Price of Elitist Blood

Watching an icon of Indian industry in a television studio on Saturday night find higher decibels in his voice than he probably did when his net worth declined in the recent financial crisis would have been mildly amusing had the circumstances not been as tragic.

With not a crease out of place in his well cut and possibly outrageously expensive outfit; this gentleman implored government to act against terror. Accusing them of failing him and of course "his" country. Populism, I always thought was the preserve of our politicians, but perhaps in these times it is understandable if it seeps into the core of all public discourse.

When the dust settles and after more ministers are sacked, we will hopefully reflect on this angst that appears to have sneaked into our collective bones and is finding voice in our response to Mumbai.

But I wonder if this angst is finding leadership on the right shoulders? Elite India has for the first time been shaken out of its slumber as terror has attacked what were so far its impenetrable citadels.

The Taj Mahal hotel was insulated before that fateful Wednesday night from all that was wrong with India. It is here while sipping on over priced coffee or gorging on grotesquely expensive stir fry noodles that corporate honchos ridiculed the real India; an India they were squeamish to be part of. Fake sympathy for terror victims in Delhi or Ahmedababad or Bangalore mixed well with the cocktails in the secure environs of the Taj and the Oberoi. 

Suddenly, those buildings where the soothing sound of a distant piano provided the comforting solace of security; have become battlegrounds. Guns were meant to go off elsewhere, weren't they? In busy market-places or railway stations that stench anyway. So no wonder the elite are enraged. Suddenly terrorism isn't just a dinner table conversation.

Instead, it has them by the balls and is making them scream. Shobha De says enough is enough. Well Miss De enough was enough long before the peace of South Mumbai was shattered. It was enough when bombs went off in hospitals in Ahmedabad, it was enough when in busy markets in Delhi, Diwali shopping turned into a gory dance of death.

You can sense that terror has moved on from attacking familiar victims: The rickshaw pullers, the daily wage earners, the commuter on a local train; even the middle class executive. Those deaths no longer matter, no longer grab headlines, are no longer enough to get home ministers sacked.

Instead, terror has a new target: Prosperity. Stark as it may sound, those who have escaped its wrath so far are now its direct targets. And they know it...and can see it clear as day.

Where was this elitist angst when a brave bus conductor lost his eyes saving others in Delhi? Or those who have had their legs amputated after the blasts in Ahmedabad? Did elite India find the shrillness in their voices to demand what they are asking for now? Was a fund set-up to support government in fighting terror?

Maybe the big corporates could have taxed their own profits and offered to help the police force get better weapons? I dare say Messer's Tata and Oberoi have deep enough pockets to restore their hotels to glory, but some around this devastated country are still picking up brutally broken pieces and will never succeed.

Mumbai has a strange message for you and me; we who live in the real world. And rarely enjoy the delights of places such as the Taj.

We are now ironically a lot safer, because we are irrelevant in this war. Our blood means little. The new targets are the hypocrites who throw the toys out of the cot only when their own cot is rattling.

Now it is this hollering that can make the wheels of change turn. Sometimes it has to hurt where it really does. The angst of the elite is our greatest ally in the fight to save our country, not some pointless candles that flicker away meaninglessly.

You get the point?

To DADA with Love...

Because when you announced your retirement, you said "Hopefully we will end up on a winning note". We did.

Because you were the only guy referred to as the royal Prince and the high-street bully "Dada" at the same time.

Because when you scored that classic debut century at Lord's, some thought you will be a one-knock wonder. At Trent Bridge, you stunned them all again with a double barrel.

Because when you played those heavenly cover drives, Rahul Dravid said, "There is only God and then Sourav Ganguly on the off-side". Maybe even the Almighty would have just moved to mid-on.

Because you took over as captain when match-fixing clouds hung over, but you made the right bets for the team.

Because with Sachin Tendulkar, you made ODI opening a treat for Indians, and a nightmare for the opposition. It was left right, left right, alright.

Because when Andrew Flintoff ran naked chest on national display at Wankhede, you lost your shirt.

Because when the Oz threatened you with chin music, you played hip-hop with them at Brisbane hitting a majestic hundred.

Because you never quite understood the logic and rationale behind being dropped even after scoring 10,000 runs plus in ODIs and in good nick. You are not good at reading whodunits.

