Home Blog Page 8322

Stricter Monetary Policy for price control

0
RBI-indianbureaucracy
RBI-indianbureaucracy

The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) is vested with the responsibility of conducting monetary policy with the primary objective of maintaining price stability while keeping in mind the objective of growth. The Agreement on Monetary Policy Framework between the Government and the Reserve Bank of India dated February 20, 2015 defines the price stability objective explicitly in terms of the target for inflation – as measured by the consumer price index-combined (CPI-C) – in the near to medium-term.

The framework aims at setting the policy (repo) rate based on a forward looking assessment of inflation, growth and other macroeconomic risks, and modulation of liquidity conditions to anchor money market rates at or around the repo rate. In the Second Bi-Monthly Monetary Policy statement 2016-17 issued on June 7, 2016, RBI stated that the stance of the monetary policy remains accommodative and any further scope for policy action would depend on macroeconomic and financial developments.

Needlessly vilifying Indian business says Sidharth Birla

0
FICCI
FICCI_logo_indianbureaucracy
The question of non-performing bank loans and mounting pressure on borrowers (to flog assets or otherwise repay) is a well-debated topic. A major foreign publication wrote about it this week. Somehow I found its unflattering vocabulary — commenting on Indian promoters as a class — upsetting; it is, of course, easier to pontificate than look nearer home, where greed and governance issues of professionals yielded much grief to global systems and citizens.
Promoters are entrepreneurs. Collective stigmatisation debates hurt commerce irrationally. Such injury may persist unless the larger ecosystem is confident of principled intent and entrepreneurs will be unfairly attacked, and impeded, as a category.
Basically, in good faith
 
In my view, all entrepreneurs undertake substantial financial, regulatory and reputation risks in good faith. Contrary to popular opinion, and debates designed to win public fancy, entrepreneurial plans do not cluster around self-enrichment at the cost of others; their basic aim is to earn risk-weighted returns on invested capital (be it owned, raised or borrowed).
Yet, it is true that a small sub-set of Indian business generated the unfortunate reputation. Rather than agonise silently, in its own larger interest business must keep asserting that alleged anomalies of any entrepreneur must be quickly proven and penalised. Innuendo is uncalled for.
In this entire backdrop it is vital to reflect that entrepreneurs (old and new) may simply reduce investing if they feel that business difficulty or failure has the potential to classify them as delinquent, or threaten personal ruin. If legitimate risk-taking by established and/or budding entrepreneurs is subdued, it is not in the nation’s interest. We need to multiply the enterprising spirit drastically.
Borrowers and lenders
A corporate promise to pay its debts cannot occur in a moral vacuum. Individuals executing such a corporate decision in a contract are free from personal liability (unless they otherwise assume it). Nevertheless, the entrepreneur (or controlling entity behind corporate actions) assigning moral accountability to the corporate borrower is in harmony with our values, increases social trust, and safeguards continued availability of lend able funds.
In a pivotal sense the borrower is the custodian of the lender’s funds and therefore has an ethical duty to avoid conduct significantly increasing risks of non-repayment. There are borrowers who repay obligations on time; there are those who face problems and need support to their intent to repay, and those who wilfully renege on contracts. They all merit being treated correspondingly. Lenders have a first task of sound due-diligence and commercial judgement; secondly, a genuine business difficulty does not render a good judgement bad and therefore merits accommodation. Thirdly, the lender must be alert and rigorous on enforcement of its contractual rights in absence of good faith on borrower’s end; delay is fatal and the system cannot lay the blame elsewhere.
Shareholders essentially provide risk capital (whose value can drop to zero) to an enterprise. A lender’s motivation in providing funds and his rights in relation thereof are entirely different.
It is crucial that risks inherent to shareholders (as a whole) and lenders get reflected equitably in real-world outcomes (that is, equity has to take the hardest knock). Once there is fairer allocation of pain, the systemic view on the NPA situation will become more balanced.
Even the best of plans are subject to economic risk or failure. While entrepreneurs must exercise sound stewardship of stakeholder funds, favourable outcomes cannot be taken for granted.
Under intense scrutiny it is easy to overlook that corporate structures exist for genuine purposes. Time-tested principles of limited liability cannot be breached without proper cause. In my view a revisit is required on the model of personal guarantee as collateral for loans, which took root in an era of wobbly governance and centralised entrepreneur control.
Drastic change
The regulatory system has brought a sea change to governance where such central control cannot exist. Therefore extra-constitutional measures such as personal guarantees lose sanctity, only to provide a false sense of comfort to lenders, which in turn often delays contractual action. Much heartburn on both sides has taken place based on guarantees. The potential of confronting liquidation under recent insolvency laws is a deterrent far beyond brittle collateral, and under present governance norms is the correct pillar to rely on.
Much investment has been made across sectors in the past 6-10 years in the hope of strong economic growth. After the global stress and slowdown, markets went south, and businesses lost pricing power (despite a fall in commodity prices). Cash flows would not sustain debt service (especially at high interest rates). Still, banks did attempt to sincerely handhold for a while. But some debt is now unsustainable, particularly in infrastructure, cyclical businesses or in businesses battered by foreign competition (mainly China). So, stresses of non-performing loans are not new; the system’s pain arose on recognition of this predicament in banks’ own accounts. While such theory is logical, the sagacity of comprehensive and forcible cleaning up of legacy pain within a few quarters must be open to debate. One hoped that as problems had persisted for long the regulator would have shaped solutions earlier.
It is useful to recall that in some contracts enforcement was restrained by judicial verdicts; it does no good to either lament this or blame entrepreneurs. It also does not help if the state’s might and plethora of laws/punishments are threatened in contract enforcement complications.
Wait and watch
An entrepreneur will, in good faith, frequently advocate waiting for healthier times to resolve debt problems rather than breaking up or selling a business. A banker convinced of the bonafides of an entrepreneur will try to support for the time he objectively can.
Distress sales have the potential to destroy value and undeservedly deprive stakeholders, more so in a generally guarded investment atmosphere. Let’s remember that assets put on sale now can be a decade or more old. Whether asset sale or management changes will be a panacea, or merely a deferment of problems, is a moot question.
The system frequently generates 3-letter attempts to solutions — CDR, SDR, S4A — but both lender and borrower ends seem to be skirting reality so far. Following the rhetoric now whipped up (media, public, judiciary, government) I feel appropriate or wholly rational decisions on resolution are still some time away. However I am sure that all responsible quarters hold the view that entrepreneurs remain honest as a class, and continue to support and abide by equitable policies.

