Hindenburg group accuses Adani group of fraud

[kepler37b]

2 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/what-is-satellite-spectrum-why-most-countries-prefer-not-to-hold-auctions-9632113/lite/

SpaceX is scary. There shall no place free from cringe tiktok reels.

[velu]

Adani was up on friday and mkt fired up as well .

looks like another big gap up on monday ..

 

ADANI won again 

 

anywya MODS , lock this thread  @Austin 3:!6 ..

open it again when Hindenburg comes with another attack on adani  

 

[randomGuy]

44 minutes ago, velu said:

Adani was up on friday and mkt fired up as well .

looks like another big gap up on monday ..

 

ADANI won again 

 

anywya MODS , lock this thread  @Austin 3:!6 ..

open it again when Hindenburg comes with another attack on adani  

 

Or when Adani buys Hindenberg

[velu]

afetr the fall in adani , took a bearish bet and lost 4/5 lakhs  

 

LIC came in and supported very early  

[Lord]

57 minutes ago, velu said:

afetr the fall in adani , took a bearish bet and lost 4/5 lakhs  

 

LIC came in and supported very early  

Adani is for long term buy

 

Was in FNO ban so I got saved tbh

 

 

[kepler37b]

25 minutes ago, Lord said:

Adani is for long term buy

 

Was in FNO ban so I got saved tbh

 

 

...Never every buy, just because of cronyism. It will bite you in the behind 

 

Only buy if you think adani companies have good path to profitability.

[Lord]

28 minutes ago, kepler37b said:

...Never every buy, just because of cronyism. It will bite you in the behind 

 

Only buy if you think adani companies have good path to profitability.

They are on path of profitability because of cronyism

[mishra]

2 hours ago, velu said:

afetr the fall in adani , took a bearish bet and lost 4/5 lakhs  

 

LIC came in and supported very early  

Companies which have survived covid and Biden wars, will allways remain a buy

[velu]

3 hours ago, kepler37b said:

...Never every buy, just because of cronyism. It will bite you in the behind 

 

Only buy if you think adani companies have good path to profitability.

 

cant buy anything then

[mishra]

1 minute ago, BlueBlood said:

Lol not a single rebuttal to my points you brainwashed bots are next level trolls who run away from all debate 

What is basis of your point?

 

I will put it simple. Today you apply for US VISA and got VISA. Tommorow, You are charged by US DoJ that "Once you bribed CRPF man in after being caught breaking traffic rules in Banglore and didnt disclose that incident".

 

Point is: You may have broken traffic rules, you may have paid bribes, You and the person taking bribes need to be charged in India and under NO circumstance you would have bribed a CRPF Man for traffic offence. DoJ can not say you withheld the info on VISA application unless there was actual recorded case against you

[rkt.india]

On 11/24/2024 at 1:21 AM, BlueBlood said:

TATA is clean as it gets.

 

Berkshire Hathaway and Warren Buffet as clean as it gets.

 

Now tell me why Adani gets all projects above Tata, Bajaj and other industrialists?

Because tata, Bajaj are not in the sectors Adani is working in.

[velu]

2 hours ago, BlueBlood said:

Lol not a single rebuttal to my points you brainwashed bots are next level trolls who run away from all debate 

 

 

was not going trhough any of your posts , but you replied to one of my posts ..

 

you are yet to give any company with good ethics ..

if you still beleive tatas are good , i am looking to sell my jaguar plant in uk to you  

[velu]

2 hours ago, rkt.india said:

Because tata, Bajaj are not in the sectors Adani is working in.

 

tata is not a saint .. they got good pr team , thats it

 

but i support all of our companies and businessman , inclduing vijay mallya  

[mishra]

^ The point was more about jurisdiction and fallacy of case.

 

I asked him basis on which he was making all the claims that Adani is corrupt blah blah blah. And He ran away 

Edited November 25, 2024 by mishra

[jigjig]

9 hours ago, mishra said:

^ The point was more about jurisdiction and fallacy of case.

 

I asked him basis on which he was making all the claims that Adani is corrupt blah blah blah. And He ran away 

There is jurisdiction because US investors are invested in Adani firms and he has given in writing that no bribes have been given to anybody

 

 

[mishra]

4 hours ago, jigjig said:

There is jurisdiction because US investors are invested in Adani firms and he has given in writing that no bribes have been given to anybody

 

 

Basis for  bribing has to come from Indian Administration and Court. My point is , Most Indians are falling in trap where US Judicial overreach is being accepted as norm. Similar to what happened to countries like Pakistan. Sovereignity is being sold because of Indian peoples political allegience. It should not and never be like that. If you think Modi is corrupt and taking bribes, Use Indian judicial system.

