[sairamboko]

In a statement issued to the stock exchanges on Thursday, Tata Consultacy Services (TCS) has said that Tata Sons has appointed Ishaat Hussain as the chairman of the company. Tata Sons has also issued a special notice to convene an extraordinary general meeting.

http://www.thehindu.com/business/Ind...cle9327044.ece

[Sawyer]

I read the TCS news with some surprise. My understanding of Company Law is that the Board elects one of their own to serve as the Chairman and can change their mind at any time in a Board meeting as happened in the Tata Sons meeting. It looks like I am wrong.

Of course, Tata Sons owns TCS to the extent of some 75%, so this change is a lot easier than for the other companies, where ownership does not exceed 40%, but even so, I was surprised at the process followed.

The EGM would be to dismiss Mistry as director, again easily done with the shareholding percentage and lack of significant shareholding of financial institutions. But it is a test of independent director independence for sure.

This is starting to look like Trump v Clinton with states going for one or the other - who will be President at the end the process?!

[sairamboko]

Tata Sons issues 9-page letter bomb, accuses Cyrus Mistry of using devious methods to take control


Tata Sons issues 9 page letter and accuses Cyrus!!!

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/...w/55348800.cms

[teemus]

And so the muck is beginning to come out! It indeed is a letter-bomb!

To give you an idea of how stingy the attack is here is an excerpt

He voluntarily took this position, knowing the composition of the Tata group and its many strong companies as well as the weaker and problem companies – which he presumably took on as a challenge for ‘turning around’ those difficult situations. Yet, after four years of full-time involvement and executive authority, we continue to be told how these ‘legacy’ problem areas are a major drag on Mr. Mistry’s otherwise good performance. How many more years would we be told this same story?

Read more at:
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/...campaign=cppst

[Sawyer]

Quote on the removal as director:
In the case of TCS, “as they have more than 70% stake so they are quite confident of pulling it through.”

In the case of other Tata group operating companies, where Mistry is chairman, Tata Sons (plus cross holdings by other group companies) owns 30-35% stake. In Tata Chemicals, whose board is set to meet Thursday, it has only 29.98% ownership.

To pass a resolution supporting the removal of Mistry as director, the Tatas will need a 51% majority. Thus, the role of institutional shareholders, particularly Life Insurance Corp. of India, becomes important.
Unquote
Let the hungry for power games begin!

[heydj]

Originally Posted by sairamboko

Tata Sons issues 9-page letter bomb, accuses Cyrus Mistry of using devious methods to take control

Tata Sons issues 9 page letter and accuses Cyrus!!!

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/...w/55348800.cms

Quite frankly having gone through the complete letter there is nothing of substance against Cyrus. If anything this looks more like usage of language by PR twats to fill pages.

I do find one point very interesting - ''Cyrus never told the board or went public with details about $18 billion write off when he was a chairman''.

Seriously that would have never happened as it would have caused panic in BSES and wiped of Tata market value. Instead Cyrus worked to off load bad performing assets so that group does not get bogged down.

Further letter said ''Tata seasoned leaders looked helplessly as Cyrus moved away from old practices''

Again what lousy statement - when Ratan Tata took over he threw out all seasoned leaders and charted a new course. Is it too wrong that Cyrus tried something new.

[Chetan_Rao]

That letter only appears to present a lot of facts, but is predominantly just a bunch of (quite a few publicly available) numbers shored up with 'he said, she said' mumbo-jumbo to make it look like an objective rebuttal.

Frankly, doesn't look much different from the usual long corporate PR releases which spout a 1000 words to essentially say nothing.

[Sawyer]

And now Tata Chemicals independent directors back Mistry:
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/...w/55355584.cms

And Nusli Wadia is an independent director of Tata Chemicals, significantly.

[desdemona]

Clearly then Tata Sons were right in the suspicion, from their PointOfView of course, that Mr.Mistry and family were 'arranging' matters with 'independent' directors and possibly with large 'institutional investors' in the group, especially LIC/other psu entities (?), to de facto displace Tata Sons/Tata Trusts as the 'promoter' group.

Matters will become entirely clear once the voting/etc stance of said institutional investors/share-holders becomes clear: across all the companies.

Partisans among the concerned public that regard Mr.Mistry as wronged keep forgetting that he is not a 'professional' appointment but is a member and proxy for a family that owns a 20% stake in Tata Sons.

This 'power struggle' is internecine: among and between the large founder-promoter and a smaller but still very large one. It is not a battle between a promoter and a 'professional' chairman/MD. Moreover: the 'power struggle' is indeed partly about business philosophy/ethos, and trust, and not simply about either money/dividends or 'ego' or operational control, etcetera.

