Vigilant
849 posts
Vigilant
@IdentifyTheMoat
Long term investing,futures & options.
Mumbai, India Katılım Haziran 2018
2.2K Takip Edilen420 Takipçiler
@Leo04G @Ravelsnip ,forex reserves reduced from 728 billion in Feb 2026 to 680 billion now
English
@Beatnik_BaBa @UtkarshShekhar6 ,cheap joke maarna kab band karega re tu
Eesti
@nctiwari05 Too naive an assessment, every cycle young ducks like you get orgasmic on landbanks shown in the balance sheet, only to realize later that what seems obvious and in plain sight is just a mirage.
English
Bombay Dyeing has a market cap of around Rs 2,300 crore. The company is sitting on approximately Rs 1,400 crore in cash and fixed deposits. Just the ongoing Three ICC luxury tower in Dadar has a revenue potential of Rs 6,500 crore. The realization from a single scheme in Dadar is nearly 3x the entire market cap, and margins could be 50%+. Think about that for a second.
This is a Wadia Group company. One of the oldest business houses in India. The textile business is what people associate with the name but that is not where the value is. The value is in the land. Prime Mumbai land. And nobody is pricing it correctly.
Bombay Realty, the real estate arm, has two flagship developments in the heart of Mumbai. Island City Centre at Dadar and Wadia International Centre at Worli. The Dadar land parcel alone has a total development potential of 30-35 lakh square feet. At current Mumbai luxury pricing of Rs 50,000-55,000 per square foot, you are looking at Rs 15,000 crore of gross development value. From one location.
They already sold 22 acres at Worli to Sumitomo Realty for Rs 5,200 crore. That cash came in, debt got wiped out, and the balance sheet is now essentially debt-free. Debt-to-equity is 0.1%. The company has more cash than total debt. That Worli monetization alone was more than double the current market cap.
And they still have land left. As per management interview, they have 800+ Acres (BD + Wadia Group) of land across India, out of that 80 + in Mumbai. Plus the massive Dadar development that is just getting started with Three ICC.
The core textile and polyester business is struggling. FY26 revenue fell 9% to Rs 1,460 crore. Full year PAT collapsed 94% to Rs 27 crore. Q4 showed improvement with PAT up 82% but that was driven by other income, not operations. The operating business is fundamentally unprofitable right now.
But here is the thing. You are not buying Bombay Dyeing for the textile business. You are buying it for the land bank. The textile business is a legacy cost centre that the market is using to discount the entire company. Strip out the operating losses and just look at what is on the balance sheet. Rs 1,400 crore cash. Zero debt. And land in Dadar and other locations worth multiples of the market cap.
If the Wadias decide to go aggressive on real estate development, this company reprices overnight. Even a joint development model where they contribute land and a developer puts in the capital would unlock enormous value. The Three ICC launch is the first real signal that they are getting serious about monetization.
The risk is pace. The Wadias have historically been slow to monetize. The textile business continues to bleed cash. And real estate development timelines in Mumbai are unpredictable. If they take another 5-7 years to develop Dadar fully, the value erosion from the textile side could offset some of the land upside.
Rumours are the next launch is in Thane. With this they wouldn't just be a one off scheme real estate player. New hires are there.
But at Rs 2,300 crore market cap for a debt-free company sitting on Rs 1,300 crore cash with Rs 15,000+ crore of developable real estate in South Mumbai, the risk-reward is heavily skewed in one direction. The market is giving you Mumbai land at a fraction of what any developer would pay for it.
Views are personal. For educational purposes only. Not investment advice.
English
Chinese founders are usually:
- engineers
- party members
- capitalists
In that order.
So when they build or acquire a company, maximizing shareholder value is not the first objective. The first objective is acquiring know-how and industrial capability.
The mindset is: "we should know how to build this thing in China for the simple reason that my civilization needs to learn this sooner or later and i don't care about consequences or optics - if it looks like stealing IP so be it, I don't have to explain..."
The only people judging you are in your local party HQ.
If you’re a credible founder in China, you can go to a local party chief and say: "I need x engineers, land, and some starter funds to build this widget company"
And if the state thinks the industry matters, you’ll get the best resources in the province, industrial land and enough support to get going. The rest is up to you.
Many, many fail. Like most people think they would be successful with capital - go to China and see. You get everything - land, capital, people and even then the success ratio is like 1-5%...
OG American founders were also engineer-first. Bill Hewlett and David Packard built HP as engineers. Same with a lot of old American industrial giants. But over time those founders exited and the boards got taken over by pure financial operators focused entirely on maximizing quarterly shareholder value.
A single generation of this mentality hollowed out the entire American industry. Product-first founders like Elon Musk exist today because there was a generational demand for good engineering lead founders.
Indian boomer founders meanwhile were always capitalist-first from day one. Not even saying that negatively. Many come from communities that are insanely optimized around capital survival and allocation. That’s a real skill developed over centuries.
