«  
  »

Is the left-hand watching the right?

Picture credit: Picture credit: FotoRita      

Two pieces of news today: the new owners of Jaguar Landrover seek UK government funding, due to the recession; the makers of the world’s smallest car sign major Formula 1 sponsorship of Ferrari. 

Observant readers will know that the company with the begging bowl is the same company with money to burn on the world’s most expensive sport.  Clearly cognitive dissonance is not a problem in the boardroom of India’s Tata.

Email this post Email this post
  • http://www.linkedin.com/in/marioluis Mario Luis Tavares Ferreira

    When I was clicking to comment I saw “no comments”, because I was the first to comment.

    This almost make me to write again, “no comments”! About the news.

    It is an absurd and we are simply seeing governments being hostages from financial markets and transnational companies.

    They dig their one graves but the bill is sent to us……

    I am not saying that open markets, free trade, globalisation, and so on, is a bad thing.

    But greed, necessity to create and increase value to shareholders and “bonus to them self”, need to have limits, and there is where governments failed.

    Also the globalised speculation is completely out of control (petroleum barrel price, commodities, stock market, and so on).

    Again, the bill will be paid by us, with unemployment, with low salaries, less opportunities, and so on.

    That’s the XXI Century, and it’s just beginning!

    Regards,

    Mario

  • Senthil

    They are two different entities. The company going into Ferrari sponsorship is Tata Consultancy Services – an IT outsourcing firm not the smallest car maker.

  • http://www.colin-beveridge.com colinb

    The UK reports of the Ferrari sponsorship referred to Tata as the makers of the world’s smallest car. Presumably the Tata group has many operating companies, but they all belong to the same group?

  • http://www.linkedin.com/in/marioluis Mario Luis Tavares Ferreira

    About the last two comments refering to “different entities”, that’s also our “modern” model of “doing business”.

    We have Trust Comanies, Holdings, Groups, and so on, and no one is culpable of anything.

  • http://www.colin-beveridge.com colinb

    “negotiation” trainers recommend “reference to higher authority” as a legitimate tactic. Mario’s comment is very valid, when accountability is not just diluted but completely lost through the device of diminished responsibility.

  • Rajesh Nair

    Hi Colin

    I understand the confusion because the media would have reported the name of ‘Tatas’. These are two different companies with very different stakeholder patterns. Even the board has only one similarity – Ratan Tata as the Chairman.

    On one level it is as illogical as saying that two step brothers have to share their revenues and problems since the father is the same. On another level I totally understand the concern of the tax payer – ” How do you expect me to have been my hardearned money given as grant to a guy staying in a country mansion with a white picket fence ‘ for all you know he would be squandering that in more extravagances ?”

    Hope this clarifies …