Ah, ARM. My best ever investment, made shortly after it floated in 1998 at the ludicrously low valuation of (from memory) just over £200m. I couldn't understand what the investment banks advising on the float price were thinking - my back-of-the-envelope calculations made it worth at least 10 times that amount. In the event I sold out for 30 times what I'd invested.
There's no doubt that ARM is a class act, but the price Softbank are paying is very high - £24bn for a company which made just £414m profit before tax in 2015.
As regards the importance of ARM to the UK, I don't see any problem here. SoftBank is a hybrid between a venture capital/investment fund, and a hi-tech conglomerate. They'll leave ARM pretty much alone, I think. Nor is there much risk of them moving the design team out of Cambridge - you can't reproduce that level of concentrated hi-tech expertise easily, and there's no advantage in trying to do so.
Incidentally, in the short term this is a bit of very welcome news to Phil Hammond. £24bn is a substantial injection of foreign exchange to offset the current account deficit (£32.6bn in Q1 2016).
As long as the government has got binding assurances, I can't see a problem. Softbank has sold its purchases onto Chinese companies in the past, though; and the Chinese would absolutely love to get their hands on ARM - especially given the deals the company has started to do in China. Whether ARM is UK-owned is pretty immaterial. It's whether it is primarily UK-based that matters.
The interesting thing to see in the short to medium term will be how this affects the kind of licences ARM offers. That premium has to be accounted for somehow. A profitable resale is one way, but assuming that is off the table the licensing policies and royalty rates look to be the obvious place to start making money back, as does the sale of non-core IP assets.
I had a call on Friday night from a business partner. He told me the UK Government is looking to throw money at UK R&D projects. The main problem is there is so little capacity in the UK to properly use the money.
I have spent considerable time sorting out one failed Uni project after another where a group of smart PHDs have wasted years and millions on a nice idea bit with no real focus on commercialisation.
ARM is the kind of company we need to keep going.
R&D has been neglected for far too long and is one of the main reasons for our stagnant productivity along with the inexhaustible supply of cheap labour. It's the reverse of the economics of the Cold War years when the normal supply of economic migrants and cheap labour from eastern Europe was cut off.
Given the UK (well, England) has three of the world's top ten research universities, it seems unlikely that research is being neglected.
Corporate R&D is poor in the UK.
Been destroyed over the past 20 years. Here's how it goes.
UK based company is merged or taken over by another entity headquarted elsewhere. Two R&D centres in Europe Company decides to start research in China. Company decides to keep R&D near headquarters. UK R&D unit closes.
Son hasn't done any of this with previous SoftBank purchases. I don't see why he would start with ARM.
The Front National just has too much baggage (at the moment) to win 50%+1 in the second round of a presidential election, and Le Pen lacks something that candidates like Hofer seem to have in Austria.
Except that's not what the polls suggest. There's a reasonable chance that she'll win the first round and it's near certain that she'll make the final two. Her problem, as you rightly point out, is in gaining transfers, but she may not need all that many if there are mass abstentions in the second round, something which some polls - particularly Hollande-Le Pen head-to-heads - suggest could well happen.
That said, I really don't see how she gets past Juppe.
thanks for the article david. seems like a lot rests on the juppe/sarkozy call. who and how exactly is that choice made? If i'm reading it correctly the general public vote on it in november?
Yes, it's a national primary, although I must admit, I don't know what (if any) the qualification rules are. From what I have seen, I agree: it does sound like a full, general public vote, but I wouldn't take my view as definitive.
Even if Sarkozy wins the primary - which he's some way off being likely to at the moment - he should still go on to win, but both the first and second rounds would become much more open affairs.
thanks david. it does seem a little dangerous allowing the general public to choose your candidate. if you support any of the candidates other than juppe must be tempting to vote sarkozy to get him on the ticket simply because he seems much more beatable.
To place your constant postings about everything bad about the leave vote info context please could you clarify at what point you are within the 5 stages? It looks like the stage 2 anger but perhaps could also be stage 4 depression?
Thanks in advance
Understanding the Kubler-Ross model doesn't mean bereavement is an illegitimate response to a death.
Firstly: childish sulking is not part of DABDA
Secondly: an understanding of the model should make it easier not to be such an arse about everything.
But this isn't a Death it's a War. Even if EU membership is dead in a political struggle there are myriad other outcomes still in play. If I'm stuck in Kubler-Ross why shouldn't I try and get the mob that killed our EU membership to move on to the Brexiters if everything goes to **** ? Does the Game of Thrones end for ever when there is a new occupant ?
"When you play the game of thrones you win... or you sulk"
That's quite funny. I admit that's funny. And your clever Oxonian word play always arouses me.
I had a call on Friday night from a business partner. He told me the UK Government is looking to throw money at UK R&D projects. The main problem is there is so little capacity in the UK to properly use the money.
I have spent considerable time sorting out one failed Uni project after another where a group of smart PHDs have wasted years and millions on a nice idea bit with no real focus on commercialisation.
ARM is the kind of company we need to keep going.
R&D has been neglected for far too long and is one of the main reasons for our stagnant productivity along with the inexhaustible supply of cheap labour. It's the reverse of the economics of the Cold War years when the normal supply of economic migrants and cheap labour from eastern Europe was cut off.
Given the UK (well, England) has three of the world's top ten research universities, it seems unlikely that research is being neglected.
Corporate R&D is poor in the UK.
Been destroyed over the past 20 years. Here's how it goes.
UK based company is merged or taken over by another entity headquarted elsewhere. Two R&D centres in Europe Company decides to start research in China. Company decides to keep R&D near headquarters. UK R&D unit closes.
Son hasn't done any of this with previous SoftBank purchases. I don't see why he would start with ARM.
Not sure there is much understanding around that ARM isn't a steelworks...
% of ARM employees in Uk that are unionised ? 0% .
Cyclefree: "No wonder morale within the French police is said to be low. Incidentally, on my recent quick visit through Paris I saw groups of soldiers patrolling the streets and metro. I've never seen this before, even when Algerian terrorists were blowing people up on the streets of Paris in the 1980's. What have we come to when a major civilised country is forced to do this?"
Surely it's long been common practice, especially in London, for heavily armed police to protect sensitive areas including The Central Criminal Court, Downing Street, the Houses of Parliament, the U.S. Embassy, Heathrow, etc., etc?
But not army soldiers just patrolling the streets. That's what struck me.
Involvement of the army in security is exactly what's needed. The police removed the vans (vans!) that were used to block access by terrorist lorries to the Nice promenade. That kind of balls-up rarely happens at army bases, and if it happened in a conflict zone there would be serious repercussions. After Nice, Francois Hollande said that everything possible had been done to prevent such attacks, which is an outrageous thing to tell the people he is supposed to protect (i.e. everyone in France) and utter shit for the morale of those who have a security role. He's not up to the job. He should get out and let someone take over who is less into posturing.
The army understand security better. They need to be given the kind of powers that the fire service have. If fire security at a hotel is inadequate, because of a malfunctioning alarm, say, the fire service can shut the place down right there and then. The fire service also has an important educational and training role. The army should be involved in the security of high streets, shopping malls, entertainment events and railway stations. No music festivals or concerts should be allowed to happen without the army present. Almost all staff on the British railway system have a security role ("if you see anything suspicious, report it to any member of staff"), but many view it as bullcrap of an unnecessary "health and safety" kind, often doing nothing if someone who doesn't speak with authority reports something to them. ("Oh, he put a bag down, did he, madam? Don't worry.") A soldier who neglected his duty in such a fashion would find that his feet didn't touch the ground. If staff had regular contact with soldiers, they'd soon wise up.
But are you sure the armed men you saw in Paris weren't CRS?
You sound surprised, but the overarching function of the armed forces is to protect the home territory. I would like them to be more visible in Britain than they are.
I had a call on Friday night from a business partner. He told me the UK Government is looking to throw money at UK R&D projects. The main problem is there is so little capacity in the UK to properly use the money.
I have spent considerable time sorting out one failed Uni project after another where a group of smart PHDs have wasted years and millions on a nice idea bit with no real focus on commercialisation.
ARM is the kind of company we need to keep going.
R&D has been neglected for far too long and is one of the main reasons for our stagnant productivity along with the inexhaustible supply of cheap labour. It's the reverse of the economics of the Cold War years when the normal supply of economic migrants and cheap labour from eastern Europe was cut off.
Given the UK (well, England) has three of the world's top ten research universities, it seems unlikely that research is being neglected.
It has been significantly downgraded in many UK academic institutions, with funding either frozen or cut. The decline in the UK's position in the university rankings over recent years reflects this to an extent. Hopefully, one part of Brexit vote - and the increased government spending we are going to see as a result - will be a restoration of funding for our world class universities.
This thing where hyper-sulking remainers are DESPERATE for everything to go down the pan is frankly demeaning.
That you choose to use as your example the largest foreign investment into the UK in corporate history as some kind of suggestion that things are going bad just makes you look like a simpleton.
Indeed, the idea that this is a cut price deal is a fantasy. This is a 70% premium on ARM's pre-referendum price and even after adjusting for a 10% reduction in the value of Sterling it is still a 54% premium.
OH NO BREXIT HAS MADE THE UK A MORE ATTRACTIVE TARGET FOR INVESTMENT! WE'RE DOOOOOOOOMED!
Perhaps now is time for sulky remainers to STFU until we get some *actual* bad economic news. Perhaps the collapse of the Italian and German banking sectors can be blamed on Brexit I dunno.
Some points I've picked up from various ruminations and forecasts:
- A technical recession of around -0.8%. (IMF). Others have it slightly worse (e.g. Credit Suisse) - Inflation to rise to ~ 2.2% in 2017 (S&P) - A GDP opportunity cost of around 2% by 2018 (various) - A 2.5% rise in unemployment by 2018 (various) - A delay of 1-2 years before UK budget surplus implying Brexit PR cost of ~ £30 billion (IFS)
These are all decent examples.
All I would say is that none of that has actually happened yet. All we can see so far is the fall in Sterling. Very little else has changed. Even the house price indicators are not as negative as they were expected to be.
Houseprices tend to be slow motion car crashes generally. People rarely cut the selling price on their property sharply. I will be very interested to see transaction numbers over the next few months, as it would be better to see a sharp drop but volumes holding up, than a shallow fall on minimal volume, which would suggest that cheapness of sterling is not bringing new buyers in.
tbf markets are up around the world, with the latest wall of money about to be unleashed by the Japanese, expectations that interest rates will stay lower for longer given the Brexit vote (with the UK poised to reduce), and the clear statement from the BoI that it will create money to prop everything up if there is any sign of a wobble. It has been the same after previous suggestions of renewed crisis - once the authorities announce they won't let things go down, of course investors jump in for some risk-free money.
