logo
Vodafone lenders worried about the fate of loans as telco seeks more debt

Vodafone lenders worried about the fate of loans as telco seeks more debt

Mint04-07-2025
Mumbai: Lenders to Vodafone Idea Ltd are worried that the telecom operator which is trying to borrow ₹35,000 crore more may prioritize paying its government debts over its new bank loans, a person aware of the matter said.
Their concern centres around the company's ability to sustain loan repayments on the proposed loans if Vodafone Idea has to pay the adjusted gross revenue (AGR) dues to the government. The weakest player in India's telecom landscape has been steadily posting losses since FY17.
On 19 May, the Supreme Court rejected petitions from Bharti Airtel Ltd and Vodafone Idea to waive some of the dues linked to their AGR. Vodafone Idea had sought a waiver on interest, penalty, and interest on penalty crossing ₹45,000 crore on the ₹83,400 crore pending AGR dues. The four-year moratorium on these payouts ends in September.
In May, the operator told the Supreme Court that it would not be able to operate beyond the current financial year without bank funding.
According to another person, whether banks approve the fresh loan proposal depends on promoter Aditya Birla Group injecting additional equity or providing a backstop to assure banks in case the telco's health worsens in future.
To be sure, last financial year, the telco raised ₹4,000 crore in a preferential issue of shares to promoters, with Aditya Birla Group putting in ₹2,100 crore and Vodafone Group ₹1,900 crore.
'The company wants to raise ₹35,000 crore from banks; but for that, the promoters have to put in more equity or produce a corporate guarantee from a strong group company," said the first person cited above. 'In such a situation, if there is no additional skin in the game, bankers are not willing to put in more money."
The second person said discussions between Vodafone Idea and a consortium of banks have been underway even before the AGR case returned to court. The person said there were a few virtual meetings between the bankers in the consortium and the management of Vodafone Idea a few months back, where lenders raised the two contentious issues on additional equity and promoter guarantee.
'This information is incorrect, and no such proposal is on the table," a spokesperson for Vodafone Idea said, without saying which proposal was being referred to.
The spokesperson added: 'We remain in active discussions with lenders and will provide an update at the appropriate time."
Also Read: Sword of Damocles hangs over Vodafone Idea's bank guarantees
'The position of lenders has not changed; the AGR setback in the Supreme Court has only made it worse," said the second person cited above.
According to Care Ratings, bankers to Vodafone Idea include State Bank of India, Punjab National Bank, Canara Bank, Bank of Baroda, and Axis Bank. While some have given term loans, others have provided bank guarantees. Its bank debt stood at ₹2,330 crore as on 31 March, as against ₹4,040 crore a year ago, as per disclosures made to analysts on 2 June.
Email sent on Wednesday to the State Bank of India—Vodafone Idea's largest lender—remained unanswered.
What complicates the matter is the government's decision not to convert more of the company's dues to equity. Following two rounds of such conversions, the government now owns a 49% stake in Vodafone Idea. Promoters Aditya Birla Group and Vodafone Group held a 25.6% stake, while the remaining are public shareholders.
On Wednesday, telecom minister Jyotiraditya Scindia told CNBC TV18 in an interview that the government's stake in the telco 'will not go beyond the current 49%".
While banks seem reluctant, the company is actively chasing loans. Akshaya Moondra, chief executive officer, Vodafone Idea told analysts on 2 June that the 'primary source of fundraising remains bank borrowing", which the telco is working on.
'The conversion of government dues to equity, along with the upgrade in the credit rating, are facilitating factors for us to take those discussions forward. Post the conversion, the engagement has started again seriously," Moondra told analysts.
While the first round of equity conversion took place in 2023, the latest one happened in April, taking the total government stake to 49%. In May, Vodafone Idea's board approved raising ₹20,000 crore through a follow-on public offering (FPO), private placement, or other permissible mode.
Also Read: Two months after second lifeline, Vodafone Idea again raises survival fears
Analysts believe that raising debt is crucial to the telco's expansion plans.
'...we believe the company's network investments remain contingent on debt raise which, in turn, is dependent on continued support/AGR relief from the Government of India. Stabilization of the subscriber base, along with further relief from the government of India remains imperative for Vi's long-term survival," analysts at Motilal Oswal Financial Services said in a note to clients on 2 June.
The tussle over AGR has stretched out over almost 20 years. On 17 April, Vodafone Idea, which has 198.2 million mobile subscribers, submitted a representation to the government, seeking a waiver of interest, penalty and interest on penalty on its AGR dues.
The telco said the government's AGR liability demand stood at ₹83,400 crore as of March end, with an annual instalment of approximately ₹18,000 crore due starting 31 March 2026 for the next six years. In comparison, Vodafone Idea generated ₹8,400-9,200 crore cash annually in the last three years.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Plea in SC seeks 'right to know' on product quality, seller details
Plea in SC seeks 'right to know' on product quality, seller details