 

Can You file a lawsuit against Trump in India as there is evidence that he fudged the books and convicted in US. Or can you arrest Hunter Biden because he broke laws in US. Its all about where the crime is done. It not because they also have business interest in some other part of world.

 

I dont care if they are saying Patanaik or Reddy or Stalin took bribe for Indian Projects in India by a Indian businessman. It has to be dealt in India

Edited November 26, 2024 by mishra

[mishra]

5 hours ago, BlueBlood said:

man you brainwashed bots are nuts.

 

Read up on Odebrecht scandal here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odebrecht_case

 

This was Brazil's Ambani & Adani combined  level company that caught bribing other country officials and in exactly the same case as Adani.

 

CEO Marcelo Odebrecht was sentenced to 19 years in prison for paying more than $30 million in bribes. The jail sentence was reduced to ten years in prison in December 2016 for paying a fine, admitting guilt and providing evidence to authorities.

 

It was a HUGE case throughout latin america and I am sure none of you brainwashed bots even know it as you have rose tinted glasses.

 

I hate the idiocy of the Indian NRI's in particular as they slave their way to US with H1B visa with no hope for citizenship in decade+ of waiting. Worry and stress out daily about losing their jobs and being sent back home.

 

But suddenly forget why they are even living outside of India in the first place - precisely because of the corruption and lack of rule of law and fairness in the system but when you bring this up suddenly tribal instincts kick in.

In Columbia and latin America, DEA guys openly work and shoot drug lords, that doesnt mean DEA guys can enter and work with impunity in every other country. Go and find out why.

 

Here, He has Brazilian citizenship, He did crime in Brazil and hence he was convicted in Brazil. On that Basis He was fined un USA

Quote

A Brazilian judge sentenced the former head of South America’s biggest construction company to 19 years in prison on Tuesday as a huge anti-corruption investigation claimed its highest-profile conviction.

Marcelo Odebrecht was found guilty of 11 charges of bribery and 40 counts of money laundering in relation to a system of kickbacks that his company allegedly paid to senior executives at the state-run oil conglomerate Petrobras.

 

Edited November 26, 2024 by mishra

[mishra]

1 hour ago, Vicks57 said:

 

Both GVK and GMR were the losers thanks to Modi-Adani connection.

 

How Modi Govt bypassed norms to enable Adani's entry into airport business.

 

https://www.newsclick.in/Modi-Adani-Privatisation-of-Airports

 

@mishra @coffee_rules @ravishingravi @singhvivek141 please read all this.

All I can make out from story is

 

UPA Government tried Privatisation and failed. --Expected Lines Nothing new

Employee Union opposed the project. --Expected Lines Nothing new

Modi Government Executed in first couple of years what MMS failed in delivering since 2003 (10 Years)--Expected Lines Nothing new

When someone throws Demand vs Supply arguement in development of India you know they are clueless (Tatas ordered over 600 Aircraft).

 

Even news reporter doesnt deny that new entrant is allways good to have. For example I personally know that  Lucknow and Guwahati Airport is better than many Capital City Airports of many countries. They didnt just outbid GMR in tender but it means the group responsible must be doing good job.

 

The arguement of not having prior experience , May be correct but when someone submits a Plan, there must have something that assures the Government. Proof of that due diligence is, these Airports are running and more are coming in India. Demand vs Supply my foot!

 

Bottomline GVK and GMK should have outbid Adani, which they didnt. Probably they would have thought Adanis bid will be rejected based on inexperience so they were complecent.

Edited November 26, 2024 by mishra

[mishra]

14 minutes ago, Vicks57 said:

 

Lol Adani has been forced into most businesses thanks to Modi.

Did you fully read the story on link you posted? I read the text below the image as well. I am sure you stopped at texts above the image on the story  I have put ====================== where you stopped reading

 

Quote

How Modi Bypassed Norms to Try and Enable Adani’s Entry into Airport Business

Ravi Nair | 27 Mar 2019

 

• India
• Economy

The Modi government violated the law and ignored the advice given by some of its own ministries and departments to allow private firms to develop and operate six airports that had been recently upgraded. The changes in the norms enabled the Adani group, a new entrant in the airport sector, to win all six bids to develop the airports at Ahmedabad, Guwahati, Jaipur, Lucknow, Mangaluru and Thiruvananthapuram. Here is an exclusive report from Newsclick.

