An other wise a normal day, seems 2 have become historical as the judgment for the most dreadful terrorist of the mumbai attack has seen the day light and kasab's life darkened.
Stake holders of 26/11:
Terrorist organisation:
They have done what they had intended to - terrorize.
There was a world wide display of the loop holes available to enter India run a massacre in the financial capital - It was an outrageous attempt to put the 'sleepless' city to sleep and in the process had the entire country sleepless. The fear was so immense that the city - that never sleeps became insomniac out of shear fear.
Media :
The news channel did a flawless execution of what these terrorist organisation wanted to - create fear, terror in the minds of people - by doing a 24/7 live coverage during the attacks. They also kept reminding us of the dare devil terrorist and the unsecured lives - we are living - by creating a news everyday after 26/11 till today which might continue - for our judicial system does give some hopes to even kasab.
Judiciary:
The Indian judiciary seems to have taken these terrorist as just another criminals and have taken their own sweet time to pass the judgment ( For kasab still has the supreme court to plead to and then, the president. All this can give him atleast 2 more years of life). When US can capture and give death sentence to an other country president, why is India so hesitant in doing the same to some guy called kasab - who would have not hit the headlines but for the attack.
People:
But as a common man, why is this judgment important to me or what difference it would make to my life. Is kasab an end to terrorism ? Is India now a safer place to live ? Well this questions will remain unanswered and my life just like billion others would continue to be on the edge.
Only wish - kasab should have been given death sentence a little earlier ( Almost 2yrs since the attacks and he is still alive, while the survivors of the innocent citizens killed by him are dying everyday). This way we would have atleast created fear in the minds of future terrorist and a false feeling of safety too.
Thursday, May 6, 2010
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
Politics – the art of camouflaging
The idea here is not to propagate or degrade any political party but it is merely to opine about the present political system, which allows the ruling party to indulge in activities that is aimed to ensure their victory in the next elections – short sightedness or narrowed mindedness call it the way you want but surely the ultimate loser is you – the subjects of the democratic system.
The Lincoln’s idea – ‘of the people, by the people, for the people ‘has been somehow forgotten and merely left is this - of the party, by the party, for the party.
Consider the plight of the country, which in a sense is world’s largest democracy but it sounds rather more of a liability to safeguard it than blowing trumpets about it. Where in some of the nation’s biggest political parties are indulged in activities that are only justified if we believe they have been done it for their own (party and individual) benefit. I am using following incidents/acts/programmes just as an illustration to bring forth my view. Few may think I am judgemental or I am overlooking the nice deeds (which I think would have been covered extensively by the media these parties own or have tie-ups with)
“Herb is the healing of a nation, alcohol is the destruction’ does not seem to have gone in with our political representatives. In lieu of resolving the issue of bootlegging as it caused many casualties in the past a party opened up a chain of liquor shops so that every individual had free and effortless access to liquor and minors are no exception here and irony is the country does not even have such a good access to drinking water. Today, this chain is as large as PDS (ration shops) or may be even larger. So, the person may or may not have access to subsidized food grains but he surely has access to liquor. The chain is obviously giving huge profits, totally insulated from the economic downturn and the government is making huge money and party is ensuring votes too but at the expense of tomorrow’s drunkard citizens. – I am not promoting ‘Ban liquor – concept’ that has failed miserably in past in one of the states but we should ensure that people do not have such effortless access to a bottle of liquor specially minors, which is almost impossible if you have liquor shops almost at par with road side pan shops or petty shops.
‘Don’t give them fish, but teach them to fish’ doesn’t seem to be the right mantra, if you want to ensure the seats for the next election. So a ruling party decided to give the people basic food and allied stuff at a price, which wouldn’t have been viable even in the 60’s & 70’s (Rice at Rs. 1 / kg – ridiculous!!!). So you buy from the farmers at a price, which is profitable to him (farmer -because even he is your vote bank) and sell it at a price, which is profitable to the party (next election is never far away) and about the people they are always at loss. The problem with the entire system is it only results in higher deficit and for the country that has been struggling to reduce deficit ‘highly subsidized’ concept doesn’t look like a sensible idea. – I am not promoting ‘Starve the poor to death’ but why can’t we simply provide them with opportunities to earn their bread by investing the same amount of money spent in subsidy to develop infrastructure and opportunities. Some might argue ‘starvation is a day-to-day problem, which cannot be resolved by a long term plan’ but subsidized food is much more short term solution and will never reap benefits but for votes in the next elections. The 100 days job opportunity was a much better and a wonderful solution so why not implement the same on larger scale; the country that has manpower in abundance can do wonders and obviously earn more than their daily bread and butter.
