now lets leave that do Indonesians after all its their choice whether they want these cars or not, let the market decide
Secondly, plz go n educate urself a bit do u even have any idea what variety of cars r offered by Tata group
u might be surprised but Tata groups market cap is almost equivalent to BD's GDP
Tata group - $100.03 billion(2011)
BD GDP(Nominal) - 113.03 billion(2011)
Tata group market wealth crosses $100-bn mark - Business News - IBNLive
Bangladesh - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
GDP For a Country is Not the Same Thing as Turnover for a Business
I’m afraid that our friends over at Business Insider have made one of the more common mistakes when trying to compare businesses and companies. Exxon’s revenues are about the same as Thailand’s GDP, therefore Exxon is about the same size as Thailand, right?
No, entirely wrong. It’s true that Thailand’s GDP is about the same as Exxon’s 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, there’s a difference in value between $ and £ but not that much: so clearly, we’re not counting the turnover in our calculation of GDP. What we’re 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 that’s the basis upon which we’re 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 Exxon’s comparable country. Profits are around $30 billion. 200,000 employees or so, all presumably on pretty good wages. Let’s just guess at $50,000 a year (this is why they’re called back of the envelope calculations). So that’s another $10 billion to add on top. So Exxon’s value added for the year is around $40 billion.
So, which country has a GDP roughly comparable to Exxon’s value added? Err, how about Luxembourg, at $52 billion? And we’ll go back and raise the average wages at Exxon to $100,000 a year so that Exxon’s value added is $50 billion.
But hey, this is still remarkable, right, that a simple company has the same value added as an entire country! Yes? Amazing or what?
Well, no, not really, for Luxembourg has a population of some 400,000. Economic participation rates generally run about 50% of the population (those “economically active” numbers you see more generally of 65 to 70%, are for those of working age. So adjust for kiddies and pensioners) so, in our very sketchy and now crowded back of the envelope we’ve got a labour force of 200,000 people.
Which is the same as Exxon’s labour force of 200,000 people.
So now our statement is that 200,000 people working away seem to produce the same added value as 200,000 people working away. We can be more specific: 200,000 rich world people add the same value as 200,000 rich world people.
Which, when you come to think about it, isn’t remarkable at all. For the very definition of being a rich world person is that you’ve got a high value add to your labour, a value add on average across the group which is not all that far away from other rich world people. If all the people of Luxembourg had low value add to their labour then Luxembourg wouldn’t be a rich world country, it would be a poor world country.
So Exxon being the same size as Luxembourg isn’t in fact all that surprising. It’s rather built into the very basics of what produces wealth in fact.
GDP For a Country is Not the Same Thing as Turnover for a Business - Forbes
and
Tata Group Profit is only US$ 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
