Spanish-owned Scottish Power sparks merger talks with Ovo Energy
Why you can trust Sky News
Scottish Power, the Spanish-owned energy supplier, and larger rival Ovo Energy have begun holding exploratory talks about a merger that would create a company serving more than 6 million British households.
Sky News has learnt that executives from Iberdrola, which owns Scottish Power, and Ovo have been engaged in preliminary discussions in recent weeks about the possibility of a deal.
The talks are at an early stage and any formal transaction would be months away, if it materialised at all.
If the two companies do agree a merger of their residential gas and electricity operations, it would create the third-largest supplier behind Centrica-owned British Gas and Octopus Energy.
As the larger company, with 4 million customers, Ovo would probably be the acquiring entity, but with Iberdrola potentially contributing cash and remaining as a shareholder in the enlarged group, according to one banking source.
Scottish Power serves about 2.4 million households.
The discussions between the two companies are running in parallel to a separate process through which Ovo is exploring the potential to raise roughly £300m from the sale of new shares in the company, according to industry sources.
In recent weeks, a number of financial investors have been contacted by Rothschild, the investment bank advising Ovo, about the opportunity.
Exactly a year ago, Sky News revealed that Ovo had hired Rothschild to explore options including bringing in a new investor or a sale, 15 years after it launched in a bid to challenge the industry's oligopoly.
Founded by Stephen Fitzpatrick, the entrepreneur who now owns London's Kensington Roof Gardens, Ovo's shareholders include the private equity firm Mayfair Equity Partners, Morgan Stanley Investment Management and Mitsubishi Corporation, the Japanese conglomerate.
Under Mr Fitzpatrick, who launched Ovo in 2009, the company positioned itself as a challenger brand offering superior service to the industry's established players.
Ovo's transformational moment came in 2020, when it bought the retail supply arm of SSE, transforming it overnight into one of Britain's leading energy companies.
Its growth has not been without difficulties, however, particularly in relation to its challenged relationship with Ofgem and a torrent of customer complaints about overcharging.
Justin King, the former J Sainsbury chief who now chairs Ovo, has made repairing its regulatory relationships a priority for the company.
He also oversaw the recruitment of David Buttress, who was briefly Boris Johnson's cost-of-living tsar after leaving the top job at Just Eat, as its chief executive.
Key to Ovo's longer-term valuation will be the performance of its technology platform, Kaluza, which was set up to license software to other energy suppliers and provides customers with smart electric vehicle charging and heat pumps.
Ovo announced last year that AGL Energy, one of Australia's biggest energy suppliers, had bought a 20% stake in Kaluza at a $500m (£395m) valuation.
The British energy company has also entered the electric vehicle car charging sector under the brand Charge Anywhere, adding tens of thousands of public charging points across the UK.
Iberdrola bought Scottish Power in 2007 in a deal valuing the company at more than £11bn.
Next week, the UK's energy price cap will fall by 7% to £1,720 a year, following an announcement by Ofgem, the industry regulator.
Ovo and Scottish Power both declined to comment.
Please refresh the page for the latest version.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
23 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Is Keir already lining up his next U-turn? Starmer faces fresh rebellion from Labour MPs over his 'family farm tax'
Sir Keir Starmer has been put on notice of a fresh Labour rebellion over the Government's 'family farm tax'. More than 40 Labour MPs are said to be considering a bid to water down looming changes to agricultural and business inheritance tax relief. It comes after the Prime Minister performed a trio of embarrassing U-turns in recent weeks. Sir Keir has reversed his position on axing the winter fuel payment for millions of pensioners, a national grooming gangs inquiry, and welfare cuts. This has left Labour rebels feeling emboldened that they can force the Government into further policy changes. According to the Telegraph, a group of Labour backbenchers are considering using amendments to legislation to exempt small family farms from a planned tax raid. At last year's Budget, Chancellor Rachel Reeves announced farmers will pay a 20 per cent rate of inheritance tax on land and property they inherit worth more than £1million. The Government has insisted the measures - dubbed the 'family farm tax' and set to be in place from April 2026 - will only affect the wealthiest quarter of landowners. But the National Farmers' Union (NFU) and others say the impact of Ms Reeves' measures will be much more widespread. Critics claim the move could wipe out family-run farms with tight margins, as they will be forced to sell up in order to pay death duties. There have been months of demonstrations by farmers in response to the Chancellor's tax raid, including tractor protests in Wesminster. A 'rural growth group' of Labour MPs is now proposing the raising of the £1million cut-off point at which estates lose their tax reliefs. They have suggested estates receive full tax relief on the value of agricultural properties up to £10million, 50 per cent to £20million, and nil thereafter. Sam Rushworth, Labour MP for Bishop Auckland, who is a member of the group, told the newspaper they would 'consider what amendments to put down'. Mr Rushworth said: 'We are all keen to avoid amendments. I don't want it to get to that point. I am a Labour MP and I broadly support the Government. 'I would like to see them bring forward different recommendations in the Bill.' Ex-Cabinet minister Louise Haigh, who was a leading rebel over the Government's now partially-reversed welfare cuts, has called for Sir Keir to 'reset' his relationship with the British public. 'I think this is a moment and an opportunity to reset the Government's relationship with the British public and to move forward, to adopt a different approach to our economic policy and our political strategy,' she told the BBC in the wake of the PM's climbdown on welfare changes. 'And I think that has been accepted from within government and a lot of people, both in the parliamentary Labour Party, but crucially, the country will really welcome that.' The Government's original welfare package had restricted eligibility for Personal Independence Payment (PIP), which is the main disability payment in England. It also cut the health-related element of Universal Credit. But, after Sir Keir offered concessions to rebel MPs, the changes to PIP will now only be implemented in November 2026 and apply to new claimants only. All existing recipients of the health element of Universal Credit will also have their incomes protected in real terms. A Government spokesman said: 'Our reforms to agricultural and business property relief are vital to fix the public services we all rely on. 'Three quarters of estates will continue to pay no inheritance tax at all, while the remaining quarter will pay half the inheritance tax that most people pay, and payments can be spread over 10 years, interest-free. 'We're investing billions of pounds in sustainable food production and nature's recovery, slashing costs for food producers to export to the EU and have appointed former NFU president Baroness Minette Batters to advise on reforms to boost farmers profits.'
