Ratan Tata’s open letter to Rajeev Chandrasekhar

Generally speaking, Indian business is a nice, cosy club of stuffed shirts and suspenders. There are a set of rules and everyone plays along happily. No one ever says anything new. No one speaks out of turn. No one ever throws a flame into someone else’s pants. There is a code of Omerta, and everybody better stick with it.

Rajya Sabha member Rajeev Chandrasekhar, the former BPL scion who owns the Suvarna network in Karnataka, stepped out of line with an open letter to Ratan Tata, the chairman of Tata Sons, who had propitiously chose the Niira Radia moment to warn of India slipping and becoming a banana republic.

Now, Tata has hit back at Chandrasekhar in a return letter, slamming the latter’s self-righteous sanctimony. A politically motivated Chandrasekhar, Tata implies, has been running with the telecom hares and hunting with the telecom hounds, and stops just short of calling him a lousy liar.

If nothing else, the two open letters provide a snapshot of how Indian business and politics is conducted (and how Indian media is managed), and underline the fact that nothing illuminating comes out when everything is hunky-dory. It is conflict between two stones that produces fire and light.

***

Dear Rajeev

I am currently overseas and have just seen a copy of the open letter you have addressed to me with copies to the entire media community. This is of course in keeping with the current trend of attempted character assassination through widespread media publicity couched in pain and concern for upholding ethics and values.

Your letter is based on untruths and distortion of facts and I feel compelled to place the real facts, as bluntly as possible before you. I hope this will also be broadly disseminated to the same audience as your letter.

I am, of course, well aware that some media house will choose not to publish or air my response in deference of their owners, who are the real gainers in the telecom sector, with whom you have unfortunately aligned to provide a massive diversion of attention away from the real culprits in the telecom space.

***

You will appreciate that the Government’s stated telecom policy of 1999 set out the principles of a technology neutral environment. When cellular mobile telephony was introduced, the first set of operators, including yourself, chose GSM, the broadly used European technology at that time.

The first set of cellular mobile operators received their licenses based on the auction process in circles for which some of them and their partners submitted very high bids. Later in July 1999, in a BJP-led NDA government, in accordance with the recommendation of a group of ministers headed by Jaswant Singh, the fixed license fee regime was changed to a revenue share regime (which exists even today).

If a hypothetical amount was to be calculated, similar to one which has been done in the CAG report, at that point of time, the loss to the exchequer would be about Rs 50,000 crore and the exchequer would have been deprived of this amount.

Realistically, however, the revenue share system would have recouped some amount over time and this important change most probably has been responsible for the greater growth of the industry as it enabled tariffs to be reduced.

***

CDMA technology (a newer and more spectrum-efficient technology), was utilised by some operators for fixed wireless operations such as PCOs and for last mile wireless connectivity for fixed line phones.

The first attempted deviation of stated policy was in January 2001 when the then telecom minister, Ram Vilas Paswan, in a BJP-led NDA government, sought to allow the fixed wireless application of CDMA for limited mobility on the grounds that it would be available to the public at a lower price.

The GSM operators led by you mounted a campaign lobbying against this on the grounds that it would be unfair to the incumbents who had made investments and who had enjoyed first mover advantage.

You will recall that you and Nusli Wadia [of Bombay Dyeing] approached me in the Chambers in Taj Mumbai in July 2002 to sign an appeal to the Prime Minister, A. B. Vajpayee, deputy prime minister, L.K. Advani and finance minister Jaswant Singh not to allow fixed mobile service providers to provide mobile services.

I enclose a copy of your fax dated July 12, 2002 requesting me to sign and the draft letter which I was supposed to sign. In para 2 of this letter your objective amongst other things was to reach 50 million subscriber base by 2006.

To refresh your memory, I enclose a copy of the letter dated August 16,2002, that I wrote to you expressing my inability to sign such letter as it would block the introduction of CDMA technology and I believed that the telecom industry needed to be technology-neutral but what I agreed with you was that any new operator should pay the same fee as the incumbents so that all operators were equalized and that no one was disadvantaged.

As a result of a technology-agnostic policy we achieved more than 100 million subscribers in 2006 and to 700 million. I am also enclosing a copy of my letter to Vajpayee dated January 12, 2001, which I advocated an open, transparent process giving all parties a chance to be head—a stance that I have not changed till date.

