CAM, SAM, Sidleys advise on $155m Indian Energy Exchange IPO

“The Rs 1,001 crore initial public offer has received good response from investors, with the issue getting oversubscribed 2.28 times. It was the first IPO by a power exchange in the country.”, reported Moneycontrol. IEX is India’s premier power trading platform and provides an automated platform for physical delivery of electricity, enables efficient price discovery and offers participants the opportunity to trade in a variety of energy products. The issue opened for subscription during October 9-11, with a price band of Rs 1,645-1,650 per share and debuted on the bourses on October 23rd.

Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas, led by Delhi-based national practice head and capital markets partner Prashant Gupta and partner Monal Mukherji, represented Kotak Mahindra Capital, Axis Capital and IIFL Holdings, the book running lead managers to the issue. the managers had also drafted in the Singapore-based Sidley Austin team comprised of partner Manoj Bhargava, counsel Ankit Kashyap, and associates Rishabh Gupta, Varun Jetly, Alexius Chong and Michael Rothenberg, with support from legal assistant Krittika Shah.

Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas national practice head-capital markets and partner Yash J Ashar along with partner Gokul Rajan acted for Indian Energy Exchange.

Comments

Aila! 20 Nov 2017, 14:18
+1 -0
Congrats Yash, nice to see your name on a deal after a quite long time.

Cheers!
secondary market 20 Nov 2017, 17:16
+2 -0
the addendum still remains a mystery for all the custodians.
Merchant banker 20 Nov 2017, 18:12
+2 -0
And the revised anchor allocation !!
What is FPI 20 Nov 2017, 18:23
+2 -0
Kian - you should reach out to the law firms to ascertain what was the lacuna in the law regarding allocation to FPIs.

Would love to see what the answer is.
Merchant banker 20 Nov 2017, 20:05
+3 -1
Oh. That’s a simple answer. [...] took a flimsy and borderline incorrect interpretation of the regulations and allowed participation of FPIs in the IPO.

Only after the custodians of FPIs objected to participation of FPIs in the IPO at all, did the deal team realise the blunder committed. Needless to say this realisation is what led to the revision in the anchor allocation after closure of the bidding period.

The question should be, what led the team at SAM to allow such a flimsy interpretation.