close

Вход

Забыли?

вход по аккаунту

?

Financial Times Europe - 18 12 2017

код для вставкиСкачать
WORLD BUSINESS NEWSPAPER
MONDAY 18 DECEMBER 2017
EUROPE
Catalonia revisited
Loosening the net
Deliveroo delivery
Spain?s regional elections raise hopes
for a new accord ? BIG READ, PAGE 8
Web rule change hurts the little guy,
not Big Tech ? RANA FOROOHAR, PAGE 11
The app service?s chief on life in the
gig economy ? HOW TO LEAD, PAGE 22
If the cap fits
Zuma?s deputy
in showdown
Briefing
i Portugal reaches milestone in recovery
Portugal has taken a big step towards its economic
rehabilitation after a second big rating agency
decided that the country once again deserved a
coveted investment grade for its borrowing.? PAGE 4
Jacob Zuma, South Africa?s president,
left, laughs alongside his deputy, Cyril
Ramaphosa, at the African National
Congress party?s five-yearly conference
in Johannesburg at the weekend. Mr
Zuma?s fate was hanging in the balance
as the ANC voted on his successor as
party leader, in the most divisive contest
in the party?s 24 years in power.
Victory for Mr Ramaphosa could lead
to the party firing Mr Zuma as president
within weeks, as he would lose his grip
on structures that defended him from
calls for his resignation this year. Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma, Mr Ramaphosa?s
opponent and the mother of Mr Zuma?s
children, is widely expected to protect
him from prosecution for corruption.
i EU seeks to dominate ?internet of things?
The EU?s science and research chief aims to ensure
companies thrive in the internet?s ?third wave?,
revealing plans to boost growth as Europe rallies
from the financial crisis.? FT SERIES, PAGE 4
i Austria?s Freedom party to be sworn in
The far-right Freedom party in Austria will control
powerful ministries when the new government is
sworn in today, after it struck a coalition deal that
will harden Vienna?s immigration stance.? PAGE 3
i Gandhi hits out at ?medieval? Modi
Waldo Swiegers/Bloomberg
Report page 3
US companies set for big profit
windfall from tax overhaul
3 Reforms to see average 10% earnings rise 3 Buffett?s group could gain extra $2.6bn in 2018
ED CROOKS ? NEW YORK
KATRINA MANSON ? WASHINGTON
US companies are expecting sharp
increases in earnings next year as
Republicans in Congress remove the
final obstacles to their overhaul of the
US tax system, with a bill likely to be
passed into law this week.
Analysts and executives think corporate profits will be boosted by an average 10 per cent, with some companies
set to see significantly higher benefits of
up to 30 per cent, thanks to the proposed cut in the US federal corporate
tax rate from 35 per cent to 21 per cent.
Steven Mnuchin, US Treasury secretary, told Fox News yesterday that he
had ?no doubt? the ?terrific? tax bill
would be passed this week. He added
that tax cuts should start in February
?because we have the IRS already working on new tax tables?.
Companies with relatively high tax
rates and mainly US-based revenues,
which are not hit by the new charge on
overseas assets, will gain the most from
the new code. Oil refiners, railways, airlines and banks are expected to be
among the biggest beneficiaries.
Delta Air Lines was one of the first
companies to specify the expected boost
to its profits, saying the tax cut would
raise next year?s earnings per share by
about 18-19 per cent.
One of the biggest gainers is likely to
be Warren Buffett?s Berkshire Hathaway, in part because of the conglomerate?s focus on the US economy. The tax
cut will boost its earnings next year by
about $2.6bn, or 15 per cent, according
to forecasts by investment bank KBW.
Most companies have been reluctant
to discuss how much they would benefit
from the tax cut, saying they needed to
see the full details before they could
assess its effects. The 503-page bill was
published late on Friday, after negotiations between Republicans in the Senate
and the House of Representatives, and
over the weekend companies and their
advisers have been working to understand its implications. Details of the legislation could have a huge impact on the
effective tax rates that companies face.
Mr Mnuchin said the legislation represented a huge tax overhaul that would
fix a ?broken? system and deliver large
tax cuts to working families, contrary to
criticisms it would help only the rich.
Countering claims that the tax bill
Donald Trump
tweeted that
?we are just days
away from
finalising the
tax bill? ? Manuel
Balce Ceneta/AP
hands the rich an unprecedented windfall, he said families making $150,000 a
year would benefit from a $4,000 tax
cut and families on $75,000 a year
would gain $2,000.
Donald Trump yesterday tweeted
?we are just days away? from finalising
the tax bill. The US president described
the reforms over the weekend as ?one of
the greatest Christmas gifts to the
middle-class people? as he tries to rush
it through Congress to make the most of
the dwindling Republican advantage in
the Senate.
Analysts and executives have already
been making estimates of the bill?s
impact on earnings, helping drive the
S&P 500 18 per cent higher this year.
Additional reporting by Patti Waldmeir
and Alistair Gray
Ikea faces investigation into Dutch tax
affairs as EU widens net on avoidance
ROCHELLE TOPLENSKY ? BRUSSELS
Egypt?s new capital city
is rising from the desert
Sisi?s dream
Austria
Bahrain
Belgium
Bulgaria
Croatia
Cyprus
Czech Rep
Denmark
Egypt
Finland
France
Germany
Gibraltar
Greece
Hungary
India
Italy
Latvia
Lebanon
Lithuania
Luxembourg
PAGE 3
?3.70
Din1.8
?3.70
Lev7.50
Kn29
?3.50
Kc105
DKr35
E�
?4.20
?3.70
?3.70
�70
?3.50
Ft1090
Rup195
?3.50
?6.99
LBP7500
?4.30
?3.70
Macedonia
Malta
Morocco
Netherlands
Norway
Oman
Pakistan
Poland
Portugal
Qatar
Romania
Russia
Serbia
Slovak Rep
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Tunisia
Turkey
UAE
Den220
?3.50
Dh45
?3.70
NKr35
OR1.60
Rupee 280
Zl 20
?3.50
QR15
Ron17
?5.00
NewD420
?3.60
?3.50
?3.50
SKr39
SFr6.00
Din7.50
TL11
Dh16.00
Brussels is set to launch an investigation into Ikea today, as the EU widens
the net in its four-year crackdown on
aggressive corporate tax avoidance.
Margrethe Vestager, the EU?s competition commissioner, will announce an
official probe into the flat-pack furniture retailer?s Dutch tax arrangements,
which have allegedly helped Ikea avoid
nearly ?1bn in EU taxes from 2009 to
2014, according to a report published by
the Greens in the European Parliament
in February 2016.
The report revealed that the Swedish
retailer had created two separate corporate groups within a web of companies
in the Netherlands, Luxembourg and
Liechtenstein, through which the group
moved money and profits to take
advantage of special tax schemes. EU
competition officials would need to conduct an investigation to determine if the
Dutch deal broke the bloc?s rules before
they could estimate any tax savings.
Since 2013, the European Commission has looked at more than 1,000 tax
deals between member states and multinational companies. In the five investigations concluded to date, officials have
ordered four member states to recover
billions of euros in total from nearly 40
companies including Apple, Starbucks,
Fiat and Amazon.
Ms Vestager last month said most
deals did not give ?special benefits? but
a few ?hand out a preferred tax treatment to selected companies?.
?Our work isn?t over yet . . . we will
open investigations whenever there are
indications that state-aid has been
granted,? she added.
World Markets
Subscribe In print and online
www.ft.com/subscribetoday
email: fte.subs@ft.com
Tel: +44 20 7775 6000
Fax: +44 20 7873 3428
� THE FINANCIAL TIMES LTD 2017
No: 39,658 ?
Printed in London, Liverpool, Glasgow, Dublin,
Frankfurt, Milan, Madrid, New York, Chicago, San
Francisco, Washington DC, Orlando, Tokyo, Hong
Kong, Singapore, Seoul, Dubai, Doha
STOCK MARKETS
CURRENCIES
Dec 15
S&P 500
Nasdaq Composite
2675.81
2651.50
Dec 8
Dec 15
0.92 $ per ?
1.41 $ per �
1.177
1.175 ? per $
0.850
1.332
1.338 � per $
0.751
1.33 � per ?
-0.20 � per $
0.884
0.879 ? per �
1.132
6936.58
6840.08
24651.74
24329.16
FTSEurofirst 300
1528.26
1531.37
Euro Stoxx 50
3560.53
3591.45
FTSE 100
7490.57
7393.96
-0.86 � per �
1.31 ? index
FTSE All-Share
4108.96
4063.72
1.11 SFr per ?
-0.92
CAC 40
INTEREST RATES
Dec 15
Dec 8 %Week
Dow Jones Ind
150.023 151.864 � index
94.517
1.167
5349.30
5399.09
13103.56
13153.70
Nikkei
22553.22
22498.03
-0.38 COMMODITIES
0.25
Hang Seng
1.93
Dec 8
price
yield
chg
0.851 US Gov 10 yr
0.748 UK Gov 10 yr
98.95
2.37
0.02
100.61
1.19
-0.02
101.89
0.31
-0.01
100.66
0.04
-0.01
101.02
2.70
-0.01
102.56
-0.64
0.00
1.138 Ger Gov 10 yr
132.545 133.420 Jpn Gov 10 yr
112.655 113.535 � per ?
Xetra Dax
94.630 $ index
1.169 SFr per �
78.713
78.426 US Gov 30 yr
100.329 100.094 Ger Gov 2 yr
1.321
28848.11
28303.19
Dec 15
Dec 8
MSCI World $
2077.55
-
Oil WTI $
57.34
57.33
MSCI EM $
1121.22
-
Oil Brent $
63.27
63.33
505.51
-
Gold $
1254.60
1250.65
MSCI ACWI $
iApps 1627
The investigation into Ikea would be
Ms Vestager?s most recent state-aid
probe into the structures that allow
some multinational companies to cut
their taxes in a way that domestic and
smaller companies cannot, which the
commission deems an illegal benefit.
Information is limited as Ikea is not a
public company and, like most multinational groups, is formed of a large
number of subsidiary companies in
numerous jurisdictions.
Ikea Group, the retailer, paid ?825m
in tax in its financial year to the end of
August on pre-tax profits of ?3.31bn. Its
sister company Inter Ikea, owner of the
brand and concept, paid ?241m on pretax earnings of ?1.15bn.
Ikea and the commission declined to
comment.
Additional reporting by Sarah Gordon and
Richard Milne.
1.330
price
prev
chg
Fed Funds Eff
1.16
1.07
0.09
%Week US 3m Bills
0.02 Euro Libor 3m
1.32
1.30
0.02
-0.38
-0.39
0.00
0.52
0.52
0.00
-0.09 UK 3m
0.32 Prices are latest for edition
Data provided by Morningstar
Rahul Gandhi has criticised
India?s premier Narendra Modi
for ?taking us back to medieval
times? as he took over the
presidency of the opposition
Congress party.? PAGE 3
i Poll highlights sexual harassment
Almost a third of women in asset management
have said they have suffered sexual harassment
at work, according to an FTfm poll of nearly
600 fund industry staff.? PAGE 15; FTFM
i Trump ratchets up pressure on Beijing
Donald Trump is expected to accuse China of
engaging in ?economic aggression? when he unveils
his national security strategy today.? PAGE 2;
EDITORIAL COMMENT, PAGE 10
i Peruvian leader faces impeachment vote
Peru?s parliament has prepared an impeachment
vote this week over President Pedro Pablo
Kuczynski?s role in a corruption scandal that has
thrown his tenure into uncertainty.? PAGE 2
Datawatch
Nature vs nurture
Reasons for differences between
the sexes (%) Biology Society
0 20 40 60 80 100
Physical abilities
How they express
their feelings
Hobbies
and interests
Approach to
parenting
Abilities in the
workplace
Source: Pew Research
For the majority
of differences
between the
genders the
American public
appears to be
equally split
between
arguments as to
whether these
are because of
sociological
reasons or
natural reasons
?
2
FINANCIAL TIMES
Monday 18 December 2017
INTERNATIONAL
Xi relations
Russia probe
US steps up tough talk on trade with China
White House
denies plans
to fire Mueller
over handling
of emails
National security strategy
will accuse Beijing of
?economic aggression?
DEMETRI SEVASTOPULO
AND SHAWN DONNAN ? WASHINGTON
Donald Trump will accuse China of
engaging in ?economic aggression?
when he unveils his national security
strategy today, in a strong sign that he is
frustrated at his inability to use his bond
with President Xi Jinping to convince
Beijing to address his trade concerns.
Several people familiar with the
national security strategy ? a document
produced by every US president since
Ronald Reagan ? said Mr Trump would
propose a much tougher stance on
China than previous administrations.
The release comes a month after he
met Mr Xi in China, and eight months
since he first welcomed the Chinese
leader to his Mar-a-Lago resort.
?The national security strategy is
likely to define China as a competitor in
every realm. Not just a competitor but a
threat, and therefore, in the view of
many in this administration, an adversary,? said one person.
Mr Trump castigated China repeatedly on the campaign trail. But in office,
and particularly since the Mar-a-Lago
summit, he had taken a less combative
stance, partly because the US
thinks Chinese pressure on North Korea
is crucial to tackling the nuclear crisis.
But over the past few months, Mr
Trump has become more irritated at
the lack of progress in tackling the US
trade deficit with China. He hinted at a
return to a harder position at the Apec
summit in Vietnam when he said he
would no longer tolerate ?chronic trade
abuses? by Asian nations.
HR McMaster, US national security
adviser who oversaw the strategy, said
last week that China ? along with Russia
? was a ?revisionist power? that was
?undermining the international order?.
The inclusion of the tough language on
China heralds a rockier period for
Sino-US relations next year. It marks a
departure from previous national security strategies, which did not incorporate trade and economic issues so prominently. The White House National
Security Council did not respond to a
request for comment, nor did the Chinese embassy in Washington.
?The national security strategy is the
starting gun for a series of economic
measures against the Chinese,? said
Michael Allen, a former Bush administration official at Beacon Global Strate-
gies. ?It is sort of the Rosetta Stone for
translating campaign themes into a
coherent governing document.?
Some people familiar with the strategy said it would be the most aggressive economic response to China?s rise
since 2001 when the US backed its entry
into the World Trade Organization. It
points to the waning influence of Gary
Cohn, the White House National Economic Council head who many people
believe will leave the administration
next year, and the growing power of
Robert Lighthizer, the US trade repre-
?[It] is the starting
gun for a series
of economic measures
against the Chinese?
sentative, and other China hawks in the
administration.
The national security strategy comes
as China-oriented trade investigations
on steel and intellectual property practices launched in the past year are
expected to come to fruition. All could
lead to the imposition of tariffs and
sanctions against China. The pending
actions have divided the US business
community, with many companies reliant on imports for supply chains.
Critics worry that if the US pushes too
hard, it may provoke a trade war that
could have devastating consequences
for US business and the global economy.
Former officials said accusing China of
economic aggression and labelling it a
strategic rival was likely to lead to retaliation by Beijing, with US companies
bearing the brunt of any response.
Editorial Comment page 10
Performance. First year
Trump close to
better scorecard
than many forecast
Tax reform offers first big
legislative victory in response
to Republican disquiet
DEMETRI SEVASTOPULO, SAM FLEMING
AND BARNEY JOPSON ? WASHINGTON
President Donald Trump is within reach
of his first big legislative victory as the
US Congress prepares to pass a tax bill
that would allow the president to end his
first year with a better scorecard than
many had predicted.
Republicans appear to have enough
votes to pass the tax bill this week
despite opposition from Democrats.
That would give Mr Trump and the GOP
ammunition to respond to Republican
voters who were angry that their party
had no big legislative wins despite controlling Congress and the White House.
Victory on his tax plan would help Mr
Trump to argue that his first year has
been a success, even though he has
made little progress on other signature
campaign issues: he is barely any closer
to building a wall on the US-Mexico border; he has failed on a complete repeal of
Obamacare; and he has made few gains
in trade wrangles with China.
But the tax bill will give him something concrete to add to his claims that
his presidency has helped to propel the
stock market to a record, and will
almost certain spur a repeat of accusations that his critics have been unwilling
to recognise any accomplishments.
Since his inauguration, Mr Trump has
followed through on several campaign
pledges that did not require legislation.
He withdrew from the Trans-Pacific
Partnership trade deal and the Paris climate accord. More recently, he recognised Jerusalem as the capital of Israel
and said the US would move its embassy
there from Tel Aviv.
At this point in his term, however, Mr
Trump ranks as the most unpopular
president in American history, as the
contempt of Democratic voters is joined
by the independents and some moderate Republicans who bemoan his
approach to governing.
But the president has delivered some
results for his conservative supporters.
While he has beset by legal problems
in office ? including the rumbling Russia investigation ? Mr Trump has been
strikingly effective in propelling judicial
appointments, including the confirmation of Neil Gorsuch to fill the Supreme
Court seat vacated following the death
of Justice Antonin Scalia.
The Senate has also approved 12 circuit court judges ? a large number for
the first year of a presidency.
James Manley, a former Democratic
congressional aide, said Mr Trump was
reshaping the judicial system in a significant way that would have long-lasting
implications. ?It will be a lasting legacy,
for better or worse, and obviously I
think it will be for worse,? said Mr
Manley. ?With life tenure, they
[appointed judges] will be able to shape
the system for years to come.?
Larry Sabato, a University of Virginia
politics professor, said Mr Trump had
also made progress on his agenda in
ways that were less obvious. ?Most people don?t follow federal rulemaking, but
Trump and company are deconstructing the regulatory system in much of
government, from the environment to
the internet to the financial world.?
Mr Trump has also made progress on
a pro-business pledge to roll back regulations, which he says are strangling
companies. Neomi Rao, a White House
official in charge of regulation, said the
administration had taken 67 deregulatory actions in September that would
lead to annual cost savings of $570m,
although critics say the administration
is over-egging these achievements.
Despite Republicans railing against
Obamacare for seven years, Mr Trump
was unable to help bridge internal divisions about how to repeal it. But the tax
bill has enabled the president to strike an
unexpected last-minute blow, proposing
to eliminate the requirement for every-
WORLD BUSINESS NEWSPAPER
Dear Don...
May?s first stab at the break-up
letter ? ROBERT SHRIMSLEY, PAGE 12
HMRC warns
customs risks
being swamped
by Brexit surge
Lloyd?s of Brussels Insurance market
to tap new talent pool with EU base
UK �80; Channel Islands �80; Republic of Ireland ?3.80
A computer system acquired to collect
duties and clear imports into the UK
may not be able to handle the huge
surge in workload expected once Britain
leaves the EU, customs authorities have
admitted to MPs.
HM Revenue & Customs told a parliamentary inquiry that the new system
needed urgent action to be ready by
March 2019, when Brexit is due to be
completed, and the chair of the probe
said confidence it would be operational
in time ?has collapsed?.
Setting up a digital customs system
has been at the heart of Whitehall?s
Brexit planning because of the fivefold
increase in declarations expected at
British ports when the UK leaves the EU.
About 53 per cent of British imports
come from the EU, and do not require
checks because they arrive through the
single market and customs union. But
Theresa May announced in January that
Brexit would include departure from
both trading blocs. HMRC handles 60m
declarations a year but, once outside the
customs union, the number is expected
to hit 300m.
The revelations about the system,
called Customs Declaration Service, are
likely to throw a sharper spotlight on
whether Whitehall can implement a
host of regulatory regimes ? in areas
ranging from customs and immigration
to agriculture and fisheries ? by the
time Britain leaves the EU.
Problems with CDS and other projects
essential to Brexit could force London to
adjust its negotiation position with the
EU, a Whitehall official said. ?If running
our own customs system is proving
much harder than we anticipated, that
ought to have an impact on how we
press for certain options in Brussels.?
In a letter to Andrew Tyrie, chairman
of the Commons treasury select committee, HMRC said the timetable for
delivering CDS was ?challenging but
achievable?. But, it added, CDS was ?a
complex programme? that needed to be
linked to dozens of other computer systems to work properly. In November,
HMRC assigned a ?green traffic light? to
CDS, indicating it would be delivered on
time. But last month, it wrote to the
committee saying the programme had
been relegated to ?amber/red,? which
means there are ?major risks or issues
apparent in a number ofkey areas?.
HMRC said last night: ?[CDS] is on
track to be delivered by January 2019,
and it will be able to support frictionless
international trade once the UK leaves
the EU . . . Internal ratings are designed
to make sure that each project gets the
focus and resource it requires for successful delivery.?
HMRC?s letters to the select committee, which will be published today, provide no explanation for the rating
change, but some MPs believe it was
caused by Mrs May?s unexpected decision to leave the EU customs union.
THE END
OF THE
ROAD
Timetable & Great Repeal Bill page 2
Scheme to import EU laws page 3
Editorial Comment & Notebook page 12
Philip Stephens & Chris Giles page 13
JPMorgan eye options page 18
A report on how the health service can survive
more austerity has said patients will wait longer for
non-urgent operations and for A&E treatment while
some surgical procedures will be scrapped.? PAGE 4
i Emerging nations in record debt sales
Credit Suisse
engulfed in
fresh tax probe
i London tower plans break records
A survey has revealed that a
record 455 tall buildings are
planned or under construction
in London. Work began on
almost one tower a week
during 2016.? PAGE 4
LAURA NOONAN ? DUBLIN
JENNIFER THOMPSON ? LONDON
A boastful WhatsApp message has cost
a London investment banker his job
and a �,000 fine in the first case of
regulators cracking down on communications over Facebook?s popular
chat app.
The fine by the Financial Conduct
Authority highlights the increasing
problem new media pose for companies
that need to monitor and archive their
staff?s communication.
Several large investment banks have
banned employees from sending client
information over messaging services
including WhatsApp, which uses an
encryption system that cannot be
accessed without permission from the
user. Deutsche Bank last year banned
WhatsApp from work-issued Black-
For the latest news go to
www.ft.com
3 UK, France and Netherlands swoop
3 Blow for bid to clean up Swiss image
i HSBC woos transgender customers
� THE FINANCIAL TIMES LTD 2017
No: 39,435 ?
Printed in London, Liverpool, Glasgow, Dublin,
Frankfurt, Brussels, Milan, Madrid, New York,
Chicago, San Francisco, Washington DC, Orlando,
Tokyo, Hong Kong, Singapore, Seoul, Dubai
Dow Jones Ind
FTSEurofirst 300
Euro Stoxx 50
FTSE 100
FTSE All-Share
CAC 40
AFP
Lloyd?s of London chose Brussels over ?five or six? other
cities in its decision to set up an
EU base to help deal with the
expected loss of passporting
rights after Brexit.
John Nelson, chairman of the
centuries-old insurance market, said he expected other
insurers to follow. Most of the
business written in Brussels
will be reinsured back to the
syndicates at its City of London
headquarters, pictured above.
The Belgian capital had not
been seen as the first choice for
London?s specialist insurance
groups after the UK leaves the
Berrys after discussions with regulators.
Christopher Niehaus, a former Jefferies banker, passed confidential client
information to a ?personal acquaintance and a friend? using WhatsApp,
according to the FCA. The regulator said
Mr Niehaus had turned over his device
to his employer voluntarily.
The FCA said Mr Niehaus had shared
confidential information on the messaging system ?on a number of occasions?
last year to ?impress? people.
Several banks have banned the use of
new media from work-issued devices,
but the situation has become trickier as
banks move towards a ?bring your own
device? policy. Goldman Sachs has
clamped down on its staff?s phone bills
as iPhone-loving staff spurn their workissued BlackBerrys.
Bankers at two institutions said staff
are typically trained in how to use new
prev %chg
Mar 30
2361.13 0.20 $ per ?
5897.55 0.09 $ per �
20703.38 20659.32 0.21 � per ?
1500.72 1493.75 0.47 � per $
EU, with Dublin and Luxembourg thought to be more likely
homes for the industry. But
Mr Nelson said the city won on
its transport links, talent pool
and ?extremely good regulatory reputation?.
Lex page 14
Insurers set to follow page 18
media at work, but banks are unable to
ban people from installing apps on their
private phones.
Andrew Bodnar, a barrister at Matrix
Chambers, said the case set ?a precedent
in that it shows the FCA sees these messaging apps as the same as everything
else?.
Information shared by Mr Niehaus
included the identity and details of a
client and information about a rival of
Jefferies. In one instance the banker
boasted how he might be able to pay off
his mortgage if a deal was successful.
Mr Niehaus was suspended from Jefferies and resigned before the completion of a disciplinary process.
Jefferies declined to comment while
Facebook did not respond to a request
for comment.
Additional reporting by Chloe Cornish
Lombard page 20
INTEREST RATES
prev
Mar 30
2365.93
1.074
1.075 ? per $
0.932
5902.74
1.249
1.241 � per $
0.801
0.859
0.866 ? per �
3481.67
7369.52
4011.01
5089.64
1.164
prev
0.930 US Gov 10 yr
0.806 UK Gov 10 yr
1.155 Ger Gov 10 yr
111.295 111.035 � per ? 119.476 119.363 Jpn Gov 10 yr
3475.27 0.18 � per � 139.035 137.822 � index 76.705 76.951 US Gov 30 yr
7373.72 -0.06 ? index 89.046 89.372 $ index 104.636 103.930 Ger Gov 2 yr
4011.80 -0.02 SFr per ? 1.069 1.072 SFr per � 1.244 1.238
5069.04 0.41 COMMODITIES
Fed Funds Eff
Xetra Dax
12256.43 12203.00 0.44
Mar 30
Nikkei
19063.22 19217.48 -0.80 Oil WTI $
24301.09 24392.05 -0.37 Oil Brent $
297.99
297.73 0.09 Gold $
52.98
52.54
1248.80
1251.10
Hang Seng
FTSE All World $
it followed ?a strategy offull client tax
The bank has unveiled a range of gender-neutral
DUNCAN
? BRUSSELS
but was still trying to
titles
such asROBINSON
?Mx?, in addition
to Mr, Mrs, Misscompliance?
or
Ms, in a move to embrace diversity and cater togather
the information about the probes.
Credit
Suisse hascustomers.
been targeted
by
HM Revenue & Customs said it had
needs
of transgender
? PAGE 20
sweeping tax investigations in the UK, launched a criminal investigation into
France and the Netherlands, setting suspected tax evasion and money launback Switzerland?s attempts to clean up dering by ?a global financial institution
Datawatch
and certain ofits employees?. The UK
its image as a tax haven.
The Swiss bank said yesterday it was tax authority added: ?The international
Terror
attacks inwith
western
Europe after
reach
co-operating
authorities
itsattacks
Recent
? of this investigation sends a clear
that there is no hiding place for
offices in London, Paris and Amsterdam
notably the message
2011
massacre bythose seeking to evade tax.?
were contacted
local officials
Highlighted
attack byOthers
in
prosecutors, who initiated the
?concerning client tax matters?. Anders BreivikDutch
Norway,
the
Dutch authorities said their counter- action, said they seized jewellery, paintattacks in Paris
ings and gold ingots as part of their
parts in Germany wereBrussels
also involved,
and Nice, and
the while French officials said their
probe;
while Australia?s revenue department
Norway
Brussels suicide
investigation had revealed ?several
said it was investigating
a Swiss
Paris
Nice bank.
bombings ? have
thousand? bank accounts opened in
The inquiries threaten to undermine
bucked the trend
efforts by the country?s banking sector
Switzerland and not declared to French
of generally low
tax authorities.
to overhaul business models and ensure
fatalities from
The Swiss attorney-general?s office
customers meet international tax
Sources: Jane?s Terrorism and Insurgency Centre terror incidents in
said it was ?astonished at the way this
requirements following a US-led clampwestern Europe
down on evaders, which resulted in operation has been organised with the
deliberate exclusion of Switzerland?. It
billions of dollars in fines.
The probes risk sparking an interna- demanded a written explanation from
tional dispute after the Swiss attorney- Dutch authorities.
In 2014, Credit Suisse pleaded guilty
general?s office expressed ?astonishment? that it had been left out of the in the US to an ?extensive and wideactions co-ordinated by Eurojust, the ranging conspiracy? to help clients
evade tax. It agreed to fines of $2.6bn.
EU?s judicial liaison body.
Additional reporting by Laura Noonan in
Credit Suisse, whose shares fell 1.2 per
cent yesterday, identified itself as the Dublin, Caroline Binham and Vanessa
Houlder in London, and Michael Stothard
subject ofinvestigations in the Netherlands, France and the UK. The bank said in Paris
RALPH ATKINS ? ZURICH
CURRENCIES
Mar 30
S&P 500
Nasdaq Composite
MAGAZINE
In a stormy three-hour meeting, investors accused
managers ofhaving an entrenched secrecy culture
and cast doubt on a revival plan after Westinghouse
filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.? PAGE 16
World Markets
STOCK MARKETS
How To Spend It
Chic new lodgings
in Scotland
i Toshiba investors doubt revival plan
Subscribe In print and online
www.ft.com/subscribenow
Tel: 0800 298 4708
Art of persuasion Mystery deepens
over disputed painting of Jane Austen
i Tillerson fails to ease Turkey tensions
The US secretary of state has failed to reconcile
tensions after talks in Ankara with President Recep
Tayyip Erdogan on issues including Syria and the
extradition of cleric Fethullah Gulen.? PAGE 9
Subscriptions & Customer service
Tel: +44 207 775 6000, fte.subs@ft.com,
www.ft.com/subscribetoday
Advertising
Tel: +44 20 7873 4000 asiaads@ft.com,
emeaads@ft.com
Letters to the editor
Fax: +44 20 7873 5938,
letters.editor@ft.com
Executive appointments
Tel: +44 20 7873 4909
www.exec-appointments.com
Congressional Republicans seeking to
avert a US government shutdown after
April 28 have resisted Donald Trump?s
attempt to tack funds to pay for a wall
on the US-Mexico border on to
stopgap spending plans. They fear
that his planned $33bn increase in
defence and border spending could
force a federal shutdown for the first
time since 2013, as Democrats refuse
to accept the proposals.
US budget Q&A and
Trump attack over health bill i PAGE 8
Censors and sensitivity
Warning: this article may be
upsetting ? LIFE & ARTS
FT WEEKEND MAGAZINE
Developing countries have sold record levels of
government debt in the first quarter of this year,
taking advantage of a surge in optimism toward
emerging markets as trade booms.? PAGE 15
City watchdog sends a clear message as
banker loses job over WhatsApp boast
Shutdown risk as border
wall bid goes over the top
HOW DRIVERLESS
TECHNOLOGY IS
CHANGING AN
AMERICAN WAY OF LIFE
i Report outlines longer NHS waiting times
FINANCIAL TIMES
1 Southwark Bridge,
London SE1 9HL
SATURDAY 1 APRIL / SUNDAY 2 APRIL 2017
Briefing
i US bargain-hunters fuel Europe M&A
Europe has become the big target for cross-border
dealmaking, as US companies ride a Trump-fuelled
equity market rally to hunt for bargains across the
Atlantic.? PAGE 15; CHINA CURBS HIT DEALS, PAGE 17
3 Confidence in IT plans ?has collapsed?
3 Fivefold rise in declarations expected
JAMES BLITZ ? WHITEHALL EDITOR
GIDEON LONG
ANDEAN CORRESPONDENT
UK �70 Channel Islands �00; Republic of Ireland ?3.00
A Five Star plan?
Italy?s populists are trying to woo
the poor ? BIG READ, PAGE 11
FEBRUARY 4 2017
FRIDAY 31 MARCH 2017
50.22
prev
49.51
price
yield
chg
98.87
2.38
0.00
100.46
1.21
-0.03
0.39
-0.01
98.68
0.06
0.00
100.14
100.45
2.99
0.01
102.58
-0.75
price
0.66
0.00
prev
chg
0.66
0.00
%chg US 3m Bills
1.43 Euro Libor 3m
0.78
0.78
-0.36
-0.36
0.00
0.84 UK 3m
-0.18 Prices are latest for edition
0.34
0.34
0.00
Data provided by Morningstar
0.00
(Deposito Legal) M-32596-1995; Publishing Director,
Lionel Barber; Publishing Company, The Financial Times
Limited, registered office as above. Local Representative
office; C/ Infanta Maria Teresa 4, bajo 2, 28016, Madrid.
ISSN 1135-8262.
UAE:
Al tough
Nisrstance
Publishing
LLC, P.O.Box 6519. Dubai. Editor
Brussels takes
on Brexit
Spain handed veto over Gibraltar
inwithChief:
Lionel Barber.
Qatar: Dar Al Sharq, PO Box 3488, Doha-Qatar. Tel: +97
444 650 600
France: Publishing Director, Jonathan Slade, 46 Rue La
Boetie, 75008 Paris, Tel. +33 (0)1 5376 8256; Fax: +33 (01)
5376 8253; Commission Paritaire N� 0909 C 85347; ISSN
1148-2753.
Turkey: Dunya Super Veb Ofset A.S. 100. Yil Mahallesi
34204, Bagcilar- Istanbul, Tel. +90 212 440 24 24.
Living wage rise to pile
pressure on care services
About 2.3m people will benefit from
today?s increase in the national living
wage to �50 per hour. But the rise
will pile pressure on English councils,
which will have to pay care workers a
lot more. Some 43 per cent of care
staff ? amounting to 341,000 people
aged 25 and over ? earn less than the
new living wage and the increase is
expected to cost councils? care services
�0m in the coming financial year.
Analysis i PAGE 4
The EU yesterday took a tough opening
stance in Brexit negotiations, rejecting
Britain?s plea for early trade talks and
explicitly giving Spain a veto over any
arrangements that apply to Gibraltar.
European Council president Donald
Tusk?s first draft of the guidelines,
which are an important milestone on
the road to Brexit, sought to damp Britain?s expectations by setting out a
?phased approach? to the divorce process that prioritises progress on withdrawal terms.
The decision to add the clause giving
Spain the right to veto any EU-UK trade
deals covering Gibraltar could make the
300-year territorial dispute between
Madrid and London an obstacle to
Robin Lane Fox on the flair
of foreign flora ? HOUSE & HOME
THE RISE
OF
ECO-GLAM
Escape
the taper
trap
How high earners can evade
a pension headache ? FT MONEY
Austen?s descendants insist the Rice portrait depicts her as a girl ? see magazine
ambitious trade and airline access deals.
Gibraltar yesterday hit back at the
clause, saying the territory had ?shamefully been singled out for unfavourable
treatment by the council at the behest of
Spain?. Madrid defended the draft
clause, pointing out that it only reflected
?the traditional Spanish position?.
Senior EU diplomats noted that
Mr Tusk?s text left room for negotiators
to work with in coming months. Prime
minister Theresa May?s allies insisted
that the EU negotiating stance was
largely ?constructive?, with one saying it
was ?within the parameters of what we
were expecting, perhaps more on the
upside?.
British officials admitted that the EU?s
insistence on a continuing role for the
European Court of Justice in any transition deal could be problematic.
Brussels sees little room for compro-
Bridgeman Art Library
For the latest news go to
www.ft.com
� THE FINANCIAL TIMES LTD 2017
No: 39,436 ?
Printed in London, Liverpool, Glasgow, Dublin,
Frankfurt, Brussels, Milan, Madrid, New York,
Chicago, San Francisco, Washington DC, Orlando,
Tokyo, Hong Kong, Singapore, Seoul, Dubai
Published by: The Financial Times Limited, 1 Southwark
Bridge, London SE1 9HL, United Kingdom. Tel: +44 20
7873 3000; Fax: +44 20 7407 5700. Editor: Lionel Barber.
Germany: Dogan Media Group, Hurriyet AS Branch
Germany, An der Brucke 20-22, 64546 Morfelden Walldorf. Responsible Editor, Lionel Barber. Responsible
for advertising content, Jon Slade.
Italy: Monza Stampa S.r.l., Via Michelangelo Buonarroti,
153, Monza, 20900, Milan. Tel. +39 039 28288201
Owner, The Financial Times Limited; Rappresentante e
Direttore Responsabile in Italia: I.M.D.Srl-Marco Provasi Via G. Puecher, 2 20037 Paderno Dugnano (MI), Italy.
Milano n. 296 del 08/05/08 - Poste Italiane SpA-Sped. in
Abb.Post.DL. 353/2003 (conv. L. 27/02/2004-n.46) art. 1
.comma 1, DCB Milano.
Spain: Bermont Impresion, Avenida de Alemania 12, CTC,
28821, Coslada, Madrid. Legal Deposit Number
19/01/2017 13:57
mise. If Britain wants to prolong its
status within the single market after
Brexit, the guidelines state it would
require ?existing regulatory, budgetary,
supervisory and enforcement instruments and structures to apply?.
Mr Tusk wants talks on future trade
to begin only once ?sufficient progress?
has been made on Britain?s exit bill and
citizen rights, which Whitehall officials
believe means simultaneous talks are
possible if certain conditions are met.
Boris Johnson, the foreign secretary,
reassured European colleagues at a
Nato summit in Brussels that Mrs May
had not intended to ?threaten? the EU
when she linked security co-operation
after Brexit with a trade deal.
Reports & analysis page 3
Jonathan Powell, Tim Harford &
Man in the News: David Davis page 11
Henry Mance page 12
World Markets
Subscribe In print and online
www.ft.com/subscribenow
Tel: 0800 298 4708
CURRENCIES
STOCK MARKETS
Mar 31
S&P 500
Nasdaq Composite
Dow Jones Ind
FTSEurofirst 300
Euro Stoxx 50
FTSE 100
FTSE All-Share
CAC 40
prev %chg
2368.06 -0.04 $ per ?
5914.34 0.07 $ per �
20689.64 20728.49 -0.19 � per ?
1503.03 1500.72 0.15 � per $
Mar 31
INTEREST RATES
prev
Mar 31
2367.10
1.070
1.074 ? per $
0.935
5918.69
1.251
1.249 � per $
0.800
0.855
0.859 ? per �
3495.59
7322.92
3990.00
5122.51
3481.58 0.40 � per �
7369.52 -0.63 ? index
111.430 111.295 � per ?
139.338 139.035 � index
88.767 89.046 $ index
4011.01 -0.52 SFr per ? 1.071
5089.64 0.65 COMMODITIES
1.069 SFr per �
1.169
price
98.63
99.27
yield
chg
2.41
-0.01
1.22
0.02
0.33
-0.01
100.36
0.07
0.00
99.27
3.04
0.01
102.57
-0.75
Mar 31
18909.26 19063.22 -0.81 Oil WTI $
24111.59 24301.09 -0.78 Oil Brent $
297.38
298.11 -0.24 Gold $
53.35
53.13
1244.85
1248.80
50.46
100.35
104.536 104.636 Ger Gov 2 yr
1.252 1.244
12312.87 12256.43 0.46
Nikkei
Hang Seng
prev
0.932 US Gov 10 yr
0.801 UK Gov 10 yr
1.164 Ger Gov 10 yr
119.180 119.476 Jpn Gov 10 yr
77.226 76.705 US Gov 30 yr
Xetra Dax
FTSE All World $
Pedro Pablo Kuczynski?s tenure as
Peru?s president is in the balance as the
country?s parliament prepares an
impeachment vote this week over his
role in a corruption scandal that has
rocked Latin America.
The lure of the exotic
390_Cover_PRESS.indd 1
ALEX BARKER ? BRUSSELS
GEORGE PARKER ? LONDON
STEFAN WAGSTYL ? BERLIN
prev
50.35
price
0.66
prev
0.00
chg
Fed Funds Eff
%chg US 3m Bills
0.22 Euro Libor 3m
0.66
0.00
0.78
0.78
0.00
-0.36
-0.36
0.00
0.41 UK 3m
-0.32 Prices are latest for edition
0.34
0.34
0.00
Data provided by Morningstar
At this
point,
Trump
ranks as
the most
unpopular
president in
American
history
atile as his campaign rhetoric suggested.
Despite his campaign pledge to unravel
the Iran nuclear deal on day one in office,
he has not done so yet. The US military
has made strides in dealing with Isis, but
has largely employed the same strategy
astheObamaadministration.
Rex Tillerson, secretary of state,
recently said the US had made progress
on issues such as North Korea, but conceded that the administration did not
yet have any big victories so far. ?Do we
have any wins to put on the board? No.
That?s not the way this works. Diplomacy is not that simple.?
Marc Short, White House legislative
affairs director, said yesterday there was
no discussion inside the White House
about firing Mr Mueller ?whatsoever?.
The Mueller investigation has already
accused several former Trump team
advisers, accusing three members of his
campaign team, as well as his
former national security adviser
Michael Flynn, of wrongdoing.
?We have continued to co-operate in
everysinglepossiblewaywiththatinvestigation,? Mr Short told NBC News? Meet
the Press yesterday, adding that he was
not in communication with Kory Langhofer,thelawyerallegingtheemailswere
improperly obtained, and that the presidentwouldcontinuetoco-operate.
The Trump administration has consistently denied working with Russia to
secure last year?s election victory. Mr
Trump himself has described the probe
as ?a witch hunt?.
Mr Langhofer, counsel for the Trump
for America transition team, wrote to
congressional committees in a sevenpage letter on Saturday, alleging that a
private email collection from the transition team had been inappropriately
passed to Mr Mueller?s team by the government agency that hosted the messages.
He alleged that the investigation
was ?tainted? by the actions as a result.
Some critics worried that the move was
part of a pretext to oust Mr Mueller and
stymie his investigation.
On Friday, the top Democrat on the
House of Representatives? intelligence
committee, Adam Schiff, also accused
Republican members of wanting to shut
down their own investigation.
But US Treasury secretary Steven
Mnuchin told Fox News yesterday that
he had dined with Mr Trump and vicepresident Mike Pence on Saturday and
had not ?heard anything about this, any
firing? of Mr Mueller, although he added
later it was up to Mr Trump.
He also called the investigation ?a
giant distraction? and said that it should
be over quickly, without saying it should
see out its full course.
Mr Langhofer alleged in his letter that
the General Services Administration, a
federal agency that hosts government
communications, ?did not own or control the records in question? and had
provided the material to the Federal
Bureau of Investigation after receiving a
letter, rather than a subpoena, and without notifying the transition team or filtering or redacting privileged material.
Supporters of the probe said emails
hosted by a government server properly
belonged to the government and not to
private individuals. A spokesman for
Mr Mueller?s office also denied any
wrongdoing. ?When we have obtained
emails in the course of our ongoing
criminal investigation, we have secured
either the account owner?s consent or
appropriate criminal process,? said Mr
Mueller?s office.
Peru?s president faces impeachment over Odebrecht links
Subscribe to the FT today at FT.com/subscription
Trump vs the Valley
Evan Vucci/AP
one to have health insurance or pay a
penalty?akeyplankofthesystem.
The administration has also left its
mark on the technology sector. The Federal Communications Commission last
week unwound Obama-era net neutrality rules that required telecoms companies to treat all internet traffic equally.
Separately, the justice department has
said it will sue to block AT&T?s proposed
takeover of media group Time Warner,
arguing that it would hurt consumers.
On foreign policy, many governments
around the world have breathed a sigh of
relief that Mr Trump has not been as vol-
A senior White House official has
denied that US president Donald
Trump is planning to fire special counsel Robert Mueller, following weekend
claims that the former FBI director?s
high-profile investigation into Russian
interference in the 2016 presidential
elections improperly obtained emails.
Corruption claims
MAKE A SMART INVESTMENT
Tech titans need to minimise
political risk ? GILLIAN TETT, PAGE 13
Donald Trump:
has followed
through on
several of his
campaign
pledges
KATRINA MANSON ? WASHINGTON
〤opyright The Financial Times 2017.
Reproduction of the contents of this newspaper in any
manner is not permitted without the publisher?s prior
consent. ?Financial Times? and ?FT? are registered trade
marks of The Financial Times Limited.
The Financial Times and its journalism are subject to a
self-regulation regime under the FT Editorial Code of
Practice: www.ft.com/editorialcode
Reprints are available of any FT article with your
company logo or contact details inserted if required
(minimum order 100 copies).
One-off copyright licences for reproduction of FT articles
are also available.
For both services phone +44 20 7873 4816, or email
syndication@ft.com
Peru?s Congress is due to decide Mr Kuczynski?s fate on Thursday after lawmakers voted by 93 to 17 to seek his removal.
Opponents need 87 votes to unseat him.
The vote at the end of last week to
start impeachment proceedings was
provoked by Mr Kuczynski?s admission
that he worked five years ago as a financial adviser on a Peruvian irrigation
project run by H2Olmos, a company
owned by scandal-plagued Brazilian
construction business Odebrecht. The
president had previously denied any
link to Odebrecht.
The Odebrecht scandal has cut a
swath through Latin American politics
because of the admission by the company that it paid bribes to politicians
across the region to win contracts.
While Mr Kuczynski said he never
dealt with the Brazilian company
directly, Peru?s rightwing opposition
seized upon the admission to insist the
79-year-old former Wall Street banker
should resign.
?It?s is a national disgrace,? said opposition lawmaker Lourdes Alcorta. ?The
less harmful option for Peru would be
his resignation. He?s forcing us to
impeach him.?
In a defiant televised address last
week, Mr Kuczynski said he would not
quit. ?I?m not going to give up my honour, nor my values, nor my responsibilities as president of all Peruvians,? he
later tweeted.
Odebrecht has acknowledged that it
had paid $4.8m to two companies
owned by Mr Kuczynski and a close
business associate. But in an open letter
to the Peruvian newspaper La Republica
on Saturday, it said the payments were
not part of the huge web of bribes it has
already admitted handing to politicians
across Latin America.
While that might win Mr Kuczynski
some support, his party has only 18
seats in the 130-seat parliament. Keiko
Fujimori?s opposition Fuerza Popular
(Popular Force) dominates with 71 seats
and is drumming up support for Thurs-
day?s vote from other smaller parties. If
Mr Kuczynski were to be ousted, he
would be replaced by his first vice-president, Martin Vizcarra, a former governor of a mining-rich region in southern
Peru ? in theory until the end of the
presidential term in 2021.
Stripped of his presidential immunity
from prosecution, Mr Kuczynski might
also find himself investigated further
over his Odebrecht links.
The Odebrecht scandal arguably has
had a bigger impact in Peru than in any
other country outside Brazil. The company was involved in several infrastruc-
Pedro Pablo Kuczynski: ?I am not
going to give up my responsibilities?
ture projects there and has admitted
paying $29m in bribes to Peruvian officials. Mr Kuczynski?s two predecessors,
Ollanta Humala and Alejandro Toledo,
have been caught up in it. Mr Humala
was jailed in July pending trial while Mr
Toledo in on the run in the US. Peruvian
authorities are seeking his extradition.
Ms Fujimori, the daughter of Peru?s
former president Alberto Fujimori, is
also under investigation as part of the
scandal. All the politicians deny the
charges against them.
Peru?s business community had high
hopes for Mr Kuczynski, a straight-talking technocrat who came to power in
July 2016 promising to tackle cronyism
and corruption in a country with one of
the fastest growing economies in Latin
America. He had previously served as
prime minister and finance minister.
But hopes that he could make headway on that agenda have largely evaporated as the government has struggled
to overcome its parliamentary weakness. A recent survey by Ipsos Peru
showed that the president?s support
among business leaders had plummeted to 37 per cent from 89 per cent a
year earlier.
?
Monday 18 December 2017
3
FINANCIAL TIMES
INTERNATIONAL
Far-right Freedom party wins
key posts in Austria coalition
South Africa
Zuma?s fate in balance as
ANC votes on leadership
JOSEPH COTTERILL ? JOHANNESBURG
Vienna to toughen stance on migrants as pro-Putin group takes strategic role
RALPH ATKINS ? ZURICH
MEHREEN KHAN ? BRUSSELS
Austria?s far-right nationalist Freedom
party will control several powerful ministries when the country?s new government is sworn in today, after it struck a
coalition deal that will significantly
toughen Vienna?s stance on immigration and asylum seekers.
In a breakthrough for the Eurosceptic
Freedom party, it will govern together
with the centre-right People?s party of
31-year-old chancellor-elect Sebastian
Kurz. The Freedom party will take control of the defence, interior and foreign
ministries while Heinz-Christian Strache, its leader who has warned of
Austria?s ?Islamification?, will become
vice-chancellor.
Mr Kurz?s government will be closely
watched around the EU, where mainstream politicians have grown increasingly concerned about the rise of nationalist and populist political forces.
Pierre Moscovici, the EU?s centre-left
commissioner for economics, warned
that the Freedom party?s presence
should ?arouse the vigilance? of democrats who supported European values.
?The presence of the extreme right in
power is never trivial,? he said.
Marine Le Pen, the leader of France?s
National Front who lost her presidential
bid in May, said Freedom?s government
role in Austria was ?excellent news for
Europe?.
Mr Kurz won Austria?s national election in October after a campaign promising to halt illegal immigration, as well
as tax cuts and institutional reforms.
The incoming chancellor, who is due to
meet EU leaders in Brussels tomorrow,
acknowledged partners? concerns but
insisted his government programme
was pro-European and pointed out that
Austria was a strong democracy.
Mr Kurz has put EU policy under the
control of his chancellery. Mr Strache
said he supported the ?European peace
project?.
With both the interior and defence
ministries, the Freedom party will oversee Austria?s security apparatus ?
including the police and army. In previous coalitions the responsibilities have
been split.
The party?s Russia links ? it has close
ties with United Russia, the party of
President Vladimir Putin ? could further raise concerns among western
allies, for instance over intelligencesharing.
Freedom?s ministerial nominations
appeared designed to assuage misgivings. As foreign minister, the party nominated Karin Kneissl, an independent,
non-party Middle East expert, whom
Mr Strache described as a ?bridgebuilder?. Mario Kunasek, defence minister, is a former soldier.
The Freedom party is notorious
beyond Austria for its historical links
with pan-German nationalists, antiSemitic voices and airbrushing of the
country?s Nazi past. When the party
joined the government in 2000, Austria
Shake on it:
chancellor-elect
Sebastian Kurz,
right, agrees
a coalition
deal with
Heinz-Christian
Strache,
chairman of the
far-right
Freedom party,
in Vienna
Roland Schlager/AFP/Getty
was ostracised by its EU neighbours.
In office, the Freedom party could
create problems on issues such as Russian sanctions but would avoid
?extreme provocations?, said Thomas
Hofer, a political analyst in Vienna.
?They want to prove they are fit for government . . . Of course, it is a stressful
time for Austria, but it is nowhere near
2000.?
Freedom took 26 per cent of the vote
in October?s poll. It was beaten into third
place by the centre-left Social Democrats, who previously led a ?grand coalition? with the People?s party. But the
unpopularity of the ?grand coalition?
persuaded Mr Kurz to form a coalition
with Freedom.
The new chancellor rose in popularity
in Austria after bluntly criticising EU
policies during the continent?s 2015
immigration crisis, and he continues to
demand action to strengthen the EU?s
external borders. Austria was on the
route for refugees fleeing wars in coun-
?The
presence of
the extreme
right in
power is
never
trivial?
Pierre
Moscovici
tries such as Syria. With a population of
9m, it received 130,000 asylum applications in 2015 and 2016.
To push ahead with economic
reforms, Mr Kurz has chosen Hartwig
L鰃er, chairman of the Uniqa insurance
company in Austria, as finance minister.
The 182-page coalition agreement
includes plans to cut taxes as a share of
gross domestic product from 42.9 per
cent to about 40 per cent, bringing the
country in line with the EU average.
The new government also plans to
give Austria?s voters more opportunities
to vote in referendums ? although it
specifically ruled out a poll on the country?s EU membership.
The coalition agreement promises
tougher rules on benefits for asylum
seekers, who would have to hand over
cash they were carrying to authorities,
and on allowing access to refugees?
mobile phones to determine their identities and travel routes, as well as the
faster processing of applicants.
Economic reboot
Sisi?s dream of new Egypt capital raises fears on cost and Cairo
HEBA SALEH ? CAIRO
If Abdel Fattah al-Sisi has his way, a
new Egyptian capital will rise from the
desert over the next 18 months and the
president and his government will
decamp there, leaving behind Cairo?s
congestion and pollution.
The ?administrative capital?, expected
to open in mid-2019, is the most ambitious of a string of megaprojects Mr Sisi
has been driving as part of his efforts to
reboot the struggling economy and bolster the image of his regime.
?We have the right to have a dream,?
says Khaled al-Husseini. ?Other countries like Brazil and Ivory Coast have
built new capitals.?
Mr Husseini is an official at the
Administrative Capital for Urban Development company, a joint venture
between the Egyptian army and a government land development agency that
is in charge of constructing the city.
The army is supervising the private
construction companies involved in the
project, underlining the deepening
involvement of the military in the economy. It is a trend that has gathered pace
under Mr Sisi, a former defence minister who overthrew his elected Islamist
predecessor in a 2013 coup.
He has relied on the army to manage
large projects, bypassing government
bureaucracy. The result is the military?s
footprint has expanded across sectors,
from pharmaceuticals to steel.
Mr Sisi?s ambitions for the new capi-
tal, 45km east of Cairo, are staggering:
not only will the government move
there but so will parliament, the presidential palace, Supreme Court, central
bank and ? it is hoped ? 6.5m people.
The as-yet nameless city is intended
to have an airport, an opera house, a
Chinese-built commercial centre, 32
ministerial offices, and a business district boasting the tallest skyscraper in
Africa. Private real estate companies
have already bought plots of land to
develop and market, and about 30,000
flats have been completed.
The first phase of the infrastructure
build is expected to cost about $4.5bn.
But while officials say a new capital is
needed to take the pressure off Cairo as
it struggles under the burden of hosting
19m people, critics argue the country
cannot afford the cost of building a city.
Some also worry it will mean the ancient
metropolis, parts of which are in decay,
will be further neglected when the government moves out.
Many wealthy Egyptians have already
moved to gated compounds on the edge
of Cairo as the city has become more
congested and polluted.
May al-Ibrashy, an architect who
heads Megawra, a heritage preservation
non-governmental group, believes the
resources being put into the new capital
would be better spent addressing Cairo?s
problems.
?Why aren?t the resources available
for the new capital being used to
develop and improve our existing
assets?? she says. ?What will happen to
Cairo after the exodus? It will be sidelined. We have an amazing resource
here in this city. How can we go and create something that really turns its back
to our identity.?
A newly built road in Egypt?s ?administrative capital? ? Mohamed el-Shahed/AFP/Getty
Mostapha Kamel al-Sayed, a politics
professor at Cairo University, complains
there has been no public debate about
the new capital.
?The country faces problems of poverty and unemployment which means
all resources should be directed to
developing productive activities,? he
says. ?This is a reversal of priorities, and
it should be the people who determine
these priorities, not just one person.?