This had angered you and other operators who were not interested in a level playing field and lobbied aggressively through COAI to ensure that a technology-agnostic environment would not come to pass.

It is obvious that an industry driven by technology cannot confine itself to a single technology only because that was the technology employed by a handful of operators who deprived early-mover advantage, enjoyed high ARPUs and in fact thwarted new admittedly more efficient technology like CDMA.

China, Korea and even the US have built their large subscriber numbers on the utilization of both CDMA and GSM technologies. Growth could have been far greater had incumbent operators like yourself risen above their self-interest of protesting their investment and allowing the existence of all technologies on an equal footing.

However, in pursuance of the spirit of NTP 1999, the Government did indeed implement the technology neutral policy in November 2003.  The minister involved was Arun Shourie in the same BJP-led NDA government under Vajpayee.

This was implemented through the creation of the UASL regime which enabled existing license holders to migrate to UASL license providing freedom of choice of technology and where a pan-India license could be obtained for a fee of about Rs. 1,650 crore, the same fee paid by the successful fourth cellular mobile operator.

Shourie needs to be commended in implementing this far sighted policy, which has enabled technology to be the driver of the industry, rather than technology protected growth.

***

I will now briefly touch on the points you raised regarding Tata Teleservices (TTSL) and the alleged advantage they gained. I have requested TTSL to address those issues in greater detail to you directly.

# On the issue of various allegations you have made on the so called benefits gained by TTSL, so called out-of-turn allotment that you claim have been given by DoT, you have chosen to misrepresent the facts as they suit you to justify the claims you have made.

The true position is that TTSL has not, I repeat not, been advantaged in any way by A. Raja or any earlier Minister.

The company has strictly followed the applicable policy and has been severely disadvantaged, as you are well aware, by certain powerful politically connected operators who have wilfully subverted policy under various telecom ministers which has subsequently been regularized to their advantage.

The same operators continue to subvert policy: have even paid fees for spectrum, even before the announcement of a policy, and have “de-facto ownership” in several new telecom enterprises. Licenses were granted to several ineligible applicants. Several licenses have spectrum in excess of their entitlement as per license conditions and not on the self-styled capacity spectrum efficiency that you have chosen to mention.

This is the smoke screen that I am referring to as these subverters of government policy continue to do so to their advantage and their acts are being ignored or condoned.

TTSL, on the other hand, an existing licensee, applied for spectrum under the dual technology policy after the policy was announced on October 19th , 2007 and is still awaiting allotment of spectrum in Delhi and 39 key districts for about three years whereas operators who applied, and paid the fee even before the policy announcement, were not only considered ahead in line but were allotted spectrum with amazing alacrity in January 2008 itself.

I am surprised that you have chosen to sidestep this very important aspect.

#  The investment by NTT DoCoMo in TTSL was not based on a zero-base valuation, like others, but was based on the performance of the company with 38 million subscribers, pan-India presence of network, offices, channel, turnover of Rs 6,000 crore, 60,000 km of fibre, and the potential growth of the company. The valuations are on the bases of a due diligence and service evaluation of the company’s service quality by DoCoMo.

#  On the question of hoarding of spectrum to which I have referred, you will no doubt remember that in 2005 I made an issue of the fact that spectrum was a scarce resource and needed to be paid for rather than given fee as was being proposed. The government policy entitled operators to no more than 6.2 MHz on the bases of their license conditions.

All additional spectrum should have been returned or paid for. Even TRAI has recommended this July 2010. I believed that TTSL was the only operator that returned spectrum when demanded by DoT. The CAG report clearly indicates which of the powerful GSM operators are holding spectrum beyond their entitlement free of cost to the detriment of the other operators.

# On the question of many disadvantaged new applicants who have supposedly been denied license in 2007, you are well aware that many of the applicants were proxy shareholders in high places, and were applying to enter the sector with a view of monetize the license once received.Even those that were granted license and spectrum have failed to effect any meaningful rollout of service.

Strangely, you have chosen to ignore this fact and singled out TTSL, who have, in fact, put in place a network supporting 82 million subscribers, despite the fact that they have been deprived of spectrum in Delhi and 39 key districts over the past 3 years as mentioned earlier.

