Hindustan Times
The great rivalries of the Indian Autobahn: Part I
A two part series that looks on and back at the intense rivalries that have structured the course of the Indian automotive landscape
Be it sports or business, nothing beats the adrenalin rush that an intense no holds barred and preferable prolonged rivalry can create. And when it comes to cars, the game of one upmanship often gives character and hope for the players and added reason and spice to consumers.
Unlike in other markets, the Indian automotive industry does not boast of many legendary rivalries. Part of it is because of the vice like grip that Maruti Suzuki has exerted in India that has enabled it to swat away any thought of a rivalry. Infact for the better part of 80s and 90s, the only quasi rivalry that the industry could flaunt was of two Maruti’s fighting it out, be it a Maruti 800 versus Zen or a Gypsy versus Omni.
With the onset of competition though, in the form of Hyundai, Maruti received its first taste of what it feels like when one meets a match. And over the last decade and a half, the two companies have fought hard and their exertions have lead to some enthralling fights. Some of them are still on but it’s better to begin from the start.
Hyundai Santro versus Maruti Wagon R
When the Santro was launched as the face of Hyundai back in 1998, Maruti initially, did not even pay much heed to it. The car looked unconventional with some even calling it ugly and Hyundai was a non entity. Maruti was more interested in what Tata would do with the Indica.
Santro though, fuelled by the superstardom of Shahrukh Khan, powered ahead and its unconventional tall boy design actually became its biggest USP. That it was the first time Maruti had missed a beat in India as Suzuki already had similar tall boy designed cars in Japan. It never quite struck the Japanese that a car like that would find takers in India.
As Santro steamed in and it was evident that the Zen was not quite potent enough to compete with it, Maruti brought in the Wagon R from Japan looking to capture those who had already fallen in love with tall cars.
For the better part of its life though, the Wagon R has played second fiddle. It started out with sales of just 6000 units in its first year, at a time when Santro was selling 10 times that. Maruti’s persistence, wider market penetration and lower cost of service though ensured that the wagon would keep finding newer buyers.
All this while though, Santro also kept getting stronger and Suzuki over a period of time began to realise, Hyundai was no pushover.
Wagon R versus Hyundai i10
In the summer of 2006, Hyundai in Korea decided to do something that would still be thought improbable in India. With an eye on the changing times, the Korean carmaker decided to halt further development of the Santro (called Atoz eleswhere) and build a newer, more advanced car in its place.
While that may have been a requirement in other markets, Santro had just rounded off its best ever sales in India and after almost 6 years of trying Maruti had begun to think Wagon R was fighting a lost battle. The decision to phase out the Santro globally and the subsequent time lag between the introduction of the new small car (codenamed PA then) gave Wagon R the chance it badly needed.
As the news leaked out to the market and confusion reigned in Hyundai showrooms, a privatised Maruti started punching and Wagon R received minor changes and new variants. The increased marketing activities did the trick and for the first time, the Wagon nudged ahead. But not too far ahead.
As the new car appeared on the horizon. Hyundai knew it had a winner on its hands. The PA got India its first global launch and the beginning of the hugely successful i series had been made. The i10 was more powerful, had better features was built stronger and still had all the niceties that the Santro possessed.
But howsoever good it might be, it is never easy to trump an established leader who has developed a fetish for being on top. The last 3 years have seen the most intense rivalry this industry has ever seen and the winner of the battle between i10 and Wagon R is often decided on a month to month basis. This battle rages on leaving the ageing Santro way behind counting its last days.
Hyundai Getz versus Maruti Swift
This one had all the ingredients of a thriller but it turned out to be a massive anti climax. Even then, few people recall (including most in Maruti) that it was actually the Getz that pioneered the concept of a super hatch, a segment that is bursting at the seams today with everybody wanting to have a piece of it in India.
The idea to launch a car like Getz, one that would be priced higher, had more features and was more fun to drive, was a logical one. By that time, the Santro and Zen were already more than 5 years old and the buyers of these cars would surely be looking to upgrade. With the Getz, Hyundai thought it had the right product as it sought to do an encore with it.
Sadly, the execution was not upto the mark. Getz was perceived as a car ahead of its times, and its rather bland looks ensured that the market was not excited. Nobody thought it was prudent to shell more money for a car which was not a head turner. To make matters worse, Maruti started a discreet whisper campaign comparing the car to its dated Zen (which was also considered expensive in the mid 90s) that gave the impression that the car had nothing new to offer.
