This is default featured slide 1 title
Go to Blogger edit html and find these sentences.Now replace these sentences with your own descriptions.
This is default featured slide 2 title
Go to Blogger edit html and find these sentences.Now replace these sentences with your own descriptions.
This is default featured slide 3 title
Go to Blogger edit html and find these sentences.Now replace these sentences with your own descriptions.
This is default featured slide 4 title
Go to Blogger edit html and find these sentences.Now replace these sentences with your own descriptions.
This is default featured slide 5 title
Go to Blogger edit html and find these sentences.Now replace these sentences with your own descriptions.
Saturday 29 March 2014
Friday 28 March 2014
aReputation-Fixing search results through Online Reputation Management
A recent study conducted by a team of researchers surveyed over 300 executives, mostly C-suite and board directors, and discovered that reputation is considered the highest impact risk area to business strategy.
This finding cuts across most industry sectors and ranks above threats to their business model and the impact of economic trends and competition.
Businesses and brands are increasingly seeking the services of companies that specialise in tidying up search engine results. The effect of a terrible review, a critical blog, an unflattering link or rant from a disgruntled ex-employee sitting in one of the top 10 Google spots can be devastating for a business as click-through rates plummet. Obviously, some companies have the online reputation they deserve, but an unjustified, malicious or obsolete complaint may linger for years, blighting every new query.
In most industry sectors, reputation has risen from outside the top five strategic risk concerns to the top of the list. In the energy and resources sector, for example, reputation ranked outside top-10 on the list of strategic risks in 2010, though today, it irritably sits on the top spot.
Large corporations and high-networth individuals are constantly targets of disenfranchised employees and customers. Companies and industries with reputation problems are prone to incur the wrath of legislators, regulators, shareholders and the public. However, what is said is not always a true reflection of a company. Perceptions are not always based on fact, but on opinion, conjecture and rumours.
“The breadth and depth of today’s reputational challenge is a consequence not just of the speed, severity, and unexpectedness of recent economic events but also of underlying shifts in the reputation environment. Those changes include the growing importance of Web-based participatory media, the increasing significance of NGOs and the declining trust in advertising,” said David Miller, spokesperson for aReputation.co.uk, an online reputation management company based in UK but operating extensively in the Indian sub-continent.
According to Miller, “the challenge with any reputation management crisis is effectively targeting those that need to be informed while not generating undue attention from those that don’t. The best way to accomplish this is to create targeted press releases within the News Room that can be linked to from a variety of sources. ”
Speaking to Forbes, Michael Fertik, founder and CEO of Reputation.com, put it succinctly when he said some time back, “you can relinquish your influence over that reputation and your cultivation of it and just let fate take over, but it’s actively costing you something. Even if your online reputation is neutral, there’s an opportunity cost because you may be missing out on visibility or connections that could help you.”
USA-based Reputation.com and UK-based aReputation.co.uk are two of the frontline global online reputation management companies that cater to a wide menu of clients. Their relatively niche, yet substantial, presence in India is likely to inspire Indian ORM companies who have so far been unable to tap the potential of the reputational market. While Reputation.com has a strong presence amongst small and medium companies across all sectors, aReputation.co.uk is known to cater to large corporations and high-networth individuals.
Unfortunately, companies struggle to categorize, let alone quantify, reputational risk. Risk managers are divided on whether reputational risk is an issue in its own right or simply a consequence of other risks. Whatever position companies take on this, almost all executives agree that reputation is a hugely valuable asset.
Whether you are handling your reputational needs or outsourcing it, generating positive content is critical. In a world where more and more people are likely to judge you based on what appears online, there’s no excuse for feigning ignorance or imagining it doesn’t matter.It's much better to take a proactive approach to owning the real estate on Page 1, as opposed to clawing your way in, after bad news is attached to your brand.
This finding cuts across most industry sectors and ranks above threats to their business model and the impact of economic trends and competition.
Businesses and brands are increasingly seeking the services of companies that specialise in tidying up search engine results. The effect of a terrible review, a critical blog, an unflattering link or rant from a disgruntled ex-employee sitting in one of the top 10 Google spots can be devastating for a business as click-through rates plummet. Obviously, some companies have the online reputation they deserve, but an unjustified, malicious or obsolete complaint may linger for years, blighting every new query.