How could you or anybody possibly consider this to be a beneficial situation of TTSL?

***

Let me address the question of the Tatas’ need for an external PR service provider. Ten years ago, Tatas found themselves under attack in a media campaign to defame the ethics and value systems of the group which held it apart from others in India.

The campaign was instituted and sustained through an unholy nexus between certain corporates and the media through selected journalists.

As Tatas did not enjoy any such “captive connections” in this environment, the Tata Group, had no option but to seek an external agency focused at projecting its point of view in the media and countering the misinformation and vested interest viewpoints which were being expressed.

Vaishnavi was commissioned for this purpose and has operated effectively since 2001. You yourself have interacted with Niira Radia on some occasions in the past and it is therefore amazing that you should now, after nearly nine years, seek to denounce Tatas’ appointment of Vaishnavi.

Also, the statement regarding Tatas employing [ex-TRAI chairman] Pradip Baijal is completely false.

Vaishnavi is neither owned by the Tata Group nor is the Tata Group Vaishnavi’s only client. Baijal, whom you apparently have a dislike for, is a part of Noesis, (an affiliate or Vaishnavi in which Tatas have no ownership) and, as facts will show, on various occasions has differed with the Tata Group during his period in office and has not advocated or influenced Telecom policy for the Tata Group in any way.

***

You and many others have focused your attention on Ms. Radia as a corporate lobbyist. I would like to draw your attention to the following

# You parked yourself at the Taj Mahal Hotel Delhi, for several months since 2002 which was the centre of operations for your to prevent entry of WLL Limited Mobility and CDMA as well as to interact with the polity and bureaucracy and with other operators to forge telecom policy of your choice. You did this in your own capacity as also as President of COAI.

# Your also constantly solicited support of Confederation of India Industry (CII).

Would you not consider this as an endeavour to influence or subvert policy? To influence politicians or solicit support from selected corporates? I take it that in your view this would not constitute lobbying.

Your affiliating with a particular political party is well known and it appears that their political aspirations and their endeavour to embarrass the Prime Minister and the ruling party may well have been the motivation behind your letter and the insinuations which you make.

We should all note that many of the flip flops in the telecom policy occurred during the BJP regime.

Whatever may be said, it must be recognised that the recent policy broke the powerful cartel which had been holding back competition and delaying implementation of policies not to their liking, such as growth of CDMA technologies, new GSM entrants, revision in subscriber based spectrum allocation norms, and now even number portability.

You yourself have publicly commended in November 2007 such initiatives and the minister for breaking the cartel and reducing the cost of service to the customer.

The 2G scam ostensibly revolved around Raja‘s alleged misdeeds and some parts of the CAG report were quoted as having indicted the minister.

Much has been made about the hypothetical loss to the exchequer in the grant of new licenses and the grant of spectrum on the basis of 3G auction prices, (which were not known or even foreseen at the time of granting such licenses and spectrum).

However, the media and even you have chosen to ignore the rest of the CAG report in which excess possession of spectrum, the disadvantages to TTSL by name, the irregularity in allotment of licenses to most players whose applications were ineligible to be considered in the first place have been clearly stated in detail.

You have also not noticed that the CAG has not ascribed value to 48 new GSM licenses issued to incumbents between 2004-08 and 65 MHz of additional spectrum allotted to incumbents during this period even though the CAG was supposed to cover the period from 2003. It would have been widely reported.

I support the ongoing investigations and believe that the period of investigation be extended to 2001 for the nation to know the real beneficiaries of the ad hoc policy-making and implementation.

***

Finally, you have chosen to lecture me on the responsibilities of upholding the ethics and values which the Tata Group has honoured and adhered to through the years.

I can say categorically that we have not wavered in upholding our values and ethical standards despite the erosion in the ethical fabric in the country and despite the efforts of others to draw us into controversy and endeavour to besmirch our record.

When the present sensational smokescreen dies down, as it will, and the true facts emerge, it will be for the people of India to determine who are the culprits that enjoy political patronage and protection and who actually subvert policy and who have dual standards.

I can hold my head high and say that neither the Tata Group or I have at any time been involved in any of these misdeeds.

