BANKING MARKETS AND THE RUN UP TOWARDS …pezzottaitejournals.net/pezzottaite/images/ISSUES/V4N3/... · · 2015-10-11its basic functions of receiving deposits and extending loans.‖

Volume 4, Number 3, July – September’ 2015

ISSN (Print):2319-9059, (Online):2319-9067

PEZZOTTAITE JOURNALS SJIF (2012): 3.946, SJIF (2013): 5.017, SJIF (2014): 5.912

International Journal of Trade & Global Business Perspectives© Pezzottaite Journals. 1865 |P a g e

BANKING MARKETS AND THE RUN UP TOWARDS LIBERALIZATION

Dr. Renu Gupta14

INTRODUCTION

A bank is a financial intermediary and hence comes under one of the classifications of financial institutions. Financial institutions

are the economic agents that specialise in buying and selling activities and deal in financial contracts and securities. Banks may be

seen as a subset of the financial institutions, which are retailers of financial securities: they buy the securities issued by borrowers

and they sell them to lenders, Deb A.T. (2005). In view of varied and complex operations of a bank, an operational definition of a

bank can be provided as, ―A bank is a financial institution whose current operations consist in granting loans and receiving

deposits from the public basically other than providing various fees based financial services generating non-interest income unlike

its basic functions of receiving deposits and extending loans.‖

The ―Banking Regulation Act, 1949‖ defines banking as ―the accepting, for the purpose of lending or investment, of deposits of

money from the public, repayable on demand or otherwise, and withdraw able by cheque, draft, order or otherwise‖. The Act

defined the functions that a commercial bank can undertake and restricted their sphere of activities. Nevertheless, modern

commercial banking operations touch almost every sphere of economic activity. In the modern world, it is not possible to make an

exhaustive list of their functions and services because commercial banks perform a variety of functions. Though functionally diverse and

geographically widespread, commercial banks in India played a crucial role in the socioeconomic progress of the country in the post-

independence period (Kunjukunju, 2008).

Bank is an organisation, which deals in two functions: extending loans and receiving deposits. Hence, banking market is constituted that is the

sum of advances made and deposits received. Now, banks pay interest on deposits received and charge interest on advances made. If banks

increase the rate of interest to be paid on bank deposits, owners of the bank suffer due to high cost of deposits in form of high interest payment

to be made and on the other hand, if interest charged on loans made by banks is raised then borrowers suffer. Thereby, a balance is needed to

be maintained. Moreover, commercial banks can be broadly categorized into SBI group, nationalized banks, private banks and foreign banks

since nationalisation1 of Indian Banking took place. The present study is aimed at analyzing the pattern of banking markets of the previously

mentioned banks since nationalization until liberalization. There is no dearth of studies related to banking and post liberalization period, the

present paper attempts to analyses the run up towards liberalization with special reference to banking markets developed after nationalization

as hardly such a study exists in this context.

CONCEPTS OF BANKING

Distinction between a Bank and a Firm

Unlike other entities, profitability is not the single objective that a commercial bank has to pursue. To maintain liquidity is equally

important for a commercial bank without which it may lose public confidence resulting in a run on the bank. Thus, in contrast to

an ordinary firm, a banking firm always needs to negotiate dual objective function including both profitability as well as liquidity.

In simple words, banks are required to maintain a trade-off between profitability and liquidity. A bank is also differentiated from

an ordinary firm based on nature of risks it faces. However, it is the fact that existing of an intermediary like bank has a net cost

advantage as compared to direct lending and borrowing; a double-edged risk is faced by banks, one from the lender‘s side and

other one from the borrower‘s side. This is because the equity base of a bank is naturally small relative to the liability. Deposits

constitute a substantial part of liability of a bank. Besides current and savings deposits, even term deposits can be subject to

premature withdrawal. When creditors are reluctant to extend or renew their credit to the bank, or they are willing to renew at

different terms alone, a bank faces a withdrawal or liquidity risk. On the contrary, a default risk arises when the debtors of the

bank are not able or willing to meet their obligations towards the bank at the agreed upon time. Thus, existence of both liquidity

and default risk for a bank distinguishes it from an ordinary firm. Moreover, a bank creates a public good in terms of liquidity and

means of payment as opposed to a firm. Thus, it can be interpreted that the externalities of a bank failure are far serious than those

emerging from a failure of a firm. As failure of a firm creates hardship for the labour force employed in the firm mainly, not for

public in general. While the economic and political costs of failure of large banks may be substantial forcing the governments to

bail them out. Global Trust Bank provides such an example in India.

