Saturday, December 31, 2016

The Curse of Cash – Book Review

This book toys with a revolutionary idea that has so far been limited to sporadic economic papers and journals. As we speak, India a country of 1.2 billion claims to have been one of the first such partial experiments in this direction (why partial – we will come on to this later).

Kenneth Rogoff first espoused this idea around 20 years ago in his paper. Over the period of years, he seems to have gained much deeper insight in the penetration of cash in the system while serving as Chief Economist of The International Monetary Fund and various other roles. This book seems to be an attempt by him to share all the detailed reasons.


He has taken special care to point out that he advocates less cash (doing away with higher denomination bills) and NOT cash-less. There’s a subtle difference between the two terms but a vast difference in the world in which they will lead into. His arguments are set in the US, an advanced economy which in his assessment is perfectly placed to usher in such a bold “economic reform”.


In 2016, the IRS estimated around $458 billion was lost due to tax evasion. And much of it is contributed by higher denomination USD bills ($100 being the highest in present day). USD is undoubtedly the most valued currency in the world with various governments holding reserves it not to mention the drug lords and the underground economy.
  • The amount of USD floating around in the world can be gauged by the fact that – for every US citizen there is $4200 present.
  • Translating in terms of $100 bills alone it means that every US citizen should be holding 34 USD 100 bills at any given time.


But the reality is quite different. And it is because most of it resides in the illegal underground economy. Rogoff argues for a gradual abolition (over one or two decades) of USD 100 bills to the point only USD 5 bills and coins are legal tender. Although, he warns that it does not guarantee going away of crime and illegal activity but even the slightest gain in tax revenue will allow government some room for tax cuts. Another key thing is that many employers pay employees in cash to skirt employment regulations and avoid making contributions like Social Security (EPF in India). Abolishing cash

Now there are some side-effects to abolishing cash which the book talks about. One key thing is privacy. Why the govt or for that matter anyone know on what does a person spend on. Electronic transactions are going to leave a trail unlike cash transactions which are anonymous. Leaving lower denomination notes in practice can possibly take care of such private transactions.

Another key reason for adopting a less-cash society would be the ability to introduce negative interest rates which will ultimately provide abundant room to Central Bankers to maneuver in times of financial crisis.
[Now understandably, this is an area which people world over dare not ponder about. It was the same for me but on giving some effort I realized it is not hard to understand. So much for financial literacy!]

Presently, the interest rates are zero bound i.e cannot fall below zero. And then there’s the sacred rule of

Real term interest rate = Nominal Interest Rate – Rate of Inflation

In 2008, with advanced economies like US having less rate of inflation the room to cut interest rates was pretty much restricted considering the US Fed had set a target rate of inflation as 2%.
With a less-cash society the Central Bankers can set interest rates to negative which basically means that you need to pay the bank to hold your deposit. And with higher denomination notes already abolished, hoarding cash has a lot of cost (storage, security etc) so practically infeasible. Negative interest rates will turbocharge the economy out of deflationary recession.

It sounds a better instrument than Quantitative Easing (QE) or tremendous amounts of government spending to simulate the economy. Now keep in mind that the debate is still out over whether the three tranches of QE actually did good.
[Here is a really famous video I came across as I tried to get my head around QE]

The author acknowledges that negative interest rates might give rise to strange situations like for example in case of a bond holder – the borrower needs to pay the lender. Legal and administrative issues can arise but they can be handled as the payments due can be deducted from the principal in this case.

Overall, it might sound weird or even scary but some countries like Japan, Denmark, Sweden and Switzerland have already tip-toed into that territory. In theory, negative interest rates sound promising as a monetary tool is what Ken Rogoff seems to say.

There’s one interesting alternative to negative interest rates shared in the book from the academic economic circles – the two currency system.

It calls for identifying as paper currency and currency in electronic form in banking system as two different. And it calls for an exchange rate when a person goes to the bank to deposit his paper currency which will ultimately be recorded in the banking system as an electronic form. This will give rise to three monetary instruments which the Central Bankers can then play with –

i.               Interest rates on electronic currency
ii.             Exchange rate b/w Electronic and Paper Currency
iii.            Forward (future) exchange rate

As these days the chatter increases about digital or crypto-currencies, Rogoff is of the view that these innovations are admirable but these currencies are at a major disadvantage as the govt. has tremendous power at its disposal to impose its will over them. But eventually, the technology like public ledger will be adopted.

WHERE DOES INDIA’S DEMONETISATION FIT INTO ALL THIS?

Ken Rogoff is very clear that the method to abolish high denomination currency and move towards electronic transactions has to be adopted ONLY by developed economies. Even for a country like US (with solid infrastructure and less than 5% of unbanked population) he proposes a gradual transition period of 1 or 2 decades!

He very clearly says for emerging economies the dangers and costs are simply too high. Financial inclusion and infrastructure are key problems. He mentioned the challenges in India explicitly as well in Chapter 13]

Secondly, Rogoff's principle works only when you take out the higher denomination notes and leave behind only lower denomination notes. What happened in India is a 180 degree - the highest denomination note was abolished and then a currency bill even higher was introduced. So much for less-cash?!

