Mumbai: The community consisting of promoters and their merchant bankers being ingenious have found new ways and have started creaming the system. This if not checked would be extremely detrimental to the capital market fund raising system in the medium to long term. In the mother of all IPO from LIC one saw that the total number of applications as per the exchanges on the last day of bidding was 73.37 lakh applications. The final number which was sent for banking or received by the registrar was down to 61.33 lakhs. Roughly one in six applications was not banked for various reasons. This is a high number and a cause for worry. However, what happened in the case of Prudent Corporate Advisory Services Limited was a shocker and needs to be studied as a test case for all capital market enthusiasts, intermediaries, regulators and above all investors.
Prudent Corporate Advisory Services Limited or Prudent had tapped the capital markets with its offer for sale of 85,49,340 equity shares in a price band of Rs 595-630. The issue was open between May 10 and 12. The primary business of the company is a distributor of mutual fund products. It also has a large base of ARN's or authorised representatives or simply explained sub-brokers. This makes Prudent a B2B and a B2C player. The company is the 3rd highest in terms of retail AUM. It has 23,262 channel partners and 13.51 lac clients. The issue was considered expensive by most analysts and the company was expected to have a tepid response. On day one of bidding the retail portion was subscribed over 72 per cent and moved on more or less equally to end day three at 1.29 times. The issue garnered 1,53,381 applications and the retail portion saw bids of 38.01 lac shares. The overall issue was subscribed post the anchor allotment at 1.22 times and received bids for 73,20,969 shares. So far so good. The basis of allotment advertisement which was issued on the day of listing on May 20 had very interesting data. The number of applications received by the registrar had dropped dramatically to 42,868 and the number of shares bid to 71,34,30 shares. This number includes anchor investors. If one were to reconcile with the bidding on the exchanges, the corresponding number would be 42,844 applications for 43,56,476 shares. The discrepancy, a massive 1,10,537 applications or 72.06 per cent of the applications bid on the system for 19,64,493 shares. This is illogical and needs to be examined. Was the system being creamed to give a feeling that there was great demand for the issue and it was oversubscribed when reality was that the issue was yet to get subscribed?