‘Knowledge is power’ seem to have been misinterpreted as there was never a clear idea of what type of knowledge but I can assure knowledge of television serials, actors & actresses, movies, cricket etc will give you( the people) no real power but it surely does give power (vote power) to the party - to rule again. The idea of distributing Colour TV’s to people who are fighting for their next meal seems to be a little illogical. The simple understanding of hierarchy of human needs would tell you entertainment is a leisure need and would only be present in people who have their other basic needs fulfilled. Resultant the government gave free TV’s, that kick started a huge black market for colour TV’s what else do you expect the people to do when you give them TV’s irrespective of whether or not they can afford the electricity bills/ cable bills. Again money (government’s money – Tax payers’ money) was drained for no good of people but for the benefit of the party to promote itself for the next election. I am not promoting ‘Poor don’t need entertainment’ but can we appreciate they need many more things that are much more basic like food, clothing and shelter, which are more important than entertainment.
Many other instances of such acts – the grand new assembly building – as if we were conducting assembly under the banyan tree so far, marina beach make over – as if people didn’t visit the beach so far etc which were camouflaged as acts of generosity or universal good but they were neither because generosity comes when you spend your own money for others but this was people’s money spent and they were not for larger good as no one in the long run would benefit but for the party which will use this as a promotional expenses out of governments’ pockets.
It is quite necessary that proper guidelines are in place when it comes to spending huge chunk of money.
Though i am not a expert here, some of them could be
1) Independent (politically neutral) organization should vet the plan and do a socio-economic cost-benefit analysis, which should be strictly published in all major dailies instead of spending enormous amount in advertising the same. The organisation should be made accountable for the study.
2) Peoples feedback via SMS etc, if possible should be taken and people across the country should be allowed to participate.
3) None of the schemes/plans should be used as a source to promote a political party. If used, not less than 50% should be funded by such party.
4) All such norms should be followed for a spending which is above a certain cut-off level.
Well I would like to close with popular promotion campaign run by an Indian business house - ‘Jaago re’
Disclaimer: The incidents happen to be related to a particular state as am not well read with the politics of other states.
The Lincoln’s idea – ‘of the people, by the people, for the people ‘has been somehow forgotten and merely left is this - of the party, by the party, for the party.
Consider the plight of the country, which in a sense is world’s largest democracy but it sounds rather more of a liability to safeguard it than blowing trumpets about it. Where in some of the nation’s biggest political parties are indulged in activities that are only justified if we believe they have been done it for their own (party and individual) benefit. I am using following incidents/acts/programmes just as an illustration to bring forth my view. Few may think I am judgemental or I am overlooking the nice deeds (which I think would have been covered extensively by the media these parties own or have tie-ups with)
“Herb is the healing of a nation, alcohol is the destruction’ does not seem to have gone in with our political representatives. In lieu of resolving the issue of bootlegging as it caused many casualties in the past a party opened up a chain of liquor shops so that every individual had free and effortless access to liquor and minors are no exception here and irony is the country does not even have such a good access to drinking water. Today, this chain is as large as PDS (ration shops) or may be even larger. So, the person may or may not have access to subsidized food grains but he surely has access to liquor. The chain is obviously giving huge profits, totally insulated from the economic downturn and the government is making huge money and party is ensuring votes too but at the expense of tomorrow’s drunkard citizens. – I am not promoting ‘Ban liquor – concept’ that has failed miserably in past in one of the states but we should ensure that people do not have such effortless access to a bottle of liquor specially minors, which is almost impossible if you have liquor shops almost at par with road side pan shops or petty shops.
‘Don’t give them fish, but teach them to fish’ doesn’t seem to be the right mantra, if you want to ensure the seats for the next election. So a ruling party decided to give the people basic food and allied stuff at a price, which wouldn’t have been viable even in the 60’s & 70’s (Rice at Rs. 1 / kg – ridiculous!!!). So you buy from the farmers at a price, which is profitable to him (farmer -because even he is your vote bank) and sell it at a price, which is profitable to the party (next election is never far away) and about the people they are always at loss. The problem with the entire system is it only results in higher deficit and for the country that has been struggling to reduce deficit ‘highly subsidized’ concept doesn’t look like a sensible idea. – I am not promoting ‘Starve the poor to death’ but why can’t we simply provide them with opportunities to earn their bread by investing the same amount of money spent in subsidy to develop infrastructure and opportunities. Some might argue ‘starvation is a day-to-day problem, which cannot be resolved by a long term plan’ but subsidized food is much more short term solution and will never reap benefits but for votes in the next elections. The 100 days job opportunity was a much better and a wonderful solution so why not implement the same on larger scale; the country that has manpower in abundance can do wonders and obviously earn more than their daily bread and butter.
