WhatsApp – The King of Apps?

Talk business or technology, the quintessential question always remains – what next and where do we go from here? Develop an idea enabled by technology, build a viable business plan and get investors to fund the project is fast becoming the way to become an entrepreneur. In most cases, we have now become an app driven community and every person who aspires to come in with a billion dollar idea that can change the world look at apps. What is also means is one has to look back at the millions of apps and programs that already exist in the market to even identify an untapped need. The gap between a concept and an innovative concept is now just growing by the day.

Yes, the advent of a smart phone has actually expanded the horizons of consumer targeted technology and there might be almost every possible need of a common man that the entrepreneurs have been investing for through an app. Even a super niche function like identify the quality of printing on paper (which was something reserved for specialized equipment) is already present in the market and available for free on an app. Most phone applications have evolved from an internet based websites and services. While a few are specially created for the mobile space, there is one undisputed king which only resides on the mobile- WhatsApp.

Now to be fair, WhatsApp is not a complete innovation of sorts. Messaging and media capabilities existed via SMS and MMS for quite some time. The Blackberry Messenger was one thing that made the biggest buzz for buyers outside the corporate domain. The success of WhatsApp possibly came from being amongst the first and versatile data based messaging app that was not limited to any particular mobile operating system.  Its capabilities of sharing photos, videos and forming groups was something that gave rise to social communities through mobiles. In terms of convenience: a voice note just in case you are bored to type or have just one small thing to talk.

It might have taken people a fair amount of time to accept an email or an SMS as a formal form of communication. It has hardly much time to be taken WhatsApp to be taken serious.  To my experience, it has become a means to be at two places without actually being there. A film set is being erected, an event stall is being constructed or anything remote that might take for a person to travel to; it has now become a common practice to send across images or videos over WhatsApp to the approving authority and seek feedback instantly.

Another common practice, form a group on WhatsApp with people work

ing on a project and you have everyone on the same page as if an email update. Groups are a great way to spread information rapidly. The last I know is a short film being released exclusive content on WhatsApp. WhatsApp has also put up a strong fight to voice calling apps like Viber with its calling capabilities. So in a way, WhatsApp has so far had most bases covered in terms of voice based communication and file sharing abilities. So where does it go now?

I guess it might just take a few dips in the near past to believe that social platforms tend to die out the moment they stop evolving. The example of Orkut, Hotmail, Chat Messengers are all examples where they got beaten or replaced by others that had better functionality or enough excitement happening to keep people hooked on all day.  The areas where WhatApp still might lack is Video Calling facilities against, say Facetime. Or the fact that you can connect only by exchanging numbers and not a onetime connect that’s possible via Skype.

One thing that WhatsApp has achieved so far is forming communities within users. Ranging from friends, business circles or even a virtual classroom notice board, it has been adapted in many ways. But if WhatsApp could form communities for a social or a professional outfit, it can be the next stage of brand campaigns or even online PR initiatives. The way news and information (much of the times even improper information) travels via groups has an overwhelming viral effect.  

Having already seen how politicians used WhatsApp during the state elections in Maharashtra, it is already become a mass broadcast medium. If marketing via WhatsApp was an idea so far, what is interesting though is that women with their ever expanding social circles and gossip groups are one strong way that Tupperware ladies have already started taking advantage of. All Tupperware does is create short videos of their products and information previously that required demo is now going across through demo videos.

The final word from me, WhatsApp needs to make a good use of its penetration and evolve into different forms for people and their needs. It has already achieved success over smart phone users which might be at par if not above what Facebook has with the same group – but it is how it will grow and endear itself to the future users that will decide the way ahead. For now, I guess there will be little debate that possibly the most subscribes app makes WhatsApp the king of its domain for now. 

Picking up the tabs for Europe

Read a joke on the internet yesterday; “A Greek, an Irish, a Spaniard and a German go to a pub and have a fun time… at the end of the party, the Greek, Irish and the Spaniard put up their hands for not having money and finally it was up to the German to clear up the mess”. Doesn’t sound funny right? The joke in fact is that this is the scenario that is currently running across most of Europe as it looks down the barrel of the financial crisis that has the potential to threaten every single country.

