Under The Radar – 04 February

This week, we discuss:

1. Downing Street on charm offensive for big tech listings

2. Biden to face far-right mid-term onslaught

3. Vice secretly organizes Saudi ‘influencer festival’

---

Downing Street on charm offensive for big tech listings

What Happened? In a bid to preserve London’s status as the global pre-eminent trading hub, ministers have set out to woo buy-now-pay-later giant Klarna to list on the London Stock Exchange.

What does it mean?

Ministers have been busy courting some of Europe’s largest tech companies, amid fears that high-growth companies are snubbing the City of London for New York. The guest-list of high valuation fintechs that attended a virtual meeting with Number 10 this week tallied up to a total valuation of $102bn. Target number one is Klarna, the Swedish fintech company who have made it big in the Buy Now, Pay Later game. The company is valued at £34bn, making it a potential big-ticket winner for the London Stock Exchange.  Ministers are touting the post-Brexit opportunities London apparently offers as a way to woo Europe’s big tech companies after an overhaul of the UK’s listing regime last year.  It is not the first time that the government has stepped in to make a bid for big tech listings. Last year, the UK government took a hands-on-approach to Deliveroo’s listing, and even committed to rule changes that would allow founders to keep more control of their companies in a bid to secure Deliveroo’s £5bn stock market listing. The listing infamously went down like a lead-balloon, with the stock price plummeting on its debut day on the stock exchange.  The government will be hoping to avoid a repeat of any similar incidents if they are to woo the fintech world and secure London’s spot as the tech capital of the world.

---

Biden to face far-right mid-term onslaught

What happened? In this year’s midterm elections, a large contingent of far-right candidates threaten to reopen the Trumpist wounds of the January 6th insurrection. What does it mean?

The Anti-Defamation League, a not for profit that monitors hate groups, is claiming that over 100 far right candidates will be running for office in November’s midterm elections under the Republican banner.

While some are establishment figures shallowly co-opting far-right rhetoric, like Harvard graduate JD Vance, others have concrete links to white supremacist groups and extremist organisations, including the Proud Boys. Far right candidates aren’t just targeting incumbent Democrats to erode Biden’s political power, they are also trying to unseat incumbent Republicans who they find disagreeable.  More worryingly, some candidates are running for bureaucratic positions that are responsible for certifying elections. They would likely look to undermine trust in a Biden 2024 win.  The far-right phenomenon is a dangerous sign for American democracy, once again driving politics to its spectral fringes, showing that Biden has not been the unifying figure that would begin the healing process that many had hoped for. This far right onslaught, if successful, would lay the foundations for a Trumpist candidate, if not a return of the man himself, in the next Presidential election. Another interpretation, however, could be that the success of the far right is a failure of the centrists in the Republican Party, devoid of ideas as to how to move on from Trumpism. Biden could even benefit from this in the midterms, forgiven for perceived covid failures due to fears of a return to the extreme political battlegrounds that resulted in the Jan 6th insurrections.

---

Vice branded as hypocritical for secretly organising Saudi ‘influencer festival’

What happened?

Despite efforts to keep their involvement secret, it has emerged that Vice, the youth media company, was responsible for organising the Saudi government funded Azimuth music festival in March 2020. Vice publicly announced it would be ceasing its activities in the Middle Eastern Kingdom following the high-profile murder of Jamal Khashoggi in 2018.

What does it mean? The extravagant government-funded Azimuth music festival, dubbed the ‘influencer festival’, promised to bring together the best of music, art and food, merging “all that is Arabian with all that is Western”.  While you would not be mistaken for thinking that a Western-style festival in a deeply conservative nation is incompatible, this is part of Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman’s (MBS) wider attempts to reform the nation’s economic and socio-cultural life and place it at the centre of a modern Middle East.  A prime example is MBS’s ultimatum to international companies that the Kingdom would stop doing business with those who do not have their regional headquarters in Riyadh. In this context, Vice’s u-turn reflects the irresistible nature of the lucrative contracts that the Saudi government offers – especially when like Vice, you are under pressure from shareholders to turn around declining revenues.  Despite opposition from staff, Vice’s response to the revelations only confirms these suspicions, with the media company setting up a dedicated office in Riyadh last year.  Speculation has been rife over whether MBS’s ambitious reforms should be taken at face value. In truth, there have been some minor reforms that lend some credibility to the modernising agenda, but it is still little more than window dressing for what remains a feudal society with vast socio-economic inequalities.  

---

This Week’s Must Reads

1. “Beijing Olympics: the new front line in the US-China cold war” by Demetri Sevastopulo et al. for The FT

2. “Johnson’s hypocrisy and lies are emblematic of the British establishment” by Owen Jones for The Guardian

3. “Energy bills: How Boris Johnson is still caught in a trap laid by Labour’s Ed Miliband” by Gordon Rayner for The Telegraph

4. “Levelling up won’t save Boris Johnson” by Harry Lambert for The New Statesman

---

Chart of the Week

Subscribe

* indicates required

Email Address *

First Name

Last Name

Job Title

Company

Industry

Digital Digest – 04 February

In this week’s digital digest we look at Klarna’s credit card launch and proposals to force tech giants to pay for UK journalism.

