VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2264
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Katare » 25 Sep 2018 07:27

ShauryaT wrote:
ramana wrote:ShauryaT, What is the value of the contract that Anil Ambani got form the 50% offset? Say in %
50%, 25%, 10%?
upwards of 50%, is my understanding. 21,000 crores is the figure being mentioned.


Rs 6000 corer and Dassault would own 49% of it so all this hapoola for Rs 3000corer of business. After adding the capital and start up cost, he would barely breakeven on the deal.

So me the meat!

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50406
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby ramana » 25 Sep 2018 07:36

Exactly. How big was the pie?
Lots of hoopla

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5217
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby ShauryaT » 25 Sep 2018 08:02

Katare wrote:
ShauryaT wrote:upwards of 50%, is my understanding. 21,000 crores is the figure being mentioned.


Rs 6000 corer and Dassault would own 49% of it so all this hapoola for Rs 3000corer of business. After adding the capital and start up cost, he would barely breakeven on the deal.

So me the meat!
Apples and Oranges sir. No, not 3000, crores worth of business. You are referring to the 100 million euros of startup capital to set things up. The offsets have to be fulfilled from 2019 and will continue, I guess till after the end of deliveries of the fighter. A total of 30,000 crores in offsets is to be fulfilled. Please recheck, what you have stated. The consensus figure for Reliance is 21,000 crores.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10406
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby pankajs » 25 Sep 2018 08:32

ShauryaT wrote:Reliance Part of Modi Govt’s ‘New Formula’: What Hollande Told AFP
(This article has been updated to reflect former French President Francois Hollande’s full statement to news agency AFP.)

On Friday, 21 September, several Indian news websites, including The Quint, published former French President Francois Hollande’s statement to news agency Agence-France Press (AFP), in which it seemed he was “unaware” whether India had put pressure on Reliance and Dassault to work together. In the same statement, he seemed to have told AFP that "only Dassault can comment on this."

However, as it turns out, that wasn’t Hollande’s full statement on what he told AFP on the Modi government’s hand in orchestrating the Reliance-Dassault tie-up in the Rafale deal.

Hollande actually reaffirmed his statement that the Modi government had proposed Anil Ambani’s Reliance as a partner for Dassault.

What Hollande Actually Told AFP

To clear up all doubts, here’s the actual statement made by Hollande to AFP, that was later published in Le Monde, and reported by Scroll:

“Asked by AFP on the sidelines of a conference in Montreal on Friday, Hollande said that the name of Reliance Group had appeared as part of a ‘new formula’ in negotiations over the Rafale deal, decided by the Modi government after it came to power.”
“Asked if he knew whether India put pressure for the Reliance Group to work with Dassault, Hollande said that he was ‘unaware’ and ‘Dassault alone is capable of answering’ he added, anxious to not intervene in the Indian controversy.”
This statement made by Hollande, that the Ambani-led Reliance Group was part of a “new formula” for the Rafale deal that was put forth by the Modi government, alone appears contradictory to the government’s claim that it had nothing to do with Dassault’s decision to go with Reliance.

While the second part of Hollande’s statement, also quoted by the news agencies on Friday, where he said he was “unaware” whether India put pressure for the Reliance Group to work with Dassault, neither confirms nor denies the same allegation, it suggests two things:

That his government did not have any role to play in choosing Reliance as Dassault’s proposed partner in the Rafale deal
That it was the Modi government which put forth Reliance’s name as part of its “new” and “official” formula
This is important, because the government has not denied putting forward Anil Ambani’s Reliance as a proposed partner, Scroll reported.


The highlighted is what the government seems to be unwilling to own up to. Instead of GoI running away from its decisions and hide behind confidentiality clauses, best to come clean and own up to the decisions made. The problem is the more the spin masters speak the more they are caught in a web of lies and half-truths. Why was ADAG proposed needs a reasonable explanation?

Anyone notice Sheela quoting Sabeen quoting and a leap into the unknown ... syndrome operating here.

There was another Quint fart post made in the Indian Econ thread that quoted some "Boom Live" to make a anti-Modi case on some issue. I had just replied to that post with a question of my own when both of the post vanished, probably Mod action. Is this "Boom Live", a favorite source for Quint, reliable? OR does Quint latch on to any tom, dick or harry website that furthers it "narrative" driven agenda?

Another interesting point that I had noticed in that prev case was this "Item" news was under the Quint banner and NOT BloombergQuint banner. Why would a economy related news not be under the more well known banner of Bloomberg when it squarely falls in that domain? Very fishy if you ask me.

I always ALWAYS look for the source used by Quint just as I do with farts from Wire or Scroll or rNDTV. etc. All these are into narrative driven "Item" news rather than news items.

Will
BRFite
Posts: 611
Joined: 28 Apr 2011 11:27

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Will » 25 Sep 2018 08:48

Well, even a child can see that the 126 aircraft tender was cancelled and the one for 36 aircraft signed, for the benefit of reliance. I had made a post to this effect at the time the deal was announced . It was a given that the airforce would go for additional aircraft over the years directly benefiting Reliance.If Dassault was playing hardball and not willing to accept HAL( not that I have any high regard for HAL. In my opinion it should be privatised) as a partner, the EF consortium should have been called in for negotiations and given the chance to match the price of the Rafale.

Even now the govt is just tying itself into knots trying to defend the deal , making one statement one day and contradicting itself the next. It is Jaitley who looks like a clown here.Even Parrikar at that time had washed his hands off the deal saying it was the Prime Ministers decision.

