The fantastic Tata’s legacy is built on the core foundation of values. Were you exposed to the values of the Tata’s in your early life?

What were some of the experiences that have informed your approach to philanthropy?

Working on the shop floor as a young man, I saw close up the misery and hardship of the less fortunate and thought about how one makes a difference to improve lives. As I moved up through departments and divisions, I continued to see hardship and had more opportunities to do something about it. Now I’m trying to take the Tata Trusts to a different level of relevance in the 21st century to maximize the benefits the trusts seek to bring to disadvantaged communities.

Do you have a philosophy of philanthropy?

If I put it into one sentence, I think you really want to be doing things that make a difference. If you cannot make a difference, it’s just water trickling through a tap or leaking through a drainage system; it’s wasteful. Dr. [Jonas] Salk must have had a tremendous feeling of satisfaction when he developed the polio vaccine. Similarly, I think going after causes where you make a difference, rather than scratch the surface, is very much in keeping with the trend in new philanthropic endeavors.

What changes have you made in the trusts’ operations, and what do you aspire for them to become?

A fair amount of our early philanthropy was in the form of charity to alleviate individual hardships—helping people with money for dialysis or for surgery, for example. And we worked with a lot of NGOs, supporting them with grants. We’ll continue to help alleviate individual hardships and support NGOs, but we also want to be more involved and to manage projects ourselves. We want to enhance our impact and ensure that interventions are sustainable. The question is: Can we fund a research project that aims to eliminate or control a certain disease and, therefore, has the potential to benefit a larger number of people, or should we stick with helping individuals suffering from that disease? We believe we can make a greater difference through large projects that serve mankind.

So the trusts have shifted emphasis from charity to projects with sustainable impact?

I have been emphasizing that the trusts must be concerned about the sustainability of the communities where they work. Until recently, we would support an NGO for 8 or 10 years, and then want to move those funds to another community. We would assume that this community was now self-sustaining, but it wasn’t. So when we withdrew our funds, the NGO collapsed, the village programs collapsed, and we became the most hated organization in the village. So, sustainability is a new calling for the trusts.

What advice would you offer to other philanthropists who seek to blend charity with strategic philanthropy?

My advice is to do thorough research before deciding where to get involved. A lot of money is less effectively used than it could be because an organization has not done enough research. Today, a large amount of philanthropy in India is deployed in traditional forms like building a temple or a hospital. India has to move into a more sophisticated form of philanthropy that is designed to make a difference rather than just building edifices.

Is it difficult for you to find NGOs ready to take on strategic partnerships?

Very often an NGO ignores or forgets the traditional outlooks of the community they are working in, and because of that, what they are trying to do, however well-intentioned, doesn’t work. Also, corruption and collusion can divert resources to personal use. For example, about five years ago we were funding 10 schools through an NGO in Bihar. On one of our site visits, we found that the principals and teachers were coming to school and signing in, then leaving the children unattended. The children played all day, and their parents didn’t even know. The students never got an education. But the principals and teachers got paid. To make matters worse, the government was paying for midday meals, but the kids never got fed. The money was divided between the principals and the teachers. So we stopped giving grants to those 10 schools. Who suffered? The kids suffered, and we were the nasty people who stopped the grant. But what could we do? A lot of that goes on. And now with the requirement that large companies in India devote 2 percent of profits to CSR [corporate social responsibility], a whole bunch of NGOs have lined up to receive these funds. What we will need to do is to see how much of this is well spent and how much just gets short-circuited.

Are you worried that much of the CSR money will not be used well?

There could be a fair amount of abuse of these funds, and the government will have to do some regulation to make sure that the money is used effectively. It would not be a bad thing if the government designated a number of causes to which companies could give these funds. Even large public works projects could be funded this way. The government may have to define what the projects are and be ready to ensure oversight.

What made JRD TATA satisfied in his life?

What JRD TATA gave to INDIA and TATA group?

Tata Industries is known for its integrity so in what ways it has been integrated?

What Does Ratan Tata feel looking at the young people or young companies in India the possibility they have or should keep?

In what ways do think you can create a sense of responsibly & integrity & evolve as a successful people ?

In what ways do think you can create a sense of responsibly & integrity & evolve as a successful people ?

Do you think technology in the current scenario will actually play a major part in looking at these opportunities and solving the challenges, which now India and entrepreneurs are facing?

