Positioning the world's cheapest car

How do you position something cheap ? The world's cheapest Car for example. In a market where two wheelers still pre-dominate the private vehicle segment and where cars are still seen as symbols of affluence; this may be an interesting exercise to undertake. With Tata motors launching Tata Nano just two days back, the whole Two wheeler market is in jitters.

The total number of registered two-wheelers and three-wheelers on road in India, as on March 31, 1998 was 27.9mn and 1.7mn respectively. The two wheeler population has almost doubled in 1996 from a base of 12.6mn in 1990.

Mr Ratan Tata, Chairman, Tata Group said that his insight into how a typical middle class Indian family travels gave him the inspiration to design and develop a "people's car" for India. The car costing just Rs.one lakh ( Rs.100,000) is the cheapest in the market and would give stiff competition to both two wheelers and other cars which are mostly the choice of first time buyers.

Though about 30 % of India's population is in the middle class, who have high aspirations and would like to have all the trappings of a successful life; I wonder how they will react to this new car. THough everyone would like to own a car, how would they like to been in the "world's cheapest car' ? Will it go well with the image that they have of themselves ??

I think this car will work more in semi-rural areas and towns more than cities; as people in cities tend to be more image conscious. While all the marketing pundits are re-writing their business plans keeping Nano in mind; i think one will have to wait and watch before jumping to big conclusions. In the meanwhile, Mr Tata and co. can bask in the glory of a job well done.

Value of Art, price of a painting

"A cynic is one who knows the price of everything, but not the value of anything" said Oscar Wilde. Truly, many of us tend to attach a price-tag for everything and evaluate whether it is worth our while to spend so much time and energy on a given object or pursuit. While paintings may be priced, the value of art is priceless.

Just two days back, I was at a pre-launch party of an art exhibition curated by a dear friend Akumal Ramachander, whose claim to fame is his discovery of a polish painter - Harold Shapinsky in the USA. In the process both became incredibly famous ( and rich ???). Akumal is a quintessential art promoter. He is one of the most passionate people i have come across, a prince in his own words.

The discussion veered towards how art is priced. There were some interesting insights that he offered during this conversation. Artists are priced comparatively. For example, if there is a talented artist who is fresh and has tremendous potential. He would be priced perhaps 1/5 of the price of a well established artist. As the artist's reputation and market value grows; the price of his paintings also goes up. Ultimately, it is a matter of reputation, pointed out Akumal.


So, what really determines the price of a painting ? How does one evaluate something so subjective and attach a price-tag to it ?

For starters, it would be easier to look at what the market is willing to pay for an artist. A fresh talent,as mentioned earlier; may not be able to get much for his/her work. At this stage, comparative or prevailing market prices will apply. As a person's reputation grows, the price of his/her paintings may grow sky-high if the works are of very good quality and have sufficient depth. While a MF Hussain large oil on canvas may sell for four or five crores, ( Rs.500,00,0000); lesser known artsts may bring in a few lakhs for a similar sized painting.

Cartels and groups of rich, corrupt socialites are also known to artificially hike the price of a certain artist; just to build his credibility for a short time. While this practice of artificially hiking the price of an artist's work is known; it often goes undetected for years together. An artist's works may reach sky-high prices and drop as dramatically when people see through this charade and call the bluff.

While commercialisation of art is an ongoing phenomenon in India, commodification is also setting in. I know of an artist ( rather well-known) in Bangalore who calls his studio a "painting factory", as he churns out painting after painting as if it is a line-assembly. This is to be expected in a society which is nouve-riche and obsessed with acquiring more by the day.

Democracy needs an image make-over...

Last week Narendra Modi won the elections in Gujarat, a state which witnessed some of the worst riots and pogroms in recent history. The fact that he has been re-elected as Chief minister while half of the country is calling him a mass-murderer does not seem to be going against him. If at all, it has strenghtened his follower's resolve in backing the "Nero of Gujarat".

In another part of Asia, the Thai seem to be bringing back Thaksin Shinawatra's party to power. The former leader who had to do a runner after the military coup is facing charges of corruption and is being investigated. But this is not stopping his party from winning.

Both these cases bring to the fore, the inherent flaw or possiblities that the democractic process entails. Here we have two leaders, both very charismatic and able to lead people and shape public-opinion at will. Both have been charged with crimes against the people who they govern. There seems to be ample proof for both to be prosecuted. Yet, both are coming back to power.

Does it make them innocent ? Just because the majority believes that they are right and good; does it exonerate them of their actions ? Or is Democracy in itself flawed ? Is it the process which is at fault or is it the people ? Or is it a case of election rigging and information assymetry ?

No easy answers here; but this sure calls for a total image make-over for democracy - if people have to believe in it as a process.

I remember having a conversation with a Pakistani Taxi driver in Dubai.

Me: Dont you feel constricted in a monarchy and a police-state here ?
Taxi driver : Mr Khan, I am worried about the money i earn, what i send to my family and the quality of my life. Does it matter if this is a monarchy or Democracy ? It doesnt to me. The monarchs here think of the citizens as their children and take care of them. Corrupt politicians in the Sub-continent only think of themselves and stash away as much money as possible in the four or five years they are in power. Now, you tell me which system is better ???