British-American Billionaire In Talks For Investment In Telegraph Newspaper
Rita Ora and Len Blavatnik attend the Warner Music Pre-Grammy Party at the NoMad Hotel in 2019 in ... More Los Angeles, California.
Billionaire Len Blavatnik has reportedly been approached by Redbird Capital Partners about making an investment in The Telegraph, one of U.K.'s most influential newspapers.
Redbird Capital has initiated talks with Blavatnik about becoming a minority investor in The Telegraph, Sky News reported Thursday, citing two sources close to the situation. The report also stated that no agreement had been reached, and it remained unclear whether one would be.
Redbird Capital declined to comment. A spokesperson for Blavatnik's investment firm Access Industries said, 'As a matter of principle, Sir Leonard does not comment on market speculation or on any conversations Access may or may not be having regarding potential investments.'
Blavatnik's investments span a range of industries and countries. Forbes estimates his net worth at $25.6 billion, placing him at No. 80 on the Real-Time Billionaires List. He is probably best known these days for investments in businesses like Warner Music, streaming service DAZN, chemicals firm LyondellBassell and energy conglomerate Calpine.
Blavatnik was knighted by Queen Elizabeth II for services to philanthropy in 2017. He has given or pledged more than $1 billion to philanthropic endeavors with a particular emphasis on supporting universities, including Harvard, Stanford and Yale.
Last week, a cross-party group of parliamentarians urged the government to investigate how Redbird Capital is funding its takeover of the venerable British newspaper, according to a report in The Guardian.
The group were said to have sent a letter to culture secretary, Lisa Nandy, expressing their concerns about the risk of 'potential Chinese state influence' within Redbird Capital.
They MPs point out that the firm's chairman, John Thornton, has served on the advisory council of CIC, China's sovereign wealth fund, and had high-level meetings with Chinese Communist Party members in recent years.
The MPs wrote in their letter there was a lack of transparency regarding the sources of funding for the £500 million ($674 million) acquisition, and they contend that it's 'conceivable, and increasingly likely, that funds could be sourced directly or indirectly from foreign state actors.'
But sources close to Redbird Capital confirmed there were no Chinese state funds involved in the proposed acquisition. A consortium of U.K. and U.S. investors will form a new consortium for the deal, led by Redbird Capital. United Arab Emirates-based International Media Investments (IMI) is expected to be a minority investor, subject to new legislation that's currently progressing through parliament.
The talks are still ongoing, the sources indicated, so no new deal structure has been put into place and submitted for government approval yet.
The Telegraph had been the subject of a two-year takeover saga that began when the Conservative-leaning newspaper was seized by Lloyds bank after the Barclay family failed to repay debts of more than £1 billion.
A joint venture between Redbird Capital and IMI effectively gained control of The Telegraph in 2023, after providing a £600 million loan to the Barclay family. But the Conservative government at the time blocked the deal when it adopted new regulations preventing foreign states from taking ownership of the press.
Blavatnik is a dual citizen of the U.S. and the U.K. He was born in Ukraine and raised north of Moscow, before he immigrated to the U.S. in 1978. He studied computer science at Columbia University, and later earned an M.B.A. from Harvard. He started his New York-based investment company, Access Industries, in 1986.
Blavatnik's fortune can be traced back to the chaotic post-Soviet days, when he made a series of shrewd investments through partnerships with various Russian moguls, including Viktor Vekselberg (net worth $9 billion) and Mikhail Fridman (net worth $14.9 billion).
The billions he earned through privatized factories and oilfields was then used the proceeds to invest in companies and buy assets in the West. His most attention-grabbing acquisition was Warner Music, which he bought for $3.3 billion at the height of the industry's turmoil in 2011. He took the company public on the Nasdaq in June 2020 at quadruple the value.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Washington Post
39 minutes ago
- Washington Post
David Beckham, Gary Oldman, Elaine Paige and others honored by King Charles III
Arise Sir David, Sir Gary and Sir Roger. And Dame Elaine, Dame Pat and Dame Penny. Former England soccer captain David Beckham , Oscar-winning actor Gary Oldman and The Who's frontman Roger Daltrey were knighted in King Charles III's birthday honors list released late Friday. Elaine Paige, the renowned musicals singer, Booker Prize-winning novelist Pat Barker and former Conservative government minister Penny Mordaunt were given damehoods, the female equivalent of a knighthood.
