Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Facebook Takes $5.7B Stake in India’s Jio

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 183 posts

Re: Facebook Takes $5.7B Stake in India’s Jio

#161

Post by sbmthakur »

searchableguy wrote: post #16
kapilkchaurasia wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

India is a developing nation and it will have to depend on foreign investment unless zero corruption government help local business out. What is required to do that ministry keep a close eye before agreeing on such deals and afterwards like in case of internet.org initiatives. >I am okay with small startups getting investment They can also be worst. During the period April 2015-March 2020, of the 30 Indian unicorns (…

Small startups are not unicorns. Small startups don't have the ability to censor you as much as your ISP especially if all your friends and family use the same one. India's net neutrality laws are already a joke when nothing is enforced and you can't access normal sites on jio in some states. I am talking about reddit, github, and heck even stack. What india needs is to invest in their own businesses and stop using i…

In which state GitHub cannot be accessed on Jio's network?

Re: Facebook Takes $5.7B Stake in India’s Jio

#162

Post by sbmthakur »

intended wrote: post #158
sbmthakur wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What is sad is that the previous governments had done a truly impressive job of threading the economic needle when it came to designing a telecom market with competition. I beg to differ. I do understand Jio was quite aggressive in expanding its services and TRAI should have been more vigilant. But that still doesn't prove that they were working together in order to establish a monopoly. The pre-Jio telecom market…

I’m sorry, but the facts are that india has (had) a remarkable telecom sector at inception. The reason why I say this is because it’s VERY easy for the market structure to get flubbed and become only 2 or 3 firms which “compete”. (See america- invented the Internet, didn’t get the market right.) India has some of the lowest, if not the lowest ARPUs in the world. The Indian telecom sector invented the 0 cost phone cal…

> I’m sorry, but the facts are that india has (had) a remarkable telecom sector at inception.

Maybe yes. But my previous point stands. What good is the sector when millions of Indians can't afford it? (from the perspective of data rates). Also the incumbents had all the time in the world to normalize data rates. But instead they chose to cartelize the industry and kept their profits up.

Re: Facebook Takes $5.7B Stake in India’s Jio

#163

Post by sbmthakur »

a-ve wrote: post #97
9nGQluzmnq3M wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a person who literally is the Government in India Out of the loop: can you clarify what you mean by this?

Mukesh Ambani once said to the son of the previous BJP PM that Congress (the previous ruling party) is his own private shop. https://www.outlookindia.com/website/story/kya-congress-muke...

Well, he did openly support a Congress candidate in national elections.

Re: Facebook Takes $5.7B Stake in India’s Jio

#164

Post by sbmthakur »

webmobdev wrote: post #6
a-ve wrote: post #5

This is bad. One executive at Jio already confirmed they use DPI to monitor traffic on their networks, and their apps, be it their MyJio, JioTV, JioNews, etc. ask for almost every permission there is. Also, it looks like the Zuck hasn't given up on his internet.org thing yet. He failed the first time, might as well join hands with a person who literally is the Government in India. Can't switch to Idea because they we…

There's BSNL. Their 4G services are currently better than Jio and Airtel in my city. And they provide better connectivity in rural and remote areas.

I have used broadband from MTNL (another state telecom operator) back in the day. I still rue those days.

Re: Facebook Takes $5.7B Stake in India’s Jio

#165

Post by ravenstine »

kumarvvr wrote: post #86
lwb wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you suggesting that we shouldn't have private companies?

No, what I think he is suggesting is that everything private companies do is defended to the extreme, just becasuse the alternative of having govt. controlled entities is undesirable. Even I agree, there is too much worship of capitalist and free market structures. There ought to be a good balance between free market and govt. regulations, where public interests in protected.

Yes, the people who worship capitalism are baffling, because corporate tyranny eventually becomes indistinguishable from government tyranny. For instance, if Facebook and Google became so pervasive that they could censor everything that everyone says, then our constitutional rights don't mean anything. I respect people's perspective most of the time, but I disrespect people who think that private companies have a license to do anything they want because it just doesn't seem to be a well thought out idea.

Then there are those who suddenly talk like free market capitalists when it's convenient to their politics. I see this all the time with whomever the balance of power is favoring. 15 years ago, it was conservatives who excused private companies that did things that liberals didn't like, as long as those companies appeared to align with their values or were at least agnostic, and now you'll hear liberals who otherwise hate capitalism pull out the "private company" card when it suits their goals or is an affront to the other side.

I believe very few people are actually interested in the public good. Everyone claims they want to do things for the public good. In reality, I think they all want whatever goodies they think they can get by acting as toadies for their party of choice.

There ought to be a balance between freedom and regulation, but this is increasingly becoming a minority opinion.