 

=======================================================================================================

 

Picture Credit: Wire.in

On February 25, the Airports Authority of India (AAI) announced that the corporate group led by Gautam Adani had won the bids to upgrade and operate five airports in Ahmedabad, Jaipur, Thiruvananthapuram, Lucknow and Mangalore. The following day, the Adani group won the rights to develop a sixth airport, Guwahati, but the news was overshadowed by the Indian Air Force’s strikes against so-called terror camps in Pakistan.

In the days following the announcement, many objections were raised. The Communist Party of India (Marxist)-headed Left Democratic Front government in Kerala has gone to court. The Union Ministry of Civil Aviation has conceded in the Rajya Sabha, the upper house of Parliament, that the “prescribed procedure (of) public consultation or consultation with the state governments (which) are mandatory for leasing out AAI airports through (the) PPP (Public Private Partnership) mode” were not adhered to.

At the time of writing on March 27, the clearance of the Union Cabinet, which is necessary for the transfer of the airports from the AAI to the Adani group, is yet to come through – and this appears unlikely given the fact that the Model Code of Conduct is in force in the run-up to the forthcoming Lok Sabha elections.

According to documents accessed by Newsclick­ (see attachment at the bottom), the Modi government violated various laws and procedures while arriving at its decision to privatise the six airports that are currently owned and operated by the AAI. In addition, the recommendations made by the Department of Economic Affairs (DEA) in the Ministry of Finance and the NITI (National Institution for Transforming India) Aayog on the technical, financial and legal aspects of the bidding process were ignored. Instead, conditions were set up that apparently favoured the Adani group.

In this article, we detail how the proposal to privatise the six airports was conceived and pushed through in a tearing hurry, in contravention of the law and existing procedures.

The Background

The AAI was constituted by an Act of Parliament in April 1995, by merging the erstwhile National Airports Authority of India and the International Airports Authority of India. According to the AAI’s website, its responsibilities include “creating, upgrading, maintaining and managing civil aviation infrastructure both on the ground and air space in the country.” The website announces that the AAI manages 18 international airports, seven Customs airports, 78 domestic airports and 26 civil enclaves at defence airfields across the country. In 2017-18, the AAI earned a profit of Rs 2,801.6 crore and held Rs 14,201.1 crore as reserves.

Airport privatisation started in India in September 2003 when the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government with Atal Bihari Vajpayee as the prime minister approved a proposal to upgrade the country’s two largest airports, at Delhi and Mumbai, in the public-private-partnership (PPP) mode. The government decided at that time that the private partner would be selected through an open and transparent competitive bidding process, and that the winning company would hold 74% stake in the joint venture (JV) company (with the AAI holding the remaining 26%) that would be responsible for executing the upgradation and development programme for the two airports.

Subsequently, new greenfield airports were developed at Bengaluru and Hyderabad by private players. Towards the fag end of its tenure, the Manmohan Singh-led United Progressive Alliance government had considered privatisation of airports in Chennai, Kolkata, Ahmedabad, Lucknow and Jaipur, but the proposal never came to fruition.

Also read: 10,000 AAI Employees to Go on Indefinite Strike Against Privatisation of Airports

After the Modi government came to power, the proposal was taken up again. The AAI invited bids to upgrade these airports in the PPP mode in December 2014. At that juncture, the AAI’s employees’ unions vehemently opposed the move pointing out that the government had already invested a massive Rs 2,300 crore in modernising the Chennai and Kolkata airports in recent years. The unions also pointed out that each of the airports proposed for privatisation had either added new facilities or were being refurbished at that time at the expense of the exchequer. Thus, it was argued that “handing over” the airports to private firms for development would imply bestowing undue favours on particular private companies.

It was reported in the Economic Times in April 2018 that the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) had “directed” the DEA in the Ministry of Finance and NITI Aayog to prepare a model mechanism for removing certain airports out of the control of the AAI and handing these over to private players. The report quoted an official familiar with the development claiming: “The new model concession agreement would take into account all eventualities, including real-estate development on airport land.”

This was the first indication that despite the objections of AAI employees, the Modi government was adamant about going ahead with the airport privatisation plan. Further, the Economic Times report made clear that despite the existence of the Ministry of Civil Aviation (MoCA), the initiative was being led by the PMO.

