L'opérateur demandait des centaines de millions d'euros de réparation dans le dossier de l'itinérance. Le tribunal de commerce l'a débouté sans ménagement.
718,5 millions d'euros. C'est la somme que réclamait Bouygues Telecom à Free en réparation de préjudices subis depuis l'arrivée de Xavier Niel sur le marché de la téléphonie mobile en 2012. Après plus de quatre ans de procédures , le tribunal de commerce de Paris a tranché jeudi dernier. Le groupe de Martin Bouygues n'aura rien. Pire, il est condamné à rembourser 350.000 euros à Free, au titre des frais de justice.
Bouygues peut encore faire appel de la décision. Mais c'est un revers de plus pour le groupe, qui s'est toujours plaint des conditions dans lesquelles la France avait laissé se lancer un quatrième acteur mobile. Même s'il a fini par encaisser le choc sur le terrain commercial, le géant du BTP a toujours fait chou blanc devant les différentes juridictions, malgré une dizaine de recours contre Free.
« Concurrence déloyale »
La décision du tribunal de commerce signe une nouvelle défaite d'importance. Les sommes en jeu étaient énormes et l'image du trublion était en jeu : Bouygues accusait Free d'avoir trompé ses clients - et il tenait à le faire savoir.
Le fond de l'affaire tient à l'accord d'itinérance 2G et 3G dont dispose Free depuis 2012 sur le réseau d'Orange. C'est ce qui a permis à Free de proposer ses services sur tout le territoire sans attendre d'avoir construit son propre réseau. Sauf que, selon Bouygues, Free bridait volontairement les débits de ses clients lorsqu'ils étaient connectés aux antennes d'Orange - afin de payer moins cher l'ex-opérateur historique.
À LIRE AUSSI
Free devra se passer du réseau d'Orange à partir de la fin de l'année 2020
Pour Bouygues, la pilule était dure à avaler. Surtout après que Xavier Niel en personne avait pris un malin plaisir, lors de sa conférence de lancement, à narguer les concurrents en offrant un volume impressionnant de 3 Go de « fair use » - c'est-à-dire la quantité de données accordée à ses clients avant que le débit ne soit fortement limité -, du jamais vu à l'époque.
Pour l'opérateur de Martin Bouygues, tout cela relevait de la concurrence déloyale. Free avait fait une promesse à ses abonnés qu'il ne tenait que très partiellement. Et la concurrence avait été obligée de suivre, en sacrifiant ses précieuses marges. Un manque à gagner estimé par Bouygues à 5 euros par mois et par abonné, entre 2012 et 2016... ce qui explique la mirobolante addition présentée à la Cour.
Le tacle des juges
Sauf qu'après examen, les juges ont complètement battu en brèche les arguments de Bouygues Telecom. Le jugement consulté par « Les Echos » explique que « les mesures proposées par Bouygues Telecom ne peuvent avoir une force probante supérieure à celle de l'Arcep ». En clair, le bridage allégué n'est pas prouvé. Le gendarme des télécoms, qui est indépendant, lui, veillait au grain. Et il n'a constaté aucun bridage qui ne soit pas lié à son action de régulation.
Le tribunal se permet même un petit tacle, quand il note que le fameux « fair use » « permet à Free Mobile d'assurer une utilisation équitable d'Internet entre les utilisateurs [...] plutôt que de valoriser très cher la data, comme l'a fait Bouygues Telecom dans ses offres ». Le vocabulaire est juridique. Mais la phrase fait écho à la célèbre sortie de Xavier Niel en 2012 : « Si vous ne passez pas chez Free Mobile, vous êtes des pigeons. »
Why Investors Should Give Aston Martin a Fresh Look
For most consumers, Aston Martin is James Bond’s car in Goldfinger. But after a stint as a unit of Ford Motor , followed by ownership by a private consortium and years of losses, Aston Martin Lagonda Global Holdings went public in London in October, only to see the shares crash.
Now, Aston Martin Lagonda (ticker: AML.UK) is on a mission to prove doubters wrong, and all of the signs indicate it’s on the right road. The firm, which dates back to 1913, plans to bring out seven models in seven years, all with a seven-year life cycle. Three have already arrived, and of the four remaining, one will be the company’s first-ever sport-utility vehicle.
The car maker operates in the ultrapremium end of the car market. At last week’s Geneva International Motor Show, Aston Martin revealed its newest models. Its electric Lagonda All-Terrain Concept allows it to play in the same market as Tesla, but at a much higher price. And its twin-turbo V6 AM-RB 003 Hypercar, which retails at a cool million pounds ($1.17 million) will enable it to complete head-on with Ferrari (RACE), Rolls-Royce, and McLaren Automotive in the mid-engine market.