________________________________

1On July 19, 1969, 14 banks were nationalized and on April15, 1980, 6 more banks were nationalized. Thus, this paper examines

the period beginning after second face of nationalization until establishment of new private banks because of liberalization of

banking sector as per the recommendations of Narasimham Committee Report I, 1991

14Assistant Professor, Commerce Department, Sri Guru Gobind Singh College of Commerce, University of Delhi, Delhi, India,

[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]





Banking Market and Industry

It is very truly determined by Deb A.T. (2005) that an analysis of the banks must be preceded by a clarification of certain basic

concepts, like a banking market, to provide out the contours of the study. Gibson‘s (1984) survey of literature on bank market

structure and competition highlighted the importance of defining a banking market. In accordance with Haslem (1985),

specification of banking products, i.e. services and definition of geographic pattern of banking markets are the two basic problems

in defining a banking market. He also claimed that existence of one single market for banking services, or different markets for

various banking services, depends on whether, financial services provided by bank, are complementary to one another, or each

banking service constitute a distinct product. The relevant clue to the problem is whether consumers consider non-identical

financial services substitutes for one another or complementary services consumed together. Haslem contended that the

determination of geographic markets is a function of the specification of financial services. In the present context, geographical

spread of the market aspect has lost its significance with emergence of telephone banking, Internet banking and ATMs, which

enable countrywide access to banking services.

All aspects of a banking market have not been elaborated by Haslem. Actually, three factors are relevant in understanding the concept of a

banking market: (a) nature of the products produced by a bank; (b) size of bank; and (c) size of banking market. The volume of both

deposits and advances may capture the size of a bank. The basic functions of a bank lead to such a conceptualization that depicts the

control of the bank over the market. On the one hand, Provision of advances justifies deposit mobilization, and deposits once mobilized

are of no use, if advances are not made from these deposits. Profitable operation of the bank will be adversely effected if deposits expand

but advances do not. In an opposite situation, where advances go on increasing but deposits do not, the bank will be able to sustain neither

increased credit, nor maintain liquidity. Thus, in both the situation, the existence of a bank will be endangered. The discussion makes it

clear that deposits and advances are complements. As for the size of the bank, it would follow that it is the sum total of deposits and

advances. In the same manner, the size of the market is the sum of the respective sizes of the total number of banks operating in the

market. It is also important to clarify the similarities and dissimilarities between the two related concepts, market and industry in

context of a bank. Industry features production and is defined by the technology and the materials used in a particular product by

the group of suppliers who make it. On the contrary, market features exchange and is defined by the products, which compete for

the business of a set of buyers. The market may be supplied by both imports and the domestic industry. For example, Indian

automobile market refers to domestic trade in new cars, notwithstanding where automobiles are produced. This is not so for a

service industry like banking, where production and exchange take place simultaneously. Thus, banking market and banking

industry can be used inter-changeably.

OBJECTIVES, SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY

The present paper aims at analyzing the banking markets since nationalization until liberalization. The objective of the study is

three fold. Firstly, to observe the banking markets2 of the four banking segments: SBI group, nationalized banks, private banks

and foreign banks in terms of overall growth rate for a period of 15 years between 1981 to 1995. Secondly, comparing each

banking segment with one another individually in pairs to judge whether there is significant difference between the means of their

market shares3 in the three time periods: 1981 to 1985, 1986 to 1990 and 1991 to 1995 separately. Thirdly, to judge the magnitude

and direction of correlation in the market shares of the banking segments individually in pairs for the three stated time frames

separately as discussed. To serve the previously mentioned objectives, ACGRs of the total markets of the banking segments have

been estimated with the help of four semi log regression equations. Paired t test has been used to contrast the difference in the

means of banking segments market shares in 6pairs: (SBI group, nationalized banks), (SBI group, private banks), (SBI group,

foreign banks), (nationalized banks, private banks), (nationalized banks, foreign banks) and (private banks, foreign banks). For the

three times separately taken for the study. On the same grounds, correlation between the market shares of the banking segments

has also been examined. Data has been collected from RBI website.

EMPIRICAL FINDINGS

Growth of Total Market (1981-1995)

The trend and ACGRs of the total markets or market size of the four banking segments understudy have been shown with the help

of Table-1 and Table-2 respectively. For the purpose, four semi log equations have been formed for each banking segment

separately as follows:

Log TM=a + bt + ui

Where:

________________________________ 2Banking market is constituted of the sum of its deposits and advances also known as total market or market size. 3The proportion of the market size or total market of each banking segment in percentage terms have been estimated out of their

total.





TM stands for total market of each banking segment,

A is constant term,

B is the slope representing growth rate,

T stands for the time,

Ui is the error term.

Table-1: Total Market (Figures In Crores)

Year SBI Group Nationalized Banks Private Banks Foreign Banks

1981 25713.67 53195.86 4267.65 2373.93

1982 30493.87 61504.35 4981.29 2738.83

1983 35688.68 72351.88 5795.71 3302.43

1984 41725.15 86323.44 6845.08 3937.85

1985 48315.47 100680.7 7157.05 4997.21

1986 54313.69 118601.2 8163.9 6406.13

1987 62392.52 135589.5 8228.01 7110.03

1988 66992.29 145421.5 9292.333 7729.156

1989 80368.73 167621.7 9637.91 10803.65

1990 98862.47 201752.7 12066.97 14494.35

1991 114633.5 227801 14381.52 18853.68

1992 129774.9 250135.9 18746.68 26613.15

1993 144126 276450.2 23357.43 31916.38

1994 153373 296827.7 29910.82 37507.15

1995 177135.4 349568.2 44972.75 43260.82

Sources: Authors Compilation

Table-2: Annual Compound Growth Rates (ACGRs)

Banking Segments ACGR P-Value

SBI Group 7.191451 1.1E-16

Nationalized Banks 7.451009 2.75E-15

Private Banks 6.371254 2.8E-09

Foreign Banks 4.545088 1.23E-14


It is indicated by Table 2 that total markets of SBI group, nationalized banks, private banks and foreign banks are growing at the

rate of 7.19%, 7.45%, 6.37% and 4.54% respectively for the period between 1981 to 1995. These results are significant as well as

shown by their P-values smaller than 0.05: 1.1e-16, 2.75e-15, 2.8e-09 and 1.23e-14 respectively in the Table 2.

t-Test: Paired Two Samples for Means

Empirical results have been shown with the help of Table 3, Table 4a, Table 4b and Table 4c respectively.

Table-3: Market Shares (in percent)

Period Year SBI Group Nationalized Banks Private Banks Foreign Banks Total

I 1981 30.0565 62.18021 4.988422 2.774868 100

1982 30.58 61.67807 4.99536 2.746566 100

1983 30.46703 61.76599 4.947733 2.819248 100

1984 30.05452 62.17856 4.930494 2.836424 100

1985 29.98159 62.47623 4.441222 3.100959 100

II 1986 28.96963 63.25907 4.354429 3.416877 100

1987 29.24831 63.56153 3.857119 3.333034 100

1988 29.0324 63.58798 3.904643 3.474972 100

1989 29.94007 62.44476 3.590448 4.024725 100

1990 30.21686 61.6648 3.688214 4.430131 100

III 1991 30.51443 60.63865 3.828236 5.018686 100

1992 30.51584 58.81805 4.408176 6.257932 100

1993 30.28812 58.09608 4.90857 6.707235 100

1994 29.63049 57.34487 5.778544 7.246098 100

1995 28.80544 56.84617 7.31339 7.034999 100






Table-4a: Paired t Test Results (Period I: 1981-1985)

S. No. Banking Segments Means R R SQUARE t Stat P(T<=t) two-tail

1 SBI Group 30.22793

Nationalized Banks 62.05581 -0.96372 (-) 0.9287 -118.94 3E-08


Private Banks 4.860646 0.530878 0.2818 227.344 2.25E-09


Foreign Banks 2.855613 -0.58095 (-)0.3374 163.25 8.45E-09

4 Nationalized Banks 62.05581

Private Banks 4.860646 -0.73312 (-) 0.5374 242.4733 1.74E-09


Foreign Banks 2.855613 0.763253 0.5825 552.8689 6.42E-11

6 Private Banks 4.860646

Foreign Banks 2.855613 -0.9899 (-)0.9799 11.89781 0.000286


(SBI Group, Nationalized banks): The mean market shares of SBI group and nationalized banks are 30.23% and 62.05% for

period I, 1981-85. It is shown by the Table 4a that difference between the mean market shares of SBI group and nationalized

banks is very high as indicated by very low P-value 3e-08. Moreover, very high negative correlation is discovered between the two

banking groups as suggested by coefficient of determination (r2) that is (-) 93% approximately.

(SBI Group, Private Banks): As per table 4a, the mean market share of private banks is 4.86% for period I, 1981-85 and it is

substantially different from that of SBI group as indicated by extremely small P-value 2.25e-09in this context. The mean market

shares of SBI group and private banks are positively correlated albeit the magnitude of correlation is not very high as depicted by

r2 28%

(SBI Group, Foreign Banks): The mean market share of foreign banks is 2.85% that is significantly different from that of SBI

group as manifested by very low P-value 8.45e-09 in Table 4a. In addition, coefficient of determination is (-) 34% indicates that

there is negative correlation though low.

(Nationalized Banks, Private Banks): The mean market shares of nationalized banks and private banks are significantly different

for period I: 1981-85 that can be judged by very low P-value 1.79e-09 as per Table 4a. In addition, correlation between the mean market

shares of the two banking groups is negative but not very high as can be understood by coefficient of determination 54%.

(Nationalized Banks, Foreign Banks): In Table 4a, it can be observed by very low P-value 6.42e-11 that there is significant

difference between nationalized banks and foreign banks in relation to their mean market shares. Further, positive correlation is

there between two banking groups but not very high as suggested by coefficient of determination r2 58% in this respect.

(Private Banks, Foreign Banks): With regard to private banks and foreign banks as given in the Table 4a, the mean market shares

are highly different. It is also corroborated by small P-value that is around .0003. Moreover, (-) 98%, coefficient of determination

signifies that negative correlation is very high between these two banking segments.

To conclude, significant difference is found in the mean market shares of the four banking segments when compared with one

another in pairs for the period I, 1981 to 1985. However, as a matter of exception; positive correlation is only found in mean

market shares of (SBI group, private banks) and (nationalized banks, foreign banks). Moreover, negative correlation is very high

between (SBI group, nationalized banks) and (private banks, foreign banks) for period I.

Table-4b: Paired t Test Results (Period II: 1986-1990)



Nationalized Banks 62.90363 -0.94041 (-)0.8843 -54.3248 6.87E-07


Private Banks 3.878971 -0.78738 (-)0.6199 70.19337 2.47E-07


Foreign Banks 3.735948 0.953248 0.908682 317.0309 5.94E-10


Private Banks 3.878971 0.5515 0.3042 184.9124 5.13E-09






Foreign Banks 3.735948 -0.98227 (-)0.9648 101.7002 5.61E-08


Foreign Banks 3.735948 -0.6548 (-)0.4287 0.455126 0.672627


(SBI Group, Nationalized banks): The mean market shares of SBI group and nationalized banks are 29.48% and 62.9%

respectively for period II, 1985-90. It is shown by the Table 4b that difference between the mean market shares of SBI group and

nationalized banks is significantly high as indicated by very small P-value 6.87e-07. Furthermore, very high negative correlation is

located between the two category of banks as asserted by coefficient of determination (r2) that is (-) 88% approximately.

(SBI Group, Private Banks): In Table 4b, the mean market share of private banks is 3.87% for period II, 1985-90 and it is

substantially different from that of SBI group as recommended by very small P-value 2.47e-07 in this context. The mean market

shares of SBI group and private banks are negatively associated although the magnitude of correlation is not very high that can be

understood by r2 (-) 62%

(SBI Group, Foreign Banks): The mean market share of foreign banks is 3.73% as per Table 4b which is substantially different

from SBI group as manifested by very low P-value 5.94e-10 in the Table 4b. Additionally, coefficient of determination is 91%

approximately indicates that there is high degree of positive correlation between the market shares of two banking markets in

question for period II.


for period II: 1985-90 that can be discerned by very small P-value 5.13e-09. In addition, correlation between the mean market

shares of the two banking groups is positive but very low as can be understood by coefficient of determination that is 30% only.

(Nationalized Banks, Foreign Banks): In Table 4b, it can be observed by very less P-value 5.61e-08 that there is significant

difference between nationalized banks and foreign banks in relation to their mean market shares. Further, negative correlation is

there between two banking groups and very high as noted by coefficient of determination r2 which is given as (-) 96% in this

respect.

(Private Banks, Foreign Banks): With regard to private banks and foreign banks as given in the Table 4b, the mean market shares

are not significantly different in view of high P-value .6726. Moreover, (-) 43% coefficient of determination also showcase that

negative correlation is there but very low in between these two banking groups.

Interpretation is that the difference between the mean market shares of the banking segments remained significant in period II,

1986 to 1990 as well but private and foreign banks became to converge in this respect. Moreover, positive correlation is seen

between (SBI group, foreign banks) and (nationalized banks, private banks) in comparison to other contrasts made where

correlation between bank groups is negative especially (SBI group, nationalized banks) and (nationalized banks, foreign banks).

Table-4c: Paired t Test Results: (Period III: 1991-1995)



Nationalized Banks 58.34876 0.805146 0.6482 -64.0452 3.56E-07


Private Banks 5.247383 -0.98161 (-)0.9635 26.48617 1.21E-05


Foreign Banks 6.45299 -0.67383 (-) 0.454 35.42461 3.79E-06


Private Banks 5.247383 -0.893 (-)0.7974 42.95253 1.76E-06


Foreign Banks 6.45299 -0.97457 (-)0.9497 49.32097 1.01E-06


Foreign Banks 5.247383 0.777589 0.6046 -3.09347 0.036451


(SBI Group, Nationalized Banks): It is shown by the Table 4c that difference between the mean market shares of SBI group and

nationalized banks is very high as indicated by very small P-value 3.56e-07. More, positive and moderate correlation is found

between these two groups as implied by coefficient of determination (r2) that is nearly 65%.





(SBI Group, Private Banks): The mean market share of private banks is 5.25% for period III, 1991-95 and it is substantially

different from that of SBI group as suggested by very low P-value 1.21e-05 in this context. The mean market shares of SBI group

and private banks are negatively correlated along with very high magnitude of correlation as depicted by r2 (-) 96%.

(SBI Group, Foreign Banks): The mean market share of foreign banks is 6.45%, which is altogether different from that of SBI

group as manifested by very small P-value 1.76e-06 in the Table 4c. Coefficient of determination is (-) 45% approximately

indicates that there is negative correlation between the market shares of two banking markets for period III.


for period III: 1991-95 that can be peered by very low P-value 1.76e-06. Other than this, correlation between the mean market

shares of the two banking groups is negative and high as can be determined by coefficient of determination that is around (-)

80%.

(Nationalized Banks, Foreign Banks): In Table 4c, it can be stated by very low P-value 1.01e-06 that there is significant difference

between nationalized banks and foreign banks in relation to their mean market shares. Further, negative correlation is there

between two banking groups and very high as highlighted by coefficient of determination r2 that is near about (-) 95% in this

respect.

(Private Banks, Foreign Banks): With regard to private banks and foreign banks as given in the Table 4c, the mean market shares

are not significantly different. This fact is approved by very small P-value 0.0364. 60% coefficient of determination also showcase

that positive correlation is there but not very high between private and foreign banks as per the results.

Substantial difference is observed amongst mean market shares of all the six pairs formed of four banking groups under

comparison. In period III, 1991-95, only mean market shares of (SBI group, nationalized banks) and (private banks, foreign

banks) showed positive correlation. In addition (SBI group, private banks), (nationalized banks, private banks) and (nationalized

banks, foreign banks) were highly negatively correlated in terms of mean market share.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

Bank is an organisations dealing in two functions: extending loans and receiving deposits. Thereby, banking market is comprised of the sum

of advances made and deposits received and a balance is needed to be maintained with respect to interest received and interest paid. Since

nationalization of Indian Banking took place, commercial banks can be broadly categorized into SBI group, nationalized banks, private banks

and foreign banks. The present study is aimed at analyzing the pattern of banking markets of the aforesaid banks after nationalization and

before liberalization for a period of 15 years ranging between 1981 to 1995.

To attain the aforesaid objective, overall growth rates for 15 years of the individual banking groups have been analyzed that come out to be

7.19%, 7.45%, 6.37% and 4.54% respectively. Moreover, the entire period of 15 years is divided into three periods: 1981-85,

1986-90 and 1991-95. With the help of paired t test, difference between the mean market shares along with correlation of the four

banking groups in 6 pairs: ( SBI group, nationalized banks), (SBI group, private banks), (SBI group, foreign banks), ( nationalized

banks, private banks), (nationalized banks, foreign banks) and (private banks, foreign banks) has been observed separately for

each of the three sub periods. The mean market shares of the banking groups under comparison in 6 pairs for all the three periods

have been found to be significantly different from one another except mean market shares of private banks and foreign banks for

the period II, 1986-90.

However, direction and magnitude of correlation in the market shares kept fluctuating. As in period I, positive correlation is only

found in mean market shares of (SBI group, private banks) and (nationalized banks, foreign banks) while negative correlation is

very high between (SBI group, nationalized banks) and (private banks, foreign banks) for the same period. Moreover, in period II,

positive correlation is seen between (SBI group, foreign banks) and (nationalized banks, private banks) in comparison to other

contrasts made where correlation between bank groups is negative especially (SBI group, nationalized banks) and (nationalized

banks, foreign banks) where it remained very high. And in period III, 1991-95, only mean market shares of (SBI group,

nationalized banks) and (private banks, foreign banks) showed positive correlation. In addition (SBI group, private banks),

(nationalized banks, private banks) and (nationalized banks, foreign banks) were highly negatively correlated in terms of mean

market share.

These results indicate that nationalization began the process of convergence in the growth rates of the market shares of SBI group

and nationalized banks on the one hand and private banks and foreign banks on the other hand.

The direction of correlation in the mean market shares of the banking groups has also changed from period I to period III in the

way to bring similarity in the mean market shares of SBI group and nationalized banks to be appropriately called them as public

sector banks. Similar pattern is highlighted in case of private banks and foreign banks to be rightly known as private banking





industry. In period III, 1991 to 95, these changes became more visible and prominent. Still, it cannot be denied that there were

some historical factors as well other than liberalization leading to these results; one of them was of course nationalization. Thus, it

can be stated in the end that the run up towards liberalization led to polarization of banking industry in India into private banking

vs. public sector banking.

REFERENCES

1. Bhanu, Murthy K. V., & Deb, Ashish Taru. (2007b). Operationalising and Measuring Competition”: Determinants of

Competition in Private Banking Industry in India. Retrieved from

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1073682.

2. Deb, A. T. (2005). The Impact of Deregulation on Private Banking Industry (Unpublished Doctoral Thesis).

University of Delhi.

3. Gibson, R. A. (1984). Bank Market Structure and Competition. Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, 16(4), 616-

645.

4. Haslem, J. A. (1985). Commercial Bank Management. Virginia: Reston Publishing Co.

5. Kalita Basanta. Banking Sector Reforms in India. Retrieved from


6. Kunjukunju, Benson. (2008). Commercial Banks in India: Growth, Challenges and Strategies. New Delhi: New

Century Publications.

7. Satija, Kalpana C. Current Observations on Banking. Retrieved from


8. Sethi, Jyotsna, & Bhatia, Nishwan. (2007). Elements of Banking and Insurance. New Delhi: Prentice-Hall of India

Private Limited.

9. Retrieved from www.rbi.org.in

10. Retrieved from

http://www.researchgate.net/publication/228240835_The_Determinants_and_Trends_of_the_Dynamics_of_Mar...

11. Retrieved from http://www.igidr.ac.in/money/mfc-13/mfc_6/mfc_06/ashish.doc

12. Retrieved from http://www.academia.edu/6465350/COMPLETE_PROJECT

13. Retrieved from http://dspace.knust.edu.gh:8080/xmlui/bitstream/handle/123456789/4274/BEDFORD%20AKUFFO-

DUAH.pdf?sequ...

*****

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1073682



http://www.rbi.org.in/

http://www.researchgate.net/publication/228240835_The_Determinants_and_Trends_of_the_Dynamics_of_Mar

http://www.igidr.ac.in/money/mfc-13/mfc_6/mfc_06/ashish.doc

http://www.academia.edu/6465350/COMPLETE_PROJECT

http://dspace.knust.edu.gh:8080/xmlui/bitstream/handle/123456789/4274/BEDFORD%20AKUFFO-DUAH.pdf?sequ

http://dspace.knust.edu.gh:8080/xmlui/bitstream/handle/123456789/4274/BEDFORD%20AKUFFO-DUAH.pdf?sequ

Documents

BANKING MARKETS AND THE RUN UP TOWARDS …pezzottaitejournals.net/pezzottaite/images/ISSUES/V4N3/... · · 2015-10-11its basic functions of receiving deposits and extending loans.‖