TheChek News Flow

Euro vs Swiss Franc (CH) Credit Suisse FX Strategist: ECB easing will not alter SNB policy

- Any credible monetary easing by ECB that depresses Euro-Area yields and weaken Euro currency would be adventageous for SNB 

- SNB would be prepared to defend the 1.2000 floor if necessary 

- Extremely unlikely that SNB would raise the floor in response to ECB easing

I will buy BNP here, after selling the rumor, I will Buy the News.. I will take profit above €54.

Laurent

* AT&T news of bidding for Direct TV pushed investors to sell the name

* Numbers of Vodafone is showing the difficult situation of the European Mobile market, environment is changing

* Main Catalyst short term is the Telefonica Deut. deal with E-Plus, dealine is the 3rd of July, an apporival will boost the all sector.

* Cash from Verizon deal has make possible to VOD to Increase Capex and take the lead in Europe Capex

I think that the stock is starting to look interesting here, downside is 5% ~190, upside is 10% - target 220 strong Support on the 200 level see chart attached.

- Stock Start to look oversold.

- VOD underperfrom SXKP by 17% YTD

- VOD Underperformed ORA by 40% YTD

- VOD is down 16% YTD & 19.5% from high on 24th of Feb.

Ahold NV reaches agreement in principle to settle Waterbury class action in the United States

BOJ gov Kuroda: Domestic demand is solid despite recent tax hike; to continue moderate economic recovery - post rate decision press conference

- Positive cycle is working in the domestic economy 

- Bank lending is rising moderately; financial conditions are accommodative 

- Consumer prices likely to hit 2% around middle of forecast period between FY14-16 

- No change in stance; will adjust policy as needed 

- QE is having its intended effect 

- Expects Q2 GDP to contract (**Note: Q1 GDP was +1.5% vs. +1.0%e due to front-loading of sales tax hike) 

- Private consumption stays in firm trend; pullback in retail sales after the sales tax hike is easing; will keep watching impact from sales tax hike

- Halfway to acheiving 2% inflation target 

- Sees no change in stock price trend 

- No reason for JPY currency (Yen) to appreciate given various factors

BOJ gov Kuroda: Domestic demand is solid depsite recent tax hike - post rate decision press conference

- Positive cycle is working in the domestic economy 

- Bank lending is rising moderately; financial conditions are accomodative

Pfizer scrambles to keep Astra bid alive

CAMBRIDGE, CAMBRIDGESHIRE - MAY 07: Packets of prescription drugs made by the pharmaceutical firms AstraZeneca and Pfizer on May 7, 2014 in Cambridge, England. The proposed takeover by American pharmaceutical giant Pfizer of its British rival AstraZeneca has led to the UK Business Secretary Vince Cable addressing Parliament to affirm the government's commitment to securing British science jobs. (Photo by Oli Scarff/Getty Images)©Getty

Pfizer is scrambling to keep alive its £69.4bn offer for AstraZeneca as the two sides vie for shareholder support in the battle to control the UK drugmaker.

AstraZeneca sought to bring a definitive end to Pfizer’s pursuit by issuing a statement saying there was no chance of renewed talks leading to an increased bid after it rejected the US company’s £55-per-share “final” offer on Monday.

But Pfizer continued to press its target to return to the table, saying: “The fate of the deal is now up to AstraZeneca’s shareholders. We believe our final proposal represents compelling and full value for AstraZeneca shareholders.”

Since AstraZeneca’s rejection the two companies have sought to blame each other for the way the bid process has been handled, and feuded over the correct interpretation of UK takeover rules.

Big investors staked out opposing positions in the dispute as the two companies lobbied for backing with just four days remaining before a May 26 deadline for Pfizer to lodge a firm bid or walk away.

Schroders, which owns 2.1 per cent of AstraZeneca, said it was disappointed with the “quick rejection” of an offer that represented a 45 per cent premium over the share price before news of Pfizer’s interest was first reported last month.

“We would encourage the AstraZeneca management to recommence their engagement with Pfizer,” the fund manager said.

But the chief investment officer of Fidelity, which owns 1.4 per cent, said AstraZeneca’s board “did the right thing” by rejecting the offer. “I don’t think that Pfizer was a suitable partner. It was motivated by tax and finance considerations,” said Dominic Ross.

The companies earlier traded rival statements on the situation, with Pfizer’s appearing to leave open the possibility of a higher offer while AstraZeneca’s ruled this out.

Under UK takeover rules, Pfizer is not allowed to increase its offer or launch a hostile bid because it declared its £55 proposal final and said it would proceed only if the bid was recommended by AstraZeneca’s board. However, in its statement late on Monday, Pfizer “reserved the right subsequently to increase its offer at any time”.

Some shareholders took this to mean that the two companies could agree a recommended £55-per-share deal as a first step towards a higher price. The May 26 deadline could be extended at AstraZeneca’s request, if it agreed to resume negotiations.

People close to AstraZeneca say the UK company saw Pfizer’s statement as an attempt to sow confusion and foment rebellion against its board.

AstraZeneca issued its own statement, saying: “Pfizer’s final proposal, which the board rejected, is not capable under the Takeover Panel rules of being increased or even suggested at being increased, privately or publicly.”

One of the principles of the Takeover Code is that parties are held to what they publicly say, in order to protect investors who may have bought or sold based on company statements. Under its rules, Pfizer would be barred from approaching AstraZeneca for six months if a deal or extension is not agreed by Monday.

However, AstraZeneca could reopen talks after three months and one big shareholder said on Tuesday it would push the company to take up that option.

