Brexit? HP Inc laughs in the face of Brexit! Hard or soft, PC maker claims it's 'no significant risk' Continued uncertainties caused by Brexit may be giving all sorts of businesses sleepless nights – but HP Inc claims it isn't among them. The world's second-largest PC maker – and the largest in Britain – made the bold statement in its latest set of profit and loss accounts for the year ended 31 October, filed with Companies …
This post has been deleted by its author
This post has been deleted by its author
This post has been deleted by its author
This post has been deleted by its author
This post has been deleted by its author
Before opening mouth, consult
https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/2019ewhc-1709-admin-johnson-v-westminster-mags-final.pdf
The magistrate in the original case ruled that the case was *not vexatious*.
The two judges in the Appeal Court ruled that Johnson had claimed the case was vexatious, but they disagreed with the magistrate and said that Ball had not sufficiently made out the case that it was not.
Let's see the mistakes in your post that show you're just a shill:
1. The original magistrate was a woman.
2. The Appeal judges were one man and one woman.
So "the judge ruled" is bollocks.
3. The Appeal judges did not rule that the case was vexatious; they ruled that there were insufficient grounds to proceed, but they did not rule either way on whether the original case was vexatious.
4. The Appeal judges did not rule that "£350m/week was an acceptable gross figure".
You have not acquainted yourself with the details, I guess you're repeating some Daily Fail garbage.
Let's see the mistakes in your post that show you're just a shill:
So shills.. Per the BBC-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48554853
Speaking outside court, Mr Ball said he had spent more than the £300,000 he raised on the case, leaving him in "massive debt".
In a statement, he later added that he would "keep fighting".
Which kinda sums up aspects of the Brexit fiasco. Lose, lose big, but decide to 'keep fighting'. And probably keep quiet about who's bankrolling that fight. Such is politics.
Meanwhile, HP is perhaps more pragmatic. It's been years since the referendum, so HP's had a couple of chances to state any impact in it's UK filings. It might happen this Halloween. It might be next year. It might be never. But businesses have now had more time to contingency plan for various hard or soft divorces. And of course we've also had a changing of the guard at the EU, which might mean they're more agreeable to negotiate in good faith.
But there have also been additional challenges for HP, namely the three-way trade spat between the US, EU and China with extra trade sanctions applied, and Brexit may mean we can avoid some of that fallout.
This post has been deleted by its author
It seems fairly clear some types of businesses are more exposed than others. I would imagine any computer production in the UK mainly uses components from outside the EU (china, far east) and as such won't face any significant changes in terms of tariffs (though ports bogged down with EU trade having to go through customs might mean non-EU trade is impacted). Also, components for computers are relatively small, so stockpiling is far less problematic, don't have to rely on just-in-time deliveries.
Similarly I would imagine high margin, low volume car producers (Aston Martin, McLaren) to be more able to cope than high volume, low margin mass production.
Car makers are very exposed, since far more of the supply of components comes from the EU and they are typically bigger and bulkier, so need a lot of space to maintain stockpiles.
The impact on HP is more likely to be any significant impact on the economy and business as a whole. People are far less likely to buy computers if they're going out of business, which many companies quite possibly will do.
If the stockpiles (for anything) that were built up prior to March are being managed correctly (as a lead-time buffer) then the only issue is how long before a stable set of x-border delivery schedules can be organised under the new system.
I'm expecting 2 weeks of utter confusion followed by a couple of months when everything settles into a new pattern - because the final go/no-go decision will be 24h ahead of it actually happening just like it was in March.
I suspect it won't sort itself out anywhere near that quickly.
The brexitters assure us that 'no deal' and WTO rules will be absolutely fine. Apparently the difference between the absolute best possible free trade deal (single market, no border checks, no quotas, uniform standards) and WTO rules for 50% of our trade is really not something we'll even notice.
But at the same time, we absolute MUST leave the EU customs union, so we can sign third party trade deals for 20-30% of our trade, which won't be anywhere near as deep as the single market, with the US, China, etc., and this will create a massive boom in the economy.
You don't need to be a nobel economist to see that these two arguments are completely contradictory. Either WTO rules are fine and trade deals make little difference, or they aren't fine, and the difference between a free trade deal and WTO is huge. But brexitters are basically arguing both cases at the same time.
You state "The brexitters assure us that 'no deal' and WTO rules will be absolutely fine." ... well, no Brexiter I have listened to (the pub doesn't count) has said this - although that bald statement is probably truer than the "utter disaster" ones if you really insist on polarising things.