The opposition smells blood and you can’t blame them for milking it for all it’s worth.The BJP did the same when it was in opposition. Who suffers in the end? The IAF! A sad state of affairs actually, seeing that the Rafale is an excellent aircraft and the IAF really needs it.

This is the reason that India really needs to develop its own weapons and domestic R&D needs to be encouraged. The armed forces need to share equal blame, seeing how they treat domestic products , putting them through endless cycles of trails , while on the other hand willingly buying half baked foreign products and trying to fix issues with them later.

Everyone has a finger in the pie! It’s not a question of NDA or UPA . Both are equally corrupt. Anyone thinking different is delusional. Of course there are those and quite a few of them in here to , who will defend their favourite political dispensation regardless of all else. For them, anyone going against their narrative is anti national.
Last edited by Will on 25 Sep 2018 09:01, edited 1 time in total.

Rudradev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3168
Joined: 06 Apr 2003 12:31

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Rudradev » 25 Sep 2018 08:55

This is actually an object lesson in how replacing 2-3 words of a deliberately (mis)translated statement can be enough to change its entire meaning, and lay the foundation for a complete edifice of lies.

I went to the source (LeMonde/AFP article published Friday Sept 21st).

https://mobile.lemonde.fr/politique/art ... 23448.html

It says the following:

Asked by Agence France-Presse on the sidelines of a conference he gave Friday in Montreal, Mr. Hollande stressed that the name of Reliance Group had appeared in the context of the "new formula" of negotiations on the purchase of Rafale, decided by the Modi government after taking office.



That Reliance Industries' name "appeared "in the context of" the new formula is quite understandable. After all one major reason the "old formula" (negotiated by UPA) fell through was that Dassault rejected the presence of HAL as lead integrator. Meanwhile, Reliance Group and Dassault had formed a partnership as of 2012, so it's hardly surprising or suspicious that the name of Reliance would be mentioned in this context.


Now note the version posted below: reported by Scroll, quoted by Quint, and regurgitated by ShauryaT as "the actual statement" made by Hollande to AFP:

ShauryaT wrote:Reliance Part of Modi Govt’s ‘New Formula’: What Hollande Told AFP
:

“Asked by AFP on the sidelines of a conference in Montreal on Friday, Hollande said that the name of Reliance Group had appeared as part of a ‘new formula’ in negotiations over the Rafale deal, decided by the Modi government after it came to power.”



That means something quite different, doesn't it? It suggests that the name of Reliance Group was part of the new formula of negotiations... not merely something mentioned in context of the negotiations, but an actual component of the terms & conditions being negotiated!

Just in case you missed the implications of that deliberate mistranslation, Scroll/Quint restates the misquote to emphasize the distortion:

Hollande actually reaffirmed his statement that the Modi government had proposed Anil Ambani’s Reliance as a partner for Dassault.


Which, if one reads the original Hollande quote to LeMonde/AFP, stands revealed as an absolute lie.

The Scroll/Quint article then uses this lie to serve as the foundation for many more:


This statement made by Hollande, that the Ambani-led Reliance Group was part of a “new formula” for the Rafale deal that was put forth by the Modi government, alone appears contradictory to the government’s claim that it had nothing to do with Dassault’s decision to go with Reliance.


Because Hollande never made such a statement, as the original LeMonde report clearly shows.


It is therefore quite rich of ShauryaT to refer to others as "spin masters", when the web of lies and half-truths he himself reproduced cannot withstand the scrutiny of a simple google search.


The highlighted is what the government seems to be unwilling to own up to. Instead of GoI running away from its decisions and hide behind confidentiality clauses, best to come clean and own up to the decisions made. The problem is the more the spin masters speak the more they are caught in a web of lies and half-truths. Why was ADAG proposed needs a reasonable explanation?

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10406
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby pankajs » 25 Sep 2018 09:02

Will wrote:Well, even a child can see that the 126 aircraft tender was cancelled and the one for 36 aircraft signed, for the benefit of reliance. I had made a post to this effect at the time the deal was announced . It was a given that the airforce would go for additional aircraft over the years directly benefiting Reliance.If Dassault was playing hardball and not willing to accept HAL( not that I have any high regard for HAL. In my opinion it should be privatised) as a partner, the EF consortium should have been called in for negotiations and given the chance to match the price of the Rafale.

1. Reliance was roped in even during UPA 126 deal time. So what was the need to cancel 126 and go with 36 "for the benefit of Reliance". They would have had their pie in 126 original contract too or if the new conditions where to be incorporated into the original 126 deal. Lets not get the reasoning backwards.

2. If Dassault was playing hardball what was the garuntee that EF consortium too wouldn't play hardball? I don't follow the thread regularly and will have to go back a few page to refresh but I do recall "someone" posting that nearly EVERY vendor expressing their inability to "Guarantee" the work quality delivered by HAL. I am sure all of them would be ok with Su30 MKI model and wash their hands off AFTER the TOT and Initial hand holding.

"Performance garuntee" was the bone of contention. If Dassault was not to be held responsible for the "quality or performance or up-time" of the HAL built plane I don't think Dassault would have a problem with HAL building the Rafale. Same with Su30 MKI. Same would have been the position with other plane makers. Which "reputed" manufacturer of such low tolerance equipment take full responsibility to the extent of guaranteed up-time, etc without having a direct say in the manufacturing?

Again lets not get the reasoning backwards.

Rudradev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3168
Joined: 06 Apr 2003 12:31

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Rudradev » 25 Sep 2018 09:11

Will wrote:Well, even a child can see that the 126 aircraft tender was cancelled and the one for 36 aircraft signed, for the benefit of reliance.