24 qualify for World Skills International Competition

0
FICCI
FICCI_logo_indianbureaucracy
The first edition of the India Skills Competition 2016 — the first of its kind in the country — culminated on Sunday with 24 winners from different States qualifying for selection at the World Skills International Competition in Abu Dhabi next year.
The competition marked the first anniversary of the ‘Skill India’ initiative by the Ministry of Skill Development and Entrepreneurship (MSDE) and witnessed the participants in the 18-22 years’ age group competing across 24 skill categories. The winners were awarded a sum of Rs1 lakh each with the first and second runners-up bagging Rs 75,000 and Rs 25,000 respectively.
Rajiv Pratap Rudy, Minister of State for Skill Development and Entrepreneurship (MSDE), who gave away the prizes, said, “I am certain, Team India will yet again prove its mettle on the global skills map at WorldSkills Abu Dhabi 2017.”
At the last event organised at Sao Paolo, Brazil, in August 2015, a team of 29 candidates (all below 23 years of age) from India participated in 27 skills and won 8 medallions of excellence.
Rudy pointed out that in the past 15 days, MSDE has got cabinet approvals on 22,000 crore worth of outlay for programmes like Apprenticeship Protsahan Yojana and PMKVY 2, to be implemented over the next few years. There has been additional support through World Bank Projects as well, he added.
Day one of the three-day Skill India anniversary celebrations had seen Rudy announcing the launch of five major initiatives Pradhan Mantri Kaushal Vikas Yojana -2, India International Skill Centres, IndiaSkills Online and a Labour Management Information System (LMIS) at Vigyan Bhawan, where the event was inaugurated by President Pranab Mukherjee.
“In order to select the best talent to represent India at India Skills, MSDE and NSDC completed more than 80 regional competitions in 24 skills/trades including hair stylist, welding, car painting, auto body repair, graphic designing, robotics to name a few,” a statement issued by MSDE maintained adding close to 4820 candidates registered to participate in the competition this year.
The statement said around 40 organisations like Mahindra, Tata, Maruti, Toyota, CII, FICCI, NASSCOM, CREDAI, NID, NIFT came together to make IndiaSkills a success (including consortium partners).