[honeybee]

Originally Posted by desdemona

.... Moreover: the 'power struggle' is indeed partly about business philosophy/ethos, and trust, and not simply about either money/dividends or 'ego' or operational control, etcetera.

Your reading on Mistry not being a professional appointment gives a new dimension to looking at this matter, thanks for that.

However, what evidence has Tata produced to substantiate his claim that Mistry violated the group ethos or philosophy?

I suspect the real reason is since Tata sons is not getting the expected amount of dividends, it is not able to bail out the sick companies in the group, and these companies are now after Tata to honour his commitments, given when he acquired those companies, and so a 'loss of face'. Other than that, I don't see an iota of solid evidence against Mistry.

[Latheesh]

Sexual harassment case against Sarna a reason for Mistry ouster?

The way in which a sexual harassment charge was handled against Indian Hotels ' (IHCL) former Managing Director Rakesh Sarna could be among the biggest triggers for the ouster of Cyrus Mistry as the Chairman of Tata Group. A woman executive working with IHCL had first reported alleged harassment by Sarna in early 2015. Before she started working with Indian Hotels, she was part of Mistry's Group Executive Council from where Sarna requested she be transferred to Taj. In November 2015, she left the company. She wrote a mail to Mistry when she departed, citing sexual harassment by Sarna as the biggest reason to leave. "Mr Sarna's inappropriate behaviour outweighed the positives of the work. During my seven months employment at Taj I was subjected to repeated unwanted sexual advances from Mr Sarna. When I ignored or tried to rebuff them the environment turned hostile," she wrote in the mail. An independant panel, which was supposed to report its findings on the case in three months, failed to do so. She further adds in her mail, "I hope you are able to use my circumstances as a learning opportunity to make the group a better employer of women." Ratan Tata dissaproved the way the harassment case was handled by the then Chairman Cyrus Mistry. This could have been the biggest reasons for Mistry's dismissal, tell sources to CNBC-TV18.

source:
http://www.moneycontrol.com/news/bus...r_7947301.html

[Sawyer]

Regardless of the why, the how is also not being well managed by Tata:
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/...w/55366442.cms
Now Tata finds old friend Wadia on the other side of the line! This is such a mess...

[RavenAvi]

Tata Motors has been asked by Tata Sons to convene a special shareholders' meeting to remove Cyrus Mistry and Nusli Wadia from it's board of directors.

Tata Motors has informed BSE that the company has received a Requisition and a Special Notice from Tata Sons, for convening an Extraordinary General Meeting for considering and passing Resolutions for the removal of Cyrus P Mistry and Nusli N Wadia from its board of directors.

Tata Sons is the promoter of Tata Motors and holds 26.51 percent shares in the company.

ET Auto

[Lalvaz]

The tide seems to be finally turning and even if Ratan finally gets his way, the damage done to the Tata brand is going to be irreversible. The stock market and many minority shareholders seemed to prefer Cyrus's approach of selling loss making assets which were a millstone and were only dragging the Tata cos with huge interest burdens.

Also interestingly none in the media are focussing on the obvious conflict of interest issue when Ratan was still forcing Cyrus's hand on investments in the aviation sector. So much for our investigative journalism. Not very surprising especially since Ratan Tata has boasted of the excellent media relations that the Tata group enjoys.

[Sawyer]

Tata have been able to get Nusli Wadia to move to the other side; another bungled outcome. Wadia is an old hand at corporate wars and will add a lot of expertise to the Mistry camp on how to fight the battle. Something that Tata should have finessed and avoided, even if they do come out on top via shareholder meetings, because now this can get like a street fight.

It is also surprising to see so much bad blood between Parsis; they tend to be the exception to this.

Even if Tatas win, the big question is what happens when Ratan Tata dies. The next chairman of Tata Sons, even if someone like N Chandra of TCS is appointed, will now clearly not be the real head of Tata. So who will succeed Ratan Tata as the real holder of power is a question that will remain hanging - does Noel Tata have a son?!

PS: Come to think of it, any appointment of a new Tata Sons Chairman in place of Ratan Tata in the promised 4 months is going to look like a farce because Ratan Tata cannot now again make the same kind of statements that he made when Mistry took over without looking a little silly, because now there is the visible underlying reality that if you don't do what I would like you to be doing, I will throw you out also! Given the events of the last few weeks and the nasty battles still to follow, I don't see any credible way now for Ratan Tata to hand over except when he is physically not there to do back seat driving - either by dying or by taking Sanyas in the mountains or some such. WHAT A MESS!