&w=3840&q=100)
US pvt firm KKR drops bid to acquire troubled British utility Thames Water
British water and sewage utility Thames Water said on Tuesday that a US investment firm has dropped a rescue bid for the debt-burdened company.
Thames Water said private equity company KKR decided not to make a bid and its status as preferred bidder had lapsed. The utility said it is talking to "senior creditors" about an alternative money-raising plan.
"Whilst today's news is disappointing, we continue to believe that a sustainable recapitalisation of the company is in the best interests of all stakeholders. We will continue to work with our creditors and stakeholders to achieve that goal," Thames Water chairman Arian Montague said.
The cash-strapped company, which provides water and sewage services to 16 million people in and around London, has teetered on the edge of insolvency under about 19 billion pounds ($26 billion) in debt. The utility received court approval in March for 3 billion pounds in emergency funding to keep it from falling into government administration.
KKR's withdrawal makes it more likely the British government will have to nationalise the company, at least temporarily.
Environment Secretary Steve Reed said the government was "monitoring the situation" but "Thames (Water) itself remains stable." Thames Water is the focus of nationwide anger over sewage spills that have fouled lakes, rivers and beaches at a time when water and sewage companies are hiking bills to modernise aging systems and cope with the demands of climate change and population growth.
Last week, the company was fined almost 123 million pounds ($166 million) for releasing sewage into rivers and streams while paying dividends to its shareholders.
Consumers and politicians have criticised the company, arguing Thames Water created its own problems by paying overly generous dividends to investors and high salaries to executives while failing to invest in pipelines, pumps and reservoirs.
Company executives say the fault lies with regulators, which kept bills too low for too long, starving the company of vital cash to fund improvements.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
13 minutes ago
- Mint
Labour Has No Choice But to Break Its Promises
(Bloomberg Opinion) -- Most governments, of whatever political stripe, would agree there's never enough money to go around. It's a problem that's particularly acute for UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer as he prepares to launch the results of his year-old administration's 'comprehensive spending review,' setting out budgets for each department for the next few years. Starmer's team not only lacks the funds to deliver what they'd like to do during their time in power, they don't have the money to do what they've already committed to. Something has to give, and Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves will ultimately need to do at least one of three things: slash spending, raise taxes or increase borrowing. Right now, she's not being clear which. Voters deserve at least a vague understanding of what tough decisions need to be made. It's a clarity Starmer and Reeves have seemed unwilling or unable to provide; instead, they've hoped for economic expansion to bring additional tax revenue to pay for their plans. Unfortunately, the boom is proving elusive: The OECD has downgraded Britain's growth forecast to 1% from 1.2% for 2026. Much of that contraction, the OECD said, is due to Donald Trump's tariffs, which may not be as punitive for the UK as on much of the rest of the world. But they will still likely have a significant impact, even if Britain can stave off 50% tariffs on steel within the capricious president's capricious new five-week deadline. Trump's move to pull back in Ukraine is also adding pressure on the British economy. This week, a UK government defense review confirmed an 'ambition' to raise spending on the military to 3% of gross domestic product, a hike Starmer believes is necessary as he continues to pursue his plan for a 'coalition of the willing' to counter the threat from Vladimir Putin in Ukraine without depending on the US. As my Bloomberg Economics colleague Dan Hanson has calculated, this would cost £17.3 billion by 2029-30, the equivalent of an increase in debt of 1.5 percentage points. NATO, which is preparing to gather this month, is pushing for a hike to 3.5% of members' GDP, rising to 5%, which Bloomberg calculates would cost the UK £350 billion ($475 billion). When she sets out her CSR on Wednesday, Reeves should be overt about how much the unfavorable economic winds are driven by Trump — voters are more likely to accept pain if they understand the reasons for it. And she should go further and provide a coherent sense of what the government believes, an ideological prism though which tricky choices can be viewed. It's something severely lacking from the government's messaging. Having witnessed the disastrous mini-budget of Liz Truss and following painful tax rises on farmers and employers in last October's budget, the mantra from Starmer and Reeves had been that the books would be balanced not via further borrowing or tax increases but through departmental cuts. That commitment was difficult for a left-leaning government that would rather be spending money on things it cares about, but it was at least intellectually coherent. It's no longer clear that the government will stand firm. Last month, Starmer unwisely gave in to pressure from his own MPs to partially reverse the move to withdraw winter fuel benefits from pensioners. The reversal revealed a soft underbelly in the iron chancellor's armor. Labour MPs are now pressing Reeves to also end a controversial two-child benefit limit and relax plans to remove some disability benefits, even if that means either increasing borrowing or taxes. If she does stick to her guns and square the fiscal circle by spending restraint, the UK will surely fall into the