Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I was watching a documentary "Slaves of Dubai" and saw TATA bus there too.Everyone of the car companies have issues even when they in way advance stages of car manufacturing over the first pass Nano from TATA. That includes brakes failing, catching on fire etc...
I was watching a documentary "Slaves of Dubai" and saw TATA bus there too.
^^ Seems like a very old model..the 2 stroke front engine type that went extinct in India years ago. Now most of the autorickshaws on road are either 4 stroke petrol or diesel.
GDP For a Country is Not the Same Thing as Turnover for a Business - Forbes
and Tata Group Profit is only US$ 5.8 billion (2010-11)
Tata Group - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
and Bangladesh GDP is $113 billion
dont insult your intelligence by this kinda ignorance comment
We buy your coal you buy our car...pretty simple and straight business.
Off topic - See so much activity of namak-harams in this thread...dont know how this news relate to them!!
GDP For a Country is Not the Same Thing as Turnover for a Business
Im afraid that our friends over at Business Insider have made one of the more common mistakes when trying to compare businesses and companies. Exxons revenues are about the same as Thailands GDP, therefore Exxon is about the same size as Thailand, right?
No, entirely wrong. Its true that Thailands GDP is about the same as Exxons revenues, yes, but the implication that this makes the two organisations the same size is entirely wrong.
Some boring explication: GDP is the value of goods and services produced in that country in that year. Yes, we can play with the definitions a little bit but it is very much NOT the turnover in that country. It is the value added through economic activity. One example should suffice: the turnover of the foreign exchange markets in London each day is some $1.5 trillion dollars. There are some 250 such trading days in the year. However, the GDP of the entire UK, let alone London, is only around £1.4 trillion a year. Yes, theres a difference in value between $ and £ but not that much: so clearly, were not counting the turnover in our calculation of GDP. What were in fact counting as part of GDP is the value added in this process. The 0.005% on each deal that goes in commissions and margins to the traders- yes, again, it becomes more complex but thats the basis upon which were working.
Revenues for a company are of course turnover: so we cannot compare turnover to GDP. What we actually want to compare is the value added. So, what is the value added of a company? One definition is the profit made by the company. Other theoreticians say we should add the profit and the wages paid out by the company together and this gives us the total value added.
So, with the Worstall Calculator (back of envelope, 1, pencil, 1) let us see what we might be able to work out as Exxons comparable country. Profits are around $30 billion. 200,000 employees or so, all presumably on pretty good wages. Lets just guess at $50,000 a year (this is why theyre called back of the envelope calculations). So thats another $10 billion to add on top. So Exxons value added for the year is around $40 billion.
So, which country has a GDP roughly comparable to Exxons value added? Err, how about Luxembourg, at $52 billion? And well go back and raise the average wages at Exxon to $100,000 a year so that Exxons value added is $50 billion.
But hey, this is still remarkable, right, that a simple company has the same value added as an entire country! Yes? Amazing or what?
Well, no, not really, for Luxembourg has a population of some 400,000. Economic participation rates generally run about 50% of the population (those economically active numbers you see more generally of 65 to 70%, are for those of working age. So adjust for kiddies and pensioners) so, in our very sketchy and now crowded back of the envelope weve got a labour force of 200,000 people.
Which is the same as Exxons labour force of 200,000 people.
So now our statement is that 200,000 people working away seem to produce the same added value as 200,000 people working away. We can be more specific: 200,000 rich world people add the same value as 200,000 rich world people.
Which, when you come to think about it, isnt remarkable at all. For the very definition of being a rich world person is that youve got a high value add to your labour, a value add on average across the group which is not all that far away from other rich world people. If all the people of Luxembourg had low value add to their labour then Luxembourg wouldnt be a rich world country, it would be a poor world country.
So Exxon being the same size as Luxembourg isnt in fact all that surprising. Its rather built into the very basics of what produces wealth in fact.
GDP For a Country is Not the Same Thing as Turnover for a Business - Forbes
and Tata Group Profit is only US$ 5.8 billion (2010-11)
Tata Group - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
and Bangladesh GDP is $113 billion
dont insult your intelligence by this kinda ignorance comment
So Cheap quality tata cars on Indonesia ?
I dont think Indonesian people will waste their money on this kinda cheap car
they should focus on UK market and their luxury brands jaguar and land rover
Why only UK market? And besides, it's a small country and their economy is not very good at the moment.
Focus on China
New Recruit
i regret for what i didI know what i m talking about the author is clearly manipulating the facts here.
The fact is u can not compare a companies turnover of goods n services with a stock market or forex market turnover
Bcoz in trading markets securities r only exchanged n no new goods or service revenue is generated except for brokerage which ofcourse he talks about whereas the turnover represents the value of goods n services generated by the company during the year
There is no net calculation in GDP, we don't take the net value added by every company or individual while calculating it rather we just take the gross value generated
Let me ask u simple question to explain my point
When u say GDP per capita of a BD is $700 does that mean that its the net amount every person in BD generates every year after deducting all the normal expenses from his income or its simple means the average value generated(income) for his living ?
The fact still remains the same that u don't take the net profit or net income of a company or a person for the purpose of GDP rather u take the turnover n the total income(not net off) for the purpose of GDP
Hope i have made my point clear here...
Other than that my intension was not to disgrace ur nation in any manner but just to make u realise that the Tata's have also worked very hard that now there turnover is equivalent to a country's economy that all...