SEARCH

Business

Updated: May 6, 2012 22:25 IST

Is Telenor more a sinner than sinned against?

Shalini Singh
Comment (13)   ·   print   ·   T  T  
Sigve Brekke
Sigve Brekke

Are Telenor's shareholders aware of its bad judgment, below average business case and excessively litigant approach in India?

Telenor is at it again. This time it is threatening to hang up on its India operations. Peeved over the high reserve price recommended by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) for spectrum auctions, as well as the low quantity of spectrum put on the block, Sigve Brekke, Managing Director of Uninor, a joint venture controlled by Norwegian firm Telenor, said last week,

“If these recommendations become policy, we will be forced to exit India. It would be impossible for us to continue operations here.” Uninor then challenged the TRAI's recommendations on spectrum auctions in the Supreme Court for not being in line with the 2G licence cancellation judgment of February 2, 2012.

It is hard to believe that Telenor, one of the world's top 10 telecom players, was not aware of the telecom scam in India, which was being reported on a daily basis by mainstream media for over a year before it struck its deal with Unitech to buy equity in October 2008. The momentum around the scandal in granting spectrum in 2008 at 2001 prices gathered strength since September 2007.

Unitech was in discussions with several multinationals while engaging with Telenor. While those companies walked away from the transaction, Telenor did not. Who is to blame for this foolhardiness?

Also, while Telenor paid a huge premium to buy 67 per cent of Unitech, rather than accept that this was a premium for spectrum, it allowed Unitech to pretend, including through press releases by the Central Government on October 31, 2008, and November 7, 2008, that the valuation was on account of other assets and not spectrum. A bad move in the end.

Telenor's process of due diligence is highly questionable considering that the Comptroller and Auditor General of India's report on 2G spectrum allocation of 2010 revealed that all 22 licence applications submitted by Unitech were an attempt to “fraudulently access spectrum” by submitting defective and false documentation.

On its part, the Telenor group maintains that it did indeed conduct its requisite due diligence on licences processed, scrutinised, stamped and guaranteed by the Indian Government under the same policy that had been established for years. But what of the applications themselves?

Copies of such applications must have been made available to Telenor's lawyers and due diligence team with violations ranging from simple things such as the memorandum of association (MoA) describing real estate as its business rather than telecom. Authorised share capital was found short in every single application, in some cases, merely Rs.5.2 crore, against the requirement of Rs.128 crore.

False certificates of paid-up capital were submitted by company secretaries in several applications. In others, the failure to register alteration in the main object clause of the MoA by the Registrar of Companies was suppressed. It is hard to believe that Telenor, as a large investor, was unable to locate these flaws, despite its due diligence being restricted to examination of these basic documents alone unless it was blinded by the temptation of a sweetheart deal.

Average performance

Telenor's performance, once it took over, while better than the other entrants, has been average. It was allocated spectrum across most of its 22 circles between April 2008 and January 2009 and was obligated to rollout networks consistent with the licence conditions and rollout obligations cast upon the joint venture.

However, by 2010, the company had started violating rollout obligations in several of its circles. This was not Unitech's fault alone.

By now, Telenor was fully in control as a majority partner. In November 2010, TRAI recommended cancellation of eight of Uninor's licences for failure to rollout while severe financial penalties were imposed on the remaining 13 (it doesn't have spectrum for Delhi) due to a delayed rollout.

The TRAI's report shows that till November 2010, Telenor merely had 16 million subscribers with zero subscribers in eight of the circles where it had received spectrum.

When the cases to cancel licences were filed, Uninor barely had 2.2 per cent market share. Even today, Uninor's market share remains a mere 4.62 per cent. Surely, it can't blame either the government or its partner Unitech for its performance.

Telenor's entry strategy also failed to recognise that participation in the telecom game in India required a serious Indian partner with deep pockets, and not just someone who had wrangled a licence through what the CBI terms as a ‘criminal conspiracy'.

It is no surprise that as things got tough, serious financial differences broke out between Unitech and Telenor. Telenor was committing investments of several thousand crore in its India operations even as the CBI was filing FIRs (October 2009) and public interest litigations (since April 2010) were being heard about the legality of the licences in the courts.

The Supreme Court, in March 2010, upheld the quashing of the press release that led to Uninor's licences. While Telenor keeps flagging its Rs.14,500-crore investment, under whose advice was it taking such massive risks with shareholders' money? The relationship between the two partners is at an all-time low. Board meetings are video-graphed, lawyers accompany both sides to discussions, one arbitration on valuation has already reached Singapore, while a second one on indemnification is rumoured to be on its way. Meanwhile, Uninor's enterprise valuation has plummeted to Rs.400 crore from its 2008 high of Rs.11,620 crore.

Grumbling over auction

Over the last two months, Telenor has grumbled that cancellation of its licences before the auctions occurred or delaying the auctions would hurt its interest. The Supreme Court has granted that licence cancellation be co-terminus with the 2G auctions, which has been extended to August, giving the company more time to plan and acquire. This is exactly what Telenor wanted.