The selective reporting and your own selective focus appear to be diversionary actions to deflect attention away from the real issue which plagues the telecom industry, in the interest of a few powerful politically connected operators.

Perhaps it is time that you and members of the media do some introspection and soul searching as to whether you have been serving your masters or serving the general public at large.

With warm regards

Yours sincerely

Ratan N. Tata

***

Also read: To: Ratan Tata. From Rajeev Chandrasekhar

Has Ratan Tata ruined the Tatas’ brand image?

‘Go to bed knowing you haven’t succumbed’

About these ads

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

35 Responses to “Ratan Tata’s open letter to Rajeev Chandrasekhar”

  1. Simple Says:

    The 2G issue has boomeranged on BJP. It now transpires that the source of all evil was the NDA government.

    Why was the ex PM silent when these telecom flip flops happened during NDA regime?

    why did he nor order an investigation when CAG said that the spectrum licences were given for a song. Thereby, causing a loss to the exchequer?

    Why was the ED not following the case? the CBI? the IT? why was a JPC not instituted then? why didn’t a single judge committee look into the procedural aspects of giving out licences?

  2. DailyBread Says:

    Tata Sir, who is advising you on this matter? who came up with this strategy of attacking political masters of Rajeev C? Fire that guy. The best strategy would have been to use some of the stenographers who lend their names to op-eds. We can see that you are missing Vir very badly….

    I think you are rattled by the Home Secretary’s statement about more incriminating tapes.

  3. Bengalooru Haida Says:

    I am lovin’ it! These are cathartic times or what? Many many chickens are coming home to roost. Many musty curtains are being raised slowly giving us gullible fools a peek into what goes on behind the scenes. All for the good I would think!

    Also as Churumuri puts it, the sanctimonious moans of many spokesmen of all hues on media was getting a bit tiring. Let them have a free-for-all now and let some light shine on the murky dealings.

    So what other holy grails are left to be shattered? I just hope Swami Nityananda and Double Sri get into a pow-wow to enlighten us about the spiritual realm. That would be nice keeping up with spirit of the times.

  4. Kelu Janamejaya Says:

    This is an excerpt from Ratan Tata’s letter:

    “The first set of cellular mobile operators received their licenses based on the auction process in circles for which some of them and their partners submitted very high bids. Later in July 1999, in a BJP-led NDA government, in accordance with the recommendation of a group of ministers headed by Jaswant Singh, the fixed license fee regime was changed to a revenue share regime (which exists even today).

    If a hypothetical amount was to be calculated, similar to one which has been done in the CAG report, at that point of time, the loss to the exchequer would be about Rs 50,000 crore and the exchequer would have been deprived of this amount.

    Realistically, however, the revenue share system would have recouped some amount over time and this important change most probably has been responsible for the greater growth of the industry as it enabled tariffs to be reduced.”

    Here he is accepting that the policy followed by NDA was indeed right.

    Second excerpt from the letter:

    However, in pursuance of the spirit of NTP 1999, the Government did indeed implement the technology neutral policy in November 2003. The minister involved was Arun Shourie in the same BJP-led NDA government under Vajpayee.

    This was implemented through the creation of the UASL regime which enabled existing license holders to migrate to UASL license providing freedom of choice of technology and where a pan-India license could be obtained for a fee of about Rs. 1,650 crore, the same fee paid by the successful fourth cellular mobile operator.

    Shourie needs to be commended in implementing this far sighted policy, which has enabled technology to be the driver of the industry, rather than technology protected growth.

    Please note here he is even appreciating the good work done by Arun Shourie who was the then telecom minister.

    Read the third excerpt:

    TTSL, on the other hand, an existing licensee, applied for spectrum under the dual technology policy after the policy was announced on October 19th , 2007 and is still awaiting allotment of spectrum in Delhi and 39 key districts for about three years whereas operators who applied, and paid the fee even before the policy announcement, were not only considered ahead in line but were allotted spectrum with amazing alacrity in January 2008 itself.

    The dates mentioned here correspond to the period UPA was in power.

    Subsequently he goes on to say a number of things and not even once he comes out with facts to support his argument about flip flops of NDA on telecom policies.

