This is where more digging needs to happen in interviews. You can see Suresh’s body language and heavy breathing when the topic was these 26 lakh shares. He relaxed quite a bit when the topic shifted to the 8KMiles Media forgery because it is not so damning as these 26 lakh shares.
The next logical step in this game of fraud is to delink the US entity from the Indian company. Isn’t it surprising that none of the other executives listed in the annual report are shareholders in India? Ramani is out. SV can easily resign taking moral responsibility. And the stage is set for delinking the US entity.
Looking at the statement of Insider trading provided by @anni23 ’ s link, from BSE and comparing it with the other BSE sourced statement I shared, it is clear one of them is true and one, false.
The former has this to say about the source:
Exchanges have commenced collating the data received from both depositories and generating disclosures under Insider Trading related data for the purpose of System Based Disclosures under Regulation 7 of SEBI (Prohibition of Insider Trading) Regulations, 2015.
**** Source - Data as collated from CDSL and NSDL
The footnote says this:
“The disclosures provided in this section are provided by the RTAs for their client companies based on the change in holdings of the promoters. The change in Demat holdings of the Promoters has been provided to the RTAs by the Depositories while the change in Physical holding is maintained by the RTA themselves. BSE Ltd. is merely receiving the disclosures and disseminating the same for the benefit of the Investors. BSE Ltd. disseminates these disclosures as submitted by the RTAs and does not verify the accuracy or truthfulness of the disclosures. The information contained in the disclosures is based on material we believe to be reliable; however, we do not represent that it is accurate, correct, complete or error free. BSE Ltd. disclaims any responsibility or loss arising out of any action, directly or indirectly taken, by any market intermediary pursuant to the dissemination of these Disclosures. In case of any errors or discrepancies in these Disclosures, promoters and listed companies may take up the same with the concerned RTAs for rectification and resubmission.”
The latter has this to say in the footnote:
Regulation 7(2) - Disclosure to the Exchange by Listed company in terms of Regulation 7(2) (b) of SEBI (Prohibition of Insider Trading) Regulations, 2015.
So in effect the former is system driven and collated from CDSL / NSDL and the latter is provided by the company. It goes without saying then that the former (provided by @anni23 ) is true and hence the latter false. The latter could be false because SV may have provided the info to the company himself.
Now, going with that assumption if I look at the former more closely some things don’t make sense. To begin with the last column always says Market, and I guess we should assume it must be a default field. But some other figures are damning. For instance it says as of 11 July SV held NIL shares in 8K Miles (besides the pledge I guess), in row 3, but then he seems to now hold 7.8 million shares on Oct 1 (row 2), and no shares acquired in between. I am wondering how is that possible?
Another one was on 02 April he disposed 7,25,000 shares. This was the first working day in FY 19, and these dates are dates of debit in CDSL/NSDL, which means either on that day or in the previous year last two trading days there must have been such volumes in BSE/NSE (net deliverable quantity). The volumes in NSE / BSE are far short of this (then it must be offmarket again?).
Would love to hear your thoughts on how this could be explained!!
Look at the SAST- System driven disclosure. It shows a fat round figure of 50 lakh shares disposed this year.
You are right that the dates don’t match with disposals. The Occam’s razor would indicate that:
RTA discloses a change only when it exceeds a certain threshold of value. Below is from Sebi’s circular on system driven disclosure SEBI | Introduction of system-driven disclosures in Securities Market
“The RTAs will then aggregate the dematerialised shareholding data received from both the depositories and the physical shareholding of the promoter/promoter group. Based on the defined criteria as per the regulations (For e.g., aggregate holding of a promoter across both depositories and physical shareholding exceeda specified percentage or value), the RTAs will generate reports and provide it to the respective stock exchange(s). The stock exchanges shall then disseminate the data on its website in accordance with the respective regulations.”
I cant find the exact regulation which indicates the specific percentage or value.
Edit: Somebody asked where this information can be seen , you can see it on bse website here
https://www.bseindia.com/corporates/Regulation_29.aspx?expandable=2
Type 8k and enter submit
2 Likes
#diffsoft
Based on the data put out, do you think it is a market trade or an off market trade.The last column of data put out by @phreak6 says mode of disposal as “Market” and value assigned.
Any single client buying or selling more than 0.5% of a company’s capital on a trading day should disclose under the block deal.The onus is on the buying/selling client, the broker, the DP. Depository and RTA.
An off marketdeal will also have t obe disclosed.How did so many deals escape being notified.
If the seller says he did not know his shares were being transferred, his DP, Depository and RTA should have notified.
If the seller and his DP/Depository/Broker/RTA did not, at least the buyer, his broker,his DP, his depository should have notified.
Yesterday in Bloomberg interview I saw SV stating the shares were transferred sans a POA or a DI instuction.How can this be possible.If true the Depositories can be hauled up.
The question that SV has to answer is -did he take a loan from the two brokerages.If so for what purpose.Has he repaid any portion thus far?Did he think loans can be advanced by lender without a collateral or security?
