A Paradise for MBA Aspirants
|Inform Others||UrMBA Group||Advertise Here|
ONLINE GD AT URPERCENTILE : IN A RACE OF TWO, IF ONE QUITS THE OTHER IS A WINNER
abc xyz and Punnu haniya clears this GD.
www.UrPercentile.com: THE TOPIC OF THE GD IS : IN A RACE OF TWO, IF ONE QUITS THE OTHER IS A WINNER.
abc xyz: This famous teaching teaches us that we should never quit. Even if we fail many times, If we try and try , it’s not a failure. Failure means to stop trying and quit. We can relate this teaching to management also .In market, some firms are having intense competition between them. But sometimes when the firm gives up and get tired, he fails and the other firm automatically becomes the winner.
Ankit Soni: If one is not having competition then of course he is the king of the market. That applies in every field of this world
abc xyz: No.Ankit , A consumer is a king of market not a firm ok
Punnu Haniya: This is not always true. If among 2 lovers one quits, both of them lose
Ankit Soni: Consumer is a king, i agree but in competition i m saying.
abc xyz: Are you talking about monopoly or bilateral competition. Take today’s example of Hutch-Essar. Both Vodafone and Reliance are trying to take it over. If anyone of them quits the bid then automatically the other one is winner.
Punnu Haniya: I do not endorse this thought at all, As i am of the view that there is nothing so trivial going on in the market, there are lots of things. Monopoly is one. But there is nothing of this sort that if one fails in competition then rest of the world wins .The thought is not universal, if Hutch Essar does not want auction at all , Who will Win?
abc xyz: But sandeep i think , we are talking about just 2 sellers , if anyone of them quits then consumer will automatically go to other one .If hutch Essar does not want auction then there will be no race only
Punnu Haniya: You are right , but I am of the view, that if one of the competitors cannot find it easy then he will not completely fail, but the seeds of rivalry are sown definitely, take for instance Reliance Textiles and Bombay Dyeing
Ravi : Hi Everyone, it appears that we are just loosing track of the topic, the topic clearly says that its a game of two, but we are trying to think over an instance where there is no game. So sticking to the topic, if its a game its definitely going to be more than one player and a game has a winner always (even a draw results in two winners) so if one guy calls it quits its a win-win for the other
abc xyz: You mean to say that the race continues and continues and there is no end. If this happens then there will be no result only and there will be no winner except the audience that is the consumers
Punnu Haniya: The question is not about race. Sometimes even if you do not run you are a winner by default. Suppose if Reliance fails to Capitalize in GSM Market, then an Obvious winner is Vodafone
abc xyz: Sandeep that automatically proven that reliance is quitting so Vodafone is winner and thats what the topic is
Punnu Haniya: But the winning is not through the race. It is because of behavior of market not of The Giants
Naveeneyes: Its a jackpot on. If you win a lottery , the money will definitely progress along and if you lose, u r gone. Because the other one is at your back standing after you . Like in Case of any industry, supervisors normally assume that if you will quit eventually, your immediate junior gets in his chance. There market today is totally fluming. You leave one, you join the other. It hardly makes any difference to the consumer whether the auction takes place or not.
abc xyz: It also teaches that even in adverse conditions or times of losses, a firm should not quit or close down, it should try to run slower because even if he runs slower there are chances when he can win like the case of Rabbit and tortoise. Trying and trying is better than quitting
Punnu Haniya: But what determines Winning??? Just quitting and Non-Quitting. No, not at all Races are not always between the competitors, if Vodafone has a Merger with Reliance
abc xyz: If its the case of two sandeep, it definitely determines quitting n non-quitting. but if there are many runners in the same lane, then you have to be quick n smart enough to win the race and beat others. If u are slow u will definitely loose
Naveeneyes: Its not a question of quitting or the other , its a talk of monopoly or bilateral competition. I think we shouldn’t divert from the topic in question.
Punnu Haniya: Then your notions of race will die down, if they, in addition fail to pick in the already existing GSM market of which AirTel is a Giant to overcome There is NOTHING ABSOLUTE in Market. Smartness alone is of no use et al
abc xyz: It also emphasizes on decision making process. While preparing plans and decisions, we should not only stick to main plan, we should be prepared with alternative plans also. With changing circumstances, if one plan fails, we can implement other and thus get the goal
Naveeneyes: Bilateral co operation can be between countries between nations across groups Its doesn’t mean fight between 2 companies.
Punnu Haniya: Topic says One has to quit and it says then, Is the winner so Obvious in this market of Today. My answer is that Nothing is so trivial. Nothing is so obvious. Commonsense in not all Important but u can’t even neglect it. Vodafone , Who knows is a Winner if Reliance wins the Bid. After all its all about Money. Think of ONLY long term , Short term Goals are not meant for Big Companies
Naveeneyes: In 2004,Sweden was granted to development cooperation .i.e approx sida is responsible for the Sweden’s multilateral support while others monopoly are channeled by its government .It think we should discuss the issue as a whole. We can lead to some good results both facilitated by monopoly and bilateral co -operation.
abc xyz: I agree with you sandeep, but if companies quit in short term goals only and fail there only, how can they achieve there long term goals. To be successful in long term, they should have the habit of winning short term ones. If India wants to win world cup, it has to win other matches also.
www.UrPercentile.com: Thanks everyone, request everyone to give a concluding statement .
Punnu Haniya: Market can see an abrupt change. Still CDMA technology is seen with Suspicion by a Common Man, even when market sees reliance as a major Competitor. India sees Monopoly as Pseudo Competitiveness .To Conclude, Its not so easy to Determine Long term after effects of a Short term winning. Thus Winner is the one who Can Predict the Long term things.
abc xyz: Winning or loosing does not matter a lot .What matters more is your approach towards the race. If you does not quit the race and run till the end, even if u r second , u r a winner. Though a runners up and this will teach u to win the future races
Naveeneyes: To conclude, I feel that because there is nothing stable in the market, we cannot say about wins and loses. In this changing world, its about competition to adapt to it, whether its monopoly or bilateral not a issue. Therefore ,if one loses a match, doesn’t mean the other side wins it. It may be draw flip also and if you follow up ,doesn’t matter, u r 2 the path of victory at the back of 1.
www.UrPercentile.com: ok thanks everyone . We will send the analysis of this discussion on the group soon
Naveeneyes :Thanks , urpercentile.
Punnu Haniya: Thanks UrPercentile, for bringing to us hat all we wanted. Thanks again
abc xyz: thx
|A Paradise for MBA Aspirants|