&w=3840&q=100)
Amul's revenue touches ₹90,000 crore in FY25 on strong double-digit growth
India's largest dairy brand Amul has seen its revenue touch ₹90,000 crore in FY25 compared to ₹80,000 crore in FY24 on the back of strong double-digit growth across categories.
Jayen Mehta, managing director (MD) at Amul told Business Standard, 'We are now aiming for Amul to be a ₹1-trillion brand in FY26 as we expect the strong growth, seen across categories, to continue.'
He said this financial year has also started on a strong note due to good demand for summer products like ice creams and milkshakes.
Mehta added that Gujarat Co-operative Milk Marketing Federation (GCMMF) saw its revenue at ₹66,000 crore, which was up almost 12 per cent in FY25.
The reason why GCMMF — which markets Amul's products across India — has a lower turnover than Amul is because dairies in Valsad, Rajkot, Godhra, Surat, Vadodara and Anand sell their own milk and milk products under the Amul brand but is not reflected in Amul's turnover.
Also, Amul's turnover reflects cattle feed turnover in Gujarat which is not a part of GCMMF's turnover.
While Amul is known for its dairy, it progressively is making a move towards becoming a foods company and launched products like organic dal, atta (wheat flour), basmati rice, spices among others.
In the previous financial year, Amul also entered the US market with its fresh milk and partnered with Michigan Milk Producers Association (MMPA) for this. Under the partnership, MMPA will collect and process the milk and GMCCF will handle the marketing and branding for Amul in the country.
The co-operative, started in FY74, now exports its products to more than 50 countries.
GCMMF came into existence on July 9, 1973, when six dairy cooperatives came together under the leadership of Verghese Kurien, who is fondly remembered as the Milkman of India.
He had come up with the idea to market milk and milk products under the brand name Amul.
Currently, GCMMF has 18 member unions with more than 360 million farmers across 18,600 villages in Gujarat.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
11 hours ago
- Business Standard
Decoding Flexi Cap vs Multi Cap Funds: Strategy, risk and suitability
Flexi Cap vs Multi Cap Fund: Despite ongoing volatility in the equity markets, investor interest in mutual funds remains robust. However, a clear shift in investment preferences is emerging. Following significant corrections in the small-cap and mid-cap segments, a growing number of investors are reallocating their portfolios towards large-cap, Flexi Cap and Multi Cap funds—categories that predominantly invest in companies with larger market capitalisations. Market analysts suggest that in times of heightened uncertainty, Flexi Cap and Multi Cap Funds may offer more stability and strategic advantage. Yet, a key question persists among investors: Which is the better choice—Flexi Cap or Multi Cap Funds? While both fund types provide broad diversification, they differ notably in terms of investment structure and portfolio strategy. Key Differences in Fund Structure Flexi Cap mutual funds are frequently compared to Multi Cap funds, given that both invest in equities and equity-related instruments across various market capitalisations. However, a key structural distinction sets the two categories apart. Flexi Cap Funds mandate a minimum allocation of 65 per cent of their total assets to equities and equity-related instruments. In comparison, Multi Cap Funds are required to allocate at least 75 per cent of their corpus to equities. Another significant difference lies in the portfolio allocation strategy. Flexi Cap fund managers have complete discretion to invest across large-cap, mid-cap and small-cap stocks, allowing for a dynamic and flexible asset allocation approach. Conversely, Multi Cap fund managers must maintain a minimum investment of 25 per cent each in large-cap, mid-cap and small-cap segments, resulting in a more regimented and rule-based allocation structure. Flexibility Reduces Risk Flexi Cap funds are generally considered to be less risky compared to Multi Cap funds. Umeshkumar Mehta, CIO at Samco Mutual Fund, explains that Flexi Cap funds offer a dynamic approach, allowing fund managers to reduce exposure to large-cap, mid-cap or small-cap stocks when valuations become expensive. Unlike Multi Cap funds, Flexi Cap funds are not required to maintain a strict 25 per cent allocation in each market cap category (large, mid, small). This gives fund managers greater flexibility to adjust allocations based on market conditions. He further added that due to this flexibility, fund managers can shift towards safer market cap segments when valuations are high or during a market correction. This is one of the reasons why the overall risk level in Flexi Cap funds tends to be slightly lower. Choosing Based on Stability According to Mehta, in the current global market environment marked by heightened uncertainty, portfolios with a greater allocation to large-cap and mid-cap stocks are better positioned to deliver stability. Large-cap stocks offer resilience and consistency, while mid-cap stocks provide moderate growth potential. Given this backdrop, Flexi Cap Funds may be more appropriate for new investors, as they allow fund managers to tilt the portfolio towards relatively stable segments. Conversely, investors seeking uniform