:rotfl:
I think ONLY a child would "see" that... as the rest of your post demonstrates.

Maybe you can tell me how India planned to PAY for 126 MMRCA at the UPA/Dassault negotiated rate? This has been discussed enough times in the past:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/m.economic ... 937909.cms

Dumping the contest: Faced with a $30 billion contract for 126 fighters that would have wrecked the capital outlay for years, if not decades (since no one in the previous government did due diligence on actual costs or available funding), abandonment of the competition was the most fiscally prudent thing to do. Moreover, while not provisioned in the DPP, it doesn’t disallow it specifically either. Which begs the question: what process violation?


So perhaps one should leave one's political partisanship over defence issues at home... especially if one is going to cry crocodile tears over how much the IAF suffers after pulling out some preposterous "everybody is corrupt" equivocation between NDA2 and UPA in this matter.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10406
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby pankajs » 25 Sep 2018 09:18

Rudradev wrote:This is actually an object lesson in how replacing 2-3 words of a deliberately (mis)translated statement can be enough to change its entire meaning, and lay the foundation for a complete edifice of lies.

Exactly! Couldn't Quint, that is rich enough to have a tie up with Bloomberg not rich enough to get the original item/video/audio and get it translated by hiring some Indian French experts? There must be some in JNU or Delhi or Pondicherry. One does not need an employee when there are free lancers for such work who work by the hour. This is after all BIG news, a political slug-fest of the highest order involving Billions of dollars! What could be better than getting to the root.

Instead, Quint had to rely on Scroll who had to rely on Sabina who had to rely on Sakina and so on and so ..... This is deliberate.

Also leaves an escape hatch open for Quint if it is ever called out for its deliberate distortion. "Oh ... we expected Scroll to do the due diligence ..." BUT what does one expect from a "News" site that relies on "Boom Live" for its facts/fact checks on economic news when it has a a tie up with Bloomberg!!! This is nothing but a clear example of "narrative" shopping and "shaping".

Inspite of its tie up with Bloomberg, Quint remains in the league of Scroll, Wire, rNDTV. Now I even read items posted under the BloombergQuint banner with suspicion. Speaking for myself, Quint's "narrative shopping and shaping" behavior has tainted the Bloomberg brand by association.

Will
BRFite
Posts: 611
Joined: 28 Apr 2011 11:27

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Will » 25 Sep 2018 10:27

Rudradev wrote:
Will wrote:Well, even a child can see that the 126 aircraft tender was cancelled and the one for 36 aircraft signed, for the benefit of reliance.

:rotfl:
I think ONLY a child would "see" that... as the rest of your post demonstrates.

Maybe you can tell me how India planned to PAY for 126 MMRCA at the UPA/Dassault negotiated rate? This has been discussed enough times in the past:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/m.economic ... 937909.cms

The same way that any govt will have to pay for the 100 odd aircraft that are planned to be bought through MMMRCA- 2. If anyone thinks it’s going to be cheaper to buy these aircraft,5 years down the line at the earliest, then he’s a moron. But as I said, when one has blinkers on , one will go to any extent to defend corruption. Out..

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4168
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Karthik S » 25 Sep 2018 11:04

Will wrote:Well, even a child can see that the 126 aircraft tender was cancelled and the one for 36 aircraft signed, for the benefit of reliance. I had made a post to this effect at the time the deal was announced . It was a given that the airforce would go for additional aircraft over the years directly benefiting Reliance.If Dassault was playing hardball and not willing to accept HAL( not that I have any high regard for HAL. In my opinion it should be privatised) as a partner, the EF consortium should have been called in for negotiations and given the chance to match the price of the Rafale.

Even now the govt is just tying itself into knots trying to defend the deal , making one statement one day and contradicting itself the next. It is Jaitley who looks like a clown here.Even Parrikar at that time had washed his hands off the deal saying it was the Prime Ministers decision.

The opposition smells blood and you can’t blame them for milking it for all it’s worth.The BJP did the same when it was in opposition. Who suffers in the end? The IAF! A sad state of affairs actually, seeing that the Rafale is an excellent aircraft and the IAF really needs it.

This is the reason that India really needs to develop its own weapons and domestic R&D needs to be encouraged. The armed forces need to share equal blame, seeing how they treat domestic products , putting them through endless cycles of trails , while on the other hand willingly buying half baked foreign products and trying to fix issues with them later.

Everyone has a finger in the pie! It’s not a question of NDA or UPA . Both are equally corrupt. Anyone thinking different is delusional. Of course there are those and quite a few of them in here to , who will defend their favourite political dispensation regardless of all else. For them, anyone going against their narrative is anti national.


What happened brother? Is it about any FCRA or what? I am not going to give you the benefit of the doubt that you don't know facts such as Reliance is just one of 72 partners etc and various other intricacies. You'd know that and still target govt. Hmm interesting.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19592
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Philip » 25 Sep 2018 12:02

There is one basic fact - that we in both DPSU ad pvt. sector have limitations as to the tech. we can develpp and absorb. Over 5 yrs. ago I think, a top Ru diplomat said the we (India) needed to quickly make up our minds as to what areas of the FGFA programme we wished to work on
as the project was moving apace.I don't think the first flight had taken place at the time. All we did was to add to the IJT team the responsibility of the FGFA programme ! Neither has the IJT arrived in any meaningful way and we did zero with the FGFA.

