A STUDY ON FDI IN INDIA’S MULTI BRAND RETAIL
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Meaning of FDI
The abbreviation of FDI is Foreign Direct Investment.
The Foreign Direct Investment means “cross border investment made by a resident in one economy in an enterprise in another economy, with the objective of establishing a lasting interest in the investee economy.”
FDI is also described as “investment into the business of a country by a company in another country”. Mostly the investment is into production by either buying a company in the target country or by expanding operations of an existing business in that country”. Such investments can take place for many reasons, including to take advantage of cheaper wages, special investment privileges (e.g. tax exemptions) offered by the country.
Countries seek FDI because of following reasons:
· Domestic capital is inadequate for the purpose of economic growth;
· Foreign capital is usually essential, at least as a temporary measure, during the period when the capital market is in the process of development;
· Foreign capital usually brings it with other scarce productive factors like technical knowhow, business expertise and knowledge
1.2 Benefits and Disadvantages of FDI
The major benefits of FDI are as follows:
· It improves the foreign exchange position of the country;
· Leads to employment generation and increase in production;
· Helps in capital formation by bringing fresh capital;
· Helps in transfer of new technologies, management skills and intellectual property.
· Increases competition within the local market and this brings higher efficiencies.
· Helps in increasing exports.
· Increases tax revenues.
The Disadvantages of FDI are as follows:
· Domestic companies fear that they may lose their ownership to overseas company.
· Small enterprises fear that they may not be able to compete with world class large companies and may ultimately be edged out of business.
· Large giants of the world try to monopolise and take over the highly profitable sectors.
· Such foreign companies invest more in machinery and intellectual property than in wages of the local people.
· Government has less control over the functioning of such companies as they usually work as wholly owned subsidiary of an overseas company.
1.3 Scope of FDI in India
Some of the reasons why the world is looking towards India for Foreign Direct Investments are noted below:
India is the 3rd largest economy of the world in terms of purchasing power parity and thus looks attractive to the world for FDI. Even Government of India, has been trying hard to do away with the FDI caps for majority of the sectors, but there are still critical areas like retailing and insurance where there is lot of opposition from local Indians / Indian companies.
In last few years, certainly foreign investments have shown upward trends but the strict FDI policies have put hurdles in the growth in this sector. India is however set to become one of the major recipients of FDI in the Asia-Pacific region because of the economic reforms for increasing foreign investment and the deregulation of this important sector. India has technical expertise and skilled managers and a growing middle class market of more than 300 million and this represents an attractive market.
Some of the major economic sectors where India can attract investment are as follows:-
· Telecommunications
· Apparels
· Information Technology
· Pharmaceuticals
· Auto parts
· Jewellery
· Chemicals
1.4 Meaning of Retail and Types of Retail
Retail is the sale of goods and services from individuals or businesses to the end-user. Retailers are part of an integrated system called the supply chain. A retailer purchases goods or products in large quantities from manufacturers directly or through a wholesale, and then sells smaller quantities to the consumer for a profit. Retailing can be done in either fixed locations like stores or markets, door-to-door or by delivery.
Single brand retail: involves selling products under one brand, which are also sold internationally. Examples are Nike, Gucci, Lotto, Levis etc.
Multi branding is basically the process of marketing of two or more widely similar and competing products by the same firm under different brands. Multi-brand retail comes in different formats like supermarket, hypermarket, and the shopping malls.
Multi brand retailing: Retail marketing of two or more similar and competing products by the same company under different and unrelated brands.
Wal-Mart, Tesco, Carrefour, Future Group, Reliance MART are some retail corporations of multi- brand.
Traditional or Unorganized retail: comprises of normally street markets, counter stores, kiosks and vendors, where the ownership and management rest with one person only. This sector accounts for two thirds of the market and requires low skilled labour. These are highly competitive outlets, with negligible rental costs (unregistered kiosks or traditional property), cheap workers (work is shared by members of family) and low taxes and overheads.
Organized retailing: comprises mainly of modern retailing with busy shopping malls, multi storied malls and huge complexes that offer a large variety of products in terms of quality, value for money and makes shopping a memorable experience.
1.5 Objectives of the study.
1) To know the concept of Retail in India.
2) To understand the concept of FDI in Multi Brand Retail.
3) To know and understand India’s policy regarding FDI in Multi Brand Retail.
4) To find the views of the consumers and traders on FDI in Multi Brand Retail.
1.6 Methodology
The data for the project was collected from primary and secondary sources.
Primary data
The primary data was collected from respondents residing in Goa as well as Mumbai (Andheri-East) through the medium of a questionnaire. This survey includes the general public as well as the retailers.
Secondary data
This data has been collected from numerous articles, research papers, websites of various news channels and also from books available in the central library.
1.7 Scope of the study
This study includes the analysis of FDI in retail in India which has been restricted since its independence from 1947 to 2011. The survey study is based in Goa and Mumbai. The views of educated people are gathered on FDI in Retail and the response of consumers and traders in India has been understood.
1.8 Chapter Scheme
Chapter 1 includes an introduction to FDI in Retail, its advantages and limitations, scope of the study, objectives of the study, methodology and chapter scheme.
Chapter 2 is about Retailing in India, FDI in “Single-Brand” Retail, FDI in “Multi-Brand” Retail, present retail sector in India, Current FDI Policy in respect of Retail Sector in India, Prospected changes in FDI policy for retail sector in India, Issues and controversies.
Chapter 3 includes the views of the consumers and traders.
Chapter 4 is on conclusion and it includes the findings and suggestions. Here the study on FDI in Retail is summarised. Various suggestions have been offered to the Government, Traders and Organised retailers in this chapter.
2. RETAILING IN INDIA
2.1Background of Retailing in India:
The recent wave of reforms by the Government to incentivize Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in various sectors is bringing a new zeal to the investment climate in India. One of the most debated reforms is the policy for allowing 51 per cent FDI in multi-brand retail.
Before going into the details of the new policy it’s imperative to understand the present stand of Retail industry in India
Retailing in India is one of the pillars of its economy and accounts for 14 to 15 per cent of its GDP. The Indian retail market is estimated to be between US$500 to 590 billion and one of the top five retail markets in the world by economic value. India is one of the fastest growing retail markets in the world, with 1.2 billion people.
India's retailing industry is essentially owner manned small shops. Latest statistics shows us that larger format convenience stores and supermarkets accounts for about 5 to 7 per cent of the industry, and these are present only in large urban centres. India's retail and logistics industry employs about 40 million Indians (3.3% of Indian population).
