Want Nespresso, BYO Coffee Pods

We got new coffee machines in the office last week. I quickly skimmed through the announcement, only picking up that we had new coffee machines and that we had to bring our own pods. I found it a bit ridiculous. Why were they investing on a new machine and scrimping on the beans? It seemed like the term 'cutting corners' was getting a new meaning altogether. Having never really used the old machine (I hate powdered milk), I decided it was not my place to comment. Someone out there must have thought we deserved something better and got half of what (s)he deserved.

The new machine arrived on the floor below ours and there was a bit of a hula-hoop that I did not quite get. I went back to read the email. If everyone was excited about a machine when they had to bring their own beans, there has got to be something I missed. It was a Nespresso machine! Whoever convinced the powers-that-be surely deserves a medal. 

So, we all went to check it out. There was a little poster that explained how to make your first coffee. Cute. There was a big glass bowl next to the machine for the used pods. The machine is a pretty little thing that makes one coffee per pod (or capsule, as the website calls it). The milk holding containers barely make a coffee or two. You can make all the usual (and more) varieties of coffee with the press of a button. If you are one of those who never tires from too many options, there are 16 flavours or Grands Crus to choose from. At 60c a capsule, i.e. a cuppa, it is cheaper than the $3.50 - $5 coffees most people were getting from the cafes every morning. 

Well, that explained the excitement of the new coffee machine. I watched the grand opening of their store at the mall a few weeks ago and boy, was it flash! It is the new big thing in the coffee world. 

Suddenly something strange is happening all around me. In the last 1 week, I have had at least 3 emails from individuals selling coffee capsules! Everyone was selling Nespresso capsules at a dollar a piece, making a 40% profit. I am speechless. I could not help but wonder if there were more people selling that coffee than drinking it. Why would I pay a dollar for one capsule when I could get a box of 10 for 6? Maybe, they were trying to sell single capsules to coffee newbies or those that wanted to just 'give it a shot'? It is quite the win-win situation, isn't it? When a colleague mentioned that in the team meeting on the first day, I marveled at his ability to turn any situation into a profitable business. Obviously, he is not alone. While he did not actually implement the idea, the others have definitely turned it into a business.

The competition has been worth following. The first email that went out merely mentioned coffee pods being sold for $1, with 4 different Grand Crus being available. Then somebody sent out an email saying they were selling all 16 Grand Crus for the same price. Before long, another email followed, offering coffee-flavoured choccies at 60c each. Whose turn is it next? I wondered for a second if I sold coffee pods for 90c, I would make a profit. Maybe not. People would rather pay a dollar than dig out small change. Who thinks about the extra 40c they have to pay when it is only a dollar? That seems to be the logic used here. 

I do not know if the coffee-pod/capsule businesses are thriving. I have no clue who is leading the competition. What I do realize that all those researches on employee incentives that insist that more money does not mean happiness are bang on the money (no pun intended). Most people would rather overpay  for good coffee than drink the free watery liquid that passes off for coffee. And everyone hates loose change.

I've been putting off trying one myself. Over the next few days, I must give each of the flavours a try. After all, it's a short walk from my desk and I am saving $2 for every dollar I spend on the expensive capsules. With that, I find myself sucked into the abysmal trap of wanting all the fancy things that the Joneses are drinking. Oh well, it is only coffee. I am only going to try it once. Ok, sixteen times. At least. 

Where Are Your Balls, News Guy?

Tehelka.com and Headlines Today, in a sting operation, 'exposed' Muthalik. For the last couple of days, HT has been running episodes of 'Rent A Riot' and trying to create a sensation, in vain. Not one other media channel has lapped up the story, here is not created enough hype over the story and definitely no action is being taken against Muthalik, who can apparently stir up a riot for a price (in the video, he was seen demanding 60 lakh rupees to start riots).

What went wrong? Why are HT licking their wounds while no one else will talk about it? No doubt the Muthalik story could have been made to be a big deal. It was breaking news when the Mangalore incident happened (they harassed girls in the name of moral policing) and then the Valentine's day moral policing again. 