The killer stroke however, was the launch of the Swift, a global trendsetter for Suzuki, and one that a Maruti official himself claimed happens only once in a lifetime. With its distinct retro looks and peppy drive, it threw caution out of the wind and was then a car that could have come from anywhere but Maruti.
A runaway success from the first day, Swift started with 6,000 pre launch bookings and the waiting period never ended even after 6 years of its launch today and on the eve of its first facelift. Swift also highlighted where Getz had gone wrong and taught an invaluable lesson on how to succeed in India. You have to hold the attention long enough at first glance or it is never going to come back.
The Swift versus Getz rivalry never really took off and beyond the first year, Hyundai knew it had lost the game. A cheaper more fuel efficient Getz Prime followed as did a diesel variant but the enthusiasm and exuberism was gone and Getz was doomed to a tragic end. Which eventually arrived last year.
It would however remain a classic case of a failed product laying the foundation for another to jumpstart on it.
Next week: Honda City versus Mitsubishi Lancer, City versus SX4, Civic versus Corolla
(23 votes, average: 4.65 out of 5)
Loading ...
I have combined the two write ups. This is a story that must be probed. DAN BROWN is writing a book on the BLUFF OF KARBALA. A war that never took place between 72 versus 26 lakhs or 72 v/s. 30,000-. Hz. Husain Ibn Ali, Governor of Kufa, was killed by a Zoroastrian (who had converted to Islam after the conquest of Iran), and a Shia-t-e-Ali in the Governor’s Palace. TABARI wrote the fictional novel “Qatl-e-Husayn” in 300 AD (240 yrs after Hz. Husayn’s murder). Tabari based his fictional work on quotes from Al Mikhnaf, a confirmed liar and a vaudeville artiste., a daastangohe., who expired 60 years before Tabari’s birth. Let us presume Tabari wrote the fictional work “Qatl-e-Husain” at age 30., it means that Abu Mikhnaf had died 90 years back.
Muslims were united as a rock 200 years after the passing away of Prophet Muhammad.
It is after 3 centuries – that Mazen Del Velmi – the Jew – started Maatam.
It is from Tabari’s commentary that Salman Rushdie got his idea to write the “Satanic Verses”., because Tabari says., that while the Surah-e-Najam was being conveyed to the Prophet by Angel Gabriel., he felt some interference from Shaitaan !
Please note what Ibn Khaldoun had said about the murder of Hz. Husain @ the Governor House in Kufah ! “Husayn ibn Ali was murdered by his grandfather’s [Prophet's] sword”. Was he murdered by some of his own groups ? was he murdered by some staff member of the Governor house ? Who was JOSHAN ?
Selling Vinegar bottled as “Honey”.
- Ali Haider Nazm Tabatabai, Hyderabad Deccan.
Shia-ism is a revenge of the Iranians against Muslims for conquering Iran. Period.
“Truth has arrived and falsehood vanished” – (Holy Quran)
Fiction sold as truth or in other words Lies concocted :
1. Hz. Omar taking fire to the home of Hz. Fatima, leading to her assault and abortion. It is a lie. Hz. Ali lived for 24 yrs under the caliphate of Hz. Abubakr, Omar and Othman and he did NOT take the revenge ? He tolerated his wife’s insult and assault ? Amazing from the Lion of God !
2. Bagh-e-Fidak : Another lie. Hz. Fatima was not cheap enough to fight for a piece of land.
3. Karbala : Fictional Novel written 3 centuries after the murder of Hz. Husain Ibn Ali. Novelist : Tabari Ibn Hormuz (Zoroastrian).
4. Hz. Omar murdered by Abu Lulu, a Zoroastrian posing as Muslim (murder mastermind : Abdullah Ibn Saba, the Jew; with support of Iranian/Jew sleeper cells in Madina).
4. Hz. Othman murdered by Abdullah ibn Saba and his son (they subsequently fled to Yemen).
5. Hz. Ali served as Governor of Kufah, happily. After the murder of Hz. Othman by Saba`yees., he shifted the capital to Kufah (where he was already settled).