The continued predictions of eventual doom from some commentators rest upon the conclusion that at some point the wall-of-money approach will stop working, and we'll have nowhere else to go.
None of this says anything about whether Brexit will be good, bad or indifferent.
QE is financial methadone and the markets are addicted. One day interest rates will have to rise and what happens then ? Or is this the "new normal" with almost zero inflation and interest rates - what's the point in anyone saving ?
I may be misremembering, but when I had my first mortgage in the late 80s - when interest rates changed - it was by a 1pt margin. Ken Clarke IIRC made something of stir when he brought in 0.5pt changes.
And it was under Gordon or Darling that we saw 0.25pt changes downwards. The rates we paid in the 80s are unimaginable today - the housing market would have a fit.
OK. A brief Memo: #1 Before 23/6/16 everything was the fault of the EU. #2 After 23/6/16 everything is the fault of Brexit. That's how Culture Wars work. Remainia has always been at war with Brexiannia. For those of us who've swapped sides we'll get used to it. Some of us faster than others it seems.
I would say Brexit is very much in spin mode right now. You could say Remainers are grumpy bad losers, but they aren't important. Any Brexit badness will be what it is. We voted for it. The Government OTOH has to implement Brexit and I still don't see any coherent or credible plan. Brexit ministers are going heavy on Leave rhetoric as if they were still on campaign. Fair enough, the government can hardly say, it will be a disaster but we'll carry on regardless. They certainly aren't preparing the public for a bumpy ride.
Mr. Sandpit, even before the VSC (and your Monaco tip was unfortunate not to come off) it was very unlikely in Hungary.
Do wonder if the Red Bulls might be value. Only 8 each on Ladbrokes, though.
Rosberg at 4 may be too long. He really needs to arrest Hamilton's momentum, though.
I was rather proud of the Monaco SC bet, even though it didn't come off thanks to the weather.
For a guy with the quickest car to be 3/1 sounds too long, especially given that Lewis is going to get penalties at some point soon - he's used all his engines and has two reprimands to his name. RBs are both 8 on Betfair too, I might go with an Ayrton on Nico and fivers on the RBs.
OK. A brief Memo: #1 Before 23/6/16 everything was the fault of the EU. #2 After 23/6/16 everything is the fault of Brexit. That's how Culture Wars work. Remainia has always been at war with Brexiannia. For those of us who've swapped sides we'll get used to it. Some of us faster than others it seems.
Just seen Juncker's announcement that he will not permit the UK to have trade negoatiations with any third country while they are a member of the EU (as it is the exclusive responsibility of the Commisson).
Words fail me sometimes, they really do.
OK but is he technically correct that a member country cannot unilaterally open trade negotiations with a non-EU country? If so what sanctions are available if we break that undertaking?
As we are going to be a member for another two and a half years at least will both sides then feel free to ignore any EU regulations that don't suit during that period?
I know PB will be full of jingoistic bravado about telling johnny-foreigner to bugger off but, in the real world, I suspect the situation is more complicated.
He is not correct, the UK cannot unilaterally enter a trade deal outside of the EU. We can talk to whoever we want. This is like a wife to whom we've served divorce papers crying foul after we've re-entered the dating scene despite the divorce not being finalised.
Fair enough, it was a genuine question. But if we can't actually enter any new trade deals for the next 3 years say, why all the breathless excitement about Australia or wherever rushing to do a deal now? I can only assume it is because, even if with 2 very willing participants, it is going to take 3 years? Again genuine questions
OK. A brief Memo: #1 Before 23/6/16 everything was the fault of the EU. #2 After 23/6/16 everything is the fault of Brexit. That's how Culture Wars work. Remainia has always been at war with Brexiannia. For those of us who've swapped sides we'll get used to it. Some of us faster than others it seems.
It certainly is the excuse du jour for businesses announcing any sort of bad news, even if the connections are very tenuous.
"Corbyn tells The Guardian today that he will vote against it, adding: "I've been involved in peace transformation all of my life, and I think we've got an opportunity to show leadership in the world." Clive Lewis, shadow defence secretary, and Emily Thornberry, shadow foreign secretary, described the vote as a "contemptible trick" and will abstain.
So. How many Labour MPs are going to walk into the giant trap sized and fully signposted trident trap today?
Hopefully, now that we have a grown-up in charge these traps will become less of a thing. Given where Labour are there is absolutely no need for them. Surely the government has better things to do than to play student politics.
The more attacks there are, the more likely it is for Marine Le Pen to win in 2017 and initiate punitive measures against residents of France (Muslims/Jews, mainly of North African origin) who hold views that are alien to European Christian values.
The National Front get a lot of Jewish votes (which is not to say that some French Jews don't oppose it) and is strongly pro-Zionist, and Le Pen would not initiate any punitive measures against Jews. Against Muslims (the detested Arabs), yes.
"Corbyn tells The Guardian today that he will vote against it, adding: "I've been involved in peace transformation all of my life, and I think we've got an opportunity to show leadership in the world." Clive Lewis, shadow defence secretary, and Emily Thornberry, shadow foreign secretary, described the vote as a "contemptible trick" and will abstain.
Dearie me.
It's been almost ten years since we had a vote committing the house to Trident.
If it were every year I might think it were a trick.
£24bn doesn't come into the UK. ARM is largely owned by non-UK funds already.
True, do you know what proportion?
It wouldn't be difficult for me to work out (thanks Bloomberg!), but it would be time consuming. I'm going to guess that it's 33% UK owned, 67% foreign.
Ah, ARM. My best ever investment, made shortly after it floated in 1998 at the ludicrously low valuation of (from memory) just over £200m. I couldn't understand what the investment banks advising on the float price were thinking - my back-of-the-envelope calculations made it worth at least 10 times that amount. In the event I sold out for 30 times what I'd invested.
There's no doubt that ARM is a class act, but the price Softbank are paying is very high - £24bn for a company which made just £414m profit before tax in 2015.
As regards the importance of ARM to the UK, I don't see any problem here. SoftBank is a hybrid between a venture capital/investment fund, and a hi-tech conglomerate. They'll leave ARM pretty much alone, I think. Nor is there much risk of them moving the design team out of Cambridge - you can't reproduce that level of concentrated hi-tech expertise easily, and there's no advantage in trying to do so.
Incidentally, in the short term this is a bit of very welcome news to Phil Hammond. £24bn is a substantial injection of foreign exchange to offset the current account deficit (£32.6bn in Q1 2016).
As long as the government has got binding assurances, I can't see a problem. Softbank has sold its purchases onto Chinese companies in the past, though; and the Chinese would absolutely love to get their hands on ARM - especially given the deals the company has started to do in China. Whether ARM is UK-owned is pretty immaterial. It's whether it is primarily UK-based that matters.
The interesting thing to see in the short to medium term will be how this affects the kind of licences ARM offers. That premium has to be accounted for somehow. A profitable resale is one way, but assuming that is off the table the licensing policies and royalty rates look to be the obvious place to start making money back, as does the sale of non-core IP assets.
ARM's premium is Son's valuation of the future and ARM's potential place in it. Son is not about to dismantle the substance on which he valued ARM's worth today and potential tomorrow. You'll have to wait years to see whether Son got his sums right. Son is not a trader.
On what did you base your assessment of future growth? This was long before ARM's breakout success in smartphones.
Licensing deals. At the time, ARM had little actual revenue, but it had already established itself as the overwhelmingly dominant architecture for the new generation of chips. You only had to read any issue of Electronics Weekly (this was at a time when traditional publications still mattered!) to see that almost every company developing software and hardware for the embededd and hand-held device market was partnering with ARM. That in turn gave ARM a huge first-mover advantage, because everyone wanted to be part of the new de facto industry standard. It was game over before many actual chips had shipped.
In addition, I had very good contacts with one of the traditional chip manufacturers. They were under no illusion that a giant market was slipping away from them, and were scrabbling to catch up. Of course they failed, and ended up licensing ARM's IP.
OK. A brief Memo: #1 Before 23/6/16 everything was the fault of the EU. #2 After 23/6/16 everything is the fault of Brexit. That's how Culture Wars work. Remainia has always been at war with Brexiannia. For those of us who've swapped sides we'll get used to it. Some of us faster than others it seems.
That is exactly how it will play out politically and it's no use Brexiters shouting it's not fair, the boot is firmly on the other foot now. The electorate is extremely fickle and not very sophisticated on the whole.
Some points I've picked up from various ruminations and forecasts:
- A technical recession of around -0.8%. (IMF). Others have it slightly worse (e.g. Credit Suisse) - Inflation to rise to ~ 2.2% in 2017 (S&P) - A GDP opportunity cost of around 2% by 2018 (various) - A 2.5% rise in unemployment by 2018 (various) - A delay of 1-2 years before UK budget surplus implying Brexit PR cost of ~ £30 billion (IFS)
These are all decent examples.
I'm not denying some (or all) of these may occur. But they've not happened *yet*. And until they do, I think the mingmongs should really stop trying to invent crises where none exist.
JOOI, what happens if these things don't materialize? Does it then become Official the remainers were just a bunch of lying shitstacks all along?
Prediction is part of this website: trying to establish (the probability of) events in the future is a necessary part of deciding whether a bet is value or not.
As for the verbiage, I need to point out this quote:
"I always cheer up immensely if one is particularly wounding because I think well, if they attack one personally, it means they have not a single political argument left. That is why my father always taught me: never worry about anyone who attacks you personally; it means their arguments carry no weight and they know it.”
Mr. Sandpit, may be worth waiting a bit. The Ladbrokes markets may well be up later today, and some other bets (podium, top score etc) may offer better value.
Just seen Juncker's announcement that he will not permit the UK to have trade negoatiations with any third country while they are a member of the EU (as it is the exclusive responsibility of the Commisson).
Words fail me sometimes, they really do.
OK but is he technically correct that a member country cannot unilaterally open trade negotiations with a non-EU country? If so what sanctions are available if we break that undertaking?
As we are going to be a member for another two and a half years at least will both sides then feel free to ignore any EU regulations that don't suit during that period?
I know PB will be full of jingoistic bravado about telling johnny-foreigner to bugger off but, in the real world, I suspect the situation is more complicated.
He is not correct, the UK cannot unilaterally enter a trade deal outside of the EU. We can talk to whoever we want. This is like a wife to whom we've served divorce papers crying foul after we've re-entered the dating scene despite the divorce not being finalised.
Not that Britain has yet served divorce papers yet, though it's said it will do.
"Corbyn tells The Guardian today that he will vote against it, adding: "I've been involved in peace transformation all of my life, and I think we've got an opportunity to show leadership in the world." Clive Lewis, shadow defence secretary, and Emily Thornberry, shadow foreign secretary, described the vote as a "contemptible trick" and will abstain.
