Are Stock Markets Getting Used To Tariff Uncertainty?
Matters have escalated between India and the United States
On Episode 648 of The Core Report, financial journalist Govindraj Ethiraj talks to Madan Sabnavis, Chief Economist at Bank of Baroda as well as Ayaz Memon, veteran sports journalist and commentator.
SHOW NOTES
(00:00) Stories of the Day
(01:00) Can the stock markets now shrug off the 25% plus 25% tariffs that we are now facing for Indian exports into the US?
(07:01) No rate cuts right now says the RBI. Could they come later?
(18:59) Exports save the day once again for Indian auto as Bajaj Auto reports record exports in the latest quarter.
(19:53) The India-England series has turned the tide for test cricket. What could that mean?
NOTE: This transcript contains the host's monologue and includes interview transcripts by a machine. Human eyes have gone through the script but there might still be errors in some of the text, so please refer to the audio in case you need to clarify any part. If you want to get in touch regarding any feedback, you can drop us a message on [email protected].
—
Good morning, it's Thursday, the 7th of August and this is Govindraj Ethiraj broadcasting and streaming weekdays from Mumbai, India's financial capital. And by the way, are you missing the rains? I wonder if August could see a breather as we are right now before another solid spell later.
And our top stories and themes.
Can the stock markets now shrug off the 25% plus 25% tariffs that we are now facing for Indian exports into the US?
No rate cuts right now says the Reserve Bank, but could they come later?
Exports save the day once again for Indian auto as Bajaj Auto reports record exports in the latest quarter.
And the India-England test series has turned the tide for test cricket. What could that mean?
The Markets Will Have To Brace For A Shock
We don't know what is driving that escalation, but the point is that matters have escalated between India and the United States.
And the latest announcement will obviously shock them at least temporarily. US President Donald Trump late evening Wednesday, that's last night, issued an executive order imposing an additional 25% on Indian goods, referring to India's continued imports of Russian oil. The new measures raise tariffs on some Indian goods as much as 50% amongst the highest in any country.
India's key exports include textiles, footwear and gems and jewellery. A note from Ellada Capital says the export weighted tariff rate after the hikes, including the additional 25% for import of Russian oil, which will kick in after 27th August, will be 33.7%. Now that figure is much higher than any other country in the region, including those we compete with for sectors like a paddle. The window of 27th August for that additional 25% is presumably to allow for some negotiations.
So maybe there is some hope there. India's external affairs ministry has said in a statement that India will take all actions necessary to protect its national interests and it is extremely unfortunate that the US should choose to impose additional tariffs on India for actions that several other countries are also taking in their own national interest. India said that India's imports were based on market factors and aimed at energy security for a population of 1.4 billion.
Earlier, a Reuters report traced the sequence of events over five rounds of negotiations between the US and India. It relies on unnamed sources, as one would expect, but the insights are important for those who try and read the lines or between the lines, as the case might be in this increasingly complex world of geopolitics. The clear takeaway, at least from that report, is that India was overconfident and did not handle the negotiations very well.
Moreover, while India was sure of a 15% tariff deal, the US side was not happy with it and yet the 15% likely structure was seen by or shown to media as the likely outcome which may not have been the case. Now, there are of course other nuances on whether Prime Minister Modi should have intervened and called Trump, who would typically look for big headlines for a prospective deal. It is quite apparent that Prime Minister Modi would not have made that call, at least from our understanding here.
But the larger point is that there is no right answer to these points and it is useful to remind ourselves of the many factors beyond our control and oftentimes boiling down to one person's worldview, as we've been seeing since April. Meanwhile, India is broadly and expectedly sticking to its stance of not opening up redline areas like dairy and agriculture and has consistently refuted any US suggestions of having mediated a truce between India and Pakistan. The core report has been pointing out since April that India would not allow a crossing of these redlines, which is the opening up of any agriculture or dairy imports.
Meanwhile, in another twist or maybe it's just the latest geopolitical news of the day, apart from the tariff sword that threatens to swing or fall any moment, Prime Minister Modi is set to visit China's Tianjin city for the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation or SCO summit on the 31st of August. Now, this will mark Prime Minister Modi's first trip to China since relations between the two nations started following the 2020 military standoff in Galwan near the Line of Actual Control in eastern Ladakh, according to a report in Business Standard, which sums this up. If Prime Minister Modi attends that meeting, a one-on-one meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping is also likely, says that report.