Most Indian shopping takes place in open markets or millions of small, independent grocery and retail shops. Shoppers typically stand outside the retail shop, ask for what they want, and cannot pick or examine a product from the shelf. Access to the shelf or product storage area is limited. Once the shopper requests the food staple or household product they are looking for, the shopkeeper goes to the container or shelf or to the back of the store, brings it out and offers it for sale to the shopper. Of course this was the practice in the early 80’s and late 90’s but have things have taken a better turn since the beginning 21st century, shoppers have begun to feel more empowered and free while they shop. Organized retail, which constitutes 5 to 7 per cent of the total retail market, will grow much faster than traditional retail. It is expected to gain a higher share in the growing pie of the retail market in India. Various estimates put the share of organized retail as 20 per cent by 2020.
2.2 FDI in Indian Retail Industry
FDI in retail industry means that foreign companies in certain categories can sell products through their own retail shop in the country.
Initially, Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in organised retailing is not permitted under Indian law. Government of India has allowed FDI in retail of specific brand of products. Following this, foreign companies in certain categories can sell products through their own retail shops in the country.
India’s retail industry is estimated to be worth approximately US$590 billion and is still growing, expected to reach US$804.06 billion in 2015. As part of the economic liberalization process set in place by the Industrial Policy of 1991, the
Indian government has opened the retail sector to FDI slowly through a series of steps:
1995: World Trade Organization’s General Agreement on Trade in Services, Which includes both wholesale and retailing services, came into effect.
1997: FDI in cash and carry (wholesale) with 100% rights allowed under the government approval route.
2006: FDI in cash and carry (wholesale) brought under the automatic route. Up to 51 per cent investment in a single-brand retail outlet permitted.
2011: 100% FDI in single brand retail permitted.
2012: 51 % FDI in Multi Brand Retail permitted.
The Indian government removed the 51 per cent cap on FDI into single-brand retail outlets in December 2011, and opened the market fully to foreign investors by permitting 100 per cent foreign investment in this area.
Government has also made some, albeit limited, progress in allowing multi-brand retailing, which has so far been prohibited in India. At present, this is restricted to 51 per cent foreign equity participation.
The spectre of large supermarket brands displacing traditional Indian Kirana stores is a hot political issue in India, and the progress and development of the newly liberalized single-brand retail industry will be watched with some keen eyes as concerns further possible liberalization in the multi-brand sector.
This project discusses the policy developments for FDI in these two retail categories, with a focus on the details of the multi-brand retail FDI discussion.
2.3 FDI in “Single-Brand” Retail
While the precise meaning of single-brand retail has not been clearly defined in any Indian government circular or notification, single-brand retail generally refers to the selling of goods under a single brand name. Examples can be Nike, Adidas, IKEA, Apple etc.
Up to 100 per cent FDI is permissible in single-brand retail, subject to the Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB) sanctions
These conditions stipulate that: Only single-brand products are sold (i.e. sale of multi-brand goods is not allowed, even if produced by the same manufacturer).Products are sold under the same brand internationally.
Single-brand products include only those identified during manufacturing.
Any additional product categories to be sold under single-brand retail must first receive additional government approval.
FDI in single-brand retail implies that a retail store with foreign investment can only sell one brand. For example, if Adidas were to obtain permission to retail its flagship brand in India, those retail outlets could only sell products under the Adidas brand. For Adidas to sell products under the Reebok brand, which it owns, separate government permission is required and (if permission is granted) Reebok products must then be sold in separate retail outlets.
2.4 FDI in “Multi-Brand” Retail
While the government of India has also not clearly defined the term “multi-brand retail,” FDI in multi-brand retail generally refers to selling multiple brands under one roof. Currently, this sector is limited to a maximum of 51 per cent foreign equity participation effective form December 2012 under certain conditions and restrictions.
These are positive steps and it will encourage international brands to set up shop in India. On the other hand, this will also lead to competition among Indian players. It will be the consumers who stand to gain. This would not change the market dynamics immediately as it will take some time for these plans to fructify.
The growing dominance of multinational companies in the country's retail business, had warned that any move to increase FDI in the retail sector would ruin the business of small and medium traders scattered over the country.
Organized retailers in India are opposing the entry of MNCs in retail trading because of their predatory pricing strategy that wipes out competition, when the Government decides to allow foreign players to enter the retail space, it should first restrict them to lifestyle products segment before permitting them to spread their wings into other areas like grocery marketing that has a direct impact on `kirana stores'.
FDI in retail trade has forced the wholesalers and food processors to improve, raised exports, and triggered growth by outsourcing supplies domestically. The availability of standardized products has also boosted tourism in these countries. FDI in retail sector has been a key driver of productivity growth in Brazil, Poland and Thailand. This has resulted in lower prices to the consumer, more consumption and higher profit for the producer.
2.5 Present Retail Sector in India
Like every other economic sector in India, the retail sector is also one of the most crucial and extremely potential sectors of the Indian economy. As of now, the retail sector in India accounts for approximately 14%-15% of the GDP with 46% of growth rate in the past three years.
The Indian retail market is one of the top 5 retail markets in the world and employs 7% of the workforce.
The retail sector in India is divided into two main heads i.e. organized and unorganized sector. The organized sector includes licensed retailers i.e. those who have registered themselves for sales, tax/vat, income tax etc.
These are generally large privately owned businesses like Westside, Tanishq, Croma, Shoppers Stop, Lifestyle, Pantaloons, Reliance World and many more.
On the other hand, Un-organised retail stores refer to the traditional “kirana shops”, general/departmental stores, Paan/Beedi shops etc.
If we talk about the statistics, the market share of Un-organised retail sector is 95% of the total retail sector, as compared to organised retail sector which accounts for merely just 5%. This data is present despite the entrance of big corporate giant like TATA, Reliance, K RAHEJA CORP GROUP.
2.6 Current FDI Policy in respect of Retail Sector in India
Keeping in mind the welfare motive, India has kept the retail sector closed for the foreign investors in order to protect the interest of the 15 million small retail store-owners. Currently the foreign investor can make investments as per the following guidelines:
· FDI up to 100% for cash and carry wholesale trading and export trading allowed under the automatic route.
· FDI up to 100% (dated 11/1/2012) with prior Government approval for retail trade of ‘Single Brand’ products.
