My Journey

I have made all the calculations; fate will do the rest -(Napoleon)

Tuesday, February 21, 2006

Why India does not have global brands?


Finland has a population of around 5.2 million, which is less than even one-third of New Delhi. If we think of global brands from Finland then there are quite a few. Nokia, Kone, UPM, Fiskars are world famous in their segments. How many global brand India has? Apparently none. Isn’t it strange? Why India failed to produce brands which are known in world?

Let’s go couple of years back. Around 2001 when internet started to become popular, lot of cyber cafes came up. In those places you could pay and surf internet. Most people didn’t have computer or internet at home. The charges at these cafes were around 60Rs (Indian Currency) for one hour. These cyber cafés started to become popular and were doing brisk business. Few of the cyber cafés started stocking soft drinks and other beverages, which the customers could buy and consume while surfing. I remember the price of a 250ml bottle of Coke in any such café would be 15 Rs while at any beverage store or kiosk it would be 10 Rs. Similarly for other beverages, the café owners were charging premium. Was there any logic for over charging? If someone else is selling coke for 10rs and making profit then it should be profitable for café owners as well. More for them, as their infrastructure being primarily used for internet surfing was already factored in the surfing charge. Rather than charging premium they could have sold them at lesser price and yet made similar/more profits. But they didn’t do it?

This example is symptomatic of Indian business mindset. They never held a collaborative approach for customer but wanted to exploit them. This gave them a higher return in short term but failed to establish a relationship. In the café example, if the experience would have been of customer delight then even today, when people have internet at home, one would have gone there to surf internet over a cup of cappuccino. Until and unless it became absolutely necessary, Indian businesses never passed on the values achieved due to efficient supply chain or economies of scale. Customer was never a partner of the supply chain. It takes a time and effort to create a band and does not give return in one or two quarters but in a long term. All the efforts during the initial period goes in creating the brand equity.

This was also evident in the retail industry till few years ago. Big retail chains never passed on the benefit of volume margin or economy of scale rather charged premium for items. When this trend was changed by one or two retail chains the competitive pressure forced others to change it as well. Now they don’t want global retail chains to be allowed in India. They want some legislation to cover their abject mentality of exploiting customers.

Clearly India has still a long way to go for creating global brands.

53 Comments:

  • At 6:29 AM, Blogger Koi Pahailee said…

    very good thinking
    you have a point!
    but it leads me to wonder that y does the 'anti-customer' attitude prevails in this part of the continent? What is it that we lack 'basically' that ends up us behaving like that?

     
  • At 7:08 AM, Blogger Abhinav said…

    very well put...
    >What is it that we lack 'basically' >that ends up us behaving like that?
    Well teh answer is there in the post..lack of foresight in the businessmen here...everybody here wants to make a quick buck.

     
  • At 8:16 AM, Blogger greensatya said…

    Koi pahailee - thanks, I think it is lack of global vision in this subcontinent.It is also due to silo mentality of people here. But things are changing and I think in few decaded situation will be much better.
    KP, am going to your new blog :)

    Abhinav - Yeah, lack of foresight and greed. May be also due to too much of restrictions in doing business. But things are changing.

     
  • At 8:23 AM, Blogger Kaps said…

    IIT and IIM's may not be commercial brands like Nokia etc, but they have managed to create their own identity globally.

     
  • At 8:34 AM, Blogger greensatya said…

    Hi Kaps,

    That's okay, even non-commercial brands can fit in picture. I don't know about IIT, but are you really sure of IIMs? I have not met a single non-indian outside India who would have heard of IIM? Do they know IIM in Singapore ?

     
  • At 8:43 AM, Blogger Kaps said…

    IIT brand has much more reach and impact that the IIM brand. IIM brand might become popular in Singapore as IIM-B is planning to start operations here. BTW I stumbled on your blog after reading this article in DNA today -
    http://dnaindia.com/report.asp?NewsID=1014019

     
  • At 9:08 AM, Blogger greensatya said…

    Kaps- Yeah about IITs it is true, but I didnt have first hand information so didn't say anything. Finally IIM got permission to open branches, good for it. Will create awareness.