It is funny in a lot of ways that the most powerful and resilient economy in Europe today is one which has actually experienced some serious political turmoil, change of guard, partition and unification all over the last century. Germany has been subject to paying up for the wars in Europe and has seen inflation that has been just mind boggling during the Depression. In the recent past, Germany has faced the difficult balancing act of offsetting debts of a low industrialized East German economy in the 90’s. Yet again, it is Germany which is having to so a salvage – this time it is most of Europe.

So where did Europe go wrong?

Through the ages, Europe has always been a restless baby. They have fought for power and control within the bounds of the continent or its colonies. It is not uncommon that while Europe made the best out of the Industrial Revolution, the monarchies never really allowed any country to have the relations that kept trading easy to do. It was the post-war Europe where countries finally allied for better relations in trade and removal of tariffs at many levels that got them back on track.

The end of the cold war and the unification of Germany in 1989 gave the idea of a unified free trading and economic zone of Europe as a whole a firm rooting. A common currency, the Euro gave a lot of member nations a tough time marking their own currencies at parity. But this was just a hiccup as in the long run, it ensured that now every member nation had easier access to resources and facilities in better developed nations and also borrow finances to fuel their economic development.

Sadly, this was the space where most countries have got it wrong. When taking a bank loan, we are always asked to issue a collateral or bring in a guarantor to support.  It is a further must for the two to be presented if your own credit rating is weak. The smaller countries like Greece were never in a shape to manage their global debts against their own incomes (usually taxes). But with easy access to global finance and backed by the fact that they are a part of Euro, borrowings increased beyond manageable levels. Public spending on government funded projects, pensions, tax waiver and all kind of populist policies have meant the money borrowed is never coming back.

It wasn’t surprising that when the slow down hit the world in 2008, it was the smaller economies in Europe that had money either invested or borrowed from the US went down. With United Kingdom not a part of Euro and France playing a second fiddle; it was up to Germany to assume the role of big brother and pull up the debt of all these failed economies. But not without conditions towards imposing austerity measures to be implemented by the countries failing to bear its own debt.

But this is easier said than done. When Government implements measures to cut down spends, it means that people are likely to lose jobs, spend less and in turn end up paying lesser taxes. Less tax means the government earns less and cannot repay its debt. What this means is that even with stronger economies in the Euro picking up the tabs and bad debts, this cycle might not end. This is a space where today we have 17 countries linked by a common currency and trade agreements – but the political will, tax structure and the ways to earn an income and spend are vastly different among the member countries.

The Utopian plan would be a uniform currency, tax policy and governance style across the member nations – which is definitely unpopular on a political front. But one thing for sure, the vicious cycle of debt ridden economies has begun. People are going to have a tough time and recoveries are going to be slow and harsh. As for the immediate, someone is going to have to step in and pick up the tab for all of Europe.

Start Ups and Hiccups

We always like to idolize people who stand apart from the ordinary and make themselves noticed in a crowd. So while most people around me in college looked up to Edison, Einstein and Hawking as gods, the business minds admired the Tata, Birla and Ambani clan as inspiration. Deviation from the regular job to entrepreneurship might have clicked in the mid-80’s and the era of economic liberalization had started to build the foundation of entrepreneurship.  People who had a sufficient understanding and experience of how to do business in their domain floated on their own. This was what I shall term as the conventional approach: Learn the rules – master the rules – break the rules.

But this chain of order has now been smashed and a new order on the path of entrepreneurship has been established in recent times. It’s the culture of friends and roommates from some of the much revered technical and business schools hatching an idea, finding investors and taking on the world to break the established business practices. It is this radical and rebellion of sorts that makes people like Sachin Bansal and Binny Bansal (Flipkart), Rahul Yadav (Housing.com), Kunal Bahl and Rohit Bansal (Snapdeal) the new age business idols for the current generation.