I think the answer is yes. We can find answers for how to operate in a new scenario. Our willingness to do that or our interest in finding those new solutions - those are the key. So, I guess one way to look at this is not to look at the changes that we are faced with, but to look at this as the new landscape or a new playing field, and applying our adaptive nature and innovativeness to finding solutions and hopefully looking back and saying this problem and this challenge gave us a new way to do things. I can say that looking at the situation as it stands, I'm sure there are going to be situations where we're going to say, why did we not do this earlier?

What is the mindset of the entrepreneur which you think you know you would advise to be in today, because there's obviously a lot of hardship and then cash concentrations. So, with what mindset does the entrepreneur go into the market today?

I think there could be multiple views on this. One could do it because the entrepreneur is enterprising, unwilling to sit and moan about the changing situation, and the need to undo what he has done. The other type is when it’s not looked at as a problem, but it’s looked at, as you said, as an opportunity. The excitement of finding a new way to do things. I know when I was a younger person in the organisation, one of the most exciting times that I have had is where you can sit down with a bunch of your colleagues and brainstorm. And when you brainstormed, it enabled you to look for different ways to do things to beat your competition, or to reduce your costs, or to change the way in which you operate. And if we are seeing that happen, it could bring about a new way, and it stops us from being traditional. It forces us to be innovative. And that would be the biggest opportunity we have. The next is, can we be innovative first? Can we do it better than our peers in other parts of the world? But that would come later.

Any specific message you would like to give entrepreneurs out there? They're still dreaming of building companies, but before that, they message investors. What do you think investors should be doing at this point of time?

I think investors should be keeping their powder dry, and that might seem to be very prudent. It may also be very self-defeating. Now might be the time when investors should be looking at opportunities like they did in the 70s and 80s, where it was driven by the creation of the integrated circuit or it was created by moving to a digital world or looking at nanotechnology as the means or looking at biology or sub nano driven projects, whatever it was the 70s and 80s were those kinds of heavy times when those things happen. So today, one could have a bunch of investors who would say I'll back this company because it's being driven to do something differently rather than say that right now is not the time to look at something new. I would like to say that to me, the virus will disappear in a period of time, but the innovativeness that we bring during these difficult times would be something we could look back on and say there was a good part of what we faced and the hardship that we went through, which had its up moments, which we availed of.

Any thoughts how governments can play a major role as countries are collaborating more, operations are collaborating, entrepreneurs are collaborating. Any thoughts on how the government can actually support this.

Yes, for example, look at the US. Then you look at what organisations like DARPA have done as the government supporting new technologies in biotechnology or integrated circuits or in the total variety of things the government has supported - three, four, five billion dollars, which the private sector would not have been able to do. They have ushered in new industries because of their ability to come up with the funds earmarked for a particular development. And if we, at a time like this, had a way of marshalling some funds. In certain areas, we could have another wave of innovativeness arising out of a problem just like we've had in World War II or the Cold War. We could look at the plus side of that which caused innovation to take place with or perhaps not have happened or taken much longer to do than they have done.

What is your experience working from this pandemic situation?

What is the mindset of the entrepreneurs which you think you would advise them be in today because there is lot of hardships and cash considerations to go into the market today?

Do you think consumer & entrepreneurs will come with live consulting at home using phenomenal app & what is your review on consumer behavior in this scenario which we are in an economy which is forcing changes in consumer behavior ?

Innovation may be possible in the supply chain, in cutting out inefficiencies, in distribution chain where possibly technology can help,What do you think ?

What message you want to give to the entrepreneurs who are dreaming of building companies & what should investors do at this point of time?

Do you think India as a country with entrepreneurship and the technology around the entrepreneurs presents to the investors globally & in India in essence a bigger opportunity in next few years?

Share Your thought in a situation government plays a important role where countries, corporation and entrepreneurs are collaborating how can government can support this?

How was the experience of your first internship in Tata Motors?

It was a total waste of time -- I was shuffled around from department to department, but nobody actually told me what to do! I guess, I was looked at as a family member, so no one said anything to me -- but I spent 6 months just trying to make myself look useful

How was your initial experience working in Tata Steel?