However, Telenor is now protesting against the reserve price and the quantum of spectrum placed on the block. Why does Telenor expect that in a bidding process, it should be guaranteed spectrum or should be offered a price that meets its business case as a new entrant?

India has seven existing operators and though new investment is critical, allocation of spectrum will have to ensure a fair market price while meeting the requirements of the most serious players. An auction process can never guarantee spectrum for any operator.

Even India's largest operators do not have pan-India 3G spectrum, despite the fact that over three slots were offered in most circles in the 3G auctions.

The guarantees and concessions that Telenor seeks in the face of its absence of due diligence, bad judgment, terrible choice of partner and average performance, where network rollouts are concerned, need to be considered carefully before any concessions are made.

Combative litigation

Finally, it is unclear what Telenor was telling its shareholders in 2008, and what story it is spinning to them now. Business sense suggests little chance of success for a new entrant in a market which already has 800 million subscribers on the networks of its competitors, even if spectrum is given at half of the current reserve price determined by the TRAI. Unless, as the TRAI chairman points out, spectrum price is a small fraction of overall operational costs. If that is true, then does Telenor really have a case for a reduction in the reserve price?

Telenor's combative and litigant strategy has not paid off either. The company is fighting the government by invoking an international litigation under a bilateral treaty, fighting the court through a review petition and now the TRAI through an interim application. It is also unclear if filing a case against TRAI recommendations in the Supreme Court is savvy strategy considering that since TRAI's recommendations are not binding on the government, they do not provide Uninor any cause of action.

Maybe shareholders need to review Telenor's mistakes and fix responsibility before allowing the company to make further allegations of unfair treatment, threaten more court cases, or even a withdrawal from India. Last week, Telenor's Chairman Harald Norvik, who was the chairman during Telenor's India entry in 2008 announced his resignation after the Norwegian Government, which holds 54 per cent majority share in Telenor, withdrew support for his leadership over the sale of TV2, Norway's main commercial television channel. It is surprising that heads are rolling over the sale of a TV channel but not for flushing $3 billion down the drain by taking unprecedented risks in the Indian market.

Meanwhile, Telenor continues to maintain that it is blameless and that several representatives at the highest level of the Indian Government have also expressed that the Telenor Group is an innocent third party. While it would be an economic loss for India to lose Telenor, the company must acknowledge that it is misplaced to whine for special consideration given its own performance and the multiple red flags that it has ignored right from mid-2008 when it began its highly questionable due diligence process in India. The only real victims here are Telenor's unsuspecting minority shareholders and Uninor's employees.

More In: Business | Industry

A highly one sided article without much insight into the Telenor thinking. At no point, we should justify a fraud perpetrated on the nation as a whole. If the writer feels any `collusion' at any point, why CBI is not taking any action against Telenor? As an Indian, I feel sad for Telenor as it has been a victim of fraud by a crooked partner and one of the worst govts to rule the country. Much care would have been taken to write about `Rs 14,500 cr investment' of Telenor as analysts do keep writing about basic costs of operations as very high in India. If an Indian company, say Bharti loses it investments in African nations like this, would we be happy to justify it as a pure investment risk? Stability in politics and policies are crucial for a nation's progress.

from:  Sreevalsan Menon
Posted on: May 31, 2012 at 15:05 IST

Seriously, like Ratan Tata said India is indeed a banana republic! Why are we so much against genuine businesses - it is a legitimate goal to make money for shareholders. Otherwise why will anyone invest?

from:  Vinay
Posted on: May 12, 2012 at 21:00 IST

Telenor is a company whose majority shareholder is the Norwegian Government. Now, read about Norway. It is basically a welfare state with a very very good/honest Govt. For Norwegians, everything is handed over in a silver plate. Do I think that is good for their Citizens? Yes. Do I think it will produce very business savvy persons? No. I heavily doubt that these guys can handle business in slightly bigger and competitive markets like the US, let alone India. They will be out sooner or later. Companies like Vodafone and Airtel will crush them in the long term for sure. Just take a look at their worldwide operations. I believe the only country they operate in where the population is higher than 200 million is India. There are only a few countries with over 100 million population that they operate in.

from:  Vivek
Posted on: May 12, 2012 at 20:08 IST

Indian people are not altogether untrustworthy. When there is no
compromise on due diligence and when everything is done legal and
above board. Any foreign investor must already know from
experience (India is not the only country they have invested in)
that if they give in to temptation to find a foothold into the
market through dubious means, even if actively encouraged to look
the other way by those in positions of power or authority, that is
a sure sign that the deal is not above board.

Anyway, coming back to trust - Indians ARE trustworthy,
unfortunately Indian politicians who confirm only on record by
violate big time in election spending will only try to get back
their money by cheating the public or illegal gratifications and
money laundering facilitated by foreign investments.