· FDI up to 51% is permitted in multi-brand retailing in India.(December 2012)
The New FDI Policy has the following important drivers
· The retailers (both single and multi-brand) will have to source at least 30% of their goods from small and medium sized Indian suppliers.
· All multi brand retail shops can open up their operations in cities having a population of up to 1 million. Out of approximately 7935 cities and towns in India, 55 cities satisfy these criteria.
· Multi brand retailers must bring a minimum investment of US $100 million. Out of this, half of the amount must be invested in back end infrastructure facilities such as cold chains refrigeration, transportation, packing, sorting and processing, in order to reduce the post-harvest losses and to bring the remunerative prices to farmers.
· Approval from State Government required i.e. the opening of retail competition (policy) will be within the parameters of the state laws and regulations. There are only 18 cities in India with population more than one million and the corresponding State Government supporting FDI in multi-brand.
2.7 An Open Discussion on FDI in Retail
The recent policy of allowing 51% foreign direct investment (FDI) in multi-brand retail has generated political feuds rather than proper economic debates. Politicians take one dimensional positions and avoid complicated reasoning with a view to be specific and not confuse their audience. It is not at all surprising; therefore, that the political parties which are advocating FDI in retail refuse to accept that there is any dark side to it while those who are opposing the policy see none of its positive aspects. But the proposed policy is primarily an economic one and like many such policies it is likely to affect different groups of people differently. It is, therefore, both necessary and desirable to understand the possible effects of the policy on the overall economy and on the groups and fragments of people lying within it. In short, the economic truth, lying somewhere in between the two extreme positions politicians have taken, needs to be carefully located.
The policy, which was cleared by the union cabinet on 24 November 2011, allows up to 51% foreign equity in a retail company, provided the total investment by foreigners in the company is at least $100 million. Of this foreign investment, one-half is to be invested in back-end infrastructure including cold chains, refrigeration, transportation, packing, sorting and processing. These investments will be allowed only in cities with a population of more than one million. According to the 2011 Census, there are 53 such cities out of a total of 7,935 cities and towns in the country. Finally, the retail company receiving the FDI is required to source at least 30% its ware from Indian micro and small enterprises which have capital investment of not more than $1 million. Big capital in retail is not new to the country. It has been a while since big domestic capital has entered the retail sector in India.
One might have thought that the entry of foreign capital would pose uncomfortable competition for the domestic capitalists who have invested in the retail sector. But this is not actually so. The announced policy has allowed the foreign investor to hold only 51% of the total shares leaving the remaining 49% for its domestic counterpart. Joint ventures are, therefore, built into the corporate structure which the new policy would entail. This has made the domestic capitalists happy. They expect to gain access to state of the art storage technologies and international markets through collaborations with giant international retailers and thereby increase their own profits. The domestic big retailers are, therefore, welcoming 51% FDI in multi-brand retail with open arms.
Identifying the Changes
Before drawing up the full menu of gainers and losers from the new policy, it is necessary to understand the changes that are likely to be brought about through the introduction of giant multinationals into the Indian retail market. In particular, it is necessary to understand and identify the major changes which the multinationals are expected to bring about on different groups of the population and which could not be brought about by domestic big retailers.
There are three such big changes. The first important change that the multinational retailers are likely to introduce is the state of the art storage technology that the multinational retailers possess and which is not known to big domestic retailers. This technology is expected to improve the supply chain and prevent wastage in a big way. Estimates of wastage of food-grains, fruits and vegetables in the country vary between 20% and 40% of the total produce. It is argued that a significant part of this wastage would be avoided if foreign investors bring in state of the art technology.
The second big change that the multinational retailers are likely to bring about is more international trade. The magnitude of international trade depends on the extent to which arbitrage possibilities across countries can be made use of. Making use of arbitrage possibilities, one can buy a commodity in a country where it is cheaper and sell it in another country where it is dear. A trader’s job is to identify the international arbitrage possibilities and trade accordingly to make profits. It stands to reason that a giant multinational trader, with its more elaborate procurement and distribution networks, will do the job more efficiently and extensively than a relatively small domestic retailer. But if that is so, entry of multinational retailers into the Indian market is likely to increase the volume of Indian international trade. This is likely to happen for any given level of restrictions on international trade.
The third change refers to the scale of operation of big retail in India. The giant multinationals along with the domestic retailers with whom they are going to form joint ventures are going to have much greater financial power than the domestic big retailers alone. Therefore, in the new setup, big organised retail is likely to cover a much larger portion of the market than before.
Advanced Storage Technology
The primary effect of advanced storage technology is gain in efficiency. Agricultural products which were being wasted so far would be available for consumption and this is pretty obvious. Under the assumption that the buyers’ side of the market would become more competitive with the entry of multinational retailers, an improvement in storage technology would increase the demand for agricultural goods in village markets. Moreover, products that went rotten and wasted before would now be available for sale to the urban markets which would imply a fall in selling costs to urban markets and a further rise in the demand for the product in the rural market. The rise in demand would increase the price of the agricultural commodities in question.
A rise in the prices of agricultural goods in rural markets is likely to benefit farmers who sell parts of their products in the market. These are essentially large and medium-sized farmers. A price rise would certainly benefit these farmers. The higher price would also induce these farmers to invest more in agriculture, thereby raising production and productivity.
However a rise in agricultural prices, especially the prices of food-grains, would certainly hurt these poor people, at least in the short run. Some of these poor bought the cheap rotten food available in the village market at throwaway prices. Their survival will become difficult and poverty is likely to increase. If farmers with positive marketable surplus start getting better prices for their produce and if due to the increased price incentive there is an expansion of agricultural output, one can argue that eventually there would be an increase in the demand for agricultural labour and a consequent increase in agricultural wages. In other words, higher farm prices induced by better storage technology is likely to have gradual trickle-down effects and in the long run it is not unlikely that everybody in the rural sector will benefit from improved storage For the rural poor it would be misery in the short run and a possible improvement in the long run.
The problem is that no one knows how long the long run is going to be. If misery continues for too long, the policy itself would become politically unsustainable, especially in view of the fact that, however faulty, India has a democracy which was absent in England during the industrial revolution and is missing in some contemporary nations like China which have brought in FDI into their retail sectors. Some critiques of FDI in retail have, however, raised doubts as to whether farm prices are going to go up at all after giant multinationals start procuring from village markets. Their argument is that once the multinationals are into the market, the local supply chains will be destroyed and the big retailers will emerge as monopoly procurers. Once they establish themselves as monopoly procurers, they can dictate their price and it goes without saying that their dictated price will not be favourable to the farmers.