Other big shareholders to have voiced support for AstraZeneca’s go-it-alone stance include Investor of Sweden, which owns 4 per cent, and M&G, a top 30 investor. Jupiter and Schafer Cullen Capital Management have joined Schroders in criticising the board.

Besides Investor, AstraZeneca’s other top 10 shareholders have so far remained silent, at least in public. One told the Financial Times that the board had made “a gross miscalculation” but declined to be named.

AstraZeneca’s top 10 shareholders include BlackRock, which with a 7.8 per cent stake is the largest; Axa, which has a 5.5 per cent stake, the second-largest; Vanguard, which holds 4.7 per cent; and Invesco, with 3.6 per cent.

AstraZeneca has argued it can deliver more value in the long term as an independent company, pointing to its rich pipeline of new drugs in development for cancer, asthma and diabetes.

Bonomi stock purchase upsets Club Med bid

A holding company controlled by Italy’s wealthy Bonomi family has increased its stake in Club Méditerranée in an attempt to derail the French holiday group’s efforts to go private in a deal due to close on Friday.

Through its fund Strategic Holdings, the Bonomi family on Monday became Club Med’s biggest shareholder after buying more than 400,000 shares at €18.96 each, according to a filing to France’s stock market authority.

The fund, represented by Andrea Bonomi, said it intended to buy more shares and had the means to lift its stake as high as 29 per cent.

The price was substantially more than the €17.50-per-share offer for Club Med made last year by Ardian, the French private equity fund, and China’s Fosun International, and poses doubts about their ability to complete their intended €557m deal.

Fosun owns 9.96 per cent of the French company, while Ardian, formerly Axa Private Equity, holds 9.4 per cent. Under the terms of the proposed deal, Ardian and Fosun would each have 46 per cent of a holding company, while Club Med’s management would have the remaining 8 per cent.

The latest twist in Club Med’s saga comes only a week after the Benetton family said that it would withdraw support for the tender offer on the grounds that the share price was now higher than the offer price. Ardian and Fosun need to have a majority of the shares tendered.

Colette Neuville, who heads the French minority shareholders’ group Adam, said she thought Ardian and Fosun’s attempt, with the group’s management, to take Club Med private was likely to fail.

“With the share price where it is, one can now imagine a better offer,” she told the FT. Ms Neuville and her shareholder activist group opposed last year’s offer from the outset, insisting that it undervalued the company and lacked transparency.

Those complaints tied up the attempted takeover for almost a year until a Paris court finally dismissed the complaints in a ruling last month.

Mr Bonomi’s position-building in Club Med in recent months through Strategic Holdings has driven the shares to a five-year high. On Tuesday, the shares were up 0.7 per cent to €19.10.

The Bonomi family are not seeking to take control of Club Med at this point. However, the family said it might consider bidding for the company through its private equity group, Investindustrial, if the Ardian-led offer fails.

Club Med could not immediately comment. Ardian declined to comment.

Club Med, founded in 1950, was a pioneer of the all-inclusive holiday resort, but ran into trouble in the late 1990s as fierce competition mounted. It has been struggling to reinvent itself ever since.

Global brands: High-speed broadband and better service help boost BT

The turning point for many at BT was felt during the balmy summer nights of the London Olympics in 2012, where an exclusive sponsorship was turned into a celebration for a company emerging from a tough few years of restructuring and cost-cutting with aggressive plans for the future.

Little could temper the excitement around the Olympics, which went off without a hitch for BT’s communication network. Some of that magic was felt to have rubbed off on the former national monopoly.

“The Olympics gave us a rallying cry,” says Gavin Patterson, BT chief executive. “That began to change people’s perception outside but had an even greater impact inside.

“It gave people some confidence that after a couple of difficult years where we were resetting the business, there was the potential to grow again.”

BT had for many years laboured under the stigma of being a former state mono­poly, with sluggish customer services and a bloated, unmotivated workforce.

The Olympics were a signal that things were changing within BT, positioning the group away from a traditional role in providing home phone calls to creating the future infrastructure of Britain for high-speed internet.

The BT board had made a crucial decision a few years earlier to invest more than £2bn in building a fibre network that would deliver fast broadband even in the midst of a widespread corporate restructuring that slashed thousands of jobs.

“We had to reset the business in 2008-09,” says Mr Patterson, referring to a difficult period when huge losses resulted from deep-rooted problems at the global services division.

On the back of the advanced fibre network and a more streamlined workforce, BT could think about moving from a defensive position of protecting traditional business from rivals to an offensive strategy. “The success of the fibre programme has been critical,” says Mr Patterson. “We have been rebuilding the business over the past five to six years and have made a number of strategic moves that have been well executed. These have impacted on the brand. A brand without substance doesn’t work.”

The shift in perception has been shared by investors. The share price doubled between 2012 and 2014, even as the company was making the sort of costly investments that shareholders tend to treat with distrust.

While the benefits to the BT brand of the fibre rollout have been gradual, Mr Patterson acknowledges the more instant impact of its shock decision to enter the pay-TV market.

Sky had previously seen off competition with ease, given its strong position in football rights in particular. BT took on the satellite broadcaster at its own game with a £2bn investment to secure rights to show some English Premier League football games, as well as other sports such as rugby and tennis.

“The move we made into sport caught everyone by surprise,” says Mr Patterson, who was part of the covert team that acquired the football rights packages. “It has demonstrated there is more than one way to look at this company – taking on a company of the quality of Sky and doing a very good job in creating an alternative. It has really shaken up how people look at the business.”

There is still work to be done, Mr Patterson admits. BT remains a large, sprawling company with a lot of legacy businesses that need to be maintained. The big bets on sports rights and TV still need to be proven right, while a fierce response is always a possibility from such aggressive competitors as Sky.