• Теги
    • избранные теги
    • Компании1261
      • Показать ещё
      Страны / Регионы560
      • Показать ещё
      Издания51
      • Показать ещё
      Разное261
      • Показать ещё
      Международные организации26
      • Показать ещё
      Формат12
      Показатели35
      • Показать ещё
      Люди45
      • Показать ещё
Выбор редакции
06 декабря, 03:14

Uncertain media future

from C. P. Chandrasekhar In today’s troubled times, mega-mergers are the norm. Announcements of marriages like that between AB Inbev and SABMiller in the beer industry or Bayer and Monsanto in the agribusiness sector attract attention that soon fades, even as the difficult task of getting clearances from the regulators continues. But the just announced agreement […]

Выбор редакции
27 октября, 22:39

Altria (MO) Beats Q3 Earnings, Revenues; Maintains FY View

Altria Inc.'s (MO) third-quarter 2016 adjusted earnings of 82 cents per share beat the Zacks Consensus Estimate of 81 cents by a penny.

21 октября, 14:00

The Comprehensive Business Case for Sustainability

Today’s executives are dealing with a complex and unprecedented brew of social, environmental, market, and technological trends. These require sophisticated, sustainability-based management. Yet executives are often reluctant to place sustainability core to their company’s business strategy in the mistaken belief that the costs outweigh the benefits. On the contrary, academic research and business experience point to quite the opposite. Embedded sustainability efforts clearly result in a positive impact on business performance.  Drawing from our own research and our colleagues’ research in this area, we have created a sustainability business case for the 21st century corporate executive. Hoping to alleviate their concerns, this article also provides concrete examples of how sustainability benefits the bottom line. For the purpose of this article, we define sustainable practices as those that: 1) at minimum do not harm people or the planet and at best create value for stakeholders and 2) focus on improving environmental, social, and governance (ESG) performance in the areas in which the company or brand has a material environmental or social impact (such as in their operations, value chain, or customers). We exclude companies with a traditional CSR program that supports employee volunteering in the community – this does not by itself qualify as sustainability. Driving competitive advantage through stakeholder engagement Traditional business models aim to create value for shareholders, often at the expense of other stakeholders. Sustainable businesses are redefining the corporate ecosystem by designing models that create value for all stakeholders, including employees, shareholders, supply chains, civil society, and the planet. Michel Porter and Mark Kramer pioneered the idea of “creating shared value,” arguing that businesses can generate economic value by identifying and addressing social problems that intersect with their business. Much of the strategic value of sustainability comes from the need to continually talk with and learn from key stakeholders. Through regular dialogue with stakeholders and continual iteration, a company with a sustainability agenda is better positioned to anticipate and react to economic, social, environmental, and regulatory changes as they arise. When firms fail to establish good relationships with their stakeholders, it can lead to increased conflict and reduced stakeholder cooperation. This can disrupt a firm’s ability to operate on schedule and budget.  A study of the gold mining industry, for example, found that stakeholder relations can heavily influence land permitting, taxation, and the regulatory environment, thus playing a substantial role in determining whether a firm has the right to transform gold into shareholder capital – therefore, as the study authors wrote, stakeholder engagement “is not just corporate social responsibility but enlightened self-interest.” Improving risk management Supply chains today extend around the world, and are vulnerable to natural disasters and civil conflict. Climate change, water scarcity, and poor labor conditions in much of the world increase the risk. McKinsey reports that the value at stake from sustainability concerns can be as a high as 70% of earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization. In the largest study on climate change data and corporations, 8,000 supplier companies (that sell to 75 multinationals) reported on their level of climate risk. Of the respondents, 72% said that climate change presents risks that could significantly impact their operations, revenue, or expenditures. Unlike traditional forms of business risk, social and environmental risks manifest themselves over a longer term, often affect the business on many dimensions, and are largely outside the organization’s control. Managing risks therefore requires making investment decisions today for longer-term capacity building and developing adaptive strategies. In the agriculture, food, and beverage sector, the impacts of climate change have the potential to alter growing conditions and seasons, increase pests and disease, and decrease crop yields. Disruptions in the supply chain may affect production processes that depend on unpriced natural capital assets such as biodiversity, groundwater, clean air, and climate. These unpriced natural capital costs are generally internalized until events like floods or droughts cause disruption to production processes or commodity price fluctuation. For example, Bunge, an agribusiness firm, reported a $56 million quarterly loss in its sugar and bioenergy segments due to drought in 2010. Flooding in 2011 in Thailand, harmed 160 companies in the textile industry and halted nearly a quarter of the country’s garment production, increasing global prices by 28%. To address these threats along their supply chain, companies like Mars, Unilever, and Nespresso have invested in Rainforest Alliance certification to help farmers deal with climate volatility, reduce land degradation, and increase resilience to drought and humidity—all of which ensure the long-term supply of their