Arm swans off to Nasdaq despite UK gov pleas to IPO in London

Arm has confirmed its shares will be listed only in New York following its initial public offering (IPO), dashing hopes of the UK government and others - for now at least - of a dual list on the London Stock Exchange. In a statement, the Brit chip design company said it intends to keep its headquarters in Cambridge, UK, as …

[Anonymous Coward]

I hear a rumour

that Softbank asked Nissan how much UK government promises (the ones given in shady backroom meetings) were worth.

They didn't get an answer, but then saw how the NI protocol managed to be a lie to parliament.

That pretty much settled it.

You probably won't hear this, as the media will be busy with some royal nonsense.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: I hear a rumour

Maybe it was just a rumour.

[Paul Crawford]

Are any of us really surprised?

The decision to flog off yet another UK business years ago is pretty much indicative of the UK government mind-set on anything technological. Or perhaps more accurately, a lack of any sort of functioning mind when it comes down to science and technology. The results are all rather predictable.

[VoiceOfTruth]

These are different circumstances to the flog offs. Arm was never state owned.

The government doesn't really care two hoots about who owns Arm. It has not talked about the technology. It has instead talked a lot about listing Arm in London so the money manipulators can get their unfair share of the loot, the sort of people who mis-sell products, manipulate bank interest rates to suit themselves, who act on insider information.

[Roland6]

The Tories don’t really care two hoots about who owns industry in Britain, the conservatives are only really interested in property, construction and financial services.

[Richard 12]

Not even that

They're almost exclusively interested in stuffing their pockets.

[J. R. Hartley]

Re: Not even that

They are scum

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Not even that

sorry your far too polite.

They are fucking bastard scum sucking peices of raw fucking shit who should be hung for fucking treason.

[Pascal Monett]

"consider a subsequent listing in due course"

Sounds like : "When the UK is relevant once again"

But hey, you took back control ! Whoop !

[elsergiovolador]

FB

The former leader of the current ruling party said "F Business"

and the party to this day follows this mantra.

So why would any company treat this country seriously?

[Headley_Grange]

Reasons?

According to some reports, one of the reasons for not wanting to list in London is that the LSE has stricter rules on reporting 'related party transactions'. If listed in London ARM would have to report on any transactions it had with Softbank or other companies in which Softbank has a stake. I don't know if not wanting to report such transactions is just good business sense or because Softbank is planning to things with ARM that it would rather not make public.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Reasons?

Name other tech giants listed on the London Stock Exchange instead of the tech targeted NASDAQ ?

[Roland6]

Re: Reasons?

Well there was a company called Autonomy that was part of the FT100…

and wasn’t ICL :) listed in London…

[TimMaher]

Re: ICL

Or Fujitsu as we now call it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Reasons?

@Roland6

You used past tense for both of those. Which is rather revealing about tech companies in the Uk...

[Roland6]

Re: Reasons?

Agree…

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Reasons?

@Roland6

It was before it went private.

[Len]

Re: Reasons?

The London Stock Exchange has a bunch of issues. Just this morning the FT wrote ‘There are no domestic equity investors’: why companies are fleeing London’s stock market about how the lack of UK investors buying equity in UK companies means that there's a lack of 'validation' that local investors give to a stock and that foreign investors might look for before they buy.

Add to that that New York has deeper liquidity pools (a combination of just having a bigger home market, more stupid people with lots of money, and some other factors) means that it's easier to raise money in NY than London and that valuations tend to be higher there.

Add to that that London is very much a 20th century exchange, dominated by stale and old-fashioned mining and commodity conglomerates, not flashy 21st century tech firms. If I recall correctly it was either 2022 or 2021 that Amsterdam had more tech IPOs than London.

Add to that that the UK has limitations on shares of multiple classes, very popular with tech founders as it allows them to sell a majority of the business but still have a controlling share.

And then there is the small issue of Brexit. It's not a top three cause of the LSE's issues but might make it into the top five.

