The Retreat of Emerging MARKET

What a difference a year makes. Even until just a year ago, the “emerging market economies” were being lauded as the hope of global capitalism. They were supposedly able to “decouple” themselves from the financial crises and stagnation of advanced economies because of their growth potential in the form of “catching up” and by dint of their demography, which meant younger populations. Newer groups of countries were identified according to shifting perceptions of their future potential, from larger countries like the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) to the MINTs (Mexico, Indonesia, Nigeria, Turkey) to other smaller economies that were still seen as attractive because of their dynamism. This apparent dynamism contrasted sharply with the secular stagnation that seemed to have gripped advanced capitalism, creating a “new normal” or even what the IMF has called “the new mediocre” of low and spluttering growth of economic activity with even lower growth of employment. Along with the differences in economic potential and the very different rates of growth of national income that were evident, there was also the widespread feeling of the changing global balance of economic power, with the countries of developed capitalism –the US, Europe and Japan–ceding power to some of the more prominent developing countries, and China in particular. In the eyes of global investors and their cheerleaders in the financial media, for a while it seemed that the emerging markets could do no wrong, and they certainly became destinations for hot money flows at a time when loose monetary policy in the US and Europe had rendered real interest rates close to negative there. The optimism continued even when both the global economy and the important economies of the developing world were already indicating signs of weakness and output slowdown. When realization finally hit the markets and financial analysts, it hit with a clamour. Now the discussion has turned completely, and the same countries that were earlier seen as full of growth promise are suddenly decried as replete with economic problems that are only going to get worse, and likely to be facing serious downturns. Problems of falling exports and slowing domestic economic activity are being compounded by capital flight from these countries, amounting to more than $1 trillion in the past year. And this has occurred even before interest rates in the United States have been raised, as they are expected to be in the near future. So what actually happened? Actually, neither the over-optimistic narrative of the recent past nor the current despair about their future prospects captures the reality of most of these developing countries. The truth is that the economies of the South, or emerging markets, were never “decoupled” from the North in their period of rapid expansion. Rather, their GDP growth was based on a strategy of increasing exports that finally depended on developed country markets, even as it generated much more trade between developing countries, and on capital inflows that stemmed from global economic changes. The quintessential example as well as the eventual lynchpin of this strategy was the Chinese economy. The combination of progressive opening up of the state-controlled economy with large increases in public spending on infrastructure and very determined export orientation generated dramatic increases in export volumes that in turn enabled very robust GDP growth over more than two decades. These exports were largely directed to the countries of the developed North, although they also increased to every region, such that China became the most important trading partner for the majority of countries, even those that were geographically distant. In the process China also became the engine of growth for many other developing countries through its ever-increasing demand for raw materials and intermediates. Both primary commodity exporters and manufactured exporters benefited from this process in terms of increasing exports, as intricate value chains developed linking different areas and regions. As the economies grew, they also attracted more and more private capital flows, thereby further adding to the economic boom, and enabling many of these countries to “emerge” through much higher rates of income growth than in the advanced economies. This process of export-led growth was not without its limitations. The idea was to rely on ever-increasing external demand based on rising shares of global markets. Since all developing countries were focused on export-led growth as the desired strategy (even those who were less successful at it) the competitive pressure was intense. The emphasis on external markets led both producers and policy makers across the developing world to view wages as a cost rather than as a source of potential demand, and generated all sorts of strategies to reduce unit wage costs. Wage shares of national income have declined across the world, but particularly in developing countries. In turn, economic inequalities grew within countries, especially the more successful ones. The process was also associated with substantially increased environmental problems, as the urge