But can this actually happen? Apparently, there are a number of factors which might prevent this from happening.
Firstly, there could be competition between multinationals over procuring farm products which will keep prices from falling too low.
Secondly, even if multinationals enter into tacit collusions of not entering into one another’s procurement territory and each one emerges as a local monopoly as far as procurements is concerned, there is always the possibility and incentive of domestic traders re-entering the market as buyers if multinationals are offering very low prices. This will prevent the multinationals from actually reducing their buying price below a certain level.
Thirdly, the minimum support price offered by the government will act as another barrier to price reduction. If multinationals offer very low prices, the farmers will have an incentive of selling to the government which, in turn, will prevent multinationals from offering very low prices. Another point to be noted is that with an improvement in the storage facility of the primary products and the consequent reduction in its wastage would, thereby result in an increase in the supply of the same. As a result the prices of these products would reduce thus, benefiting the consumers.
In case of consumers there is an argument that once the foreign players gain a monopoly over the market they may charge exorbitant prices for the products they sell. Here too a monopoly is practically not possible because of the existence of competition from other players in the market and at the same time the traditional retailers can always come back into competition if the new setup turns out to be more expensive to the consumers than it is now.
Ultimately the overall benefits go to the consumers as well as the farmers.
Scale Effects of Organised Retail
The much-debated issue is whether and to what extent entry of foreign capital in organised retail would lead to the closing down of traditional and un-organised trade. It will not be far-fetched to assume that the giant multinationals would enter the Indian retail market at a scale which the domestic organised retailers can hardly match. This would be possible not only because of their superior storage technology, but also due to their immense financial strength and experience.
The mammoth presence of these retailers, in turn, can hurt the traditional traders in two different, but not mutually exclusive, ways. First, as the multinational retailers start procuring from the village markets, there will be less left for the indigenous traders to trade with. This will obviously reduce the volume of the latter’s activities. In this context one can think of two existing supply chains. There is one that is routed through oligopolistic big traders controlling the village markets. We may call this the main supply chain. In addition, there is a small supply chain where the farmer or the small trader buying from the farmer sells directly to urban markets. Though the multinationals can do sufficient damage to the big-trader managed supply chains, the small supply chains, being run on a very low profit basis, may still survive.
It is not unusual to find these small sellers selling to urban consumers in western cities where big retailers control a significant portion of the market. Second, the indigenous traders will face direct competition from the giant retailers in the urban consumer markets. Some argue that since FDI in retail is allowed only in big cities with large consumer markets, the effect of competition from giant retailers on indigenous traders will be negligible. On reflection, however, it does not appear to be so. If we assume that the total urban demand for consumer goods at any point in time does not change with the entry of the multinational, then any gain in sales by the giant retailer must denote a corresponding fall in sales by the indigenous traders.
The situation could be somewhat different if the entrant multinational could create additional demand for its commodities without affecting the indigenous segment. The possibility cannot be ruled out, but the extent to which it can happen remains doubtful. It is likely that the multinational retailers will differentiate their goods in terms of quality selling more standardised and quality controlled products. And these goods would bear the implicit or even explicit certificates of reliability. This would fragment the market, pushing upscale customers to the multinationals and the relatively less affluent to the traditional traders. In the process, because of the quality assurance, the multinational stores will create some additional demand. But it is inevitable that more affluent customers, who had been buying from small shops in the absence of better alternatives, will move to the giant stores, thereby eroding the customer base of the traditional shops.
2.8 Issues and controversies:
A lot of objections have been raised by the opposition parties and public at large, as a result the said bill had to be kept on hold for some time till a consensus could be reached
Those who criticised these reforms supported of the following points.
1. Current independent stores will be compelled to close, leading to massive job losses. The operations in big stores like the Wal-Mart are highly automated and employ very less work force.
2. Big players can afford to lower their prices in initial stages in order to knock out the competition and become a monopoly and later on raise the prices. This kind of phenomenon was evident earlier in the case of soft drinks. Eviction of Campa Cola by Pepsi and Coke is one such example.
3. India doesn’t need foreign retailers, since home grown companies and traditional markets may be able to do the job.
4. Just like in the BPO industry, work will be done by Indians, profits will go to foreigners.
5. Remember the East India Company, it entered India as a trader and then took over politically.
6. The government hasn’t built a consensus.
2.9Swot Analysis of FDI in Retail
Strengths
1. Major contribution to the GDP; the retail sector in India is covering 33%-35% of the GDP to around 20% in the USA.
2. High growth rate: the retail sector in India enjoys an extremely high growth rate of approximately 46%.
3. High potential: since the organized portion in the retail section in India is only 5%, thereby creating a lot of potential for the future players.
4. High employment generator: the retail sector employs 7% of the total workforce in India, which is now limited to Un-organised sector only. Once the reforms are implemented, this per cent is likely to increase substantially.
Weaknesses
1. Lack of competition: India is the least saturated market of the world.
2. Highly Un-organised: the Un-organised portion of the total retail sector is 95% as compared to the US, which is 20%.
3. Low productivity: the retail productivity in India is very low as compared to its international peers.
4. Shortage of talented professionals: the retail trade business in India is not considered as a reputed profession and is mostly carried out by the family members. Such people are generally not academically or professionally qualified.
5. The retail sector in India does not enjoy the “Industry” status thereby making it difficult for them to raise funds for the expansion projects.
Opportunities
1. There will be more organization in the sector: organized retail will need workers, this is quite evident as in the United States of America where 80% of the retail sector is organized and it employs 13-16% of the work-force in the country. Moreover, according to the findings of KPMG, one of the world’s largest audit companies in China, the employment in both retail and wholesale trade increased from 4% in 1992 to about 7% in 2001, post reforms and innovative competition in the retail sector in that country.
2. Healthy competition will be boosted and there will be a check on the prices (inflation) : Retail giants such as Wal-Mart, Carrefour, Tesco and 350 other global retail companies are already have operations in many countries for over 30 years. Until now, they have not at all become monopolies; rather they have managed to keep a check on the food inflation through their healthy competitive practices.
3. Create transparency in the system. The intermediaries operating as per mandi norms do not have transparency in their pricing. According to some of the reports, an average Indian farmer realise only one-third of the price, which a final consumer pays.
