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

Google to Invest $10B in India

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 349 posts

Re: Google to Invest $10B in India

#221

Post by intended »

enitihas wrote: post #188
intended wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indian telecom is now a classic oligopoly, far from our heady days as one of the most insanely competitive telecom markets.

Ironically, the prices are far lower than they were in those insanely competitive days.

True, yet recently I recall prices being raised and all firms moving in lock step. A classic signs of oligopolistic behavior.

Further all 3 major firms are in massive debt, and after the SC interpretation of how they have to pay their dues, they are pretty much dead firms unless they get money.

You can already see them creating new packages to target users who have more disposable income.

I'd say make hay while the sun shines. The structure of a market dictates the strategies and tactics which work. With 3 players collusion is the norm, not competition.

Re: Google to Invest $10B in India

#222

Post by abhishekash »

enitihas wrote: post #200
midasz wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For now

It has been about 3 years atleast since Jio has paid plans, and things are still way way cheaper. Even if the prices double, they will be way cheaper than what they were.

My personal take is that for Jio the cellphone network is an opening to providing services that can be monetised in long run. Same strategy thats being followed by biggest tech companies across the world.

Re: Google to Invest $10B in India

#223

Post by intended »

sbmthakur wrote: post #206
intended wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indian telecom is now a classic oligopoly, far from our heady days as one of the most insanely competitive telecom markets.

In those 'competive' days data prices were so high that most of the country couldn't afford it. And this was just because the existing companies had formed some sort of a 'cartel' and were not willing to part with profits[0]. All that changed when Jio entered the market. 0. https://www.counterview.net/2016/09/top-telecom-cartes-airte...

Those are not the competitive days, those are pretty much classic examples of the chilling effect on our market after the SC forcing a re-auction.

An auction exposes market pricing information which was hidden before.

In case people aren't aware, the Indian mobile sector was one of the cheapest and most pioneering markets of its time.

People created the 0 cost phone call - farmers and mobile users could give a missed call to a number they heard on the radio, and then they would get a call back.

Stuff that was in sharp contrast to the mobile plans and service packs around the world.

While people argue about data, they forget how hard it is to set up the infrastructure and the massive boost forward simple phone calls were for people.

That was the era I am talking about, not post the SC verdict.

Re: Google to Invest $10B in India

#224

Post by reachtarunhere »

questionfor wrote: post #212
kamaal wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well Indian customer is always a price conscious one though. Like it or not, we are that way. Remember those days people used to make pre agreed arrangements, and just make the communication acknowledgements though missed calls? So eventually if you want to be profitable and sell more services, you have to offer a good price. It's just the way it is. I even know people who look at fares and then decide if they want t…

> Remember those days people used to make pre agreed arrangements, and just make the communication acknowledgements though missed calls? Can you elaborate how did that work? I never heard about this method

Hypothetical Example: I would tell my dad that I'll give a missed call and let it ring just thrice once I got safely to University from home.

Actual Example from my life: My dad had a cellular plan that had lots of free minutes of calling. So, I would just give him a missed call and he would call back. This was the early 2000s I think.

Re: Google to Invest $10B in India

#225

Post by mycodebreaks »

viklove wrote: post #214
derefr wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> volunteered as servers at his daughters wedding ... subservience I don't know about you, but when I hear "working as a server at a wedding attended by many powerful people", I don't think "subservience", I think "unique opportunity to make connections, and to potentially snoop insider information."

You must not know of Amitabh and the Shahrukh -- they're not some smalltime actors that need to get a leg up. This would be like Tom Cruise and Brad Pitt offering to be servers at Jeff Bezos' daughters wedding. It's absurdly subservient.

Do not ignore cultural differences. If you see such an activity as a job, then you would arrive at a conclusion like yours.

In India, it's common for hosts to serve food as a sign of respect to their guests. Close friends and family of hosts also join. This only showed the closeness of the relationships among Mukesh and other stars. Seeing it as a subservient act isn't accurate, no big star would sign up if it were so.

Re: Google to Invest $10B in India

#226

Post by intended »

questionfor wrote: post #212
kamaal wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well Indian customer is always a price conscious one though. Like it or not, we are that way. Remember those days people used to make pre agreed arrangements, and just make the communication acknowledgements though missed calls? So eventually if you want to be profitable and sell more services, you have to offer a good price. It's just the way it is. I even know people who look at fares and then decide if they want t…

> Remember those days people used to make pre agreed arrangements, and just make the communication acknowledgements though missed calls? Can you elaborate how did that work? I never heard about this method

A classic example from a business perspective: Poorer users had no money to waste calling people up - but incoming calls were free.