It was only after I moved to Tata Steel that I got specific assignments and my job got interesting. I started from the floor and really understood the plight of those working around me... By the time I finished 6 years in Jamshedpur, architecture had become my hobby -- I enjoyed designing homes for myself and my mother, but apart from that, my life was dedicated to the business

When you became chairman of TATA group, how hard was it for you to create a culture of positive change?

In what mindset does the entrepreneur go into the market today?

You will have a lot of competition. Hyundai and Daewoo already have small cars in the market. Fiat is expected to bring the Palio to India next year and Opel may bring the Corsa.

Yes, but these cars are going to be positioned around the Maruti Zen, not around the Maruti 800. I am more concerned about the Koreans, whose pricing is more aggressive

Do you think the Koreans could trigger a price war?

They will try to be below us, to beat us but I doubt they will go below us because they will then upset a lot of buyers who have already booked their cars and paid up in full

The small car is obviously a major gamble for you.

Let me put this in perspective., When I joined Telco in 1986, the then chairman Sumant Moolgaokar wanted to develop a passenger car. So we first went into a pick-up and then the Tata Estate model as in-house efforts on one platform. These were credible and creditable efforts, if a little crude. Then we initiated the Sierra, which was again a cut-and-paste job on the same platform. These were all bridge vehicles: rough and tough, not so well finished. We were making the transition to a manufacturer with a full range of vehicles, but we were making it inadequately. Our mindset was still the same as when we made vehicles for [truck] operators and not for car owners. But in this process we learnt a lot, often at the cost of the customer.All these vehicles were on manual lines. Our first automated line for passenger vehicles was for the Safari. That was our first major investment in this area. But when we decided on what finally became the Indica, we needed volumes. This meant a still larger investment: not just for this car but so that we also created facilities for other cars.For the Indica, we have tried to create a separate organization that will manufacture and market it: somewhat like what General Motors did for their Saturn project. We have set up a plant adjacent to our existing plant. But we have hedged the car gamble to the best extent that we can. In the worst possible case, even if the car initiative were to bomb, an investment of some $400 million will not gamble away the company. Our going in to the car business may be a gamble, yes, but not as much of a gamble as in getting into a new business or adopting a new technology.

And your emotional investment?

Only to the extent of being a chief executive and directing it. The plans to enter the car sector were there even before I joined Telco.

Do you see the Indica as your first big statement as chairman of the Tata group?

Since I got involved in Telco we first developed the first modular truck, the 407, then the 709 and now the 2213. These trucks broke away from the old face of Telco trucks. I was also just as much involved with the Safari, but nobody talks about the Safari. My involvement has been there with all Telco's projects--somehow the car has got hyped up.

If the Indica project were to bomb how would that impact on the Tata group?

Let's first define bombing. Let's say instead of producing 150,000-200,000 cars, as we hope, we end up producing only 50,000 or so. If the average realization per car is even as little as $600-$800 per car, we make money. For me, bombing would mean having to sell the car at a still lower price.At the same time, what we are getting for our investment is a plant that will produce cars, not just this car. Most of the jigs and fixtures that are there are not specific to the small car. I see the project not so much as a gamble as an investment in building the infrastructure of Telco.

O.K., say the car is a success. What comes next?

We will need to develop variants of the same vehicle: maybe an estate version, or a three-box version. We will also look at the export markets in some countries. Not necessarily the developed countries but African countries, Southeast Asian economies, Australia. Our cars are more suited to Australia than those made by Japanese or Korean companies. In South Africa, also, we have hopes: in fact the car is undergoing road testing there right now.

Do you always prefer to go it alone?

Not always. We do have a joint venture with Mercedes. But we don't really have a choice in the case of those joint ventures which would tantamount to our giving up the company. Let's say that Toyota came with a proposal for a JV and wanted us to produce the cars they wanted. If that's all we do, it would virtually amount to giving up management control of company

How do you read the state of the Indian economy?

For the past 18 months or so, there has been a loss of sentiment, a dilution in the clarity of direction. Investments have been put on hold. This has come on the back of a period of aggressive expansion and diversification by industry. A gap has emerged between the economic fundamentals, which are far healthier than in our Asian neighbors, and the sentiment. It is this sentiment which has to change, which can only happen when we get back our sense of being on the move. This will not happen through sops. My greatest concern is that [the government is] still saying there is nothing wrong. That's dangerous because then there's nothing they feel they need to do.