Egypt?s economy has been in a downturn since the 2011 revolution. The government is grappling with a budget deficit of 10.9 per cent of gross domestic
product and was forced to turn to the
International Monetary Fund for a
$12bn loan.
But officials insist the city will not
place an extra burden on state coffers.
Ahmed Zaki Abdeen, head of the
Administrative Capital for Urban Development company, said in a television
interview the funding would come from
the sale of land to private developers.
The cost of building the government
quarter will be financed by the company
and recouped from the sale or rental of
the ministries? premises in Cairo.
But critics point to Egypt?s long record
of failing new cities that lack amenities
and attract few residents.
Still, Mr Abdeen is adamant he is not
building ?a ghost town?.
?People say this project will burden
the state treasury, but we tell them that,
God willing, this will be an investment
that brings returns to the state.?
When Jacob Zuma opened the African
National Congress conference that will
end his term as party leader, South
Africa?s president delivered a typically
defiant speech.
The ANC congress is taking place as the
party is haemorrhaging support,
engulfed by corruption allegations
linked to Mr Zuma and his allies. But the
man who has led the organisation for
the past decade was having none of it,
dismissing the graft claims and accusing
his opponents of being part of a plot by
big business to undermine the party.
?We need to find ways of protecting
the ANC from corporate greed,? thundered Mr Zuma.
Yet his reception from large numbers
of the party faithful was noticeably subdued. It hinted that, as ANC members
voted for a new leadership yesterday,
many were hoping to finally put an end
to Mr Zuma?s scandal-prone term.
The leadership contest is deemed the
ANC?s most important since the former
liberation movement swept to power in
1994, and its outcome is likely to go a
long way to determining Mr Zuma?s fate
and whether he completes the final two
years of his presidency of the nation.
It will also decide who leads the party
into 2019 elections, when the ANC is at
risk of losing its majority for the first
time; and whether there is a genuine
attempt to root out the patronage networks that have tarnished its image.
The contest to take over from Mr
Zuma has been bitter and ? as it entered
its final hours ? on a knife edge. It pits
Cyril Ramaphosa, the deputy president,
who has campaigned on an anti-corruption ticket, against Nkosazana DlaminiZuma, Mr Zuma?s ex-wife.
Ms Dlamini-Zuma has served as a minister under every ANC president. But Mr
Zuma?s critics fear he is backing her
because he believes that as the mother of
four of his children she will protect him
from prosecution, including 783 counts
of fraud, corruption and money launderingthathavedoggedhimforyears.
She has campaigned on a populist
message of tackling the yawning racial
imbalances in Africa?s most industrialised nation, but has largely remained
silent on the corruption claims.
In contrast, Mr Ramaphosa has
launched thinly veiled attacks on the
man he hopes to succeed, including Mr
Zuma?s ties to the Gupta family, who are
accused of using their friendship with
the president to influence cabinet
appointments and state business.
If Mr Ramaphosa and his backers win,
it would reshape the composition of the
ANC?s national executive committee,
which has thwarted two attempts by
senior party members to remove Mr
Zuma in the past year.
As more than 5,000 party delegates
prepared to cast their ballots, Mr Ramaphosa?s supporters circulated a draft
list of candidates for the NEC that was
purged of Mr Zuma?s allies ? underlining the threat to the president?s grip on
the top party structures.
The result of the leadership contest is
unlikely to be released until today after
voting was delayed by an impasse
between rival factions over the number
of delegates, amid allegations of bribery
and vote-buying. Courts also rejected
the legitimacy of some provincial delegations, leading to hundreds who were
expected to back Ms Dlamini-Zuma
being prevented from voting.
However, delegates continued to raise
concernsthatthevotecouldberigged.
Ashedeliveredhisspeechtodelegates,
Mr Zuma showed no signs that he
expected his hold over the party to end.
?Already we have received threats that
the ANC will implode and the economy
will collapse if certain outcomes
arise . . . [that] are not those favoured by
business,? Mr Zuma said, in words
directed at Mr Ramaphosa, who has bigbusinessbacking.
Supporters of Ms Dlamini-Zuma
danced and cheered as he spoke. But the
president?s attacks on business, media,
and NGOs as foes of the government
drew muted applause from delegates.
?Either he?s stupidly unrealistic or he?s
got a plan that we don?t know about,?
said Ralph Mathekga, a political analyst.
Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma: she has
campaigned on a populist message
India
Gandhi leads Congress into
battle against ?medieval? Modi
AMY KAZMIN ? NEW DELHI
Rahul Gandhi, scion of India?s most
influential political dynasty, attacked
Narendra Modi, the prime minister, for
?taking us back us to medieval times?
as he took over the presidency of the
opposition Congress party.
His comments, at a long-awaited coronation ceremony, came before today?s
vote-counting for legislative assembly
elections in Mr Modi?s home base of
Gujarat, where the Congress waged a
feisty campaign to unseat the prime
minister?s Hindu nationalist Bharatiya
Janata party. The BJP has governed the
state for more than two decades.
Mr Gandhi, the sixth member of his
family to become president of Congress
? which led India?s 20th-century anticolonial struggle ? would ?never back
down? from its traditional vision of an
inclusive India in which even those on
the margins of society have a place.
?Our commitment is this: we will
defend the voice of every single Indian,?
he said during Saturday?s event, switching back and forth between English and
Hindi. ?We will never ever allow the
democratic dreams and longings of our
people ? not one of them ? to be
silenced.?
Mr Gandhi has taken the reins of the
Congress from his Italian-born mother,
Sonia Gandhi ? widow of former prime
minister Rajiv Gandhi ? as the 132year-old organisation is fighting for
its survival against the ascendant BJP.
The 47-year-old, a son, grandson and
great-grandson of former Indian prime
ministers, denounced the political climate in India, where he said ?people are
being killed for who they are . . . and
butchered for what they eat?.
?This ugly violence shames us in the
world,? Mr Gandhi said, referring
obliquely to a series of high-profile killings of Muslims suspected of eating beef
or transporting cows ? an animal that
devout Hindus revere as near deities.
The BJP believes the religious beliefs
and cultural practices of the country?s
Hindu majority should shape public
policy, and that the rights of India?s religious minorities ? both Muslims and
Christians ? should be circumscribed in
deference to Hindu sentiments.
The BJP, led by the charismatic and
combative Mr Modi, has also repeatedly
called for a ?Congress-free India?.
During the bitter campaign in
Gujarat, Mr Modi suggested that Pakistani officials were conspiring with senior Congress leaders ? and some of the
party?s Muslim politicians ? to interfere
in the state elections and defeat the BJP.
But critics accuse Mr Gandhi of pandering to Hindu nationalist voters too,
by visiting more than 26 Hindu temples
during the campaign, as the BJP sharply
questioned his religious identity.
Mr Gandhi has also been accused of
being too feeble in denouncing recent
hate crimes against Muslims, apparently for fear of antagonising Hindu vot-
?Our commitment is this:
we will defend the voice
of every single Indian?
Rahul Gandhi, Congress president
ers during elections in Gujarat. ?To win
Gujarat, Rahul Gandhi is apparently
prepared to acquiesce in the making
of Gujarat into a place where minorities
must live in sufferance and not have
the equal rights assured them by the
constitution,? Ramachandra Guha, a
historian, wrote in the Hindustan Times
yesterday.
Mr Gandhi entered politics in 2004,
standing for his late father?s parliamentary seat, and has been running the
party with his ailing mother for the past
few years. But he has often been perceived as a reluctant politician. He has
been no match for the BJP?s electoral
juggernaut, and has struggled to connect with voters and articulate a coherent vision for India in the 21st century.
In 2014, Congress won just 44 of parliament?s 543 seats, its worst showing
ever, and was heavily defeated in this
year?s important Uttar Pradesh state
elections too. The Gujarat election
results will be the latest measure of Mr
Gandhi?s political abilities in the face of
his formidable rival.
?
4
FINANCIAL TIMES
Monday 18 December 2017
INTERNATIONAL
Economic assessment
Regional election
Rating agency recognises Portugal revival
Catalonia?s
anti-split
parties appeal
for votes to
quell tension
Fitch awards coveted
investment grade for
Lisbon?s borrowing
PETER WISE ? LISBON
Portugal has reached a turning point in
its economic rehabilitation after a second big rating agency decided that the
country ? given a ?78bn international
bailout in 2011 ? again deserved a coveted investment grade for its borrowing.
The decision by Fitch Ratings late on
Friday to upgrade Portugal from ?junk?
status marks a decisive moment in its
recovery from a punishing debt crisis.
The country?s revival mirrors the
broader recovery under way in much of
the eurozone throughout this year, with
the European Central Bank last week
again raising growth forecasts for the
region through to 2019. Portugal was
one of the eurozone member states
most deeply affected by the debt crisis,
with unemployment rising to 17 per
cent and the economy shrinking 4 per
cent in 2012.
M醨io Centeno, finance minister, said
the ?unprecedented magnitude? of
Fitch?s reassessment of the Portuguese
economy, was a recognition of the
Socialist government?s success in controlling public spending, cutting unemployment and shoring up banks.
Mr Centeno, who will take over as
president of the eurogroup of eurozone
finance ministers in January, has presided over a remarkable turnround in
Portugal?s fortunes in the past two years.
The budget deficit has fallen to a 40year low, freeing Portugal from the
threat of EU sanctions. The unemployment rate has halved to 8.5 per cent and
on Friday the Bank of Portugal revised
its economic growth forecasts upwards
to 2.6 per cent this year and 2.3 per cent
in 2018. Fitch?s decision to change its
grading of Portugal from BB+ to BBB,
the first time a leading rating agency has
awarded Lisbon a two-notch upgrade,
Deficit is at a 40-year low,
unemployment has halved
and growth forecasts have
been revised upwards
follows a similar decision by Standard &
Poor?s in September and could see Portuguese bond yields drop to record lows
when trading resumes today.
The upgrade will qualify Portugal for
inclusion in big bond indices for the first
time in six years, allowing its debt to be
held by a wider range of investors and
loweringgovernmentborrowingcosts.
Portugal?s 10-year bond yields, which
soared above 16 per cent during the debt
crisis, dropped to 1.76 per cent on Friday, in anticipation of the Fitch upgrade.
This was close to a three-year low and, at
one point, the rate fell briefly below
equivalent Italian yields. Yields move
inversely to prices.
In March, Mr Centeno insisted that
the three big rating agencies were treating Portugal unfairly by keeping in place
the junk status ratings they had applied
at the height of the eurozone crisis.
Only three months ago, Portugal
depended on a single investment-grade
rating from DBRS, a Canadian agency, to
qualify for its sovereign debt to be
included in the ECB?s bond-buying programme. Whenever that rating came up
for reassessment, Portuguese debt came
under renewed pressure. That changed
in September when S&P became the first
of the big three agencies to reinstate Portugal?s investment-grade status. After
Fitch?s decision, many investors expect
Moody?stofollowsuitearlynextyear.
Fitch cited a three-point drop in the
public debt-to-output ratio to 127 per
cent this year, ?the first decline since the
sovereign debt crisis?, as the main reason for its upgrade, together with a fifth
consecutive annual current account
surplus and the recapitalisation of Portugal?s two largest banks.
Mr Centeno has been the chief strategist of the Socialists? anti-austerity economic platform. He had no previous
government experience when he was
appointed finance minister in the
minority Socialist administration that
gained office in November 2015 after an
inconclusive general election.
mented single market. It is a problem
that has bedevilled successive commissions and one Brussels is trying to solve
through the creation of a ?pan-European venture capital fund of funds? tied
to the European Investment Bank.
Other challenges, which stretch well
beyond Brussels? remit, include building the right legal environment to foster
innovation and modern labour laws.
A bright spot for the EU is that its pool
of science and technology graduates is
increasing. According to Brussels data,
the number rose by almost a quarter
between 2008 and 2015, although
women remain under-represented.
?Europe has no shortage of ideas,? Mr
Moedas says, citing Spotify, developed
in Sweden, and Booking.com, headquartered in Amsterdam, as examples
of the continent?s innovative potential.
?The thing about innovation is it is
probably one of the most difficult, the
most complex policies,? he adds. ?It is
like a puzzle where if there is one piece
missing it doesn?t work.?
Rana Foroohar page 11
FT Big Read page 8
EU aims to dominate ?internet of things?
Research chief confident that
bloc?s scientific and technical
expertise will give it the edge
JIM BRUNSDEN ? BRUSSELS
Tipping point:
Carlos Moedas,
right, the EU?s
science and
research chief,
with UN
secretarygeneral Ant髇io
Guterres at
Web Summit,
Europe?s biggest
tech conference,
in Lisbon last
month ? Pedro
Nunes/Reuters
very different world?, Mr Moedas says.
?[With the internet of things] you are
getting into health, you are getting into
energy, you are getting into food, so you
are getting into this internet of sensors.?
This territory ?comes back to what we
are good at ? fundamental science,
deep technology; it is pure science and
engineering . . . No one in the world is
better than us at that. We have a fantastic opportunity?.
Europe?s history of science and innovation includes industrial giants such as
Bosch and Philips, while Mr Moedas
points to the more recent example of
Veniam, a company founded in Portugal
that used university research to develop
a technology that allows bus stops to
work as WiFi hotspots.
The challenge, he says, will be in making sure Europe steers its public policy
and regulation in a direction that helps
this agenda. The former Portuguese
minister oversees the EU?s nearly
?80bn, seven-year funding programme
for research and development, known
as Horizon 2020. It underpins thou-
sands of projects across the EU, accounting for around 10 per cent of total public
spending in these areas by the bloc and
its member countries.
In September, the European Commission announced the pilot phase of a
European Innovation Council with the
aim of supporting technologies that ?are
radically different from current offerings?, are ?highly risky? and ?need additional investment to get to market?.
The EU?s next multi-annual R&D
funding programme will be more ?mission oriented?, says Mr Moedas. In that
respect, it draws inspiration from the
successful ?Darpa? programme in the
US, which funnels money into very specific goals, such as stealth camouflage
for planes, that are identified as priorities by the military. While the EU
research programme is non-military in
its focus, Brussels believes a ?civil
Darpa? will help spur the kinds of interdisciplinary research Europe needs.
For Brussels, a big headache is how to
find a way to replicate the US?s large
venture capital market in the EU?s frag-
?[It is] pure
science and
engineering
. . . No one
in the world
is better
than us at
that?
Series online
FT reporters
travelled across
Europe to find
out how it is
gaining an edge
in innovation
ft.com/
euinnovation
Catalan politicians were making a lastditch attempt to win over a divided
region yesterday as the latest polls
showed pro- and anti-independence
candidates neck and neck ahead of
elections this week.
There are fears in Madrid that another
victory by the three pro-independence
parties on Thursday could reignite the
tensions of October when the Catalan
government made a unilateral declaration of independence.
Over the weekend, the anti-independence parties were insisting that a
vote for them in the election called by
Mariano Rajoy, the Spanish prime minister, would help to quell tensions in the
region and start to repair the damage to
the economy and Catalan society caused
by the separatist push.
The election could be the ?switch that
turns off the independence process?,
said In閟 Arrimadas, the head of Ciudadanos in Catalonia, the largest antiindependence party, as she addressed a
crowd in Barcelona yesterday.
Miquel Iceta, the head of the antiindependence Socialist party in Catalonia, was joined at a rally on Saturday by
the party leader Pedro Sanchez, who
told supporters: ?After five lost years in
Catalonia, it is time for four years of
coexistence and social justice.?
The pro-independence parties were
presenting the election as a referendum
on separation from Spain. Marta Rovira,
the general secretary of the ERC party,
told a rally in Barcelona that the election
was a choice between submitting to the
?Spanish elite? or striving to create a
new republic.
Many in the crowd held pictures of
Oriol Junqueras, who is still head of the
ERC party but is in prison awaiting trial
for sedition and rebellion for his role in
October?s declaration of independence.
Carles Puigdemont, the former Catalan president, who is in self-imposed
exile in Brussels, called on Catalans via
video to vote for his Junts per Catalunya
party to help create a ?better country?
free from Spanish rule.
Polls on Friday by Metroscopia suggest that the three pro-independence
parties ? the far-left CUP, the centre-left
ERC and the centre-right Junts Por Catalonia ? were set to win around 63 of the
135 parliamentary seats.
This is up to three more seats than the
anti-independence parties ? Ciudadanos, the Socialists and the PP ? but
is less than the 68 needed for a majority
and less than the 72 they won in the previous election in 2015.
Such a result would be a setback for
the separatist movement, a relief for
Madrid, and likely to leave the leftwing
Catalunya en Com� party, which has a
more ambiguous stance on independence, as kingmakers.
On Saturday, its candidate for president, Xavier Dom鑞ech, said he would
focus on building a coalition in Catalonia based on leftwing politics rather
than the divide between pro- and antiindependence. ?They say there are 40
per cent in favour and 40 per cent
against independence, but what they do
not say is that the progressive left makes
up 60 per cent,? he said, calling for a
coalition of ERC, Socialists and Catalunya en Com�.
FT series. Europe?s innovation comeback
As Europe?s economy recovers, companies
and investors across the continent are gearing up for new opportunities, taking advantage of its hidden strengths: education,
skills and innovative people. Here we look
at plans by the EU?s science and research
chief to ensure European companies thrive
in the internet?s ?third wave?.
Europe?s expertise in engineering and
science should enable it to dominate
the ?internet of things?, according to the
EU?s science and research chief. But Carlos Moedas admits that the bloc?s companies were slow to grasp the rise of the
app-based digital economy.
?We missed it,? he says, referring to
the success of Silicon Valley and companies such as Google and Facebook in
developing services that have transformed European consumers? lives.
European companies? relative
absence from the digital transformation
of recent years represents a strategic
failure, says Mr Moedas. It is also a
reversal from the success of previous
decades, when European pioneers such
as Tim Berners-Lee, the world-wideweb inventor, and EU companies such
as Nokia and Siemens, helped to lay ?the
backbone of the internet?.
As the bloc?s commissioner for
research, science and innovation, Mr
Moedas, who played a key role during
Portugal?s eurozone bailout and has
worked for Goldman Sachs, is now in
charge of one of the world?s biggest
research and development budgets.
Hopes are high that European innovation could create an opportunity for
growth as the eurozone recovers from
the financial crisis.
Mr Moedas is beginning to design the
bloc?s next multi-annual research programme and is determined to sharpen
its focus to ensure that European companies thrive in the ?third wave? of the
internet. This phase will be when digital
services connect with the physical
world to help us do everything from
switching on a kettle to running a city?s
public transport system.
We are now at the ?tipping point of a
MICHAEL STOTHARD ? MADRID
FT-La Stampa survey
Australia
Italians gripped more by migration than desire to leave euro
Police charge Sydney man with
breaching N Korea sanctions
JAMES POLITI ? ROME
JACOPO IACOBONI ? TURIN
Hostility towards migrants and fears
over growing multi-ethnicity are fuelling Italy?s populist political forces
more than a drive to leave the euro, an
informal FT-La Stampa survey has
found ahead of a general election.
In mid-November, La Stampa and the
FT asked readers of the Turin-based
newspaper to offer their views on
Europe and immigration, eliciting more
than 1,100 responses from across the
country, albeit with a preponderance
from the industrialised north.
The request was an unscientific
attempt to gauge the public mood in the
eurozone?s third-largest economy ahead
of a parliamentary election expected in
March that could be pivotal for Europe.
Polls suggest that the ruling centreleft Democratic party (PD), led by
former prime minister Matteo Renzi,
faces a challenge from the anti-establishment Five Star Movement as well as
a resurgent centre-right, including the
Northern League, and could well be
ousted from government.
Readers? responses showed that dissatisfaction with migration ran deeper
than disappointment with the EU or a
desire to leave the eurozone. More than
two-thirds believed the EU had benefited Italy and were sceptical about leaving the single currency. Even supporters
of Eurosceptic parties such as the Five
Star Movement and the Northern
League were split on the issue.
?The problem comes from
the enormous cultural
differences between
Islam and the west?
?The euro . . . gives stability to our
economic apparatus and cushions us
from sudden economic and financial
changes, otherwise we would have
ended up like Argentina or Venezuela,?
said Giuseppe Di Martino, an IT consultant from Maiori, near Naples, who
described himself as a Five Star supporter.
Daisy Astrella, a political science student from Turin and a Five Star voter,
said: ?I believe leaving Europe would be
very negative and complicated for the
country, because the political class
would be incapable of acting efficiently.?
On immigration views were much
more mixed, with about 41 per cent of
respondents saying it was an opportunity, 38 per cent considering it a threat
and 21 per cent holding a neutral or
uncertain view. About 40 per cent
believed in a multi-ethnic Italy.
Uneasiness with immigration was
stark among Northern League voters
but was noticeable among supporters of
the ruling centre-left Democratic party.
?The problem comes from the enormous cultural differences between
Islam and the west,? said Stefano Vitali,
an executive from Turin and selfdescribed PD voter. ?History teaches us
that coexistence is impossible, that one
will obliterate the other, and from what
we see today, our western civilisation
will be destroyed. A new and dark Middle Ages are on our doorstep.?
La Stampa?s readership and the fact
that it is based in Turin meant the sample was tilted towards PD voters and
those in the north-west of Italy, but
there were also significant numbers of
responses from supporters of other parties, including the centre-right and Five
Star.
Marco Marino, an accountant from
Cuneo in Piedmont, said the euro was
based on German interests and that
Italy had benefited little from EU membership. ?To work in Italy the euro
would have to be completely different.
Unfortunately we don?t have the
strength to change the rules on an EU
level ? at this point it?s best to be autonomous than exploited,? he said.
Sofia Tatu, a Five Star voter from
Bologna, added: ?Since the euro arrived
in Italy, the price of everything went up
and my salary has been frozen for eight
years! I can?t get to the end of the month
with my salary.?
Responses showed widespread anxiety about the country?s economic
future. ?I don?t think I?ll have a pension:
there are too few young people, too
many old people, and not enough
money,? said Diego Renzi, a student
from Abruzzo and a supporter of Five
Star. ?If things don?t change, and not just
in Italy, things will be bad?.
JAMIE SMYTH ? SYDNEY
Police in Sydney have arrested a man
accused of attempting to broker sales
of missile technology and coal on
behalf of North Korea in defiance of UN
sanctions.
The59-year-oldmanwaschargedyesterday with breaching UN and Australian
sanctions and breaking a law covering
thesaleofweaponsofmassdestruction.
The police allege that he attempted to
broker the transfer of coal from North
Korea to Vietnam and Indonesia and to
sell missiles, missile components and
expertise from Pyongyang to international groups.
Neil Gaughan, AFP assistant commissioner, said the case was unique in Australia and was the first time charges had
been laid under the Commonwealth
Weapons of Mass Destruction Act.
If the trades had been successful the
financial benefit to the North Korean
regime would have run into tens of millions of dollars, said Mr Gaughan, who
revealed that police acted following a
tip-off from an international law
enforcement agency.
The police said the accused man had
lived in Australia for more than 30 years
and was of Korean descent. They
described him as a ?loyal agent of North
Korea? who believed he was acting to
serve a higher patriotic purpose. Mr
Gaughan said no military components
arrived in Australia and the attempted
sales were all on the black market.
Euan Graham, analyst at the Lowy
Institute think-tank, said: ?Pyongyang
tends to use sympathisers and fellow
travellers to perform an economic function for them, often raising money from
the black market, in countries where
they don?t have an official representation. North Korea closed its embassy in
Australia in 2008.?
North Korea is facing a cash crunch
because of stricter sanctions imposed in
response to the continued development
of its missile and nuclear programmes
in defiance of international pressure.
Monday 18 December 2017
?
FINANCIAL TIMES
5
?
6
FINANCIAL TIMES
Monday 18 December 2017
ARTS
Eminently articulate Eminem
OPERA
Rigoletto
Royal Opera House, London
aaaee
Richard Fairman
PO P ALBUM
Eminem: Revival
Polydor
aaeee
Ludovic Hunter-Tilney
In 2013 Eminem broke the world record
for the largest quantity of words in
a song with his single ?Rap God?, which
crammed 1,560 of them into its six
minutes. Two years later a study of
lyrics by the 99 bestselling acts ever
found him to have by far the largest
vocabulary, with almost double the
lexical variation of Bob Dylan. To the
superlatives surrounding the most commercially successful rapper in history
can be added pop?s most impressive case
of logorrhoea.
His new album opens with the sound
of paper being scribbled on and then
crumpled up with a curse from the
author. Meanwhile a megastar hook
singer ? Beyonc� no less ? sings a fauxhumble refrain about not being able to
walk on water. An unusually chastened
Eminem starts rapping about his insecurities as a writer (?Am I lucky to be
around this long??). But there is fauxhumility here too. The verses are dense
yet unfailingly coherent, each verbal
twist and turn negotiated with dizzying
felicity by the rapper. At the end of the
song he rallies: ?But as long as I got a
mic, I?m godlike.?
Revival arrives amid doubts about
Eminem?s relevance in 2017. The former
enfant terrible, who sold more records
in the US in the 2000s than anyone else,
is now a middle-aged man of 45. He has
accrued the typical baggage of celebrity,
the well-worn ?journey? of motivational
clich� ? drug addiction and recovery,
bad albums and supposed ?return to
form? albums. His status as figurehead
of the angry white man has been taken
by Donald Trump, target of a furious
rant by Eminem at an awards show this
year. To the rapper?s chagrin, the
famously thin-skinned president failed
to respond.
The album?s cover, showing Eminem
having a face-palm moment with the
Like a python trying to digest a dictionary: Eminem
Stars and Stripes superimposed over
him, promises more political engagement. ?Untouchable? denounces police
brutality and white racism in an initially
electrifying fashion before dwindling
into an overlong screed. ?Like Home?
combines Trump-bashing with boilerplate patriotism; Alicia Keys sings the
pro-America hook, a weak amplification of her and Jay-Z?s New York anthem
?Empire State of Mind?. But most of the
other tracks in this 78-minute album
focus on the life of their creator.
Navel-gazing is the closest that Revival
gets to current rap trends: hip-hop?s
chief solipsist, Drake, is referenced in
the intro to ?Believe?. Having mined his
personal life for material throughout his
career, Eminem does it as well as anyone. ?Bad Husband? is an intense apologia to his ex-wife, Kim, a frequent victim
of his vitriol. In ?Castle? he imagines
writing a suicide letter to his daughter,
Hailie, autobiography masquerading as
death note.
?Man, I know sometimes/These
thoughts can be harsh and cold as ice/
To me they?re just inkblots/I just
fling ?em like slingshots, and so precise,?
he raps in ?Believe?. Listening to
his intricate, flowing sentences, full
of internal rhymes and puns and runons, is a pleasure. There is less of the
objectionable content ? homophobia,
violence against women ? in which he
used to glory. ?Framed? is a throwback
to the horror-rap of his previous work,
but its misogynistic fantasies are neutralised by a self-mocking, tongue-incheek tone.
References to writing recur, invariably of the pen-and-paper variety, a preference that makes the rapper seem curiously old-fashioned: with so many epistolary songs, he is pop music?s last great
letter-writer. Revival?s tracks sound
swollen with words, like a python trying
to digest a dictionary. Lengthy verses
are interspersed with choruses sung
by a guest vocalist, a predictable toand-fro. Eminem?s rapping is dynamic,
with multiple changes in timbre
and pace, but the songs themselves
lack vibrancy.
His mentor Dr Dre appears in the
attenuated role of executive producer.
Rick Rubin helms a pair of Licensed to Illera Beastie Boys pastiches, one set to a
hoary sample of Joan Jett?s ?I Love Rock
?n? Roll?. Basslines are a rarity, a sign of
the music?s drift away from the hip-hop
scene to which Eminem professes fealty.
The result is a curious album, at once
impressive and not very good, as though
the rapper has outgrown the format
of the song as a vehicle for his thoughts.
Perhaps he should pick up his pen
and try writing a book next time. If
nothing else, the audio version will be
worth a listen.
It is hard to see this production without thinking of
Dmitri Hvorostovsky. Rigoletto may not have been the
foremost role of the Russian
baritone, who died in London last month aged just 55,
but he sang it here several
times, and an echo of his elegant singing hangs in the air.
The opening night of this
revival was dedicated to him.
It is a sturdy show, not especially moving, but offering
a direct and uncontroversial
presentation of Verdi?s
drama, well sung by the
three principals.
Given the news stories
about sexual abuse, it cannot
be long before Rigoletto is
given the full updated treatment. David McVicar?s 2001
production keeps Verdi?s
Duke of Mantua firmly at
home in the Renaissance,
presiding over a licentious
court and much flagrant victimisation of women. The
opening orgy is even more
crudely overdone than it was
originally. The look of the
production, grungy and
gloomily lit, remains oppressively atmospheric.
It fits that Dimitri Platanias plays Rigoletto as
an old-fashioned bruiser,
downtrodden, resentful,
pugnacious. His strong baritone is welcome back in the
role, which he sang in 2012,
as is his ever-vigilant care for
Verdi?s vocal lines, but he
rarely suggests the inner
nobility of spirit that should
make Rigoletto superior to
his betters. His new Gilda
is Russian soprano Sofia
Fomina, who is a touch stiff
physically, but her silvery
soprano shines nicely, especially when the flutter in her
voice goes away. Their scenes
together, though, miss any
personal chemistry. Michael
Fabiano is the most striking,
singing with an all-out,
extrovert, ringing fervour
that brings the Duke of Mantua vividly to life. His tendency to over-sing becomes
part of the character.
A formidable duo lurks in
Mantua?s underworld in the
form of Andrea Mastroni?s
assassin Sparafucile and his
sister accomplice, Nadia
Krasteva?s Maddalena. James
Rutherford is the imposing
Monterone, Sarah Pring an
effective Giovanna and the
Jette Parker Young Artists
field several smaller roles,
headed by Dominic Sedgwick as Marullo and Simon
Shibambu as Count Ceprano.
The performance does not
hang around. Alexander Joel
conducts with a keen sense of
pacing and a light, wellsprung style that makes a
nice change.
To January 16, roh.org.uk
eminem.com
THE LIFE OF A SONG
?Silent Night? is a Christmas carol that has
become steeped in mythology over the years.
David Cheal separates fact from fiction in the
story of a song that was sung across the first
world war trenches and became the third
biggest selling single of all time
ft.com/life-of-a-song
Sofia Fomina and Dimitri Platanias in ?Rigoletto? ? Mark Douet
What the Dickens does ?Dickensian? mean?
PODCASTS
Fiona
Sturges
Ifyou?relookingfortraditionalfestive
audiotokick-startChristmas?carol
singing,sleighbells,thatsortofthing?
you?llstruggletofinditinpodcasting.
Thisisjustasitshouldbe,since
mainstreamradiohasallthatcovered.
Instead,storytellingtendstobeatthe
heartofChristmaspodcasts,thoughthe
approachisinvariablyoffbeat.
TheAllusionistisalong-runningshow
aboutetymologyhostedbyHelen
Zaltzman,amedievalscholarwhoalso
co-foundedtheBritishcomedypod
AnswerMeThis!WhileTheAllusionistis
steepedinhistory,itisprimarilydriven
byZaltzman?ssenseoftheabsurd.The
latestepisodepaysabewilderedvisittoa
Dickens-themedChristmasfairin
Californiawherethelamplitbackstreets
ofVictorianLondonarelovingly
recreated,andvisitorswatchtheatrical
happeningswhileminglingwithpeople
inperiodcostume.Thispromptsan
investigationintotheword
?Dickensian?.?Alotofauthorshave
writtenaboutChristmasbutdon?thave
T H E AT R E
The Twilight Zone
Almeida Theatre, London
aaaee
Ian Shuttleworth
Rod Serling?s anthology series
(1959-64) was the first major, sustained
television breakthrough for ?genre?
work, even if the actual genre can?t be
pinned down. Science fiction is there
aplenty, but also fantasy, moderate
horror, social satire, comedy . . . the
supreme unifying factor is imagination,
which ? as Serling?s opening or closing
monologues often reminded us ? is the
fundamental stuff of which the Zone is
made. You can see its appeal as source
material for a non-traditional, leftfield
Christmas stage show.
Rather than work in a similar way to
the series and simply whack, say, two
30-minute episodes each side of the
interval, Anne Washburn has interwoven versions of eight teleplays (six written by Serling, with Richard Matheson
festivefairsdevotedtothem,?observes
Zaltzman.?WhydoesDickensgetto
betheadjective?Whyishegivencredit
forChristmas??
SheconsultsthehistorianGregJenner,
whorevealstherealityoflifeinthe
Victorianage,atimewhencholera,
scurvyandtyphoidwererife,life
expectancywasaround40yearsand
industrialisationwasputtingmanyout
ofjobs.JennerreflectsonhowDickens?s
feelgoodhit,AChristmasCarol,tapped
intonostalgiaforbettertimes:?Dickens
isnotthearchitect[ofChristmas],?he
says,?he?sthecheerleader.?
ShortCuts,anotherlong-established
Christmas past: illustration of
Scrooge by Harold Copping
and Charles Beaumont the other original authors). It?s determined that we
shouldn?t for a moment miss how different it is, and how knowing. Scenes are
changed, sometimes after barely a couple of minutes, by supernumeraries
dressed in greatcoats (blending in with
Paul Steinberg?s starscape backdrop),
flying helmets and goggles, as if they are
our pilots and navigators. They also
carry or spin across the stage large roundels bearing images familiar from the
Lizzy Connolly and Matthew
Needham in ?The Twilight Zone?
podcast,whichalsoairsonBBCRadio4,
featuresatrioofterrificfestivetales
(availablefromDecember19).These
micro-documentariesarebeautifully
madeandeachtakesyousomewhere
utterlyunexpected.Theopener,The
NightBeforeTheNightBeforeChristmas,
tellsofaNewYorkerwhohasspent25
yearstryingtofindasingerforhisselfpennedChristmassongthatheis
convincedcouldbeafestivesmash.
Amongtheperformerstohaveignored
hislettersareTonyBennettandBarbra
Streisand,thoughBarbaraCookdidat
leastwritebackwithagentle?thanksbut
nothanks?. Heisbothsanguineabout
hislackofsuccessandstillhopefulthat
hisdaywillcome:?Iwouldliketolive
longenoughtoseethiscometofruition.?
Sometimestheoldonesarethebest;
theAmericanhumoristDavidSedaris?s
essaySantalandDiarieswasfirst
broadcastonNPRin1992andis
availableasapodcastonThisAmerican
Life.Bringingdelightfulsournesstothis
jollytimeofyear,Sedarisrecallsaseason
workingasaChristmaselfatMacy?s.
Whenonecustomersaysshe?sgoingto
havehimfired,hefantasisesabout
tellingher:?I?mgoingtohaveyoukilled.?
There?sfurthersournessinMallSanta,
awell-writtenandperformeddramain
TheTruthpodcast,inwhichabored,
self-pityingFatherChristmasgetsa
wake-upcall.
original title sequence: an eye, an op-art
pattern, a door.
Periodically one of the 10 actors delivers part of a Serling piece-to-camera,
always interrupted or distracted just as
they get to the words ? . . . the Twilight
Zone?. This is the stuff we know and
love. And yet it isn?t. I?m afraid it suggests not a twilight here-and-there duality, but self-conscious effort.
Moreover, the series worked because
it was so palpably just half a step sideways from actual 1950s/early ?60s preoccupations: the new frontier of space,
the limitless power of the atom, a growing popular awareness of human psychology. This dates the material heavily,
and when Washburn tries to insert
updates (as in a story about fractious
neighbours vying for space in a fallout
shelter), it accentuates rather than
alleviates the differences. It raises
smiles and chuckles at its quaintness,
but no chills or musings. Unlike the parallel dimension in one of the stories, this
is not a Zone that intersects with our
own world.
To January 27, almeida.co.uk
Monday 18 December 2017
?
FINANCIAL TIMES
7
?
8
FINANCIAL TIMES
Monday 18 December 2017
FT BIG READ. CATALONIA
Catalans go to the polls on Thursday amid ugly tensions over independence, with some of its former leaders either in
jail or in exile. But there is also optimism about a new accord between the region and the central government.
By Michael Stothard
Capturing the middle ground
W
hen Catalonia held an
illegal independence
referendum in October,
Albert Salvador was up
at 6am to cast his vote.
The 50-year-old was one of about 2m
Catalans who went to the polls despite
initially violent efforts by the Spanish
police to stop them. ?I was there to vote
Yes. I wanted to try and make Catalonia
an independent republic,? he says.
Mr Salvador insists that his desire for
independence has, if anything, hardened since then. This week he hopes
that a pro-independence party will win
the Catalan elections that are being contested amid ugly tensions between the
forces that want to stay in Spain and
those than want to leave.
But Mr Salvador is not as hardline as
some. For him, a divorce from Spain is
not the only solution to the crippling
political impasse: a significant change in
Catalonia?s relationship within Spain
might convince him to stay. ?Many people in Catalonia could be won over if
there was a new deal and new attitudes
from Madrid,? says the long-time Barcelona resident.
The willingness of someone like Mr
Salvador, a former chief of staff to an exmayor of Barcelona, to step back from
independence if there were a new agreement presents a glimpse of a solution
some say could calm tensions in Catalonia.
It suggests there is still a political middle ground in the region and a chance to
return to the less incendiary Catalan
debate that existed before 2012, when
nationalists in the region were mostly
pushing for more autonomy rather than
A woman and a girl
at a concert
organised by the
Catalan National
Assembly on
December 2 to raise
funds for
imprisoned Catalan
politicians and civil
leaders ? Santi Palacios/AP
?There is a huge
reluctance to reward the
nationalist movements
with more money and
power?
unilateral independence.
But with more than 40 per cent of
people in the region saying they support
the creation of a brand new state, Catalonia represents one of the greatest
political and existential challenges to
Spain since its return to democracy in
the mid-1970s.
Following the October vote, the
regional parliament unilaterally
declared independence from Spain.
This, in turn, forced the Spanish government to take the unprecedented step of
imposing direct rule over the region,
dissolving the government and calling a
new election. Senior separatist figures
are today in prison awaiting trial for
rebellion or in exile.
While the separatist push was ultimately stopped in its tracks, the uncertainty spooked international investors,
worried those European leaders with
their own internal secessionist movements and weighed on Spain?s economic
recovery, which has lowered estimate?s
for growth next year.
Relations between Catalan separatists
and the rest of Spain may be at a low ebb,
but there is a renewed desire to stop a
repeat of October which has led to calls
for a fresh look at the ?third way?
approach to the region that is neither
independence nor the status quo: it is
instead a new deal for Catalonia.
?If there was a new agreement with
Madrid, it could take air out of the independence movement,? says Antoni Castells, a former Catalan finance minister
long opposed to independence. ?It
would need to be a serious proposal, but
I think that if the talks were in good faith
people would accept it.?
Catalonia is already one of the most
autonomous regions in Europe ? more
so than Scotland in the UK and Wallonia
in Belgium, according to the international regional authority index. It has its
own police force as well as control over
domestic areas such as health, education and culture. But Catalans have for
years wanted more, particularly in
terms of fiscal powers, reflecting what
they see as their unique status in Spain.
The art of the deal
Miquel Iceta is a busy man. The head of
the anti-independence Socialist party in
Catalonia, the 57-year-old has a chance
at being the next president of the region,
depending on how the post-election
coalition talks evolve.
If that happens, he believes he could
strike a new kind of deal with Madrid
that could convince moderate separatists to abandon the push for a new
republic, potentially cutting support for
full-blown independence from the
40-50 per cent it has been over the past
five years to nearer 30 per cent.
He argues there is a hardcore third of
Catalan separatists who will not be placated by anything other than full independence, and that another third of Catalans simply want to keep the status
quo. But he says that in the middle there
is also a significant proportion of moderates who support some idea of separatism, but might be brought round if
Madrid agreed to a new relationship.
?These people say that Spain must
respect us, that we need better financing, that we need to influence more
Spanish policies,? he says from his office
in Barcelona. ?They say they would
want to stay part of Spain if their treatment was better.?
To win them over, he has a long list of
demands. This includes additional
money for Catalonia; extra powers for
the region to have more control of its
own finances; more central government
infrastructure funding; and the promotion of the Catalan language across
Spain.
?We don?t want to collide with the rest
of Spain,? he says. ?We want a new
agreement, and to somehow renew the
agreement we got in 1978 [when Spain?s
constitution was written after the dictatorship of Francisco Franco].?
While the nature of the demands differ, this broad view is shared by a large
number of business leaders and politicians in Catalonia, many of whom are
seeking a political consensus that a
majority of Catalans can support. Jordi
Alberich, the director of the Barcelona
think-tank C韗culo de Econom韆, sums
up the mood: ?I feel that if we could just
Catalonia poll tracker
Lines represent weighted averages, points represent polls
Voting intention,
Referendum
share by party (%)
30
Election
22% Republican Left**
25
22% Citizens
20
18% Together
for Catalonia**
15
15% Catalonian
Socialists
10
8% Catalonia
in Common*
5
0
6% Popular Party
6% Popular Unity Candidacy**
Jul 17
Source: Various polls,
updated 13:50, Dec 14 2017
Sep 17
Nov 17
Graphic: Anna Leach
**Pro-independence parties
*After Nov 7, Catalonia in Common results include Podem results
Candidates
Pro-independence forces
fear loss of majority
There are seven significant parties
jostling for votes in Thursday?s
election. The crucial question is which
group of parties will win out and form
a coalition to run the regional
assembly: those who back, or those
who oppose, full-blown independence.
A victory for the pro-independence
parties ? which controlled the Catalan
parliament from 2015 until it was
dissolved two months ago ? could
herald another unilateral push to
break away from Madrid. Among the
candidates is the former president Carles
Puigdemont, who leads the proindependence Junts per Catalunya
(Together for Catalonia) group and who
fled to Belgium to avoid arrest in October.
The polls all suggest Thursday?s
election is finely balanced. The proindependence parties ? the Candidatura
de Unidad Popular (Popular Unity
Candidacy), ERC (Republican Left) and
Junts per Catalunya ? are set to win
roughly the same number of votes as the
parties opposed to independence ?
Ciudadanos (Citizens), the Socialists and
the PP ? according to a poll on Friday by
Metroscopia for El Pa韘.
This poll suggests that this will lead to
a hung parliament, with the pro-
get a little bit more from Madrid in
terms of our status, in terms of money,
in terms of respect, then it would go a
long way to calm down this crisis we are
living through.?
Moral hazard
In Madrid there is a renewed sense following this year?s Catalan crisis that
reform of Spain?s system of regional
financing, and even the constitution, is
necessary to ease tensions.
?Spain needs to forge a new consensus
by updating the constitution,? Pedro
S醤chez, the Spanish Socialist party
leader, said this month. Albert Rivera,
the head of the reformist Ciudadanos
party, has called for ?serious and rigorous? modifications to the constitution.
But new bilateral concessions that
apply only to Catalonia strike many as
the wrong solution. This is firstly
because it could be seen as a moral hazard, rewarding the region for bad behaviour. Second, the other 16 semi-autonomous Spanish regions would want anything that the Catalans receive as well,
creating a spiral of demands.
And thirdly, many have concluded
from the Catalan crisis that Spain needs
a new, clearer and more transparent
relationship with all its regions ? and
that a complex back room deal with one
difficult region would be a step in the
wrong direction.
?There is a huge reluctance to reward
the nationalist movements with more
money and power,? says Manuel Arias
Maldonado, a professor of political science at the University of M醠aga. ?More
than ever, in Spain there is an idea that
all the regions should be more equal.?
The divergence of views between
Catalonia and Madrid remains wide.
The former?s politicians say transport is
badly underfunded and that they pay
secessionist parties getting 63 of the
135 parliamentary seats. While this is
one to three more seats than the antiindependence parties, it is less than
the 68 needed for a majority.
The leftwing Catalunya en Com�
(Catalonia in Common) party, with a
more ambiguous stance on
independence, may prove kingmakers.
In the immediate aftermath of the
election there will be a scramble of
coalition talks as the parties try to
form a government.
For the pro-independence groups,
loosing the majority they won in 2015
would be a major blow, and could force
them to rethink their strategy of
unilaterally pushing for independence.
Protesters and police on the day of
the independence vote
too much in taxes to subsidise other
poorer regions. ?Madrid robs us,? is a
popular slogan of the independence
movement.
Just as important is the sense that
Madrid is intransigent and disrespectful. Separatists frequently talk about
how the Spanish courts struck down
parts of a grand accord ? the so-called
Estatut ? in 2010 that would have given
them a new deal on funding, education
and the status of the Catalan language.
The salt in the wound was Madrid
declining to agree to another deal on
financing in 2012. This, they say, left
them with no choice but to push for
independence.
However, the analysis of most policymakers in Madrid is very different. The
rise in support for independence from
2011 came about, they say, not due to
the Estatut fiasco but as a byproduct of
the financial crisis, with Catalan politicians attempting to deflect anger over
austerity by blaming Madrid for all its
problems. Between 2010 and 2014, support for independence rocketed from 20
per cent to nearly 50 per cent. It has
since fallen to 40 per cent as Spain?s
economy has returned to growth.
Pablo Casado, spokesman for the ruling party in Madrid, says the argument
about new concessions for the regions
misses the point: that Catalan nationalism is built on the idea that Spain is an
enemy, rather than on objective facts.
?Nationalism is never satisfied, because
it is based on dissatisfaction,? he says.
He refutes the whole narrative of
oppression. ?Spain is the most decentralised country in the world,? he says.
?There are no powers really left to give.?
Concessions could even be harmful,
he adds. Previous moves to give Catalans more money and autonomy have
ultimately only ?fed the poison? of
nationalism, allowing them to take over
the school system ? which teaches in
Catalan over Spanish ? as well as what
he sees as a biased pro-independence,
state-funded media.
Luis Garicano, a professor in charge of
the economic programme for Ciudadanos, says: ?The idea that Catalonia
is oppressed does not hold up to the
facts . . . What is needed in Spain is better governance, less corruption, a more
transparent state financing model
. . . not creating more asymmetry with
privileges for Catalonia.?
Despite such fundamental differences, there are still those who believe
that some kind of deal between Barcelona and Madrid will be reached, even if
it takes years and comes as part of a
complex package of wider regional
reforms. ?Under certain circumstances,
I think there may be things we can negotiate with the Catalan regional government,? says Mr Casado, ?as with all the
other regions.?
But that depends on Thursday?s election. For the past two years the Catalan
?These people say that
Spain must respect us,
that they would want to
stay part of Spain if their
treatment was better?
Strong support While many Catalans
want compromise, more than 40% back
the creation of an independent state
Calm in a crisis The Socialists believe a
new kind of deal that would win over
moderate separatists can be achieved
Catalan tension Election of another
pro-independence government would
make talks over such a deal difficult
government has rejected any discussions that were not based around organising an agreed referendum on independence ? something that the Spanish
constitution declares illegal and which
Madrid refuses to discuss.
The election of another pro-independence government could see tensions spark again and would probably
make talks over a new deal impossible.
Marta Rovira, the presidential hopeful
of the largest separatist party, Esquerra
Republicana de Catalunya, says that it
will continue to push for an independence referendum, describing it as the
?only solution? for the nation.
A victory for the anti-independence
parties, however, could restart a dialogue with Madrid. ?If there was loyalty
from the Catalans, the two sides may be
able to sit down and talk, particularly
about symbolic things like language and
culture,? says Mr Maldonado.
Mr Iceta says it will not be easy to
strike a deal that would be amenable to
Madrid and could also win over moderate separatists. But he does believe there
is a road where Catalonia can once again
?pledge loyalty? to the Spanish state,
and in return Madrid can accept that
millions of Catalans are dissatisfied and
need something more.
?When you have nearly 2m people
that want to split from the rest of Spain,?
he says, ?it?s better to give them another
reason to stay.?
Monday 18 December 2017
?
FINANCIAL TIMES
9
?
10
FINANCIAL TIMES
Letters
Monday 18 December 2017
Email: letters.editor@ft.com
Include daytime telephone number and full address
Corrections: corrections@ft.com
If you are not satisfied with the FT?s response to your complaint, you can appeal
to the FT Editorial Complaints Commissioner: complaints.commissioner@ft.com
The new G3 on trade is a logical next step
MONDAY 18 DECEMBER 2017
Trade tussle with China
tests the global system
US, EU and Japan bump up against its entrenched political economy
The yawning divergence between the
political economies of China and the
west has once more become the subtext of crucial efforts to avert a surge in
trade protectionism.
The US, EU and Japan last week
ramped up pressure on China on trade,
subsidies and intellectual property
issues. In a rare effort towards international co-operation by the Trump
administration, the three issued a
statement on the sidelines of a World
Trade Organisation meeting in Buenos
Aires last week that took aim at ?severe
excess capacity? in steel and other sectors and the role of illegal subsidies and
state-owned enterprises in causing it.
The statement, which also targeted
the forced transfer of intellectual property, did not name China directly. But
officials have made clear that China is
the statement?s main target, though
not the only one. The intention behind
the trilateral alliance is to avert a lurch
towards protectionism by wringing
concessions from Beijing.
But from a broader perspective, such
mounting tensions represent an existential test for the global trading system. At issue is whether China?s statedriven, hybrid system has become so
divergent from free-market principles
that fruitful co-operation is precluded.
The hope of ?convergence? with the
liberal economic order that attended
China?s accession to the WTO in 2001
appears dead. Beijing has launched
suits at the WTO against the US and EU
for failing to follow through on what it
claims was their promise to accord
China ?market economy status? within
15 years of its accession into the world
trade body. China wants to be regarded
officially as a market economy because
such a designation boosts its ability to
fight dumping cases against it.
Multinationals operating in China
complain of a deteriorating environment, with nearly 50 per cent of Euro-
pean firms reporting in 2016 that it has
become more difficult to do business in
China than in the previous year. The
American Chamber of Commerce similarly reported in 2017 that more than
three-quarters of its member companies felt less welcome. The World
Bank?s ease-of-doing-business ranking
places China 78th out of 183 countries,
and the OECD puts it fourth to last
among 62 countries evaluated on
restrictions to foreign investment.
Some of the reasons behind such perceptions derive from its technology
drive. In 2015, it announced its ?Made
in China 2025? policy, which targets
higher market shares in 10 global
industries. The scheme is nakedly
nationalistic, aiming to boost ?indigenous innovation? and self-reliance in
the manufacture of key components.
China?s ascent up the technology ladder has brought it increasingly into
direct competition with US and European companies. It has also turbocharged Chinese acquisitions of technology leaders and brand champions in
US and European markets. In 2016, for
example, Chinese investment into the
EU jumped 77 per cent to ?35bn, while
investment from European firms into
China declined 23 per cent to ?8bn and
has continued to decline this year.
The US and EU argue that illegal subsidies, state financing and favourable
policies toward state-owned enterprises have contributed to industrial
overcapacity that is flooding world
markets with cheap steel, aluminium
and other commodities.
Such accusations may be justified.
But this does not make the success of
the trilateral approach to China any
more likely. The issues that the US,
EU and Japan identified are fused into
the nature of Beijing?s party state. They
are expressions of a political economy
that China has no intention of rolling
back.
Sir, Your Big Read article ?Trump?s
next trade target? (December 7) was a
look at the problems of the World
Trade Organization and how the
Trump administration correctly sees
little effectiveness in such large
multinational organizations. You follow
up on December 13 with your report
?US, EU and Japan to link up on China
trade?. The logic between the two is
clear: large institutions with diverse
memberships together with weak
governance or voting processes cannot
lead to effective outcomes for the
major trading nations, or bring about
effective changes to their mandates.
Yet a small number of large countries
with skin in the game can make
collective decisions that could never be
achieved in a large multinational
setting. This is the lesson from the
postwar Bretton Woods institutions, at
least for the initial stages.
A new prime minister should take the opportunity to signal change
A change of the guard in Poland?s government should, in theory, present an
opportunity to repair the country?s battered relationship with its European
partners. In practice, the burden of
proof is on Mateusz Morawiecki, the
new prime minister, to demonstrate
that the change is more than cosmetic.
Mr Morawiecki has ascended to the
top post in a cabinet reshuffle at the
hands of Jaroslaw Kaczynski, the
deeply ideological chairman of the ruling Law and Justice (PiS) party, and the
unchallenged power behind the
throne. The businesslike, Englishspeaking Mr Morawiecki is well placed
to resolve tensions with the EU, at the
very least in terms of tone. Brussels is
on the cusp of triggering an unprecedented sanction procedure over efforts
to purge and politicise the judiciary, just passed by Poland?s parliament.
Despite a conciliatory gesture to stop
resisting a European Court of Justice
ruling on logging, he has fallen short
both on style and substance. He left his
first European Council meeting last
week early, prompting an icy remark
from council president Donald Tusk
that he must have had ?very, very
weighty reasons? for missing discussions about Brexit and the euro.
The new prime minister has also
hewn closely to his leader?s narrative
that PiS must fulfil Poland?s liberation
from the pre-1989 communist regime.
This is a party that sees in any act of
opposition the insidious holdover from
communism. The result is a strategy
best described as Gramsci through the
looking-glass: a quick march through
the institutions, but by rightwingers
rather than Marxists.
The Venice Commission (part of the
Council of Europe) has slammed
Poland?s judicial reforms, comparing
them with features of the Soviet legal
system. This puts in its right place Mr
Morawiecki?s attempt to align the
reforms with France?s postwar restructuring of the Vichy regime?s courts.
The judicial reforms follow PiS?s
stacking of the constitutional court
after coming to power two years ago.
The government bureaucracy, too, has
been packed with regime loyalists.
That includes the state broadcaster,
which has been reduced to a claque for
the government. The authorities have
recently broadened their attacks on
independent media, fining a private TV
station for its reporting on last year?s
stand-off between opposition and government members of parliament.
PiS now has its eyes on the electoral
system. A reform bill giving the government greater control over electoral
oversight bodies has drawn extraordinary criticism from the current head of
Poland?s State Electoral Committee.
Mr Kaczynski has been able to get
away with this because opposition everywhere has been weak. The EU has
struggled to find effective ways to react
against a clear undermining of European values. The domestic political
opposition has been largely useless:
there is no political left to speak of, and
the liberal centre-right has squabbled
among itself. And inside PiS, the ideological zealots at the centre can rely on
a coterie of political opportunists.