He's also expected to hold bilateral meetings with other SCO leaders, including Russian President Vladimir Putin. And he's also expected to visit Prime Minister Modi, Japan just before that on the 30th of August for the annual India-Japan summit. And finally, to the markets, which will have a tough time in coming days as they try and make sense of the geopolitics omelette.
Equally, on the other hand, the markets are also getting used to the uncertainty as it appears and moving on to other cues which admittedly are lacking on the side. Which brings us to the markets. The Sensex and Nifty closed lower today after the Reserve Bank of India's Monetary Policy Committee headed by Governor Sanjay Malhotra kept the repo rate unchanged at 5.5%. It also retained its GDP growth forecast for 2526 at 6.5% and has said it will wait for more data on the tariff front.
The Reserve Bank Governor said the potential impact of global headwinds was already built into projections and current data does not warrant a revision. It also cut its inflation forecast for the current year from 3.7% to 3.1% attributing that change to softening food prices, a favourable monsoon and healthy food grain reserves. The Sensex was down 166 points to close at 80,543.
NSC Nifty 50 was down 75 points to 24,574. The broader indices were also down. The Nifty mid-cap 100 was down 0.8%. The small cap was down 1.1%. Brokerage Goldman Sachs has cut its growth forecast for India citing renewed concerns over trade tensions with the US following the latest move to impose a 25% tariff on Indian exports to the US.
Goldman now expects real GDP to grow 6.5% in calendar 2025, a 0.1% point cut from its earlier estimate and 6.4% in 2026, that's 0.2% points year-on-year, according to a Times report. While the economic impact of the tariff move is expected to evolve, the report argues that not all that damage may be permanent. The report says, in our view, some of these tariffs are likely to be negotiated lower over time and further downside risk to the growth trajectory mainly emanates from the uncertainty channel.
Goldman also says, interestingly, with the low inflation numbers right now suggesting that they may not stay low because vegetable prices which are keeping them low could swing suddenly in the opposite direction and that's something that we've of course seen before. Even inputs like edible oil which have been contributing to keeping inflation down most of last year has now gone up. So Goldman Sachs says that the bigger drag on growth may not be the tariffs themselves but the lack of clarity around them.
Credit Policy
Now back to the credit policy, the Bank of Baroda has predicted that there could be a rate cut of 25 basis points in the third quarter. It also says that there could be a low probability of a further reduction in rates and there is limited room for the same given that inflation is projected to be higher and above the 4% mark in the fourth quarter of the current year and the first quarter of the next year. However, if conditions change we could see a rate cut, says BoB, though the 5.5% rate could remain for some time and that's the critical part.
On the other hand, transmission of interest rates on both the borrowing and lending side has been broad-based across sectors even as liquidity continues to be supported by the Reserve Bank. I reached out to Madan Sabnavis, Chief Economist at Bank of Baroda and I began by asking him to first give us a macroeconomy backdrop as the Reserve Bank went into the latest meetings of the Monetary Policy Committee.
INTERVIEW TRANSCRIPT
Madan Sabnavis: Okay, so essentially there were two kinds of scenarios which have to be looked at. One is based on data, the way in which the economy is performing. I think that part has been largely positive.
So what I mean out here is that the Indian economy appears to be moving along the targeted growth path of around six and a half percent, which is what we have for 2025-2026. This has been supported by signs of a good monsoon, which means a good agricultural harvest. Industrial performance has been frankly mixed, manufacturing doing well, mining and electricity have been lagging.
We've seen the government being very strong in terms of their CAPEX, so that is something which has provided some boost to investment. Overall, what we have seen is that inflation seems to be largely under control. We are actually looking at a low number even for the months of July and August, which means for the entire year we would be having an inflation rate much below what RBI had earlier targeted at 3.7 percent. So that is actually the good part of the story when we are talking of hard economic numbers. But this has been clouded to a certain extent by the uncertainty which has been brought about on account of this entire tariff issue which the US has raised. One part is to know that we knew that the tariff would be 26 percent in April.
We brought it to 25 percent in August. But more recently, maybe a day back, there has been this announcement that there could be even a further tariff which could be imposed on India in case we come to buy oil from Russia. So I think that part of the story appears to be fairly volatile, something which can make things swing in different directions.
But otherwise, for the first four months, looking at all the indicators, in fact, we look at the PMI indicators, we look at tax collection, they all seem to be talking of a lot of stability in our overall targeted growth of 6.5 percent which we're looking at for the year.
Govindraj Ethiraj: Right. And if we were to look at, again to recap, the impact of a high tariff rate on India's export industries in the context of GDP or overall economic growth, has anything changed?