Dearie me.
Ha ha, a trick my arse. This vote has been postponed so many times, let's just bloody get on with building the new boats. Let's get some more things on the postponed list going too - yes, Heathrow, that means you!
@tnewtondunn: Theresa May going to see Merkel tomorrow and Hollande on Thurs for a chat "as the UK prepares to leave the EU". Forcing pre-Brexit talks?
£24bn doesn't come into the UK. ARM is largely owned by non-UK funds already.
True, do you know what proportion?
It wouldn't be difficult for me to work out (thanks Bloomberg!), but it would be time consuming. I'm going to guess that it's 33% UK owned, 67% foreign.
Thanks, the foreign ownership is higher than I thought.
I had a call on Friday night from a business partner. He told me the UK Government is looking to throw money at UK R&D projects. The main problem is there is so little capacity in the UK to properly use the money.
I have spent considerable time sorting out one failed Uni project after another where a group of smart PHDs have wasted years and millions on a nice idea bit with no real focus on commercialisation.
ARM is the kind of company we need to keep going.
R&D has been neglected for far too long and is one of the main reasons for our stagnant productivity along with the inexhaustible supply of cheap labour. It's the reverse of the economics of the Cold War years when the normal supply of economic migrants and cheap labour from eastern Europe was cut off.
Given the UK (well, England) has three of the world's top ten research universities, it seems unlikely that research is being neglected.
It has been significantly downgraded in many UK academic institutions, with funding either frozen or cut. The decline in the UK's position in the university rankings over recent years reflects this to an extent. Hopefully, one part of Brexit vote - and the increased government spending we are going to see as a result - will be a restoration of funding for our world class universities.
Remember George Osborne was cutting UK research funds while the Chinese are massively ramping up theirs (SeanT sent many reports iirc). Whether this will be restored, as well as substitution of lost EU funding, who knows?
I had a call on Friday night from a business partner. He told me the UK Government is looking to throw money at UK R&D projects. The main problem is there is so little capacity in the UK to properly use the money.
I have spent considerable time sorting out one failed Uni project after another where a group of smart PHDs have wasted years and millions on a nice idea bit with no real focus on commercialisation.
ARM is the kind of company we need to keep going.
R&D has been neglected for far too long and is one of the main reasons for our stagnant productivity along with the inexhaustible supply of cheap labour. It's the reverse of the economics of the Cold War years when the normal supply of economic migrants and cheap labour from eastern Europe was cut off.
Given the UK (well, England) has three of the world's top ten research universities, it seems unlikely that research is being neglected.
Corporate R&D is poor in the UK.
Been destroyed over the past 20 years. Here's how it goes.
UK based company is merged or taken over by another entity headquarted elsewhere. Two R&D centres in Europe Company decides to start research in China. Company decides to keep R&D near headquarters. UK R&D unit closes.
Son hasn't done any of this with previous SoftBank purchases. I don't see why he would start with ARM.
Last month Softbank sold its majority stake in Supercell 2 to Tencent.
Just seen Juncker's announcement that he will not permit the UK to have trade negoatiations with any third country while they are a member of the EU (as it is the exclusive responsibility of the Commisson).
Words fail me sometimes, they really do.
OK but is he technically correct that a member country cannot unilaterally open trade negotiations with a non-EU country? If so what sanctions are available if we break that undertaking?
As we are going to be a member for another two and a half years at least will both sides then feel free to ignore any EU regulations that don't suit during that period?
I know PB will be full of jingoistic bravado about telling johnny-foreigner to bugger off but, in the real world, I suspect the situation is more complicated.
He is not correct, the UK cannot unilaterally enter a trade deal outside of the EU. We can talk to whoever we want. This is like a wife to whom we've served divorce papers crying foul after we've re-entered the dating scene despite the divorce not being finalised.
Fair enough, it was a genuine question. But if we can't actually enter any new trade deals for the next 3 years say, why all the breathless excitement about Australia or wherever rushing to do a deal now? I can only assume it is because, even if with 2 very willing participants, it is going to take 3 years? Again genuine questions
I don't think so, which is why delaying Article 50 is in our interests.
@tnewtondunn: Theresa May going to see Merkel tomorrow and Hollande on Thurs for a chat "as the UK prepares to leave the EU". Forcing pre-Brexit talks?
It is the Commission that doesn't hold pre-Brexit talks.
Some points I've picked up from various ruminations and forecasts:
- A technical recession of around -0.8%. (IMF). Others have it slightly worse (e.g. Credit Suisse) - Inflation to rise to ~ 2.2% in 2017 (S&P) - A GDP opportunity cost of around 2% by 2018 (various) - A 2.5% rise in unemployment by 2018 (various) - A delay of 1-2 years before UK budget surplus implying Brexit PR cost of ~ £30 billion (IFS)
These are all decent examples.
I'm not denying some (or all) of these may occur. But they've not happened *yet*. And until they do, I think the mingmongs should really stop trying to invent crises where none exist.
JOOI, what happens if these things don't materialize? Does it then become Official the remainers were just a bunch of lying shitstacks all along?
Prediction is part of this website: trying to establish (the probability of) events in the future is a necessary part of deciding whether a bet is value or not.
As for the verbiage, I need to point out this quote:
"I always cheer up immensely if one is particularly wounding because I think well, if they attack one personally, it means they have not a single political argument left. That is why my father always taught me: never worry about anyone who attacks you personally; it means their arguments carry no weight and they know it.”
"Corbyn tells The Guardian today that he will vote against it, adding: "I've been involved in peace transformation all of my life, and I think we've got an opportunity to show leadership in the world." Clive Lewis, shadow defence secretary, and Emily Thornberry, shadow foreign secretary, described the vote as a "contemptible trick" and will abstain.
Dearie me.
Ha ha, a trick my arse. This vote has been postponed so many times, let's just bloody get on with building the new boats. Let's get some more things on the postponed list going too - yes, Heathrow, that means you!
There's a Times article today saying LHR decision could be weeks away. I remain sceptical.
Just seen Juncker's announcement that he will not permit the UK to have trade negoatiations with any third country while they are a member of the EU (as it is the exclusive responsibility of the Commisson).
Words fail me sometimes, they really do.
OK but is he technically correct that a member country cannot unilaterally open trade negotiations with a non-EU country? If so what sanctions are available if we break that undertaking?
As we are going to be a member for another two and a half years at least will both sides then feel free to ignore any EU regulations that don't suit during that period?
I know PB will be full of jingoistic bravado about telling johnny-foreigner to bugger off but, in the real world, I suspect the situation is more complicated.
He is not correct, the UK cannot unilaterally enter a trade deal outside of the EU. We can talk to whoever we want. This is like a wife to whom we've served divorce papers crying foul after we've re-entered the dating scene despite the divorce not being finalised.
Fair enough, it was a genuine question. But if we can't actually enter any new trade deals for the next 3 years say, why all the breathless excitement about Australia or wherever rushing to do a deal now? I can only assume it is because, even if with 2 very willing participants, it is going to take 3 years? Again genuine questions
Spin, simply. Finding new trade deals to replace the ones that we will lose is activity we need to do. The breathless excitement is in planting the idea that we don't need the EU. New trade deals, in fact just talking about them, means we could avoid the messy business of working out a good post-Brexit relationship with the EU.
Mr. Sandpit, may be worth waiting a bit. The Ladbrokes markets may well be up later today, and some other bets (podium, top score etc) may offer better value.
I'll hold for a day if you say so, but will probably stay on Betfair (don't have many other accounts, as getting money out when I spend so much time abroad is a pain in the proverbial).
Your mid season review is good, I'll follow your spread bets, but like you only with virtual cash for now.
A thought on next year, there's a lot of changes on the cars for 2017 but little on the power units, so the PU suppliers will continue to converge in performance. It could be McLaren's year to step up, although they probably won't win the title - a 'buy' spread on their points might be profitable.
Ah, ARM. My best ever investment, made shortly after it floated in 1998 at the ludicrously low valuation of (from memory) just over £200m. I couldn't understand what the investment banks advising on the float price were thinking - my back-of-the-envelope calculations made it worth at least 10 times that amount. In the event I sold out for 30 times what I'd invested.
There's no doubt that ARM is a class act, but the price Softbank are paying is very high - £24bn for a company which made just £414m profit before tax in 2015.
As so.
Incidentally, in the short term this is a bit of very welcome news to Phil Hammond. £24bn is a substantial injection of foreign exchange to offset the current account deficit (£32.6bn in Q1 2016).
As long as the government has got binding assurances, I can't see a problem. Softbank has matters.
The interesting thing to see in the short to medium term will be how this affects the kind of licences ARM offers. That premium has to be accounted for somehow. A profitable resale is one way, but assuming that is off the table the licensing policies and royalty rates look to be the obvious place to start making money back, as does the sale of non-core IP assets.
ARM's premium is Son's valuation of the future and ARM's potential place in it. Son is not about to dismantle the substance on which he valued ARM's worth today and potential tomorrow. You'll have to wait years to see whether Son got his sums right. Son is not a trader.
The share price already reflects the market's view of ARM's value - and is a forward projection. That Son has put close to a 50% premium on that says to me that business as usual is unlikely to be the strategy. ARM has been doing a lot of deals in China. China wants self-sufficiency in semiconductor technology. I can't hep seeing the deal in that light, but have to assume that the government has put a block on any resale as to not do so would be extraordinary negligence. So, if that is off the table the next obvious place to look is royalty rates and licensing terms. That said, as Qualcomm can vouch, Asian anti-trust regulators are paying ever-closer attention to the terms of patent licensing deals local companies are being asked to pay and they are clamping down on them.
The behaviour rules for South Shields Labour meetings appear to ban almost everything that people do in meetings https://t.co/sJhRtLGlGG
It's 5 that gets me. No action that might be regarded as aggressive physical behavior, regardless of whether that was the intent. If it was not my intent, how would I know not to do it? I know some things we don't think of as offensive or aggressive can reasonably be guessed to be potentially seen as such, but it seems so reflective of general infantilisation, where the right to not be offended is seen as the most crucial right a person can have, regardless of whether offence is a reasonable reaction and no matter if 'protecting' someone from such is disproportionate.
4 is a good one too. No comments (presumably derogatory, but it doesn't specify) about age, gender, etc. Ok, mostly seems fine, although I guess that means saying 'I've been a Labour member for 35 years' would not be ok, as its drawing a comparison with others' lack of experience. But it includes 'individual personal politics' on the list. Age, gender, and personal politics? These things are of the same category?
