The Daily Brief has done proper due diligence and research about Tata Communications that rightly conveys us —the CORRECT FACTUAL POSITION that—Whenever mobile operators have tried addressing these dues, the Supreme Court has made it abundantly clear that it’s in no mood to reconsider things. The initial licenses may have been broadly worded, but nobody forced anyone to accept that regime. This was simply the risk of getting into a regulated business like telecom.
If that principle works for mobile operators, can it be any different for others?
The other topic is Television, speculation, manipulation —that explains Rationally the dark side to business news. Ever so often, the very people we trust to interpret the markets use their platforms for personal gain. They plant ideas, stir excitement, and cash in before.
But this isn’t about taking on Dalal Street. It’s not us versus them. It’s us versus us. Every time someone buys in, someone else is looking to cash out. We are not investing in real businesses rather in the planted ideas.We’re playing a game of musical chairs where the only way you can get rich is if you sell at the peak.
These so called advisors/influencers are just exploiting intersection of capital markets and narrative. These Advisors understand that a massive part of shareholder value is perception. That higher P/E isn’t about fundamentals; it’s a function of their abilities to convince the market that these stocks are Ready to Fly ! The Daily Brief has rightly DECODED the myth that this is brilliant marketing. It’s getting a ton of press — But, the reality? It doesn’t have any core competency and SEBI ‘s action is timely and Praiseworthy!
I don’t get the supreme court verdict. If the clause is too broad, then it needs to be clarified. Right now neither the government knows what it means nor the businesses. And eventually government is interpreting it in their own way and the businesses in their own way. The solution is to first and foremost clear up the language and make it exact. And then do what is the “right thing” to do for “back-data” points.
Breaking down Indian businesses because of uncertain rules sounds unfair. The interpretation - A telecom rule asking money on earnings not related to telecom - and the court favoring it sounds like a tribal justification of something which was not clear just to amass profits out of the businesses. 🤷🏻♂️
The Daily Brief has done proper due diligence and research about Tata Communications that rightly conveys us —the CORRECT FACTUAL POSITION that—Whenever mobile operators have tried addressing these dues, the Supreme Court has made it abundantly clear that it’s in no mood to reconsider things. The initial licenses may have been broadly worded, but nobody forced anyone to accept that regime. This was simply the risk of getting into a regulated business like telecom.
If that principle works for mobile operators, can it be any different for others?
The other topic is Television, speculation, manipulation —that explains Rationally the dark side to business news. Ever so often, the very people we trust to interpret the markets use their platforms for personal gain. They plant ideas, stir excitement, and cash in before.
But this isn’t about taking on Dalal Street. It’s not us versus them. It’s us versus us. Every time someone buys in, someone else is looking to cash out. We are not investing in real businesses rather in the planted ideas.We’re playing a game of musical chairs where the only way you can get rich is if you sell at the peak.
These so called advisors/influencers are just exploiting intersection of capital markets and narrative. These Advisors understand that a massive part of shareholder value is perception. That higher P/E isn’t about fundamentals; it’s a function of their abilities to convince the market that these stocks are Ready to Fly ! The Daily Brief has rightly DECODED the myth that this is brilliant marketing. It’s getting a ton of press — But, the reality? It doesn’t have any core competency and SEBI ‘s action is timely and Praiseworthy!
I don’t get the supreme court verdict. If the clause is too broad, then it needs to be clarified. Right now neither the government knows what it means nor the businesses. And eventually government is interpreting it in their own way and the businesses in their own way. The solution is to first and foremost clear up the language and make it exact. And then do what is the “right thing” to do for “back-data” points.
Breaking down Indian businesses because of uncertain rules sounds unfair. The interpretation - A telecom rule asking money on earnings not related to telecom - and the court favoring it sounds like a tribal justification of something which was not clear just to amass profits out of the businesses. 🤷🏻♂️