(Le Monde) Dieselgate : Fiat Chrysler soupçonné d’avoir fait obstacle a l

Fiat Chrysler Automobiles (FCA) est visé par une enquête judiciaire non seulement pour tromperie, mais aussi pour avoir fait obstacle aux enquêtes des autorités françaises, ce qui peut aggraver son cas

11:52:40 shared Dieselgate _ Fiat Chrysler soupçonné d’avoir fait obstacle à l’enquête française.pdf[383KB]
11:53:19 Les dernières générations de moteurs sont touchés
Ainsi, en plus d’« avoir trompé les acquéreurs de véhicules des marques Fiat, Alfa-Roméo, Jeep et Lancia (…) sur les qualités substantielles des véhicules et sur les contrôles effectués » – un délit de « tromperie aggravée », puni d’une amende maximale de 10 % des trois derniers chiffres d’affaires de l’entreprise (soit 10,5 milliards d’euros si on prend les revenus mondiaux de FCA) – , le groupe industriel se voit accusé d’avoir fait obstacle à une enquête, un second délit puni, lui, de la même amende mais aussi de deux ans d’emprisonnement.
L’enquête de la DGCCRF reproche à FCA d’avoir fait « obstacle aux fonctions d’un agent habilité à constater les infractions au code de la consommation ». Le courrier de la juge Bernard donne des précisions : cette réticence à collaborer avec les autorités françaises s’est concrétisée « à Paris et sur le territoire national, entre le 26 mai 2016 et le 17 janvier 2017 » et a entravé l’enquête de l’un des inspecteurs de la DGCCRF, Sacha Davidson. C’est lui qui a conduit la plupart des investigations sur le diesel menées par les services de Bercy.
Le courrier précise également que les véhicules des quatre marques incriminées sont « équipés de moteurs diesel de génération euro 6, notamment de type Multijet II (1,6 litre et 2 litres), posés notamment sur les véhicules Fiat 500X. » Ils sont également dotés « de moteurs euro 5 de type 1,3 litre, posés notamment sur les véhicules Fiat Doplo ainsi que de moteurs euro 5 de type 2 litres, posés notamment sur les véhicules Jeep Cherokee. » On le voit, les dernières générations de moteurs sont touchés, y compris les euro 6, les plus récents et censés être les moins polluants, mais aussi quelques-uns des modèles les plus vendus de FCA : la Fiat 500X et la Jeep Cherokee.

Les Echos : Céder Orange, un casse-tête pour l'Etat actionnaire

Céder Orange, un casse-tête pour l'Etat actionnaire

Dans la volonté d'Emmanuel Macron d'élaguer le portefeuille de participations de l'Etat, Orange est un candidat de choix. Mais aussi un enjeu stratégique majeur, décisif pour la consolidation du secteur des télécoms et l'aménagement numérique du territoire.

Sortie du capital d'Alstom. Cession de 4,5 % du capital d'Engie pour 1,5 milliard d'euros... L'arrivée d'Emmanuel Macron à l'Elysée ouvre une nouvelle ère pour l'Etat actionnaire. A qui le tour dans le bal des désengagements annoncés ? Tous les regards se tournent désormais vers Orange, le numéro un français des télécoms, dont l'Etat détient indirectement 22,95 % du capital (13,39 % via la Banque publique d'investissement et 9,56 % via l'Agence des participations de l'Etat).

Même s'il est le premier actionnaire de l'opérateur télécoms, l'Etat ne considère pas cette participation comme stratégique. Emmanuel Macron l'a dit au site Internet ElectronLibre pendant sa campagne : « La participation de l'Etat dans une entreprise comme Orange peut évoluer. [...] Orange n'est ni une entreprise du secteur nucléaire ou de la défense ni une entreprise assurant un service public en monopole. »

Mais ce n'est pas n'importe quel type d'entreprise non plus. Et la cession de tout ou partie de la part de l'Etat dans le capital de ce fleuron français représente un enjeu tellement important que sa main tremble à chaque fois qu'il se pose la question.