agricultural products. Certification also improves productivity and net income:   According to an independent study by COSA, Rainforest Alliance reported that certified cocoa farmers in Cote d’Ivoire, for example, produced 1,270 pounds of cocoa per hectare, compared with 736 pounds per hectare on non-certified farms. Net income was also significantly higher on certified cocoa farms than noncertified: $403 versus $113 USD per hectare. Companies are also experiencing risks in their manufacturing due to resource depletion – particularly water. Water has largely been considered a free raw material and therefore used inefficiently, but many companies are now experiencing the higher costs of using the resource. Coca-Cola, for example, faced a water shortage in India that forced it to shut down one of its plants in 2004. As the 24th biggest industrial consumer of water, Coca Cola has now invested $2 billion to reduce water use and improve water quality in the communities in which it operates. SabMiller has also invested heavily in water conservation, including $6 million to improve equipment at a facility in Tanzania affected by deteriorating water quality. Water-related risks threaten to strand billions of dollars for mining, oil, and gas companies. “Stranded assets” are investments that become obsolete due to regulatory, environmental, or market constraints. For example, social conflict related to disruptions to water supplies in Peru has resulted in the indefinite suspension of $21.5 billion in mining projects since 2010. Fostering innovation Investing in sustainability is not only a risk management tool; it can also drive innovation.  Redesigning products to meet environmental standards or social needs offers new business opportunities. 3M, for example, integrates sustainability into its innovation pipeline through its “Pollution Prevention Pays” program, which aims to proactively minimize waste and avoid pollution through product reformulation, equipment redesign, process modification, and waste recycling. 3M’s Novec fire suppression fluids are the first viable, sustainable alternative to hydrofluorocarbons. Nike embedded sustainability into its innovation process and created the $1 billion-plus Flyknit line, which uses a specialized yarn system, requiring minimal labor and generating large profit margins. Flyknit reduces waste by 80% compared with regular cut and sew footwear.   Since its launch in 2012, Flyknit has reduced 3.5 million pounds of waste and fully transitioned from yarn to recycled polyester, diverting 182 million bottles from landfills. Recognizing the growing consumer interest in sustainable products and looking to solve consumer challenges such as high energy costs, CPG companies have developed new products to gain access to this market. Proctor & Gamble, for example, conducted a life cycle assessment of its products and found that U.S. households spend 3% of annual electricity budgets on heating water to wash clothes. In 2005, they launched a U.S. and European line of cold-water detergents that require 50% less energy than warm water washing. Facing strict regulation on chemical release and competition from flowers from Africa, the Dutch flower industry developed a closed-loop system that grows flowers hydroponically in greenhouses, lowering risk of infestation and reducing the use of fertilizers and pesticides. The system also improves product quality by creating regulated growing conditions. Their innovative system has increased productivity and quality, reduced environmental impact and costs, and increased global competitiveness. Improving Financial Performance Many business leaders have the erroneous perception that one can have profits or sustainability, but not both.  This probably has its roots in Milton Friedman’s 50-year old, but still influential, thesis that the only business of a business is profit as well as a hangover from the 1970s and 80s, when low quality, high priced environmental products failed in the market and early socially responsible investing delivered low returns. That conventional wisdom has now reversed. In addition to the financial benefits that accrue from increased competitive advantage and innovation as discussed earlier, companies are realizing significant cost savings through environmental sustainability-related operational efficiencies. Moreover, investors are now able to track the high performers on ESG (environmental, social and governance factors) and are correlating better financial performance with better ESG performance. Significant cost reductions can result from improving operational efficiency through better management of natural resources like water and energy, as well as minimizing waste. One study estimated that companies experience an average internal rate of return of 27% to 80% on their low carbon investments. Since 1994, Dow has invested nearly $2 billion in improving resource efficiency and has saved $9.8 billion from reduced energy and wastewater consumption in manufacturing.  In 2013, GE had reduced greenhouse gas emissions by 32% and water use by 45% compared to 2004 and 2006 baselines, respectively, resulting in $300 million in savings. A focus on sustainability can also unlock opportunities for process and logistics savings. Wal-Mart, for example, aimed to double fleet efficiency between 2005 and 2015 through better routing, truck loading, driver training, and advanced technologies. By the end of 2014, they had improved fuel efficiency approximately 87% compared to the 2005 baseline. In that year, these improvements resulted in 15,000 metric tons of CO2 emissions avoided and savings of nearly $11 million. Mounting evidence shows that sustainable companies deliver significant positive financial performance, and investors are beginning to value them more highly. Arabesque and University of Oxford reviewed the academic literature on sustainability and corporate performance and found that 90% of 200 studies analyzed conclude that good ESG standards lower the cost of capital; 88% show that good ESG practices result in better operational performance; and 80% show that stock price performance is positively correlated with good sustainability