Poland?s ? and Europe?s ? future
depends on this changing. There are
positive signs. The EU looks likely to
move forward with its sanction procedure this week. Opposition parties
have attempted to coalesce. Even
inside PiS, Mr Kaczynski has faced
pushback. Poland?s president for the
first time threw off the role of a PiS
cipher by rejecting earlier versions of
the judicial reform. It would be good if
Mr Morawiecki, too, would show that
he was his own man ? one who sees
that Poland?s greatest future lies in
embracing modern Europe rather than
wishing it away.
devote no doubt personal and business
time to complex issues and to bring
along the key countries, at least so far.
Yet they too do not have transparent
governance arrangements (and,
critically, measures of success) that
would stand the test of time or leaders,
or perhaps critical scrutiny. Also the
Basel Committee sets minimum
standards and many countries choose
to implement higher standards. This is
a good outcome especially where
markets can see which countries
implement higher and lower standards.
Perhaps the other lesson is that the
creation of new institutions is a
response to the pre-existing
institutions not being able to change or
to tackle key international financial
issues. This new G3 on trade is a logical
outcome.
John Pattison
Toronto, ON, Canada
Cost internalisation
is not a new concept
Sir, Peter Jones (Letters, December 13)
argues that ?the linear production
world? is biased against cost
internalisation. He maintains that only
by having companies pay for the
ultimate costs of their products, in this
case the externalities of plastic, can we
hope to address this egregious
problem.
His suggestion is hardly new. The
great economist Arthur Pigou argued
in 1920 that taxes should be used to
internalise externalities. Mr Jones also
ignores the eponymous theorem of
Professor Ronald Coase: regardless of
how property rights are assigned for,
say, the right to less pollution, the
allocative results for society are the
same. Whether we tax polluters and
such costs are passed forward to
various stakeholders, or whether as a
society we pay polluters to reduce their
use of plastics, the allocative efficiency
is the same.
Lastly, at a practical level Mr Jones
should remember that one man?s
poison is another?s meat: all plastics are
made from hydrocarbons and as such
have an energy content. Plastics should
be burnt in preferably closed-cycle
combustion for their energy content.
As long as we must remove
hydrocarbons from the earth?s crust, it
would be more efficient and less
polluting to utilise the waste we have
productively. Unlike nuclear waste,
which can be a real problem, using
plastics to generate energy addresses
several real problems.
Dr Lawrence Haar
Senior Lecturer,
Dept of Accounting & Finance,
Lincoln International Business School,
University of Lincoln, UK
Bravo to you, Ms Clark
Poland at the crossroads
in relations with Europe
The challenge for the global system is
to engineer governance arrangements
that lead to effective solutions. But this
may be impossible with current
memberships and voting
arrangements. China needs to be at the
core of a small number of members, not
the periphery, even though this may
make decision-making more difficult at
the outset, although changes to the
Chinese economy may facilitate better
outcomes today than 10 years ago.
This is a general challenge,
exacerbated by international
organisations expanding memberships
and thus reducing the chances of
effective outcomes. Yet both the Basel
Committee and the Financial Stability
Board expanded their memberships
after the crisis, and it could be said that
the outcomes were not unsuccessful.
But the reasons are instructive. Both
have had effective leaders able to
Sir, I was in despair when Lucy
Kellaway left the Financial Times to
teach high-school maths. Her column
was always the first thing I turned to in
the Monday paper. But now that Pilita
Clark has replaced her, I find that her
column is now the first thing I read.
Brava!
Edward Shorter
Jason A Hannah Professor of the History
of Medicine and Professor of Psychiatry,
Faculty of Medicine,
University of Toronto, ON, Canada
A contrarian,
and timely, view
on globalisation
Book review
Shawn Donnan
Straight Talk on Trade:
Ideas for a Sane World
Economy
by Dani Rodrik
Princeton, $29.95/�.95
Taking the Aristotelian position on water divining ? Rex/Shutterstock
Students are customers
now ? and demand results
Sir, In response to your editorial
?Academic autonomy is no excuse for
excess pay? (December 5), it?s no
wonder that students are angry at high
tuition fees, and the salaries and
benefits packages awarded to academic
staff and chancellors, when a degree is
no guarantee to a great job, the benefits
of which will outweigh the original
investment. The moment students
began to be charged (partly) for their
education, they became customers of a
service and, as with all services and
businesses, customers demand quality
service, transparency in how their
service provider uses their money and
? results!
Dr Grazyna S鰀erbom
S鋠edalen, Sweden
Lord Turner got there
first on productive credit
Sir, Jim Pickard reports that GFC
Economics, in a report commissioned
by the UK Labour party leadership,
bemoans the fact that the Bank of
England ?makes no distinction
between productive and unproductive
lending? (December 12). This is
precisely the point made by Adair
Turner, former chairman of the
Financial Services Authority (and a
sometime vice-chairman of Merrill
Lynch) in his excellent book Between
Debt and the Devil.
Lord Turner goes on to point out
that the banking sector?s decades-long
switch away from lending to businesses
towards mortgage lending only serves
to inflate asset prices, which leads to
property bubbles. This phenomenon
Dani Rodrik does not waste any time
getting to the central question in his
new book: ?Are economists
responsible for Donald Trump?s
shocking victory in the US presidential
election?? is the opening line.
Straight Talk About Trade, as the
question suggests, is in large part an
indictment of Rodrik?s fellow
economists. He accuses them of, since
the 1980s, having abandoned the
profession?s core principles and
becoming unquestioning cheerleaders
for globalisation, even as its broad
benefits were accompanied by
economic carnage and political
backlash in some places.
The Turkish-born Harvard
professor is a longstanding critic of
governments? embrace of free trade
and what he sees as the corporate
takeover of the economic agenda in
many rich countries. He has for years,
as he writes in his book, been
dismissed, or shushed, by fellow
economists worried that he might feed
a protectionist fire.
Rodrik is no protectionist. He is
instead what might best be termed a
trade pragmatist.
But he is also an erudite critic of his
profession and that ? as well as the
moment in history we are confronting
? is what makes this book compelling.
You do not have to agree with Rodrik?s
sceptical take on globalisation and
may even find it maddening. It is
worth, however, taking on board the
charge he makes that too many
economists have in recent years
behaved like free trade ideologues
may also be a factor driving increased
wealth inequality as the change in
credit allocation away from production
towards asset-based lending helps
capital growth outstrip incomes.
I would be surprised if Graham
Turner, founder of GFC, were entirely
unaware of his namesake but I am
curious to know if the Labour
leadership is au fait with the shared
opinion of Lord T?
Bill Mendenhall
Managing Partner,
Lacuna Solutions,
London E1, UK
Lex should not scoff
at water divining
Sir, I am sad that Lex joins the Stalinist
element of the scientific world, rather
than take the Aristotelian position.
In ?Ofwat: watered down?
(December 14) Lex says: ?If a key part
of the [UK water] industry?s tool kit is
two bent pieces of metal the scale of
the leaks begins to make sense.?
Aristotle took the line that science
should observe the world, and make
deductions from those observations.
Water divining works. Practical people
employ water diviners when they want
to find a leak, and then can mend it,
rather than listening to professors
denying that divining can work.
Companies that employ people using
two very cheap and available bent
pieces of metal to find leaks will save
more water, and make better returns,
than companies that employ people
using expensive, unwieldy
mechanisms that often go wrong. Lex
is foolish to scoff.
Andrew Threipland
Fingask, Perthshire, UK
rather than the calibrated social
scientists they ought to be. Or that the
result has been policy mistakes, rising
inequality and President Trump.
Rodrik occasionally reads like an
ideologue himself. There are times
when Straight Talk on Trade can be
read like a polite academic manifesto
for a Trumpian economic nationalism.
He rails against efforts at global
governance and the World Trade
Organization. The EU and its
advocates? pursuit of ever greater
economic integration is portrayed as a
threat to the nation-state and national
sovereignty in a way that will have
many Brexiters nodding
enthusiastically. He makes a case for
mercantilism and points to the limits
of liberal democracy.
But underpinning it all is a
pragmatic reading of the state of
politics and the global economy and a
call for caution that, to Rodrik?s credit,
is now embraced by far more
mainstream economists and political
leaders than it has ever been. He has
warned for years of the political risks
of getting the politics of globalisation
wrong. Now he is warning that
political leaders risk getting the
response to the current crisis in the
system wrong.
Among Rodrik?s most famous ideas
is what he calls the inescapable
trilemma of the modern global
economy. It holds that democracy,
national sovereignty and the pursuit
of globalisation are incompatible.
In theory, the election of Mr
Trump and the vote for Brexit in
Any language learner
should aspire to mastering
the figurative phrase
Sir, Slamming ?native? English
speakers ? a breed now often hard to
define ? for their use of idioms has
recently become almost as popular
(and as tedious) a pastime as
lambasting them for their
monolingualism (Michael Skapinker?s
review of Languages After Brexit,
December 11). Unsurprisingly,
therefore, teaching programmes and
conferences these days are awash with
such ?simplify it? guff, while the study
of idioms is viewed as a deleterious,
nay counter-revolutionary activity.
Yet so-called figurative phrases are,
surely, the lifeblood of any language,
and something a learner should aspire
to emulate. Would, I ask myself, a
speaker of any other language with a
global footprint on the scale of English
wish to emasculate their speech in this
way? I think not. Accommodation
where accommodation is due, yes, but
not at the expense of linguistic
vibrancy. I, for example, would not
wish to be talked down to by a speaker
of a language I was seeking to learn,
considering a natural inquisitiveness to
be part and parcel of the work such
linguistic acquisition entails (a point on
which I am especially indebted to my
Japanese friends ? and to Leo Lewis in
his Notebook column of December 12).
As for ?to buck a trend?, or to be
?chuffed? (the example cited by your
Dutch correspondent in his letter of
December 12), these are hardly the
most arcane of idiomatic usages. Extra
homework, Mr Macron?
Steve Elford
English Language Facilitator,
Frankfurt, Germany
Border clearance won?t be
simpler for AEO traders
Sir, Further to ?Nine ways companies
can prepare for life outside the EU?
(December 11), in which you say that
Authorised Economic Operator status
allows faster clearance at borders:
there are facilitations, such as a lower
cost of a guarantee, but goods for an
AEO trader undertake the same
processes as those for a trader that is
not authorised. The gov.uk website
does give an impression an AEO can
bypass other traders. Furthermore,
about 50 per cent of AEO companies
are members of the trade association I
represent so the proportion of
importers and exporters is minuscule.
The application process is reasonably
robust, so if the 10,000 or so companies
trading were to apply tomorrow then
the waiting list for an HM Revenue &
Customs audit would stretch well past
the UK leaving the EU, including a twoyear transition period.
There is bland talk of reverting to
World Trade Organization rules or
trusted trader schemes being the
panacea to post-Brexit border controls,
but the difficulties that could be
experienced at borders in the future
are more complex than many
commentators actually understand.
Robert Keen
Director General,
British International Freight Association,
Feltham, Middx, UK
COMMENT ON FT.COM
Gavyn Davies? blog
Plotting time paths for GDP forecasts reveals
they are not usually very accurate
ft.com/gavyndavies
the UK proved that to be right.
But you have to wonder if that is a
transitional trilemma. The book
ignores some of the backlash to the
original backlash that has taken place
since, or the generational divides that
2016 exposed. Young voters are more
likely than not to be comfortable
participants in today?s disruptive
digital economy and to embrace its
global scope. Polls also show that more
Americans now embrace international
trade and trade agreements. A Pew
Research Center survey in November,
for example, found that 56 per cent of
Americans believe the North
American Free Trade Agreement, the
two-decades-old pact between the US,
Canada and Mexico that the Trump
administration is now renegotiating,
has been good for the US economy.
The politics of trade in Trump?s
America and other large economies
are therefore as complicated as they
have ever been.
Rodrik ends his book with another
call for dramatic change. The rise of
authoritarian governments in
Germany and elsewhere that came out
of the economic calamities of the
1930s yielded not just war but also
Bretton Woods and huge structural
responses. Rodrik calls for something
similar. ?Without bolder, bigger ideas
we may find that the good things that
the present consensus produced ? a
liberal democratic order in particular
? is swept away by the backlash
wrought by its excesses,? he warns.
The writer is the FT?s world trade editor
?
Monday 18 December 2017
11
FINANCIAL TIMES
Comment
Recovery cannot hide the holes in the eurozone
europe
Wolfgang
M黱chau
L
ast year was defined by big
political shocks. This year
saw more subtle, but important, surprises: the destruction of the French two-party
political system and the erosion of the
centrist majority in German politics.
Over the long term, I suspect these
events will matter more than Brexit. In
the past few weeks, UK prime minister
Theresa May has managed to build trust
among her European colleagues, now
lining up behind her version of Brexit.
Yet while the UK?s exit might not derail
the EU, the eurozone?s old, unresolved
issues still could.
This is not for a lack of trying: this
year saw four substantive proposals for
reform. First, French president
Emmanuel Macron devised the idea of a
eurozone budget, a eurozone finance
minister and a eurozone parliament, all
outside the structures of the EU.
Next was the German finance ministry. Its plan was to transform the European Stability Mechanism, the rescue
umbrella, into a full-blown European
monetary fund. The key idea is a semiautomatic rule that would reschedule,
and in some cases restructure, the sovereign debt of the recipient country.
When the monetary fund moves in to
provide help, it claws the money back by
bailing in private investors.
More recently we heard that Martin
Schulz, the leader of the German Social
Democrats, has proposed creating a
United States of Europe by 2025. If you
are pro-European, this might raise your
heartbeat. That is until you realise that
Mr Schulz did not campaign for Euro-
pean integration when he stood for election earlier this year. By raising the subject a few days before the first round of
coalition talks with German chancellor
Angela Merkel, he gave the impression
of attempting to fix a negotiating position. Be prepared for disappointment.
Then the European Commission
weighed in with its own proposals. The
commission?s main concern is not the
eurozone, but its own diminishing role.
It wants all the intergovernmental bits
that were created during the financial
crisis, such as the ESM, brought into the
institutional framework of the EU.
Of the four proposals, the commission?s suggestion is diametrically
opposed to that of Mr Macron?s. And the
majority of EU finance ministers are
opposed to both. Last week, they
ditched everything proposed by the
commission and almost the entirety of
Mr Macron?s agenda, in particular the
idea of a eurozone finance minister.
They do not want competition.
It would have been possible, in theory,
to marry the French and German
finance ministry proposals as they are
complementary. France could have
agreed to a semi-automatic bail-in
regime while Germany would accept the
principle of a eurozone budget, tax-raising and debt-issuing powers, as well as
While the UK?s exit might
not derail the union, the
bloc?s unresolved
issues still could
the position of a European finance minister. That would not have been the
worst compromise, but it is not going to
happen. Berlin?s incentive to compromise is curtailed by the lukewarm
reception of its own proposals.
Which means we end the year in perfect gridlock. The proposal of the Ger-
man finance ministry is unacceptable to
the French and the Italians. The French
proposal is unacceptable to the European Commission. The commission?s
proposal is unacceptable to everybody.
As is Mr Schulz?s idea of a United States
of Europe.
This was supposed to be the year of
optimism about eurozone reform, but
this has mostly dissipated. At Friday?s
eurozone summit, leaders did not discuss substance, only timetables.
My expectation for next year is that
EU leaders will agree on a compromise
? such as the ambition to complete the
banking union. Yet this does not address
the main issue, which is the continued
interdependence between sovereigns
and their banks.
There is a theoretical argument that a
fully functioning banking union constitutes a sufficient set of conditions for
eurozone stability. It would be a wonderful proposal for a monetary union in
a parallel universe. Back on earth, fiscal
Why Big Tech
wants to keep
the net neutral
america
Rana
Foroohar
T
he technology sector has
driven global markets this
year. Now, it seems to be
driving dealmaking and
regulatory decisions, too.
Consider Disney?s $66bn agreement
to buy 21st Century Fox assets, or
AT&T?s bid for Time Warner, which are
reactions to the power of Netflix and
Amazon. Or the CVS-Aetna deal, which
aims to counter Amazon?s growth in the
drug market as well as Google?s likely
entry into healthcare.
Consider also the US Federal Communication Commission?s decision last
week to roll back ?net neutrality? rules,
the principles that stipulate that internet service providers must treat all
online traffic the same. While FCC chair
Ajit Pai, a former Verizon lawyer, says
this is about moving back towards ?light
touch? regulation, it is also about changing the balance of power between tech
and telecoms. It does this by allowing
the largest internet service providers
such as AT&T, Verizon, Sprint and
T-Mobile to charge the cash-rich platform companies fees to move their traffic to the front of the digital queue.
All of it speaks to the huge power of
the Fangs ? Facebook, Amazon, Netflix
and Google ? which now dominate not
just the digital business, but the entire
economy. Eighty per cent of corporate
wealth now resides in 10 per cent of
companies rich in intellectual property,
of which the platform companies are the
richest, according to the McKinsey Global Institute. It is a power that has grown
so quickly, and changed so much, that it
is forcing a fundamental rethink of everything from antitrust policy to the
rules that have governed the internet
for more than 20 years. It is also forcing
both liberals and conservatives to bump
up uncomfortably against their traditional policy positions.
Take net neutrality. The term was
coined in the early 2000s by the academic Tim Wu, author of The Attention
Merchants. It has come to be understood
as shorthand for the idea that everyone
? rich and poor, the start-up and the
multinational conglomerate ? should
be able to use the internet on a level
playing field.
Liberals in the US have supported the
idea for reasons of social equity. But
some conservatives, as well as some
members of the business community,
have argued that it is a distorting regulation that prevents the ISPs from properly monetising their investment in
broadband. It?s a fair point. After all, the
telecoms companies building the 21stcentury digital highway have singledigit profit margins, while the likes of
Google and Facebook ? which simply
has to wait for someone to upload a cat
video and then sell hyper-targeted
advertising against it ? have high double-digit profit margins.
Big tech platform companies, which
have been the largest corporate beneficiaries of net neutrality, have until now
worked both the social and economic
arguments to their own advantage.
They and many other supporters of net
neutrality ? including start-ups that are
worried about being winnowed out by
larger players with deeper pockets that
can pay to have their data delivered
faster ? have argued that more power
for the ISPs would squash innovation on
the internet and unfairly penalise small
businesses.
Yet a number of critics would argue
union is needed precisely because the
banking union will always be imperfect.
Therefore, the fundamental problems
of the eurozone will remain unaddressed: large and non-decreasing
financial imbalances between member
states; weak banking systems that are
overdependent on EU members; an
inbuilt tendency towards pro-cyclical
fiscal policies that exacerbate boom and
bust; a lack of instruments to deal with
asymmetric shocks; and, most important of all, a fundamental lack of trust.
The cyclical economic recovery has
deflected attention away from these
issues, but has not resolved any of them.
Will eurozone reform happen eventually? If it does, then it will be not through
an ordinary political process but
another crisis, one that threatens the
wealth of the northern creditor nations.
This is the real cliff edge Europe faces.
Not Brexit.
munchau@eurointelligence.com
2017
A year in a
word / n.
Maybot
(noun) A prime minister so lacking in
human features that she soon requires
a system reboot
that the Fangs themselves are a bigger
risk to innovation than the telecoms
companies, in large part because of the
network effects that make them natural
monopolies. The currency of the digital
age is data, and its value grows exponentially. This allows the biggest players to
become ever more dominant and able to
squash competition in myriad ways ?
be it snapping up any firm that comes
close to their core business model, or via
?efficient infringement? on competitors? IP.
Other industries complain that the
Fangs still enjoy unfair regulatory
The currency of the digital
age is data, and its value
grows exponentially,
benefiting the big players
exemptions thanks to loopholes in section 230 of the 1996 Communications
Decency Act. Economic power begets
political power, which is why the Fangs
have fought hard, and so far successfully, in Washington against efforts to
repeal those loopholes, as well as other
attempts to make their business models
fairer and more transparent.
All this serves as a reminder that
many of the monopoly battles being
waged these days are not confrontations
between David and Goliath, but rather
Goliath and Goliath. It is hard to argue
that a vertical merger between content
and pipe owners like Time Warner and
AT&T is a good thing for competition, or
for the little guy, even if you buy the idea
that the goal of antitrust policy should
be ?consumer welfare?. (For the record I
don?t; we need to think about new business creation and workers, too.) But it
seems inconsistent to go after AT&T
without also going after the Fangs.
What is lost in all of this debate may
well be the American consumer. Even if
the US had an administration that cared
about enforcing antitrust ? beyond US
president Donald Trump?s politicised
battles over whether Time Warner
should divest itself of his arch media
enemy CNN ? policies predicated on
outdated models that do not address the
problems of the digital age will not even
out the playing field.
Meanwhile, a rollback of net neutrality will not really hurt the Fangs ? they
can easily pay whatever fees the ISPs
decide to charge. But it could create a
premium and economy class internet
for consumers. What we need is equal
and consistent application of competition rules. That will probably mean
coming up with new rules.
There are many ways to explain why
Theresa May went from a 20-point
poll lead in April to losing her parliamentary majority in June?s election.
But you can start with a single word:
Maybot ? coined late last year by the
Guardian?s sketch writer John Crace
? mercilessly summed up the UK
prime minister?s inability to engage
with questions. It didn?t matter how
trivial the issue. Sherlock or Midsomer
Murders, she was asked by the Sunday Times in May. ?I?ve watched
both.? Whisky or wine? ?Depends on
the circumstances.? Merkel or
Macron? ?I?m going to work with
both of them.?
Mrs May?s voice recognition software was equally limited on serious
matters. When would a second Scottish independence referendum be
appropriate? ?Now is not the time.?
Why did she make a U-turn on social
care policy? ?Nothing has changed.?
Brexit simply meant Brexit, and the
election shambles apparently gave
the Conservatives ?legitimacy?.
Maybot was a cruel nickname but,
given the prime minister?s own reputation for ruthlessness, sympathy for
her was limited. The moniker stuck;
soon, even Conservative party HQ
was using it. The beneficiary was
Labour?s Jeremy Corbyn: as Crace
wrote, ?when you?re up against a
black hole in the form of the Maybot,
then it?s hard not to be a personality?.
Tony Blair and David Cameron
dodged questions, too, but they
offered their questioners something.
In parliament, Mrs May?s reticence
was annoying. In an election campaign, it came across as arrogant.
The worst was still to come: in her
October party conference speech,
Maybot suffered a complete system
malfunction, aka a coughing fit. She
survived and steadied her premiership. But Downing Street is one
workplace where, before too long, a
human will surely replace a robot.
Henry Mance
rana.foroohar@ft.com
A revived Russia vies with America for centre stage
OPINION
Thomas
Graham
O
ver the past 25 years,
Americans have come to
think of their country as
the world?s indispensable
nation. Having won the
cold war, the US was everywhere. It
championed the reconstruction of eastern Europe and the eastward expansion
of Nato and the EU. It led the coalition to
keep Saddam Hussein boxed in and to
prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear
weapons. It spurred Nato into action to
keep Serbian leader Slobodan Milosevic
from perpetrating more war crimes.
After 9/11, it led the global coalition
against terrorism.
The US grew accustomed to the world
following its lead. No more. Both the
world and America have changed. And
lately it seems as if another country is
emerging as the new indispensable
nation on the world stage ? Russia.
Certainly, this is what President
Vladimir Putin wants us to believe. His
mission, when he rose to power 18 years
ago, was to restore his country?s status as
a great power ? one of the few that
determine the structure, substance and
direction of world affairs ? and to
ensure that no global problem could be
resolved without Moscow. He has made
considerable progress.
Mr Putin?s audacious intervention in
Syria in 2015 saved President Bashar alAssad from almost certain defeat and
helped him reassert control over much
of the country. Moscow is now leading
the diplomatic effort to settle the conflict, with the US barely involved. Russia
might not be able to negotiate peace in
Syria alone, but no longer can a deal be
negotiated without its involvement.
Russian diplomacy in the wider
region has been equally impressive.
Until recently, the US was the main
actor. Its military presence, business
and diplomatic ties are still hard to overestimate, but Moscow has leveraged the
combination of its successes in Syria
and widespread uncertainty about US
commitment into an opportunity to
raise its standing as a reliable and effective partner. It has working relationships with all the main countries in the
region ? Egypt, Iran, Israel, Saudi Arabia and Turkey. It is well positioned to
play a leading, if not quite decisive, role
in shaping a new regional equilibrium.
In Europe, Russia has demonstrated
through its incursion into Ukraine that
it has an effective veto over the eastward
expansion of Nato and the EU through
the use of force. No longer can those
organisations develop and implement
policy toward their eastern neighbours
without accommodating Moscow?s
interests, in sharp contrast to the situation in the 1990s and 2000s. Rebuilding
a durable European security architecture will now also require bargaining
with Russia. Similarly, in north-east
Asia, Moscow may not be the main
player on the North Korea nuclear issue,
but its ties to Pyongyang ensure that it
will be party to any settlement.
Meanwhile, Russian emissaries have
Moscow is now leading the
diplomatic effort to settle
the Syrian conflict, with the
US barely involved
scoured the world as part of an attempt
to gain influence on the global stage. In
South Africa, they attempted to capitalise on Jacob Zuma?s former contacts
with Soviet intelligence to negotiate a
$76bn contract to build a series of
nuclear power plants, although the
project has since run into legal difficul-
ties. In Libya, Russians have been courting one of the regional warlords, Khalifa
Haftar, and through him are likely to
form part of any talks about the country?s future. In Venezuela, Rosneft, Russia?s state oil company, has been bailing
out the Maduro government in
exchange for equity stakes in the country?s energy sector.
Russia cannot play the role of the
indispensable nation in the manner the
US once did. It is not proposing concrete
solutions to problems and rallying other
countries behind it. With a stagnating
$1.5tn economy, compared with $19tn
for the US, Moscow lacks the means to
take the lead in post-conflict reconstruction, and its interference in European electoral politics has alienated a
large swath of the countries that could
provide much-needed resources. Yet,
against US wishes, it has forced its way
to the table at which resolutions will be
hammered out.
The hard truth is that America cannot
ignore Russia or seek to isolate the country, as it has tried to do in recent years.
That is the reality of today?s emerging
multipolar world.
Although Washington?s demonisation
of Russia would suggest otherwise, the
US should be able to engage with confidence. It still leads the world in hard and
soft power, and attracts more talented,
enterprising people from around the
world than any other country. American ideals are widely shared and
admired, even if the country is doing a
poor job of living up to them. It may no
longer be the indispensable nation, as
that idea was understood in the 1990s,
but it still remains more indispensable
as a partner in more places than Russia.
The US just needs to regain the will to
act like the great power it is.
The writer is a managing director at
Kissinger Associates. Eugene Rumer, of the
Carnegie Endowment for International
Peace, co-wrote this article
?
12
FINANCIAL TIMES
Monday 18 December 2017
WORK & CAREERS
The curse of
the circular
strategy loop
diagram
Search for business models and
strategies and you quickly run across
the ubiquitous circular strategy loop.
These ?virtuous circles? typically
have four or five segments, and
clockwise arrows indicating that a plan,
process, or strategy vision, once
accomplished, restarts automatically at
the beginning of the loop. Look up your
organisation?s version and, hand on
heart, tell me that you have at some
point tried to follow the arrows ? or
even know how to.
For much of management history,
consultants depended on words to
persuade clients. From the moment it
became possible to illustrate strategies
colourfully and easily (PowerPoint ?
I?m looking at you), they succumbed to
the temptation to insert those endless
loops into presentations.
I guess such illustrations are children
of the 1970s, when the M鯾ius strip
recycling logo was born. That image is
a rare example of vision and diagram
coinciding: complete reuse of
everything we throw away is a noble
goal. Advocates of the regenerating
?circular economy? have revived the
loop in its pure sense. But for most
organisations, the closed-circle strategy
is nonsense ? risky nonsense at that.
For a start, it has a spurious neatness.
Strategies and business models are not
Andrew Hill
Onmanagement
infinitely repeatable perpetual motion
machines. If they were, chief
executives and their teams could go
home.
But plans go wrong. Rubbish
strategies and failing business models
should be thrown out, not recycled.
They should be joined in the bin by
misconceived ventures, self-serving
divisions and redundant projects that
continue because nobody dares or
cares to tell them to stop.
When Harvard Business Review
identified ?crap circles? in 2005, it
found some classics. One, perpetrated
by a software company, rotates from
?termination? of the project back into
?deployment?.
?This may be a good model from a
consultancy?s standpoint ? when a
client?s projects end, they start again ?
but if you are paying . . . you probably
want the project to actually end when
it?s terminated,? wrote HBR?s Gardiner
Morse.
Most companies would love to think
of profit spiralling automatically ever
upwards in this way. But such a magic
roundabout is as likely to keep turning
as MC Escher?s architectural
provocations are to be integrated into
the latest housing development.
This may be why, when the circlesketchers examine their work, they
introduce complications to explain the
untidy parts of business that a closed
circle cannot cover.
Building company Galliford Try
shows its business model as two
revolving rings, one for construction
and one for housebuilding. Round
them is a line for partnerships and
regeneration, while a red line ? group
strategy, governance and culture ?
loops between the wheels. I suspect the
strategy department drew that line.
The UK government?s
communications department offers a
roundabout for its ?professional
communicators? to help them
?broaden the range of skills [they]
have and to make integrated working
easier?. Insight, Ideas, Implementation,
Impact are the four stages of
communication planning, the
department suggests. It may be right ?
but why resort to an endless circle to
describe it? If your communications
team has an idea, you would want to
hear about it immediately, not wait for
the carousel to take another half turn
past implementation. Meanwhile, I
defy anyone to take in PwC UK?s
sustainability business model ?at a
glance?, as the professional services
group suggests. In the picture from its
2017 report, a simple loop featuring
four steps is assailed from both sides by
?
I defy anyone to
take in PwC
UK?s sustainable
business model
?at a glance? as the
group suggests
?
Working Lives
andrew.hill@ft.com
Twitter: @andrewtghill
The Commuter
?Tis the season of loneliness and fear
in the white-collar gig economy
Tempted by freelance life?
Reality often falls short of
the liberated dream ?
especially at Christmas,
writes Emma Jacobs
?Anarchy in the UK? relieves
the stress of the working day
AS TOLD TO AMY BELL
Max Earey
Andy Palmer
Job: chief executive, Aston Martin
C
ourt Guinness is used to
working at Christmas. He is
not an Uber driver, a policeman or a doctor ? rather, he
works for himself as a business consultant and broker, which he
describes as ?an independent estate
agent for businesses?.
The period between Christmas and
new year is one of his busiest. ?People
re-evaluate their plans,? deciding to sell
and buy businesses, he says.
Christmas has always been an intense
time in Mr Guinness?s 18-year experience of freelance life. In his previous
role as a self-employed IT consultant, he
helped retailers and travel agents prepare festive sales. ?You only had a small
window to get a lot of the IT systems
sorted. I had to prepare websites, make
sure the graphics and deals were in place
for Boxing Day sales. There must have
been thousands of us sitting around on
Christmas Day working.?
Many employees fantasise about
improving their quality of life by working for themselves. A survey by IPSE,
the association of independent professionals and the self-employed, this year
found that the top three reasons to go
solo were: better work-life balance, control of work and maximising earnings.
Research published last year by McKinsey Global Institute found 20 to 30 per
cent of the working-age population in
the US and EU ? up to 162m people ?
engage in independent work. Of this,
they estimated that 30 per cent (49m)
of these were ?free agents?, doing so as
their primary income, seeking flexibility and autonomy out of choice.
While there has been much attention
on the conditions of gig workers such as
Uber drivers, white-collar self-employed workers also face problems.
Independent professional and managerial workers frequently report job satisfaction, but the dream does not always
match reality ? often they feel overworked and incapable of switching off.
Jordan Marshall, policy development
manager at IPSE, says the festive period
highlights some of the difficulties of
independent working, particularly the
inability to take a break. ?Being on
demand means it?s difficult to plan what
you are doing. It?s an issue all year
round, but particularly hard at Christmas.?
Andy Fairweather, a 37-year-old freelance brand designer based in the southeast of England, will take Christmas Day
off to spend it with his wife and child.
But he will use the downtime before the
new year to work on administration and
marketing. ?This is the time that my
VAT and accounts will be done,? he says.
He uses this time to set revenue targets for the year ahead. ?I tend not to see
Christmas as a normal holiday. It gives
me an opportunity to work on my business, rather than doing the work. You
can get halfway through a year and forget what your [goals are].?
Mark Fogerty, an independent consultant who is working on a logistics
project in waste management, says he
a whole quiver-full of conflicting
arrows. Six ?business inputs? pointing
from left to right seem to flow against
the tide of ?performance? and ?impact
on society?, moving in the other
direction.
Tim Brown, chief executive of Ideo,
the design consultancy, sees the loop as
one of a few strong frameworks to
which humans naturally default.
Others include the linear path to
greater efficiency; strategy consultants?
favourite two-by-two matrix, with
nirvana always just out of your grasp in
the top right quadrant; and a
hierarchical pyramid.
You may argue that these circles are
visual ephemera. They enliven a more
reasoned verbal explanation by a silver
tongued strategy director or
consultant. But that seems all the more
reason to make them meaningful or
sweep them out. Like the redundant
org charts I wrote about last year, the
circles suppress real questions about
the organisation?s next steps.
Companies that want to move forward
need to stop going round and round in
circles.
Share your worst cases of endless strategy
loops at www.ft.com/circles
Commute: 45 minutes
Independent
consultant Inga
Umblija will
take work with
her on a festive
holiday to the
Austrian Alps.
Below: wreathmaking
workshops for
WeWork?s
members in
London
Charlie Bibby/FT
Report
The
invisible
workers
would love to take a week off at Christmas, but: ?The reality is I will catch up
on my business administration and do
some client work.?
Laura Empson, a professor in the
management of professional service
firms at Cass Business School, believes
many consultancies recruit ?insecure
overachievers? because of their tendency to work hard. When those workers leave to become independent contractors, many are disillusioned.
Prof Empson, whose book Leading
Professionals: Power, Politics, and Prima
Donnas is about overwork, management
and professionals? desire for autonomy,
says many of those who quit a company
for self-employment continue to work
punishing hours, because it is part of
their make-up.
There is no longer a difficult boss to
A recent report by think-tank IPPR found
that almost a third of people working in
the professions are now self-employed in
the UK (32 per cent). ?The occupation
with the largest number of selfemployed is ?managers, directors, and
senior officials?, with 800,000 people in
this sector identifying as self-employed,
or 17 per cent self-employed people?.
The report says concern over
unregulated work at the manual end of
the gig economy, while important, has
?obscured? the role that independent
work and self-employment plays.
blame for overwork. Rather they
become their own difficult boss.
Mr Fogerty recognises the description. ?A lot of it is the way we are built as
individuals. I flog myself to death in the
week.? He tries not to work at weekends
but instead is at his desk from 8am to
?A lot of it is the way we
are built as individuals ?
I flog myself to
death in the week?
10pm during the working week, with
very few breaks, typically working a 60
to 70-hour week.
?One of my hopes was that I?d take an
extended period of time off over the
summers, and similarly with Christmas.
I don?t really,? he says.
Independent workers can be plagued
by a kind of performance anxiety.
Instead of working for a brand, an individual depends on their own reputation;
they are only as good as their last job.
Pay is another problem. Inga Umblija
has been an independent consultant
since 2007. ?As an employee there?s a
kind of enforced Christmas break,
offices shut down. There?s always an
assumption that you are not going to be
there. Full-time staff get paid but if you
are working for yourself, you don?t.?
Commissioned by Odgers Connect,
which finds contracts for independent
consultants, the IPPR notes that many
professional workers have taken
advantage of technology and changes in
the nature of work ? often incorporating
as sole traders, or setting up
microbusinesses.
However, the report also notes that
labour market statistics have failed to
keep pace with economic changes,
meaning that ?a significant portion of
those working in the professional gig
economy are invisible?.
Chasing invoices can be time-consuming. As Mr Marshall points out, you
can have plenty of work but if money
doesn?t come in, it causes problems.
Planning for pay gaps is key, Ms
Umblija says. She has built six months?
worth of savings to carry her through
quiet periods. The longer she has
worked this way, the better she has got
at managing her time. Last year she took
a month off, devoting much of it to yoga.
That would be hard for a full-time
employee, she notes. This Christmas,
Ms Umblija is taking a week off but will
coach clients ? a side enterprise ? from
her holiday in the Austrian Alps.
Although some might be glad to be
free of the corporate Christmas party ?
after all, many people flee company life
to escape office politics ? for others, seeing streams of office workers donning
party antlers on an evening out can reinforce loneliness.
Mr Marshall notes that: ?Christmas
corporate bashes [can make freelancers] feel out of sync. Freelancing can be
an isolated way of working. You have to
work harder at making connections.?
The popularity of co-working spaces
such as WeWork is partly explained by
freelancers? need to be around others.
Many co-working companies put on
Christmas activities for members.
Across London, for example, WeWork?s
hubs host a Christmas market pop-up,
party, children?s day, Christmas carol
workshop and wreath-making sessions.
As well as finding networks, self-employed workers should also manage clients? expectations over the holiday
period. As Mr Marshall says, ?lots of
freelancers use online organisations like
Freelancer.com, and have clients all
over the world who might contact them
at unusual times?.
?You might get stressed out if you are
dealing with a client. And they might get
frustrated if they don?t hear back from
you.?
Read Inga Umblija?s tips for successful
freelancing at ft.com/work-careers
I live close to Silverstone, a
45-minute drive away from
headquarters in Gaydon,
Warwickshire.
There are three possible
ways for me to commute:
the first is driving into work,
which allows me to clear my
head. I take either my Aston
Martin DB11 or my 1980 V8
Vantage.
Sometimes I assess a
prototype car on the route to
work. And if I am not going to
Gaydon or I am travelling,
I am lucky enough to have a
chauffeur I can call on.
The alarm
goes off at
6:30am and I
listen to the
news, normally
BBC Radio 2.
I am not much of
a morning person.
I look at my emails
in case anything
urgent has come
in overnight, then I
leave for work by 7:30am.
I drive to work on fast,
sweeping country lanes.
There are some technical
corners, they are a little bit
pot-holey and with different
surfaces ? a really
interesting series of roads for
assessing a car.
If I am testing a car on my
commute I use the recorder
on my phone to talk during
the journey, recording notes
and feelings, which I later use
to debrief our engineers.
Recently I tested the final
production version of the V8
powered DB11, and the
prototype of the new
Vantage.
When I get into the office
I take an hour or so before
meetings start at 9am, to
check emails and social
media and glance through
the Financial Times and
motoring press with a cup of
tea ? milk, no sugar. It sets
me up for the day.
I travel weekly,
mostly between
the US, China,
Japan and the
Middle East.
I enjoy long-haul
flights but I find the
process from arriving
kerbside to departure
frustrating, probably because
I am an engineer and I run a
factory. Sometimes I want to
shake people and say, ?You
need a decent industrial
engineer here to improve
your process flow? ?
especially the bag scanning
system.
I never watch films or use
WiFi on flights. I write emails
just after take-off, ready to
send when I arrive. Then I
relax, read and maybe have a
glass of red wine.
Books
I typically have three or four
on the go at the same time.
The one in my travel bag is
the Ghosts of the Tsunami
by Richard Lloyd Parry, a
correspondent who
has lived in Japan
for a long time.
I was living in
Tokyo ? I lived
there for 13 years
? when the great
tsunami hit northeastern Japan in
2011 and the book
is about the
aftermath.
On a recent trip I
went up to visit one of the
most affected areas. The
book is a really good read
and personal to me.
I love historical novels. The
one I am reading at the
moment is Fools and Mortals
by Bernard Cornwell, about
the brother of Shakespeare.
Music
I listen to music in the car as I
commute. In the morning it is
either BBC Radio 2 or
Absolute 80s an online radio
station dedicated to music of
the 1980s. My journey home
is heavier. I have lots of
adrenalin so I listen to rock or
punk: The Stranglers?
?Peaches?, Joy Division?s ?Love
Will Tear us Apart? or the Sex
Pistols? ?Anarchy in the UK?
(pictured). I look forward to
the drive home. It is a release
from the tension of the day.
Magazines
Occasionally for flights
I pick up a motorbike
mag. I have been
riding motorbikes
since I was 16. I
currently have a
BMW K1600 GT ?
a huge touring bike.
The last time I took it
out was in the summer when
my son finished his A-levels.
We took a motorcycling and
whisky (not together) trip
around Scotland, trying to
cover as many of the
distillery regions as possible.
Monday 18 December 2017
?
13
FINANCIAL TIMES
WORK & CAREERS
How ?Englishnization? changed company fortunes
Michael Skapinker
explores what happened
when a Japanese business
switched to working in a
foreign language
?The cost was borne by the employee.?
Tsedal Neeley, a Harvard Business
School associate professor, became
deeply involved in researching and consulting on the Rakuten English programme. Mr Katsuragi says that a survey by Prof Neeley found most employees said that ?we understand the need
for Englishnization, we understand the
background and the necessity. But we
need support from the company. That?s
why Mikitani-san changed his mind.?
Rakuten began offering English classes,
e-learning, apps and one-to-one help.
By 2015, as Prof Neeley records in her
book about the project, The Language of
Global Success, the vast majority of Japanese staff could understand the bulk of
O
n March 1 2010, Hiroshi
Mikitani, flamboyant chief
executive of Rakuten, the
leading Japanese ecommerce company, delivered
startling news to the 7,000 Japanese
staff gathered for his weekly address
and the 3,000 overseas employees
watching by video.
From now on, he said, everything at
Rakuten, from meetings to the canteen
menus, would be in English.
Staff had two years to get their English
up to scratch. Anyone who did not reach
the expected level in that time would be
demoted. Mr Mikitani gave the programme the slightly awkward title
?Englishnization?. Leading the English
charge would be Takashi Katsuragi.
In Rakuten?s Tokyo headquarters, Mr
Katsuragi reflects on the seven years
since he was given the job of leading the
company to English competence ? and
on what the company got wrong and,
eventually, right.
In the immediate aftermath of Mr
Mikitani?s announcement staff were
shocked, Mr Katsuragi said. They
worked in Japanese. All their documents were in Japanese. How would
they cope with doing everything in
English?
Mr Katsuragi had his own struggle to
learn English. He had been one of
Rakuten?s early employees, joining in
2000, when the company was three
years old with just 100 or so staff.
He became Rakuten?s first head of
human resources and in 2007 Mr Mikitani sent him on a trip abroad. He found
it tough. ?When I participated in an
international meeting, I wasn?t able to
speak English,? he says, ?I was so embarrassed.? Back in Japan, he immediately
enrolled in English classes.
A year later, he left to work for
Shiseido, the skincare and cosmetics
company, but in 2010 Mr Mikitani
Composing documents in
English was taking hours.
People were struggling
to form sentences
What was the best thing you read this year?
Business school professors and FT writers share the
books and articles that changed their outlook at
work. See their selections and add to our readers?
list at ft.com/work-careers
asked him to return. Mr Mikitani
wanted to push Rakuten into becoming
a global company; the drive to use English was a central part of that strategy.
To understand the importance of
Rakuten?s switch to English, one must
understand Japan?s demographics, Mr
Katsuragi says. Rakuten was a force in
domestic ecommerce but the country?s
ageing population meant its growth
would be limited at home.
To continue to prosper, Rakuten had
to expand internationally. For that, Mr
Katsuragi says, Rakuten needed talented employees, ?not only from Japan
but also from overseas?.
Eighteen months after the language
switch, Rakuten evaluated its progress.
There had been very little. Few staff had
achieved a competent level of English.
The problem was that the company had
expected its employees to teach themselves, by listening to recordings or
reading books in their own time.
Composing documents in English was
taking hours. People were struggling to
form sentences ? and then clamming
up. ?If people wanted to say something
it took longer, but the conversation was
shorter,? Mr Katsuragi says.
Why did Rakuten fail to realise that
employees would need support?
Because Mr Mikitani was self-taught.
He picked up English as a child while his
father was a visiting professor in the US.
As an adult working at the Industrial
Bank of Japan, he went to Harvard Business School to do an MBA. ?Before going
to HBS, he studied English by himself,?
Mr Katsuragi says. The employees
were given information about how
to study the language, but that was it.
Takashi
Katsuragi says
top-level
commitment is
essential for
embedding a
different
language into an
organisation
what was happening in meetings and
were increasingly confident. ?I am not
afraid to speak English to my co-workers,? one told her.
Mr Katsuragi now leads a Rakuten
business offering English language
learning and advice to Japanese companies that wish to embed English in their
organisations. What are Rakuten?s principal lessons?
?The first is top-level commitment.
Rakuten fortunately had a CEO with a
strong commitment.? The second lesson, Mr Katsuragi says, is that everyone
has to learn English. ?If the company
divides employees into two groups ? the
one international or more global, and
the second one domestic, or Japanese ?
possibly the company [will develop] different cultures and, if so, the project
might fail.?
The third lesson is measurement.
?Measure study time, measure test
results. Then provide the time or the
score to all employees so that everyone
knows the progress of the project.?
The final lesson is not to expect the
employees to pay to learn English themselves. ?The costs should be paid by the
company,? he says.
Target the best in the business with
FT Special Reports
Business Education:
Global MBA Rankings Magazine
Gemma Taylor in London
Tel: +44 020 7873 3698
Email: gemma.taylor@ft.com
Next issue: 29 January 2018
Online Learning Rankings Report
Next issue: 05 March 2018
Allie Besing in London
Tel: +1 917 551 5113
Email: allie.besing@ft.com
Find out more and get a full list of representatives at www.ft.com/advertising
Back issues of printed FT Reports can be obtained from: Historic Newspapers, Signature Online Limited. No 1 Waterside Station Road, Harpenden, Herts, AL5 4US.
Tel: 0870 165 1470, Fax: 01852 469 248, Email: info@back-issue-newspapers.co.uk
?
14
FINANCIAL TIMES
Monday 18 December 2017
Emma Jacobs
Discover more insights
at ft.com/visualjournalism
?Sorry? seems
to be the
hardest word
Graphical Insight
How the FT uncovered improbable data on gender pay
The UK government requires companies and public sector bodies with more than 250
employees to publicly report their median and mean gender pay gaps by April 1 2018.
A Financial Times analysis suggested many companies have submitted data that claim
no mean or median gaps. This is statistically improbable.
Why is it unlikely for a company to have both no mean
and no median gender pay gap?
Let us look at a hypothetical company. Each circle represents one employee,
male or female
The median salary ? the value that half of salaries fall below and half above ?
is �,000 for men and women. There is no median pay gap in this company ...
... but there is a 45% gap between mean salaries ? the value
calculated for each gender by adding together all salaries and
dividing by the number of employees
Outliers
Mean pay gap
Male
staff
0
50
100
Charlie Rose: the TV
host lost his job in
November ? Craig Barritt/Getty
Images for Showtime
advances. Second, while some women
might have put up with it in the past,
that does not mean they liked or
wanted it. Quite the opposite.
Yet there is also a kind of selective
evolution at play here. Harassers,
particularly ones who are proud of
their professional acumen, manage to
stay attuned to so many developments
in the business world ? the arrival of
disruptive technologies, say, or of new
overseas markets. Yet they are blind to
changes in workplace behaviour. Such
blindness seems wilful.
Mr Weinstein?s apology also included
the pledge that he was embarking on
therapy. This is a trope that has been
reiterated by numerous other
apologists. Being caught becomes ?a
voyage of self-discovery?, as if lunging
at a colleague is the first step on the
path to enlightenment.
Charlie Rose, the journalist and talk
show host, who lost his job in
?This year was marked by
a series of terrible
apologies by Goliaths
who had been exposed
as harassers?
November after he was accused of
harassment, said he had ?learnt a great
deal as a result of these events?. Then
he turned it into a generous gift ? a
teachable moment for everybody else,
as he wrote that he hoped that ?others
will [learn] too?. He continued: ?All of
us, including me, are coming to a
newer and deeper recognition of the
pain caused by conduct in the past, and
have come to a profound new respect
for women and their lives.?
The common denominator in all
these apologies is narcissism. That
these men were so entitled that they
thought they could behave as they
wished was always the problem. These
apologies are self-indulgent mepologies: all about the perpetrator not
about the victims.
I picked a few me-pologies to see how
many times they used the word ?I?.
Harvey Weinstein?s count was 37 times
in 26 sentences; Charlie Rose used the
word 14 times in eight sentences, and
Louis CK, the comedian who was
accused of harassment in November,
36 times in 26 sentences (although one
was in the title of his new film, I Love
You, Daddy, which is now shelved).
I talked to a friend about her most
recent experience of harassment, at a
CROSSWORD
No. 15,735 Set by DANTE
The first Financial Times crossword to be set by Dante, Roger
Squires, was published on May 27 1982. Since then he has
compiled a further 1,401 cryptic puzzles for the paper as well
as providing crosswords for many other UK newspapers and
appearing in 600 publications worldwide. He was accepted in
the 1970s as the world?s most prolific compiler.
Now 85 years old, Roger Squires has decided to retire from
crossword compiling. This is, regrettably, his final FT puzzle.
ACROSS
1 Scored slowly (6)
4Display wines duty-free here?
(8)
9How one acts proudly but
ineffectually (6)
10Space travel in strange
contrivance (8)
12 Basic requirements for shiplaunchings (8)
13 A youth initially in hovel finds
refuge (6)
15 Track a bird (4)
16 Gathering custom (10)
19 Brandy?s set out for spectators
(10)
20Request a slice of apple a day
(4)
23Left in play (6)
25Measures of port take a very
long time (8)
27Break popular with those on
edge (8)
28It gives time to see large
mountain (3,3)
29Get heir a settlement he
expects (8)
30Strict clergyman has a setback
in the diocese (6)
DOWN
1 He recommends Verdi as a
change (7)
2 We can do with them (9)
3 Marital relations (2-4)
5 They are naturally charged for
half portions (4)
6Urgent job for a laundress (8)
7Have fun setting up a
purchase (5)
8Scottish man going it alone;
was he wise? (7)
11 How one verbally passes on
proverbs? (7)
14 Caviare might produce such
greed (7)
17 Unwell, say, with bile disorder?
Hard to make out (9)
18 Brave pirate?s superficial
improvement (4-4)
19 Some terrible mishap results
in a scar (7)
21 The attendant?s not
responsible for it (7)
22Give up work and go to bed
(6)
24?Not out? the umpire is upset
to conclude (5)
26Eager for silver turn-over (4)
Solution to Saturday?s prize puzzle on Saturday December 30
Winners? names will be printed in Weekend FT
small company that employed no
newsworthy stars. It was not a
headline-grabbing assault. It was a
drip, drip, drip of unwanted emails
about her appearance, sent to her work
and personal accounts, supplemented
by texts at weekends.
She caught her harasser
surreptitiously taking pictures of her.
Colleagues joked about his shrine to
her at home. When she told the human
resources department, they just
warned her to be careful. In the end,
she left the company.
A few months later, her former
employer got back in touch ?
inevitably her harasser had started on
other women.
After she heard that he had left, I
asked whether she wanted him to
apologise. No. She had heard enough
from him ? she just wanted to be
heard herself.
That made me think of two bright
spots in Louis CK?s apology. These were
simply: ?These stories are true? and ?I
will . . . take a long time to listen.?
emma.jacobs@ft.com
@emmavj
Pilita Clark is away.
The fact there are no highly paid
female employees is hidden by
the median,but shows up in the mean
Female
staff
mean
female
salary
mean
male
salary
The actual reported gender pay gap in the UK
Despite the unlikelihood of the two measures being equal, 5% of companies did
report such figures. At the time of writing, 368 out of 9,000 have reported their data.
The FT?s data team will keep monitoring the submissions to check for further
anomalies.
Mean
27 companies
These peaks,
suggesting no
pay gaps,
are highly
suspicious.
18 companies
appear in both
50
25
0
69 companies
Median
Companies tend to
pay men more
75
50
25
0
-100
Women paid more
-50
0
50
Pay gap (%)
To read more about the story, go to ft.com/gpg
FT graphic: Aleksandra Wisniewska, Billy Ehrenberg-Shannon Source: Gov.uk
100
Men paid more
Number of companies
#MeToo ripped through 2017. Women
? and men ? broke their silence and
out poured a volcanic rage engulfing
Silicon Valley, Hollywood, the media,
restaurant industry and politics. They
told stories, so many stories, about
sexual harassment.
In their wake came statements of
regret from the accused. Upon scrutiny
these crumbled into dust.
And so 2017 was marked by a series
of terrible apologies by Goliaths who
had been exposed, this time
unwillingly, as harassers. This year has
shown that there is no perfect way to
apologise for inappropriate requests,
gropes or assaults. But there are plenty
of wrong ways.
Harvey Weinstein produced a model
of the bad apology. His opening
declaration set the tone for an
onslaught of wrongness.
?I came of age in the ?60s and ?70s
when all the rules about behaviour and
workplaces were different. That was
the culture then.? This is a common
line of defence by men who claim to be
hopeless dinosaurs, out of touch with
changing sensibilities. First, that
excuse only works if all men of the
same age think it is OK to ruin a
woman?s career if she refuses their
Well-paid senior managers and
board members: their salaries do
not affect the median, but they
increase the mean
150
200
250
300
Salary (�000)
?
Monday 18 December 2017
15
ThyssenKrupp Frustrated investors
turn up heat on the steelmaker ? PAGE 17
Third of female
asset managers
suffer sexual
harassment
Market mismatch Private equity and
the care homes business ? JONATHAN FORD, PAGE 16
Netflix surges
further ahead
of Hulu in race
for viewers
Gaining currency ETF providers hope launch of bitcoin
derivatives will help sway regulators to approve trackers
TIM BRADSHAW ? LOS ANGELES
3 Number leaps from 20% in 2014
3 Poll of 600 staff highlights challenge
ATTRACTA MOONEY AND PETER SMITH
Almost a third of women in asset management say they have suffered sexual
harassment at work, according to an
FTfm poll of nearly 600 fund industry
staff that underscores the challenges
facing female staff in the sector.
The number of women reporting sexual harassment has leapt from 20 per
cent in 2014 to 32 per cent today, up
from 25 per cent in 2016. The latest statistic will disappoint those in the industry who are involved in initiatives to
improve diversity and attract more
female workers.
Seventy-two per cent of respondents,
including 511 women, said they had
experienced sexist behaviour in the
office, up from a third in 2014. A third of
women said they had considered leaving the industry because of how they
were treated. The global survey of men
and women was conducted between
October and December.
?Women are much more often talked
over, ignored and interrupted in my
business,? one female respondent said.
?It is my experience that successful
women are still fighting against stereotyping by the old boys? club and that
most promotions of women are still
hard-earned when compared with the
promotions of men.?
