Why India is out of the Big Mac Index: Where's the beef?

Still on economist.com. Looked at the Big Mac Index. Couldn't find India.

Why?
Clicked on link offering explanation.
Found this:

Burgernomics is based on the theory of purchasing-power parity, the notion that a dollar should buy the same amount in all countries. Thus in the long run, the exchange rate between two countries should move towards the rate that equalises the prices of an identical basket of goods and services in each country. Our "basket" is a McDonald's Big Mac, which is produced in about 120 countries. The Big Mac PPP is the exchange rate that would mean hamburgers cost the same in America as abroad. Comparing actual exchange rates with PPPs indicates whether a currency is under- or overvalued.

And since McDonald's in India doesn't serve beef, we aren't considered for the index. It wouldn't be an apple to apple comparison.
I have no beef now on India being excluded.

India cleans up corruption act

Was on Economist.com. Looking for sports articles under articles by subject. “Corruption” caught my eye. Clicked link.
Here’s what I found:


EUROPE: Albania's government
No power, no glory
A tale of corruption and power cuts
UNITED STATES: Political corruption
Investigating Alaska
State and federal officials are facing a pile of indictments and inquiries. The common thread: oil
EUROPE: Political scandals in Italy
Courting trouble
Now magistrates take on the centre-left
MIDDLE EAST & AFRICA: Sierra Leone
As you were
Peace, and now elections. But not much else to brag about
THE AMERICAS: Brazil
Fight in the favelas
Rio cracks down on crime. But the police are at least half the problem
BUSINESS: Business in China
Dirty dealing
Despite a clampdown, corruption remains a formidable problem
LEADERS: Nigeria
Mission impossible, nearly
After fraudulent elections a new and tainted president faces a mountain of problems

Look, ma, there's no mention of India!
And why am I surprised? Just a few days ago, a friend and I were trying to recollect the last time either of us had paid a bribe to anyone. Couldn't remember...

And I think to myself, what a wonderful world!

A foretaste of times to come

A month or so from now, NDTV's Lifestyle channel will be available to all of us. And another few special interest channels from the same stable.
So will a number of niche channels from TV18, and from Peter Mukerjea's INX Media (oops, that should read Indrani Mukerjea).
So will a zillion lifestyle programmes on various channels.

So will a zillion niche and special interest magazines.
And in this wonderful age of consumerism, Indians will consume almost anything, which is good for the economy and good for special interest media products.

And one of my favourite media products, The Onion, gives you an idea of times to come.

New Pompous Asshole Magazine To Compete With Cigar Aficionado

NEW YORK-Upscale consumers who enjoy cigars, wine, and "all the finer things in life" will have a new magazine to enjoy beginning next month when Pompous Asshole hits the stands.

Go on, get out of here and click on the Onion link!

What's up at Haymarket?

This morning, I attempted to visit the web site for Haymarket Publishing -- and the site stubbornly refused to go beyond the frame that is reproduced above -- and the gif is called Haymarket_launch.

Intriguing headline. And, if you look at the copyright carefully, Haymarket is 50 years old this year. Or is it today?

A visit to the site, http://www.haymarketgroup.co.uk/, a little later in the day might be worth one's while.

India Today: keeping up with the Joneses

In today's media environment the competition is not limited to other titles in your defined and narrow space; you have to consider titles in other media as well.

Therefore, India Today, the weekly, competes not just with Outlook, but has to consider newspapers, the Internet, and news television as well.

So it is interesting that while India Today normally hits the stands on Friday, the weekly delayed this week's edition to Saturday -- which enabled them to cover the Mayawati victory on the same day as the newspapers and Internet portals did.

Outlook, India Today's "nearest" competitor, will cover Mayawati on the issue hitting the stands on the coming Friday -- a full SIX days behind.

Cool, India Today.

STAR right, media not so bright

Just when one thought STAR TV could do nothing right, they pull off a winner. The timing of the announcement of the resignations of Peter Mukerjea and Sameer Nair caught every journo on the wrong foot, and served STAR’s objective perfectly.
Led by the rumour mill, the media complacently waited for an announcement to be made on Wednesday, when Paul Aiello, CEO designate STAR TV and acting CEO, STAR India was expected (by the same, efficient rumour mill) to come back to Mumbai (in fact, he's probably at STAR House, Mumbai, as you read this).
The press announcement is made late evening on Sunday, when no senior journalist is in office, and clearances for an article by a junior hack are tough to get.
Most newspapers (of those who were, indeed, able to carry it at all) carried vanilla pieces of one of the most significant developments in Indian media in the last few years. If the announcement had been made at a civilized time, say, 5 o’clock on a Monday, all the pieces would have carried a few quotes from STAR top brass and reactions from industry peers.
More importantly, given that Mukerjea and Nair had decided to leave, the announcement forced media to focus on the first episode of the SRK starring KBC rather than on shenanigans in the boardroom – and surely SRK KBC is distraction enough to divert attention.
Perhaps the first analytical piece of the impact of the resignations on STAR, on the television firmament, on Indian media, will be seen in a magazine and not a newspaper – written by Vanita Kohli-Khandekar in the next issue of BusinessWorld? I’m going to wait for that one.
And, perhaps, you might see something of an analysis here, as well. By the weekend.

