Chinese firms in talks to join group to buy Li Ka-shing's ports, Bloomberg News reports
June 12 (Reuters) - Chinese ports operator China Cosco Shipping Corporation is among the firms in talks to participate in a global consortium seeking to buy 43 ports from billionaire Li Ka-shing-owned CK Hutchison (0001.HK), opens new tab, Bloomberg News reported on Thursday.
CK Hutchison said last month that Mediterranean Shipping Company, run by the family of Italian billionaire Gianluigi Aponte, was the main investor in a group seeking the portfolio of ports, which includes two near the Panama Canal, for $22.8 billion.
Negotiation for the deal that covers 43 ports in 23 countries is on an exclusive basis between CK Hutchison and the consortium for 145 days until July 27.
Adding Chinese investors to the consortium emerged as one of the options after high-level talks in Switzerland last month between Chinese and U.S. officials, the Bloomberg report said.
China Cosco Shipping Corp is among the state-backed companies in talks with the consortium run by the Aponte family, the report said.
CK Hutchison and China Cosco Shipping didn't immediately respond to Reuters requests for comment. Reuters could not immediately verify the report.
The deal has been through weeks of global scrutiny and criticism in China and the U.S. over CK Hutchison's plan to sell the ports to a consortium, previously led by U.S. investment firm BlackRock (BLK.N), opens new tab. BlackRock remains part of the group.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
5 hours ago
- The Independent
There is one statistic that should worry Reeves and Starmer the most
If there is one statistic that should ring alarm bells in government it is this: that the number of foreign direct investment (FDI) projects in the UK has fallen to the lowest level since records began 18 years ago. It isn't the Tories or a Tory-backed think tank saying this but the government's own people, the Department for Business and Trade. There were 1,375 FDI projects secured by the UK to the end of March, down 12 per cent from the previous year and the lowest since the data began to be compiled in 2007-08. Why does this matter? Because investment from overseas brings with it jobs and prosperity. It's a declaration of faith that Britain is a good place in which to do business and by choosing to come here, foreign businesses are preferring this country over others. Britain needs that international money, it cannot rely on homegrown capital to drive wealth. But increasingly, it's not coming. Investors, it seems, do not like what they see and would rather go elsewhere. The phenomenon is not new – the peak, of 2,265 ventures, was in 2016-17 – but it gives the lie to Sir Keir Starmer 's much vaunted growth agenda. We're told that the prime minister and his chancellor, Rachel Reeves, are going further and faster to kickstart the economy. A year into their rule, a period that more or less coincides with the official DBT update on FDI, foreigners are telling us something very different. There is of course, more than one way to skin a cat, and a DBT spokesperson duly insists: 'This government knows the power of inward investment and is laser-focused on targeting the highest-impact job-creating wins across the UK, which is why the value of our FDI projects has gone up over the past year as we seek quality over volume.' Note the 'laser-focused', which sounds impressive but is meaningless. It's insulting and, by the way, wouldn't previous administrations also declare they were similarly 'laser-focused'? Then again, it's a bit like 'further and faster', a description to be repeated ad nauseam but which does not amount to anything. Note, too, the shift from quantity to quality. These were figures devoted to quantity, as they have been for almost two decades. But now, they are rendered redundant. Would they have said the same if the total had risen? What do you think? The point about concentrating on the size of a deal rather than its existence is that value is hard to quantify. It depends on how companies formulate their accounts, exchange rate movements and other factors. Crucially as well, that size tally can be skewed by just one deal, one mega-merger between multinationals that may even result in substantial UK job losses. Another, accompanying, piece of data is that the government estimates that jobs created via FDI were down 3 per cent in the year to end of March 2025. It was said to be an estimate but the number was precise, at 69,355, which is the lowest since 2020-21, when Britain, and the world, was in the grip of Covid-19. It is true that Britain is not alone. Other large nations, especially those in Europe and including the US, suffered falls in their inward investment. The recent EY attractiveness survey put the blame on 'weak economic growth, geopolitical turbulence and ongoing high energy prices'. That may be so, but how to explain then the fact that FDI in the UAE increased by 49 per cent last year? This was in the World Investment Report from the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. Being the UN, however, the popularity of the rich UAE was a cause for regret. 'Too many economies are being left behind… because the system still sends capital where it's easiest, not where it's needed,' said UNCTAD's secretary-general. Yes, capitalism is unfair. Unlike many nations, though, Britain is in a position to make life easier for investors. What is the government doing? Only increasing employers' national insurance contributions and adding to the regulatory burden, and therefore the cost, with its new workers' charter. Not much sign of 'further and faster' there. Comparing the UK's performance with others and saying they were down as well, is rather like those organisations that when they suffer a disaster fall back on the reality that most of the time everything operates fine. No, it's this calamity that counts and its consequences, that is all that people are concerned with. It's a convenient get-out tactic that encourages acceptance and complacency rather than action. But they are laser-focused so that's alright then. What is concerning is where those falls in FDI projects occurred, in IT and financial services, in life sciences, biotech and pharmaceuticals, just the sectors the government is keen to promote as epitomising Britain's modern economy. There is a trend underway that, if reports are to be believed, has seen Reeves react. This is outflow of individuals' wealth from Britain. Some non-doms, the wealthy foreigners able to take advantage of lower tax rules, have chosen to depart. Meanwhile, others are not coming. Why? Because in her Budget, the chancellor said she was planning to make them subject to UK inheritance tax on their worldwide assets, including those held in trusts – a proposal she is now said to be reconsidering. Whether it's enough remains to be seen. Hers is a regime that has targeted the wealthy in other areas. That she decided to strike at the non-doms may be seen as indicative of a wider policy. Reeves made her move at exactly the same moment as other nations were doing their level best to woo the fleet-of-foot global rich, offering an array of inducements and benefits. They were doing so because while these folks pay lower taxes they contribute to the public purse through other means, by spending and investing – like FDI in other words. Perish the thought the two are related, that foreigners per se no longer wish to invest in Britain. That laser focus, it seems, has yet to reach them.