exposure across all market capitalisations may find Multi Cap Funds more suitable, as these funds mandate a minimum allocation to each of the large-cap, mid-cap and small-cap segments, ensuring balanced diversification. Time Horizon Matters A.K. Nigam, Director at BPN Fincap, notes that Flexi Cap Funds are well-suited for investors with a short- to medium-term investment horizon, typically ranging from zero to five years. These funds offer portfolio flexibility to navigate market volatility and are generally structured to deliver moderate returns. While the core allocation tends to favour large-cap stocks, they also include selective exposure to mid-cap and small-cap segments. Nigam further highlights that Multi Cap Funds are more appropriate for long-term investors, with an investment horizon of at least five to seven years. Owing to their mandated exposure to mid-cap and small-cap stocks, these funds carry higher risk but also present the potential for enhanced returns. They are most suitable for investors with a higher risk tolerance who seek long-term capital appreciation. Aligning Risk and Goals For investors with a high risk appetite but limited exposure to equities, Multi Cap Funds may present a more suitable option, as they offer diversified exposure across all market capitalisations regardless of prevailing market conditions. Conversely, investors with moderate risk tolerance seeking equity participation may find Flexi Cap Funds more aligned with their investment objectives. Mehta recommends that individuals with a higher risk appetite consider diversified equity funds such as Flexi Cap or Multi Cap Funds, which invest across a broad spectrum of stocks, including large-cap companies. These funds actively rotate allocations among sectors and market segments in response to changing market dynamics. As such, Mehta emphasises the importance of remaining invested for at least one full market cycle to realise the potential benefits. Given their structure and investment approach, these funds are generally more appropriate for long-term investment horizons.
Time of India
16 hours ago
- Time of India
Amul debuts in Europe: How did it expand from a small co-operative to a global brand?
Image credits: X/@DeshGujarat 'Utterly, butterly, delicious'! Amul has been the go-to brand for milk-related products for years in India. But now, the Gujarat-based cooperative is expanding to Europe. The brand announced a strategic partnership with Spain's Cooperativa Ganadera del Valle de los Pedroches (COVAP) to introduce its flagship milk product in Spain and the European Union. The rollout will begin in Madrid and Barcelona, followed by cities including Malaga, Valencia, Alicante, Seville, Cordoba and Lisbon in Portugal. From 1946 to 2025, Amul has had an exemplary journey of its own. Here's how it became the global brand it is today. — Amul_Coop (@Amul_Coop) The seeds of Amul were sown in Anand, a small town in Gujarat. The exploitative trade practices followed by the local trade cartel led to a rebellious cooperative movement where the farmers approached Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, seeking a solution. It was his advice that led to the formation of a co-operative as he suggested the farmers remove the middlemen, form their own co-operative and take the procurement, processing and marketing under their control. In 1946, the farmers went on a strike refusing to work under the cartel and under the inspiration of Sardar Patel, Morarji Desai and Tribhuvandas Patel formed a cooperative. Named Kaira District Co-operative Milk Producers Union Ltd., the company began with just two village dairy co-operative societies and 247 litres of milk. Tribhuvandas Patel became the founder Chairman along with Dr Verghese Kurien, who was tasked with running the dairy from 1950. In post-independence India where there was a dire need for Milk, Amul came as a needed relief. Kurien led the 'Operation Flood' launched by the National Dairy Development Board which aimed to make India dairy independent. The program created a national milk grid which linked producers throughout the country, eliminating middlemen, reducing regional prices and ensuring that farmers got the majority of the price share. Due to the success of the operation, Kurien was subsequently named 'Father of the White Revolution' Amul's business model Image credits: X/@DeshGujarat The Amul Model of Dairy Development is a three-tiered structure where the dairy cooperative societies at the village level are federated under a milk union at the district level and a federation of member unions at the state level. Tier 1 has village dairy cooperative societies set up in various localities. Every milk producer is a part of this community that elects representatives that manage District Milk Unions. Tier 2 has the District Milk Unions that manage the processing of milk and associated products and sell these to the State Milk Federation. The federation then sells these products in the market. Tier 3 has all these organizations that come under Amul (Anand Milk Union Limited) and the cooperative directly sells products to customers through the milk federation. The revenue is shared in a similar manner. In FY'22, Amul saw a group turnover of INR 61,000 Crores and achieved 18% growth in the previous year, further cementing it as one of the largest FMCG brands in India.
