Make in India booster: Optiemus signs licensing agreement with American Corning for screen protectors
NEW DELHI: Top American specialty glass and technology company Corning is expanding its business in India as it ties up with local contract manufacturer Optiemus through a trademark and licensing agreement for screen protectors.
The company is also close to the start of production of finished cover glass for smartphones in India, this time in a Rs 1,000 crore joint venture again with Optiemus.
The factory is likely to begin production from December this year, and this will be the first time when it directly supplies finished cover glass from India rather than importing it. The customers for the cover glass are likely to include companies such as Apple, Samsung and the ubiquitous Chinese makers who account for a majority of smartphone sales in the country.
Ashok Gupta, chairman of Optiemus Infra, said the company will be importing glass sheets into India for the tempered glass, and these will thereafter be sold in the country under the Rhinotech brand after processing as per Corning's techniques and mandates.
The domestic market for tempered glass screen protectors is expected to see annual sales of 400 million pieces this year with an estimated retail value of Rs 20,000 crore.
Most of these these are currently sold through the unorganized sector after imports from China and Vietnam.
Sudhir Pillai, MD of Corning in India, said the screen protectors will carry the 'Engineered by Corning' trademark. 'We believe that this development will support India's growing need for providing screen protectors for the mobile consumer electronics industry.'
Sources said the govt is concerned over the import of 'low quality but high revenue' tempered glass into India.
'BIS standards for setting quality standards for screen protectors have been announced and will need to be implemented over the next few months. This will lead to higher production of tempered glass within India which is critical as its volumes and turnover have been going up with each passing year,' a senior official of the IT Ministry said.
Corning's expansion in India particularly comes at a time when the govt pushes the Atmanirbhar Bharat and
Make in India
programme for having self-sustainability in the supply chain ecosystem.
The company's key push in the mobile manufacturing ecosystem will come in after it starts the finished cover glass manufacturing at Chennai, Pillai said.
Gupta said that Optiemus will initially expand the screen protector business in India, before looking at exporting them to locations such as the Middle East, and Europe. 'We will be expanding production as we move from here, and are looking at a strong play in India and beyond.'
Stay informed with the latest
business
news, updates on
bank holidays
,
public holidays
, current
gold rate
and
silver price
.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
25 minutes ago
- Mint
Apple brings back Blood Oxygen feature to Apple Watch, but there's a catch
Apple on Thursday announced that is bringing a redesigned Oxygen tracking feature to Apple Watch Series 9, Series 10, and Apple Watch Ultra 2 users in the United States. Notably, the tech giant had been banned from importing Apple Watches with that feature by an International Trade Commission ruling in early 2024 and it is now bypassing it with a clever workaround. The Cupertino based tech giant will calculate and measure the blood oxygen data on the iPhone that the Apple Watch is paired to and users won't be able to view this data on their wrist. In order to check their blood oxygen levels, users will have to navigate to th Respiratory section under the iPhone's Health app. In its announcement, Apple says that a recent US customs ruling has ensured that it can import Apple waches with the new Blood oxygen feature. In order to get the new feature, Series 9, 10 and Ultra users will have to update their iPhones and Apple watch to iOS 18.6.1 and watchOS 11.6.1 respectively. The new blood oxygen feature redesign only impacts the Apple Watches sold in the US after 17th January, 2024 when the ITC ban took full effect. Any previously sold Apple Watches in the US or the units bought anywhere else in the world continue to have the original blood oxygen feature.
Hans India
25 minutes ago
- Hans India
Trump targets India
For decades, India and the United States have shared a trajectory that felt increasingly like a strategic partnership. Shared democratic values, growing defence ties, mutual concerns over China, and booming trade painted a picture of an upward relationship. That is why President Donald Trump's aggressive targeting of India during his tenure, particularly through punitive tariffs and public criticism, raised eyebrows both in New Delhi and Washington. The easy explanation is Trump's mercurial style. The harder, and more accurate, explanation is that his stance was a calculated geopolitical play. I see at least five clear strategic reasons behind this approach, all deeply connected to his 'America First' doctrine, his transactional view of diplomacy, and the larger chessboard of global power. 1. Trade protectionism and the 'America first' doctrine: Trump was elected on a promise to bring jobs back to America. That meant dismantling trade arrangements he saw as unfair, whether with China, the EU, or even long-standing partners like India. His administration's trade team looked at numbers through a competitive lens. India's growing export footprint, particularly in pharmaceuticals, IT services, and textiles, was not lost on Trump's strategists. The US has long enjoyed a trade surplus with many nations, but India was one of the few developing countries running a significant surplus against America. In Trump's worldview, that surplus was America's loss. The withdrawal of India's preferential trade status under the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) was not an impulsive act. It was a calculated signal that friendship did not guarantee special treatment. High tariffs on steel, aluminium, and even niche exports like hand-crafted jewellery or specialty agricultural products were meant to create discomfort in specific industries. The idea was to make political and business leaders in India push their government to open more of the Indian market to US companies. It was economic pressure designed to shift the negotiation table. Trump understood that in trade politics, perception matters as much as policy. He wanted the American voter to see a leader who would fight for them, even if it meant upsetting allies. That consistency in messaging made his stance on India entirely predictable, to those who understood his doctrine. 