Every single start up story has almost a similar beginning – the feeling that there is so much we can do to make things better and establish a new order. While some start up entrepreneurs have worked before they went on their own, most these days have an idea developed and launched from their hostel rooms and possibly find an investor in the idea even before they graduate. Not to mention symposiums from established giants like Microsoft Ventures have become like a breeding ground for start-ups and investors to come together and find mutually beneficial interactions – even leave the place with a deal in hand.

There is nothing to deny the fact that the entrepreneur culture is redefining the way business is done and services are provide. Technology and internet is changing the face of what we believed was the only way to do things. I’s sure we all have seen the infographic about Airbnb, Uber, Alibaba, Facebook and YouTube changing the face of various industry verticals and the perception that business can be done only in a defined manner.

While all of might be aware of the success stories, what is the success rate and why do the start-up acts fail? An idea at most times is like the USP or the competitive advantage that gives a start-up an edge and immediate traction. But this can only be in existence as long as the other either don’t catch up or innovate beyond to surge ahead. This is the space where things get a little dicey. Not to mention, investors are in for a long haul and look at break even and profits – not able to deliver is not an option at this stage.

Rahul Yadav has been in the news across for the last two weeks after being sacked as the CEO by the investors. It is not that his venture is not able to deliver; but the fact that every growth phase also needs to be made robust with consolidation and firm rooting before the next level was greatly overlooked. This is the space where great ideas need to be going together with great managers. The people who are needed to hold the company together and possibly also pull off a few decisions that keep the creative minds at rest for a while. It is the evolution of an entrepreneur from a rebel or maverick into a leader that counts at this point.

Three things I have cited recently amongst start-ups as I hunt for job opportunities:

Firstly, the scores of start-up companies which have come up and are looking for people to work with them because they have lost their way. From a number of interactions with such people, I have been able to discover a few startling facts. Yes, most start-ups begin operation with angel capital which is usually the pocket savings of the people involved. With expenses and investment in technology and infrastructure, the ideal turnaround time from the idea to implementation and acceptance needs to be under a year.

It baffles me when there are start-ups with having invested close to two years don’t even reach a beta stage. In one case, the marketing function was required to deliver results in 8 months where a target market was yet to be defined. Not to mention, the idea was already finding feet with established players like Evernote and Google to make the app redundant even before release. In another, a start-up with no clients or established service offering was looking for funding and needed media presence (castles in the air) to achieve this. I feel this is a case of tunnel vision and people often lose touch with reality having invested too much time and effort into their own obsessions.

The second being the fact that people are looking for like – minded people over more than anything else. So an IIT/IIM start up is more skewed for people from IITs and IIMs. It is not surprising that job portals can now have posts asking for a start-up partner, tech partner etc. from the premier institutes only to join the ones with ideas.

On the first level, it sounds good; like minds will gel and people will deliver. But how about another line of thought – an idea is no one’s domain and every IIT/ IIM is groomed to believe they are an invincible lot designed to rule the lesser minds. So how can one accept orders from another equal or not move out to pursue his/her own dream during the formative days? May be I’m wrong, but this seems like a complete recipe for a power struggle in the making.

The third and the one I believe is the breaking point – rapid expansions with no control on costs or break even periods. Most start-ups are technology driven and technology obsolesce cycles are shorter than even what Moore’s Law would have defined. Who could have thought that Orkut could have died and Whatsapp could have almost wiped Blackberry messenger. Not to forget, we are still debating if Amazon has ever reached a break-even point to date. Amidst such confusion, investors are pumping in billions in anticipation of backing the next big idea. These billions are being spent on expansions and hiring people at amazing pay scales. Offices are like party zones and massive monies are spent under employee welfare. So the big question is will there be a pay back to the investor at some point in the recent future and how long will the party last?

It was funny at times where I came across start-ups that were over 5 years old and were yet to make a big impact. Having spent their initial investor monies, they had now taken over a few other smaller players in a bid to attract more funding. Open fissures amongst the founding team, power struggles and crumbling client and revenues were just too evident.

