The real estate market in India expanded at a CAGR of ~10% from $50bn to $120bn between 2008-17.
It's estimated to expand at a CAGR of 17.7% to $1tn by 2030. It will added $820bn in 10 years from $180bn in 2020.
Will throw a number of opportunities along the way.
More from Sahil Kapoor
More from Real estate
Domestic MDF market size is pegged at 2500Cr currently & is
expected to grow at 15% CAGR over the next 3 years (organised players to grow even faster).
The industry further has potential to capture incremental opportunity of 4500-5000Cr low-end plywood market. https://t.co/Cre3xVUNqu
GREENPANEL had 1,400 dealers (retail business) as of FY21 and added 250 dealers in 6MFY22. Target to
increase this to 2,200 by FY23.
The industry further has potential to capture incremental opportunity of 4500-5000Cr low-end plywood market. https://t.co/Cre3xVUNqu
GREENPANEL would grow earnings at 15-20% CAGR over the next 3-5 years with ROCE & Margin expansion once they commision the de-bottlenecked capacity in FY22 and the brownfield AP CAPEX in FY23/FY24.
— Saket Reddy (@saketreddy) October 14, 2021
Huge runway for growth, industry structure (both MDF & RE) turned for the good! https://t.co/jFTZCwhNMS
GREENPANEL had 1,400 dealers (retail business) as of FY21 and added 250 dealers in 6MFY22. Target to
increase this to 2,200 by FY23.
You May Also Like
This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?
Imagine for a moment the most obscurantist, jargon-filled, po-mo article the politically correct academy might produce. Pure SJW nonsense. Got it? Chances are you're imagining something like the infamous "Feminist Glaciology" article from a few years back.https://t.co/NRaWNREBvR pic.twitter.com/qtSFBYY80S
— Jeffrey Sachs (@JeffreyASachs) October 13, 2018
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?