US Equity firm trying to buy the UK Nuclear Submarine supplier
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 |
Originally Posted by NutLoose
(Post 11096095)
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 |
Yes, but they have just agreed terms
|
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.
|
"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.............. |
Originally Posted by Asturias56
(Post 11096179)
"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. |
Originally Posted by DuckDodgers
(Post 11096154)
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 |
As Ultra also make other Defense Equipment, does ownership by a US firm make its products subject to ITAR and all the associated restrictions?
|
Originally Posted by Chewing the crud
(Post 11096488)
As Ultra also make other Defense Equipment, does ownership by a US firm make its products subject to ITAR and all the associated restrictions?
|
I hope the Sidewinder lunch is protected!
|
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 |
Originally Posted by Asturias56
(Post 11096558)
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.
|
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
|
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. |
Originally Posted by Asturias56
(Post 11096558)
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 |
https://www.theguardian.com/business...ra-electronics
Kwasi Kwarteng intervenes in takeover bid of UK defence firm Ultra Electronics |
"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................. |
Originally Posted by Asturias56
(Post 11097849)
No these guys have previous form - their last promises lasted 18 months.................
|
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
|
Originally Posted by Asturias56
(Post 11098330)
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
As to the sort of deal HMG wants, they want one enforceable in court. One like Jack's, not Harry's. Wise Jack. |
All times are GMT. The time now is 04:19. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.