We then take a look at big tech as Silicon valley’s attempts to prevent tighter US regulation and war games kick off in the gaming industry.

---

Closer To Home

Debt fears as Klarna launches credit card

Klarna’s plans to launch a credit card that would allow its customers to use its ‘Buy Now Pay Later’ service (BNPL) has sparked fears for consumer welfare. Debt charities have been outspoken against the move as BNPL schemes encourage consumers to spend money they don’t necessarily have. Klarna’s card will allow customers to delay payments by up to 30 days. While failure to repay in time would not incur the charge of interest or any other fees, it would risk a debt collector being appointed. Late payments will also soon start affecting customers when credit rating agencies start accepting Klarna’s data and therefore late payments would harm their score. Klarna is not currently monitored by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) meaning customers cannot complain to the Financial Ombudsman Service if they wish to report grievances. This may need to be remedied sooner rather than later considering that, according to Klarna, some 400,000 people have already signed up to a waiting list to get the card.

Strengthening the UK’s resilience from cyber attacks

Concerns that consumers are being put at risk due to tech firms exploiting online advertising have led to plans being drawn up to force big tech firms to pay for British newspaper stories. Facebook and Google took in around 80% of the revenue generated from online advertising expenditure in 2019, newspapers, on the other hand, took in less than 4%. Nadine Dorries, the culture secretary, is likely piggybacking off of Australia’s controversial law to force big tech to pay for news content. A source from the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) has suggested that the plan will present “an important vehicle to tackle the imbalance of power between the largest platforms and publishers.” There are critics of the reform. One social media consultant suggested that news outlets actually benefit from social media as it increases traffic to their websites. The consultant thought the government would be better served by raising taxes on big tech firms or subsidising news outlets. The news of Dorries’ plans come after her recent controversial move to freeze the BBC license fee.

---

Big Tech increases funding to US foreign policy think-tanks

In an attempt to prevent stricter competition laws, Big Tech firms are pumping money into US foreign policy think-tanks. The line they are attempting to assert is that the measures being considered to clamp down on Silicon Valley would help make Chinese tech giants more powerful. Amazon, Google, Facebook and Apple’s increased funding to four major think tanks has doubled, according to research from the Financial Times, from $625,000 in 2017-18 to over $1.2m in 2019-20. These numbers could be even higher, and it is thought donations have continued to increase. These amounts may be small in relation to the overall worth of the firms, however, the rise in funding makes the tech giants the top donors to the think tanks, along with oil and gas companies. The tech firms have found success with this tactic. Twelve former leading national security officials linked to the think tanks recently wrote to congress to request they stop working on bills to regulate big tech more. The think tanks have denied being influenced by donations from the technology industry.

Sony to buy video game maker Bungie for $3.6bn as takeovers continue

The move by Japanese studio, Sony, follows Microsoft’s highly publicised purchase of Activision Blizzard, which totaled close to $70bn. Sony’s $3.6bn purchase of Bungie, the original developer of Xbox’s flagship series Halo, is a form of return fire. Bungie no longer develops Halo games but its recent big hit series, Destiny, of which it has released two installments, has seen it develop close ties with Sony, releasing exclusive content for its Playstation platforms. A big driver behind these two particular companies is that they both have huge online franchises, which tend to maintain a player base, and generate income, after release. Sony may worry that Microsoft could make Activision games an exclusive product to its Xbox console, at the expense of Sony’s own Playstation brand. In the case that Microsoft were to threaten to make one of Activision’s main franchises, such as Call of Duty, an Xbox exclusive, Sony could do the same with Bungie’s franchises. One analyst described the situation as being akin to ‘mutually assured destruction’.

---

Also In The News

1. Boris Johnson pulled out of a highly publicised meeting with tech chiefs after the release of the Sue Gray report. See here.

2. Spotify says it will start giving ‘content advisories’ on content containing potential covid misinformation as it looks to limit the damage of the Joe Rogan saga. See here.

3. The teenager who asked Elon Musk for $50,000 to stop monitoring his flights is also tracking Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos and Drake. See here.

4. Alphabet has announced a surge in advertising revenue from its Google search engine. See here.

5. Tesla has been forced to fix 50,000 of its self driving cars after its software made some drive past stop signs. See here.

---

Worth A Read

1. Wired: Britcoin is Coming. The Treasury is Woefully Underprepared

2. Daily Telegraph: From laughing stock to potential Spotify-killer: the fall and rise of Tidal

3. Daily Telegraph: Elon Musk fights to rid rural Britain of sluggish broadband in battle with BT.

Subscribe

* indicates required

Email Address *

First Name

Last Name

Job Title

Company

Industry

Under The Radar – 28 January

Photo by lan deng on Unsplash

This week, we discuss:

1. The Big Cats set to unite in UK-India trade deal

2. 808s & Heartbreak for Gap?