6. There was no Jang-e-Jamal. The war between Hz. Ali and Hz. Aisha is a bluff and fiction.
7. There was no Jang-e-Siffeen. The war between Hz. Ali and Hz. Muawiyya is a bluff and fiction.
8. Hz. Ali was murdered by Ibn Muljam (a Zoroastrian) Mastermind : Zoroastrians and Jews of Iran.
9. Hz. Hasan Ibn Ali served as Governor Kufah after Hz. Ali’s assasination. He left on health grounds (died of Tuberculosis) and settled in Madinah where he died a natural death. The story of poisoning by wife is another fake.
10. Hz. Husain Ibn Ali was murdered in the Governor House at Kufah by Joshan Ibn Hormuzan, a Zoroastrian. (Mastermind : the same group of Elitist Zoroastrians, Jews and Sabayeen).
11. Subsequently, the Zoroastrian Elite and Jews took revenge by inviting Mongols / Halaku Khan to invade Baghdad and destroy Baghdad.
12. The first casualty was Literature. All literature was burnt. (Abu Muslim Khorasani/Jafar Barmaki & Co. got active; role played by Nasiruddin Tusi, Astronomer)
13. New literature (Fiction) was produced and propogated. It is this literature that has reached down to us.
14. Tabari, a zoroastrian wrote the Karbala Novel (purely fiction). It is based on quoting Al Mikhnaf, a liar (and a stage artiste – a Daastaangoh ) who died 60 years before Tabari was born. In other words if Tabari wrote the Karbala Fiction Novel at age 30, that means Al Mikhnaf (his source) had died 90 years ago !!
SO, Shia-ism may be a religion (a mixture of Zoroastrianism, Christianity and Judaism with Arabic terms/names) by itself, but it is NOT Islam. It has got nothing to do with Islam. Shia-ism is a revenge against Islam. It is getting into Islam, taking Arabic names., and destroying Islam from “within”. Sabayeen succeeded in this endeavour.
Vinegar is being marketed as Honey. This is now exposed. Those who find the above wrong, may kindly devote time and research for themselves. They will reach the truth if they persevere.
THE TRUTH
GHADIR KHUM : Prophet had deputed Hz. Ali as his REPRESENTATIVE for purposes of TAX COLLECTION (Revenue). People of that area had not paid their taxes regularly. SO it was in THAT CONTEXT that he said, “Why did you not pay the taxes when Ali asked you for it (collection). I had sent Ali to do the job”. So that is the context. The trick is to make GHADIR KHUM the Last Speech (thereby diluting the Last Sermon delivered in Arafat). Ghadir Khum speech was fictionalised so as to compete with the Last Sermon at Arafat (that was made second last thru the trick, i.e.). Ghadir Khum is a bluff. It was uttered in that context. Prophet never gave an inclination that Hz. Ali was to be his successor. NEVER.
2. People forget that Hazrat Ali had 2 sons named : Usman Ibn Ali Ibn Abi Talib, and Abubakr Ibn Ali Ibn Abi Talib
!
Haqeeqat-e-Waqeya-e-Karbala – REAL STORY OF KARBALA
With due respect to all Muslims let us stick to truth.
Why ten days of mourning Muharram? It is well known fact that Shias started this custom of mourning Al-Husayn (maatam Husayn). Shia historian Justice Amir Ali (‘Mohammedan Law’ says, “founder and starter of Maatam-e- Husayn was Mazzal Dal Velmi a Shia in 352 A.H. (300 years after the incident)”. MAZZAL fixed 10 days of Muharram as permanent days for remembrance of the tragedy of Karbala. Shias today commemorate these 10 days of Muharram. Iraqi SABAAI narrators fabricated imaginary stories of cruel acts of horrific nature, like refusal of water and forced combats, which are not reliable and worthy of trust.
