Question : Read the passage given below and then answer the questions given below the passage. Some words may be highlighted for your attention. Read carefully.

Over two weeks after Cyrus Mistry was unceremoniously ousted from the Tata Group as its chairman, the \$103-billion group has finally stated its reasons for such a move. In a letter to the media, the 148year-old Tata Group listed out numerous concerns, including the former chairman's inability to generate adequate profits even as debt mounted, and his "devious" plan to wrest control of the group from Tata Sons, the group's holding company. Four days after his ouster, Mistry had come out all guns blazing at the group, questioning its corporate governance practices while also alluding to constant interference from former chairman Ratan Tata. He also claimed he was a lame duck chairman and that the group would have to write off $\$ 18$ billion because of five unprofitable businesses. On Nov. 10, the Tata Group finally rebutted Mistry's arguments. The conglomerate's letter came after the group replaced Mistry as chairman of software giant Tata Consultancy Services (TCS), too. Mistry had remained the TCS chairman even after his ouster from the group.The group has pointed out that under Mistry it was facing losses that had affected the dividends paid to Tata Sons.
In its letter, the group said dividends from the group companies declined from Rs 1,000 crore in 2012-13 to Rs 780 crore in 2015-16. Tata Consultancy Services was the only saving grace when it came to generating profits, it said.

"Thus, but for the TCS dividend and even before impairment provisions, Tata Sons would have shown operating losses over the last three years (with a small surplus in between), showing the significant dependence on TCS. This dependence was indeed a source of concern for the Directors and its shareholder," the letter said.
The letter says that Mistry was "consciously" dismantling many of the group companies and reducing Tata Sons' control and influence over them.

"Tata Sons has historically exercised control over its group companies through its shareholding and commonality of senior directors (apart from the chairman) which had acted as a binding force in the group for many years and which has enhanced the credibility and creditworthiness of the group companies," the group said. "We now have an unacceptable new structure where the chairman is the only common director across several companies and this situation could not be allowed to go on."

In his letter, Mistry had raised concerns about his helplessness over handling many of the "legacy hotspots" at the group. These included the group's decision to launch an airline business and the Tata Nano car.

"Nobody will deny that there were some problem companies," the group said. "The three major problem companies are Tata Steel Europe, Tata Teleservices/ Docomo, and the Indian operations of Tata Motors. The fact is that even after four years, there is no noticeable improvement in the operations of these companies, and in fact they have got worse as shown by continuing huge losses, increasing high debt levels and declining share in their respective markets."

"There are a few other companies which are also having different problems-and are these also to be excused as "legacy' issues?" the group questioned.
The Tata Group has been trying to dispose of its steel business in Europe over the past few months without much success. In addition, it also had a public spat with its telecom partner in India, Japan's largest phone company, NTT Docomo. Docomo had been demanding that it be paid half the amount it invested in the 28.5% stake in the partnership.

Question
According to Cyrus Mistry, what amount would have to be written off because of 5 unprofitable businesses?

Option 1: $17billion
 

Option 2: $17million
 

Option 3: Rupees 18 billion
 

Option 4: $18billion

Question : Read the passage given below and then answer the questions given below the passage. Some words may be highlighted for your attention. Read carefully.

Over two weeks after Cyrus Mistry was unceremoniously ousted from the Tata Group as its chairman, the 103-billion group has finally stated its reasons for such a move. In a letter to the media, the 148 year-old Tata Group listed out numerous concerns, including the former chairman's inability to generate adequate profits even as debt mounted, and his "devious" plan to wrest control of the group from Tata Sons, the group's holding company. Four days after his ouster, Mistry had come out all guns blazing at the group, questioning its corporate governance practices while also alluding to constant interference from former chairman Ratan Tata. He also claimed he was a lame duck chairman and that the group would have to write off 18 billion because of five unprofitable businesses. On Nov. 10, the Tata Group finally rebutted Mistry's arguments. The conglomerate's letter came after the group replaced Mistry as chairman of software giant Tata Consultancy Services (TCS), too. Mistry had remained the TCS chairman even after his ouster from the group.The group has pointed out that under Mistry it was facing losses that had affected the dividends paid to Tata Sons.
In its letter, the group said dividends from the group companies declined from Rs 1,000 crore in 2012-13 to Rs 780 crore in 2015-16. Tata Consultancy Services was the only saving grace when it came to generating profits, it said.