    And hey, thanks for the link or else I would have never known that I was mentioned some where. :)

    It mentions these two articles
    1

    2

     
  • At 9:11 AM, Blogger Koi Pahailee said…

    its the same blog greenbean
    just wanted to change the look and all...to help get me out of my bleaky self!

    and when abhinav replied to my comment, i thought u had changed your nick (again) and that abhinav is your real name :)

    and to abhinav...hi :)

     
  • At 9:49 AM, Blogger Y said…

    Satya, I fully disagree with you on this regard. Remmember the simplicity approach in your previous post. You are missing it here altogether. Brands are build by comsumerism. Tell me the big American brands the GMs, the Ford's, where are they. They got a head start because the market was there. India or for that matter couyntries not having any brands are such because they never had the market or disposable income for brands to nuture.

    Coming to your second point. Amti consumerism. Its a systemic pressure which causes it. Today go to a cyber cafe and you can browse at Rs 10/-. This is not pro consumerism but competition. Earlier the situation did not allow competition to breed. Now it does. Satya, earlier the Cyber cafe's were at an entry stage so it was expected. Similarly many segm,ents today can be labelled anti consumer. They are not due to attitude of the ppl. But because the environment causes a systemic pressure on them to behave in such a manner.

    All in all there is one thing market size. Brands which are today all started because they had a market to tap into. India never had. It does now. But its the earlier brand which are exploiting it.

     
  • At 10:29 AM, Blogger Sara said…

    hi Satya...when thinking of global brands...we do have some (the change is already happening)...if you can check Tom Peters website u can find the effect of our software firms on the Western world...Infy is a big brand name in that sense...but in conventional non-IT businesses...i agree to wat u have said

     
  • At 10:30 AM, Blogger greensatya said…

    Koi- Yeah your new blog has much better template and it looks colorful. Hope it did cheer you...and that was one time, my nice 'greenbean' :)

     
  • At 10:36 AM, Blogger greensatya said…

    Sher - At first after seeing the 'fully' I thought you have agreed with me ;)

    1. Market Size - This is the reason I mentioned the population of Finland. Now how that didn't limit Finland to come up with global brands.

    2 Head Start or First mover advantage - Well, I don't know if you are aware that Nokia earlier used to make tyres, tubes, rubber gloves and tissue papers. They did get into mobile phone business in late eighties, few years before we were liberalised.

    3.Cyber Cafe - I didn't object to the high price. I was talking of selling beverages at higher cost inside cafe. What is the business logic behind this other than milking the customer. Abroad there are cafes where you go to have a cup of coffee and surf for free.

    (Would reply to further comments in late evening.)

     
  • At 10:50 AM, Blogger Y said…

    Satya, dont mind if I write a full post here.

    1. Market Size. Dont take it literally. In Finland if I launch a consumerist product how much of the population will be my target. Probably 80%. In India probably 5%-10%. And earlier we didnot have the disposable incomes. Let a new consumerist segment open up. I bet the leading brand wud be Chinese or Indian. Please name one brand originating from outside the developed market. Samsung is one such case and that is why it is subject to so many brand building case studies in american univs. Even Samsung cannot be termed as coming from a well defined developing country. Brands are made from demographic profiles and then they profilerate. Rest are all details built on it.

    2. This point is just a way of saying how Nokia collected capital to move from one greater positive value project to another. How is this related to first movers advantage. What I meant was that when you are first in a market, you have a tendency to charge a premium. If tommorow I launch a bike which drives itself, Wont I be more alligned to charge a premium for it, if I already know the demand is there and there is no competition. The situation will be different if either I have to develo the market in the first place or if there is a threat of competitors.

    3.Again the mindset was not anti consumers. A lot of things go into it. Since cyber cafe's were not like common retail outlets, they were a layer below our next door kiryana wala - so a mark up for the distribution costs. Secondly, there was a misplaced logic that since internet wud be accessed by only the well heeled so they will be ready to pay more. Dont tell me this logic is only applicable to our society. It sounds like common place to me.

     
  • At 11:07 AM, Blogger Raj said…

    Right now, I don't have the time (and the knowledge) to decide if u r right or not, but u drove home ur point well :)

    I c u've turned off word verification :P

     
  • At 12:31 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Satya, I don't think nokia is not the first mover in telecommunication or mobile phone, Nokia just did good research and are able to come up with more user friendly products than motorola...

    a good book to read is the Wireless Horizon by Dan Steinbock :) available at amazon.