I’ll like to end with a lighter note, a series by TVF called Pitchers which revolves around a bunch of guys preparing to build a start-up. The manager accepts the resignation of this employee, but runs him across a list of names – all his classmates but only a few who made it big. It is easy to think of a start-up, it is much tougher to manage the hiccups. 

India’s darkest hour

"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely; Great men are almost always bad men.”… The words of Sir John Dalberg-Acton, 8^th- an English politician talking about the monarchies in Europe attaining status of demi gods.

Time and again it has come across in history that great leaders went on to reach a status of total power over their subjects. They were good as leaders, decisive and ruthless against external threats and also with a sense of care and concern for their people. But at some point, the power and sense of judgement turned foes and leaders turn into demons.

Exactly 40 years ago - 25^th June 1975 is one such date in the history of unified India- when a democracy went through a phase of Political Emergency with everything and everyone coming under the direct rule of one person- the then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. A period that might have been the darkest hour of unified India till date.

So why is this even relevant today? Its past, history, dead and buried…. Yes, it is. But what remains to be recalled is how a country can drive itself into doom without realizing the effects till very late. I openly say that I am not a fan of Mrs Gandhi (I’m not Nixon as well) but I do feel that as the 2^nd longest serving Prime Minister of India, there are actions of hers (especially post 1971) which continue to affect us even to date. 

Though I was not around when it happened (if I was, I’m sure I’d have been in jail for writing something like this), I have read a lot of accounts from journalists, historians and other who witnessed the drama unfold to help me find understand the times. Not to mention, my journalism classes and “India after Gandhi” by Ramchandra Guha (I regard this as the most in-depth account of India post- independence) to be the basis of my writing.

Mrs Gandhi was not a politician, not even someone who might have has anything to do with the freedom struggle or a nationalist. An estranged daughter of Nehru; she was more like a personal assistant who was not even a member of the Congress party. But the unofficial influence got her to be the Party president in 1959 and a cabinet minister for I&B in the cabinet led by Lal Bahadur Shastri in 1964. All this while, her party leadership was more of a coy to keep away an ambitious Morarji Desai; the infamous Kamraj Plan. Even on her appointment as the Prime Minister in 1966, the tag of “Moom ki gudiya” did reflect the fact that no one had faith in her abilities to lead India.

The concentration of power started to happen when Mrs Gandhi on being expelled from the Congress due to fall out from the senior leaders, formed Congress (I) and pulling along the entire but 65 members of the existing people in power. Nehru was a Socialist, but his ideology of keeping government away from business was well defined. Indira broke this line and prior to the 1971 elections, 14 banks were nationalized and the allowance to the princely state heads was abolished. This naturally led to a lot of dissent amongst the people, but opportunity presented Mrs Gandhi very soon.

December 1971 and the Bangladesh War saw Mrs Gandhi take the ruthless path against Pakistan and paid no heed to the fact that the US Navy was on alert during the conflict. The fact that even an opposition leader like Atal Bihari Vajpayee deemed her as “Goddess Durga” was a testimony to the way she handled the situation. The populist slogans like Garibi Hatao won hearts of the people and the whole country stood behind the lady. With a lot of support, Congress (I) swept the state elections in 1972 without anything given away to the opposition. It had become a scenario where “Indira is India” was actually happening.  But this was possibly where things went wrong and the power structure turned amorphous. Indira Gandhi self- conferred upon herself a Bharat Ratna – much like Nehru.

Failed monsoon, rise in unemployment, rising inflation, the pending expenses of a jubilant but costly war with Pakistan and the state resting with all the powers for finance and wealth; it was just an explosive situation. With her son Sanjay Gandhi acting as an advisor, draconian powers were unleashed on the people. While students and youth came out on the streets following an able socialist like J P Narayan, new leaders like George Fernandes crippled the railways with a strike. Former royalty stripped of their privy purse used all their might against Mrs Gandhi. Adding fuel to the fire was the Allahabad Court verdict regarding election malpractices which dismissed Mrs Gandhi’s membership to parliament.