The Hindu
21 hours ago
- The Hindu
What Google plans to do about online search antitrust decision
The story so far: On May 31, Google said it will appeal an antitrust decision aimed at making competition in the online search market fair. Google's reaction to the decision comes a day after U.S. Judge Amit Mehta heard closing arguments in a trial that sought to curtail the tech giant's illegal monopoly in online search. While the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) proposed stringent remedies to bring about fair competition, Google is opposed to these measures. Judge Mehta is expected to deliver his decision soon, which could potentially unravel Google's position as a dominant player in the online search business. What is the DOJ vs Google antitrust case? The DOJ hit Google with multiple legal challenges in recent years, alleging violations of antitrust laws, and the monopolisation of multiple markets the search giant operates in. In particular, the regulator scrutinised Google's revenue sharing agreements with partners like Apple over worries that the search giant's rivals' services are being locked out of the market and that customers are seeing reduced choices for search engines on their devices. In August 2024, however, Judge Mehta handed the DOJ a victory when he ruled that Google was an illegal monopolist with monopoly power in the general search services and general search text advertising markets. The Google Search Remedies trial that followed this year saw the DOJ presenting a series of far-reaching proposals to cut down Google's monopoly power, while Google presented its own list of far milder proposals. What is the DOJ's case against Google? The DOJ and the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) are regulators that both work to ensure that companies, including Big Tech firms, are complying with American antitrust laws to enable fair competition. While the two regulators coordinate their efforts, the U.S. DOJ has the power to obtain criminal sanctions and has sole antitrust jurisdiction across industries including telecommunications, banks, railroads, and airlines. One of the key topics in Google's Search Remedies trial is the Big Tech company's multi-billion dollar deals with telecom device manufacturers to offer Google services via their products. To bring about fairer competition, the U.S. DOJ suggested the forced sale of the Chrome browser, possible divestment of the Android platform, temporary restrictions on some of Google's market activities, and the creation of a 'Technical Committee' to oversee Google's compliance measures. What is Google's defence? Google has consistently defended the quality and innovation of its products, while denying that it stifled competition. The tech giant strongly criticised the DOJ's remedies to reduce its dominance, claiming that data-sharing with rivals would put customers at risk and that giving up Chrome and Android would lead to cybersecurity risks as well as increased device costs. Google strongly opposed the idea of a DOJ-controlled Technical Committee, complaining that it would reserve the right for the U.S. government to decide who can access Google users' data. This is not a favourable outcome for the company, since U.S. President Donald Trump has systematically worked to reduce the independence of even federal agencies and regulators such as the FTC. Trump also suggested in the past that Google could shut down. However, the DOJ suggested in its Revised Proposed Final Judgment a court-appointed Technical Committee made up of independent experts. Google's own proposed remedies include more flexible browser agreements and Android contracts, as well as oversight to ensure that Google complies with the court's order rather than coming under government control. 'While we heard a lot about how the remedies would help various well-funded competitors (w/ repeated references to Bing), we heard very little about how all this helps consumers,' posted Google on X on May 31. However, a new issue in Google's antitrust quandary is Generative AI, and whether or not Google's monopoly in multiple markets also hurts competition in markets related to large language models (LLMs) and AI integrations across devices and the web. For example: Google's 'AI overviews' that now greet users at the top of their searches could reshape the way customers worldwide search for information online. Google, meanwhile, claimed that the AI space was highly competitive and that rivals were thriving even without government intervention. 'The US Department of Justice's 2020 search distribution lawsuit is a backwards-looking case at a time of intense competition and unprecedented innovation. With new services like ChatGPT (and foreign competitors like DeepSeek) thriving, DOJ's sweeping remedy proposals are both unnecessary and harmful,' wrote Lee-Anne Mulholland, Vice President, Regulatory Affairs, Google, in a company blog post. What happens to Google next? U.S. Judge Amit Mehta will take time over the summer months to consider the facts of the case. A decision regarding the Google Search Remedies trial is expected from him before Labour Day (the first Monday in September), per AP. Google is waiting for the court's remedies but said it still disagrees with the original decision and believes it is 'wrong.' The tech giant also plans to present its side during the appeal, which will happen after the court remedy is revealed. In other words, the legal process could stretch on for even years. This is just one of several antitrust challenges that Google is facing in the U.S. and overseas, with cases covering different areas of its lucrative business such as its advertising technology, rights to its Android platform, and the treatment of developers using the Google Play Store. The U.S. DOJ in April announced that it 'prevailed' against Google in a second monopolisation case, where the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia held that Google 'violated antitrust law by monopolizing open-web digital advertising markets.' Google disagreed with this decision as well and said it would appeal the ruling.
