MULLING OVER MITTAL 
  
Swapan Dasgupta | The Telegraph |  June 30, 2006

http://telegraphindia.com/1060630/asp/opinion/story_6415902.asp


For reasons that have as much to do with ethnicity as with national 
pride, Lakshmi Mittal's doughty success in effecting the merger of 
the Luxembourg-registered Arcelor SA with his Mittal Steel has been 
widely celebrated in India. Apart from being seen as a glorious 
chapter in the annals of Indian entrepreneurship, Mittal's triumph 
is also perceived as a successful assault on European prejudices. 
The gripping story of an Indian entrepreneur, who dared take on an 
entrenched establishment and win, is the stuff legends are made of.

The five month saga that began with Mittal's hostile bid for the 
European steel giant Arcelor on January 27 was in many ways akin to 
a clash of civilizations. It is not that Mittal's credentials in the 
steel industry were in any doubt — even before the bid for Arcelor, 
his Rotterdam-registered company, had already made a mark as the 
largest producer of steel in the world. Nor was it the case that 
Mittal's earlier experience was confined to turning around 
dilapidated steel plants acquired at knock-down prices in countries 
of the erstwhile Warsaw Pact. Mittal Steel has a substantial stake 
in the United States too.

As the richest man in Britain, and the third richest in Europe, with 
a net worth of some £14.9 billion, Mittal was already a known figure 
in the European Union. His generous donations to the British Labour 
Party, his acquisition of a mansion in London's Kensington Palace 
Gardens, and the lavish reception he hosted in the Palace of 
Versailles for his daughter's wedding had already made him a 
celebrity. To those with old money, Mittal may have seemed a trifle 
too flashy and comparable to some of the louder Texan billionaires 
who are routinely denied entry into some of the snootier gentleman's 
clubs in Pall Mall and St James's, but at least he was not an 
unknown entity. Neither was Mittal some lesser-known Arab sheikh nor 
was he mysteriously low-profile like the Barclay brothers who took 
over The Ritz in London and The Daily Telegraph. If analogies are to 
hold, Mittal was almost in the same league as the then Australian 
Rupert Murdoch when he bought The Times from the Thompson family.

Guy Dolle, the outspoken CEO of Arcelor, who led the robust 
resistance to the takeover of Arcelor, was indiscreet enough to 
identify the problem with Mittal Steel as being too "full of 
Indians", but the fact remains that race was only a subliminal 
factor in the ugly corporate battle. Regardless of his assertion 
that Mittal was blessed with "monkey money" and was "incompatible 
with European cultural values"— a disqualification which did not 
hold true for Alexey Mordashov, the Russian owner of Severstal, the 
suitor favoured by the old Arcelor management — political 
correctness ruled out dwelling too much on Mittal's national origins 
and the colour of his skin. In any case, as President Jacques Chirac 
discovered during a visit to India last February, where he was 
dogged by the Mittal controversy, the collateral damage of playing 
the race card was too much for the French economy to digest. With 
France hoping to sell commercial aircraft and nuclear reactors to 
India, screaming "bloody Indians" was plain untenable.

The fear of Mittal was actually centred on management style. Arcelor 
was in many ways one of the last vestiges of what is 
called "gentlemanly capitalism". Blessed with a fine wine cellar and 
its own resident cheese expert in its Luxembourg headquarters, 
Arcelor epitomized the relaxed, high-cost and protectionist style of 
traditional European business. The Arcelor management viewed 
Mittal's low-cost style of steel production — unlike Arcelor, Mittal 
Steel operates out of rented accommodation in London's Berkeley 
Square — as a threat to a languid way of life. Dolle's assertion on 
January 30 comparing the "perfume" produced by Arcelor with the "Eau 
de Cologne" churned out by Mittal was an evocative expression of the 
sharply contrasting styles. He reacted in exactly the same way as 
the pampered printers of Fleet Street and the clubbable journalists 
to Murdoch's acquisition of The Times.

It is a tribute to the business environment of Europe that neither 
political pressure from the governments of France, Luxembourg and 
Spain nor contrived xenophobia could ward off the cold logic of 
capitalism. The Arcelor management tried many tricks — from 
announcing a company buy-back of shares to proposing a merger with 
Russia's Severstal — to beat back Mittal. They failed, not least 
because of a revolt of ordinary shareholders — a rebellion that was 
said to have been orchestrated by both Adam, an organization of 
small French investors, and Goldman Sachs, one of the advisers to 
Mittal Steel. Finally, after Mittal raised his bid from the original 
18.6 billion Euros to 26 billion Euros and lowered his family stakes 
to 43.5 per cent in the merged entity, even the Arcelor management 
succumbed, leaving only the Russians crying foul.

Of course, there was a final diplomatic compromise by Mittal. The 
new entity, which will control some 10 per cent of the world's steel 
output, will be known as Arcelor Mittal, rather than Mittal Arcelor. 
As one commentator put it, for the man who has travelled a long way 
from a Rajasthan village and Calcutta, "it was not worth risking the 
derailment of a world-domination strategy because of quibbles over 
whose name comes first."

Viewed in totality, Mittal's achievement is awesome and India is 
right to feel very proud of him. Yet, the question remains: is this 
India's achievement or the achievement of an Indian? The answer 
seems clear-cut. Mittal's meteoric rise in the world of steel began 
from the day he branched away from his family's steel business in 
India. Mittal could leap into the big league and dream of global 
domination only after he extracted himself away from the suffocating 
business environment of India. He could achieve in a decade what the 
Tatas haven't been able to manage in a century, not because his 
business acumen was more formidable, but because he wasn't dragged 
down by an environment where there is a glass ceiling put on 
entrepreneurship and growth. He could succeed because he was not 
hemmed in by protectionism and could operate globally.

It is indeed ironic that the triumph of Mittal, who still holds an 
Indian passport, constitutes an indictment of India and a ringing 
endorsement of the West. Why is it that despite its high taxes and 
class biases, an immigrant entrepreneur can end up as the third 
richest man in Europe? Why is Indian entrepreneurial talent unable 
to find full expression in India? Why are there limits to the growth 
of Indian corporate houses operating from India?

The answers, without doubt, lie in the business environment of the 
West. Mittal had to fight prejudice and stomach a lot of gratuitous 
insults from native Europeans. In addition, he had to counter the 
resistance of a powerful section of the political class. He could 
overcome these because at the end of the day Europe allows full 
play, much more than, say, the US, to the logic of capitalism. Would 
a hostile takeover that encounters political resistance be allowed 
to succeed in India? Can India overcome its own xenophobic instincts 
as effortlessly as Europe did?

These are questions that Indians need to mull over in the wake of 
Mittal's spectacular business success. By gloating over Mittal 
showing the white man his place, India will be clutching at the 
wrong end of the stick. For India, the Mittal story suggests that 
Indians can come into their own — outside India.










------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Something is new at Yahoo! Groups.  Check out the enhanced email design.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/SISQkA/gOaOAA/yQLSAA/uTGrlB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

--
This is ZESTGlobal. Post articles on international affairs to 
[email protected]

If you got this mail as a forward, subscribe to ZESTGlobal by sending a blank 
mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] OR, if you have a Yahoo! ID, by visiting 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTGlobal/join/ 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTGlobal/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 


Reply via email to