Some points I've picked up from various ruminations and forecasts:
- A technical recession of around -0.8%. (IMF). Others have it slightly worse (e.g. Credit Suisse) - Inflation to rise to ~ 2.2% in 2017 (S&P) - A GDP opportunity cost of around 2% by 2018 (various) - A 2.5% rise in unemployment by 2018 (various) - A delay of 1-2 years before UK budget surplus implying Brexit PR cost of ~ £30 billion (IFS)
These are all decent examples.
I'm not denying some (or all) of these may occur. But they've not happened *yet*. And until they do, I think the mingmongs should really stop trying to invent crises where none exist.
JOOI, what happens if these things don't materialize? Does it then become Official the remainers were just a bunch of lying shitstacks all along?
Prediction is part of this website: trying to establish (the probability of) events in the future is a necessary part of deciding whether a bet is value or not.
Yes, but the corollary of that is that prediction in the real world is so bloody difficult it is almost not worth trying (where are all the punters' Gulfstreams?) So it is entirely legitimate to say, let's wait for data rather than forecasts.
"Corbyn tells The Guardian today that he will vote against it, adding: "I've been involved in peace transformation all of my life, and I think we've got an opportunity to show leadership in the world." Clive Lewis, shadow defence secretary, and Emily Thornberry, shadow foreign secretary, described the vote as a "contemptible trick" and will abstain.
I had a call on Friday night from a business partner. He told me the UK Government is looking to throw money at UK R&D projects. The main problem is there is so little capacity in the UK to properly use the money.
I have spent considerable time sorting out one failed Uni project after another where a group of smart PHDs have wasted years and millions on a nice idea bit with no real focus on commercialisation.
ARM is the kind of company we need to keep going.
R&D has been neglected for far too long and is one of the main reasons for our stagnant productivity along with the inexhaustible supply of cheap labour. It's the reverse of the economics of the Cold War years when the normal supply of economic migrants and cheap labour from eastern Europe was cut off.
Given the UK (well, England) has three of the world's top ten research universities, it seems unlikely that research is being neglected.
Corporate R&D is poor in the UK.
Been destroyed over the past 20 years. Here's how it goes.
UK based company is merged or taken over by another entity headquarted elsewhere. Two R&D centres in Europe Company decides to start research in China. Company decides to keep R&D near headquarters. UK R&D unit closes.
Son hasn't done any of this with previous SoftBank purchases. I don't see why he would start with ARM.
Last month Softbank sold its majority stake in Supercell 2 to Tencent.
What do you think they are raising capital for? Plus, Son is a canny operator, mobile gaming is an easy come, easy go kind of market. Tencent offered to more than double SoftBank's money. I don't see anyone offering £48-£55bn for ARM.
Just seen Juncker's announcement that he will not permit the UK to have trade negoatiations with any third country while they are a member of the EU (as it is the exclusive responsibility of the Commisson).
Words fail me sometimes, they really do.
Seems like a good opening negotiating position from his point of view. Get used it.
Not really. It will be ignored and he will lose credibility.
PB Brexitory thinks Juncker has credibility to lose? Wow.
That's what I was thinking as well.
Well at least you must be very relieved you both voted out.
I actually voted Remain!
I know.
You have just proved the point I was making in one single 4 worded response.
Edgewood are by far the largest. They're based in Philadelphia.
That's the ADR. For the common shares, the buggest holder is Baillie Gifford (in Scotland) with 10%. Blackrock and Vanguard (US) are 10%. Capital is next with 4% (US). Legal & General is 3%. Norges Bank has 2%. Standard Life, Massachusetts Mutual, BNP, State Street, and a bunch of others have 1%.
But,
You then need to look at the underlying owners of the funds! How many of Baillie Giffords customers are British? They manage a lot of money for US endowments. And Blackrock - while American - has a big business doing Council pension schemes in the UK.
Basically, the ultimate beneficial ownership of ARM is incredibly global.
''As regards the importance of ARM to the UK, I don't see any problem here. SoftBank is a hybrid between a venture capital/investment fund, and a hi-tech conglomerate. They'll leave ARM pretty much alone, I think.''
The report I read said ARM is going to create at least 4,000 UK jobs at its Cambridge site.
I had a call on Friday night from a business partner. He told me the UK Government is looking to throw money at UK R&D projects. The main problem is there is so little capacity in the UK to properly use the money.
I have spent considerable time sorting out one failed Uni project after another where a group of smart PHDs have wasted years and millions on a nice idea bit with no real focus on commercialisation.
ARM is the kind of company we need to keep going.
R&D has been neglected for far too long and is one of the main reasons for our stagnant productivity along with the inexhaustible supply of cheap labour. It's the reverse of the economics of the Cold War years when the normal supply of economic migrants and cheap labour from eastern Europe was cut off.
Given the UK (well, England) has three of the world's top ten research universities, it seems unlikely that research is being neglected.
It has been significantly downgraded in many UK academic institutions, with funding either frozen or cut. The decline in the UK's position in the university rankings over recent years reflects this to an extent. Hopefully, one part of Brexit vote - and the increased government spending we are going to see as a result - will be a restoration of funding for our world class universities.
Remember George Osborne was cutting UK research funds while the Chinese are massively ramping up theirs (SeanT sent many reports iirc). Whether this will be restored, as well as substitution of lost EU funding, who knows?
It is in the UK's national interest that it happens. We were told that leaving the EU would not have a negative affect on EU-funded academic research funding, so we don't have to worry about that. But the government should put more in on top. Our universities are a major national asset and should be treated as such.
''As regards the importance of ARM to the UK, I don't see any problem here. SoftBank is a hybrid between a venture capital/investment fund, and a hi-tech conglomerate. They'll leave ARM pretty much alone, I think.''
The report I read said ARM is going to create at least 4,000 UK jobs at its Cambridge site.
Huge win win for UK PLC. Post Brexit.
Someone below said that was on the cards anyway - but it's good it will continue I guess.
''As regards the importance of ARM to the UK, I don't see any problem here. SoftBank is a hybrid between a venture capital/investment fund, and a hi-tech conglomerate. They'll leave ARM pretty much alone, I think.''
The report I read said ARM is going to create at least 4,000 UK jobs at its Cambridge site.
Huge win win for UK PLC. Post Brexit.
That was already happening. I was there last year and was given a full site visit and a presentation on the plans. What's good is that Brexit has not changed any of it, though given that much of ARM's client base is non-European that is not really a surprise.
The behaviour rules for South Shields Labour meetings appear to ban almost everything that people do in meetings https://t.co/sJhRtLGlGG
It's 5 that gets me. No action that might be regarded as aggressive physical behavior, regardless of whether that was the intent. If it was not my intent, how would I know not to do it? I know some things we don't think of as offensive or aggressive can reasonably be guessed to be potentially seen as such, but it seems so reflective of general infantilisation, where the right to not be offended is seen as the most crucial right a person can have, regardless of whether offence is a reasonable reaction and no matter if 'protecting' someone from such is disproportionate.
I had a call on Friday night from a business partner. He told me the UK Government is looking to throw money at UK R&D projects. The main problem is there is so little capacity in the UK to properly use the money.
I have spent considerable time sorting out one failed Uni project after another where a group of smart PHDs have wasted years and millions on a nice idea bit with no real focus on commercialisation.
ARM is the kind of company we need to keep going.
R&D has been neglected for far too long and is one of the main reasons for our stagnant productivity along with the inexhaustible supply of cheap labour. It's the reverse of the economics of the Cold War years when the normal supply of economic migrants and cheap labour from eastern Europe was cut off.
Given the UK (well, England) has three of the world's top ten research universities, it seems unlikely that research is being neglected.
It has been significantly downgraded in many UK academic institutions, with funding either frozen or cut. The decline in the UK's position in the university rankings over recent years reflects this to an extent. Hopefully, one part of Brexit vote - and the increased government spending we are going to see as a result - will be a restoration of funding for our world class universities.
Remember George Osborne was cutting UK research funds while the Chinese are massively ramping up theirs (SeanT sent many reports iirc). Whether this will be restored, as well as substitution of lost EU funding, who knows?
It is in the UK's national interest that it happens. We were told that leaving the EU would not have a negative affect on EU-funded academic research funding, so we don't have to worry about that. But the government should put more in on top. Our universities are a major national asset and should be treated as such.
Completely agreed. I'd also like to see fees reductions for fields in which we have a shortage of workers.
"Corbyn tells The Guardian today that he will vote against it, adding: "I've been involved in peace transformation all of my life, and I think we've got an opportunity to show leadership in the world." Clive Lewis, shadow defence secretary, and Emily Thornberry, shadow foreign secretary, described the vote as a "contemptible trick" and will abstain.
Dearie me.
Ha ha, a trick my arse. This vote has been postponed so many times, let's just bloody get on with building the new boats. Let's get some more things on the postponed list going too - yes, Heathrow, that means you!
There's a Times article today saying LHR decision could be weeks away. I remain sceptical.
Grr. Come on Theresa, just bloody announce it. Two new runways at LHR and one more at LGW please, preferably with a maglev or Hyperloop running between them
Are we trying to show the World we're open for business, or not?
Just seen Juncker's announcement that he will not permit the UK to have trade negoatiations with any third country while they are a member of the EU (as it is the exclusive responsibility of the Commisson).
Words fail me sometimes, they really do.
OK but is he technically correct that a member country cannot unilaterally open trade negotiations with a non-EU country? If so what sanctions are available if we break that undertaking?
As we are going to be a member for another two and a half years at least will both sides then feel free to ignore any EU regulations that don't suit during that period?
I know PB will be full of jingoistic bravado about telling johnny-foreigner to bugger off but, in the real world, I suspect the situation is more complicated.
He is not correct, the UK cannot unilaterally enter a trade deal outside of the EU. We can talk to whoever we want. This is like a wife to whom we've served divorce papers crying foul after we've re-entered the dating scene despite the divorce not being finalised.
Fair enough, it was a genuine question. But if we can't actually enter any new trade deals for the next 3 years say, why all the breathless excitement about Australia or wherever rushing to do a deal now? I can only assume it is because, even if with 2 very willing participants, it is going to take 3 years? Again genuine questions
The devil is in the detail. And detail takes time....
£24bn doesn't come into the UK. ARM is largely owned by non-UK funds already.
True, do you know what proportion?
It wouldn't be difficult for me to work out (thanks Bloomberg!), but it would be time consuming. I'm going to guess that it's 33% UK owned, 67% foreign.
Since the available data shows virtually all largest ARM shareholders as investment trusts or similar, this is really is the guess to outguess all other guesses
''As regards the importance of ARM to the UK, I don't see any problem here. SoftBank is a hybrid between a venture capital/investment fund, and a hi-tech conglomerate. They'll leave ARM pretty much alone, I think.''
The report I read said ARM is going to create at least 4,000 UK jobs at its Cambridge site.
Huge win win for UK PLC. Post Brexit.