"Thus, but for the TCS dividend and even before impairment provisions, Tata Sons would have shown operating losses over the last three years (with a small surplus in between), showing the significant dependence on TCS. This dependence was indeed a source of concern for the Directors and its shareholder," the letter said.
The letter says that Mistry was "consciously" dismantling many of the group companies and reducing Tata Sons' control and influence over them.

"Tata Sons has historically exercised control over its group companies through its shareholding and commonality of senior directors (apart from the chairman) which had acted as a binding force in the group for many years and which has enhanced the credibility and creditworthiness of the group companies," the group said. "We now have an unacceptable new structure where the chairman is the only common director across several companies and this situation could not be allowed to go on."

In his letter, Mistry had raised concerns about his helplessness over handling many of the "legacy hotspots" at the group. These included the group's decision to launch an airline business and the Tata Nano car.

"Nobody will deny that there were some problem companies," the group said. "The three major problem companies are Tata Steel Europe, Tata Teleservices/ Docomo, and the Indian operations of Tata Motors. The fact is that even after four years, there is no noticeable improvement in the operations of these companies, and in fact they have got worse as shown by continuing huge losses, increasing high debt levels and declining share in their respective markets."

"There are a few other companies which are also having different problems-and are these also to be excused as "legacy' issues?" the group questioned.
The Tata Group has been trying to dispose of its steel business in Europe over the past few months without much success. In addition, it also had a public spat with its telecom partner in India, Japan's largest phone company, NTT Docomo. Docomo had been demanding that it be paid half the amount it invested in the 28.5% stake in the partnership.

Question 

What are the three major problem companies?

Option 1: Tata Steel India, Tata Docomo and Tata Nano.
 

Option 2: Tata Steel India, Tata Motors and Tata Tea.
 

Option 3: Tata Steel Europe, Tata Teleservices/ Docomo and Tata Motors.
 

Option 4:
Tata Steel Europe, Tata Teleservices/ Docomo and Tata Breweries.

Question : Read the passage given below and then answer the questions given below the passage. Some words may be highlighted for your attention. Read carefully.

Over two weeks after Cyrus Mistry was unceremoniously ousted from the Tata Group as its chairman, the 103-billion group has finally stated its reasons for such a move. In a letter to the media, the 148 year-old Tata Group listed out numerous concerns, including the former chairman's inability to generate adequate profits even as debt mounted, and his "devious" plan to wrest control of the group from Tata Sons, the group's holding company. Four days after his ouster, Mistry had come out all guns blazing at the group, questioning its corporate governance practices while also alluding to constant interference from former chairman Ratan Tata. He also claimed he was a lame duck chairman and that the group would have to write off 18 billion because of five unprofitable businesses. On Nov. 10, the Tata Group finally rebutted Mistry's arguments. The conglomerate's letter came after the group replaced Mistry as chairman of software giant Tata Consultancy Services (TCS), too. Mistry had remained the TCS chairman even after his ouster from the group.The group has pointed out that under Mistry it was facing losses that had affected the dividends paid to Tata Sons.
In its letter, the group said dividends from the group companies declined from Rs 1,000 crore in 2012-13 to Rs 780 crore in 2015-16. Tata Consultancy Services was the only saving grace when it came to generating profits, it said.

"Thus, but for the TCS dividend and even before impairment provisions, Tata Sons would have shown operating losses over the last three years (with a small surplus in between), showing the significant dependence on TCS. This dependence was indeed a source of concern for the Directors and its shareholder," the letter said.
The letter says that Mistry was "consciously" dismantling many of the group companies and reducing Tata Sons' control and influence over them.

"Tata Sons has historically exercised control over its group companies through its shareholding and commonality of senior directors (apart from the chairman) which had acted as a binding force in the group for many years and which has enhanced the credibility and creditworthiness of the group companies," the group said. "We now have an unacceptable new structure where the chairman is the only common director across several companies and this situation could not be allowed to go on."

In his letter, Mistry had raised concerns about his helplessness over handling many of the "legacy hotspots" at the group. These included the group's decision to launch an airline business and the Tata Nano car.