Another woman said: ?There is
immense misogyny.?
Andrew Formica, co-chief of Janus
Henderson, which has $360bn under
management, said it was ?hard to
believe the problem is getting worse
given the attention and leadership from
the top?.
?The only thing I can point to is that
people feel they are able to speak up
more,? he said. This year, famous figures
ranging from film director Harvey
Weinstein to US and UK politicians have
been accused of mistreating women.
The revelations prompted women
worldwide to share their experiences of
sexual harassment on social media
under the #MeToo hashtag.
Abigail Johnson, chief executive of
Fidelity Investments, sent a video to the
40,000 employees at the $2tn asset
manager in October, stressing that there
was ?no tolerance? for any kind of harassment. This followed an incident in
which two fund managers left the Boston-based company after accusations of
inappropriate behaviour.
Brenda Trenowden, global chair of
the 30% Club, a campaign group to get
more women on to company boards,
72%
Dan Kitwood/Getty Images
Bitcoin prices rocket
Interest in bitcoin is at all-time high
$?000 per unit
Worldwide searches (index)
Share of women
who say situation
has improved
over past 5 years
said her ?heart is sinking? that women
in the asset management industry continue to be subjected to sexual harassment and sexist behaviour.
?But [women] feel much more confident to start reporting and speaking
about it. People are feeling more
empowered to speak about it than in the
past.?
The FTfm survey shows that only 30
per cent of women said they believed
the situation in asset management had
improved over the past five years, compared with 55 per cent of men. Despite
this, just 15 per cent of women think sexism is worse in asset management than
elsewhere in financial services.
See FTfm Separate section
80
15
60
10
40
30%
Proportion of
respondents who
have experienced
sexist behaviour
100
20
5
20
0
2013
14
15
16
17
2013
14
Banks grapple with issue of
clients? assets after Brexit
The world?s biggest investment banks
are grappling with where they should
hold hundreds of billions of clients?
assets after Brexit ? described as one
of the most confusing problems of the
transition. Some will move assets to EU
entities but others will leave existing
trades where they are, even after the
UK leaves the bloc.
Report i PAGE 16
China?s securities regulator has
rejected more applications for initial
public offerings this year than in the
previous four years combined, as regulators block fundraising deals that
undermine economic policy goals.
China?s government maintains strict
control over the flow of IPOs in Shanghai
and Shenzhen, unlike in developed
markets, where privately owned stock
exchanges enforce only minimum
thresholds.
The China Securities Regulatory
Commission has rejected or deferred
105 IPO applications this year, compared with 114 such decisions in the five
years to the end of 2016, according to
data from Wind Info. A further 155
encouraged potential ETF providers
to push for approval of funds that
would track bitcoin futures instead of
the underlying cryptocurrency.
Regulatory filings show that
VanEck and Rex ETFs, which withdrew earlier applications after the
SEC?s ruling on the Winklevoss Bitcoin Trust, refiled to launch bitcoin
futures-based ETFs this month.
Direxion Investments registered a bitcoin ETF on Friday. The providers
declined to comment because of regulatory restrictions.
?The fact that there are now futures
might improve the likelihood that
ROBIN WIGGLESWORTH
Bitcoin mania has reignited a race to
launch an exchange-traded fund in
the US that would track the volatile
cryptocurrency.
Approval for such an ETF would represent a U-turn for the Securities and
Exchange Commission, which in
March refused to approve a fund
proposed by Cameron and Tyler
Winklevoss citing concerns that ?significant markets for bitcoin are
unregulated?.
But the launch of bitcoin derivatives by two big exchanges has
applicants, facing dim prospects for
approval, voluntarily suspended or terminated their applications this year,
more than double last year?s figure.
?We must sternly guard the quality
barrier [for companies seeking access to
the market]?, Liu Shiyu, CSRC chairman, said at the inauguration ceremony
for the new issuance review committee
in October.
The new committee has rejected or
deferred 40 per cent of the applications
it reviewed, compared to an 18 per cent
rejection rate from 2010-16.
Yet the CSRC has simultaneously
increased the pace of approvals. Some
426 companies have listed this year,
raising Rmb224bn ($34bn), the highest
fundraising total since 2011. The applicant queue had shrunk to 441 by early
December, from 725 in November 2016.
Analysts say that the CSRC wants to
block deals that would finance speculative investments, while promoting those
that boost real economic activity and
growing industries such as technology.
?The application cycle is shorter, so
for companies doing real business, the
opportunity is greater,? said Yang Hai,
strategist at Kaiyuan Securities in Xi?an.
Some observers believe that accelerated decision-making this year is aimed
at shrinking the IPO queue to a manageable size ready for a transition to a lighter-touch ?registration? mechanism for
listings. A smaller queue is seen as a precondition for such an overhaul, which
could otherwise lead to a disruptive
surge when the floodgates open.
CSRC pledged in 2015 to implement a
registration process within two years,
but the commitment has not been met.
Companies / Sectors / People
Companies
DBRS.................................................................4
Ikea.....................................................................1
Spotify..............................................................4
Sectors
People
ACS..................................................................16
Delta Air Lines.............................................1
Investec.........................................................16
Standard & Poor?s....................................4
Airlines..............................................................1
Castellucci, Giovanni..............................16
Abertis...........................................................16
Endesa...........................................................16
JPMorgan Chase.........................................1
Starbucks........................................................1
Construction...............................................16
Formica, Andrew......................................15
Acciona..........................................................16
Enel..................................................................16
Janus Henderson.....................................15
State Farm...................................................18
Energy.........................................................1,16
Allianz.............................................................18
Engie..................................................................1
Leonard Green..........................................16
Tata Steel.....................................................17
Financials................................................15,16
Amazon..................................................1,11,18
Equistone.....................................................16
McDonald?s.....................................................1
Teva.................................................................18
Apple............................................................1,18
Facebook.............................................4,11,22
Atlantia..........................................................16
Fiat......................................................................1
Moody?s...........................................................4
ThyssenKrupp...........................................17
Aviva...............................................................18
Fidelity Investments..............................15
Neos................................................................18
Time Warner...............................................15
Axa...................................................................18
Fitch Ratings................................................4
Netflix.........................................................11,15
Twentieth Century ................................15
Berkshire Hathaway.................................1
Four Seasons.............................................16
Nokia.................................................................4
Twitter...........................................................22
Booking.com.................................................4
Fox....................................................................15
Odebrecht......................................................2
Uber................................................................22
Bosch................................................................4
Franklin Templeton................................17
Philips...............................................................4
Uniqa.................................................................3
Pharmaceuticals.......................................18
CPA Global..................................................16
Gas Natural.................................................16
Pure Gym.....................................................16
Walt Disney.................................................15
Retail..................................................................1
Cevian.............................................................17
Google....................................................4,11,18
RSA..................................................................18
Wells Fargo ..................................................1
Retail & Consumer....................................1
Poll, Matt......................................................18
Chubb.............................................................18
Hochtief........................................................16
Rosneft...........................................................11
Winklevoss Bitcoin Trust....................15
Support Services.....................................16
P閞ez, Florentino.....................................16
Comcast.........................................................15
Hulu.................................................................15
Siemens......................................................4,17
Zurich.............................................................18
Technology...............................................4,11
Schultz, Kare..............................................18
� The Financial Times Limited 2017
16
17
0
Sources: Bloomberg; Google Trends
China steps up IPO rejections in push
to promote listings that foster growth
GABRIEL WILDAU AND YIZHEN JIA
SHANGHAI
15
Healthcare...................................................16
F鰎berg, Lars..............................................17
Haber, Spencer.........................................16
Industrial Goods.........................................1
Hands, Guy.................................................16
Industrials.............................................1,16,17
Hiesinger, Heinrich.................................17
Insurance......................................................18
Iger, Bob........................................................15
Media..........................................................11,15
Johnson, Abigail.......................................15
Oil & Gas.........................................................1
Kaeser, Joe..................................................17
Personal & Household Goods............1
Kerkhoff, Guido.........................................17
L鰃er, Hartwig............................................3
Week 51
they?ll get approved,? said Todd
Rosenbluth, director of ETF and
mutual fund research at CFRA.
?Many firms are now trying to get one
out ? as in ETFs, there?s a big firstmover advantage.?
Amid sizeable and still growing
speculative interest in bitcoin, a
listed, tradable vehicle that tracks the
price of the cryptocurrency could
attract US investors unable to buy bitcoin on an unregulated exchange.
The Winklevoss twins are appealing against the SEC?s ruling on their
ETF. The regulator did not respond to
a request to comment.
Netflix is widening the gap with its Hollywood-backed rival Hulu in the battle
for viewers, researchers said, as Walt
Disney moves to take full control of the
video streaming service through its
Twentieth Century Fox acquisition.
Netflix?s American audience is
approaching the size of the entire US
pay-TV market, according to a PwC survey, while separate research by IHS
Markit suggests the maker of House of
Cards is widening its lead over Hulu in
paying subscribers.
The findings point to the scale of the
challenge facing Walt Disney in the fight
to win subscribers. After its planned
$66bn takeover of 21st Century Fox?s
entertainment businesses it will
become Hulu?s majority owner, as US
cable subscriptions continue to ebb.
Bob Iger, Disney chief executive, said
last week on a conference call announcing its bid for Fox that creating direct-toconsumer streaming services is ?vital?
to its future and his ?highest priority?.
He said that Hulu would be a ?more
adult-oriented product? than the family-friendly Disney-branded streaming
service planned for launch in 2019,
when the first phase of its current content licensing deal with Netflix expires.
Today, Disney and Fox are joint owners of Los Angeles-based Hulu alongside
Comcast?s NBC unit. The three each
have an equal stake; Time Warner
bought 10 per cent of Hulu last year.
?Owning roughly a third of it was
great, but having control of it will enable
us to greatly accelerate Hulu into that
[direct-to-consumer] space and
become an even more viable competitor
to those that are already out there,? Mr
Iger said.
Market researchers suggest that Disney and Hulu have a long way to go to
close the gap on Netflix. Analyst group
IHS predicts that Netflix will lift its US
subscribers to 54m by the end of this
year, increasing its lead over Hulu from
33m a year ago to 37m. Hulu does not
disclose its paid subscriber numbers but
IHS estimates they are higher than others in the industry at 17m.
A survey of around 2,000 Americans
in October by PwC found 73 per cent of
respondents subscribe to pay-TV services, including cable and satellite, while
73 per cent also subscribe to Netflix.
?
16
FINANCIAL TIMES
Monday 18 December 2017
COMPANIES
INSIDE BUSINESS
Financials
Big banks divided on Brexit ?novation?
Some groups aim to shift
clients? assets to EU while
others plan no change
LAURA NOONAN ? LONDON
The world?s biggest investment banks
are split on whether they have to move
hundreds of billions of clients? assets
ahead of Brexit, with some planning to
begin ?novating? assets to EU entities
while other want to leave existing trades
where they are even after the UK leaves
the EU.
?Novation?, the process of moving client assets from one legal entity to
another, has become a hot topic in the
Brexit countdown, with bankers
describing it as one of the most prob-
lematic and confusing issues they are
grappling with.
In some businesses, such as private
banking and treasury, banks are already
preparing to move assets over to new EU
entities by April 2019. But banks have
taken different stances on what they
will do with their markets businesses
and what regulators will sanction.
Assuming the UK does not retain
access to the EU?s common market,
some banks say they must move EU clients? markets assets to an EU entity
before April 2019, unless clients set up
UK entities to take over the trades.
In either case they warn that the situation is precarious, because moving those
assets could require the long-date derivatives contracts to be reset at current
market prices, and new margin and col-
lateral rules to be applied to trades created under old regimes and ?grandfathered? in.
?Novation is a much bigger issue than
people realise,? said one senior investment banker. An executive at another
large bank said that regulators were
aware of the issue and were very
engaged on finding a solution, but that
the path ahead was not yet clear.
?It?s very high up on [regulators?] priority,? he said, adding that there were
implications from a ?market disruption
and efficiency point of view?, and also
financial stability issues.
One option that would ease some of
the pressure is to novate clients en
masse under generic terms, rather than
having individual agreements with
every client, as happened when the euro
There are
implications
around
?market
disruption
and
efficiency?,
and also
financial
stability
issues
was introduced. Such a deal would
include continuity of existing terms and
allow grandfathered transactions to
remain as they are.
Other executives said that they were
not planning to novate clients unless
they specifically asked for it.
?For markets business, the core
assumption we?ve taken is that we as a
first phase wouldn?t novate,? said
another executive. ?We start the business afresh for new transactions and
only novate in a post-Brexit scenario
and it would depend upon the requests
of the clients.?
Setting up the business in that way
could be costly because banks would
lose the ability to net trades off against
each other if they were split between
legal entities in the UK and EU.
Industrials. Takeover
Battle for Spanish toll road operator intensifies
Construction company?s chief
tries to trump Italy?s Atlantia
with ?19bn bid for Abertis
MICHAEL STOTHARD ? MADRID
Florentino P閞ez, the president of Real
Madrid football club, is used to buying
what he wants. In recent years he has
outbid rivals and smashed transfer
records, spending as much as ?100m for
a single player.
But in his second job as a construction
chief executive, he faces the larger challenge of trying to pull-off a ?19bn
takeover of the Spanish toll road operator Abertis that would transform the
future of his company ACS and the global infrastructure sector.
It is an uphill battle, in part because
ACS is trying to swallow a company with
nearly double its market value. In a
complex deal designed to preserve its
credit rating, ACS is making the bid via a
German subsidiary, Hochtief, which is
half the size of Abertis.
They are up against a much larger
rival bidder, the Italian group Atlantia,
which has a market value of more than
double them at ?22bn. As an infrastructure group, rather than a construction
company, Atlantia can also borrow
much more cheaply than ACS.
?There is no question Atlantia has the
biggest pockets,? says Bosco Ojeda, an
analyst at UBS.
Aside from being smaller, the bid by
Mr P閞ez has another problem, according to analysts and people close to the
deal. At the moment, it relies on
CriteriaCaixa, the main shareholder of
Abertis, taking at least some of the payment in Hochtief shares rather than
cash. This could be a problem because it
is not clear that CriteriaCaixa, a Barcelona-based holding company, wants to
swap shares in a company in the stable
infrastructure sector for one in the volatile construction sector.
?The long-term goal is a stable dividend,? says one person close to
CriteriaCaixa, adding that it would be
likely to take mostly cash from either
offer.
But Mr P閞ez may have one thing on
his side: politics.
Two senior Spanish politicians who
have long been uneasy about the Atlantia bid ? the public works minister Inigo
de la Serna and the energy minister
羖varo Nadal ? last week delivered a
shot across the bows to the Italian offer.
They complained to the local market
regulator, the CNMV, saying that the
Atlantia bid should not have been
authorised in October because it had
not sought permission to take the
group?s satellite business or the toll road
concessions. The Spanish government
considers Hispasat, majority owned by
Abertis, as a strategic asset since it controls Spain?s national satellite communications system. Toll roads are a concession from the government.
On the one hand, this can be seen as
Deal barriers:
ACS is making
its bid via
German
subsidiary
Hochtief, which
is half the size of
target company
Abertis ? Pau
Barrena/Bloomberg
simply a spat between the two ministers
and the CNMV over takeover procedure. Any authorisations that Atlantia
needs to get, Hochtief needs to get too.
But people close to the government
say it does reflect scepticism by the two
ministers, and particularly Mr Nadal,
about the possibility of Abertis being
taken over by an Italian company.
Part of this scepticism has its root in
recent Spanish corporate history after
Italy?s Enel ? along with Spain?s Acciona
? bought the Spanish energy group
Endesa in 2007, even after the then government tried to champion an all-Spanish deal with Gas Natural.
That deal has been criticised as being
bad for Spain. Mr Nadal has accused Enel
of underinvesting in Spain to create jobs
in Italy, saying this year that it was ?doing
politics for Italians at the expense of
Spanishconsumersandworkers?.
One person close to the government
said: ?The Enel deal is front and centre
in the mind of Nadal.?
It remains to be seen if Mr Nadal?s
opposition will make any difference to
the deal process. One person close to the
deal said it could serve as a discouragement to Atlantia, a warning sign that the
company was not welcome.
But, at least for now, there is no sign
this scepticism is turning into full-blown
opposition from the Spanish state. The
finance minister, Luis de Guindos, publicly said in October that the government would be ?neutral?.
Three people close to Abertis told the
FT that they thought the deal would be
won or lost purely on which offered
more value to shareholders.
The battle for control of Abertis will
probably be decided in the first half of
next year. A ?16.3bn offer from Atlantia
in May this year was put on hold in October to give the Spanish authorities time
to review a rival ?18.6bn proposal from
Hochtief.
Giovanni Castellucci, Atlantia?s chief
executive, signalled to the FT in a recent
interview that the company was willing
to raise its offer.
?We believe we have room to make
our offer adequately competitive, at the
right moment, without jeopardising
value creation,? he said.
But this is unlikely to happen until
European infrastructure
groups
Market capitalisation (?bn)
Atlantia
Abertis
ACS
Hochtief
0
5
10
15
Source: Thomson Reuters Datastream
20
after the market regulator gives a green
light to Hochtief?s bid, which could be
delayed given the debate over the process of the CNMV. The deal could then go
down to ?best and final offers?.
Atlantia may have the ability to pay
more than ACS, but analysts say a big
question for the coming weeks and
months is which of the two groups is
willing to raise its bid higher and take
the risk that it will end up paying over
the odds.
For Atlantia, which is controlled by
the Benetton family, the deal is seen as
crucial to help cut its dependence on its
low-growth domestic Italian market as
well as to benefit from the scale of
becoming the world?s largest infrastructure operator.
But some analysts argue that the deal
is even more critical for ACS, because it
would be more transformational for the
business. This could mean that while it
is smaller, it might be willing to pay
more.
ACS is a construction company, and
having a reliable revenue from a stable
concessions business would give it
access to cheaper financing. A combined construction and concession
company could bid for bigger government projects.
?I think ACS will be able to extract
more value from the deal, and therefore
might be willing to pay more in the end,?
said Daniel Gandoy, analyst at JB Capital
Markets, highlighting the new construction and financing opportunities.
ON MONDAY
Jonathan
Ford
Private equity is the
wrong prescription for
creaking care homes
T
he City of London likes nothing better than a
dust-up between two alpha male financiers
over large sums of money. Hence the excitement that surrounds the ugly stand-off
between Guy Hands and Spencer Haber,
whose US hedge fund is a big investor in one of the British
private equity veteran?s most troubled punts.
Last week, after months of macho posturing about the
ownership of some disputed assets, Mr Hands finally
backed away from a showdown with Mr Haber?s H/2 fund
over the future of Four Seasons, one of Britain?s largest
nursing home groups.
To avert a looming default on the group?s �5m debt,
now mainly held by H/2 after the fund bought in at bargain
prices, the two sides agreed to a standstill while they establish the ownership of some care homes that provide beds
for Four Seasons and are worth an estimated �0m. Mr
Hands says he owns them; Mr Haber?s fund insists they
were pledged as collateral for debts Mr Hands took on
when he bought the Four Seasons chain five years ago.
Lost as ever in this squabble about financial assets are
the real lives of those to whom Four Seasons is supplying
services. For behind the buckling balance sheet and City
bravado are tens of thousands of elderly people. Promised
a decent standard of care, they find themselves the victims
of austerity-driven economies, such as those experienced
by residents of Millbrow Care Home in Widnes, where
inspectors observed ?unpleasant smells of urine? and
?seventeen-hour gaps? between dinner and breakfast.
Formerly run by Four Seasons, Millbrow was recently
taken back into local authority control after the group
indicated its intention to close the home.
Owners blame their straitened circumstances on local
councils, which have been cutting back the money they
spend on the 60 per cent of care home residents who
depend on public support. Another gripe is the introduction of the living wage, which has pushed up staff costs. But
these problems have arguably been exacerbated by the
presence of private equity in the sector.
Of course, not all leveraged care homes are owned by
private equity groups. Plenty of other owners use property
as collateral for loans in what remains a fragmented industry. But three of the biggest
chains ? HC-One, Four SeaThe imperative
sons and Care UK ? are in
the hands of buyout groups.
to deliver returns
There is some logic to the
can force groups
idea of consolidating the sector to obtain scale economies to adopt fragile
and offset the monopsony
capital structures
power of local council buyers. But as with other essential services such as water, one can question whether timelimited investment funds, with their emphasis on shortterm financial goals, are appropriate owners of these longterm assets ? especially at times of turbulence.
The imperative to deliver returns can force groups to
adopt fragile capital structures. The sector?s most notorious bankruptcy ? that of Southern Cross in 2011 ?
occurred mainly because a series of private equity owners
had profitably sold the underlying properties through
sale-and-leaseback deals before floating the ?management-only? company on the stock market, leaving the
homes to meet a stream of rising rental payments. When
occupancy dipped, the company was overwhelmed. Four
Seasons itself failed, under Qatari ownership, in 2009.
Baroness Altmann, a former pensions minister, draws
an analogy between pension annuities and social care.
Both make promises to old people that are designed to help
them see out their days. But whereas annuity providers
?need to jump through some serious hoops to show they
have the wherewithal to stand behind their promises, with
care homes it?s a case of anything goes?, she says.
The regulator has no sensible way of stepping in when
care homes teeter towards bankruptcy. The only mechanism at the Care Quality Commission?s disposal is to
injunct councils from placing new residents with troubled
operators. But with 1 per cent of residents dying every
week, that simply accelerates the rush into administration. It is akin to chucking a bomb through the door, as Baroness Altmann points out.
Any meaningful reform requires fresh capital and ideas.
But poor economics and the reputational risks exemplified by Mr Hands? argumentative exit are driving investors
in the opposite direction. A recent report by the Competition and Markets Authority showed that despite growing
demand, the number of beds was going down, not up.
If essential services are to function in the private sector,
it is the longevity and commitment ? and not just the
amount ? of private capital that matters. Inadequate state
funding and weak regulation have contributed to the
malaise into which the care home sector has tumbled.
For the baby boomer generation approaching senescence this does not look a good time to be getting old.
jonathan.ford@ft.com
Financials
Buyout groups sell assets at fastest pace since run-up to crisis as prices surge
JAVIER ESPINOZA
Private equity groups are selling businesses at a faster rate than in the years
leading up to the financial crisis as they
look to cash in on record-high prices
while the global economy remains
strong.
Company sales by private equity groups
in Europe generated ?489bn over the
past four years, a third higher than in
the peak between 2004 and 2007,
according to an analysis of deal volumes
by the Centre for Management Buy-out
Research. The past four years have also
seen the highest prices being paid for
assets sold ? ?254m as an average compared with ?151m through the four
years to 2007, the analysis found.
?It?s a perfect storm,? said Christian
Hess of Investec, the bank that sponsored the survey alongside the British
private equity group Equistone. ?Anyone that can sell is taking advantage.?
The analysis comes at a time when
buyout funds are raising a record
amount of fresh capital as institutional
investors come under pressure to
deploy money in a low interest world.
Industry insiders argue that this
growing demand for private equity has
been helped by waning interest in competing alternative investments such as
hedge funds.
At the same time a glut of readily
available credit for buyers is also propelling asset sales.
Booming sales came as private equity
groups looked to flip assets in anticipa-
tion of a downturn, according to Mr
Hess, Investec?s head of financial sponsor transaction group.
?Sellers will think that they have a
more finite period time left in a sellers?
market and nobody knows whether we
have 12 or 24 months left of [good economic conditions], but as a seller you
want to make sure you use that time
window.?
Mr Hess added that sales are strong
thanks to more buyers entering Europe.
?There are also new buyers in Europe
that weren?t there before, including
trade buyers and private equity groups
from all parts of the world.?
Mr Hess pointed to Los Angeles-based
Leonard Green?s acquisitions of CPA
?It?s a perfect storm . . .
Anyone that can sell is
taking advantage?
Christian Hess, Investec
Global and Pure Gym this year as an
example of firms buying more assets in
the region.
However, not all features of the market are the same as a decade ago as most
buyers of assets are corporations rather
than other private equity houses, the
data showed.
Mr Hess also warned a boom in sales
may not last. ?The sheer number of
portfolio companies ready for sale is
decreasing as we head into the fifth sellers? market,? he said.
?
Monday 18 December 2017
17
FINANCIAL TIMES
COMPANIES
ThyssenKrupp
investors lose
patience with
pace of change
Warning signs
ThyssenKrupp
Earnings (?bn)
Operating profit
Net income
2
1
0
-1
-2
Operating earnings
have recovered as
-3
the company reorganises, but writedowns from steel assets -4
continue to impact
on a net basis
-5
2010
Call for new strategy as German steel
group restructuring enters eighth year
13
15
17
Share price and index rebased
250
200
PATRICK MCGEE ? FRANKFURT
ThyssenKrupp shareholders are frustrated. When Heinrich Hiesinger took
the reins of the German group in 2011,
he promised major asset sales and cultural reforms that would transform it
from a steel company to a diversified
industrial goods maker of elevators,
submarines and vehicle components.
Investors, assuming a restructuring
would take two to five years, were
enthused.
But today, as they reflect on their disappointing returns ? in the past six
years shares have gained 27 per cent,
against 115 per cent for the Dax index of
Germany?s 30 largest companies ? and
the restructuring enters its eighth year,
some are concerned that management
has lost its way.
Among them is David Segal, portfolio
manager at Franklin Templeton, which
owns 2 per cent of the company.
?There?s a lot of potential and opportunity at the company [but] it seems like
the sense of urgency is not there,? he
said. ?The open-endedness of how long
it will take to see things through is a
point of frustration with shareholders.?
Ingo Speich, a portfolio manager at
Union Investment, also thinks management has not acted radically enough.
?Seven years is a long time,? he said.
?From a capital markets perspective, it?s
a dinosaur company.?
In September, the company raised
capital for a second time in five years,
diluting shareholders by about 10 per
cent.
The investors who have stuck around
tend to be on board with Mr Hiesinger?s
grand plan to rid ThyssenKrupp of the
volatile steelmaking business and focus
instead on high-margin industrial
goods. The aim is to ?unlock value?: in
the absence of exposure to the gyrations
of steel prices, ThyssenKrupp shares
should strengthen.
To this end, investors had hoped steel
?They are sticking on
the brakes . . . investors
want them to push down
on the gas pedal?
mills in the US and Brazil ? disastrous
investments from the previous decade
that make up the Steel Americas division ? could be sold at a profit rather
quickly.
Instead, sales were wrapped up only
this year and at a loss. The group has
spent ?12bn on Steel Americas since
2005 and lost ?8bn in the process. The
?1.5bn sale of its Brazilian plant led to a
?900m writedown ? enough to drown
out ThyssenKrupp?s operational profits
for the year.
Yet from management?s perspective,
2017 was a significant year for the
?Strategic Way Forward?programme
launched in 2011.
In addition to exiting Steel Americas,
it laid out plans to spin off its Steel
Europe division next year by merging it
with India?s Tata Steel.
ThyssenKrupp now makes more than
three-quarters of its revenue from capital goods and services.
Michael Shillaker, a Credit Suisse analyst, believes the company is on a turnround path and ?could be one of the best
stories of 2018?.
He points out that in the year that
ended in September, adjusted profit at
the group outside the steelmaking divisions rose 15 per cent to ?1.72bn. Net
debt has shrunk from ?5.8bn in 2011 to
?1.96bn, the lowest since 2008. All five
divisions were profitable last year and
order intake rose 18 per cent to ?42.8bn,
a five-year high.
But as Mr Hiesinger continues to use
the same set of slides he created in 2011
to show the group is making progress
and holding to its promises, some investors are pushing for bigger changes.
Like conglomerates across Europe
and the US, ThyssenKrupp is facing calls
to split up into smaller groups that can
react more quickly to market challenges.
Siemens provides a template. Under
its chief executive, Joe Kaeser, Europe?s
largest conglomerate has been undergoing a major transformation since 2014,
focusing on core industrial operations
and spinning off other businesses.
Cevian, the Swedish activist fund
that has been building a stake in
ThyssenKrupp since 2013 and is now
the second-largest shareholder, has
called for a new strategy.
Lars F鰎berg, Cevian?s co-founder,
pointed out that management had
missed margin targets and told the German business newspaper Handelsblatt:
?Businesses today need to be faster,
more efficient and closer to the customer. They can only do that if they
decentralise.?
Mr F鰎berg suggested that if margin
targets were met, the share price would
be about ?50 ? more than double its
current level.
But ThyssenKrupp?s top managers
are fighting on two fronts. While shareholders accuse them of moving too
slowly, labour unions are worried that
they are being too hasty in spinning off
the steelmaking business, putting jobs
at risk.
Ulrich Lehner, chairman of the
ThyssenKrupp supervisory board,
rejected calls for a split and took issue
with Cevian?s criticism. ?If an investor
positions itself publicly in such a way,
this hurts the company,? he said.
In management?s view, they have not
been slow or failed to keep their promises, rather the problems being tackled
by ThyssenKrupp are deeper than
investors realise.
One anecdote that Mr Hiesinger likes
to tell is from when he visited the company?s Brazilian operations in 2011. The
manager giving him a tour was nearing
retirement and so felt he was in a position to speak more directly. ?Which
story do you want to hear?? he asked Mr
Hiesinger. ?The real story or the one we
keep telling the other managers??
This episode underlined to Mr Hiesinger that reform would have to include
transforming a culture where truth did
not always reach the top. He blamed
earlier problems on an ?old boys? mentality that favoured ?blind loyalty
[over] business success?.
Guido Kerkhoff, the company?s chief
financial officer, said: ?If we look at the
crisis from 2011 to 2013, the question
was whether we would survive at all.
?The number of risks we had coming
out of compliance [the company was
fined for involvement in a cartel, amid
other problems], the investment in the
Americas, the stainless steel sector having huge losses every year due to overcapacities in Europe ? it required us to
solve issues where the underlying issues
were not working and the culture was
not good.?
For these reasons, Mr Kerkhoff rejects
comparison with Siemens, where he
said the problem was ?optimising a
portfolio of not-bad companies?.
ThyssenKrupp was tackling problems
that affected the entire industry, he said.
The survival of steelmaking in Europe,
for example, was likely to require farreaching consolidation that would limit
production and make it competitive
with cheap imports from China.
Mr Speich said he did understand how
bad things were and credited Mr Hiesinger with rescuing ?an awful situation? in
2011 that otherwise would have bankrupted the company.
He believed that after two years of big
changes, management wavered in its
plans as it realised the magnitude of
problems it had inherited. Now, the
company?s strategy looked too conservative, he said.
? T h ey a re s t i c k i n g o n t h e
brakes . . . whereas investors want
them to push down on the gas pedal.?
Mr Segal said progress was so slow he
was not yet sure whether he would vote
in favour of management at the annual
shareholder meeting next month.
?There hasn?t been a solid answer of
why they need so much more time,? he
said.
Christian Strenger, a corporate governance expert, said a vote against the
management board would be ?premature?. He sympathised with investors
who wanted the restructuring to move
faster, he said, but given the labour situation and the conservative culture of the
business, management?s current plan
may be the only one ?with more than a
50 per cent chance of succeeding?.
DAX 30
150
ThyssenKrupp
100
50
2010
Workers protest against ThyssenKrupp?s plans to merge its European steel unit with Tata Steel ? Thomas Frey/AFP/Getty Images
13
15
17
Sources: company; Thomson Reuters Datastream
?
18
FINANCIAL TIMES
Monday 18 December 2017
COMPANIES
Insurance. Technology
Smart homes open the door to growth for insurers
Companies hope connected
sensors and alarms will
help to bring down claims
OLIVER RALPH
Patrick Milne likes his gadgets. His four
bedroom semi-detached house in north
London has door sensors, motion sensors, smoke alarms, leak detectors and
an internal camera. All of them, of
course, are connected to his phone.
He got these devices for nothing: they
came as part of a home insurance policy
from a company called Neos, which is
backed by, among others, the former
England footballer Gary Lineker.
The reason they were free is simple.
Insurers hope they will help to keep
claims down and are spending money to
try to encourage millions of others to
follow Mr Milne?s example.
?The flood detector earned its keep
after about a week,? said Mr Milne. ?The
boiler started dribbling water on to the
floor. Within seconds the alarm went off
and we got a bucket under it. Rather
than a couple of grand?s worth of damage, we had a bit of mopping up to do.?
The market for ?smart? internet connected home gadgets is growing rapidly,
attracting some of the largest technology groups such as Google and Amazon.
According to IHS Markit, the world
market for connected home devices will
grow from just over 100m units this year
to about 600m by 2021.
But some worry that the proliferation
of connected devices in the home brings
its own problems, increasing, for one
thing, the risk that hackers will be able
to discover what people have and even,
when they are away, how to get through
the door.
Amazon recently launched a smart
lock that homeowners can use to let a
courier into the house when they are
out.
Neos does not yet offer smart locks.
Matt Poll, the company?s founder, said
market research suggested that customers were not keen. ?There?s a barrier,? he
said. ?Customers have a fear of being
hacked. That?s why smart lock penetration is low.?
Apple recently had to fix a problem
with its HomeKit system that could
have allowed hackers to access smart
locks.
Few insurers have decided how to
price policies for homes secured by
smart locks. ?Whenever you connect a
device to the internet, there is a risk
they?ll be hacked,? said Leigh Calton, a
former executive at the insurer Ageas
who now runs Cerulean Digital Consulting. ?There are very few insurers who
have practical experience of the data
provided by these devices.
?Insurers would probably price your
policy on the basis that you do not have
a [standard] five-lever lock, not on the
basis that you do have a smart lock.?
But insurers also want to use smart
technology to change the way they
relate to customers: becoming service
providers rather than people who col-
Safe as houses
The ?connected? home: how smart is the technology?
Insurers are investigating whether internet connected sensors around the house linked
to a homeowner?s mobile device can be used to bring claims down
Smoke/carbon detector
Interconnected gadgets such
as this can alert homeowners
and insurers when a fire starts
Window sensors
Security packages are being
pushed by insurers who want
a more hands-on role in home
protection
Camera
Some security measures carry
risks that hackers will be able to
work out when a property is empty
?The technology will
fundamentally change the
relationship between
insurers and homeowners?
lect premiums and make payouts. Success would reduce their dependence on
annual renewals.
Sean Ringsted, chief digital officer at
insurer Chubb, said: ?The technology
will fundamentally change the relationship between insurers and homeowners. There?s a big shift from ?repair and
replace? to ?predict and prevent?. Now
it?s not just risk transfer ? the service is
the product.?
Chubb is not the only one looking in
this direction. In the UK, RSA and Aviva
are among those working on smart
home insurance. Elsewhere, State
Farm, Zurich, Axa and Allianz are getting involved.
The market is also attracting start-ups.
As well as Neos, there is Buzzmove,
which started life helping people to move
house and is now planning to introduce
insurance based on connected devices.
PolicyCastle, a home insurance start-up,
Some of the
companies working on
smart home insurance
Allianz
Aviva
Axa
RSA
State Farm
Smart locks
Some devices, such as locks that
can be opened remotely from a
mobile phone for couriers, have
not been popular so far
Zurich
Trading Directory
Leak detector
Leaks, one of the biggest sources
of home insurance claims, could be
caught earlier in the
interconnected world
FT graphic
Source: FT research
is offering customers a 15 per cent discount if they install a smart home securitysystemcalledCocoon.
But some industry veterans think
consumers might not be so keen. ?One
thing insurers misjudge is the concept of
customer engagement,? said Mr Calton.
?Insurers say they?ll be able to communicate with customers on a weekly or
daily basis. But why would customers
want that level of contact??
Connected homes are also susceptible
to a different kind of insecurity, with
privacy groups warning that people
could unthinkingly open their doors to
surveillance by large tech groups.
Matt Lehman, a managing director at
consultancy Accenture, said: ?Trust and
privacy are a real concern . . . customers
havetoknowhowthedataaregoingtobe
used. Transparency from the insurer to
thecustomerisveryimportant.?
Experience suggests that the rollout of
smart home-enabled insurance policies
couldalsoberatherslow.?Black-box?car
insurance?inwhichinsurersputasmall
box in the car to assess a customer?s driving and give discounts to those who drive
safely ? has been around for years but
not widely adopted. One of the barriers,
until recently, has been the cost of the
devices. The average UK car insurance
policy sells for less than �0, so it does
not make financial sense for insurers to
supply black boxes that, until recently,
costmorethan�0.
A similar problem could hit smart
devices for the home. ?The commercial
argument at the moment doesn?t stack
up,? said Mr Calton.
The devices that Neos offers would
sell for about �0 ? well above the
average �0 cost of a UK home and
contents insurance policy. Mr Poll said
the company received discounts
because it bought in bulk and was relying on lower claims, costs and customer
loyalty to offset the upfront cost.
Mr Milne said he would be happy to
stay loyal to Neos. ?I think if no one
comes up with a stunning deal we?ll
probably stick with this,? he said. ?I like
techy toys but nothing too complicated.
I?m very good at breaking things, and
this is very difficult to break.?
Pharmaceuticals
Teva risks US ire with plan to lift drug prices
DAVID CROW ? NEW YORK
Teva, the Israeli drugmaker, plans to
raise prices on a string of medicines in
the US to help repair its ailing business
? even as analysts warn that the move
risks provoking a backlash among customers and politicians.
Like other generic drugmakers, Teva
has signed multi-medicine contracts
with many customers where it sells
some products at break-even or a loss
and tries to recoup the difference on
more profitable lines.
But Kare Schultz, Teva executive, has
told investors he wants to either raise
the price of some of these ?non-economical? drugs or stop manufacturing them
altogether. ?With pricing dynamics, I
think it?s reasonable and responsible to
reach a sustainable price level,? Mr
Schultz told the Financial Times.
Business Opportunities
Wildfires in California add to
?horrific year? of disaster losses
Readers are strongly recommended to take appropriate
Insurers are braced for another multibillion-dollar loss from the fires in
southern California, capping what is
already shaping up to be one of the
costliest ever years for the industry.
FT TRADING DIRECTORY
.....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Financial Advertising
UK: +44 20 7873 4017 | aman.dogra@ft.com
naive? about pricing dynamics in the
generics industry, where Teva?s customers have the upper hand.
Many of the largest buyers of copycat
drugs in the US, such as pharmacy
chains and wholesalers, have clubbed
together to form ?mega buyers?, which
have demanded large discounts that are
pressuring margins across the industry.
?If you?re a custom shoe maker, you
might be able to name your price,? said
Mr Maris. ?But when you make commodity generics, if customers ask you to
break even or lose a little money, you?re
going to have to do that.?
Ronny Gal, an analyst at Bernstein,
said: ?I think Teva will get some leeway
to raise prices, but if they start bringing
them up more than two or three times ?
and then declare victory to [Wall Street]
that they?re beating their numbers ?
then they?re going to get slapped down.?
Insurance
ALISTAIR GRAY ? NEW YORK
OLIVER RALPH ? LONDON
Trading Directory
The price rises are part of a turnround
plan unveiled by Mr Schultz last week,
which will see Teva slash 14,000 jobs,
suspend its dividend and sell assets as it
tries to cut $3bn of costs and repay
$35bn of debt.
But the push also comes at a time of
heightened political scrutiny of drug
pricing in the US, the world?s largest and
most profitable healthcare market, and
some analysts warned the plan could
backfire.
?Do you think regulators or politicians are going to let a company that is
firing thousands of US workers start
raising lots of prices?? asked David
Maris, analyst at Wells Fargo. ?They
might as well have raised a red flag in
front of a bull.?
Mr Maris said the plan suggested Mr
Schultz, a veteran of the branded pharmaceuticals sector, was ?completely
Adam Kamins, senior economist at
Moody?s Analytics, estimates that losses
from the Thomas Fire alone ? the most
serious of several in the region ? would
come in at about $1.5bn. That could rise
sharply depending on how much it
spreads. The ultimate losses will depend
inlargepartonwindsinthecomingdays.
Insurers already face claims of more
than $100bn from a series of natural disasters this year, including hurricanes in
the Caribbean and southern US, earthquakes in Mexico and wildfires in northern California in October.
Threats from the latest fires grew over
the weekend. On Saturday, fire authorities ordered evacuations from some
parts of Santa Barbara, a city just north
of Los Angeles, along with nearby Montecito, home to celebrities including
Oprah Winfrey and Ellen DeGeneres.
Properties already damaged include
multimillion-dollar homes in Bel-Air, a
ritzy area of Los Angeles.
Yet residents in less wealthy fire-exposed areas could also pay a price, as
insurers seek to recover the costs
through higher premiums.
The cost of the disasters is likely to
push insurance prices up at the January
1 reinsurance renewal season. Some
executives are predicting widespread
increases as higher reinsurance prices
filter down to the primary insurance
that individuals and businesses buy.
Tomas Girnius, manager and principal scientist at the modelling agency
AIR Worldwide, said: ?The current siege
of wildfires in Southern California
meets all the criteria for extreme losscausing fires in that area: dry vegetation; fire ignitions in the wilderness
close to residential areas; fierce . . . and
recurring Santa Ana winds.?
Authorities in California have warned
that about 18,000 properties are at risk
from the Thomas Fire. So far, only 1,230
have been hit. The North Bay fires in
California in October damaged about
15,000 structures, costing at least
$9.4bn. Dave Jones, California?s insurance commissioner, has called on insurers to accelerate processing claims.
?This is just one more loss for insurers
after a horrific year,? added Mike
Schnur, partner at the broker TigerRisk.
professional advice before entering into obligations.
Legal Notices
Businesses
For Sale
Business for Sale, Business Opportunities,
Business Services,
Business Wanted, Franchises
Runs Daily
.............................................................................................................................
Classified Business Advertising
UK: +44 20 7873 4000 | Email:
acs.emea@ft.com
Monday 18 December 2017
?
FINANCIAL TIMES
19
20
FINANCIAL TIMES
Monday 18 December 2017
MARKET DATA
WORLD MARKETS AT A GLANCE
FT.COM/MARKETSDATA
Change during previous day?s trading (%)
S&P 500
Nasdaq Composite
0.90%
Dow Jones Ind
1.17%
FTSE 100
0.58%
FTSE Eurofirst 300
Nikkei
-0.18%
0.57%
Hang Seng
-0.62%
FTSE All World $
-1.09%
0.29%
$ per ?
$ per �
-0.085%
-0.745%
Stock Market movements over last 30 days, with the FTSE All-World in the same currency as a comparison
AMERICAS
EUROPE
Index
Nov 16 - S&P 500
All World
Index
Nov 16 - Dec 15
S&P/TSX COMP
New York
2,675.81
All World
15,935.37
2,564.62
Day 0.90%
Month 3.76%
Year 18.75%
Day 0.16%
New York
IPC
Nasdaq Composite
Month 1.03%
Toronto
Nov 16 - Dec 15
FTSE 100
16,041.98
7,386.94
Year 5.41%
Mexico City
� per ?
0.027%
Oil Brent $ Sep
Gold $
0.30%
0.29%
0.798%
ASIA
Index
All World
London
Index
Nov 16 - Dec 15
Xetra Dax
All World
Frankfurt
7,490.57
Month 1.51%
Year 6.93%
FTSE Eurofirst 300
All World
Index
Nov 16 - Dec 15
Kospi
Tokyo
22,553.22
All World
Seoul
2,534.79
2,482.07
22,028.32
Day 0.27%
Europe
Index
Nov 16 - Dec 15
Nikkei 225
13,103.56
13,047.22
Day 0.57%
� per $
Month 0.98%
Year 15.28%
Ibex 35
Day -0.62%
Madrid
Month 0.77%
Year 17.14%
Hang Seng
Day 0.51%
Hong Kong
Month -1.76%
Year 21.86%
FTSE Straits Times
Singapore
6,936.58
Day 1.17%
Month 2.95%
Year 27.59%
Dow Jones Industrial
1,513.42
Day -0.19%
New York
1,528.26
48,132.87
47,832.77
6,706.21
Month 0.93%
Year 4.93%
Bovespa
Day -0.18%
S鉶 Paulo
Month 1.63%
Year 7.58%
CAC 40
10,150.40
10,088.70
Day -0.26%
Paris
Month 1.60%
Year 10.11%
FTSE MIB
29,018.76
Day -1.09%
Milan
72,607.70
23,271.28
Day 0.58%
Month 5.31%
Country
Index
Argentina
Australia
Merval
All Ordinaries
S&P/ASX 200
S&P/ASX 200 Res
ATX
BEL 20
BEL Mid
Bovespa
S&P/TSX 60
S&P/TSX Comp
S&P/TSX Div Met & Min
IGPA Gen
FTSE A200
FTSE B35
Shanghai A
Shanghai B
Shanghai Comp
Shenzhen A
Shenzhen B
COLCAP
CROBEX
70,826.59
Day 0.25%
Year 24.55%
Latest
Previous
27021.94
6087.10
5997.00
3847.50
3279.24
3992.27
6687.50
72607.70
953.69
16041.98
798.07
26234.79
10390.14
9000.71
3420.53
336.65
3266.14
1988.47
1146.25
1475.39
1859.34
27139.10
6096.40
6011.30
3850.50
3311.35
3985.22
6710.64
72428.93
951.45
16016.46
769.54
25682.70
10515.48
8988.96
3448.16
336.76
3292.44
2002.89
1156.99
1472.75
1859.76
Country
Month 2.51%
Index
Year 24.34%
Latest
Previous
5,349.30
5,336.39
Day -0.15%
Country
Month 0.63%
Year 12.16%
Index
Latest
Previous
CSE M&P Gen
69.18
69.70
Italy
FTSE Italia All-Share
24421.38
PX
1062.05
1065.42
FTSE Italia Mid Cap
42481.83
OMXC Copenahgen 20
1005.16
1017.06
FTSE MIB
22094.04
EGX 30
14679.91
14651.42
Japan
2nd Section
7184.92
Austria
OMX Tallinn
1191.07
1189.27
Nikkei 225
22553.22
Belgium
OMX Helsinki General
9425.43
9420.22
S&P Topix 150
1443.21
CAC 40
5349.30
5357.14
Topix
1793.47
Brazil
SBF 120
4267.01
4274.04
Jordan
Amman SE
2147.16
Canada
Germany
M-DAX
26043.16
26071.02
Kenya
NSE 20
3731.79
TecDAX
2532.04
2535.83
Kuwait
KSX Market Index
6331.72
XETRA Dax
13103.56
13068.08
Latvia
OMX Riga
1015.36
Chile
Greece
Athens Gen
767.76
767.57
Lithuania
OMX Vilnius
651.83
China
FTSE/ASE 20
1997.73
2003.53
Luxembourg
LuxX
1655.74
Hong Kong
Hang Seng
28848.11
29166.38
Malaysia
FTSE Bursa KLCI
1753.07
HS China Enterprise
11365.92
11531.73
Mexico
IPC
48132.87
HSCC Red Chip
4238.98
4300.49
Morocco
MASI
12441.73
Hungary
Bux
38657.37
38616.19
Netherlands
AEX
548.67
India
BSE Sensex
33462.97
33246.70
AEX All Share
817.38
Nifty 500
9216.75
9133.65
New Zealand
NZX 50
8360.86
Colombia
Indonesia
Jakarta Comp
6119.42
6113.65
Nigeria
SE All Share
37933.70
Croatia
Ireland
ISEQ Overall
6912.76
6968.88
Norway
Oslo All Share
879.93
Israel
Tel Aviv 125
1325.91
1323.73
Pakistan
KSE 100
38645.90
(c) Closed. (u) Unavaliable. ? Correction. ? Subject to official recalculation. For more index coverage please see www.ft.com/worldindices. A fuller version of this table is available on the ft.com research data archive.
24522.92
42578.71
22191.74
7195.27
22694.45
1458.05
1808.14
2131.52
3750.53
6237.87
1008.38
650.53
1655.35
1759.00
48222.38
12414.85
547.47
815.51
8323.75
38534.64
884.86
38223.55
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Denmark
Egypt
Estonia
Finland
France
stock
traded m's
Apple
65.0
Amazon.com
54.1
Facebook
48.8
Microsoft
45.8
Oracle
35.4
Alphabet
34.5
Bank Of America
34.4
Alphabet
33.8
Nvidia
30.9
J P Morgan Chase & Co
30.7
close
price
173.87
1179.14
180.18
86.85
48.30
1064.19
29.04
1072.00
191.56
106.14
Day's
change
1.65
4.88
1.79
2.16
-1.89
15.04
0.31
14.53
5.09
1.48
BIGGEST MOVERS
Close
price
Day's
change
Day's
chng%
13.62
19.75
93.02
21.04
16.98
1.17
1.10
4.49
1.00
0.79
9.40
5.90
5.07
4.99
4.88
52.93
8.08
5.37
15.48
94.86
-4.38
-0.61
-0.29
-0.76
-4.16
-7.64
-7.02
-5.12
-4.68
-4.20
Ups
Under Armour
Discovery Communications
Biomarin Pharmaceutical
Discovery Communications
Freeport-mcmoran
Downs
Csx
Frontier Communications
Sirius Xm Holdings
Mattel
Centene
Based on the constituents of the S&P500 and the Nasdaq 100 index
3,341.30
Day -0.55%
Year 28.46%
Shanghai
Day -0.44%
Country
22,094.04
Year 16.32%
Month -0.29%
Index
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Latest
Manila Comp
Wig
PSI 20
PSI General
BET Index
Micex Index
RTX
TADAWUL All Share Index
FTSE Straits Times
SAX
SBI TOP
FTSE/JSE All Share
FTSE/JSE Res 20
FTSE/JSE Top 40
Kospi
Kospi 200
IBEX 35
CSE All Share
OMX Stockholm 30
OMX Stockholm AS
SMI Index
Romania
Russia
Saudi-Arabia
Singapore
Slovakia
Slovenia
South Africa
South Korea
Spain
Sri Lanka
Sweden
Switzerland
Previous
8337.04
62619.60
5385.63
2976.07
7603.31
2143.99
1148.27
7075.72
3416.94
325.16
793.01
57412.76
35960.34
50953.23
2482.07
326.23
10150.40
6352.10
1594.35
572.36
9394.71
Country
8461.06
62916.39
5356.11
2964.60
7587.26
2152.41
1153.32
7100.46
3435.78
325.16
794.28
57845.57
35944.19
51498.36
2469.48
324.74
10176.50
6357.04
1609.60
576.36
9383.02
Taiwan
Thailand
Turkey
UAE
UK
USA
Venezuela
Vietnam
Month -4.76%
Index
Year 4.00%
Latest
Weighted Pr
Bangkok SET
BIST 100
Abu Dhabi General Index
FT 30
FTSE 100
FTSE 4Good UK
FTSE All Share
FTSE techMARK 100
DJ Composite
DJ Industrial
DJ Transport
DJ Utilities
Nasdaq 100
Nasdaq Cmp
NYSE Comp
S&P 500
Wilshire 5000
IBC
VNI
Mumbai
33,462.97
Day 0.65%
Previous
10491.44
1717.69
109666.44
4339.22
3229.80
7490.57
6683.90
4108.96
4562.38
8299.85
24651.74
10393.01
753.38
6466.32
6936.58
12699.69
2675.81
27734.32
1265.50
935.16
Year 15.67%
33,106.82
3,420.53
Day -0.80%
Month 0.53%
BSE Sensex
3,559.96
22,206.60
Country
Cross-Border
10538.01
1714.99
108153.16
4381.80
3218.30
7448.12
6651.20
4088.58
4572.35
8253.27
24508.66
10327.95
750.57
6389.91
6856.53
12629.07
2652.01
27503.09
1257.62
935.85
Month 1.58%
Index
DJ Global Titans ($)
Euro Stoxx 50 (Eur)
Euronext 100 ID
FTSE 4Good Global ($)
FTSE All World ($)
FTSE E300
FTSE Eurotop 100
FTSE Global 100 ($)
FTSE Gold Min ($)
FTSE Latibex Top (Eur)
FTSE Multinationals ($)
FTSE World ($)
FTSEurofirst 100 (Eur)
FTSEurofirst 80 (Eur)
MSCI ACWI Fr ($)
MSCI All World ($)
MSCI Europe (Eur)
MSCI Pacific ($)
S&P Euro (Eur)
S&P Europe 350 (Eur)
S&P Global 1200 ($)
Stoxx 50 (Eur)
Year 25.79%
Latest
Previous
300.88
3560.53
1038.24
6640.75
335.22
1528.26
2983.50
1661.45
1423.94
4080.40
1918.42
592.80
4322.90
4967.24
505.51
2077.55
1610.26
2824.64
1650.46
1570.28
2328.25
3184.47
299.00
3556.22
1038.50
6606.65
334.24
1531.06
2987.89
1652.24
1423.37
4040.10
1923.63
590.76
4324.22
4966.28
506.84
2084.37
1618.97
2822.00
1651.37
1574.31
2321.82
3186.85
UK MARKET WINNERS AND LOSERS
STOCK MARKET: BIGGEST MOVERS
AMERICA
ACTIVE STOCKS
Month -1.04%
Shanghai Composite
24,651.74
3,416.94
28,848.11
LONDON
ACTIVE STOCKS
EURO MARKETS
ACTIVE STOCKS
stock
traded m's
Royal Dutch Shell
389.8
Hsbc Holdings
353.5
British American Tobacco
318.2
Anglo American
301.3
Rio Tinto
252.1
Unilever
247.2
Bp
226.8
Glencore
225.5
Reckitt Benckiser
219.0
Shire
208.3
close
price
2428.50
751.50
4967.00
1410.00
3624.50
4196.00
505.20
362.75
6731.00
3762.50
Day's
change
33.50
-5.00
42.50
21.50
62.50
56.00
1.20
5.40
31.00
77.50
BIGGEST MOVERS
Ups
Hansteen Holdings
Talktalk Telecom
Vedanta Resources
Capital & Counties Properties
Workspace
Close
price
Day's
change
Day's
chng%
135.60
142.90
723.00
278.20
960.00
7.20
6.80
33.00
9.80
32.50
5.61
5.00
4.78
3.65
3.50
Ups
E.on Se Na O.n.
Adidas Ag Na O.n.
Gecina Nom.
Ferrovial
Kpn Kon
Downs
Vectura
Electra Private Equity
Serco
Mitie
Restaurant
106.00
912.50
93.95
192.50
279.70
-6.00
-38.00
-3.75
-7.00
-9.80
-5.36
-4.00
-3.84
-3.51
-3.39
Downs
Hennes & Mauritz Ab , H & M Ser. B
Skanska Ab Ser. B
Ses
Omv Ag
Rwe Ag St O.n.