practices. Here are some other datapoints to consider: Between 2006 and 2010, the top 100 sustainable global companies experienced significantly higher mean sales growth, return on assets, profit before taxation, and cash flows from operations in some sectors compared to control companies. During the 2008 recession, companies committed to sustainability practices achieved “above average” performance in the financial markets during the 2008 recession, translating into an average of $650 million in incremental market capitalization per company. Additionally, companies with superior environmental performance experienced lower cost of debt by 40-45 basis points. Studies also suggest that companies with strong corporate responsibility reputations “experience no meaningful declines in share price compared to their industry peers during crises” versus firms with poor CSR reputations whose reputations declined by “2.4-3%; a market capitalization loss of $378M per firm.” Investors are paying attention. According to the 2015 EY Global Institutional Investor Survey, investors are increasingly using companies’ nonfinancial disclosures to inform their investment decisions. In its survey of over 200 institutional investors, 59.1% of respondents view nonfinancial disclosures as “essential” or “important” to investment decisions, up from 34.8% in 2014. Some 62.4% of investors are concerned about the risk of stranded assets (i.e. assets that lose value prematurely due to environmental, social, or other external factors) and over one-third of respondents reported cutting their holdings of a company in the past year because of this risk. Building Customer Loyalty Companies are skeptical about consumer interest in sustainable products – especially where willingness-to-pay is concerned.  Some of that is self-inflicted, as early on companies tended to increase “sustainable” product prices substantially and in some cases sold inferior products (e.g. pricy natural cleaning products that did not work). However, a shift is occurring in the minds of consumers. Today’s consumers expect more transparency, honesty, and tangible global impact from companies and can choose from a raft of sustainable, competitively priced, high quality products.  In fact, one study found that among numerous factors surveyed, the news coverage regarding environmental and social responsibility was the only significant factor that affected respondents’ evaluation of a firm and intent to buy. Nearly two-thirds of consumers across six international markets believe they “have a responsibility to purchase products that are good for the environment and society” — 82% in emerging markets and 42% in developed markets. In the food and beverage industry, a growing number of consumers are considering values beyond price and taste in their purchasing decisions, such as safety, social impact, and transparency. Far from feeling skittish about buying sustainable products, today’s consumers perceive a higher level of product performance in products from sustainable companies and sustainability information has a significantly positive impact on consumers’ evaluation of a company, which translates into purchase intent. The results of these studies support that consumers in a post-Recession era are shifting purchasing decisions to brands with integrity, social responsibility, and sustainability at their core. In fact, Unilever claims its “brands with purpose” are growing at twice the rate as others in their portfolio. Companies can also charge higher price premiums based on positive corporate responsibility performance. These premiums can reach 20% according to some estimates. Moreover, some studies show that overall sales revenue can increase up to 20% due to corporate responsibility practices. Another study found that revenues from sustainable products and services grew at six times the rate of overall company revenues between 2010 and 2013, among the 12 members of the S&P Global 100 sampled (Singer, 2015). GE’s Ecomagination division, for example, has generated $200 billion in sales since 2005. IKEA’s line of sustainable products like LED bulbs and solar panels from its Products for a More Sustainable Life at Home now generate a billion dollars. Attracting and Engaging Employees Corporate sustainability initiatives aimed at improving ESG performance and proving value to society can increase employee loyalty, efficiency, and productivity and improve HR statistics related to recruitment, retention, and morale. Research is finding that 21st century employees are focusing more on mission, purpose, and work-life balance. Companies that invest in sustainability initiatives tend to create sought-after culture and engagement due to company strategy focusing more on purpose and providing value to society.  In addition, companies who embed sustainability in their core business strategy treat employees as critical stakeholders, just as important as shareholders. Employees are proud to work there and feel part of a broader effort. One study found that morale was 55% better in companies with strong sustainability programs, compared to those with poor ones, and employee loyalty was 38% better. Better morale and motivation translate into reduced absenteeism and improved productivity. Firms that adopted environmental standards have seen a 16% increase in productivity over firms that did not adopt sustainability practices. Corporate responsibility performance also positively impacts turnover and recruitment. Studies show that firms with greater corporate responsibility performance can reduce average turnover over time by 25-50%. It can also reduce annual quit rates by 3-3.5%, saving replacement costs up to 90%-200% of an employee’s annual salary for each retained position. *** The preponderance of evidence shows that sustainability is going mainstream.  Executives can no longer afford to approach sustainability as a “nice to have” or as solid function separated from the “real” business.  Those companies that proactively make sustainability core to business strategy will drive innovation and engender enthusiasm and loyalty from employees, customers, suppliers, communities and investors.