     
  • At 12:32 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    oops what am I saying.. I meant, I don't think nokia is the first mover in telecommunications or mobile phone..

     
  • At 2:32 PM, Blogger Maverick said…

    Market Size: Even if the target market for a product is 5%-10% of our population set, its a decent size and investments in a brand building excercise could produce positive returns.

    Available Consumers: Brands like colgate, lux and detol had almost become generic in India. How many buyers know that Surf is an International brand or HLL is a multinational organization. Very Few! (believe me). My point is that the succesful multinational brands in India have had a nationalized strategy with changing their marketing mix to suit the Indian consumer mindset and thats like starting from scratch. Thus we have always had a huge consumer base to give the oppertunity to build a brand.

    But, forget producing a Multinational brand, we have not been able to produce many sustained national brands. Why?

    We lack the ability to organize towards a long term business goal. Brands are not produced overnight. Brands like coke have invested over decades on promoting the product to stand for some values that the consumer percieves and associate with.

    The problem happens to be with the Indian organization's structure. The Indian organizations happen to run on whims and fancies of a few, and when these few are marketing genuises we happen to get the Nirmas and when they phase out the organization does not understand their personal business strategies and the brand rolls down. Indian organizations strive on personal excellences over system generated competencies.

    I happen to work for Samsung, a brand that has really gone places as mentioned by SEZ. What does Samsung do differently? The brand stands for technology, thus the investment on R&D as a % of turnover is way higher than most of the electronic brands. It alsovinvests heavily on system oriented development (for eg it employees a huge think force who just work on organization structure and strategy). Now both these expenses are not directed towards our key processes but we consider them as core business process and are loaded on product pricing, so the consumer is paying for future value additions. To put it differently the comany invests the brand premium it charges on future premium generators.

    Now how many company's do that in India.

    My view is that we have the recources to generate a global brand but we are inherently weak in channelising these resources. Our greates weakness is the inability to organize.

     
  • At 2:41 PM, Blogger Akanksha said…

    cool discusson.. i never thought abt our brands as ever going global..
    when i read ur post i seemed to agree with what u were saying green satya but sej has also put forth some very interesting opposing views.. so all in all i am confused..

     
  • At 3:04 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Reminds me of a lecture delivered by Doongaji, a staunch Tata man, in a forum for HR professionals. I had the luck to be nominated for it.

    He related an incident of how brand building results in loyal customers who will stick to your brand, when they are convinced of your brand´s integrity.

    He said, "it was a time when this Tata division was manufacturing hair-clips for women/girls. During one period, the raw material came cheaper and the market was doing good, but our competitors still either hiked the prices or kept the status quo, without passing on the benefit to the customer.

    We on the other hand, reduced our rates. This we did despite the opposition to the move, when all heads were in favor of doing the same as our competitors . I dug my heels in and the decision to reduce the prices prevailed.

    As fate would have it, the raw material prices surged again, and there was a slump in demand. The situation was so bad that I had to persuade my wife and daughter to buy some clips, for fear of losing my job(laughter in the audience).

    Our competitors lowered the prices to boost sales, but we did not. Still, our customer segment stuck to us.

    My manager tried to convince me, "Doongaji, thanks to our brilliant marketing efforts, our clients still prefer what we sell."

    I said, "Shut up. I know why they are still with us."

    So, it was as early as the 60s that the Tatas realized the need to create a strong brand value and customer loyalty by making them feel a part of our business. That is the secret behind the respect the name commands everywhere."

    Applause unending.

    This lecture was a year back. I have managed to recollect most of what he said and out it in my own words.

    -Alice

     
  • At 3:20 PM, Blogger XVSA013 said…

    india doesnt have global brands because it takes time. we started 15 yrs ago only.

    and dont start comparing with singapore or european countries.

    ur extrapolation from cybercafe ... i dont agree with that.

    retail makes sense.

     
  • At 5:10 PM, Blogger Y said…

    I cant agree more with Mowgli....it takes time. Our consumer potential has just been unleashed. Give us time. What I have been trying to say is, India never had the 'DESIRED' consumer base for brands to prop up. Thats my basic logic rest are details.