Il existe plusieurs voies de sortie auxquelles l'Etat a réfléchi. Sans tabou. La cession de l'intégralité de sa participation a même été étudiée. Une hypothèse qui paraît aujourd'hui hasardeuse tant la décote serait importante. Impossible aussi de laisser Orange sans actionnaire de référence, « cela reviendrait à signer le début de la fin de son leadership », commente un expert des télécoms. Ou à laisser la porte ouverte à un « rapace », voire à un acteur étranger.

Un ticket à 9 milliards d'euros

Il faut donc trouver un acheteur, un acteur industriel qui serait prêt à mettre quelque... 9 milliards d'euros sur la table pour reprendre la part de l'Etat. Mais les conséquences pourraient être lourdes pour le secteur des télécoms, suivant le profil retenu. D'abord, Orange est un actif sensible : c'est par lui que transitent les communications. Etre présent au capital peut faciliter l'action de l'Etat en cas de nécessité de défense d'intérêts sécuritaires. En clair, l'Etat ne peut pas laisser entre n'importe quelles mains un actif aussi stratégique.

Trois industriels auraient été sondés discrètement par Alexis Kohler, le secrétaire général de l'Elysée , pour tester leur éventuel appétit : Bouygues, Altice, la maison mère de SFR, et Vivendi (Canal+, Universal Music, Telecom Italia). « L'Etat reçoit régulièrement des dirigeants de grandes entreprises. Ces entretiens ont vocation à discuter des secteurs économiques dans lesquelles les entreprises opèrent. Cela ne signifie en rien que l'Etat s'apprête à mener une opération quelconque dans le secteur des télécoms », explique-t-on à l'Elysée.

« Quand on sonde à ce niveau, c'est que l'on est un peu plus qu'en mode exploratoire, commente de son côté un proche du pouvoir. L'Etat est probablement prêt à vendre sa part, mais il ne trouve pas encore le bon acheteur, ni le bon schéma. »

Bouygues, Altice et Vivendi sondés

L'exercice n'est en effet pas facile. Vendre à Bouygues ou à Altice reviendrait à relancer la consolidation du secteur des télécoms. Bouygues se marierait avec Orange. Quant à Altice, s'il devait entrer au capital de l'opérateur historique, il se verrait contraint de revendre SFR pour des questions de concurrence.

Mais cela ne serait pas un problème pour son propriétaire, Patrick Drahi, que certains ont déjà entendu dire, sans rire, qu'il pourrait très bien alors céder SFR à Bouygues. Dans ces deux cas, cela aurait pour effet de réduire le nombre d'acteurs télécoms de quatre à trois. Ce qui permettrait de renforcer le marché français pour une éventuelle consolidation européenne.

Mais Emmanuel Macron y réfléchira à deux fois, lui qui pousse aujourd'hui à une accélération du déploiement de la fibre optique et de la 4G en France. Un autre enjeu politique majeur... Or relancer les grandes manoeuvres dans les télécoms aurait sûrement pour effet de ralentir la cadence. Et comment mieux s'assurer que ces promesses aux Français soient tenues sinon en restant actionnaire de référence d'Orange ?

Sans compter que les salariés de l'opérateur historique, qui détiennent plus de 5 % du capital, verraient d'un très mauvais oeil l'arrivée au capital d'un Altice ou d'un Vivendi, aux méthodes souvent jugées brutales.

Il y a donc fort à parier que l'Etat ne cède qu'une partie du capital d'Orange - 2 %, 3 %, 4 % ? « N'importe quel banquier pourrait les placer sans décote en moins de deux heures, notamment auprès d'investisseurs américains », estime un bon connaisseur.

Mais l'heure n'est sûrement pas encore venue. Le cours de l'action Orange est relativement bas. Il a un potentiel de revalorisation dans les années à venir, notamment si les acteurs télécoms parviennent à faire remonter leurs tarifs.

