The curious case of the Indian Grand Prix and the Bangalore Metro !

Two events captured nation's imagination this month - The launch of Bengaluru's 'Namma' metro and the successful completion of first ever Indian Grand Prix at Buddh International Circuit(BIC) in Noida. 

Both events had evident similarities. Both marked a watershed moment for the respective cities. Bangalore will finally get much needed respite from it's traffic snarls. Noida, on the other hand, will finally come out of New Delhi's shadow and bask in its own international glory. Both boast of a tremendous fan following. While officials claimed that 10 million people used metro within 3 days of its launch, the global viewership for Indian Grand Prix could anywhere be near 30 million levels. Both generated a frenzied excitement around them and were widely discussed in the media and in social networks. 

Add one more to the list - There was an insurmountable importance given to both of them. Both were projected as symbols of a resurgent India and supposedly herald the dawn of a new India - an India which is agile, contemporary and spirited.

I believe the last similarity, the hype generated around Bangalore metro and the of-utmost-national-pride thing, attached to Indian Grand Prix, was hugely unfounded, unwarranted and unreasonable. And here's why:

The Case of the Bangalore Metro: Bangalore metro missed it's launch deadline five times. 4 times the delays were because of customary land acquisition, labor and regulatory issues. The reason of the fifth delay was however absurd - the scheduled inauguration date couldn't fit in PM's tight schedule. Eventually also, after a delay of about a month, it was not inaugurated by the PM which brings me to the question as to why was the PM required to inaugurate such a Basic-Public-Utility? It was not even a first or one of a kind. Even most of the technology that goes into is not indigenous, it's borrowed. Add the financial angle and things get even more perplexing. With each day of delay, the metro authorities lost 5 million INR. And to add to that you end up coughing 25 million INR for the inauguration ceremony. All this when the whole world is talking about austerity measures and fears of another slowdown loom large?

Something which was supposed to be inaugurated in March 2010, missed 5 deadlines to be inaugurated 18 months later, to cover a stretch of 6.7 kms and which was marked by a blatant disregard for fiscal intelligence and common sense, I refuse to regard it as a symbol of new resurgent India.


The Case of the Indian Grand Prix:  Indian F1 viewership is estimated to be around 30 million annually and BIC could manage only 75% (95000 spectators) attendance at the circuit for the inaugural race. Even if BIC were to run full house, it will still incur an annual operational loss of 35 million USD. And then there's 200 million USD of capital costs spent on building the track that is to be recovered. A few other Asian GPs - those at Seoul, Shanghai and Sepang (Malaysia) which started with much fanfare are now running in losses. So what really was the need for hosting this extravaganza? The it-will-generate-tourism argument also does not cut ice. The number of tourists attracted by the GP would perhaps pale in front of those repelled by a host of other factors. Even if the idea was to promote a sports culture, perhaps a world-class soccer stadium would have done much better to help the cause of sports in India.

875 acres of precious farm land acquired by state govt., for a highly non-viable and suspect business model, by giving inadequate compensation  to farmers, so that in a country of a 1.2 billion, a few thousand adrenaline junkies can hear the roar of world's most powerful engines , is perhaps symbolic of misplaced priorities, indifference and of the accentuating social inequity.
And I refuse to regard it either as a symbol of new resurgent India.