Nothing Phone (3) will be company's first-ever flagship to be manufactured in India
Nothing
has confirmed that its upcoming flagship smartphone, the Phone (3), will be
manufactured in India
. The Phone (3) will be the company's first-ever flagship phone to be produced at Nothing's existing manufacturing facility in Chennai. This facility currently employs over 500 people, with 95% of the workforce being women. This decision is part of the London-based phone maker's strategy to boost its presence in the Indian market. The company wants to use India's position as a developing hub for manufacturing and technological innovation. This move also signifies a stronger focus on local production as Nothing expands its manufacturing capabilities in the region.By producing key products locally, Nothing intends to enhance efficiency, reduce lead times, and respond more quickly to market demand.
What Nothing said about making Phone (3) in India
Commenting on the development,
Akis Evangelidis
, co-founder and India President of Nothing, said, 'India has been an important market for us ever since the very beginning of Nothing. Every one of our smartphones has been manufactured here — and Phone (3) proudly joins that list. As we accelerate our growth here, we're doubling down on our investment in
local manufacturing
, talent, and innovation — fully aligned with the
Make in India
vision. Phone (3) marks a major milestone: our first true flagship, delivering the very best of Nothing. We can't wait for our Indian users to experience it.'
Apart from this, Nothing is also expanding its post-sales support in India. The company now runs five exclusive service centers in Bengaluru, Delhi, Mumbai, Hyderabad, and Chennai, plus 20 priority desks (with 10 more on the way) and over 330 authorized service centers nationwide.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
5 Books Warren Buffett Wants You to Read In 2025
Blinkist: Warren Buffett's Reading List
Undo
With these efforts, the company plans to improve customer experience and provide timely support across regions. Meanwhile, Nothing's retail footprint has grown from 2,000 stores at the start of last year to 10,000 at present, that can help the company to boost its postion in India's smartphone market.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
28 minutes ago
- Time of India
ASEAN stonewalling FTA review, 9 rounds done: Official
The 10-member ASEAN has stonewalled the review of its free trade pact with India, a critical demand of New Delhi as it seeks to balance its trade with the bloc. The ASEAN-India Trade in Goods Agreement (AITIGA), came into effect in 2010, is currently under review. India has been demanding a review of the pact to eliminate barriers and its misuse. The review is aimed to be completed this year. 'Diplomatically, the relations are very good but why should our industry suffer? It's the anguish of the Indian industry as nine rounds have happened and the Asean have stonewalled the progress,' said an official. Last week, commerce and industry minister Piyush Goyal slammed the ASEAN describing several countries in the region as a 'B team of China' and the trade pact with the bloc 'silly'. Asean, or the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, comprises Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam. India's goods exports to the ASEAN shrank 5.4% on-year in FY25 to $38.96 billion while rose 5.6% to $84.16 billion. 'India's exports have doubled but imports trebled since the pact. There is a whopping 26 times increase in imports,' said an official. The AITIGA is being reviewed as India seeks to eliminate barriers and misuse of the trade pact. Concerns have also been raised about routing of goods to India from third countries especially China through Asean members by taking the duty advantages of the agreement. India had opened 71% of tariff lines while Indonesia opened only 41%, Vietnam 66.5%, and Thailand opened 67%, said another official. As per the official, subsidised goods from a third country were found to be dumped until India levied anti-dumping duty. Similarly, India cracked down on dumping of steel imports via Safeguard duty as the melt-and-pour clause was not a part of the AITIGA.
