Will make profit of Rs 31 on each Rs 251 Smartphone: Mohit Goel

February 22, 2016

New Delhi, Feb 22: Since he announced the launch of a mobile phone for Rs 251, Mohit Goel has faced widespread scepticism, along with visits by police and income tax officials at his rented two-storey office in Noida. However, the Amity University graduate insists that he will not only deliver the phones at the stunning price he has quoted, but also make a profit of Rs 31 on each handset sold.

mohith1"Why am I being hounded? What wrong have I done?" Goel asked in the course of an exclusive interview with TOI. The director of Ringing Bells insists that his new venture is not a fly-by-night operation and will begin customer deliveries from April 15. "Has there ever been a case of income-tax evasion against me or my company, or has there been an FIR filed against me in any police station? Why am I being called a 'bhagora' (who'll run away with the money)? I intend to do a valid business, just like any other startup, and I have a business plan ready."

The company claims it has received over 7 crore registrations on its website since it started accepting applications on February 18. "We are taking online bookings for only 25 lakh units in the first batch due to limited supplies, while giving another 25 lakh through offline distributors. I will deliver the handsets before June 30. All the money that we receive from customers through the payment gateway will be kept in an escrow account and we will touch it only when we deliver the devices." The company has an account with ICICI Bank.

Goel, and his much-older confidant Ashok Chadha, who is the president of the company, insists that there have not been any infringements on design and other matters. "Some of the devices had the Adcom branding as we sourced panel (screen) from them. However, the final device will have our branding and the phone will have the same features and design that we had showcased."

The dual SIM Freedom 251 device carries a 4-inch display, 1 GB RAM, 8GB internal memory with a 1.3 GHZ quad-core processor, dual cameras and comes with a charger, headphone and one-year warranty.

The duo say that they have a carefully laid-out business model to manage the disruptive price for the device "The price that works out per device is roughly around Rs 1,500," Chadha says. insists, though significantly lowering it down from the Rs 2,500 he had announced on the day of the unveiling of the device. "We will source the devices from a supplier in Noida, who will be assembling the units for us after getting components from Taiwan." And while we do this, we also start the work to identify land and suppliers for setting up our manufacturing locations. For this, we have identified Noida while also looking at locations in Uttarakhand, West Bengal, Bihar and Punjab," Chadha says.

And just how does he bring down the cost to Rs 251, and also earn a profit? "Economies of scale gets it down to around Rs 1,200, and thereafter an online sales model cuts down marketing and sales expenses, giving us further savings," he says. And to this we will add marketing piggybacks from companies whose applications we load on the devices. We will save around Rs 300 per device more through this," Chadha says.

The unveiling of the phone on February 17 had created quite a flutter among existing handset suppliers, prompting industry body Indian Cellular Association to file a complaint with the government. (ICA) - which has members such as Samsung, Apple, Sony, Lava, Micromax, Karbonn, Motorola and HTC - ICA president Pankaj Mohindroo wrote a letter to telecom minister Ravi Shankar Prasad, expressing doubts about the intentions of Ringing Bells, saying it is not possible to supply a phone for Rs 251. Also, there were allegations that the company had ripped off the design of the prototype from American phone major Apple's iPhone, while also giving out devices sourced from a local electronics importer Adcom.

The company is also talking to large e-commerce companies, such as travel website Goibibo, to get their apps on the devices. "We will also monetize from the heavy traffic on our website and will make it into a marketplace for other brands to hop on. This will also help us to bring down the cost."

Comments

rampa
 - 
Monday, 22 Feb 2016

I think battery only original.

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
March 16,2020

Kottayam, Mar 16: A trial court in Kerala  on Monday dismissed a discharge petition filed by Bishop Franco Mulakkal, in connection with the case of alleged rape of a nun in which he is the prime accused.

In his plea filed before the Additional District and Sessions Court I, Mulakkal had claimed that prima facie there was no case to frame charges against him.

Dismissing the plea, the trial court said the bishop should stand for trial in the rape case.

The bishop's lawyer said an appeal would be filed in the High Court against the trial court order.

The prosecution had filed its objection to the plea filed by the bishop, accused of raping and sexually assaulting a nun of the same diocese.

The bishop had filed the plea just ahead of commencement of the preliminary hearing on charges against him in January this year.

The case is based on a complaint filed against the bishop by the nun.

In her complaint to the police in June, 2018, the nun had alleged that she was subjected to sexual abuse by the bishop during the period between 2014 and 2016.