austerity she has vowed to resist. At minimum, she'll have to let go of manifesto commitments such as halving violence against women and girls, making homes more energy efficient and building affordable social housing. There is no way Labour can avoid breaking some of its promises; now we need to know the rationale shaping which promises they are. None of this is simple — which is why it's important the government's priorities are made explicit. Instead, Starmer is offering mixed messaging. In speeches and interviews, he's said his first priority is the defense of the realm, but also that he sees nothing more important than protecting 'working people' from the consequences of market turmoil, and also that he believes 'profoundly in driving down poverty and child poverty.' As Labour resists the threat from the upstart populist Reform UK party, Starmer has pledged to fix public services, slash NHS waiting lists and reduce immigration by making it harder to come to Britain to work and study (which Bloomberg estimates will cost £9 billion by 2028-2029.) At the same time, the PM seeks to drive growth through a youth-mobility arrangement with the European Union that leaves him vulnerable to accusations of open borders. Does he avoid strikes by boosting public-sector pay or focus on keeping down inflation? Encourage entrepreneurship or tax the rich so that many quit these shores? No wonder voters are confused — they've been given no framework within which to anticipate where the ax will fall or how else the government will make the sums add up. If Starmer's team doesn't lay out a clear vision for how they'll approach these touch choices, then they'll be more than confused — they'll be let down. More From Bloomberg Opinion: This column reflects the personal views of the author and does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners. Rosa Prince is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering UK politics and policy. She was formerly an editor and writer at Politico and the Daily Telegraph, and is the author of 'Comrade Corbyn' and 'Theresa May: The Enigmatic Prime Minister.' More stories like this are available on
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
UK's Warehouse REIT agrees to Blackstone's $635.35 million bid
BENGALURU: UK's Warehouse REIT has agreed to sell itself to Blackstone for 470 million pounds ($635.35 million), days after the investment firm lowered its bid for the company due to valuation-related issues uncovered during due diligence. The 110.6 pence per share offer price agreed on Wednesday represents a 34.2% premium to Warehouse REIT's closing stock price on February 28, the day before Blackstone's initial bid with global investment firm Sixth Street Partners was disclosed. Blackstone raised its bid to 489 million pounds in March but knocked off the sweetener, citing differing views on the value of an asset. The final offer price includes a dividend of 1.6 pence per share. "The company's growth has been constrained by the weak macroeconomic backdrop, high interest rates, and an inability to raise new equity," said Neil Kirton , the chair of Warehouse. Kirton said these factors, paired with the current macroeconomic conditions, make Blackstone's offer particularly attractive. U.S.-based firms have been snapping up British assets recently, taking advantage of a market that is plagued with comparatively weaker valuations and stunted growth. In recent months, companies such as Dowlais and Deliveroo have been bought out by their American rivals or by investment firms.
Time of India
3 hours ago
- Time of India
Trump's new move could hammer India's factories, and wreck exports and jobs
At a rally in Pennsylvania last Friday, US President Donald Trump declared, 'We're going to bring it from 25 per cent to 50 per cent, the tariffs on steel into the United States of America. At 25 per cent, they can sort of get over that fence… At 50 per cent, they can no longer get over the fence.' True to his words, Trump signed a proclamation on Tuesday doubling tariffs on steel and aluminium imports to 50%, a move that could have far-reaching consequences for global trade, including India 's export sector. The decision, which excludes the United Kingdom, took effect on June 4 and is seen as part of Trump's renewed 'America First' trade policy ahead of the upcoming election cycle. The UK was officially exempted from the tariffs following a meeting in Paris between British Trade Minister Jonathan Reynolds and US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer at the OECD summit. Also Read: 'Kill the Bill': Elon Musk declares war on Trump's big, beautiful tax and spending bill, warns that it will 'bankrupt America' Export worry for India India exported around $4.56 billion worth of steel, aluminium, and related products to the US in FY25, according to data from the Global Trade Research Initiative (GTRI). These included: Live Events $587.5 million in iron and steel products $3.1 billion in articles of iron or steel (up 14.1 per cent year-on-year) $860 million in aluminium and related items Much of this output comes from small and medium-sized manufacturers concentrated in Maharashtra, Gujarat and Tamil Nadu, where job losses may become unavoidable. Moody's Ratings, in a note dated February 10, warned that Indian steel producers will face greater difficulty in exporting their products following the tariff hike. "Over the past 12 months, high steel imports into India have already dampened prices and earnings," said Hui Ting Sim, Assistant Vice President at Moody's. 'Indian producers are already struggling due to low-cost imports, and the doubled tariffs could worsen their situation,' noted the Aluminium Association of India (AAI). The Engineering Export Promotion Council of India (EEPC) also warned that the 50% tariffs could pose a serious threat to this key export segment. According to Business Today, EEPC Chairman Pankaj Chadha said, 'The proposed hike could jeopardise engineering exports worth around $5 billion.' Also Read: Under Trump's 'big, beautiful' bill, over 10 million more Americans projected to lose insurance He said that India should seek a waiver similar to the UK's, as part of its ongoing bilateral trade agreement (BTA) talks with the US. 