That means that London is not a place where many tech firms like to list. I don't know if Amsterdam could be a place for ARM's secondary listing as I don't know enough about the minutiae and specific requirements that ARM is looking for.

[elsergiovolador]

Re: Reasons?

You are also forgetting about IR35 changes that was like a bucket of cold sick poured on the tech sector.

Meaning that UK based tech companies struggle to find talent and given how this legislation is botched it is actually easier for foreign corporations to hire talent in the UK than for our domestic companies.

(basically the IR35 changes don't apply if the client does not have presence in the UK)

[James Anderson]

Re: Reasons?

You have hit the nail on the head.

The UK financial services industry is primarily interested in paying its staff large bonuses.

To raise the money for bonuses they have three strategies

Gaming the system using high speed trading, research and inside knowledge to pick winners and dump losers on retail investors.

Forcing companies to cut costs and forego investments to pay higher dividends.

Then when companies are hollowed out by years of cost cutting, they sell the company to foreign investors who are only interested in what was once a prestigious brand name. (Jaguar, Mini?)

It’s all basically asset stripping and deeply damaging to the UK economy.

[elsergiovolador]

Chasing pies in the sky

Another thing is, why government is not creating a good environment for business to grow so that we could build something better than ARM rather than clinging to the past?

Currently there is absolutely no way this country can attract any talent with its punitive taxes, poor services, crime and skyrocketing costs of living.

[Anonymous Coward]

Great idea here...

Maybe the UK should leave the EU so that it can get even fewer- sorry, my mistake, meant "more"- companies like ARM to list their shares in London and get on with the race-to-the-bottom, low-rent, low-tax, low-protection "Singapore Upon Thames" business environment people like you to propose.

Oh, and I'm thinking of, I dunno, that Kwasi Kwarteng and Liz Truss as the people who'd be best placed to implement your tax-cutting policies and definitely wouldn't foul it up so that they stymied growth and investment far more than any risibly fictitious "anti-growth coalition" could.

One could become PM and the other the chancellor. Which one do you think should get the top job?

[John H Woods]

Re: Great idea here...

None of these "Singapore Upon Thames" enthusiasts seem to have the slightest idea about Singapore

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Singapore

I did a stop-over in Singapore some 20-odd years ago. Then, there were SG$3.30 to the pound. Now it's about half that, SG$1.62 last time I looked. I think that tells us something about the competence of the UK's political classes.

[elsergiovolador]

Re: Great idea here...

I'm thinking of, I dunno, that Kwasi Kwarteng and Liz Truss as the people who'd be best placed to implement your tax-cutting policies and definitely wouldn't foul it up so that they stymied growth and investment far more than any risibly fictitious "anti-growth coalition" could.

The measures Liz Truss wanted to introduce would affect SMEs the most and big business is against that. Big corporations can easily avoid paying taxes while SMEs can't.

Healthy and growing SMEs is a danger to the status quo and big corporations don't want risks involved in that.

Furthermore, good business environment means the talent that has no alternative to working in a big corporation, could start their own enterprise and that's another problem big corporations don't want to have.

Lastly the reversal of IR35 changes could give the power back to the talented engineers hands. Imagine workers quitting and starting their own businesses.

Seems like you are a believer of late stage capitalism.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Great idea here...

Yeah, sure- it's all big businesses' fault and not Liz Truss's fault that her "Unfunded tax cuts for the most well off" plan shat the bed and- ironically- inflicted the "moron tax" on us.

Just because she said she was going to do something about one particular thing that suited you personally.

> Seems like you are a believer of late stage capitalism.

Ooh, "late stage capitalism". Did you learn that on Reddit?

You sound like like a right-winger attempting to troll a left-winger because they didn't agree with *their* particular flavour of right-wing shite. And doing so on Reddit ;-)

Given your IR35 comment above, I bet you'd love to imply that I'm best chums with Rishi "Infosys spouse" Sunak too, rather than someone who despises Truss, Sunak, Johnson and anyone worthless enough to have remained willingly associated with the Tory party at this point.