Au-delà donc de sa volonté supposée de vouloir conserver un rôle d'influence chez Orange, l'Etat a tout à gagner à attendre, avant de céder tout ou partie de sa participation, s'il veut, aussi, agir en investisseur avisé.

TechCrunch : After the end of the startup era

After the end of the startup era
There’s a weird feeling afoot these days, in the Valley, and in San Francisco. Across the rest of the world — Denver, Santiago, Toronto, Berlin, “Silicon Glen,” “Silicon Alley,” “Silicon Roundabout“, Station F — it seems every city still wants to be a startup hub, dreaming of becoming “the new Silicon Valley.” But in the Valley itself? Here it feels like the golden age of the startup is already over.
Hordes of engineering and business graduates secretly dream of building the new Facebook, the new Uber, the new Airbnb. Almost every big city now boasts one or more startup accelerators, modeled after Paul Graham’s now-legendary Y Combinator. Throngs of technology entrepreneurs are reshaping, “disrupting,” every aspect of our economy. Today’s big businesses are arthritic dinosaurs soon devoured by these nimble, fast-growing mammals with sharp teeth. Right?
Er, actually, no. That was last decade. We live in a new world now, and it favors the big, not the small. The pendulum has already begun to swing back. Big businesses and executives, rather than startups and entrepreneurs, will own the next decade; today’s graduates are much more likely to work for Mark Zuckerberg than follow in his footsteps.
The web boom of ~1997-2006 brought us Amazon, Facebook, Google, Salesforce, Airbnb, etc., because the Internet was the new new thing, and a handful of kids in garages and dorm rooms could build a web site, raise a few million dollars, and scale to serve the whole world. The smartphone boom of ~2007-2016 brought us Uber, Lyft, Snap, WhatsApp, Instagram, Twitter, etc., because the same was true of smartphone apps.
Because we’ve all lived through back-to-back massive worldwide hardware revolutions — the growth of the Internet, and the adoption of smartphones — we erroneously assume another one is around the corner, and once again, a few kids in a garage can write a little software to take advantage of it.
But there is no such revolution en route. The web has been occupied and colonized by big business; everyone already has a smartphone, and big companies dominate the App Store; and, most of all, today’s new technologies are complicated, expensive, and favor organizations that have huge amounts of scale and capital already.
It is no coincidence that seed funding is down in 2017. It is no coincidence that Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, Facebook, and Microsoft have grown from “five big tech companies” to “the five most valuable public companies in the world.” The future belongs to them, and, to a lesser extent, their second-tier ilk.
It is widely accepted that the next wave of important technologies consists of AI, drones, AR/VR, cryptocurrencies, self-driving cars, and the “Internet of Things.” These technologies are, collectively, hugely important and consequential — but they are not remotely as accessible to startup disruption as the web and smartphones were.
AI doesn’t just require top-tier talent; that talent is all but useless without mountains of the right kind of data. And who has essentially all of the best data? That’s right: the abovementioned Big Five, plus their Chinese counterparts Tencent, Alibaba, and Baidu.
Hardware, such as drones and IoT devices, is hard to prototype, generally low-margin, expensive to bring to market, and very expensive to scale. Just ask Fitbit. Or Jawbone. Or Juicero. Or HTC. (However, in fairness, software and services built atop newly emerging hardware are likely an exception to the larger rule here; startups in those niches have far better odds than most others.)
Self-driving cars are even more expensive: like biotech, they’re a capital-intensive battle between huge companies. A few startups may — will — be expensively acquired, but that’s not the same as having a realistic chance of actually becoming major competitors themselves.

