Blog

Thursday 18 October 2018

Something is better than Nothing !

DNA ( 19 Oct ) , for its following news report claims that its sources are , COAI , DoT and UIDAI :

Solving Aadhar puzzle : All you wanted to know

Highlights :

· SC order only prohibits issue of new SIM cards through Aadhaar eKYC authentication process.

· Only if you want the mobile player to delete your Aadhaar data, you may submit fresh documents for KYC.

· No. The service won't be disconnected at any point in time.

· If any mobile user wishes to delink Aadhaar from existing mobile connection, they need to contact operator and provide other documents (voter ID, passport, PAN, driving licence) as prescribed under DoT guidelines.

Of course , this falls short of saying :

“ Dear Mobile User ,

TELCOs are prohibited from “ insisting “ ( ie: coercion ) on Aadhar based e-KYC for a NEW subscriber,

BUT

If you ( new subscriber ) wish to “ voluntarily “ provide Aadhar based e-KYC to your Mobile Service Provider ,

· you may do so

· and the TELCO may accept such proof

· and UIDAI shall continue to VALIDATE such requests “

Before I got to read DNA this morning , I posted in LinkedIn as follows :

Aadhar based e-KYC by TELCOs

15th Oct ( deadline set by Supreme Court ) has come and gone and TELCOs are still waiting for DoT for a clarification

They don't think UIDAI has any final authority on the subject

Let us hope that DoT comes out with the following clarification which I have been advocating since Supreme Court order :

"Consensual sex between two consenting adults is NOT a crime and therefore , not ILLEGAL .

In much the same way , if a mobile user voluntarily gives his Aadhar detail ( for e - KYC ) to a Service Provider, who in return , provides a Service , then there is nothing illegal in that “

For exact mechanism to ascertain the " VOLUNTARISM / CONSENSUALISM , " read :

Who will bell the Cat ?

19 Oct 2018

www.hemenparekh.in / blogs

Friday 12 October 2018

EESL : It is your move now !

For over a year , I have been urging EESL to ,

· Scrap it current purchase orders ( for a total of 10,000 Electric Cars ) on TATA and M&M

( Delayed deliveries – by over ONE YEAR – is a sufficiently good reason )

· Convert that order into a “ Wet Leasing “ ( driver / maintenance / insurance included )

In my following emails ( to Shri Saurabh Kumarji – CEO , EESL ) , you will find detailed COST / BENEFIT analysis of “ Buying vs Leasing “ and the potential for saving of a huge INITIAL INVESTMENT , running into thousands of crore of rupees

I have no idea what internal deliberations held back EESL from implementing my suggestion but , it seems , now they are left with no other option !

How come ?

“ Now , no need to buy a Mahindra SUV for a life full of stories – just lease “

Highlights :

· Lease period …………………5 years

· Lease Rent……………………Rs 13,499 pm for KUV 100 NXT / Rs 32,999 pm for XUV 500

· Furher Details………http://www.mahindra.com/news-room/press-release/1293780398

If we assume that a typical car runs 2000 km per month , then the amounts mentioned above , would translate as follows :

· For KUV 100 NXT……………… Rs 7 per km

· For XUV 500…………………… Rs 16.5 per km

To this , add following additional costs :

· Petrol ……………………………… Rs 9 per km ( assuming 10 km per litre of petrol )

· Driver Salary……………………. Rs 10 per km ( assuming Rs 20,000 per month )

So , the total cost for KUV 100 NXT would come to :

· Rs 7 + Rs 9 + Rs 10 = Rs 26 per km ( for a petrol car )

But EESL order is for an Electric Car which does not need any petrol

And battery charging cost would be around Re 1 per km only , taking the total per km cost of an electric car to :

Rs 7 + Rs 1 + Rs 10 = Rs 18 per km

Of course , both TATA and M&M would readily bring down this figure to , Rs 12 per km when EESL floats a fresh tender for “ Wet Leasing “

I strongly urge EESL to insist on a “ Per Km “ , lease rent method only ( under no circumstance , “ per month “ method )

This has the following distinct advantages :

· Burden of setting up a vast Battery Charging Infrastructure , all over the country would fall on the EV supplier since he would not want his cars to stay parked ( idle ) if discharged

· EESL do not need to worry about a “ fully charged km range “ – even if it is only 80 km !

· Car supplier would ensure immediate replacement of any defective car

· Car supplier would also ensure sufficient standby drivers to take care of absenteeism