4. Intermediaries and ‘mandi system’ will be evicted, hence directly benefiting the farmers and producers. The prices of the commodities will automatically be checked. For example, according to the business standard, Wal-Mart has introduced “Direct Farm Project” at Haider Nagar near Malerkotla in Punjab, where 1100 farmers have been connected with Bhartiwalmart for sourcing fresh vegetables directly.
5. Quality control and control over leakage and wastage. Due to organization of the sector, 40% of the production does not reach the ultimate consumer. According to news in the Times of India, 42% of the children below the age group of 5 are malnourished and the Prime Minister Dr.Manmohan Singh has referred to it as “a national shame”. Food often gets rot in farm, in-transit and in antiquated state-run warehouse. Cost-cautions and highly competitive retailers will try to avoid this wastage and loss and it will be their endeavour to make the product available at lowest prices, hence making food available to the weakest and poorest segment of Indian society.
6. Heavy flow of foreign capital will help in building up the infrastructure of the growing population. India is already operating in the budgetary deficit. Neither the government of India nor the Indian domestic investors are capable to satisfy the growing needs (schools, hospital, transport, and infrastructure) of the ever growing Indian population. Hence foreign capital inflow will enable us to create a heavy capital base.
7. There will be sustainable development and many other economic issues will be focused upon. Many Indian small shop owners’ employ many workers, who are not under any contract and make them work for long hours. Many of such shop owners employs under-aged workers, thus giving rise to child –labour. Not only this, lack of contract between workers and employer and no registration of such shops boosts corruption at grass-root level and generates black money.
Threats (drawbacks):
Emergence of foreign players in Indian retail sector can give rise to a number of threats also, which are discussed below. Out of the below mentioned drawbacks, most of them are politically created.
1. Effect on the small retailers – local Kirana stores. There is a claim that the advent of foreign players could wipe out the local retailers out of business
2. Long gestation period – Foreign Retailers will take a while to adapt to India and generate profits
3. States not buying in so efficiencies expected may not be achieved: the decision of allowing FDI in Retail has been delegated to the State governments i.e. the power to permit FDI in Multi Retail rests in their hands. Hence the projected development will not be achieved.
2.10Advantagesof FDI inRetail
While it is important not to lose sight of the local kirana shops, there is a distinct opportunity for FDI in multi-brand retail. At the present moment, Indian companies are exporting different types of products to numerous retailers across the globe. There is a large segment of the population which feels that there is a difference in the quality of the products sold to foreign retailers and the same products sold in the Indian market.
In view of the availability of higher disposable incomes for Indians, there is an increasing tendency to pay for quality and ease and access to a “one-stop shop” which will have a wide range of different products.
If the market is opened, then the pricing could also change and the monopoly of certain domestic Indian companies will be challenged. In the eventual analysis, the consumers will benefit in the form of potential lower prices due to enhanced and, possibly, tough competition in the market.
Benefits for the Farmers
Presumably, with the onset of multi-brand retail, the food and packaging industry will also get an impetus.
Though India is the second largest producer of fruits and vegetables, it has a very limited integrated cold-chain infrastructure. Lack of adequate storage facilities causes heavy losses to farmers, in terms of wastage in quality and quantity of produce in general, and of fruits and vegetables in particular.
With liberalization, there could be a complete overhaul of the currently fragmented supply chain infrastructure. Extensive backward integration by multinational retailers, coupled with their technical and operational expertise, can hopefully remedy such structural flaws.
Also, farmers can benefit with the “farm-to fork” ventures with retailers which helps (i) to cut down intermediaries ; (ii) give better prices to farmers, and (iii) provide stability and economics of scale which will benefit, in the ultimate analysis, both the farmers and consumers.
Improved Technology and Logistics
Improved technology in the sphere of processing, grading, handling and packaging of goods and further technical developments in areas like electronic weighing, billing, barcode scanning etc. could be a direct consequence of foreign companies opening retail shops in India,. Further, transportation facilities can get a boost, in the form of increased number of refrigerated vans and precooling chambers which can help bring down wastage of goods.
Impact on Real-Estate Development
Retail is closely dependant on real estate as any retailer will require substantial spaces for setting up business.
Real estate in India has gone through a revamp due to the demand of high-end retail malls and people’s changing perception towards an enjoyable shopping experience. Thus real estate can get a further facelift in India and receive more investment with the opening up of FDI in multi-brand retail.
2.11Disadvantages of FDI inRetail
Opponents of the FDI feel that liberalization would jeopardize the unorganized retail sector and would adversely affect the small retailers, farmers and consumers and give rise to monopolies of large corporate houses which can adversely affect the pricing and availability of goods. They also contend that the retail sector in India is one of the major employment providers and permitting FDI in this sector can displace the unorganized retailers leading to loss of livelihood.
The views in support of this are given below
1. The entry of large global retailers such as Wal-Mart would kill local shops and millions of jobs.
2. The global retailers would collude and exercise monopolistic power to raise prices and monopolistic (big buying) power to reduce the prices received by the suppliers.
Hence, both the consumers and the suppliers would lose, while the profit margins of such retail chains would go up.
3. It would lead to lopsided growth in cities, causing discontent and social tension elsewhere.
Although unorganized retail suffered initially with the opening up of organized retail in their vicinity, this effect significantly weakened over time. The rate of closure of unorganized retail shops in gross terms was found to be 4.2 % per annum, which was much lower than the international rate of closure of small businesses. Similarly, the rate of closure on account of competition from organized retail was found to still lower, at 1.7 per cent per annum.
This was achieved through competitive response from traditional retailers and through improved business practices and technology up gradation. However, the development of organized retail has the potential of generating employment for both the skilled and unskilled sections of the population.
The Government can protect small retailers by restricting FDI to be permitted only for stores having floor size greater than, say, 2,000 square feet. Moreover, monopolies of large corporate houses can also be controlled by the Government by enforcement of strict regulations and, where needed, through the Competition Commission of India which is empowered to evaluate abuse of dominant position.
3. SURVEY AND ANALYSIS
3.1 Introduction
The decision of allowing FDI in India’s multi brand retail was not a small one with negligible after effects but to the contrary it was a huge decision which had far reaching and nationwide effects, this decision will slowly change the lives of the 1 billion odd Indian citizens. As mentioned above in the previous chapters India has a huge retail market employing a large chunk of our population, any decisions regarding such an issue should not be taken lightly, every Indian citizen has a say, a voice in such a matter. India’s retail market could be roughly valued at almost 500 billion US dollars and it comprises of about 14 to 15 per cent of our GDP, this sector alone employs about 3.5 per cent of our population, and any decision taken about such a sector should be a prudent one.