In most industry sectors, reputation has risen from outside the top five strategic risk concerns to the top of the list. In the energy and resources sector, for example, reputation ranked outside top-10 on the list of strategic risks in 2010, though today, it irritably sits on the top spot.
Large corporations and high-networth individuals are constantly targets of disenfranchised employees and customers. Companies and industries with reputation problems are prone to incur the wrath of legislators, regulators, shareholders and the public. However, what is said is not always a true reflection of a company. Perceptions are not always based on fact, but on opinion, conjecture and rumours.
“The breadth and depth of today’s reputational challenge is a consequence not just of the speed, severity, and unexpectedness of recent economic events but also of underlying shifts in the reputation environment. Those changes include the growing importance of Web-based participatory media, the increasing significance of NGOs and the declining trust in advertising,” said David Miller, spokesperson for aReputation.co.uk, an online reputation management company based in UK but operating extensively in the Indian sub-continent.
According to Miller, “the challenge with any reputation management crisis is effectively targeting those that need to be informed while not generating undue attention from those that don’t. The best way to accomplish this is to create targeted press releases within the News Room that can be linked to from a variety of sources. ”
Speaking to Forbes, Michael Fertik, founder and CEO of Reputation.com, put it succinctly when he said some time back, “you can relinquish your influence over that reputation and your cultivation of it and just let fate take over, but it’s actively costing you something. Even if your online reputation is neutral, there’s an opportunity cost because you may be missing out on visibility or connections that could help you.”
USA-based Reputation.com and UK-based aReputation.co.uk are two of the frontline global online reputation management companies that cater to a wide menu of clients. Their relatively niche, yet substantial, presence in India is likely to inspire Indian ORM companies who have so far been unable to tap the potential of the reputational market. While Reputation.com has a strong presence amongst small and medium companies across all sectors, aReputation.co.uk is known to cater to large corporations and high-networth individuals.
Unfortunately, companies struggle to categorize, let alone quantify, reputational risk. Risk managers are divided on whether reputational risk is an issue in its own right or simply a consequence of other risks. Whatever position companies take on this, almost all executives agree that reputation is a hugely valuable asset.
Whether you are handling your reputational needs or outsourcing it, generating positive content is critical. In a world where more and more people are likely to judge you based on what appears online, there’s no excuse for feigning ignorance or imagining it doesn’t matter.It's much better to take a proactive approach to owning the real estate on Page 1, as opposed to clawing your way in, after bad news is attached to your brand.
Tuesday 25 March 2014
SAHARA-SEBI STANDOFF
The Supreme Court is set to hear Sahara chief Subrata Roy’s petition on Tuesday. Sahara has raised some points over its legal battle with stock market regulator Sebi
Sahara says it has already paid 93% of the investors. Per investor average deposit is of 8,400. Hence, it can be repaid in cash as per law In last 17 months, Sebi repaid only 1 cr and is holding 5619 cr (including interest), argues Sahara .
No verification process has been started by Sebi in the last 17 months, disobeying court’s August 31, 2012 order, the company says
Sahara offered guarantee of the entire amount through bank trustee security; but when it was rejected, the company says it offered irrevocable bank guarantee.This has not been accepted .
At the heart of the matter lies Sebi’s demand, under directions of the Supreme Court, of an additional 20,000 crore along with 15% interest to investors .The company says Sebi has alleged that Sahara’s investors are fictitious and untraceable.
Sahara says that in 2008, it had repaid around 4 crore depositors under supervision of the Reserve Bank of India. The company says in response to Sebi’s assertion that many of the 20,000 letters to depositors didn’t elicit a response, Sahara had submitted affidavits and KYC
documents confirming their existence .
Sahara says it remains Sebi’s responsibility to ascertain the authenticity of its claim that it has repaid most of their money. If Sebi continues to insist that investors do not exist, then, by the same logic, the regulating body — born out of the specific mandate of protecting investors — also ceases to have any further stake or role to play in the case, the company said in a statement .
Sahara says a proper verification process has not been implemented to ascertain the existence of its depositors — despite conclusive evidence forwarded to Sebi
in the form of original documents, repayment vouchers and receipts. Sahara says as a market regulator, Sebi does not have the power to regulate unlisted entities. Sebi is looking to sell properties belonging to third parties which have been kept as security with Sebi, even when it has no authority to effect any such sale without the consent of the titleholders of the properties.
