6 ms·

Save ARM

91 points by baal80spam 6y ago

untog 6y ago
All good points. All will fall on deaf ears. With Brexit looming, the UK needs a trade deal with the US. They aren't in a position of power to demand something like this. The issues with a sale of this nature were obvious when it was sold to Softbank, much like the trade issues with Brexit were obvious years ago too. The UK governments decided to ignore both.
stephc_int13 6y ago
Too late. ARM should not have been sold to SoftBank in the first place.
- mijoharas 6y ago
  To be fair, he did campaign against that too. At the same time, which do you think is worse for the chip industry, ARM being owned by softbank or being owned by Nvidia?
  - hardlianotion 6y ago
    Not much difference, it seems.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
wcerfgba 6y ago
It seems to me like keeping ARM in the UK -- either being incorporated there, or just the offices and workers -- would be a huge benefit for the UK in the context of Brexit.
- phtrivier 6y ago
  I was actually wondering if ARM would have been harder to sell under the EU market rule... We'll never know, I guess.
  - hardlianotion 6y ago
    What rule? Originally? Or now? Isn't UK still under most EU law until the end of this year?
lxe 6y ago
> This puts Britain in the invidious position Nice. > in·vid·i·ous /inˈvidēəs/ adjective (of an action or situation) likely to arouse or incur resentment or anger in others.
- 0-_-0 6y ago
  Unrelated, but it's also an alternative access to YouTube: https://invidio.us/ https://invidio.us/
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- jannes 6y ago
  It took me a moment to realise that this was a play of words on "Nvidia".
  - spinningarrow 6y ago
    Took me your comment to realize that!
  - nsonha 6y ago
    doesn't it mean envious in Spanish or smt like that?
- rdiddly 6y ago
  Yes, I thought that was clever. Also (not sure whether intentional) "when the chips are down."
rafaelturk 6y ago
IMO this is lovely, but innocuous, such plead should be made a long time ago when ARMs was sold to SoftBank
- SamWhited 6y ago
  Softbank doesn't have to comply with US tech restrictions and isn't also a customer who could be given special treatment once the deal went through. Also since they're just a holding company they were less likely to move jobs out of the UK. I don't think the two situations are at all the same.
  - dogma1138 6y ago
    Softbank has billions invested in the US so yes it does.
    - SamWhited 6y ago
      For those US companies it does, but I don't think that would apply here since it would be a japanese company investing in a UK company, of course, I could be wrong. Either way the point is "most of the reasons given in this article didn't apply to Softbank which is why it doesn't make sense that they should have argued this when the Softbank investment happened"
      - dogma1138 6y ago
        US Sanctions are universal they apply to any entity that has dealings with the US, if it violates the sanctions it can be sanctioned itself if it has billions worth of US assets on their books they are especially exposed not that a country like SoftBank would give up the US market to invested in a Pyongyang startup anyhow. As far as ARM specifically well they have already revoked the licenses for Huawei and a few others and now there is the situation where ARM China is essentially a rogue entity being seized by the CCP.
        SamWhited 6y ago
flyingfences 6y ago
Petitions like this have a better chance when they've been been given a once-over by an editor...
- wcerfgba 6y ago
  What's wrong with the letter?
dtwest 6y ago
If the cofounder of ARM wanted it to stay a British owned company, why did they let it go public in the first place? And then did they make the same case when it was bought by Softbank? "If you do not make Arm a British owned company again with a Golden Share for national economic security, history will remember you as the person who, when the chips are down, failed to act in the national interest." And then they blame this on the Prime Minister?
- atarian 6y ago
  I found an article from 2017, which mentioned "substantial opposition" from Houser against the sale to Softbank: https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/business/business-news/i-regret-selling-arm-says-13926432 https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/business/business-news/i-re...
- azinman2 6y ago
  I wondered the same thing. Isn't it already a Japanese company now via Softbank? Can the UK actually halt this transaction in any way?
  - est31 6y ago
    Not a lawyer, but there is a UK legal entity with the Arm name still. It might be owned by Softbank but that doesn't change the fact that it's an UK company bound by UK laws.
    - wcerfgba 6y ago
      Correct, the company is registered in the UK: https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/02557590 https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/02557590
  - inopinatus 6y ago
    Arm Ltd remains incorporated in the UK. Softbank did not strip or transfer the assets. The transfer of ownership is subject to UK law. Given the activities and size of the firm, the sale could be halted by ministerial intervention. That said, I think such intervention is unlikely. UK law on overseas M&A is very open. Britain has a long-standing policy of encouraging foreign acquisitions, since it encourages inward investment and keeps the City of London relevant and flourishing as a major financial center. Many members of the ruling parties have personal and financial connections therein, and the UK's fraught divorce from the EU elevates the risks to London's ongoing relevance, so the incentives are skewed in favour of this sale. The core of British trade policy is financial services i.e. invisible trade, not manufacturing, since competing on a playing field of physical scale (such as with manufacturing) is problematic for a small island nation. R&D is tolerated since it creates realisable value from (and for) the higher education sector, without dependence on a locally integrated manufacturing base. ARM itself is a microcosm of that strategy, designing chips but not making them; but by the same token, the value of that research was already fully realised by Softbank's acquisition.
Hamuko 6y ago
Shocking to see that Hideo Kojima, Mao Zedong, Leon Trotsky, Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin are all against the ARM sale.
- hardlianotion 6y ago
  They are not capitalists.
- dosshell 6y ago
  And do not forget Alotta Fagina from Austin Powers. :)
- yadco 6y ago
  And Boris Johnson
- mijoharas 6y ago
  I find it very funny that someone said "why do you need my name" when being asked to co-sign an open letter.
phillipseamore 6y ago
(Edit: It actually appears to be ARM Limited) Save what? What's left in the UK seems to be ARM Holdings Ltd.[0] which is registered as dormant and it's last accounts suggest it has a whopping 100 pounds in the bank[1]. [0] https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/11299879 https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/11299879 [1] https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/11299879/filing-history/MzI0MzY4MTgxN2FkaXF6a2N4/document?format=pdf&download=0 https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/11299879/filing-h...
- wcerfgba 6y ago
  I believe the current primary entity is Arm Limited https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/02557590 https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/02557590
  - phillipseamore 6y ago
    That appears to be it, thanks! It's financial records[0] make a lot more sense. [0] https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/02557590/filing-history/MzI1MjQ1Mjk3M2FkaXF6a2N4/document?format=pdf&download=0 https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/02557590/filing-h...
jpxw 6y ago
> Recent Signatories: Richardo Stallmanu - Ganoo Loonix Lol
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
amadeuspagel 6y ago
> The UK has suffered from American technology dominance by companies like Google, Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, Apple and others. For there to be suffering there must be people who suffer. So who, concretely, in the UK has suffered from American technology dominance? > As you have spent £500m to help OneWeb out of Chapter 11, which arguably is not as important to Britain as Arm, you could spend £1-2bn as the anchor investor for an IPO on the London Stock Exchange and get a Golden Share for it so that this problem cannot happen again. Half a billion here, a few billion there. I cannot stand this kind of thinkig. Do you know how much a billion is? A million people will have to pay a thousand pounds more in taxes due to this jingoistic bullshit.