If Rbk is Reebok, what is...

I’m an old man, and I like things old fashioned.
But I have two kids, and I have to learn new fangled mores and values.
And spellings.
So I might prefer Reebok, but I understand Rbk is cool.
And I’m slowly learning to read txt splng.

So what do I do when I open the new issue of India Today, (The special anniversary one, which is a steal at 20 bucks, by the way) and I’m blown by the lovely Audi car…
… and the license number reads FKS 2207.

Gnite.

Is it time for circulation to de-grow?

I know a lot of print space sellers. Some of them are friends.
And those who are still in the business are doing well, making serious money, holidaying abroad.
And close to burn out.
Because, as they grow older in the business, the weight of the business rests on their shoulders.
Because it is, virtually, the only source of revenue for print products, considering the ridiculously low price of newspapers and magazines.
TV has distribution as a second revenue stream.
Put in other words, the consumer pays for the content.
Which the consumer refuses to do in the print paradigm.
Which gets me thinking. The same human being, the same consumer, is willing to pay for content in one medium and unwilling to pay for content in another?
What is this guy? Some kind of whacko?
Or is he simple and predictable, it’s just the print media that reads him wrong?
Will he pay Rs. 30 for a copy of India Today instead of the Rs. 20 he pays today? Will he pay Rs. 40? Rs. 50?
How many buyers of India Today will drop out if Aroon Purie jacks up the price to Rs. 50?
Ten per cent? Twenty? Thirty? Fifty?
And suppose it is as high as fifty percent; is Malcolm Mistry, the man who has the responsibility of filling the magazine with advertising week after week, a happier man?
And what happens if The Times of India is priced at Rs. 10 per day? How much will they lose in circulation? Fifty percent? Sixty? Seventy? Fifteen?
And suppose it is fifty percent, would Bhaskar Das be a happier man?

It depends, primarily, on two stakeholders: the consumer and the advertiser.
It depends on how reliable, authoritative, relevant and trusted the consumer perceives your content to be. Which is the simple truth in any product category: the consumer pays a premium when he believes that brand delivers a premium product.
It depends on the media owner’s answer to this question: while we have built a brand for the advertiser, are we a brand or a commodity vis-à-vis the consumer?
It depends on how the media planners and buyers and advertisers deal with the new circulation and readership numbers. Which, today, come from ABC and NRS and IRS.
Which they take with spoonsful of salt.
And in a number of cases, as the publications do not subscribe to ABC, they are left with just NRS and IRS.
Which, as history teaches us each year, is full of holes.
So why not bite the bullet if you have a product that you believe delivers value to the consumer? And raise the goddamn cover price?
Don’t gamble and endanger a product you might have taken decades to build. Don’t endanger the well being of the thousands who depend on your paycheck.
Do it as the Udipi restaurants across the country do. No disruptive changes in the prices, just keep nudging them upwards.
And, each time you raise the price, analyse the impact. Every six months, reduce the advertising rates.
Yes, reduce them, in keeping with the loss of circulation and readership.
You keep doing this till you have your balance. And a significant portion of your overhead comes from content, not advertising. And your dependence on the advertiser is significantly reduced.
And now, start increasing the advertising rates.
Because by this time, you would have more involved, more loyal consumers than you have at present. Who will significantly revise time-spent figures on the next NRS and IRS. Who will notice the advertising and who will have the propensity and the income to buy the products and services advertised.

I know, I know, I live in Utopia.

But it will happen. And when it happens, I will be able to say to all of you: I told you so.

Outlook survey for paedophiles

OK, I'm nitpicking.

But I studied in a Jesuit school, and we spent a few zillion hours understanding grammar. And a subset of those zillion in understanding antonyms and synonyms.

And when Outlook magazine's e-mailer referred to "men" in opposition to "girls", it jarred.

And I checked with Roget's.

The antonym of man is woman.

The antonym of boy is girl.

The antonym of men is not girls.

End of post.