Sahara says it has already paid 93% of the investors. Per investor average deposit is of 8,400. Hence, it can be repaid in cash as per law In last 17 months, Sebi repaid only 1 cr and is holding 5619 cr (including interest), argues Sahara .
No verification process has been started by Sebi in the last 17 months, disobeying court’s August 31, 2012 order, the company says
Sahara offered guarantee of the entire amount through bank trustee security; but when it was rejected, the company says it offered irrevocable bank guarantee.This has not been accepted .
At the heart of the matter lies Sebi’s demand, under directions of the Supreme Court, of an additional 20,000 crore along with 15% interest to investors .The company says Sebi has alleged that Sahara’s investors are fictitious and untraceable.
Sahara says that in 2008, it had repaid around 4 crore depositors under supervision of the Reserve Bank of India. The company says in response to Sebi’s assertion that many of the 20,000 letters to depositors didn’t elicit a response, Sahara had submitted affidavits and KYC
documents confirming their existence .
Sahara says it remains Sebi’s responsibility to ascertain the authenticity of its claim that it has repaid most of their money. If Sebi continues to insist that investors do not exist, then, by the same logic, the regulating body — born out of the specific mandate of protecting investors — also ceases to have any further stake or role to play in the case, the company said in a statement .
Sahara says a proper verification process has not been implemented to ascertain the existence of its depositors — despite conclusive evidence forwarded to Sebi
in the form of original documents, repayment vouchers and receipts. Sahara says as a market regulator, Sebi does not have the power to regulate unlisted entities. Sebi is looking to sell properties belonging to third parties which have been kept as security with Sebi, even when it has no authority to effect any such sale without the consent of the titleholders of the properties.
Thursday 20 March 2014
Jindal moves poll panel against Zee News
Naveen Jindal, a Congress member of Parliament and chairman of Jindal Steel & Power Ltd, on Tuesday filed a complaint against Zee News to the Election Commission
(EC).
Jindal has stated violation of the code of conduct by Zee News,
Zee Business and Zee News UP Channels by broadcasting "false,
manipulated and misleading news items" about him since he was contesting
from the Kurukshetra constituency of Haryana.
The complaint lists down specific news items broadcast by the channels. "It is pertinent to mention here that Section 125 of Representation of the People Act 1951 under the heading 'Electoral Offences' specifically mentions "any person who in connection with an election under this Act promotes or attempts to promote on grounds of religion, race, caste, community or language, feelings of enmity or hatred, between different classes of the citizens of India shall be punishable, with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both"."
In his complaint, Jindal requested the EC to restrain Zee News and its associate channels from airing the "false, defamatory and misleading news items" against him and his company.
 |
| Naveen Jindal |
The complaint lists down specific news items broadcast by the channels. "It is pertinent to mention here that Section 125 of Representation of the People Act 1951 under the heading 'Electoral Offences' specifically mentions "any person who in connection with an election under this Act promotes or attempts to promote on grounds of religion, race, caste, community or language, feelings of enmity or hatred, between different classes of the citizens of India shall be punishable, with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both"."
In his complaint, Jindal requested the EC to restrain Zee News and its associate channels from airing the "false, defamatory and misleading news items" against him and his company.
The
Election Commission has asked the News Broadcasters Association (NBA)
to take action against Zee NewsBSE -0.80 % based on a complaint filed
by Congress member of Parliament and chairman of Jindal Steel and
PowerBSE 1.48 % (JSPL), Naveen Jindal.
In his complaint, Jindal who is contesting election from Kurukshetra Parliamentary Constituency of Haryana, had written to EC earlier this week stating that news channels of the Zee group were breaching the election code of conduct by "bro ..
In his complaint, Jindal who is contesting election from Kurukshetra Parliamentary Constituency of Haryana, had written to EC earlier this week stating that news channels of the Zee group were breaching the election code of conduct by "bro ..
Read more at:
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/32379094.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/32379094.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst
The
Election Commission has asked the News Broadcasters Association (NBA)
to take action against Zee NewsBSE -0.80 % based on a complaint filed
by Congress member of Parliament and chairman of Jindal Steel and
PowerBSE 1.48 % (JSPL), Naveen Jindal.