‘Knowledge is power’ seem to have been misinterpreted as there was never a clear idea of what type of knowledge but I can assure knowledge of television serials, actors & actresses, movies, cricket etc will give you( the people) no real power but it surely does give power (vote power) to the party - to rule again. The idea of distributing Colour TV’s to people who are fighting for their next meal seems to be a little illogical. The simple understanding of hierarchy of human needs would tell you entertainment is a leisure need and would only be present in people who have their other basic needs fulfilled. Resultant the government gave free TV’s, that kick started a huge black market for colour TV’s what else do you expect the people to do when you give them TV’s irrespective of whether or not they can afford the electricity bills/ cable bills. Again money (government’s money – Tax payers’ money) was drained for no good of people but for the benefit of the party to promote itself for the next election. I am not promoting ‘Poor don’t need entertainment’ but can we appreciate they need many more things that are much more basic like food, clothing and shelter, which are more important than entertainment.
Many other instances of such acts – the grand new assembly building – as if we were conducting assembly under the banyan tree so far, marina beach make over – as if people didn’t visit the beach so far etc which were camouflaged as acts of generosity or universal good but they were neither because generosity comes when you spend your own money for others but this was people’s money spent and they were not for larger good as no one in the long run would benefit but for the party which will use this as a promotional expenses out of governments’ pockets.
It is quite necessary that proper guidelines are in place when it comes to spending huge chunk of money.
Though i am not a expert here, some of them could be
1) Independent (politically neutral) organization should vet the plan and do a socio-economic cost-benefit analysis, which should be strictly published in all major dailies instead of spending enormous amount in advertising the same. The organisation should be made accountable for the study.
2) Peoples feedback via SMS etc, if possible should be taken and people across the country should be allowed to participate.
3) None of the schemes/plans should be used as a source to promote a political party. If used, not less than 50% should be funded by such party.
4) All such norms should be followed for a spending which is above a certain cut-off level.
Well I would like to close with popular promotion campaign run by an Indian business house - ‘Jaago re’
Disclaimer: The incidents happen to be related to a particular state as am not well read with the politics of other states.
Saturday, March 13, 2010
Does PRICE and QUALITY have any relation?
If you had to buy a shirt, say branded. After analyzing various factors you reduce your options to two of them but ironically you haven’t used any of them before, so you know nothing more than the price say one of them costs Rs.1000 and other Rs.1100 which one would you buy?
Many of you will choose the one that costs Rs.1100.
Everything remaining same but this time the buying decision is about a blazer. One has a price tag of Rs. 5000 and other Rs. 5500 which one would you choose?
Many of you will choose the pair that costs Rs.5500.
This remains true for every single product we buy from a pair of socks (bought almost every month) to wedding suite (hopefully bought once in a lifetime).
Many buyers cannot justify their decision? But according to studies done there exists a relation between price and quality. Customers find high priced product more qualitative than the one priced lower.
So simply stated the relationship between price and quality can be graphically presented as
So as the price increases customer perceives the product to be of better quality.
Many buyers have different reasons to justify this
Price = Cost + Profit
So the producers charge them more because its costlier to produce quality products.. (They talk about the cost factor)
Well others say that it is the premium producer charge for the quality given (They talk about the premium i.e. profit factor)
But think about products like garments, where the raw material is usually supplied by same vendors but the customer perceives a difference in quality based on price and usually tends to buy the costlier one. None of the above reasons justify this buying behaviour because there is no quality difference at all. So, this is only a perceived notion. This will give a great amount of joy to all the producers because now they can raise their price as high as they want and earn high profit because their high price will only send cues to customers that their product quality is better. A concept referred to as “grandmother’s psychology”
Until now we discussed the topic under the assumption that customer has unlimited money to spend on a particular product and that the product quality can be increased to level of infinity but both of these are practically impossible.
At what price will you buy a 50gm toothpaste, if the quality keeps increasing with the price?
Some would spend Rs.50; others would spend Rs.100 some might go up to Rs.200 but will anyone spend more than RS.500. so customer may demand more and more quality but restrict their spending amount.So there is budget constrain and the basic graph can be redrawn as
This simply indicates that though the customer is expecting higher quality but is not willing to spend any extra money after a certain level.
Now again what level of quality would a customer perceive in the toothpaste with the increasing price?