    Please dont tell me companies make consumers. They augment their creation only.

    Mav: Successful International brands could come to India bcz they had a strong base. Strong financials. India cud not because with such a consumer base we needed a very very strong financial muscle to sustain our efforts .

    Regarding saying 5% -10% of Indian poplulatin. You know more than anyone of us. But our buying habits are very different. An american doesnot save. Infact they are a negative saving economy. We are a savings oriented economy-atleast till recently. An American having two cars is common. An Indian having two cars is still indecent. That 5-10% is too miniscule an amount if u take everything like behaviour etc into account.

    2. Who says India doesnot have national brands. Leave the software sector. In automobiles, I proudly say Indica is the No. 2 four wheeler brand in India. I ccan validate so by the brand equity survey published in the latest issue. This says much. Toyota, Honda, GM, Suzuki, Ford are all in Idia.

    Again Pulsar takes the cake in 2 wheeler segment. I note this from the brand equity survey. And arent automobiles the most difficult category?And lets just not talk about Kingfisher. Indian brands are being given an opportunity now...give it more time.

    India will have difficulty to be able to generate a global brand.

    Firstly, the incumbents are too strong.

    Secondly, for acquiring brands huge moolah needed.

    thirdly, we'll have to overcome a huge mindset mountain.

    Fourthly, Indian firms are too small.

    For God's sake we have just 2 fortune 500's.

    But let a new consumer segment open up. Software sector was a B@B case. This segment will provide the best opportunity for us to set up a global brand. Most manufacturing is connected, I think the opportunity could be in services.

     
  • At 7:25 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I have thought on this but not deeply ever before.

    In India the consumers are too many and it leads to suppliers taking them for granted. This is a wrong approach of course from the suppliers.

    I have been astounded by the lack of services, common respect customers get in India. Stil Indians buy products. With private players coming in consumers can choose. If there are 4 players, they have to compete and eventually a bit of seriousness towards services is bound to come in as it is. But it will take time.

    Ambassadors were bought cos there were no other cars. People watch cricket in the stadiums despite the worst spectator ammenities, treatments.

     
  • At 10:58 PM, Blogger greensatya said…

    Sher - Thanks for your comments and why would I mind if the comment is too long like post. I love debatable comments. I am replying to both of your comments here.

    Why do you look at market size of India? Even you take 5% of Indian population, it is more than 80% of Finland. But the point here is of being 'Global' - why Indian brands are not global? I was focussing more on Indian mindset and how that mindset hinders Indians to create global brands.

    Nokia example I gave, cause you might argue that GM, Ford had first mover or huge domestic market example. And if you think 15 years is not enough then see the example of Nokia again. how long they have been making mobile phones.

    You say that cafe owners were only a layer above Kirana shops. Okay, now tell me if Kirana shops are making profit by selling coke at 10rs, how come cafe owners were selling it for rs 15 when their infrastructure cost was factored in the surfing tariff. Wasn't that opportunistic ? Will that create brand ? NO and then they will excuses like developing countries and only 15 years..


    Why would you want to charge a premium if you are the only one in market? Well you could but then you will not have brand loyalty the moment someone else comes up similar products. There are different attributes which matter in product life cycle. The best way to be order winner in all the stages or product life cycle is making a brand

    Yeah there are many other things required to create a global brand but first is the mindset. I gave the cafe example to show the mindset of those who conduct businesses in India.

     
  • At 11:09 PM, Blogger greensatya said…

    Sara - Sorry buddy, blogger showed your comment a bit late so I didnt reply to it in morning.

    Yeah IT companies are creating brand name for themself. Moreover Indian mindset is changing so in next decade or two we will have global Indian brands across sectors. But there are reasons why we didn't have them till now.

    Raj - Thanks for being here. Yeah, word verification was creating a huge nuisance, so I stopped it for time being.

    Heather - thanks for putting up that fact. It helped to emphasize my point that NOkia didn't have the first mover advantage. I will try to read that book, kinda busy these days :)

     
  • At 11:32 PM, Blogger greensatya said…

    Maverick - Yeah your points are in line of what I feel. You have replied to the points raised by 'Sher'

    We lack the ability to organize towards a long term business goal. Brands are not produced overnight. Brands like coke have invested over decades on promoting the product to stand for some values that the consumer percieves and associate with.

