A Danish adage:
Your last suit doesn't have any pockets.' You can't take it with you. You can make all the money you want, but who cares?
Sunday, February 22, 2009
product and era
every product comes of a certain age.
They have an indelible stamp of their beginnings.
cars have had a beginning in the 1900's.
guns in the 1800's.
Rail in the 1850's.
telephones in the 1900's.
they would have taken a modest investments in the beginning.
But as they scale upwards to supply to the masses the investments in capital is huge.
In 1903, Ford in setting up his initial assembly plant for the Model T was able to do so with USD 100,000.
In the 1960, Ford required USD 60 million of investments in its assembly line for the Mustang.
At that time its total investments was USD 6 billion.
Most products in their life cycle require more investments as the product begins to get sophisticated or specialized as in the case of cars.
Today a re jig on its assembly line for a new line of vehicles would require an humongous source of capital. The big 3 Detroit car makers Chrysler, Ford and GM are looking to the government for funds so as to sustain their product lines in a recessionary market.
What this could imply is that products can become sophisticated or specialised such that they can be rendered uneconomical in market downturns.
What one can also infer is that the product lines are outmoded in the current era.
Just as we find running an old car less fuel efficient or uneconomical, maybe products that require such kind of uneconomic investments should be laid to rest.
The fault lies with the car companies itself, to not have invested adequately to come up alternate or superior products to reduce investments in capital machinery.
Technology generally renders the traditional to be uneconomic or inefficient.
Locomotives outmoded the camel and horse.
Airlines outmoded Ocean Liners.
Markets generally align to newer cost effective alternatives.
In such a case, should companies that are outmoded be baled out.
Since there isn't as on date an alternative to the personal car, it looks unlikely.
And as long as cars are dependent on fossil fuels, a newer novel invention from them is highly unlikely.
in all likelihood the big 3 would be baled out by the government.
They have an indelible stamp of their beginnings.
cars have had a beginning in the 1900's.
guns in the 1800's.
Rail in the 1850's.
telephones in the 1900's.
they would have taken a modest investments in the beginning.
But as they scale upwards to supply to the masses the investments in capital is huge.
In 1903, Ford in setting up his initial assembly plant for the Model T was able to do so with USD 100,000.
In the 1960, Ford required USD 60 million of investments in its assembly line for the Mustang.
At that time its total investments was USD 6 billion.
Most products in their life cycle require more investments as the product begins to get sophisticated or specialized as in the case of cars.
Today a re jig on its assembly line for a new line of vehicles would require an humongous source of capital. The big 3 Detroit car makers Chrysler, Ford and GM are looking to the government for funds so as to sustain their product lines in a recessionary market.
What this could imply is that products can become sophisticated or specialised such that they can be rendered uneconomical in market downturns.
What one can also infer is that the product lines are outmoded in the current era.
Just as we find running an old car less fuel efficient or uneconomical, maybe products that require such kind of uneconomic investments should be laid to rest.
The fault lies with the car companies itself, to not have invested adequately to come up alternate or superior products to reduce investments in capital machinery.
Technology generally renders the traditional to be uneconomic or inefficient.
Locomotives outmoded the camel and horse.
Airlines outmoded Ocean Liners.
Markets generally align to newer cost effective alternatives.
In such a case, should companies that are outmoded be baled out.
Since there isn't as on date an alternative to the personal car, it looks unlikely.
And as long as cars are dependent on fossil fuels, a newer novel invention from them is highly unlikely.
in all likelihood the big 3 would be baled out by the government.
Thursday, February 19, 2009
oxymoron
China is a socialist state with a capitalist economic system (a product of democracy however China is not a democratic state).
We are a democratic state with a socialist economic system. We should have a capitalist economic system and free trade, no barriers but strangely we have a protectionist socialist economic system.
Our free democratic system should have created universities, laboratories, entrepreneurs, venture capitalists, inventors, innovators, multinationals and free markets, we seem to have these but they are still lacking vis a vis a USA or W.Europe.
The one thing China does have that we don't is: they have a vision for the future and they know when and how to achieve it.
We have a vision for the future too, but we get lost in the politics, bureaucracy, voters backlash, special interest groups, lobbyists, minorities, backward classes,
etc.
Despite all that paraphernalia, we seem to have got somewhere but the paraphernalia is making our progress much slower, it is holding us back and at the pace we are going I don't know if this pace will mean anything for us for the future.
We may not be someone to reckon with for the future.
We seem to have chosen democracy and not yet savoured its fruits in a capitalist economy.
China seems to have chosen socialism but has enabled a capitalist institution to function that is reaping them dividends.
Dividends that should accrue to us on choosing democracy.
We are a democratic state with a socialist economic system. We should have a capitalist economic system and free trade, no barriers but strangely we have a protectionist socialist economic system.