In the monsoon session of Parliament, the Modi government tried to amend the Airports Economic Regulatory Authority of India Act, 2008 (AERA Act, 2008). The AERA is a regulatory body, set up in 2008, that is intended to provide a level playing field among different categories of airports in the country. An analysis by PRS Legislative Research explains the objectives of the AERA in simple terms:

“Over the last few years, private players have started operating civilian airports. These private airports run the risk of becoming a monopoly. This is because cities typically have one civilian airport which controls all aeronautical services in that area. To ensure that private airport operators do not misuse their monopoly, the need for an independent tariff regulator in the airport sector was felt. Consequently, the Airports Economic Regulatory Authority of India (AERA) Act of 2008 was passed and the authority was set up.”

“AERA regulates tariffs and other charges (development fee and passenger service fee) for aeronautical services (air traffic management, landing and parking of aircraft, ground handling services) at major airports. Major airports include civilian airports with annual traffic above 15 lakh (15,00,000) passengers.  In 2017-18, there were 31 such airports. As of July 2018, 24 of these were being regulated by AERA. For the remaining airports, tariffs are determined by AAI.”

The bill introduced by the government wanted to completely change the way tariffs were determined. The bill proposed that the AERA would no longer determine tariffs, tariff structures and airport development fees, in cases where these were a part of bid documents on the basis of which private players would be awarded rights to oversee airport operations. Hence, the amendment (if it had gone through) would have weakened the authority of the AERA and enabled private firms to exercise monopoly control over charges that are levied at airports.

In addition, the amendment had sought to redefine a “major airport” by more than doubling the minimum required passenger volume for such a classification from 15 lakh to 35 lakh passengers annually. If the bill had been passed and become law, the AERA would have been left with only 14 airports to regulate.

The government failed to pass the bill in both the monsoon session and the winter session of Parliament. It was reported that the government had considered promulgating an ordinance, but this did not happen. With the bill still pending in Parliament, the government invited bids for upgradation of the six airports on December 14, 2018. In apparent violation of the extant law and without changing the AERA Act, private bidders were invited to declare tariffs and passenger charges on the basis of which their bids would be evaluated thereby circumventing the regulatory authority’s powers to determine such charges.

As we shall now see, this decision was taken extremely expeditiously without considering caveats and checks suggested by the NITI Aayog and the DEA in the Ministry of Finance.

The Decision

On November 8, 2018, a meeting of the Union Cabinet chaired by Prime Minister Narendra Modi gave its “in-principle” approval to a proposal by the PMO to lease six airports for development in the PPP mode. An Empowered Group of Secretaries (EGoS) headed by the Chief Executive Officer of the NITI Aayog Amitabh Kant was constituted at the meeting to oversee what is essentially a process of privatisation. Other members in the EGoS included the Secretaries to the Ministry of Civil Aviation, the DEA and the Department of Expenditure (the last two in the Ministry of Finance). The Cabinet noted that its decision would confer the following benefits:

“PPP in infrastructure projects brings efficiency in service delivery, expertise, enterprise and professionalism apart from harnessing the needed investments in the public sector.The PPP in airport infrastructure projects has brought world class infrastructure at airports, delivery of efficient and timely services to … airport passengers, augmenting (the) revenue stream (of) the Airports Authority of India without making any investment, etc… for (the) development of greenfield airports at Hyderabad and Bengaluru. Presently, the airports being managed under the PPP model include Delhi, Mumbai, Bangalore, Hyderabad and Cochin.”

“The PPP airports in India have been ranked among the top five in their respective categories by the Airports Council International (ACI) in terms of Airport Service Quality (ASQ). While these PPP experiments have helped create world class airports, it has also helped AAI in enhancing its revenues and focusing on developing airports and (the) air navigation infrastructure in the rest of the country.”

From here onwards, the decision-making process moved ahead at a lightning speed. The EGoS met on November 17 and submitted its report on December 4, less than a month after the approval of the Cabinet. Six days later, on December 10, appraisal notes prepared by the NITI Aayog and the DEA were forwarded to the NITI Aayog CEO, the Secretaries to the Department of Expenditure in the Finance Ministry and the Department of Legal Affairs in the Ministry of Law and Justice, together with the AAI Chairman, informing them that the Public Private Partnerships Appraisal Committee (PPPAC) – the committee that has to clear all PPP projects undertaken by the Union government – was scheduled to meet the very next day, that is, on December 11, to discuss the proposal relating to the effective privatisation of six airports managed by the AAI.