Re: Facebook Takes $5.7B Stake in India’s Jio

#166

Post by _nedR »

ra7 wrote: post #64
statguy wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I will give you a datapoint, among many. The Indian govt. recently awarded a critical contract for modernizing the Indian Air Force to a company owned by Anil Ambani who is the brother of Mukesh Ambani, owner of Jio. The Anil Ambani (who has since declared bankruptcy) company had zero experience in defence or aeronautics, yet it was chosen over India's state owned HAL which has decades of aeronautical expertise.

All the petitions regarding wrongdoings in the deal were dismissed by the Supreme Court. The reason cited was that it was not the government who was responsible to choose an Indian partner for the “offset clause” of the deal, it was Dassault who entered into a JV with Anil Ambani’s company.

>The reason cited was that it was not the government who was responsible to choose an Indian partner for the “offset clause” of the deal, it was Dassault who entered into a JV with Anil Ambani’s company.

Because the Indian govt. forced Dassault to deal with Ambani. We know this because the French President literally said so.

“We did not have a say in this,” Mediapart quoted Mr Hollande saying. “It was the Indian government that proposed this service group, and Dassault negotiated with Ambani. We did not have a choice. We took the interlocutor that was given to us.”

https://m.economictimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/india-p...

https://www.ft.com/content/4e95c46c-bdb6-11e8-94b2-17176fbf9...

Re: Facebook Takes $5.7B Stake in India’s Jio

#167

Post by _nedR »

sbmthakur wrote: post #105
statguy wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I will give you a datapoint, among many. The Indian govt. recently awarded a critical contract for modernizing the Indian Air Force to a company owned by Anil Ambani who is the brother of Mukesh Ambani, owner of Jio. The Anil Ambani (who has since declared bankruptcy) company had zero experience in defence or aeronautics, yet it was chosen over India's state owned HAL which has decades of aeronautical expertise.

That's false. Anil Ambani's firm was chosen as an offset partner by Dassault, not by the Government. HAL wasn't interested in working as an offset partner. https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/rafale-deal-anil-ambanis-fir... > The Anil Ambani (who has since declared bankruptcy) company had zero experience in defence or aeronautics The company that you are talking about came into existence after Anil Ambani got stake in Pi…

Anil Ambani's firm was chosen as an offset partner by Dassault, not by the Government.

"Chosen". As in forced to chose by the Indian govt. We know this because the French President literally said so in an interview.

“We did not have a say in this,” Mediapart quoted Mr Hollande saying. “It was the Indian government that proposed this service group, and Dassault negotiated with Ambani. We did not have a choice. We took the interlocutor that was given to us.”

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-natio...

https://www.ft.com/content/4e95c46c-bdb6-11e8-94b2-17176fbf9...

Re: Facebook Takes $5.7B Stake in India’s Jio

#169

Post by intended »

sbmthakur wrote: post #162
intended wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m sorry, but the facts are that india has (had) a remarkable telecom sector at inception. The reason why I say this is because it’s VERY easy for the market structure to get flubbed and become only 2 or 3 firms which “compete”. (See america- invented the Internet, didn’t get the market right.) India has some of the lowest, if not the lowest ARPUs in the world. The Indian telecom sector invented the 0 cost phone cal…

> I’m sorry, but the facts are that india has (had) a remarkable telecom sector at inception. Maybe yes. But my previous point stands. What good is the sector when millions of Indians can't afford it? (from the perspective of data rates). Also the incumbents had all the time in the world to normalize data rates. But instead they chose to cartelize the industry and kept their profits up.

Again that perspective is wrong, because India is literally among the cheapest and often the cheapest country to buy data.

https://www.cable.co.uk/mobiles/worldwide-data-pricing/

https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2019/03/05/the-co...

So they didn't cartelize, and only recently after the insane noise over the 3g auction which fizzled out, did we lose that market.

We've now essentially cartelized (all remaining firms raised rates in tandem), and the few players left are also teetering with Vodafone considering leaving.

This means that we will likely see Jio, and Airtel left, with BSNL constantly being denuded.

Their profits are terrible, and the debt burden because of arrears means they need a rescue, or the future situation will become - impressively - even worse.

Re: Facebook Takes $5.7B Stake in India’s Jio

#170

Post by intended »

intended wrote: post #158
sbmthakur wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What is sad is that the previous governments had done a truly impressive job of threading the economic needle when it came to designing a telecom market with competition. I beg to differ. I do understand Jio was quite aggressive in expanding its services and TRAI should have been more vigilant. But that still doesn't prove that they were working together in order to establish a monopoly. The pre-Jio telecom market…

I’m sorry, but the facts are that india has (had) a remarkable telecom sector at inception. The reason why I say this is because it’s VERY easy for the market structure to get flubbed and become only 2 or 3 firms which “compete”. (See america- invented the Internet, didn’t get the market right.) India has some of the lowest, if not the lowest ARPUs in the world. The Indian telecom sector invented the 0 cost phone cal…

I wasn't confident in asserting data rates were low, but I've checked and Indian data rates, along with call rates are the lowest in the world.
Post reply on HN