Based on the constituents of the FTSE 350 index
stock
traded m's
Nestle N
1578.7
Novartis N
979.0
Roche Gs
924.2
Telefonica
819.9
Total
778.7
Sap Se O.n.
736.2
Hennes & Mauritz Ab , H & M Ser. B
704.6
Bayer Ag Na O.n.
658.6
Siemens Ag Na
603.6
Allianz Se Na O.n.
599.9
close
price
72.24
71.81
209.18
8.25
46.51
97.35
17.44
106.50
116.45
197.15
Day's
change
-0.60
-0.04
2.06
0.01
-0.70
0.58
-2.60
1.40
0.25
1.40
BIGGEST MOVERS
Close
price
Day's
change
Day's
chng%
9.39
172.25
147.85
18.33
2.92
0.20
3.15
2.30
0.29
0.04
2.22
1.86
1.58
1.58
1.49
17.44
17.20
13.20
49.95
16.81
-2.60
-0.93
-0.68
-2.31
-0.46
-12.98
-5.13
-4.86
-4.42
-2.69
Based on the constituents of the FTSEurofirst 300 Eurozone index
TOKYO
ACTIVE STOCKS
stock
traded m's
Softbank .
791.9
Mitsubishi Ufj Fin,.
679.1
Kddi
620.4
Toyota Motor
607.3
Nippon Telegraph And Telephone
521.0
Sumitomo Mitsui Fin,.
446.3
Ntt Docomo,.
386.3
Sony
371.5
Rakuten .
341.6
Mizuho Fin,.
302.8
close
price
8931.00
798.50
2922.00
6966.00
5351.00
4792.00
2686.00
5006.00
1025.00
200.80
Day's
change
-219.00
-11.10
-208.00
-130.00
-305.00
-29.00
-129.50
-10.00
-59.50
-1.90
BIGGEST MOVERS
Ups
Tokai Carbon Co.,
Showa Denko K.k.
Tokyo Dome
Pioneer
Comsys Holdings
Close
price
Day's
change
Day's
chng%
1306.00
4470.00
1168.00
219.00
3270.00
173.00
460.00
54.00
8.00
95.00
15.27
11.47
4.85
3.79
2.99
Downs
Kddi
Rakuten .
Nippon Telegraph And Telephone
Ntt Docomo,.
Tokyo Gas Co.,
2922.00
1025.00
5351.00
2686.00
2560.00
-208.00
-59.50
-305.00
-129.50
-120.00
-6.65
-5.49
-5.39
-4.60
-4.48
Based on the constituents of the Nikkei 225 index
FTSE 100
Winners
Mondi
Hargreaves Lansdown
Bhp Billiton
Glencore
Tui Ag
Rio Tinto
Antofagasta
Dcc
Micro Focus Int
Wpp
Bt
Babcock Int
Dec 15
price(p)
%Chg
week
%Chg
ytd
Dec 15
price(p)
%Chg
week
%Chg
ytd
9.1
40.6
8.6
30.8
25.7
14.8
37.9
19.7
15.6
-
FTSE 250
Winners
Vedanta Resources
Dixons Carphone
Ig Holdings
Cineworld
Petrofac
Acacia Mining
Diploma
Indivior
Euromoney Institutional Investor
Kaz Minerals
Centamin
Evraz
723.00
189.60
733.00
576.00
454.40
179.40
1200.00
393.00
1233.00
778.50
144.70
320.40
13.2
12.8
10.8
9.7
8.5
7.9
7.6
7.4
6.7
6.4
6.3
5.9
48.4
1.9
15.5
32.7
7.7
4.5
44.5
FTSE SmallCap
Winners
Lonmin
Interserve
Games Workshop
Zotefoams
Ophir Energy
Petra Diamonds
Soco Int
Kainos
Hollywood Bowl
Hostelworld
Motorpoint
Volution
1818.00
1705.00
1419.50
362.75
1462.00
3624.50
930.50
7230.00
2518.00
1389.00
277.55
684.50
7.3
6.6
5.8
5.0
4.8
4.5
4.1
4.0
3.8
3.6
3.6
3.5
Losers
Ashtead
Next
Marks And Spencer
Centrica
Crh
Nmc Health
Sainsbury (j)
Bunzl
Whitbread
Smith & Nephew
Morrison (wm) Supermarkets
Easyjet
1894.00
4246.00
303.80
138.00
2532.00
2800.00
236.10
2016.00
3864.00
1282.00
215.50
1417.00
-6.2
-5.3
-4.8
-4.2
-3.7
-3.5
-3.5
-3.3
-3.3
-3.2
-2.9
-2.7
19.9
-14.8
-13.2
-41.1
81.3
-5.3
-4.4
2.3
5.0
-6.6
41.0
Losers
Capita
Nostrum Oil & Gas
Wood (john)
Inmarsat
Saga
Talktalk Telecom
Aggreko
Sirius Minerals
Sports Direct Int
Ocado
Millennium & Copthorne Hotels
Travis Perkins
404.40
298.40
620.50
443.30
124.00
142.90
758.00
22.99
368.90
337.00
581.50
1517.00
-16.8
-9.4
-9.0
-8.7
-8.1
-7.5
-5.8
-5.7
-5.3
-5.3
-5.2
-5.1
19.4
32.4
27.6
26.3
4.5
Losers
Luceco
Sdl
Hss Hire
Cambian
Dialight
Mothercare
Town Centre Securities
Treatt
Nanoco
Gem Diamonds
Findel
Carr's
Dec 15
price(p)
%Chg
week
%Chg
ytd
83.75
83.50
2500.00
469.50
68.50
74.75
111.00
337.75
205.00
371.00
222.75
212.75
43.2
32.0
19.7
16.3
9.6
9.1
8.0
7.9
7.9
7.8
7.1
6.9
250.4
87.8
-29.0
65.2
23.3
65.8
77.1
31.9
128.00
348.00
25.50
160.00
570.00
64.25
270.00
446.50
25.25
71.75
194.00
121.50
-43.9
-26.0
-20.9
-17.6
-12.6
-8.9
-8.2
-7.8
-7.3
-6.8
-6.5
-6.4
29.3
-0.7
76.8
3.7
-
Dec 15
price(p)
%Chg
week
%Chg
ytd
19582.33
3584.93
17307.15
3190.99
8785.24
3079.31
10768.56
2356.65
12388.93
4528.34
2770.57
3087.25
7.1
5.6
4.5
2.8
2.6
2.0
1.9
1.9
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.6
8.9
58.9
16.8
3.2
5.4
15.7
24.3
-7.9
9.5
11.9
12.2
Losers
Oil Equipment & Services
12049.15
Construction & Materials
6210.71
General Retailers
2449.29
Health Care Equip.& Services 7501.48
Support Services
7774.83
General Industrials
6165.56
Gas Water & Multiutilities
5132.11
Industrial Engineering
12042.97
Household Goods
18120.34
Food & Drug Retailers
3193.58
Automobiles & Parts
6967.44
Electricity
7715.09
-4.6
-2.6
-1.9
-1.9
-1.3
-1.2
-1.1
-0.7
-0.6
-0.6
-0.5
-0.4
-9.2
-5.4
2.2
10.4
11.9
-15.2
17.2
12.8
3.4
-
Industry Sectors
Winners
Forestry & Paper
Industrial Metals
Mining
Fixed Line Telecommunication
Oil & Gas Producers
Real Estate Investment Trusts
General Financial
Software & Computer Services
Pharmaceuticals & Biotech.
Banks
Real Estate & Investment Servic
Nonlife Insurance
Based on last week's performance. ?Price at suspension.
CURRENCIES
Dec 15
Argentina
Australia
Bahrain
Bolivia
Brazil
Canada
Chile
China
Colombia
Costa Rica
Czech Republic
Denmark
Egypt
Hong Kong
Hungary
India
Currency
Argentine Peso
Australian Dollar
Bahrainin Dinar
Bolivian Boliviano
Brazilian Real
Canadian Dollar
Chilean Peso
Chinese Yuan
Colombian Peso
Costa Rican Colon
Czech Koruna
Danish Krone
Egyptian Pound
Hong Kong Dollar
Hungarian Forint
Indian Rupee
DOLLAR
Closing
Mid
17.5975
1.3072
0.3770
6.9100
3.3191
1.2826
637.9600
6.6082
2997.8500
565.9000
21.8278
6.3272
17.8670
7.8133
266.7460
64.1075
Day's
Change
0.2525
0.0028
-0.0104
-0.0016
-1.4050
-0.0006
-2.2300
-0.2400
-0.0014
0.0049
0.0320
0.0059
0.3327
-0.2350
EURO
Closing
Mid
20.7044
1.5380
0.4436
8.1300
3.9050
1.5090
750.5942
7.7749
3527.1316
665.8117
25.6816
7.4442
21.0215
9.1928
313.8410
75.4259
POUND
Day's
Closing
Day's
Change
Mid
Change
0.2798
23.4346
0.1505
0.0020
1.7408
-0.0102
-0.0004
0.5021
-0.0040
-0.0069
9.2020
-0.0740
-0.0156
4.4200
-0.0496
-0.0032
1.7080
-0.0159
-2.2908 849.5713
-8.7175
-0.0073
8.8001
-0.0716
-5.6172 3992.2375
-35.0952
-0.8471 753.6089
-6.3820
-0.0234
29.0681
-0.2356
-0.0005
8.4259
-0.0612
0.0199
23.7935
-0.1484
-0.0008
10.4050
-0.0757
0.1256 355.2256
-2.4098
-0.3407
85.3719
-1.0019
Dec 15
Indonesia
Israel
Japan
..One Month
..Three Month
..One Year
Kenya
Kuwait
Malaysia
Mexico
New Zealand
Nigeria
Norway
Pakistan
Peru
Philippines
Currency
Indonesian Rupiah
Israeli Shekel
Japanese Yen
Kenyan Shilling
Kuwaiti Dinar
Malaysian Ringgit
Mexican Peson
New Zealand Dollar
Nigerian Naira
Norwegian Krone
Pakistani Rupee
Peruvian Nuevo Sol
Philippine Peso
DOLLAR
Closing
Mid
13576.5000
3.5213
112.6550
112.6547
112.6543
112.6524
103.1000
0.3020
4.0855
19.1168
1.4269
359.5000
8.3390
109.6250
3.2715
50.4600
Day's
Change
-1.0000
-0.0067
0.0300
0.0294
0.0287
0.0248
-0.1500
-0.0001
0.0207
-0.0049
-2.0000
0.0503
-0.0250
0.0285
-0.0020
EURO
POUND
Closing
Day's
Closing
Day's
Mid
Change
Mid
Change
15973.4968 -14.7103 18079.8478
-146.7083
4.1429
-0.0115
4.6892
-0.0468
132.5447
-0.0771 150.0226
-1.1661
132.5448
-0.0768 150.0226
-1.1661
132.5448
-0.0767 150.0225
-1.1665
132.5450
-0.0763 150.0226
-1.1674
121.3027
-0.2795 137.2982
-1.3054
0.3553
-0.0004
0.4022
-0.0033
4.8068
-0.0041
5.4407
-0.0437
22.4919
0.0054
25.4578
-0.1769
1.6789
-0.0072
1.9003
-0.0219
422.9711
-2.7137 478.7461
-6.5344
9.8113
0.0510
11.1050
-0.0217
128.9797
-0.1388 145.9876
-1.2074
3.8491
0.0303
4.3567
0.0032
59.3689
-0.0527
67.1976
-0.5430
Dec 15
Currency
Poland
Polish Zloty
Romania
Romanian Leu
Russia
Russian Ruble
Saudi Arabia
Saudi Riyal
Singapore
Singapore Dollar
South Africa
South African Rand
South Korea
South Korean Won
Sweden
Swedish Krona
Switzerland
Swiss Franc
Taiwan
New Taiwan Dollar
Thailand
Thai Baht
Tunisia
Tunisian Dinar
Turkey
Turkish Lira
United Arab Emirates
UAE Dirham
United Kingdom
Pound Sterling
..One Month
DOLLAR
Closing
Mid
3.5782
3.9363
58.8025
3.7503
1.3479
13.2163
1089.5500
8.4966
0.9918
29.9835
32.5100
2.4856
3.8664
3.6729
0.7509
0.7513
Day's
Change
-0.0043
0.0018
-0.0369
0.0009
-0.2138
0.5500
0.0611
0.0017
-0.0160
0.0400
-0.0011
-0.0161
0.0060
0.0061
EURO
Closing
Mid
4.2099
4.6313
69.1843
4.4124
1.5859
15.5496
1281.9141
9.9967
1.1670
35.2772
38.2498
2.9244
4.5490
4.3214
0.8835
0.8834
POUND
Day's
Closing
Day's
Change
Mid
Change
-0.0086
4.7651
-0.0441
-0.0018
5.2420
-0.0397
-0.1021
78.3073
-0.6792
-0.0037
4.9943
-0.0402
-0.0003
1.7950
-0.0133
-0.2649
17.6001
-0.4285
-0.4392 1450.9536
-10.9289
0.0635
11.3149
-0.0090
0.0011
1.3208
-0.0083
-0.0488
39.9290
-0.3425
0.0147
43.2936
-0.2944
-0.0038
3.3100
-0.0281
-0.0229
5.1488
-0.0631
-0.0037
4.8912
-0.0393
0.0063
0.0063
-
Dec 15
..Three Month
..One Year
United States
..One Month
..Three Month
..One Year
Venezuela
Vietnam
European Union
..One Month
..Three Month
..One Year
Currency
United States Dollar
Venezuelan Bolivar Fuerte
Vietnamese Dong
Euro
DOLLAR
Closing
Mid
0.7515
0.7529
10.9766
22717.5000
0.8499
0.8495
0.8491
0.8468
Day's
Change
0.0061
0.0061
0.9866
2.0000
0.0007
0.0006
0.0007
0.0006
EURO
POUND
Closing
Day's
Closing
Day's
Mid
Change
Mid
Change
0.8833
0.0063
0.8825
0.0063
1.1766
-0.0010
1.3317
-0.0107
1.1761
-0.1659
1.3321
-0.0106
1.1757
-0.1659
1.3323
-0.0106
1.1734
-0.1659
1.3337
-0.0106
12.9145
1.1508
14.6175
1.2068
26728.3914 -20.3046 30252.9754
-240.5005
1.1319
-0.0081
1.1318
-0.0081
1.1316
-0.0081
1.1308
-0.0081
Rates are derived from WM Reuters Spot Rates and MorningStar (latest rates at time of production). Some values are rounded. Currency redenominated by 1000. The exchange rates printed in this table are also available at www.FT.com/marketsdata
UK SERIES
FTSE ACTUARIES SHARE INDICES
www.ft.com/equities
Produced in conjunction with the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries
� Strlg Day's
Euro
� Strlg
� Strlg
Year
Div
Dec 15 chge%
Index
Dec 14
Dec 13
ago yield% Cover
FTSE 100 (100)
7490.57
0.57 6606.17 7448.12 7496.51 7011.64 3.87 1.18
FTSE 250 (250)
20048.61
0.21 17681.51 20006.27 20061.40 17784.79 2.73 2.01
FTSE 250 ex Inv Co (203)
21469.13
0.15 18934.31 21436.92 21494.89 19057.08 2.79 1.76
FTSE 350 (350)
4162.18
0.51 3670.76 4141.12 4165.37 3860.93 3.67 1.29
FTSE 350 ex Investment Trusts (302) 4125.36
0.51 3638.29 4104.48 4128.79 3832.90 3.71 1.23
FTSE 350 Higher Yield (115)
3835.53
0.54 3382.67 3815.03 3843.13 3701.06 5.07 1.03
FTSE 350 Lower Yield (235)
4096.20
0.48 3612.57 4076.74 4093.91 3623.46 2.14 1.95
FTSE SmallCap (284)
5772.10
0.23 5090.60 5758.94 5770.98 5059.01 2.98 2.59
FTSE SmallCap ex Inv Co (153)
5007.14
0.00 4415.96 5007.14 5010.26 4487.77 3.17 1.19
FTSE All-Share (634)
4108.96
0.50 3623.82 4088.58 4111.96 3803.70 3.65 1.32
FTSE All-Share ex Inv Co (455)
4048.36
0.50 3570.37 4028.27 4051.70 3758.74 3.70 1.23
FTSE All-Share ex Multinationals (568) 1246.33
0.33
911.01 1242.18 1245.12 1140.04 3.23 1.74
FTSE Fledgling (95)
10717.82 -0.18 9452.39 10737.20 10738.71 8741.63 2.69 2.43
FTSE Fledgling ex Inv Co (46)
15273.04 -0.54 13469.78 15355.39 15343.14 11541.31 3.30 0.81
FTSE All-Small (379)
4023.38
0.21 3548.35 4015.03 4023.03 3513.78 2.96 2.58
FTSE All-Small ex Inv Co (199)
3764.03 -0.02 3319.61 3764.78 3766.93 3351.89 3.17 1.17
FTSE AIM All-Share (797)
1014.92
0.01
895.09 1014.79 1016.57
825.19 1.33 1.08
FTSE Sector Indices
Oil & Gas (14)
9149.92
Oil & Gas Producers (9)
8821.63
Oil Equipment Services & Distribution (5)12717.98
Basic Materials (30)
5882.77
Chemicals (9)
14800.27
Forestry & Paper (1)
21367.92
Industrial Metals & Mining (2)
3861.55
Mining (18)
16560.43
Industrials (110)
5333.10
Construction & Materials (15)
6552.94
Aerospace & Defense (9)
4968.90
General Industrials (7)
5012.63
Electronic & Electrical Equipment (11) 7968.97
Industrial Engineering (12)
13263.04
Industrial Transportation (6)
5179.88
Support Services (50)
7647.91
Consumer Goods (42)
21991.99
Automobiles & Parts (1)
7003.14
Beverages (5)
21231.00
Food Producers (11)
8313.88
Household Goods & Home Construction (16)15178.40
Leisure Goods (2)
9534.05
Personal Goods (5)
31862.91
Tobacco (2)
53765.28
Health Care (22)
9207.79
Health Care Equipment & Services (10) 7647.17
Pharmaceuticals & Biotechnology (12)12309.82
Consumer Services (95)
5070.55
Food & Drug Retailers (7)
3337.32
General Retailers (28)
2393.49
Media (22)
7689.56
Travel & Leisure (38)
9656.77
Telecommunications (6)
3340.51
Fixed Line Telecommunications (4) 3256.49
Mobile Telecommunications (2)
5041.62
Utilities (7)
7284.15
Electricity (2)
7697.57
Gas Water & Multiutilities (5)
6782.60
Financials (292)
5283.17
Banks (12)
4472.06
Nonlife Insurance (9)
3529.57
Life Insurance/Assurance (9)
8780.14
Real Estate Investment & Services (19) 2746.28
Real Estate Investment Trusts (34) 2784.95
General Financial (30)
9211.81
Equity Investment Instruments (179) 9945.79
Non Financials (342)
4797.69
Technology (16)
2259.88
Software & Computer Services (13) 2606.48
Technology Hardware & Equipment (3) 1853.78
0.84
0.85
0.32
1.61
0.32
2.42
0.02
1.76
0.18
0.33
0.18
-0.39
-1.06
0.24
0.15
0.37
0.70
0.30
0.80
-0.10
0.16
1.62
1.05
0.92
0.37
-0.49
0.49
0.35
0.09
-0.79
0.86
0.50
0.47
1.39
0.12
0.86
0.61
0.93
0.13
-0.40
0.60
0.46
1.08
0.94
0.26
0.50
0.63
0.00
0.03
-0.46
8069.60
7780.08
11216.39
5188.20
13052.83
18845.04
3405.62
14605.17
4703.43
5779.24
4382.23
4420.79
7028.09
11697.09
4568.30
6744.93
19395.43
6176.29
18724.29
7332.28
13386.31
8408.38
28100.91
47417.30
8120.64
6744.28
10856.42
4471.88
2943.29
2110.89
6781.66
8516.62
2946.11
2872.00
4446.36
6424.12
6788.73
5981.79
4659.39
3944.06
3112.84
7743.49
2422.03
2456.13
8124.19
8771.51
4231.24
1993.06
2298.74
1634.91
9073.36
8746.88
12676.83
5789.27
14753.13
20862.52
3860.86
16274.61
5323.44
6531.10
4959.76
5032.13
8054.46
13231.12
5172.16
7619.96
21839.65
6981.99
21062.78
8321.81
15154.37
9382.37
31532.09
53274.37
9173.78
7684.89
12250.29
5052.81
3334.44
2412.53
7624.18
9608.86
3324.75
3211.87
5035.79
7221.80
7651.10
6719.81
5276.39
4490.17
3508.62
8739.85
2716.90
2758.94
9188.14
9896.65
4767.50
2259.81
2605.81
1862.27
9105.60
8776.65
12813.81
5753.20
14719.86
20263.09
3790.76
16184.72
5380.82
6621.83
5014.98
5051.02
8100.80
13270.46
5178.25
7723.57
22072.85
7012.54
21141.99
8421.79
15224.64
9183.48
31862.34
54235.42
9252.12
7741.87
12356.76
5071.84
3351.15
2418.23
7664.73
9635.86
3317.93
3149.29
5059.86
7297.45
7683.69
6801.82
5306.93
4554.34
3498.36
8727.38
2710.57
2721.94
9230.59
9932.86
4794.66
2263.11
2609.51
1866.63
8651.50
8274.66
16452.97
4912.10
12792.86
18335.51
2791.13
13792.99
4855.61
6641.78
4860.26
4459.01
6263.91
11112.78
4588.07
6801.95
19147.79
7750.45
16291.84
7847.42
13011.36
5340.86
24631.37
51652.41
9689.56
7243.13
13121.74
4790.18
3130.63
2494.57
7732.35
8341.32
3382.16
4243.89
4520.96
8414.05
8903.96
7836.47
4759.54
4161.89
3064.82
7839.18
2450.21
2578.57
7825.14
8609.43
4485.00
1834.43
2066.47
1931.34
P/E
ratio
21.91
18.24
20.31
21.18
21.87
19.14
23.97
12.97
26.60
20.70
21.95
17.80
15.34
37.18
13.07
26.88
69.33
X/D
adj
285.08
518.47
564.50
149.64
149.91
188.32
86.14
151.02
136.03
146.23
146.38
37.97
271.82
435.47
105.10
102.47
12.61
Total
Return
6347.56
14735.72
16101.87
7080.30
3615.69
6874.58
4528.48
8372.99
7635.67
7066.37
3605.73
2262.33
20344.13
28356.07
7491.97
7272.71
1123.84
5.59 0.75 23.88 509.21 8718.63
5.61 0.76 23.36 495.31 8705.89
4.70 -0.07 -306.34 417.21 10019.57
3.22 1.74 17.82 189.08 6113.74
1.99 1.84 27.31 313.75 13383.39
2.73 3.15 11.63 582.72 23506.81
5.46 2.22
8.26 211.81 3594.15
3.35 1.68 17.84 549.05 9013.98
2.38 1.34 31.37 119.54 5560.97
2.34 0.53 79.89 162.07 7023.91
2.46 0.91 44.77 106.48 5378.27
2.83 1.45 24.30 136.09 5786.19
1.65 2.08 29.07 116.10 7324.69
2.06 1.66 29.30 273.15 16325.74
4.01 1.33 18.78 201.82 4740.00
2.28 1.61 27.32 161.35 8031.07
3.22 1.38 22.55 699.50 16492.29
3.02 3.52
9.41 211.50 6816.10
2.33 1.64 26.15 494.83 15195.02
2.08 2.38 20.22 173.21 7255.97
3.42 2.03 14.37 516.83 10925.34
4.27 1.00 23.34 315.27 8855.78
2.79 0.29 125.88 860.97 21810.82
3.89 1.16 22.07 2096.90 35306.87
3.80 0.82 31.92 348.91 7215.16
1.39 2.18 33.14 111.73 6673.54
4.12 0.76 31.77 502.66 8610.88
2.79 1.93 18.54 131.21 4823.56
1.52 2.59 25.31
51.17 3937.09
3.31 1.91 15.83
77.68 2786.90
3.14 1.87 17.00 208.83 4805.95
2.69 1.90 19.63 245.45 9269.55
5.71 0.16 110.72 174.86 3868.01
5.53 0.97 18.63 125.92 3040.89
5.78 -0.15 -115.18 291.47 5276.06
5.71 1.32 13.24 403.70 8529.79
6.56 1.58
9.63 505.19 11474.18
5.48 1.23 14.78 356.83 7937.32
3.47 1.87 15.43 180.47 4982.78
3.94 1.31 19.42 174.29 3375.31
2.99 1.74 19.20 104.16 6307.34
3.62 1.68 16.46 323.17 8737.97
2.48 2.18 18.54
63.39 7424.84
3.48 2.09 13.74 102.24 3545.21
3.38 1.73 17.06 276.29 10730.78
2.42 4.42
9.35 230.23 5507.18
3.71 1.14 23.63 173.22 7226.28
2.12 0.96 49.05
43.92 2933.13
2.09 0.89 53.90
51.99 3574.94
2.72 2.15 17.10
25.98 2188.99
8.00
9.00
10.00
11.00
12.00
13.00
14.00
15.00
16.00 High/day Low/day
Hourly movements
FTSE 100
7438.48 7437.66 7443.74 7455.96 7454.68 7463.34 7471.25 7460.44 7469.37 7490.57 7434.22
FTSE 250
20027.34 19978.36 19994.52 19965.66 19982.57 19982.83 19981.58 20003.77 20020.06 20048.61 19963.81
FTSE SmallCap
5761.94 5751.52 5754.04 5754.00 5756.11 5757.92 5758.42 5762.12 5765.95 5772.10 5748.86
FTSE All-Share
4085.14 4082.86 4086.13 4090.38 4090.58 4094.44 4097.87 4093.98 4098.54 4108.96 4081.70
Time of FTSE 100 Day's high:16:35:30 Day's Low08:08:30 FTSE 100 2010/11 High: 7562.28(06/11/2017) Low: 7099.15(31/01/2017)
Time of FTSE All-Share Day's high:16:40:40 Day's Low08:08:00 FTSE 100 2010/11 High: 4156.95(03/11/2017) Low: 3858.26(31/01/2017)
Further information is available on http://www.ftse.com � FTSE International Limited. 2013. All Rights reserved. ?FTSE� is a trade mark of the
London Stock Exchange Group companies and is used by FTSE International Limited under licence. ? Sector P/E ratios greater than 80 are not shown.
For changes to FTSE Fledgling Index constituents please refer to www.ftse.com/indexchanges. ? Values are negative.
UK RIGHTS OFFERS
Amount
Latest
Issue
paid
renun.
price
up
date
High
Low
Stock
There are currently no rights offers by any companies listed on the LSE.
FTSE SECTORS: LEADERS & LAGGARDS
FT 30 INDEX
Dec 15 Dec 14 Dec 13 Dec 12 Dec 11 Yr Ago
High
Low Year to date percentage changes
FT 30
3229.80 3218.30 3230.80 3231.20 3226.00
0.00 3391.10 3060.90 Leisure Goods
71.16
FT 30 Div Yield
1.84
1.85
1.84
1.84
1.84
0.00
3.93
2.74 Industrial Metals &
59.49
P/E Ratio net
24.27
24.12
24.29
24.31
24.21
0.00
19.44
14.26 Electronic & Elec Eq
28.79
FT 30 since compilation: 4198.4 high: 19/07/1999; low49.4 26/06/1940Base Date: 1/7/35
Beverages
26.62
FT 30 hourly changes
Personal Goods
24.59
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
High
Low Software & Comp Serv
24.41
3218.3 3218.3 3218.9 3218 3219.3 3219.9 3219.1 3216.2 3221.3 3229.8 3213.2 Technology
21.25
FT30 constituents and recent additions/deletions can be found at www.ft.com/ft30
Industrial Eng
18.45
Mining
16.66
Basic Materials
16.45
Financial Services
15.84
Equity
Invest
Instr
13.76
Dec 14 Dec 13 Mnth Ago
Dec 15 Dec 14 Mnth Ago
Household Goods & Ho
13.18
Australia
94.27
93.78
94.61 Sweden
76.64
76.66
77.70 Travel & Leisure
13.16
Canada
90.91
90.88
91.93 Switzerland
151.78 152.16 152.30 Chemicals
13.04
Denmark
110.17 110.28 109.95 UK
78.71
78.44
77.35 FTSE SmallCap Index
12.23
Japan
134.09 133.71 133.61 USA
100.33 100.57 100.84 Nonlife Insurance
12.07
New Zealand
114.72 115.25 114.08 Euro
94.52
94.59
94.42
Norway
85.53
84.85
87.46
Source: Bank of England. New Sterling ERI base Jan 2005 = 100. Other indices base average 1990 = 100.
Index rebased 1/2/95. for further information about ERIs see www.bankofengland.co.uk
FX: EFFECTIVE INDICES
Consumer Goods
Mobile Telecomms
FTSE 250 Index
Financials
Support Services
Real Est Invest & Se
Industrial Transport
Banks
Life Insurance
Forestry & Paper
Industrials
FTSE All{HY-}Share Index
Real Est Invest & Tr
FTSE 100 Index
NON FINANCIALS Index
Food & Drug Retailer
Consumer Services
Oil & Gas Producers
+or-
Aerospace & Defense
Food Producers
Health Care Eq & Srv
Oil & Gas
Tobacco
Telecommunications
Media
Construct & Material
General Retailers
Health Care
Tech Hardware & Eq
Pharmace & Biotech
Automobiles & Parts
Gas Water & Multi
Utilities
Electricity
Fixed Line Telecomms
Oil Equipment & Serv
3.19
2.92
2.60
2.44
1.80
-1.16
-3.09
-5.11
-5.67
-6.78
-7.39
-7.88
-10.16
-15.18
-15.42
-16.47
-23.35
-23.66
FTSE GLOBAL EQUITY INDEX SERIES
Dec 15
Regions & countries
FTSE Global All Cap
FTSE Global Large Cap
FTSE Global Mid Cap
FTSE Global Small Cap
FTSE All-World
FTSE World
FTSE Global All Cap ex UNITED KINGDOM In
FTSE Global All Cap ex USA
FTSE Global All Cap ex JAPAN
FTSE Global All Cap ex Eurozone
FTSE Developed
FTSE Developed All Cap
FTSE Developed Large Cap
FTSE Developed Europe Large Cap
FTSE Developed Europe Mid Cap
FTSE Dev Europe Small Cap
FTSE North America Large Cap
FTSE North America Mid Cap
FTSE North America Small Cap
FTSE North America
FTSE Developed ex North America
FTSE Japan Large Cap
FTSE Japan Mid Cap
FTSE Global wi JAPAN Small Cap
FTSE Japan
FTSE Asia Pacific Large Cap ex Japan
FTSE Asia Pacific Mid Cap ex Japan
FTSE Asia Pacific Small Cap ex Japan
FTSE Asia Pacific Ex Japan
FTSE Emerging All Cap
FTSE Emerging Large Cap
FTSE Emerging Mid Cap
FTSE Emerging Small Cap
FTSE Emerging Europe
FTSE Latin America All Cap
FTSE Middle East and Africa All Cap
FTSE Global wi UNITED KINGDOM All Cap In
FTSE Global wi USA All Cap
FTSE Europe All Cap
FTSE Eurozone All Cap
FTSE RAFI All World 3000
FTSE RAFI US 1000
FTSE EDHEC-Risk Efficient All-World
FTSE EDHEC-Risk Efficient Developed Europe
Oil & Gas
No of
US $
stocks indices
7777 574.33
1452 506.28
1707 768.87
4618 810.43
3159 335.22
2586 592.80
7454 597.03
5901 513.24
6469 586.21
7123 592.85
2133 538.98
5658 566.51
918 497.80
235 378.17
321 617.06
701 869.47
285 574.27
396 829.44
1407 851.45
681 382.28
1452 270.25
186 390.36
316 652.69
806 730.39
502 166.24
545 724.12
453 939.76
1457 594.00
998 570.87
2119 775.26
534 737.69
492 939.27
1093 804.89
121 378.98
238 890.97
238 712.38
323 354.15
1876 658.28
1450 445.01
654 442.55
3009 6956.98
987 11484.92
3159 399.20
556 327.97
144 375.33
Day
%
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.7
0.3
0.3
0.4
-0.3
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
-0.2
-0.4
-0.4
0.9
0.8
1.1
0.9
-0.4
-1.0
-0.4
-0.3
-0.9
-0.5
-0.1
0.3
-0.5
-0.3
-0.4
0.1
0.4
-0.3
0.4
0.7
-0.3
0.9
-0.3
-0.1
0.2
0.9
0.3
-0.4
-0.2
Mth
%
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.1
3.0
1.6
3.0
3.2
3.2
3.2
3.2
1.3
1.7
2.0
4.3
3.4
3.5
4.1
1.7
2.5
4.5
5.2
3.0
0.6
1.2
0.5
0.6
1.2
1.1
2.3
0.9
2.8
1.4
5.7
2.9
4.3
1.5
0.8
3.1
4.9
3.0
1.4
2.1
YTD
Total
%
retn
19.9 824.70
20.3 746.08
19.3 1046.42
18.0 1067.11
20.2 508.58
19.8 1207.36
20.3 843.90
20.8 789.82
19.7 849.73
19.4 835.18
19.8 780.25
19.6 810.03
19.9 731.84
18.4 639.56
25.3 932.85
25.3 1272.33
20.1 789.20
15.5 1059.65
14.1 1055.44
19.3 537.58
20.8 447.05
19.8 509.67
26.3 816.21
30.9 945.32
21.2 243.44
27.8 1150.41
23.5 1431.05
22.2 889.60
27.3 963.32
23.8 1170.56
24.7 1121.71
18.1 1407.97
24.2 1167.26
12.7 602.41
16.0 1383.63
8.3 1124.80
13.8 603.30
19.1 877.38
20.0 726.40
25.0 726.81
16.5 9293.75
13.2 15219.56
19.3 560.52
22.5 504.34
0.0 614.83
YTD Gr Div Dec 15
No of
US $
Day
Mth
YTD
Total
YTD Gr Div
% Yield Sectors
stocks indices
%
%
%
retn
% Yield
22.6
2.2 Oil & Gas Producers
108 361.34
-0.2
-0.2
2.8 605.00
6.5
3.5
23.3
2.4 Oil Equipment & Services
27 300.17
0.1
0.1 -14.2 440.65 -12.4
3.2
21.7
2.0 Basic Materials
258 522.19
0.3
0.3
23.7 805.08
26.9
2.5
20.0
1.8 Chemicals
122 789.47
0.1
0.1
25.2 1221.97
28.2
2.3
23.0
2.3 Forestry & Paper
16 297.31
0.7
0.7
24.9 509.67
28.6
3.1
22.6
2.3 Industrial Metals & Mining
68 453.75
0.5
0.5
25.3 696.19
28.0
2.4
22.9
2.2 Mining
52 606.33
0.6
0.6
18.2 934.64
21.8
2.9
24.2
2.7 Industrials
557 407.37
0.2
0.2
22.9 591.30
25.4
2.0
22.5
2.3 Construction & Materials
115 543.24
0.0
0.0
18.0 823.08
20.2
2.0
22.0
2.2 Aerospace & Defense
27 763.28
0.7
0.7
35.1 1098.02
37.8
1.8
22.6
2.3 General Industrials
58 238.40
0.4
0.4
1.3 373.97
3.6
2.6
22.2
2.2 Electronic & Electrical Equipment
72 454.07
-0.2
-0.2
32.1 603.71
34.3
1.6
22.8
2.3 Industrial Engineering
103 832.70
0.1
0.1
32.2 1191.27
34.8
1.9
22.4
3.3 Industrial Transportation
102 702.04
-0.1
-0.1
24.7 1020.21
27.4
2.1
28.6
2.6 Support Services
80 376.35
0.6
0.6
27.5 522.49
29.8
1.7
28.3
2.4 Consumer Goods
439 504.10
0.1
0.1
20.6 752.35
23.3
2.3
22.5
2.0 Automobiles & Parts
108 440.62
-0.3
-0.3
19.8 636.19
22.8
2.5
17.4
1.6 Beverages
45 665.17
0.4
0.4
20.6 1009.10
23.5
2.4
15.7
1.5 Food Producers
111 626.99
0.1
0.1
10.2 959.43
12.6
2.3
21.6
1.9 Household Goods & Home Construction
49 464.40
0.3
0.3
14.9 688.71
17.7
2.5
24.2
2.8 Leisure Goods
33 238.58
-0.3
-0.3
49.1 314.87
50.8
1.3
22.2
1.9 Personal Goods
82 749.15
0.5
0.5
29.5 1057.65
32.1
1.9
28.3
1.5 Tobacco
11 1412.56
0.6
0.6
11.5 2949.00
14.7
3.7
33.1
1.6 Health Care
189 503.09
0.6
0.6
18.9 729.99
21.3
1.9
23.5
1.8 Health Care Equipment & Services
73 881.06
0.8
0.8
28.1 1031.08
29.3
1.0
31.3
2.7 Pharmaceuticals & Biotechnology
116 352.79
0.5
0.5
15.3 536.01
18.1
2.4
26.7
2.8 Consumer Services
401 468.17
0.3
0.3
18.7 629.62
20.6
1.6
25.2
2.5 Food & Drug Retailers
59 289.28
1.3
1.3
2.3 406.99
4.5
2.2
30.8
2.7 General Retailers
131 682.97
0.3
0.3
25.4 893.34
27.3
1.3
27.2
2.7 Media
82 338.28
0.2
0.2
11.2 456.04
12.9
1.7
28.1
2.6 Travel & Leisure
129 476.30
0.0
0.0
25.1 648.17
27.4
1.7
21.4
3.1 Telecommunication
92 164.02
-0.3
-0.3
1.8 312.60
6.0
4.2
27.4
2.5 Fixed Line Telecommuniations
40 133.71
0.5
0.5
-4.9 280.87
-0.5
4.8
17.2
4.1 Mobile Telecommunications
52 179.04
-1.4
-1.4
12.0 305.89
15.8
3.5
18.7
2.6 Utilities
168 280.27
0.1
0.1
13.7 552.31
17.6
3.6
11.5
3.1 Electricity
110 309.77
0.2
0.2
13.9 603.11
17.7
3.5
18.0
3.7 Gas Water & Multiutilities
58 290.85
0.0
0.0
13.3 589.19
17.4
3.7
21.3
1.8 Financials
716 254.58
0.2
0.2
19.3 420.53
22.7
2.8
23.8
3.1 Banks
248 227.07
0.0
0.0
17.9 403.64
21.7
3.2
28.5
2.8 Nonlife Insurance
72 271.46
0.6
0.6
17.1 396.52
19.7
2.2
19.8
2.8 Life Insurance
53 245.35
-0.3
-0.3
22.5 396.78
26.1
2.7
15.7
2.3 Financial Services
156 305.30
0.6
0.6
26.7 423.54
29.0
1.8
21.7
2.1 Technology
195 269.68
0.8
0.8
38.9 332.50
41.0
1.3
25.6
2.6 Software & Computer Services
96 466.04
0.8
0.8
40.0 545.95
41.4
0.8
3.3
3.5 Technology Hardware & Equipment
99 202.58
0.9
0.9
37.6 260.66
40.5
1.9
Alternative Energy
9
91.86
-1.1
-1.1
0.0 124.55
0.9
2.0
Real Estate Investment & Services
110 358.03
-0.9
-0.9
29.7 603.00
33.2
2.5
The FTSE Global Equity Series, launched in 2003, contains the FTSE Global Small Cap Indices and broader FTSE Global All Cap Indices (large/mid/small cap) as well as the enhanced FTSE All-World index Series (large/
mid cap) - please see www.ftse.com/geis. The trade names Fundamental Index� and RAFI� are registered trademarks and the patented and patent-pending proprietary intellectual property of Research Affiliates, LLC
(US Patent Nos. 7,620,577; 7,747,502; 7,778,905; 7,792,719; Patent Pending Publ. Nos. US-2006-0149645-A1, US-2007-0055598-A1, US-2008-0288416-A1, US-2010- 0063942-A1, WO 2005/076812, WO 2007/078399 A2,
WO 2008/118372, EPN 1733352, and HK1099110). ?EDHEC?? is a trade mark of EDHEC Business School As of January 2nd 2006, FTSE is basing its sector indices on the Industrial Classification Benchmark - please see
www.ftse.com/icb. For constituent changes and other information about FTSE, please see www.ftse.com. � FTSE International Limited. 2013. All Rights reserved. ?FTSE� is a trade mark of the London Stock Exchange
Group companies and is used by FTSE International Limited under licence.
UK COMPANY RESULTS
closing
Price p
11.73
11.72
10.91
10.55
10.13
10.05
9.64
9.46
9.33
9.12
8.20
6.09
5.06
4.87
4.54
3.79
3.42
3.20
FTSE 100 SUMMARY
Company
Aggregated Micro Power Holdings
Fulham Shore (The)
Henderson Alternative Strategies Trust
JPMorgan Indian Investment Trust
Lowland Investment Co
MediaZest
Miton UK MicroCap Trust
Thruvision Group
FTSE 100
Closing Week's
Price Change FTSE 100
3I Group PLC
Admiral Group PLC
Anglo American PLC
Antofagasta PLC
Ashtead Group PLC
Associated British Foods PLC
Astrazeneca PLC
Aviva PLC
Babcock International Group PLC
Bae Systems PLC
Barclays PLC
Barratt Developments PLC
Berkeley Group Holdings (The) PLC
Bhp Billiton PLC
BP PLC
British American Tobacco PLC
British Land Company PLC
Bt Group PLC
Bunzl PLC
Burberry Group PLC
Carnival PLC
Centrica PLC
Coca-Cola Hbc AG
Compass Group PLC
Convatec Group PLC
Crh PLC
Croda International PLC
Dcc PLC
Diageo PLC
Direct Line Insurance Group PLC
Easyjet PLC
Experian PLC
Ferguson PLC
Fresnillo PLC
G4S PLC
Gkn PLC
Glaxosmithkline PLC
Glencore PLC
Hammerson PLC
Hargreaves Lansdown PLC
HSBC Holdings PLC
Imperial Brands PLC
Informa PLC
Intercontinental Hotels Group PLC
International Consolidated Airlines Group S.A.
Intertek Group PLC
Itv PLC
Johnson Matthey PLC
Kingfisher PLC
Land Securities Group PLC
Legal & General Group PLC
891.50
1907
1410
930.50
1894
2843
4881
502.50
684.50
563.00
202.25
626.50
4160
1419.5
505.20
4967
671.00
277.55
2016
1723
4830
138.00
2325
1534
205.80
2532
4331
7230
2655
365.80
1417
1601
5270
1336
252.00
298.00
1295
362.75
534.00
1705
751.50
3085
740.00
4581
633.50
5045
165.70
3039
331.70
984.00
268.20
23.00
58.00
46.00
37.00
-125.00
-40.00
97.00
-7.50
23.00
6.00
5.85
-3.50
47.00
78.00
12.45
28.00
16.00
9.55
-69.00
-13.00
-98.00
-6.10
6.00
43.00
-4.40
-96.00
78.00
280.00
19.50
6.70
-39.00
28.00
-75.00
30.00
0.30
-0.70
7.50
17.25
7.50
105.00
18.30
1.50
6.00
135.00
-3.00
-5.00
2.00
27.00
-4.50
25.50
4.40
Closing Week's
Price Change
Lloyds Banking Group PLC
London Stock Exchange Group PLC
Marks And Spencer Group PLC
Mediclinic International PLC
Merlin Entertainments PLC
Micro Focus International PLC
Mondi PLC
Morrison (Wm) Supermarkets PLC
National Grid PLC
Next PLC
Nmc Health PLC
Old Mutual PLC
Paddy Power Betfair PLC
Pearson PLC
Persimmon PLC
Prudential PLC
Randgold Resources LD
Reckitt Benckiser Group PLC
Relx PLC
Rentokil Initial PLC
Rio Tinto PLC
Rolls-Royce Holdings PLC
Royal Bank Of Scotland Group PLC
Royal Dutch Shell PLC
Royal Dutch Shell PLC
Rsa Insurance Group PLC
Sage Group PLC
Sainsbury (J) PLC
Schroders PLC
Scottish Mortgage Investment Trust PLC
Segro PLC
Severn Trent PLC
Shire PLC
Sky PLC
Smith & Nephew PLC
Smiths Group PLC
Smurfit Kappa Group PLC
Sse PLC
St. James's Place PLC
Standard Chartered PLC
Standard Life Aberdeen PLC
Taylor Wimpey PLC
Tesco PLC
Tui AG
Unilever PLC
United Utilities Group PLC
Vodafone Group PLC
Whitbread PLC
Worldpay Group PLC
Wpp PLC
66.41
3780
303.80
609.00
361.00
2518
1818
215.50
868.60
4246
2800
203.40
8585
725.00
2626
1847.5
6955
6731
1729
309.40
3624.5
831.00
276.30
2452.5
2428.5
607.50
781.50
236.10
3472
437.00
574.50
2090
3762.5
1018
1282
1444
2406
1315
1184
757.10
418.00
201.90
207.30
1462
4196
816.00
230.00
3864
435.40
1389
-0.39
-10.00
-15.20
14.00
1.90
93.00
124.00
-6.40
-9.20
-237.00
-102.00
4.70
15.00
-15.50
-45.00
12.50
85.00
15.00
17.00
-3.40
156.00
-7.50
-4.70
67.50
71.00
7.00
13.50
-8.60
47.00
-7.90
13.50
7.00
114.50
25.00
-42.00
-30.00
31.00
-9.00
27.00
-2.60
-0.40
-1.00
2.75
67.00
14.50
-1.00
0.60
-130.00
10.70
48.00
UK STOCK MARKET TRADING DATA
Dec 15
Dec 14
Dec 13
Dec 12
Dec 11
Yr Ago
SEAQ Bargains
9.00
9.00
9.00
9.00
8506.00
8506.00
Order Book Turnover (m)
449.03
864.88
953.60
415.48
457.65
457.65
Order Book Bargains
1105010.00 1032927.00 1030788.00 923834.00 1095255.00 1095255.00
Order Book Shares Traded (m)
2258.00
1938.00
1896.00
1620.00
1762.00
1762.00
Total Equity Turnover ()
7512.31
9344.87
8825.51
6327.21
5418.00
5418.00
Total Mkt Bargains
1295972.00 1242293.00 1219248.00 1090931.00 1263206.00 1263206.00
Total Shares Traded (m)
5134.00
5378.00
5620.00
4872.00
5056.00
5056.00
? Excluding intra-market and overseas turnover. *UK only total at 6pm. ? UK plus intra-market turnover. (u) Unavaliable.
(c) Market closed.
All data provided by Morningstar unless otherwise noted. All elements listed are indicative and believed
accurate at the time of publication. No offer is made by Morningstar or the FT. The FT does not warrant nor
guarantee that the information is reliable or complete. The FT does not accept responsibility and will not be
liable for any loss arising from the reliance on or use of the listed information.
For all queries e-mail ft.reader.enquiries@morningstar.com
Data provided by Morningstar | www.morningstar.co.uk
UK RECENT EQUITY ISSUES
Int
Int
Pre
Pre
Pre
Int
Int
Int
Turnover
Pre-tax
2.375179L 1.957353L 2.469625L 1.957353L
0.51
0.932
0.58
1.095
15.622
15.638
12.903
12.918
167.67
167.67
69.461
69.461
42.224
42.341
65.684
65.87
0.067
0.071
0.149
0.149
5.871
5.871
2.616
2.616
4.958L
0.287L
13.783L
2.432L
Figures in . Earnings shown basic. Figures in light text are for corresponding period year earlier.
For more information on dividend payments visit www.ft.com/marketsdata
EPS(p)
6.28L
0.1
32.2
65.97
243.2
0.01L
1.53
8.35L
6.69L
0.1
36.35
158.93
156.4
0.01L
4.16
3L
Div(p)
4.75
13
Pay day
3.8
Feb 7
12 Jan 31
-
Total
4.75
49
-
3.8
45
-
Issue
date
12/06
11/27
11/27
11/23
11/22
11/20
11/16
11/15
11/09
Issue
price(p)
230.00
50.00
160.00
170.00
134.00
59.00
180.00
10.00
3.90
Sector
AIM
AIM
AIM
AIM
AIM
AIM
Stock
code
SBRE
BKS
KEYS
CPC
TENG
BOKU
BAKK
LAHL
ATM
Stock
Sabre Insurance Group PLC
Beeks Financial Cloud Group PLC
Keystone Law Group PLC
City Pub Group (The) PLC
Ten Lifestyle Group PLC
Boku Inc
Bakkavor Group PLC
Landscape Acquisition Holdings Ltd
AfriTin Mining Ltd
lacing price. *Intoduction. ?When issued. Annual report/prospectus available at www.ft.com/ir
For a full explanation of all the other symbols please refer to London Share Service notes.
Close
price(p)
256.00
45.00
190.50
170.50
141.50
73.00
193.75
9.50
2.50
+/5.75
0.00
-2.50
0.00
-5.00
0.90
0.38
0.05
0.19
High
265.25
47.75
193.00
182.00
152.00
83.00
196.50
9.89
4.00
Low
238.00
41.00
188.00
168.00
136.00
72.00
185.50
8.74
2.30
Mkt
Cap ()
64000.0
2205.0
5957.7
9627.7
11412.0
15584.6
112263.7
460.0
743.7
21
FINANCIAL TIMES
Monday 18 December 2017
MARKET DATA
FT500: THE WORLD'S LARGEST COMPANIES
Stock
Australia (A$)
ANZ?
BHPBilltn
CmwBkAu
CSL
NatAusBk
Telstra
Wesfarmers
Westpc?
Woolworths
Belgium (?)
AnBshInBv
KBC Grp
Brazil (R$)
Ambev
Bradesco?
Cielo
ItauHldFin?
Petrobras
Vale
Canada (C$)
BCE?
BkMontrl
BkNvaS
Brookfield?
CanadPcR
CanImp
CanNatRs?
CanNatRy
Enbridge
GtWesLif?
ImpOil?
Manulife?
Potash
RylBkC
Suncor En?
ThmReut
TntoDom
TrnCan
ValeantPh
China (HK$)
AgricBkCh
Bk China
BkofComm
BOE Tech
Ch Coms Cons
Ch Evrbrght
Ch Rail Cons
Ch Rail Gp
ChConstBk
China Vanke
ChinaCitic
ChinaLife
ChinaMBank
ChinaMob
ChinaPcIns
ChMinsheng
ChMrchSecs RMB
Chna Utd Coms RMB
ChShenEgy
ChShpbldng RMB
ChStConEng RMB
ChUncHK
CNNC Intl RMB
CSR
Daqin RMB
Gree Elec Apl
GuosenSec RMB
HaitongSecs
Hngzh HikVDT RMB
Hunng Pwr
IM Baotou Stl RMB
In&CmBkCh
IndstrlBk RMB
Kweichow RMB
Midea
New Ch Life Ins
PetroChina
PingAnIns
PngAnBnk RMB
Pwr Cons Corp RMB
SaicMtr RMB
ShenwanHong
ShgPdgBk RMB
Sinopec Corp
Sinopec Oil RMB
Denmark (kr)
DanskeBk
MollerMrsk
NovoB
52 Week
High
Low
Price+/-Week
Yld
P/E MCap m
28.22
27.71
79.94
140.03
29.69
3.69
44.59
31.37
27.07
-0.26
0.57
0.97
-2.12
0.01
0.04
0.47
-0.01
0.20
32.95
28.82
87.74
149.30
34.09
5.29
45.60
35.39
27.75
27.19 8.60 13.54 63413.77
22.06 3.77 18.73 68081.88
73.20 7.73 13.91 107186.48
96.09 1.27 35.75 48448.53
29.00 9.77 11.94 60996.19
3.34 12.34 11.04
33573
39.52 6.52 17.06 38676.81
29.40 8.72 13.44 81458.09
22.77 3.63 23.84 27019.47
93.95
70.93
-0.48
-1.07
110.10
72.97
93.02
56.22
3.59 55.58 187166.26
3.94 10.58 34890.6
20.90
30.29
23.77
37.53
15.56
36.89
-0.12
-0.21
0.44
-0.29
-0.33
1.41
22.70
35.83
26.29
40.18
18.85
37.40
15.79
24.01
20.15
27.28
12.47
25.00
3.04
2.08
3.15
5.07
2.97
35.83
10.78
15.40
9.69
26.24
8.55
61.35
100.63
82.16
56.23
230.05
119.43
42.56
103.35
49.89
34.93
38.00
26.70
25.32
101.92
43.66
56.90
71.83
61.59
25.39
-0.93
-0.28
-1.44
0.46
-1.68
-0.22
-2.29
0.27
0.55
-0.21
-1.45
-0.16
0.99
-0.55
-0.59
-0.08
-1.02
-1.40
0.03
63.00
104.15
85.50
56.83
232.31
122.56
47.00
108.64
58.28
37.79
48.72
27.54
26.62
102.80
46.66
62.83
75.09
65.24
29.28
56.95
88.63
73.31
43.47
188.36
103.84
35.90
88.84
43.91
33.01
35.15
22.39
20.68
90.13
36.09
55.05
61.50
59.23
11.20
4.70
3.53
3.70
1.25
0.94
4.24
2.57
1.59
4.76
4.22
1.66
3.05
1.51
3.41
2.83
3.08
3.26
4.03
-
18.66 43070.82
12.73 50826.26
12.69 76819.64
96.02 43364.86
18.36 26005.81
10.65 41113.44
18.83 40421.04
19.91 60074.57
25.26 65624.32
13.97 26939.47
15.30 24709.98
14.41 41252.51
37.53 16585.8
13.51 115452.46
26.13 56298.66
30.20 31566.93
13.09 103184.62
31.03 42139.73
5.10 6894.07
3.62
3.77
5.75
1.35
8.52
3.59
9.04
5.74
6.90
28.80
4.87
23.95
30.50
76.80
37.25
7.72
17.65
6.83
19.12
5.98
9.30
10.60
7.28
7.60
8.78
0.06
11.33
11.32
37.95
4.93
2.54
6.14
17.02
653.79
1.57
52.00
5.36
77.40
12.72
7.38
31.11
0.21
12.62
5.48
2.73
0.03
0.02
0.12
0.05
-0.01
0.04
0.07
0.07
0.25
1.30
-0.01
-0.25
0.85
0.20
-0.10
0.17
-1.29
-0.10
0.24
-0.20
-0.34
-0.12
-0.25
0.50
-0.19
0.00
-0.46
0.14
0.91
0.06
0.02
0.25
-0.36
37.10
-0.03
2.30
0.21
2.65
-0.11
-0.15
-0.28
0.01
-0.34
0.01
-0.08
3.80
4.18
6.44
1.89
11.74
4.06
11.98
7.71
7.12
31.00
5.50
28.20
34.25
91.30
42.30
9.48
22.35
9.29
21.10
8.14
10.96
13.24
8.11
7.99
9.49
0.23
16.18
15.14
43.66
6.25
3.17
6.48
18.52
719.96
1.87
57.85
6.38
87.10
15.24
9.00
34.23
0.35
14.02
6.57
4.37
3.10
3.32
5.40
1.22
8.45
3.38
8.91
5.63
5.42
17.40
4.69
19.84
17.52
75.80
26.35
7.16
15.57
6.15
14.10
5.87
8.33
8.67
6.83
6.81
6.76
0.04
11.32
11.08
22.61
4.77
1.98
4.45
14.99
316.20
1.50
34.35
4.72
38.00
8.54
6.78
22.64
0.20
11.16
5.40
2.72
5.46 5.44 14241.6
5.18 5.66 40348.58
5.51 5.53 25765.93
1.52 15.12
34.38
2.62 7.30 4827.97
3.18 5.04 3155.98
2.05 7.10 2402.27
1.77 8.49 3090.92
4.70 6.29 212314.94
3.18 11.44 4846.95
5.14 5.09 9276.05
1.15 18.15 22809.36
2.83 9.57 17921.04
3.66 12.01 201261.51
2.21 23.01 13231.27
4.32 4.93 6850.79
1.06 22.63 13097.39
- 150.12 21907.95
2.80 7.93 8316.71
- 126.07 16616.21
2.28 9.61 41841.45
68.28 41511.25
1.49 23.94 4659.64
3.23 17.59 4251.74
2.81 9.99 19752.76
-1.92
102.96
1.74 23.42 3763.52
2.25 14.26 4939.82
1.04 40.46 41679.67
6.95 24.55 2965.85
93.41 8471.07
4.42 6.74 68206.23
3.54 6.20 49071.01
1.03 34.31 124283.42
6.92 20.36
43.21
26.58 6882.31
1.06 38.27 14474.06
1.57 16.41 73777.11
1.23 9.99 32565.1
1.14 15.81 10721.18
5.24 10.75 51906.05
-2.55
238.30
1.20 6.87 53671.16
5.71 10.23 17894.36
-3.70 1164.31
239.20
1.60
10460 -170.00
329.50
0.50
259.50
14260
339.80
212.20
10060
225.60
3.75 10.72 35417.08
1.29 -17.53 16631.92
2.30 21.32 102204.76
Stock
Finland (?)