Our free democratic system should have created universities, laboratories, entrepreneurs, venture capitalists, inventors, innovators, multinationals and free markets, we seem to have these but they are still lacking vis a vis a USA or W.Europe.
The one thing China does have that we don't is: they have a vision for the future and they know when and how to achieve it.
We have a vision for the future too, but we get lost in the politics, bureaucracy, voters backlash, special interest groups, lobbyists, minorities, backward classes,
etc.
Despite all that paraphernalia, we seem to have got somewhere but the paraphernalia is making our progress much slower, it is holding us back and at the pace we are going I don't know if this pace will mean anything for us for the future.
We may not be someone to reckon with for the future.
We seem to have chosen democracy and not yet savoured its fruits in a capitalist economy.
China seems to have chosen socialism but has enabled a capitalist institution to function that is reaping them dividends.
Dividends that should accrue to us on choosing democracy.
walk the talk
On a recent visit to China, I happen to see that there is a great disparity in our walk.
I hear a lot of talk about India being the powerhouse of services and China the powerhouse of manufacturing, but this recent visit kind of made it clear that we can claim to be a powerhouse of sorts but we may not be any powerhouse in the future, though at present we seem to have go something going that has given us some lead over our Asian counterparts.
If you look at our walk and ignore a lot of our talk, I would have to conclude that we have no sense of urgency when it comes to infrastructure, civic planing, resource efficiency and research.
It is as if the the Asian world is doing a lot more on these fronts and we just get up everyday, have a shower and go to work. There is no innovation or
inventions or even for that matter solutions addressing these needs; we just hope and expect that the problems we face with our billion plus people the urbanisation of towns and villages are going to sort themselves out by itself.
In China, however I see a definite plan and action.
I can see them walking the talk.
For us in India it is all talk.
I hear a lot of talk about India being the powerhouse of services and China the powerhouse of manufacturing, but this recent visit kind of made it clear that we can claim to be a powerhouse of sorts but we may not be any powerhouse in the future, though at present we seem to have go something going that has given us some lead over our Asian counterparts.
If you look at our walk and ignore a lot of our talk, I would have to conclude that we have no sense of urgency when it comes to infrastructure, civic planing, resource efficiency and research.
It is as if the the Asian world is doing a lot more on these fronts and we just get up everyday, have a shower and go to work. There is no innovation or
inventions or even for that matter solutions addressing these needs; we just hope and expect that the problems we face with our billion plus people the urbanisation of towns and villages are going to sort themselves out by itself.
In China, however I see a definite plan and action.
I can see them walking the talk.
For us in India it is all talk.
Monday, February 16, 2009
the pack
The truth of a proposition is independent of how many believe it to be true.
The merits of such a proposition is likewise not enhanced by the number of people supporting it or making similar propositions.
Never the less, we as humans, rather stick with propositions that are more commonly ascribed than true.
The merits of such a proposition is likewise not enhanced by the number of people supporting it or making similar propositions.
Never the less, we as humans, rather stick with propositions that are more commonly ascribed than true.
Friday, February 6, 2009
swiss banks,
the swiss banking tradition is one of being discreet about its customers.
the point being they cater to customers who have wealth to hide or rather one that needn't want the rest of the lesser folks to know about their wealth, its all about being discreet...
swiss banks cater to that market of keeping ones wealth secret.
however the swiss banking tradition is completely lost out on Generation X, especially those who have become rich with a change in market dynamics especially so from the dot com boom, real estate, IT, retail, etc. The nouveau rich GEN-X have nothing to hide, I mean it is fairly common knowledge who got rich on the bourses, or who is the new CEO of these new market firms, or who sold his/her stock options, or who came up with yahoo or google or hotmail, or who is the world richest folks from the Forbes 500, such folks have really nothing to hide.
Their names are featured in books, newspapers, magazines and even if they do intend to be discreet, these folks all made money on stock, the stock exchanges hold information about who sold what and who bought what...there is no place to be secretive in such a market mechanism.
So why do the Swiss banks still do business or rather where are the customers that still needs their identity and wealth information to be kept discreet.
I mean the point of wealth is you've got it, flaunt it.
But then again you want to be discreet when wealth is garnered by unscrupulous means.
any sane person would dread banking with Swiss banks whose affiliations and customers are unscrupulous folks. Folks who their identity disclosed, as their income is from unscrupulous means.
But let's face it, most of us really just want to be able to say, "Oh, I'll wire the money from my Swiss bank account."