"Nobody will deny that there were some problem companies," the group said. "The three major problem companies are Tata Steel Europe, Tata Teleservices/ Docomo, and the Indian operations of Tata Motors. The fact is that even after four years, there is no noticeable improvement in the operations of these companies, and in fact they have got worse as shown by continuing huge losses, increasing high debt levels and declining share in their respective markets."

"There are a few other companies which are also having different problems-and are these also to be excused as "legacy' issues?" the group questioned.
The Tata Group has been trying to dispose of its steel business in Europe over the past few months without much success. In addition, it also had a public spat with its telecom partner in India, Japan's largest phone company, NTT Docomo. Docomo had been demanding that it be paid half the amount it invested in the 28.5% stake in the partnership.

Question
What is the main idea put forth by the passage?

Option 1: Interference of Ratan Tata in Tata group of Industries.

 

Option 2: Financial Report for the year 2018-2017.
 

Option 3: Ratan Tata vs. Cyrus Mistry.
 

Option 4: Tata Group of Industries defense against ousting of Cyrus Mistry.

Question : Read the passage given below and then answer the questions given below the passage. Some words may be highlighted for your attention. Read carefully.

Over two weeks after Cyrus Mistry was unceremoniously ousted from the Tata Group as its chairman, the 103-billion group has finally stated its reasons for such a move. In a letter to the media, the 148year-old Tata Group listed out numerous concerns, including the former chairman's inability to generate adequate profits even as debt mounted, and his "devious" plan to wrest control of the group from Tata Sons, the group's holding company. Four days after his ouster, Mistry had come out all guns blazing at the group, questioning its corporate governance practices while also alluding to constant interference from former chairman Ratan Tata. He also claimed he was a lame duck chairman and that the group would have to write off  18 billion because of five unprofitable businesses. On Nov. 10, the Tata Group finally rebutted Mistry's arguments. The conglomerate's letter came after the group replaced Mistry as chairman of software giant Tata Consultancy Services (TCS), too. Mistry had remained the TCS chairman even after his ouster from the group.The group has pointed out that under Mistry it was facing losses that had affected the dividends paid to Tata Sons.
In its letter, the group said dividends from the group companies declined from Rs 1,000 crore in 2012-13 to Rs 780 crore in 2015-16. Tata Consultancy Services was the only saving grace when it came to generating profits, it said.

"Thus, but for the TCS dividend and even before impairment provisions, Tata Sons would have shown operating losses over the last three years (with a small surplus in between), showing the significant dependence on TCS. This dependence was indeed a source of concern for the Directors and its shareholder," the letter said.
The letter says that Mistry was "consciously" dismantling many of the group companies and reducing Tata Sons' control and influence over them.

"Tata Sons has historically exercised control over its group companies through its shareholding and commonality of senior directors (apart from the chairman) which had acted as a binding force in the group for many years and which has enhanced the credibility and creditworthiness of the group companies," the group said. "We now have an unacceptable new structure where the chairman is the only common director across several companies and this situation could not be allowed to go on."

In his letter, Mistry had raised concerns about his helplessness over handling many of the "legacy hotspots" at the group. These included the group's decision to launch an airline business and the Tata Nano car.

"Nobody will deny that there were some problem companies," the group said. "The three major problem companies are Tata Steel Europe, Tata Teleservices/ Docomo, and the Indian operations of Tata Motors. The fact is that even after four years, there is no noticeable improvement in the operations of these companies, and in fact they have got worse as shown by continuing huge losses, increasing high debt levels and declining share in their respective markets."

"There are a few other companies which are also having different problems-and are these also to be excused as "legacy' issues?" the group questioned.
The Tata Group has been trying to dispose of its steel business in Europe over the past few months without much success. In addition, it also had a public spat with its telecom partner in India, Japan's largest phone company, NTT Docomo. Docomo had been demanding that it be paid half the amount it invested in the 28.5% stake in the partnership.

Question

Why did the Tata Group wait for almost over two weeks before finally rebutting Cyrus Mistry's accusations and giving the reasons for his ousting?

Option 1: A court order had asked them to explain and submit their explanations on Nov 10, 2016 and thus they had to wait for 2 weeks.