to produce more and to produce it as cheaply as possible led to over-exploitation and degradation of nature. Because most countries were simultaneously opening up capital accounts and deregulating domestic financial markets, they rendered themselves more susceptible to hot money flows that could in turn generate boom and bust cycles, independent of the real economic processes. All of this meant that this strategy was ultimately unsustainable, although when that “ultimately” would occur was of course open to question. The financial crisis in the US in 2008 and the subsequent Global Recession in 2009 provided the first major shock to this process. It is widely believed that developing countries weathered the global crisis rather well despite the precipitous decline in exports in 2009, and this is taken as proof of their resilience and “decoupling” from the growth tendencies in the North. But this is a misinterpretation. The most important economies – especially China – were able to weather the storm because they put in place substantial recovery packages designed to prop up domestic demand. However, the focus in China was not on increasing consumption, so much as on fuelling more investment demand through higher public investment (especially by provincial governments and state owned enterprises). So, in a context of past over-accumulation, the emphasis was on creating even more capacity, and that too with investment financed through debt. In other developing countries too, any shift to domestic demand was generally not based on increasing wages and employment (other than in some Latin American countries) since that would threaten the export-driven model by increasing wage costs relative to competitors. Rather, the focus was on debt-driven expansion even for household spending, particularly on real estate and consumer durables. Across developing Asia, for example, the period after the global crisis has been characterised by real estate bubbles driven by debt creation. Ironically, therefore, developing countries sought to rely less on Northern markets by reproducing their unsustainable economic strategies: the same policies that had led to the housing and real estate bubbles in the US and UK, for example. In many of these countries, the unwinding of these bubbles had already begun well before this was recognised by global investors. In China too, the real estate bubble and related construction boom were actively encouraged by the government, even though the resulting expansion and asset price rises were well beyond anything that could be justified by real economic variables. When that (inevitably) petered out, leaving large debt overhangs for public and private agents, growth was sought to be instigated once again by pushing up the stock market. Various monetary policy measures were brought in and financial regulations were eased so as to actively promote the market for A-shares that can only be purchased by Chinese investors. The frantic attempts to shore up the stock market after its mid-June collapse were destined to fail, but that unwinding will also have a deflationary impact. But the behaviour of the stock market in itself is less relevant than the broader point that this additional attempt to sustain domestic growth without abandoning the export-led model has also failed. In the last year, the slowdown in demand from developed country markets has made itself felt ever more painfully across the developing world, as it affects production in China and therefore indirect demand for exports of other developing countries. Primary producers are clearly feeling the pain, with prices dropping dramatically along with declining import volumes. Economies dependent on oil exports or other primary goods exports are all facing slowdown or declining incomes, and in some case domestic political turmoil as a result. But manufactured goods exporters are also badly affected. The interlinkages between different regional production centres are now so strong that these negative impulses not only have adverse domestic consequences through internal multiplier effects, but they also generate negative feedback loops across countries. In such a context competitive devaluations will only exacerbate the problem. Already it is clear that exchange rate changes are causing changes in the trade balance mainly through declining imports rather than rising exports, causing an aggregate deflationary tendency. Chinese imports have declined much more precipitously than Chinese exports, and this is also true for a number of other exporting countries – so global imbalances do not really improve through this means. Meanwhile, finance is a fickle as ever, rushing out of countries to a degree completely unwarranted by current or expected real economic tendencies and thereby making things much worse. All this is made even more complicated by the fact that recent trade deals (both multilateral and regional) have essentially worked to liberalise the trade in goods and services in terms of the production phase, but have tightened monopolies in the pre-production phase through the control over knowledge in the form of intellectual property rights like patents and industrial designs and in the post-production