That was already happening. I was there last year and was given a full site visit and a presentation on the plans. What's good is that Brexit has not changed any of it, though given that much of ARM's client base is non-European that is not really a surprise.
Yeah, Brexit has absolutely no connection with the deal whatsoever, except that the fall in sterling has made picking up UK assets (especially UK assets which earn nearly all their revenues in foreign exchange) cheaper.
Mr. Sandpit, I'll have to wait and see how the numbers look, both on the spreads and in my Ladbrokes account.
I'm not doing as well as I should be (accidentally put too small a stake on the Perez bet in Baku). One singular moment aside, this season's been pretty disappointing, from a betting perspective.
Edited extra bit: on what I plan to watch for in the 2017 spreads: Alonso, Verstappen, Ricciardo
If engines converge, a credible scenario, then the advantage moves to those who are aerodynamically strong. Obviously, that includes Mercedes, but they'll be top of the prediction tree and the price may be long (but selling them would be rather brave too).
"Corbyn tells The Guardian today that he will vote against it, adding: "I've been involved in peace transformation all of my life, and I think we've got an opportunity to show leadership in the world." Clive Lewis, shadow defence secretary, and Emily Thornberry, shadow foreign secretary, described the vote as a "contemptible trick" and will abstain.
Dearie me.
Ha ha, a trick my arse. This vote has been postponed so many times, let's just bloody get on with building the new boats. Let's get some more things on the postponed list going too - yes, Heathrow, that means you!
There's a Times article today saying LHR decision could be weeks away. I remain sceptical.
Grr. Come on Theresa, just bloody announce it. Two new runways at LHR and one more at LGW please, preferably with a maglev or Hyperloop running between them
Are we trying to show the World we're open for business, or not?
Any chance she could stop throwing money down a hole, I mean HS2, as well?
"Corbyn tells The Guardian today that he will vote against it, adding: "I've been involved in peace transformation all of my life, and I think we've got an opportunity to show leadership in the world." Clive Lewis, shadow defence secretary, and Emily Thornberry, shadow foreign secretary, described the vote as a "contemptible trick" and will abstain.
Dearie me.
Ha ha, a trick my arse. This vote has been postponed so many times, let's just bloody get on with building the new boats. Let's get some more things on the postponed list going too - yes, Heathrow, that means you!
There's a Times article today saying LHR decision could be weeks away. I remain sceptical.
Grr. Come on Theresa, just bloody announce it. Two new runways at LHR and one more at LGW please, preferably with a maglev or Hyperloop running between them
Are we trying to show the World we're open for business, or not?
Or Boris Island. Either would be fine.
I like the idea of a hyperloop between the two airports. (Quiet Mr Jessop)
This thing where hyper-sulking remainers are DESPERATE for everything to go down the pan is frankly demeaning.
That you choose to use as your example the largest foreign investment into the UK in corporate history as some kind of suggestion that things are going bad just makes you look like a simpleton.
Indeed, the idea that this is a cut price deal is a fantasy. This is a 70% premium on ARM's pre-referendum price and even after adjusting for a 10% reduction in the value of Sterling it is still a 54% premium.
OH NO BREXIT HAS MADE THE UK A MORE ATTRACTIVE TARGET FOR INVESTMENT! WE'RE DOOOOOOOOMED!
Perhaps now is time for sulky remainers to STFU until we get some *actual* bad economic news. Perhaps the collapse of the Italian and German banking sectors can be blamed on Brexit I dunno.
Some points I've picked up from various ruminations and forecasts:
- A technical recession of around -0.8%. (IMF). Others have it slightly worse (e.g. Credit Suisse) - Inflation to rise to ~ 2.2% in 2017 (S&P) - A GDP opportunity cost of around 2% by 2018 (various) - A 2.5% rise in unemployment by 2018 (various) - A delay of 1-2 years before UK budget surplus implying Brexit PR cost of ~ £30 billion (IFS)
These are all decent examples.
All I would say is that none of that has actually happened yet. All we can see so far is the fall in Sterling. Very little else has changed. Even the house price indicators are not as negative as they were expected to be.
Houseprices tend to be slow motion car crashes generally. People rarely cut the selling price on their property sharply. I will be very interested to see transaction numbers over the next few months, as it would be better to see a sharp drop but volumes holding up, than a shallow fall on minimal volume, which would suggest that cheapness of sterling is not bringing new buyers in.
Outside London, the exchange rate is really not going to be very important.
"Corbyn tells The Guardian today that he will vote against it, adding: "I've been involved in peace transformation all of my life, and I think we've got an opportunity to show leadership in the world." Clive Lewis, shadow defence secretary, and Emily Thornberry, shadow foreign secretary, described the vote as a "contemptible trick" and will abstain.
Dearie me.
Ha ha, a trick my arse. This vote has been postponed so many times, let's just bloody get on with building the new boats. Let's get some more things on the postponed list going too - yes, Heathrow, that means you!
There's a Times article today saying LHR decision could be weeks away. I remain sceptical.
Grr. Come on Theresa, just bloody announce it. Two new runways at LHR and one more at LGW please, preferably with a maglev or Hyperloop running between them
Are we trying to show the World we're open for business, or not?
Twelve new runways at heathrow, nine at Gatwick, six at Stansted and Luton to be demolished and replaced with a Virgin Galactic spaceport.
This thing where hyper-sulking remainers are DESPERATE for everything to go down the pan is frankly demeaning.
That you choose to use as your example the largest foreign investment into the UK in corporate history as some kind of suggestion that things are going bad just makes you look like a simpleton.
It's more complicated than that. To what extent are these sort of global capital flows precisely what was being voted against ? Does the currency devaluation make them more likely ? Outside the eurosphere will these capital flows have garage social consequences. Brexit is a gargantuan does of creative destruction.
This isn't a cut price deal though. SoftBank are paying a huge premium both dollar adjusted and in Sterling. I very much doubt the weakness of Sterling had much to do with this, Son has probably been planning it for a while and weak Sterling has just brought it into play sooner.
It seems the average sulky remainer thinks that two global megacorps can have their M&E teams put together one of the largest acquisitions in corporate history in little over a fortnight.
Re the Labour contest and the assumption that if Corbyn wins there will be some kind of Labour split, shorthanded as SDP v2. This shorthand implies certain things - such as seeking electoral pacts and ultimately association with Lib Dems and the major protagonists never coming back to Labour - but assumed to be on a much bigger scale than in 1981. Are they safe assumptions or is there a more 'left' way of splitting? Without researching what would need to happen for other possibilities to come into play, I give some brainstorming thoughts on other things that might be considered singly or in combination, and what might come from those. To be discussed / shot down as you will:
More leftish ways of splitting than by forming a brand new party. One or more may apply to different MPs:
- Taking the SDLP whip, how does this sit with any agreement between SDLP /Labour? - Becoming Indepedent Labour and having only a loose association between members, no formal whipping or party structures. - Taking over some existing Labour structure, for instance the Cooperative party, and demerging or running as more separate.
What do the above mean in terms of party funding and formal opposition (assuming 120 MPs even wish to split into a single body, which is a bigger step than a vote of no confidence and leadership election trigger)?
Could the splitters, even if they do join into a formal party, do things in such a way as to align themselves back to the Labour party in terms of electoral pact making? Does whatever Watson was trying to put together the week before form any kind of start point for this? This would mean dealing with a Corbyn Labour at a time of rancour overdrive, but is a deal splitting seats between Progressive Labour and original Labour (perhaps held seat protection for the incumbent party whilst held and a 50/50 split of target seats to be alternated at elections) in any way reachable? Could this be done for competition in elections or unilaterally, without any promise of coalition post-election (giving Progressives freedom to deal with Lib Dems as per the situation on the ground).
Could such a route ever be made to work? The risks are obvious - I can see writ big the Salmond/Miliband poster with Corbyn (or successors) as Salmond, both in advertising terms and in political reality. It would be a kind of half-escape, but if the ultimate aim is to put Labour back together again, which I would think is still the desire of many, is there any milage in taking such risks?
"Corbyn tells The Guardian today that he will vote against it, adding: "I've been involved in peace transformation all of my life, and I think we've got an opportunity to show leadership in the world." Clive Lewis, shadow defence secretary, and Emily Thornberry, shadow foreign secretary, described the vote as a "contemptible trick" and will abstain.
Dearie me.
Ha ha, a trick my arse. This vote has been postponed so many times, let's just bloody get on with building the new boats. Let's get some more things on the postponed list going too - yes, Heathrow, that means you!
There's a Times article today saying LHR decision could be weeks away. I remain sceptical.
Grr. Come on Theresa, just bloody announce it. Two new runways at LHR and one more at LGW please, preferably with a maglev or Hyperloop running between them
Are we trying to show the World we're open for business, or not?
Any chance she could stop throwing money down a hole, I mean HS2, as well?
I reckon HS2 will be canned and replaced with Manchester-Leeds HS3 which frankly makes a lot more sense.
''As regards the importance of ARM to the UK, I don't see any problem here. SoftBank is a hybrid between a venture capital/investment fund, and a hi-tech conglomerate. They'll leave ARM pretty much alone, I think.''
The report I read said ARM is going to create at least 4,000 UK jobs at its Cambridge site.
Huge win win for UK PLC. Post Brexit.
That was already happening. I was there last year and was given a full site visit and a presentation on the plans. What's good is that Brexit has not changed any of it, though given that much of ARM's client base is non-European that is not really a surprise.
Yeah, Brexit has absolutely no connection with the deal whatsoever, except that the fall in sterling has made picking up UK assets (especially UK assets which earn nearly all their revenues in foreign exchange) cheaper.
I don't think it has in this case. The USD adjusted premium is still 50% on the pre-referendum price. ARM shares are up as much as Sterling is down (pre-bid, of course).
Outside London, the exchange rate is really not going to be very important.
Prime London is where there is the greatest likelihood of a car crash. And it matters because money flowing into the London property market (both commercial and residential) is one of the things that enables us to run our huge current account deficit.
Mr. Grabcocque, I'd be surprised, but think that would have a lot of support up here. Most HS2 controversy in Yorkshire is from people annoyed it isn't going near/through their patch.
Mr. kle4, I know
That alone means I'll finish the season ahead even if I get every other tip from now on wrong. Wish I'd put more than a pittance on it, but still.
The behaviour rules for South Shields Labour meetings appear to ban almost everything that people do in meetings https://t.co/sJhRtLGlGG
It's 5 that gets me. No action that might be regarded as aggressive physical behavior, regardless of whether that was the intent. If it was not my intent, how would I know not to do it? I know some things we don't think of as offensive or aggressive can reasonably be guessed to be potentially seen as such, but it seems so reflective of general infantilisation, where the right to not be offended is seen as the most crucial right a person can have, regardless of whether offence is a reasonable reaction and no matter if 'protecting' someone from such is disproportionate.
