US Equity firm trying to buy the UK Nuclear Submarine supplier

[NutLoose]

And the secrets no doubt within, so much for protecting our core military assets and if it's blocked i think it would be a good thing.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/othe...6bn/ar-AANmNgW

[Mr N Nimrod]

Originally Posted by NutLoose

And the secrets no doubt within, so much for protecting our core military assets and if it's blocked i think it would be a good thing.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/othe...6bn/ar-AANmNgW

this is not news, it has been going for months

[NutLoose]

Yes, but they have just agreed terms

[DuckDodgers]

This, like the acquisition of Cobham itself, will be waived through by this government. But first there will be a thin veneer of due diligence by Kwasi Kwarteng before it is complete. I hope I am wrong, but history is telling.

[Asturias56]

"And the secrets no doubt within"

What "secrets" do you think we have that the USN don't know? We rent the missiles from them, we worked together on a new joint missile section for the next generation SSBN's, the RN are in and out of USN bases all the time..............

[NutLoose]

Originally Posted by Asturias56

"And the secrets no doubt within"

What "secrets" do you think we have that the USN don't know? We rent the missiles from them, we worked together on a new joint missile section for the next generation SSBN's, the RN are in and out of USN bases all the time..............

Senior former military leaders have warned that Ultra’s sensitive technology needs to be protected from foreign ownership.

Those ones, and I didn’t specify who from, of course the US and U.K. have an active relationship, it’s other third parties.

[rattman]

Originally Posted by DuckDodgers

This, like the acquisition of Cobham itself, will be waived through by this government. But first there will be a thin veneer of due diligence by Kwasi Kwarteng before it is complete. I hope I am wrong, but history is telling.

Also didn't the UK exchange the tech of its pump jets for the new generation of US reactor tech

[Chewing the crud]

As Ultra also make other Defense Equipment, does ownership by a US firm make its products subject to ITAR and all the associated restrictions?

[Easy Street]

Originally Posted by Chewing the crud

As Ultra also make other Defense Equipment, does ownership by a US firm make its products subject to ITAR and all the associated restrictions?

Not necessarily. UK-developed intellectual property can be ring-fenced within a UK subsidiary of a US conglomerate such that ITAR doesn't apply and a UK export licence would need to be granted for any sales (including to the US). This will be part of the small print which the Government will need to be satisfied with before it approves the deal. Much of Ultra's IP will have been developed with MOD funding and that gives the MOD a say in how the rights are managed. Providing, of course, the relevant contracts were drawn up correctly...

[2Planks]

I hope the Sidewinder lunch is protected!

[Asturias56]

The biggest problem with this deal is that you can't trust anything they say - and they're in for the quick buck rather than a long term strategy, They'll break it up and sell the bits.

Now not sure if it makes any difference that they're US asset strippers cp UK ones

[Easy Street]

Originally Posted by Asturias56

The biggest problem with this deal is that you can't trust anything they say - and they're in for the quick buck rather than a long term strategy, They'll break it up and sell the bits.

As long as critical IP and development/manufacturing capabilities remain onshore (which is within HMG's gift to dictate) then I'm not sure HMG cares how the ownership structure evolves.

[Asturias56]

I think HMG feel they were given a real run-around over Cobham - - "understandings" don't do it - you need a cast iron contract with teeth

[tartare]

Private Equity - bah.
In for five, out for five... i.e in for five years, and out at five times the EBITDA multiple they paid.
Hoover up the cashflow, strip it to the bone of anything that doesn't immediately contribute to underlying profit and either carve it up, or flog the lot.
They like to see themselves as the apex predators of the commercial world that pick off the weak and under-evolved.

[minigundiplomat]

Originally Posted by Asturias56

The biggest problem with this deal is that you can't trust anything they say - and they're in for the quick buck rather than a long term strategy, They'll break it up and sell the bits.

Now not sure if it makes any difference that they're US asset strippers cp UK ones

I suspect you’d be ok with it if the asset stripping was being done by eurotrash companies?

[ORAC]

https://www.theguardian.com/business...ra-electronics

Kwasi Kwarteng intervenes in takeover bid of UK defence firm Ultra Electronics

[Asturias56]

"I suspect you’d be ok with it if the asset stripping was being done by eurotrash companies?

No these guys have previous form - their last promises lasted 18 months.................

[Easy Street]

Originally Posted by Asturias56

No these guys have previous form - their last promises lasted 18 months.................

They may have said publicly that they wouldn't break up Cobham, but that's different to making a legally-binding agreement to that effect with HMG (which as I said earlier is interested in IP rights and on-shore capabilities, not ownership structures). Have they broken any of those terms?

[Asturias56]

I'm not sure what sort of "legally binding agreement" the Govt wants - it has to have some serious penalties in it I guess - they clearly just accepted their word on Cobham......... and having got away with it there they're back for more

[Easy Street]

Originally Posted by Asturias56

I'm not sure what sort of "legally binding agreement" the Govt wants - it has to have some serious penalties in it I guess - they clearly just accepted their word on Cobham......... and having got away with it there they're back for more

Come on, you know you're dodging my question. Which of Cobham's IP rights and/or development & manufacturing capabilities have left the UK as a result of its breakup? Were any of those meant to stay in the UK under the terms agreed with HMG? In the absence of any examples, your assertion that the buyers have "got away with" something is empty rhetoric.

As to the sort of deal HMG wants, they want one enforceable in court. One like Jack's, not Harry's. Wise Jack.