SEBI, the ‘regulator’ of the Indian capital markets, is truly a bull in a China shop. Chronicles of regulators worldwide would rival Cervantes’ Don Quixote. The regulator thinks that it is engaged in ‘investor’ protection. Action that is focused on investor protection ends up having a totally bizarre result. To protect the ‘investors’ from the mutual fund sales man, it took several steps, which have had the unintended (?) impact of hammering a nail in to the coffin of the yet to mature mutual fund industry. When the noise became unbearable, SEBI tried to take on the Insurance industry which was merrily run by proxies of the insurance salesmen. Regulators tend to see windmills as giant enemies.
SEBI has never been able to pre-empt any white collar crime in India. Its investigation and prosecution has been the stuff that comedies are made of. The Harshad Mehta scam, after everything was handed to it on a platter, is testimony to its prosecution abilities. The Gods got tired of waiting for action from the regulator and pulled Harshad below. Innumerable acts (rulings) of SEBI were overturned by its tribunal.
Suddenly, SEBI discovered ‘compounding’. A full import from the US of A. Compounding has now become a planned expenditure for brokers, bankers and other players who now have a way to evaluate the costs and benefits of breaking a law. And compounding has enabled AMC’s, brokers, investment bankers, companies and other regulated entities to break the law with impunity and not carry any scars! When punishment for an act is merely a fine, it is no longer a sin. There is merely a price at which it is right. Going through the website of SEBI and reading the compounding done so far, is scary. The hallowed names all have contributed to the bottom line of SEBI. Of course, the IRDA (the agency that ‘regulates’ the insurance industry) has also picked this practice up. Recently, it slapped a ‘penalty’ of a miserable half a million rupees on an insurance company that submitted one product for approval, but sold something else altogether!
Now SEBI is chasing the likes of Bennett Coleman (Times of India, Economic Times, ET Now etc). These media companies have been selling ad and PR space in exchange for equity in many companies. Naturally, to protect their investments, the media ensures that the investee companies are plugged and negative news blanked out. Yes, it is a scam, but who can say it is legally wrong? The media company is not bound by any law. They are unlisted entities. They do not legally mislead anyone. On what basis can SEBI regulate this? SEBI clearly is caught with its pants down. Crime does pay.
World over, it is the business interests that write the rules. Regulators are there merely because it seems logical. No country in the world can actually claim that regulators stopped or saved an investor. Sometimes, public pressure and legal compulsions do force the regulator to do some good. Given a choice, the regulator is merely a spectator. I remember going to meet the Deputy Governor of RBI, once upon a time. My boss and I were worried about what the leasing and hire purchase companies were up to. It was obvious to everyone that there is a tragedy in the making. Public deposits were being accepted in gross violations of all norms. Fancy accounting had inflated the networth of all the NBFC’s. Credit quality was slipping. NBFC’s were paying six to ten percent commission to get one year deposits at the then ceiling rate of 14% p.a.! We discussed all this. Then the honourable gentleman said that the RBI can act only if someone ‘brings it to our attention’. We were stunned! He wanted us to put in a written complaint so that the government could act! I lost my temper and told the gentleman, that right outside the main RBI building, there were cloth banners announcing incentives of six percent on the one year deposit by a NBFC. The gentleman was getting uncomfortable and we were pissed off with him. True to his form, the Dy Governor did precisely nothing.
How many people have lost money with time shares and plantation companies? Has the regulator been able to do anything at all?
Regulation of financial markets is a charade. You have only yourself to blame if you get trapped in the web of deceit that is continuously being spun by the players. Caveat Emptor!
Showing posts with label SEBI. Show all posts
Showing posts with label SEBI. Show all posts
Monday, August 30, 2010
Monday, April 12, 2010
SEBI van Winkle- Bull in a China Shop
Finally SEBI has mustered courage to take on the Insurance companies (except fellow government co called LIC of India) in the matter of ULIP’s. Alas, it is very late, with ULIP’s having put in a big hole in millions of investors pockets. The only happy people were the ‘soliciting’ agents of insurance, who made fat commissions on every ULIP sale.
The main problem is that SEBI has made this move in a rather undesirable fashion. Insurance is regulated by IRDA. SEBI should have moved differently and avoid creating a confusion. Sure, millions of guys are invested in ULIP’s (proof that it is easy to fool people) and panic does not help. SEBI has woken up too late and is now trying stunts that can only create panic and confusion.