HUDCO and MoHUPA sign MoU

0
Hudco Mou_indianbureaucracy
Hudco Mou_indianbureaucracy

The Memorandum of Understanding for the year 2016-17 was signed between Housing and Urban Development Corporation Limited (HUDCO) and Ministry of Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation (MoHUPA) with Dr. Nandita Chatterjee, Secretary (MoHUPA) and Dr. M. Ravi Kanth, Chairman and Managing Director (HUDCO) in the presence of senior officials of MoHUPA and HUDCO.

For the year 2015-16 HUDCO registered ‘Excellent’ level of performance in all MoU parameters.

IndianBureaucracy.com wishes HUDCO the very best.

Hukmdev urges farmers to opt Modern Farming Techniques

0
FICCI
FICCI_logo_indianbureaucracy
In a bid to avert crop failure and enhance fertility of soil, BJP lawmaker Hukmdev Narayan Yadav urged the farmers to adopt the modern farming techniques, including agro-chemicals.
Highlighting the plight of farmers, Mr Yadav who is also Chairman, Standing Committee of Parliament on Agriculture told reporters, “Farmers are dying because of harmful pesticides and fertilizers used in farming that leads to crop failure and infertility of soil and to avoid such losses, modern technology should be used in farming such as agrochemicals.” “There’s an urgent need for concerted efforts to forge research and development led strategy to save the loss of crops due to pests, weeds and diseases,” the BJP leader said at a FICCI event, ‘6th national conference on Agrochemicals’. Mr Yadav also released a Knowledge Paper on the theme of the conference, prepared by FICCI in association with the Tata Strategic Management Group.

Steps to tackle Banned Pesticides

0
Banned Pesticides_indianbureaucracy
Banned Pesticides_indianbureaucracy

Minister of State for Agriculture and Farmers Welfare, Shri Sudarshan Bhagat has conveyed that the Government registers pesticides after a detailed evaluation of efficacy of the product and safety to human, animal and environmental health. Technical reviews are carried out from time to time to assess the safety of pesticides. An expert committee was constituted under Dr. Anupam Verma, Former Professor, Indian Agriculture Research Institute (IARI), to carry out technical review of 66 pesticides that are banned, restricted, withdrawn in one or more countries but continued to be registered in India. The Expert Committee, inter alia, recommended 13 pesticides to be banned, 27 pesticides to be reviewed in 2018 after completion of certain technical studies and 6 pesticides to be phased out by 2020.  The Committee further recommended continuation of ban on 1 pesticide and did not offer any assessment of a pesticide which is currently sub judice. The Verma Committte recommended continued use of 18 pesticides which are given below in table.

Further, the Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare is implementing a program for “Monitoring of Pesticide Residues at National Level” (MPRNL) under which samples of agriculture commodities are collected and analyzed for the presence of pesticide residues. In the previous year , 2.9 % of all samples of commodities contained pesticide residues above the Maximum Residues Limits (MRLs) fixed by the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India.  No residues of banned pesticides have been detected in commodities monitored under this program.

Central Integrated Pest Management Centres (CIPMCs) under the Department of Agriculture, Cooperation and Farmers Welfare conduct Farmers Field Schools to sensitize farmers regarding safe and judicious use of pesticides, use of bio-pesticides etc. A ‘Grow Safe Food’ campaign has also been initiated carrying the message of safe and judicious use of pesticides to farmers and other stakeholders.  Package of practices for control of pests and diseases in 79 crops have been revised to include techniques to reduce dependence on chemical pesticides and encourage use of bio-pesticides and other alternative plant protection measures. Under Soil Health Management Scheme, financial assistance is provided to States for imparting training and demonstration to farmers on balanced use of fertilizers.

Further, the Government is encouraging establishment of Bio-fertilizer units by providing financial assistance to State Government up to a maximum limit of Rs 160.00 lakh per unit. Financial assistance is also provided to farmers/Individual/Private agencies @ 25% of total financial outlay or Rs. 40 lakh, whichever is less under Capital Investment Subsidy Scheme (CISS) through National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development.