What difference has the slowdown in the economy made to the projections of the Indica project?

The slowdown has not affected our strategy very much. It is just that the market will be smaller. The earlier optimistic projections were for an end-millennium demand of between 700,000-1 million cars per annum, with 60% in the small-car segment. The proportion remains the same but the likely demand in a year's time will be smaller than anticipated earlier. What is certain is that the low-priced segment will be the healthiest segment even though a lot of expected conversions from two-wheelers to cars may not take place

You were all sure of your destiny then as industrialists?

es. By the way, another correction - I think Yusuf Hamied was also in Cathedral School. He didn’t come from Campion but he was in Cathedral. It is a little difficult to remember who was where. There was Dinshaw Pundole who was a classmate. He was a major squash player and ended up being the owner of Duke’s drinks which was later sold to Coke. In those days, we were just a bunch of fun-loving kids who were friends. We didn’t have any of the animosity to contend with (laughs). Then I went to the US. I had to go to a Prep school for a year because the College Board exams could not be taken in India at that time. Now you can take them here. I went to Cornell University. My father wanted me to become an engineer; so I spent two years at Cornell as an engineering student, didn’t like it and switched to architecture – which is what I wanted to do – and graduated as an architect. I went on to complete structural engineering, which was more to my liking and interest, rather than mechanical engineering, and graduated. I had a very happy time at Cornell; the five-year course for the architecture degree, along with the two-year structural engineering programme, made it seven years. Mainly because architecture design is a five-year degree course and you cannot get a credit for anything, you have to go through the full five years. So I had a happy time at Cornell; the only thing I did not like was the cold weather. It was something that I never got used to and, probably, never will. However warm you dress, you were never warm enough. So after I graduated, I wanted to be in some place where it was warmer and ended up in Los Angeles in an architect’s office. I would not have come back to India, since I was very happy there. But my grandmother fell ill and she asked for me; so I came back. And one thing led to another and I stayed here indefinitely because she continued to be ill. One day, J.R.D. Tata called me and said that I should be with the group even if it was temporary. So I was sent to Jamshedpur and spent six months with Telco (now Tata Motors).

That is around the time you wrote the famous Ratan Tata plan.

Yeah. Around 1982, my mother was diagnosed as having cancer and I had just been made the chairman of Tata Industries, which was more of a titular thing, because there was nothing in Tata Industries; it was a shell company from the erstwhile managing agency days. So I thought, well, why not sit down and make a strategic plan? I had taken three months leave to be with my mother and I actually sat in the hospital and wrote that plan. After she died, I came back and presented that plan. Everybody said ‘it is very nice but it is not going to happen’. That’s because the plan talked about going into certain high-tech areas which were till then closed to the private sector. The management turned down that plan. I said, ‘well, I am the chairman of Tata Industries, so why don’t we go into these high-tech areas for Tata Industries?’ And we did. We entered into joint ventures with IBM, Honeywell, etc. Then, in 1984, Rajiv (late-former PM Rajiv Gandhi) came into power. It had no bearing on my plan, but it was as though he had the same view. So certain areas began to be opened up for the private sector. Telecom opened up - you were able to produce PABXs and telecom instruments. So we got into those areas. Areas that were in my plan such as VSAT (Very Small Aperture Terminal) communications didn’t get passed at that time, but the groundwork for that got done. Some parts of the telecom sector were opened up instead of saying that ITI (Indian Telephone Industries) would be the only manufacturer. The government also said that the main exchanges would come from different sources. So it became very exciting. Everybody looks at the 1990s as the period when reforms started, but actually they started during Mrs Gandhi’s (Indira Gandhi) time and Rajiv took it further. I had established, not a close relationship but a very exciting relationship with Rajiv Gandhi in terms of trying to do things in the country. We were exchanging ideas and he was actually executing many of them. Those were the days when Arun Singh and Arun Nehru were his advisors. I think, if I look back, those were probably the most exciting days of my career in India – the early days of Rajiv’s prime ministership. I was very fortunate to be a part of that period.

Then there was the face-off with the V.P. Singh government when J.R.D. Tata wrote a strong letter to V.P. Singh about allegations of foreign exchange violations over Tata Zug.