Was it the romance with power or the fact that you have people’s support behind- not prepared to step down and the social uprising at hand; a Political Emergency was imposed. It was now a crazy circus that was controlled by Indira and Sanjay Gandhi for the next 21 months. What followed was definitely something that I feel was short of the Simon Commission Report.

Ordinances were passed and constitution amended in a manner by which all political opposition was crushed with people suspected of anti-government activity being imprisoned. The press was gagged and power to newspaper offices and presses was shut off. How can one not talk about the courageous R P Goenka printing blank spaces in Indian Express as a mark of protest against the government imposed censorship?

Ruling with an iron fist got a whole new meaning and fear became the currency of the government machinery. Civil liberties were curtailed and with brutal activities like forced population control programmes and dismissal of any state government not in tune with the central power was the biggest blow to democracy. Certainly the darkest hour – and a trauma for all those who saw the worst of it.

I’m happy that such things might never happen again in India. Changes in the constitutional framework have now eliminated the possibilities of an Emergency being imposed unless absolutely critical and agreed upon by 2/3^rd of the parliament. Media today is much more deep rooted and India is no longer in a space to be isolated from the rest of the world. The biggest difference – people now have access to ways and means where they cannot be dominated by a force that is suppressing them and anything that is against national interest meets stiff opposition.

But the impact from the days of the Emergency is still around. Dynasty politics is now deeply entrenched in our system. The son-daughter distant relative of a politician becoming a successor is a common thing for today. Also, the feeling that an MP’s relative is above the law is somehow still a law. Going back to privatization of the financial system is still work in progress. There are some other misdoings from the tyrant leadership in those days which led to a lot more complications – but 1975 to 1977 was by far the worst we saw as a nation in terms of a democratic state turn into a pseudo dictatorship. 

The Argumentative Non-Resident Indian

The cabin of my very first boss in life had a very nice statement printed on a wall behind his back- “If you don’t like something, try to change it. If you can’t; then change your attitude”. I can safely say this was taken on to a very different level by most of my classmates from the engineering days – Don’t wait to find out if there can be a change; it is easier to just change the country you stay in.  These were the people who even before fishing graduation had the dollar dreams and education loans for their MS degree already in place.

Frankly, I have nothing against anyone who chooses to take this way of life. I guess the universities abroad need Asians to fill up their seats as much as they looking to move out of their land. The idea of life for an average Indian looking to settle down abroad is having a house and a car of his own with 24 water and power, good civic amenities and yes- a fair skin wife (firang is the ultimate but unfulfilled dream). It is when the erstwhile Non-residential Indian turns in the Not Returning Indian and the attitude changes.

Just a point of context- a few days back; Mumbai had its first spell of heavy rains for the year. In a space of 24 hours, Mumbai got about 260mm of rain (2400 mm being an annual average) and coupled with the rising tides gave the city a few new lakes for the day. The trains were out of gear and the traffic was at a stand-still. As unforgiving social media is, tonnes of pictures and comments were floating around the network. My engineering college group on WhatsApp was not isolated from it and soon the pictures and jokes started making the rounds. But what also started was some NRI ranting.

“India will not improve, BMC just doesn’t care, BMC has abuses built in its name… take a piss and Milan subway is flooded… etc…” 

Honestly, I don’t give a damn for such ranting as it has been over 10 years I have heard these people complain of how backward India is and we cannot offer basic amenities to its citizens. Frugal arguments like a change in government doesn’t change a nation and 65 years on we still in dark ages are just pitiful in my opinion. But what was massively surprising was that no one from India was complaining or cursing the authorities. Not that we had got used to it and settled in to the fact that things can never change- but we do see ground level activity and can understand grass root problems.

While we claim that people lack civic sense, the BMC now sweeps roads twice a day to maintain basic cleanliness standards at a high level. While storm drains are cleaned every year, the amount of filth that is washed in with rains has private level origins. The challenge to build new infrastructure and replace the aging structure is a tight rope walk. But sadly, we have an ever bursting urban population and cannot control migration. But sadly, the NRI eye catches only what it likes to see and the counter measures are neither appreciated nor observed.