 

RECOMMENDATION OF THE EXPERT COMMITTEE WITH RESPECT TO 66 PESTICIDES

 

 

 

S.No. Category No. of Pesticides Name of the Pesticides
1. I– to be continued 18 Aluminium phosphide, Bifenthrin, Carbosulfan, Chlorfenapyr, Chlorothalonil, Dazomet, Diflubenzuron, Ethofenprox, Fenpropathrin, Iprodione, Kasugamycin, Mepiquat chloride, Metaldehyde, Paraquat dichloride, Pretilachlor, Propargite, Propineb and Zinc phosphide
2. II– to be reviewed again in 2018, after completion of the recommended studies 27 Acephate, Atrazine, Benfuracarb, Butachlor, Captan,  Carbendazim, Carbofuran, Chlorpyriphos, Deltamethrin, Dicofol, Dimethoate, Dinocap,  Diuron, 2,4-D, Malathion, Mancozeb, Methomyl, Monocrotophos, Oxyfluorfen, Pendimethalin, Quinalphos, Sulfosulfuron, Thiodicarb, Thiophanate methyl, Thiram, Zineb, Ziram
3. III– to be phased out  by 2020 6 Alachlor, Dichlorvos, Phorate, Phosphamidon, Triazophos, Trichlorfon
4. IV– ban to be continued 1 Fenitrothion
5. V– to be banned 13 Benomyl, Carbaryl, DDT, Diazinon, Fenarimol, Fenthion, Linuron, MEMC, Methyl Parathion, Sodium Cyanide, Thiometon, Tridemorph, Trifluralin
6. VI– not reviewed as it is sub-judice 1 Endosulfan

Biochemists feed ‘poison pill’ to deadly Virus

0
Biochemists_indianbureaucracy
Biochemists_indianbureaucracy

Summary:It has a funny name — coxsackie virus — but there’s nothing funny about how this tiny germ and its close relatives sicken their hosts. Researchers have designed a genetic modification to one type of coxsackie virus that strips its ability to replicate, mutate and cause illness. They hope their work could lead to a vaccine for this and other viruses like it.

It has a funny name — coxsackievirus — but there’s nothing funny about how this tiny germ and its close relatives sicken their hosts.

Colorado State University researchers led by Olve Peersen, a professor in the Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, have designed a genetic modification to one type of coxsackie virus that strips its ability to replicate, mutate and cause illness. They hope their work could lead to a vaccine for this and other viruses like it.

The results are published in The Journal of Biological Chemistry, and co-authored with Marco Vignuzzi at Paris’ Institut Pasteur. Peersen’s group seeks to understand the complex biochemical replication machinery of positive-sense single-stranded RNA viruses, a group that includes coxsackie virus, poliovirus, dengue and Zika.

For their most recent work, the team focused on the coxsackie virus B3, which causes heart disease. (It is closely related to coxsackie A viruses, which cause hand, foot and mouth disease in children.)

Coxsackie viruses have relatively small genomes made of single-stranded RNA. The viral RNA encodes for about a dozen proteins, one of which is the enzyme responsible for making new copies of the virus.

In earlier work published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Peersen and co-authors had discovered the exact chemical steps by which the RNA-dependent RNA polymerise copies the virus genome. During this process, the polymerise makes three or four random mistakes that allow the virus to continually evolve and survive.

The researchers have built upon this breakthrough to design a way to “outsmart Mother Nature,” Peersen said, by re-engineering one key part of the polymerise enzyme so the virus can’t grow very rapidly in a cell. Their technology could lead to what’s called a live-attenuated vaccine. Such vaccines contain a weakened version of the virus, purposely injected to trigger the production of antibodies and create immunity rather than cause disease.

The classic live-attenuated vaccine is for polio virus, invented by Jonas Salk in the mid 20th century. But the process isn’t foolproof. The simple RNA genome lets viruses make millions of copies within days, and many of those copies contain “mistakes,” or mutations, that can slightly alter the vaccine virus and restore its ability to cause disease. That’s one reason why RNA viruses are hard to eradicate and why some people get vaccine-induced sickness.

To minimise the chances of a vaccine-induced infection, the researchers changed one specific amino acid in the RNA polymerise (a phenylalanine) to another amino acid (a tryptophan).

First, they showed that the tryptophan caused the polymerise to make fewer mutations, and this in turn reduced its ability to replicate and cause disease. Second, even if the virus tries to mutate the change away, then it can no longer replicate, so the virus self-destructs — which is why the researchers call their modification a “genetic poison pill.”

