pan-European cooperation and economic revival
Order ID |
53563633773 |
Type |
Essay |
Writer Level |
Masters |
Style |
APA |
Sources/References |
4 |
Perfect Number of Pages to Order |
5-10 Pages |
Description/Paper Instructions
By James Kanter, Heather Timmons and Anand Giridharadas
June 25, 2006
LUXEMBOURG A new steel giant is to be created out of a bitter battle, after Arcelor formally agreed on Sunday to a 26.5 billion takeover by rival Mittal Steel.
The deal combines Arcelor – a symbol of successful, pan-European cooperation and economic revival, with operations that span Luxembourg, Belgium, France and Spain – with a fast- growing conglomerate founded by the India-born Lakshmi Mittal, who built a fortune turning around sick steel plants in rapidly expanding markets from Trinidad to Kazakhstan.
The deal, valued at $33.1 billion, is the latest sign that shareholder activism is marching through the once staid and sleepy boardrooms of Europe. The agreement to pair with Mittal caps a wrenching turnaround for Arcelor’s management, which once dismissed Mittal as a “company of Indians” but were forced to backtrack after shareholders threatened to revolt.
Politicians in Europe who once criticized Mittal have remained mum in recent days, and the merger brings hope that protectionist barriers against such deals may be eroding in Europe.
ADVERTISEMENT
Continue reading the main story
Mittal is paying 40.37 a share for Arcelor, nearly double what the company was trading at when Mittal first made an offer in January. The new company will be named Arcelor-Mittal and will be headquartered in Luxembourg. Joseph Kinsch, chairman of Arcelor, will be chairman of the new company, and will be succeeded by Mittal when Kinsch retires next year.
It was unclear what role Guy Dollé, Arcelor’s chief executive, will have. Mittal will be president until Kinsch’s departure.
“It’s been a long struggle,” said Wilbur Ross Jr., a U.S. billionaire investor and Mittal board member. “Now that we have had an opportunity to be inside, with management, we believe there will be even more synergies than we thought.”
Daily business updates The latest coverage of business, markets and the economy, sent by email each weekday. Get it sent to your inbox.
Kinsch, speaking in the courtyard of the Arcelor headquarters, said that the deal would create “global leadership in steel” not just by ton but by value.
Getting to this point has involved a bruising fight for both sides. Mittal first made an unexpected 18.6 billion offer for Arcelor in January, and was swiftly and harshly rebuked by Arcelor management and a chorus of European politicians who criticized everything from his grammar to his Indian origins to the quality of his company’s steel. Arcelor’s bare-knuckled defense strategy included refusing to meet with Mittal until a string of demands were met, and simultaneously orchestrating a 13 billion deal with Severstal of Russia to keep him away.
Editors Picks
Brilliance, and Heartbreak: The Story of Chris Pauls Career
A Rap Song Lays Bare Israels Jewish-Arab Fracture and Goes Viral
The Riddle of Riley Keough
Continue reading the main story
ADVERTISEMENT
Continue reading the main story
Arcelor’s choice of Severstal as a white knight was problematic from the beginning. An unconventional vote on the deal, which was scheduled for Friday, was immediately criticized by shareholders. It allowed the deal to be approved unless the meeting was attended by an unprecedented number of Arcelor shareholders and they voted it down.
After Arcelor executives and Severstal’s chief executive, Aleksei Mordashov, appeared at a triumphant news conference to announce the deal, they were rarely seen together again. Instead, Mordashov embarked alone on a global tour to win Arcelor’s investors to his side. He found shareholders were willing to listen to him, but angry with Arcelor’s top executives, according to one of his advisers who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
“They had managed to alienate everyone,” the adviser said. Management had “taken their shareholders for granted.”
In fact, Arcelor’s shareholders, including institutional investors and a growing number of hedge funds, were angry enough about the way the last- minute deal with Severstal was being pushed that they had started to talk about trying to oust Arcelor’s management, and suing its board members.
Daily Business Briefing
Latest Updates
Updated
July 21, 2021, 4:50 p.m. ETJuly 21, 2021
July 21, 2021
A Treasury official says an international tax deal would help make globalization work.
The National Labor Relations Board grants a reprieve to inflatable rats.
Lyft will team up with Ford and a self-driving car start-up to offer rides in Miami.
Such shareholder revolts have been successful in the past.Last year, for example, the chief executive of Deutsche Börse, Werner Siefert, was forced out after shareholders opposed his plans to buy the London Stock Exchange.
Support eroded for Arcelor’s plans behind the scenes, too. Representatives from the Luxembourg government, which is one of Arcelor’s largest and most influential shareholders, spoke out strongly against the Mittal deal at first. Luxembourg regulators approved the Severstal deal, even though it had a few quirks. But as shareholder wrath grew over the Severstal agreement, the government began to privately question it. One representative claimed that Arcelor management had tried to “bully” the government into writing a takeover law that shut Mittal out.
