Corporate Finance Strategies

“What happens after an IPO matters more.” That perspective from Kalyan Krishnamurthy reflects how Flipkart has evolved under his leadership. Over nearly a decade, Kalyan helped transition Flipkart from a high-growth, founder-led startup into a professionally managed ecommerce institution. He navigated leadership transitions, strengthened alignment with Walmart, expanded supply chain coverage across 22,000+ serviceable PIN codes and scaled a platform serving 500M+ users and 2M sellers. What stands out is his ability to shift the narrative from valuation to durability. The India domicile shift signals capital market ambition. Yet Kalyan Krishnamurthy frames the IPO as a responsibility milestone rather than a celebration. Management prepares the company. The board decides timing. That clarity of roles reflects governance maturity and institutional discipline. He speaks about building a predictable and future-proof organization through AI-enabled discovery across 200M listings, seller-focused tools that improve productivity and operational discipline that protects long-term economics. This is structured, long-horizon thinking. In today’s environment, listing-day excitement often dominates conversations while post-listing accountability defines outcomes. Retail participation in India’s markets continues to deepen. Public capital deserves transparency, compliance rigor and sustainable economics. Kalyan Krishnamurthy’s ability to grow Flipkart while reinforcing governance signals a shift from scale-at-all-costs to scale-with-discipline. An IPO changes stakeholder complexity forever. Preparing for that phase instead of chasing it reflects long-term stewardship. That mindset ultimately shapes institutional credibility. https://lnkd.in/g_Gct6Wd

Last week I wrote about running a proper fundraising process. This week is about the decisions most founders get wrong: whether to raise at all, how much, from whom, and what kind of capital. First, raising external capital should be a last resort. Can you grow slower, stretch runway to profitability? Are there grants available? Can you take debt instead of equity to minimise dilution and maintain autonomy? These are the questions worth sitting with before you open a round. Second, do your due diligence on investors. Many founders I talk to are surprised by this. Once investors are on your cap table, it can be a venture-lifelong marriage. Bad investors can make your life hell, hinder decision making, create extra work, or even kill the company. Speak to their portfolio company founders about how they were treated in the good and bad times, and what value they really added versus the promise. Third, raise less than you think you need. A large round and high valuation feels like validation, but it often comes with heavy dilution, super-high expectations, and pressure that compounds founder stress. Far better to raise a smaller amount fast and oversubscribe than face a never-ending process. My preference is milestone-based raising. Raise what you need to hit clearly defined milestones over 18 to 24 months. Under promise, over deliver. Build trust and the next raise happens at a higher valuation with less dilution. Fourth, be deliberate about who you raise from. Most founders chase the biggest name or engage whoever knocks on the door first. Mistake. Prioritise investors who can genuinely help, have strong networks in your sector, can access the best talent, and can introduce partners and customers at C level. At PropertyGuru, that discipline allowed us to select the right partner at each stage, rather than whoever could write the biggest cheque. For climate founders specifically: what kind of capital do you actually need? Climate businesses are mostly physical, with upfront hardware requirements. Equity is expensive for that. Ideally you want a capital stack. Grant capital to fund R&D and de-risk first deployments. Equity to build the IP, team, brand, and operating platform. Debt to finance working capital and the assets. The challenge is that grant and debt capital remain scarce, immature, and heavy on admin in emerging markets. It is one area we collectively need to fix if we want to accelerate green adoption. Founders obsess over valuation. The ones who build the best companies obsess over funding strategy and process. This is part of a weekly series on scaling lessons from building PropertyGuru to NYSE and backing 40+ climate ventures. Follow along if useful.

Energy efficiency isn’t just about reducing costs; it’s about building resilience and competitive advantage in a volatile energy world. The latest IEA report shows a paradox: global investment in efficiency is rising, yet progress is only 1.8% annually, less than half the COP28 target of 4%. This gap is a massive opportunity for businesses ready to act. Efficiency is no longer an operational detail; it is a boardroom priority. Organizations that treat it as strategic infrastructure, not overhead, are gaining margins competitors cannot match. Companies implementing energy management systems achieve 11–30% savings in their first year. Industrial motor upgrades boost performance by 40%. Heat pumps cut process energy demand by 75%.  Payback periods run 3 to 5 years for buildings and under 10 for industry. Emerging markets like India and Africa are embedding efficiency into growth strategies, while mature markets offer advanced tech and financing ecosystems. Success means adapting to local dynamics. Digital intelligence is transforming energy audits into real-time decision tools. Efficiency is now risk management, resilience, and a signal of maturity to investors. The companies that act today will define competitive advantage for the next decade.  Let’s accelerate together. 