The bishop, who was arrested by the Special Investigation Team which probed the case, has been charged with wrongful confinement, rape, unnatural sex and criminal intimidation.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
June 18,2020

Mysuru, Jun 18: The Karnataka government's proposal announced on Thursday to hold online classes for students amid concerns over COVID-19 has not gone down well with thousands of tribal students residing in villages across the state.

A team from Karnataka State Commission for Protection of Child Rights (KSCPCR) visited a few tribal hamlets in Mysuru and Kodagu recently and found that the students, unlike their urban counterparts, lack accessibility to not just smartphones and computers, but basic necessities like power supply.

''When such is the situation in the tribal hamlets, how can you expect students to catch up on their studies if classes are held online?'' wondered M L Parashurama Member, KSCPCR, who toured villages like Thithimathi, Beematagere, Devamachchi and Gaddadi in Kodagu's Virajpet taluk, besides Bavali, Balyadi, Machchuru, and Anemone in Mysuru's HD Kote taluk along with Chairperson Antony Sebastian.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
February 19,2020

Bengaluru, Feb 19: Pointing out that there was a deliberate attempt to cover up police excesses by implicating innocent persons at whim, the Karnataka High Court on Tuesday granted conditional bail to 21 people who were accused by police of involving in violence during the protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) in Mangaluru.

Allowing the bail petitions of Ashik and 20 others from Udupi and Dakshina Kannada districts, Justice John Michael Cunha said the overzealousness of the police is also evident from the fact that FIRs were registered under Section 307 of IPC against the persons killed by the police themselves.

“In an offence involving a large number of people, the identity and participation of each accused must be fixed with reasonable certainty. In the present cases, the identity appears to have been fixed on the basis of their affiliation to PFI and they being members of the Muslim community. Though it is stated that the involvement of the petitioners is captured in CCTV footage and photographs, no such material is produced before the court showing the presence of any of the petitioners at the spot, armed with deadly weapons,” the judge noted.

In the statement of objections filed by the State Public Prosecutor-I, it was stated that there was a hint of Muslim youths holding protest on December 19, 2019, opposing the implementation of CAA. Prohibitory orders were clamped in that connection. This assertion indicated that the common object of the assembly was to oppose the implementation of CAA and National Register for Citizens (NRC) which, by itself, was not an “unlawful object”, the judge pointed out.

‘Pics show cops throwing stones at crowd’

Justice Cunha also said the material collected by the investigators did not contain any specific evidence regarding the presence of any of the petitioners at the spot. On the other hand, omnibus allegations were made against the Muslim crowd of 1,500-2,000, alleging that they were armed with weapons like stones, soda bottles and glass pieces. The photographs produced by the SPP depicted that hardly any member of the crowd were armed with weapons, except one of them holding a bottle. In none of these photographs, police station or policemen were seen in the vicinity, the judge noted.

“On the other hand, photographs produced by the petitioners show that the policemen themselves were pelting stones at the crowd. The petitioners have produced copies of the complaints lodged by the dependants of the deceased who died due to police firing and the endorsement made thereon reveals that even though the law required the police to register independent FIRs in view of the specific complaint made against the police officers making out cognizable offences, the police have failed to register FIRs. This goes to show that a deliberate attempt is underway to cover up police excesses by implicating innocent persons at the whims and caprice of the police,” the judge observed.

In the wake of counter-allegations against the police and in the backdrop of their failure to register FIRs based on complaints lodged by the families of victims, the possibility of false and mistaken implication could not be ruled out, the judge said. In these circumstances, it would be a travesty of justice to deny bail to the petitioners and sacrifice their liberties to the mercy of the district administration and police. The records indicate that a deliberate attempt has been made to trump up evidence and to deprive the liberties of the petitioners by fabricating evidence. None of the petitioners have any criminal antecedents, the court said.

“The allegations levelled against the petitioners are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. There is no direct evidence to connect them with the alleged offence. The investigation appears to be malafide and partisan. In the circumstances, in order to protect the rights and liberties of the petitioners, it is necessary to admit them to bail,” the judge said.

The petitioners were arrested and remanded in judicial custody after the anti-CAA protests on charges of being members of an unlawful assembly, armed with lethal weapons, attempting to set fire to the North Police Station in Mangaluru, obstructing the police from discharging their duties and causing damage to public property, etc., on December 19 in violation of the prohibitory orders. They moved the High Court as their bail pleas had been rejected by a sessions court in Dakshina Kannada.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.