    Suddenly in the ending part of the letter he questions the political affiliation of Rajeev C and mentions that BJP was doing flip flop on telecom policy.

    How is BJP responsible for the events which have occurred post their foregoing power?

    What is the flip flop he is trying to highlight here?

    Lot of unanswered questions here.

    ***

    When an industrialist like Tata has to resort to half truths and innuendos to defend himself, it is a very sad state of affairs.

    India Today has reported on how Tata’s company became the beneficiary of the telecom mismanagement of A Raja. Here is what it has to say:

    My client Tata Teleservices has also been a beneficiary in this (read 2G scam).” This is the candid claim that Niira Radia made to a senior IAS officer Sunil Arora in a taped telephone conversation in June 2009. It was no idle boast.

    Radia managed to get Tata Teleservices’ precious GSM spectrum across 18 telecom circles of the 22 at dirt cheap rates. She ensured that Tata jumped the queue and got spectrum ahead of 343 applicants. Till as late as 2010, Department of Telecom (DoT) continued to allot Tata the spectrum at the 2001 price. All Tata paid was a little over Rs 1,600 crore for the 4.4 MHz spectrum. The CAG report tabled in Parliament states that if former telecom minister A. Raja had chosen the auction route, Ratan Tata would have paid anywhere between Rs 9,000 crore and Rs 20,000 crore for the same spectrum allocation.

    After this deal, the net worth of Tata Teleservices skyrocketed. In November 2008, Tata Teleservices sold 26 per cent stake to Japanese telecom player Docomo for a staggering $2.8 billion, making a stupendous profit out of a single deal.

    While Raja, citing shortage of spectrum, arbitrarily altered the cut-off date for applications made by new entrants from October 1, 2007 to September 25, Tata was shown a special favour and allotted spectrum ahead of 343 applicants even when Tata Teleservices had submitted the application only on October 20.

    Can someone write all these things just because of their political affiliations? If this is not true, then would they not be inviting defamation suits against them??

  5. Tarlemaga Says:

    This is era of mud slinging.

    We had the Journos and Editors going up against each other in Editors guild.

    Then we have Politicians in Parliament.

    Now the Industrialists !!!

    Time to Celebrate !!!

    Skeletons are falling out of the Cupboard.

  6. Murthy Says:

    What a timely article.
    A country getting new states everyday and if you cross one state to another you not getting the mobile signals and charged for roaming in your own “so called one biggest democratic country” – the problem of disintegration is solved by involving the big corporate tussle like the Ambanis and now TATAs.
    I am buying sims everywhere I go and the way I am paying for telecom in this era of 5G -even sometimes developing it -without using not more than talking after city limits shows the inability of good old congress.

    Living in a state surrounded by 6 states I am annoyed by being called a roamer when I travel just anywhere 200km and I have to pay more!!

    The essence of capitalism is nauseating now . This country needs to get rid of weak Punjabi like Manmohan once for all and his open market sons developed from 90′s like Ambanis Mittals and TAtas will take over the remaining task of dividing the country with a capitalistic perspective – I don’t mind that way either neither does Arundhati’s views.

    Ishtu maadodaake PMship.!! He is unable to resolve any problems be it Ambani or now Tata. I like the weakening.
    An ordinary halli shetty would have done these type of dealings.

  7. Hosa Belaku Says:

    Tata has made many valid points. Those who were looking for juicy bits missed the entire story he related. It was a story of policy short-sightedness.

    Different companies benefit from different policies. This is true of any sector. Government is strangely unable to fashion technology-neutral policies. So it is blamed. These flip-flops are often corrections. But there are victims, always. That said, it is disappointing to see TV channels call in the same set of people to discuss this issue (and every other issue) when the controversy is reaching a peak. These ‘stand-by’ panels have very little to offer in the discussions, but gossip.

    I missed telecom experts debating the pros and cons. Hope the print medium has made an effort and we see better informed wrie-ups and views of those who know the subject.

    The only point that Rajeev managed to make today, amidst reconciliatory noises was that there seemed to be a gap between what Tata said/ stood for and what his Companies actually do on ground!

  8. Kirataka Says:

    Bekittha ee malayalee-ge? Reshme vastradalli chappali mucchi hodeda haagide ee Tata letter. Sariyagi biddide pettu RC mamanige.

