5 ms·

The Observer proposed an interesting solution last weekend: "The government could offer a foundational investment of, say, £3bn-£5bn and invite other investors

The Observer proposed an interesting solution last weekend: "The government could offer a foundational investment of, say, £3bn-£5bn and invite other investors — some industrial, some sovereign wealth funds, some commercial asset managers — to join it in a coalition to buy Arm and run it as an independent quoted company, serving the worldwide tech industry..." https://news.slashdot.org/story/20/08/10/0358216/should-the-uk-government-form-a-coalition-to-buy-arm https://news.slashdot.org/story/20/08/10/0358216/should-the-...

rpastuszak 6y ago
I feel like with the current political climate in the UK this solution is fairly unlikely to happen.
- klelatti 6y ago
  Actually the UK government has started taking stakes in technology firms where it deems it has a strategic interest. [1] I can easily see the man now running the UK (Dominic Cummings) deciding to take a stake in ARM. Maybe other ARM customers would also be willing to take (non controlling) stakes to keep it away from Nvidia (Apple of course used to be a big shareholder). [1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-53279783 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-53279783
jabirali 6y ago
So basically an ARMsrace against Nvidia?
Shivetya 6y ago
No, no, no. Government should not be in the business of picking winners and losers and this is more about denying someone else that benefiting the whole. Oh its wrapped up in pretty paper with a ribbon on it but the true reason is they don't want "those people" to have it. (being Nvidia but I am certain there are a few more suitors they don't like either)
- klelatti 6y ago
  I'm not generally in favour of government picking winners but this is an exceptional case where keeping ARM independent really would 'benefit the whole'. The argument against Nvidia buying is that they are likely boost their own business at the expense of ARM and the wider ecosystem. It seems perfectly valid for the UK government to step in to protect its most successful technology firm.
  - znpy 6y ago
    > I'm not generally in favour of government picking winners tHe MaRkEt WiLl ReGuLaTe ItSeLf!!!
    - klelatti 6y ago
      Effective regulation != Taking large equity stakes
  - valuearb 6y ago
    Valid for what reason? There is no evidence ARM would be anymore successful under UK control then nVidias, in fact the opposite maybe true. The history of government owned businesses, esp. in UK is desultory.
    - klelatti 6y ago
      Because Nvidia will find a way to use ARM to strongly favour its own SoCs at the expense of everyone else’s - that’s why it would pay $32bn. That’s not good for ARM or the UK (or for everyone else for that matter).
      - valuearb 6y ago
        NVidia isn’t going to intentionally destroy a $32B acquisition to throw that money down the drain. They are likely to fully support every customer, to protect their investment, and fund it do new things strategically important to NVidia. If the UK owns ARM, over time every investment decision they made will be required to benefit the party in charge, it’s supporters and their districts. That will certainly destroy ARM.

rpastuszak 6y ago

I feel like with the current political climate in the UK this solution is fairly unlikely to happen.

klelatti 6y ago
Actually the UK government has started taking stakes in technology firms where it deems it has a strategic interest. [1] I can easily see the man now running the UK (Dominic Cummings) deciding to take a stake in ARM. Maybe other ARM customers would also be willing to take (non controlling) stakes to keep it away from Nvidia (Apple of course used to be a big shareholder). [1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-53279783 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-53279783

jabirali 6y ago

So basically an ARMsrace against Nvidia?

Shivetya 6y ago

No, no, no. Government should not be in the business of picking winners and losers and this is more about denying someone else that benefiting the whole. Oh its wrapped up in pretty paper with a ribbon on it but the true reason is they don't want "those people" to have it. (being Nvidia but I am certain there are a few more suitors they don't like either)

klelatti 6y ago
I'm not generally in favour of government picking winners but this is an exceptional case where keeping ARM independent really would 'benefit the whole'. The argument against Nvidia buying is that they are likely boost their own business at the expense of ARM and the wider ecosystem. It seems perfectly valid for the UK government to step in to protect its most successful technology firm.
- znpy 6y ago
  > I'm not generally in favour of government picking winners tHe MaRkEt WiLl ReGuLaTe ItSeLf!!!
  - klelatti 6y ago
    Effective regulation != Taking large equity stakes
- valuearb 6y ago
  Valid for what reason? There is no evidence ARM would be anymore successful under UK control then nVidias, in fact the opposite maybe true. The history of government owned businesses, esp. in UK is desultory.
  - klelatti 6y ago
    Because Nvidia will find a way to use ARM to strongly favour its own SoCs at the expense of everyone else’s - that’s why it would pay $32bn. That’s not good for ARM or the UK (or for everyone else for that matter).
    - valuearb 6y ago
      NVidia isn’t going to intentionally destroy a $32B acquisition to throw that money down the drain. They are likely to fully support every customer, to protect their investment, and fund it do new things strategically important to NVidia. If the UK owns ARM, over time every investment decision they made will be required to benefit the party in charge, it’s supporters and their districts. That will certainly destroy ARM.