spilldig Posted February 6, 2013 Share Posted February 6, 2013 good thing Agreed, It will make a for a better service I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoroB Posted February 6, 2013 Share Posted February 6, 2013 Have you ever wondered whether the Brits own or control any companies in the US? The UK is currently the single largest foreign investor in the United States, with $442 billion invested in the country, representing 17% of the total foreign direct investment in America. The UK has substantially larger investments than its international competitors, with more than one million high-paying jobs created by British businesses throughout the country, spread across each US state. But that dosn't mean it always works out well when US companies take over UK companies, Kraft with Cadburys being a recent example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted February 6, 2013 Share Posted February 6, 2013 Nor does it mean it works out well when British companies take over American companies. If you want to live in a world where overseas investment is encouraged, then don't be surprised when it happens. It's a two-way street. If you want to stop foreign investors from buying up British Companies, buy them up yourself. There is nothing to prevent British Investors - be they institutional or private investors - from buying up British companies. For some reason, they often seem to prefer not to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoroB Posted February 6, 2013 Share Posted February 6, 2013 Nor does it mean it works out well when British companies take over American companies. If you want to live in a world where overseas investment is encouraged, then don't be surprised when it happens. It's a two-way street. If you want to stop foreign investors from buying up British Companies, buy them up yourself. There is nothing to prevent British Investors - be they institutional or private investors - from buying up British companies. For some reason, they often seem to prefer not to do so. As you say overseas investment is a two way street in the world today. You could argue that it is only China investing in US government bonds that keeps the US afloat. ---------- Post added 06-02-2013 at 18:49 ---------- Agreed, It will make a for a better service I think. I hope it starts a price war with SKY, would be good news for cutomers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted February 6, 2013 Share Posted February 6, 2013 You could argue whatever you like. If you look around, you'll probably find people arguing that and any number of other hypotheses. Most governments crow when they 'attract foreign investment' (foreigners come to their country and buy it up) and they tell the peons (or those already peed on) what a good deal they're getting. I remember (back in the late 1980's) when the Sears tower in Chicago was sold to a Japanese buyer. A local TV station canvassed the opinions of the plebs around the tower. "I don't think it's right! - They shouldn't be allowed to sell it!" "The Sears Tower is a local landmark! It shouldn't be sold to the Japanese, is should stay right here!" Those were two of the less silly comments. If a foreign investor comes into your country and buys a building or a company or whatever so what? He can't take it away and if - for some reason (a reason such as 'your government starts printing money') - your currency becomes worthless, then that investor has lost (a lot of) his money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoroB Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 You could argue whatever you like. If you look around, you'll probably find people arguing that and any number of other hypotheses. Most governments crow when they 'attract foreign investment' (foreigners come to their country and buy it up) and they tell the peons (or those already peed on) what a good deal they're getting. I remember (back in the late 1980's) when the Sears tower in Chicago was sold to a Japanese buyer. A local TV station canvassed the opinions of the plebs around the tower. "I don't think it's right! - They shouldn't be allowed to sell it!" "The Sears Tower is a local landmark! It shouldn't be sold to the Japanese, is should stay right here!" Those were two of the less silly comments. If a foreign investor comes into your country and buys a building or a company or whatever so what? He can't take it away and if - for some reason (a reason such as 'your government starts printing money') - your currency becomes worthless, then that investor has lost (a lot of) his money. Movement of money is a key part of the capitalist world that we live in and will continue to be so. I'd prefer that UK companies invest in the UK but you can not force them to. As stated by another poster alot of Virgins call centres are overseas - great for Virgins bottom line but a hassle for alot of customers who have had difficulty dealing with them. It is down to consumers whether they buy goods/services from a certain company. As I said in my original post I am reasonably happy with the service that Virgin provide but uncomfortable with it now being owned by a US company. As a consumer I'll have to weigh up the pros and cons and decide whether to keep my current provider or switch to another one. I'm free to do that, just as Liberty are free to buy Virgin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sierra Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 You could argue whatever you like. If you look around, you'll probably find people arguing that and any number of other hypotheses. Most governments crow when they 'attract foreign investment' (foreigners come to their country and buy it up) and they tell the peons (or those already peed on) what a good deal they're getting. I remember (back in the late 1980's) when the Sears tower in Chicago was sold to a Japanese buyer. A local TV station canvassed the opinions of the plebs around the tower. "I don't think it's right! - They shouldn't be allowed to sell it!" "The Sears Tower is a local landmark! It shouldn't be sold to the Japanese, is should stay right here!" Those were two of the less silly comments. If a foreign investor comes into your country and buys a building or a company or whatever so what? He can't take it away and if - for some reason (a reason such as 'your government starts printing money') - your currency becomes worthless, then that investor has lost (a lot of) his money. They can't take it away? Are you sure about that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 But it appears that those people (the ones who bought London Bridge) didn't know the difference between London Bridge and Tower Bridge. If the current owners of the Sears Tower (now renamed the Willis Tower) sent somebody to Chicago to get it, I wonder what they would come back with? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sierra Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 But it appears that those people (the ones who bought London Bridge) didn't know the difference between London Bridge and Tower Bridge. If the current owners of the Sears Tower (now renamed the Willis Tower) sent somebody to Chicago to get it, I wonder what they would come back with? That's an old rumor. I'm sure he knew which bridge he was getting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 But do the people who go to see that tourist attraction know what they are going to see? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.