Brexiters state that a friendly, mutually beneficial deal would be better for both the UK and the EU than WTO. The EU looks like it may deny us this. However, UK under WTO will be a constantly improving scenarion depending on the scale and nature of the preparations made in the run-up. That is now key. WTO trading will be a bit scrappy for a while, but the UK is not a trivial player in world trade terms and will do at least OK, and I like to thing probably rather well in the longer term.
"no Brexiter I have listened to (the pub doesn't count) has said this"
What?
So BoZo and Hunt are just customers at your local?
ALL leading Brexiteers are now saying that no-deal is "just fine". NONE of them said that before the referendum.
Then you proceed to say yourself that no-deal is just fine, because we will soon have oh so many deals in place, because we are oh so important. What utter delusional bollocks! On our own we are pretty trivial, for your information, as Hunt just found out when China laughed in his face.
"Also, components for computers are relatively small, so stockpiling is far less problematic, don't have to rely on just-in-time deliveries."
When I worked for IBM (now Lenovo), they were extremely just-on-time.
The components are very expensive, and tend to go obsolete very quickly, so you don't want to have loads of money tied up in obsolete parts.
Yeah but - car part/component typical import duty 3-5%.
Completed cars typical import duty 10%.
So if you are a high-volume manufacturer, your importing competitors will be hit by 10% but your costs only go up 4% (well less actually, nearer 2%, as only half the cost is components)
So you have an 8% price advantage post-brexit in the UK market.
It sounds like a win-win to me....
One overlooked issue is that the UK will no longer be part of the CE mark and instead is launching the UKCA mark (must be better it has more letters!) although it will still recognise the CE mark.
So if you want to make cars for the UK market all your bits and pieces will now need to be UKCA marked, but if you are building for export then you will need all the bits to be CE marked (UKCA isn't recognised anywhere in the world). The key element is placing on the market, and if its after the time limited overrun (not yet decided) then its a real challenge to know if you can get conformity or components.
Its why Vauxhall will pull out of the UK if its a no deal exit as they have no idea what they will need to do or when.
Of course like all good governments they haven't actually decided what, when or if this will happen and everything I have said is subject to change.......good luck planning supply chain on that basis
"So if you want to make cars for the UK market all your bits and pieces will now need to be UKCA marked, but if you are building for export then you will need all the bits to be CE marked (UKCA isn't recognised anywhere in the world)."
So you build them to make both standards, and stamp them with both. Or you make a subset for the UK market with both stamps, and use them in Europe.
CE doesn't work like that.
CE is a legal assertion by the entity placing it on the common market (importer in this case) that it meets the requirements.
It can only be asserted by an EU citizen - mostly so there's someone that can be held responsible should the product not meet the requirements.
So nope, you can't do that. You can manufacture the product to meet the requirements, but you can't apply the CE mark yourself. You have to convince somebody within the EU to do that.
It can only be asserted by an EU citizen - mostly so there's someone that can be held responsible should the product not meet the requirements.
Are you suggesting there will be no EU citizens remaining in the UK post-Brexit? OK, so I don't know the exact details around CE marking, but I do know it's fairly common to have foreign nationals in some posts for compliance. Or even non-compliance, ie keeping US nationals ignorant of things the US may not approve of. I wonder how all the non-EU manufactured stuff that's imported into the EU manages this problem?
(answer's in the 'Blue Book', which doesn't require an 'EU citizen' at all..)
The bigger challenge for EU car makers currently are the double whammies of demonising diesel, and deciding to ban ICE vehicles.. Both political decisions rather than market driven.
It can only be asserted by an EU citizen - mostly so there's someone that can be held responsible should the product not meet the requirements
What are you on about?
Plenty of companies exist within the EU UK that exists to take you through certifying the CE mark. While you can do it all yourself, lots of companies work with companies whose only purpose is to help you through and certifying your product.
None of that is applying a CE mark. CE is not like UL, it's not a stack of paper and there is no "certification process". (Except in specific high-risk industries)
There are plenty of companies that will help you do tests, plenty that will advise you on how you can cheaply make your product comply, and plenty that will advise you on which standards apply to your product.
And none of those will sign the declaration of conformity, because doing so makes them entirely liable for product compliance.
In the event of a no-deal Brexit all UK companies will be flatly legally incompetent to mark anything as CE. (If there is a deal then there will hopefully be two years to work out WTF to do)
They'll need an EU subsidiary or partner importer willing to apply the CE mark to do any trade with the EU at all.