It is as though we would want to imply that we have income from unscrupulous means!
the point being they cater to customers who have wealth to hide or rather one that needn't want the rest of the lesser folks to know about their wealth, its all about being discreet...
swiss banks cater to that market of keeping ones wealth secret.
however the swiss banking tradition is completely lost out on Generation X, especially those who have become rich with a change in market dynamics especially so from the dot com boom, real estate, IT, retail, etc. The nouveau rich GEN-X have nothing to hide, I mean it is fairly common knowledge who got rich on the bourses, or who is the new CEO of these new market firms, or who sold his/her stock options, or who came up with yahoo or google or hotmail, or who is the world richest folks from the Forbes 500, such folks have really nothing to hide.
Their names are featured in books, newspapers, magazines and even if they do intend to be discreet, these folks all made money on stock, the stock exchanges hold information about who sold what and who bought what...there is no place to be secretive in such a market mechanism.
So why do the Swiss banks still do business or rather where are the customers that still needs their identity and wealth information to be kept discreet.
I mean the point of wealth is you've got it, flaunt it.
But then again you want to be discreet when wealth is garnered by unscrupulous means.
any sane person would dread banking with Swiss banks whose affiliations and customers are unscrupulous folks. Folks who their identity disclosed, as their income is from unscrupulous means.
But let's face it, most of us really just want to be able to say, "Oh, I'll wire the money from my Swiss bank account."
It is as though we would want to imply that we have income from unscrupulous means!
the next....
I happen to take the mumbai city train after quiet awhile.
It was packed with people and I think it was more crowded than I last remember.
looking at all these people who use the train to commute everyday to work and back, you wonder if ever some soul paused to consider.....
every morning they would get up and they would be on the train, today and the tomorrow and the day after....seldom if ever pausing to re-consider that commute.
I doubt if they would consider not taking the commute...too much depended on them to decide against the commute.
...the commute, that was their world.
I doubt if ever they could leave that world behind.....
for someone new here, all these people at the station, travelling to where they have to be every morning, the way they literally hang out of the trains at peak hours desperately wanting to get to where ever they have to, all that jazz everyday is pretty scary.
what I think is scarier is
once you get to the place and wonder:
What's the point of getting here?
this appears as a reasonable question, but this scares the daylight out of me.
I mean all those years you thought you were doing something and it finally comes down to a question of: What's the point of getting here?
most people would be scared the way people commute back and forth.
what scares me is if your commute is getting you anywhere....
It was packed with people and I think it was more crowded than I last remember.
looking at all these people who use the train to commute everyday to work and back, you wonder if ever some soul paused to consider.....
every morning they would get up and they would be on the train, today and the tomorrow and the day after....seldom if ever pausing to re-consider that commute.
I doubt if they would consider not taking the commute...too much depended on them to decide against the commute.
...the commute, that was their world.
I doubt if ever they could leave that world behind.....
for someone new here, all these people at the station, travelling to where they have to be every morning, the way they literally hang out of the trains at peak hours desperately wanting to get to where ever they have to, all that jazz everyday is pretty scary.
what I think is scarier is
once you get to the place and wonder:
What's the point of getting here?
this appears as a reasonable question, but this scares the daylight out of me.
I mean all those years you thought you were doing something and it finally comes down to a question of: What's the point of getting here?
most people would be scared the way people commute back and forth.
what scares me is if your commute is getting you anywhere....
Thursday, February 5, 2009
the tic
a causal conversation with teenagers today gives you a pretty good idea on which words he/she uses more often than you would consider appropriate in a conversation, which makes you wonder, is this how I was when I was a teenager.
One such teenage cousin of mine, has the banal use of the word 'so'; perhaps he felt it necessary to begin his sentences with 'so' or interject them with a 'so'.
So, you I see I studying this subject.
So, I am from here....
So, I scored pretty well in this exam
perhaps maybe teens feel the use of a 'so' cuts boundaries and barriers between a 30 something (yours truly) and a teen.
come to think of it, you hear some of these young teens speak and there seems to be some sort of a verbal tic that's got a hold of them....,
so...
like...
obviously....
generally....
basically....
could be the teen years or some kind of an infection that makes you mutter the 'tic' every now and then, maybe some kind of reassurance with the constant verbal chant of the 'tic' now and then...
now, I wonder what was mine....and if I sounded this silly with the verbal tic...
One such teenage cousin of mine, has the banal use of the word 'so'; perhaps he felt it necessary to begin his sentences with 'so' or interject them with a 'so'.
So, you I see I studying this subject.
So, I am from here....
So, I scored pretty well in this exam
perhaps maybe teens feel the use of a 'so' cuts boundaries and barriers between a 30 something (yours truly) and a teen.
come to think of it, you hear some of these young teens speak and there seems to be some sort of a verbal tic that's got a hold of them....,
so...
like...
obviously....
generally....
basically....
could be the teen years or some kind of an infection that makes you mutter the 'tic' every now and then, maybe some kind of reassurance with the constant verbal chant of the 'tic' now and then...
now, I wonder what was mine....and if I sounded this silly with the verbal tic...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