4 is a good one too. No comments (presumably derogatory, but it doesn't specify) about age, gender, etc. Ok, mostly seems fine, although I guess that means saying 'I've been a Labour member for 35 years' would not be ok, as its drawing a comparison with others' lack of experience. But it includes 'individual personal politics' on the list. Age, gender, and personal politics? These things are of the same category?
I wonder what category 'looking at your watch' comes under
I had a call on Friday night from a business partner. He told me the UK Government is looking to throw money at UK R&D projects. The main problem is there is so little capacity in the UK to properly use the money.
I have spent considerable time sorting out one failed Uni project after another where a group of smart PHDs have wasted years and millions on a nice idea bit with no real focus on commercialisation.
ARM is the kind of company we need to keep going.
R&D has been neglected for far too long and is one of the main reasons for our stagnant productivity along with the inexhaustible supply of cheap labour. It's the reverse of the economics of the Cold War years when the normal supply of economic migrants and cheap labour from eastern Europe was cut off.
Given the UK (well, England) has three of the world's top ten research universities, it seems unlikely that research is being neglected.
Corporate R&D is poor in the UK.
Been destroyed over the past 20 years. Here's how it goes.
UK based company is merged or taken over by another entity headquarted elsewhere. Two R&D centres in Europe Company decides to start research in China. Company decides to keep R&D near headquarters. UK R&D unit closes.
Son hasn't done any of this with previous SoftBank purchases. I don't see why he would start with ARM.
Last month Softbank sold its majority stake in Supercell 2 to Tencent.
What do you think they are raising capital for? Plus, Son is a canny operator, mobile gaming is an easy come, easy go kind of market. Tencent offered to more than double SoftBank's money. I don't see anyone offering £48-£55bn for ARM.
The Chinese really want semiconductor technology self-sufficiency. I think they would very happily pay a very decent premium on top of £24 billion to get their hands on ARM. However, I cannot imagine that the government has not factored that into their assessment of the deal and on any enforceable assurances they have asked for. If ARM does end up in Chinese hands, there is no doubt that it will end up in China.
I had a call on Friday night from a business partner. He told me the UK Government is looking to throw money at UK R&D projects. The main problem is there is so little capacity in the UK to properly use the money.
I have spent considerable time sorting out one failed Uni project after another where a group of smart PHDs have wasted years and millions on a nice idea bit with no real focus on commercialisation.
ARM is the kind of company we need to keep going.
R&D has been neglected for far too long and is one of the main reasons for our stagnant productivity along with the inexhaustible supply of cheap labour. It's the reverse of the economics of the Cold War years when the normal supply of economic migrants and cheap labour from eastern Europe was cut off.
Given the UK (well, England) has three of the world's top ten research universities, it seems unlikely that research is being neglected.
It has been significantly downgraded in many UK academic institutions, with funding either frozen or cut. The decline in the UK's position in the university rankings over recent years reflects this to an extent. Hopefully, one part of Brexit vote - and the increased government spending we are going to see as a result - will be a restoration of funding for our world class universities.
Remember George Osborne was cutting UK research funds while the Chinese are massively ramping up theirs (SeanT sent many reports iirc). Whether this will be restored, as well as substitution of lost EU funding, who knows?
It is in the UK's national interest that it happens. We were told that leaving the EU would not have a negative affect on EU-funded academic research funding, so we don't have to worry about that. But the government should put more in on top. Our universities are a major national asset and should be treated as such.
I'd agree with HamiltonAce's point below about UK Uni R&D generally being very poor at commercialisation. There seems to be no shortage of government money to buy research equipment (normally German or Japanese made) but then little is done with it once the shiny photo ops are past.
Probably much more money needs to be focussed on knowledge transfer partnerships between unis and small to medium firms and on startups.
Also Jonathan's comment about UK corporate R&D centres getting merged out of existence is very true and seems to live my career.
The more attacks there are, the more likely it is for Marine Le Pen to win in 2017 and initiate punitive measures against residents of France (Muslims/Jews, mainly of North African origin) who hold views that are alien to European Christian values.
The National Front get a lot of Jewish votes (which is not to say that some French Jews don't oppose it) and is strongly pro-Zionist, and Le Pen would not initiate any punitive measures against Jews. Against Muslims (the detested Arabs), yes.
The National Front are anti-Semitic and their previous leader regarded the killing of Jews in 1939-45 as a minor footnote in the history of WW2. No self-respecting Jew will vote for the NF.
In addition, most of the Jews living in France today are of North African origin and are loathed just as much as Muslim Arabs by indigenous French folk. They used to live in the same neighbourhoods until the Muslims, as they became more islamicised, took a dislike to them too.
Ah, ARM. My best ever investment, made shortly after it floated in 1998 at the ludicrously low valuation of (from memory) just over £200m. I couldn't understand what the investment banks advising on the float price were thinking - my back-of-the-envelope calculations made it worth at least 10 times that amount. In the event I sold out for 30 times what I'd invested.
There's no doubt that ARM is a class act, but the price Softbank are paying is very high - £24bn for a company which made just £414m profit before tax in 2015.
As so.
Incidentally, in the short term this is a bit of very welcome news to Phil Hammond. £24bn is a substantial injection of foreign exchange to offset the current account deficit (£32.6bn in Q1 2016).
As long as the government has got binding assurances, I can't see a problem. Softbank has matters.
The interesting thing to see in the short to medium term will be how this affects the kind of licences ARM offers. That premium has to be accounted for somehow. A profitable resale is one way, but assuming that is off the table the licensing policies and royalty rates look to be the obvious place to start making money back, as does the sale of non-core IP assets.
ARM's premium is Son's valuation of the future and ARM's potential place in it. Son is not about to dismantle the substance on which he valued ARM's worth today and potential tomorrow. You'll have to wait years to see whether Son got his sums right. Son is not a trader.
The share price already reflects the market's view of ARM's value - and is a forward projection. That Son has put close to a 50% premium on that says to me that business as usual is unlikely to be the strategy. ARM has been doing a lot of deals in China. China wants self-sufficiency in semiconductor technology. I can't hep seeing the deal in that light, but have to assume that the government has put a block on any resale as to not do so would be extraordinary negligence. So, if that is off the table the next obvious place to look is royalty rates and licensing terms. That said, as Qualcomm can vouch, Asian anti-trust regulators are paying ever-closer attention to the terms of patent licensing deals local companies are being asked to pay and they are clamping down on them.
I don't buy this. Why would the Chinese pay billions for something they could steal with a far smaller investment of time and money?
"Corbyn tells The Guardian today that he will vote against it, adding: "I've been involved in peace transformation all of my life, and I think we've got an opportunity to show leadership in the world." Clive Lewis, shadow defence secretary, and Emily Thornberry, shadow foreign secretary, described the vote as a "contemptible trick" and will abstain.
Dearie me.
Ha ha, a trick my arse. This vote has been postponed so many times, let's just bloody get on with building the new boats. Let's get some more things on the postponed list going too - yes, Heathrow, that means you!
There's a Times article today saying LHR decision could be weeks away. I remain sceptical.
Grr. Come on Theresa, just bloody announce it. Two new runways at LHR and one more at LGW please, preferably with a maglev or Hyperloop running between them
Are we trying to show the World we're open for business, or not?
Any chance she could stop throwing money down a hole, I mean HS2, as well?
HS2 still seems to be alive right now. How long for? I've no feeling for this at all.
The ARM deal will have been In the works a long time before Brexit looked likely. The Brexit angle is that it wasn't cancelled because of it. ARM doesn't have a particular exposure to the EU beyond possibly missing out on EU blue sky research projects. There owners can always move operations later if they think Brexit holds them back
@MaxPB . Regarding house price prediction, it's too early to tell.
Let's have a quick look at the indicators, in descending order of immediacy
* Rightmove asking price index: asking prices for houses * RICS Residential Market Survey: estate agent surveyors opinions of prices falling/rising * Halifax and Nationwide indices: mortgages have been approved * Bank of England mortgage approvals: mortgages that have been granted * Land Registry index: sale price for houses
If you don't count auction properties, cash purchases and online agencies, to buy a house requires placing a house on sale at an estate agent, getting an offer accepted, getting a mortgage approved, doing the conveyancing, exchange, register sale. That's not an instantaneous process and takes about three-six months from beginning to end. Consequently many of the indices lag, thus
* Rightmove asking price index: lags by about a month * RICS Residential Market Survey: lags by about a month * Halifax and Nationwide indices: lags by about two-three months * Bank of England mortgage approvals: lags by about three-six months * Land Registry index: lags by about three-six months
There are numerous caveats to this: some indices don't count auction properties or cash purchases, there is a further lag caused by publication delays, some transactions (esp intra-family) don't get registered. There are also other indices that I don't know much about, like construction indices, housebuilder share prices, auction activity.
The early data from Rightmove and RICS is a fall, with anecdotal pointing to about a 5% fall, which is big...but it is too early to tell: it may be a momentary blip or the beginning of another 2008, we don't know yet. The picture should be clear around January/February 2017
The ARM deal will have been In the works a long time before Brexit looked likely. The Brexit angle is that it wasn't cancelled because of it. ARM doesn't have a particular exposure to the EU beyond possibly missing out on EU blue sky research projects. There owners can always move operations later if they think Brexit holds them back
Since ARM is fabless it has basically no supply chain to manage. So it's entirely export-focused, which makes the recent realignment of GBP works almost entirely in their favour.
I had a call on Friday night from a business partner. He told me the UK Government is looking to throw money at UK R&D projects. The main problem is there is so little capacity in the UK to properly use the money.
I have spent considerable time sorting out one failed Uni project after another where a group of smart PHDs have wasted years and millions on a nice idea bit with no real focus on commercialisation.
ARM is the kind of company we need to keep going.
Presumably the call was referring to R&D that is at tech transfer/commercialisation stage?
There is going to a bloody massive R&D shortfall in universities for more pure/pre-commercial research stuff thanks to us being out of EU and Horizon. Already, according to Will Hutton, UK unis look for EU partners are getting the cold shoulder for co-operative projects cos they don't think we'll be around in 2 or 3 years time.
Which is odd as you don't need to be in the EU to be in Horizon. I think some are overreacting.
Ah, ARM. My best ever investment, made shortly after it floated in 1998 at the ludicrously low valuation of (from memory) just over £200m. I couldn't understand what the investment banks advising on the float price were thinking - my back-of-the-envelope calculations made it worth at least 10 times that amount. In the event I sold out for 30 times what I'd invested.
There's no doubt that ARM is a class act, but the price Softbank are paying is very high - £24bn for a company which made just £414m profit before tax in 2015.