[elsergiovolador]

Re: Great idea here...

"Unfunded tax cuts for the most well off" plan shat the bed and- ironically- inflicted the "moron tax" on us.

That's the most stupid soundbite people who can't think beyond two variables got attached to. Like if tax hikes are somehow funded? How can you yield any tax from a company that goes bankrupt or a workers that loses their job because the business can no longer be competitive?

Then another lie was that - apart from bankers - the tax cuts were mostly affecting high earning working class and small businesses - these groups are hardly "most well off".

I bet you'd love to imply that I'm best chums with Rishi

I imply that you don't understand how economy works.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Great idea here...

> I imply that you don't understand how economy works.

Shame that Liz Truss didn't either.

[John H Woods]

Re: Chasing pies in the sky

So you want to improve services and lower taxes?

[elsergiovolador]

Re: Chasing pies in the sky

There is a large scale corruption taking place that is not being addressed. Departments that are supposed to fight it are doing nothing.

In essence a huge proportion of tax payer money is being wasted. That's one thing.

Another thing, the tax system needs to be rebalanced. It is wrong that engineer can pay over 50% of tax on their income, while CEO pay 10% at most if they have bad accountants.

Same goes regarding inverted progression when it comes to business. Small business pays the most tax % wise while big corporations pay the least.

Not sure why people on here want big corporations to continue to avoid paying taxes and individual success to be punished?

Envy?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Chasing pies in the sky

> Not sure why people on here want big corporations to continue to avoid paying taxes and individual success to be punished?

You're not going to win anyone here over with obvious strawman misrepresentations of anyone who doesn't agree 100% with you.

[elsergiovolador]

Re: Chasing pies in the sky

Please enlighten us how business having less money to grow and pay the workers and workers having less in their pockets is good for the country.

Also tell us why do you think big corporations should have competitive advantage over SMEs?

[Anonymous Coward]

A déjà vu is usually a glitch in the Matrix. It happens when they change something.

> why do you think big corporations should have competitive advantage over SMEs?

You're not going to win anyone here over with obvious strawman misrepresentations of anyone who doesn't agree 100% with you.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Chasing pies in the sky

nice twisting, you must look like a knotted pretzel.

[codejunky]

Re: Chasing pies in the sky

@John H Woods

"So you want to improve services and lower taxes?"

That should surely be the aim? Good business is producing more and costing less, yet government doesnt seem to have the same motivation. The idea that the gov should take more and do more until it eats us all alive is insane.

[Headley_Grange]

Re: Chasing pies in the sky

The state isn't like a factory - it doesn't produce stuff - it pays for stuff.

Figures below for UK public expenditure from the OBR for fy 22/23.

30% of UK public spending is on public services like education, NHS, social care, prisons, and such. All of these are labour intensive but the usual production strategies of automation and offshoring won't make huge cost reductions. You could double class sizes and half the teaching workforce, I suppose, but I assume we're interested in quality of output as well as base costs. The NHS is a problem because it's considered sacred by much of the population and so it is a brave person that implicitly criticizes it by talking about inefficiencies, but my opinion is that we need efficiency improvements to catch up with the backlog and deal with the increased future workload coming with the demographics of fatter and older people. The state already pays less for social care than it costs, with the care homes loading the difference onto private patients.

25% is on Social Security and half of this is the state pension. People are living longer and unless the state pension is slashed the costs will rise for ever, even with the current increase of the pensionable age. We already have one of the lowest state pensions in the developed world, so there doesn't seem to be much room for huge reductions unless we're going to go down the Logan's Run route. You could look at means-testing, but the phenomenon of wealthy boomer pensioners who have benefited from good work, good company pensions and cheap houses is not going to be repeated in the generations following them and there will be a net increase in people who rely on the state pension as the boomers fade away.