Yahoo
40 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Protesting in Michigan this weekend? These are your rights
With a Washington military parade, President Donald Trump's birthday and growing opposition to immigration raids in Los Angeles, organizers have planned protests around the country for this weekend. Protests have been a part of the United States since the founding of the country. The U.S. Constitution guarantees rights, but that doesn't always mean the police will respect them or that a court will uphold them if they're violated, according to the National Lawyers Guild's "Know Your Rights — a guide for protesters." "When you are protesting or having any interaction with law enforcement, asserting your rights does not usually mean that the police will respect your rights or change how they are treating you. However, by using your rights ... you can make it harder for police to use your own statements or anything found on you during a search as evidence against you during a trial." Public property. No permit is necessary to march on public sidewalks, as long as car and pedestrian traffic is not obstructed, according to the ACLU of Michigan. Police may ask demonstrators without a permit to move to the side of a sidewalk to let people pass or for other safety reasons. According to the ACLU, the rights of protesters and organizers are strongest in "traditional public forums," such as streets, sidewalks and parks. People have the right to speak out in front of government buildings as long as they are not blocking access or interfering with operations. The rules for speech on private property are determined by the property owner. Counter-protesters also have the right to be present and voice displeasure within the vicinity of a different group, although they do not have a right to physically disrupt an event or drown out the speakers they are protesting, according to the ACLU. Some Michigan cities, including Detroit, Ann Arbor and Grand Rapids, ask large gatherings that have the potential to obstruct traffic obtain a permit with up to 70 days' notice. The National Lawyers Guild recommends trying to end law enforcement interaction as quickly as possible, as well as stating your rights out loud when asked questions. 'If a cop is speaking to you on the street, ask: 'Am I free to go?' If they say yes, you should leave, if you can do that safely. "If the cop says anything other than yes, follow up with: 'Am I being detained?' If they say anything other than yes, then say that you do not want to talk further and leave immediately,' according to NLG's Know Your Rights guide. If a police officer asks a question, a protester does not have to answer and can let the officer know they will remain silent and want to speak to a lawyer. Statements you make to people who are not police can be held against you, according to the NLG. In Michigan, police cannot ask you to provide your name or other identity information unless you have been detained on reasonable suspicion that you have committed a crime. This right is not the same in every state. Police are allowed to pat down the outside of your clothing without consent, but they need your permission or a warrant to search beyond that, according to NLG's guide. To decline a search, the guide recommends using the standard legal phrasing, 'I do not consent.' Michigan's ACLU recommends asking for a lawyer immediately, remaining silent and not signing or agreeing to anything without a lawyer. If a defendant hasn't hired a lawyer, they can ask for a court-appointed public defender if they can't afford it, according to Michigan Legal Help from the Michigan Supreme Court and Michigan State Bar Association. If you are arrested, you will be searched as part of the arrest process, according to NLG. Police officers may lie to you about having evidence, deals to drop charges, overstating penalties for crimes, the timeline of your detention, and whether they are recording, according to the guide. Lying to a government agent is sometimes a criminal offence, while remaining silent until speaking to a lawyer is not, according to the NLG. When in a public space, people have the right to photograph anything in plain view, including federal buildings and police, according to Michigan's ACLU. On private property, property owners may set their own rules. Police may not confiscate or demand to view photos or videos without a warrant. They may not delete data under any circumstances, according to the ACLU. Police may order citizens to stop recording if they are "truly interfering with legitimate law enforcement operations, but video recording from a safe distance is not interfering," according to the ACLU. [ Help us make the Free Press better for you. ] According to Michigan's ACLU, police may not disperse a protest unless there is "clear danger of a riot, disorder, interference with traffic, or other immediate threat to public safety." "Protesters must receive a clear and detailed notice of a dispersal order, including how much time they have to disperse, consequences for failing to disperse, and what exit route they can follow before they may be arrested or charged with any crime," according to the ACLU. Officers must give "reasonable opportunity to comply, including sufficient time and a clear exit path," according to the ACLU. The ACLU of Michigan recommends getting contact information of witnesses, taking photos of injuries, and writing down everything you can remember, including officers' names, badge and patrol car numbers. With this information, you can file a written complaint to a civilian complaint board, police department or agency, according to the ACLU. This article originally appeared on Detroit Free Press: Protest rights in Michigan: What to know ahead of No Kings events
Yahoo
40 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump Just Revoked California's EV Rules. How Much Is California To Blame?