This is why a lot of large UK companies have now got EU subsidiaries, or have moved out of the UK.
In the event of a no-deal Brexit all UK companies will be flatly legally incompetent to mark anything as CE. (If there is a deal then there will hopefully be two years to work out WTF to do)
No, they will not. There's a zillion products produced in places like China, Taiwan, Korea or even closer to the EU that come complete with CE marks. It's not like, say, getting a proof mark on a firearm where that has to be applied by legally recognised proof house.
Again the explanation is in the EU's 'Blue Book' which sets out the process and standards that should apply to CE marked stuff... And by no means guarantees safety, or actual conformity to CE standards.. And as CE marking's pretty widely abused, it's perhaps an area where the UK could do more to enforce conformity and safety.
There is no legal requirement in CE marking to have an EU entity involved, or weilding a hot stamp graved with the official logo.
"So you build them to make both standards, and stamp them with both. Or you make a subset for the UK market with both stamps, and use them in Europe."
That assumes the two standards are identical or at least similar but with the UK's grand plan to diverge on standards (as the rest of the world is converging) thats not as simple as your solution suggests.
Reality is you will end up with parallel construction lines and variable component sources, add in rules of origin with the UK having to meet hugely increased content levels to be trade deal compliant and its easier to just shut up shop and focus on the bigger market with the relocation of the manufacturing.
"Of course for a company it's way more profitable to be alone on a small market than having to compete with other companies on a large market."
Is it?
Will imports be banned to help to small market manufacturer? (You did say "alone")
Also, how wold that work out for the consumers then?
Not quite. The candidates are only trying to convince Conservative party members that they're tough enough to stick it to Europe.
The winner will be desperately hoping that the Irish border issue can sorted because they can't run a third national election campaign on the promise that they'll 'implement the peoples wishes'.
As for HP, what do they sell from the UK into Europe?
It don't matter one little bit what either of those clowns promise the Tory party, Europe will just do a General DeGaule and say 'NON' to any changes in the treaty that has been agreed.
They have the high ground here. I'd be tempted to let Boris have a go at re-negociation if giving him the PM job was not already dangerous enough as it is. He'll fail naturally and that will be the end of Blowjob, sorry BoJo, as a politician.
@Wellyboot
"Not quite. The candidates are only trying to convince Conservative party members that they're tough enough to stick it to Europe."
I am amused that the effort is to be the toughest to take on Europe, now. 2 years after handing in art50 and having the preparation time. Where was this dedication 2 years ago and why does it take 1 referendum, 1 general election and then European elections for them to realise that we know what we voted for so just get on with it?
It is too late for being the tough negotiator, now its just getting on in a few months what should have been done for the last 2 years.
"The winner will be desperately hoping that the Irish border issue can sorted"
Thats a non-issue. Never has been an issue throughout this whole EU brexit thing, at least not for the UK.
"they can't run a third national election campaign on the promise that they'll 'implement the peoples wishes'."
Very true. The tories (and labour for their own reasons) are losing a lot of support and struggling with credibility. Their only hope I expect is to deliver and then run a campaign on actually implementing what they have been promising. Cameron will remain known as a jellyfish and May as either weak or a traitor. I think it is fair to say both remain and leave are just waiting someone to actually deliver.
because of a massive demographic and paradigm shift that both parties ignored when it was highlighted ages ago ... (we all know how hard it is to tell someone something they really don't want to hear).
The tectonic plates of popular support are changing, and the old guard haven't a fucking clue.
And it's not because of Facebook, Twitter et al ... (which is why treating them as the problem won't solve anything) they are merely reflecting the shift that is encompassing us all.
The tectonic plates of popular support are changing, and the old guard haven't a fucking clue.
Not yet, Change UK aside (knew Change UK wasn't going to, merely from the name they gave it).
There's been a few grumblings and a weak spot has become a fault line over brexit, it's a small shift that's unlikely to cause to much problems with a few precautions and a softening by hardliners, but the political wildebeast are in full stampede, and the political extremes can smell the blood on the wind.
It's going to get much worse before it gets better.
"Thats a non-issue. Never has been an issue throughout this whole EU brexit thing, at least not for the UK."
Didn't the UK government sort of promise that it would uphold the current border arrangements, and therefore ensuring that it somehow gets sorted is indeed an issue?
Also, if the Irish border doesn't get sorted, that will likely torpedo any future trade deal with the US, and that was one of the main reasons the Brexiters wanted out of the EU, wasn't it?