We are grossly deficit in skilled manpower in aeronautical engineering, why the LCA too is stuck in a production quagmire , as the former VCoAS AM Barbora said the first sqd. was meant to be formed in 2009!
Thus there are genuine concerns about HAL's capacity to deliver.Complicating this factor is the TOT and " make in India" mantra when as in the Raffy case we can't do the biz. What should've been done was to follow the same incremental roadmap as done for the Flanker MKIs. The first tranche of 36 should've been part of the same 126 aircraft deal.The choice- by whoever of the completely inexperienced R co. as Dassault's JV partner is proving to be an unmitigated disaster.

M.Hollande can't escape so easily.He has to come clean on how he and Dassault picked the R co. Let's wait and watch.
Last edited by Philip on 25 Sep 2018 13:01, edited 1 time in total.

jpremnath
BRFite
Posts: 121
Joined: 18 Dec 2016 21:06

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby jpremnath » 25 Sep 2018 12:43

pankajs wrote:1. Reliance was roped in even during UPA 126 deal time. So what was the need to cancel 126 and go with 36 "for the benefit of Reliance". They would have had their pie in 126 original contract too or if the new conditions where to be incorporated into the original 126 deal. Lets not get the reasoning backwards.


The UPA Reliance was mota bhai's company..they withdrew later. The one which entered the fray during the 2015 negotiations was chota bhai's firm. It shouldnt make any difference, but it really bothers me why the NDA's defense partnership guidelines did not prevent a paper company with bad financials and without any prior industrial experience enter the country's biggest defense procurement. Come to think of it, it is practically the same as your or me going to meet the govt with a paper company and tagging my 'unkil' at the bank who will pull strings to arrange all funding i need. Because, If they let ambani make complex and expensive fighter jet parts with just bank loans, they should let me also do it then.
I dont have any proof which suggest kickbacks and I dont want to insinuate one either. But considering the history of defense scams in the country for every overseas defense purchase, I am surprised the govt did not weigh in pros and cons when letting in a guy whose family name is synonymous with 'scam'. Of course you can say they did not invite him and Dassault did, but the govt could have made some guidelines/ requirements on experience and balance sheet for companies which want to be part of the offsets...we could have avoided this mess atleast...

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7834
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Pratyush » 25 Sep 2018 13:00

The last few pages on the thread reminds me what Ramanna once said.

We suffer from whiter than white syndrome. One spot and we start running hear and there and tearing our hair out. That a scam has broken out.

Guys repeat after me. No scam has taken place just because chota Ambani is one of the offset partner in JV with Dassault that will make part's of the Falcon business jet.

Regarding the experience of reliance as a part of the JV. I thought Dassault part of the JV took care of that aspect.

Grow a spine. And stop paying attention to this Pappu Giri.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19592
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Philip » 25 Sep 2018 13:07

PS: Pl. read Dassault's own statement put out after Hollande's statement.Both Falcon AND Rafale components will be made at the Nagpur facility. There is a definite deal between Dassault and the R co. brokered by M.Hollande.We know his mistress benefited from the R co.Did he also have a finger in the pie? There are umpteen ways to skin a scam.He is probably under the scanner in France and wants to pre-empt an embarassing inquiry into his alleged misdemeanours while in office ( by throwing mud on India) as seems to be the norm with all French ex- presidents!

Kashi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2964
Joined: 06 May 2011 13:53

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Kashi » 25 Sep 2018 13:31

jpremnath wrote:The UPA Reliance was mota bhai's company..they withdrew later. The one which entered the fray during the 2015 negotiations was chota bhai's firm.


Didn't Mota bhai sell his company to Chhota bhai and was re-branded as such?

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10406
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby pankajs » 25 Sep 2018 13:39

jpremnath wrote:
pankajs wrote:1. Reliance was roped in even during UPA 126 deal time. So what was the need to cancel 126 and go with 36 "for the benefit of Reliance". They would have had their pie in 126 original contract too or if the new conditions where to be incorporated into the original 126 deal. Lets not get the reasoning backwards.


The UPA Reliance was mota bhai's company..they withdrew later. The one which entered the fray during the 2015 negotiations was chota bhai's firm. It shouldnt make any difference, but it really bothers me why the NDA's defense partnership guidelines did not prevent a paper company with bad financials and without any prior industrial experience enter the country's biggest defense procurement. Come to think of it, it is practically the same as your or me going to meet the govt with a paper company and tagging my 'unkil' at the bank who will pull strings to arrange all funding i need. Because, If they let ambani make complex and expensive fighter jet parts with just bank loans, they should let me also do it then.
I dont have any proof which suggest kickbacks and I dont want to insinuate one either. But considering the history of defense scams in the country for every overseas defense purchase, I am surprised the govt did not weigh in pros and cons when letting in a guy whose family name is synonymous with 'scam'. Of course you can say they did not invite him and Dassault did, but the govt could have made some guidelines/ requirements on experience and balance sheet for companies which want to be part of the offsets...we could have avoided this mess atleast...

Lets review point wise

1. Paper company - Take any industry where an entrepreneur enters for the 1st time it is most definitely starts with a paper company. Take the biggest Indian private sector success is defense manufacturing Kalyani or Tata or L&T. Everyone of their 1st venture into whatever field they choose started with paper company.

a. Kalyani had ZERO experience building a Gun BEFORE they built THE gun. Therefore that venture of their started as a paper company.

b. Tata SED has ZERO experience building whatever they build for the Indian defense force when they rolled out their FIRST product. There venture of the Tata's too started as a paper company.

c. L&T's first venture into defense too could be shown to have started with a paper company BEFORE they built the first product.