AR/VR is already far behind its boosters’ optimistic adoption predictions, and is both an expensive hardware problem and a complex software problem. Magic Leap has raised almost two billion dollars without releasing a product (!), but is by most (admittedly sketchy) accounts struggling. Meanwhile, Microsoft’s HoloLens, Google’s Cardboard / Tango / ARCore, and Apple’s ARKit continue to build successfully on their existing platforms.
Cryptocurrencies aren’t about making startups valuable; they’re about the making the currencies themselves, and their decentralized ecosystems, valuable. The market capitalization of Bitcoin vastly exceeds that of any Bitcoin-based startup. The same is true for Ethereum. True believers argue that cryptocurrencies will overturn everything, in time, but read this Twitter thread and see if, like me, you can’t help but finding yourself nodding along, even if, like me, you truly want the Internet and its economy to be decentralized:

One like, one unpopular Blockchain/Cryptocurrency opinion


So where does all this leave tech startups? Struggling, and probably hoping to be acquired by a larger company, ideally one of the Big Five. While some breakout startups will still doubtless arise, they’ll be far rarer than they were during the boom years.
We’re already seeing this. Consider Y Combinator, by all accounts the gold standard of startup accelerators, famously harder to get into than Harvard. Then consider its alumni. Five years ago, in 2012, its three poster children were clearly poised to dominate their markets and become huge companies: Airbnb, Dropbox, and Stripe. And so it came to pass.
Fast forward to today, and Y Combinator’s three poster children are… unchanged. In the last six years YC have funded more than twice as many startups as they did in their first six — but I challenge you to name any of their post-2011 alumni as well-positioned today as their Big Three were in 2012. The only one that might have qualified, for a time, was Instacart. But Amazon broke into that game with Amazon Fresh, and, especially, their purchase of Whole Foods.
From here on in, the existing tech titans will accrue ever more power, and startups will be increasingly hard-pressed to compete. This is not a good thing. Big businesses already have too much power. Amazon and Google are so dominant that there are loud calls for them to be regulated. Fake news shared on Facebook may have swayed the most recent presidential election.
What’s more, startups bring fresh approaches and thinking, while hidebound behemoths stagnate in their old ways of doing things. But for the next five to ten years, thanks to the nature of the new technologies coming down the pipe, those behemoths will just keep accruing ever more power — until, we can hope, the pendulum swings back again.

>>> Mediclinic to consider its position after Spire rejected its offer

Mediclinic to consider its position after Spire rejected its offer
23 OCT 2017
Mediclinic [LON:MDC] notes the announcement made by Spire Healthcare Group plc [SPI:LSE] ("Spire") earlier today. Mediclinic confirms that it made an approach to Spire regarding a possible offer for the entire issued and to be issued share capital of Spire not already owned by it or its subsidiaries (the "Proposal").

Under the Proposal, Spire shareholders would receive 0.232 Mediclinic shares and 150 pence in cash for each Spire share. Based on the closing price of Mediclinic shares as at 17 October 2017, being the last business day prior to the Proposal being made, the Proposal valued each Spire share at 300 pence, representing a premium of:
  • 30% to the closing price of Spire shares on 17 October 2017(1); and
  • 31% to the volume weighted average closing price of Spire shares in the one month prior to and including 17 October 2017(2).
As noted by Spire, the Proposal was rejected by the independent directors of Spire. As a consequence, Mediclinic is considering its position.

In accordance with Rule 2.6(a) of the Code, by not later than 5.00 p.m. on 20 November 2017, Mediclinic will be required to either announce a firm intention to make an offer for Spire in accordance with Rule 2.7 of the Code or announce that it does not intend to make an offer, in which case such announcement will be treated as a statement to which Rule 2.8 of the Code applies. This deadline will only be extended with the consent of the UK Takeover Panel in accordance with Rule 2.6 of the Code. Mediclinic understands that, in accordance with Rule 2.6(c) of the Code, the UK Takeover Panel will normally consent to such an extension at the request of Spire.