Yes, there was that also. Bhure Lal (former director of enforcement, foreign exchange) was heading an investigation. I don’t believe we did anything wrong and also everything was disclosed -- it was an issue of whether the child of a parent or the grand child of the parent company also needed to have the Reserve Bank’s approval/permission to register or not. The issue never really came to be proven because they couldn’t find anything that we hadn’t disclosed. I think that issue revolved more around Indian Hotels rather than the Tatas because Indian Hotels had a lot of foreign operations at that time. Anyway, after that things become hazy in my mind until 1991.

Some of the new businesses that the Tatas entered into - was the objective to move away from commodity businesses to new businesses with high margins? In that case, a lot of the money is again coming from commodity-type businesses such as Tisco…

I never wanted to move the group away; I was just giving emphasis to inching into new areas. My hypothesis in the early 1980s was that Jamshetji Tata entered new businesses at the turn of the century -- businesses that Indian companies did not want to enter. They were indeed heavy industries -- steel, power, textiles, etc., but they broke new ground. What I was saying was that, in the 1980s, there were new technologies on the horizon such as biotechnology, electronics, computing, artificial intelligence and communications. So why don’t we, at this time, have a new wave for Tatas to get into these businesses? Never did I say - other than getting out of soaps and textiles and in those areas - never did I say that we should get out of steel or anything of that nature. In fact, what I was advocating at that time, which was not done in the Russi Mody era but was done later, was that we should get into flat products in steel and work up the value chain to high-end steel rather than the conventional construction steel, etc., which Tata Steel was doing those days. So it’s not true that I wanted to move the group away from our traditional businesses.

Is there a pitfall to your international expansion?

here is always a pitfall to anything you do. I was going to say, if you take risks, there will be pitfalls; but even if you don’t take risks, there can still be pitfalls. Another thing that I advocated very early when I took over, was that we should look at acquisitions and mergers as an inorganic means of growth, not organic growth alone. I think globalisation just made the availability of target companies that much bigger than they were in India. That would be the only difference.

What is your main motivation? Is it to supply components from India or to build links with your existing business?

Our motivation is not based on outsourcing and it is not based on taking technology from these companies. The synergies we see are the fundamental ones of having in our midst two brands that we greatly respect. The world should look at brands like these for what they are. Who owns them is almost immaterial. Our challenge at Tata, if our bid is successful, would be to nurture them and make them thrive.

What is your view of Jaguar’s and Land Rover’s forward model programme? Do you like what you see?

The teams from Ford and Tata are deep in due diligence work at present and I have not heard of any problem from that area. I have seen proposals for new models that look very exciting and impressive. We would not be arrogant enough to think we could arrive at this stage and bring something better.

Could you tell us about your love of cars?

I have always had a personal passion for cars and so I have the credit and notoriety for getting Tata Motors into this business. The car business takes up a fair bit of my time, and rather more of my interest. It’s a more exciting business than others because the products have a far greater emotional attachment for their owners.

How does Tata go about about injecting its own management ethos into the companies it owns?

We satisfy ourselves, early on, that the people in the company share our values and ethics, and that we can have good human contact with the management, because we would want the management to continue to be there. That is how we have worked with Daewoo, with Corus, with Tetley Tea and other companies we have acquired. We aim put our imprint on the company through a negotiation board, but the existing managers continue to run the company.

Tata Motors has a tech centre at Warwick University. If the JLR deal goes through, will that move to Gaydon?

We have no plans to move. Tata Motors wants to be an international car company, which means it needs a window on the latest technology, and the operation we have serves us very well for that. Some people believe Britain has lost its car industry, we don’t see it that way. There is still tremendous technological know-how in Britain, though it’s very understated, and we will continue to utilise it.

What is the nature of your relationship with Fiat?

It is a very open relationship, friendly but not finite. It has the potential to be very deep or very slight, as we choose. But it is unique. Every time we have had a relationship with another company, they have wanted to own us or own a piece of us. But with Fiat it is an association of true individuals for the right reasons. We both want to keep it friendly and wide-ranging. We have listed our ways of co-operating as jointly developing new platforms, exchanging existing platforms and exchanging technology. Sergio Marchionne and I have agreed that Tata wants to regard Fiat as its preferred development partner, and vice versa, though of course, we would both still be open to relationships with other companies on the right terms.

How is it that you’ve been able to make such a low-cost car as the Nano? What are other manufacturers doing wrong?