The mutual funds ran a better and more transparent vehicle for investments, but the distributors made far lesser money by selling a mutual fund as opposed to ULIP’s. So, naturally, they pushed ULIP’s down the throat of their ‘customers’. These advisors never explained the economics of a ULIP. Even comparison of NAV’s was a fraud. It never showed the return on what money you actually gave the insurance companies. AMFI never bothered to point out the difference. The simple fact was that most fund house sponsors also have insurance companies. Their approach was simple. “If my fund house does not get you, then my insurance company will”. So, AMFI kept its mouth shut, in line with the wishes and designs of its major influencers. In fact, AMFI should have filed a complaint with SEBI and even gone to the extent of getting a legal stay on ULIP’s long back. The fact that it kept quiet, begs the question.
Now, it is interesting to see what happens. IRDA has been widely quoted as saying as under:
“The IRDA.. is satisfied that the order of Sebi...will bring the insurance industry to a standstill which would not be in public interest and would be detrimental to the interests of the policyholders and prejudicial to the interests of the insurers," the mail noted. Hence, IRDA "directed to note" all the insurance companies that "they shall continue to carry out insurance business as usual including offering, marketing and servicing ULIPs in accordance with the Insurance Act, 1938, Rules, Regulations and Guidelines issued thereunder by the IRDA."
I fail to understand why public interest will not be served should the insurance industry come to a standstill. Why is it that they should come to a standstill? And why should stopping a fraudulent product be “detrimental to interest of policyholders’? This is no reason why ULIP sales should be banned.
I also think that the media should wake up and expose the ULIP. So far, they have perhaps kept quiet for fear of losing ad revenue from insurance companies and been their willing partner in seducing the public at large (in the matter of ULIP’s).
It is time for AMFI to join hands with SEBI and approach the courts to get an immediate stay on sale of ULIP’s. If this opportunity is missed by the mutual fund industry, they have only themselves to blame. Perhaps, even a single MF, which does not have an insurance associate, can join issue on this.
In fact, to my mind, over ninety percent of business done by insurance companies is outside the realm of insurance. Whether it is ULIP’s or endowment policies or ‘money back’ policies, the element of investment is far greater than pure insurance. In fact, the only insurance product is a term policy, which the insurance companies are loath to sell. Try and go to an insurance agent for a pure term policy and see the effort that he will take to fob you off. I have personally tried to ask agents and they have always ended up showing me the middle finger to such a request. On a term policy their commissions are the least. Luckily, now you can go online to pioneering insurance companies like Religare Aegon and buy a term policy without going through a broker or agent. Your premiums are extremely modest and once you take such a policy, you do not have to worry about ever seeing the face of an insurance agent. More important, you are financially far better off.
The main problem is that SEBI has made this move in a rather undesirable fashion. Insurance is regulated by IRDA. SEBI should have moved differently and avoid creating a confusion. Sure, millions of guys are invested in ULIP’s (proof that it is easy to fool people) and panic does not help. SEBI has woken up too late and is now trying stunts that can only create panic and confusion.
The mutual funds ran a better and more transparent vehicle for investments, but the distributors made far lesser money by selling a mutual fund as opposed to ULIP’s. So, naturally, they pushed ULIP’s down the throat of their ‘customers’. These advisors never explained the economics of a ULIP. Even comparison of NAV’s was a fraud. It never showed the return on what money you actually gave the insurance companies. AMFI never bothered to point out the difference. The simple fact was that most fund house sponsors also have insurance companies. Their approach was simple. “If my fund house does not get you, then my insurance company will”. So, AMFI kept its mouth shut, in line with the wishes and designs of its major influencers. In fact, AMFI should have filed a complaint with SEBI and even gone to the extent of getting a legal stay on ULIP’s long back. The fact that it kept quiet, begs the question.
Now, it is interesting to see what happens. IRDA has been widely quoted as saying as under:
“The IRDA.. is satisfied that the order of Sebi...will bring the insurance industry to a standstill which would not be in public interest and would be detrimental to the interests of the policyholders and prejudicial to the interests of the insurers," the mail noted. Hence, IRDA "directed to note" all the insurance companies that "they shall continue to carry out insurance business as usual including offering, marketing and servicing ULIPs in accordance with the Insurance Act, 1938, Rules, Regulations and Guidelines issued thereunder by the IRDA."