'This may not be the right time for such unilateral tariffs, especially when BTA talks are underway. It could complicate negotiations,' he added. In 2024, the largest steel exporters to the US were Canada ($7.7 billion), Brazil ($5 billion), and Mexico ($3.3 billion). Imports from China and India, on the other hand, stood at $550 million and $450 million, respectively. While India's share is small, it could become strategically vulnerable. Consumers to take big hit While exporters are bracing for revenue losses, everyday consumers could soon feel the impact. Higher input costs for products ranging from cars to refrigerators are expected to be passed on to buyers. If cheap steel that can't enter America floods the Indian market, it could weaken pricing power for domestic producers and trigger volatility in construction and manufacturing, two key sectors. 'It is important that India implements necessary trade measures proactively and in time. There is likely to be increased risk of trade diversion into India due to changing global tariffs, and India is very vulnerable due to strong domestic demand,' said Jayant Acharya, Joint Managing Director and CEO of JSW Steel, according to Reuters. Ranjan Dhar, Director and Vice President (Sales & Marketing) at AMNS India, added, 'We hope more protection will come for domestic industry. Every country is protecting its industry. India should also do that as long as it focuses on protecting itself from low-priced imports.' India's response Union Minister H D Kumaraswamy played down the broader impact of the move on India. 'Minor impact will be there... A minor problem is there because we are not exporting in a big way. The only thing is, if the consignment, which is already on its way (to the US from India), reaches after 4 June, then there is some problem as they have to pay 50 per cent tariffs,' he said. Also Read: Apple and Alibaba's AI rollout in China delayed by Trump's trade war: Report Despite relatively low export volumes to the US compared with Canada and Mexico, Indian authorities have filed a formal notification at the World Trade Organization (WTO), indicating that retaliatory tariffs may be imposed on US imports if needed. Any such response would aim to match the value of US metal exports into India, currently estimated at around $2 billion. This mirrors India's move in 2019, when it imposed additional customs duties on 28 US products in retaliation for Washington's 2018 steel and aluminium tariffs. More than five years later, on July 3, 2023, those duties were lifted after the US removed tariffs on Indian metal imports, only for Trump to now reintroduce them. Ajay Srivastava of GTRI said, 'If Trump follows the same playbook, the return of tariffs on steel and aluminium could be used as leverage in trade negotiations... The latest move, if implemented, could lead to new trade disputes and retaliatory measures from affected countries.' Trade diversion threat looms The biggest concern is trade diversion. As countries such as South Korea and Vietnam face similar tariff barriers in the US, they may offload excess metal into India, resulting in a flood of cheap imports. This might seem beneficial to consumers in the short term but could severely harm domestic manufacturing, a major source of employment. If countries redirect their steel to India, it could distort local prices and introduce uncertainty in planning and costing, whether one is building infrastructure, assembling cars or manufacturing appliances. India has been a net steel importer for two consecutive years. In FY25, imports rose 9.2% to 10.5 million tonnes, while exports dropped 27% to 6.3 million tonnes, reversing India's traditional trade surplus in steel. Also Read: Trump travel ban: US imposes entry ban on 12 nations, adds restrictions on 7 others This imbalance has affected domestic producers in several ways: Underutilised manufacturing capacity Margin erosion due to depressed global prices Risks to employment and future investment In response, the Indian government imposed a 12% provisional safeguard duty on flat steel products effective from 21 April 2025, to curb cheap imports and stabilise the domestic market. The duty applies to a wide range of flat steel products including hot-rolled coils, cold-rolled coils and galvanised sheets. These are widely used in infrastructure, automobile manufacturing, shipbuilding, home appliances and heavy engineering. These products had seen a sharp increase in imports from China, Vietnam and South Korea, often at prices well below the cost of production in India. T V Narendran, CEO of Tata Steel , warned that the financial health of the industry could deteriorate without timely action. 'If current trends continue, we will have to revise our investment plans and reassess our capex strategy,' he said. Global impact and outlook The tariff hike is viewed as a continuation of Trump's protectionist approach, rooted in national security concerns and efforts to preserve manufacturing jobs. According to the US government's Producer Price Index, steel prices have already increased by 16% since January 2025. With imports accounting for roughly one-quarter of US steel consumption, mainly from Canada, Mexico, Japan and South Korea, the effects are expected to ripple through global supply chains. Additionally, Fitch Ratings noted that Indian steelmakers could face pricing and demand pressures if major exporting countries begin redirecting surplus volumes to India. Countries will now need to act quickly to protect their manufacturers and consumers while managing trade relations with the US to minimise the impact on their economies. Economic Times WhatsApp channel )