Business Standard

time4 hours ago

  • Business Standard

Plea in SC seeks 'right to know' on product quality, seller details

A petition has been filed in the Supreme Court seeking to declare that consumers have a "right to know" about the quality, purity and certification of products, besides details of distributors and sellers for redressal against unfair restrictive trade practices. It has also sought directions to the Centre and the states to ensure that every distributor, trader and shop owner displays details of registration, including name, address, phone number and number of employees at the entry gate in bold letters on a display board visible to people. The plea is slated to come up for hearing on July 21 before a bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta. The petition filed by petitioner Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay said "right to know" was crucial for consumers to make informed choices and to protect themselves from unfair or restrictive trade practices and unscrupulous exploitation. "Right to know helps consumers avoid falling prey to a fraudulent or deceptive distributor, dealer, trader, seller and shop owner, who might misrepresent a product/service or disappear after sale, purchase and money transaction," said the plea, filed through advocate Ashwani Kumar Dubey. It said that if a consumer has an issue with a product or service, knowing details about the distributor, dealer, and seller is essential for filing a complaint and seeking redressal through consumer redressal forums. "When a distributor, dealer, trader, seller and shop owner are transparent about their details, it fosters a fair and competitive market where consumers can make informed choices," the plea said. It said in essence, the right to know empowers consumers to be informed or protected and to make choices when engaging in sales, purchases and money transactions. The plea has sought to direct and declare that "every consumer has 'right to know' not only about quality, quantity, potency, purity, standard, manufacturing date, expiry date and BIS/FSSAI certification of good/products, but also about the details of the distributor/dealer/ trader/seller and shop owner, so as to seek redressal against unfair restrictive trade practices and unscrupulous exploitation in spirit of sections 2(6), 2(9), 2(10) and 2(11) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019".

Trump might fire Jerome Powell, but it could spark a legal war like nothing America's seen before
Trump might fire Jerome Powell, but it could spark a legal war like nothing America's seen before

Time of India

timea day ago

  • Time of India

Trump might fire Jerome Powell, but it could spark a legal war like nothing America's seen before

US President Donald Trump is once again questioning whether Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell should continue in his position. However, removing Jerome Powell could result in a legal battle unlike any other in American history. From Supreme Court precedents to agency independence, this potential battle is already taking shape behind the scenes. Donald Trump may want to fire Fed Chairman Jerome Powell, but doing so could spark a complicated legal battle. With only 10 months left in Powell's term, Trump may simply wait him out. Explore courses from Top Institutes in Select a Course Category Digital Marketing Data Science Technology PGDM Artificial Intelligence Product Management Project Management Public Policy Leadership Design Thinking healthcare Cybersecurity Operations Management Others Finance Degree Management Data Analytics Healthcare MBA others CXO MCA Data Science Skills you'll gain: Digital Marketing Strategy Search Engine Optimization (SEO) & Content Marketing Social Media Marketing & Advertising Data Analytics & Measurement Duration: 24 Weeks Indian School of Business Professional Certificate Programme in Digital Marketing Starts on Jun 26, 2024 Get Details Skills you'll gain: Digital Marketing Strategies Customer Journey Mapping Paid Advertising Campaign Management Emerging Technologies in Digital Marketing Duration: 12 Weeks Indian School of Business Digital Marketing and Analytics Starts on May 14, 2024 Get Details The Fed Chair has been clear about his intentions. His removal is "not permitted by law," he stated earlier this year, and he would not leave if Trump attempted to fire him. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Villas Prices In Dubai Might Be More Affordable Than You Think Villas In Dubai | Search Ads Get Quote Undo ALSO READ: ESPN anchors go too far - shocking on-air stunt on Astronomer CEO Andy Byron and Kristin Cabot sparks outrage The Wall Street Journal claims that Fed officials have been secretly preparing for a legal battle since Trump's first term, when the president also considered firing the chair. Live Events What makes firing Jerome Powell legally complicated? Jerome Powell's case is strong because it relies on certain Fed autonomy protections that are already included in US law. The Federal Reserve Act, which established the central bank in 1913 and was revised in 1935, stipulates that each Fed board member will serve for a period of 14 years "unless sooner removed for cause by the President,' as per a report. Powell is protected under federal law unless he is removed "for cause," which has never been fully tested in court. The "for cause" requirement was designed to increase the Fed's independence by making it more difficult for a president to remove its president-appointed board members. Although the Supreme Court's stance on the matter is unclear, there are indications that the court would intervene if Trump took action, as per a report. Just this week, a federal judge ruled that Trump's prior firing of FTC Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter was illegal, citing a 1935 Supreme Court case, Humphrey's Executor v. United States, that limited the president's power to remove leaders of independent agencies. The judge referenced a Supreme Court decision from ninety years ago that restricts the president's authority to fire independent agency board members unless there is negligence or misconduct. Powell has some protection from that precedent. What does 'for cause' really mean in this context? While the law says 'for cause,' it doesn't define exactly what that means in the context of firing the chair of the Fed, especially since the statute doesn't specifically reference the chair's role. Historically, 'for cause' has been interpreted to mean serious misconduct, like inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance. But so far, those standards haven't been tested in court for a Fed chair. Now, Donald Trump and his allies are suggesting a potential reason: the $2.5 billion renovation of the Fed's Washington headquarters. Trump recently claimed there might be fraud involved in the project, telling reporters, 'It's possible there's fraud,' and hinting that it 'sort of is' a fireable offense. Although he clarified that he wasn't actively planning to remove Powell, Trump also said, 'I don't rule out anything.' Kevin Hassett, former National Economic Council director and a rumored contender to replace Powell, said last weekend that the question of presidential firing authority is 'being looked into.' Still, he called it a 'highly uncertain legal matter.' Behind the scenes, White House officials appear unsure of their legal footing. According to Politico, outside attorneys warned that firing Powell over the renovation project would likely not hold up in court. One anonymous official even admitted, 'Whether or not it's illegal, I don't know. But is it a good thing to point out to damage this guy's image? Yeah.' Could Donald Trump actually pull it off before Powell's term ends? While the legal challenges would be significant, time may actually be Trump's biggest obstacle. Powell's term ends in less than a year, in May 2026. Some legal scholars think Trump may ultimately decide to let the clock run out. Eric Chaffee, a business law professor at Case Western Reserve University, said he believes Powell would win any court fight. But more importantly, Chaffee says Trump may not see the battle as worth it. FAQs Can Donald Trump legally remove Jerome Powell? Not easy. U.S. law requires "cause" for firing a Fed board member, and Powell has stated that he will oppose any such move. What does Donald Trump accuse Powell of? To justify a potential dismissal, Trump and allies have cited a $2.5 billion Fed building renovation, raising unproven fraud concerns.