The real turning point, according to several people involved in the negotiations, came when Arcelor’s board and management realized that a share buyback connected to the deal with Severstal might be voted down. The vote on the buyback, scheduled for last Wednesday, was canceled, in order to concentrate on negotiations with Mittal.
By James Kanter, Heather Timmons and Anand Giridharadas
June 25, 2006
LUXEMBOURG
A new steel giant is to be created out of a bitter battle, after Arcelor
formally agreed on Sunday
to a 26.5 billion takeover by rival Mittal Steel.
The deal combines Arcelor
–
a symbol of successful, pan
–
European cooperation and
economic revival, with operations that span Luxembourg, Belgium, France and Spain
–
with a fast
–
growing conglomerate found
ed by the India
–
born Lakshmi Mittal, who built a
fortune turning around sick steel plants in rapidly expanding markets from Trinidad to
Kazakhstan.
The deal, valued at $33.1 billion, is the latest sign that shareholder activism is marching
through the onc
e staid and sleepy boardrooms of Europe. The agreement to pair with
Mittal caps a wrenching turnaround for Arcelor’s management, which once dismissed
Mittal as a “company of Indians” but were forced to backtrack after shareholders
threatened to revolt.
Po
liticians in Europe who once criticized Mittal have remained mum in recent days, and
the merger brings hope that protectionist barriers against such deals may be eroding in
Europe.
ADVERTISEMENT
Continue reading the main story
Mittal is paying 40.37 a
share for Arcelor, nearly double what the company was trading
at when Mittal first made an offer in January. The new company will be named Arcelor
–
Mittal and will be headquartered in Luxembourg. Joseph Kinsch, chairman of Arcelor,
will be chairman of the n
ew company, and will be succeeded by Mittal when Kinsch
retires next year.
It was unclear what role Guy Dollé, Arcelor’s chief executive, will have. Mittal will be
president until Kinsch’s departure.
“It’s been a long struggle,” said Wilbur Ross Jr., a U
.S. billionaire investor and Mittal
board member. “Now that we have had an opportunity to be inside, with management, we
believe there will be even more synergies than we thought.”
Daily business updates The latest coverage of business, markets and the e
conomy, sent
by email each weekday. Get it sent to your inbox.
Kinsch, speaking in the courtyard of the Arcelor headquarters, said that the deal would
create “global leadership in steel” not just by ton but by value.
By James Kanter, Heather Timmons and Anand Giridharadas
June 25, 2006
LUXEMBOURG A new steel giant is to be created out of a bitter battle, after Arcelor
formally agreed on Sunday to a 26.5 billion takeover by rival Mittal Steel.
The deal combines Arcelor – a symbol of successful, pan-European cooperation and
economic revival, with operations that span Luxembourg, Belgium, France and Spain –
with a fast- growing conglomerate founded by the India-born Lakshmi Mittal, who built a
fortune turning around sick steel plants in rapidly expanding markets from Trinidad to
Kazakhstan.
The deal, valued at $33.1 billion, is the latest sign that shareholder activism is marching
through the once staid and sleepy boardrooms of Europe. The agreement to pair with
Mittal caps a wrenching turnaround for Arcelor’s management, which once dismissed
Mittal as a “company of Indians” but were forced to backtrack after shareholders
threatened to revolt.
Politicians in Europe who once criticized Mittal have remained mum in recent days, and
the merger brings hope that protectionist barriers against such deals may be eroding in
Europe.
ADVERTISEMENT
Continue reading the main story
Mittal is paying 40.37 a share for Arcelor, nearly double what the company was trading
at when Mittal first made an offer in January. The new company will be named Arcelor-
Mittal and will be headquartered in Luxembourg. Joseph Kinsch, chairman of Arcelor,
will be chairman of the new company, and will be succeeded by Mittal when Kinsch
retires next year.
It was unclear what role Guy Dollé, Arcelor’s chief executive, will have. Mittal will be
president until Kinsch’s departure.
“It’s been a long struggle,” said Wilbur Ross Jr., a U.S. billionaire investor and Mittal
board member. “Now that we have had an opportunity to be inside, with management, we
believe there will be even more synergies than we thought.”
Daily business updates The latest coverage of business, markets and the economy, sent
by email each weekday. Get it sent to your inbox.
Kinsch, speaking in the courtyard of the Arcelor headquarters, said that the deal would
create “global leadership in steel” not just by ton but by value.