2. Containing a future economic challenger: While China was Trump's main target in the global economic rivalry, his advisors were not blind to India's trajectory. The Indian economy, with its youthful demographic and expanding domestic market, had the potential to emerge as another formidable Asian giant within two decades. Pre-emptively shaping that rise was part of a long-term calculation. History shows that the US often takes early steps to slow down competitors before they become too large to influence. This may take the form of trade barriers, sanctions, technology restrictions, or control over access to critical global markets. In Trump's calculus, acting now meant shaping the rules of engagement before India's economic clout matched its demographic weight. By exerting pressure, he was sending a message not just to India but to other emerging economies that the US would not hesitate to act against those who could someday challenge its economic primacy. In this sense, India was not an immediate threat, but it is a future possibility that needed to be managed. This approach also reflected Trump's preference for dealing with partners from a position of strength. By putting India on the defensive early, the US could extract concessions more easily, rather than waiting until India was as powerful a rival as China is today. 3. Strategic signalling to China: On the surface, pressuring India while confronting China might seem counterintuitive. Both Washington and New Delhi have strong strategic incentives to counter Chinese expansionism in the Indo-Pacific. Yet, Trump's approach to foreign policy was rarely linear. He often believed in unsettling the board to keep all players guessing. By targeting India economically, Trump demonstrated to Beijing that the US could turn its attention to any Asian power if it served American interests. This was regional signalling at its most deliberate. China would take note that even a US partner like India was not immune to pressure, which reinforced Trump's reputation for unpredictability. In the Indo-Pacific, perception often matters as much as action. By showing that the US could recalibrate relationships in unexpected ways, Trump added an element of uncertainty to China's strategic planning. If Beijing thought it could predict American behaviour based solely on alliances, this tactic disrupted that assumption. This kind of signalling also had a secondary purpose, reminding India that alignment with the US did not automatically guarantee immunity from American economic leverage. The subtext was clear: partnerships are conditional, and conditions can change quickly in a transactional framework. 4. The Pakistan factor and South Asian balancing: No analysis of Trump's India policy is complete without considering Pakistan. During Trump's presidency, Washington was deeply involved in negotiations with the Taliban to end the long-running war in Afghanistan. Pakistan's cooperation was indispensable in facilitating talks and influencing Taliban factions. Trump's public warmth toward Pakistan, including his earlier meetings with Prime Minister Imran Khan, more recently with Army Chief Asim Munir at the White House, were not sentimental; but a calculated carrot. The corresponding stick was applied to India, ensuring that the balance in South Asia did not tilt too heavily in New Delhi's favour. Historically, US–Pakistan relations have been marked by transactional exchanges - military aid, political backing, or strategic support in exchange for cooperation on specific issues. Trump applied this same logic. By keeping India under trade pressure, he maintained a level of parity in regional optics that made Pakistan feel its role was still valued. From Trump's perspective, keeping Islamabad engaged meant keeping the Taliban talks alive, which was a major foreign policy priority for his administration. For India, this dynamic was a reminder that US policy in South Asia is never solely about one bilateral relationship. 5. Bargaining leverage for strategic deals: Trump's diplomacy was built on leverage. To him, leverage often meant making the other side feel economic discomfort until they were more inclined to make concessions. India's large and growing economy made it an attractive target for this approach. The withdrawal of GSP benefits, the imposition of tariffs, and the public criticism were all part of a toolkit meant to push India toward agreement in other areas - defence purchases, energy imports, and greater market access for US firms. The logic was simple: if the cost of disagreement was high enough, India would be more open to negotiation. For instance, while raising tariffs, the US was simultaneously pressing India to buy more American oil and liquefied natural gas. Defence deals for fighter jets, drones, and helicopters were on the table. The US was also pushing for greater access to India's e-commerce and agricultural markets, sectors with enormous potential for American corporations. Trump treated these as interlinked discussions rather than isolated issues. Pressure in one domain was meant to yield advantage in another. The strategy was not unique to India, but its application to a democratic partner was unusual enough to draw global attention. Long-term implications: Trump's targeting of India created turbulence in the short term. New Delhi responded firmly by resisting tariffs, filing complaints with the WTO, and making it clear that strategic partnerships could not be leveraged purely through economic threats. Yet, beneath the public disagreements, the fundamentals of the US–India relationship remained steady. Defence cooperation continued, the Quad initiative gained momentum, and backchannel diplomacy ensured communication lines stayed open. In a way, Trump's pressure tested