Nano is the biggest Heist India has ever seen and Tata beats Ramalinga Raju hands down!
When the world Auto initially said it is not possible to produce a car under a lac neither they were ignorant not were they arrogant. But then they were only talking about Auto Engineering they were not talking about Financial Engineering.
Nano is a product of convoluted Financial engineering and not auto engineering.
Actual price paid by the collective consumer is 3 Lac and not 1 lac.
1. 9750 Cr virtually interest free loan at 0.1%p.a. translates to 1.35 Lac subisidy if you take 11% bank FD rate (prevailing on the date of loan given to Tata)and Tata produces about 85,000 cars p.a.
2.1110 Acres free land; and no stamp duty and no registration charges.
3. Heavily subidised Power and free water and other tax concessions.
All of these aggregates to atleast Rs.65,000 per car taking the total subsidy to 2 Lac per Nano; over and above the consumer pays 1 lac to buy this piece of tin. It is the tax payers money.
That 2 lac profit is shared by Tatas who pocket major portion and the politician who arranged these facility.
When Gujarat riots were happening Ratan Tata along with Alyque Padamsee vociferously demanded the ouster of Modi. Now the same Tata goes and hugs Narendra Modi whose ouster Tata demanded.
This is what Heist called Nano and Theif called Tata!
Mamata was right when poor farmers farming land was usurped. Farming soil takes millenia to form!
Re: Heist called Nano; Thief called Tata!
by veerendra khatawkar on Mar 18, 2009 08:45 AM Permalink
My dear Friend,
Before giving such nasty comments Note the fallowing facts: Mr TATA made this promise almost 3-4 years back & they are still sticking to that. This comes from one of the most trusted companies in the world having track record of 100 years without damaging any of their investors. The price may vary depending on current scenario that one should accept, keep it in mind this is the only techniocommercial marvel India ever produced which whoole world is looking eagerly.
Lets be proud of this be proud IndianInstead of mere commenting, Though Govts offered discounts that is because its potential to ceate jombs for millions & revenue can be recovered then : alnd value etc automatically go up in that area: Remeber after this Mr Modi became Blue eyed person of Indian Industry over nite Morever The things TATA have lost during Singur episode is very ugly thanks to dirty politics, zInspite of that TATAs have kept theis Nerves strong Thanks Ratan TATA, JAI HO!!!
Re: Heist called Nano; Thief called Tata!
by Arun Shankar on Mar 18, 2009 02:42 PM Permalink
Business has its own economics. It is meaningless in business to add back the benefits accorded to the corporates. All corporates, IT, Apparel... have such offers. On converse, appreciate those who venture to deliver on the freebies offered. That will lead to development.
Re: Heist called Nano; Thief called Tata!
by SHAAN on Mar 18, 2009 08:26 AM Permalink
NONSENSE, REAL BENEFICERIES ARE GEN. PEOPLE,WHO WILL GET NEW CAR IN 1.25 OR 1.50 LAC
Re: Heist called Nano; Thief called Tata!
by Abhi Bhat on Mar 18, 2009 08:27 AM Permalink
Kabeer, I tend to agree with you. Tata is profiting by harming tax payers and usrping land cheaply and causing Environment pollution. Mamta had raised these concerns. Modi is alright normally but i dont know why he succumbed to the pressure of industrialist tycoon syndicates and pressure of job creation. I guess he will slowly realise why Mamta was right. I believe that horses and oxes are best mode of transport now. Western engineering and industries are dooms for everyone. I wish west ceases to exist.
Re: Heist called Nano; Thief called Tata!
by parasuramaxe on Mar 18, 2009 08:16 AM Permalink
You have a negative thinking tendency and does't know the twist & turns of a business. It is better to keep quiet rather than venting irrelevant matters. Don't be a nonsense to the people of India just stay-out.
Re: Re: Heist called Nano; Thief called Tata!
by Abhi Bhat on Mar 18, 2009 09:06 AM Permalink
Sure. Also take plague, cholera, nuklear threat, global warming, pollution, water shortage, poverty, etc positively too. Seriousness apart, I like your philosofy.
Re: Heist called Nano; Thief called Tata!
by vaman aphale on Mar 18, 2009 08:28 AM Permalink
Mr. Kabir have you checked the facts about other car makers plant. They were also offered similar subsidies when their plants started first. This is done for any business which has the potential to create lot of jobs & taxes for the state. It is easy to get some figures & make allegations but are always not true . Critisism is the easiest thing to do as you need not have to prove anything but prove somebody wrong. Change your mentality man!
Re: Re: Heist called Nano; Thief called Tata!
by Sameer Bhagwat on Mar 18, 2009 08:33 AM Permalink
Moron Kabeer, your facts are wrong. Nobody is aksing you the buy the Nano on loan. Every carmaker got a subsidy when their cars were produced initially. Instead of appreciating an Industrialist like Tata who has given employment to millions and also donates millions to trust. Ratan pesonally has only 4% stake in TATA sons and even today lives in a rented house in Mumbai.. Do you know that??
Compare this with Narayan Murthy or Premji who have majority stake in their company and only care about profits.
Re: Re: Re: Heist called Nano; Thief called Tata!
by vaman aphale on Mar 18, 2009 08:40 AM Permalink
Sameer A small correction Even Narayanmurthy holds less than 4% in Infosys He is equally appriciable
Re: Re: Re: Heist called Nano; Thief called Tata!
by Ravi shankar on Mar 18, 2009 09:27 AM Permalink
only 4% holdings by Murthy. It is to his credit that he made many more mollioneers. Besides, Murthy has relenqished his position and is only a mentor now. Can TATA do this. The difference is 'Family business'
Re: Heist called Nano; Thief called Tata!
by patrick mason on Mar 18, 2009 08:50 AM Permalink
kabeer, lets go to medieval times where we used bows and arrows. I am sure you'll agree with me. actually we dont need laws or a legal system itself. we can go by the law of hanibal - an eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth. howzzat for a change. I think if you were the prime minister, then YES WE CAN.