Because they burnt your effigies and hurled stones at your team in 2003, and then you led India to the finals of the World Cup in South Africa.

Because you discovered youngsters, groomed, encouraged and inspired Yuvraj, Harbhajan, Zaheer, Irfan and MSD to become our future heroes.

Because you suffered the humiliation from Greg Chappell and several critics with humility, dignity and grace.

Because you proved that the word "age" is not a four-letter word.

Because when axed, you concealed your hurt and disappointment, went and played local tournaments and sneaked back into the team. Then Johannesburg happened. Your fairy-tale return had happened.

Because you have redefined the word comeback. And grit. And determination. And fighting spirit. And leadership. And many unmentioned superlatives.

Because MSD seems to have taken the leadership baton from you, for the good of Indian cricket.

Because you never traded your self-respect, and when they dropped you for the Irani Cup, you said---Enough!

Because you taught Indians to fight back, not turn around in defeat.

Because even 7,000 Test runs and 10,000 ODI runs is sometimes insufficient to measure your heroics for Indian cricket.

Because the 2001 series win against Australia marked a historic victory in one of the greatest series ever. You were India's captain.

Because if it exasperated Steve Waugh, you let him wait for the toss.

Because hopefully, we will still see you in black shining armour, Prince, for the KKR in IPL next year.

Because on the Lord's balcony, we discovered that you were not six-abs-pack.

Because at Nagpur this time, you had the last laugh, and India, the last hurrah. The final frontier is recaptured.

Because you did a Pepsi ad for your team, even as you stood silently alone in Kolkota.

Because you will not be ever seen in whites again. Scoring runs, bowling those deceptive medium pacers. And perhaps, even misfielding.

Because your fans will borrow from a new TV ad, and say "We miss you so much, it hurts".

Because it is time to let you go home to your family, and friends.

Because now you can watch colleagues like Sachin and VVS and Ishant on the television like all of us.

Because tomorrow morning you will join Gavaskar, Vishwanath, Bedi and Srikanth as a "former" player. An ex.

Because you can now perhaps play football as well at Eden Gardens.

Because it's time to say good-bye.

Because you did us proud.

Because you never gave up.

Because if you don't deserve the salutations from us all Indians, who does?

Of People and Technology

The Man or the Machine?Analyze this...

There is an organization called Dell Computers which "was" market-leader in the PC business.There is an organization called Toyota Motor Corp. which "is" a market-leader in the Automotive business and by-far the most profitable auto-maker in the world.While the former is panting for breath with the competition catching up with it (or otherwise), the latter is rolling like a juggernaut.

Why this uncanny comparison between two non-competing entities?The point is this...Both Dell and Toyota are names to swear-by when it comes to supply chain efficiencies.Both have pioneered such great processes by virtue of which they had the competition running for cover.

Direct model from Dell was such a brilliant strategy that it threw the likes of IBM out of Business.And contrary to the popular misconception, there is something that is actually perfect in this world and that's the Toyota Production System.

While Dell's innovation relied mostly on Technology, Toyota relied on its people.Dell had almost everything going right (which is against the laws of nature).If everything is going right...something has to go wrong and wrong it went.The competition soon caught up with the Lenovos and the HPs quickly realizing the benefits of mimicking the Dell model and the whole competitive advantage of Dell is fast fading away.

On the other hand, Toyota has proved to the world that smart people come in small packages and are not too abundant.Inspite of the huge consulting assignments that Toyota has done with a number of American companies on its production system, the world is yet to see anything even close to Toyota.No complex softwares for inventory optimization and Production Planning for Toyota.Just an inclusive manpower and some excellent execution strategies at its perusal.

Technology is definitely something but man seems to be everything for he clearly, still, seems to be the Master!

Its all about Money...Honey!!!

My favourite story of cricket is from another generation: In 1956, India defeated New Zealand in four days in a test match. The team, which was paid Rs 50 per day at the time, did not receive an allowance for the fifth day. When one of the players dared to ask a cricket official for an additional fifty rupees, he was curtly told: "Who asked you to win the match in four days!"