As so.
Incidentally, in the short term this is a bit of very welcome news to Phil Hammond. £24bn is a substantial injection of foreign exchange to offset the current account deficit (£32.6bn in Q1 2016).
As long as the government has got binding assurances, I can't see a problem. Softbank has matters.
The interesting thing to see in the short to medium term will be how this affects the kind of licences ARM offers. That premium has to be accounted for somehow. A profitable resale is one way, but assuming that is off the table the licensing policies and royalty rates look to be the obvious place to start making money back, as does the sale of non-core IP assets.
ARM's premium is Son's valuation of the future and ARM's potential place in it. Son is not about to dismantle the substance on which he valued ARM's worth today and potential tomorrow. You'll have to wait years to see whether Son got his sums right. Son is not a trader.
The share price already reflects the market's view of ARM's value - and is a forward projection. That Son has put close to a 50% premium on that says to me that business as usual is unlikely to be the strategy. ARM has been doing a lot of deals in China. China wants self-sufficiency in semiconductor technology. I can't hep seeing the deal in that light, but have to assume that the government has put a block on any resale as to not do so would be extraordinary negligence. So, if that is off the table the next obvious place to look is royalty rates and licensing terms. That said, as Qualcomm can vouch, Asian anti-trust regulators are paying ever-closer attention to the terms of patent licensing deals local companies are being asked to pay and they are clamping down on them.
I don't buy this. Why would the Chinese pay billions for something they could steal with a far smaller investment of time and money?
Stealing only helps domestically and even domestically the Chinese courts are getting a lot more forceful in enforcing IP rights. The win rate for foreign plaintiffs in patent cases at the Beijing IP court last year was 65-0.
Edgewood are by far the largest. They're based in Philadelphia.
That's the ADR. For the common shares, the buggest holder is Baillie Gifford (in Scotland) with 10%. Blackrock and Vanguard (US) are 10%. Capital is next with 4% (US). Legal & General is 3%. Norges Bank has 2%. Standard Life, Massachusetts Mutual, BNP, State Street, and a bunch of others have 1%.
But,
You then need to look at the underlying owners of the funds! How many of Baillie Giffords customers are British? They manage a lot of money for US endowments. And Blackrock - while American - has a big business doing Council pension schemes in the UK.
Basically, the ultimate beneficial ownership of ARM is incredibly global.
The Chinese really want semiconductor technology self-sufficiency. I think they would very happily pay a very decent premium on top of £24 billion to get their hands on ARM. However, I cannot imagine that the government has not factored that into their assessment of the deal and on any enforceable assurances they have asked for. If ARM does end up in Chinese hands, there is no doubt that it will end up in China.
Just remember that China want a CISC competitor, they'd be better off buying AMD which holds one of two global x86 licences and the patents for x86-64. In terms of what China wants to achieve, ARM doesn't make a lot of sense. AMD does, which is why they have been sniffing around there for a while.
Outside London, the exchange rate is really not going to be very important.
Prime London is where there is the greatest likelihood of a car crash. And it matters because money flowing into the London property market (both commercial and residential) is one of the things that enables us to run our huge current account deficit.
Anecdotal evidence from the sandpit - a noticeable effect from overseas property buyers (mainly Arabs, Russians, Africans, Indians) noting that London just got 10% cheaper when buying in dollars. The key will be if they start to think London's overvalued - which it is, surely?
John Kerry has just come out and said that TTIP will be completed this year!
Here's an intriguing thought. Do the US and Germany want TTIP signed now, with us being on board and therefore helpful, because TTIP wouldn't pass with us not a member of the EU?
This would also suggest that we'd grandfather straight into TTIP upon Brexit.
(However, I suspect this means that the appetite for a custom US-UK deal would be quite limited.)
@MaxPB . Regarding house price prediction, it's too early to tell.
Let's have a quick look at the indicators, in descending order of immediacy
* Rightmove asking price index: asking prices for houses * RICS Residential Market Survey: estate agent surveyors opinions of prices falling/rising * Halifax and Nationwide indices: mortgages have been approved * Bank of England mortgage approvals: mortgages that have been granted * Land Registry index: sale price for houses
If you don't count auction properties, cash purchases and online agencies, to buy a house requires placing a house on sale at an estate agent, getting an offer accepted, getting a mortgage approved, doing the conveyancing, exchange, register sale. That's not an instantaneous process and takes about three-six months from beginning to end. Consequently many of the indices lag, thus
* Rightmove asking price index: lags by about a month * RICS Residential Market Survey: lags by about a month * Halifax and Nationwide indices: lags by about two-three months * Bank of England mortgage approvals: lags by about three-six months * Land Registry index: lags by about three-six months
There are numerous caveats to this: some indices don't count auction properties or cash purchases, there is a further lag caused by publication delays, some transactions (esp intra-family) don't get registered. There are also other indices that I don't know much about, like construction indices, housebuilder share prices, auction activity.
The early data from Rightmove and RICS is a fall, with anecdotal pointing to about a 5% fall, which is big...but it is too early to tell: it may be a momentary blip or the beginning of another 2008, we don't know yet. The picture should be clear around January/February 2017
Which was sort of my point. People seem to be banging on about the dire pain we're currently taking. It's far too soon to come to any conclusions.
The ARM deal will have been In the works a long time before Brexit looked likely. The Brexit angle is that it wasn't cancelled because of it. ARM doesn't have a particular exposure to the EU beyond possibly missing out on EU blue sky research projects. There owners can always move operations later if they think Brexit holds them back
Since ARM is fabless it has basically no supply chain to manage. So it's entirely export-focused, which makes the recent realignment of GBP works almost entirely in their favour.
True. Their costs are mainly in UK salaries that have seen a cut of 15% relative to their international revenues.
Actually, I think Brexit is a wash as far as this deal is concerned, which itself is arguably +1 to Leave.
John Kerry has just come out and said that TTIP will be completed this year!
Here's an intriguing thought. Do the US and Germany want TTIP signed now, with us being on board and therefore helpful, because TTIP wouldn't pass with us not a member of the EU?
This would also suggest that we'd grandfather straight into TTIP upon Brexit.
(However, I suspect this means that the appetite for a custom US-UK deal would be quite limited.)
Outside London, the exchange rate is really not going to be very important.
Prime London is where there is the greatest likelihood of a car crash. And it matters because money flowing into the London property market (both commercial and residential) is one of the things that enables us to run our huge current account deficit.
Anecdotal evidence from the sandpit - a noticeable effect from overseas property buyers (mainly Arabs, Russians, Africans, Indians) noting that London just got 10% cheaper when buying in dollars. The key will be if they start to think London's overvalued - which it is, surely?
My local Knight Frank keeps sending me "Price Reduction!" emails. Last year, at the peak of the market, a 1,200 square foot three bedroom flat, in the unfashionable Golders Green side of Hampstead (albeit still NW3) went for £2.8m.
John Kerry has just come out and said that TTIP will be completed this year!
Here's an intriguing thought. Do the US and Germany want TTIP signed now, with us being on board and therefore helpful, because TTIP wouldn't pass with us not a member of the EU?
This would also suggest that we'd grandfather straight into TTIP upon Brexit.
(However, I suspect this means that the appetite for a custom US-UK deal would be quite limited.)
Hopefully Theresa has the good sense not to join it.
Tattoos are a form of 'defacing' yourselves and beards are terrible, apparently. My god - I hope I'm not as miserable as some of you guys when I get old! I don't have any tattoos and am fairly neutral on the subject of beards. But how others choose to dress isn't really of my concern. And I don't know why it would concern others that much either.
Don't think there are many miserable people on here. However, this is PB. Ever watchful. Ever judging. Often completely wrong (apart from a sizeable contingent of PB tories noted for their infallibility).
I know some PB Tories tend to get elections spot on. But I am not sure their magical powers extend to other areas of expertise....
No doubt TSE will be along shortly to tell you that pb Tories are the world's finest lovers. Based on a sample size of one.....
''As regards the importance of ARM to the UK, I don't see any problem here. SoftBank is a hybrid between a venture capital/investment fund, and a hi-tech conglomerate. They'll leave ARM pretty much alone, I think.''
The report I read said ARM is going to create at least 4,000 UK jobs at its Cambridge site.
Huge win win for UK PLC. Post Brexit.
That was already happening. I was there last year and was given a full site visit and a presentation on the plans. What's good is that Brexit has not changed any of it, though given that much of ARM's client base is non-European that is not really a surprise.
Yeah, Brexit has absolutely no connection with the deal whatsoever, except that the fall in sterling has made picking up UK assets (especially UK assets which earn nearly all their revenues in foreign exchange) cheaper.
John Kerry has just come out and said that TTIP will be completed this year!
Here's an intriguing thought. Do the US and Germany want TTIP signed now, with us being on board and therefore helpful, because TTIP wouldn't pass with us not a member of the EU?
This would also suggest that we'd grandfather straight into TTIP upon Brexit.
(However, I suspect this means that the appetite for a custom US-UK deal would be quite limited.)
Hopefully Theresa has the good sense not to join it.
So: we should leave the EU and not have a free trade deal with the US?
John Kerry has just come out and said that TTIP will be completed this year!
Here's an intriguing thought. Do the US and Germany want TTIP signed now, with us being on board and therefore helpful, because TTIP wouldn't pass with us not a member of the EU?
This would also suggest that we'd grandfather straight into TTIP upon Brexit.
(However, I suspect this means that the appetite for a custom US-UK deal would be quite limited.)
It's just rhetoric tbh, they want free trade to be Obama's legacy. I don't see how it gets through the EU before 1. Obama leaves office and 2. Before we leave the EU. It's basically wishful thinking.
John Kerry has just come out and said that TTIP will be completed this year!
Here's an intriguing thought. Do the US and Germany want TTIP signed now, with us being on board and therefore helpful, because TTIP wouldn't pass with us not a member of the EU?
This would also suggest that we'd grandfather straight into TTIP upon Brexit.
(However, I suspect this means that the appetite for a custom US-UK deal would be quite limited.)
Hopefully Theresa has the good sense not to join it.
So: we should leave the EU and not have a free trade deal with the US?
Um, yes. I find our trade with the US to be wholly satisfactory.
The behaviour rules for South Shields Labour meetings appear to ban almost everything that people do in meetings https://t.co/sJhRtLGlGG
It'
I wonder what category 'looking at your watch' comes under
In all seriousness, it is a worry if politics, be in internal party politics or more openly adversarial politics, becomes poisonous as a result of extreme, aggressive, dismissive and polarising behaviour. But a worry though that is, robust political debate and discussion is a vital element in a vibrant democracy, internally among parties and otherwise.