In its appraisal note, the DEA raised several issues. It stated that neither the AAI nor the MoCA had submitted details of the break-up of project costs to the PPPAC for its consideration. Neither had they provided KPIs or key performance indicators, development plans or details of capital works in progress that had been undertaken by the AAI and which the new concessionaire would be required to complete. It was pointed out that without these details comparing technical proposals submitted by bidders would be very difficult.

Also read: PM’s Rapid-Fire Announcements: Job Creation or Corporate Handouts?

Further, the note said the MoCA had not submitted the “deviation statement from the documents followed for the preparation of the bid documents” – namely the Request for Quotations (RFQ), the Request for Proposals (RFP) and the Draft Concession Agreement (DCA). In addition, what was required to be submitted was a legal vetting certificate and detailed calculations to support the figures stated in the memorandum to the PPPAC together with the project report. This was considered especially important because the numbers to determine financial viability mentioned in the PPPAC memo and the project report were “vastly different”.

The PPP cell of the DEA recommended that since these six airport development projects are “highly capital intensive,” a clause should be incorporated that not more than two airports would be awarded to a single bidder because of the high financial risks involved and the need for stringent adherence to performance indicators.

Awarding the airport development projects to different companies would also facilitate comparisons using defined yardsticks and that there was greater competition, the DEA note suggested, adding that in case there was a “project failure,” there would be other capable bidders available to take on the failed projects. The DEA recalled that when private companies bid for the development of the airports in Delhi and Mumbai airports, although the GMR group was the only “qualified bidder,” the contracts to develop both the airports were not given to the same bidder. The department also cited the example of privatisation of the power distribution network in Delhi wherein contracts were given to more than one bidder.

These suggestions were completely forgotten subsequently. Was this done for the benefit of one player, the Adani group, which emerged as the winner in the bids to develop six airports?

Financial Parameters

The story does not end here. The DEA asked the AAI and the MoCA to submit examples of proposed transaction structures (based on a fee per passenger) that were followed by airports in different countries and the benefits such structures had over a revenue-sharing model. The department in the Finance Ministry also wanted the technical capacity and the financial capacity of the bidder to be linked with the project cost. Hence, it recommended that the worth of the bidder’s technical capacity must be twice the total project cost (TPC) while the bidder’s financial capacity measured in terms of its net worth should be a fourth of the TPC.

As for the concession period of 50 years, it was recommended that “the detailed project financials with all assumptions including (the) financial model to support the 50 years concession period needs to be submitted.” The DEA added: “It is … suggested that the concession period should be co-terminus with all the project facilities including city-side development facilities. Further, it is suggested that after efflux of concession period, all assets should be returned to the (Airports) Authority free of cost.”

Moreover, the department stated that a license model be followed instead of a lease model. It was recommended that the bidders submit “all the details such as project scoping, project sizing, demand supply analysis to ascertain the (financing) gap, periodic capital investment, regulatory framework with regard to (the ) AERA and (the) National Civil Aviation Policy (of) 2016, (the) demand-supply analysis to justify the projected revenues and the financial returns and component-wise break-up of project cost with assumption(s)/benchmarks”.

The NITI Aayog, in its assessment made on December 10, agreed with many of the suggestions made by the DEA. It said:

“While it is important to enlarge the spectrum of bidders through the inclusion of players from other sectors, it is also important to ensure that the quality of experience is suitable to the technical capabilities required for undertaking (the) proposed projects. Also it needs to be mentioned that such differentiation of sectors and quality of experience has already been captured under the model RFQ through the classification of experience in the following categories:

(a) project experience in the sector to which (the) proposal pertains;

(b) project experience in other core sectors;

(c) construction experience in the sector to which (the) proposal pertains; and

(d) construction experience in other core sector(s).

 

Edited November 26, 2024 by mishra

[mishra]

6 minutes ago, Vicks57 said:

 

Lol why are even trying to post the contents of the link I posted?

 

Only an moron would allow a company with no experience to get airport contracts. That moron is Modiji the vishwaguru which means Adani has been forced into business segments that he simply does not have the qualifications for thanks to Modiji.

 

 

Again, You did not Read it beyond headline and 2 sentences. Infact still havent read it fully

 

Quote

How Modi Bypassed Norms to Try and Enable Adani’s Entry into Airport Business

The Modi government violated the law and ignored the advice given by some of its own ministries and departments to allow private firms to develop and operate six airports that had been recently upgraded. The changes in the norms enabled the Adani group, a new entrant in the airport sector, to win all six bids to develop the airports at Ahmedabad, Guwahati, Jaipur, Lucknow, Mangaluru and Thiruvananthapuram.

 

Edited November 26, 2024 by mishra