91 points by baal80spam 6y ago

All good points. All will fall on deaf ears. With Brexit looming, the UK needs a trade deal with the US. They aren't in a position of power to demand something like this. The issues with a sale of this nature were obvious when it was sold to Softbank, much like the trade issues with Brexit were obvious years ago too. The UK governments decided to ignore both.

stephc_int13 6y ago

Too late. ARM should not have been sold to SoftBank in the first place.

mijoharas 6y ago
To be fair, he did campaign against that too. At the same time, which do you think is worse for the chip industry, ARM being owned by softbank or being owned by Nvidia?
- hardlianotion 6y ago
  Not much difference, it seems.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

wcerfgba 6y ago

It seems to me like keeping ARM in the UK -- either being incorporated there, or just the offices and workers -- would be a huge benefit for the UK in the context of Brexit.

phtrivier 6y ago
I was actually wondering if ARM would have been harder to sell under the EU market rule... We'll never know, I guess.
- hardlianotion 6y ago
  What rule? Originally? Or now? Isn't UK still under most EU law until the end of this year?

lxe 6y ago

> This puts Britain in the invidious position Nice. > in·vid·i·ous /inˈvidēəs/ adjective (of an action or situation) likely to arouse or incur resentment or anger in others.

0-_-0 6y ago
Unrelated, but it's also an alternative access to YouTube: https://invidio.us/ https://invidio.us/
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
jannes 6y ago
It took me a moment to realise that this was a play of words on "Nvidia".
- spinningarrow 6y ago
  Took me your comment to realize that!
- nsonha 6y ago
  doesn't it mean envious in Spanish or smt like that?
rdiddly 6y ago
Yes, I thought that was clever. Also (not sure whether intentional) "when the chips are down."

rafaelturk 6y ago

IMO this is lovely, but innocuous, such plead should be made a long time ago when ARMs was sold to SoftBank