  9. mounaprasad Says:

    Kelu,

    Please be cautious while defending NDA, our Don Quixote has already started charging at the proverbial windmill…LOL…me thinks Don Quixote is Kaangress’s answer for Hallu Daaktru Ramesappa of JDS ;)

  10. Bhamy V Shenoy Says:

    It is high time some one with deep knowledge of telecom come up with a simple explanation of what has been going on since the liberalization of telecom sector. It cannot be that complex to find out what went wrong or why certain policies were adapted to benefit whom etc. For a lay man it is difficult to make any sense out of all these explanations to arrive at independent assessment. There must be some one among the churumuri readers who knows about telecom to write a short article on this.

  11. Anonymous Guy Says:

    Mounaprasad,

    And Kelu is your cheddi sancho panza answer to defend the saffronites – RSS, BJP, VHP etc. on Churumuri.

  12. twistleton Says:

    Kelu

    you are guilty of the crime you accuse other people of.

    But this is the time for celebration.

    Like BH says, Bring it!

  13. common man Says:

    Kelu….
    Please stop defending NDA and BJP.. with Vajpayee’s ashes.. BJP will also go into ashes. We should respect the business house here. The TATA’s have made India proud generated employment to lakhs of people in India. If they are benefitted with the policies of Govt.. what is wrong in that.
    As a whole I believe in Mr.TATA’s rather than the dirty politicians.
    Moreover one thing I would like to tell here.. Nira Radia came to limelight when Mr.AnanthKumar was civil aviation minister in NDA regime.She had close nexus with NDA governmnet.

  14. Goldstar Says:

    Bhamy V Shenoy
    >>There must be some one among the churumuri readers who knows about telecom to write a short article on this.

    Let us try to “crowd source” the knowledge, instead of one person trying to make sense of it.

    Let me start:
    ————

    1994-1995: Govt auctions basic telephony and cellular telephony. Maximum 2 providers per circle limit. All cellular operators were GSM operators.

    Around 2000: Tata Tele and Reliance start CDMA cellular services (mis)using their fixed telephony licenses. GSM operators oppose this as they have already made huge investments.

  15. DailyBread Says:

    Kelu,

    Very good post but go easy on Mr. Tata.

    I don’t believe in a “high license fee” regime for the spectrum, as you know eventually consumer ends up paying for it. Revenue sharing + Service tax from telcos have been a great source of moolah for GOI and going forward will continue to fund non asset creation programs like NREGA. Isse kahethe hai-Hawaka (airtime)paisa hawa me udaneka.

    PS: Nobody has looked at loss caused to the exchequer when some potential revenue streams like Tower Infrastructure was hived/sold off by Telcos. I guess we have a story there.

  16. Kelu Janamejaya Says:

    @ Common Man,

    I have nothing against Mr.Tata…I truly believe that the House of Tatas have done a fantastic service to this country by getting into all the businesses they are in today. Infact, I drive a Tata car, use their mobile & internet services too!!! And to tell you what? The service is definitely good..

    I have no problem in him getting business licences using either political or money clout he has. Business worldwide is done that way and we should have no qualms if someone does it here too.

    I lauded his move to shift the nano plant from WB to Gujarat and defended him when the sickular gang attacked him for chosing “communal” Gujarat to set up his base.

    But I have a problem when, in his enthusiasm to defend the present political set up, he makes unsubstantiated comments on the previous regime. Please go through his letter word by word. Has he mentioned anywhere what this flip flop is all about? Where it was done, how it was done etc???? Instead, we find one line which says maximum flip flop happened during BJP regime. How is this accepted form of defence?

    It was sometime in 2003 or 2004. Tata Tele Services came up with a wireless landline telephone offer. This was actually a landline but because it was wireless, one could take it anywhere just like a mobile phone. Remember, during that period the mobile telephony charges were very high. I too had this phone. Believe me, it was a fantastic deal. Take your phone in the car and use it like your land line at the same cost….

    But there was a catch.. when the permission to this wireless telephony was given, it was intended as a wireless phone to be used within four walls. However in reality it was sold on a different platform. Mobility at the land line cost!!!The other mobile service providers were obviously upset with this backdoor machinations of the Tata Teleservices. They complained to TRAI I think and this was withdrawn by the Tatas.