Since the project was on topic with such a nationwide and far reaching after effects it was imperative to include the voice of the Indian citizens on this topic. The citizen’s voice was something that could not be ignored.
The citizens have been demarcated into two groups, namely the consumers and the sellers or the traders. The survey of the consumers was conducted on a sample of hundred people each from the city of Panaji and Mumbai. Our survey of the traders was solely based on traders of Mumbai city as FDI in Multi Brand Retail was not a practical reality in Goa due to the policy specifications.
Since consumers are the most affected by this decision, and since they form the larger part of the population, an upper hand was given to them and more concentration was given on their responses and opinions.
3.2 Summary of the Interview with the Consumers
We all live in a globalized world, in such a world it is imperative for everyone to understand and accept certain economic realities; and one such reality is that today we all live in a business environment or a market where the consumers are considered to be the king and the dictator. The fact that we live in a buyer’s market have long been accepted by the various business organizations, governments and all those who are a part of this global economy. All actions taken in rational economy should take into account the above mentioned fact.
Consumers all together form the largest part of the Indian population and it is therefore rightly said that they are the decision makers, especially in a democracy like that of ours. Keeping this in mind we went straight ahead to the decision maker of this country, to the common man or the AamAadmi as they are also known as.
As mention in the above sub chapter the sample of our consumer survey comprised of hundred random consumers each from the city of Panaji and Mumbai. A series of about 15 questions were asked to each of our random respondents, to which answers were received in a closed ended yes or no format. The subsequent sections below will study and analyse their responses and also compare the responses of the two cities. This project concentrates on the responses to the more relevant questions; the irrelevant ones have been ignored. The words below are just not merely our composition but these are the words of the common man and this is what the real decision makers had to say.
3.2 (i) Awareness about the decisions on FDI in Multi Brand Retail
The question of awareness of the Decision on FDI in Multi Brand Retail gave us lot of surprising answers as we expected a lot of negative response but to the contrary of our expectation we received a lot of positive replies, it is a point to be noted that by awareness we do not mean merely having a vague idea of the decisions but we made it a point that the respondents were actually aware of the entire new policy changes and decisions.
In Panaji city we found that about 75 per cent of our respondents we aware of the decisions taken while in Mumbai the awareness rate was a little over 80 per cent. The respondents with absolutely no or only a vague idea of the concept surprisingly took only a small part of our pie chart, there percentage out of the total responses being 25 and 14 for Panaji and Mumbai city respectively. The reason for this variation could be the presence of more educated and working class people present in the highly urbanized Mumbai city
3.2 (ii) Opinion about the Decision, whether FDI is required for the growth of our Economy.
This maybe the most important question that is their opinion about the decision, are they for it or against. We found satisfactory results. The consumers in favour of the decision got only a slight majority over the ones who were totally against it, at the same time there was also a considerable number of people who preferred to take a middle stand on the question.
In Goa we found that a very strong majority of consumers believing and stating that FDI in Multi Brand retail is an absolute necessity and the totally agreed with the decisions of the government. Not falling behind was the consumers of the Mumbai city with 54 per cent of the total consumers surveyed agreeing to the decisions of the government.
Consumers who did not agree with the decision of the government were not far behind and held a strong 30 to 35 percentage of the total consumers surveyed in both the cities Panaji and Mumbai respectively.
Surprisingly a little over 10 per cent of the consumers surveyed were not so sure about the decision and preferred to take a middle stand about the issue and let the governing authorities take the rightful decisions as they felt that the issue was still not closed and it could be taken up for discussions in the upcoming budget sessions of the parliament.
The statistics were similar to the questions of whether FDI in Multi Brand Retail will help our economy to grow. People in favour of the decision also thought that this will help our economy to grow while those against it had contrary opinions.
3.2 (iii) Respondents opinion on Whether the Government Rushed in with the Reforms.
This question received mixed reviews in support of the government’s decisions as a majority of the consumers in Goa and Mumbai felt that the decision was taken in at the right time and it could not have been kept for a later timeframe.
In Goa we found about 60 per cent of the respondents who felt that decision was taken at the right time, at the same time about 52 per cent of the Mumbaikars believed the reforms arrived at the right time.
At this point it was brought to our notice that some consumers who totally supported the decisions of the government were against it when it came to agreeing with the timing of the government, as many consumer who initially agreed with the government’s decision were not so happy with the timing of the reforms. A considerable number of the consumers in both the cities believed that the reforms came in too early. In Goa about 35 per cent of the respondents belonged to this group while in Mumbai the percentage was about 36 out of the total respondents.
A certain section of the society remained unclear about the timing of the reforms. This section comprised of about 5 to 10 per cent in both the cities
3.2 (iv) Opinion on whether FDI in Multi Brand Retail will help our Farmers.
One of the most debated topics and was certainly an important part of our project, will the farmers benefit out of the reforms brought in by the government?
The question was answered for us by the common man or the consumers. In Goa we found out that about 52 per cent of the total consumers surveyed believed that these reforms will help the farmers in various ways which could be better prices, better transportation and storage facility, no exploitation from in numerous middlemen etc.
At the same time about 45 per cent consumers were totally against the concept of FDI being helpful to the farmers. The remaining remained not so sure about the after effects of FDI in retail to the farmers of our country
In case of Mumbai we were able to find out that a little over 50 per cent of the consumers surveyed believe that farmers are going to benefit out of these reforms in a very profitable way, while about 46 per cent of the respondents choose to contradict the former’s belief. A very tiny part of the surveyed population did not have any opinion about the topic, which was about 2 per cent of the total respondents.
3.2 (v) Whether FDI in Multi Brand Retail will help the Consumers.
This was the only question where we received positive reviews at large and where a large percentage of the respondents answered in unison.
In Goa 90 per cent of the total respondents believed that introduction of FDI in India’s Multi Brand Retail will be beneficial to the consumers both in the short run as well as in the long run. They saw nothing negative about having foreign players competing in this market.
We still had about 10 per cent of the population who believed that the reforms will bring no benefit to the consumers.
In Mumbai we found similar results with 85 per cent respondents supporting the decision and an adamant 15 per cent who believe that the entire reforms decisions could prove disadvantages for the consumers.
