Connect with us

Business

Johnson Concedes Russia Could Win War and Proposes Sending Tanks to Poland

Avatar

Published

on

The UK has proposed sending tanks to Poland to allow Warsaw to pass its own tanks to Ukraine, Boris Johnson said, as he became the first western leader to concede Vladimir Putin could win the war.

The British prime minister, speaking during a trip to India, predicted gruelling months ahead and said it was possible the conflict in Ukraine could continue until the end of next year.

The UK government has been reluctant to send armoured vehicles directly to the Ukrainian government. But he said western countries needed to look at what more they could do militarily and economically to create “wave after wave of intensifying pressure on Putin”.

Johnson outlined a potential “backfilling” manoeuvre whereby the UK would compensate Poland if it provided its own T-72 tanks to Ukraine.

“We are looking more at what we can do to backfill in countries such as Poland, who may want to send heavier weaponry to help defend the Ukrainians,” Johnson told a press conference in New Delhi.

Asked if Russia could win the war, Johnson admitted it was a “realistic possibility”, adding that Putin was determined to “grind the Ukrainians down”. Russia was also very close to securing a land bridge in Mariupol, he added.

“The sad thing is that that is a realistic possibility, yes of course . . . the situation is, I’m afraid, unpredictable at this stage.”

His statement was the first admission by a major western leader that Russia could triumph in the war and marks a significant shift in his own rhetoric from just weeks ago. It also breaks with the united front G7 leaders have shown since the invasion began.

A senior EU official said Johnson’s remark was “ridiculous” and would “make Kyiv irate”.

Johnson went on to say that Putin would never be able to “conquer the spirit of the Ukrainian people” and was instead strengthening and reinforcing resistance against the invading Russian army.

Speaking after a meeting of Nato leaders in Brussels last month, Johnson said: “Putin’s failure in Ukraine is vital for the peace and prosperity of all of us . . . the people of Ukraine will prevail and Putin must fail and he will fail.”

US president Joe Biden said on Thursday that “our unity with our allies and partners . . . is sending an unmistakable message to Putin: he will never succeed in dominating and occupying all of Ukraine. He will not — that will not happen.”

Johnson announced the reopening of the British embassy in Kyiv in recognition of the Ukrainian government’s success in holding off the Russian army from the capital city.

The UK prime minister said the decision to reopen the office next week was a reflection of the “extraordinary fortitude and success of President Zelensky and the Ukrainian people in resisting the Russian forces in Kyiv”.

Speaking during his visit to India, Johnson also paid tribute to British diplomats who had remained elsewhere in Ukraine since the Russian invasion in February.

The British government started moving staff out of the Kyiv embassy in January as speculation grew about a likely invasion of Ukraine by Russia.

On February 18, just six days before the invasion began, the government moved remaining diplomats from Kyiv to temporary offices in Lviv in the west of Ukraine as a “temporary” measure.

Johnson conceded that the Indian government — which has abstained on several procedural motions on Ukraine at the UN — had a longstanding historic relationship with Russia. But he said that Narendra Modi, India’s prime minister, had intervened several times with Putin to “ask him what on earth he thinks he’s doing”.

Read More

Article: ft.com

Business

Iceland Announces Packing Ban Set Roll Out in Every UK Supermarket ‘What a Pain!’

Avatar

Published

on

ICELAND has contacted its customers to announce a change to its home delivery shopping service.

Continue Reading

Business

EY: a Management Consultant’s PowerPoint Guide to Splitting Up

Avatar

Published

on

By

EY is hatching a pioneering split of its audit and advisory operations. It is a U-turn but a welcome one that — if it materialises — may set a template for its fellow Big Four audit firms. Presumably EY will start, as must all management consultants worth their salt, with a PowerPoint presentation. Lex previews the slide deck.

Slide 1: Venn diagram. EY’s global workforce of 312,000 does not coalesce into two buckets of audit and consultancy. In the middle sit a whole slew of bodies whose function serves both arms: in tax, pensions, IT, cyber security, industry expertise and other skill sets. Putting a line down the middle and sending half into the audit arm and the remainder into consultancy will not fly. Creating a third arm, which both sets can tap, seems messy.

Slide 2: Metaverse-mapped 3D flow chart (VR goggles provided). Take 140 countries, with — conservatively — twice that number of interested regulators and as many different legal structures. Add 13,000 partners, all of whom will have their own vested interests in terms of ring fencing liabilities and tapping income flows. They hold far more muscle than would be the case in your average public company: directors are replaceable, partners are the business.

