UK to ease rules for tech share listings | Reuters

“Britain plans to make it easier for technology firms to list their shares in London, the government said on Thursday, in an attempt to stem the flow of high-growth companies heading across the Atlantic in search of capital.”

Interesting. Countries in a competition to keep their tech wizards at home. But how important are stock markets for innovation? And nation-states?  
via Diigo http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/09/20/uk-ipo-tech-idUKBRE88J0AP20120920

While I’m writing this, we’re covering a 1.96 billion euro ($2.56 billion) bid by US-based cable operator Liberty Global for the shares in Belgian peer Telenet it did not already own. There is quite some discussion here in Belgium about the transfer of important corporate decision centers to other countries such as the US. Globalization and nation-states, it remains an interesting combination.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on LinkedInShare on TumblrPin on PinterestShare on RedditShare on StumbleUponEmail this to someone

About rolandlegrand

I'm social media manager at Mediafin, the publisher of Belgium's leading business newspapers De Tijd and L'Echo. I have a special interest in the intersection of immersive media, business and philosophy.
Tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

0 Responses to UK to ease rules for tech share listings | Reuters

  1. Prokofy Neva says:

    No, Roland, CC does not offer “more choice”. It offers a horribly constricting, browbeating culture, where you are frog-marched into offering your content for free — or accused of being like an old dead white guy grasping on to your content crazily even after 100 years. No matter if you are a young alive black guy who made your content 10 minutes ago. It’s just awful. The entire culture around CC is one of “give it up for free but get credit” — and with only vague assurances that this “stone soup” will somehow reward you — if no other way, then, um, “spiritually”. You are supposed to believe that giving up your content for the world enables all kinds of specialty consulting/customized gigs to come to your doorstep. But…they only come to a very select niche of people.

    Second Life or Open Sim or Twitter don’t need to “benefit” from presidential “attention”. They are tools. The question is: how will these tools be used? The use of them in the Obama campaign was decidedly mixed, as they were used to incite hatred and spread false memes as much as to spread any “message of hope”. Why give these people the benefit of the doubt?

Leave a Reply