RIL's broadband Bet: Broadband subscriber base in India to increase 8 times in 3 years

In my blog dated 6th June 2005 NEXT REVOLUTION IS BROADBAND, I predicted that Reliance would lead a broadband revolution. In my OPEN LETTER TO MR. ANIL AMBANI dated May 27, 2005, I predicted that data revenue would surpass voice revenue and Reliance Infocomm’s optic fibre infrastructure is a potential gold mine. Mukesh Ambani’s big bang entry into broadband reconfirms – Broadband is the next revolution and RIL will lead that. Fight between Ambani brothers delayed it by 5 years but now the time has come!!
RIL has bid around Rs. 13000 crores for all India broadband spectrum. My back of the envelop calculation suggest that India’s broadband penetration needs to increase 8 fold in the next 3 years for RIL to break even.

Sr. Ambani would again try to create a “Monsoon Hungama” kind of Hungama and this time wireless broadband launch would be a ‘big bang’ launch. It might take him 12 months to source the equipment etc. They might leverage Reliance Retail network to reach the maximum number of customers.
RIL would expect atleast 30% of its revenue to come from corporate clients and RIL is really good at this. For the first 12-18 months they might focus only on corporate clients and high pay capacity circles like Mumbai and Delhi.
The real challenge is to launch broadband in the interiors of India. The wireless technology is a big enabler, however RIL need to get the decentralized customer focused mindset for that, which till date have proved illusive for RIL.
If RIL is able to get it right this time, it would be no less than a revolution. Interiors of India although today connected by mobile phones are still not great in terms of connectivity of roads, rails etc. Unlike many other developed country, India has the advantage of high density of population which brings down the per capita capital cost of broadband and makes the operation very economical. Secondly, like in mobile revolution India again has the opportunity of skipping 2-3 stages of development in broadband infrastructure and directly moves to the latest technology.
India suffers from grave disparity in land prices, salaries, opportunities due to lack of connectivity infrastructure (like rail, air transport, roads etc). Broadband revolution can change all that. It can improve governance, education, information flow. It can also cure some of ‘constrains to growth’ created by lack of transport and other infrastructure. IT/BPO revolution which is limited to cities till today can move to town and villages. The possibilities are endless. Online shopping, gaming, education, services….. Size of the market will increase and it would be easier to target ‘able to pay’ customers in the hinderland who are today uneconomical to reach due to small size.
Sunil Mittal once mentioned that telecom is like packman. It keeps eating various businesses and growing. Broadband is one such packman it will eat many businesses like retail, banking, transportation, entertainment etc. Broadband revolution, if implemented well, has the capability of pushing India into high growth trajectory which will help it bridge the gap between developed and developing nations. All the best Mukeshbhai! We wish you all the success!!

Reliance: Staying sane during insane times (excess liquidity times)

The economic slowdown had hit everybody hard and RIL is no exception. Many of its projects like Reliance Retail, SEZ etc have been affected. But if one looks around RIL has managed to control itself really well during the Insane Years of 2005-2009. Not only it managed to focus and complete its major Greenfield projects – KG D6 oil & gas project, Jamnagar 2^nd Refinery project, East west pipeline project in time, but it also managed to stay sane and avoid the lure of mega international acquisition unlike its peers. And staying sane in such insane times is no mean achievement. If you don't agree, ask Tata, Birla or Mittal.

Last few years had been really mad years. Factor of production (land, labor & capital) prices had hit the roof and most businesses were unviable at market value of factor of production (not to be confused with historic value). The only way people could make money was by selling out stake or the business to public through IPOs, to private equity firms, to strategic investors or to competitors. The best and the biggest company in India fell for the lure of international acquisition including Tata group, Birla group and also the Mittal group. Ratan Tata had been bold enough to admit in public that they ended up buying Corus, Jaguar & Land Rover at peak prices and it had been a big mistake.

Others like Birla, Suzlon and Mittal had been equally foolhardy and now realize that they made a mistake although they might never admit in public. On the other end of the spectrum had been players like Ranbaxy who managed to exit the business at a very good price. We may keep arguing that selling out completely made sense or not but we all will agree that timing was amazing.

So why did it happen? Do these companies don't have smart people who can advise the management properly? I don't think it's a skill set problem (Finance Problem). I believe it's an individual's interest Vs Company's interest problem (HR Problem). I see a systemic problem here. The system has a built-in bias towards occurrence of the deal. The system incentivizes people who vote for the deal and penalizes who vote against the deal.

Today corporate world is designed in a fashion where you are paid incentives and bonuses for making deals and not for voting against it. Investment bankers make money when deal is done; consultants make money when deal is done. Even the company's in-house managers reap benefits in form of bonus, recognition in the organization, additional responsibility when the deal is done and a sane advisor who advises the management against it is a looser both ways. If the management goes ahead with the deal the one who advised in favor of the deal get the recognition, responsibility of the new company and all associated benefit. In case management decides against it for any reason, nobody gets anything. Hence, advising against the deal is a lose – lose strategy.

From Investment bankers to Media, for everybody occurrence of the deal is beneficial and hence in most cases the deal happens. Again, higher the value of the deal, higher is the commission (for I-bankers, consultants and experts), higher is the interest of the public (for media), and higher is the recognition & responsibility (for in-house managers). And to top it all the excess liquidity in the system, thanks to Mr. Alan Greenspan & company made sure arranging funding for it was never a problem.

So what helped RIL stay sane when others could not resist the temptation? This is despite Mukesh Ambani declaring in two consecutive AGM, the company's ambition for international acquisition and change of strategy towards inorganic growth. It seems there were few in RIL who were ready to take lose-lose strategy for self in the interest of the company. I hope RIL if not rewarded, at least recognized these selfless employees.