So firms would advertize a missed call number on the radio.

People could give that number a missed call, and they would soon get a call back from the firm - thus never spending any money at all.

The more common interpersonal example was one person having more money than the other, or being on a company plan - so they would get missed calls from their family/friends, and they would then call back.

The cost was thus borne by the firm/richer person/person with more talk time.

Re: Google to Invest $10B in India

#227

Post by enitihas »

abhishekash wrote: post #222
enitihas wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has been about 3 years atleast since Jio has paid plans, and things are still way way cheaper. Even if the prices double, they will be way cheaper than what they were.

My personal take is that for Jio the cellphone network is an opening to providing services that can be monetised in long run. Same strategy thats being followed by biggest tech companies across the world.

That will not work that well. Average Indian right now doesn't really have that much disposable income for such services to be very profitable. It will have to be the very long run. I doubt either google or Facebook earn a lot from India right now, and they are very well established, and their compute costs are as low as they can get. I don't see how Jio is going to be able to follow the strategy of the biggest tech companies.

I hope India does grow at a large enough rate for such services to be profitable.

Re: Google to Invest $10B in India

#228

Post by xxpor »

screye wrote: post #199
amrrs wrote: post #3

There's been a recent surge in American companies investing in India primarily through Reliance Jio (owned by Mukhesh Ambani who's got a good connect with the current ruling Government). It's been spiking since the Anti-China sentiment led Buy and Use 'Made in India' cries. Government has even asked eCom Flipkart and Amazon to display Country of Origin for each product. With all these, This investment from Google see…

> Mukhesh Ambani who's got a good connect with the current ruling Government To be fair, Mukesh has got good connections everywhere. He is India's most powerful person. Amitabh and the Shahrukh (some of the world's richest actors, both half billionaires) both volunteered as servers at his daughters wedding as a show of appreciation. If a man can command the most powerful of his country to such level of willful subser…

Random language usage question: in India, if someone is referred to as a billionaire, would that be in terms of rupees or dollars? (1 billion INR is ~13.3 million USD)

Or does it essentially never come up because a typical Indian would use lakh/crore instead? Is there's something like a "lakh croreaire"?

Re: Google to Invest $10B in India

#229

Post by munificent »

kumarvvr wrote: post #82
buran77 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Companies don't invest billions in India to shaft China, they're doing it to maintain or grow their position on the Indian market, which is a huge one. If India suddenly sees a wave of "build it at home" sentiment then Google or Apple won't want to be left out and fall behind the competition. Publicly traded companies can't afford to play favorites, they "have to" go where the profits are and make the best of it, whe…

> Publicly traded companies can't afford to play favorites, they "have to" go where the profits are and make the best of it, whether it's decades of being the mole in a wack-a-mole game with the Chinese system, or having to invest extra billions in India. True to some extent only. Apart from profits, publicly traded companies also clamour for a stable business environment. And authoritarian countries have an inherent…

> No one can make 50 year plans for China, like they can do with US

Five years ago, I would have agreed with you about the US. But the direction that politics have gone since then makes me a lot less sure.

The rate that corruption has grown under the Trump without repercussions is absolutely astonishing. Like any relationship, I don't know how that break in trust between the government and its citizens can be repaired.

Re: Google to Invest $10B in India

#230

Post by flak48 »

xxpor wrote: post #228
screye wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Mukhesh Ambani who's got a good connect with the current ruling Government To be fair, Mukesh has got good connections everywhere. He is India's most powerful person. Amitabh and the Shahrukh (some of the world's richest actors, both half billionaires) both volunteered as servers at his daughters wedding as a show of appreciation. If a man can command the most powerful of his country to such level of willful subser…

Random language usage question: in India, if someone is referred to as a billionaire, would that be in terms of rupees or dollars? (1 billion INR is ~13.3 million USD) Or does it essentially never come up because a typical Indian would use lakh/crore instead? Is there's something like a "lakh croreaire"?

> Or does it essentially never come up because a typical Indian would use lakh/crore instead?

Exactly. USD is almost always implied when million/billion is used

Post reply on HN