“The company has been professionalized over the past four years,” Tim Rokossa, an analyst at Deutsche Bank, wrote in a November note. “The new management team has vast industry experience, a successful track record, and ambitious plans.” In February, he reiterated his target price of £20 and rated the stock a Buy.
Results are looking up. Last month, Aston, which sold just over 6,441 vehicles in 2018, posted full-year results that saw volumes rise 26% and revenues increase 25%. In 2018, its margin of earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization, or Ebitda, was 22.6%, and it has given guidance of 24% for 2019, and long-term guidance of 30%. This would put it on par with Ferrari, which posted a 32.6% Ebitda margin for 2018. Aston’s shares on Friday closed at £11.41 with a four-quarters forward price/earnings ratio of 26, which compares with 31 for Ferrari, and 21 for the luxury goods sector.
Aston Martin benefits from a superwealthy customer base that’s less affected by economic cycles and geopolitical crises. “Insulated rather than immune,” says Aston Martin CEO Andy Palmer, adding, “I think we’re still on a development path, so we’re not all the way there yet.”
U.S.-China Trade Talks Hit a Bump
The U.S. and China have yet to set a date for a summit to resolve their trade dispute, the U.S. ambassador to China said, as neither side feels an agreement is imminent.
See pdf attached
Closing Stock Market SummaryThe S&P 500 declined as much as 1.0% on Friday, as disappointing growth in U.S. jobs contributed to global growth concerns and profit-taking interest. However, renewed buying interest in the afternoon helped the benchmark index trim its loss to 0.2% and close at session highs.
The Dow Jones Industrial Average (-0.1%), the Nasdaq Composite (-0.2%), and the Russell 2000 (-0.1%) also finished near session highs after being down as much as 0.9%, 1.2%, and 0.9%, respectively.
The S&P 500 energy (-2.0%) and consumer discretionary (-0.7%) sectors underperformed the broader market. Conversely, the utilities (+0.4%), materials (+0.2%), real estate (+0.1%), and consumer staples (+0.1%) sectors outperformed.
It had been broad-based retreat for most of the day with all 11 S&P 500 sectors trading lower following a mixed February Employment Situation Report. The ability to hold above morning lows, though, encouraged some buying interest, and the acceleration of the rebound likely added a short-covering element into the picture.
February nonfarm payroll growth was surprisingly weak, coming in at just 20,000 (Briefing.com consensus 173,000). NEC Director Larry Kudlow, among many others, believed the payroll figure was an outlier.
The positive spin is that average hourly earnings grew 0.4%, which pushed up the year-over-year wage growth rate to 3.4% -- the highest since April 2009, and unemployment fell to 3.8% from 4.0%. Still, the big miss on payrolls stoked concerns that it was a sign of developing softness in the labor market.
At the same time, weak trade data out of China, where February exports declined 20.7% year-over-year, and some pessimism about the prospects for a U.S.-China trade deal helped contribute to early-morning weakness.
In earnings news, Costco (COST 227.82, +11.03, +5.1%) and Big Lots (BIG 36.18, +4.34, +13.6%) sported notable gains after both beat earnings estimates. National Beverage (FIZZ 58.27, -1.00), meanwhile, dropped 14.7% after it missed top and bottom-line estimates.
U.S. Treasuries edged higher, pushing yields lower. The 2-yr yield declined two basis points to 2.44%, and the 10-yr yield declined one basis point to 2.44%. The U.S. Dollar Index declined 0.3% to 97.36. WTI crude lost 0.8% to $56.14/bbl.
Reviewing Friday's economic data, which included the February Employment Situation Report and the Housing Starts and Building Permits Report for January:
- The February Employment Situation Report muddied what had been a pretty clear labor market picture. The headline that will jump out at everyone is that nonfarm payrolls increased by only 20,000 in February, well below expectations and far off recent readings running above 200,000. Average hourly earnings, meanwhile, increased 0.4%, which left the year-over-year wage figure up 3.4%. That's good news, as it is a positive underpinning for consumer spending.
- The key takeaway from the report is that the weak payrolls figure will drive thoughts of either there being a shortage of skilled labor that could drive up wages or that it is a sign of a softening job market. In other words, the key takeaway is that it is going to create uncertainty that is going to hang over the market.
- Housing starts increased 18.6% month-over-month in January to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 1.230 million units (consensus 1.180 million) and permits rose 1.4% month-over-month to 1.345 million (consensus 1.280 million).
- The key takeaway from the report, however, is that starts were down 7.8% year-over-year and permits were down 1.5% year-over-year. Accordingly, the strong January figures belie an otherwise torpid new residential construction market.