    This is exactly what I wanted to say through my post. You are so true about expenditure on R & D and long term strategy. A company needs to stop thinking about making extra bucks in short term by exploiting customers to create brands.

    Akanksha - Yeah thats true about getting confused. But you should look at both sides of the points from the comments and try to reason them out. There is a beauty in debatable comments. They are valuable.

    Alice - That was a wonderful example. Thanks for posting it. Recently there was some survey, don't know the details of it but it adjuged TATA brand as the most valuable brand of India. You just showed that how one brand didn't exploit the customers when they could.

     
  • At 11:50 PM, Blogger greensatya said…

    Mowgli -

    india doesnt have global brands because it takes time. we started 15 yrs ago only.

    You mean that without economic liberalisation brands can't be created or that alone stopped creation of Global brands. And there are examples of brands being created in less than 15 years. With the mindset I described no brands can be created even in 100 years in a highly liberalised economy.

    and dont start comparing with singapore or european countries.

    Then you want to compare India with Somalia, Sudan or even Haiti ?

    ur extrapolation from cybercafe ... i dont agree with that.

    You haven't given any reason.


    retail makes sense.

    In what way ?


    Sher - Have replied to your comments above.

    Pratyush - Exactly, the suppliers are adopting an opportunistic attitude. With competition it is brand which is going to create a sustained and stable source of revenue.

     
  • At 4:24 AM, Blogger XVSA013 said…

    ppl have stopped going to cyber cafe's because they have net at home ... it convienent and easy ... and net cafes went down because cost of PC went down and more and more ppl bought PC and started surfing at home. point is ... ppl wud have stopped coming even if softdrinks were given at lesser cost.

    you are forgetting the cost of a PC at that time - it was very high ... an avg cafe wud spend lacs on PCs and ACs and ambience ... i think their infrastructure overheads werent getting covered with 60 bucks ... hence its probable that the guys u are refering to had marked up softdrink in a hurry to see cash ... also remember they were small business men ... they werent out to build global brands.

    ---- if you are talking abt global brands ...lets talk of big brands ... retail is a good example:

    have you been to Vivek's/food world ... price quite low there ... if you are refering to Pantaloons/westside ... yeah i agree ... but the market is immature lets see what happens.

    -----

    now the lack of global brands + indian business mentatily.

    well ... its true that we dont have one. before 91, it was ILLEGAL to move capital from india ... what was legal was so difficult to do (and bribing) hardly anyone did it. and great companies are always few and far even in US. visionaries are rare commodity and with time we will have our share. even indian owned companies like Mittal/Vedanta etc are based in London (HQ of old world) simply because its easier to do it from there. there is a clear trend indian companies are buying out forgien companies ... not earth shattering acquires/mergers ... but there is a trend.

    I believe what you want to see is a massive corporation owning lot of IP, stradling whole world in its presence and market power. yes there are examples of companies growing fast (Apple was fortune 500 in 5 yrs flat). how many are there????

    Rome was not built in one day. Understand where we come from ... even Nigeria/somalia have fewer challenges to scale compared to India .. and singapore and Finland ... well ... one is smaller than Janakpuri and other's population is lesser than bangalore. they all spk same language and well placed geo-politically. the pulls pressures they have to face at home is a fraction of indian political system.

    i think no country can be a model for India's advancement. we have to do it our own way.

    my point is: if you want to believe indians have no brain/ambition/thought/ability to build vast wealth because of some "cyber cafe" guys then .... well ... go ahead.

     
  • At 6:05 AM, Blogger Maverick said…

    @SEJ: Brand building, financialy is a simple concept where you invest towards future cash flows (+ive ROIs). The thing about lack of funds etc. is an excuse.

    And i meant very few national brands, not zero national brands.

    There is a small country called Tanzania, population about the 5-10% range of India, financially no where close to us but one organization there has been able to create consumer brands which are leader in their categories, and yes P&G and Levers of the world are there too. These brands have now started to penentrate sucessfully into other South African markets. This organization is growing organically with most of the top management being Indians. But the organization is highly structured and it spends again alot on developing its business model.