20 октября, 13:59

Putting courage at the heart of business

Courage. In the past few weeks, I've seen more evidence of this amongst global corporations than I could ever have imagined. When I launched the Thomson Reuters Foundation Stop Slavery Award last year, an initiative to reward businesses that have excelled in efforts to try to eradicate forced labour from their supply chains, I could not have predicted the response. Would companies be brave enough to subject themselves to a level of scrutiny that might publically expose significant issues in their supply chains? Would they wish to be associated with an award connected to 'slavery' in any way? The response to our Stop Slavery Award has far surpassed all expectations. Global, heavyweight brands have thrown their hats into the ring alongside smaller, independent companies. All voluntarily took on the task of completing a very detailed questionnaire. Our shortlist of ten have gone through rigorous assessment by an independent third party, using specific criteria based on existing standards and best practices. These companies have tried to eradicate slavery from their supply chains attempting different approaches, and then trying harder when some of them didn't work. The transparency that has emerged through their submissions is quite remarkable. Technology giants such as Apple - with a large and complex supply chain - and Hewlett Packard Enterprise are shortlisted, along with Dutch manufacturing company NXP Semiconductors. Big retailers like Tesco compete with Thai Union, the world's largest producer of seafood. Interestingly, the two companies are at odds over the environmental standards of John West Tuna, a Thai Union brand that Tesco has currently removed from its shelves. Australian iron ore mining company Fortescue Metals Group, hospitality and travel company Carlson, food producers ABP UK, Twining teas and Gildan Activewear complete the shortlist. These businesses now face an authoritative and independent judging board to decide on a winner. The jury comprises Nobel Peace Prize Kailash Satyarthi, global human rights and business expert John Ruggie, Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus H. Vance Jr, Britain's Independent Anti-Slavery Commissioner Kevin Hyland, International Criminal Prosecutor Patricia Sellers; Edelman President and CEO Richard Edelman, and myself. The winner (or winners) will be announced at the Foundation's Trust Women conference on November 30 and receive a sculpture created by Anish Kapoor for this initiative. Clearly, the nominations will lead to further press scrutiny for these companies. Nevertheless, they have put themselves forward. In contrast, look at the disappointing response to the UK's Modern Slavery Act. Passed last year, the bill requires all companies with a turnover of more than £36 million operating in the United Kingdom to report on the steps they are taking to clean their supply chains of the risk of forced labour. So far, only 27 FTSE of the 100 companies have complied. Among them, just two - Marks and Spencer, and SABMiller (now part of Anheuser-Busch InBev)- have been independently rated as 'best performers' by the Business and Human Rights Resource Centre. It was widely hoped that many more would set a precedent for the 12,000 businesses globally who are required to comply with the Act. The fight against modern slavery is complex. According to the Walk Free Foundation, there are currently 45.8million slaves worldwide. Today, the growing slave industry is worth US$ 150 billion a year, according to the ILO, meanwhile the combined response by international governments amounts to less than $1 billion a year. We are fighting an organized crime in a totally disorganized manner. But if businesses are ready to take on their share of the fight, things could change rapidly. A new global ranking, the Modern Slavery Index, says companies are exposed to slavery in their supply chains in 115 countries - almost 60% of the world's nations. India and China are among the big export economies where the risk is highest. Modern-day slavery is a silent crime. Victims cannot stand up and speak out. Perpetrators act in almost total impunity. Yet a growing global thirst for cheap products and fast fashion ensures the most vulnerable will continue to be enslaved, often hidden so far down the supply chain of a multinational corporation that those running the business will not know of this if they don't specifically look out for it. The complexity of today's global supply chains means that today no corporation can confidently declare it is slave-free. But when businesses start to think of human rights as an imperative, there is a glimmer of hope. Let us hope that the Stop Slavery Award is the first, courageous step, in the right direction. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

