acting decidedly pissed off about the stock market's dive (thanks to irresponsible statements from the rent-a-quote Sitaram Yechury and his Communist Party colleagues). Late evening on the same day, I could only tolerate a few minutes of Sardesai attempts to sugar-coat a CPI-M leader's tirade against privatization as "the left's concerns". On the next day, when I saw Shivnath Thukral filing his stock market report well away from the Bombay Stock Exchange building (from where, Shivnath said, the NDTV crew was driven away by angry protestors on Monday), I wasn't surprised.
I have heard several people criticize NDTV for its anti-BJP slant - especially for its "biased" coverage of the Gujarat riots. In fact, I've heard several people using the word "anti-National" to describe the channel. As someone whose main interest is business journalism, with only a passing interest in politics, my main views on NDTV have been limited to deep admiration for the two of their journalists: Barkha Dutt and Vikram Chandra. (Barkha's "We the People" program makes for fascinating viewing - regardless of the subject being discussed. Vikram Chandra is a superbly mature news anchor. I used to look forward to watching "Business Weekend" each Sunday when he used to anchor the program.) In fact, I had even sent NDTV an email (when CNBC went off air in Chennai thanks to CAS) suggesting that it would be good for them to introduce live stock tickers during market hours. A suggestion that they promptly heeded.
It was NDTV's coverage of the post-election drama - starring Sitaram Yechury, Sonia Gandhi and the Stock Markets - that made me realize how bad the political bias of some of NDTV's correspondents really was. And how much damage they were causing the channel.
And it is not just bias. There's poor journalism as well. Last week, I was amazed to hear NDTV's Bangalore correspondent Nupur Basu saying on air that Deva Gowda had told her "off-the-record" that he would not ally with the BJP. (If it was "off the record", why was she telling the world about it?)
This lack of focus on ethics and quality is highly unfortunate for what is a pioneering venture in TV news journalism.
Hopefully, now that NDTV is a publicly-listed company, founder Prannoy Roy and the other Directors of the company will heed the widespread criticism from viewers and media observers (like the folks at TheHoot.org ) and weed out the bad elements.
It would be good for business. And the company's stock price.
It's highly irritating to view/read about politicians and others interpret the "people's verdict" as per their convenience. Unfortunately, journalists - for reasons of personal political bent or laziness - don't challenge these selective interpretations.
According to Sitaram Yechury (CPI-M) and Mani Shankar Aiyer (Congress), who appeared on NDTV 24X7's "The Big Fight" program over the weekend, the people have voted "clearly" in favor of "secular forces".
There are obvious problem with this such a simplistic interpretation.
What about the people of Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan? Since they voted in favor of the NDA, does that mean that they desire a "communal government"?
And what does the CPI-M's sweep in Kerala essentially against the Congress say about the people of Kerala's opinion on the "secular vs. communal" debate?
And how does Aiyer explain the transformation of the Congress Party's current allies in his home state Tamil Nadu - the DMK, PMK and MDMK? These parties were very much a part of the previous NDA government, which he now brands as "communal". How did they suddenly become "secular"? Could he kindly explain the exact "purification" process through which a party can transform from "communal" to "secular" - other than by allying with the Congress?
Unfortunately, the moderator, Rajdeep Sardesai, failed to ask these questions.
While channel surfing last night, I chanced upon the live coverage of Sonia Gandhi's press meet (on DD).
But the screaming and shouting (and the occasional mobile phone ringing) of the media folks put me off big time. And I surfed off to a different channel. Sad, because I was definitely interested in hearing what Sonia had to say.
Yeah, I could read about her comments in tomorrow's newspapers. But who reads newspapers for news, these days? I don't.
Isn't there a better way of organizing such press meets? Or, to put it differently, can't the media be more organized?
Now that the elections are over, I hope the Supreme Court quickly puts an end to this business of Exit Polls.
Not because I believe that exit poll results from some states would influence voting patterns in other states that go to polls later. But because, as
an article in today's Economic Times (with a nice headline that I've borrowed for this post) points out, the "exit pollsters" almost never seem to get it right. (Yeah. Maybe one particular poll during some election might have got the number right. But the fact that 1 out of 1,000 darts that I throw at a dart board hits bull's eye, doesn't say much about my skills. It's just random.).
More importantly, the exit pollsters are not accountable for putting out horribly wrong numbers. This is not a trivial matter. Especially since the exit polls were clearly influencing movements in the stock market during the 4-week long election period. If I, as an investor, lost money during that time, will NDTV and others who put out the wrong numbers compensate me for it?
Over to you, your honors.
I'm making the first posting to this blog on the day after Vajpayee's government has been booted out of government.
I used to actually like the BJP because of their pro-free market views and L.K.Advani's heroic stand when he was accused of corruption. (Remember he refused to enter Parliamant unless he was cleared of the charges against him. Very very unlike Laloo & Co. who would like to enjoy power until and unless they are indicted - and that too by the Supreme Court only.)
But that was before Tehelkha happened.
The ruthless way in which the BJP-led government destroyed Tehelkha.com and its investors - just because they had "dared" to expose corruption in its ranks - damaged all the respect that I had for Vajpayee, Advani, and the BJP. And also to a certain extent Arun Shourie - since he chose to continue as part of such a government.
Yes. The fact that the new Congress-led government is going to be dependent on the left parties (and other sundry undesirables) for sustenance would mean that the pace of economic reform will slow down.
But, I don't care. I'm glad Vajapayee and company are out.
Not because of any "secular" nonsense.
But because of what they did to Tehelkha.
