Unilever chooses London

Watch
Gundabad(good)
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 3 weeks ago
#1
Unilever, a massive company which is split between the UK and the Netherlands, has decided to become a solely British company after 2 years of deciding. Making over £40 billion a year and valued at over a £100 billion, this is no small company. Is this good news?
0
reply
Napp
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#2
Report 3 weeks ago
#2
Evidently...
0
reply
ColinDent
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#3
Report 3 weeks ago
#3
I know, despite all the hand wringing a couple of years ago.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.ft....d-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.
Last edited by ColinDent; 3 weeks ago
0
reply
ColinDent
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#4
Report 3 weeks ago
#4
Obviously many of you do not like good news!
0
reply
Burridge
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#5
Report 3 weeks ago
#5
(Original post by ColinDent)
I know, despite all the hand wringing a couple of years ago.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.ft....d-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.
0
reply
ColinDent
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#6
Report 3 weeks ago
#6
(Original post by Burridge)
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.
Last edited by ColinDent; 3 weeks ago
0
reply
Burridge
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#7
Report 3 weeks ago
#7
(Original post by ColinDent)
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.
0
reply
ColinDent
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#8
Report 3 weeks ago
#8
(Original post by Burridge)
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.
0
reply
Burridge
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#9
Report 3 weeks ago
#9
(Original post by ColinDent)
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.
0
reply
AntiMonarchist
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#10
Report 3 weeks ago
#10
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.
2
reply
ColinDent
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#11
Report 3 weeks ago
#11
(Original post by Burridge)
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.
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?
Last edited by ColinDent; 3 weeks ago
0
reply
Burridge
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#12
Report 3 weeks ago
#12
(Original post by AntiMonarchist)
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.
Perhaps quote me next time?

I've not decided it's got nothing to do with Brexit, Unilever have decided it's nothing to do with Brexit.

"The climbdown in 2018 represented a major blow to the credibility of the then top team – chairman Marijn Dekkers and chief executive Paul Polman, both Dutchmen who had lobbied hard for a relocation that they insisted was not linked to Brexit."

https://www.theguardian.com/business...over-rotterdam

You don't have to travel to another dimension to imagine Unilever picking Rotterdam as their capital - just go back two years. Moving to Rotterdam was the most likely outcome; but even then a Brexit link was being denied. The Remainer Guardian literally ran the headline "Unilever pick Rotterdam ... but denies Brexit link".

https://www.theguardian.com/business...rdam-hq-london
0
reply
Burridge
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#13
Report 3 weeks ago
#13
(Original post by ColinDent)
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 :yawn:

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.
0
reply
ColinDent
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#14
Report 3 weeks ago
#14
(Original post by Burridge)
Jeeez, you're quick to get ratty aren't you :yawn:

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.cit...k-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
0
reply
Burridge
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#15
Report 3 weeks ago
#15
(Original post by ColinDent)
Ratty! 🤣🤣🤣, I could not care less about your somewhat incorrect opinion.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cit...k-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 :bird:

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 :dontknow:
1
reply
ColinDent
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#16
Report 3 weeks ago
#16
(Original post by Burridge)
For somebody who doesn't care about my opinion you seem to do a good job of replying to my posts :bird:

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 :dontknow:
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.
0
reply
Burridge
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#17
Report 3 weeks ago
#17
(Original post by ColinDent)
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...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.
0
reply
ColinDent
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#18
Report 3 weeks ago
#18
(Original post by Burridge)
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...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.
The incorrect opinion to which I referred was of me being ratty, I believe I am allowed to state that.
And I am also entitled to ask you the question if you don't appear to be understanding what is a pretty simple point, but you go on trying to deflect.
I cherry picked that particular quote because it highlights exactly why I am making my argument, regardless of what you think if Unilever thought the City was dead in the water and the EU would provide a utopian sanctuary then they would have relocated, with the shareholders approval if the situation was to be as bad as people try to make out on here and in papers like the guardian .
I note that the guardian omitted the statement I "cherry picked", I wonder why??
Last edited by ColinDent; 3 weeks ago
0
reply
Quady
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#19
Report 3 weeks ago
#19
(Original post by Burridge)
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.
You realise its not been agreed right?

This is just 2017 all over again
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...h-for-new-home
0
reply
Quady
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#20
Report 3 weeks ago
#20
(Original post by ColinDent)
Yet again you ignore what is right under your nose, why did they not pick the Netherlands?
They did pick the Netherlands.....?
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

How are you finding researching unis for 2021 entry?

I have been able to get all the information I need from online research (65)
19.35%
I have tried virtual events and found them useful (72)
21.43%
I have tried virtual events and did not find them useful (62)
18.45%
I would be interested in trying socially distanced or scaled down in person events (70)
20.83%
I want to but don't know where to start with researching unis for 2021 entry (34)
10.12%
I haven't started researching yet (33)
9.82%

Watched Threads

View All