2. Industrial experience - This too is a smoke grenade. Dassault is the JV partner for what hanji? Ambani's will play harmonium AND Dassault will play harmonium so who will built whatever they have committed to build? One of them must do something to deliver something .. No?

Now lack of experience of Ambani's to build "Aircraft parts" should not be the matter just as it has not been for Kalyani or L&T or Tata when they made their INITIAL foray into defense production. The experience of Dassault, whcih is a 49% [or whatever is the right number] partner, should make the JV work. So while Ambani has no prior experience the JV will have sufficient industrial experience.

3. Lastly bad financial - As far as the current situation goes the chota has sufficient capital to fund his part of the venture it seems. The group as a whole is not bankrupt and then there is mota bhai to bail his brother out.

BTW, if you, without any defense manufacturing experience, go with a proposal for defense manufacturing with sufficient "technical backing" with a "experienced partner" and sufficient "financial backing", either of your own or partners, I will back you to the hilt for any contract.

This is basic stuff.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10406
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby pankajs » 25 Sep 2018 13:47

In reference for the above post:

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/ne ... 293640.cms
L&T to make artillery guns in India with Korean defence firm Hanwha Techwin
"We have initiated setting up of a greenfield manufacturing line. This will include a test track to produce, test and qualify the guns," said Jayant Patil, head of defence and aerospace at L&T.

The gun will have over 50% indigenous content, he said.

L&T is looking at a long-term partnership with Hanwha Techwin, which could lead to larger collaboration on land-based military systems to tap the growing Indian market, officials said.

A larger collaboration between the two companies could include future orders from the Army for mobile air defence systems and similar artillery requirements.

BEFORE L&T made the 1st gun what was its industrial experience in making guns? If it still is not clear, the worlds "Greenfield", "50% indigenous content", "partnership" and "collaboration" should clear the cobwebs of the mind.

So now by the criteria applied to the the Reliance-Dessault JV we have many many "paper companies" floating around in Indian defense manufacturing. So now we are discovering scam after scam after scam after scam in Indian defense manufacturing.

Jai ho! Jai ho! BUT no one objects to that! :-?
Last edited by pankajs on 25 Sep 2018 14:07, edited 1 time in total.

ArjunPandit
BRFite
Posts: 1285
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby ArjunPandit » 25 Sep 2018 13:59

mods could we please take this scam related discussion on a separate thread? these meaningless rants on either side have turned this more into political/corporate law thread rather than a military thread

nandakumar
BRFite
Posts: 805
Joined: 10 May 2010 13:37

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby nandakumar » 25 Sep 2018 14:13

People would do well to remember that Maruti Udyog was just a tin car shed. After Sanjay Gandhi's death it lost what little automobile expertise it had, to build cars. It is this company that Suzuki chose to build a car with. We know how that story ended. On the Rafale deal the downside to GoI was nil. If the JV company didn't export components or didn't attract foreign investments for dometic business (offset obligations can be fufilled by either investment or export earnings or a combination of the two) it is Rafale's performance guarantee that would be encashed. There was no reason for Rafale to agree if it didnt believe the JV could deliver. However even if for the sake of argument we believe that Rafale was arm twisted into signing up with Anil Ambani then the only conclusion is that Rafale built the potential loss into the price of the aircraft. It could do so because it was the sole supplier. It would be impossible to prove that the price of the aircraft would have been lower had Anil Ambani not been pushed into the deal.

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1346
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby nam » 25 Sep 2018 14:45

People, Reliance is NOT building Rafales. It is building parts of Falcon business jet.

No one cares if they go bankrupt or succeed because Indian Government is NOT buying Falcon business jet.

souravB
BRFite
Posts: 206
Joined: 07 Jun 2018 13:52

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby souravB » 25 Sep 2018 15:43

Not giving my opinion on anything, just trying to clear out some facts which after this much amount of Chinese whisper has become somewhat obfuscated.
I'd hope both side in the argument will keep these points in mind.
  1. Reliance has formed a JV. It is going to be a separate company and not in any way fulfilling only Offset contracts. Very Probably another use of the new entity is to coordinate and fulfill PBL clause and future maintenance requirements effectively. Falcon jet parts are an added bonus.
  2. DRAL will conduct it's operations in India. Indian People will be offered jobs. People talking about HAL, it is not the only company that employs Indians, Reliance does too and arguably more.
  3. Technical expertise will be provided by DA to Reliance.
  4. HAL is already building 40 Tejas with 284 in pipeline and Su30 with upgradations coming down the path bungling both of them without any help just fine.
  5. The point that No one knew before Modi announced is such a BS. Joint statements are written days before and checked between two foreign ministries before it even get to the hands of respective Head of States. by my noob estimate, people started to talk between themselves atleast a week before including it in the Joint Communique.
  6. IAF wanted Rafale. not EFT, they wanted Rafale. reasons are many. This is evident by the small discrepancies that come during L1 selection and their vehement argument for the deal.

