Attacking - or even appearing to attack - national brands is totally counterproductive. They’re all but guaranteed government bailouts. And it’s very hard to argue against.
Saying that JLR should’ve had better cybersecurity misses the point of being attacked by a hostile state. If a cruise missile were used it’d be silly to say JLR should’ve had underground factories or other protective measures.
Tata’s outsourcing decisions are what led to the UK government having to step in to prevent job losses at scale in the supply chain. This is a partial cost of nationalization without any of the benefit, while Tata continues to own and control the enterprise.
https://avenuez.com/blog/jaguars-sales-collapse-the-cost-of-...
Attacking - or even appearing to attack - national brands is totally counterproductive. They’re all but guaranteed government bailouts. And it’s very hard to argue against.
Saying that JLR should’ve had better cybersecurity misses the point of being attacked by a hostile state. If a cruise missile were used it’d be silly to say JLR should’ve had underground factories or other protective measures.
> national brands
Sort of. JLR is owned by Tata Group.
The money, and a tiny fraction of the management, are Tata.
(Unfortunately, so is the outsourced IT contract...)
The jobs, and the factories, are still in the West Midlands where they've always been.
Tata’s outsourcing decisions are what led to the UK government having to step in to prevent job losses at scale in the supply chain. This is a partial cost of nationalization without any of the benefit, while Tata continues to own and control the enterprise.