The demonstration of this poison pill in the coxsackievirus B3 could theoretically translate to other positive-sense RNA viruses, including those linked to asthma and to foot-and-mouth disease that is a major animal health concern in Europe and South America.

This past spring, Peersen received a new National Institutes of Health grant to continue testing the genetic modification in live animals, in partnership with researchers at the University of Wisconsin.

“We think it’s going to work, but we have to show that it will,” Peersen said. “Trying to outsmart Mother Nature is pretty daunting, especially in these viruses. There are ways that things happen you never anticipate, and the virus finds a way to survive.”

More:Science

ONGC improves its brand valuation – 7th in India

0
ONGC
ONGC

ONGC has strengthened its brand position, climbing from 10th position last year to 7th this time. According to a recent study conducted by consultant Brand Finance, ONGC ($3.4 billion) has secured the 7th rank among top 10 most valued brands of India.

The improvement in the oil major’s brand index comes with a bigger cheer this time. There has been an aggressive competition for places in top 100 brands. Emerging brands in e-commerce, telecommunications and technology and banking services are particularly competitive. Considering the turbulent world oil scenario, India’s national oil company (ONGC) has all the reason to be happy at this latest brand scorecard.

Among the public sector turf, ONGC settles at the 3rd position among Indian top public enterprises of the country, following two retail-space peers.

Brand Finance values brands on several factors. Apart from financial metrics, the future prospects are also evaluated in a competitive context to assign brand strength indices. “Reputation is a measure of the effectiveness of transmitted belief about attitudes showcasing respect” says the Chief Spokesperson of India’s Most Reputed Brands.

Street Lighting National Programme

0
The Street Lighting National Programme_indianbureaucracy
The Street Lighting National Programme_indianbureaucracy

The Street Lighting National Programme(SLNP), being implemented by Energy Efficiency Services Limited (EESL), a joint venture company of four Power Sector PSUs, envisages replacement of conventional street lights with LED lights by March, 2019. EESL is playing an important role as a catalyst in replacing these streetlights, while several other suppliers are also carrying out the same in cities/states.

The target for 2015-16 was to launch the programme in 100 Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) whereas EESL has already launched the programme in 112 ULBs. The State/UT- wise details of LED street lights installed by EESL are given below:

S. No State LED Street Lights Installed by EESL
1 Andhra Pradesh 3,93,500
2 Delhi (Only South Delhi Municipal Corporation area) 1,88,973
3 Kerala (Only Alleppey District) 5,676
4 Rajasthan 3,74,914
5 Tripura (only Agartala city ) 34,200
6 UP (Aligarh & Varanasi Cities ) 17,290
7 Assam 3,535
8 Telangana 971 (pilot project)
9 Pondicherry 300 (pilot project)
10 Maharashtra 659 (pilot project)
11 Bihar 150 (pilot project)
  Total 10,20, 168

Stock of Coal with Power Utilities

0
Coal Mines
Coal Mines

As on 28th April, 2016, the coal stock position reported by the power utilities was 35.92 Million Tonnes(MT) as against 29.76 MT as on 30th April, 2015.

The coal stock, as on 31st March, 2016, was the highest in last four years. The details of coal stock position in the thermal power plants are as under:

S. No. Coal Stock as on Coal Stock (MT)
1 31.03.2013 18.98
2 31.03.2014 20.29
3 31.03.2015 26.10
4 31.03.2016 38.87

As the actual coal stock position was 31.17 MT, which is sufficient to operate the plants for 23 days as against the normative coal stock position of 28.45 MT to operate the plants for 21 days. Further, these power plants receive coal on daily basis and consume it based on their daily requirement in line with the generation schedule given to the plants. Hence, the coal stock is not static and is not stored for a long time.

Synchronisation of financial accounting year with Calendar Year

0
ministry finance
ministry finance

Government has constituted a Committee to examine the desirability and feasibility of having a new financial year and give its recommendations by 31st December, 2016.

