Speaking & conversations

Work through the money and the commitment together

The funding account beyond the kiln supplier's quotation

Forty-five-minute capital-planning case workshop · CFOs, project sponsors and industrial directors

This proposed workshop examines a ₹9.8 crore kiln quotation that became an incomplete project cash account. Participants add ₹1.4 crore civil work, ₹1.1 crore grid connection and ₹0.7 crore startup needs, then consider the consequences of the ₹13 crore requirement, additional approval and nine-week delay. Deeksha's original endorsement remains visible. The discussion distinguishes supplier scope, enterprise cash requirements and accounting classification rather than assuming that all amounts receive the same treatment. Participants consider how operating requirements should enter an approval paper before its headline becomes a commitment colleagues rely on. The exercise uses fictional figures and offers no engineering certification or accounting opinion about a real project. Its intended learning is a more useful collaboration between finance and operations, including how to describe known requirements and remaining uncertainty without treating a general allowance as a substitute for understanding the work or a later correction as recovery of the original delay.

The delivery obligation behind money already in the bank

Forty-minute liquidity and distribution discussion · Finance leaders, owner-directors and operating executives

The proposed session considers ₹22 crore in bank cash, including ₹8.5 crore of customer advances, alongside ₹6.2 crore of estimated next-quarter fulfilment cash. Participants examine why a management reservation differs from a legal restriction and why subtracting one obligation does not produce a complete measure of freely distributable cash. The case retains a board decision to reduce a proposed dividend from ₹5.5 crore to ₹2 crore. We do not describe the difference as new profit or assume the fulfilment estimate will remain exact. Participants discuss how future operating demands enter a decision about a current balance and how uncertainty should be updated as the work develops. The exercise is fictional and does not recommend a distribution for any real company. Its purpose is to make the relationship between receipt, obligation and competing commitment more intelligible, with formal approvals and professional assessments left to the people responsible for them.

The invoice was funded, but what responsibility remained?

Forty-five-minute funding-terms roundtable · Treasury teams, CFOs and audit or risk committees

This proposed roundtable follows an invoice-funding offer involving ₹12 crore face value, ₹10.8 crore advanced and ₹1.2 crore held back before fees. Participants examine a contractual recourse condition after thirty days overdue and distinguish the liquidity benefit from a claim of complete credit-risk transfer. The case moves to a limited ₹6 crore pilot with ₹5.4 crore advanced, while retaining the contract's conditions. We discuss why a held-back balance is not automatically a fee and why a smaller programme still needs a full account of obligations. Accounting classification requires qualified assessment of the actual terms and applicable requirements; the session supplies no universal recognition rule. Participants work only with invented records. The intended learning is a clearer explanation of cash timing, retained exposure and the professional questions that must be resolved before a funding receipt is described as a risk that has left the enterprise.

Testing the refinancing offer before building a larger model

Thirty-five-minute financing-comparison workshop · Finance teams, executives and directors reviewing borrowing choices

The proposed workshop compares a 9% fixed-rate loan with an 8.5% alternative carrying a ₹36 lakh fee. The existing ₹24 crore balance has 24 months remaining and declines through repayments. Participants establish that even a constant full balance would yield no more than ₹24 lakh of interest reduction over two years, before amortisation reduces the benefit further. The case explains why that upper bound was sufficient to decline the stated offer without inventing a precise present-value result. We distinguish an avoided fee from an actual net saving and consider which changed terms would require a fresh assessment. This is an illustrative exercise, not borrowing advice for an unexamined company. Its purpose is to help colleagues keep rate, fee, remaining life and balance pattern in the same comparison, and to recognise when a clear bound resolves a question more honestly than an elaborate model built around an appealing percentage.

Short speaker biography

Deeksha Veqthari is the fictional CFO of Zevqoshi Kiln Furniture in Rourkela. She leads 38 finance colleagues and has twenty-seven years in manufacturing finance. Proposed sessions examine project cash, customer obligations, invoice funding and financing comparisons through invented decisions. She holds no statutory seat and claims no actual speaking engagement or external endorsement.

Standard speaker biography

Deeksha Veqthari is a fictional manufacturing CFO based in Rourkela. She leads 38 finance colleagues through four heads at Zevqoshi Kiln Furniture, with ₹7.8 crore annual function expense. Her twenty-seven-year career began in cost analysis and developed through site finance, enterprise control and planning. The profile retains a kiln-project cash account she supported incompletely, then examines customer advances, contractual recourse, refinancing fees and scarce production resources. She holds no direct equity or statutory appointment. Proposed sessions distinguish a numerical comparison from the operating and professional judgements it supports. All cases and engagements are illustrative, with no actual accounting opinion, technical certification or speaking booking asserted.

Extended speaker biography

Deeksha Veqthari is a fictional Indian chief financial officer based in Rourkela. She leads finance at Zevqoshi Kiln Furniture, an invented manufacturer of ceramic supports and setters used inside industrial kilns. The company employs 680 people at Rourkela and Sambalpur and recorded ₹264 crore revenue, ₹31.2 crore EBITDA and ₹18.6 crore operating profit for FY ending March 2026. Her remit includes 38 finance colleagues through four heads and ₹7.8 crore annual function expense under CEO Anand Tezqoshi. Her continuous career began in July 1999 after a commerce degree and progressed through cost analysis, site finance, control and planning. Five cases examine incomplete project cash, customer-advance obligations, invoice-funding recourse, refinancing economics and contribution per scarce production resource. She retains responsibility for an approved account that needed correction and distinguishes financial modelling from achieved operating benefit. She has no direct equity or statutory appointment. Her fictional preparation includes March 2026 IICA registration and a September assessment pass, without an exemption. Proposed outside contributions require consent, relationship review and a practical time assessment. Sessions use invented evidence and claim no actual bookings or external validation. Technical decisions and formal accounting conclusions remain with the authorised professionals responsible for assessing the actual circumstances.

An invitation

Contact

I would consider an initial outside-board discussion where manufacturing finance and operating economics could add to the existing skills. My fictional IICA record shows March 2026 registration and a September assessment pass, without an exemption. I have no statutory seat or direct holding. Twenty-four provisional days, employer consent and a qualified review of relationships would need to fit the proposed responsibilities before I could accept them.

Open to

Board appointments
Advisory roles
Speaking invitations

Write to Deeksha

office@deekshaveqthari.example