Mukesh Ambani loses Asia wealth crown to Jack Ma in $5.8 billion rout

May 9: Two more companies are said to be eyeing stakes in Reliance Jio Platforms, the $65-billion digital unit of Mukesh Ambani-controlled Reliance Industries, suggests a Bloomberg report. If these deals materialise, they would add to a growing list of firms that have recently invested in the Indian company.

US private equity firm General Atlantic was considering investing about $850 million to $950 million in the Mumbai-based company, a Bloomberg report said, citing people with knowledge of the matter.

The deal could be completed as soon as this month, though no agreement had been finalised and plans may change, it added.

Saudi Arabia's Public Investment Fund (PIF) is also considering to buy a minority stake in Jio, Bloomberg said in a separate report.

General Atlantic declined to comment on the report, while Jio and PIF did not immediately respond to Reuters request for comment. Hours earlier on Friday, Reliance Industries announced a $1.5 billion stake sale in Jio to Vista Equity Partners, the third deal in just over two weeks.

The conglomerate cut a $5.7 billion deal with Facebook for a 9.99 per cent stake in Jio on April 22 and a few days later, it secured a $750 million investment from private equity firm Silver Lake.

Together the three deals will inject a combined $8 billion in the telecoms-to-energy group and help it pare its debt.

Vista's investment gave Jio an equity value of Rs 4.91 trillion ($65 billion) and an enterprise value of Rs 5.16 trillion, said Reliance, controlled by billionaire tycoon Mukesh Ambani.

The potential investments from New York-based General Atlantic and the Saudi sovereign wealth fund, which manages over $300 billion in assets, would inject money on top of the $8 billion which Jio has already raised.

Saudi's PIF has been buying minority stakes several companies. Last month, it disclosed an 8.2 per cent stake in coronavirus-hit Carnival Corp, sending the cruise operator's shares up nearly 30 per cent higher.

Mumbai, Jan 9: India's weddings are famously lavish -- lasting days and with hundreds if not thousands of guests -- but this season many families are cutting costs even if it risks their social standing.

It is symptomatic of a sharp slowdown in the world's fifth-largest economy, with Indians spending less on everything from daily essentials to once-in-a-lifetime celebrations.

Growth has hit a six-year low and unemployment a four-decade high under Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Prices are rising too, squeezing spending on everything from shampoo to mobile data.

Chartered accountant Palak Panchamiya, for example, has already slashed the budget on her upcoming Mumbai nuptials by a third, trimming spending on clothing and the guest list.

"Initially I chose a dress that cost 73,000 rupees ($1,000)," Panchamiya told news agency as she picked through outfits at a recent marriage trade fair.

"But my partner felt it was too expensive, and so now I am here reworking my options and looking for something cheaper."

India's massive wedding industry is worth an estimated $40-50 billion a year, according to research firm KPMG.

The celebrations can last a week and involve several functions, a dazzling variety of cuisines, music and dance performances, and lots of gifts.

Foreigners can even buy tickets to some events.

But these days, except for the super-rich -- a recent Ambani family wedding reportedly cost $100 million -- extravagance is out and frugality is in as families prioritise saving.

"Earlier Indian weddings were like huge concerts, but now things have changed," said Maninder Sethi, founder of Wedding Asia, which organises marriage fairs around the country.

Cracks emerged in 2016 when the Indian wedding season, which runs from September to mid-January, was hit by the government's shock withdrawal of vast amounts of banknotes from circulation in a bid to crack down on undeclared earnings.

Mumbai-based trousseau maker Sapna Designs Studio shut for months as the economy was turned on its head by Modi's move.

"No exhibitions were happening and there were no avenues for us to sell either," said Vishal Hariyani, owner of the clothing studio.

Hopes for a recovery proved short-lived when the cash ban was followed by a botched rollout of a nationwide goods and services tax (GST) in 2017 that saw many small-scale businesses close.

Since then, keeping his studio afloat has been a challenge, with consumers increasingly reluctant to spend too much, says Hariyani.

"We customise our clothes as per their budgets, and now week-long weddings have been converted to just a 36-hour ceremony," he told news agency.

"We have to pay GST, pay workers and even offer discounts to customers," he added.

"The whole economy has slowed down and reduced spending on weddings is a by-product of that. Everyone except the super-rich are affected," Pradip Shah from IndAsia Fund Advisors told news agency.

"It is reflective of how sombre the mood is," he said.

In a country where families traditionally spend heavily on weddings -- including taking on debt in some cases -- the downturn is also a source of sadness and shame, with elaborate celebrations often seen as a measure of social status.

"We haven't even invited our neighbours. It is embarrassing but the current situation doesn't offer us much respite," 52-year-old Tara Shetty said ahead of her son's wedding.

"In my era, we always spent a lot and had thousands of people attending the weddings," she explained.

"My wedding was supremely grand, and now my son's is the polar opposite."

Aboard Air Force One, Jan 6: US President Donald Trump threatened sanctions against Baghdad on Sunday after Iraq's parliament called on US troops to leave the country, and the president said if troops did leave, Baghdad would have to pay Washington for the cost of the air base there.

"We have a very extraordinarily expensive air base that's there. It cost billions of dollars to build, long before my time. We're not leaving unless they pay us back for it," Trump told reporters on Air Force One.

Trump said that if Iraq asked US forces to leave and it was not done on a friendly basis, "we will charge them sanctions like they've never seen before ever. It'll make Iranian sanctions look somewhat tame."