The world has changed for the good, since then. As the cricketers went under the hammer, one couldn't help thinking how dramatically the sport has been transformed. As business tycoons and film stars bid furiously for the big and not so big names in the game, a revolution seemed to be in the making. The sport finally was becoming a part of the great Indian bazaar.

Cricket, unlike a few other competitive sports, has been burdened with the myth that the men who play it do so for the “love” of the sport (I speak of world cricket…).While footballers were being traded places for millions, F1 drivers and Golfers were millionaires, cricketers were expected to bask in the sheer joy of playing the game. Which other sport would allow teams to play each other over five days, at the end of which there could be an "honourable" draw? Which other sport was played with such an insistence on the "rules" and "traditions" of the game? Soaked in romantic prose, cricket was branded for decades as the "gentleman's game".

In a way, all Indian sport has suffered in a model of socialism in which all big businesses were “evil” and sport was a only a distraction from professional activity. When did sports then, particularly cricket, start hogging the front page? From a feudal sport to being the great Indian dream, the transformation has been gradual and fuelled by the convergence of sports, entertainment and most importantly corporate India. 1983 victory was a landmark as it coincided with the onset of colour television and the sudden realization that cricketers are commodities (marketable…).From Kapil’s shaving cream ad (“Palmolive ka jawab nahin”…remember) to Dhoni’s hair gel to music endorsements ???(Royal Stag…mega music…just in case u wavered J), it’s come a really long way.

The IPL, as I see it, is a brilliant example of the 21st century business enterprise. It may have raised eyebrows as to whether its worth the hype, but, I would definitely like to give it the benefit of doubt. After all, do we want to slip back to the era where talented cricketers were treated as daily wage labourers and expected to pay obeisances to the officials for being selected? Or do we want to see the talented cricketers demand their rightful place in the market? Talent should never come and most importantly “go” for cheap…

picture abhi baki hai...mere dost!

Why is it that some movies get me? And I mean, get me hook, line and sinker? And a very tiny few of them? I am a Bollywood buff. But that's not to say I watch all the movies (actually, I do watch a lil more, but just because I have an unlimited internet connection to d/l the choicest of movies :-)

But why is it that those few movies get me? By the end of when I watch such movies, I go hyper! Not hyper in the sense of jumping around on a pogo stick but hyper mentally. I think more and surprisingly seem to think more clearly at the same time after I have seen such a movie. What is more surprising is that, the people that I watch such movies with, come out of the theatre with a "well, it wasn't as great as I expected it to be" or "that piece could have been handled deftly" kind of look on their faces. I mean, don't they get it? Or 'am I the odd one out? I dont know.

I remember this altercation I had with a dude who had issues with "Rang De...". At that time (even today), I wouldn't buy anything against such a brilliant movie...brilliant not coz it had a message et al...but for the simple reason that while watching the movie, I could relate and would have done exactly the same things.The issue that this guy had was that it promoted violence. Gimme a break...we're humans...unless we're shown sex and violence...we aren't excited.So why crib?I asked him if he liked "Swades"...he said it was boring...precisely for the lack of "action".I mean...either I'm nuts or this guy is so open-minded that his brain has started falling out.

Remember when we were kids, we used to read so many stories? And remember how all those stories had an ending. When we were tiny toddlers, almost all those endings were the "and they lived happily ever after" type. And as we grew older, we came across endings which were not necesarily happy but the story still had an ending. Is it not possible for a person to direct a movie and resist the temptation to put an 'ending' into it? Its not about just trying to be different from the rest of the film-makers...but the devotion to the original concept so that nothing sways it."Mithya", I thought, was a courageous attempt.

So, all you creative people...the proposition is this..."Succumb to the Temptation" (remember the brilliant Kwality Walls' Campaign) and execute it with a twist!!!

BRAND EQUITY

Like me, do you get the feeling that our world view is a mosaic of different brand filters? Let’s consider a scenario:

Anamika meets Rajiv for the first time on their first date. Rajiv takes her to a coffee shop mentioning how he loves the ambience there. As they sit down, Rajiv places his cell phone on the table. Anamika checks the time on her watch and fishes for her cell phone from her bag and calls up a friend. Meanwhile Rajiv is checking out the menu stretching out his legs with his boots on. He steals a glance at Anamika looking cute in her pink top and jeans. Wearing his faded jeans and his favourite black shirt, Rajiv feels pretty comfortable on his first date with her.