Slide 3: Scatter plot chart. Severing ties with audit eliminates conflicts and thus widens the field of tech players EY can team up with to service clients. But that leaves it competing with the big integrated tech-savvy companies such as France’s Capgemini and Intel, Cognizant and Accenture (which has a two-decade head-start in going it alone) in the US.

Slide 4: Winners and losers. Slipped in at the end, because there will be many. In some ways Big Four firms resemble McDonald’s, or any other franchise. The local rainmakers draw in the business and a portion of fees go out for the name over the shopfront and technology. Asymmetric fiefdoms inevitably mean some partners have more to lose than others.

Tombstone: RIP the partnership model. It will take some fiendishly clever footwork to avoid tearing up the structure that has underpinned the industry through history. Client work is a doddle compared with this one.

Read More

Original Source: ft.com

Continue Reading

Business

EY Explores IPO or Partial Sale of Global Advisory Business

Avatar

Published

on

By

EY is exploring a public listing or partial sale of its global advisory business as part of the most radical transformation of a Big Four accountancy firm in two decades, according to people with direct knowledge of the matter.

A stake sale or listing would raise the prospect of a massive windfall for EY’s existing partners who own and run the firm, reminiscent of the IPOs of Goldman Sachs in 1999 and Accenture in 2001.

The 312,000-strong firm, which along with Deloitte, KPMG and PwC dominates the accounting industry, is considering a historic break-up of its business as a solution to the conflicts of interest that have dogged the profession and attracted regulatory scrutiny.

EY’s advisory businesses, which offer tax, consulting and deals advice, generated revenues of $26bn last year and employ 166,000 advisers.

EY’s audit business, which generated revenues of $14bn last year, is likely to remain as a partnership following any break-up. Some advisers would shift to the audit side to support its work in areas such as tax, said people with knowledge of the details.

The newly independent advisory business would have the option of incorporating as a company, allowing it to take on external funding through a sale or IPO. Fresh investment could help it to boost growth and compete with larger consulting businesses such as Accenture, which reported revenues of $51bn last year and is valued at about $200bn on the New York Stock Exchange.

A break-up would also free EY’s advisory business to win work from companies audited by EY, opening up a swath of potential new clients that are currently off-limits under independence rules.

EY was being advised on its planning by JPMorgan and Goldman Sachs, people with knowledge of the matter said. The banks declined to comment.

The firm’s senior partners have yet to make a firm proposal to partners on whether to proceed with a restructuring and exactly what form it should take.

The sale of part of the business to external shareholders would be a radical departure. A senior partner at another firm said that selling parts of the business and handing the windfall to partners would significantly alter the existing structure where “you come in naked and you leave naked” with the business’s capital preserved for the next generation.

The Big Four are structured as networks of legally separate national member firms that pay a fee each year for shared branding, systems and technology. The set-up has prevented them from taking on external investment and made it difficult to push through radical overhauls, which require a broad consensus across the business.

However, EY is seen by many accountants as being best placed among the Big Four to push through significant international changes because its global bosses have greater influence than at competitors, where rank-and-file partners have more power.

Partners at EY will nonetheless have the opportunity to vote on any changes. Asked whether EY might line up investors before a ballot, a person with knowledge of the matter said: “We’re looking through those options. We’ll be looking to see what’s in the right interests of all the partners.”

EY and other professional services firms have “the doorbell ringing all the time” from private equity firms seeking to invest in parts of their business, said this person. An IPO would be more difficult to pull off than a private stake sale, the person added.

A split by EY would force its rivals to decide whether to follow suit. On Friday, PwC and KPMG both said they believed in the benefits of having their audit and consulting businesses under one roof.

PwC said it had “no plans to change course”. KPMG said a multidisciplinary model “brings a range of benefits”. Deloitte did not comment.

A break-up would probably attract dissent from some partners. Auditing has historically had lower profit margins and could struggle to recruit and retain staff, especially expert partners who make most of their money from consulting but provide crucial expertise in areas such as tax, said Big Four partners.

EY declined to comment on the possibility of a stake sale or an IPO. After news of its break-up planning on Thursday, global chief executive Carmine Di Sibio told staff in an email on Friday that “no . . . decisions have been made”.

Read More

Original Post: ft.com

Continue Reading

Trending

FTFO.com