President Donald Trump just revoked California's permission to enforce its nation-leading clean-car rules — and Mary Nichols understands why. "No one likes being regulated," she told me ahead of Thursday's Oval Office signing ceremony. Nichols knows that better than almost anyone. As head of California's Air Resources Board for 17 years, she brought the world's biggest automakers to heel using the state's unique authority to go further than the federal government in setting vehicle emissions standards. It's those same automakers who lobbied Trump to "rescue the U.S. auto industry from destruction by terminating California's electric vehicle mandate once and for all," as Trump put it Thursday. It didn't have to get to this point. California officials had been in talks with automakers prior to the November election about how to keep them on board, but the state overplayed its hand, Nichols said. "Many people were acting on the assumption that it was going to be the Democrats continuing in power," she said. "So the state felt like they had all the cards in their hand, and then after the election, it was pretty hard to reset the conversation." To hear Nichols tell it, California may have gone too far this time in nudging the industry to ever-higher sales of zero-emission vehicles. The rules would have required automakers to hit increasing percentages — 35 percent by model year 2026 and 68 percent by model year 2030 — before reaching 100 percent of new-car sales in 2035. Maybe that would have worked if it were just about California. But a dozen other states are signed on to California's targets, and they have been slower and less generous with incentives and EV charging infrastructure. Where California has more than a quarter of its new car sales coming from EVs, New Jersey is at 15 percent, and New York is under 12 percent, according to the industry's latest figures. "They were definitely having issues with the California program because they didn't think they could meet the sales numbers in the mandate, especially [Gov. Gavin] Newsom's target of nothing but ZEVs with a deadline attached to it," Nichols said. "That was scary, and even the interim targets were going to be hard to meet." The pendulum has swung against California before: The George W. Bush administration was the first to attempt to deny California's permission from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to require automakers to sell increasing percentages of zero-emission vehicles, and Trump went further in his first term by attempting to revoke the state's already-issued authority. But Republicans had never resorted to doing it through Congress, via an untested maneuver that congressional watchdogs have warned is likely illegal but that still drew 35 Democratic votes in the House and one in the Senate (Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), in the tradition of Detroit's John Dingell). It's a far cry from the bipartisan consensus that reigned when President Richard Nixon famously signed the Clean Air Act, which set federal air pollution levels for the first time but gave California permission to continue going further, owing to its decade-plus of vehicle emissions rules aimed at the smoggy Los Angeles basin. The automakers have been steadily lobbying against the rules since then, with a brief ceasefire from 2009-16, when ten automakers and the United Auto Workers signed a nonaggression pact in President Barack Obama's Rose Garden with California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and the EPA. That it happened at the same time that the federal government was taking an equity stake in General Motors was no coincidence, said Nichols, who helped broker the pact. "They saved them from bankruptcy," she said. California has less recourse this time around. Where Newsom signed deals in 2019 with Ford, Volkswagen, Honda, BMW and Volvo to abide by the state's rules even in the event of federal cancellation, he now only has Stellantis, which signed a separate agreement last year that goes through model year 2030. And several of the state's allies are peeling off. California had 12 other states signed on to follow its lead as of last year, but it now has 10, after Republican-led Virginia dropped out and Vermont delayed enforcement by 19 months. And Democrats are getting cold feet, too: Maryland Gov. Wes Moore signed an executive order in April delaying enforcement, and Democratic lawmakers in New York introduced a bill this year to delay their participation by two years. (California and the other 10 states immediately sued Thursday to preserve the emissions standards.) "If it was only California, I think [automakers] wouldn't have been as eager to jump in on the federal level and work with the Republicans, but it's the fact it's the other states that had the California standards that were killing them, especially New York," Nichols said. That echoes the automakers' argument. "The problem really isn't California," John Bozzella, CEO of the Alliance for Automotive Innovation, said in a statement after the Senate's vote last month to overturn the rules. "It's the 11 states that adopted California's rules without the same level of readiness for EV sales requirements of this magnitude."