Reuters
5 hours ago
- Reuters
Flood-hit China expands social security net as extreme rain takes toll
BEIJING, June 28 (Reuters) - China has expanded the economic safeguards for segments of its population affected by flood control schemes in times of extreme rainfall, including pledges of direct compensation from the central government and payments for livestock losses. In China, diverting flood-waters to areas next to rivers is a major step in managing downstream flooding. As extreme rainfall grows in frequency, China is increasingly utilising such areas, some of which have been unused until now and have been populated by farms, croplands and even residential buildings, stoking social tensions. According to revised rules on compensation related to flood diversions released late on Friday, the central government will now bear 70% of all compensation funds, with local governments responsible for the rest. Previously, the ratio was to be decided based on actual economic losses and the fiscal situation of local governments. Livestock and poultry that cannot be relocated in time before the arrival of diverted flood-waters will also be included in the compensation scheme for the first time. Previously, only the loss of working animals could be claimed for compensation. In the summer of 2023, almost 1 million people in Hebei, a province on the doorstep of Beijing, were relocated after record rain forced authorities to divert water from swollen rivers to some populated areas for storage, triggering anger over the homes and farms sacrificed to save the Chinese capital. China currently has 98 designated flood diversion areas spanning major river basins including the Yangtze River basin, home to a third of the country's population. During the 2023 Hebei floods, eight flood storage areas were used. Since the start of the East Asia monsoon in early June, precipitation in the middle and lower reaches of the Yangtze has been up to two times higher than usual, officials from the China Meterological Administration told reporters on Friday. In other parts of China, daily rainfall measured by 30 meteorological stations in provinces such as Hubei and Guizhou broke records for the month of June, they said. Guizhou was the focal point of China's flood alleviation efforts this week, with one of its cities hit by flooding on a scale that meteorologists said could only happen once in 50 years, and at a speed that shocked its 300,000 residents. That prompted Beijing to issue pledges on Thursday to move vulnerable populations and industries to low-flood areas and allocate more space for flood diversion.
The Independent
10 hours ago
- The Independent
Your Nike shoes are about to cost a whole lot more thanks to Donald Trump, company warns
Nike warned that tariffs imposed by President Donald Trump will cost the company about $1 billion as it looks to make 'surgical' price increases in the fall. The company is shifting production away from China, where Nike makes about 16 percent of the footwear it imports into the U.S., Chief Financial Officer Matthew Friend told investors Thursday. 'We will optimize our sourcing mix and allocate production differently across countries to mitigate the new cost headwind into the United States,' Friend said on the call. The sports giant appears to be unloading some of the burden of the tariffs onto customers. Last month Nike announced it was increasing prices for adult apparel and equipment by $2 to $10 from June 1. It forecast that footwear costing between $100 to $150 would rise by $5, while shoes costing above $150 would increase by $10. There were some exceptions — the price of children's products, Nike Air Force 1s or Jordan products would not rise. 'We regularly evaluate our business and make pricing adjustments as part of our seasonal planning,' Nike previously said in a statement, without mention of the tariffs. Nike also reported a quarterly profit of $211 million, or 14 cents per share. Revenue totaled $11.1 billion. Both edged out Wall Street projections. Nike, Adidas, Under Armour and Puma were among 76 companies that signed a letter in April addressed to Trump, asking for a footwear exemption from reciprocal tariffs. The letter warned tariffs would 'become a major impact at the cash register for every family.' The potential for higher prices from Trump's tariffs have raised alarms for families, notably those who already spend a good chunk of money on equipment needed to participate in sports. Trump and his Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said late Thursday that the U.S. and China have signed an agreement on trade, but provided no details. Elsewhere, Trump on Friday said he was suspending all trade talks with Canada — and making plans to force Americans to pay high import taxes on its goods — after the northern ally's finance department confirmed plans to collect a digital services tax.