    So brother it requires a mindset and not financial muscle to produce brands.

     
  • At 9:06 AM, Blogger greensatya said…

    Mowgli - Very good points you have put, earlier it was not clear.

    I wasn't discussing why ppl have stopped going to cybercafe, it was a perfect example of business life cycle. I though meant that with a brand people till today would be going to some cybercafe.I used that example of illustrating mind set.

    If you are telling me that someone who invested probably 500,0000 or 600,000Rs and was also dependant on 50 bottle of coke for the cash, then you yourself realise what wrong they were. They could have done well to open a soft drink cafe instead. Hurry to see cash -- this is the mindset Mowgli.

    When you say that small business don't make global brands then please read the history of McDonald(you might agree that it is the most global brand along with VISA)

    I have been to Foodworld and Vivek's both and prices are low. This is what I said in my post about retail stores now doing good. But did you visit the retail chains in late eighties or early nineties.

    Yeah before 91 lot of problems were there but even the Indian mindset was not conducive to brand building as last as 2001(described in my post). But I still think how much has changed- there has no been change in capital accout covertiblity, the amount of direct overseas investment is allowed now and the limit is 25,000 US Dollars !!! Don't you think there were Indian MNCs before 91 ?

    You know BAJAJ auto, ppl had to wait for 10 years to get the scooters and now you buy bikes and scooters off the shelf. What stopped Bajaj to increase their capacity then? Any license or permit was easily within their reach given their socio-politco-economical clout. They didnt do it until market forced them to do it.

    Indian companies buying out foreign companies not always make brands. Tata bought TETLEY but did that make TATA brand in tea market? People still know TETLEY and not TATA.

    Hinduja family started doing business way back in 1919 in Iran. That was way before 1991 and that too in Iran, where people won't think of investing even 5 years back.

    I don't know what's wrong in comparing with successful examples. Everyone does benchmarking and compare with the best in breed. The same difference about population or egalitarian society could be given for Finland had India have more global brands than Finland. We compare GDP of different countries and we should say that we are different so let us not compare !!

    Well I never said that Indian can't create global brands or we will never have. I gave an example of why it was not possible, there are many more examples. But unfortunately I didn't have the examples from board rooms of bigger corporations, so I analysed from what I had.

     
  • At 9:07 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Who needs global brands?? I can live very well without them.

     
  • At 9:12 AM, Blogger greensatya said…

    Maverick - You have put 'brand building' in the simplest and best way. It is an investment for future, ROI is not visible in the next one quarter or one year. Brand equity is also an intangible asset which gets reflected in the sales figure.

    That was a good example of Tanzania; I wasn't aware of it. And yeah, it requires mind set and long term vision.

    Zohguy - Well creating global brands have several cascading benefits for the country and economy.

     
  • At 2:14 PM, Blogger XVSA013 said…

    green - CAC was not the only problem before '90s. it was almost a crime.

     
  • At 2:15 PM, Blogger XVSA013 said…

    Green - on a more serious note:

    starting tommorow morning please go and ahead and start acquiring companies from pole to pole ... coast to coast (when its clear :p) ... in any industry you choose.

    right now, steel is my favourite .. so start with mittal if you like.

    dont worry abt the cash.

    what say you?

     
  • At 2:52 PM, Blogger greensatya said…

    Mowgli - So how has Capital account convertibility changed now ? Till yesterday there is no full capital account convertibility in India.

    I am sorry that you think me as an intelligent person enough to decode your comments, but I have hard time understanding them.

    Your argument in the whole case was

    We don't have global brands cause

    1. We didn't have liberal economcy
    2. After liberalisation 15 year is not enough
    3. Don't compare India with other countries cause we have our own sweet ways of doing things and we take our own sweet time.

    My argument is

    Notwithstanding anything which has been mentioned earlier- Indian business weren't having the mindset to create brands cause they were short sighted and in hurry to exploit customers.

    I guess I have adequately summed up the debate from your side. I appreciate your participation.

     
  • At 3:12 PM, Blogger XVSA013 said…

    99% of business might not have it.

    few do have.

    and thats all that matters.