You could reduce universal credit by getting people into well-paying jobs that allow them to afford to live (and pay taxes), but the lack of affordable housing and consumers' desire for cheap at any cost makes this particularly difficult. 41% of UC recipients are working, but don't earn enough to live and need help. The tax take from these and other "gig-economy" jobs is low, and it's ridiculous that the taxpayer is subsidizing the profits of wealthy companies by allowing them to pay below-subsistence wages.

Defence is small - ~3%, much less than debt servicing (10%). Investment is 5%. Capital (roads, etc.) is about 10% - the big tickets are social security, health and social care.

[elsergiovolador]

Re: Chasing pies in the sky

You could reduce universal credit

Universal credit is de-facto a subsidy for big corporations paid for by SMEs and higher earning workers. What probably needs changing is that corporations that don't pay workers enough to live should directly be funding this instrument or the minimum wage should be raised to a level where this subsidy is not needed.

Of course this won't happen because big corporations have enough money to buy any politician willing to change this.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Chasing pies in the sky

Agreed, the quickest and easiest solution for lowering the cost of Universal Credit is to drastically raise the minimum wage. No person working full-time, not even a road sweeper, should have to rely on Universal Credit and food banks to survive.

[SundogUK]

Re: Chasing pies in the sky

The minimum wage is always 0

[codejunky]

Re: Chasing pies in the sky

@Headley_Grange

"The state isn't like a factory - it doesn't produce stuff - it pays for stuff."

And for the most part doesnt make any money. It doesnt create. Instead it consumes and eats away at what is made, so should be very price conscious.

"30% of UK public spending is on public services like education, NHS, social care, prisons, and such. All of these are labour intensive but the usual production strategies of automation and offshoring won't make huge cost reductions"

And yet in your very next line after that you state how to reduce costs. You literally did it with the next line. Home chores are labour intensive, and are increasingly automated. Moving boxes around a warehouse is labour intensive, and increasingly automated. Flipping burgers is labour intensive, and increasingly automated. The reason you dont spend all your waking hours in a muddy field is because the extremely labour intensive work of growing food no longer takes 90% of the population. So why shouldnt we expect increased productivity from the state when others achieve it?

"You could reduce universal credit by getting people into well-paying jobs"

That would be achieved by the state taking less out of the economy to leave more in the economy surely. The government cannot create jobs, it does destroy them. So its actions have to be careful otherwise it destroys without sufficient benefit to justify it.

"but the lack of affordable housing and consumers' desire for cheap at any cost makes this particularly difficult"

How is housing to be affordable when the government insists it cant be? Look at the ever increasing rules and regulations on how housing is made, the standards they must all meet for sale or rent. The stupidly slow planning rules making building slow and expensive. The second part of that quote shows why your plan doesnt work, you want people to stop being people. You want people to self harm (not look for their best option but your decision of what is best).

"41% of UC recipients are working, but don't earn enough to live and need help"

Amazing isnt it. Ramp up the cost of things and then have to give money to people who then cant afford those things. The recent obvious example being energy.

[John H Woods]

Re: Chasing pies in the sky

That idea is insane yes, but it's not my idea, it's your straw man.

[codejunky]

Re: Chasing pies in the sky

@John H Woods

"That idea is insane yes, but it's not my idea, it's your straw man."

No straw man. The governments spending is an increasingly large part of the economy. Government debt ever growing beyond comprehensible numbers. Glad you agree it is insane.

[Roland6]

Re: Chasing pies in the sky

> punitive taxes

Nice sound it’s that doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.

But be my guest if you want to take a pay cut and emigrate to India or China…

[45RPM]

Yet another example of a Conservative government failing to protect businesses or the best interests of the country. Reuters, Rover, Lyons, British Steel, Rowntree, Apricot, Cadbury, ARM… Cornerstones of British Industry, and now all gone. Even the city of London, and much of our countries land, sold to Russians, Arabs - and anyone else with deep pockets. I’d say the NHS is next, but they’re already more than halfway through destroying that.

