The British Government has Intervened in Nvidia's planned ARM acquisition

Glad at least one government is trying to stop this.

What scares me, is that with the pound under pressure, almost every UK industry is a massive investment appeal for US companies, as they get incredible tax incentives if they can bring back cash to their domestic market.

At least that is how it was back in 2019. Perhaps much has changed now.
 
The pound has gained a lot of value against the dollar over the last year (Not great for some of my paychecks), now about $1.40 per £1 rather than $1.20 a year ago

But a lot of the UKs valuable public assets are indeed being readied for selling off to private US companies through the backdoor once a trade deal is reached, protections against these unscrutinised trades were ripped out of the proposed bills before they passed back in February, and over the last few months US health insurance companies have already quietly taken control of a good chunk of London's GP services and over half a million people's health records without their knowledge, no doubt a small initial step in a several year long sell-off ready to ensue.

This is why I properly believe the government when they say this is on national security grounds. They're definitely not the most scrutinous when it comes to selling off valuable business assets alone.
 
Last edited:
Isn't ARM owned by Soft-bank, a Japanese company?

Yes, but they had to agree to stick to legally binding terms to keep ARM in the UK and to expand their presence in Cambridge. They also needed to keep ARM's business model the same. Nvidia is a very different buyer.
 
What if nvidia agreed to the same terms?

I don't like the idea of nvidia buying ARM either, but how are they different or more risky than Softbank? nvidia will just add gamery words to ARM branding and quadruple prices.
 
What if nvidia agreed to the same terms?

I don't like the idea of nvidia buying ARM either, but how are they different or more risky than Softbank? nvidia will just add gamery words to ARM branding and quadruple prices.

Even with the same terms and agreements, Nvidia is not a neutral party. Nvidia competes with ARMs customers, making them a bad overseer for ARM IMHO.

Softbank wanted to grow ARM with their existing business model, but Nvidia's ownership changes things. ARM would be part of Nvidia, not a standalone company under Softbank.

TBH, I don't want Nvidia to own ARM. It gives Nvidia too much power, and they can do plenty in the CPU market as an ARM customer. I don't want to see an ARM where the needs of Nvidia outweigh the needs of ARM licensees.
 
What if nvidia agreed to the same terms?

I don't like the idea of nvidia buying ARM either, but how are they different or more risky than Softbank? nvidia will just add gamery words to ARM branding and quadruple prices.
I think the main motivator seems to be that Softbank were not already an ARM licensee and not in competition with ARMs licensees whereas NVidia are, many of those licensees rely on ARM being a neutral standards setting body long term and if that is seen to be threatened then it puts a lot of other national and defence infrastructure, as well as companies and industries at risk long term.

In the mid term NVidia definitely would be constrained by any kind of deal to attempt to solidify the neutrality, and maintaining this good relationship with their licensees would be critical business wise too, but the introduction of the long term uncertainty seems to be what is getting many of ARMs customers a bit hot under the collar

If the deal does go through, we will no doubt see a mad rush to RISC-V begin, in many of the less consumer orientated sectors ARM is currently used like infrastructure, research, ect
 
Last edited:
Even with the same terms and agreements, Nvidia is not a neutral party. Nvidia competes with ARMs customers, making them a bad overseer for ARM IMHO.

Softbank wanted to grow ARM with their existing business model, but Nvidia's ownership changes things. ARM would be part of Nvidia, not a standalone company under Softbank.

TBH, I don't want Nvidia to own ARM. It gives Nvidia too much power, and they can do plenty in the CPU market as an ARM customer. I don't want to see an ARM where the needs of Nvidia outweigh the needs of ARM licensees.

I think the main motivator seems to be that Softbank were not already an ARM licensee and not in competition with ARMs licensees whereas NVidia are, many of those licensees rely on ARM being a neutral standards setting body long term and if that is seen to be threatened then it puts a lot of other national and defence infrastructure, as well as companies and industries at risk long term.

In the mid term NVidia definitely would be constrained by any kind of deal to attempt to solidify the neutrality, and maintaining this good relationship with their licensees would be critical business wise too, but the introduction of the long term uncertainty seems to be what is getting many of ARMs customers a bit hot under the collar

If the deal does go through, we will no doubt see a mad rush to RISC-V begin, in many of the less consumer orientated sectors ARM is currently used like infrastructure, research, ect

That makes a lot of sense. Thanks to both of you for clearing that up for me. More reason for me not to like Nvidia trying to buy them.
 
Back
Top