The brokerages, the Depository, the RTA should speak their version before SV repeats his claims with more and more channels.
1 Like
Just a thought …Quite possible that SV might have given his shares on loan to earn extra money…Brokers do contact their clients holding big chunks of shares from time to time regarding the same…Since I m not a broker,I dont know exactly how it works but many ppl in the forum can throw light on the same.
Thanks @anni23 Your Occam’s razor works better than mine 
so I may borrow it many more times!!
I checked for such violations on earlier dates and there seem to be none, so this is the one and a big one, and @phreakv6 's presumption they sold it all out in March - July makes more sense. The Sept 17 bit in what I reported is a smokescreen in my opinion
Thanks @alterego I did not know of this below.
1 Like
You,@phreakv6 and @anni23.Thank you guys for adding so much value to the discussions.The data that has been put out nails SV and I have forwarded it to a DP head to find out how this manipulation could occur.
1 Like
However I am not able to understand bse data fully . In few rows,it shows that “Number of Equity Shares held after the acquisition/disposal” as “0”. Does that mean, SV had 0 shares at that date.Please explain bro
The statement refers to multiple DP accounts and they would be with multiple brokers So you when you see a 0 it means that that dp account has been emptied. The bse data is collated from NSDL/CSDL.
Any single client buying or selling more than 0.5% of a company’s capital on a trading day should disclose under the block deal
A broker is only responsible for his client. He doesn’t have a way of knowing if his client has multiple brokerage accounts If you as an investor or promoter sell .49% a day on each one of your multiple brokerage accounts, would it get reported?
There’s an onus on an individual broker to report .5% breach of any one of his clients to stock exchange. There doesn’t seem to be any regulation which asks stock exchange sto aggregate different broker actions to a single client. Unique client code exists only for a broker and not for the exchange.
2 Likes
@anni23.Agreed.
The first line of responsibility is that of the
client.
He has to disclose.Thereafter everyone else follows.Client may have multiple DP accounts,accounts jointly with some one, may sign as guardian or even for an off market sale. In cases where he misses or misleads or is not aware of Total Capital others step in to disclose the correct information.
It is a clear case of inept handling by CFO and SV and now blaming others.
There can be no transfer without a POA or DI.If it happens the Depository can be sued.The whole charade is to delay action and exit further.
The question that now remains is will the Indian operations continue or will they spin off the cash cow US subsidiary?
seems fair enough finally. SMS is provided by broker and NSE/BSE for any transaction. For whoever is invested in 8K, including myself; seems like all is just left to good luck and prayers now. At least i hope, like Satyam, 8K too just gets different decent management and woes will be over in 1-2 years time…
1 Like
Why would a margin call be triggered on a promoter holding in demat account? I find it strange. Unless SV or someone on his behest/behalf was actively trading his holdings and in the process sold his holdings but bought them back on margin. Assuming a 1:4 leverage, you get to take out 80% of value of holdings home while still maintaining your holdings (hence no disclosure necessary). This works better than a pledge if you can find a fool who would lend you the money for margin. All would have been well until the house of cards collapsed and someone got a bit too greedy.
1 Like
3 interviews by leading finance portals…They missed asking the main question… Have you taken loans from the 2 brokers? What happened to that money? Had that question asked, the interview would have ended in 2 minutes…
5 Likes
phreakv6
SV has borrowed money based on some story that Ramani told him.The shares were kept with the broker in DP a/c but blank DIs given.The leverage is around 1:2.The brokers have transferred the shares to their pool a/c as soon as they disbursed the amount.But if the share price was Rs650 when the loan was disbursed they should wait till Rs325 for triggering margin call. In this case, it appears the brokers have been regularly selling shares from their pool a/c exerting a downpard price pressure. The company/RTA would have known it as the shares get credited to the buyer a/c and debited to brokers pool a/c in the BENPOS.
Everyone has played a game by concealing the facts and now that the game is over everyone tries to blame the other.
The borrower, the broker, the company and the RTA are definitely guilty of concealing facts.
3 Likes
@Friendly_Vpice Glad you noticed that. I wonder how many people noticed this.
THE Company in quote actually refers to 8k miles media and not 8k miles . Watch the interview for yourself.
This is some judo level of spin where the mistake of 8k miles media is being used to cover up selling.
I remember Bill Clinton using the word THAT woman. First time i am hearing a non existent THE.
5 Likes
I am surprised still some discussion is going on in this counter. Thought people would have sold all their holdings by now.
Its pretty clear that Mr… SV have signed documents for loans, which broker has sold as soon as price of share came down.
Broker Can inform Mr.SV before selling if they want to, but they need not.
Broker might have sold it straight away without informing, which they have right to do it.
2 Likes
The US subsidiary is not a cash cow. Most of their revenue comes from the body shopping operations. A small but growing portion comes from consulting to pharma companies. They have packaged a walnut into a giant watermelon.
2 Likes
Taking loan from Ramani to be included