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 1529
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Manish_P » 25 Sep 2018 15:48

ArjunPandit wrote:mods could we please take this scam related discussion on a separate thread? these meaningless rants on either side have turned this more into political/corporate law thread rather than a military thread


+1

ks_sachin
BRFite
Posts: 637
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby ks_sachin » 25 Sep 2018 16:14

souravB wrote:Not giving my opinion on anything, just trying to clear out some facts which after this much amount of Chinese whisper has become somewhat obfuscated.
I'd hope both side in the argument will keep these points in mind.
  1. Reliance has formed a JV. It is going to be a separate company and not in any way fulfilling only Offset contracts. Very Probably another use of the new entity is to coordinate and fulfill PBL clause and future maintenance requirements effectively. Falcon jet parts are an added bonus.
  2. DRAL will conduct it's operations in India. Indian People will be offered jobs. People talking about HAL, it is not the only company that employs Indians, Reliance does too and arguably more.
  3. Technical expertise will be provided by DA to Reliance.
  4. HAL is already building 40 Tejas with 284 in pipeline and Su30 with upgradations coming down the path bungling both of them without any help just fine.
  5. The point that No one knew before Modi announced is such a BS. Joint statements are written days before and checked between two foreign ministries before it even get to the hands of respective Head of States. by my noob estimate, people started to talk between themselves atleast a week before including it in the Joint Communique.
  6. IAF wanted Rafale. not EFT, they wanted Rafale. reasons are many. This is evident by the small discrepancies that come during L1 selection and their vehement argument for the deal.

Please talk to Rahul...

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5217
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby ShauryaT » 25 Sep 2018 18:57

Rudradev wrote:It is therefore quite rich of ShauryaT to refer to others as "spin masters", when the web of lies and half-truths he himself reproduced cannot withstand the scrutiny of a simple google search.
RD: Good attempt at spinnning. So, you agree that NS/Jaitley were lying when they said GoI had nothing to do with the selection of ADAG as the major vendor to fulfill offsets? If you do care for the matter beyond the partisanship, let me know what is the rationale for ADAG selection to fulfill a major part of the offsets. Maybe there is one but it is not clear to me. Highlighting a supposed difference between semantics (Proposed, in context of, part of) does not prove anything, except to argue like lawyers. Next someone will ask, show me the proof in writing that GoI gave the name of ADAG to fulfill offsets and short of that all who question are anti-nationals? Also, you debate well, but when you resort to such constructs, in my eyes you are admitting defeat for your position. Contempt for those who oppose an argument is the first sign of defeat, in my eyes. If asking questions of those in power is termed as being anti-national then what is a democracy for?

This matter can be cleared by a simple assertion of ownership for GoI's fiduciary duty to own their decisions and end the matter. The more the obfuscation the more the "perception" that crony favoritism has been part of the deal.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35889
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby SaiK » 25 Sep 2018 18:59

But scam news did get us the list of addons though.. so there is some advantage for us.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10406
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby pankajs » 25 Sep 2018 20:12

Quint quoting scroll. Lets go to scroll

https://scroll.in/article/895491/no-fre ... at-he-said
No, French ex-President Hollande did not deny his Rafale remarks to AFP: Here’s what he said
[Notice the spin here. "Hollande did not deny his Rafale" Arre baba! when he clearly says "Dassault alone is capable of answering" how can be confirm or deny when Dassault "alone" can answer?

If Hollande is truly "unaware" as he claims, he will be lying when he deny's, for Dassault alone is capable of answering"

This is the level of journalism of today's India. Scroll is past master if spin and so is Quint.]


“Asked by Agence-France Press on the sidelines of a conference in Montreal on Friday, Hollande said that the name of Reliance Group had appeared as part of a ‘new formula’ in negotiations over the Rafale deal, decided by the Modi government after it came to power.

Asked if he knew whether India put pressure for the Reliance Group to work with Dassault, Hollande said that he was ‘unaware’ and ‘Dassault alone is capable of answering’ he added, anxious to not intervene in the Indian controversy.”

Hollande does not know if Reliance was made part of the deal because of Indian pressure but Reliance "appeared as part of a ‘new formula’ in negotiations".

So who knows? Again Hollande says "‘Dassault alone is capable of answering".

What about the "the name of Reliance Group had appeared as part of a ‘new formula’ in negotiations over the Rafale deal, decided by the Modi government after it came to power"

GOI scrapped the old deal for a news one. This is the "new formula" where 126 with 108 to be built in India was out of the window and 36 off the shelf with ~50% offset.

But what about "the name of Reliance Group had appeared as part of a ‘new formula’ in negotiations over the Rafale deal". We already know that Dassault has chosen Reliance as a partner as far back as 2012. Dassault brought Reliance as a partner to the table during the negotiation on this "new formula. Hence Hollande's "‘Dassault alone is capable of answering".

Rest all is spin from Scroll and quite cleverly copied by Quint which has other such reliable sources as "Boom Live" on economics rather than its partner Bloomberg! This is "narrative shopping and shaping" at the finest.

In case, folks still don't connect, the promoter of Quint is none other than the past promoter of Network 18 where the Hajdeep Turdesai was his chief henchman. The bias is not even skin deep for folks who care.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raghav_Bahl
Raghav founded Quintillion Media Pvt Ltd with his wife Ritu Kapur after their exit from Network 18. He has signed a joint venture agreement with Bloomberg L.P. to launch BloombergQuint.[
Last edited by pankajs on 25 Sep 2018 20:38, edited 1 time in total.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17491
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby chetak » 25 Sep 2018 20:33

Why don't people highlight the fact that there may be 70 0dd offset partners in the rafale deal??

@tavleen_singh the balance 2$bn in offsets is to develop #Manufacturing partners ,this again is divided amongst nearly 70 odd firms. Fact is #Reliance cannot get more than a few hundred million $ at best in offsets.Some of the offset partners as revealed by @livefist below.

Image

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17491
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby chetak » 25 Sep 2018 20:41

rafale offset partners and some still under consideration.


