One of the biggest fund houses in India is hitting the IPO market expecting to price themselves at about 4% of the AUM as a valuation. Maybe more about 5% if the bidding happens at the higher end.

History:

Reliance mutual fund was one mutual fund which did not have a collaborator till 2012. It was a big homegrown fund house with a few good schemes which had attracted investor interest. In 2012 it sold a part of its stake to Nippon Life insurance – in what was considered to be a big deal at that point in time. Reliance Nippon Asset Management is now selling its in the Rs 247-252 price band. The IPO size would be around 10 per cent of the post issue paid-up capital of the company. The minimum bid lot is of 59 equity shares and bids may be made in multiples of 59 equity shares thereafter. By keeping the size of the issue small the ADAG is doing a smart job of creating post issue demand. At the issue itself one can expect oversubscription – remember by today’s standards the issue size is small, and the mood is euphoric. This will give the ADAG to flaunt high valuation and do a lot of small private placements at higher valuation. Or same valuation but with more assets – thus realising more money for he group. Smart move.

Human memory is smart so I do not think people are going to worry about the ADAG track record in IPO pricing. So the issue will be a hit.

Yesterday HNI investor Shyam Sekhar spoke about how this is a great time to do a dilution in the Asset management business (it was in ET). Another big fund manager also spoke about IPO pricing….remember?

What is going well for RNAM?

  • it has a fairly competent fund management team
  • it has an extremely well knit and well spread out sales team headed by competent team
  • they have created a great name with their training programs and I know of IFA who swear by it
  • even with so much negative publicity for ADAG they have retained the AUM, and grown it
  • they have a big technology budget and that will help them score over their rivals who may not have that tech spend

To quote Motilal Oswal / Raamdeo Agrawal the force behind Motilal Oswal wealth management team…

Every time we buy a stock we SHOULD examine it through QGLP methodology where

  • ‘Q’uality i.e. quality of the business and management,
  • ‘G’rowth i.e. growth in earnings and sustained RoE,
  • ‘L’ongevity i.e. longevity of the competitive advantage or economic moat of the business
  • ‘P’rice i.e. our approach of buying a good business for a fair price rather than buying a fair business for a good price.
there is no doubt that Madhu Kela, Sunil Singhania, Sundeep Sikka – the past and present teams have definitely built a good business and has competent top management.  They have an amazing sales reach, and have built a good training brand which is capable of taking the business to various locations. They have a good research and wealth approach to the business. The owner going through troubled times may or may not impact the future – I am clearly incompetent to talk about that
Growth in this sector is being helped by many people. NaMo with his demonetisation has brought in about Rs. 100,000 crores of cash into the system and that is finding its way into the Mf industry also. Shifting of assets from real estate and gold to financial assets is having a huge impact especially in the less urban India. In the forthcoming years with reach, and competence they are likely to build assets. In fact they have made a provision for some acquisitions too. Wealth management is big business all over the world and it might just allow RNAM to go international with its offering – tech from Nippon and people from Reliance doing wealth management in Singapore, Hongkong and London is a likely thing to happen.
Longevity – in a country where the GDP is growing, asset management business is bound to do well. Given the population’s age in Japan with RNAM get into managing wealth in Japan? we have younger fund managers do we not? Longevity of this business is guaranteed to be good – albeit at lower margins? A listed amc will be able to compensate its employees with esop and thus retain them for a longer period.
Price – surely looks expensive. However the growth may be far better than the industry thus justifying the price! This is the first of 3-4 asset management companies which are waiting in the wings for their IPO. Being the early mover RNAM is likely to get a good response. Also keeping the issue size small is likely to spur demand. Gujarat is gung ho about the issue – and all these augur well for the issue. I do think that the Asset gathering business is at a high, but surely not at a peak in a country with 80% population under the age of 30. JAM is again likely to dramatically change the business opportunity space!
Caveat: I have not been paid to write this piece. I currently do not have any of my money invested in RNAM. Personally I never apply in IPO – I prefer the secondary market rather than a lottery system.
  1. Subra,

    Why are we so forgiving? Should a group with this kind of history, credentials and governance track record be allowed to price its businesses at FMV? How discerning are we really?

    We get what we deserve. If we choose to ignore past misdeeds then we will get entrepreneurs who don’t worry about governance because they will believe that reputation does not matter. Why are we doing this to ourselves?

  2. Sir can understand your question. It is for the bigger powers like the regulator who should ask such questions. I am a simple blogger who has fun penning a few words.

    Personally I do not buy anything in an IPO – which is a place where smart merchant bankers choose the price, timing, quantity….and suckers like me end up buying. I quit the suckers market long ago.

  3. Read somewhere that “Diplomacy is thinking twice before saying nothing”. Sadly we are saying nothing when something ought to be said…me thinks 🙂 Cheers.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes:

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>