Looking ahead, investors will receive Retail Sales for January and Business Inventories for December on Monday.
- Russell 2000 +12.9% YTD
- Nasdaq Composite +11.7% YTD
- S&P 500 +9.4% YTD
- Dow Jones Industrial Average +9.1% YTD
When in Paris, See Where Genius Slept
Modern architecture nuts take note: Le Corbusier’s private Paris apartment has finally reopened after suitably finicky renovations
AFTER TWO YEARS of research and two more of renovation, Le Corbusier’s flat and studio in Paris have reopened to the public. In 1931, the Swiss-French architect was commissioned to design the Molitor apartment building (with cousin Pierre Jeanneret) and negotiated the top two floors for himself. In 1934, he and his wife moved in and he stayed for the rest of his life.
The Fondation Le Corbusier endeavored to preserve the 16th arrondissement duplex in the state he left it in 1965. With his bric-a-brac and some worn furniture, it’s as if he just popped out to get the morning paper. The 2,600-square-foot open-plan design features a floating spiral staircase and pivoting doors to regulate a flood of light from windows, skylights and glass brick. A stone-and-exposed brick wall frames his art studio, while the tiny terrace has plantings and the cityscape all around. 24 rue Nungesser et Coli, fondationlecorbusier.fr
Elizabeth Warren vows to break up Amazon, Google and Facebook
Senator becomes the latest US politician to argue Silicon Valley has too much power
Elizabeth Warren, a prominent Democratic senator and consumer rights champion, has promised to break up the country’s biggest technology companies if she is elected president in 2020.
Ms Warren, who made her name arguing for stricter regulation of Wall Street banks, published a Medium post on Friday saying her administration would break up Amazon, Google and Facebook in an effort to promote competition in the sector.
She is the latest high-profile Democrat to argue the biggest Silicon Valley companies have too much power, adding further pressure to the already embattled technology sector.
Ms Warren said: “Today’s big tech companies have too much power — too much power over our economy, our society, and our democracy. They’ve bulldozed competition, used our private information for profit, and tilted the playing field against everyone else. And in the process, they have hurt small businesses and stifled innovation.”
She added: “That’s why my administration will make big, structural changes to the tech sector to promote more competition — including breaking up Amazon, Facebook, and Google.”
The biggest US technology companies are facing political battles on a number of fronts, including attempts to restrict how they use customers’ data and accusations of political bias on their platforms.
But antitrust action is emerging as one of the most serious threats to the business models of the likes of Google, Amazon and Facebook.
Earlier this week, David Cicilline, the Democratic leader of the House subcommittee on antitrust, told the Financial Times he wanted to explore a “Glass-Steagall” rule for the technology sector, which could see big companies forced to separate different parts of their business as large banks did after the Great Depression.
Mr Cicilline’s comments came just days after the Federal Trade Commission announced it was setting up a task force to look specifically at the technology industry — including mergers the FTC had previously approved.
Ms Warren has a history of taking on the largest Wall Street banks, and was appointed by Barack Obama when he was president to set up the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau following the financial crisis.
Her reputation as a scourge of big business has made her popular among leftwing Democratic voters, and bookmakers make her the fifth or sixth most likely candidate to win her party’s nomination for president.
In her post, Ms Warren argued that Facebook’s purchases of Instagram and WhatsApp were one example of how large technology companies had misused their market power to eliminate competition.
She said that if elected, she would appoint regulators who were committed to undoing Facebook’s mergers with those two apps, as well as Amazon’s acquisitions of Whole Foods and Zappos, and Google’s purchases of Waze, Nest and DoubleClick.
Similar concerns are also being voiced in Europe. On Thursday night, George Osborne, the former UK chancellor of the exchequer and now editor of the Evening Standard newspaper, made a speech in which he argued: “The tech mergers . . . were allowed to happen because no one really understood these markets — and . . . would never have been accepted if they happened now.”
There are signs, however, that Silicon Valley is reacting to the threat.
Earlier this week, Mark Zuckerberg, the chief executive of Facebook, said he wanted to integrate Facebook’s messaging service with those of Instagram and WhatsApp, which it bought in 2012 and 2014 respectively. Some analysts believe the move was motivated by a desire to make it harder for regulators to undo those mergers in the future.
The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, a technology policy think-tank, argued on Friday that Ms Warren’s proposals would hurt consumers.
Rob Atkinson, the president of the ITIF, said: “The Warren campaign’s call to break up big tech companies reflects a ‘big is bad, small is beautiful’ ideology run amok.
“The proposal ignores the fact that many of the services big tech companies now provide free used to cost consumers money.”