It’s not our job to embarrass or comment on other manufacturers. We live in a low-cost country. It is likely that the others have cost structures that make it more difficult for them than it is for us.

Will you try to acquire other established car companies?

I really don’t think we would on the prowl to acquire other car companies. If you say that contradicts what we’re doing now, I don’t believe it does. We were not aggressively looking to buy Jaguar and Land Rover. People brought us together, and we were happy to be considered as bidders. We will soon see what happens.

The National Cancer Grid.

The cancer grid, nutrition and while the trust cannot take care of the country, we are setting some footfalls in the sand which I must say, the state governments and the central government, they are all supporting us fully and what we are trying to do is taken as being genuine and honest and it is very rewarding to see state governments and the centre working with us, things that some people would say could never happen.

Is there a pitfall to your international expansion?

There is always a pitfall to anything you do. I was going to say, if you take risks, there will be pitfalls; but even if you don’t take risks, there can still be pitfalls. Another thing that I advocated very early when I took over, was that we should look at acquisitions and mergers as an inorganic means of growth, not organic growth alone. I think globalisation just made the availability of target companies that much bigger than they were in India. That would be the only difference.

But what do you feel?

I think you cannot just have one interest. You need to be able to jump. So I think I have been fortunate in having those interests. I failed in some ways, when I retired, I said I would relearn the piano. I have not done that.

You have sat on international boards. You continue to. You have feted by governments, nations, admired a lot. Who do you admire?

Two people that, apart from JRD Tata, whom I have mentioned, who I admire greatly and sort of oscillates between being a family member and a mentor and a businessman I admire, two people not connected with me have been an inspiration to me and have had a profound impression on what I have done and how I have done it have been Dr. Amar Bose who developed the Bose speakers, the Bose Corporation. He and I enjoyed a friendship that was very close and was very personal because he opened his company to me. We spent hours and hours together and discussed various things. In fact, I knew more about the Bose Corporation than most people might have done. And the other person is a person called Henry Schacht who was the chairman Cummins Engine Company where we had a joint venture. Then became the Chairman of Lucent which was the telecom company that merged with Alcatel. Henry continues to be today, Dr. Bose died a couple of years ago and those two people are people that have had a great influence on my career.

Are you nervous? Is this much bigger than the launch of Indica?

I think I was much more nervous during the launch of Indica because we had never been in car manufacturing before. We were venturing into a new segment. We are again venturing into a new segment but in a product line in which we have 10 years of experience now.At the time of the Indica launch, you did not know whether the market would accept you becoming a car manufacturer from a truck manufacturer. We took some widely publicised goals at that time that we would be as big as the Ambassador, or we would have the same size of the Maruti or we would have a diesel engine. We made those statements. We didn't know those would be the kind of things the market would go for. So, I think at that time we were much more apprehensive and nervous than we are today.

You think that this car is going to some way change the DNA of the group?

That is not what it was conceived for. Well, the fact that you are doing it to address the market, that's huge. It gives you an expectation of, you know, if we produce 50,000 of such cars then we are ready to undertake that exercise. From the time we are thinking that we could follow on with this, could be different fuels can be produced, an electric version of the car can be produced or hybrid version of this car or can we make this car the platform for a new set of personal transport. The one thing that I think we have established is that we have created an affordable, personal form of transport. Some may like it, some may not. Some may think it has things that it shouldn't have, while some may think it is coarser than it should be. But we have an affordable form of transport that will take four or five people in all weather conditions to where they want to go, running on regular fuel and not some exotic fuel.

But how would you signal differentiation to the customer?

I don't know because I don't know what they would have. All I would say is that probably of the players that we are talking of, I couldn't say that, because I was going to say that the outlets or the distribution networks might be an important thing. But I take that back because the two wheeler distribution outlets may serve well to do this and a tractor distribution outlet may also work well. So, I don't know what would differentiate this from the others. The product itself would have to be differentiated. The one thing I wish to do, is I want to have several follow-on products, following this. Moving up market because we have a great advantage, we start with a very low base so we add content to this. We are very competitive as we move up. Today for example, the Smart is an expensive car. If it started at a very low base and you added content, it would be a very competitive car when you loaded it. I feel that there is probably a market, maybe outside India more than India for a fully loaded power steering, automatic transmission, power windows, air conditioned kind of car with a bigger engine at a very affordable price, which is far lower than what is available elsewhere and we should be able to address that kind of market also.

