A Quote by Tulsi Tanti

When German companies take over firms in India, it is seen as normal. When an Indian buys one or two firms in Germany, that is something special. — © Tulsi Tanti
When German companies take over firms in India, it is seen as normal. When an Indian buys one or two firms in Germany, that is something special.
German and English firms operate internationally, while French firms do not. The only place where they all have work is in China. Anybody can sell himself in China!
Fear of foreign domination in India led the Janata Party, in the 1970s, to push for partial Indian ownership of all multinational firms within the country. The result was a spectacular pullback, by companies such as IBM and Coca-Cola, and a stagnant economy.
More American companies are getting bought by foreign firms or they`re becoming foreign firms or they`re outsourcing. Right now the tax code says if you want to make something in another country and re-import it back into America, go ahead and do that. We don`t want to incentivize that.
The global financial system consists of firms in the financial services sector - banks, hedge funds, insurance companies and the like - and various governmental agencies who are charged with regulating these firms.
You have various institutions like law firms and accounting firms which bill by the hour. I'm really against that. You have an incentive to go slowly, be there as long as possible, to over-research things and over-staff.
Poor firms ignore their competitors; average firms copy their competitors; winning firms lead their competitors.
More reforms will give more impetus to German industries to invest in India. German companies want to be treated on par with Indian companies, and creation of an equitable market is crucial for investments.
If two firms join together, we want their total tax bill to go up because we don't want more big firms. We'd actually like to have lots more small ones.
We're not going into advertising. But we see the future battleground existing between ourselves, digital firms, and media-buying firms.
The lawyers have escaped most criticism [and undeservedly so]. The tax shelters [were approved by lawyers, who got paid huge commissions to do so] and every miscreant had a high-falutin' lawyer at his side. Why don't more law firms vote with their feet and not take clients who have signs on them that say, "I'm a skunk and will be hard to handle?" I've noticed that firms that avoid trouble over long periods of time have an institutional process that tunes bad clients out. Boy, if I were running a law firm, I'd want a system like that because a lot of firms have a lot of bad clients.
The global market does not understand the India risk as well as we do, and therefore, we have the arbitrage facility of making better margin on the same set of Indian firms than what we would have made by giving rupee loans.
After all, despite the economic advantage to firms that employed child labor, it was in the social interest, as a national policy, to abolish it - removing that advantage for all firms.
In a moment of stress, funding may go to systemically-important firms, which could pull funding away from firms not making the cut.
Let the tech firms and consulting firms build your skills, but be sure to ask yourself, 'Am I maximizing my impact?' 'Am I living up to my values?'
For decades, the pace of technological change in manufacturing has outstripped that in the economy as a whole. And, so, firms - manufacturing firms - have found it easier to continue producing by - with - reducing their workforces.
The idea that big buyside firms are going to come in and trade mano-a-mano with high-frequency trading firms shows a lack of knowledge of the business.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!