I fail to understand why public interest will not be served should the insurance industry come to a standstill. Why is it that they should come to a standstill? And why should stopping a fraudulent product be “detrimental to interest of policyholders’? This is no reason why ULIP sales should be banned.
I also think that the media should wake up and expose the ULIP. So far, they have perhaps kept quiet for fear of losing ad revenue from insurance companies and been their willing partner in seducing the public at large (in the matter of ULIP’s).
It is time for AMFI to join hands with SEBI and approach the courts to get an immediate stay on sale of ULIP’s. If this opportunity is missed by the mutual fund industry, they have only themselves to blame. Perhaps, even a single MF, which does not have an insurance associate, can join issue on this.
In fact, to my mind, over ninety percent of business done by insurance companies is outside the realm of insurance. Whether it is ULIP’s or endowment policies or ‘money back’ policies, the element of investment is far greater than pure insurance. In fact, the only insurance product is a term policy, which the insurance companies are loath to sell. Try and go to an insurance agent for a pure term policy and see the effort that he will take to fob you off. I have personally tried to ask agents and they have always ended up showing me the middle finger to such a request. On a term policy their commissions are the least. Luckily, now you can go online to pioneering insurance companies like Religare Aegon and buy a term policy without going through a broker or agent. Your premiums are extremely modest and once you take such a policy, you do not have to worry about ever seeing the face of an insurance agent. More important, you are financially far better off.
Monday, April 5, 2010
SEBI- Lost in a maze
http://in.reuters.com/article/businessNews/idINIndia-47455220100405
SEBI has changed the time period for listed companies to file quarterly and annual results, in order to streamline the disclosure of financial results.
Listed companies will now have to submit audited quarterly results within 45 days from the end of the relevant quarter, the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) said in a statement.
Currently, listed Indian companies submit unaudited results within 30 days from the quarter-end.
However, SEBI has reduced the period to submit audited annual financial results within 60 days from the end of the financial year, in place of 90 days currently.
The changes would encourage companies to submit audited results faster, a SEBI official, who declined to be named, said.
The regulator also said companies would have to report their asset-liability position along with their half-year results. Currently, companies disclose their balance sheet position only at the time of annual results.
The revised rules will be applicable with immediate effect.
This is certainly a good move, though one would have wanted the quarterly to go and the half yearly interval being enough for any investor. Unfortunately, the regulators have fallen prey to the broker demand, who need to create buzz as often as possible, to create trades where none are necessary.
My bigger concern is that now the auditors will have to compulsorily throw their hands up in despair. How many companies can an auditor handle? And how competent is he to do anything at all? Managements should rejoice, because more means less here.
Imagine an auditor certifying the quarterly results of a company like Reliance or a SBI. There is absolutely no way he would have a clue about anything.
The other interesting fall out is that the 45 day window between closure and declaration of results, gives a lovely window for the promoter to rig his shares. He has more time to plan and execute the play.
SEBI is now like a Bull in China shop. Killing the mutual fund industry, losing its grip and issuing a show cause to the insurance industry, missing the IPO grey market, and playing in to the hands of brokers and merchant bankers. Ignorance is bliss.
SEBI has changed the time period for listed companies to file quarterly and annual results, in order to streamline the disclosure of financial results.
Listed companies will now have to submit audited quarterly results within 45 days from the end of the relevant quarter, the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) said in a statement.
Currently, listed Indian companies submit unaudited results within 30 days from the quarter-end.
However, SEBI has reduced the period to submit audited annual financial results within 60 days from the end of the financial year, in place of 90 days currently.
The changes would encourage companies to submit audited results faster, a SEBI official, who declined to be named, said.
The regulator also said companies would have to report their asset-liability position along with their half-year results. Currently, companies disclose their balance sheet position only at the time of annual results.
The revised rules will be applicable with immediate effect.
This is certainly a good move, though one would have wanted the quarterly to go and the half yearly interval being enough for any investor. Unfortunately, the regulators have fallen prey to the broker demand, who need to create buzz as often as possible, to create trades where none are necessary.
My bigger concern is that now the auditors will have to compulsorily throw their hands up in despair. How many companies can an auditor handle? And how competent is he to do anything at all? Managements should rejoice, because more means less here.