    Is this a flip flop of policy???

    On the one hand he claims that he could not have gone to sleep knowing that he paid a 15 crore bribe to start an airline. On the other, he appoints a PR agency to get the work done. Do you honestly think that any PR person will go to the powers that be and politely asks for a policy change and it happens??? Money will exchange hands, favours are given and the PR person will not pay all these out of his/her fees. These would be billed to TATAs as out of pocket expenses and it will be paid.

    Tell me how different this is from directly bribing someone?

    Respecting someone is different from believing everythign that person says. I respect Ratan Tata, but in this instance I dont believe what he is saying!!!

  17. Goldstar Says:

    Somebody help me (and Mr. Tata) here !!

    On December 7th, Simple goes hammer and tongs against Mr. Tata. He says:

    Why isn’t BJP raking up muck against Tata with as much vehemence as they did against Raja?

    https://churumuri.wordpress.com/2010/12/07/rajeev-chandrasekhars-open-letter-to-ratan-tata/#comment-132347
    ——–

    And now Kelu goes ballistic against Mr. Tata here in this thread.

    Simple and Kelu have the same opinion against Mr. Tata ??

  18. Tarlemaga Says:

    Guyz,

    Dont break your head too much discussing and forming opinions here. No one is a Saint in this world. Not even the Saints..

    Everything is far in Love, War, Polictics, Business,Judiciary,Police and Media.

    Instead of taking a moral high ground use it to your conveineince, like they use you.

    Then the requirement to write long articiles and analyzing it wont arise.

    Hope this sums up. Live Life King Size !!!

  19. chris Says:

    This Rajeev, Isn’t he the guy who used and abused his own industrialist father-in-law of BPL for personal gain? After using BPL money and making a personal fortune in telecom, now he is abusing Tatas. Why are we even talking about him? We should treat him like a little scum.

  20. H.R.Bappu Satyanarayana Says:

    The latest revelations that Radia was under the scanner since 3 years and reveals a disturbing fact thet she is alleged to have been an agent of the foreign intelligence agencies and that she was indulging in anti-national activities puts altogether a different complexioin. Therefore Tata’s contenston on violation of privacy becomes a minot issue. In fact a deeper investigation may reveal many disturbing facts beyond the outward manifestation of corruption in 2G spectrum scam because many may be in the loop

  21. Bengalooru Haida Says:

    Goldstar,

    >>GSM operators oppose this as they have already made huge investments.

    You mean in network infrastructure? If that’s the case the cost incurred would be similar for CDMA players too. Or did you mean high license fees that the GSM blokes were supposed to have paid at the outset? That in any case became irrelevant as it had been changed to revenue share model by the time CDMA guys started knocking on the door.

    So there I think Tata has a valid point. The GSM guys had a vested interest in blocking the entry of new technologies (read new players). They were having a nice meal and didn’t like others to join them at the table.

  22. karihaida Says:

    @Goldstar,
    I guess you have mixed WLL with CDMA mobile technology. WLL (CDMA is a type of WLL) which is a personal mobile, was a brilliant idea… but since the “gov’t” was not getting any revenue from it, it was neutered heavily. So much for a socialist gov’t …

  23. Shiv Says:

    I am regular reader of Guardian blogs not because I agree with the bloggers but the interesting viewpoints in the comments section.I wish educated knowledgeable and balanced Indians congregate in similar way and I think kelu’s analysis is balanced.
    I listened/ read most of the tapes /transcripts and also read the 14 pages of CBI/IT department letters which have analysed Radia’s blabberings.It is clear that Ratan tata has gone in the same mediocre rotten path as that of the pioneer rotters like the Ambanis and soon to unfrock Mittals.For more than a decade, crony capitalists have made hay in this land of impoverished people.There are many impotenent industrialists who conveniently looked the other way like the NRN’s and am not surprised that the learned privileged high society people have grabbed with glee whatever they can lay their hands on. India is a rotten society and it is high time we looked at ourselves and our devious ways.

  24. Tarlemaga Says:

    Can anyone of you give me the number of Radia. I will like to make some tax free money. She is the single point connection to all the influential folks in INDIA.