Anything out of the place? Maybe not at first glance. Take a look again.

Anamika meets Rajiv for the first time on their first date. Rajiv takes her to a Cafe Coffee Day coffee shop mentioning how he loves the ambience there. As they sit down, Rajiv places his cell phone on the table, a Nokia N92. Anamika checks the time on her Titan Raga watch and fishes for her cell phone, a Motorzr from her Gucci bag and calls up a friend. Meanwhile Rajiv is checking out the menu stretching out his legs with his Woodlands boots on. He steals a glance at Anamika looking cute in her MNG spaghetti top and Levi's jeans. Wearing his faded Red Tab jeans and his favourite black Diesel shirt, Rajiv feels pretty comfortable on his first date with her.

The point is this. Have you ever had the feeling you were trying to possess things you didn’t really need based on promises that are intangible at best? That someone else was creating wants you didn’t have before? Welcome to the surreptitious world of brand marketing. I am talking about brands that have made us want to possess things we didn’t need based on what they said those things will do to us. “Eat this and you will stay slim”, “wear that and you will be the hottest thing around”, “spray this and you will be irresistible”.

That is not to say all brands are ‘evil’. A brand is a promise. A promise of either physical, emotional or(and) psychological benefit(s). And there are many brands out there that have lived up to their promises. What I am talking about is those brands that have told us we cannot be what we want to be if we do not use their products/services. A brand that tells a girl she cannot be an air-hostess if she doesn’t use their fairness cream, a brand that tells boys they are losers till they start using that brand of deodorant…..you get the idea.

We are all beautiful people and we do not need some brand to tell us we are not good enough. We are free people. Free to make choices…free to question things. We are all free people and we are all curious as hell!!

Curiosity is one of the most basic instincts amongst us humans. We all have wondered where babies come from, if the face on the moon is indeed that of an old man and if the big bang was for real. Each of us continuously questions the status quo and why it needs to be that way. It’s an exciting journey, one on which WE choose our thoughts and our wants, not someone else.

theism = believing in Google!

A premise is what i'm looking for to start with...
hmmm...can't think beyond a 9 yr young baby(??) whom we fondly call Google...

Think what can 0 and 1 do to this noblest of races...POLARIZATION...and how many poles have we grown up studying about...north and south , positive and negative...is that it?

but the Google thingy has the internet community divided into 3!!!...

lemme explain:
First there is this group that believes that Google is gonna do what Alexander the great couldn't...the eternal ravers of Google i'm talking about.For them Microsoft and Yahoo are nothing more than the brave spartans of 300 who will lay down their lives fighting the Google juggernaut.You say "internet" by slip of tongue in a conversation with them and the next thing you know is you are almost into believing the apparent superiority of this company.Google is the second best and the most kickass thing to have happened for them...(first being the Computer itself).They're above mundane things like search and all that.They have a hypermetropic view of Google as the all pervasive phenomenon.Google is,very soon, going to rule the world...

For the second kind...Google is Smart but not God.Page Rank and all that is fine...but how long a shelf life does it have?...is their reason...Fair enough...(how abt Contextual search???).Believers in Darwin's theory as they are...they extrapolate that one day Larry Page, the junior, will come and better the senior and kick his butts on that.Orkut,Youtube et al are all for them proof that Google's business model is past its prime.They wouldn't deny that nobody has even come close to tasting the kind of success that Google has with its search engine...but they believe there still are things out there that can create much bigger businesses than Google’s in a shorter time span.Right now, for them, somebody has got a better rulebook and is working on improving upon Google's health...

Then there is the third kind...the indifferent but selfish kind.Whenever they need info about anything...whom do they ask?...Google.And what is that?.Its a piece of software that crawls the web and gets you information on demand.No loyalties et al for this kind.Google , Lycos , Altavista ...they're all the same for this kind.Chandramukhi or Paro...whats the big deal...as long your job is done!!.They are least interested in Google...its only the search that matters..."mallika's pics or great deals on ipod".And thanks to the information explosion, if Google doesn't satisfy them...they do wag their tongue more than a bit!...poor G.

which kind am I???