phase through more enforcement of branding and marketing power. So, even insofar as global trade continues to limp along, the value added in such trade will be concentrated in the developed economies while developing economies battle it out over the meagre spoils to be had in the low value segments. So what does this mean for emerging markets? Is the party really over? That really depends on whether these countries can change their growth strategy away from export dependence and reliance on financial bubbles to generate economic expansion, and move instead towards domestic wage- and employment-led growth. The current model has clearly run its course, and is now leaving financial, economic and ecological devastation in its wake. Of course this change in strategy requires more than the getting of wisdom among policy makers – it requires changes in political economy that do not seem immediately likely in many countries. But for the party to continue at all, the theme clearly has to change

mahanagar attack and aftereffects

on 29th june 2004 mahanagar press underthe juridisction of mahim police station was attacked by bjym .i got to know in evening my the then ward president under whose jurisdiction the mahanagar press comes .well in the evening the m.special attached to mahim police station visited the then mandal general secratary house wherein the mandal president was also present .But after 8 pm when the then home minister kripa shanker singh came to the mahanagar office it all changed eyewitness account they visited then mandal mahila morcha president nitika katu and mandal president iqbal thanawala place by then m-special ramchandra salunke & pradeep adav and it all changed from then onnwards .Over kababs ,snacks and colddrinks deal was stuck to implicate me ,prashant pal & rajnesh kotmire .they proceeded to my house and went further to rajnesh kothmire's house & prashant pal house .there was a deal to put strigent section and still 10 sections of law was put and make it attempt to murder case .But friends of my asked sanjay gupta the tipper of police to implicate shami sheikh when they came to know attempt to murder section was to be put but his arrest to avoid non bailable section in which the deal was to be stuck .Knowing my arrest my friend Adv Parag Joshi the then legal head of dist came but when the news reached the dist and mandal office bearers they wanted to stop him from entering the police station .but then entered the ward president lalmani upadyay and then shiv sainiks and now mns corpratars manish chawan and virendra tandel .Keeping the rampuri knife at ashok pokale kneck .MY LAWYERS ENTERED THE POLICE station but fearing something the then dist president also entered with ashok pokale .they went to sr p.i cabin and there the dist president insisted on putting strigent law with odour of alchol on his mouth smelt with of ashok pokale .they came and assurred us that tommorrow we might well be realeased .In night at 3 am shammi sheikh was brought before that the detection officer told us its your person who was behind your arrest and further told us the protest of us of vasant davkare giving a lakh to israt jahan family that tip 2 days ago has also come from the same group .they maintainined iqbal told them that israt was like his daughter . At the time of going to the court i was told by m special that i am against his friends religion thats why i was implicated in this mahanagar attack case .next day the wait was long then we were taken to bandra court there i was presented as accused no i and my educational credentials were put forth being an mba bail was granted to me and others .well during judical custody i was told by then organisation general secratary and many bjym office bearers than action will be taken against police tippers .but after we left court in few days we knew that due to pressure from dist office bearers and minority lobby within the party no action was taken forth .within 3 days after the incident vilas ambekar at a bar mentioned that we took pangas with the seniors you paid the price and the m special salunke is part of the group and a sum of Rs 30,000 was paid by mandal from RS 1 LAKH THEY got from manohar joshi campaign .after 2 months when police takes iqbal thanwala for a inquiry on his criminal activities a mahabaitak in district office takes place and out bjym president of mumbai wherein we were told that gandhi has also gone to jail and iqbal thanawala should not be troubled by police ,politically and religiously .but then came the 2004 assembly election and shaina nc entered the party wherein vinod tawde made her entry to the party and mentioned along with her fist time mba 's are entering the party .Taking this many times one during the 2004 assembly election time ashok pokale ,iqbal and rajesh shirwadkar then dist bjym pres(who tesfied as police witness claiming my presence) put many false complaint taking name of vinod tawde first time mba 's have entered party through shaina n.c entry in party and i am not the member of party because we have no mba 's in party because it shaina who brought mba 's in party .well it did not end here when i was marcom head of sknl i was wondering why i am getting letters from then maharastra bjp president and now central minister i later found out through the housekeeping person the police provided chargsheet of mahanagar was send to my cmd office .the secratary paid a trick and insisted on then maharastra bjp persident to direct it to me .Letters were recomedemended media and sponsorship of newspapers in nagpur .but during my renewal of passport even after the complainant mentioned that i was not involved in mahanagar and still additional chargsheet not filed .They raised objections on my passport that why i filed a discharged and my passport was restored .well today case is discharged and i am planning a defamation suit against rajesh shirwardarwadkar and few others

