Unilever chooses London

I know, despite all the hand wringing a couple of years ago.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.ft.com/content/3fafd93e-8507-11e8-a29d-73e3d454535d

By the way, I'm surprised you bought this one up as it's very much one of the examples of how bad Brexit was going to be that remainers would attempt to use to prove their point.

This is great news. Renewed confidence in the capital and a great contribution to the economy.

This Unilever battle has been ongoing since 2018 and relates to disputes between shareholders. Nothing to do with Brexit. The company has stated throughout that the restructuring of Anglo-Dutch relations was nothing to do with the UK's decision to leave the EU.

That hasn't, however, stopped Unilever warning specifically about the threat that a no deal Brexit poses. I think you will struggle to find any company that will find a no deal Brexit beneficial. But that doesn't matter I guess, 'f*ck business' and all.

Oh yes I know as I argued the point at the time, but it was a point I had to argue.
It also goes totally against the idea that the city is losing it's status.

The relocation of the headquarter aside, let's not forget how Unilever explicitly supported the UK's continued membership of the EU. That would suggest that they believed - and still do - that a vote to Leave would be damaging for their business.

It would also suggest that they have more confidence in our "dynamic" system, very important word that.

Whether it had gone in favour of the UK or Netherlands, it wouldn't have been a win for either side. The decision wasn't anything to do with Brexit - something you agreed with in post no6.

Hahaha when some good economic news comes up 'it actually has nothing to do with Brexit'. Would love to travel to the other dimension where Unilever chose Holland, and see if these same remainers are of the same opinion then.

So you're choosing to ignore the point I was making.
I'll spell it out for you, Unilever chose to remain In the UK despite of Brexit, because of the dynamism of our economy as opposed to the EU and their bureaucratic slothness, what about that do you not understand?

Jeeez, you're quick to get ratty aren't you

You've decided that this is a UK v EU issue, as per the bold above. Find me a statement from Unilever that relates this issue to EU bureaucracy. I'll wait.

Ratty! 🤣🤣🤣, I could not care less about your somewhat incorrect opinion.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cityam.com/unilever-to-unify-anglo-dutch-structure-under-uk-listing/amp/

In this article there is a direct quote stating "the Covid-19 pandemic will create a business environment in which having as much flexibility and responsiveness as possible will be critically important"

Why do you think that they chose the UK over the EU if that is the criteria which they seek?
I'll allow you to continue to dig your defensive hole

For somebody who doesn't care about my opinion you seem to do a good job of replying to my posts

You'll find that in the very line above the one you quoted it states "the coronavirus crisis means unifying under Unilever PLC will give it more flexibility". Nice cherrypicking! The flexibility comes from unifying the brand and not because of the location of the headquarters. This specifically relates to the companies' ability to sell off its tea companies; a dual-headed legal structure disadvantages their ability to do this.

Again - I'm waiting for a specific mention of EU bureaucracy from Unilever, as you so confidently labelled as a reason for the move

Yet again you ignore what is right under your nose, why did they not pick the Netherlands?
What part of the statement includingthe pphrase flexible responsiveness does not suggest that the EU are considered to be less capable of responding to an economic crisis, do you not think that if Unilever thought the EU were better placed to facilitate their needs then they would have chosen the Netherlands.
You are arguing over the minutiae of a statement to try to cover the obvious truth.
And I am an extremely laid back person so please feel free to imagine your own importance, I guess it comes with the territory when holding such a superiority complex.

Why did you cherry pick the quote? It specifically states that flexibility is related to unifying the brand. Why did you try and argue that headquartering in London proves its flexibility over the "EU bureaucracy"?

British investors were worried that once Unilever shifted its domicile to the Netherlands, it would have been ejected from the FTSE 100. That would have forced funds that track the FTSE 100, and funds that buy only UK stocks, to sell their shares. At least 10 shareholders, who together owned a 12% stake in Unilever, publicly spoke out against the move.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/oct/05/unilever-scraps-plan-move-london-rotterdam-uk-netherlands

That is why the move to Rotterdam was rejected. Because of a shareholder rebellion. Not one link you have provided even mentions the EU.

I'm the one with a superiority complex? That's despite you condescendingly asking me "what do you not understand?" and telling me that I've got an 'incorrect opinion'. Strange, I imagine most people would think it's you with the superiority complex.

This is great news. Renewed confidence in the capital and a great contribution to the economy.

This Unilever battle has been ongoing since 2018 and relates to disputes between shareholders. Nothing to do with Brexit. The company has stated throughout that the restructuring of Anglo-Dutch relations was nothing to do with the UK's decision to leave the EU.

That hasn't, however, stopped Unilever warning specifically about the threat that a no deal Brexit poses. I think you will struggle to find any company that will find a no deal Brexit beneficial. But that doesn't matter I guess, 'f*ck business' and all.

Yet again you ignore what is right under your nose, why did they not pick the Netherlands?