<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
	<channel>
		<title>gdp's Comments</title>
		<language>en-us</language>
		<link>https://www.intensedebate.com/users/665829</link>
		<description>Comments by SandeepParekh</description>
<item>
<title>the PRS Blog : To eat or not to eat: Bt Brinjal</title>
<link>http://prsindia.org/theprsblog/2010/02/11/to-eat-or-not-to-eat-bt-brinjal/#IDComment56356394</link>
<description>Great post. Sandeep Parekh </description>
<pubDate>Thu, 11 Feb 2010 15:12:29 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://prsindia.org/theprsblog/2010/02/11/to-eat-or-not-to-eat-bt-brinjal/#IDComment56356394</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Initial Private Opinion : Governance in companies - the dark side</title>
<link>http://blog.livemint.com/initial-private-opinion/?p=486#IDComment55179804</link>
<description>That is a quotation from the Financial Times, not my quote. In fact I don&amp;#039;t agree with much that is stated in the report, as I have mentioned in another blog post. In short, you need to direct your queries to a) the authors of the report b) the director, IIM-A - for your very valid issues. Good luck. </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 3 Feb 2010 12:12:45 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://blog.livemint.com/initial-private-opinion/?p=486#IDComment55179804</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Initial Private Opinion : Media shames itself - SEBI Board misconduct</title>
<link>http://blog.livemint.com/initial-private-opinion/?p=368#IDComment44037516</link>
<description>I find that all your issues are rhetorical questions, so I guess you are not looking for answers. BTW, losing battle is a figure of speech - you don&amp;#039;t need to be in battle to be in a losing battle.  What can an academician do but point towards what is right and what is wrong - I do that for SEBI regulations (as I did before joining SEBI) you can see my articles before joining SEBI criticising aspects of regulations and enforcement of SEBI. I also do that (expose the right from the wrong) for the sad issue of suppression of orders of SEBI as I have explained and the sadder suppression by the media of the events which took place - because the media is beholden to powerful people.  Believe me you have reason to be insecure and anonymous.  </description>
<pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 09:49:21 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://blog.livemint.com/initial-private-opinion/?p=368#IDComment44037516</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Initial Private Opinion : Media shames itself - SEBI Board misconduct</title>
<link>http://blog.livemint.com/initial-private-opinion/?p=368#IDComment43409423</link>
<description>I never had the powers to pass orders in SEBI. The investigation and the long first order were passed long before I joined SEBI and the two member panel after I left. Even if I time-travelled and upgraded myself to a whole time member and then passed the order - how is that my \\\&#039;interest in this subject\\\&#039;? Not only is the comment delusional but also irrelevant. But I\\\&#039;m glad the Board is recruiting people to post anonymous comments on my blog - good signs that it is making a difference.  Though I might be fighting a losing battle - my institute itself has invited the SEBI Chair to speak at the distinguished IIMA Confluence event as keynote speaker. </description>
<pubDate>Mon, 16 Nov 2009 07:36:22 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://blog.livemint.com/initial-private-opinion/?p=368#IDComment43409423</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Initial Private Opinion : Media shames itself - SEBI Board misconduct</title>
<link>http://blog.livemint.com/initial-private-opinion/?p=368#IDComment43038744</link>
<description>Thank you for pointing this out. Sandeep  </description>
<pubDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2009 07:15:03 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://blog.livemint.com/initial-private-opinion/?p=368#IDComment43038744</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Initial Private Opinion : Takeover regulations - what a mess</title>
<link>http://blog.livemint.com/initial-private-opinion/?p=312#IDComment38695276</link>
<description>I don&amp;#039;t think the idea is very complex and therefore the 18 plus trigger points are in my opinion wholly pointless complexity. If I could design the regulations, it would only have 2 trigger points, one at say 15% with a creeping acquisition permitted upto 75% (where creeping is available at points below 15% as well). The second trigger would be on breaching the creeping limit. There would be no further trigger points. Also no one can make a tender offer beyond the 55% level, so that a 20% tender offer would be consistent with a 25% public float (there is expected to be a uniform public float for all companies according to a paper published by the Ministry of Finance).   </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 14 Oct 2009 11:36:08 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://blog.livemint.com/initial-private-opinion/?p=312#IDComment38695276</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Initial Private Opinion : Dual listing - FM should be better briefed</title>
<link>http://blog.livemint.com/initial-private-opinion/?p=287#IDComment36317013</link>
<description>I guess, they have better things to do than clear mirages in the desert. Sandeep  </description>
<pubDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2009 04:43:17 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://blog.livemint.com/initial-private-opinion/?p=287#IDComment36317013</guid>
</item>	</channel>
</rss>