THE GENOCIDE OF HINDUS WHICH WORLD AND HINDUS FORGET

When we can rise your voice for 2,000 Muslims killed in Gujarat, we must cry from the rooftops for 2.4 million Hindus killed in 1971 or the 250,000 Kashmiri Pandits forced out of their homes in Kashmir. Why do we not? Why were the guilty not brought to book? A crime like genocide usually involves established institutions like governments or nations. For the criminals to be brought to book, one needs a dedicated champion like the legendary Nazi hunter, Simon Wiesenthal, or a driven community, who share a commonality with the victims and will not let the perpetrators to rest. The Hindu community has neither. When we can rise our voice for 2,000 Muslims killed in Gujarat, we must cry from the rooftops for 2.4 million Hindus killed in 1971 or the 250,000 Kashmiri Pandits forced out of their homes in Kashmir. Why do we not? Public memory is short and fleeting. Events register momentarily like a blip on a radar and are then consigned to some dark corner of our cerebral galaxy. The brain needs to be bombarded with repetitive stimuli or jolted by a single moral turpitude of seismic proportions to evoke a strong and sustained re-sponse. In the absence of such reinforcement, a thought fades away from ones mind and that is the unfortunate tragedy of the Bangladesh genocide. To ascertain the etiology of this amnesia or selective attention deficit we need to delve deeper into the details of this gory chapter of South Asia. In a massive military operation, code named Operation Searchlight aimed at crushing Bengali aspirations of autonomy, the Pakistan army in March of 1971 unleashed a deadly reign of terror that killed about 3 million Bangladeshis and forced another 10 million to seek refuge across the border in India. Estimates of the actual numbers vary from a ridiculous low 26,000 put out by the Pakistan government (Hamood-ur-Rahman Commission) to a high of 3 million circulating in the international media. In a preface to this massacre, Yahya Khan, the military dictator of Pakistan at that time is supposed to have remarked: “Kill 3 million of them and the rest will eat out of our hands.” (Pierre, Stephen and Robert Payne (1973), Massacre, New York: Macmillan, p 50). The official position from Bangla-desh concurs with the figure of 3 million. R.J. Rummel in his book, Statistics of Democide: Genocide and Mass Murder Since 1900 (ch.8) concludes: “Consoli-dating both ranges, I give a final estimate of Pakistan’s democide to be 300,000 to 3,000,000, or a prudent 1,500,000.” Even this figure of 1.5 million places this massacre high up in the list of notable world genocides. While the number killed by the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia (in excess of 2 million) may top the Bangladesh genocide, it was carried out over a period of four years in comparison to the nine-month deadly rampage of the Pakistan army: a chilling testimony to the awesome brutality of this massacre. Who bore the brunt of this genocide? Was it the Bengali Muslims? Were the Bengali Hindus selectively targeted? Or did both communities suffer equally? It is important to know the actual distribution of the casualties for therein may lay the clue to the big unanswered question: Why were the guilty not brought to book? The killings were not random acts of response to a mass uprising but a meticulously crafted strategy of selective victimization as Rummel indicates in his book: “In East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) (General Agha Mohammed Yahya Khan and his top generals) also planned to murder its Bengali intellectual, cultural, and political elite. They also planned to indiscriminately murder hundreds of thousands of its Hindus and drive the rest into India. And they planned to destroy its economic base to insure that it would be subordinate to West Pakistan for at least a generation to come. This despicable and cutthroat plan was outright genocide.” A report in the Sunday Times, London (June 13, 1971) corroborates the existence of such a diabolical blueprint: “The government’s policy for East Bengal was spelled out to me in the Eastern Command headquarters at Dacca. It has three elements: 1. The Bengalis have proved themselves unreliable and must be ruled by West Pakistanis; 2. The Bengalis will have to be re-educated along proper Islamic lines. The — Islamization of the masses — this is the official jargon — is intended to eliminate secessionist tendencies and provide a strong religious bond with West Pakistan; 3. When the Hindus have