But the downside of that mindset is that they were rarely engineer-first or product-first EVEN if they were engineers by training. They were always capitalist first.
And that's very reasonable. They're on their own. Nobody has their back. They need to perform or die.
So when an Indian conglomerate acquires something like Jaguar, the instinct becomes:
- optimize margins
- reduce costs
- extract shareholder value
But if you don’t deeply understand first principles of car manufacturing, how much value can you really compound long term ? So companies get handed to hired professionals and MBA operators. The exact same class of people that helped hollow out American industry.
Now America is slowly realizing pure financial capitalism can become self-destructive because eventually the spreadsheet people cannibalize the actual industrial base in pursuit of EPS.
India already lives in that reality. Infosys is a good example. A company effectively consuming itself to maintain quarter-on-quarter performance without aggressively building the future.
And as I said they’re not even wrong. Anyone would do the same unless the system is realigned for long term incentives.
Who in India actually has your back if you miss numbers for 2-3 yrs while investing heavily into long-term capability ? Tesla survived because retail investors and the American public effectively backed Elon Musk through a decade of chaos and losses.
Toyota delivers 6-7x of Tesla's profit EVERY QUARTER but Tesla wins because try posting and see Tesla retail investors explaining you the future of automobiles.
Indian scarcity markets can't and won't tolerate that kind of long-duration industrial gamble. Its a 3k gdp/capita country nobody has time for long term nonsense plus who know who's grfiting vs being serious...people talk about nationalism then take your money and run.
China solved this by
- serve the party
- align with state goals
- stay below the radar and build
the system will protect you while you build.
In India you are on your own.
- manage the regulators
- manage capital - which is very expensive
- manage your own power/infra
- deal with corruption
- manage untrained talent
All of that becomes a massive tax on operations.
Nobody has the time to do any long-term thinking. Any anyone who does that would be eaten alive by those who optimize for survival.
Nikkei Asia@NikkeiAsia
China investor gobbles up 120-year-old German sewing machine maker s.nikkei.com/4fq5GRb
English
@deepakshenoy No it doesn't stabilize the rupee, selling gold is akin to selling forex reserves for the RBI, there is no getting around the fact that the rupee is going to consistently weaken.
English
One of the key influences to reduce dollar spends is on gold imports. India's demand has been high, and was $51 billion in FY25. It is likely to be about $92bn in FY26. Remember, net imports of crude - a larger import - was about $102bn in FY26.
Given that we export other things, our current account deficit should be around $80bn in FY26 (up from $50bn in FY25) Basically, cutting crude oil imports and gold by 25% each will bring the deficit down substantially.
So cutting gold is useful, to some extent. There's demand from retail buying of coins. From ETFs. From the jewellery sector. And now from other digital gold products.
We imported around 780 tonnes of gold last year.
RBI has a lot of gold. It bought gold, and has brought back gold it stored abroad. It doesn't need this much gold - it has over 800 tonnes. And it has a bloated balance sheet - way too high for a central bank that isn't doing any QE. More than 85 lakh crores sits in the central bank bal sheet - and more than 12 lakh crores is in gold alone.
The RBI can slowly bring back more gold reserves back to india - it's doing about 100-200 tonnes per year anyhow. It can then sell 200 tonnes of gold locally, to serve the jewellery market this year (this will satisfy about half the demand)
That would mean there is no dollars going out for importing gold. Not too much - only $30 bn or so, but that's enough to offset the current account deficit substantially.
There is no major pressing need then for domestic consumers to stop consuming gold. The consumption will slow if prices fall; and if the rupee improves, and India's gold imports slow, prices should be under control.
Anyhow, telling people to not buy gold has the opposite effect. We don't trust our government, inherently. So if they tell us to not buy, we will buy more. It's a bit of a problem to express this desire. Buy Indian is fine. Don't buy gold isn't going to help, I think.
Now there's an impact - if the RBI sells 200 tonnes of gold, it will hurt rupee liquidity (any rupee paid to the RBI for its gold = rupee out of circulation). that's about 300,000 cr. rupees. But there is a huge surplus right now, and we can ease out 300,000 cr. through some temporary moves (VRR) or durable ones (RBI buying government bonds). This will reduce some forex reserves but just $30 bn which is a very small number compared to over $500 bn we own and which isn't that necessary.
It will also help stabilize the rupee, allowing future inflows to be planned by foreign investors. It will also help in reducing any supply imbalances.
This will help for one year, by which time, the government can create more room for foreign investment through regulatory red tape reduction, level playing field on taxes for FPIs, single window clearances etc.
In short: RBI should sell about 15 tonnes of gold per month to the domestic market and that's enough to reduce a lot of the imports, reduce the current account deficit and allow the rupee to stabilize.
English
@crghoniya 2 jeans pant becha , 500 rs kamaya aur fir space mai aa gaya
हिन्दी
@crghoniya Andhbhakt log hi trading karne aate hai aur ghar bahar bech ke jaate hai.
हिन्दी