     
  • At 3:18 PM, Blogger greensatya said…

    Yeah, thats what I mean, they don't have the mindset. It is reflected in the way they conduct their daily businesses. And I think this mindset is so important that even if you have every other conveneinces you won't be able to create the brand if you are not willing to invest for future.

     
  • At 3:31 PM, Blogger XVSA013 said…

    1. what is global brand in ur view?
    2. you havent replied to my other comments.

     
  • At 3:35 PM, Blogger Y said…

    Its all getting very confusing and I raelly have no time to read all comments...financial muscle, organization structure ...I dunot know how they effect...they are beyond me...I have never made a brand..but my point is here plain and simple:

    We are fighting over the following thing; why dont we produce babies that become scientists?

    I am saying we in India have never got ((consistently))two people to do what they do to produce babies in the first place!!

    And that condition to me is a huge consumer market. Only when u produce a baby , you think of him to trave abroad and globalise!!!

    My example is quite a misnomer:))

    Will read the comments later.

     
  • At 4:37 PM, Blogger greensatya said…

    Mowgli - We discussed this. The other comment you mean, buying out companies. What will that achieve ?

    Sher- Yeah it is getting confusing.
    Using your analogy you say that
    - There are no people to produce babies
    - I say even if there are people they are not interested in producing baby.

    You say that domestic consumer market hinders creation of band. India has domestic brands since long and this tells us that there is a consumer market. So how come it is not there ?
    If Indian brands get huge consumer market they start exploiting the consumer base but do not they of creating a brand (global)

     
  • At 5:32 PM, Blogger Y said…

    Its driving me crazy. Why doesnt blogger allows us to store our voices.

    Ok..

    Please tell me where was the market in 1990s???

    Give me some statistic. Godsakes compare the per capita GDP of India to even the least developed developed country. India has a big market but is the behaviour big???????

    I want a result from this discussion.

    Lets carry point wise. Afresh.

    Pls explain u r following comments with examples. Also take note in the era of pre 1995(yes 1995 not 92), the regulations in place. Also bear in mind that Indian companies were not originators of any product. By that I mean no product was invented in India.

    //you say that domestic consumer market hinders creation of band. India has domestic brands since long and this tells us that there is a consumer market. So how come it is not there ?
    If Indian brands get huge consumer market they start exploiting the consumer base but do not they of creating a brand//

    Also lets take a case where a product or a serviced product was made in India. Software services. I wud like you to compare this with above.

    Had I been in my previous company where free ISD was allowed I wud have surely called you up to get a real time debate.

     
  • At 5:34 PM, Blogger Y said…

    Sorry the phrase shud be

    a serviced product invented in India

     
  • At 5:49 PM, Blogger Y said…

    Ok I'll now write a post to encapsulate my thoughts. This is getting out of my hand

     
  • At 11:28 PM, Blogger greensatya said…

    Sher - Yeah we have to reach a logical conclusion out of this discussion.

    Your argument is we didn't have customer base hence not much of demand. This is one reason why we don't have global brands.

    Now what I say is this - Indian businesses(majority) lack the mindset to develop brands. Take for example

    1. Bajaj - The queue time for getting a Bajaj scooter was more than a decade. So demand was there,isn't it ? They did nothing to reduce this marketing time and merrily made money. Their scooters were of crappy design, fuel guzzlers but why the heck they would care when they are selling with huge backorders. The first threat came from LML, they had to reduce time to reach the product and also to improve the design and you know the present status.
    Bajaj failed to create a brand. It did not put money on innovativeness or quality. So today with the coming of Honda, their no one cared for their brand.

    2 You know BOSE sound systems. They have niche segment of customers who are lesser in number. The market size is quite small yet the brand is a global brand. So again consumer base has nothing to do with brand.

    3. Your own Bullet - did it have the market size of Bajaj scooters but it has its own brand name.

    All these three example decouples the relationship between market size and brand creation.

    Tell me if you don't agree to me then I am going to call you and we shall discuss :)

     
  • At 10:07 AM, Blogger Y said…

    Satya,

    I think let me write a post. Maybe your point is valid but not at the very origin of the problem.

    You can get the context of my thoughts and we'll be able to do better.

     
  • At 10:41 AM, Blogger greensatya said…

    Sher, yeah let you write the post and we will discuss it there.