been eliminated by death and fight, their property will be used as a golden carrot to win over the under -privileged Muslim middle-class. This will provide the base for erecting administrative and political structures in the future.” In a report submitted to the US Senate Judiciary Commit-tee (November 1, 1971) Senator Edward Kennedy further confirms this persecution of Hindus: “Field reports to the US government, countless eye-witness journalistic ac-counts, reports of international agencies such as World Bank and additional information available to the subcommittee document the reign of terror which grips East Bengal (East Pakistan). Hardest hit have been members of the Hindu community, who have been robbed of their lands and shops, systematically slaughtered, and in some places, painted with yellow patches marked ‘H.’ All of this has been officially sanctioned, ordered and implemented under martial law from Islamabad.” An article in Time magazine dated August 2, 1971 titled Pakistan: The Ravaging of Golden Bengal (external link) categorically concluded: “The Hindus, who account for three-fourths of the refugees and a majority of the dead, have borne the brunt of the Muslim military hatred.” All this evidence clearly indicates that the Hindu community of Bangladesh was the specially culled out by the Pakistan army for this inhuman treatment. Coming to specifics, let us see whether we can ascertain with a fair degree of accuracy, the ball park figures for the Hindus killed or driven from their homes. In the senate judiciary committee report, Kennedy indicates that 80 percent of the refugees were Hindu that is 8 of the 10 million; a figure in line with the Time magazine report that suggests that three-fourths of the refugees were Hindu. The percentage figures follow the same pattern when we look at the people killed. Shrinandan Vyas in an article in The Hindu titled Hindu Genocide in East Pakistan uses population statistics from the Bangladesh Ministry of Planning, Bureau of Statistics to extrapolate the number of Hindus killed by the Pakistan army: a mind-numbing figure of 2.4 million equivalents to 80 percent of the overall total of 3 million emerges. While this is not an attempt to underplay or trivialize the sacrifices of Bangladeshis as a whole (Muslim intellectuals were also killed in large numbers), it cannot be denied that the Hindu community of Bangladesh accounted for an astronomically disproportionate share of the dead and paid a price that was more than its due. A crime like genocide usually involves established institutions like governments or nations. For the criminals to be brought to book one needs a dedicated champion like the legendary Nazi hunter, Simon Wiesenthal, or a driven community who share a commonality with the victims and will not let the perpetrators to rest. The Hindu community has neither. Logically it would fall upon the Bangladesh government to relentlessly pursue the executors of this horrific massacre. After some half-hearted attempts in the immediate post — 1971 periods, the Bangladesh government has relegated this issue to a back burner. Why they have done so is intriguing? Does it have to do something with Islamic brotherhood and the fact that the victims happened to be predominantly Hindu? What about the Hindus themselves? The Hindus, wherever they maybe, are afflicted with a strange psychic malady that inhibits them from standing up for their rights or highlighting atrocities committed against them. Moreover those Hindus, who do so are shouted down by their own brethren. However, in defense of Bangladeshi Hindus, I must say that the continued oppressive religious environment in that country makes any such protest impossible, especially with their limited numbers. The only other lobby with a special interest in this matter was predominantly Hindu India. I have always felt that India owes a moral responsibility to the Hindus left behind in Pakistan and Bangladesh in 1947. While the Muslim minority of India became a part of a secular republic with equal rights, the Hindu minority of Pakistan (and later Bangladesh) were relegated to second class status through no fault of theirs. Could India with its famed free and secular media have played a key role? Yes, it certainly could have. And should have. But did not. To side with Hindus even if they are right is akin to blasphemy in the vaunted circles of the free Indian media. How else can you explain the relentless crusade against the Gujarat riots that persists even to this day in comparison with the near total silence on the monumental genocide that obliterated 2.4 million Hindus from the face of the earth or the shoddy treatment meted out to the continued ethnic cleansing of a quarter million Hindus from Kashmir? All atrocities regardless of the color, caste, creed or religion of the victims must be condemned fair and square and the perpetrators relentlessly pursued till eternity if need be and brought to book. When we can raise your voice for 2,000 Muslims, (the official figures are much less) killed in Gujarat and we should, we must cry from the roof tops for 2.4 million Hindus killed in 1971 or the 250,000 Kashmiri Pandits forced out of their homes in Kashmir. Why do we not?