Pursuant to Rule 2.5 of the Code, Mediclinic reserves the right to vary the form and/or mix of the offer consideration and vary the transaction structure. Mediclinic also reserves the right to amend the terms of any offer (including making the offer at a lower value):
  1. with the recommendation or consent of the Spire Board;
  2. if Spire announces, declares or pays any dividend or any other distribution or return of value to shareholders, in which case Mediclinic reserves the right to make an equivalent reduction to its Proposal;
  3. following the announcement by Spire of a whitewash transaction pursuant to the Code; or
  4. if a third party announces a firm intention to make an offer for Spire at a lower price than referred to above.
A further announcement will be made in due course, but there can be no certainty that an offer will be made.

In accordance with Rule 26.1 of the Code, a copy of this announcement will be available on Mediclinic's corporate website at www.mediclinic.com. The content of this website is not incorporated into, and does not form part of, this announcement.

In accordance with Rule 2.9 of the Code, as at the date of this announcement, Mediclinic's issued share capital comprises 737,243,810 ordinary shares of GBP0.10 each held outside treasury (ISIN: GB00B8HX8Z88).

WSJ : Tesla Strikes Deal With Shanghai to Build Factory in China

Tesla Strikes Deal With Shanghai to Build Factory in China
Arrangement could enable electric-car maker to slash production costs; firm would still likely incur 25% import tariff

Electric-car maker Tesla Inc. TSLA -1.91% has reached an agreement to set up its own manufacturing facility in Shanghai, according to people briefed on the plan, a move that could help the company gain traction in China’s fast-growing EV market.

The deal with Shanghai’s government will allow the Silicon Valley auto maker to build a wholly owned factory in the city’s free-trade zone, these people said. This arrangement, the first of its kind for a foreign auto maker, could enable Tesla to slash production costs, but it would still likely incur China’s 25% import tariff.

Tesla is currently working with the Shanghai government about details of the deal’s announcement, such as timing, one of these people said. The effort comes as President Donald Trump, who has been critical of China’s trade policies, prepares to visit Beijing early next month.

A Tesla spokesman didn’t have a comment beyond reiterating the company’s previous statement in June that it planned to “clearly define” production plans in China by year’s end. The Shanghai government didn’t reply to a request for comment.

China’s electric-vehicle market—already the world’s largest—is primed for growth. The Chinese government is targeting seven million EV sales a year by 2025, up from 351,000 last year, and in September it ordered all auto makers already operating in China to start producing EVs by 2019. Officials have also said they are working on a plan to ban gasoline cars.

China had previously circulated a proposal that would allow electric-car makers into the country without local partners if they were to locate in the so-called free-trade zones. The government set up the country’s first such zone in Shanghai in 2013, and has since approved 10 more around the country.

Until now, foreign auto makers have built cars in China through joint ventures with local manufacturers. That allows them to avoid the 25% tariff on autos, but also forces them to split profits, and potentially share technology, with the local partner—something that has tripped up Tesla’s previous efforts to expand there.

Under current rules, the cars Tesla builds in the free-trade zone would still count as imports and incur the tariff. Auto analysts in Shanghai doubt the Chinese government has any incentive to give Tesla special treatment.

“Government regulators examine every deal and try not to set a precedent,” said Bill Russo, chief executive of Automobility, a Shanghai-based consultancy, and a former Chrysler executive. “Whatever deal Tesla gets, others will want it too.”

A plant in Shanghai’s free-trade zone still has clear benefits, Mr. Russo said. It would give Tesla a base from which to export to the region, while offering proximity to the Chinese supply chain, thereby lowering production costs and the sale price of Tesla cars sold there. Today, a Tesla costs roughly 50% more in China than it does in the U.S.

Manufacturing in Shanghai would also put Tesla in good standing with the Chinese government, said Michael Dunne, an auto-industry consultant who spent years in Asia. Having Tesla cars built on Chinese soil would please Beijing officials, he said, which “in turn, will give Tesla goodwill leverage to negotiate better China market-access terms in the future.”