Image

Image

Sumeet
BRFite
Posts: 1222
Joined: 22 May 2002 11:31

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Sumeet » 25 Sep 2018 23:00

This is from CSRam fav channel :). This needs to be spread further. Vishnu explains to his colleagues at NDTV:


ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50406
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby ramana » 26 Sep 2018 01:33

Kashi wrote:
jpremnath wrote:The UPA Reliance was mota bhai's company..they withdrew later. The one which entered the fray during the 2015 negotiations was chota bhai's firm.


Didn't Mota bhai sell his company to Chhota bhai and was re-branded as such?



Yes as part of reconciliation Mota Bhai gave up the Reliance defence business to chotu bhai.

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2264
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Katare » 26 Sep 2018 01:55

ShauryaT wrote:
Katare wrote:
Rs 6000 corer and Dassault would own 49% of it so all this hapoola for Rs 3000corer of business. After adding the capital and start up cost, he would barely breakeven on the deal.

So me the meat!
Apples and Oranges sir. No, not 3000, crores worth of business. You are referring to the 100 million euros of startup capital to set things up. The offsets have to be fulfilled from 2019 and will continue, I guess till after the end of deliveries of the fighter. A total of 30,000 crores in offsets is to be fulfilled. Please recheck, what you have stated. The consensus figure for Reliance is 21,000 crores.


It can’t be. Dassault’s share is much less than 50% of the total offsets and reliance is going to get only a piece of it.

Rs 29k corer is total offset
<< Rs14K corer is Dassault’s share (rest is by MBDA, Safran etc)
DRDL’s share is roughly half of it , there are 69 other companies that are getting share of this pie
Anil’s share would br Rs3K corer (51% equity)

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50406
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby ramana » 26 Sep 2018 04:30

Chetak and Katare

Can we create a spreadsheet of the offsets ?

Total 29K crores
Split between Dassault, MBDA, Safran and Thales.

And who was this allocated?
it will take time but if someone creates the basic template folks can go dig the information.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10406
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby pankajs » 26 Sep 2018 04:31

Scroll/Quint/Wire/rNDTV quality Quality-journalism

https://scroll.in/article/895687/the-da ... g-pakistan
The Daily Fix: BJP’s response to Rafale should be transparency – instead it’s blaming Pakistan
To this day it is unclear why Prime Minister Narendra Modi altered the deal from 126 jets to 36 jets, without keeping his own ministers, bureaucrats or the Air Force in the loop. {False on both counts and had been rebutted many time before. But as the saying goes, To wake a sleeping man is easy but not someone who pretends to be asleep}

<snip>

And to this day, there is not a straightforward answer on whether the government proposed Anil Ambani’s Reliance Group as part of a “new formula” for the Rafale deal, as former French President Francois Hollande has alleged. Of course, the Indian government has insisted that it had no role in Dassault’s decision to finally go with Anil Ambani’s firm as part of its obligations under the deal. But has it categorically stated that it did not propose Reliance Defence? Sure, the government has suggested that Hollande somehow coordinated his statement with Congress President Rahul Gandhi. But has it definitely denied his remarks and said that the former French President is lying? {Another classic spin. GOI has insisted that it had no role in Dassault’s decision but it has not been categorical enough, at least not to the expectation of this chappie.

Next, per this chappie, Sure GOI, Dassault and the present French government have been categorical that it was Dassault’s decision BUT has GOI "definitely denied" or accused the "French President is lying?"}


<snip>

Modi made a decision without any consultation, with no regard for procedure, {False} and there are now credible allegations of corruption or at least crony capitalism from no less than the former foreign head of state that negotiated the deal. {This chappie is darn selective! He chooses to believe someone "no less" than a former French president on one statement but not on his next statement!! Well done! Well done!

For him the current French government's words don't count when someone "No less" that the former French president has given two contradictory statements. Darn it! If only we had more chappies like him, India today would be super duper power just based on gas this gasbag is generating on his own!!}
Last edited by pankajs on 26 Sep 2018 04:39, edited 2 times in total.

Rudradev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3168
Joined: 06 Apr 2003 12:31

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Rudradev » 26 Sep 2018 04:33

ShauryaT wrote:
Rudradev wrote:It is therefore quite rich of ShauryaT to refer to others as "spin masters", when the web of lies and half-truths he himself reproduced cannot withstand the scrutiny of a simple google search.
RD: Good attempt at spinnning. So, you agree that NS/Jaitley were lying when they said GoI had nothing to do with the selection of ADAG as the major vendor to fulfill offsets? If you do care for the matter beyond the partisanship, let me know what is the rationale for ADAG selection to fulfill a major part of the offsets. Maybe there is one but it is not clear to me. Highlighting a supposed difference between semantics (Proposed, in context of, part of) does not prove anything, except to argue like lawyers. Next someone will ask, show me the proof in writing that GoI gave the name of ADAG to fulfill offsets and short of that all who question are anti-nationals? Also, you debate well, but when you resort to such constructs, in my eyes you are admitting defeat for your position. Contempt for those who oppose an argument is the first sign of defeat, in my eyes. If asking questions of those in power is termed as being anti-national then what is a democracy for?

This matter can be cleared by a simple assertion of ownership for GoI's fiduciary duty to own their decisions and end the matter. The more the obfuscation the more the "perception" that crony favoritism has been part of the deal.


Dear Shaurya,

Goalposts are large, heavy things. Great men like Arun Shourie and Yashwant Sinha have tried to move them as convenient, but succeeded only in embarrassing themselves. I fear you will only muddy your trousers if you follow in the muck of their footsteps.