Option 2: They needed to gather proper evidence against Cyrus Mistry for the media and hence the two week gap between ousting him and giving the reasons.

Option 3: Cyrus Mistry, even though ousted as the Chairman of Tata Group was still the Chairman for TCS. Only after his removal from there did the company come out with an explanation showing that they were prudent enough to wait and bide their time as any form of criticism of the existing chairman would have caused drops in stock prices and even legal troubles.

 

Option 4: The Tata Group wanted to go through legal channels to legitimize their claims against Mistry. Since Mistry had also accused Ratan Tata of hampering the companiy's working, He needed to be personally present during the explanation and he was out of the country on business.

Question : Read the passage given below and then answer the questions given below the passage. Some words may be highlighted for your attention. Read carefully.

Over two weeks after Cyrus Mistry was unceremoniously ousted from the Tata Group as its chairman, the 103-billion group has finally stated its reasons for such a move. In a letter to the media, the 148 year-old Tata Group listed out numerous concerns, including the former chairman's inability to generate adequate profits even as debt mounted, and his "devious" plan to wrest control of the group from Tata Sons, the group's holding company. Four days after his ouster, Mistry had come out all guns blazing at the group, questioning its corporate governance practices while also alluding to constant interference from former chairman Ratan Tata. He also claimed he was a lame duck chairman and that the group would have to write off 18 billion because of five unprofitable businesses. On Nov. 10, the Tata Group finally rebutted Mistry's arguments. The conglomerate's letter came after the group replaced Mistry as chairman of software giant Tata Consultancy Services (TCS), too. Mistry had remained the TCS chairman even after his ouster from the group.The group has pointed out that under Mistry it was facing losses that had affected the dividends paid to Tata Sons.
In its letter, the group said dividends from the group companies declined from Rs 1,000 crore in 2012-13 to Rs 780 crore in 2015-16. Tata Consultancy Services was the only saving grace when it came to generating profits, it said.

"Thus, but for the TCS dividend and even before impairment provisions, Tata Sons would have shown operating losses over the last three years (with a small surplus in between), showing the significant dependence on TCS. This dependence was indeed a source of concern for the Directors and its shareholder," the letter said.
The letter says that Mistry was "consciously" dismantling many of the group companies and reducing Tata Sons' control and influence over them.

"Tata Sons has historically exercised control over its group companies through its shareholding and commonality of senior directors (apart from the chairman) which had acted as a binding force in the group for many years and which has enhanced the credibility and creditworthiness of the group companies," the group said. "We now have an unacceptable new structure where the chairman is the only common director across several companies and this situation could not be allowed to go on."

In his letter, Mistry had raised concerns about his helplessness over handling many of the "legacy hotspots" at the group. These included the group's decision to launch an airline business and the Tata Nano car.

"Nobody will deny that there were some problem companies," the group said. "The three major problem companies are Tata Steel Europe, Tata Teleservices/ Docomo, and the Indian operations of Tata Motors. The fact is that even after four years, there is no noticeable improvement in the operations of these companies, and in fact they have got worse as shown by continuing huge losses, increasing high debt levels and declining share in their respective markets."

"There are a few other companies which are also having different problems-and are these also to be excused as "legacy' issues?" the group questioned.
The Tata Group has been trying to dispose of its steel business in Europe over the past few months without much success. In addition, it also had a public spat with its telecom partner in India, Japan's largest phone company, NTT Docomo. Docomo had been demanding that it be paid half the amount it invested in the 28.5% stake in the partnership.

Question 

Why has the Tata Group tried to dispose off its steel business in Europe?

Option 1: The group ran into problems with the European steel mafia and hence wants to close down its operations before the losses become bigger.
 

Option 2: Given the current political scenario in Europe (Brexit etc), the group wants to sell off its steel business before things become worse.

Option 3: Reduction in steel prices all over the world, has led the steel industry to become an unprofitable venture, causing the company to try and sell off while it can still break even in the capital invested.
 

Option 4: For a period of four years, the Tata Steel business in Europe has shown huge losses, increasing high debt levels and declining shares in the market, causing the company to take the decision to sell off while they can still recover some of the capital invested.