Pleas are irrelevant. ARM shouldn’t have been sold to foreign interests in the first place. Can you imagine France or Germany allowing such a thing to happen?

If there’s one thing you can guarantee though, some Conservative politician or vested interest has made a nice fat short term profit - and to hell with the future.

I wish sanity prevailed in the Conservative Party. I don’t mind a political party whose views I disagree with as long as they are genuinely held and believed to be in the best interests of the country. This mob though are just a bunch of chancers and shysters - much like the current iteration of the Republican Party in America.

You’d have to be an utter mug to vote for them. Grr.

[VoiceOfTruth]

You make a very good overall point with your list of companies. Rover was interesting. I can't remember which Tory MP it was who talked about "success" when four people enriched themselves while Rover went bust. You can read more about it here: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2009/sep/11/mg-rover-phoenix-four1.

The Tories are not the party that it was even 30 years ago. It is in the hands of very very wealthy people who seek to enrich themselves even further. 30 or 40 years ago, particularly in the 1970s and early 1980s, it might have been seen as the party for people who aspired to better things by dint of their own effort. Now it's just a party for the rich and bugger off any one else.

Labour are not any better.

[IGotOut]

To be fair, Rover was a money pit. It only survived as long as it did because of hand out after hand out They were badly but rust buckets from the 70s onwards, badly thrown together and with only a slight afterthought of quality.

They got their asses kicked by the Japanese (as did many UK automotive industries) because they make reliable well built cars.

I actually liked and had a few Rovers, and because of that, I became a dab hand at replacing body parts, treating and filling rust holes and high quality respraying, hell I even became good friends with girl in the parts department.

[Anonymous Coward]

> They were badly but rust buckets from the 70s onwards [..] They got their asses kicked by the Japanese

Honestly, didn't *lots* of cars have rust problems during the 70s and the 80s? Fiat I remember having a bad reputation for it during the 80s, and the late-1970s Datsun my parents bought secondhand had rusted into a borderline writeoff before its eighth birthday. (Ironic, given that you mention the Japanese above.)

When I was growing up in Scotland during the 80s, visible rust on cars was common and normal to an extent that- it occurred to me a few years ago- you just don't see today. (*)

Some of this may be due to the MOT standards having been tightened up. But most of it, I suspect, is due to massively improved rustproofing since then.

(*) For whatever reason, the place I most notice significant amounts of rust spots or visible damage these days is on commercial vehicles. The fact that

[Anonymous Coward]

In those days, didn't Alfa Romeo have the reputation that its cars were already rusty in the brochures?

They had a problem with the steel they used and it took years to (a) solve it and then (b) lose that reputation..

[Anonymous Coward]

Alfa Romeo or Lancia?

> They had a problem with the steel they used and it took years to (a) solve it and then (b) lose that reputation..

Thought that Alfa Romeo was owned by Fiat, checking says they were bought over in 1986, so not sure if that covers the time period you had in mind.

I did find out later that Fiat's aforementioned problems with rust partly stemmed from the low quality of the steel they got from the Soviets as payment in kind for their cooperation and resources.*

Or maybe you were thinking of Lancia- who Fiat definitely did own by then- which had a particularly notorious reputation for rust during the 1980s. (Apparently this was so bad it was the reason the brand was ultimately withdrawn from the UK).

* The "classic" Lada design was apparently based on the mid-1960s Fiat 124 which explains why they already looked so dated during the 1980s.

[Anonymous Coward]

Cars? Someone suggest Rovers really weren't that bad?

Cars I've had... most of, in order, some owned in parallel to others... from ageing memory..

Datsun 120YU - slow as hell, but tough as old boots.

Alfa Sud - unreliable, many repairs

Nissan Cherry Estate

Nissan Bluebird - A slow but reliable car that took a good beating but went on and on.