Nokia
3.92
SampoA
45.63
France (?)
Airbus Grpe
85.25
AirLiquide
108.40
AXA
25.28
BNP Parib
62.92
ChristianDior 303.55
Cred Agr
14.15
Danone
71.20
EDF
10.49
Engie SA
14.54
Esslr Intl
112.45
Hermes Intl
439.80
LOreal
187.25
LVMH
245.15
Orange
14.66
PernodRic
129.10
Renault
83.85
Safran
86.11
Sanofi
73.55
Sant Gbn
47.00
Schneider
71.21
SFR Group
34.50
SocGen
43.20
Total
46.51
UnibailR
212.05
Vinci
87.03
Vivendi
22.42
Germany (?)
Allianz
197.15
BASF
93.67
Bayer
106.50
BMW
85.95
Continental
222.60
Daimler
71.01
Deut Bank
16.54
Deut Tlkm
15.07
DeutsPost
40.36
E.ON
9.39
Fresenius Med
87.05
Fresenius SE
64.18
HenkelKgaA 101.85
Linde
179.80
MuenchRkv
186.30
SAP
97.35
Siemens
116.45
Volkswgn
169.10
Hong Kong (HK$)
AIA
61.95
BOC Hold
38.85
Ch OSLnd&Inv
23.95
ChngKng
66.00
Citic Ltd
10.84
Citic Secs
15.88
CK Hutchison
95.90
CNOOC
10.90
HangSeng
185.70
HK Exc&Clr
226.40
MTR
45.45
SandsCh
40.65
SHK Props
125.70
Tencent
389.00
India (Rs)
Bhartiartl
517.95
HDFC Bk
1873.45
Hind Unilevr 1324.55
HsngDevFin
1723
ICICI Bk
303.15
Infosys
1022.9
ITC
264.60
L&T
1203.55
OilNatGas
183.00
RelianceIn
919.75
SBI NewA
312.25
SunPhrmInds 518.35
Tata Cons
2545.6
Indonesia (Rp)
Bk Cent Asia?
21100
Israel (ILS)
63.40
TevaPha
Italy (?)
5.36
Enel
ENI
13.94
Generali
15.45
IntSPaolo
2.80
Luxottica
50.45
Unicred
16.15
98973.51
27875.53
19456.99
37899.68
34890.89
31454.6
52 Week
High
Low
Price+/-Week
5.96
47.46
3.81
41.53
0.44 -56.15 26931.75
5.03 10.92 29999.82
-2.52
0.55
0.01
-2.12
0.50
-0.53
0.26
-0.82
-0.28
-1.90
-0.20
-1.15
-2.25
0.02
-2.90
-0.56
-2.96
0.37
-0.72
0.04
0.00
-0.72
-0.52
-12.45
-0.73
0.23
89.27
111.60
26.35
69.17
309.00
15.68
72.00
12.48
15.16
122.15
468.30
197.15
260.55
15.80
132.65
91.30
92.25
92.97
52.40
75.94
34.56
52.26
49.50
238.15
88.77
23.50
61.73
90.27
21.81
53.96
190.95
11.06
57.99
7.33
10.77
100.60
383.75
167.05
175.80
13.50
101.05
73.71
61.51
72.63
43.21
63.36
21.87
40.66
42.23
202.15
63.84
15.96
1.58 63.79 77688.9
2.38 22.81 54621.54
4.56 10.39 72748.47
4.28 10.60 92443.85
1.02 37.14 64466.97
4.23 11.59 47365.87
2.37 24.45 56185.83
8.53 11.34 36113.35
6.84 -63.61 41660.64
1.33 31.78 28941.15
0.85 40.16 54626.71
1.75 28.94 123424.89
1.62 28.35 146233.19
4.07 147.50 45881.4
1.48 24.74 40315.7
3.73 5.38 29174.19
1.75 13.82 42250.53
4.00 19.96 109332.68
2.55 20.70 30604.79
2.85 20.52 50005.3
- -23.02 17905.81
5.08 13.58 41059.37
4.93 17.39 138380.54
4.78 8.64 24909.67
2.40 18.75 61118.3
1.78 68.53 34180.69
-2.00
-0.41
1.80
0.47
-1.80
0.71
0.05
-0.46
-0.06
-0.40
-0.25
-2.04
-1.40
-6.40
1.50
1.81
1.25
-1.00
204.50
97.90
123.90
91.76
226.25
73.64
17.69
18.15
40.89
10.81
89.22
80.07
114.60
193.20
199.00
100.70
133.50
175.40
154.25
78.97
96.18
77.07
180.70
59.01
13.11
14.62
30.52
6.27
73.87
60.15
95.23
145.60
166.60
80.32
108.00
128.05
3.83 12.03 103476.56
3.18 18.13 101223.5
2.53 22.43 103619.01
4.06 7.47 60876.64
1.90 14.84 52381.73
4.56 8.05 89381.78
1.15 -34.20 40219.82
3.97-1510.77 84395.81
2.60 18.56 57623.42
2.23 94.11 24309.62
1.10 20.88 31465.35
0.96 20.05 41873.74
1.57 20.42 31131.86
2.05 29.51 39290.8
4.60 87.29 33980.87
1.14 33.63 140709.8
3.08 16.15 116458.22
1.18 12.26 58709.66
1.15
0.20
0.05
0.50
-0.10
-0.28
-2.00
0.40
-2.40
3.00
-0.55
2.60
3.90
11.00
69.15
40.50
29.45
70.50
12.70
18.74
108.90
11.28
195.30
257.60
50.00
41.85
136.90
439.60
43.00
27.10
20.15
46.50
10.66
15.36
87.00
8.45
142.10
177.60
37.20
31.25
96.50
179.60
1.43
3.42
3.45
2.35
3.12
2.57
2.87
3.29
3.33
2.01
2.42
5.04
3.18
0.16
-7.20 564.80 288.70
33.05
1888 1168.4
-2.10
1337 781.95
40.05
1804 1197.25
-7.60 332.35 224.27
21.05
1044 860.00
2.40 354.80 222.00
-16.80 1274.95 868.33
2.75 211.80 155.20
-1.25 959.50 506.40
-0.85 351.30 241.10
-3.50 729.05 432.70
-55.90 2777.4
2153
32296.59
75632.47
44721.14
42914.65
30363.91
36650.85
50306.1
26300.86
36633.5
90866.24
42044.32
19399.95
76013.11
21625
14125
0.95 23.30 37934.65
11.70
147.40
38.20
6.15 -3.01 18243.87
-0.23
0.04
0.17
-0.08
-1.00
-1.81
5.59
15.92
16.08
3.01
56.90
18.38
3.82
12.94
13.21
2.06
45.32
11.93
3.35
5.72
4.50
6.34
1.81
-
Week
change change %
0.83
11.3
28.32
9.0
4.30
7.3
0.50
7.0
2.60
6.8
7.04
6.8
10.03
6.6
37.10
6.0
1.79
5.8
3.49
5.7
518.00
5.1
1.69
5.1
80.00
5.0
17.25
5.0
3.40
5.0
2.64
4.9
219.00
4.8
1.85
4.8
1.30
4.7
1.76
4.6
Month
change %
-15.17
10.33
11.19
2.43
8.69
7.25
17.10
-3.68
8.28
14.41
-4.99
21.79
-3.03
3.67
19.15
13.66
8.11
6.88
3.41
6.34
Current
1.00-1.25
4.50
0.75
0.00
0.50
0.00-0.00
0.00-0.25
22.37
29.74
12.11
8.03
26.03
-1.57
64054.56
59604.86
28390.16
52284.96
28788.36
42291.15
Yld
2.43
2.73
3.46
0.67
1.95
1.20
1.80
0.83
3.90
1.69
2.52
3.76
3.06
0.10
3.34
1.16
1.76
1.41
2.43
3.71
1.64
2.51
4.58
3.02
2.66
3.33
1.49
2.01
1.09
0.49
0.45
3.21
2.87
3.03
2.99
P/E MCap m
16.12 26288.41
14.20 36752.18
20.35 51051.33
10.37 38190.14
16.00 44857.78
14.90 38170.16
33.32 47403.35
36.10 41994.45
13.92 25071.36
14.02 35323.68
10.62 60812.41
16.20 66024.58
13.09 67106.11
68349.88
8.98 40762.88
31.65 24298.14
15.38 34365.14
23.55 22392.97
50.52 99428.44
16.04 45255.26
19.20 29125.01
12.74 99576.64
6.60 41081.32
9.95 22286.27
11.37 23611.47
16.12 92976.15
29.07 36331.46
25.96 37273.76
24.55 43707.39
13.21 87257.54
25.10 56198.41
9.78 60166.11
30.13 43675.52
19.34 33193.15
10.83 201766.83
1.83 30.13 38757.51
1.48 14.10 20330.05
1.37 24.55 41888.86
0.82
1.54
4.24
2.70
-4.17
31.58
27.16
12.16
24.05
12991.74
74039.49
58546.33
70748.43
97897.7
3.88 12.41 29806.3
4.32 -81.86 67151.77
4.62 54.27 31599.22
2.56
6.02
9.34
6.55
1.02
2.02
0.97
2.10
9.22 31580.42
3.58
6.96
10.38
12.11
17.79
7.47
10.47
54551.35
49469.43
28512.58
36041.68
54006.94
83161.34
17567.54
4.69 11.93 27731.11
1.28 9.99 26824.52
3.96 15.55 80793.54
5.86 14.77 36423.76
2.53
2.44
0.75
2.94
4.60
2.76
16.10
6.42
5.88
13.75
10.86
13.58
46640.4
45782.94
44496.97
38221.23
45429.51
32348.84
4.38 12.36 23772.79
5.44 29.26 18982.06
0.16 35.10 109861.09
1.24 11.07 23854.63
5.27 4.17 22978.84
0.75 6.26 50580.31
1.81 10.26 299892.88
4.20
3.77
2.56
4.71
1.69
5.01
6.53
12.15 56084.79
13.11 106771.96
14.82 27467.3
15.00 48915.89
28.39 109842.22
12.12 27234.49
17.98 50403.86
Last
1.00
3.75
0.75
0.05
0.25
0.00
0.00-0.75
Mnth Ago
1.00-1.25
4.25
1.75
0.00
0.25
0.00--0.10
-1.25--0.25
Year Ago
0.25-0.50
3.50
1.00
0.00
0.25
0.00--0.10
-1.25--0.25
Day
0.245
0.006
0.000
Change
Week
0.245
0.007
0.002
Month
0.014
0.009
0.003
-0.007
0.010
0.000
-0.020
0.000
0.000
One
month
1.49078
-0.40829
0.49244
-0.83105
-0.04050
-0.37100
0.45000
1.21000
-0.44500
Three
month
1.60042
-0.38429
0.51838
-0.75520
-0.01767
-0.33100
0.50000
1.34000
-0.40500
Six
month
1.76769
-0.31800
0.57919
-0.65280
0.02000
-0.27100
0.59500
1.51000
-0.33500
One
year
2.04263
-0.25857
0.77056
-0.52920
0.10650
-0.19200
Short
term
-0.50 -0.35
7 Days
One
Three
Six
One
Dec 15
notice
month
month
month
year
Euro
-0.50 -0.35 -0.62 -0.37 -0.48 -0.33 -0.41 -0.26 -0.41 -0.16
Sterling
0.42 0.52 0.40 0.50 0.45 0.55 0.52 0.67 0.68 0.83
Swiss Franc
Canadian Dollar
US Dollar
1.37 1.47 1.34 1.44 1.48 1.58 1.56 1.66 1.77 1.87 2.13 2.23
Japanese Yen
-0.50 -0.20 -0.35 -0.05 -1.20 -0.70 -0.50 0.00 -0.20 0.30 -0.10 0.40
Libor rates come from ICE (see www.theice.com) and are fixed at 11am UK time. Other data sources: US $, Euro & CDs:
Tullett Prebon; SDR, US Discount: IMF; EONIA: ECB; Swiss Libor: SNB; EURONIA, RONIA & SONIA: WMBA.
COMMODITIES
Energy
Price*
Crude Oil?
Dec
57.35
Brent Crude Oil?
63.23
RBOB Gasoline?
Dec
1.66
Heating Oil?
Dec
1.60
Natural Gas?
Dec
2.62
Ethanol?
Uranium?
Dec
18.10
Carbon Emissions?
Diesel?
Unleaded (95R)
Base Metals (? LME 3 Months)
Aluminium
2062.00
Aluminium Alloy
1805.00
Copper
6909.00
Lead
2524.00
Nickel
11570.00
Tin
19170.00
Zinc
3206.50
Precious Metals (PM London Fix)
Gold
1254.60
Silver (US cents)
1598.50
Platinum
879.00
Palladium
1020.00
Bulk Commodities
Iron Ore (Platts)
71.45
Iron Ore (The Steel Index)
70.70
GlobalCOAL RB Index
95.00
Baltic Dry Index
1619.00
www.ft.com/commodities
Change
0.17
-0.16
-0.02
0.00
-0.06
0.00
18.00
15.00
125.00
35.50
380.00
320.00
20.50
Agricultural & Cattle Futures
Corn?
Wheat?
Soybeans?
Soybeans Meal?
Cocoa (ICE Liffe)X
Cocoa (ICE US)?
Coffee(Robusta)X
Coffee (Arabica)?
White SugarX
Sugar 11?
Cotton?
Orange Juice?
Palm Oil?
Live Cattle?
Feeder Cattle?
Lean Hogs?
S&P GSCI Spt
DJ UBS Spot
R/J CRB TR
M Lynch MLCX Ex. Rtn
UBS Bberg CMCI TR
0.95 LEBA EUA Carbon
0.60 LEBA CER Carbon
0.00 LEBA UK Power
-49.00
3.60
-2.50
2.00
12.00
Dec
Jan
Feb
Price*
347.25
418.50
968.50
320.60
1410.00
1900.00
1730.00
120.70
360.50
13.67
75.85
144.95
119.00
147.95
68.53
Change
-1.50
-0.25
1.25
-0.60
3.00
9.00
-15.00
0.40
-1.30
-0.11
0.60
-2.35
2.70
1.85
0.83
Dec 14
419.70
84.05
187.36
231.14
14.59
7.14
0.17
856.00
% Chg
Month
0.73
0.30
-2.29
-9.84
-1.63
-6.54
-5.56
-56.21
% Chg
Year
-2.90
-33.05
43.09
-45.16
-63.76
Mar
Mar
Jan
Jan
Mar
Mar
Jan
Mar
Mar
Jan
Sources: ? NYMEX, ? ECX/ICE, ? CBOT, X ICE Liffe, ? ICE Futures, ? CME, ? LME/London Metal Exchange.* Latest prices, $
unless otherwise stated.
Stock
Price+/-Week
52 Week
High
Low
Sweden (SKr)
AtlasCpcoB
313.70 -2.60 339.00 243.40
Ericsson
55.10
2.20 64.95 43.75
H&M
174.30 -24.00 262.30 168.50
Investor
383.10 -4.70 425.60 334.60
Nordea Bk
100.30
0.30 115.70 95.90
SEB
97.90 -1.50 109.00 94.05
SvnskaHn
112.80 -0.70 136.30 108.80
Swedbank
200.10 -1.80 234.00 193.20
Telia Co
37.44
0.02 40.33 34.49
Volvo
157.20
0.20 171.30 105.60
Switzerland (SFr)
ABB
25.77 -0.15 26.54 21.43
CredSuisse
17.47
0.28 17.53 12.91
Nestle
84.30 -1.05 86.40 71.45
Novartis
83.80
0.70 85.40 69.50
Richemont
89.05
1.95 92.50 65.60
Roche
244.10
3.60 273.00 226.10
Swiss Re
92.50
1.85 98.50 81.65
Swisscom
523.00 -1.00 527.00 429.80
Syngent
463.00
1.80 471.20 360.50
UBS
18.01
0.66 18.01 15.11
Zurich Fin
302.00
4.40 306.90 262.10
Taiwan (NT$)
Chunghwa Telecom 105.50
1.00 111.00 99.50
Formosa PetChem 112.00
3.50 119.00 101.00
HonHaiPrc
93.50 -0.10 122.50 82.60
MediaTek
285.00 -2.50 350.50 203.00
TaiwanSem
230.00
3.50 245.00 178.50
Thailand (THB)
PTT Explor
432.00 12.00 436.00 359.00
United Arab Emirates (Dhs)
Emirtestele
17.05
0.55 18.95 15.75
United Kingdom (p)
AscBrFd?
2843 -40.00
3387
2335
AstraZen
4881 97.00
5520 4136.5
Aviva
502.50 -7.50 570.50 467.31
Barclays
202.25
5.85 244.40 177.30
BP?
505.20 12.45 529.00
4.80
BrAmTob
4967 28.00 17365.43 2879.89
BSkyB
1018 25.00
1023 893.42
BT
277.55
9.55 400.70 242.70
Compass
1534 43.00 1765.92 1424.8
Diageo
2655 19.50 2677.5
2040
GlaxoSmh?
1295
7.50 1724.5
1270
Glencore
362.75 17.25 388.25 260.50
HSBC
751.50 18.30 772.00 518.17
Imperial Brands
3085
1.50 3956.5
3013
LlydsBkg
66.41 -0.39 73.58 61.81
Natl Grid?
868.60 -9.20 1174.36 859.30
Prudential
1847.5 12.50 1933.5
1524
RBS
276.30 -4.70 290.50 213.40
ReckittB
6731 15.00 8110.43
6299
RELX
1729 17.00
1784
1363
RioTinto
3624.5 156.00 4226.56 2882.5
RollsRoyce?
831.00 -7.50 994.50 635.00
RylDShlA?
2428.5 71.00 2516.32 1982.5
Shire
3762.5 114.50
5067 3435.5
StandCh
757.10 -2.60 860.00 649.80
Tesco
207.30
2.75 215.16 165.35
Vodafone?
230.00
0.60 233.90 186.50
WPP
1389 48.00 1928.07 1238.45
United States of America ($)
21stC Fox A
34.99
1.69 35.86 24.81
3M
238.00 -0.13 244.23 173.55
AbbottLb
55.50
0.86 56.69 37.90
Abbvie
97.45
1.50 98.87 59.27
Accenture
152.66
2.13 152.90 112.31
Adobe
177.51
3.94 186.27 101.91
AEP
76.54 -0.39 78.07 61.82
Aetna
179.70 -3.03 192.37 116.04
Aflac
89.26
1.10 89.67 66.50
AirProd
160.42 -0.50 164.65 133.63
Alexion
115.76
1.30 149.34 96.18
Allegran
171.68
3.88 256.80 160.07
Allstate?
103.97
1.47 104.46 73.04
Alphabet
1072 22.62
1080 789.62
Altria
71.67
0.13 77.79 60.01
Amazon
1179.14 17.14 1213.41 747.70
AmerAir
51.06
0.04 54.48 39.21
AmerExpr
98.52 -0.03 99.75 73.50
AmerIntGrp?
59.39 -0.12 67.47 57.85
AmerTower
142.76
0.29 155.28 102.51
Amgen
177.04
1.63 191.10 145.12
Anadarko?
47.52 -0.40 72.32 39.96
Anthem?
226.21
1.36 236.39 140.50
Aon Cp
138.39 -0.10 152.78 109.82
Apple
173.97
4.60 176.24 114.76
ArcherDan
40.56 -0.95 47.44 38.59
Yld
P/E MCap m
2.16
1.88
3.10
2.65
6.46
5.80
4.58
6.82
6.90
2.14
22.13
-9.73
14.44
3.92
11.56
11.93
13.24
11.55
13.73
14.77
14407.14
19924.33
29964.36
20537.15
47808.55
25003.53
25342.66
26659.41
19080.39
30444.59
2.92
3.93
2.90
3.31
2.06
3.57
5.50
4.28
6.24
25.17 56332.29
-22.48 45020.44
26.55 264510.85
30.08 221093.5
26.32 46866.06
20.42 172904.73
8.81 32589.94
15.89 27315.03
41.32 42748.26
16.86 69946.34
13.23 46078.68
4.60
5.26
4.72
2.75
2.99
21.76
13.64
12.23
23.74
17.81
27295.35
35583.18
54037.59
15032.29
198909.1
4.03 10.94 37955.14
5.10 15.39 40371.29
1.33 18.75 29972.96
4.21 23.47 82273.9
4.27 33.28 27068.71
1.48 17.00
45882
5.88 34.49 133122.18
3.14 19.93 123325.06
2.06 25.45 23304.2
5.21 17.24 36815.54
2.15 21.92 33596.12
2.27 24.65 89008.39
6.18 27.38 84810.93
0.74 31.41 69537.25
5.03 36.01 200656.11
5.03 29.05 39182.32
4.07 15.44 63463.08
5.26 17.49 39666.63
2.35 17.30 63619.45
- -10.31 43697.84
2.28 22.56 63009.59
1.88 30.99 47701.83
3.59 13.72 66499.78
0.55 -22.28 20363.78
5.96 32.19 144777.81
0.61 27.29 45482.54
- 1638.74 33180.9
37.02 22603.09
5.72 -83.67 81699.46
4.07 10.24 23574.2
1.02 21.76 36879.77
1.93 26.76 141754.73
1.89 46.60 96603.34
2.54 23.83 155572.08
1.64 27.15 97922.42
54.01 87502.31
3.06 20.13 37648.91
0.83 34.09 58600.17
1.95 13.17 35092.54
2.30 31.32 35102.65
52.06 25861.9
1.21 -7.66 57097.87
1.37 14.59 37307.13
36.13 319755.19
3.45 9.05 136759.95
- 302.28 568194.76
0.78 12.99 24432.16
1.32 19.12 85514.99
2.14 -28.22 53389.2
1.74 54.69 61223.54
2.49 16.11 128515.21
0.42 -13.64 26000.93
1.22 20.60 58081.8
0.99 39.50 34583.34
1.37 19.03 893216.26
3.08 19.18 22683.19
Stock
52 Week
High
Low
Price+/-Week
AT&T
AutomData?
Avago Tech
BakerHu
BankAm?
Baxter?
BB & T
BectonDick?
BerkshHat
Biogen
BkNYMeln
BlackRock?
Boeing
BrisMySq
CapOne
CardinalHlth
Carnival
Caterpillar
CBS?
Celgene
CharlesSch
Charter Comms
Chevron Corp
Chubb
Cigna
Cisco
Citigroup
CME Grp?
Coca-Cola
Cognizant
ColgtPlm
Comcast
ConocPhil
Corning
Costco
CrownCstl?
CSX
CVS
Danaher
Deere
Delphi
Delta
Devon Energy
DiscFinServ
Disney?
DominRes?
DowChem
DukeEner?
Eaton
eBay
Ecolab
Emerson
EOG Res
EquityResTP
Exelon
ExpScripts
ExxonMb
Facebook
Fedex?
FordMtr
Franklin
GenDyn
GenElectric
GenMills
GenMotors
GileadSci
GoldmSchs?
Halliburton?
HCA Hold
Hew-Pack?
HiltonWwde?
HomeDep
Honywell
HumanaInc
IBM
IllinoisTool
Illumina
Intcntl Exch?
Intel
Intuit
John&John
JohnsonCn?
JPMrgnCh
Kimb-Clark?
KinderM
Kraft Heinz
Kroger
L Brands
LasVegasSd
LibertyGbl
Lilly (E)
38.24
1.51 43.03 32.55
118.19
2.17 121.77 94.11
265.73
5.82 285.68 173.31
57.68 68.59 43.09
29.04 -0.01 29.50 21.77
65.33
1.28 66.18 43.81
49.53 -0.28 51.11 41.17
221.46
1.78 229.69 161.50
296280 1894.67 299790237983.82
327.94
2.17 348.84 244.28
54.20 -0.47 55.40 43.85
511.87 -3.62 518.88 365.83
293.94
8.04 297.37 153.14
62.41 -0.01 66.10 46.01
96.31
0.52 97.31 76.05
63.19
4.30 84.88 54.66
65.95 -0.96 69.89 50.77
146.69
2.83 149.05 90.34
58.90
1.43 70.10 52.75
109.41
3.32 147.17 94.55
51.28 -0.11 51.98 37.16
322.31 -2.19 408.83 282.54
119.73 -0.19 122.30 102.55
148.72 -1.33 156.00 127.15
204.14 -5.83 212.46 133.11
38.19
0.58 38.37 29.80
74.77 -0.94 77.92 55.23
151.07 -1.75 155.29 113.27
46.19
0.88 47.48 40.22
72.08
0.26 76.51 51.52
74.05
0.73 77.27 63.43
39.71
1.76 42.18 34.12
52.17
0.60 54.22 42.27
32.05 -0.30 32.82 24.12
192.73
4.66 195.35 150.00
110.65
1.15 114.97 83.96
52.93 -3.53 58.35 35.59
73.08 -0.01 84.72 66.45
94.00
0.82 94.82 77.66
150.87 -0.71 153.34 100.90
50.95 -0.05 57.25 31.83
56.10
2.64 56.49 43.81
37.68 -0.37 49.45 28.79
74.59
0.79 75.51 57.50
111.27
7.04 116.10 96.20
84.91
1.03 85.26 70.87
66.65
2.11
87.84 -0.21 91.80 75.78
77.29
0.00 82.34 66.60
38.37
0.72 39.28 29.01
135.19 -0.14 137.96 116.92
67.26
0.71 67.83 55.40
98.55 -1.84 107.95 81.99
65.66 -0.15 70.46 59.49
40.74 -0.31 42.67 33.30
71.55
3.40 73.42 55.80
83.03
0.37 91.67 76.05
180.18
1.18 184.25 114.77
240.05 -0.68 243.48 182.89
12.58 -0.03 13.27 10.47
43.46 -1.21 47.65 38.93
198.84 -2.23 214.81 171.65
17.82
0.11 32.38 17.46
56.89
1.05 63.74 49.65
40.95 -1.07 46.76 31.92
75.57
1.35 86.27 63.76
257.17
6.82 260.50 209.62
44.61
0.62 58.78 38.18
88.46
3.62 91.03 71.18
20.92 -0.15 22.68 14.40
77.09 -1.29 83.85 55.00
182.58 -0.83 186.31 133.05
154.25
0.59 156.70 113.60
253.64 -2.85 264.56 186.25
152.50 -2.31 182.79 139.13
165.17 -1.32 169.69 120.06
216.55 -1.10 230.72 125.68
70.49 -0.44 72.99 55.80
44.56
1.21 47.30 33.23
159.65
4.42 159.77 111.90
142.46
1.87 144.35 110.76
37.26 -0.15 44.70 34.51
106.14
0.21 108.40 81.64
118.51 -1.60 136.21 109.67
17.93
0.14 23.01 16.68
79.54
1.06 97.77 75.21
26.45 -0.23 36.44 19.69
58.11
0.83 71.61 35.00
70.50
0.14 71.42 51.35
32.56
1.79 37.69 28.17
86.54
0.09 89.09 71.76
BONDS: HIGH YIELD & EMERGING MARKET
Close
Prev
price
price
H&M
174.30
200.30
Unicred
16.15
16.46
KDDI
2922.00
3130.00
Naspers N
3310.00
3415.49
NipponTT
5351.00
5656.00
EDF
10.49
10.48
ChMrchSecs
17.65
17.86
NTTDCMo
2686.00
2815.50
CSX
52.93
57.31
UnibailR
212.05
211.10
CanNatRs
42.56
42.97
Metlife
51.41
52.49
Telefonica
8.25
8.24
Softbank
8931.00
9150.00
E.ON
9.39
9.18
Enel
5.36
5.34
GuosenSec
11.33
11.50
ImpOil
38.00
37.91
Inditex
29.96
30.72
Cred Agr
14.15
14.34
Based on the FT Global 500 companies in local currency
Day
change change %
-26.00
-12.98
-0.31
-1.88
-208.00
-6.65
-105.49
-3.09
-305.00
-5.39
0.01
0.10
-0.21
-1.18
-129.50
-4.60
-4.38
-7.64
0.95
0.45
-0.41
-0.95
-1.08
-2.06
0.01
0.15
-219.00
-2.39
0.20
2.22
0.02
0.37
-0.17
-1.48
0.09
0.24
-0.77
-2.49
-0.19
-1.33
Week
change change %
-24.00
-12.1
-1.81
-10.1
-278.00
-8.7
-309.20
-8.5
-443.00
-7.6
-0.82
-7.2
-1.29
-6.8
-193.00
-6.7
-3.53
-6.3
-12.45
-5.5
-2.29
-5.1
-2.35
-4.4
-0.38
-4.3
-405.00
-4.3
-0.40
-4.1
-0.23
-4.0
-0.46
-3.9
-1.45
-3.7
-1.12
-3.6
-0.53
-3.6
Month's
change
Year
change
Return
1 month
Return
1 year
Month
change %
-13.71
-3.64
-3.03
-9.60
-8.00
0.29
-7.35
-5.25
8.84
-2.28
-4.27
-0.83
-6.00
-6.29
-4.12
1.71
-12.85
-4.31
-4.92
-0.25
Bid
yield
Mth's Spread
chge
vs
yield
US
Dec 15
High Yield US$
HRG Group, Inc.
S*
Ratings
M*
F*
Bid
price
07/19
7.88
BB-
Ba3
BB
100.36
7.77
0.00
0.33
5.92
High Yield Euro
Kazkommerts Intl BV
02/17
6.88
B
Caa1
B
97.50
-
0.00
0.00
-
Emerging US$
Mexico
Brazil
Peru
Peru
Brazil
Poland
Turkey
Colombia
Turkey
Russia
09/16
01/18
03/19
03/19
01/22
03/22
03/23
03/23
03/27
06/28
11.40
8.00
7.13
7.13
12.50
5.00
3.25
2.63
6.00
12.75
BBB+
BB
BBB+
BBB+
BB
BBB+
BBB
BB+
A3
Ba2
A3
A3
Ba2
A2
Ba1
Baa2
Ba1
Ba1
BBB+
BB
BBB+
BBB+
BB
ABB+
BBB
BB+
BBB-
106.80
100.42
106.75
114.01
112.50
107.75
93.05
97.52
106.04
173.74
1.49
2.97
1.88
2.60
8.76
3.05
4.76
3.17
5.24
4.10
0.03
1.42
0.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
-0.24
0.29
0.20
0.02
0.15
-2.25
0.01
-0.30
-0.04
0.44
1.12
0.03
0.84
6.60
0.88
2.59
1.00
2.87
1.73
Red
date Coupon
Index
Day's
change
Markit IBoxx
ABF Pan-Asia unhedged
Corporates( �)
Corporates($)
Corporates(?)
Eurozone Sov(?)
Gilts( �)
Global Inflation-Lkd
Markit iBoxx � Non-Gilts
Overall ($)
Overall( �)
Overall(?)
Treasuries ($)
188.59
346.66
279.56
227.85
235.45
324.75
267.54
340.71
240.13
326.39
231.38
225.14
0.02
0.18
0.10
0.04
0.07
0.17
0.32
0.17
0.06
0.17
0.06
0.05
0.16
1.53
0.82
0.29
0.24
1.87
0.75
1.41
0.61
1.73
0.26
0.57
8.88
5.01
6.19
2.97
1.19
2.42
8.24
4.39
3.98
2.99
1.47
2.75
1.58
1.58
0.82
0.41
0.58
1.71
1.59
1.39
0.61
1.61
0.50
0.57
8.52
7.58
6.19
3.67
2.10
5.54
9.13
6.77
3.98
5.89
2.27
2.75
Emerging Euro
Brazil
02/15
7.38
BBBBaa2
BBB 111.75
0.73
0.00
0.00
0.09
Mexico
02/20
5.50
BBB+
A3
BBB+ 111.50
0.17
-0.01
-0.17
-1.68
Mexico
04/23
2.75
BBB+
A3
BBB+ 110.20
0.79
-0.02
-0.12
-1.37
Bulgaria
03/28
3.00
BB+
Baa2
BBB 114.68
1.45
0.00
-0.09
-0.92
Data provided by SIX Financial Information & Tullett Prebon Information. US $ denominated bonds NY close; all other
London close. *S - Standard & Poor?s, M - Moody?s, F - Fitch.
FTSE
Sterling Corporate (�)
Euro Corporate (?)
Euro Emerging Mkts (?)
Eurozone Govt Bond
116.50
107.86
670.59
112.89
0.21
0.10
3.21
0.18
-
-
0.85
0.21
3.27
0.43
1.29
0.37
-18.77
-0.21
Index
Day's
change
Week's
change
Month's
change
Series
high
Series
low
369.26
85.00
70.05
111.86
-12.07
-1.98
-2.51
-3.89
35.21
7.21
2.21
10.86
40.34
7.01
-0.87
12.50
390.04
90.43
93.03
121.66
288.69
67.59
64.22
80.36
BONDS: BENCHMARK GOVERNMENT
Austria
Belgium
CREDIT INDICES
Markit iTraxx
Crossover 5Y
Europe 5Y
Japan 5Y
Senior Financials 5Y
Markit CDX
Emerging Markets 5Y
126.19
1.25
126.19
124.94
Nth Amer High Yld 5Y
314.68
2.08
-6.16
-10.41
337.70
308.36
Nth Amer Inv Grade 5Y
50.99
0.52
-0.58
-4.09
60.00
50.43
Websites: markit.com, ftse.com. All indices shown are unhedged. Currencies are shown in brackets after the index names.
Denmark
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Ireland
Italy
BONDS: INDEX-LINKED
Price
Month
Value
No of
Yield
Dec 14
Dec 14
Prev
return
stock
Market
stocks
Can 4.25%' 21
116.10
0.167
0.115
-0.07
5.18
74408.98
7
Fr 2.25%' 20
110.95
-1.809
-1.811
0.02
20.31 234423.06
15
Swe 0.25%' 22
115.16
-2.039
-2.045
0.00
28.53 242136.23
8
UK 2.5%' 20
365.14
-2.343
-2.347
-0.15
6.58 655734.79
28
UK 2.5%' 24
365.03
-1.950
-1.934
0.42
6.82 655734.79
28
UK 2%' 35
270.72
-1.683
-1.643
1.33
9.08 655734.79
28
US 0.625%' 21
101.78
0.127
0.116
0.03
35.84 1285215.64
38
US 3.625%' 28
131.09
0.529
0.116
1.00
16.78 1285215.64
38
Representative stocks from each major market Source: Merill Lynch Global Bond Indices ? Local currencies. ? Total market
value. In line with market convention, for UK Gilts inflation factor is applied to price, for other markets it is applied to par
amount.
BONDS: TEN YEAR GOVT SPREADS
Spread Spread
Bid
vs
vs
Yield Bund T-Bonds
Australia
2.60
Austria
0.46
Belgium
0.50
Canada
1.90
Denmark
0.38
Finland
0.47
France
0.63
Germany
0.31
Greece
3.93
Ireland
0.51
Data provided by SIX Financial Information
Canada
2.29
0.15
0.19
1.60
0.07
0.16
0.33
0.00
3.63
0.20
0.23
-1.91
-1.88
-0.47
-1.99
-1.90
-1.74
-2.06
1.56
-1.86
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Portugal
Spain
Spread Spread
Bid
vs
vs
Yield Bund T-Bonds
Italy
Japan
Netherlands
Norway
Portugal
Spain
Switzerland
United Kingdom
United States
Japan
1.81
0.04
0.40
1.49
1.80
1.46
-0.18
1.19
2.37
1.51
-0.27
0.10
1.18
1.50
1.15
-0.49
0.88
2.06
-0.56
-2.33
-1.97
-0.88
-0.57
-0.91
-2.55
-1.18
0.00
Sweden
Switzerland
United Kingdom
United States
Data provided by SIX Financial Information
P/E MCap m
Stock
52 Week
High
Low
Price+/-Week
Yld
Lockheed?
322.82
6.97 323.38 247.01
Lowes
86.69
1.09 88.55 70.49
Lyondell
106.03 -1.11 108.13 78.01
Marathon Ptl
65.75
1.00 66.19 46.88
Marsh&M
83.11 -1.02 86.54 66.75
MasterCard
153.40
3.51 154.65 102.98
McDonald's
174.06
0.91 175.09 118.18
McKesson?
162.60 10.03 169.29 133.82
Medtronic
83.50
2.43 89.72 69.35
Merck?
56.24
0.67 66.80 53.63
Metlife
51.41 -2.35 55.91 44.17
Microsoft
86.85
2.69 87.09 61.95
Mnstr Bvrg
64.01
0.79 64.25 41.02
MondelezInt
43.38
0.73 47.23 39.19
Monsanto
117.35
0.05 122.80 104.77
MorganStly
53.10
0.21 54.25 40.06
MylanNV
40.52
1.85 45.87 29.39
Netflix
190.12
1.58 204.38 122.87
NextEraE
158.43 -0.60 159.40 117.12
Nike?
64.79
3.49 65.07 50.35
NorfolkS
141.11
0.29 143.35 105.89
Northrop?
310.47
4.80 311.15 223.88
NXP
116.35
1.06 118.20 96.00
Occid Pet?
70.62
1.75 73.51 57.20
Oracle
48.30 -1.30 53.14 38.30
Pepsico?
119.22
2.65 119.39 101.06
Perrigo
86.50
0.90 91.73 63.68
Pfizer
37.20
1.46 37.23 30.90
Phillips66
99.92
0.37 100.46 75.14
PhilMorris
109.68
3.09 123.55 88.90
PNCFin
144.95
1.15 146.24 113.66
PPG Inds
115.09 -0.83 119.85 93.80
Praxair
149.60 -1.81 156.40 115.00
Priceline
1760 40.16 2067.99 1459.49
ProctGmbl
91.89
1.52 94.67 83.24
Prudntl
115.73 -1.42 117.99 97.88
PublStor?
211.56
0.72 232.21 192.15
Qualcomm
64.76
0.52 69.28 48.92
Raytheon
191.38
3.31 191.54 141.16
Regen Pharm 388.95
8.17 543.55 340.09
ReynoldsAm
65.40
0.40
S&P Global
169.05 -2.16 174.07 107.21
Salesforce
105.48
2.04 109.19 68.23
Schlmbrg?
62.09 -1.45 87.84 61.02
Sempra Energy 116.53 -0.16 122.98 99.71
Shrwin-Will
403.82 -5.03 413.98 265.14
SimonProp
167.81
5.56 188.10 150.15
SouthCpr
43.32
1.33 44.69 31.55
Starbucks
58.29 -0.32 64.87 52.58
StateSt
98.53
0.86 100.90 74.45
Stryker
154.25
2.32 160.62 116.50
Sychrony Fin
37.19 -0.31 38.06 26.01
Target
62.61
1.24 78.37 48.56
TE Connect
96.22
1.40 96.78 66.20
Tesla Mtrs
343.45 28.32 389.61 197.39
TexasInstr
101.22
3.20 101.60 72.45
TheTrvelers? 134.89
1.14 137.95 113.76
ThrmoFshr?
192.27
4.31 201.20 139.88
TimeWrnr
90.25 -0.46 103.89 85.88
TJX Cos
74.17
0.29 80.92 66.44
T-MobileUS
62.66
0.12 68.88 54.60
UnionPac?
130.60
1.49 132.39 101.06
UPS B
118.00 -1.56 125.16 102.12
USBancorp
54.50 -0.86 56.61 49.54
UtdHlthcre
221.82 -2.09 231.77 156.09
UtdTech
126.17
3.36 126.44 106.85
ValeroEngy
88.19
0.59 88.43 60.69
Verizon
52.67
1.58 54.83 42.80
VertexPharm 145.86
2.25 167.86 71.46
VF Cp?
74.41
1.06 74.87 48.05
Viacom?
30.24
0.95 46.72 22.13
Visa Inc
113.82
1.22 114.37 77.19
Walgreen
71.94
0.39 88.00 63.82
WalMartSto?
97.11
0.56 100.13 65.28
WellsFargo
59.87
0.56 60.65 49.27
Williams Cos?
29.73
1.18 32.69 26.82
Yum!Brnds
82.30 -1.02 84.29 62.36
Venezuela (VEF)
Bco de Vnzla
1900 100.00
1950 181.00
Bco Provncl
120000-10000.00 144000
3200
Mrcntl Srvcs 680000-60000.00 760000 11250
5.40 17.60 234755.36
1.91 30.22 52416.05
1.36 200.82 108412.35
0.85 -8.48 24541.87
1.18 16.72 302905.02
0.88 35.20 35593.87
2.46 18.55 39075.26
1.31 48.50 50396.54
21.79 223255.28
20.26 69351.75
1.48 16.01 55502.01
1.90 24.15 82069.22
1.81 27.32 175064.35
2.48 24.66 102146.43
1.65 13.55 46685.71
2.86 18.56 19879.8
2.35 17.34 35392.48
2.09 101.92 87270.81
1.21 15.87 21355.97
25.88 86140.35
0.60 32.91 68744.76
- 176.48 80129.63
3.58 35.17 227412.04
1.87 17.90 69039.09
0.02 22.50 50330.66
2.97 19.83 188796.93
1.06 14.51 197692.03
1.70 34.51 51407.82
3.14 44.75 196800.22
0.41 22.48 42501.66
2.12 28.80 65023.69
1.52 19.19 186792.98
1.99 -26.15 62370.06
1.86 13.98 27853.29
1.02 30.67 84221.01
3.41 92.90 44954.34
1.43 27.49 47304.76
2.61 15.21 74029.49
0.58 28.19 65300.85
1.61 24.85 48257.59
13544.54
1.48 10.81 39997.79
0.63 12.61 19801.41
1.66 12.91 27104.56
1.39 19.70 168052.44
3.47 25.31 54642.11
81542.6
3.90 22.75 61485.86
3.04 12.26 34053.97
5.80 40080.19
1.09 30.74 39058.32
2.83 26.68 43168.8
0.674963.32 56983.51
3.05 32.27 24129.05
3.17 18.41 39145.13
11.97 40523.99
3.85 32.49 351806.92
35.18 429692.91
0.69 21.02 64368.85
4.73 11.52 49073.36
1.83 14.55 24072.84
1.67 18.18 59370.22
5.35 20.88 154536.55
3.51 19.73 32332.78
3.68 8.72 58165.69
2.67 8.66 98714.75
1.08 13.52 97004.9
1.60 180.08 38924.05
12.71 31319.48
2.52 14.90 35215.37
0.85 65.27 24665.06
1.85 25.25 213207.54
1.71 23.55 116738.01
0.70 19.99 36235.03
3.78 12.85 141183.19
1.64 25.52 56587.07
41.56 31616.3
1.08 25.82 41238.5
2.37 15.75 208540.8
0.89 42.23 40814.51
2.29 24.96 382721.65
2.66 21.45 34481.71
1.91 15.43 368276.67
3.27 19.30 41686.76
2.77 32.26 40041.99
3.03 25.04 96916.93
1.81 15.48 23312.02
4.14 17.67 16402.43
4.37 28.78 55728.84
37.71 7198.71
2.37 41.52 95288.74
P/E MCap m
2.24 26.38 92563.53
1.76 20.78 71931.95
3.28 11.36 41824.62
2.17 20.96 32113.1
1.71 22.94 42415.76
0.57 36.02 160088.68
2.14 25.38 140988.01
0.72 7.98 33897.95
2.14 22.87 113017.08
3.32 54.48 153222.33
3.09 -63.85 54098.71
1.78 30.92 670012.16
47.07 36099.29
1.81 30.35 64826.58
1.90 22.44 51657.47
1.59 14.78 95999.45
24.89 21730.1
- 226.15 82270.84
2.39 17.95 74525.09
1.15 26.68 84374.25
1.70 22.42 40378.45
1.22 23.13 54046.16
20.35 40257.43
4.29 100.21 54041.63
1.46 20.32 201579.39
2.59 24.82 169547.93
0.72 -9.51 12182.72
3.36 23.13 221738.31
2.64 25.36 50633.51
3.89 23.67 170355.26
1.64 17.85 68967.37
1.42 22.51 29287.63
2.07 26.82 42831.28
24.87 85834.4
3.01 24.29 233121.08
2.53 11.68 49069.52
3.78 29.44 36820.16
3.37 39.54 95466.9
1.64 25.82 55325.47
35.53 41045.18
0.93 25.05 43107.75
76188.2
3.43 -40.49 86010.9
2.74 25.97 29281.35
0.83 34.45 37762.79
4.11 29.82 52164.14
0.89 28.53 33487.59
1.70 29.81 82935.01
1.57 17.17 36538.54
1.09 33.21 57726.15
1.44 14.25 29104.58
3.88 13.14 34033.08
1.59 20.76 33834.53
- -40.52 57722.75
1.96 23.83 99758.44
2.07 13.14 37222.5
0.31 32.89 77099.38
2.21 17.19 70268.02
1.55 19.99 46897.88
24.76 52130.87
1.84 23.29 102804.25
2.75 29.14 81072.78
2.08 16.34 90442.27
1.23 25.40 214958.54
2.11 19.65 100755.57
3.04 19.23 38590.3
4.38 13.61 214864.15
- 190.84 36888.41
2.24 29.87 29403.04
2.63 6.52 10669.49
0.58 40.95 206111.28
2.19 18.42 71246.19
2.10 25.75 292738.01
2.54 15.59 294815.53
3.67 52.55 24579.17
1.70 25.36 27734.58
2074.2
- 104.98 3873.09
0.001101.53 12391.88
Closing prices and highs & lows are in traded currency (with variations for that
country indicated by stock), market capitalisation is in USD. Highs & lows are
based on intraday trading over a rolling 52 week period.
? ex-dividend
? ex-capital redistribution
# price at time of suspension
Dec 15
US$
FleetBoston Financial Corp.
SunTrust Banks Inc.
Nicor Gas Company
NationsBank Corp.
Dover Corporation
United Utilities PLC
Euro
AT&T Inc.
AT&T Inc.
HBOS plc
Electricite de France (EDF)
Yen
Enagas Transportes, S.A.U.
� Sterling
Electricite de France (EDF)
HSBC Holdings plc
Red
date Coupon
Ratings
M*
Bid
yield
Day's
chge
yield
Mth's Spread
chge
vs
yield
US
F*
Bid
price
01/28
01/28
02/28
03/28
06/28
08/28
6.88
6.00
6.58
6.80
6.65
6.88
BBB
BBB+
A
BBB
ABBB+
Baa2
Baa1
Aa3
Baa2
A3
Baa1
AAAAAAA-
121.65
115.59
117.13
122.38
120.32
123.52
4.26
4.14
4.51
4.14
4.27
4.17
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-0.10
-0.11
0.00
-0.01
0.09
-0.05
1.89
1.77
2.14
1.77
1.90
1.80
12/29
12/29
03/30
04/30
2.60
2.60
4.50
4.63
BBB+
BBB+
BBBA-
Baa1
Baa1
Baa1
A3
AAAA-
105.70
105.50
118.30
130.67
2.06
2.08
2.23
1.83
-0.03
0.00
0.00
-0.01
-0.08
-0.05
-0.12
-0.03
-
09/39
3.23
A-
Baa2
A-
106.57
2.85
0.00
0.01
-
05/28
08/28
6.25
2.63
AA
A3
A2
AAA-
132.80
101.30
2.62
2.48
-0.02
-0.02
-0.10
-0.20
0.25
0.11
S*
Data provided by SIX Financial Information. US $ denominated bonds NY close; all other London close. *S - Standard & Poor?s, M Moody?s, F - Fitch.
GILTS: UK CASH MARKET
Dec 15
Day Chng
Prev
52 wk high
52 wk low
VIX
9.42
-1.07
10.49
17.28
8.56
VXD
10.57
-1.03
11.60
27.74
3.93
VXN
11.88
-0.51
12.39
21.03
9.75
VDAX
? CBOE. VIX: S&P 500 index Options Volatility, VXD: DJIA Index Options Volatility, VXN: NASDAQ Index Options Volatility.
? Deutsche Borse. VDAX: DAX Index Options Volatility.
Australia
Yld
BONDS: GLOBAL INVESTMENT GRADE
Day's
chge
yield
VOLATILITY INDICES
BOND INDICES
Since
15-06-2017
15-06-2017
15-06-2017
16-03-2016
04-08-2016
01-02-2016
15-01-2015
INTEREST RATES: MARKET
Dec 15 (Libor: Dec 14)
US$ Libor
Euro Libor
� Libor
Swiss Fr Libor
Yen Libor
Euro Euribor
Sterling CDs
US$ CDs
Euro CDs
0.19 133.60
0.57 32.39
1.31 60.76
1.02 25.17
1.58 18.20
2.45 17.03
1.72 29.78
2.27 26.41
4.26 10.90
0.58 17.06
0.81 68.06
0.66 40.01
1.82 19.80
52 Week
High
Low
Price+/-Week
Japan (�)
AstellasPh
1431.5 12.50
1688 1331.5
Bridgestne
5092 88.00
5605
3973
Canon
4312
6.00
4472
3218
CntJpRwy
20885 -45.00 21520 17525
Denso
6364 254.00
6697
4551
EastJpRwy
11150 -5.00 11570
9511
Fanuc
26170 -835.00 29205 19630
FastRetail
44600 1330 45470 30000
Fuji Hvy Ind
3672 27.00
5016
3562
Hitachi
823.30 -20.40 908.70 566.30
HondaMtr
3782 26.00
3863
3000
JapanTob
3719 -11.00
4243
3607
KDDI
2922 -278.00
3260 2840.5
Keyence
63320 490.00 69910 38375
MitsbCp
2888 -2.00
2972 2208.5
MitsubEst
1968 -21.50 2418.5
1825
MitsubishiEle
1803 -21.00
1979
1462
MitsuiFud
2544.5 20.50 2851.5 2274.5
MitUFJFin
798.50 19.10 830.70 570.20
Mizuho Fin
200.80 -0.80 224.50 185.40
Murata Mfg
14565 -230.00 17910 14000
NipponTT
5351 -443.00
5905
4672
Nissan Mt
1096.5 17.50
1220 996.20
Nomura
656.80 -4.70 774.40 567.70
Nppn Stl
2799 -25.50
2912 2323.5
NTTDCMo
2686 -193.00 2907.5 2501.5
Panasonic
1668.5 80.00
1800
1137
Seven & I
4737 83.00
4891
4234
ShnEtsuCh
11395 -255.00 12915
8983
Softbank
8931 -405.00 10550
7494
Sony
5006 -113.00
5485
3262
SumitomoF
4792 219.00
4920
3760
Takeda Ph
6221 94.00
6464
4664
TokioMarine
4999 -28.00
5209
4192
Toyota
6966 34.00
7312
5670
Mexico (Mex$)
AmerMvl
16.52
0.21 18.44 12.21
FEMSA UBD 179.83
3.13 186.87 150.11
WalMrtMex
45.86
0.40 47.29 34.70
Netherlands (?)
Altice
8.15
0.83 23.43
6.44
ASML Hld
145.85 -1.00 159.95 100.60
Heineken
86.39
0.81 89.71 69.04
ING
15.48 -0.18 16.13 12.81
Unilever
48.53 -0.29 52.31 37.23
Norway (Kr)
DNB
152.60
0.30 164.30 126.90
Statoil
169.40
2.60 174.00 135.80
Telenor
175.50 -6.20 187.70 125.60
Qatar (QR)
QatarNtBk
124.49
5.89 173.00 115.01
Russia (RUB)
Gzprm neft
135.50
2.90 158.88 111.46
Lukoil
3420 31.50
3582
2601
MmcNrlskNckl
10595 518.00 11938
7677
Novatek
698.00 29.60 800.10 590.20
Rosneft
299.65
5.90 425.70 286.00
Sberbank
226.53
5.64 233.95 136.20
Surgutneftegas
28.92
1.22 32.87 24.09
Saudi Arabia (SR)
AlRajhiBnk
64.00 -0.20 71.70 61.00
Natnlcombnk
50.30 -0.80 58.00 37.00
SaudiBasic
101.00 -0.20 105.40 90.50
SaudiTelec
68.30 -1.70 78.90 64.50
Singapore (S$)
DBS
24.58
0.34 25.36 17.15
JardnMt US$
63.04
0.94 68.11 53.65
JardnStr US$
40.17
0.32 46.48 32.14
OCBC
12.30
0.18 12.59
8.85
SingTel
3.75 -0.05
4.02
3.62
UOB
26.05
0.42 26.85 20.05
South Africa (R)
Firstrand
56.01
0.36 59.00 43.44
MTN Grp
133.14
4.76 134.94 109.05
Naspers N
3310 -309.20 4142.99 1936.82
South Korea (KRW)
HyundMobis 267000 4000 289500 212000
KoreaElePwr
39000 150.00 49000 37000
SK Hynix
75700 -300.00 90300 44600
SmsungEl
2531000-6000.00 2876000 1760000
Spain (?)
7.15 -0.06
7.93
5.92
BBVA
BcoSantdr
5.62 -0.01
6.25
4.79
CaixaBnk
3.90 -0.14
4.51
3.03
Iberdrola
6.58 -0.14
7.30
5.76
Inditex
29.96 -1.12 36.90 29.00
Repsol
15.16 -0.32 16.30 13.05
Telefonica
8.25 -0.38 10.63
8.21
18.30 95736.5
15.63 52570.93
6.06 33583.94
12.03 31233.29
7.60 40359.25
16.00 4630.54
10.61 47348.92
17.08 62285.88
20.60 45439.09
41.31 35924.99
20.80 34942.46
30.32 42004.01
8.49 46602.75
58.14 472925.27
125.00
INTEREST RATES: OFFICIAL
Over
night
1.42750
-0.43214
0.47444
Stock
FT 500: BOTTOM 20
Day
change change %
0.03
0.39
5.56
1.65
2.84
4.71
-0.05
-0.65
0.10
0.25
0.70
0.63
5.40
3.44
-10.76
-1.62
0.23
0.71
0.26
0.40
-74.00
-0.69
0.11
0.32
-7.50
-0.45
5.40
1.51
2.53
3.67
0.85
1.54
-29.00
-0.60
0.51
1.27
-0.40
-1.37
0.59
1.51
Close
Prev
price
price
Altice
8.15
8.12
Tesla Mtrs
343.45
337.89
CardinalHlth
63.19
60.35
CSR
7.60
7.65
SandsCh
40.65
40.55
Disney
111.27
110.57
McKesson
162.60
157.20
Kweichow
653.79
664.55
LibertyGbl
32.56
32.33
Nike
64.79
64.53
MmcNrlskNckl
10595.00 10669.00
21stC Fox A
34.99
34.88
Panasonic
1668.50
1676.00
Glencore
362.75
357.35
ExpScripts
71.55
69.02
Delta
56.10
55.25
SumitomoF
4792.00
4821.00
MylanNV
40.52
40.01
China Vanke
28.80
29.20
Comcast
39.71
39.12
Based on the FT Global 500 companies in local currency
Rate
Fed Funds
Prime
Discount
Repo
Repo
O'night Call
Libor Target
P/E MCap m
-0.01
0.73
FT 500: TOP 20
Dec 15
US
US
US
Euro
UK
Japan
Switzerland
Yld
Red
Date Coupon
10/19
2.75
11/28
2.75
10/19
0.25
04/27
0.50
09/19
3.00
06/27
0.80
02/20
1.25
06/28
2.00
11/20
0.25
11/27
0.50
09/19
1.75
09/27
0.50
11/20
0.25
05/23
1.75
05/28
0.75
10/20
0.25
08/23
2.00
08/27
0.50
08/48
1.25
04/19
4.75
01/28
3.75
10/19
5.90
05/26
1.00
06/20
0.35
08/22
0.90
08/27
2.05
03/48
3.45
11/19
0.10
11/22
0.05
09/27
0.10
09/47
0.80
01/20
0.25
07/27
0.75
04/20
3.00
04/27
4.50
05/19
4.50
02/27
1.75
06/20
4.80
04/27
4.13
01/19
0.25
10/27
1.45
07/19
1.50
11/26
1.00
07/20
2.25
06/27
3.25
07/20
2.00
07/23
0.75
07/27
1.25
07/47
1.50
11/19
1.75
10/22
2.00
11/27
2.25
11/47
2.75
Bid
Price
101.54
101.42
101.53
100.37
106.46
102.82
99.27
100.90
102.23
101.21
99.58
100.29
102.15
110.33
101.17
102.54
112.63
101.85
103.97
103.74
98.50
112.03
104.05
101.08
101.65
102.14
107.45
100.48
99.65
100.62
99.85
101.95
103.24
102.43
114.51
105.75
102.23
112.11
119.76
100.69
99.91
99.27
104.54
107.78
133.04
103.93
99.50
100.58
95.16
99.81
99.25
98.95
101.00
Bid Day chg Wk chg Month
Year
Yield
yield
yield chg yld chg yld
1.89
0.01
0.09
0.11
-0.09
2.60
0.01
0.00
-0.04
0.00
-0.59
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.46
-0.03
0.01
-0.06
0.00
-0.61
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.50
-0.02
0.00
-0.08
0.00
1.60
0.03
0.06
0.12
0.00
1.90
0.00
0.00
-0.09
0.00
-0.51
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.38
-0.03
0.00
-0.07
0.00
2.01
0.00
0.03
0.07
0.18
0.47
-0.03
0.01
-0.07
0.00
-0.47
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-0.14
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.63
-0.01
0.01
-0.08
0.00
-0.64
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-0.22
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.31
-0.01
0.00
-0.06
0.00
1.10
-0.03
-0.04
-0.14
0.00
1.86
-0.03
-0.30
-0.96
-6.08
3.93
-0.15
-0.54
0.00
0.00
-0.62
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.51
-0.01
0.02
-0.07
-0.39
-0.08
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.54
0.02
0.14
-0.05
0.00
1.81
0.02
0.17
-0.02
0.00
3.09
0.01
0.19
-0.03
0.00
-0.15
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.12
0.00
-0.01
0.00
0.00
0.04
-0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.80
0.00
-0.01
-0.02
0.00
-0.68
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.40
-0.01
0.01
-0.06
0.00
1.92
0.02
-0.02
-0.09
-0.59
2.73
0.01
-0.08
-0.14
-0.73
0.43
-0.03
-0.06
-0.08
-0.32
1.49
-0.04
0.01
-0.04
0.00
-0.06
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.80
-0.01
0.01
-0.17
0.00
-0.37
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.46
0.02
0.07
-0.09
0.00
1.98
0.00
0.03
0.11
0.00
0.48
-0.02
0.04
-0.02
-0.15
-0.76
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-0.18
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.47
-0.02
-0.08
-0.05
-0.01
0.84
-0.01
-0.08
-0.08
0.00
1.19
-0.02
-0.12
-0.15
0.00
1.71
-0.02
-0.14
-0.14
-0.37
1.85
0.04
0.05
0.00
0.00
2.16
0.03
0.03
0.10
0.00
2.37
0.02
-0.01
0.03
0.00
2.70
-0.01
-0.07
-0.08
0.00
Red
52 Week
Change in Yield
Price �
Yield
Day
Week
Month
Year
High
Low
Tr 5pc '18
101.03
0.26
0.00
-13.33
-16.13
85.71 105.95 101.03
Tr 4.5pc '19
104.97
0.40
0.00
-13.04
-13.04 150.00 109.80 104.97
Tr 4.75pc '20
109.54
0.42
0.00
-10.64
-6.67
23.53 114.50 109.51
Tr 1.5pc '21
102.94
0.54
0.00
-10.00
-6.90
-10.00 104.73 102.71
Tr 4pc '22
114.14
0.60
0.00
-9.09
-9.09
-17.81 118.04 113.88
Tr 5pc '25
128.55
0.90
-2.17
-10.89
-12.62
-28.57 132.93 127.35
Tr 1.25pc '27
100.55
1.19
-1.65
-9.16
-11.19
-26.09 131.42
98.24
Tr 4.25pc '32
136.11
1.47
-0.68
-8.13
-9.82
-22.63 139.13 132.06
Tr 4.25pc '36
141.37
1.62
-0.61
-7.43
-8.99
-20.59 144.09 135.73
Tr 4.5pc '42
156.08
1.73
-0.57
-6.99
-7.98
-18.40 159.30 148.51
Tr 3.75pc '52
155.86
1.63
-1.21
-7.91
-8.94
-19.31 159.09 144.96
Tr 4pc '60
175.60
1.55
-0.64
-8.28
-9.36
-20.10 179.15 161.03
Gilts benchmarks & non-rump undated stocks. Closing mid-price in pounds per �0 nominal of stock.
Dec 15
Amnt

35.24
36.35
33.31
32.46
37.95
35.08
20.87
35.44
29.76
26.64
23.59
23.61
GILTS: UK FTSE ACTUARIES INDICES
Price Indices
Fixed Coupon
1 Up to 5 Years
2 5 - 10 Years
3 10 - 15 Years
4 5 - 15 Years
5 Over 15 Years
7 All stocks
Index Linked
1 Up to 5 Years
2 Over 5 years
3 5-15 years
4 Over 15 years
5 All stocks
Yield Indices
5 Yrs
10 Yrs
15 Yrs
Day's
chg %
0.00
0.10
0.16
0.12
0.27
0.15
Dec 15
94.56
183.37
214.15
190.38
341.79
181.39
Dec 15
310.83
718.11
479.96
923.70
648.45
Dec 15
0.66
1.22
1.59
Day's
chg %
0.04
0.01
0.18
-0.05
0.01
Dec 14
0.67
1.24
1.61
Yr ago
0.70
1.54
1.99
Total
Return
2419.37
3493.00
4270.26
3684.70
5237.08
3602.22
Month
chg %
-0.46
1.44
0.30
1.82
1.25
20 Yrs
45 Yrs
Year's
chg %
-0.71
7.81
2.64
9.60
7.06
Return
1 month
0.12
0.82
1.54
1.09
3.17
1.63
Total
Return
2459.27
5360.12
3727.25
6742.49
4913.91
Dec 15
1.74
1.52
Return
1 year
0.12
3.05
5.97
3.97
9.87
5.22
Yield
0.55
1.01
1.39
1.17
1.64
1.48
Return
1 month
-0.46
1.44
0.30
1.82
1.25
Return
1 year
0.76
8.37
3.72
9.99
7.70
Dec 14
1.75
1.54
inflation 0%
inflation 5%
Dec 15
Dur yrs Previous
Yr ago
Dec 15
Dur yrs Previous
Real yield
Up to 5 yrs
-2.00
3.28
-1.98
-2.23
-2.45
3.30
-2.44
Over 5 yrs
-1.65
24.92
-1.65
-1.42
-1.68
25.02
-1.68
5-15 yrs
-1.77
9.51
-1.75
-1.64
-1.89
9.53
-1.88
Over 15 yrs
-1.63
30.08
-1.64
-1.39
-1.66
30.13
-1.66
All stocks
-1.65
23.01
-1.65
-1.42
-1.69
23.13
-1.69
See FTSE website for more details www.ftse.com/products/indices/gilts
�17 Tradeweb Markets LLC. All rights reserved. The Tradeweb FTSE
Gilt Closing Prices information contained herein is proprietary to
Tradeweb; may not be copied or re-distributed; is not warranted to be
accurate, complete or timely; and does not constitute investment advice.
Tradeweb is not responsible for any loss or damage that might result from the use of this information.
Yr ago
2.14
1.95
Yr ago
-2.92
-1.45
-1.79
-1.42
-1.47
All data provided by Morningstar unless otherwise noted. All elements listed are indicative and believed accurate
at the time of publication. No offer is made by Morningstar or the FT. The FT does not warrant nor guarantee
that the information is reliable or complete. The FT does not accept responsibility and will not be liable for any
loss arising from the reliance on or use of the listed information. For all queries e-mail
ft.reader.enquiries@morningstar.com
Data provided by Morningstar | www.morningstar.co.uk
?
22
Monday 18 December 2017
How to lead
Handling fast growth
William Shu
Ask an outsider
The Deliveroo chief is
managing huge demand
while fending off criticism
of the gig economy,
writes Jonathan Moules
People are begging for your
product. You are ready to enter the
growth stage of your start-up. What
do you do next? Stefanos Zenios,
professor of entrepreneurship and
operations, information and
technology at Stanford Graduate
School of Business, has collected
advice from the teaching team of
his course Start-up Garage.
First, he says, focus on people
and culture. Your role will be to hire
people and maintain the culture
and vision.
Second, be clear about your
growth hypothesis and how you
think growth will be achieved:
customer relationships, unit
economics and so on. Measure your
results, accept it will be messy and
be ready to decide which balls to
keep up in the air ? some will fall
and that is OK.
Third, make sure everyone in the
company stays close to the
customer. Every new customer is an
experiment that will either prove or
disprove your growth hypothesis.
If the hypothesis is disproved,
understanding your customer will
lead you to a new, improved
hypothesis.
W
illiam Shu?s love of convenience has been the
making of him. The
concept for Deliveroo,
the app-based takeaway food delivery service he started
from his London flat in 2013, came to
him after he left Wall Street in 2004 for
London?s Canary Wharf.
The former investment banker
missed the New York service culture,
where the stress of working late on M&A
deals was relieved by ordering in meals
from local eateries. Mr Shu wondered
whether he could get London?s new
range of upmarket restaurant chains to
do the same thing.
?I just knew it would work,? the 38year-old American says. What Mr Shu
did not anticipate was how popular the
concept would be. That created huge
challenges ? both professional and personal ? in leading this young business.
Mr Shu, who dresses casually in
T-shirts and trainers, is serious about
his task: ?I?m a competitive person and I
want to see growth,? he says.
Nearly five years after launch,
Deliveroo bears all the hallmarks of
hyper growth. It is lossmaking ?
�9.1m in 2016 ? but the company has
a $2bn valuation, making it one of the
UK?s most successful tech start-ups. It
raised nearly $400m in a September
funding round and generated �8.6m
in revenue last year, up by more than
600 per cent on the previous year. It
delivers food to customers in 200 cities
across 12 countries.
More than 1,500 people are on its payroll, 900 of whom work out of its London riverside HQ. A further 35,000 freelance delivery riders worldwide tote
meals around urban streets by bike. But
it does not produce the food it delivers
nor employ the riders who deliver it ? it
merely connects the two.
The scale of today?s operation is a long
way from Deliveroo?s early days, when
William Shu at
his London
riverside offices:
?I?m a
competitive
person and I
want to see
growth?
Charlie Bibby/FT
Mr Shu delivered food himself on a second-hand motorbike, while Greg
Orlowski, his co-founder who has since
left the business, developed the booking
technology from his home in Chicago.
For the first year Mr Shu processed
every rider and restaurant bank payment by hand because Deliveroo?s IT
system was not sophisticated enough to
handle it. He seems to accept such
drudgery as part of building a business.
?Ability to improvise on the fly is
exceedingly important,? he says.
Deliveroo?s business model is not
unique ? both UberEats, owned by USbased ride-hailing service Uber, and
Berlin?s Delivery Hero launched similar
services months after Deliveroo started.
But the British company has been a
vocal defender of gig economy working
practices. In doing so it has attracted
condemnation from policymakers, law-
yers, activists and regulators ? and legal
challenges ? for classifying its riders as
self-employed rather than salaried staff.
The legal position on the status of
delivery staff is core to Deliveroo?s business model, according to Mr Shu, and
the complaints clearly irk him. ?I am
not a lawyer,? he says, crossing his arms.
?I can just tell you what is most important to our riders, which is flexibility.?
Some riders disagree. Last month,
Deliveroo fended off a claim from a
group in London calling for union recog-
?I hired people who
have been through
scale because I?m a
first-time entrepreneur?
nition and collective bargaining rights.
Another case, brought by 45 London
riders, will be heard in 2018. They claim
their contracts, which pay them by the
hour plus �per delivery, should give
them the same rights as shift workers,
including a minimum wage.
Deliveroo could continue operating if
it lost the case, Mr Shu says. ?It just
would not be as flexible for the riders.?
No one making deliveries is now covered by the contract at the centre of the
upcoming case. Deliveroo made riders
sign a new contract this summer, otherwise their account would be frozen.
?Everyone is now moving towards a
fee-per-delivery system,? he says, adding that riders in the UK earn on average
� an hour ? 33 per cent higher than
the minimum wage for over 25s.
Deliveroo is not the only fast-growing
gig economy start-up facing legal chal-
Week ahead
The FT?s take
on what to look
out for in the
coming week
now runs online
only. For
guidance on
what is
happening
in markets,
economics,
companies and
politics, go to:
ft.com/weekahead
lenges, but it has fared better than others. Uber, like Deliveroo, grew at an
exponential rate. It has been ordered to
give its UK drivers workers? rights, such
as the minimum wage and holiday pay,
and has had its licence to operate in London revoked. It is appealing. Mr Shu is
attempting to forestall such measures.
This month he launched an income
insurance policy for riders that protects
pay if they are injured or fall ill.
Communicating directly with staff is
critical in a fast-moving business, Mr
Shu says, although he admits he has
needed ?a lot of help? from team members. A confession of the importance of
others in this does not surprise contemporaries at the Wharton School, where
Mr Shu honed his business plan while
completing an MBA. They recall someone more at home in finance classes
than marketing himself as a founder.
Mr Shu watches the data, noting that
in the early days he would only expand
the Deliveroo service into new districts
when the retention rates and repeat
sales from customers in the places
already served rose above 50 per cent.
And he was not averse to adopting
dubious money-saving measures. When
Deliveroo moved out of Mr Shu?s flat
into a shared workspace, he tried to
avoid paying for more desks by sneaking new recruits through the building?s
back door. The owners eventually found
out and Deliveroo moved elsewhere.
Hiring executives with the expertise
for growth is a perpetual challenge. Mr
Shu used Gumtree, the classified advertising website, to save money on finding
his first staff and he enticed several
executives from Silicon Valley, by finding out which ones were keen to move to
London. His vice-president of engineering, Dan Webb, an early hire from Twitter, wanted to raise his children in the
UK. ?I consciously hired people who
have been through scale before because
I?m a first-time entrepreneur,? he says.
In many ways Mr Shu still acts as he
did when he was starting out, such as
trying to get to know his staff. He even
claims to log on as a delivery rider.
Meeting the Deliveroo teams means
much of Mr Shu?s time is spent away
from London. ?Making sure that everyone is on the same page is just a huge
prerogative,? he says. As we are talking,
his phone rings. A Deliveroo driver has
arrived in reception with dinner.
rope
Oil & Gas
No of
US $
stocks indices
7777 574.33
1452 506.28
1707 768.87
4618 810.43
3159 335.22
2586 592.80
7454 597.03
5901 513.24
6469 586.21
7123 592.85
2133 538.98
5658 566.51
918 497.80
235 378.17
321 617.06
701 869.47
285 574.27
396 829.44
1407 851.45
681 382.28
1452 270.25
186 390.36
316 652.69
806 730.39
502 166.24
545 724.12
453 939.76
1457 594.00
998 570.87
2119 775.26
534 737.69
492 939.27
1093 804.89
121 378.98
238 890.97
238 712.38
323 354.15
1876 658.28
1450 445.01
654 442.55
3009 6956.98
987 11484.92
3159 399.20
556 327.97
144 375.33
Day
%
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.7
0.3
0.3
0.4
-0.3
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
-0.2
-0.4
-0.4
0.9
0.8
1.1
0.9
-0.4
-1.0
-0.4
-0.3
-0.9
-0.5
-0.1
0.3
-0.5
-0.3
-0.4
0.1
0.4
-0.3
0.4
0.7
-0.3
0.9
-0.3
-0.1
0.2
0.9
0.3
-0.4
-0.2
Mth
%
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.1
3.0
1.6
3.0
3.2
3.2
3.2
3.2
1.3
1.7
2.0
4.3
3.4
3.5
4.1
1.7
2.5
4.5
5.2
3.0
0.6
1.2
0.5
0.6
1.2
1.1
2.3
0.9
2.8
1.4
5.7
2.9
4.3
1.5
0.8
3.1
4.9
3.0
1.4
2.1
YTD
Total
%
retn
19.9 824.70
20.3 746.08
19.3 1046.42
18.0 1067.11
20.2 508.58
19.8 1207.36
20.3 843.90
20.8 789.82
19.7 849.73
19.4 835.18
19.8 780.25
19.6 810.03
19.9 731.84
18.4 639.56
25.3 932.85
25.3 1272.33
20.1 789.20
15.5 1059.65
14.1 1055.44
19.3 537.58
20.8 447.05
19.8 509.67
26.3 816.21
30.9 945.32
21.2 243.44
27.8 1150.41
23.5 1431.05
22.2 889.60
27.3 963.32
23.8 1170.56
24.7 1121.71
18.1 1407.97
24.2 1167.26
12.7 602.41
16.0 1383.63
8.3 1124.80
13.8 603.30
19.1 877.38
20.0 726.40
25.0 726.81
16.5 9293.75
13.2 15219.56
19.3 560.52
22.5 504.34
0.0 614.83
YTD Gr Div Dec 15
No of
US $
Day
Mth
YTD
Total
YTD Gr Div
% Yield Sectors
stocks indices
%
%
%
retn
% Yield
22.6
2.2 Oil & Gas Producers
108 361.34
-0.2
-0.2
2.8 605.00
6.5
3.5
23.3
2.4 Oil Equipment & Services
27 300.17
0.1
0.1 -14.2 440.65 -12.4
3.2
21.7
2.0 Basic Materials
258 522.19
0.3
0.3
23.7 805.08
26.9
2.5
20.0
1.8 Chemicals
122 789.47
0.1
0.1
25.2 1221.97
28.2
2.3
23.0
2.3 Forestry & Paper
16 297.31
0.7
0.7
24.9 509.67
28.6
3.1
22.6
2.3 Industrial Metals & Mining
68 453.75
0.5
0.5
25.3 696.19
28.0
2.4
22.9
2.2 Mining
52 606.33
0.6
0.6
18.2 934.64
21.8
2.9
24.2
2.7 Industrials
557 407.37
0.2
0.2
22.9 591.30
25.4
2.0
22.5
2.3 Construction & Materials
115 543.24
0.0
0.0
18.0 823.08
20.2
2.0
22.0
2.2 Aerospace & Defense
27 763.28
0.7
0.7
35.1 1098.02
37.8
1.8
22.6
2.3 General Industrials
58 238.40
0.4
0.4
1.3 373.97
3.6
2.6
22.2
2.2 Electronic & Electrical Equipment
72 454.07
-0.2
-0.2
32.1 603.71
34.3
1.6
22.8
2.3 Industrial Engineering
103 832.70
0.1
0.1
32.2 1191.27
34.8
1.9
22.4
3.3 Industrial Transportation
102 702.04
-0.1
-0.1
24.7 1020.21
27.4
2.1
28.6
2.6 Support Services
80 376.35
0.6
0.6
27.5 522.49
29.8
1.7
28.3
2.4 Consumer Goods
439 504.10
0.1
0.1
20.6 752.35
23.3
2.3
22.5
2.0 Automobiles & Parts
108 440.62
-0.3
-0.3
19.8 636.19
22.8
2.5
17.4
1.6 Beverages
45 665.17
0.4
0.4
20.6 1009.10
23.5
2.4
15.7
1.5 Food Producers
111 626.99
0.1
0.1
10.2 959.43
12.6
2.3
21.6
1.9 Household Goods & Home Construction
49 464.40
0.3
0.3
14.9 688.71
17.7
2.5
24.2
2.8 Leisure Goods
33 238.58
-0.3
-0.3
49.1 314.87
50.8
1.3
22.2
1.9 Personal Goods
82 749.15
0.5
0.5
29.5 1057.65
32.1
1.9
28.3
1.5 Tobacco
11 1412.56
0.6
0.6
11.5 2949.00
14.7
3.7
33.1
1.6 Health Care
189 503.09
0.6
0.6
18.9 729.99
21.3
1.9
23.5
1.8 Health Care Equipment & Services
73 881.06
0.8
0.8
28.1 1031.08
29.3
1.0
31.3
2.7 Pharmaceuticals & Biotechnology
116 352.79
0.5
0.5
15.3 536.01
18.1
2.4
26.7
2.8 Consumer Services
401 468.17
0.3
0.3
18.7 629.62
20.6
1.6
25.2
2.5 Food & Drug Retailers
59 289.28
1.3
1.3
2.3 406.99
4.5
2.2
30.8
2.7 General Retailers
131 682.97
0.3
0.3
25.4 893.34
27.3
1.3
27.2
2.7 Media
82 338.28
0.2
0.2
11.2 456.04
12.9
1.7
28.1
2.6 Travel & Leisure
129 476.30
0.0
0.0
25.1 648.17
27.4
1.7
21.4
3.1 Telecommunication
92 164.02
-0.3
-0.3
1.8 312.60
6.0
4.2
27.4
2.5 Fixed Line Telecommuniations
40 133.71
0.5
0.5
-4.9 280.87
-0.5
4.8
17.2
4.1 Mobile Telecommunications
52 179.04
-1.4
-1.4
12.0 305.89
15.8
3.5
18.7
2.6 Utilities
168 280.27
0.1
0.1
13.7 552.31
17.6
3.6
11.5
3.1 Electricity
110 309.77
0.2
0.2
13.9 603.11
17.7
3.5
18.0
3.7 Gas Water & Multiutilities
58 290.85
0.0
0.0
13.3 589.19
17.4
3.7
21.3
1.8 Financials
716 254.58
0.2
0.2
19.3 420.53
22.7
2.8
23.8
3.1 Banks
248 227.07
0.0
0.0
17.9 403.64
21.7
3.2
28.5
2.8 Nonlife Insurance
72 271.46
0.6
0.6
17.1 396.52
19.7
2.2
19.8
2.8 Life Insurance
53 245.35
-0.3
-0.3
22.5 396.78
26.1
2.7
15.7
2.3 Financial Services
156 305.30
0.6
0.6
26.7 423.54
29.0
1.8
21.7
2.1 Technology
195 269.68
0.8
0.8
38.9 332.50
41.0
1.3
25.6
2.6 Software & Computer Services
96 466.04
0.8
0.8
40.0 545.95
41.4
0.8
3.3
3.5 Technology Hardware & Equipment
99 202.58
0.9
0.9
37.6 260.66
40.5
1.9
Alternative Energy
9
91.86
-1.1
-1.1
0.0 124.55
0.9
2.0
Real Estate Investment & Services
110 358.03
-0.9
-0.9
29.7 603.00
33.2
2.5
The FTSE Global Equity Series, launched in 2003, contains the FTSE Global Small Cap Indices and broader FTSE Global All Cap Indices (large/mid/small cap) as well as the enhanced FTSE All-World index Series (large/
mid cap) - please see www.ftse.com/geis. The trade names Fundamental Index� and RAFI� are registered trademarks and the patented and patent-pending proprietary intellectual property of Research Affiliates, LLC
(US Patent Nos. 7,620,577; 7,747,502; 7,778,905; 7,792,719; Patent Pending Publ. Nos. US-2006-0149645-A1, US-2007-0055598-A1, US-2008-0288416-A1, US-2010- 0063942-A1, WO 2005/076812, WO 2007/078399 A2,
WO 2008/118372, EPN 1733352, and HK1099110). ?EDHEC?? is a trade mark of EDHEC Business School As of January 2nd 2006, FTSE is basing its sector indices on the Industrial Classification Benchmark - please see
www.ftse.com/icb. For constituent changes and other information about FTSE, please see www.ftse.com. � FTSE International Limited. 2013. All Rights reserved. ?FTSE� is a trade mark of the London Stock Exchange
Group companies and is used by FTSE International Limited under licence.
UK COMPANY RESULTS
closing
Price p
11.73
11.72
10.91
10.55
10.13
10.05
9.64
9.46
9.33
9.12
8.20
6.09
5.06
4.87
4.54
3.79
3.42
3.20
FTSE 100 SUMMARY
Company
Aggregated Micro Power Holdings
Fulham Shore (The)
Henderson Alternative Strategies Trust
JPMorgan Indian Investment Trust
Lowland Investment Co
MediaZest
Miton UK MicroCap Trust
Thruvision Group
FTSE 100
Closing Week's
Price Change FTSE 100
3I Group PLC
Admiral Group PLC
Anglo American PLC
Antofagasta PLC
Ashtead Group PLC
Associated British Foods PLC
Astrazeneca PLC
Aviva PLC
Babcock International Group PLC
Bae Systems PLC
Barclays PLC
Barratt Developments PLC
Berkeley Group Holdings (The) PLC
Bhp Billiton PLC
BP PLC
British American Tobacco PLC
British Land Company PLC
Bt Group PLC
Bunzl PLC
Burberry Group PLC
Carnival PLC
Centrica PLC
Coca-Cola Hbc AG
Compass Group PLC
Convatec Group PLC
Crh PLC
Croda International PLC
Dcc PLC
Diageo PLC
Direct Line Insurance Group PLC
Easyjet PLC
Experian PLC
Ferguson PLC
Fresnillo PLC
G4S PLC
Gkn PLC
Glaxosmithkline PLC
Glencore PLC
Hammerson PLC
Hargreaves Lansdown PLC
HSBC Holdings PLC
Imperial Brands PLC
Informa PLC
Intercontinental Hotels Group PLC
International Consolidated Airlines Group S.A.
Intertek Group PLC
Itv PLC
Johnson Matthey PLC
Kingfisher PLC
Land Securities Group PLC
Legal & General Group PLC
891.50
1907
1410
930.50
1894
2843
4881
502.50
684.50
563.00
202.25
626.50
4160
1419.5
505.20
4967
671.00
277.55
2016
1723
4830
138.00
2325
1534
205.80
2532
4331
7230
2655
365.80
1417
1601
5270
1336
252.00
298.00
1295
362.75
534.00
1705
751.50
3085
740.00
4581
633.50
5045
165.70
3039
331.70
984.00
268.20
23.00
58.00
46.00
37.00
-125.00
-40.00
97.00
-7.50
23.00
6.00
5.85
-3.50
47.00
78.00
12.45
28.00
16.00
9.55
-69.00
-13.00
-98.00
-6.10
6.00
43.00
-4.40
-96.00
78.00
280.00
19.50
6.70
-39.00
28.00
-75.00
30.00
0.30
-0.70
7.50
17.25
7.50
105.00
18.30
1.50
6.00
135.00
-3.00
-5.00
2.00
27.00
-4.50
25.50
4.40
Closing Week's
Price Change
Lloyds Banking Group PLC
London Stock Exchange Group PLC
Marks And Spencer Group PLC
Mediclinic International PLC
Merlin Entertainments PLC
Micro Focus International PLC
Mondi PLC
Morrison (Wm) Supermarkets PLC
National Grid PLC
Next PLC
Nmc Health PLC
Old Mutual PLC
Paddy Power Betfair PLC
Pearson PLC
Persimmon PLC
Prudential PLC
Randgold Resources LD
Reckitt Benckiser Group PLC
Relx PLC
Rentokil Initial PLC
Rio Tinto PLC
Rolls-Royce Holdings PLC
Royal Bank Of Scotland Group PLC
Royal Dutch Shell PLC
Royal Dutch Shell PLC
Rsa Insurance Group PLC
Sage Group PLC
Sainsbury (J) PLC
Schroders PLC
Scottish Mortgage Investment Trust PLC
Segro PLC
Severn Trent PLC
Shire PLC
Sky PLC
Smith & Nephew PLC
Smiths Group PLC
Smurfit Kappa Group PLC
Sse PLC
St. James's Place PLC
Standard Chartered PLC
Standard Life Aberdeen PLC
Taylor Wimpey PLC
Tesco PLC
Tui AG
Unilever PLC
United Utilities Group PLC
Vodafone Group PLC
Whitbread PLC
Worldpay Group PLC
Wpp PLC
66.41
3780
303.80
609.00
361.00
2518
1818
215.50
868.60
4246
2800
203.40
8585
725.00
2626
1847.5
6955
6731
1729
309.40
3624.5
831.00
276.30
2452.5
2428.5
607.50
781.50
236.10
3472
437.00
574.50
2090
3762.5
1018
1282
1444
2406
1315
1184
757.10
418.00
201.90
207.30
1462
4196
816.00
230.00
3864
435.40
1389
-0.39
-10.00
-15.20
14.00
1.90
93.00
124.00
-6.40
-9.20
-237.00
-102.00
4.70
15.00
-15.50
-45.00
12.50
85.00
15.00
17.00
-3.40
156.00
-7.50
-4.70
67.50
71.00
7.00
13.50
-8.60
47.00
-7.90
13.50
7.00
114.50
25.00
-42.00
-30.00
31.00
-9.00
27.00
-2.60
-0.40
-1.00
2.75
67.00
14.50
-1.00
0.60
-130.00
10.70
48.00
UK STOCK MARKET TRADING DATA
Dec 15
Dec 14
Dec 13
Dec 12
Dec 11
Yr Ago
SEAQ Bargains
9.00
9.00
9.00
9.00
8506.00
8506.00
Order Book Turnover (m)
449.03
864.88
953.60
415.48
457.65
457.65
Order Book Bargains
1105010.00 1032927.00 1030788.00 923834.00 1095255.00 1095255.00
Order Book Shares Traded (m)
2258.00
1938.00
1896.00
1620.00
1762.00
1762.00
Total Equity Turnover ()
7512.31
9344.87
8825.51
6327.21
5418.00
5418.00
Total Mkt Bargains
1295972.00 1242293.00 1219248.00 1090931.00 1263206.00 1263206.00
Total Shares Traded (m)
5134.00
5378.00
5620.00
4872.00
5056.00
5056.00
? Excluding intra-market and overseas turnover. *UK only total at 6pm. ? UK plus intra-market turnover. (u) Unavaliable.
(c) Market closed.
All data provided by Morningstar unless otherwise noted. All elements listed are indicative and believed
accurate at the time of publication. No offer is made by Morningstar or the FT. The FT does not warrant nor
guarantee that the information is reliable or complete. The FT does not accept responsibility and will not be
liable for any loss arising from the reliance on or use of the listed information.
For all queries e-mail ft.reader.enquiries@morningstar.com
Data provided by Morningstar | www.morningstar.co.uk
UK RECENT EQUITY ISSUES
Int
Int
Pre
Pre
Pre
Int
Int
Int
Turnover
Pre-tax
2.375179L 1.957353L 2.469625L 1.957353L
0.51
0.932
0.58
1.095
15.622
15.638
12.903
12.918
167.67
167.67
69.461
69.461
42.224
42.341
65.684
65.87
0.067
0.071
0.149
0.149
5.871
5.871
2.616
2.616
4.958L
0.287L
13.783L
2.432L
Figures in . Earnings shown basic. Figures in light text are for corresponding period year earlier.
For more information on dividend payments visit www.ft.com/marketsdata
EPS(p)
6.28L
0.1
32.2
65.97
243.2
0.01L
1.53
8.35L
6.69L
0.1
36.35
158.93
156.4
0.01L
4.16
3L
Div(p)
4.75
13
Pay day
3.8
Feb 7
12 Jan 31
-
Total
4.75
49
-
3.8
45
-
Issue
date
12/06
11/27
11/27
11/23
11/22
11/20
11/16
11/15
11/09
Issue
price(p)
230.00
50.00
160.00
170.00
134.00
59.00
180.00
10.00
3.90
Sector
AIM
AIM
AIM
AIM
AIM
AIM
Stock
code
SBRE
BKS
KEYS
CPC
TENG
BOKU
BAKK
LAHL
ATM
Stock
Sabre Insurance Group PLC
Beeks Financial Cloud Group PLC
Keystone Law Group PLC
City Pub Group (The) PLC
Ten Lifestyle Group PLC
Boku Inc
Bakkavor Group PLC
Landscape Acquisition Holdings Ltd
AfriTin Mining Ltd
lacing price. *Intoduction. ?When issued. Annual report/prospectus available at www.ft.com/ir
For a full explanation of all the other symbols please refer to London Share Service notes.
Close
price(p)
256.00
45.00
190.50
170.50
141.50
73.00
193.75
9.50
2.50
+/5.75
0.00
-2.50
0.00
-5.00
0.90
0.38
0.05
0.19
High
265.25
47.75
193.00
182.00
152.00
83.00
196.50
9.89
4.00
Low
238.00
41.00
188.00
168.00
136.00
72.00
185.50
8.74
2.30
Mkt
Cap ()
64000.0
2205.0
5957.7
9627.7
11412.0
15584.6
112263.7
460.0
743.7
21
FINANCIAL TIMES
Monday 18 December 2017
MARKET DATA
FT500: THE WORLD'S LARGEST COMPANIES
Stock
Australia (A$)
ANZ?
BHPBilltn
CmwBkAu
CSL
NatAusBk
Telstra
Wesfarmers
Westpc?
Woolworths
Belgium (?)
AnBshInBv
KBC Grp
Brazil (R$)
Ambev
Bradesco?
Cielo
ItauHldFin?
Petrobras
Vale
Canada (C$)
BCE?
BkMontrl
BkNvaS
Brookfield?
CanadPcR
CanImp
CanNatRs?
CanNatRy
Enbridge
GtWesLif?
ImpOil?
Manulife?
Potash
RylBkC
Suncor En?
ThmReut
TntoDom
TrnCan
ValeantPh
China (HK$)
AgricBkCh
Bk China
BkofComm
BOE Tech
Ch Coms Cons
Ch Evrbrght
Ch Rail Cons
Ch Rail Gp
ChConstBk
China Vanke
ChinaCitic
ChinaLife
ChinaMBank
ChinaMob
ChinaPcIns
ChMinsheng
ChMrchSecs RMB
Chna Utd Coms RMB
ChShenEgy
ChShpbldng RMB
ChStConEng RMB
ChUncHK
CNNC Intl RMB
CSR
Daqin RMB
Gree Elec Apl
GuosenSec RMB
HaitongSecs
Hngzh HikVDT RMB
Hunng Pwr
IM Baotou Stl RMB
In&CmBkCh
IndstrlBk RMB
Kweichow RMB
Midea
New Ch Life Ins
PetroChina
PingAnIns
PngAnBnk RMB
Pwr Cons Corp RMB
SaicMtr RMB
ShenwanHong
ShgPdgBk RMB
Sinopec Corp
Sinopec Oil RMB
Denmark (kr)
DanskeBk
MollerMrsk
NovoB
52 Week
High
Low
Price+/-Week
Yld
P/E MCap m
28.22
27.71
79.94
140.03
29.69
3.69
44.59
31.37
27.07
-0.26
0.57
0.97
-2.12
0.01
0.04
0.47
-0.01
0.20
32.95
28.82
87.74
149.30
34.09
5.29
45.60
35.39
27.75
27.19 8.60 13.54 63413.77
22.06 3.77 18.73 68081.88
73.20 7.73 13.91 107186.48
96.09 1.27 35.75 48448.53
29.00 9.77 11.94 60996.19
3.34 12.34 11.04
33573
39.52 6.52 17.06 38676.81
29.40 8.72 13.44 81458.09
22.77 3.63 23.84 27019.47
93.95
70.93
-0.48
-1.07
110.10
72.97
93.02
56.22
3.59 55.58 187166.26
3.94 10.58 34890.6
20.90
30.29
23.77
37.53
15.56
36.89
-0.12
-0.21
0.44
-0.29
-0.33
1.41
22.70
35.83
26.29
40.18
18.85
37.40
15.79
24.01
20.15
27.28
12.47
25.00
3.04
2.08
3.15
5.07
2.97
35.83
10.78
15.40
9.69
26.24
8.55
61.35
100.63
82.16
56.23
230.05
119.43
42.56
103.35
49.89
34.93
38.00
26.70
25.32
101.92
43.66
56.90
71.83
61.59
25.39
-0.93
-0.28
-1.44
0.46
-1.68
-0.22
-2.29
0.27
0.55
-0.21
-1.45
-0.16
0.99
-0.55
-0.59
-0.08
-1.02
-1.40
0.03
63.00
104.15
85.50
56.83
232.31
122.56
47.00
108.64
58.28
37.79
48.72
27.54
26.62
102.80
46.66
62.83
75.09
65.24
29.28
56.95
88.63
73.31
43.47
188.36
103.84
35.90
88.84
43.91
33.01
35.15
22.39
20.68
90.13
36.09
55.05
61.50
59.23
11.20
4.70
3.53
3.70
1.25
0.94
4.24
2.57
1.59
4.76
4.22
1.66
3.05
1.51
3.41
2.83
3.08
3.26
4.03
-
18.66 43070.82
12.73 50826.26
12.69 76819.64
96.02 43364.86
18.36 26005.81
10.65 41113.44
18.83 40421.04
19.91 60074.57
25.26 65624.32
13.97 26939.47
15.30 24709.98
14.41 41252.51
37.53 16585.8
13.51 115452.46
26.13 56298.66
30.20 31566.93
13.09 103184.62
31.03 42139.73
5.10 6894.07
3.62
3.77
5.75
1.35
8.52
3.59
9.04
5.74
6.90
28.80
4.87
23.95
30.50
76.80
37.25
7.72
17.65
6.83
19.12
5.98
9.30
10.60
7.28
7.60
8.78
0.06
11.33
11.32
37.95
4.93
2.54
6.14
17.02
653.79
1.57
52.00
5.36
77.40
12.72
7.38
31.11
0.21
12.62
5.48
2.73
0.03
0.02
0.12
0.05
-0.01
0.04
0.07
0.07
0.25
1.30
-0.01
-0.25
0.85
0.20
-0.10
0.17
-1.29
-0.10
0.24
-0.20
-0.34
-0.12
-0.25
0.50
-0.19
0.00
-0.46
0.14
0.91
0.06
0.02
0.25
-0.36
37.10
-0.03
2.30
0.21
2.65
-0.11
-0.15
-0.28
0.01
-0.34
0.01
-0.08
3.80
4.18
6.44
1.89
11.74
4.06
11.98
7.71
7.12
31.00
5.50
28.20
34.25
91.30
42.30
9.48
22.35
9.29
21.10
8.14
10.96
13.24
8.11
7.99
9.49
0.23
16.18
15.14
43.66
6.25
3.17
6.48
18.52
719.96
1.87
57.85
6.38
87.10
15.24
9.00
34.23
0.35
14.02
6.57
4.37
3.10
3.32
5.40
1.22
8.45
3.38
8.91
5.63
5.42
17.40
4.69
19.84
17.52
75.80
26.35
7.16
15.57
6.15
14.10
5.87
8.33
8.67
6.83
6.81
6.76
0.04
11.32
11.08
22.61
4.77
1.98
4.45
14.99
316.20
1.50
34.35
4.72
38.00
8.54
6.78
22.64
0.20
11.16
5.40
2.72
5.46 5.44 14241.6
5.18 5.66 40348.58
5.51 5.53 25765.93
1.52 15.12
34.38
2.62 7.30 4827.97
3.18 5.04 3155.98
2.05 7.10 2402.27
1.77 8.49 3090.92
4.70 6.29 212314.94
3.18 11.44 4846.95
5.14 5.09 9276.05
1.15 18.15 22809.36
2.83 9.57 17921.04
3.66 12.01 201261.51
2.21 23.01 13231.27
4.32 4.93 6850.79
1.06 22.63 13097.39
- 150.12 21907.95
2.80 7.93 8316.71
- 126.07 16616.21
2.28 9.61 41841.45
68.28 41511.25
1.49 23.94 4659.64
3.23 17.59 4251.74
2.81 9.99 19752.76
-1.92
102.96
1.74 23.42 3763.52
2.25 14.26 4939.82
1.04 40.46 41679.67
6.95 24.55 2965.85
93.41 8471.07
4.42 6.74 68206.23
3.54 6.20 49071.01
1.03 34.31 124283.42
6.92 20.36
43.21
26.58 6882.31
1.06 38.27 14474.06
1.57 16.41 73777.11
1.23 9.99 32565.1
1.14 15.81 10721.18
5.24 10.75 51906.05
-2.55
238.30
1.20 6.87 53671.16
5.71 10.23 17894.36
-3.70 1164.31
239.20
1.60
10460 -170.00
329.50
0.50
259.50
14260
339.80
212.20
10060
225.60
3.75 10.72 35417.08
1.29 -17.53 16631.92
2.30 21.32 102204.76
Stock
Finland (?)
Nokia
3.92
SampoA
45.63
France (?)
Airbus Grpe
85.25
AirLiquide
108.40
AXA
25.28
BNP Parib
62.92
ChristianDior 303.55
Cred Agr
14.15
Danone
71.20
EDF
10.49
Engie SA
14.54
Esslr Intl
112.45
Hermes Intl
439.80
LOreal
187.25
LVMH
245.15
Orange
14.66
PernodRic
129.10
Renault
83.85
Safran
86.11
Sanofi
73.55
Sant Gbn
47.00
Schneider
71.21
SFR Group
34.50
SocGen
43.20
Total
46.51
UnibailR
212.05
Vinci
87.03
Vivendi
22.42
Germany (?)
Allianz
197.15
BASF
93.67
Bayer
106.50
BMW
85.95
Continental
222.60
Daimler
71.01
Deut Bank
16.54
Deut Tlkm
15.07
DeutsPost
40.36
E.ON
9.39
Fresenius Med
87.05
Fresenius SE
64.18
HenkelKgaA 101.85
Linde
179.80
MuenchRkv
186.30
SAP
97.35
Siemens
116.45
Volkswgn
169.10
Hong Kong (HK$)
AIA
61.95
BOC Hold
38.85
Ch OSLnd&Inv
23.95
ChngKng
66.00
Citic Ltd
10.84
Citic Secs
15.88
CK Hutchison
95.90
CNOOC
10.90
HangSeng
185.70
HK Exc&Clr
226.40
MTR
45.45
SandsCh
40.65
SHK Props
125.70
Tencent
389.00
India (Rs)
Bhartiartl
517.95
HDFC Bk
1873.45
Hind Unilevr 1324.55
HsngDevFin
1723
ICICI Bk
303.15
Infosys
1022.9
ITC
264.60
L&T
1203.55
OilNatGas
183.00
RelianceIn
919.75
SBI NewA
312.25
SunPhrmInds 518.35
Tata Cons
2545.6
Indonesia (Rp)
Bk Cent Asia?
21100
Israel (ILS)
63.40
TevaPha
Italy (?)
5.36
Enel
ENI
13.94
Generali
15.45
IntSPaolo
2.80
Luxottica
50.45
Unicred
16.15
98973.51
27875.53
19456.99
37899.68
34890.89
31454.6
52 Week
High
Low
Price+/-Week
5.96
47.46
3.81
41.53
0.44 -56.15 26931.75
5.03 10.92 29999.82
-2.52
0.55
0.01
-2.12
0.50
-0.53
0.26
-0.82
-0.28
-1.90
-0.20
-1.15
-2.25
0.02
-2.90
-0.56
-2.96
0.37
-0.72
0.04
0.00
-0.72
-0.52
-12.45
-0.73
0.23
89.27
111.60
26.35
69.17
309.00
15.68
72.00
12.48
15.16
122.15
468.30
197.15
260.55
15.80
132.65
91.30
92.25
92.97
52.40
75.94
34.56
52.26
49.50
238.15
88.77
23.50
61.73
90.27
21.81
53.96
190.95
11.06
57.99
7.33
10.77
100.60
383.75
167.05
175.80
13.50
101.05
73.71
61.51
72.63
43.21
63.36
21.87
40.66
42.23
202.15
63.84
15.96
1.58 63.79 77688.9
2.38 22.81 54621.54
4.56 10.39 72748.47
4.28 10.60 92443.85
1.02 37.14 64466.97
4.23 11.59 47365.87
2.37 24.45 56185.83
8.53 11.34 36113.35
6.84 -63.61 41660.64
1.33 31.78 28941.15
0.85 40.16 54626.71
1.75 28.94 123424.89
1.62 28.35 146233.19
4.07 147.50 45881.4
1.48 24.74 40315.7
3.73 5.38 29174.19
1.75 13.82 42250.53
4.00 19.96 109332.68
2.55 20.70 30604.79
2.85 20.52 50005.3
- -23.02 17905.81
5.08 13.58 41059.37
4.93 17.39 138380.54
4.78 8.64 24909.67
2.40 18.75 61118.3
1.78 68.53 34180.69
-2.00
-0.41
1.80
0.47
-1.80
0.71
0.05
-0.46
-0.06
-0.40
-0.25
-2.04
-1.40
-6.40
1.50
1.81
1.25
-1.00
204.50
97.90
123.90
91.76
226.25
73.64
17.69
18.15
40.89
10.81
89.22
80.07
114.60
193.20
199.00
100.70
133.50
175.40
154.25
78.97
96.18
77.07
180.70
59.01
13.11
14.62
30.52
6.27
73.87
60.15
95.23
145.60
166.60
80.32
108.00
128.05
3.83 12.03 103476.56
3.18 18.13 101223.5
2.53 22.43 103619.01
4.06 7.47 60876.64
1.90 14.84 52381.73
4.56 8.05 89381.78
1.15 -34.20 40219.82
3.97-1510.77 84395.81
2.60 18.56 57623.42
2.23 94.11 24309.62
1.10 20.88 31465.35
0.96 20.05 41873.74
1.57 20.42 31131.86
2.05 29.51 39290.8
4.60 87.29 33980.87
1.14 33.63 140709.8
3.08 16.15 116458.22
1.18 12.26 58709.66
1.15
0.20
0.05
0.50
-0.10
-0.28
-2.00
0.40
-2.40
3.00
-0.55
2.60
3.90
11.00
69.15
40.50
29.45
70.50
12.70
18.74
108.90
11.28
195.30
257.60
50.00
41.85
136.90
439.60
43.00
27.10
20.15
46.50
10.66
15.36
87.00
8.45
142.10
177.60
37.20
31.25
96.50
179.60
1.43
3.42
3.45
2.35
3.12
2.57
2.87
3.29
3.33
2.01
2.42
5.04
3.18
0.16
-7.20 564.80 288.70
33.05
1888 1168.4
-2.10
1337 781.95
40.05
1804 1197.25
-7.60 332.35 224.27
21.05
1044 860.00
2.40 354.80 222.00
-16.80 1274.95 868.33
2.75 211.80 155.20
-1.25 959.50 506.40
-0.85 351.30 241.10
-3.50 729.05 432.70
-55.90 2777.4
2153
32296.59
75632.47
44721.14
42914.65
30363.91
36650.85
50306.1
26300.86
36633.5
90866.24
42044.32
19399.95
76013.11
21625
14125
0.95 23.30 37934.65
11.70
147.40
38.20
6.15 -3.01 18243.87
-0.23
0.04
0.17
-0.08
-1.00
-1.81
5.59
15.92
16.08
3.01
56.90
18.38
3.82
12.94
13.21
2.06
45.32
11.93
3.35
5.72
4.50
6.34
1.81
-
Week
change change %
0.83
11.3
28.32
9.0
4.30
7.3
0.50
7.0
2.60
6.8
7.04
6.8
10.03
6.6
37.10
6.0
1.79
5.8
3.49
5.7
518.00
5.1
1.69
5.1
80.00
5.0
17.25
5.0
3.40
5.0
2.64
4.9
219.00
4.8
1.85
4.8
1.30
4.7
1.76
4.6
Month
change %
-15.17
10.33
11.19
2.43
8.69
7.25
17.10
-3.68
8.28
14.41
-4.99
21.79
-3.03
3.67
19.15
13.66
8.11
6.88
3.41
6.34
Current
1.00-1.25
4.50
0.75
0.00
0.50
0.00-0.00
0.00-0.25
22.37
29.74
12.11
8.03
26.03
-1.57
64054.56
59604.86
28390.16
52284.96
28788.36
42291.15
Yld
2.43
2.73
3.46
0.67
1.95
1.20
1.80
0.83
3.90
1.69
2.52
3.76
3.06
0.10
3.34
1.16
1.76
1.41
2.43
3.71
1.64
2.51
4.58
3.02
2.66
3.33
1.49
2.01
1.09
0.49
0.45
3.21
2.87
3.03
2.99
P/E MCap m
16.12 26288.41
14.20 36752.18
20.35 51051.33
10.37 38190.14
16.00 44857.78
14.90 38170.16
33.32 47403.35
36.10 41994.45
13.92 25071.36
14.02 35323.68
10.62 60812.41
16.20 66024.58
13.09 67106.11
68349.88
8.98 40762.88
31.65 24298.14
15.38 34365.14
23.55 22392.97
50.52 99428.44
16.04 45255.26
19.20 29125.01
12.74 99576.64
6.60 41081.32
9.95 22286.27
11.37 23611.47
16.12 92976.15
29.07 36331.46
25.96 37273.76
24.55 43707.39
13.21 87257.54
25.10 56198.41
9.78 60166.11
30.13 43675.52
19.34 33193.15
10.83 201766.83
1.83 30.13 38757.51
1.48 14.10 20330.05
1.37 24.55 41888.86
0.82
1.54
4.24
2.70
-4.17
31.58
27.16
12.16
24.05
12991.74
74039.49
58546.33
70748.43
97897.7
3.88 12.41 29806.3
4.32 -81.86 67151.77
4.62 54.27 31599.22
2.56
6.02
9.34
6.55
1.02
2.02
0.97
2.10
9.22 31580.42
3.58
6.96
10.38
12.11
17.79
7.47
10.47
54551.35
49469.43
28512.58
36041.68
54006.94
83161.34
17567.54
4.69 11.93 27731.11
1.28 9.99 26824.52
3.96 15.55 80793.54
5.86 14.77 36423.76
2.53
2.44
0.75
2.94
4.60
2.76
16.10
6.42
5.88
13.75
10.86
13.58
46640.4
45782.94
44496.97
38221.23
45429.51
32348.84
4.38 12.36 23772.79
5.44 29.26 18982.06
0.16 35.10 109861.09
1.24 11.07 23854.63
5.27 4.17 22978.84
0.75 6.26 50580.31
1.81 10.26 299892.88
4.20
3.77
2.56
4.71
1.69
5.01
6.53
12.15 56084.79
13.11 106771.96
14.82 27467.3
15.00 48915.89
28.39 109842.22
12.12 27234.49
17.98 50403.86
Last
1.00
3.75
0.75
0.05
0.25
0.00
0.00-0.75
Mnth Ago
1.00-1.25
4.25
1.75
0.00
0.25
0.00--0.10
-1.25--0.25
Year Ago
0.25-0.50
3.50
1.00
0.00
0.25
0.00--0.10
-1.25--0.25
Day
0.245
0.006
0.000
Change
Week
0.245
0.007
0.002
Month
0.014
0.009
0.003
-0.007
0.010
0.000
-0.020
0.000
0.000
One
month
1.49078
-0.40829
0.49244
-0.83105
-0.04050
-0.37100
0.45000
1.21000
-0.44500
Three
month
1.60042
-0.38429
0.51838
-0.75520
-0.01767
-0.33100
0.50000
1.34000
-0.40500
Six
month
1.76769
-0.31800
0.57919
-0.65280
0.02000
-0.27100
0.59500
1.51000
-0.33500
One
year
2.04263
-0.25857
0.77056
-0.52920
0.10650
-0.19200
Short
term
-0.50 -0.35
7 Days
One
Three
Six
One
Dec 15
notice
month
month
month
year
Euro
-0.50 -0.35 -0.62 -0.37 -0.48 -0.33 -0.41 -0.26 -0.41 -0.16
Sterling
0.42 0.52 0.40 0.50 0.45 0.55 0.52 0.67 0.68 0.83
Swiss Franc
Canadian Dollar
US Dollar
1.37 1.47 1.34 1.44 1.48 1.58 1.56 1.66 1.77 1.87 2.13 2.23
Japanese Yen
-0.50 -0.20 -0.35 -0.05 -1.20 -0.70 -0.50 0.00 -0.20 0.30 -0.10 0.40
Libor rates come from ICE (see www.theice.com) and are fixed at 11am UK time. Other data sources: US $, Euro & CDs:
Tullett Prebon; SDR, US Discount: IMF; EONIA: ECB; Swiss Libor: SNB; EURONIA, RONIA & SONIA: WMBA.
COMMODITIES
Energy
Price*
Crude Oil?
Dec
57.35
Brent Crude Oil?
63.23
RBOB Gasoline?
Dec
1.66
Heating Oil?
Dec
1.60
Natural Gas?
Dec
2.62
Ethanol?
Uranium?
Dec
18.10
Carbon Emissions?
Diesel?
Unleaded (95R)
Base Metals (? LME 3 Months)
Aluminium
2062.00
Aluminium Alloy
1805.00
Copper
6909.00
Lead
2524.00
Nickel
11570.00
Tin
19170.00
Zinc
3206.50
Precious Metals (PM London Fix)
Gold
1254.60
Silver (US cents)
1598.50
Platinum
879.00
Palladium
1020.00
Bulk Commodities
Iron Ore (Platts)
71.45
Iron Ore (The Steel Index)
70.70
GlobalCOAL RB Index
95.00
Baltic Dry Index
1619.00
www.ft.com/commodities
Change
0.17
-0.16
-0.02
0.00
-0.06
0.00
18.00
15.00
125.00
35.50
380.00
320.00
20.50
Agricultural & Cattle Futures
Corn?
Wheat?
Soybeans?
Soybeans Meal?
Cocoa (ICE Liffe)X
Cocoa (ICE US)?
Coffee(Robusta)X
Coffee (Arabica)?
White SugarX
Sugar 11?
Cotton?
Orange Juice?
Palm Oil?
Live Cattle?
Feeder Cattle?
Lean Hogs?
S&P GSCI Spt
DJ UBS Spot
R/J CRB TR
M Lynch MLCX Ex. Rtn
UBS Bberg CMCI TR
0.95 LEBA EUA Carbon
0.60 LEBA CER Carbon
0.00 LEBA UK Power
-49.00
3.60
-2.50
2.00
12.00
Dec
Jan
Feb
Price*
347.25
418.50
968.50
320.60
1410.00
1900.00
1730.00
120.70
360.50
13.67
75.85
144.95
119.00
147.95
68.53
Change
-1.50
-0.25
1.25
-0.60
3.00
9.00
-15.00
0.40
-1.30
-0.11
0.60
-2.35
2.70
1.85
0.83
Dec 14
419.70
84.05
187.36
231.14
14.59
7.14
0.17
856.00
% Chg
Month
0.73
0.30
-2.29
-9.84
-1.63
-6.54
-5.56
-56.21
% Chg
Year
-2.90
-33.05
43.09
-45.16
-63.76
Mar
Mar
Jan
Jan
Mar
Mar
Jan
Mar
Mar
Jan
Sources: ? NYMEX, ? ECX/ICE, ? CBOT, X ICE Liffe, ? ICE Futures, ? CME, ? LME/London Metal Exchange.* Latest prices, $
unless otherwise stated.
Stock
Price+/-Week
52 Week
High
Low
Sweden (SKr)
AtlasCpcoB
313.70 -2.60 339.00 243.40
Ericsson
55.10
2.20 64.95 43.75
H&M
174.30 -24.00 262.30 168.50
Investor
383.10 -4.70 425.60 334.60
Nordea Bk
100.30
0.30 115.70 95.90
SEB
97.90 -1.50 109.00 94.05
SvnskaHn
112.80 -0.70 136.30 108.80
Swedbank
200.10 -1.80 234.00 193.20
Telia Co
37.44
0.02 40.33 34.49
Volvo
157.20
0.20 171.30 105.60
Switzerland (SFr)
ABB
25.77 -0.15 26.54 21.43
CredSuisse
17.47
0.28 17.53 12.91
Nestle
84.30 -1.05 86.40 71.45
Novartis
83.80
0.70 85.40 69.50
Richemont
89.05
1.95 92.50 65.60
Roche
244.10
3.60 273.00 226.10
Swiss Re
92.50
1.85 98.50 81.65
Swisscom
523.00 -1.00 527.00 429.80
Syngent
463.00
1.80 471.20 360.50
UBS
18.01
0.66 18.01 15.11
Zurich Fin
302.00
4.40 306.90 262.10
Taiwan (NT$)
Chunghwa Telecom 105.50
1.00 111.00 99.50
Formosa PetChem 112.00
3.50 119.00 101.00
HonHaiPrc
93.50 -0.10 122.50 82.60
MediaTek
285.00 -2.50 350.50 203.00
TaiwanSem
230.00
3.50 245.00 178.50
Thailand (THB)
PTT Explor
432.00 12.00 436.00 359.00
United Arab Emirates (Dhs)
Emirtestele
17.05
0.55 18.95 15.75
United Kingdom (p)
AscBrFd?
2843 -40.00
3387
2335
AstraZen
4881 97.00
5520 4136.5
Aviva
502.50 -7.50 570.50 467.31
Barclays
202.25
5.85 244.40 177.30
BP?
505.20 12.45 529.00
4.80
BrAmTob
4967 28.00 17365.43 2879.89
BSkyB
1018 25.00
1023 893.42
BT
277.55
9.55 400.70 242.70
Compass
1534 43.00 1765.92 1424.8
Diageo
2655 19.50 2677.5
2040
GlaxoSmh?
1295
7.50 1724.5
1270
Glencore
362.75 17.25 388.25 260.50
HSBC
751.50 18.30 772.00 518.17
Imperial Brands
3085
1.50 3956.5
3013
LlydsBkg
66.41 -0.39 73.58 61.81
Natl Grid?
868.60 -9.20 1174.36 859.30
Prudential
1847.5 12.50 1933.5
1524
RBS
276.30 -4.70 290.50 213.40
ReckittB
6731 15.00 8110.43
6299
RELX
1729 17.00
1784
1363
RioTinto
3624.5 156.00 4226.56 2882.5
RollsRoyce?
831.00 -7.50 994.50 635.00
RylDShlA?
2428.5 71.00 2516.32 1982.5
Shire
3762.5 114.50
5067 3435.5
StandCh
757.10 -2.60 860.00 649.80
Tesco
207.30
2.75 215.16 165.35
Vodafone?
230.00
0.60 233.90 186.50
WPP
1389 48.00 1928.07 1238.45
United States of America ($)
21stC Fox A
34.99
1.69 35.86 24.81
3M
238.00 -0.13 244.23 173.55
AbbottLb
55.50
0.86 56.69 37.90
Abbvie
97.45
1.50 98.87 59.27
Accenture
152.66
2.13 152.90 112.31
Adobe
177.51
3.94 186.27 101.91
AEP
76.54 -0.39 78.07 61.82
Aetna
179.70 -3.03 192.37 116.04
Aflac
89.26
1.10 89.67 66.50
AirProd
160.42 -0.50 164.65 133.63
Alexion
115.76
1.30 149.34 96.18
Allegran
171.68
3.88 256.80 160.07
Allstate?
103.97
1.47 104.46 73.04
Alphabet
1072 22.62
1080 789.62
Altria
71.67
0.13 77.79 60.01
Amazon
1179.14 17.14 1213.41 747.70
AmerAir
51.06
0.04 54.48 39.21
AmerExpr
98.52 -0.03 99.75 73.50
AmerIntGrp?
59.39 -0.12 67.47 57.85
AmerTower
142.76
0.29 155.28 102.51
Amgen
177.04
1.63 191.10 145.12
Anadarko?
47.52 -0.40 72.32 39.96
Anthem?
226.21
1.36 236.39 140.50
Aon Cp
138.39 -0.10 152.78 109.82
Apple
173.97
4.60 176.24 114.76
ArcherDan
40.56 -0.95 47.44 38.59
Yld
P/E MCap m
2.16
1.88
3.10
2.65
6.46
5.80
4.58
6.82
6.90
2.14
22.13
-9.73
14.44
3.92
11.56
11.93
13.24
11.55
13.73
14.77
14407.14
19924.33
29964.36
20537.15
47808.55
25003.53
25342.66
26659.41
19080.39
30444.59
2.92
3.93
2.90
3.31
2.06
3.57
5.50
4.28
6.24
25.17 56332.29
-22.48 45020.44
26.55 264510.85
30.08 221093.5
26.32 46866.06
20.42 172904.73
8.81 32589.94
15.89 27315.03
41.32 42748.26
16.86 69946.34
13.23 46078.68
4.60
5.26
4.72
2.75
2.99
21.76
13.64
12.23
23.74
17.81
27295.35
35583.18
54037.59
15032.29
198909.1
4.03 10.94 37955.14
5.10 15.39 40371.29
1.33 18.75 29972.96
4.21 23.47 82273.9
4.27 33.28 27068.71
1.48 17.00
45882
5.88 34.49 133122.18
3.14 19.93 123325.06
2.06 25.45 23304.2
5.21 17.24 36815.54
2.15 21.92 33596.12
2.27 24.65 89008.39
6.18 27.38 84810.93
0.74 31.41 69537.25
5.03 36.01 200656.11
5.03 29.05 39182.32
4.07 15.44 63463.08
5.26 17.49 39666.63
2.35 17.30 63619.45
- -10.31 43697.84
2.28 22.56 63009.59
1.88 30.99 47701.83
3.59 13.72 66499.78
0.55 -22.28 20363.78
5.96 32.19 144777.81
0.61 27.29 45482.54
- 1638.74 33180.9
37.02 22603.09
5.72 -83.67 81699.46
4.07 10.24 23574.2
1.02 21.76 36879.77
1.93 26.76 141754.73
1.89 46.60 96603.34
2.54 23.83 155572.08
1.64 27.15 97922.42
54.01 87502.31
3.06 20.13 37648.91
0.83 34.09 58600.17
1.95 13.17 35092.54
2.30 31.32 35102.65
52.06 25861.9
1.21 -7.66 57097.87
1.37 14.59 37307.13
36.13 319755.19
3.45 9.05 136759.95
- 302.28 568194.76
0.78 12.99 24432.16
1.32 19.12 85514.99
2.14 -28.22 53389.2
1.74 54.69 61223.54
2.49 16.11 128515.21
0.42 -13.64 26000.93
1.22 20.60 58081.8
0.99 39.50 34583.34
1.37 19.03 893216.26
3.08 19.18 22683.19
Stock
52 Week
High
Low
Price+/-Week
AT&T
AutomData?
Avago Tech
BakerHu
BankAm?
Baxter?
BB & T
BectonDick?
BerkshHat
Biogen
BkNYMeln
BlackRock?
Boeing
BrisMySq
CapOne
CardinalHlth
Carnival
Caterpillar
CBS?
Celgene
CharlesSch
Charter Comms
Chevron Corp
Chubb
Cigna
Cisco
Citigroup
CME Grp?
Coca-Cola
Cognizant
ColgtPlm
Comcast
ConocPhil
Corning
Costco
CrownCstl?
CSX
CVS
Danaher
Deere
Delphi
Delta
Devon Energy
DiscFinServ
Disney?
DominRes?
DowChem
DukeEner?
Eaton
eBay
Ecolab
Emerson
EOG Res
EquityResTP
Exelon
ExpScripts
ExxonMb
Facebook
Fedex?
FordMtr
Franklin
GenDyn
GenElectric
GenMills
GenMotors
GileadSci
GoldmSchs?
Halliburton?
HCA Hold
Hew-Pack?
HiltonWwde?
HomeDep
Honywell
HumanaInc
IBM
IllinoisTool
Illumina
Intcntl Exch?
Intel
Intuit
John&John
JohnsonCn?
JPMrgnCh
Kimb-Clark?
KinderM
Kraft Heinz
Kroger
L Brands
LasVegasSd
LibertyGbl
Lilly (E)
38.24
1.51 43.03 32.55
118.19
2.17 121.77 94.11
265.73
5.82 285.68 173.31
57.68 68.59 43.09
29.04 -0.01 29.50 21.77
65.33
1.28 66.18 43.81
49.53 -0.28 51.11 41.17
221.46
1.78 229.69 161.50
296280 1894.67 299790237983.82
327.94
2.17 348.84 244.28
54.20 -0.47 55.40 43.85
511.87 -3.62 518.88 365.83
293.94
8.04 297.37 153.14
62.41 -0.01 66.10 46.01
96.31
0.52 97.31 76.05
63.19
4.30 84.88 54.66
65.95 -0.96 69.89 50.77
146.69
2.83 149.05 90.34
58.90
1.43 70.10 52.75
109.41
3.32 147.17 94.55
51.28 -0.11 51.98 37.16
322.31 -2.19 408.83 282.54
119.73 -0.19 122.30 102.55
148.72 -1.33 156.00 127.15
204.14 -5.83 212.46 133.11
38.19
0.58 38.37 29.80
74.77 -0.94 77.92 55.23
151.07 -1.75 155.29 113.27
46.19
0.88 47.48 40.22
72.08
0.26 76.51 51.52
74.05
0.73 77.27 63.43
39.71
1.76 42.18 34.12
52.17
0.60 54.22 42.27
32.05 -0.30 32.82 24.12
192.73
4.66 195.35 150.00
110.65
1.15 114.97 83.96
52.93 -3.53 58.35 35.59
73.08 -0.01 84.72 66.45
94.00
0.82 94.82 77.66
150.87 -0.71 153.34 100.90
50.95 -0.05 57.25 31.83
56.10
2.64 56.49 43.81
37.68 -0.37 49.45 28.79
74.59
0.79 75.51 57.50
111.27
7.04 116.10 96.20
84.91
1.03 85.26 70.87
66.65
2.11
87.84 -0.21 91.80 75.78
77.29
0.00 82.34 66.60
38.37
0.72 39.28 29.01
135.19 -0.14 137.96 116.92
67.26
0.71 67.83 55.40
98.55 -1.84 107.95 81.99
65.66 -0.15 70.46 59.49
40.74 -0.31 42.67 33.30
71.55
3.40 73.42 55.80
83.03
0.37 91.67 76.05
180.18
1.18 184.25 114.77
240.05 -0.68 243.48 182.89
12.58 -0.03 13.27 10.47
43.46 -1.21 47.65 38.93
198.84 -2.23 214.81 171.65
17.82
0.11 32.38 17.46
56.89
1.05 63.74 49.65
40.95 -1.07 46.76 31.92
75.57
1.35 86.27 63.76
257.17
6.82 260.50 209.62
44.61
0.62 58.78 38.18
88.46
3.62 91.03 71.18
20.92 -0.15 22.68 14.40
77.09 -1.29 83.85 55.00
182.58 -0.83 186.31 133.05
154.25
0.59 156.70 113.60
253.64 -2.85 264.56 186.25
152.50 -2.31 182.79 139.13
165.17 -1.32 169.69 120.06
216.55 -1.10 230.72 125.68
70.49 -0.44 72.99 55.80
44.56
1.21 47.30 33.23
159.65
4.42 159.77 111.90
142.46
1.87 144.35 110.76
37.26 -0.15 44.70 34.51
106.14
0.21 108.40 81.64
118.51 -1.60 136.21 109.67
17.93
0.14 23.01 16.68
79.54
1.06 97.77 75.21
26.45 -0.23 36.44 19.69
58.11
0.83 71.61 35.00
70.50
0.14 71.42 51.35
32.56
1.79 37.69 28.17
86.54
0.09 89.09 71.76
BONDS: HIGH YIELD & EMERGING MARKET
Close
Prev
price
price
H&M
174.30
200.30
Unicred
16.15
16.46
KDDI
2922.00
3130.00
Naspers N
3310.00
3415.49
NipponTT
5351.00
5656.00
EDF
10.49
10.48
ChMrchSecs
17.65
17.86
NTTDCMo
2686.00
2815.50
CSX
52.93
57.31
UnibailR
212.05
211.10
CanNatRs
42.56
42.97
Metlife
51.41
52.49
Telefonica
8.25
8.24
Softbank
8931.00
9150.00
E.ON
9.39
9.18
Enel
5.36
5.34
GuosenSec
11.33
11.50
ImpOil
38.00
37.91
Inditex
29.96
30.72
Cred Agr
14.15
14.34
Based on the FT Global 500 companies in local currency
Day
change change %
-26.00
-12.98
-0.31
-1.88
-208.00
-6.65
-105.49
-3.09
-305.00
-5.39
0.01
0.10
-0.21
-1.18
-129.50
-4.60
-4.38
-7.64
0.95
0.45
-0.41
-0.95
-1.08
-2.06
0.01
0.15
-219.00
-2.39
0.20
2.22
0.02
0.37
-0.17
-1.48
0.09
0.24
-0.77
-2.49
-0.19
-1.33
Week
change change %
-24.00
-12.1
-1.81
-10.1
-278.00
-8.7
-309.20
-8.5
-443.00
-7.6
-0.82
-7.2
-1.29
-6.8
-193.00
-6.7
-3.53
-6.3
-12.45
-5.5
-2.29
-5.1
-2.35
-4.4
-0.38
-4.3
-405.00
-4.3
-0.40
-4.1
-0.23
-4.0
-0.46
-3.9
-1.45
-3.7
-1.12
-3.6
-0.53
-3.6
Month's
change
Year
change
Return
1 month
Return
1 year
Month
change %
-13.71
-3.64
-3.03
-9.60
-8.00
0.29
-7.35
-5.25
8.84
-2.28
-4.27
-0.83
-6.00
-6.29
-4.12
1.71
-12.85
-4.31
-4.92
-0.25
Bid
yield
Mth's Spread
chge
vs
yield
US
Dec 15
High Yield US$
HRG Group, Inc.
S*
Ratings
M*
F*
Bid
price
07/19
7.88
BB-
Ba3
BB
100.36
7.77
0.00
0.33
5.92
High Yield Euro
Kazkommerts Intl BV
02/17
6.88
B
Caa1
B
97.50
-
0.00
0.00
-
Emerging US$
Mexico
Brazil
Peru
Peru
Brazil
Poland
Turkey
Colombia
Turkey
Russia
09/16
01/18
03/19
03/19
01/22
03/22
03/23
03/23
03/27
06/28
11.40
8.00
7.13
7.13
12.50
5.00
3.25
2.63
6.00
12.75
BBB+
BB
BBB+
BBB+
BB
BBB+
BBB
BB+
A3
Ba2
A3
A3
Ba2
A2
Ba1
Baa2
Ba1
Ba1
BBB+
BB
BBB+
BBB+
BB
ABB+
BBB
BB+
BBB-
106.80
100.42
106.75
114.01
112.50
107.75
93.05
97.52
106.04
173.74
1.49
2.97
1.88
2.60
8.76
3.05
4.76
3.17
5.24
4.10
0.03
1.42
0.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
-0.24
0.29
0.20
0.02
0.15
-2.25
0.01
-0.30
-0.04
0.44
1.12
0.03
0.84
6.60
0.88
2.59
1.00
2.87
1.73
Red
date Coupon
Index
Day's
change
Markit IBoxx
ABF Pan-Asia unhedged
Corporates( �)
Corporates($)
Corporates(?)
Eurozone Sov(?)
Gilts( �)
Global Inflation-Lkd
Markit iBoxx � Non-Gilts
Overall ($)
Overall( �)
Overall(?)
Treasuries ($)
188.59
346.66
279.56
227.85
235.45
324.75
267.54
340.71
240.13
326.39
231.38
225.14
0.02
0.18
0.10
0.04
0.07
0.17
0.32
0.17
0.06
0.17
0.06
0.05
0.16
1.53
0.82
0.29
0.24
1.87
0.75
1.41
0.61
1.73
0.26
0.57
8.88
5.01
6.19
2.97
1.19
2.42
8.24
4.39
3.98
2.99
1.47
2.75
1.58
1.58
0.82
0.41
0.58
1.71
1.59
1.39
0.61
1.61
0.50
0.57
8.52
7.58
6.19
3.67
2.10
5.54
9.13
6.77
3.98
5.89
2.27
2.75
Emerging Euro
Brazil
02/15
7.38
BBBBaa2
BBB 111.75
0.73
0.00
0.00
0.09
Mexico
02/20
5.50
BBB+
A3
BBB+ 111.50
0.17
-0.01
-0.17
-1.68
Mexico
04/23
2.75
BBB+
A3
BBB+ 110.20
0.79
-0.02
-0.12
-1.37
Bulgaria
03/28
3.00
BB+
Baa2
BBB 114.68
1.45
0.00
-0.09
-0.92
Data provided by SIX Financial Information & Tullett Prebon Information. US $ denominated bonds NY close; all other
London close. *S - Standard & Poor?s, M - Moody?s, F - Fitch.
FTSE
Sterling Corporate (�)
Euro Corporate (?)
Euro Emerging Mkts (?)
Eurozone Govt Bond
116.50
107.86
670.59
112.89
0.21
0.10
3.21
0.18
-
-
0.85
0.21
3.27
0.43
1.29
0.37
-18.77
-0.21
Index
Day's
change
Week's
change
Month's
change
Series
high
Series
low
369.26
85.00
70.05
111.86
-12.07
-1.98
-2.51
-3.89
35.21
7.21
2.21
10.86
40.34
7.01
-0.87
12.50
390.04
90.43
93.03
121.66
288.69
67.59
64.22
80.36
BONDS: BENCHMARK GOVERNMENT
Austria
Belgium
CREDIT INDICES
Markit iTraxx
Crossover 5Y
Europe 5Y
Japan 5Y
Senior Financials 5Y
Markit CDX
Emerging Markets 5Y
126.19
1.25
126.19
124.94
Nth Amer High Yld 5Y
314.68
2.08
-6.16
-10.41
337.70
308.36
Nth Amer Inv Grade 5Y
50.99
0.52
-0.58
-4.09
60.00
50.43
Websites: markit.com, ftse.com. All indices shown are unhedged. Currencies are shown in brackets after the index names.
Denmark
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Ireland
Italy
BONDS: INDEX-LINKED
Price
Month
Value
No of
Yield
Dec 14
Dec 14
Prev
return
stock
Market
stocks
Can 4.25%' 21
116.10
0.167
0.115
-0.07
5.18
74408.98
7
Fr 2.25%' 20
110.95
-1.809
-1.811
0.02
20.31 234423.06
15
Swe 0.25%' 22
115.16
-2.039
-2.045
0.00
28.53 242136.23
8
UK 2.5%' 20
365.14
-2.343
-2.347
-0.15
6.58 655734.79
28
UK 2.5%' 24
365.03
-1.950
-1.934
0.42
6.82 655734.79
28
UK 2%' 35
270.72
-1.683
-1.643
1.33
9.08 655734.79
28
US 0.625%' 21
101.78
0.127
0.116
0.03
35.84 1285215.64
38
US 3.625%' 28
131.09
0.529
0.116
1.00
16.78 1285215.64
38
Representative stocks from each major market Source: Merill Lynch Global Bond Indices ? Local currencies. ? Total market
value. In line with market convention, for UK Gilts inflation factor is applied to price, for other markets it is applied to par
amount.
BONDS: TEN YEAR GOVT SPREADS
Spread Spread
Bid
vs
vs
Yield Bund T-Bonds
Australia
2.60
Austria
0.46
Belgium
0.50
Canada
1.90
Denmark
0.38
Finland
0.47
France
0.63
Germany
0.31
Greece
3.93
Ireland
0.51
Data provided by SIX Financial Information
Canada
2.29
0.15
0.19
1.60
0.07
0.16
0.33
0.00
3.63
0.20
0.23
-1.91
-1.88
-0.47
-1.99
-1.90
-1.74
-2.06
1.56
-1.86
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Portugal
Spain
Spread Spread
Bid
vs
vs
Yield Bund T-Bonds
Italy
Japan
Netherlands
Norway
Portugal
Spain
Switzerland
United Kingdom
United States
Japan
1.81
0.04
0.40
1.49
1.80
1.46
-0.18
1.19
2.37
1.51
-0.27
0.10
1.18
1.50
1.15
-0.49
0.88
2.06
-0.56
-2.33
-1.97
-0.88
-0.57
-0.91
-2.55
-1.18
0.00
Sweden
Switzerland
United Kingdom
United States
Data provided by SIX Financial Information
P/E MCap m
Stock
52 Week
High
Low
Price+/-Week
Yld
Lockheed?
322.82
6.97 323.38 247.01
Lowes
86.69
1.09 88.55 70.49
Lyondell
106.03 -1.11 108.13 78.01
Marathon Ptl
65.75
1.00 66.19 46.88
Marsh&M
83.11 -1.02 86.54 66.75
MasterCard
153.40
3.51 154.65 102.98
McDonald's
174.06
0.91 175.09 118.18
McKesson?
162.60 10.03 169.29 133.82
Medtronic
83.50
2.43 89.72 69.35
Merck?
56.24
0.67 66.80 53.63
Metlife
51.41 -2.35 55.91 44.17
Microsoft
86.85
2.69 87.09 61.95
Mnstr Bvrg
64.01
0.79 64.25 41.02
MondelezInt
43.38
0.73 47.23 39.19
Monsanto
117.35
0.05 122.80 104.77
MorganStly
53.10
0.21 54.25 40.06
MylanNV
40.52
1.85 45.87 29.39
Netflix
190.12
1.58 204.38 122.87
NextEraE
158.43 -0.60 159.40 117.12
Nike?
64.79
3.49 65.07 50.35
NorfolkS
141.11
0.29 143.35 105.89
Northrop?
310.47
4.80 311.15 223.88
NXP
116.35
1.06 118.20 96.00
Occid Pet?
70.62
1.75 73.51 57.20
Oracle
48.30 -1.30 53.14 38.30
Pepsico?
119.22
2.65 119.39 101.06
Perrigo
86.50
0.90 91.73 63.68
Pfizer
37.20
1.46 37.23 30.90
Phillips66
99.92
0.37 100.46 75.14
PhilMorris
109.68
3.09 123.55 88.90
PNCFin
144.95
1.15 146.24 113.66
PPG Inds
115.09 -0.83 119.85 93.80
Praxair
149.60 -1.81 156.40 115.00
Priceline
1760 40.16 2067.99 1459.49
ProctGmbl
91.89
1.52 94.67 83.24
Prudntl
115.73 -1.42 117.99 97.88
PublStor?
211.56
0.72 232.21 192.15
Qualcomm
64.76
0.52 69.28 48.92
Raytheon
191.38
3.31 191.54 141.16
Regen Pharm 388.95
8.17 543.55 340.09
ReynoldsAm
65.40
0.40
S&P Global
169.05 -2.16 174.07 107.21
Salesforce
105.48
2.04 109.19 68.23
Schlmbrg?
62.09 -1.45 87.84 61.02
Sempra Energy 116.53 -0.16 122.98 99.71
Shrwin-Will
403.82 -5.03 413.98 265.14
SimonProp
167.81
5.56 188.10 150.15
SouthCpr
43.32
1.33 44.69 31.55
Starbucks
58.29 -0.32 64.87 52.58
StateSt
98.53
0.86 100.90 74.45
Stryker
154.25
2.32 160.62 116.50
Sychrony Fin
37.19 -0.31 38.06 26.01
Target
62.61
1.24 78.37 48.56
TE Connect
96.22
1.40 96.78 66.20
Tesla Mtrs
343.45 28.32 389.61 197.39
TexasInstr
101.22
3.20 101.60 72.45
TheTrvelers? 134.89
1.14 137.95 113.76
ThrmoFshr?
192.27
4.31 201.20 139.88
TimeWrnr
90.25 -0.46 103.89 85.88
TJX Cos
74.17
0.29 80.92 66.44
T-MobileUS
62.66
0.12 68.88 54.60
UnionPac?
130.60
1.49 132.39 101.06
UPS B
118.00 -1.56 125.16 102.12
USBancorp
54.50 -0.86 56.61 49.54
UtdHlthcre
221.82 -2.09 231.77 156.09
UtdTech
126.17
3.36 126.44 106.85
ValeroEngy
88.19
0.59 88.43 60.69
Verizon
52.67
1.58 54.83 42.80
VertexPharm 145.86
2.25 167.86 71.46
VF Cp?
74.41
1.06 74.87 48.05
Viacom?
30.24
0.95 46.72 22.13
Visa Inc
113.82
1.22 114.37 77.19
Walgreen
71.94
0.39 88.00 63.82
WalMartSto?
97.11
0.56 100.13 65.28
WellsFargo
59.87
0.56 60.65 49.27
Williams Cos?
29.73
1.18 32.69 26.82
Yum!Brnds
82.30 -1.02 84.29 62.36
Venezuela (VEF)
Bco de Vnzla
1900 100.00
1950 181.00
Bco Provncl
120000-10000.00 144000
3200
Mrcntl Srvcs 680000-60000.00 760000 11250
5.40 17.60 234755.36
1.91 30.22 52416.05
1.36 200.82 108412.35
0.85 -8.48 24541.87
1.18 16.72 302905.02
0.88 35.20 35593.87
2.46 18.55 39075.26
1.31 48.50 50396.54
21.79 223255.28
20.26 69351.75
1.48 16.01 55502.01
1.90 24.15 82069.22
1.81 27.32 175064.35
2.48 24.66 102146.43
1.65 13.55 46685.71
2.86 18.56 19879.8
2.35 17.34 35392.48
2.09 101.92 87270.81
1.21 15.87 21355.97
25.88 86140.35
0.60 32.91 68744.76
- 176.48 80129.63
3.58 35.17 227412.04
1.87 17.90 69039.09
0.02 22.50 50330.66
2.97 19.83 188796.93
1.06 14.51 197692.03
1.70 34.51 51407.82
3.14 44.75 196800.22
0.41 22.48 42501.66
2.12 28.80 65023.69
1.52 19.19 186792.98
1.99 -26.15 62370.06
1.86 13.98 27853.29
1.02 30.67 84221.01
3.41 92.90 44954.34
1.43 27.49 47304.76
2.61 15.21 74029.49
0.58 28.19 65300.85
1.61 24.85 48257.59
13544.54
1.48 10.81 39997.79
0.63 12.61 19801.41
1.66 12.91 27104.56
1.39 19.70 168052.44
3.47 25.31 54642.11
81542.6
3.90 22.75 61485.86
3.04 12.26 34053.97
5.80 40080.19
1.09 30.74 39058.32
2.83 26.68 43168.8
0.674963.32 56983.51
3.05 32.27 24129.05
3.17 18.41 39145.13
11.97 40523.99
3.85 32.49 351806.92
35.18 429692.91
0.69 21.02 64368.85
4.73 11.52 49073.36
1.83 14.55 24072.84
1.67 18.18 59370.22
5.35 20.88 154536.55
3.51 19.73 32332.78
3.68 8.72 58165.69
2.67 8.66 98714.75
1.08 13.52 97004.9
1.60 180.08 38924.05
12.71 31319.48
2.52 14.90 35215.37
0.85 65.27 24665.06
1.85 25.25 213207.54
1.71 23.55 116738.01
0.70 19.99 36235.03
3.78 12.85 141183.19
1.64 25.52 56587.07
41.56 31616.3
1.08 25.82 41238.5
2.37 15.75 208540.8
0.89 42.23 40814.51
2.29 24.96 382721.65
2.66 21.45 34481.71
1.91 15.43 368276.67
3.27 19.30 41686.76
2.77 32.26 40041.99
3.03 25.04 96916.93
1.81 15.48 23312.02
4.14 17.67 16402.43
4.37 28.78 55728.84
37.71 7198.71
2.37 41.52 95288.74
P/E MCap m
2.24 26.38 92563.53
1.76 20.78 71931.95
3.28 11.36 41824.62
2.17 20.96 32113.1
1.71 22.94 42415.76
0.57 36.02 160088.68
2.14 25.38 140988.01
0.72 7.98 33897.95
2.14 22.87 113017.08
3.32 54.48 153222.33
3.09 -63.85 54098.71
1.78 30.92 670012.16
47.07 36099.29
1.81 30.35 64826.58
1.90 22.44 51657.47
1.59 14.78 95999.45
24.89 21730.1
- 226.15 82270.84
2.39 17.95 74525.09
1.15 26.68 84374.25
1.70 22.42 40378.45
1.22 23.13 54046.16
20.35 40257.43
4.29 100.21 54041.63
1.46 20.32 201579.39
2.59 24.82 169547.93
0.72 -9.51 12182.72
3.36 23.13 221738.31
2.64 25.36 50633.51
3.89 23.67 170355.26
1.64 17.85 68967.37
1.42 22.51 29287.63
2.07 26.82 42831.28
24.87 85834.4
3.01 24.29 233121.08
2.53 11.68 49069.52
3.78 29.44 36820.16
3.37 39.54 95466.9
1.64 25.82 55325.47
35.53 41045.18
0.93 25.05 43107.75
76188.2
3.43 -40.49 86010.9
2.74 25.97 29281.35
0.83 34.45 37762.79
4.11 29.82 52164.14
0.89 28.53 33487.59
1.70 29.81 82935.01
1.57 17.17 36538.54
1.09 33.21 57726.15
1.44 14.25 29104.58
3.88 13.14 34033.08
1.59 20.76 33834.53
- -40.52 57722.75
1.96 23.83 99758.44
2.07 13.14 37222.5
0.31 32.89 77099.38
2.21 17.19 70268.02
1.55 19.99 46897.88
24.76 52130.87
1.84 23.29 102804.25
2.75 29.14 81072.78
2.08 16.34 90442.27
1.23 25.40 214958.54
2.11 19.65 100755.57
3.04 19.23 38590.3
4.38 13.61 214864.15
- 190.84 36888.41
2.24 29.87 29403.04
2.63 6.52 10669.49
0.58 40.95 206111.28
2.19 18.42 71246.19
2.10 25.75 292738.01
2.54 15.59 294815.53
3.67 52.55 24579.17
1.70 25.36 27734.58
2074.2
- 104.98 3873.09
0.001101.53 12391.88
Closing prices and highs & lows are in traded currency (with variations for that
country indicated by stock), market capitalisation is in USD. Highs & lows are
based on intraday trading over a rolling 52 week period.
? ex-dividend
? ex-capital redistribution
# price at time of suspension
Dec 15
US$
FleetBoston Financial Corp.
SunTrust Banks Inc.
Nicor Gas Company
NationsBank Corp.
Dover Corporation
United Utilities PLC
Euro
AT&T Inc.
AT&T Inc.
HBOS plc
Electricite de France (EDF)
Yen
Enagas Transportes, S.A.U.
� Sterling
Electricite de France (EDF)
HSBC Holdings plc
Red
date Coupon
Ratings
M*
Bid
yield
Day's
chge
yield
Mth's Spread
chge
vs
yield
US
F*
Bid
price
01/28
01/28
02/28
03/28
06/28
08/28
6.88
6.00
6.58
6.80
6.65
6.88
BBB
BBB+
A
BBB
ABBB+
Baa2
Baa1
Aa3
Baa2
A3
Baa1
AAAAAAA-
121.65
115.59
117.13
122.38
120.32
123.52
4.26
4.14
4.51
4.14
4.27
4.17
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-0.10
-0.11
0.00
-0.01
0.09
-0.05
1.89
1.77
2.14
1.77
1.90
1.80
12/29
12/29
03/30
04/30
2.60
2.60
4.50
4.63
BBB+
BBB+
BBBA-
Baa1
Baa1
Baa1
A3
AAAA-
105.70
105.50
118.30
130.67
2.06
2.08
2.23
1.83
-0.03
0.00
0.00
-0.01
-0.08
-0.05
-0.12
-0.03
-
09/39
3.23
A-
Baa2
A-
106.57
2.85
0.00
0.01
-
05/28
08/28
6.25
2.63
AA
A3
A2
AAA-
132.80
101.30
2.62
2.48
-0.02
-0.02
-0.10
-0.20
0.25
0.11
S*
Data provided by SIX Financial Information. US $ denominated bonds NY close; all other London close. *S - Standard & Poor?s, M Moody?s, F - Fitch.
GILTS: UK CASH MARKET
Dec 15
Day Chng
Prev
52 wk high
52 wk low
VIX
9.42
-1.07
10.49
17.28
8.56
VXD
10.57
-1.03
11.60
27.74
3.93
VXN
11.88
-0.51
12.39
21.03
9.75
VDAX
? CBOE. VIX: S&P 500 index Options Volatility, VXD: DJIA Index Options Volatility, VXN: NASDAQ Index Options Volatility.
? Deutsche Borse. VDAX: DAX Index Options Volatility.
Australia
Yld
BONDS: GLOBAL INVESTMENT GRADE
Day's
chge
yield
VOLATILITY INDICES
BOND INDICES
Since
15-06-2017
15-06-2017
15-06-2017
16-03-2016
04-08-2016
01-02-2016
15-01-2015
INTEREST RATES: MARKET
Dec 15 (Libor: Dec 14)
US$ Libor
Euro Libor
� Libor
Swiss Fr Libor
Yen Libor
Euro Euribor
Sterling CDs
US$ CDs
Euro CDs
0.19 133.60
0.57 32.39
1.31 60.76
1.02 25.17
1.58 18.20
2.45 17.03
1.72 29.78
2.27 26.41
4.26 10.90
0.58 17.06
0.81 68.06
0.66 40.01
1.82 19.80
52 Week
High
Low
Price+/-Week
Japan (�)
AstellasPh
1431.5 12.50
1688 1331.5
Bridgestne
5092 88.00
5605
3973
Canon
4312
6.00
4472
3218
CntJpRwy
20885 -45.00 21520 17525
Denso
6364 254.00
6697
4551
EastJpRwy
11150 -5.00 11570
9511
Fanuc
26170 -835.00 29205 19630
FastRetail
44600 1330 45470 30000
Fuji Hvy Ind
3672 27.00
5016
3562
Hitachi
823.30 -20.40 908.70 566.30
HondaMtr
3782 26.00
3863
3000
JapanTob
3719 -11.00
4243
3607
KDDI
2922 -278.00
3260 2840.5
Keyence
63320 490.00 69910 38375
MitsbCp
2888 -2.00
2972 2208.5
MitsubEst
1968 -21.50 2418.5
1825
MitsubishiEle
1803 -21.00
1979
1462
MitsuiFud
2544.5 20.50 2851.5 2274.5
MitUFJFin
798.50 19.10 830.70 570.20
Mizuho Fin
200.80 -0.80 224.50 185.40
Murata Mfg
14565 -230.00 17910 14000
NipponTT
5351 -443.00
5905
4672
Nissan Mt
1096.5 17.50
1220 996.20
Nomura
656.80 -4.70 774.40 567.70
Nppn Stl
2799 -25.50
2912 2323.5
NTTDCMo
2686 -193.00 2907.5 2501.5
Panasonic
1668.5 80.00
1800
1137
Seven & I
4737 83.00
4891
4234
ShnEtsuCh
11395 -255.00 12915
8983
Softbank
8931 -405.00 10550
7494
Sony
5006 -113.00
5485
3262
SumitomoF
4792 219.00
4920
3760
Takeda Ph
6221 94.00
6464
4664
TokioMarine
4999 -28.00
5209
4192
Toyota
6966 34.00
7312
5670
Mexico (Mex$)
AmerMvl
16.52
0.21 18.44 12.21
FEMSA UBD 179.83
3.13 186.87 150.11
WalMrtMex
45.86
0.40 47.29 34.70
Netherlands (?)
Altice
8.15
0.83 23.43
6.44
ASML Hld
145.85 -1.00 159.95 100.60
Heineken
86.39
0.81 89.71 69.04
ING
15.48 -0.18 16.13 12.81
Unilever
48.53 -0.29 52.31 37.23
Norway (Kr)
DNB
152.60
0.30 164.30 126.90
Statoil
169.40
2.60 174.00 135.80
Telenor
175.50 -6.20 187.70 125.60
Qatar (QR)
QatarNtBk
124.49
5.89 173.00 115.01
Russia (RUB)
Gzprm neft
135.50
2.90 158.88 111.46
Lukoil
3420 31.50
3582
2601
MmcNrlskNckl
10595 518.00 11938
7677
Novatek
698.00 29.60 800.10 590.20
Rosneft
299.65
5.90 425.70 286.00
Sberbank
226.53
5.64 233.95 136.20
Surgutneftegas
28.92
1.22 32.87 24.09
Saudi Arabia (SR)
AlRajhiBnk
64.00 -0.20 71.70 61.00
Natnlcombnk
50.30 -0.80 58.00 37.00
SaudiBasic
101.00 -0.20 105.40 90.50
SaudiTelec
68.30 -1.70 78.90 64.50
Singapore (S$)
DBS
24.58
0.34 25.36 17.15
JardnMt US$
63.04
0.94 68.11 53.65
JardnStr US$
40.17
0.32 46.48 32.14
OCBC
12.30
0.18 12.59
8.85
SingTel
3.75 -0.05
4.02
3.62
UOB
26.05
0.42 26.85 20.05
South Africa (R)
Firstrand
56.01
0.36 59.00 43.44
MTN Grp
133.14
4.76 134.94 109.05
Naspers N
3310 -309.20 4142.99 1936.82
South Korea (KRW)
HyundMobis 267000 4000 289500 212000
KoreaElePwr
39000 150.00 49000 37000
SK Hynix
75700 -300.00 90300 44600
SmsungEl
2531000-6000.00 2876000 1760000
Spain (?)
7.15 -0.06
7.93
5.92
BBVA
BcoSantdr
5.62 -0.01
6.25
4.79
CaixaBnk
3.90 -0.14
4.51
3.03
Iberdrola
6.58 -0.14
7.30
5.76
Inditex
29.96 -1.12 36.90 29.00
Repsol
15.16 -0.32 16.30 13.05
Telefonica
8.25 -0.38 10.63
8.21
18.30 95736.5
15.63 52570.93
6.06 33583.94
12.03 31233.29
7.60 40359.25
16.00 4630.54
10.61 47348.92
17.08 62285.88
20.60 45439.09
41.31 35924.99
20.80 34942.46
30.32 42004.01
8.49 46602.75
58.14 472925.27
125.00
INTEREST RATES: OFFICIAL
Over
night
1.42750
-0.43214
0.47444
Stock
FT 500: BOTTOM 20
Day
change change %
0.03
0.39
5.56
1.65
2.84
4.71
-0.05
-0.65
0.10
0.25
0.70
0.63
5.40
3.44
-10.76
-1.62
0.23
0.71
0.26
0.40
-74.00
-0.69
0.11
0.32
-7.50
-0.45
5.40
1.51
2.53
3.67
0.85
1.54
-29.00
-0.60
0.51
1.27
-0.40
-1.37
0.59
1.51
Close
Prev
price
price
Altice
8.15
8.12
Tesla Mtrs
343.45
337.89
CardinalHlth
63.19
60.35
CSR
7.60
7.65
SandsCh
40.65
40.55
Disney
111.27
110.57
McKesson
162.60
157.20
Kweichow
653.79
664.55
LibertyGbl
32.56
32.33
Nike
64.79
64.53
MmcNrlskNckl
10595.00 10669.00
21stC Fox A
34.99
34.88
Panasonic
1668.50
1676.00
Glencore
362.75
357.35
ExpScripts
71.55
69.02
Delta
56.10
55.25
SumitomoF
4792.00
4821.00
MylanNV
40.52
40.01
China Vanke
28.80
29.20
Comcast
39.71
39.12
Based on the FT Global 500 companies in local currency
Rate
Fed Funds
Prime
Discount
Repo
Repo
O'night Call
Libor Target
P/E MCap m
-0.01
0.73
FT 500: TOP 20
Dec 15
US
US
US
Euro
UK
Japan
Switzerland
Yld
Red
Date Coupon
10/19
2.75
11/28
2.75
10/19
0.25
04/27
0.50
09/19
3.00
06/27
0.80
02/20
1.25
06/28
2.00
11/20
0.25
11/27
0.50
09/19
1.75
09/27
0.50
11/20
0.25
05/23
1.75
05/28
0.75
10/20
0.25
08/23
2.00
08/27
0.50
08/48
1.25
04/19
4.75
01/28
3.75
10/19
5.90
05/26
1.00
06/20
0.35
08/22
0.90
08/27
2.05
03/48
3.45
11/19
0.10
11/22
0.05
09/27
0.10
09/47
0.80
01/20
0.25
07/27
0.75
04/20
3.00
04/27
4.50
05/19
4.50
02/27
1.75
06/20
4.80
04/27
4.13
01/19
0.25
10/27
1.45
07/19
1.50
11/26
1.00
07/20
2.25
06/27
3.25
07/20
2.00
07/23
0.75
07/27
1.25
07/47
1.50
11/19
1.75
10/22
2.00
11/27
2.25
11/47
2.75
Bid
Price
101.54
101.42
101.53
100.37
106.46
102.82
99.27
100.90
102.23
101.21
99.58
100.29
102.15
110.33
101.17
102.54
112.63
101.85
103.97
103.74
98.50
112.03
104.05
101.08
101.65
102.14
107.45
100.48
99.65
100.62
99.85
101.95
103.24
102.43
114.51
105.75
102.23
112.11
119.76
100.69
99.91
99.27
104.54
107.78
133.04
103.93
99.50
100.58
95.16
99.81
99.25
98.95
101.00
Bid Day chg Wk chg Month
Year
Yield
yield
yield chg yld chg yld
1.89
0.01
0.09
0.11
-0.09
2.60
0.01
0.00
-0.04
0.00
-0.59
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.46
-0.03
0.01
-0.06
0.00
-0.61
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.50
-0.02
0.00
-0.08
0.00
1.60
0.03
0.06
0.12
0.00
1.90
0.00
0.00
-0.09
0.00
-0.51
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.38
-0.03
0.00
-0.07
0.00
2.01
0.00
0.03
0.07
0.18
0.47
-0.03
0.01
-0.07
0.00
-0.47
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-0.14
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.63
-0.01
0.01
-0.08
0.00
-0.64
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-0.22
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.31
-0.01
0.00
-0.06
0.00
1.10
-0.03
-0.04
-0.14
0.00
1.86
-0.03
-0.30
-0.96
-6.08
3.93
-0.15
-0.54
0.00
0.00
-0.62
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.51
-0.01
0.02
-0.07
-0.39
-0.08
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.54
0.02
0.14
-0.05
0.00
1.81
0.02
0.17
-0.02
0.00
3.09
0.01
0.19
-0.03
0.00
-0.15
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.12
0.00
-0.01
0.00
0.00
0.04
-0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.80
0.00
-0.01
-0.02
0.00
-0.68
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.40
-0.01
0.01
-0.06
0.00
1.92
0.02
-0.02
-0.09
-0.59
2.73
0.01
-0.08
-0.14
-0.73
0.43
-0.03
-0.06
-0.08
-0.32
1.49
-0.04
0.01
-0.04
0.00
-0.06
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.80
-0.01
0.01
-0.17
0.00
-0.37
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.46
0.02
0.07
-0.09
0.00
1.98
0.00
0.03
0.11
0.00
0.48
-0.02
0.04
-0.02
-0.15
-0.76
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-0.18
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.47
-0.02
-0.08
-0.05
-0.01
0.84
-0.01
-0.08
-0.08
0.00
1.19
-0.02
-0.12
-0.15
0.00
1.71
-0.02
-0.14
-0.14
-0.37
1.85
0.04
0.05
0.00
0.00
2.16
0.03
0.03
0.10
0.00
2.37
0.02
-0.01
0.03
0.00
2.70
-0.01
-0.07
-0.08
0.00
Red
52 Week
Change in Yield
Price �
Yield
Day
Week
Month
Year
High
Low
Tr 5pc '18
101.03
0.26
0.00
-13.33
-16.13
85.71 105.95 101.03
Tr 4.5pc '19
104.97
0.40
0.00
-13.04
-13.04 150.00 109.80 104.97
Tr 4.75pc '20
109.54
0.42
0.00
-10.64
-6.67
23.53 114.50 109.51
Tr 1.5pc '21
102.94
0.54
0.00
-10.00
-6.90
-10.00 104.73 102.71
Tr 4pc '22
114.14
0.60
0.00
-9.09
-9.09
-17.81 118.04 113.88
Tr 5pc '25
128.55
0.90
-2.17
-10.89
-12.62
-28.57 132.93 127.35
Tr 1.25pc '27
100.55
1.19
-1.65
-9.16
-11.19
-26.09 131.42
98.24
Tr 4.25pc '32
136.11
1.47
-0.68
-8.13
-9.82
-22.63 139.13 132.06
Tr 4.25pc '36
141.37
1.62
-0.61
-7.43
-8.99
-20.59 144.09 135.73
Tr 4.5pc '42
156.08
1.73
-0.57
-6.99
-7.98
-18.40 159.30 148.51
Tr 3.75pc '52
155.86
1.63
-1.21
-7.91
-8.94
-19.31 159.09 144.96
Tr 4pc '60
175.60
1.55
-0.64
-8.28
-9.36
-20.10 179.15 161.03
Gilts benchmarks & non-rump undated stocks. Closing mid-price in pounds per �0 nominal of stock.
Dec 15
Amnt

35.24
36.35
33.31
32.46
37.95
35.08
20.87
35.44
29.76
26.64
23.59
23.61
GILTS: UK FTSE ACTUARIES INDICES
Price Indices
Fixed Coupon
1 Up to 5 Years
2 5 - 10 Years
3 10 - 15 Years
4 5 - 15 Years
5 Over 15 Years
7 All stocks
Index Linked
1 Up to 5 Years
2 Over 5 years
3 5-15 years
4 Over 15 years
5 All stocks
Yield Indices
5 Yrs
10 Yrs
15 Yrs
Day's
chg %
0.00
0.10
0.16
0.12
0.27
0.15
Dec 15
94.56
183.37
214.15
190.38
341.79
181.39
Dec 15
310.83
718.11
479.96
923.70
648.45
Dec 15
0.66
1.22
1.59
Day's
chg %
0.04
0.01
0.18
-0.05
0.01
Dec 14
0.67
1.24
1.61
Yr ago
0.70
1.54
1.99
Total
Return
2419.37
3493.00
4270.26
3684.70
5237.08
3602.22
Month
chg %
-0.46
1.44
0.30
1.82
1.25
20 Yrs
45 Yrs
Year's
chg %
-0.71
7.81
2.64
9.60
7.06
Return
1 month
0.12
0.82
1.54
1.09
3.17
1.63
Total
Return
2459.27
5360.12
3727.25
6742.49
4913.91
Dec 15
1.74
1.52
Return
1 year
0.12
3.05
5.97
3.97
9.87
5.22
Yield
0.55
1.01
1.39
1.17
1.64
1.48
Return
1 month
-0.46
1.44
0.30
1.82
1.25
Return
1 year
0.76
8.37
3.72
9.99
7.70
Dec 14
1.75
1.54
inflation 0%
inflation 5%
Dec 15
Dur yrs Previous
Yr ago
Dec 15
Dur yrs Previous
Real yield
Up to 5 yrs
-2.00
3.28
-1.98
-2.23
-2.45
3.30
-2.44
Over 5 yrs
-1.65
24.92
-1.65
-1.42
-1.68
25.02
-1.68
5-15 yrs
-1.77
9.51
-1.75
-1.64
-1.89
9.53
-1.88
Over 15 yrs
-1.63
30.08
-1.64
-1.39
-1.66
30.13
-1.66
All stocks
-1.65
23.01
-1.65
-1.42
-1.69
23.13
-1.69
See FTSE website for more details www.ftse.com/products/indices/gilts
�17 Tradeweb Markets LLC. All rights reserved. The Tradeweb FTSE
Gilt Closing Prices information contained herein is proprietary to
Tradeweb; may not be copied or re-distributed; is not warranted to be
accurate, complete or timely; and does not constitute investment advice.
Tradeweb is not responsible for any loss or damage that might result from the use of this information.
Yr ago
2.14
1.95
Yr ago
-2.92
-1.45
-1.79
-1.42
-1.47
All data provided by Morningstar unless otherwise noted. All elements listed are indicative and believed accurate
at the time of publication. No offer is made by Morningstar or the FT. The FT does not warrant nor guarantee
that the information is reliable or complete. The FT does not accept responsibility and will not be liable for any
loss arising from the reliance on or use of the listed information. For all queries e-mail
ft.reader.enquiries@morningstar.com
Data provided by Morningstar | www.morningstar.co.uk
?
22
Monday 18 December 2017
How to lead
Handling fast growth
William Shu
Ask an outsider
The Deliveroo chief is
managing huge demand
while fending off criticism
of the gig economy,
writes Jonathan Moules
People are begging for your
product. You are ready to enter the
growth stage of your start-up. What
do you do next? Stefanos Zenios,
professor of entrepreneurship and
operations, information and
technology at Stanford Graduate
School of Business, has collected
advice from the teaching team of
his course Start-up Garage.
First, he says, focus on people
and culture. Your role will be to hire
people and maintain the culture
and vision.
Second, be clear about your
growth hypothesis and how you
think growth will be achieved:
customer relationships, unit
economics and so on. Measure your
results, accept it will be messy and
be ready to decide which balls to
keep up in the air ? some will fall
and that is OK.
Third, make sure everyone in the
company stays close to the
customer. Every new customer is an
experiment that will either prove or
disprove your growth hypothesis.
If the hypothesis is disproved,
understanding your customer will
l
Документ
Категория
Журналы и газеты
Просмотров
39
Размер файла
16 782 Кб
Теги
Financial Times, newspaper
1/--страниц
Пожаловаться на содержимое документа