Modern Foods: Disinvestment and After
|
|
ICMR HOME | Case Studies Collection
Case Details:
Case Code : BSTR018
Case Length : 14 Pages
Period : 2000-2002
Organization : MUL Modern Foods
Pub Date : 2002
Teaching Note : Available
Countries : India
Industry : Food, Beverages & Tobacco
To download Modern Foods: Disinvestment and After case study (Case Code: BSTR018) click on the button below, and select the case from the list of available cases:
OR
Buy With PayPal
|
Price:
For delivery in electronic format: Rs. 300 ; For delivery through courier (within India): Rs. 300 + Shipping & Handling Charges extra
»
Business Strategy Case Studies
» Business Strategy Short Case Studies
» View Detailed Pricing Info
» How To Order This Case » Business Case Studies » Area Specific Case Studies
» Industry Wise Case Studies
» Company Wise Case Studies
Please note:
This case study was compiled from published sources, and is intended to be used as a basis for class discussion. It is not intended to illustrate either effective or ineffective handling of a management situation. Nor is it a primary information source.
Chat with us
Please leave your feedback
|
<< Previous
EXCERPTS
Post Sale Drama
Analysts felt that the sale of MFIL was well timed since the company was sold as a going concern, not as a BIFR case. However, some analysts were of the opinion that the sale was undervalued.
Apart from machinery at its 14 bakeries, MFIL had 19 franchises and six ancillary units scattered across the country. Some analysts felt that the real estate alone-16 acres in Delhi, 4 acres in Kanpur and 18 acres in Mumbai - would be worth over Rs 5 billion. They felt that HLL had paid for the brand and got the fixed assets for free. The Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG) also criticised the government for not valuing MFIL correctly. The CAG said that the value of the plant and the machinery should have been considered, and not just dismissed as scrap. The CAG also criticised the valuer of MFIL (ANZ Grindlays Bank) for not taking into account the value of surplus land in Delhi Business Unit-I as well as the leased land of the Silchar unit in Assam...
|
|
Turning Around MFIL
After HLL acquired MFIL, MFIL's losses went up. By December 2000, MFIL's accumulated losses increased to Rs 470 million (in 1998-99, MFIL made losses of around Rs 69 million) as against its networth of Rs 330 million.
|
In early 2001, MFIL was referred to the Board of Industrial and Financial Reconstruction as more than 50% of its networth had been eroded by its losses. Officials of MFIL alleged that HLL wanted MFIL to be referred to BIFR so as to get some relief from banks and financial institutions. They further contended that if HLL had used the Rs 200 million it infused into MFIL as preference share capital instead of loans, MFIL would not have become sick. However, HLL officials said that they had little choice but to go to the BIFR, because MFIL's accumulated losses had exceeded 50 percent of its peak net worth, over a four year period. According to section 23 of the Sick Industries Act (SICA) if a company's accumulated losses over four years exceed 50 percent of net worth, then it has to be declared sick and referred to BIFR... |
Exhibits
Exhibit I: PSUs Approved for Disinvestment
Exhibit II: Important Issues Involved in Disinvestment
Exhibit III: MFIL - Unitwise Capacity, Production and Profit
Exhibit IV: Defective Production (%)
Exhibit V: Market Return of Unsold Loaves (%)
Exhibit VI: Highlights of MFIL Disinvestment
|
|