It was only in this category that we did not find a third category of respondents who were not sure of an opinion
3.2 (vi) Whether FDI in Multi Brand Retail will Create more Employment.
This is another controversial question and a well debated and widely known problem that has been associated with FDI since the beginning, because there is a claim made by various political parties that FDI could result in the unemployment of many.
The consumers in Goa had an opinion in this matter too and a vast majority of the surveyed population think that the introduction of FDI in India’s multi brand retail could create a whole lot of employment opportunities for the Indian youth.
At the same time about 25 per cent of the respondents believed that FDI in retail will result in more people losing their job than creating more jobs.
There also was a considerable number of Goans who had no opinion about this question.
In Mumbai we found a better distributed opinion, the number of people who thought that FDI could create employment was almost equal to the number of people that believed that FDI could wipe out employment, and both these groups shared a percentage of 44 and 38 out of the total respondents. The rest had no answer to the question of employment creation.
3.2 (vii) Whether the New Decisions will Help Reduce the Wastage Prevalent in the Current Retail Market.
Reduction of wastage happens to be one of the advantages of FDI in Multi Brand Retail. And a vast majority of Goans thought so and agreed to the question that the reforms adopted by the government will really lead to the reduction of wastage prevalent in the current retail market.
Another part of the respondents stated that this new form of retail will not amount to any reduction in the wastage present in the current retail market. About 15 per cent of the total respondents did not have any opinion.
At the same time Mumbai showed about 56 per cent people stating that FDI in Retail could possibly reduce the wastage present in the existing retail market.
A very strong 32 per cent respondent believes that no reduction is possible with FDI in Retail in the wastage aspect.
Here as well, we found some people who did not have an answer or were not sure of an opinion.
3.3 Summary of the Interview with the proprietors of Kirana Stores
As mentioned in the chapter introduction the survey of the kirana stores were conducted within the scope of just one city, we chose Mumbai Andheri-East, as Mumbai is among the cities that can be considered eligible to invite FDI in Multi Brand Retail as per the policy specifications. Goa was not an option since it does not fall in the list of eligible cities.
The respondents to this survey included kirana store owners spread across the city and the suburbs. The response was mostly negative with 80 per cent of the respondents stating that they are not happy with the reforms introduced by the government. Most of the respondents who disagreed with the government were located in and around the city catering to the needs of the city dwellers.
None of the respondents were in favour of the policies introduced by the government but around 20 per cent of the respondents were indifferent to the decision, they preferred to take a middle stand and had no opinion whatsoever.
The respondents who were indifferent to the situation were basically the store owners who were located in the suburbs of the city, who felt that they will not be affected by the advent of foreign players.
4. CONCLUSION
4.1 Summary
4.1 (a) Concluding Remark
Since we have tried to present the arguments both for and against FDI in retail, our stand may seem a little confusing. Therefore, it is necessary to be specific about the conclusions and policy suggestions we wish to make. We are not suggesting by any means that FDI should be prevented from entering the retail sector. One must understand that one would be going against progress if one fails to take advantage of the capital and the advanced technology FDI in retail can offer.
The new policy, however, will involve huge losses of jobs and livelihood among traditional traders. At the same time, new jobs would be created in the giant stores and their newly built supply chains. In the short-run, the net outcome on aggregate employment is still likely to be negative, at best ambiguous. But in the longer run, as profits are reinvested and organised retail keeps on expanding, and as newer avenues open up for the underprivileged, the policy would pay off. This had happened during the industrial revolution. This has happened more recently when computers came into our lives in a big way. It would not have been prudent, for example, if we had shunned computers because they would destroy jobs for the numerous typists who used to crowd the city streets with their archaic typewriters and have virtually disappeared with the advent of the new technology. But this long-run view should not make us think for a moment that the short run can be ignored.
4.1 (b) Challenges
The journey ahead is challenging to say the least, not only for the indigenous retailers but also for the well-established MNC retailers, who have to pay heed to the Indian political, social and competitive landscape, if they want to succeed in the Indian retail sector.
Some of the challenges that lie ahead are discussed below:-
· Availability of Retail Space: Hypermarkets require more than 60,000 sq. ft. and departmental stores require more than 20,000 sq. ft. of retail space. Such retail space in prime locations in the big cities is scarce and available only at high rental costs.
· Clarification on certain policy features: The policy note does not specify whether investment in back end infrastructure needs to be a fresh investment or if foreign companies can buy stakes in already established backend infrastructure.
· Political Risk: The largest opposition party in India has opposed FDI in retail and some of its leaders have indicated that they will scrap the policy if their party comes to power. A political change in state and central governments puts a lot of political risk on investment in retail.
· Skilled Manpower: One of the major challenges faced by the existing players is the availability of skilled manpower; any foreign retailer planning to enter India will have to face similar challenges.
· Infrastructure Challenge: Roads, ports, electricity are some of the infrastructure challenges, which increase the operational cost of the retail chain.
· Currency Fluctuation: In the past three months, the dollar/INR exchange rate has fluctuated by approx. 8 per cent. This may put considerable currency risk on any foreign investment in India.
4.2 Suggestions
To the government and Policy Makers
Following suggestions have been put forth for the decision makers
Firstly, the public distribution system should have enough infiltration and bite in the rural areas to protect the rural poor from a possible rise in the prices of grains and vegetables.
Secondly, the government should reconsider the gamut of tariffs and quantitative restrictions to counterbalance the effects of more easy international trade through multinational retailers.
Third, the government should make an effort to compensate for the loss of jobs and livelihood, at least partially. The retail stores may be required to fill up a certain proportion of their labour requirement from displaced small traders. Also for the purpose of making these small traders employable in the new set up, appropriate training programs may be set-up by the government. The multinationals may be taxed, if required, to finance these programs.
The foreign direct investment (FDI) in the Indian retail sector should be allowed in a phased manner so that it could serve the purpose of much-needed capital and bring a boom in the sector.
1. FDI should be gradually allowed first in relatively less sensitive sectors like garments, lifestyle products, house ware and entertainment."
2. Alternative funding mechanisms and investment opportunities should be considered like FIIs and venture capital in the primary market, besides FDI. Hence they should be legalized and encouraged in the primary market.