Imagine an auditor certifying the quarterly results of a company like Reliance or a SBI. There is absolutely no way he would have a clue about anything.
The other interesting fall out is that the 45 day window between closure and declaration of results, gives a lovely window for the promoter to rig his shares. He has more time to plan and execute the play.
SEBI is now like a Bull in China shop. Killing the mutual fund industry, losing its grip and issuing a show cause to the insurance industry, missing the IPO grey market, and playing in to the hands of brokers and merchant bankers. Ignorance is bliss.
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Is SEBI taking over AMFI???
Finally, SEBI has a full time CEO. Media reports suggest that he was ‘guided’ there by the regulator rather than chosen.We did not have the grand old man, Mr. Kurien introducing him to the media. In his first interview, he has already sounded out his intent to convert AMFI in to an SRO.If a person with no experience can make this statement on day zero, obviously he has been planted or imposed in his chair. Someone who is totally to the industry has made this remark. If AMFI becomes a SRO, it would be tragic. UK is a class example. It is akin to setting a cat to guard the milk.
Why is AMFI having a CEO, who is sixty plus, with zero experience in the mutual fund industry? Who chose him? Was it AMFI members or SEBI used arm twisting?
If AMFI moves to self regulation, it will become a law unto itself, like IRDA. AMFI will become a parking slot for retired bankers and civil servants. AMFI is just a club cum trade lobby, with vested interests guiding each and every move. SEBI, in the first place should never have given any freedom to AMFI to write any rule books.
AMFI is also a distributors club. Imagine, this is the only industry where the seller has to have a license. The fund manager can be a autorickshaw driver. AMFI / SEBI have done nothing to take care of this.
An afterthought: Maybe SEBI interfering in AMFI is a good thing. Hopefully, AMFI will now be aware of the existence of the universe called 'investors' and a watchdog will be in place. If it has to be a SRO, at least half of AMFI Board should be of people outside the industry, who can shake a leg for the investors
What a shame!!
Why is AMFI having a CEO, who is sixty plus, with zero experience in the mutual fund industry? Who chose him? Was it AMFI members or SEBI used arm twisting?
If AMFI moves to self regulation, it will become a law unto itself, like IRDA. AMFI will become a parking slot for retired bankers and civil servants. AMFI is just a club cum trade lobby, with vested interests guiding each and every move. SEBI, in the first place should never have given any freedom to AMFI to write any rule books.
AMFI is also a distributors club. Imagine, this is the only industry where the seller has to have a license. The fund manager can be a autorickshaw driver. AMFI / SEBI have done nothing to take care of this.
An afterthought: Maybe SEBI interfering in AMFI is a good thing. Hopefully, AMFI will now be aware of the existence of the universe called 'investors' and a watchdog will be in place. If it has to be a SRO, at least half of AMFI Board should be of people outside the industry, who can shake a leg for the investors
What a shame!!
Monday, November 23, 2009
Killing the mutual fund industry- SEBI style
SEBI wants mutual fund units to be traded through the exchange. This is already happening (or should happen) in closed ended funds and ETF’s. It is generally the experience that brokers do not have any enthusiasm to service the mutual fund investor due to the small change type of business.
SEBI took the first right step in waiving entry load for ‘direct’ applicants. Then it dealt the mutual fund industry a body blow by totally banning entry loads. SEBI has to understand that unless there is some money, no one will undertake activity. Yes, the distributors were screwing the investors with 3 and 5 percent upfront commissions. The NFO market existed only because of the entry load which the distributor got in full, in addition to goodies from the AMC’s. It also ensured that the distributor did not sell existing schemes. Today, we have a plethora of schemes, which mimic each other, have no focus and then fund houses like UTI fold one scheme in to another.
The doing away of the entry load, has in no way diminished investments in mutual funds, as can be evidenced by the steady growth in the Assets Under Management. What it will do however, is to stop the penetration of mutual funds beyond the traditional financial market centres.
The unfortunate part is that SEBI has no say over the insurance companies, which collectively cheat investors through schemes like ULIP’s and endowment policies. Here, the agent commissions can be as high as 40% of the premium paid in the first year and then taper down to around 5% p.a. In addition, the insurance companies dob the investor with administrative charges, management fees etc, that can amount to as high as 3.5% p.a.