@AC
"Didn't the UK government sort of promise that it would uphold the current border arrangements, and therefore ensuring that it somehow gets sorted is indeed an issue?"
And the UK wouldnt be making a border. We wont be changing the arrangements.
"Also, if the Irish border doesn't get sorted, that will likely torpedo any future trade deal with the US, and that was one of the main reasons the Brexiters wanted out of the EU, wasn't it?"
Rubbish. Why would the US care a hoot about Ireland? If they did then we wouldnt have been put to the front of the 'queue' and the EU told to get stuffed. The border is already porous and the EU doesnt care. Its not a problem except the EU and remainers like to pretend its a problem. A newly developed problem identified in an already well known situation that was not considered a problem before.
"Didn't the UK government sort of promise that it would uphold the current border arrangements, and therefore ensuring that it somehow gets sorted is indeed an issue?"And the UK wouldnt be making a border. We wont be changing the arrangements."
That weasel argument is repeated many times by the ignorant that don't understand the situation.
I don't think you are that stupid. You know full well that if we didn't maintain a border that EU law requires, we'll have *no* trade deal with the EU at all.
"Also, if the Irish border doesn't get sorted, that will likely torpedo any future trade deal with the US, and that was one of the main reasons the Brexiters wanted out of the EU, wasn't it?"Rubbish. Why would the US care a hoot about Ireland? If they did then we wouldnt have been put to the front of the 'queue' and the EU told to get stuffed.
Why would the US care a hoot about Ireland? The current thinking is that the Democrats see the Good Friday agreement as part of their legacy - it's also very popular with the American Irish.
Still, "why" is not relevent. As "anon" rightly says, the Democrats have already stated there will be no trade deal with the UK if the Good Friday agreement is affected (Google is your friend):
"Congress would torpedo a UK trade deal if Brexit led to a hard border in Ireland, a senior US politician has warned in a blow to Brexiteers.British politicians should "not think for one minute that there's any comfort for them that if they leave the EU they will quickly have a US-UK trade agreement," Nancy Pelosi, the House speaker, said in Dublin on Tuesday (16 April).
"That's just not in the cards if there is any harm done to the Good Friday accords. Don't even think about it," she said.
"This isn't for us an issue or an agreement. It's a value," she added. -- https://euobserver.com/foreign/144688
So, there you go, in your brexit world we'd have no deal with the EU, or the USA.... But at least brexit MEPs will no longer be paid for shitting over everything (oops, no, they'll still get their EU pensions..)
@Jamie Jones
"I don't think you are that stupid. You know full well that if we didn't maintain a border that EU law requires, we'll have *no* trade deal with the EU at all."
No deal because Ireland wont have a border, thats a new one but amusingly logical. If the EU want a border they require they need to make it. As you said EU law requires, and we are leaving them.
"Why would the US care a hoot about Ireland? The current thinking is that the Democrats see the Good Friday agreement as part of their legacy - it's also very popular with the American Irish."
That will be fun if the EU is demanding a border and the Democrats consider it breaking the GFA. I guess the Democrats will have to be against the EU.
"So, there you go, in your brexit world we'd have no deal with the EU, or the USA.... But at least brexit MEPs will no longer be paid for shitting over everything (oops, no, they'll still get their EU pensions..)"
Actually leaving the EU is the way to stop the most popular party from being in the EU. The party with a stunning win for only just coming into existence for this particular vote. And you can claim there will be no deal with the US but thats for you to believe. The EU may or may not be interested in a deal in the short term, although they do seem willing to make exceptions where their economy would likely take another massive blow. Remember the Democrats (Obama) was putting us to the back of the 'queue' and wanted his deal with the EU.
The EU has a problem there. They have to stick to WTO rules and the schedules agreed upon with all the WTO members. So the external border in the north has to be like the external border in the east. The UK can't be treated any better than Russia.
The UK otoh is free to do whatever they want.
If the UK doesn't put in place border controls in the event of a no-deal Brexit, this would leave us wide open to legal claims against us under WTO non-discrimination rules. Unless, of course, you are suggesting we drop all border controls with the rest of the world as well?
@AC
"this would leave us wide open to legal claims against us under WTO non-discrimination rules"
Except Ireland is a bit of a special case, having no actual border that can be applied. So the EU (the only ones wanting a hard border) can either make one or they could do a trade deal allowing no border. At worst we can always lie. The good news is the WTO dont insist a border is needed-
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/wto-says-its-rules-would-not-force-eu-or-uk-to-erect-hard-irish-border-1.3710136
WTO says its rules would not force EU or UK to erect hard Irish border
Why did you even post that link if that's the argument you're making? AC said the UK would be wide open to legal claims if they have an open border, you posted that link, and your link confirms it. You clutched at straws and just shot yourself in the foot. Did you even read as far as the second paragraph where it says:
"The Geneva-based trade body where countries negotiate the rules of international trade would only intervene in a dispute over trade if one of its 164 member countries made a complaint."