GOI's position is that it had nothing to do with encouraging, driving, or in any way influencing the selection of Reliance Defence as a partner for Dassault. That relationship has been known to exist since 2012, and it is a matter of record that Reliance Defence passed on to ADAG in subsequent restructuring. It has been confirmed yet again by Hollande, the French government, AND Dassault that the choice of an Indian offset partner was Dassault's alone. Not the French government's choice, and not the GOI's.

So why should I, GOI, or anyone else offer a rationale for something which evidently did not happen?

As for semantics, let me offer the following example:
1) "Arun Shourie gets a lot of publicity in the context of the Narendra Modi government."
2) "Arun Shourie gets a lot of publicity as part of the Narendra Modi government."

Does it take a "lawyer" to distinguish between the above two statements? As far as I can see, (1) is obviously true, because Shourie is gibbering about the Modi government on every available media platform. But (2) is not true, and the whole reason why Shourie is having apoplectic fits since 2014 is that (2) is not true! :D

"Next someone will ask" is a strawman if I ever saw one. The initial question you raise about "why was ADAG proposed" is itself based on a total fabrication, and wilful distortion of M. Hollande's statement. Now you insist that GOI must "assert ownership" of a proposal that they are not established to have made in the first place.

What if I ask you WHY you passed gas 31 times during our last BRF meeting. Does that put the onus on you to prove that you didn't pass gas? And will the matter be cleared if and only if you "assert your ownership" of passing gas? :rotfl: Now that's what I mean by shifting the goalposts!

Certainly questions should be asked of GOI, but when the questions themselves are revealed to be frivolous, defamatory, and completely without merit in their underlying assumptions... then one begins to consider the motives of the questioners who repeat them endlessly. Wouldn't you?

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5217
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby ShauryaT » 26 Sep 2018 05:48

Katare wrote:[
It can’t be. Dassault’s share is much less than 50% of the total offsets and reliance is going to get only a piece of it.

Rs 29k corer is total offset
<< Rs14K corer is Dassault’s share (rest is by MBDA, Safran etc)
DRDL’s share is roughly half of it , there are 69 other companies that are getting share of this pie
Anil’s share would br Rs3K corer (51% equity)
Some information to dig in. Thales too has a venture with Reliance. The numbers are a forecast but it seems somewhere along the line the claim of 21,000 crore has come from Reliance. I have not been able to get a source yet.

Reliance Defence corners offset contracts worth ₹21,000 crore on Rafale deal
Even as BEL, Bharat Dynamics Ltd, Samtel and other defence companies, are readying to get a slice of the estimated ₹30,000 crore Rafale offset contract, Reliance Defence has already walked away with a major chunk of the deal.

The Rafale offset contract is India's biggest ever. With two joint ventures in a row related to the $8.8-billion Rafale aircraft, Anil Ambani's Reliance Group is looking to target business worth ₹21,000 crore as part of the offsets.

Last year, Reliance Aerostructure had entered into a 51:49 joint venture with Dassault Aviation. The new JV with Thales will help the Indian major execute Thales’ offset obligation amounting to $1billion.

The Thales JV capital is under discussion. Both Thales and Reliance Defence refused comment on the investment.


The estimated ₹30,000 crore offset clause is divided among these four companies. Sources indicated that the biggest chunk would be with Dassault, with a share of ₹15,000 crore.

While Thales has an offset obligation of ₹6,500 crore, Safran has an offset obligation of around ₹5,500 crore, and MBDA has ₹3,000 crore offset obligation.

The Thales JV with Reliance Defence inculcates a long term strategy to serve the defence needs of the country.

The JV plans to have a team of 40 people to begin with and will initially work within the framework of offsets commitments as part of the 36 Rafale combat aircraft contract.

However, Thales also has another $800 million to $1 billion offset obligation against the Mirage 2000 Upgrade.

Thales is yet to announce the offset partner for this.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50406
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby ramana » 26 Sep 2018 06:05

Ok.
Total offsets are 30K crores.
Dassault has to share 15k crores.
Thales has to share 6.5k crores plus $2800 to $1B for the M2K upgrade.
Safran has to share 5.5K crores
MBDA had to share 3k crores
From those graphics put up by Shiv Aroor, we know 72 companies in different sectors are being evaluated.

We need to build a spreadsheet that shows what these 72 companies are getting.
Reliance has made two JVs with Dassault and Thales. Also Dassault has 49% of the ownership of the Reliance JV. How much does Thales own in the other JV?

We know Safran has tied up with HAL about a $1b in the Kaveri thread....

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5710
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Rakesh » 26 Sep 2018 06:16

Saurav Jha: Rafale deal "will go through but the political charges will fly thick and fast"


Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5710
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Rakesh » 26 Sep 2018 06:19

People 'misinformed' about offset aspect of Rafale deal: Air Force deputy chief
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/ind ... TOIDesktop

When asked about the charges by the opposition over offset contract under the deal to buy 36 fighter jets, he said, "I believe people are misinformed. It is nothing like Rs 30,000 crore to one party. Dassault alone has to only do offset to the tune of Rs 6,500 crore. Nothing more than that."

Sumeet
BRFite
Posts: 1222
Joined: 22 May 2002 11:31

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Sumeet » 26 Sep 2018 10:01

The thing is some fence sitters are thinking Reliance will be manufacturing Rafales. Still some normal people (who have no stake in Anti-Modi propaganda) think its Reliance that will manufacture Rafale. That I think is failure of Modi Govt.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Kakarat and 23 guests