As a result, the distributor of mutual funds is now hooked on to insurance products, none of which are insurance products in the true sense. I went to an agent seeking details of pure life policy and except that he showed me everything else! His idiotic logic was that there is some return of money!
SEBI should stop over regulating the harassed mutual fund industry and focus on regulation and ensuring a healthy platform for growth. Micro management does not help, because the regulator has no clue of the industry.
By pushing trading of MF units through the exchange platforms, SEBI is promoting the cause of the exchanges, which are seeking the holy grail of the capital markets. The broker will charge anything between 0.25 to 0.75% for buying/selling mutual fund units. In addition, service tax, turnover tax and STT will be loaded. If the same thing is allowed to the distributor, he will do a better job. In addition the investor would have to have a demat account (for which maintenance charges would have to be paid) and one more round of the obnoxious Kill Your Customer (KYC) compliances would evolve. Further, the stock broker is not going to help the investor in other areas like redemption etc. It will force the distributor to get some kind of a terminal, with SEBI oversight and SEBI will charge a fee for it. SEBI is merely pushing up the costs for the investors whilst pretending to save costs for the investors through making fund houses cut costs!
It is unfortunate that the mutual fund industry is totally at the mercy of the regulator. The investor does not seem to figure at all. Of course, the regulator efforts are clear when one sees the stock markets, where the number of retail investors is steadily declining, only to show a spike when IPO’s open the floodgate for spurious demat accounts.
SEBI took the first right step in waiving entry load for ‘direct’ applicants. Then it dealt the mutual fund industry a body blow by totally banning entry loads. SEBI has to understand that unless there is some money, no one will undertake activity. Yes, the distributors were screwing the investors with 3 and 5 percent upfront commissions. The NFO market existed only because of the entry load which the distributor got in full, in addition to goodies from the AMC’s. It also ensured that the distributor did not sell existing schemes. Today, we have a plethora of schemes, which mimic each other, have no focus and then fund houses like UTI fold one scheme in to another.
The doing away of the entry load, has in no way diminished investments in mutual funds, as can be evidenced by the steady growth in the Assets Under Management. What it will do however, is to stop the penetration of mutual funds beyond the traditional financial market centres.
The unfortunate part is that SEBI has no say over the insurance companies, which collectively cheat investors through schemes like ULIP’s and endowment policies. Here, the agent commissions can be as high as 40% of the premium paid in the first year and then taper down to around 5% p.a. In addition, the insurance companies dob the investor with administrative charges, management fees etc, that can amount to as high as 3.5% p.a.
As a result, the distributor of mutual funds is now hooked on to insurance products, none of which are insurance products in the true sense. I went to an agent seeking details of pure life policy and except that he showed me everything else! His idiotic logic was that there is some return of money!
SEBI should stop over regulating the harassed mutual fund industry and focus on regulation and ensuring a healthy platform for growth. Micro management does not help, because the regulator has no clue of the industry.
By pushing trading of MF units through the exchange platforms, SEBI is promoting the cause of the exchanges, which are seeking the holy grail of the capital markets. The broker will charge anything between 0.25 to 0.75% for buying/selling mutual fund units. In addition, service tax, turnover tax and STT will be loaded. If the same thing is allowed to the distributor, he will do a better job. In addition the investor would have to have a demat account (for which maintenance charges would have to be paid) and one more round of the obnoxious Kill Your Customer (KYC) compliances would evolve. Further, the stock broker is not going to help the investor in other areas like redemption etc. It will force the distributor to get some kind of a terminal, with SEBI oversight and SEBI will charge a fee for it. SEBI is merely pushing up the costs for the investors whilst pretending to save costs for the investors through making fund houses cut costs!
It is unfortunate that the mutual fund industry is totally at the mercy of the regulator. The investor does not seem to figure at all. Of course, the regulator efforts are clear when one sees the stock markets, where the number of retail investors is steadily declining, only to show a spike when IPO’s open the floodgate for spurious demat accounts.
Saturday, June 20, 2009
SEBI- Lost and yet to be found
SEBI wants 'anchor investors', who will stay on for at least thirty days!! This is supposed to give confidence to retail investors.
I wonder when will the pretence stop and we realise that in stock markets, it is 'caveat emptor'? SEBI cannot catch capital market crimes. So, it resorted to 'compounding'. Now it has nothing to do. So trying to micro manage every damn thing and in the process, screwing up.