As I like going back to, paraphrased from a legal judgement:
The exclusion of all emotive, non-rational expression would be a mistake as the most opprobrious insult may form part of an otherwise serious criticism of a political figure. Even were it possible to separate such expression from rational discourse, it would be wrong to allow its proscription because if speakers could be punished each time they included a colourful, non-rational epithet, much valuable speech would be inhibited. Some margin should be allowed for invective and exaggeration, even if that means some apparently worthless comments are as fully protected as a carefully balanced argument.
Being overly restrictive with the albeit positive intent of prohibiting a negative atmosphere that would itself inhibit debate, can seem a small thing compared to actual restriction of language as above but it is tangentially related, and can have larger, more harmful impacts upon the political discourse within a party.
And ultimately, better you learn to be able to put up with people shaking their heads and tutting while you speak, than others should feel limited in what they are able to express. If the fear is that if you permit such reactions then a hostile environment would ensue as a result, well, the problem is not really the rules of debate, is it?
Outside London, the exchange rate is really not going to be very important.
Prime London is where there is the greatest likelihood of a car crash. And it matters because money flowing into the London property market (both commercial and residential) is one of the things that enables us to run our huge current account deficit.
Comments
The interesting thing to see in the short to medium term will be how this affects the kind of licences ARM offers. That premium has to be accounted for somehow. A profitable resale is one way, but assuming that is off the table the licensing policies and royalty rates look to be the obvious place to start making money back, as does the sale of non-core IP assets.
Do wonder if the Red Bulls might be value. Only 8 each on Ladbrokes, though.
Rosberg at 4 may be too long. He really needs to arrest Hamilton's momentum, though.
% of ARM employees in Uk that are unionised ? 0% .
Hence why you wont see much comment from Corbyn..
The army understand security better. They need to be given the kind of powers that the fire service have. If fire security at a hotel is inadequate, because of a malfunctioning alarm, say, the fire service can shut the place down right there and then. The fire service also has an important educational and training role. The army should be involved in the security of high streets, shopping malls, entertainment events and railway stations. No music festivals or concerts should be allowed to happen without the army present. Almost all staff on the British railway system have a security role ("if you see anything suspicious, report it to any member of staff"), but many view it as bullcrap of an unnecessary "health and safety" kind, often doing nothing if someone who doesn't speak with authority reports something to them. ("Oh, he put a bag down, did he, madam? Don't worry.") A soldier who neglected his duty in such a fashion would find that his feet didn't touch the ground. If staff had regular contact with soldiers, they'd soon wise up.
But are you sure the armed men you saw in Paris weren't CRS?
You sound surprised, but the overarching function of the armed forces is to protect the home territory. I would like them to be more visible in Britain than they are.
And it was under Gordon or Darling that we saw 0.25pt changes downwards. The rates we paid in the 80s are unimaginable today - the housing market would have a fit.
For a guy with the quickest car to be 3/1 sounds too long, especially given that Lewis is going to get penalties at some point soon - he's used all his engines and has two reprimands to his name.
RBs are both 8 on Betfair too, I might go with an Ayrton on Nico and fivers on the RBs.
"Corbyn tells The Guardian today that he will vote against it, adding: "I've been involved in peace transformation all of my life, and I think we've got an opportunity to show leadership in the world." Clive Lewis, shadow defence secretary, and Emily Thornberry, shadow foreign secretary, described the vote as a "contemptible trick" and will abstain.
Dearie me.
If it were every year I might think it were a trick.
http://investors.morningstar.com/ownership/shareholders-major.html?t=ARMH
Edgewood are by far the largest. They're based in Philadelphia.
In addition, I had very good contacts with one of the traditional chip manufacturers. They were under no illusion that a giant market was slipping away from them, and were scrabbling to catch up. Of course they failed, and ended up licensing ARM's IP.
As for the verbiage, I need to point out this quote:
"I always cheer up immensely if one is particularly wounding because I think well, if they attack one personally, it means they have not a single political argument left. That is why my father always taught me: never worry about anyone who attacks you personally; it means their arguments carry no weight and they know it.”
Margaret Thatcher, interview on RAI, broadcast on 18 March 1986.
Last time, hopefully, I'll mention it, but my mid-season review, including a horribly skewed graph and four suggestions for spread-betting, is up here:
http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2016/07/the-2016-mid-season-review.html
http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/news/2016/06/21/tencent-buys-clash-clans-maker-supercell-softbank/86169756/
Member states can do as they wish.
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/heathrow-runway-ruling-may-come-in-weeks-says-grayling-nkxvkz3sq
Your mid season review is good, I'll follow your spread bets, but like you only with virtual cash for now.
A thought on next year, there's a lot of changes on the cars for 2017 but little on the power units, so the PU suppliers will continue to converge in performance. It could be McLaren's year to step up, although they probably won't win the title - a 'buy' spread on their points might be profitable.
4 is a good one too. No comments (presumably derogatory, but it doesn't specify) about age, gender, etc. Ok, mostly seems fine, although I guess that means saying 'I've been a Labour member for 35 years' would not be ok, as its drawing a comparison with others' lack of experience. But it includes 'individual personal politics' on the list. Age, gender, and personal politics? These things are of the same category?
But,
You then need to look at the underlying owners of the funds! How many of Baillie Giffords customers are British? They manage a lot of money for US endowments. And Blackrock - while American - has a big business doing Council pension schemes in the UK.
Basically, the ultimate beneficial ownership of ARM is incredibly global.
The report I read said ARM is going to create at least 4,000 UK jobs at its Cambridge site.
Huge win win for UK PLC. Post Brexit.
Are we trying to show the World we're open for business, or not?
I'm not doing as well as I should be (accidentally put too small a stake on the Perez bet in Baku). One singular moment aside, this season's been pretty disappointing, from a betting perspective.
Edited extra bit: on what I plan to watch for in the 2017 spreads:
Alonso, Verstappen, Ricciardo
If engines converge, a credible scenario, then the advantage moves to those who are aerodynamically strong. Obviously, that includes Mercedes, but they'll be top of the prediction tree and the price may be long (but selling them would be rather brave too).
I like the idea of a hyperloop between the two airports. (Quiet Mr Jessop)
More leftish ways of splitting than by forming a brand new party. One or more may apply to different MPs:
- Taking the SDLP whip, how does this sit with any agreement between SDLP /Labour?
- Becoming Indepedent Labour and having only a loose association between members, no formal whipping or party structures.
- Taking over some existing Labour structure, for instance the Cooperative party, and demerging or running as more separate.
What do the above mean in terms of party funding and formal opposition (assuming 120 MPs even wish to split into a single body, which is a bigger step than a vote of no confidence and leadership election trigger)?
Could the splitters, even if they do join into a formal party, do things in such a way as to align themselves back to the Labour party in terms of electoral pact making? Does whatever Watson was trying to put together the week before form any kind of start point for this? This would mean dealing with a Corbyn Labour at a time of rancour overdrive, but is a deal splitting seats between Progressive Labour and original Labour (perhaps held seat protection for the incumbent party whilst held and a 50/50 split of target seats to be alternated at elections) in any way reachable? Could this be done for competition in elections or unilaterally, without any promise of coalition post-election (giving Progressives freedom to deal with Lib Dems as per the situation on the ground).
Could such a route ever be made to work? The risks are obvious - I can see writ big the Salmond/Miliband poster with Corbyn (or successors) as Salmond, both in advertising terms and in political reality. It would be a kind of half-escape, but if the ultimate aim is to put Labour back together again, which I would think is still the desire of many, is there any milage in taking such risks?
Mr. kle4, I know
That alone means I'll finish the season ahead even if I get every other tip from now on wrong. Wish I'd put more than a pittance on it, but still.
Probably much more money needs to be focussed on knowledge transfer partnerships between unis and small to medium firms and on startups.
Also Jonathan's comment about UK corporate R&D centres getting merged out of existence is very true and seems to live my career.
In addition, most of the Jews living in France today are of North African origin and are loathed just as much as Muslim Arabs by indigenous French folk. They used to live in the same neighbourhoods until the Muslims, as they became more islamicised, took a dislike to them too.
Let's have a quick look at the indicators, in descending order of immediacy
* Rightmove asking price index: asking prices for houses
* RICS Residential Market Survey: estate agent surveyors opinions of prices falling/rising
* Halifax and Nationwide indices: mortgages have been approved
* Bank of England mortgage approvals: mortgages that have been granted
* Land Registry index: sale price for houses
If you don't count auction properties, cash purchases and online agencies, to buy a house requires placing a house on sale at an estate agent, getting an offer accepted, getting a mortgage approved, doing the conveyancing, exchange, register sale. That's not an instantaneous process and takes about three-six months from beginning to end. Consequently many of the indices lag, thus
* Rightmove asking price index: lags by about a month
* RICS Residential Market Survey: lags by about a month
* Halifax and Nationwide indices: lags by about two-three months
* Bank of England mortgage approvals: lags by about three-six months
* Land Registry index: lags by about three-six months
There are numerous caveats to this: some indices don't count auction properties or cash purchases, there is a further lag caused by publication delays, some transactions (esp intra-family) don't get registered. There are also other indices that I don't know much about, like construction indices, housebuilder share prices, auction activity.
The early data from Rightmove and RICS is a fall, with anecdotal pointing to about a 5% fall, which is big...but it is too early to tell: it may be a momentary blip or the beginning of another 2008, we don't know yet. The picture should be clear around January/February 2017
Here's an intriguing thought. Do the US and Germany want TTIP signed now, with us being on board and therefore helpful, because TTIP wouldn't pass with us not a member of the EU?
This would also suggest that we'd grandfather straight into TTIP upon Brexit.
(However, I suspect this means that the appetite for a custom US-UK deal would be quite limited.)
Actually, I think Brexit is a wash as far as this deal is concerned, which itself is arguably +1 to Leave.
I reckon it'd be lucky to get £2m today.
As I like going back to, paraphrased from a legal judgement:
The exclusion of all emotive, non-rational expression would be a mistake as the most opprobrious insult may form part of an otherwise serious criticism of a political figure. Even were it possible to separate such expression from rational discourse, it would be wrong to allow its proscription because if speakers could be punished each time they included a colourful, non-rational epithet, much valuable speech would be inhibited. Some margin should be allowed for invective and exaggeration, even if that means some apparently worthless comments are as fully protected as a carefully balanced argument.
Being overly restrictive with the albeit positive intent of prohibiting a negative atmosphere that would itself inhibit debate, can seem a small thing compared to actual restriction of language as above but it is tangentially related, and can have larger, more harmful impacts upon the political discourse within a party.
And ultimately, better you learn to be able to put up with people shaking their heads and tutting while you speak, than others should feel limited in what they are able to express. If the fear is that if you permit such reactions then a hostile environment would ensue as a result, well, the problem is not really the rules of debate, is it?