While the argument was on its high, a comment was made claiming NRI money drives India. Is that a fact? I can safely say that most personal investment from overseas is in to residential spaces to make immense of the exchange rate disparity. Most of this population already have properties bought as investments in India and left either vacant or on rent to the residential population. Bottom line- is this money actually helping India grow or is just pushing up the realty prices for the locals making housing more and more expensive? Not to mention, aren’t the investment returns are more to the personal benefit as interest rates and property appreciation is much better in India than in; say US?

In words of Kennedy- it is actually never about what the country does for you; but what we as citizens have to offer. Are we doing our individual bit in helping it change or just expecting a few local bodies to deliver once we have elected them? Politics and corruption are rampant; but do we challenge the system against it or be a part of the same chain? In my opinion; an NRI giving up a lucrative job and setting up something in India, building about a change is always appreciated by people. But these are very few; the ones who don’t mind travelling in public transport. The others are the – jaldi se AC chalu karo variety who just don’t care for the country.

The argumentative non-resident Indian is only just happy to stay in a cozy comfort of their foreign land and critique matters where they don’t have a clue of the ground reality. I don’t have an issue with then; but I do believe that unless you can make a difference, keep it shut.

The Manipulation Game

I learnt this a part of economics- The Circular Flow of Income.

Industry produces goods: people buy the goods with their wages :: People work for the industry making the goods: Industry pays people wages.

This was simple and pretty basic. Then there was the government which taxed the people and industry to provide for the infrastructure for both. The next layer was financial institutions which gathered surplus from the wages and loaded it to the governments and industry to bridge gaps and grow larger. In return, people earned interest and bought more goods…. And so the cycle grew larger with a global perspective and international trade come in.  

In an ideal world, we have actually set in motion a perpetual growth system that is worldwide and self- sustained. But somehow this never happens. There is always a rouge element which tries to play folly and break the complete cycle. In most cases globally, a government- industry- financial institution nexus has often played havoc and has left communities, countries and even entire financial structure around the world jeopardised. Enron, the crash of 2008 are just a few examples which have left a mark on global economy.

Living in a world where nothing seems to be robust leaves a lot of gaps for me to think in all the places where greed and instant profits are linked to a scenario that seems a calamity but seems like a cover- up for a larger plot. I can’t help but speculate that sometimes it almost seems like a crisis is being created to manage the financial bearings. When companies issue stocks, they are borrowing from people with the idea of mutual ownership and sharing of profits. When the company buys back their shares; dividend is no longer a liability to be paid. A recent article by Jayant Vidhvauns in a Marath daily drew my attention that this is actually a big possibility. (http://epaper.loksatta.com/521248/indian-express/15-06-2015#page/13/2)

Let’s take the recent case of Maggi in India. A legendry brand that’s almost 30 years in existence and stands to take 70% of the instant noodles market. It contributes in the range of 20% of Nestle India’s revenues and is almost a habit for most people who have grown with the brand. We always knew it was not healthy, had MSG and other flavouring agents. So why all of a sudden did one fine morning in June we got alerted? How did this happen to a company that was over exceeding analyst expectations? Why all of a sudden did the share prices fall for a few days and bounce back? Its hard to imagine how many shares might have been bought back by Nestle within the sessions it was running low and how much money was lost by the investors in the process. 

I can’t help but question, is this a planned move to buy back shares in a bid to retain profitability? The company has recovered its shares in the few sessions of panic sale and now the stock is back on track. People have lost money- the company lost nothing. As for its reputation: the entire set of packaged food market with all its competition has gone sluggish; so no loss of market share. The losses in sales are going to be far less as compared to the dividend to be spread amongst shareholders.

Now wait a minute… How did Cadbury’s get worm infested in 2003? Never happened before or after? But that was the time Cadbury got "Delisted" and there was an active buy back. How come Coke had pesticide residues one year and is sharing happiness ever since with no issues? Not to mention the pesticides later got bottles from all the brands and no one lost anything in the market. 