In his complaint, Jindal who is contesting election from Kurukshetra Parliamentary Constituency of Haryana, had written to EC earlier this week stating that news channels of the Zee group were breaching the election code of conduct by "bro ..
In his complaint, Jindal who is contesting election from Kurukshetra Parliamentary Constituency of Haryana, had written to EC earlier this week stating that news channels of the Zee group were breaching the election code of conduct by "bro ..
Read more at:
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/32379094.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/32379094.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst
The
Election Commission has asked the News Broadcasters Association (NBA)
to take action against Zee NewsBSE -0.80 % based on a complaint filed
by Congress member of Parliament and chairman of Jindal Steel and
PowerBSE 1.48 % (JSPL), Naveen Jindal.
In his complaint, Jindal who is contesting election from Kurukshetra Parliamentary Constituency of Haryana, had written to EC earlier this week stating that news channels of the Zee group were breaching the election code of conduct by "bro ..
In his complaint, Jindal who is contesting election from Kurukshetra Parliamentary Constituency of Haryana, had written to EC earlier this week stating that news channels of the Zee group were breaching the election code of conduct by "bro ..
Read more at:
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/32379094.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/32379094.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst
The
Election Commission has asked the News Broadcasters Association (NBA)
to take action against Zee NewsBSE -0.80 % based on a complaint filed
by Congress member of Parliament and chairman of Jindal Steel and
PowerBSE 1.48 % (JSPL), Naveen Jindal.
In his complaint, Jindal who is contesting election from Kurukshetra Parliamentary Constituency of Haryana, had written to EC earlier this week stating that news channels of the Zee group were breaching the election code of conduct by "bro ..
In his complaint, Jindal who is contesting election from Kurukshetra Parliamentary Constituency of Haryana, had written to EC earlier this week stating that news channels of the Zee group were breaching the election code of conduct by "bro ..
The
Election Commission has asked the News Broadcasters Association (NBA)
to take action against Zee NewsBSE -0.80 % based on a complaint filed
by Congress member of Parliament and chairman of Jindal Steel and
PowerBSE 1.48 % (JSPL), Naveen Jindal.
In his complaint, Jindal who is contesting election from Kurukshetra Parliamentary Constituency of Haryana, had written to EC earlier this week stating that news channels of the Zee group were breaching the election code of conduct by "bro ..
In his complaint, Jindal who is contesting election from Kurukshetra Parliamentary Constituency of Haryana, had written to EC earlier this week stating that news channels of the Zee group were breaching the election code of conduct by "bro ..
Read more at:
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/32379094.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/32379094.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst
The
Election Commission has asked the News Broadcasters Association (NBA)
to take action against Zee NewsBSE -0.80 % based on a complaint filed
by Congress member of Parliament and chairman of Jindal Steel and
PowerBSE 1.48 % (JSPL), Naveen Jindal.
In his complaint, Jindal who is contesting election from Kurukshetra Parliamentary Constituency of Haryana, had written to EC earlier this week stating that news channels of the Zee group were breaching the election code of conduct by "bro ..
In his complaint, Jindal who is contesting election from Kurukshetra Parliamentary Constituency of Haryana, had written to EC earlier this week stating that news channels of the Zee group were breaching the election code of conduct by "bro ..
SEBI trying to ‘siphon off’ investor refund: Sahara
The Securities and Exchange Board of India has claimed that it has spent
close to Rs 60 cr in 2013-14 on locating genuine investors of SIRECL
and SHICL.
Sahara India has alleged that market regulator Securities Exchange
Board of India (SEBI) is trying to "siphon off money from the funds"
deposited by the group for refunding the investors of Sahara India Real
Estate Corp Ltd (SIRECL) and Sahara Housing Investment Corp Ltd (SHICL).
SEBI has claimed that it has spent close to Rs 60 cr in 2013-14 on
locating genuine investors of Sahara group companies Sahara India Real
Estate Corp Ltd (SIRECL) and Sahara Housing Investment Corp Ltd (SHICL).
 |
| Subrata Roy |
"We have spent a huge chunk of our money on this and we are running
out of money now. We had requested the Supreme Court to allow us to use
the funds deposited by Sahara India so as we can meet the expenses
incurred on this task," said a senior official from SEBI requesting
anonymity.