RUBRIC
QUALITY OF RESPONSE |
NO RESPONSE |
POOR / UNSATISFACTORY |
SATISFACTORY |
GOOD |
EXCELLENT |
Content (worth a maximum of 50% of the total points) |
Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. |
20 points out of 50: The essay illustrates poor understanding of the relevant material by failing to address or incorrectly addressing the relevant content; failing to identify or inaccurately explaining/defining key concepts/ideas; ignoring or incorrectly explaining key points/claims and the reasoning behind them; and/or incorrectly or inappropriately using terminology; and elements of the response are lacking. |
30 points out of 50: The essay illustrates a rudimentary understanding of the relevant material by mentioning but not full explaining the relevant content; identifying some of the key concepts/ideas though failing to fully or accurately explain many of them; using terminology, though sometimes inaccurately or inappropriately; and/or incorporating some key claims/points but failing to explain the reasoning behind them or doing so inaccurately. Elements of the required response may also be lacking. |
40 points out of 50: The essay illustrates solid understanding of the relevant material by correctly addressing most of the relevant content; identifying and explaining most of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology; explaining the reasoning behind most of the key points/claims; and/or where necessary or useful, substantiating some points with accurate examples. The answer is complete. |
50 points: The essay illustrates exemplary understanding of the relevant material by thoroughly and correctly addressing the relevant content; identifying and explaining all of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology explaining the reasoning behind key points/claims and substantiating, as necessary/useful, points with several accurate and illuminating examples. No aspects of the required answer are missing. |
Use of Sources (worth a maximum of 20% of the total points). |
Zero points: Student failed to include citations and/or references. Or the student failed to submit a final paper. |
5 out 20 points: Sources are seldom cited to support statements and/or format of citations are not recognizable as APA 6th Edition format. There are major errors in the formation of the references and citations. And/or there is a major reliance on highly questionable. The Student fails to provide an adequate synthesis of research collected for the paper. |
10 out 20 points: References to scholarly sources are occasionally given; many statements seem unsubstantiated. Frequent errors in APA 6th Edition format, leaving the reader confused about the source of the information. There are significant errors of the formation in the references and citations. And/or there is a significant use of highly questionable sources. |
15 out 20 points: Credible Scholarly sources are used effectively support claims and are, for the most part, clear and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition is used with only a few minor errors. There are minor errors in reference and/or citations. And/or there is some use of questionable sources. |
20 points: Credible scholarly sources are used to give compelling evidence to support claims and are clearly and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition format is used accurately and consistently. The student uses above the maximum required references in the development of the assignment. |
Grammar (worth maximum of 20% of total points) |
Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. |
5 points out of 20: The paper does not communicate ideas/points clearly due to inappropriate use of terminology and vague language; thoughts and sentences are disjointed or incomprehensible; organization lacking; and/or numerous grammatical, spelling/punctuation errors |
10 points out 20: The paper is often unclear and difficult to follow due to some inappropriate terminology and/or vague language; ideas may be fragmented, wandering and/or repetitive; poor organization; and/or some grammatical, spelling, punctuation errors |
15 points out of 20: The paper is mostly clear as a result of appropriate use of terminology and minimal vagueness; no tangents and no repetition; fairly good organization; almost perfect grammar, spelling, punctuation, and word usage. |
20 points: The paper is clear, concise, and a pleasure to read as a result of appropriate and precise use of terminology; total coherence of thoughts and presentation and logical organization; and the essay is error free. |
Structure of the Paper (worth 10% of total points) |
Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. |
3 points out of 10: Student needs to develop better formatting skills. The paper omits significant structural elements required for and APA 6th edition paper. Formatting of the paper has major flaws. The paper does not conform to APA 6th edition requirements whatsoever. |
5 points out of 10: Appearance of final paper demonstrates the student’s limited ability to format the paper. There are significant errors in formatting and/or the total omission of major components of an APA 6th edition paper. They can include the omission of the cover page, abstract, and page numbers. Additionally the page has major formatting issues with spacing or paragraph formation. Font size might not conform to size requirements. The student also significantly writes too large or too short of and paper |
7 points out of 10: Research paper presents an above-average use of formatting skills. The paper has slight errors within the paper. This can include small errors or omissions with the cover page, abstract, page number, and headers. There could be also slight formatting issues with the document spacing or the font Additionally the paper might slightly exceed or undershoot the specific number of required written pages for the assignment. |
10 points: Student provides a high-caliber, formatted paper. This includes an APA 6th edition cover page, abstract, page number, headers and is double spaced in 12’ Times Roman Font. Additionally, the paper conforms to the specific number of required written pages and neither goes over or under the specified length of the paper. |
|
|
GET THIS PROJECT NOW BY CLICKING ON THIS LINK TO PLACE THE ORDER
Also, you can place the order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow / www.phdwriters.us/orders/ordernow
|
Do You Have Any Other Essay/Assignment/Class Project/Homework Related to this? Click Here Now [CLICK ME]and Have It Done by Our PhD Qualified Writers!! |
|
|