|
|
 |
|
Viewing report
|
|
|
|
India's Most Valuable Companies-2009
Living Media India Limited (India Today), Nov 2009, Pages: 88
The 2009 edition of BT 500, an annual performance barometer of over 1,000 listed companies, has some pointers to these. The beat of the economic recovery has brought a smile on the lips of everybody— from consumers to businessmen and policymakers. the recovery is real, and that all this seems to be indicating is that the government’s fiscal stimulus has worked in stoking consumer spending and corporate investment. But every company that has weathered the storm so far has to confront a far more critical question: Will the recovery benefit it as much as it would its competitor? The answer to this question— which could dramatically change market shares and alter the corporate landscape—depends on what the companies did during the downturn.
The harvest of recovery is not going to be equally good for all. Good harvests will be claimed by companies that not only understand the shape and speed of the unfolding recovery better than the rest, but also did the “right” things during the downturn.
The market value of the top 10 in this year’s BT 500 actually climbed up, by 4.3 per cent. The biggest, and pleasant, surprise is the performance of the public sector pack, with the market value of the top 50 public sector undertakings value rising by 12.4 per cent. As far as sector-wise performance goes, there were surprises galore. Those that were expected to be dragged down by the downturn succeeded in bucking the slowdown in style. Another sector which was almost written off by the analyst community in the first quarter of 2009 was software, but companies like Infosys Technologies, TCS and Wipro subsequently came out with better-than-expected results.
As a result, value erosion was minimal in the top tier of Indian IT services. The sector that was hit the hardest was real estate, thanks to the double whammy of falling property prices and ballooning debt. Clearly, the smaller companies found themselves more vulnerable to the global meltdown and, more specifically, more adversely impacted by the crisis of liquidity. In sharp contrast, the big—the elite businesses at the top of the heap—continued to get bigger.
|
|
|
|