Your 10-point way to evaluate agency creative

It amazes me that almost every marketing company has its recommended format for writing out great creative briefs, but none teaches its brand managers how to evaluate their agency’s work and give feedback at the time the creative outputs is presented Most people do not realize that responding to creative output is as much a science and art as is the process of writing a brief or indeed the process of creative generation itself. How many agency folks have gnashed their teeth at client comments like “Erm.. it’s not there yet”, or “Yaar woh baat nahi hai…mazaa nahi aaya”? That’s because there is no structured training for marketing managers to properly evaluate the creative when the agency comes back with their output. In the course of my last many years in marketing, I‘ve learnt and developed an approach that works for me. Here is my 10-point method you might want to follow. 1. Refer to your brief Remember, your brief and prior discussions form the foundation for the agency to work on. When you sit down to review creatives, keep your creative brief and notes from previous meetings with you. Whatever the agency presents, evaluate it versus the basics that you specified in the brief. This achieves three things:(a) It helps you stay true to the brand objectives, target audience, product and proposition (b) It makes you an objective and impassionate judge, not being swayed by personal opinions and biases (c) It gives the agency a clear signal that you are serious about your brief and they cannot but address the brief whilst being creative with the insights and execution. So, for instance, if your brief specifically asks to appeal to 40+ target group, you can conscientiously shoot down a clever idea that will make only a 20 year old chuckle even if you personally like the idea. 2. Listen and watch first, take notes, comment later Chances are that your agency will bring you 3-5 ideas to begin with. As they are presenting each option, resist the impulse to comment immediately. Agency folks are a sensitive lot. They like to have their place in the sun as they passionately present their stuff. Allow them this full opportunity. Let all the ideas be narrated fully as you take notes on important points on each option. If possible, keep a set of parameters ready in a rough form based on which your notes should be taken down. Nod, smile and mumble your “um-hmm” as they go through the ideas…keep egging them on non-verbally to show that they’ve got your interest.This will allow you to mentally compare the different options as you go along instead of outright rejection or acceptance of ideas without listening to what else is coming up. Your notes-taking also communicates to the agency that you’re seriously evaluating each idea, and that you’ll not give off-the-cuff reactions 3. Be sure where it’s headed You will pretty much know how the meeting is going by the time you hear the last creative idea. If it’s the first round, there’s always a 99% chance that there will be more iterations required. Before you start giving feedback, make up your mind whether you’ve found something valuable in any of the ideas or not. Your tone from here on will determine how the rest of the meeting will go and how the next round of outputs will turn out. Think through how you’re going to talk. Do not be flippant or dismissive if you haven’t found what you were looking for. Show a serious straight face if you’re disappointed, but you have to be encouraging at all times. 4. Comment with precision & start with intended message delivery Start commenting on one idea at a time, starting with the first and following the same order in which they were presented. Begin by saying whether overall you liked some or all the ideas or not. The most important aspects of a creative – whether TVC, print or even a POP – is the intended message delivery. Focus only on that to begin with. Did the idea communicate the intended value proposition clearly? Was it done in a simple manner such that a consumer will get it within seconds? Believe me, everything else is secondary – funny, clever, celebrity being used well, colour scheme to your liking. Everything else can be looked at afteryou’ve determined that the intended message is being communicated well within the constraints laid down by the brief.If the message is being communicated but needs 60 seconds while your brief asked for a 30 sec TVC, think again. If the intended message needs the consumer to do mental calculus, don’t encourage it. Tell the agency specifically what your problem with the message delivery is – that it is muddled, or that it is not to the brief, or that it is too long-winded. The guys at the other side must know clearly how the message delivery needs to change. 