     
  • At 1:12 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Satya,

    1. You seem to have linked increased pricing (coupled with laggard customer services) to be obstacles in the creation of a global brand (correct me if I am wrong).

    2. I agree that market size does not influence the process of brand creation.

    The key is to create a brand is the credibility you enjoy with your customer base (in terms of what is important to them - Value for money/Quality/Vanity etc).

    Ergo, pricing per se is also not an obstacle to (non)creation of a brand.

    Unfortunately, with little disposable incomes, the majority of our population - the Indian middle class has always emphasised VFM . Because the mentality was to save or invest in gold.

    My point is, the Indian businessman´s attitude to "make a quick buck" may not be the reason for our not having a global brand at all! The Asian mindset of frugality may not be applicable everywhere.

    Nowadays, even in India, with the increase of yuppies, spending is on the rise. They will not take unnecessary efforts (call them lazy or whatever)just to save a few hundreds here and there, if the products are not much differentiated in their offerings.

    Alpha will still be the best hang-out in town, even if Beta offers better services at a lower price, simply bcos they are "used" to Alpha´s atmosphere. This is why people would prefer wearing Nike to a Bata sports shoe.

    The bottomline is, money not being a constraint, it will be the "experience" that the offering conjures us in the consumer´s mind, that will help create a brand. So it is important that the brand develop that association with the consumer (depending on the segment targetted), rather than worrying about not being seen as "making a quick buck".

    -Alice

     
  • At 2:10 PM, Blogger greensatya said…

    Alice -

    Your point no 1 may be direclty related to my post but this is not what I inferred. What I meant was

    - our businesses never thought of customer (for eg- value for money), they were always trying to exploit them, making quick bucks as long as the bargaining power was with them.

    - I didn't couple increased pricing but I meant they were unwilling to pass on customer 'delight' cause they enjoyed sort of monopoly.

    I agree with you here that it is the experience, the trust, the credibility and the guarantee of getting best out of money is what makes a brand.

    We all buy Nike instead of Bata though there is a huge price difference. Nike has a brand which we trust to give us the best return of our money.

     
  • At 6:31 PM, Blogger Y said…

    IN TOTALITY,

    India,like other developing countries is/was unable to develop global brands.

    Satya's proposition: Our businesses lack the mentality to develop brands, establish relationship with consumers etc.

    My proposition : The problem is the environment. The environment in India which is made of consumer market, govt policies,business landscape etc is not conducive to help nurture the proactive mindsets which can create global brands. In other words it is not the Indian mindset which is at fault. In such an environment the American ,Japenese, French or anyother mindset would also be equally shackled from producing such an effort.

     
  • At 8:27 AM, Blogger greensatya said…

    Sher - Now what is the basis of this line

    //In other words it is not the Indian mindset which is at fault. In such an environment the American ,Japenese, French or anyother mindset would also be equally shackled from producing such an effort.//

    How can we say so confidently that every ohter person in planet would be so shortsighted ?

     
  • At 11:34 AM, Blogger Maverick said…

    SEJ: Why dont you look at the picture differently.

    Japan, US of A and France are there where they are due to their investments in futuritive concepts. They are not financially ahead of us because they were created so. They beacame big econmies because they invested well.

    What was the condition of Japan after world war II. (WWII ended at almost the same tima as we gained Independence)

    And the nature has not blessed them with much of its wealth. No significant mineral or oil. So how come they became such a power that in 90's were the biggest threat to US. It was the Japeenese mindset. Their business acumen. Their investment in brands and up copming technologies.

     
  • At 11:38 AM, Blogger greensatya said…

    Maverick - Wow! you have hit the nail on the head.

    This is what I am trying to point out to Sher.

    They are not financially ahead of us because they were created so. They beacame big econmies because they invested well.


    This is the most apt explanation. Japan example is the perfect one.

     
  • At 1:00 PM, Blogger Y said…

    Sataya,you seem to be agreeing with Maverick alot.

    Maverick....I 'll reply in a short while.

    But from this arguement it appears maverick is on myline,he just needs some tuning to agree with me completely :>>

     
  • At 5:13 PM, Blogger Y said…

    mav have replied to you in my blog.

     

Post a Comment

<< Home