India Cements Q1 results: Co slips to Rs 131 crore loss, revenue flat YoY
India Cements Q1 results: Co slips to Rs 131 crore loss, revenue flat YoY

Economic Times

timea day ago

  • Economic Times

India Cements Q1 results: Co slips to Rs 131 crore loss, revenue flat YoY

India Cements on Saturday reported a consolidated net loss of Rs 131 crore for the June quarter compared to the profit of Rs 71 crore in the year-ago period. The company's revenue stood at Rs 1,025 crore, marginally lower than Rs 1,027 crore in the corresponding quarter of the previous financial year. ADVERTISEMENT The performance also marked a sharp downturn from the previous quarter, when the company had posted a profit of Rs 19 crore. Sequentially, revenue fell 14% from Rs 1,197 crore in Q4FY25. The Aditya Birla Group company incurred expenses of Rs 1,042 crore in the quarter under review versus Rs 1,313 crore in Q4FY25 and Rs 1,190 crore in Q1FY25. The expenses were made under the heads including 'Cost of Materials consumed', freight & forwarding expense and power & fuel, among other things. The company achieved domestic sales volume of 2.18 MnT, up 11.6% YoY. The average capacity utilisation stood at 61% for the Cement Realisations (net of logistics cost) improved by 5.7% company recorded total Ebitda/Mt of Rs 424, which improved significantly from Rs 88/Mt in Q4FY25. ADVERTISEMENT The average interest rate for Q1FY26 stood at 6.83%, declining by 110 bps a standalone basis, India Cements reported a net loss of Rs 14 crore in Q1FY26, narrowing from a loss of Rs 76 crore in Q4FY25 and compared to a net profit of Rs 57 crore in the year-ago period. Revenue rose 5.5% year-on-year to Rs 1,025 crore from Rs 972 crore. ADVERTISEMENT During the quarter under review, the company approved the sale of its entire equity stake in its subsidiary, Industrial Chemicals & Monomers Ltd (ICML), for a total consideration of Rs 97.68 crore. As a result, the investment in ICML, previously carried at a cost of Rs 0.36 crore, has been reclassified as held for sale. The gain from this transaction will be recognised upon its completion, the company filing company's step-down subsidiary, PT Adcoal Energindo, Indonesia, approved the sale of its entire stake in PT Mitra Setia Tanah Bumbu, Indonesia, an associate entity, on July 3, 2025. The impact, if any, on the carrying value of the investment in the foreign subsidiary will be evaluated for impairment once the transaction is completed. ADVERTISEMENT The exceptional items for the quarter include two key impairments. First, an impairment of Rs 47.53 crore was recognised upon the consolidation of the subsidiary ICML, which has been classified as held for sale. This amount reflects the difference between the carrying value of ICML's net assets and their fair value less costs to sell. Second, an impairment of Rs 76.24 crore was recorded in relation to the proposed sale of a stake in MSTB, representing the gap between the carrying amount of the investment (including goodwill) and its fair value less costs to sell. (Disclaimer: Recommendations, suggestions, views and opinions given by the experts are their own. These do not represent the views of Economic Times) (You can now subscribe to our ETMarkets WhatsApp channel)

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store