When will SEBI realise that its role is as a watchdog and a judge. It is not for SEBI to boost trading volumes or to change sentiments.
Simultaneously it has attacked the MF industry by banning entry loads!! Whilst it regulates every aspect of the mutual fund industry, it does not do anything to presecribe even a minimum qualification for a fund manager. Yes, the bus passengers and the conductors should have a license, but the driver can be anyone. I think I will launch a MF with my house maid and the driver as fund managers. It will be legal and you cannot do a damn about it. It is also very likely that they will outperform the fund managers out there, if past performance is any indicator..
I wonder when will the pretence stop and we realise that in stock markets, it is 'caveat emptor'? SEBI cannot catch capital market crimes. So, it resorted to 'compounding'. Now it has nothing to do. So trying to micro manage every damn thing and in the process, screwing up.
When will SEBI realise that its role is as a watchdog and a judge. It is not for SEBI to boost trading volumes or to change sentiments.
Simultaneously it has attacked the MF industry by banning entry loads!! Whilst it regulates every aspect of the mutual fund industry, it does not do anything to presecribe even a minimum qualification for a fund manager. Yes, the bus passengers and the conductors should have a license, but the driver can be anyone. I think I will launch a MF with my house maid and the driver as fund managers. It will be legal and you cannot do a damn about it. It is also very likely that they will outperform the fund managers out there, if past performance is any indicator..
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
SEBI and STT-
SEBI oversteps
The announcement by SEBI that it will recommend a dilution in the Securities Transaction Tax (STT) is a sad one and made without ‘application of the mind’. STT was introduced in lieu of abolition of long term capital gains and a very thin rate of tax on short term gains.
Our market does volumes of more than one lakh crore rupees on most days with ninety percent or more being of the satta bazaar variety (the F&O segment). This clearly shows that the STT is not a deterrent to trading. Trading is more a function of the state of the market. The government has already made capital gains from listed stocks on par with agriculture income.
More dangerous is the fact that this kind of a recommendation comes from a market regulator, who has been like the proverbial police in the hindi films. SEBI should stick to what it is supposed to do. Let them not get in to thinking that they are here to grow or throttle the market. Their sole job is to provide a clean platform and also ensure speedy punishment for wrong doers. Whilst they have managed the first one reasonably well, the second role of punishing wrong doers has been a dismal failure. To cover that up, they borrowed the immoral concept of ‘compounding’, from the West, where all malpractices in capital markets originate.
Let SEBI focus on regulation and leave the economics to market forces. The irony is that the exchanges (which are akin to public utilities) are busy issuing stock and playing the market cap game. It is matter of time before they impose levies on players and participants in this endeavour. Let SEBI stop this first rather than doling out favours to players who are in any case addicted to gambling on the bourses. SEBI is like the child who has a toy, but does not know what to do with it, so eyes someone else's toy.
The announcement by SEBI that it will recommend a dilution in the Securities Transaction Tax (STT) is a sad one and made without ‘application of the mind’. STT was introduced in lieu of abolition of long term capital gains and a very thin rate of tax on short term gains.
Our market does volumes of more than one lakh crore rupees on most days with ninety percent or more being of the satta bazaar variety (the F&O segment). This clearly shows that the STT is not a deterrent to trading. Trading is more a function of the state of the market. The government has already made capital gains from listed stocks on par with agriculture income.
More dangerous is the fact that this kind of a recommendation comes from a market regulator, who has been like the proverbial police in the hindi films. SEBI should stick to what it is supposed to do. Let them not get in to thinking that they are here to grow or throttle the market. Their sole job is to provide a clean platform and also ensure speedy punishment for wrong doers. Whilst they have managed the first one reasonably well, the second role of punishing wrong doers has been a dismal failure. To cover that up, they borrowed the immoral concept of ‘compounding’, from the West, where all malpractices in capital markets originate.
Let SEBI focus on regulation and leave the economics to market forces. The irony is that the exchanges (which are akin to public utilities) are busy issuing stock and playing the market cap game. It is matter of time before they impose levies on players and participants in this endeavour. Let SEBI stop this first rather than doling out favours to players who are in any case addicted to gambling on the bourses. SEBI is like the child who has a toy, but does not know what to do with it, so eyes someone else's toy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