The auto maker reported more than $1 billion in revenue in China for 2016 on sales of roughly 11,000 imported vehicles, representing about 15% of total revenue. Sales in China were up from about $319 million in 2015.

In June, Tesla revealed it was in talks with the Shanghai government about the possibility of opening a factory and reiterated that it aims to define its China production plans by year’s end. A month earlier, Chief Executive Elon Musk cryptically had told analysts that a change in China rules would be “good timing.”

Mr. Musk has said Tesla could cut prices in China by one-third by reducing shipping costs and avoiding import duties.

Mr. Musk has previously signaled a desire to expand manufacturing capabilities in China and Europe. The company, which manufactures its vehicles in Fremont, Calif., does final assembly at a facility in Tilburg, Netherlands, for the European market.

Fremont is currently under pressure to expand manufacturing capacity to meet Mr. Musk’s ambitious goals of making 10,000 Model 3 sedans a week by the end of next year. The Model 3, priced starting at $35,000, is part of his vision for expanding the auto maker beyond selling luxury niche vehicles.


While the cost of introducing the new vehicle has left the auto maker with little cash to spare, investors’ enthusiasm for Mr. Musk’s vision has helped push shares of the company up more than 50% this year so far, propelling Tesla’s market value to rival General Motors Co.’s .

Chinese internet company Tencent Holdings Ltd. acquired a 5% stake in Tesla in March, giving Mr. Musk a powerful ally in China.

>>> What to look at today - 23rd o f October 2017

Asian equity markets have opened generally higher. The Nikkei 225 opened up by over 1.1%, as Japan PM Abe’s ruling coalition won a supermajority in the lower house, following Sunday’s elections. Overall, the LDP/Komeito coalition won at least 312 seats, up from 290 prior. Automakers, Honda and Nissan have rebounded from the declines seen on Friday’s session. At the same time, the ‘mega-banks’ in Japan are also all trading higher by over 0.7% following the election results. China Life has risen by over 3%, after reporting an over 90% increase in its 9-month profits, which it said was mostly driven by higher investment returns. Japanese tech firms are trading generally higher. Softbank has gained over 1%. Shares of Canon Inc are also trading higher ahead of its later today earnings report. Taiwan Semi has gained over 0.7%. The company is said to have received an exclusive chip order from Apple, according to a press report. Mediatek has also gained amid press speculation related to a chip order from Alibaba.
In the US, there is press speculation that Cisco is near an agreement to acquire Broadsoft Inc, while in the lumber space Potlatch is said to be close to acquiring Deltic Timber in an all-stock deal.

Nikkei +1.16% Hang Seng -0.64% CSI +0.08% Shanghai +0.12% Shenzen +0.43%

Eur$ 1.1772 CNH 6.6308 CNY 6.6291 JPY 113.69 GBP 1.3202 CHF 0.9836 RUB 57.4450 WTI$ 52.05 +0.41%

S&P -0.01% EuroStoxx +0.11% Dax +0.07% FTSE +0.05% SMI +0.16%

Macro :
- Abe Placed to Lead Japan Through 2021 After Big Election Victory
- Saudi Minister to Discuss Oil Output Cut Extension With Iraq
- Yellen Is Said to Be Back at White House, Person Familiar Says
- Watch Out Vol Sellers, Those Tails Are Getting Fatter: Macro Man
- Italy’s Rich Lombardy, Veneto Regions Hold Autonomy Votes
- France Determined to Tax Internet Giants, Le Maire Tells Figaro