Madan Sabnavis: It hasn't really changed if we are talking of the 25 percent tariff. So the picture is basically saying that in case we have this 25 percent tariff, the worst possible case is that our GDP growth could move down by around 0.2 percent. So we at Banco Baroda have a forecast of 6.4 to 6.6. So 6.4 is what it would be in case this 25 percent rate stands in the absence of any negotiation or any deal which Indian government is fighting with the US. But however, this said, we should remember that the specific export industries like your ready-made textiles, precious stones, leather products, maybe pharmaceuticals and electronics at some point of time, they're the ones which have large exposure to America. And if there is any discrepancy or any disturbance which comes in terms of overall growth in exports of these industries to America, while they prefer maybe goods coming from other countries which have a lower tariff rate, then at the micro level, the industry level, they would definitely get hurt. But overall micro picture, given the fact that India is a diversity-orientated economy, to my mind will remain largely unstopped.
Govindraj Ethiraj: Right. And, you know, there were some expectations that there would be an interest rate cut or maybe there was just hope because as the Reserve Bank also has pointed out, there's not enough data and things are changing too quickly. And I'll come to the quick part in a moment.
But if you were to look at the coming quarters now, it does seem that inflation is likely to trend upwards. What does that suggest or what does that portend for interest rates as things stand? If you were to purely look at domestic stories now?
Madan Sabnavis: Yeah. Now, looking at the inflation story, yes, inflation is low now. 2.1% is what the RBI is forecasting for the second quarter. However, this is going to increase to 4.4% in Q4. Now, monetary policy is always supposed to be forward-looking. When I say forward-looking, it means it has to be drawn up keeping in mind what could be future inflation.
Current inflation may not really matter, especially as the RBI has explained that low inflation is because of vegetable prices coming down and the high base effect. So, if you're talking in terms of Q4, where inflation is supposed to be around 4.4%, then the reported 5.5% looks fairly appropriate. In fact, if you go to Q1 of fiscal 27, which RBI has also said is 4.9%, 5.5% would be even more than appropriate because we're talking about the rate of 0.6% compared to 1.1% in Q4. So, 5.5% appears to be probably the most appropriate report rate in case the inflation numbers work out the way in which the RBI is projected.
Govindraj Ethiraj: Right. And just to come back to the point about the rapid change, now, this is a slightly broader question. Now, obviously, things are moving much faster than we can expect.
Now, this is not the first time it's happened, but this is of a different nature. How do you feel monetary policymaking, more specifically here, is equipped for this world?
Madan Sabnavis: See, monetary policy will be able to support the overall growth process, assuming that inflation is now under control. If monetary policies are supposed to target growth, there are some limitations which are there. I think that's what the RBI had mentioned in the earlier policy, that the limitations which you're talking of is that you're able to make sure that credit is available at a lower cost to all the borrowers, which can be retail people like you and I, and also industry.
But this is only one part of the story for anybody to actually start investing money or to buy homes. We'll also have to see whether there is adequate demand. So, I think that is the issue which is there in India, that when you have, for example, surplus capacity in a number of industries, there may not be any incentive to invest in capital today, especially when the demand is not expected to go up significantly and you have surplus capacity with you, and the surplus can be something like 25 to 30 percent.
And hence, even in case your interest rates are low, which is the case today, and there is full transmission which takes place, the RBI has already indicated around 70 percent of the transmission has gone through in terms of the lending rates, companies may not still come forward and borrow money. So, if interest rates have to target growth, that is to spur investment, bring about higher growth in credit, it's only one part of the story, only where there is demand it will be done. Otherwise, if we have to try and push forward growth, maybe because of the tariff issues which have come up, there has to be a certain order of action taken by the government in terms of protecting the exporters or providing a certain kind of incentive to exporters, which could actually turn the tide.
Credit policy can only work to a certain extent where demand is not an issue.
Govindraj Ethiraj: Right. And if you were to look back, I mean, we've had a relatively low interest regime for some time now, several quarters at least, and we could head lower or not, but I'll come to that. Do you feel that this lower interest rate regime has changed things?
I mean, purely as a financial input, has that helped industry or even on the consumer side?
Madan Sabnavis: See, it has definitely helped in terms of providing an incentive to industry to invest more. Now, private investment will not come running in immediately. It will come only at a time when demand picks up.