SamWhited 6y ago
Softbank doesn't have to comply with US tech restrictions and isn't also a customer who could be given special treatment once the deal went through. Also since they're just a holding company they were less likely to move jobs out of the UK. I don't think the two situations are at all the same.
- dogma1138 6y ago
  Softbank has billions invested in the US so yes it does.
  - SamWhited 6y ago
    For those US companies it does, but I don't think that would apply here since it would be a japanese company investing in a UK company, of course, I could be wrong. Either way the point is "most of the reasons given in this article didn't apply to Softbank which is why it doesn't make sense that they should have argued this when the Softbank investment happened"
    - dogma1138 6y ago
      US Sanctions are universal they apply to any entity that has dealings with the US, if it violates the sanctions it can be sanctioned itself if it has billions worth of US assets on their books they are especially exposed not that a country like SoftBank would give up the US market to invested in a Pyongyang startup anyhow. As far as ARM specifically well they have already revoked the licenses for Huawei and a few others and now there is the situation where ARM China is essentially a rogue entity being seized by the CCP.
      - SamWhited 6y ago

flyingfences 6y ago

Petitions like this have a better chance when they've been been given a once-over by an editor...

wcerfgba 6y ago
What's wrong with the letter?

dtwest 6y ago

If the cofounder of ARM wanted it to stay a British owned company, why did they let it go public in the first place? And then did they make the same case when it was bought by Softbank? "If you do not make Arm a British owned company again with a Golden Share for national economic security, history will remember you as the person who, when the chips are down, failed to act in the national interest." And then they blame this on the Prime Minister?

atarian 6y ago
I found an article from 2017, which mentioned "substantial opposition" from Houser against the sale to Softbank: https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/business/business-news/i-regret-selling-arm-says-13926432 https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/business/business-news/i-re...
azinman2 6y ago
I wondered the same thing. Isn't it already a Japanese company now via Softbank? Can the UK actually halt this transaction in any way?
- est31 6y ago
  Not a lawyer, but there is a UK legal entity with the Arm name still. It might be owned by Softbank but that doesn't change the fact that it's an UK company bound by UK laws.
  - wcerfgba 6y ago
    Correct, the company is registered in the UK: https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/02557590 https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/02557590
- inopinatus 6y ago
  Arm Ltd remains incorporated in the UK. Softbank did not strip or transfer the assets. The transfer of ownership is subject to UK law. Given the activities and size of the firm, the sale could be halted by ministerial intervention. That said, I think such intervention is unlikely. UK law on overseas M&A is very open. Britain has a long-standing policy of encouraging foreign acquisitions, since it encourages inward investment and keeps the City of London relevant and flourishing as a major financial center. Many members of the ruling parties have personal and financial connections therein, and the UK's fraught divorce from the EU elevates the risks to London's ongoing relevance, so the incentives are skewed in favour of this sale. The core of British trade policy is financial services i.e. invisible trade, not manufacturing, since competing on a playing field of physical scale (such as with manufacturing) is problematic for a small island nation. R&D is tolerated since it creates realisable value from (and for) the higher education sector, without dependence on a locally integrated manufacturing base. ARM itself is a microcosm of that strategy, designing chips but not making them; but by the same token, the value of that research was already fully realised by Softbank's acquisition.

Hamuko 6y ago

Shocking to see that Hideo Kojima, Mao Zedong, Leon Trotsky, Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin are all against the ARM sale.

hardlianotion 6y ago
They are not capitalists.
dosshell 6y ago
And do not forget Alotta Fagina from Austin Powers. :)
yadco 6y ago
And Boris Johnson
mijoharas 6y ago
I find it very funny that someone said "why do you need my name" when being asked to co-sign an open letter.

phillipseamore 6y ago

(Edit: It actually appears to be ARM Limited) Save what? What's left in the UK seems to be ARM Holdings Ltd.[0] which is registered as dormant and it's last accounts suggest it has a whopping 100 pounds in the bank[1]. [0] https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/11299879 https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/11299879 [1] https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/11299879/filing-history/MzI0MzY4MTgxN2FkaXF6a2N4/document?format=pdf&download=0 https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/11299879/filing-h...

wcerfgba 6y ago
I believe the current primary entity is Arm Limited https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/02557590 https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/02557590
- phillipseamore 6y ago
  That appears to be it, thanks! It's financial records[0] make a lot more sense. [0] https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/02557590/filing-history/MzI1MjQ1Mjk3M2FkaXF6a2N4/document?format=pdf&download=0 https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/02557590/filing-h...

jpxw 6y ago

> Recent Signatories: Richardo Stallmanu - Ganoo Loonix Lol

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

amadeuspagel 6y ago

> The UK has suffered from American technology dominance by companies like Google, Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, Apple and others. For there to be suffering there must be people who suffer. So who, concretely, in the UK has suffered from American technology dominance? > As you have spent £500m to help OneWeb out of Chapter 11, which arguably is not as important to Britain as Arm, you could spend £1-2bn as the anchor investor for an IPO on the London Stock Exchange and get a Golden Share for it so that this problem cannot happen again. Half a billion here, a few billion there. I cannot stand this kind of thinkig. Do you know how much a billion is? A million people will have to pay a thousand pounds more in taxes due to this jingoistic bullshit.