18 октября, 18:00

Invest in Sin Stocks During Uncertain Times

When we are stressed, we have a tendency to embrace our vices. So, it may not come as a surprise that sin stock performance has more than tripled the performance of the broader markets.

Выбор редакции
18 октября, 14:05

Altria to receive $5.3 bln in cash, as part of closing of Anheuser-Busch's merger with SABMiller

This is a Real-time headline. These are breaking news, delivered the minute it happens, delivered ticker-tape style. Visit www.marketwatch.com or the quote page for more information about this breaking news.

14 октября, 20:07

Unpicking the "Value at Risk" of Cultural Incompatibility in M&A

Terry Tyrrell, Worldwide Chairman, Brand Union As politicians debate the consequences of a ‘hard’ or ‘soft’ Brexit, the implications from this historic move are unavoidable. The pound has hit the lowest levels in three decades and uncertainty is prolific. However, for those looking towards the UK, a weak pound makes for an attractive market for acquisition. Meanwhile, a landscape of uncertainty spreads caution. Whatever the outcome, M&A activity continues to be high on the agenda. M&A activity worldwide reached $4.6 trillion in 2015, the highest ever recorded. Despite the impression, this has not stemmed from a healthy global economic outlook. The appetite, on the whole, has bred from necessity as businesses combat difficult economic conditions and look to M&A to provide stability, consolidation and ultimately drive sales. The picture in 2016 is looking very similar. This year we have already seen major deals such as Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE) merge its non-core software assets with Micro Focus International and the back and forth of AB InBev and SABMiller finally come to fruition for £79bn. However, are these companies truly prepared for the huge change acquisition can have on both companies? And what about all the hundreds of other mergers and acquisitions that didn’t manage to end with a deal?  According to strategy consultants McKinsey, nearly 70% of all M&A are unsuccessful. The Society for Human Resource Management state that 50% of mergers fail because of cultural incompatibility. If the latter statistic is correct, then a huge proportion of potential mergers can pre-empt failure by examining each company’s cultural compatibility before closing the deal. With this in mind, it is even more shocking that only 27% of businesses surveyed in the KPMG 2015 M&A Outlook survey analysed the cultural compatibility of the firms set to merge. Financial and structural synergies are championed as the key ingredient for successful M&A. However, striking a successful long term partnership goes far beyond this. Understanding in advance how and whether or not the two company’s cultures can be effectively merged will help to  migitgate risk and avert potentially millions of pounds worth of costs and lost value. When Publicis and Omnicom failed to make their merger dreams a reality, Omnicom’s CEO John Wren said that, “We knew there would be differences in the corporate cultures. We underestimated the depth of the differences”. To avoid an M&A disaster such as this, ensuring the two cultures are compatible, before signing the dotted line, is vital. Cultural compatibility might seem like a subjective and intangible concept to measure. However, there are in fact scientific ways to analyse it across the two companies and even place a financial figure on the cultural incompatibility gap. A small percentage gap can be rectified. However, there are some instances where, if the gap is too significant, it will simply be too challenging to make the merger function effectively. A huge financial saving can be made by working out this ‘value at risk’ prior to M&A taking place. If the cultural challenges are identified early, there are steps that can be followed to bring about the desired outcome. Unite your organization around a clear and compelling purpose In order for the merger to be successful leadership and staff need to be aligned and know where they stand within the company. It’s important to develop a shared, clear and compelling purpose for the merged organisation. You then need to align your culture building on mutual strengths capabilities and business plans around that one purpose. AB InBev and SABMiller’s merger had been rumbling on for months before finally coming to completion this month. However, as we all know, this isn’t AB InBev’s first experience of M&A.  