Or a little bit further down:
“There is nothing in WTO rules that forces anyone to put up border posts,” said WTO spokesman Keith Rockwell on a visit to Dublin last week.
“Someone has to bring a complaint and say that their interests have been hurt.”
As there are about 20+ countries currently blocking the UK's proposed WTO schedules because they argue that they would hurt their interests, I'd say the chances of that happening as the AC says are pretty good. Russia would be first out of the gate to make a complaint just for the lulz.
Brexiteers talking about "WTO rules" as if trading without approved schedules and an open border meaning the UK is open to claims of discrimination is following WTO rules. Not a good look. Could we call them "WTF rules" instead?
@Dan 55
"Why did you even post that link if that's the argument you're making?"
I suggest you read the link. That you picked that one little thing out of an entire page saying no need to make a border is amazing.
But never mind... you were complaining?
The UK having no border checks with Ireland but not being in a customs union with them means any other country in the world, without a bilateral agreement with the UK that states that they agree that the UK can have no border checks with Ireland, can legally challenge the UK and their complaint will be that the UK is discriminating against them in favour of Ireland.
What's so difficult to understand about that? Come on, use the power of logic. Or are your programs subcontracted out to cats walking across keyboards?
@Dan 55
"What's so difficult to understand about that? Come on, use the power of logic. Or are your programs subcontracted out to cats walking across keyboards?"
As i said, if it becomes a big enough issue and the EU wont come to some agreement we effectively lie. Stamping feet and crying there is no border is pointless when there cant be an effective border.
https://continentaltelegraph.com/brexit/no-deal-brexit-means-the-eu-imposes-a-hard-irish-border-not-us/
As i said, if it becomes a big enough issue and the EU wont come to some agreement we effectively lie.
So the Brexit buccaneers cite WTO rules until they're inconvenient and then just ignore them and bluster their way through it, as if that's something to be proud of.
I guess the EU takes its legal obligations more seriously than the UK with Brexiters at the wheel. It agreed to the backstop as a way to uphold the GFA, which the current clique poised to take over the Brexit process don't want to agree to even though it was requested by the British government in the first place, and said that in a no deal situation without a backstop it will have to try and uphold its WTO obligations. To do otherwise would leave 27 countries open to being sued and the EU is, if nothing else, a legal entity between countries so it is adverse to this.
Why are you linking to the gibberings on Worst-all's blog as if they actually meant something?
@Dan 55
"So the Brexit buccaneers cite WTO rules until they're inconvenient and then just ignore them and bluster their way through it, as if that's something to be proud of."
So remain morons demand a border where no border has effectively been enforced and is ignored while we are in the EU but is a magic problem if we leave as if thats something to be proud of?
"I guess the EU takes its legal obligations more seriously than the UK"
Actually no. A signed agreement not to use our contribution to bail out Greece was ignored when the EU wanted to bail out the Euro. The EU ignores Euro rules when they choose and apply when they wish to. So no.
"Why are you linking to the gibberings on Worst-all's blog as if they actually meant something?"
Because I consider your comments gibberings while he provides reasoning and research behind his economics site. Btw his blog is a different link.
Yet you seem unable to comprehend a) that Brexit means the UK will leave the Customs Union and b) what happens anywhere in the world at the border between two countries with differing customs regimes and no bilateral agreement.
Perhaps Worst-all's blog is at your level after all.
@'Dan 55
"Yet you seem unable to comprehend a) that Brexit means the UK will leave the Customs Union"
I get that. Still doesnt place any actual features to make an actual border in Ireland. Still doesnt stop the EU from an agreement on Ireland. Doesnt stop smuggling which already happens on a border that doesnt really exist in physical reality- https://www.rte.ie/brainstorm/2019/0221/1031880-why-smuggling-across-the-border-could-worsen-after-brexit/
"b) what happens anywhere in the world at the border between two countries with differing customs regimes and no bilateral agreement."
Ireland? For a fair amount of time already. Even now.
"Perhaps Worst-all's blog is at your level after all."
I take that as a complement and I wish you all the best in your efforts to improve.