Similarly, when we lower the interest rates, say, for buying homes, it's only over a period of time that it will work. Because we should remember that the way in which the interest rates are structured in India, that as a home buyer, I know very well that if I'm going to take a home loan, say, for 20 years, interest rates are going to be high at certain points of time, they're going to be low at certain points of time. So the low rate which I get today is not something which is binding for the next 20 years.
So with this in mind, I think what is really important is do I have a demand where I really want to buy it? Is the price of property right? That is what will actually decide on the choice of whether I want to go in for higher spending.
The same thing will hold also for industry. So what interest rates do is that they only facilitate this kind of a decision. They say that, OK, the cost is not a factor today.
Other things will have to be looked at by other conditions like employment, incomes, other support which is provided by the company.
Govindraj Ethiraj: Right. Last question. So you've touched on export incentives or potential export incentives or incentives to exporters to make up for the tariff hit that may come.
Now, my question is, if you go by the past, I don't know whether you've studied this specifically right now, but if you go by the past, do these incentives help or do such incentives help? Or what do they do to ensure that exporters in this case are in good stead or are able to continue the fight?
Madan Sabnavis: See, when we're giving incentives to exporters, it's again a case of demand and supply. So whatever incentives are given by the government or by the Reserve Bank of India are more on the supply side. Ultimately, at the end of the day, you're competing with other countries, which could be competing not just on price, it could be on quality, there could be other relations which other exporters have.
So today, for example, in ready-made garments, which we are competing with, say, Vietnam or maybe even Bangladesh, Sri Lanka. Now, this kind of competition which is there, to a certain extent, we'd be able to provide by the incentives. Like, say, for example, let's talk about the PLI scheme.
If I have a PLI-like scheme for exporters, that's a direct thing which the government can provide. So it was also provided to around 15 industries. If you ask me how many of these industries have actually been successful, it's maybe around two or three of them which have done very well.
Electronics, maybe a solar panel, some parts of auto ancillaries, EVs, they have done well. It cannot work for other industries, it's still a work in progress. So even here, when we give incentives to exporters, it's a case of saying that it will take time.
Some will take it, some will not be able to benefit from it. Because there are other global conditions which are also playing. There'll be other countries providing similar benefits to their own exporters.
So at the end of the day, it's an open market. We cannot be sure of it. But from the point of view of the government or the Reserve Bank of India, if you're providing certain incentives to exporters, it's something which is required.
And the rest, of course, it depends upon how the players take it on, how they're able to compete favourably. Because at the end of the day, the decisions are going to be taken by, say, the American buyers. So the American companies, which are importing from other countries, are going to take the final decision about where to import and how to import, and they will have their own considerations for it.
Govindraj Ethiraj: Right. Madan, thank you so much for joining me.
Madan Sabnavis: Yeah, thanks.
—
Meanwhile, the rupee has recovered some ground after edging and hovering close to its all-time low on Tuesday, the 5th of August. It closed on Wednesday at Rs 87.73, up slightly from Rs 87.80 on Tuesday. And foreign exchange reserves have now fallen to about 688.9 or close to 689 billion dollars.
As of 1st of August, the Reserve Bank of India Governor revealed on Wednesday it's fallen about 9.3 billion dollars now compared to the previous week, which economists quoted by Reuters say reflects the central bank's defence of the rupee and tariff-related uncertainties.
The Bajaj Export Boost
Increasingly, Indian two- and four-wheeler makers are reporting stronger performance in sales, but this is also because of exports rather than the domestic market, which is sluggish, particularly for four-wheelers and even extending into two-wheelers, at least on a relative basis. Bajaj Auto beat quarterly profit estimates on Wednesday, helped by, according to the company, a record boost in exports as it resumed overseas shipments of its premium KTM motorcycles, according to a Reuters report.
Bajaj Auto exports its motorcycles and its three-wheelers to South America, Africa and Asia. Exports grew 16 percent during the quarter, and that offset an 8 percent decline in domestic sales. Bajaj also confirmed or rather said that export revenues had hit a record in the quarter but did not share further details, according to Reuters.
Will Test Cricket Come Back
The recently concluded Test series between India and England has been pitched as one of the greatest modern test series since the Ashes in 2005. A New York Times article said the series ended in the most extraordinary fashion at the Oval on Monday in England when Mohamed Siraj bowled Gus Atkinson to give India victory by just six runs and a 2-2 series draw with England. Now, the series, despite being a draw, has undoubtedly drawn more attention and interest from cricketers world over and enthusiasts, obviously, and in India, and more than before.