Understanding the Mechanics of Purchase Price Allocation in M&A Most discussions around M&A revolve around strategy, synergies, and deal multiples. But if you're serious about mastering deal execution, you must understand the less glamorous—but critically important—process of Purchase Price Allocation (PPA). Why does it matter? Because how you allocate the purchase price affects everything from post-deal financial statements to goodwill, depreciation, taxes, and even future impairments. Here’s a simplified breakdown of how PPA works: 1. Start with the total purchase consideration Cash paid, stock issued, liabilities assumed—all of it adds up to the “Purchase Price.” 2. Measure the fair value of tangible assets Land, buildings, machinery, inventory. Often easier to value using market comparables or appraisals. 3. Identify and value intangible assets This is where it gets complex. Key intangibles may include: - Customer relationships - Technology and patents - Brand/trade names - Non-compete agreements These are typically valued using methods like relief-from-royalty or excess earnings approach. 4. Allocate the remainder to goodwill Whatever is left after assigning value to net identifiable assets goes into goodwill. Goodwill reflects expected future synergies, overpayment, or reputation value. 5. Update post-acquisition financials accordingly Intangibles will be amortized (if applicable), tangible assets depreciated, and goodwill tested annually for impairment. - All of this flows into P&L and impacts future earnings. Why analysts and associates must understand this: Because A) It directly affects financial modeling - Depreciation/amortization projections - Tax calculations - Future write-downs and impairments B) It shows up in due diligence and deal memos Especially in quality of earnings (QoE) adjustments and synergy realization assessments C) It influences negotiations and deal structuring The way assets are classified can affect tax shields, earn-outs, and even the buyer's accounting policies PPA is a strategic lever. The better you understand it, the more precise your post-deal financial projections and investor communications will be. Follow Pratik for investment banking careers and education

Most large-scale energy initiatives follow the same pattern: start with big commitments, roll out connections, figure out the policy later. Nigeria did the opposite. And that’s why it’s working. Instead of treating private investment as an afterthought, Nigeria built the policy framework first. And that made all the difference. What Nigeria Got Right - 1. A Structured Energy Compact – Nigeria created a clear, integrated policy that combines grid expansion, mini-grids, and decentralized solutions into a single plan. Other countries still treat off-grid power as an afterthought. 2. Private Sector Was Built Into the Model – Most African energy plans rely almost entirely on government spending. Nigeria understood that public money alone won’t be enough, so they de-risked the investment landscape for private players. 3. Policy Stability That Investors Can Trust – The biggest deterrent to energy investment is regulatory unpredictability. Nigeria structured clear rules around licensing, tariffs, and long-term market participation, giving businesses and investors the ability to plan long-term—not just react to political cycles. The Results Speak for Themselves - - Nigeria is now the leading mini-grid market in Africa. - Private capital is flowing into the energy sector at scale. - The policy model is structured for real expansion—not just short-term funding cycles. Now compare this to many other Mission 300 countries - - There’s no clear strategy to integrate decentralized and centralized power. - Investment risk is still too high for private capital to flow at scale. - The policy landscape remains too unstable for long-term planning. Nigeria isn’t perfect. But it’s one of the few places where energy policy is being built for growth, not just for the next round of funding. If Mission 300 countries want to make real progress, this is the playbook - - Stable, investment-friendly regulation - A clear plan that integrates all forms of power - Long-term market structures that attract capital at scale Energy access is an industry, not a one-time intervention. And Nigeria is proving that when the policy is right, the investment follows. #NigeriaEnergy #Mission300 #SmartInvestment #EnergyForGrowth

Time kills fundraising deals. A founder lost $500k by taking one week to create a financial model. I avoided this with my 3-step process 👇🏾 When raising VC, momentum is everything. The founder who lost out on that $500k check was asked for a financial model. Because they didn’t properly prepare, they had to take a week to make it from scratch. By the time they sent it over, the investor had moved on. Avoid this mistake by breaking your raise into three steps: pre-fundraising, fundraising, and maintaining. PRE-FUNDRAISING (6+ months before): People think fundraising is all about non-step investor meetings. They ignore the prep work. During this stage, you should: - Build your target investor list and connect the dots for warm intro requests - Prepare ALL docs (pitch deck, financial model, market calculations) - Draft email templates (forwardable emails, follow-ups) FUNDRAISING (2-3 months): In this phase, you’re: - Taking 4-5 investor meetings a day - Pitching and tweaking your deck weekly - Following up with investors (up to 3 times, then move on) - Responding to requests from investors in due diligence - Closing the round If you've done pre-fundraising right, you spend 100% of your energy on meetings and relationship-building, not scrambling to create documents. MAINTENANCE (ongoing): Traditional advice tells you always to be raising, but that’s wrong. Maintain relationships with investors with a system: - Send monthly investor updates - Schedule quarterly check-ins with high-priority investors Can you raise VC without this process? Of course! Can you raise VC without ANY process? Probably not. Before you raise venture capital, create a plan. Once you have a plan, see it through until the money is in the bank 💰.