5. Shortlist early, improve later Since you would have made notes, and determined which options are successful (or have the potential) at delivering the message, you need to spend time only on the right options. If there are any ideas that are completely unacceptable, get them off the table immediately. Tell them straight, with your reasons and do not even discuss them after they’ve been put away. Focus on the ones that do have the potential to be developed into winning ads. 6. Reject the execution, extract the value Many times you will find that the way a creative is presented – the drawing, the words used, the colours – turns you off, and you end up rejecting the creative altogether. Look beyond these things. Remember, there is plenty of time for execution later; your current job is to pick out the winning idea and nurture that into a compelling audio/visual spectacle. My approach is to see how powerfully the concept can convince people into understanding and believing what the brand is trying to say. Look into the intrinsic value within an idea, and if you like it ask for the way it is presented to be changed. 7. Give constructive ideas When you don’t like something in the creative, don’t just reject it with “this won’t do…rework it”. Tell the agency guys what part of it you didn’t like and don’t stop there. Give suggestions for how you would like to see it done so that it has a better chance of passing your scrutiny the next time.Example: Instead of saying, “These colours are lousy. Don’t you guys understand the brand?”, I would say, “I know this is a promotion, but the loud colours in the ad are jarring and not in line with the brand personality. It would be more acceptable if you changed it to steel grey or a pastel shade. However, I like your headline because it boldly conveys the promotional idea”. Now, with this feedback, the agency knows exactly what must change, and you have a better chance of getting a 90% finished output in the next round. 8. Don’t hesitate to be the consumer Many times we’re so busy being marketers that we forget that we ourselves are consumers of all kinds of goods and services. So when you see a creative output, ask yourself as a consumer – Will I get this? Will it make me want to watch it again and again? Does it offend me in any way? Will I talk about this to others? If you’re able to answer yourself, speak in these terms to the agency as well, explaining what consumer reactions you anticipate and why some things work and some don’t. 9. Do not, I repeat, do not become the creative director However bad the output may be and however talented you think you are, it is unpardonable for a marketing manager to don the agency’s role. Your job is to get the work done by your agency by giving damn good briefs and spotting the best ideas when the specialized creative people come up with those ideas. If you start generating the creative, you’ll become biased and blind to other good ideas. It’s human, and it happens. Give suggestions, ask for specific changes, but do not start writing the scripts and drawing the layouts. 10. Set the agenda for the next round It sounds obvious but many clients tend to take it for granted that the agency will minute the meeting and that’s that. No! Before the meeting ends, the marketing manager must recap what is accepted and what is rejected. What changes have been specifically asked for in accepted options? Are there new options to be generated? If so, what is the expectation from those? How are the new options to be different from the ones already presented? And so on. Set the agenda and expectations for the next meeting now. Well, these are my proven methods to get better work done from my creative agencies. If you have more suggestions, please do add them in the comments. And if you’re from an agency, do comment with your pet peeves about clients. It’s always entertaining to hear them!

KALI TANDAV

WHITHERING COBRAS POISED TO STRIKE ;ORNAMENTS OF BLUE BLACK GODDESS GOHRA HILITERY ,AS SHE CRUNCHES BONES BLOOD DRIPPING FROM HER PROTRUDING FANGS THOUSANDS HEADS ANAHATA ,THE LUMINIOUS AURA AROUND HER HEAD ABSOLUTE UNTAIMED WILDNESS DESTRUCTION HER SOLE DESIRE THOUSAND OF SHAKTI'S EMERGING OUT OF HER BODIES TWISTING AND TURNING INTO A JOYOUS CIRCLE ;THEY LOSE ALL SELF AWARNNESS IN THE TEMPO OF HER BLOOD DANCE EVERY MOMENT IS ANIMALISTIC AND PRIMITIVE INTHEIR FACES ,MASS LIKE ANGULARITY ,A DISENGAGEMENT OF TURMOIL ALL AROUND THE UNIVERSE IS REDUCED TO DISTURBING ,CHAOTIC SCENCE OF VIOLENCE AND TERROR .LIKE A SCRIPTURE CONSTRUCTED SPONTANEOUSLY FROM THE DARK RECESSES OF THE SUBCONCIOUS

WAITING

When those days are gone ,when the dreams have been lived and found to be no more enchanting when the leaves have been shed and the landscapes is but a low outline of what once was there remains to sit back and wounder ,what after all , was all that about ? At that age ,What was to come : veiled in mystery, garbed in riches, visioned in luster, ennobled in expectancy, drenched in dreams, was something that trilled, and made the waitingitself ,painful and joyous. AND then it came to pass what was to be ,-became,nearer came the dream world a little glitter did lose and then it choked when came the truth: that this waiting has been done and i lived within that world that in those bygone days was the end ! And i learned that waiting speeds times away and many tommorrow becomes yesterdays so fast ,that destinations when reached are felt to be mere way stations untill one's made to alight and then it is to late the times have gone ,the dreams have been lived ,days like leaves have been shed ,the landscapes is bare and spring no more is ,what one dreamt to be RAMMOHAN SHETTY