Remember, we're talking about 25 days of cricket across five matches. Given that test cricket has been given up on many times in recent years, was England the turning point? And if so, what could that mean for the business of the game? I reached out to Ayaz Memon, veteran sports and cricket journalist and frequent Core Report contributor, and I began by asking him whether this was indeed the biggest series since the Ashes 20 years ago.
INTERVIEW TRANSCRIPT
Ayaz Memon: This was a truly remarkable series. The result itself suggests how closely fought it was. But it was not just about the final scoreline to all.
You can have two completely one-sided matches in favour of one team and another two in favour of the other team, which are also completely one-sided. But here, each match, you know, it was a blow-for-blow contest. At the end of the day, each session seemed to matter.
It was a seesaw, ding-dong battle. I might use all the cliches and still not be able to communicate to you the thrill and the excitement which followed the action right through these 25 days. Four of the five test matches, in fact, all five went into the final day, which tells you how close it was.
And four of them actually went into the last hour. So that's how competitive, intensely competitive and close the contest was. And there, for 2-2, for the result to be 2-2, and from India's point of view especially, I want to highlight this.
One is that not many people gave India a chance to survive defeat in the series. They had gone there without Rohit Sharma, Virat Kohli, R. Ashwin, who were all retired abruptly, suddenly, whatever it was.
Mohammed Shami, one of their major pace bowlers, who was not declared fit by the medical authorities of the BCCI. And then there was a little bit of a question mark hovering over Jasprit Bumrah. How many matches will he play?
Will he play only three? Will he survive all three? How many overs will he bowl?
And so on and so forth. And then what happened is India went and lost the first match. And everybody said, ha ha, now this could be a clean sweep or a 3-0 or 4-0 or a 4-1 favour of England.
But India won the second test match. India lost the third test match. India saved the fourth test match in a very dramatic or melodramatic fashion.
And then went and won the fifth in an even more enthralling manner. On the last day, in the last 56 minutes of play, the tension was palpable to get four wickets, England needing only 35 runs and not reaching there, failing by six runs. It's the closest ever victory India has got in their test history.
So it's been that kind of a battle. And nobody thought this England team, bereft of the depth of experience which the players who I mentioned had brought, would fare so well under a new captain, Shubman Gill, leading for the first time in his life. So in all the pressure, the onus was on India to go and prove themselves.
And they did it in flying colours, with flying colours.
Govindraj Ethiraj: A lot of public attention, obviously, in recent years has been on IPL. And also because of the nature of what it does, which is, it's a couple of hours, at one shot, people come and enjoy. They really don't mind the composition of the teams themselves, which is a mix of international and domestic players.
Do you feel that this series brings back any attention to test matches, which was otherwise being given up as a genre?
Ayaz Memon: I think it's a massive boost. Remember, this series was the opening salvo of the next cycle of the World Test Championship, which is a two-year cycle, as we know. The first two cycles, India reached the final, but couldn't win the final.
In the third cycle, they could make the cut, but they didn't reach the final. So this, I think it's given a massive booster shot to test cricket, because it completely engaged everybody on the cricket circuit globally. The level of competition, the never-say-die spirit of both teams.
And I'd say, listen, England also had their issues. I mean, their bowling attack wasn't great consistently. And they had some injury problems also.
But I think they also put up a very stiff fight in order to try and win, because they have a fabulous record at home, but they've never reached the final of the WTC. So this was a battle for getting a head start into the next cycle, apart from the bilateral contest, which both wanted to win.
Govindraj Ethiraj: Right. And you talked about engaging and exciting global cricket. So do you feel that viewership also went up?
I mean, I'm sure it did, but I mean, to what extent? And do you feel that could continue?
Ayaz Memon: It went through the roof. If you go by the figures that were kind of, you know, broadcasters put up intermittently or periodically or continuously, you might, you know, some people say take that with a pinch of salt, but these things are measurable now. So I think the measurements or the measures will come.
We'll know the facts. We'll know the figures soon. But just to give you an idea, almost all of Bollywood was there watching either the Lords Test match or the Oval Test match, because both were played in London.
There was Sundar Pichai, who signed off from Google for a while and went and watched the match at the Oval. So all kinds of people who are interested or invested in cricket emotionally, financially, or otherwise, were all there. And the amount of followers on social media who are responding to what was happening in the field of play, almost in real time, from Australia, from New Zealand, from the US, was phenomenal.
You know, it just kind of boggled my mind.
Govindraj Ethiraj: Right. Yeah. And I did notice that too, which is why I was wondering whether this was passive participation or active participation.