Time of India
28 minutes ago
- Time of India
‘They take revenge, not interviews': Techie slams insane hiring process in India
Live Events (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel Interviews in India are brutal, claims a software engineer who has been on the job hunt for the last six his experience on Reddit, the techie compared the hiring process in India to that in Europe, calling Indian interviews unnecessarily difficult."In Europe, interviews are fairly straightforward. My friend there got two offers soon after he started applying," he wrote."But over here in India, we're expected to implement end-to-end machine code, understand Garbage Collector internals—which most of us will never tune in real-world scenarios—and be fluent in every Docker and Kubernetes command. Miss one thing, and you're done for.'He added, 'Who is even clearing these kinds of rounds?'The engineer even suggested a theory behind the high bar: "Before bhaiyas and didis began sharing interview prep tips online, only Tier-1 college grads cracked top tech firms. But now, since interview knowledge is widely available, companies have made the process insanely hard just to gatekeep people from Tier-2 and Tier-3 backgrounds."The post triggered a flurry of reactions from fellow commenter disagreed with the conspiracy angle: 'It's just supply and demand. Too many candidates, not enough jobs. If interviews are too easy, everyone qualifies and it becomes impossible to pick the right person. The EU has a smaller candidate pool. FAANG is an exception—interview difficulty is pretty much the same across regions."Another added nuance: 'FAANG interviews operate at the organizational level, not the country level. While the difficulty may vary slightly depending on the team, there's usually a bar raiser round to ensure consistency across regions.'Frustration with Indian interview culture was a recurring theme.'Indian interviewers are egoistic. They take revenge, not interviews. No one likes Indian interviewers globally,' one user vented. 'Interviews should be healthy discussions, not ego trips and grilling sessions.'A different user recounted a disheartening experience: 'I had an interview with a service-based company yesterday. I answered everything. The interviewer even said, 'You know too much for someone with just three years of experience.' I was over the moon. Then came the rejection. Now I wonder—was he being sarcastic?'Another chimed in with a resigned take: 'Honestly, from the interviewer's side, what else can they do? If they ask only job-relevant questions, they'll get 1,000 qualified candidates. It's like a government exam now—you just have to cram the whole syllabus and hope for the best.'
Mint
37 minutes ago
- Mint
Grifols Case Shows It Paid Family-Linked Entity More for Plasma
(Bloomberg) -- Spanish drugmaker Grifols SA paid a higher price to buy blood plasma from an entity linked to its controlling family than from third-party suppliers, according to a regulator's findings submitted in a court case. Grifols paid Scranton Enterprises BV — one of its main shareholders — between 2% and 39% more annually for plasma than it paid other suppliers over five years, according to a document from the securities regulator filed with a Spanish court. Grifols also agreed to pay a fixed 16.5% mark up on costs to Scranton, according to the documents, which were seen by Bloomberg. Although Grifols had previously disclosed that it had a 30-year supply agreement with Scranton, it hadn't revealed any information on how prices were set. The deal was signed in 2018 and stipulated that Grifols would buy all the plasma from two companies owned by Scranton, Haema and BPC. Scranton, which is owned by members of the Grifols family and acquaintances, had acquired Haema and BPC from Grifols the same year. In a statement in response to Bloomberg questions, Grifols denied any illicit enrichment and said that all explanations related to the transactions have already been given to the securities regulator CNMV. The disclosures are emerging in documents in a court fight between Grifols and short seller Gotham City Research, and once again raise questions about the company's governance. In a January 2024 short-selling report, New York-based Gotham had accused Grifols of misleading investors and misstating its accounting —- claims denied by the Barcelona-based company. Business dealings between Grifols and Scranton had been at the heart of Gotham's attack. Grifols and Scranton subsequently took Gotham to court in Spain while Grifols also filed a lawsuit against the short seller in New York. The regulator documents filed with the court also show that Grifols specifically asked the Spanish securities agency CNMV in 2019 not to publicly disclose the pricing deal. In a statement to Bloomberg, Grifols said it never made the request. 'These are matters that fall within the jurisdiction of the affected company, and it is the company that must decide whether to make them public,' the CNMV said in a response to questions regarding the disclosures. Gotham declined to comment. Scranton representatives didn't reply to several calls and emails seeking comment. According to the court documents, Grifols told the securities regulator that the sale of Haema and BPC was unanimously approved on Dec. 24, 2018, by members of its board who had no links to Scranton, but didn't address the regulator's questions about whether conflicted directors took part in the deliberations prior to the vote. Grifols also told the CNMV that the fairness opinion letter for Scranton's acquisition of Haema and BPC was produced by then Chief Financial Officer Alfredo Arroyo, who retired from the company last year. Arroyo declined to comment when contacted by Bloomberg. Fairness opinions are typically written by investment banks or independent valuation firms and help boards with their financial assessment. The Spanish court is assessing whether Gotham published potentially misleading or biased information about Grifols. The court's fact-finding process in the case includes various reports produced by the securities regulator CNMV — one focusing on whether Gotham's actions could amount to market manipulation and another examining alleged shortcomings in Grifols' financial disclosures. Following the Gotham report, Grifols removed family members from top management positions and also named outsiders as chief executive officer and CFO. More stories like this are available on