@anonymous boring coward
"OK... "making a border".. Lol!"
That seems to be the complaint. That no real enforceable border has ever been successful even while we are in the EU and it has been considered acceptable. To try and enforce some kind of border (which cuts through peoples land and even buildings) will apparently cause problems. And yet we dont seem to have any desire to create a border, so no problems, not from our side.
"The winner will be desperately hoping that the Irish border issue can sorted because they can't run a third national election campaign on the promise that they'll 'implement the peoples wishes'."
I'd guess that whatever happens they'll run an election campaign* on the claim that they did implement the peoples' wishes. We're talking about politicians here.
*Probably ASAP and hope that they get to the winning post before it all unravels.
CEO: Eh, Jimmy, why shall I tell them our numbers are crap again this quarter? "The cloud"? "Currency headwinds"?
CFO: No, we've used those 5 straight quarters and that chap from Goldman seemed to be onto us last time. Let's go with "Brexit" instead.
CEO: But Brexit hasn't happened, may never, and probably won't matter if it does.
CFO: Even better. Tell them it's "uncertainty surrounding Brexit" now, and we'll include Brexit actually happening later as a material risk. That way if and when it does happen, we'll have another 5 or 6 quarters worth of excuses and can even say "look, we disclosed it as a risk".
CEO: Excellent.
CFO: More caviar?
CEO: Certainly, and while you're up, be a sport and refill my glass at the champagne fountain.
One has to wonder what's wrong in HP Ink's boardroom.
Malini Paul, research manager at IDC, told us the Windows 10 refresh had driven sales in Britain,
O'rly? I'd say its more case of any new computer/laptop will come with Win 10 as the only choice and its hardware refresh that drives the sales rather than the worst OE Microsoft has managed to produce. I doubt there are any meaningful numbers for anyone buying a new computer just to get Win 10.
On HP kit yeah they probably are.
If I remember correctly they bought the Samsung copier arm. While I generally approve of Samsung products the copiers are not in the same league as Canon Ricoh and KM. HP are toys in comparison.
Don't get me wrong HP have made some very good printers but they are not great to work with as a supplier and there is no margin on ink (pagewide devices and large format) to bother trying.
Their large format is quite good and comparable to Canon on the mid to low end. If you want high end though it's KIP (fastest LED toner based), OKI (Seiko eco solvent) and maybe a few others. HP z series looks like is dying on its arse and the latex machines are a pain compared to solvent due to the power requirements and a separate training course.
Do HP actually make/assemble PC's or any other product in the UK for sale in markets outside of the UK?
I suspect if HP UK is effectively just a UK sales organisation, the only impact Brexit will have is on the willingness of the UK market to buy (imported) HP equipment.
The clue is in the company name: HP Inc.
A US-based global conglomerate. In its world view, the UK is an insignificant dot on an insignificant dot. The HP offices in the UK may thrive or die, but the effect won't be noticed and the company as a whole wouldn't notice either way.
"The two remaining candidates in the running to be the next leader of the Tory party appear hellbent on trying to tell the British public that they can offer the hardest Brexit possible."
This is absolute bollocks. True, they have both said they are willing to leave without a deal, but that isn't the hardest Brexit possible and it isn't what either of them regard as the desired outcome either. Try actually listening to what they say. Just because you disagree in principle with Brexit doesn't make this kind of nonsense true.
The negativity surrounding Brexit is now very much sounding like Y2K. The press obviously love to report only generally negative views (click bait = money) and 'some' of those with a vested interest in remaining also only want to see the negative, after all they are pissed it didn't go their way, which of course must make everybody that didn't vote to remain, stupid.
As for the company I'm in we are more reliant on the US, China and Canada, where possible we have shifted the assembly of components into the UK, mainly because believe it or not it's actually cheaper for us to do that. So no, we don't believe brexit will have a significant impact. Quite possibly the opposite, maybe it's making us realise that we can actually manufacture things ourselves.
Much like life, business will generally find a way to succeed and make money (as long as the government doesn't tax them to death at every opportunity, #Corbyn).
I'm surprised you recycled the Y2K argument considering the audience... this ain't the Daily Mail.
You could actually plan and do something about Y2K, and people did. What can you do against Brexit when the date is not fixed and what's going to happen depends on the whims of a bunch of narcisists and 100,000 Conservative Party members who might as well live on a different planet?
Your corporation has decided the UK's cheap enough (thanks to the battering the pound has taken) and it'll be alright on the night. That might even be true, but all the same it's no way to run a country.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