So do you feel that all of this could change, let's say, the way some sponsorship flows or broader commercial interest in Test cricket?
Ayaz Memon: I think so. I think it will make Test cricket more appealing. Certainly, what we have seen, you know, India, when India went to Australia last year, the crowds were fantastic.
The viewership was fantastic. Record-breaking then. I think that record has been better here in England.
Maybe also because of the timings and stuff like that, because of the time difference. But I think the challenge for the ICC and for the cricket boards is that India, Australia, and England are commanding attention globally for Test cricket. And that's great for the game.
But what happens when the West Indies is playing Australia or, you know, Pakistan is going to play Sri Lanka? Will it get the same attention? Now, these are things that need to be addressed.
And there's a whole school of thought which says, listen to the ICC that, obviously, you want to make money, make money from these three big guys, but invest in the smaller teams so that they also raise the bar, the level of excellence in their respective countries. And therefore, the matches they play also become enjoyable. Now, you know, it's not as secular as it might sound, how cricket is apportioned and, you know, spoils are shared and all of that.
But it's an interesting situation now for the ICC because there's been so much talk over the last 20-25 years, Test cricket is dying, Test cricket is dying, Test cricket is dying. But the last two series have shown that Test cricket is alive and kicking.
Govindraj Ethiraj: Right. And, you know, obviously, Mohammad Siraj was one great performance with those 23 wickets, 180 overs and how he was playing at the very end into the last day of the last match. But my question is, from your perspective, what was the point, was there a tipping point where you felt that, okay, you know, here is the point where things have changed, not just for that particular match and that series, but in a way, even if it's only for now, Test cricket itself?
Ayaz Memon: In the context of this series, India versus England, Anderson Tendulkar Trophy, I think India losing the first Test and being baseballed, there's a whole term called baseball, which is the way England play their cricket and they chased down 373 runs in the first Test match. And it was like a rubbing that India got. From being in a winning position, they lost that match.
They collapsed twice in both innings. And therefore, it seemed that this is it now, you know, this has now become a very emollient psychological hurdle to cross or overcome after that. But hey, in the next match, India came back and won, you know, because they just fought so brilliantly.
And Shubman Jail came into its own. He had made 100 in the first match. He made 430 runs in that match alone.
Govind has made 754 runs in the series, which is the second highest by any captain in the history of the game behind only Donald Bradman. And his run aggregate was just 20 runs behind Sunil Gavaskar's 774. But as Gavaskar keeps highlighting, he was never the captain.
He was the only player. This guy had to carry the burden of responsibility on himself to lead the team as well as make runs. And he's only 25-26 in his first series as captain.
But in that match, Mohammad Siraj emerged as a game-changer. He picked up wickets. Then Akash Deep got inspired.
He picked up wickets. And they beat England. They turned the tables on England.
Then England turned the tables on India again in the third test match. And then in the fourth test match, when India looked down and out for the count, there was Jadeja and Washington Sundar, who's another young player. Jadeja is a veteran who batted the entire day to score 100 apiece and save the match.
And then, of course, as I mentioned, in the final test match, it went one way and the other. And finally, India prevailed in a thriller, an absolute thriller. So the financial implications, sorry, Govind, you had asked me just to give you an idea.
So in the last series, I mean, Jaswit Bumrah over the past few years has been India's pre-eminent, the world's pre-eminent fast bowler. And it's not often that you see bowlers across the world, but certainly from India, getting brand endorsements. But Jaswit Bumrah started getting them because of his sheer sustained excellence.
I dare say that after seeing the lion-hearted performance of Mohammad Siraj, the never-say-die attitude, the highest number of wickets in the series that he's picked up, he's going to be in everybody's spotlights. The sponsors will be looking at him as one of the guys who could be endorsing their products. And to give you a further insight into where the dynamics might change, before the series started, Shubhman Gill, who was endorsed, you know, endorsing for a sticker on his bat for X rupees, X crore per annum, when he was made captain, announced captain, maybe a little before that, around that period, he went to a rival company for the same thing, for the bat sticker, and he got 6X crore.
And had this come, this kind of decision to change or get a new sponsor come post this series, I dare say it could have gone up to 10X. So that's the kind of money-casing cricket still. It's by far the biggest money spinner in sports in India.
Govindraj Ethiraj: Right. I have run out of time. Thank you so much for joining me.
Ayaz Memon: Thank you. Thanks a lot. Take care. Bye-bye.