This is fiction. Pure lies akin to truth. In particular details about the date and days. The caravan of Husayn made a very long journey over a difficult route in difficult circumstances, could never have made it in a matter of 20-22 days time and reach its destination (Mecca – Karbala). Fabricators of the story of his arrival on the 2nd of Muharram of 61 A.H. did this on purpose to fabricate fiction for 10 days, which flourish with cruelty, refusal of water, battles and forced combats. The average speed of a laden camel, which is moving in the line of a caravan under normal circumstances, is two and a half miles per hour. Now to cover a distance of about 950 miles (Mecca to Karbala) at the speed of two and a half miles per hour and daily traveling for twelve hours on average would take at least 30-31 days. Departure of Al-Husayn from Mecca was on the 10th of Dhul-Hajj 60 A.H. (Ibn-Kathir) wrote: Husayn with his family members and 60 Kufic companions departed from Mecca for Kufa and the date of his departure was 10th of Dhul-Hajj.´Therefore, it was impossible for him to arrive at Karbala on 2nd of Muharram. According to truthful narrators Husayn reached Karbala on 10th of Muharram 61 A.H., which is acceptable. Thus it is obvious that purpose of fabricated narrations was to enable the narrators to present happenings in the colors and in accordance with their fiction. Nothing has aspired in these ten days, all these incidents are just imaginary stories and lies, then why do we keep Majlis´ in these 10 days of Muharram?
THE REAL STORY OF KARBALA : Husayn revolted against Yazid bin Muawiya and Kufis instigated him by supporting his idea. When Husain realized on his way near Kufa, that Kufis betrayed his cousin Muslim bin Aqil, he diverted the caravan towards Syria. On his way at Karbala, the Amir’s army halted him. Husain agreed to pledge to Yazid bin Muawiya.
60 Kufis who had accompanied Husayn saw their fate at stake, now that Husayn had changed. When Army approached them for their weapons, THESE Kufis attacked, and during this attack, Al-Husayn was killed (martyred).
This incident took place at Karbala when the caravan arrived on 10th Muharram and the fight was over in less than an hour. The claim of the Shias that Husayn was beheaded is a bluff. Husayn was buried with due honours and great respect and the Namaaz-e-Janaza was led by his son Ali bin Al-Husayn (Zeinul Abideen). So every thing was over in less that an hour ! Ibn Khaldoun has famously written : “Hussain was killed by the sword of his grandfather” (Prophet Muhammad!). What happened inside the Tent (Khayma) needs very deep research., esp. when the Zoroastrians destroyed all material along with the Tartars (Halaku and Changez). If Husain Ibn Ali was killed inside the tent.. some say after he agreed to give Bayah to Yazeed.. by the family of Muslim Bin Aqeel..).. A more reliable source says Husain, the Governor of Kufa was killed by a Zoroastrian Joshan Ibn Hormuzan., not in Karbala., but in Kufa.
The story of denial of water – fight for 10 days – burning of tents – is purely fictional and a bluff. There is no river/lake around Karbala. There never was any lake/river near Karbala for the past 5000 years according to Geologists.
(Matam : started by Maazal Dal Velmi 300 yrs after Husain!) – Syed Amir Ali, Judge Privy Council, and author of “Mohammedan Law”. The most prominent Shia Scholar !
[Baquer Majlisi, Author “Bahar-ul-Anwaar” was a student of Mullah Sadra, wrote a tome of lies. Allama Razi wrote attributed his articles to Hazrat Ali ! What a bunch of liars they were. They insulted Hazrat Ali by using his name and building a maze of lies and insults around his family to destroy the mission of Prophet Muhammad]. Shia means to Kill Ali and His Family and friends., then start beating the chest laying blame on someone else (Old Jewish Trick). Khud to Dawaat Phodi – Naam Aur Kaa bataya ? Shia means to destroy the mission of Prophet Muhammad., conquer Kabah and place new idols therein.
Shia-ism may be a religion, like Hinduism, Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism. That is fine and we respect the Shias for their religion. But Shia-ism has got nothing to do with islam. Shia-ism is a blend of Zoroastrianism, Judaism and Christianity with Arabic names thrown in for effect and confusion.
I challenge the Aghas of Iran and the Indian Continent to explain to me why the Book “Nabuwwa” is banned in Iran ? I want the Aghas to explain to me the work done by Abu Muslim Khorasani, Jafar Barmaki, Abdullah Ibn Saba, Nasiruddin Tusi etc. in the destruction of Baghdad, and in the destruction of the Muslim Solidarity. Explain to me the role of the above gentlemen and the work they did. But if you remain silent I will explain to you the dirty work they did.
Shia wants to do the same thing as Jews. Undo Prophet Muhammad’s Islamic mission of Tawheed and replace it with new idols (new designs of Lat-Manat-Uzza, in the form of flags, Panjetan Palm, and other symbols).
AGARCHEY PEER HAI AADAM ~ JAWAAN HAI LAT-O-MANAAT (Iqbal)
[Reply]