Lettres to the editor dated October 27, 2021

| Updated on October 28, 2021

Divestment: Air India vs LIC

Apropos ‘With Air India done, can LIC be far behind?’ (October 27), the government’s recent moves are towards reaching the budgeted figure of ₹1.75-lakh crore, from stake sale of public sector companies and financial institutions and fill its coffers.

The move of disinvestment in LIC can never be compared with the recent Air India deal. In case of the latter, the government got rid of the loss-making enterprise to a successful bidder in order to save it from further deterioration. But in LIC’s case, the situation is different. LIC is not a loss making company like Air India. Ever since its formation, LIC has been doing robust business and its revenue generation is more consistent and above all, it has won the confidence of citizens across the country. It even raised its stake in IDBI to 51 per cent. During the pandemic situation, LIC was very quick in coming to the rescue of the deceased family in making hassle-free claim settlement.

Disinvestment plan in LIC is like killing the goose that lays the golden egg.

RV Baskaran


Apropos ‘With Air India done,can LIC be far behind?’ (October 27), indeed the sale of Air India to Tatas is a significant achievement in the government’s disinvestment programme as a continuous loss-making company has been sold, which will relieve a big burden off the government’s shoulders.

But the 10 per cent stake sale in LIC,valuing nearly ₹1.5 trillion ought to be sold gradually since such a mammoth sale will crowd out private companies from the equity market which may hamper economic growth. LIC with a fine track record and a cash cow for the government must be divested with care and diligence and the government must retain its 51 per cent stake. The life insurance behemoth’s divestment must be gradual and smooth .

NR Nagarajan


Celebrities’ responsibility

This is with reference to the news report ‘Is it time for brands to rethink their messaging strategy?’ (October 27). Extensive advertisement of a product increases the expectations and the product fails if it does not meet the expectations. Many products in India are popular without any promotions/advertisements. These products depend on word of mouth publicity.

India is a country where sportspersons especially cricketers and cine stars are treated as demigods and get plenty of endorsements for various products running into crores of rupees. These celebrities should take advantage of their image and market only those products which are good for the country/youth and refuse to endorse junk food, aerated drinks, and other harmful products. Celebrities must think beyond financial gain and endorse only those products which are good for a healthy lifestyle. Celebrities should emulate Pullela Gopichand, who refused to endorse soft drinks and colas because they are detrimental to the health of children.

By taking advantage of their imagecelebrities should encourage the youth to participate in nation-building activities like conserving water, reducing air pollution, participating in government flagship programmes etc.

Veena Shenoy


We are such a massive and diverse country, hence there will always be differences of opinions on any and every topic. What we have seen in the case of Fab India, Dabur, Ceat advertisements is not something that has happened for the first time.

All these companies and their advertising agencies need to be sensitive and pragmatic enough to not cross the line, because their target audience will include people from all religions and faith. So they should take into account everyone’s interests and tread carefully.

Bal Govind


Published on October 28, 2021

Follow us on Telegram, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube and Linkedin. You can also download our Android App or IOS App.

This article is closed for comments.
Please Email the Editor

You May Also Like