Some will feel toothpaste that cost Rs.50 as moderate, the one that cost Rs.100 as good, the one that cost Rs.200 as best but after that all toothpaste’s quality would be perceived as same at whatever price they are sold at. So after certain level customer seems to perceive same quality in all toothpastes despite the higher price. Customer expectation of quality from a particular product stops after a particular level.So the basic graph can be redrawn as
Analyzing things so far it’s obviously evident that there exists a certain relation between price and quality. A simple combination of the above two constrains will result in a graph of the following kind
So ideally customer quality cues of a product from price remains true till certain level after which there is not much of an impact on quality and price relationship. Though it’s easy to represent a relationship theoretically and graphically but it’s not practically possible to use this relation easily. The qualitative price would change with every product because customer’s budget constraints are different for different product based on its utility and requirement for e.g. you might afford to pay Rs.50 for toothpaste, Rs.500 for a tie and Rs. 5000 for a watch. This holds true for your quality expectation and perception too. But one thing is sure that producers should price their product such that they don’t lose on the extra profit they could earn by creating a high quality perception in the minds of customers by pricing their product at a correct qualitative price. Again the customers should not judge quality based on price alone.
Many of you will choose the one that costs Rs.1100.
Everything remaining same but this time the buying decision is about a blazer. One has a price tag of Rs. 5000 and other Rs. 5500 which one would you choose?
Many of you will choose the pair that costs Rs.5500.
This remains true for every single product we buy from a pair of socks (bought almost every month) to wedding suite (hopefully bought once in a lifetime).
Many buyers cannot justify their decision? But according to studies done there exists a relation between price and quality. Customers find high priced product more qualitative than the one priced lower.
So simply stated the relationship between price and quality can be graphically presented as
So as the price increases customer perceives the product to be of better quality.
Many buyers have different reasons to justify this
Price = Cost + Profit
So the producers charge them more because its costlier to produce quality products.. (They talk about the cost factor)
Well others say that it is the premium producer charge for the quality given (They talk about the premium i.e. profit factor)
But think about products like garments, where the raw material is usually supplied by same vendors but the customer perceives a difference in quality based on price and usually tends to buy the costlier one. None of the above reasons justify this buying behaviour because there is no quality difference at all. So, this is only a perceived notion. This will give a great amount of joy to all the producers because now they can raise their price as high as they want and earn high profit because their high price will only send cues to customers that their product quality is better. A concept referred to as “grandmother’s psychology”
Until now we discussed the topic under the assumption that customer has unlimited money to spend on a particular product and that the product quality can be increased to level of infinity but both of these are practically impossible.
At what price will you buy a 50gm toothpaste, if the quality keeps increasing with the price?
Some would spend Rs.50; others would spend Rs.100 some might go up to Rs.200 but will anyone spend more than RS.500. so customer may demand more and more quality but restrict their spending amount.So there is budget constrain and the basic graph can be redrawn as
This simply indicates that though the customer is expecting higher quality but is not willing to spend any extra money after a certain level.
Now again what level of quality would a customer perceive in the toothpaste with the increasing price?
Some will feel toothpaste that cost Rs.50 as moderate, the one that cost Rs.100 as good, the one that cost Rs.200 as best but after that all toothpaste’s quality would be perceived as same at whatever price they are sold at. So after certain level customer seems to perceive same quality in all toothpastes despite the higher price. Customer expectation of quality from a particular product stops after a particular level.So the basic graph can be redrawn as
Analyzing things so far it’s obviously evident that there exists a certain relation between price and quality. A simple combination of the above two constrains will result in a graph of the following kind
So ideally customer quality cues of a product from price remains true till certain level after which there is not much of an impact on quality and price relationship. Though it’s easy to represent a relationship theoretically and graphically but it’s not practically possible to use this relation easily. The qualitative price would change with every product because customer’s budget constraints are different for different product based on its utility and requirement for e.g. you might afford to pay Rs.50 for toothpaste, Rs.500 for a tie and Rs. 5000 for a watch. This holds true for your quality expectation and perception too. But one thing is sure that producers should price their product such that they don’t lose on the extra profit they could earn by creating a high quality perception in the minds of customers by pricing their product at a correct qualitative price. Again the customers should not judge quality based on price alone.
“U” and only “U” are responsible for the EVIL around “U”.
Many a times, it easy to find faults in others and how interesting it gets when you actually get into inspecting into details why someone has done something wrong/ illegal? But if you ever have done the inspection thoroughly you would know that you are equally responsible for the act.