The official explained that SEBI has spent a large amount on not just locating the investors but also on the storage of the documents submitted by Sahara. In an email response to The Sunday Guardian, Sahara India's counsel, Keshav Mohan, stated, "We suspect that this is a highly malicious campaign initiated by SEBI with a very clear intention to siphon off money from the funds that Saharas have deposited with SEBI, purely for the repayment to its investors. It is really unfortunate and unbecoming of a regulator, the way SEBI is blowing hot and cold, both at a time."
He further pointed out that on Thursday, the counsel for SEBI had argued in the Supreme Court that SIRECL and SHICL issues were public issues, while now SEBI has made a plea that Sahara's investors are untraceable. "We ask SEBI to disclose the basis of their contention, else withdraw their statement. The fact is that, when SEBI sent letters to about 20,000 account numbers and did not receive any responses for them, we immediately got affidavits from a large number of such investors and submitted to SEBI the affidavits, authentic Know Your Customer (KYC) documents and photographs of almost all those investors, who the regulator had tried to contact. Those who were already paid, confirmed that they had received redemption of their investments to their full satisfaction," Mohan noted.
In a strong rebuttal to SEBI's allegations, Mohan further added that the market regulator has not been following directions and has not refunded even Rs 1 cr to the investors, in the last 15 months. "It is not known, why SEBI is not following this direction, and why it is only interested in extracting money from Sahara...SEBI's intentions are unfair and acutely malafide."
Mohan also pointed out to the fact that on 4 March, SEBI told the court that it had completed the scanning and digitisation of the 3.03 crore investors' documents provided by Sahara. Therefore the verification process has still not started.
Mohan also recounted that the Minister of State for Finance, Namo Narayan Meena in a reply to a question in Parliament had said that the money given by Sahara is for refund to the investors only and the money would not be utilised for any other purpose. "The money received by SEBI will only be used for the repayment of the investors and till now SEBI has only refunded only Rs 1 cr. This is a sinister attempt by SEBI to eat away investors' money. Till now, in Saharas' case SEBI has not shown any intention to protect the interest of investors, for which it has been constituted... we will not let SEBI make this another Golden Forest Case where investors have still not got their hard earned money and will stand and fight till the end in the interest of our investors."
The official explained that SEBI has spent a large amount on not just locating the investors but also on the storage of the documents submitted by Sahara. In an email response to The Sunday Guardian, Sahara India's counsel, Keshav Mohan, stated, "We suspect that this is a highly malicious campaign initiated by SEBI with a very clear intention to siphon off money from the funds that Saharas have deposited with SEBI, purely for the repayment to its investors. It is really unfortunate and unbecoming of a regulator, the way SEBI is blowing hot and cold, both at a time."
He further pointed out that on Thursday, the counsel for SEBI had argued in the Supreme Court that SIRECL and SHICL issues were public issues, while now SEBI has made a plea that Sahara's investors are untraceable. "We ask SEBI to disclose the basis of their contention, else withdraw their statement. The fact is that, when SEBI sent letters to about 20,000 account numbers and did not receive any responses for them, we immediately got affidavits from a large number of such investors and submitted to SEBI the affidavits, authentic Know Your Customer (KYC) documents and photographs of almost all those investors, who the regulator had tried to contact. Those who were already paid, confirmed that they had received redemption of their investments to their full satisfaction," Mohan noted.
In a strong rebuttal to SEBI's allegations, Mohan further added that the market regulator has not been following directions and has not refunded even Rs 1 cr to the investors, in the last 15 months. "It is not known, why SEBI is not following this direction, and why it is only interested in extracting money from Sahara...SEBI's intentions are unfair and acutely malafide."
Mohan also pointed out to the fact that on 4 March, SEBI told the court that it had completed the scanning and digitisation of the 3.03 crore investors' documents provided by Sahara. Therefore the verification process has still not started.
Mohan also recounted that the Minister of State for Finance, Namo Narayan Meena in a reply to a question in Parliament had said that the money given by Sahara is for refund to the investors only and the money would not be utilised for any other purpose. "The money received by SEBI will only be used for the repayment of the investors and till now SEBI has only refunded only Rs 1 cr. This is a sinister attempt by SEBI to eat away investors' money. Till now, in Saharas' case SEBI has not shown any intention to protect the interest of investors, for which it has been constituted... we will not let SEBI make this another Golden Forest Case where investors have still not got their hard earned money and will stand and fight till the end in the interest of our investors."