Mercedes 280SE - tough old beast with next to no extra features.

Rover 820SE - unreliable in the extreme, massive repair costs.

Jaguar XJ6 - lots of issues, power steering etc.

Jaguar XJ6 Sovereign - written off

Jaguar XJ6 Sovereign (post-Ford) minor issues, wonky speedo, and disintegrating wheel bearings.

Lexus GS300 Twin Turbo - power steering pump, very very fast.

Lexus LS400 - faultless.

After UK:

Audi A8 4.3 Quattro - bought a year old, unreliable, breaking problems, bad software etc.

Maserati Quattroporte - not quite an everyday car.

Chrysler 300 (5.7-litre version) - surprisingly reliable for an American car, auto great-stick jammed once, otherwise fine.

Nissan Infinity - Great people carrier alternative

Ferrari California (for a few weeks, not a nice car, 30k for a gearbox change, imported so Ferrari warranty was a waste of time) Horrid drive, uncomfortable as hell, and kids put posters of this heap of junk?

Back to UK... with a massive drop in income...

Lexus LS430

The car I've now had for 12 years, is 18 years old, 90k miles (commute no more than 3 miles by bike during this time) and maintenance? Other than tyres and two batteries, steering folding motor £300 12 years ago and two O2 sensors about £150 including labour. A chap around the corner has a Datsun 120Y, a bit beaten up, but that it's still on the road is remarkable.

Why on earth would I want to ever buy European again? The family want an upgrade because they're bored of the car, a quick trip in someone else's or hearing of their repair stories, like a relative's Mercedes CL that needed a few grand to fix the suspension or a new Mercedes S-Class with auto-drive (lane and distance assist) whose bumper fell off, and bills makes them quite again.

[Claverhouse]

The link, interesting enough despite it being the wretched Guardian --- woke but not socialist --- has a redundant 1 at the end leading to a 404; it is:

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2009/sep/11/mg-rover-phoenix-four

[VoiceOfTruth]

Thank you for the correction. I agree the Grauniad is pretty wretched. The story was among the first few links I found for Rover + Phoenix.

[Anonymous Coward]

"The Tories are not the party that it was even 30 years ago. It is in the hands of very very wealthy people who seek to enrich themselves even further. 30 or 40 years ago, particularly in the 1970s and early 1980s, it might have been seen as the party for people who aspired to better things by dint of their own effort. Now it's just a party for the rich and bugger off any one else."

Your funny as fuck.

even before thatcher the snatcher, they were creaming money into their pockets, Thatcher just made it more visable, and pretended it was for everyones good.

so you can fuck off with that history re-write

[Roland6]

You missed Westland Helicopters…

[Anonymous Coward]

"Can you imagine France or Germany allowing such a thing to happen?"

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deezer

[Anonymous Coward]

or just look at what Macron did when he was minister, before being the sinister clown he is now

[IGotOut]

Correction needed in article.

"adds urgency to the need for the UK government to publish its long-awaited semiconductor strategy.""

It should read

"adds urgency to the need for the UK government to publish its long-awaited Brexit strategy."

[Doctor Syntax]

Re: Correction needed in article.

Should read "adds need for UK government to publish any strategy"

Although I do worry about that saying that the most dreaded sentence in the English language is "I'm from the government and I'm here to help.".

[Zippy´s Sausage Factory]

Feels like something was deleted here... wonder how it read originally?

"After failed attempts at engagement with the British government and way too many meetings with the Financial Conduct Authority over several months, SoftBank and Arm have had it up to here with the lot of them and determined that pursuing a US-only listing of Arm in 2023 is the best and, for the sake of our collective sanity, the only path forward for the company and its stakeholders."

FTFY?

[amanfromMars 1]

For All Mega Meta Data BasICQ NEUKlearer HyperRadioProACTive IT Energy Users

It’s a great deal worse that, Zippy´s Sausage Factory, but no less than well deserved would many say.