    Impotent Industrialist like NRN have shut their mouth during this crisis. He used to loud mouth about ethics all the time.

    NRN has International connections compared to the small fries in India.

    TED TURNER had turned up for his daughter’s reception along with whose who of US.

    Now the Oligarchy society is complete

    http://matthewjwagner.blogspot.com/2009/09/akshata-murthy-rishi-sunak-2-day.html

  25. Anonymous Guy Says:

    Karihaida,

    At least in the matter of wireless, the Indian government has protected the consumer much better than say the US capitalist govt in terms of both prices and services. In the US it is just bare-faced robbery – the contracts, tying hardware to plans, exorbitant rates for SMS etc.

  26. Mathihalli madan mohan Says:

    Nobody is a saint in this present permissive society. Everybodys hands are tainted. Nobody is above board. If you think that somebody is saint, thatis your mistake and not of the person concerned.

    Tata Chandrasekhar feud accusing each other being infidel is like the wives of same husband, accusing each other is being infidel.

    Kumarawamy and Yeddyurappa, who are in the midst of the mudslinging match need not feel sorry for their performanance. They are in good company like the Tatas and Chandrasekhars.

  27. karihaida Says:

    @AG,
    Agree with you on that. In this regard in a contrived way Thiru Raja has a hand in making it affordable :)

  28. Anonymous Guy Says:

    KH,

    Raja is directly responsible for making it affordable. Why do you say contrived?

    Corruption/kickbacks is a different matter. To the end user, his policies and actions have been beneficial, even revolutionary.

  29. twistleton Says:

    and so the dust begins to settle…

  30. twistleton Says:

    then all services should be auctioned illegally.

  31. prasad Says:

    Ratan Tata is slowly digging his own grave, with the help of the Congress 2G boss.

  32. Kelu Janamejaya Says:

    After the revelation yesterday about the dealings between Voltas and the DMK family, now we know why Tata suddenly brought BJP into picture!!!

    Every little bit of information which is coming out is clearly saying the nexus that existed between these industrial houses and the corrupt politicians of DMK & Congress. Every bit of paper work is leading the trail to their doorstep. Still they blame BJP & NDA for all the ills!!!

    And the stock reply that is coming out of every Congies mouth these days is that BJP in Karnataka is corrupt!!! Ask them about CWG, they take Karnataka. Ask them about Adarsh, they talk about Karnataka. Ask them about 2G scam, they talk Karnataka….

    I wonder if the few acres of land which these stupid politicans of Karnataka have amassed can ever be equal to the frauds of gigantic proportions that are being perpetrated by the Congress and its allies day in and day out.

  33. twistleton Says:

    Kelu

    BJP cannot hope to compete with the Congress in any field at any level :)

  34. Bengalooru Haida Says:

    TwistleT,

    >>BJP cannot hope to compete with the Congress in any field at any level :)

    I strongly condemn the condescending tone of your remark. It is not factual. I pity your ignorance of the past and present.

    There have been many instances when we came within sniffing distance of beating the old blighters and indeed on occasion we have breasted the tape ahead of them.

    I wonder how you could have missed illustrious names like Pramod Mahajan, Ram Naik, Madanlal Khurana and V K Malhotra to name a few. We did sleep with Kalaignar and Amma when it suited us and you would know they haven’t been caught out with clean pair of hands ever.

    Ok, you would say so much in the past what about the present? You must be terribly blind not to notice the jalsa in our own state where in almost every single minister is doing his bit to beat Congress at it’s old game lead by our great caste-less leader Yeddy. This is truly phenomenal where in we have even bucked that useless 80-20 trend in Indian politics – 80% being corrupt and 20% being honest.

    I think this should convince you unless you are stubbornly biased against us. No? Ok, what you think about our nice little coalitions with Akalis in Punjab and the mint-fresh one in Jharkhand? Still have doubts? Then you are a hopeless case. Even Gadkari can’t save you.

  35. twistleton Says:

    @BH

    I’ll concede you that point today. But you cannot compete with the sheer experience of the INC behemoth- the Association to end all associations, a veritable capo di tutti capi.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 7,343 other followers

%d bloggers like this: