And we’ll, of course, then be happy to share that with all of you. Meanwhile, I would say that we have taken into account the performance of the wind over the last 2 years. We have become, I think, a lot more — I would not say a lot more, but certainly, we’ve become a lot more mindful of looking at the near-term performance of wind over the last few years when we are making our longer-term forecast. So we are becoming a little bit more careful about the long-term forecast. So that correction to future projects that takes into account the last few years we are making. If — finally, the last 3 years, is seen more as an aberration to the long-term mean, then so much the better we just came out conservative on big forecast going forward. And of course, if it is, in fact, a change to what we had thought was the long-term mean, then our future bids at least will be more on track.
So that’s really where we are.
Puneet Gulati: Got it. My second question is on the acquisition, the 0.5 gigawatt acquisition. What’s driving in the delays? And this is — and now you’ve also segregated your EBITDA estimate between the acquisition and the organic. So is there a risk that the acquisition can get pushed into FY ’24 versus ’23?
Sumant Sinha: Kedar?
Kedar Upadhye: Yes. Yes. So Puneet, we are currently in the process of integrating this acquisition. This is through slump sale route and slump sale route means that you essentially acquire all the underlying assets for land and the PPA and everything, and that’s a little longer than the company acquisition. And there are — obviously, you have to circumvent state level issues, regulatory matters and that is taking a little bit of time. At this stage, it’s difficult for us to tell you exactly and precisely what we will end up with in the current year. That’s why we have helped you segregate that particular item. There might be some risk, but the quantum and the magnitude will be better placed to tell you by February call. So that’s the reason we are saying that the guidance is subject to completion of that acquisition.
However, I should add, Puneet, that the lock — the lockbox date of this acquisition is April, which means once the acquisition is consummated, the cash is secured. The only question is, the recognition in P&L from a revenue standpoint vis-a-vis recognition in balance sheet as a reduction in the capital expenditure. So that’s the only thing I wanted to add to it that lockbox date is in April. So the economic interest is secured. The only thing is the accounting whether in P&L on balance sheet.
Puneet Gulati: Got it. That’s useful. My last one is on the project Sumant said that you will give up projects where you won’t make below 16% to 20% IRRs. Does that mean that there are some projects — or do you see some projects which have that kind of risk in your portfolio projects where there are low tariffs of 2.18, 2.35. Do you foresee a point where you will just forfeit those projects from your portfolio?
Sumant Sinha: No, Puneet, let me clarify. What I meant to say was, not for our existing portfolio, but for any future bids that we might participate in. If we see that the tariff is coming to a level that we are not going to make the returns that we typically target, which is 16% to 20%, then we will walk away from those bids. We will not go ahead and build those bids in that case. For things that is already there in our portfolio that we’ve already won in the past, where we’ve already signed PPAs. First of all, by and large, I would say that most of our projects are within the defined range, and so we don’t anticipate any issues. But even if there were issues, having signed the PPA, it would now be difficult for us to walk away, and we will probably not be looking at doing that.