So like in all market transactions, investment comes with the risk
even when everything is legally done. No assurance of returns. So
why cry foul when dubious deals are done and gets exposed?

from:  r n iyegar
Posted on: May 12, 2012 at 19:12 IST

Alex, yes stay far, far, far, far......away from India. We have lot of problems on our own to sort out. It would help if you guys don't meddle. Stop seeing us as $$$$$$$ and start seeing us a humans first.

It serves right on any one who pays an Indian politicians bribery. What were you guys trying to do? Buys us out?

from:  ram
Posted on: May 12, 2012 at 19:03 IST

Telecom ppl knows but eye opner for shareholders

from:  sanjay
Posted on: May 7, 2012 at 16:25 IST

So an Indian CEO bribes and Indian politician - and this is now Telenors fault? The only lesson to get from this is that Indians are untrustworthy and foreign investors should stay far far away from India.. Indians seem very eager to always blame everyone else for the state of their country.

from:  Alex
Posted on: May 7, 2012 at 16:08 IST

Fantastic article by Shalini Singh again .Thorough analysis has been done on Telenors case . It should also get published in Norway papers as well , so that the public /shareholders of Telenor will understand the real truth of Telenors mis-adventure in India and clamour for the scalps of the Directors , who took the dubious decisions ,"blinded by the temptation of a sweetheart deal".
The Telenor- Unitech tieup is a good case-study for all potential investors into India .

from:  VJ NAMBIAR
Posted on: May 7, 2012 at 10:20 IST

Telenor was well on their way to proving their initial critics wrong and making India work. Since the Norwegian government is the biggest owner they can afford to look at things on a longer term contrary to companies were shareholders look more at short term profits. Also the Norwegian government will not mind it if Telenor could help bring Indians out of poverty at the cost of a lower short term return on their investment. On the courts. The Indian courts seem to have taken the role of the government, so they have to present their case at every opportunity to them. What is wrong with that? The BIT says one must notify the Indian government within a certain period or loose their rights to do so. If all else fails and Telenor is forced out of India then it can sue the Indian government to recoup some of it's losses.

from:  ToreBear
Posted on: May 7, 2012 at 01:55 IST

I only have 1000 ch per post so, I will have to write more than one. On the investment itself. I don't understand the nitty gritty about purchasing shares, and what sum of that went to invest in uninor and what went to Unitech. However I would like to note that Telenor has to abide by strict regulations regarding taking part in corruption in foreign countries. If they do anything that is illegal by Norwegian standards they will get prosecuted. What local law says is permitted will not help if it is illegal in Norway. As for threatening to exit, It's not a threat it's a fact. They will exit if their business case says they can't continue. Also the canceling of the licenses has reduced the willingness to commit more money to India. TRAI recommendations have soured that sentiment even more. If a licence was cancelled once, why not twice? And TRAI recommendations seem to go out of their way to extract even more money from Telenor. Not a good sign for continued investment.

from:  ToreBear
Posted on: May 7, 2012 at 01:17 IST

A lot of people in India tend to say Telenor should have known what they were getting into back in 2008 if they had done due diligent investigations thoroughly. I have a difficult time taking them seriously since they tend to use articles written after Telenor entered to prove their point. The question is what information was available before they entered, not after. When Telenor announced their buy it was in the middle of the financial crisis, and minority shareholders were screaming their head of. Since there was talk about shareholders needing to inject cash, the Norwegian government carried out it's own due diligent investigation. So in effect there were two investigations conducted that both found nothing. The question then is how far can an investor go in investigating. Could say Ernst & Young on behalf of the Norwegian gov. have marched into the offices of the finance/telecom minister and demanded all information? Would Indians think this was OK? I think not.

from:  ToreBear
Posted on: May 7, 2012 at 00:44 IST

well-researched, well-writteen article.almost reads like a chargesheet against telenor.great piece of work!

from:  raj
Posted on: May 6, 2012 at 23:25 IST

It's a well known fact that both the foreign operators, Vodafone and Telenor are trying to fool the government and defraud the exchequer. Vodafone is a tax-cheat that did a treaty-shopping M&A deal in Cayman Islands just to avoid capital gains tax. Telenor knowingly entered the telecom market with Unitech that a big scam had taken place. The same is true for Sistema MTS of Russia. They were happy as long as the lunch was virtually free. When the Supreme Court cancelled the free lunch, the frauds started behaving victims. We have been hearing this non-sense from Telenor, Vodafone and Sistema for some time now. It's the classic case of "the thief shouted the most." Why don't they leave the country, like 'Etisalat' did after getting caught with Anil Ambani's Swan Telecom? They should desist from false bravado and chest-thumping. They stand exposed now!!

from:  Sayan
Posted on: May 6, 2012 at 22:57 IST
Show all comments
This article is closed for comments.
Please Email the Editor

Instagram

O
P
E
N

close

Recent Article in Business

Sebi to sell shares held by 9 entities to recover Rs 4 crore

Sebi has decided to sell shares held by nine entities in various companies to recover penalties worth nearly Rs 4 crore imposed on them... »