Embattled Infosys’ third largest institutional investor OppenheimerFunds has said its views on the company have not been “materially” impacted by CEO Vishal Sikka quitting.
The views assume significance as large investors take on Infosys and their buy-in will be critical in shaping the company’s narrative in the next few days.
“The investment team’s thesis on Infosys has not been materially affected by the
She was responding to an email query on whether the recent developments at Infosys were a cause of a worry for the investment fund that holds 2.16 per cent stake (4.96 crore shares) as of June 30, 2017 in the Bengaluru-based company.
Sikka, Infosys’ first non-founder CEO, resigned last week citing slander by the founders. In the high drama that followed, the board issued a stinging statement blaming co-founder N R Narayana Murthy for the CEO’s resignation and also said it would find a replacement latest by March 31, 2018.
A day after the announcement, Infosys board also approved the proposal of up to Rs 13,000-crore buyback offer.
The heated war of words — often public — between the Infosys board and Murthy has been on for months now. Murthy, along with some former key executives have alleged serious lapses in corporate governance and also raised questions on some top executives’ pay as well as a $200-million acquisition by the company.
Matters came to a head when an anonymous letter was sent to the Securities and Exchange Board of India and the US Securities and Exchange Commission earlier this year, alleging that the Israel-based Panaya acquisition by Infosys was overvalued and that some company executives may have benefited from the deal.
While an independent probe absolved the board of any wrongdoing, Murthy kept up the pressure on Infosys, exhorting the company to make public the full contents of the investigation report.
On August 18 when Vishal Sikka quit, the board in a scathing verbal attack on Murthy blamed the latter’s “continuous assault” and inappropriate demands for Sikka’s extreme move and ruled out a formal role for the co-founder in the company’s governance.
The board rued that its efforts to resolve the concerns of the founders over the course of a year through a dialogue had not been successful and warned that Murthy’s actions and demands were damaging the company.