3. The battle to censor social media

The Big Cats set to unite in UK-India trade deal

What Happened? Talks between Anne-Marie Trevelyan, the UK’s International Trade Secretary, and Piyush Goyal, India’s Minister of Commerce and Industry, are said to be progressing well as new Resolution Foundation analysis suggests Britain can gain first-mover advantage in India by striking a deal.  What does it mean?

The Resolution Foundation report predicts that the gains from a UK-India trade deal could be on par with those from a future trade agreement with the US, as negotiations over the latter have ground to a halt due to Brexit complications. The report does note, however, that the UK economy may face tougher competition as Britain’s business service firms could be undercut by lower-cost Indian alternatives. In May 2021, Boris Johnson met virtually with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi to announce a historic commitment to strengthen and welcome a new era in bilateral relations. The UK Government’s trade policy pivot to the Indo-Pacific region is indicative of its recognition of the significant growth potential in countries such as India, a traditionally tough market to crack due to strict domestic regulations. Looking to reinforce its ‘Global Britain’ image, the UK is also seeking membership of the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), which includes nations like Canada, Australia, and Japan. If the UK were to be successful, they would be the first European state to join the 11-nation group, yet the potential benefits of a deal with India would outweigh the benefits of gaining CPTPP membership – as would the risks. The uncertainty associated with India’s rapidly evolving economy is a price Johnson’s government must pay in return for access to what will be the world’s third-largest import market by 2050. The juicy first-move advantages, granting UK businesses competitive advantage over exporting firms in other Western nations without preferential access to India, may well be enough to convince our current administration to act now.

808s & Heartbreak for Gap?

What happened? When Kanye West, the ever-controversial rapper, announced his ten-year partnership with family-friendly American retailer Gap, eyebrows were raised. Surprisingly, it now looks as if the marriage isn’t going quite to plan. What does it mean?

Kanye’s decision to collaborate with Gap, while out of left field, offered a potentially beneficial partnership for both sides. West could present his branding in a more affordable way to a larger market, while Gap had the opportunity to rejuvenate its image after close to two decades of declining sales. An added bonus for Gap was that West is a self-marketing machine. The business models of the two couldn’t be more different. Kanye’s foray into the fashion industry has resulted in various collaborations with high profile brands as well as regular attendance at high end fashion shows. Gap, on the other hand, markets itself as an affordable, high street clothing brand. So, what has “this generation’s closest thing to Einstein” (in his own words), brought to the mid-level clothing brand so far? Not much, as it turns out. Mr West, who actually worked at a Gap store before he became famous, has released just two products in eighteen months under the Yeezy Gap branding. Gap is reportedly frustrated with the slow rollout, yet they may soon be appeased with a Balenciaga collaboration set to be announced. Kanye’s history of erratic and impulsive music releases, which have seen him delay and cancel projects, means Gap may just have to accept an inconsistent rollout. But eighteen months into the collaboration, and with net sales down 12% in 2021 compared to 2019, it’s difficult to see whether it will ever be worth it.

The battle to sensor social media

What happened?

Twitter has revealed that a record 43,387 demands to remove content were made by governments around the world between January and June last year. What does it mean? This time last year, Twitter sparked a heated debate after they permanently banned Donald Trump’s account in the wake of the Capitol insurrection. A year later, and the topic of censorship is back on the table, but this time, the table has well and truly turned. 95% of the legal demands came from just five countries. Surprisingly, Japan leads the pack, followed by more obvious authoritarian culprits – Russia, Turkey, and India, with another East Asian democracy, South Korea, rounding off the list.   Whilst the United States did not find itself at the top of the table in this category, it is the undisputed invasion of privacy champion, finding itself as the single largest source of government information requests. Despite Twitter’s attempt to appear defiant in their statement, accusing these governments of being a “threat to privacy and freedom of expression”, records revealed that the social media site ‘withheld’ access to content, or required reported accounts holders to remove the content, in over half of the demands made by government officials. The debate over big tech and government intervention has been simmering for some time now, and it appears that threats from politicians to clampdown on social media has seen Twitter rollover more often than not. We are in the era of social media censorship, whether it’s the private sector or state who reigns supreme remains to be seen.

This Week’s Must Reads

1. “How the Ukraine question divides the American right” by Janan Ganesh for The Financial Times

2. “Is Wes Streeting the next Labour leader?” by Ailbhe Rea for The New Statesman

3. “Boris Johnson is the problem, not his underlings” by Daniel Finkelstein for The Times

4. “The abandoned revolution: has the government given up on Brexit?” by Ross Clark for The Spectator

Chart of the Week

Subscribe

* indicates required

Email Address *

First Name

Last Name

Job Title

Company

Industry