In a bid to keep the story to themselves and come across looking fabulous, HT ran a story with the video a couple of days ago. They had discussions on what should be done with Muthalik and asked if he should not be arrested? That was their first mistake. While what they have done is a neat way to trap the bugger, they should have shared clips of the video with other media channels before they did their first run. They could have come out with the story first, the others would still need time to whip up a presentation. They would have made some money out of it (possibly, I am not sure how it works). To have not shared and to expect that the rest of the world will pick up from their accounts, was foolishness. Why would any other news channel want to run a news report that HT has played and replayed enough times to make it stale for them by the next day? 

Their second mistake was to refuse responsibility. This is something I feel strongly about. Why do they expect that recording an expose on video and playing it on TV is enough to warrant action? One of their reporters on TV, Shoma, repeatedly said it was their job to simply bring the reality out in the open but the responsibility of civic institutions like the police department to take action. Even as an ex-DIG argued that the police will be unable to take action without a complaint. While I think there is something wrong if the police know of a wrong-doing but cannot take action unless there is a complainant, I cannot see why HT or Tehelka do not want to take complete responsibility for their operation? Why are they refusing to file an FIR or even a PIL?

On Day 2 of HT's 'Rent A Riot', they spoke to the public and tried to generate a voice that said to to the police department, "Arrest Muthalik!" A cheap tactic to escape having to register a complaint themselves, I think. They have been bold enough to blow his cover. Why do they want to hide now? Agreed there is a lot of red tape to cut through and a shitload of garbage to face but if they started something, they must finish it. Why do they keep asking on TV whether Muthalik must be arrested? We all know he should be locked up to never see the light of day again but repeating the question is not going to make the creaky wheels of the government departments moving. Especially when their viewership is limited and they have no support from the rest of the media world. The public will wait for more noise before they join the bandwagon. The common masses are a lethargic group, aren't we? Isn't that why we sit around and watch when shit happens all around us? 

If they ran the expose in public interest, as a conscientious organization, then they must take complete responsibility and see through to the end of the matter. It appears that Tehelka performed their sting operation, as it is what they do, and HT chipped in with a promise publicity but now do not have the guts to brave politics and get their hands and feet dirty. Everybody wants to tape wrong-doings on video (and God knows there is enough of it in our country) and run it on their news channel, in order to get an edge over the others. The question is, how far are they willing to really clean up the mess? 

Through all this noise, Muthalik has been able to sleep peacefully. All that came of the video (so far) was that he had to give an interview on TV (Headlines Today) where he refuted their claims and called the journalists shameless. Nothing has changed in his life, as a result of the news. As Director General of Police, Mr. Ajai Singh, said there are a number of cases pending against him and this will be looked into as part of those. In short, the grand expose by Tehelka and HT just relegated to the dark corners of an already dust-gathering pandora's box of Mr. Muthalik.

A Dream Job

When I first joined the IT world, I told myself, I'd work for a few years (initially it was 5, then it became 10) and retire. I was not sure what I wanted to do if I retired but I wanted to do something else. This was even before I started doing something!

As years of code-development, software-design and testing grew on me, I decided that there was no way I could quit. I would go crazy if I had to spend a day not doing what I was doing. I can't say I have always had the world's best work environment but I have always loved my work. Almost always. I would joke on my days of frustration and tension that I "wanted to quit my job and become a housewife" as if that was a terrible punishment for me.

Then came the phase when I wanted to take a career break. I wanted to break from doing what I loved doing and do something else I loved doing. In a better environment, hopefully. When people around me heard this, some just shook their head in hopelessness, some were alarmed, some agreed it sounded good (deep inside, I bet they were praying I'll change my mind). In short, it was not something that excited anyone as much as it excited me. Slowly, it appeared that  would change my mind too and decide to keep my job, my money and the financial independence that came with it. That's when I met an old friend of mine who tells me she has done exactly that! Quit the Corporate World. Not her job, but the industry itself. A pang of envy struck me. I started getting excited about the concept of career break again...