What to look at today :
- ABE SM : Abertis sale of Hispasat to REE in final stages
- ACS SM : ACS to Issue Negotiable Commercial Paper of Up to EU300m
- AF FP : Air France-KLM Says KLM Pension Agreements to Cost EU505m
- AAPL US : Apple, Foxconn Executives Are Said to Meet Later in Oct.: Nikkei
- BSLN SW : Basilea Gets First Milestone Payment from Astellas of CHF5m
- BAYN GY : France Asks Regulator to Study New Data on Dow Insecticides
- BMPS IM : Monte Dei Paschi Return to Stock Market Is Said Delayed: Reuters
- BMW GY : BMW Upset VW, Daimler Hid Contacts With EU on Talks: FAS
- BNN GY : Biotech Co. Brain Reaffirms Profitability Goal: Welt am Sonntag
- BT/ LN : BT May Ramp Up Operations Revamp After McKinsey Report: S. Times
- ALCLS US : Cellectis Rallies; Nomura Highlights Co. Meetings With Investors
- CSGN VX : Activist investor RBR Capital Advisors is to commence talking to other shareholders Tagesanzeiger
- CSCO US : Cisco Is Said to Be Near Deal for Software Maker Broadsoft
- EN+ IPO : Qatar Sovereign Fund Is Said to Mull Buying Stake in En+: FT
- 486 HK : EN+ IPO : *LAW DEBENTURE CORP NAMES TIM INTERIM CEO
- FDR FP : Fonciere Des Regions to Buy 38.6% of Fonciere Dev Logements
- FORTUM FH : Fortum Hires Barclays to Sell India Solar Assets Stake: Mint
- GKN LN : GKN Eyes Plan to Split Aerospace, Automotive Ops: Sunday Times
- HEN3 GY : Henkel Seeks More U.S. Acquisitions: CEO to Welt am Sonntag
- HOT GY : Hochtief Sees EU1b in Dividend Payments From Abertis: Expansion
- ICADE FP : ICADE Nine Month Revenue EU1.15 Bln
- IFX GY : Infineon Seeks to Become Top Car-Chip Supplier: Automobilwoche
- ILD FP : France’s Niel Says Iliad Won’t Seek Sporting Rights: JDD
- LBK SM : Liberbank Completes Bank Syndicate for Cap. Increase: Expansion
- IAM FP : Maroc Telecom 9-Month Revenues 26.02b Dirhams, Down 2.5% Y/y
- NOVN VX : Novartis Treatment Granted Orphan Drug Status by FDA
- OBEL BB : Orange Belgium Third Quarter Service Rev. 2.6% Above Estimates
- PLT IM : Parmalat Willing to Negotiate With Citi on Claim: Corriere
- P1Z GY : Patrizia Seeks More Acquisitions, CFO Tells Boersen-Zeitung
- PHIA NA : Philips Third Quarter Revenue Misses Lowest Estimate
- QIWI US : Qiwi: Otkritie Holding buys further shares; possibly part of plan to increase stake to 45%-55%
- RYA LN : Ryanair Will Continue to Engage With London Stansted ERC
- RYA LN : Ryanair Pilots Outline Proposal to Double Airline’s Pay Offer
- SECUB SS : Securitas Moves Up 3Q Results After Reports Stolen From Manager
- SECUB SS : Securitas Third Quarter Net Sales Meets Estimates, 3Q Showed ‘Strong Market Momentum’ Throughout Group
- SPI LN : *SPIRE REJECTS 298.6P/SHR CONDITIONAL PROPOSAL FROM MEDICLINIC
- SSPG LN : SSP a Rare Growth Story in European Leisure, Raised at Barclays
- SYNN VX : Syngenta Granted Exemption From Listing Maintenance Obligations
- TOM NO : Tomra Third Quarter Revenue Misses Lowest Estimate
- TSM US : TSMC Gets A12 Chip Exclusive Orders From Apple: Eco Daily
- TSLA US : Tesla Is Said to Reach Deal to Set up Facility in Shanghai: WSJ
- TIT IM : Telecom Italia Board Approves Canal Plus Media Venture
- UBER IPO : Uber-SoftBank Deal Is Said to Be Threatened Over Terms: FT
- UMI BB : Umicore Sells Large-Area Coatings Activity, Takes EU14m Charge
- VOW3 GY : Audi To Recall 200k Cars, SUVs on Wire Melting Risk: NHTSA