Is it bigger than the Corus deal?

Corus is a transaction. It got us a lot of visibility, but Corus is a trans-action. We didn't build anything. There is a different level of excitement when you are building something.

You have been quoted in the media the last couple of weeks saying that this would be an ideal time after the launch of the small car to step down. How serious are you about it?

All I said, you know, I think in everybody's life there is a certain amount of moments of satisfaction. You feel, that after that has been achieved it is a nice time to step away or change gears and that's why I said that in an ideal world this would be a good time to step away. I didn't say that this is what I would. You've achieved something, it is successful, it is a nice time to leave because you may not have the luxury of being able to do that, but it is a nice time to leave. And you don't want ever to have a situation where somebody sort of whispers, when is he going to leave? You know, recently I had an occasion to meet Michael Schumacher and I asked him, are you sorry you retired? And he said, No. I retired at the peak of my career. How much more could I have done? I may have gone down. I am now a test driver for Ferrari and I am enjoying what I am doing. And he said that I am enjoying my new life and I really am enjoying myself. And I think there is a lot there to what he said. You don't like to fade away because of hanging in there for too long, you love to be on the back of something that is exciting. So it is a true statement and not hypocritical.

Do you have somebody in mind?

I have several people in mind and have a problem finding the right person.

But would you look at largely India-like markets?

Well, the obvious markets overseas for us would be the African markets, the Latin American markets like Brazil, Argentina and some of the Far East countries like Malaysia, Indonesia, etc. Those would be the markets. There are people who say that this product could be quite acceptable in Europe, but that is not the market that excites me so much.

But would you look at largely India-like markets?

Well, the obvious markets overseas for us would be the African markets, the Latin American markets like Brazil, Argentina and some of the Far East countries like Malaysia, Indonesia, etc. Those would be the markets. There are people who say that this product could be quite acceptable in Europe, but that is not the market that excites me so much.

But would you look at largely India-like markets?

Well, the obvious markets overseas for us would be the African markets, the Latin American markets like Brazil, Argentina and some of the Far East countries like Malaysia, Indonesia, etc. Those would be the markets. There are people who say that this product could be quite acceptable in Europe, but that is not the market that excites me so much.

Is Fiat going to play a role in the overseas distribution and marketing of this product?

There is no agreement to play a role. But I think we both have a view that wherever one is stronger than the other we will seek to leverage that strength. Fiat has assembly plants in Brazil and Argentina. In other markets like South Africa, we have a better market presence than they do. So it varies, but we have not made any decision or even discussed this.

Has someone from China been interested to associate with you for this car?

No

For a project of this kind to succeed, suppliers also have to respond differently. How easy or difficult was it to drive innovation across the extended enterprise?

I think more than anything else the vendors disbelieved that the project was real. That's been a bigger issue, you know, because it has not been that they have not been able to respond. They did not expend their energies to respond to the same criteria we did, they didn't respond because they thought it was a hypothetical project. The real interest has come after they have seen us invest in the site in Singur. I think that the amount of vendor interest that we have created, the kind of inputs, the kind of aggression that we see from the vendors now has gone up exponentially because they now realise that this is a real project, there will be volumes and they have the chance to address that kind of demand.

With the small car project and the Jaguar likely to co-exist inside Tata Motors how will the organisation structure look like?

I don't think the two have to be looked at in continuity. I think it is possible that you can have high-end brands because the SUV part of it, Land Rover, can sit squarely on top of our business. The other side, I think is a luxury car we don't have and it would be a great mistake to try and integrate it. It should be nurtured as a brand and hopefully come back to its previous image which was a great image at one time.

Next year, and I know you do not like anniversaries, but next year, the House of Tata will turn 150. It is a significant milestone for any industrial group, especially in young, vibrant democracies like ours. What are your thoughts about that?

I am very happy to see that we have held together for that period of time. Many companies disintegrate in that kind of period or are just a tombstone and we should do everything we can to preserve it and to continue that. As I said earlier, the group may change. It may look different in the next 30 years, 50 years, but it should embody the same values and the same ethical standards that it has had. It should never forget that most of its earnings go to philanthropy, not in the pockets of founders and leaders and that it is doing something for the common good of mankind and that is very satisfying if that were to happen.