In a world of heightened uncertainty, making your own luck has never been more important. KKR’s Mid-Year Outlook for 2025 highlights how—despite recent market volatility from tariff tensions to geopolitical flare-ups—credit markets have demonstrated remarkable resilience. Three key takeaways for credit investors: 𝐅𝐢𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐫𝐞𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐯𝐚𝐥𝐮𝐞 𝐢𝐬 𝐜𝐫𝐮𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐥: With high-yield spreads near historical tights after quickly recovering from "Liberation Day" shocks, private credit still presents pockets of relative value opportunities, including collateral-backed investments like asset-based finance and parts of Asia credit. In liquid credit, we're seeing compelling opportunities on the margin for shorter-duration CLO liabilities, particularly BB tranches currently offering 300-400bps spread pickup vs. U.S. high yield, with comparable volatility. 𝐂𝐨𝐥𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐥 𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐬: In today's environment, we favor secured cash flows over unsecured beta. Asset-based finance continues to shine as a structural beneficiary of both inflation (boosting hard asset values) and bank de-risking (creating funding gaps). 𝐄𝐮𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐞’𝐬 𝐥𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐠𝐞 𝐝𝐢𝐬𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐭 𝐝𝐞𝐬𝐞𝐫𝐯𝐞𝐬 𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧: European issuers typically run lower leverage yet offer wider spreads than U.S. peers—effectively paying investors a premium for market complexity. As we navigate this "Glass Still Half Full" environment, we believe the key is to climb the capital stack toward secured cash-flows that compensate you for accepting complexity, not leverage. In credit markets where technical factors remain supportive, but dispersion is increasing, this approach could allow investors to truly make their own luck. Explore the full analysis: https://go.kkr.com/44wuMYW

How this government bond buyback may affect the stock market positively: The government of India announced a bond buyback worth ₹40,000 crore. This moves seems to be done to benefit corporations. I’ll explain how in this post - You see when government does bonds buyback the value of these bonds would increase, which means that the bond yield rate will fall. Since most corporate bonds yield is directly related to sovereign bond yields one can anticipate this move to reduce the corporate bond yield too which would reduce the borrowing cost of these corporations. In high interest rate periods, corporations pay high interest on their borrowings which reduces the profit. These moves help them to offset some charges. Given that banks are the largest holders of these G-Sec bonds, this buyback would also release liquidity into the banking system.

Private Credit Has Demonstrated Resiliency Through Varying Rate Environments: This chart doesn’t just highlight performance—it exposes fragility. Across the last six interest rate cycles, only one asset class stands out for showing up—cycle after cycle—with positive, cumulative returns: private credit. While Treasuries and even high-yield bonds buckled under rate pressure, private credit quietly outperformed. Why? Three reasons: 1. No daily mark-to-market — private loans aren’t exposed to market swings the way liquid bonds are. When public credit panics, private credit stays grounded. 2. Stronger covenants — these aren’t passive instruments. Lenders set the terms, structure protection, and control borrower flexibility. 3. Floating-rate structure — as rates go up, so does income. No duration drag. No blindside losses. And yet… most portfolios still lean on traditional fixed income like it’s 1995. If you’re allocating in today’s market and relying on old-school duration-heavy bonds to protect you, this chart should make you pause. Private credit didn’t just survive multiple Fed cycles—it thrived. Not because it’s aggressive. But because it’s built different: direct, negotiated, floating, and protected. In a world where rate direction is anybody’s guess and bond yields are still adjusting to a post-zero world, owning an asset that doesn’t flinch at policy shifts is more than nice to have—it’s strategic defense. Ignore the crowd chasing rate cuts. Focus on assets that deliver—regardless of where rates go. That’s what this chart proves. #privatecredit #fixedincome #alternatives #interestrates #assetallocation #macrostrategy #nomura #resilientcapital