The security act was not intended for such work. The exclusion of controversial mergers and acquisitions – or, possibly, preventing French billionaire Patrick Drahi from adding 18% of his stake in BT – was more of an intention. While Arm microprocessor technology has defensive uses, it is very difficult to say that the national security of the United Kingdom would be in jeopardy if Arm were listed on our main nuclear ally. U.S. officials could reasonably point out that if the UK was really bothered about Arm’s long-term ownership, Theresa May’s government in 2016 should not have approved the sale to private Japanese ownership from the start, while singing misleading songs about a Brexit “vote of confidence” from abroad. That was the initial mistake. The battle to host the Arm registration is definitely worth continuing, of course. The company is a chip designer around the world and, with £ 40 billion or more, would do more for the London and UK credentials as part of a tech-savvy IPO of thousands of companies like Deliveroo. The arm represents the appropriate technology. But the only way to win is through value. Two arguments seem to have a chance to convince Masayoshi Son, queen at SoftBank, that he could have full value for Arm in London. First, there is a living example of a high value European technology company outside the US stock market. ASML, the Dutch machine maker that is central to the progress of the semiconductor industry, is worth € 190 billion (4 164 billion) in Amsterdam and is recognized worldwide as the best in its field. Second, a major listing in London and US Treasury bills listed on the stock exchange offer a “best of both worlds” option. The arm would be in the top 20 in the FTSE 100, but U.S. investors would be free to play through the familiar (for them) custodian mechanism. Arm, before the acquisition of SoftBank, was introduced in this way and half of the companies in Footsie have US custodian credentials. The setting works. Critically, however, the order falls in reverse. A secondary or standard entry in London is ignored. The American company Vantiv, after taking Worldpay from the FTSE 100 in a cash and stock deal in 2017, tried it and quickly dropped the UK end on the grounds that no one was trading its shares in London. Verizon did the same after buying Vodafone’s assets in the US in 2014. One still suspects that Sean will remain in his stated preference for New York “the center of global high technology,” as he called it. It is the safe choice on the part of a seller. But SoftBank officials have not made similar inflammatory comments recently. London may still be in the game. But the threat of distorting security laws to suit commercial purposes is guaranteed to fail. The implied message of weakness would send every other British tech company to New York.
JD Sports reforms need to be better than the fudge
Peter Cowgill, JD Sports’s executive director for two decades, is gone and the sportswear retailer is in a state of flux, covering everything from “standardization in governance systems” to “reporting mechanisms”. relevant issues to regulatory authorities “. . After two confrontations with the Competition and Purchasing Authority in recent months, we should also hope. Investors, including the 55% shareholder in the Rubin family, who are shy about publicity, will not complain as long as the huge profits continue to come. In this score, interim President Helen Ashton was full of confirmation: pre-tax profits this year will be “in line” with the knockout of 947 million pounds achieved last year, which was twice the previous record. JD had a great lockout period. In this context, the company’s policy of reimbursing support for the UK Government’s Covid license is a fudge. JD has repaid 24 24.4 million λαβε received in the 12 months to January of this year, but retains the amount it received in the first year of the pandemic, which is estimated at εκατο 61 million £. There is no obligation to repay, it should be said, even when profits have increased. But approaching halfway is neither. One hopes that governance reforms will be more comprehensive.