The terms of reference (ToR) of the Committee are as under: Examine the merits and demerits of various dates for the commencement of the financial year including the existing date, taking into account, inter-alia, the following:

(i) The genesis of the current financial year and the studies made in the past on the desirability of change in financial year;

(ii) The suitability of the financial year from the point of view of –

a. correct estimation of receipts and expenditure of Central and State Governments;
b. the effect of the different agricultural crop periods;
c. the relationship of financial year to the working season;
d. impact on businesses;
e. taxation systems and procedures;
f. statistics and data collection;
g. the convenience of the legislatures for transacting budget work; and  other relevant matters.
The Committee may, after due examination of all relevant factors, recommend the date of commencement of the financial year which in its view is the most suitable for the country.
In case a change in the financial year is recommended, the Committee may also work out the modalities for effecting the change. This would inter-alia include:

(i) appropriate timing of change;
(ii) the determination of a transitional period;
(iii) the change in tax laws during the transitional period;
(iv) the amendments that may be required in various statutes; and
(v) changes in the coverage of the recommendations of the Finance Commission.

The Committee may interact with experts, institutions, Government Departments and others as deemed necessary.The Committee is expected to soon convene its first meeting.

Startups in India: How incubators can help !

0
FICCI
FICCI_logo_indianbureaucracy
With the rise in the number of startups and growing interest in entrepreneurship and the need to recognise good incubators, the Centre has certified 20 private organisations as incubators under the Startup India Action Plan. The Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce & Industry (FICCI), the Associated Chambers of Commerce & Industry of India (Assocham), Indian Software Product Industry Round Table (iSPIRT), National Association of Software and Service Companies (Nasscom), Indian Electrical & Electronics Manufacturers’ Association (IEEMA) and Indian Angel Network and All India Biotech Association (AIBA) are among them.
Young startup founders are not that experienced. Their businesses too demand a certain depth of expertise in areas like technology, marketing and creating value proposition. Here, incubators can assist them in their initial phase of development by providing these various services. In India, it is estimated that there are about 200 startup incubators of which, about 50% are set up in non-metro cities—outside NCR, Bengaluru and Mumbai. According to the industry body Nasscom, there is a 40% year-on-year growth in the number of incubators.
Commenting on the development, Rajat Tandon, vice-president at Nasscom said, “This (government recognising 20 incubators) is the first step towards certification process. We would be assessing and determining the nature of the startup and defining the innovation aspects. Like in Israel, Singapore and other countries, with the government support the startups can benefit in many ways with such initiatives. It will be a learn as you grow approach for us too.” As of last week, the government has certified about 160 companies as startups, including Phoenix Robotix, Snapchai Productions, Cheetah Logistics, among others, giving them the tax benefits.
Explaining the need for more incubators in India, Apoorv Ranjan Sharma, co-founder and president of Venture Catalysts said, “In the past, we have witnessed many funded startups shutting down shop due to lack of guidance, business consulting and mentoring. Startups are having high mortality rate of around 75-80%. Hence, setting up a good incubation programme becomes very vital for helping the early stage startups, to reduce the chances of startup failures.”
Sharma, who holds a doctorate in incubation, says, “There are mere 200 incubation centres in India to cater to 4,500 odd startups. That is too less a number when compared to US, Singapore and China. To put India on the global innovation map, there is much needed push required to set up more technology business incubation centres to breed and nurture increasing number of startups. The public private partnership (PPP) model will be indeed a game changer.”
Beyond helping startups in building a sustainable business environment, startup incubators also share both tangible and intangible resources such as equipment, office space, services such as accounting, computing and legal services and provide the much needed help in raising seed funding, mentoring and training.
Last week, the Kerala government launched what it claimed as the world’s first online incubator —SV.Co—exclusively for college students to help them take up entrepreneurship. The programme, modelled on technology incubators in the Silicon Valley, US, offers both regular and virtual incubation with regular incubatees being situated at its physical campus while virtual incubates can use the address of Startup Village for business communications.
Big corporates are also setting up incubator programmes to help the emerging startup ecosystem. For instance, Tata Group launched T-Hub, online payment giant Paypal setup PayPal Incubator, tech giant Infosys, as part of the Infosys Innovation fund, launched Infosys Incubator in March last year.
Hemant Singh, co-founder and chief strategy officer at Houssup, an e-commerce platform for interior design incubated in Startup Oasis Rajasthan, said, “Starting a new business is similar to giving birth to a baby. As the baby is kept under parental super vision during the initial years, every startup needs a lot of guidance, support and positive energy during its formative months. Before reaching the incubator, Houssup was just a vague idea in the minds of founders. The incubator helped us to discover the immediate pain points of the customers which we could not have known before talking to so many people. Later, incubator also helped us making a business plan and how to pitch the startup to investors.”