In 2008, InBev, the global beverage company acquired Anheuser-Busch.. Early in the integration process, an important part of the successful acquisition derived from  the leadership team focusing on the most effective way to introduce InBev's long-term global strategy to Anheuser-Busch employees, utilising InBev's "Dream-People-Culture" mission statement to excite the imagination of the AB organization. Only time will tell whether the current AB InBev – SABMiller merger will see a smooth transition. Create a tailored action plan to achieve organisation–wide alignment Once your purpose is in place, you need to have a clear plan of how the two companies will work together moving forward, with a united goal in mind. When Disney and Pixar finally merged in 2006 after years of negotiations, it proved to be a huge success. Why? Because each company knew their responsibility and how they would move forward together. Under the merger, Steve Jobs became the majority shareholder of Disney and a board member. Pixar co-founder, Ed Catmull, became the president of Walt Disney and Pixar Animation Studios. Pixar executive vice-president John Lasseter became the Chief Creative Officer of both studios. This was something Jobs had fought for throughout the merger talk. It was imperative for him that Pixar would not lose its independence and be eclipsed by Disney. Coach leaders to inspire and unify the merged organisation An acquisition or merger needs a strong leader across the two companies. He or she must have the authority to make crucial decisions, coordinate taskforces and set the pace. In 1998, Mercedes-Benz manufacturer Daimler Benz merged with U.S. auto maker Chrysler to create Daimler Chrysler for $37 billion. The logic was obvious: to create a trans-Atlantic, car-making powerhouse that would dominate the markets. But by 2007, Daimler Benz sold Chrysler to the Cerberus Capital Management firm, which specialises in restructuring troubled companies, for a mere $7 billion. So what happened? Many felt that Daimler strutted in and tried to control the team at Chrysler. Such clashes tend to undermine a new alliance. A leadership team needs to be in place to ensure that the two companies are merging in unison and working together. Therefore, it is clear that making sure that both company’s cultures can work together is a fundamental part of the overall integration process. However, this isn’t to be taken as an afterthought once other – usually financial - decisions have been made. It needs to be one of the first questions asked by both parties before considering the M&A and it requires its own rigorous financial measurement to assess the ‘value at risk’. If not, you are putting your business’ reputation and finances in serious danger -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Выбор редакции
14 октября, 16:38

Консолидация пивоваров

Два крупнейших мировых производителя пива объединяются. Бельгийская AB InBev поглотила британскую SABMiller. Цена сделки составила $106 млрд. Объединённая компания будет контролировать треть мирового производства пива. Как глобализация пивной отрасли повлияет на российский рынок?

12 октября, 15:37

Coca-Cola Company (KO) to Acquire ABI's Stake in CCBA

The Coca-Cola Company (KO) plans to buy Anheuser-Busch InBev's ("ABI") stake in Coca-Cola's largest African bottler -- Coca-Cola Beverages Africa ("CCBA").