the resilience of the partnership. However, the episode carries a cautionary lesson. If the US treats India solely as a competitor to be contained rather than a partner to be cultivated, it risks encouraging New Delhi to diversify its strategic options. This could mean deeper engagement with Europe, a recalibrated relationship with Russia, or even selective cooperation with China on trade matters. India's takeaway should be clear, strategic autonomy is not optional. It is the foundation of sustained influence in a world where alliances shift rapidly. Economic diversification, resilient domestic manufacturing, and the capacity to stand firm in negotiations are non-negotiable priorities. The bigger Picture: Trump's punitive stance toward India is not a personal grudge or an emotional whim. It was a calculated extension of his worldview, one that is transactional, competitive, and unapologetically centred on American advantage. Every action, from the tariffs to the GSP withdrawal, fit into a broader pattern. His objectives are multi-layered, extract more from partners, contain potential challengers early, maintain leverage over rivals, and send strategic messages to adversaries. In Trump's eyes, the end goal was always the same: advance US interests without compromise. India, for its part, must read this as a case study in future-proofing its foreign policy. The US will remain a critical partner, but partnership does not mean protection from pressure. National interest, not sentiment, must be India's guiding principle. In the great game of global power, emotional narratives are short-lived. Strategy endures. Trump understood that well. India must, too. (The writer is the Chief Spokesperson of BJP, Chairman for Nation Building Foundation, and a Harvard Business School certified Strategist)
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Tata Sons AGM marks SP Group thaw, Noel Tata joins board
At the Tata Sons AGM, the Shapoorji Pallonji Group approved all resolutions, signaling improved relations. Discussions are underway regarding SP Group's potential exit and monetization options, with Tata Sons exploring avenues. Revenue has nearly doubled and net profit has more than tripled over the past five years, with the group adopting a 'fitness first, velocity next' mantra. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads The Tata Sons annual general meeting (AGM) saw Shapoorji Pallonji (SP) Group okaying all resolutions, leading to their unanimous approval, marking another advance in the thawing relations between the minority and majority previous years, SP Group, which holds 18.37% in the Tata group holding company, has either abstained from voting or objected to some resolutions. Tata Sons voted to appoint Noel Tata to the board and approved the reappointment of Venu Srinivasan and Saurabh Agrawal as directors. It also approved Anita George, cofounder and chief executive of emerging markets growth fund Prosperete, as an independent this was the first AGM held since the passing of Ratan Tata in October last year. His halfbrother, Noel Tata, is chairman of Tata Trusts , which holds a controlling 66% stake in Tata Sons. This was the company's 107th Sons has initiated early discussions with SP are exploring potential exit options and monetisation avenues in the unlisted holding company, currently pledged with lenders. People close to SP Group said it was optimistic about growth under the leadership of Tata Sons chairman N Chandrasekaran, and is looking forward to constructive met SP Group chairman Shapoor Mistry a few times in the recent past, they added. These were the first formal interactions between the two sides since ties soured following the ouster of the late Cyrus Mistry, Shapoor's brother, as Tata Sons chairman in 2016. The talks are said to be Group nearly doubled revenue and more than tripled net profit and market cap over the past five years, when it spent Rs 5.5 lakh crore to be 'future fit' and has sought to alter strategies that 'may have aged poorly with time and changing economic conditions,' adopting a 'fitness first, velocity next' mantra, Chandra sekaran said in the latest Tata Sons annual report. Group revenue from all listed and unlisted entities was Rs 15.3 lakh crore in FY25, with net profit at Rs 1.1 lakh crore and market cap at Rs 37.8 lakh crore, it said. Tata Sons and SP Group did not AGM at Bombay House was led by Chandrasekaran and attended by Noel Tata and his children Leah, Maya and Neville on behalf of the smaller trusts. This was among the shortest AGMs in years, at about 20 minutes, said the people Mistry attended as a representative of the Sir Ratan Tata Trust and Vijay Singh as a representative of the Sir Dorabji Tata Trust. Mistry, also one of the executors of Ratan Tata's will, proposed the appointment of Noel Tata as director and the passing of accounts. At last year's AGM, SP Group had expressed dissatisfaction over not being informed about Tata Sons' decision to apply to the Reserve Bank of India for deregistration as an Upper Layer Core Investment Company (UL-CIC). It had also voiced concerns about being left out of deliberations on the Tata Trusts' resolution that Tata Sons remain an unlisted private company. In January, RBI said in its annual report that it was reviewing Tata Sons' application for deregistration from the UL-CIC per regulations, companies classified as NBFC-UL are required to go public by September. Tata Sons had cleared all its debt obligations to meet the eligibility criteria for exclusion from this Ratan Tata's demise, longstanding tensions between the two groups have been easing, according to people close to them. Cyrus Mistry died in 2022 in a road accident. Noel Tata is married to the sister of the Mistry brothers. There currently appears to be room for constructive dialogue, potentially paving the way for a mutually agreed exit for the Mistry family from Tata Sons, said the people cited. SP Group has suggested Tata Sons consider the possibility of an IPO as a route to unlock value for shareholders, according to people in the Tata, who became chairman of Tata Trusts in October 2024, was nominated to the Tata Sons board by the trusts. He had been appointed additional director last year.