Tuesday 11 March 2014
Delhi gets its highest monumental flagpole
New Delhi: Shri Naveen Jindal, MP and President of the Flag
Foundation of India, hoisted the largest flag in the country and highest
flagpole in Delhi, measuring 207 ft. in height, at Central Park in
Connaught Place today(March 7). The monumental flag measures 60 ft. in
width and 90 ft. in length and weighs 35 kg.
The hoisting of mammoth sized flag at Central Park is part of Flag Foundation of India’s initiative to inspire Indians to take pride in displaying the National Flag and instill sense of nationalism and patriotism amongst the citizens of the country.
After the hoisting, Shri Naveen Jindal said, “The Tiranga enshrines the very soul of our Republic and Constitution, and is evocative of the tireless struggle of lakhs of people who sacrificed their lives for the country’s freedom. Thus, it has been a constant endeavour of Flag Foundation of India to inspire young Indians to take pride in displaying the Tricolour. It is for the younger generation of today to keep the flag flying high, keeping in mind the principles the flag stands for. I am very happy that Delhi has got its first monumental flag today and this is the 12th amongst the 207 ft. monumental flag in the country.”
“Connaught Place is an iconic area in the Capital and the Central Park its landmark. Aesthetically landscaped and designed, the Central Park was our obvious choice to hoist Delhi’s tallest flagpole as it will add colour to the skyline of CP. At a height of 207 ft., it will be visible from afar and make you feel proud of being an Indian. A visit to the Capital is incomplete for any tourist without visiting Connaught Place and the monumental flag will become a future tourist attraction.” he added.
The monumental flag is made of knitted polyster fabric called ‘Deneir Polyester’ manufactured in Mumbai by the ‘Flag Shop’. The Chakra of the flag has been painted by using specialized printing process.
The concept of monumental flagpoles in India was conceived and introduced by the founder of the Flag Foundation, Shri Naveen Jindal, in 2009. The first monumental flagpole measuring 207 ft. in height was installed at Kaithal, Haryana. Ever since, the Foundation has installed such flagpoles at 12 places in the country.
Flag Foundation of India has so far established thirty-three 100 ft. tall flagpoles across the country, and in all there are now 46 such monumental flagpoles, which is the highest number in the world. Besides India, there are 11 more countries, which have got such monumental flagpoles.
Read More:
The hoisting of mammoth sized flag at Central Park is part of Flag Foundation of India’s initiative to inspire Indians to take pride in displaying the National Flag and instill sense of nationalism and patriotism amongst the citizens of the country.
After the hoisting, Shri Naveen Jindal said, “The Tiranga enshrines the very soul of our Republic and Constitution, and is evocative of the tireless struggle of lakhs of people who sacrificed their lives for the country’s freedom. Thus, it has been a constant endeavour of Flag Foundation of India to inspire young Indians to take pride in displaying the Tricolour. It is for the younger generation of today to keep the flag flying high, keeping in mind the principles the flag stands for. I am very happy that Delhi has got its first monumental flag today and this is the 12th amongst the 207 ft. monumental flag in the country.”
“Connaught Place is an iconic area in the Capital and the Central Park its landmark. Aesthetically landscaped and designed, the Central Park was our obvious choice to hoist Delhi’s tallest flagpole as it will add colour to the skyline of CP. At a height of 207 ft., it will be visible from afar and make you feel proud of being an Indian. A visit to the Capital is incomplete for any tourist without visiting Connaught Place and the monumental flag will become a future tourist attraction.” he added.
The monumental flag is made of knitted polyster fabric called ‘Deneir Polyester’ manufactured in Mumbai by the ‘Flag Shop’. The Chakra of the flag has been painted by using specialized printing process.
The concept of monumental flagpoles in India was conceived and introduced by the founder of the Flag Foundation, Shri Naveen Jindal, in 2009. The first monumental flagpole measuring 207 ft. in height was installed at Kaithal, Haryana. Ever since, the Foundation has installed such flagpoles at 12 places in the country.
Flag Foundation of India has so far established thirty-three 100 ft. tall flagpoles across the country, and in all there are now 46 such monumental flagpoles, which is the highest number in the world. Besides India, there are 11 more countries, which have got such monumental flagpoles.
Read More:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
