First the positives -
-
Bandhan since inception has been extremely cost conscious in its operations
-
But it has been very aggressive geo expansion wise
-
It has been able to keep a very low profile and avoided any confrontation with govt machinery. This is where the south based MFIs failed even though they were far bigger than Bandhan for a considerable period of the journey. Example: SKS
In fact they have always collaborated with state machinery so that has helped them in times of crisis such as WB’s Shardha scam related field backlashes and overall demonetization period.
However since it became a Bank it has become very very aggressive in its lending. The understanding is that they need to grow their balance sheet and with all the cheap CASA coming in from Banking operations needs to be deployed too. So rather that going heavy in other untested sectors it has got aggressive in its core market i.e; Microfinance.
However microfinance being unsecured lending, over aggression has always led to bubble and subsequent backlashes. Such as as have recently been seen in Assam.
So we need to see how a conservative lender who has turned 180 degrees and become a hyper aggressive one manages this transition in the medium/long term.
In India - the biggest risk to microifinance operations is regulatory backlash prompted from customer complaints (poor customer/bottom of pyramid) who are the core constituencies of Indian politics.
Done right its one of the most scalable and profitable (marginwise) lending opportunity in entire retail financial spectrum along with Credit Cards.