I don’t have enough evidence, study and the understanding to put my finger on things. But one thing is for sure; there are more ways to manipulate and control the business outcomes- especially when big numbers exchange across over a matter of few days. Shares have often been subject to allegations of insider trading, bubbles and scams- but this seems to be a new way that even the regulators might find tough to manage and distinguish as a rouge activity. No matter if you agree or call me a skeptic-  Business today is not just a PnL statement- it is an entire manipulation game. 

Ever Lasting to Lasting as long as it does….

I recently read an article in the newspapers talking about the expansion joints on the flyover bridges in Mumbai getting worn out and not much being done towards repairs. While this is actually not a one off occurrence, I was a bit concerned as two of them were in around my home. Apart from the fact that I do take them often to go around, they offer a bigger potential problem of traffic snarls for me. (http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report-3-flyovers-damaged-no-repair-in-sight-2084345)

So even though a part of my concern was the likelihood of inconvenience, it is also to be noted that the flow over at King’s Circle is just a few years old and with no real heavy vehicular traffic, this might actually be due to bad construction rather than wearing due to higher traffic.  Considering I have witnessed some of the flyovers for over 30 years myself and some in South Mumbai have been dated to far earlier, it just brought me to a thought- do we still believe in the ideology of ‘Built to last’? I mean, there was a time when contractors gave municipal corporations a guarantee on its construction, but I believe they don’t make them like that anymore.

But this change in attitude is not limited to large capital projects. I have a desktop which has been upgraded from time to time due to technology getting obsolete. My dad has been using an IBM Thinkpad for 8 years and except for its battery has never had a problem. So has been the case with all the mobile phones I used. Most have lasted 3-4 years and I was forced to upgrade rather than change as the phone I was using had gone bad. Well, that existed until very recent when my first smart phone lost its mind and somehow screwed the motherboard chips. While I’m comfortable with the idea of a new purchase, my parents are seeing it as a sign of splurging.

But that is exactly where the difference in ideology makes its presence most felt. My parents have grown with the “Built to last” feeling deeply rooted. Every bit of furniture used teak and meant to last two generations with minimal repairs until the design loses its appeal in total. That is where some cupboards designed for me as a kid became less of a use as I grew up and felt the space wasn’t designed for my growing and changing needs. And this is not just me; I do see study desks, book shelves and pin- up boards sitting idle that once were hot possessions for my friends and family.

As against this, a colleague of mine bought some very cheap furniture with composite boards last year with a very simple thought- “This will last a few years and serve well until then… possibly the needs with my kids in teens, I might have to redo the room in a few years and Mickey Mouse will be replaced by Miley Cyrus”. I did agree with his point and got a study desk and book shelf that flaunted books rather than hid them behind closed doors. Also, it gave me the chance to look for my room a few years down.

The thought that I am perplexed with is what is driving this attitude of short term planning and change- over of assets. My dad has a car that is a decade old and mine is under 5. But given a chance, I’m looking to change the car and my dad doesn’t even run the thought in his mind. My argument is the car gets outdated while his opinion is that the car should last 15 years until the RTO forces a replacement. Even for capital purchases, my generation seems a bit more comfortable replacing things; in fact if observed, the next generation has an almost instinctive buy and dispose cycle.

My argument got me a response from a friend saying, “You know they don’t make things like they used to make before”. Against it, my car mechanic or electronics repair shop often say , “Iska life ab khatam ho gaya hai sahaab- aur kitne saal ragadoge???”. It possibly is a reflection that idioms like my old faithful, built to last might have run their course. That old mechanical lift in a building in Fort draws an awe; a swanky automatic door lift in a plush new office complex somehow always has an odd shake in between to send down the shivers.

Though I’m tempted to say that possibly the boom of the “China ka maal” mentality has much to play with the change in attitude; one thing is for sure… We no longer crave for ever lasting; it’s now about compromising to enjoy the good as long as they last.