P.S – 
I had the fortune to meet Kenneth Rogoff and listen to his talk. :-)
While reading the book I had to look up the Web as there were lot of terms I didn’t know. Sharing some useful terms/links –

Seigniorage = Govt. revenue from manufacture of coins calculated as difference between the face value and metal value of coins.



Thursday, November 10, 2016

How to Build something Special?

Recently I read couple of books back to back which chronicled the rise of two different unrelated companies – Starbucks (Pour Your Heart Into It) and Zappos (Delivering Happiness – A path to Profits, Passion, And Purpose). 
Zappos was acquired by Amazon in 2009 for $1.2 bn 


Both of these books were penned down by their founders and have the same theme more or less. Reading them in quick succession provided me an opportunity to spot the similarities, common mistakes made in the rise, development of these companies. It is important to note that both these companies worked in different sectors – in beverage and shoe retail business and started their journey in different timeframes.



Firstly, a few things from the Zappos journey which caught my attention.
The way Tony Hsieh has written it is phenomenal and it is so engaging. It feels as if someone my age, someone with the same mindset as me has written it because I felt I could relate to almost every emotion, every thought process which he shared. Not to say that Howard Schultz in Pour Your Heart Into It did a bad job - Just that I could relate more to Tony’s story and at places Howard Schultz’s book became a bit theoretical.

Both Tony and Howard mentioned that when they started their ventures, it was like they knew almost everyone by their first name and when they grew in size they could see new faces almost every day and the familiarity with people at workplace decreased rapidly. However, Zappos introduced a new measure to deal with it – every time an employee had to log in into his system not only he had to enter the username and password but also had to recognize a random employee face which was displayed. In case he didn’t know – the employee’s name and department was displayed. Over a period of time this would help everyone associate faces with names thus increasing bit of familiarity.
I like this creative way of tackling this problem and I understand it might not be completely practical that each time you login you are presented with a “Guess Who” puzzle. Maybe it is a good idea to do it once a week on Fridays when the atmosphere is already a bit relaxed.

Tony also describes how he as the company grew was approached for public speaking at conferences to share his experience of growing as a company. I was pleasantly surprised to read that the few mantras he adopted to become a skillful speaker are the same as what I learned in my stint in Toastmasters. He emphasized on personalizing the speech and not getting rattled even if he missed a portion of the script as anyways the audience never knows if you skipped something.

Zappos which started delivering shoes which was unheard during that time placed a lot of importance on customer experience. This is something which is practiced by successful giants like Amazon and Flipkart as well. The fundamental principle is to – “Under promise and Over deliver.”

Since I read the Zappos book right after the Starbucks one – I was able to see something in common in how these companies evolved into successful enterprises.

  1.  Amongst all the teething problems a new company faces – the biggest problem is the financial crunch. It cannot be avoided and it takes skillful handling of situations to steer away from crisis.
  2.  It is important to take lot of risks. Both Starbucks/Zappos launched new beverages/delivery style models which had no guarantee that they would work out fine. But to be successful a company needs to break new ground and try out new things and take risks.
  3. Lot of innovative, successful ideas come from normal employees – not the management ones. So it is important to have an open structure in the organization and employees are encouraged to share ideas and suggestions.
  4. Extending the above point – The management should have Honest and open communication with the employees. This builds trust and keeps everyone on the same page.

    Howard Schultz the Starbucks CEO – during one of the early years, directly shared with the employees in a meeting at the start of holiday (peak) season that the company was going to miss its targets. This helped braced the employees for the tough times ahead and breed the feeling of “
    we are in this together”. The company missed its targets but the direct openness increased togetherness within the company and they beat their own targets next year. 
    Similarly, Tony Hsieh (Zappos) directly shared with its own employees in a companywide email as they struggled with cash crunch that they had to lay off 8% off its employees as it would help them stay cash positive for the next financial year. The impressive thing is he didn’t use corporate jargon like – restructuring/reorganization, which is common place nowadays. Clearly spelling out the reasons allows the employees to trust you and you at least have a chance that they can see the company’s viewpoint.
  5. As the company grows from a startup to decent sized organization – it is very important to hire people who are a perfect fit to the company’s culture. Many people look to jump in just to make a quick buck for 2-3 years, add to their resume and venture towards greener pastures. But it ends up blowing a hole in the culture and the fabric of the organization. The vision which the company adopted gets relegated to just plaques and annual reports.
  6. Lastly, I find that making the customers happy should be the ultimate goal of any successful company. Not only Starbucks and Zappos tried to do that – if you look around every big successful company has adopted this mantra in their own way.
Starting a new company is like venturing out into the sea with a small boat but as the company grows braving the adversities it becomes a medium/big sized ship. And then it is very difficult to change its direction. So a lot of importance has to be placed in the starting years on company culture, and the commitment to the company’s vision.


A lot of other factors (tangible and intangible) decide how a startup blossoms but I realized that the above ones play a crucial role and shouldn’t be missed.