3. Industry needs time for capital formation, which would take at least two-three years.
The gradual inflow of FDI should not be a hindrance for the growth of the retail sector. The major goal should be
1. To serve the purpose of much needed capital and bring a boom in this sector.
2. To enhance the backend infrastructure.
The government should also try to build up a consensus within the parliament and try to convince the policymakers to look beyond political differences and concentrate solely on the development of our country.
As mentioned above the government should try to adopt a step by step approach in implementing FDI in Multi Brand Retail.
Initially the government may go ahead with just 51% in Retail but as the policy is slowly welcomed by the country it may go ahead with increasing the stake of foreign players in the retail market. This may ultimately be necessary as the requirement of finance in this sector is bound to rise in the future as rural India is slowing moving towards the creation of a an urban India and urban India needs an urban treatment and organised retailing is a necessity in an urban nation.
Suggestions to the Traders and Middlemen (kirana stores)
There can be no doubt the road ahead is tough and unpredictable. The traders and middlemen will have to adapt to these changes in order to survive. Here are a few suggestions;
· Provision of credit facilities
The provision of this facility would help in the generation of customer loyalty especially the lower income groups, this facility also helps in the expansion of their business activity. Hence this would not only help them in the reaching out to a wider market but also help them to sustain their business in our dynamic, cut-throat environment.
· Improvement in CRM
In order to sustain their business, it is imperative for these retailers to improve their Customer Relationship Management and try to retain as many customers as possible.
· Creation of a Trustworthy Environment
The kirana store retailers have always been questioned for their malpractices in rendering their services, faulty weighing scales; inferior quality products, adulteration etc. these are problems that customers face (especially the uneducated ones) in a regular basis. The traditional store owners could bring about a change in this image of theirs by adopting better technology (electronic weighing machines), improving upon their trade practices etc. could be options worth exercising
To the Indigenous Organised Retailers
· Utilization of E-Commerce; Multi-brand retailers with FDI will not be able to use e-commerce, whereas, Indian retailers can use e-commerce as another channel for sales.
· In order to sustain their business, it is imperative for these retailers to improve their Customer Relationship Management and try to retain as many customers as possible.
· The indigenous organised retailer could also use the advanced technology that are used by these foreign retailers i.e. mainly to improve their storage facilities, for those small retailers who are not eligible to form joint ventures with the foreign players, adaption of their modern technologies is an option to target customers in the smaller cities.
Future Scope for FDI
Foreign Direct Investment has become a reality only after 1991 in India. Its total acceptance is still a major political debate, in spite of all the issues and controversies associated with foreign investors, FDI has been allowed in various sectors in the country. The retail sector has been one such controversial sector when it came to the question of allowing FDI or not.
The recent policies allowing FDI in India’s Multi Brand Retail was an acceptable one, it seems to be promising and beneficial to the future of India’s organised Retail.
Any further amendments to the policy is not advisable as the present one is a full proof policy, but the government could still try to get to a consensus with the other opposing political parties and try to get a nationwide approval for the reforms.
The government should also think of taking the policy to a much larger scale than it is right now. The policy only allows 53 cities to take advantage of the new reforms, as time passes the government based on the success of the reforms could open up more cities to take advantage of the new benefits.
As India is slowly transforming from being a rural nation to an urban nation there is tremendous scope for organised retail in this country. The government as well as the future entrepreneurs should realise and try to tap this opportunity. FDI will go a long way in providing the right amount of finance and technical assistance to help our nation grow, and at the same time it should not be forgotten that FDI not only provides finance but it can also act as an inducement to Indian entrepreneurs to compete in the similar sectors there by making our nation a successful and a powerful nation. JAI HIND!
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Books Referred:
· Government of India ,2004, Reports on Investment Approval and FDI in India, Academic Foundation, New Delhi.
· Planning Commission, Government of India, August 2002, Reports of the Steering Group on FDI, Academic Foundation, New Delhi.
· Dr. Padma Raghavan,2010, Indian Economy,Spectrum Books, New Delhi.
Articles and Research Papers Referred:
· PankajDinodia, September 2012, FDI in Multi Brand Retail – The Journey, Dinodia Capital Advisors, New Delhi.
· YajatBindal, 2012, New FDI Policy to Drive Retail Growth In India, CEDAR, Mumbai
· AbhirupSarkar, January 2013, Economic And Political Weekly
· Deloitte, January 2013, Indian retail Market Opening More Doors., New Delhi.
· Dr.Surendra Kumar, October 2012, FDI in Retail Sector, Competition Refresher
Websites Referred
· www.navhindtimes.com
· www.thehindu.com
· www.timesofindia.com
· www.theeconomictimes.com
· www.ndtv.com
· www.wikipedia.com
QUESTIONNAIRE ON FDI IN MULTI BRAND RETAIL
TO THE CONSUMERS
Name: Age:
Occupation:
1) Are you familiar with organised retail?
a) Yes b) No
2) Are you aware of FDI in Multi Brand Retail?
a) Yes b) No
3) Are you aware about the recent decisions made by the government regarding FDI in multi brand retail?
a) Yes b) No
4) Are you in favour of the decisions made by the government regarding the same?
a) Yes b) No c) Not Sure
5) Do you feel that the government rushed with this decision of FDI in multi brand retail?
a) Yes b) No c) May be
6) Are you of the opinion that FDI in Muti-Brand Retail is required in our country?
a) Yes b) No c) Not Sure
7) Are you of the opinion that FDI in Multi-Brand Retail will help our economy to grow?
a) Yes b) No c) Not Sure
8) Do you feel the farmers will benefit with the introduction of FDI in Multi-Brand Retail?
a) Yes b) No c) May be
9) Do you feel the consumers will benefit with the introduction of FDI in Multi-Brand Retail?
a) Yes b) No c) May be
10) Do you think FDI in Multi-Brand Retail will help generate employment?
a) Yes b) No c) May be
11) Are you of the opinion that FDI in Multi-Brand Retail will reduce the wastage of agricultural products?
a) Yes b) No c) Not Sure
Date:
Signature:
QUESTIONNAIRE ON FDI IN MULTI BRAND RETAIL
TO THE RETAILERS
Name of the store:
Location:
Nature of Business:
1) Are you aware about the recent decisions made by the government regarding FDI in multi brand retail?
a) Yes b) No
2) Do you feel that the government rushed with this decision of FDI in multi brand retail?
a) Yes b) No c) May be
3) Are you in favour of FDI in Muti-Brand Retail?
a) Yes b) No c) Not Sure
4) Kindly give your reasons for the same.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Name &Signature of the respondent:
