Blog Post

Should emerging multinationals be kept out?

Nicolas Véron draws lessons from cases such as CNOOC and Unocal, Dubai Ports World and P&O, or Vneshtorgbank and EADS, to identify in which cases government actions to prevent takeovers can be considered wise, and why these cases are generally the sign of dysfunctional markets. Recent edginess about a Russian state-owned bank purchasing 5% of […]

By: Date: October 7, 2006 Topic: Digital economy and innovation

Nicolas Véron draws lessons from cases such as CNOOC and Unocal, Dubai Ports World and P&O, or Vneshtorgbank and EADS, to identify in which cases government actions to prevent takeovers can be considered wise, and why these cases are generally the sign of dysfunctional markets.

Recent edginess about a Russian state-owned bank purchasing 5% of EADS raises questions that go beyond the airspace industry. Are some owners unwelcome in Europe’s large listed companies?
Within Europe, despite lurid headlines, protectionism no longer works. Even the most contentious takeover attempts have either succeeded or given rise to compromise: think of Italy’s Edison (now controlled by EDF), Antonveneta and BNL banks, UniCredit’s inroads into Poland’s banking sector, Mittal’s purchase of Arcelor, and probably soon also some combination of Abertis with Italy’s Autostrade, and of E.ON with Spain’s Endesa. (Suez in France is still an undecided story.) In fact if not in the rhetoric, governments have no veto right to oppose to a determined European acquirer, and so much the better. The same is largely true at transatlantic level.

The mergers between Daimler and Chrysler, BP and Amoco, Vodafone and AirTouch, now Alcatel and Lucent, and perhaps Euronext and NYSE, all show that political considerations have not hindered combinations between EU and US players including in industries considered “strategic”. Even in the much-trumpeted Danone case, there is nothing to indicate that PepsiCo would not have been able to win the Paris-based food-maker, had it effectively made an offer.

By contrast, political vetoes appear to have more weight when the acquirer is non-Western. Wise or not, the US Congress has succeeded in making China’s CNOOC renounce Unocal, and Dubai Ports World sell the US assets it inherited from the purchase of P&O. In Europe too, the UK Government has opposed the purchase of Centrica by Russia’s Gazprom. But such cases are likely to become more frequent in the future. ‘Emerging multinationals’ are gaining strength under the combined effects of globalisation and of higher oil prices. At more than 200 billion euro by end-September, Gazprom is worth almost as much as Total and EDF combined, Saudi Basic Industries (Sabic) more than the addition of Bayer and BASF, and China Mobile more than the sum of France Telecom and Deutsche Telekom. These new giants are bound to increasingly seek external growth.

It would be absurd and dangerous to repel them systematically. Wherever competition is effective, government intervention against the market is unnecessary and can quickly become counterproductive. The Americal refusal of Cnooc acquiring Unocal, a company whose influence on the oil market was modest, has probably strengthened the Chinese government’s dangerous belief that the oil market is a loser’s game for those who do not control the oilfields, which may have encouraged them to reinforce their political alliance with Iran.

At first sight, there would probably be no reason to oppose, say, Sabic buying Rhodia, or Egypt’s Orascom buying BouygTel, or India’s Infosys buying CapGemini, or even Bank of China buying a French mid-sized bank such as CIC. Even if the acquirers did not manage these companies well, which is by no means sure, the market would let alternative offers emerge, which would provide any needed goods and services and the corresponding jobs.

The argument that unique technologies need protection is also an unconvincing one. Europe’s problem is not that its innovating firms are snapped up by outsiders; it is that they are too few, and do not grow enough. Among the world’s 500 largest listed companies (1), 63 are mainly high-tech activities (not counting life sciences and telecoms operators). Among these, only 8 are headquartered in Europe(2) versus 38 in the US; their cumulated market values are in a ratio of 1 to 6. To fill this gap, Europe may need to ensure a better functioning of its markets, reform its financial system to foster more growth, or rebuild its research and higher education infrastructure; but closing its economy to outsiders certainly won’t help.

However, the bet on an open economy should not be a blind one. If a company enjoys significant and wellentrenched market power, it would be dangerous to see it in the hands of players that could use this power for political purposes. The defence industry is a case in point. In the US, the Pentagon is the dominant customer, and suppliers are effectively competing for orders: the state can use its market power to oversee their commercial policies and control the risk of proliferation. By contrast, Europe’s defence markets are fragmented, and companies such as EADS have inherited the legacy of the former public procurement monopolies. In such a context, it may be prudent to keep an eye on their equity structure, even though such a control does not solve the broader competition issue.

The only sustainable answer lies in developing competitive, contestable, and well-regulated markets. In Europe, industries such as defence procurement, energy, banking or transport infrastructures generally require better regulation in order to enable fairer competition and general-interest objectives, e.g., sensitive data protection or security of supply. In the P&O case, the fears caused by the arrival of a Dubai-based operator were largely caused by the public authorities’ prior failure to convince the US public of their ability to enforce port security. Where the regulation’s efficiency is doubtful, it makes sense to submit to “robust scrutiny” (as the UK government said about Centrica) any moves by companies which themselves come from opaque political systems. But this kind of reasoned protectionism remains in essence an admission of failure. The interest of Europe’s governments is to support public trust in their open economies, not to close the door to new entrants because of their facial features.

(1) Source: FT Global 500 ranking by 30 September 2006: www.ft.com.
(2) Alcatel, BAE Systems, EADS, Ericsson, Nokia, Philips, SAP, and Siemens.

This comment was also published by La Tribune.


Republishing and referencing

Bruegel considers itself a public good and takes no institutional standpoint. Anyone is free to republish and/or quote this post without prior consent. Please provide a full reference, clearly stating Bruegel and the relevant author as the source, and include a prominent hyperlink to the original post.

Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Opinion

Xi, Biden switching strategies for dominance

The US now sees Asia more through an economic lens, while China shifts toward a security focus

By: Alicia García-Herrero Topic: Global economy and trade Date: May 25, 2022
Read about event More on this topic
 

Upcoming Event

Jun
7
10:30

Future of Work and Inclusive Growth Annual Conference

Annual Conference of the Future of Work and Inclusive Growth project

Speakers: Erik Brynjolfsson, Francis Green, Francis Hintermann, Ivailo Kalfin, J. Scott Marcus, Anoush Margaryan, Julia Nania, Laura Nurski, Poon King Wang, Fabian Stephany and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: Digital economy and innovation Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels
Read about event
 

Past Event

Past Event

Three data realms: Managing the divergence between the EU, the US and China in the digital sphere

Major economies are addressing the challenges brought by digital trade in different ways, resulting in diverging regulatory regimes. How should we view these divergences and best deal with them?

Speakers: Susan Ariel Aaronson, Henry Gao, Esa Kaunistola and Niclas Poitiers Topic: Digital economy and innovation, Global economy and trade Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: May 19, 2022
Read about event More on this topic
 

Past Event

Past Event

Is China’s private sector advancing or retreating?

A look into the Chinese private sector.

Speakers: Reinhard Bütikofer, Nicolas Véron and Alicia García-Herrero Topic: Global economy and trade Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: May 18, 2022
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Blog Post

REPowerEU: will EU countries really make it work?

By acting together, the European Union can optimise its response to the energy crisis in all scenarios but each country will have to make concessions.

By: Simone Tagliapietra Topic: Green economy Date: May 18, 2022
Read about event More on this topic
 

Past Event

Past Event

Adapting to European technology regulation: A conversation with Brad Smith, President of Microsoft

Invitation-only event featuring Brad Smith, President and Vice Chair of Microsoft who will discuss regulating big tech in the context of Europe's digital transformation

Speakers: Maria Demertzis and Brad Smith Topic: Digital economy and innovation Location: Bibliothéque Solvay, Rue Belliard 137A, 1000 Bruxelles Date: May 18, 2022
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Opinion

Buy now, pay later: the age of digital credit

A relatively new fintech market, BNPL is currently not regulated in the EU, meaning that consumers do not have the same protection level as they do for other credit products.

By: Maria Demertzis Topic: Digital economy and innovation Date: May 17, 2022
Read article
 

Blog Post

The EU needs transparent oil data and enhanced coordination

The EU lacks the coordination structure and transparent data necessary to most effectively navigate an embargo on Russian oil.

By: Agata Łoskot-Strachota, Ben McWilliams and Georg Zachmann Topic: Global economy and trade, Green economy Date: May 16, 2022
Read article
 

Blog Post

Now is not the time to confiscate Russia’s central bank reserves

The idea of confiscating the Bank of Russia’s frozen reserves is attractive to some, but at this stage in the Ukraine conflict confiscation would be counterproductive and likely illegal.

By: Joshua Kirschenbaum and Nicolas Véron Topic: Banking and capital markets, Global economy and trade Date: May 16, 2022
Read about event More on this topic
 

Upcoming Event

Jun
23
14:00

BRI 2.0: How has the pandemic influenced China’s landmark Belt and Road Initiative?

China's Belt and Road Initiative is undergoing a transformation after two years of pandemic. How is it changing and what are the consequences for Europe.

Speakers: Alessia Amighini, Eyck Freymann, Alicia García-Herrero and Zhang Xiaotong Topic: Global economy and trade Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels
Read about event
 

Past Event

Past Event

[Cancelled] Shifting taxes in order to achieve green goals

[This event is cancelled until further notice] How could shifting the tax burden from labour to pollution and resources help the EU reach its climate goals?

Speakers: Niclas Poitiers and Femke Groothuis Topic: Green economy, Macroeconomic policy Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: May 12, 2022
Read article More on this topic
 

Blog Post

Insights for successful enforcement of Europe’s Digital Markets Act

The European Commission will enforce digital competition rules against big tech; internally, it should ensure a dedicated process and teams; externally, it should ensure cooperation with other jurisdictions and coherence with other digital policies.

By: Christophe Carugati and Catarina Martins Topic: Digital economy and innovation Date: May 11, 2022
Load more posts