After tempting failed British government entities to engage in attempts forsaking their collective insanity, is the better path forward for out of this world leaderships a series of Long Marches, onward and upwards delving and diving deep into dark webs of mysterious intrigue and SMARTR IntelAIgent Networks of Virtual Endeavour and Stellar Performance.

And sadly for the UK is that too perfectly true to be desperately spun as and easily dismissed as patently false and fake home news either for or from jolly rotten foreigners either abroad or at home ...... the international internetional competition and/or unofficial opposition.

[anonymous boring coward]

Could you possibly write "ARM"? I'm pretty sure "ARM" is correct, and "Arm" is not.

[Michael Strorm]

I asked the author, and they said "arm not sure about that".

[John Brown (no body)]

He's just messing about. There's no 'arm in it.

The sleeveless one --------------->

[Tron]

Brexit.

Brexit was always going to relegate the UK's financial sector, and it has done. It's game over. Stop pretending we are still premier league. This is the second company to do this in the last week. There will be more.

[SundogUK]

Re: Brexit.

Absolute rubbish. London's only competitor is New York. There isn't another European center in the top ten. Paris is 11 and Frankfurt 16

[amanfromMars 1]

Meanwhile, Elsewhere, as Jeff* has said, Life Begins Again :-)

"I don't think this has much to do with the UK's lack of a 'coherent technology strategy,' which is a given," he told us. "More likely it's to do with financial market considerations."

It has previously been stated that Arm will have better access to finance in the US stock markets, and Gordon pointed out that most of Arm’s major licensees are also based on the US.

Quite so, it is as simple as that, with its Suttonesque** raison d'être for robbing banks .... It's where the money is. .... being echoed in the above two short paragraphs and supported by a quartet of rhetorical questions asked of El Regers in a comment posted to them on Thursday 2nd March at 12:49 .....

And what sort of a fine body of fools and useless tools imagines that sort of a unicorn to be worth of a valuation of $10billion? Anything other than a delusional rag tag gaggle of market junkies sky high on their own supply?

What is it they say about such situations? .... Fools and their money are easily invented and parted?

And is anyone else thinking that all recent past and current running present day UK woes and tribulations are entirely obviously due to the UK's lack of any coherent politically correct and adept universal strategy, with the problem supported and exacerbated by its apparent national adoption and unseemly addiction to the tragicomical type of leadership delivering Wannabe Lions led by Donkeys with Roundheads and Parliamentary Dunderheads masquerading in the Public Harry Limelight in the places and spaces traditionally preserved and reserved for the Great and the Almightily Good in the Postmodern 0day Chapters Chartering the Movements and Developments of Saints and Sinners with a Common and Simply Complex Mutually Beneficial, Positively Reinforcing Engaging Interest Supplying Overwhelming Leverage and Insurmountable Pioneering Advantage to the Right Royal Cavalier and Private Pirate Marketeer alike ‽ .

Knowing the Problem allows for ITs Fixing, with paths to be travelled and experienced together shared ensuring Eradication is assured, guaranteeing significant further almighty advantage to Special Access Parties and Prime Interest Proprietary Intellectual Property Groups? Anything else has one fiddling about in going nowhere great and good fast fantasy lands rendering one catastrophically exposed and criminally vulnerable to all manner of suddenly known unknown titanic indefensible attack.

* .... https://thewaroftheworlds.com

** ..... Willie Sutton

[pimppetgaeghsr]

So they have lost so much talent they are finally opening up in Bristol and admitting Cambridge isn't the only city in the UK with engineers. Looks like a direct move on the competition that are established there.

[NikBartlett]

An ARM office in Bristol has been talked about for many years. They cut 700 roles in the UK just 12 months ago which hardly instils confidence for anyone considering joining them in Bristol.

[Medieval Research Council]

One of the founders of ARM told me today that he has been invited to be on BBC Radio4 news at about 18:15 on Monday 6th March. If the TV side want to interview him perhaps a haircut first....