Then came this incredible job offer. Advice, threats, push, shove, yell, explain and numerous discussions later, I decided that I would take it. When we were in college, everyone had a "dream job" in mind. I never did. I was so under-confident that my dream job was really sitting behind the reception counter of some organization and reading a book everyday, while attending to customers. It wasn't a dream I enjoyed but I told myself that some job was better than no job. Once I got a job in IT, I told myself that my dream job was probably something at Infosys but a couple of failed, intimidating interviews, long, hungry waits and days wasted in stress later, I now remember Infy as a place I do not want to interview with anymore.

As a kid in school, I used to have a distant dream of travelling to various parts of the world. Australia topped the list, then came Europe, New York and so on. Rome was another one of my favourites. Of course, after the first 3 or 4, the rest were just names I'd heard from various people or read in books.

So, there came this incredible job offer. If I knew what I wanted to do in my career and I had a dream job, some of it might have been like this. Of course, a real dream offer would have been to be able to work with the people I love working with so much. Ah, how much I regret not being able to join them! Worse, when I hear from my friends who have the opportunity to try are wavering. Of course, they have a different set of priorities. 

Back to my new job. I am usually one of those people who do not care to keep such things a secret. Too many burnt fingers, too many stab-wounds in my back and this time, I am finding it hard to share. As someone said me yesterday, eventually I will and then it won't matter. In the meanwhile, while the wait is on for some, some others are celebrating with me...

Breaking News

There were days when TV channels had the 'news hour' set aside every morning and evening, to update us with what was going on in the world around us. The local channels had a half-hour local news with headlines from the rest of the world. At a specified time, the news would go on for an hour, with more detailed national and/or world news. News-Readers (as they were called back then) dressed in a saree or suit and started off with a 'Namaskar'. The actual news session was preceeded by a few seconds of 'start-up' mostly consisting of music in the background, while the ying-yang-like symbol of 'The News' bounced and somersaulted across the screen.

Back in those days, when one heard "Breaking News", it usually meant that there was something so urgent and important that it had to be announced right away. It could not wait for the designated 'news hour'. It was news that would break through the ceiling, come crashing down over every other news or program on television. It had to be BIG and would most likely be bad too.

When the 9/11 happened, I remember being glued to the TV all day, watching the BREAKING NEWS. When my uncle called me from a village in Kerala, where there was no TV, I remember telling him there was BREAKING NEWS! We had been on phone for an hour, while I gave him a running commentary from the scenes that were continuously appearing on TV, almost ad-lib-ing the news reader.

Cut to present. We have 24-hr news channels. There's one in every local language and atleast 3 English news channels. No surprise, therefore, that there is cut-throat competition. How different can they get? The big news are big news and they can only relay what is happening in the real world. Yet, if one has to be ahead in the competition, something different needs to be done.

So, they sensationalize news - big and urgent ones, small and unimportant ones, sometimes even non-descript ones. As a result, every news has become "Breaking News". Switch on the TV at any time of the day and these channels have news scrolling at the bottom, flashing at the bottom, journalists at the scene & inside the studio speaking fast with excitement in their voice. When there isn't enough news to carry on for the entire day, they have repeats. If you missed a piece of news in the last hour, do not worry. Keep watching, it'll show up again in the next few minutes. 

As if that weren't enough, in a desperate bid to be different, they even call the 'Breaking News' by different names. Flash News, Big News, Just In, What Is In The News, etc.

Unfortunately, when there is a freak event, they have nothing else to call it. That goes under the same name - depending on the channel, it could be one or more of the above. There is nothing to differentiate the actual 'Big News' from the trivia like Kathryn Bigelow winning 6 Oscars against her ex-husband James Cameron who won only 3. The 'Just In' news need not necessarily be "just in" - this afternoon, the same news-line scrolled for about 30 minutes and was called 'Just In'.

As fillers, they also have panels of famous people discussing the issue in question, most of the time drawing no conclusions in the end. No surprise there. It is merely a bunch of people voicing their opinion. The law-makers and keepers are busy either fighting fires or hiding. The only people watching are more of the ones who can do nothing except to listen to others and speculate within their own limitations.

One particular news channel (and journalist) I used to admire greatly has now turned into more of a commercial venture. Watching this news channel is like watching a movie channel. From times when I believed everything that was on the news, I've come to realize that I cannot watch the news without taking in the updates with a pinch of salt (actually, a handful of salt).