Выбор редакции
11 октября, 17:39

Coca-Cola планирует выкупить долю SABMiller в своем африканском подразделении

В понедельник, 10 октября, крупнейший в мире производитель безалкогольных напитков Coca-Cola заявил о том, что рассматривает возможность выкупа доли SABMiller в своем африканском подразделении Coca-Cola Beverages Africa. Заметим, что на конец августа компании SABMiller принадлежала 54%-ная доля данного подразделения. Примечательно, что вчера крупнейший в мире производитель пива Anheuser-Busсh InBev (AB InBev) объявил о закрытии исторической сделки по поглощению британской пивоваренной компании SABMiller за $106 млрд. Теперь AB InBev стала крупнейшей пивоваренной компанией в мире с годовым оборотом в $55 млрд.

Выбор редакции
11 октября, 10:59

Coca-Cola планирует выкупить долю SABMiller в своем африканском подразделении

В понедельник, 10 октября, крупнейший в мире производитель безалкогольных напитков Coca-Cola заявил о том, что рассматривает возможность выкупа доли SABMiller в своем африканском подразделении Coca-Cola Beverages Africa. Заметим, что на конец августа компании SABMiller принадлежала 54%-ная доля данного подразделения. Примечательно, что вчера крупнейший в мире производитель пива Anheuser-Busсh InBev (AB InBev) объявил о закрытии исторической сделки по поглощению британской пивоваренной компании SABMiller за $106 млрд. Теперь AB InBev стала крупнейшей пивоваренной компанией в мире с годовым оборотом в $55 млрд.

Выбор редакции
11 октября, 02:55

It's Final: AB InBev Closes on Deal to Buy SABMiller

NEW YORK, NY - OCTOBER 09: In this photo illustration, Bud Light beer and Miller High Life beer are sold in a grocery store on October 9, 2015 in New York City. Budweiser's parent company AB InBev is attempting to buy SABMiller. (Photo by Andrew Burton/Getty Images) And then there were [...]

Выбор редакции
Выбор редакции
11 октября, 00:29

Бельгийская Anheuser-Busсh InBev поглотила британскую SABMiller

Крупнейший в мире производитель пива Anheuser-Busсh InBev (AB InBev) объявил о закрытии исторической сделки по поглощению конкурента – британской пивоваренной компании SABMiller за $106 млрд. Теперь AB InBev стала крупнейшей пивоваренной компанией в мире с годовым оборотом в $55 млрд – на четверть больше, чем до покупки, отмечает Financial Times (FT). Торги бумагами объединенной компании на бирже начнутся уже 11 октября.

Выбор редакции
09 октября, 19:17

Hard work on AB InBev mega deal begins

Takeover of SABMiller involves major integration challenges

Выбор редакции
Выбор редакции
28 сентября, 22:19

Владельцы брендов "Золотая бочка" и "Клинское" договорились о слиянии

Акционеры SABMiller подавляющим большинством проголосовали в пользу сделки с Anheuser-Busch InBev за £79 млрд ($102,5 млрд), пишет Financial Times. В голосовании приняли участие 95,5% акционеров SAB. Два крупнейших инвестора SAB - ...

Выбор редакции
28 сентября, 20:54

Акционеры Sabmiller одобрили слияние с AB Inbev

В среду акционеры британской пивоваренной компании SABMiller одобрили приобретение ее бельгийской Anheuser-Busch InBev (AB InBev). Сумма сделки составит $100 млрд, она станет одной из крупнейших сделок в истории. Напомним, что слухи о том, что AB InBev собирается купить SABMiller появились еще в 2014 году. После этого AB InBev сделала SABMiller несколько предложений о покупке, в октябре прошлого года британская компания ответила согласием на пятое предложение. Тогда речь шла о £44 за одну акцию, позже предложение было повышено до £45 в связи с падением курса фунта стерлингов. После объединения на AB InBev будет приходиться доля в 46% мирового рынка пива по прибыли и 27% по объемам производства. По мнению экспертов, сделка снизит зависимость AB InBev от американского рынка и позволит усилить свои позиции на африканском рынке, где лучше представлена SABMiller. Ранее чтобы получить…