According to bible god has created everything for us to enjoy. But evil had decided to make use of greed as a weapon to bring human on his side. Gluttony or more commonly referred as greed can take any form and more and more people are getting into the clutches of greed.
Lets us go to the beginning of the world, in the Garden of Eden, Adam and Eve who had everything but the forbidden tree. Eve became greedy, and against all the trees and fruits, she decides to eat from the wisdom tree and Adam quickly pursues and that’s when it all started. Thereafter, greed was just to overwhelm us every time in every possible way.
Today, we have decided our boundaries and earmarked our properties to ensure we produce and sell what we want & at whatever price we want. Infact, we have justified our increasing greed as inflation.
What is inflation?
It is a rise in the price of goods.
So, if a farmer knows his product(Paddy) has a good demand and decides to mint money he simply raises the price and calls it inflation. Assume another farmer, who probably is selling oranges, decide to buy paddy, he has to have more money so he sells his oranges at a price higher than last year. This is a chain reaction from primary goods it passes on to secondary goods and then to tertiary. In the process everything becomes costlier. If you analyse you will find interestingly the intrinsic value of the product has not changed only the greed of the farmer has, which we have accepted and named it inflation.
So if everyone becomes greedy and decide to sell their products/services etc at a price higher because someone out there is ready to buy as he can afford it, what actually is happening is that we are denying others, who need but can’t afford, the opportunity to buy. Money is just one of the mediums to buy, other mediums include steal, cheat etc. So the denied member tries to satisfy the need by using one of these or tries to earn more money, either legally or illegally – both of which is dangerous as we are only inculcating greed.
More money earned by any means only gives you more of ‘disposable’ income allowing you to buy much more than you need and would cherish- imagine three member family living in 4000 sq. ft. house - ridiculous as it could be, but what they surely have done is denied a needy - a house.
Today we are keeping our people starving just to feed some other nations for better margins. As mentioned earlier everything was created for “us” and not “US”. But today we want to export everything because that is more profitable but at what expense is the question??? Father of the nation once said there is sufficiency in the world for human need but not for his greed. Just like god has created everything for you, he has created it for others – so everyone needs to have their own share, so that they don’t have to indulge in something against you or the society at large.
So the next time you feel a little greedier to buy a little more, a little extra just remember you would be responsible for the evil that will follow your purchase.
According to bible god has created everything for us to enjoy. But evil had decided to make use of greed as a weapon to bring human on his side. Gluttony or more commonly referred as greed can take any form and more and more people are getting into the clutches of greed.
Lets us go to the beginning of the world, in the Garden of Eden, Adam and Eve who had everything but the forbidden tree. Eve became greedy, and against all the trees and fruits, she decides to eat from the wisdom tree and Adam quickly pursues and that’s when it all started. Thereafter, greed was just to overwhelm us every time in every possible way.
Today, we have decided our boundaries and earmarked our properties to ensure we produce and sell what we want & at whatever price we want. Infact, we have justified our increasing greed as inflation.
What is inflation?
It is a rise in the price of goods.
So, if a farmer knows his product(Paddy) has a good demand and decides to mint money he simply raises the price and calls it inflation. Assume another farmer, who probably is selling oranges, decide to buy paddy, he has to have more money so he sells his oranges at a price higher than last year. This is a chain reaction from primary goods it passes on to secondary goods and then to tertiary. In the process everything becomes costlier. If you analyse you will find interestingly the intrinsic value of the product has not changed only the greed of the farmer has, which we have accepted and named it inflation.
So if everyone becomes greedy and decide to sell their products/services etc at a price higher because someone out there is ready to buy as he can afford it, what actually is happening is that we are denying others, who need but can’t afford, the opportunity to buy. Money is just one of the mediums to buy, other mediums include steal, cheat etc. So the denied member tries to satisfy the need by using one of these or tries to earn more money, either legally or illegally – both of which is dangerous as we are only inculcating greed.
More money earned by any means only gives you more of ‘disposable’ income allowing you to buy much more than you need and would cherish- imagine three member family living in 4000 sq. ft. house - ridiculous as it could be, but what they surely have done is denied a needy - a house.
Today we are keeping our people starving just to feed some other nations for better margins. As mentioned earlier everything was created for “us” and not “US”. But today we want to export everything because that is more profitable but at what expense is the question??? Father of the nation once said there is sufficiency in the world for human need but not for his greed. Just like god has created everything for you, he has created it for others – so everyone needs to have their own share, so that they don’t have to indulge in something against you or the society at large.
So the next time you feel a little greedier to buy a little more, a little extra just remember you would be responsible for the evil that will follow your purchase.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)