All Analysis. Stock Picks. All stock picks. My Portfolio. My Watchlists. Investment style. Investment themes. Top News. Top Fundamentals. Top Technicals. Top Movers. Investment selections. Technical Rankings.
Fundamental Rankings. Stock Screener Home. MarketScreener tools. Dynamic chart. Our Services. MarketScreener Portfolios. Add to my list. Markets and indexes - Main Market. L - Datastream Code :. Yet North West Water began life as a private company with an ambitious capital investment program, representing the largest commitment of any of the ten water companies. From the start, however, North West Water's ambitions went beyond its position as a regional water company. The creation of the regional water authorities in the s had given North West Water, and the British water supply industry in general, a great deal of experience in bringing together and operating large-scale and cross-community utility systems, a position that gave the company an advantage in the worldwide market.
North West Water began to leverage its experience in the late s, marketing its expertise in the design and operation of large-scale water supply and sewage treatment systems on the global scale. North West Water targeted in particular the developing markets in Asia and South America, where strengthening economies were leading governments to invest in improving meager and even nonexistent public utility systems.
In , North West Water scored its first success in this area, when it led a consortium to win the year contract to modernize, expand, and operate the water supply system in Ipoh, in Malaysia.
Other contracts followed, including an entry into Thailand with a contract to design, build, and operate a waste treatment plant, as well as a kilometer sewer network, in Bangkok. The company also was called in as an advisor by the Indonesian government as it began plans to privatize that country's water system at the beginning of the s. North West Water faced limits in its growth in the United Kingdom--the water supply business remained heavily regulated, and the possibility of geographic expansion remained limited.
Instead, North West Water began seeking other, nonregulated avenues for growth. In , North West Water boosted its U.
Although North West Water sold off most of that operation to Vivendi in , the acquisition expanded the company's expertise in what the company later called Contract Solutions. North West Water's international operations scored new successes in the early s. In , the company joined the Indah Water Konsortium, which was awarded the contract to modernize and operate the sewer system in Kuala Lumpur. This success came on top of other recent solo successes, as the company won contracts in Mexico City, and in Sydney and Melbourne in Australia.
Staples and Pitcher stepped up the company's U. The joint venture, called US Water, enabled North West Water to avoid having to make costly investments in building up its own construction operation, while providing a more solid basis for its worldwide expansion. Two years later, the two companies expanded their cooperation agreement on a worldwide scale with the creation of a new joint venture subsidiary, International Water Limited.
Met initially with skepticism--and a bit of government resistance--the merger created one of the United Kingdom's first and largest "multi-utility" groups. United Utilities quickly took advantage of similarities in the two companies' operations, not least of which was their focus on the same geographic area. In , the company merged both companies' operations in customer service and call center management to form a new subsidiary, Vertex, which then went on to compete for and win third-party contracts.
The approaching deregulation of the British electricity market at the close of the 20th century led United Utilities to attempt to expand its own electric power supply business, which had been renamed Norweb Energi in Those talks fell through at the last minute, however. United Utilities maintained control of Norweb's electricity distribution network, however. Over three quarters of the shareholders of English water are based overseas.
What does it matter if the person ripping you off for your water is British or not? But being based outside the UK can provide legal remedies unavailable domestically. So-called Bilateral Investment Treaties protect the rights of investors from one state investing in another. The UK has been a keen advocate of these full list here.
One notorious example of the consequences of these treaties was tobacco giant Philip Morris suing the government of Uruguay after it tried to restrict cigarette marketing, using a treaty signed between the US and Uruguay. And they have been used to protect water profiteers too. Anglian Water was among a group of companies that used a Bilateral Investment Treaty to demand multimillion pound compensation after Argentina froze water rates following its financial crisis.
These treaties work both ways. In such scenarios almost all of the major shareholders would have access to such mechanisms to delay things in courts for as long as possible. How would they use their financial muscle? Many of the investment funds invest huge amounts in company and government bonds. In the current economic context, a post-privatisation supply would likely look to fund itself by borrowing from the capital markets. But that would mean trying to raise capital from many of the same funds that are currently water company shareholders.
Would Blackrock and the others play ball? Or would they refuse to lend, or demand higher interest rates — and tell colleagues in other funds to do the same? That would have knock on effects for the cost of the new supply. An obvious point, but it allows them to up their game whenever privatisation is questioned. Facing rising criticism, companies and the regulator have recently agreed to hold prices steady — or in some cases lower them — over the next five years.
Shareholders of some of the companies, notably Thames Water, have even agreed to forgo dividends for the moment. How long this restraint lasts remains to be seen. Shareholders are just one of the groups that would lose out from an end to privatisation. Suppliers to the industry too. Anti-privatisation campaigns also need to consider how the banks and investment funds that currently lend the companies money would react to moves to end privatisation.
What compensation could they demand, and how willing would they be to lend to the new supply? Similar questions arise to those in the market power section above, especially as some of the lenders may be the same institutions that own shares in the companies. Click here to go back to the top of the report. Click on the links below to find out who they are owned by. See the spreadsheet for more details.
As such they each have thousands of shareholders. We have listed the top ten for each company here. See the spreadsheet, linked to at the top of the report, for the top Photo by pan xiaozhen on Unsplash. So who are they? And how can they protect their position? Get in touch with any queries Who are the shareholders and what power do they have?
0コメント