Finextra
31 minutes ago
- Finextra
Deep Dive: Wise – Building a World of Money Without Borders: By Sam Boboev
Wise (formerly TransferWise) has quietly become one of fintech's biggest success stories, transforming how people and businesses send money across borders. From humble startup origins in 2011, Wise now moves over £145 billion internationally each year for 15+ million customers – at a fraction of the cost charged by banks. In doing so, Wise saved its users an estimated £2 billion in fees in FY2025 alone. It's a rare fintech that's both fast-growing and profitable, pursuing a bold mission encapsulated in its slogan: 'Money without borders – instant, convenient, transparent and eventually free.' This deep dive explores why Wise matters today – covering the massive market it's tackling, its journey and products, the technology and regulatory infrastructure under its hood, its recent financial performance, competitive landscape, and what customers and leadership are saying. A Massive Market Ripe for Disruption Moving money internationally has long been notorious for high costs and hassle. Over £22 trillion crosses borders each year, projected to reach £28 trillion by 2027 as globalization drives more migration, remote work, and global commerce. By Wise's own 2025 estimate, the number may be as high as £32 trillion annually. Historically, this market was dominated by big banks and legacy remittance providers relying on an antiquated correspondent banking network. International transfers often meant 'expensive, slow and inefficient service, reliant on outdated infrastructure,' as Wise's 2023 report bluntly puts it. Banks and incumbents like Western Union layered on fees and hidden exchange rate markups – profiting from customers' lack of transparency. The result: sending money abroad could cost 5-8% in fees (often not obvious upfront) and take days to arrive. Wise was founded to change this status quo. Its vision of 'Money Without Borders' is about making moving money 'as cheap, fast, and convenient as sending an email,' in the words of its co-founder. Wise's core innovation was using technology and clever account structures to eliminate intermediaries and hidden fees, giving users the real mid-market exchange rate and charging only a low upfront fee. As we'll see, this strategy is forcing the industry to evolve. Today, many fintechs and even banks are racing to offer cheaper, easier cross-border payments – yet traditional banks remain Wise's primary competitors, still handling the majority of cross-currency transactions. A growing field of digital challengers (from neobanks like Revolut to PayPal's Xoom and others) are also carving out niches. But Wise has a head start in scale, efficiency, and trust – built over a decade of singular focus on solving this problem. From Startup to Public Company Wise's origin story is a personal one. In 2011, two Estonian friends living in London – Kristo Käärmann and Taavet Hinrikus – grew frustrated with the 'massive problem' of bank fees on international transfers. They started TransferWise that year to help people send money abroad at the true exchange rate. The concept resonated: by 2014, having raised a $58 million Series C to expand globally, TransferWise launched in the US and Australia. The company hit major milestones quickly. It reached its first £1 billion transferred (cumulative) in 2014, and by 2017 was profitable with over £1 billion being moved every month through its platform – a rarity in fintech. Importantly, Wise also became an innovator in financial infrastructure early on. In 2016 it gained direct access to the UK's Faster Payments network (the first tech company to do so), showing a knack for working with regulators to improve speed and cost. Over time, TransferWise broadened its offerings beyond person-to-person remittances. In 2016 it launched its first business accounts for SMEs to send money internationally on better terms. By 2018 it rolled out a borderless multi-currency account and debit Mastercard, enabling customers to hold money in multiple currencies and spend it via card in different countries with low fees. The company's global footprint also expanded: it opened offices around the world (10 offices by 2019, including a European hub in Belgium to navigate Brexit) and set up an Asia-Pacific hub in Singapore in 2017. In 2021, reflecting its broadened mission, TransferWise rebranded to 'Wise.' That same year, Wise went public via a direct listing on the London Stock Exchange – notably, London's largest tech listing ever at the time. The listing valued Wise at ~$11 billion, signaling its arrival as a major fintech player. Today, Wise is truly international: over 6,500 employees ('Wisers') across 20+ offices serve customers in 170+ countries. Yet the company insists it's 'still solving only a fraction of the problem'. As CEO Kristo Käärmann wrote, 'Twelve years ago we set out to solve the massive problem people and businesses face in sending money around the world… While we're nowhere near mission complete, 16 million people and businesses are now helping us get closer every day.' In the next sections, we'll examine how Wise is attempting to fulfill that mission through its products and underlying infrastructure. --------- Source: Wise Annual Reports FY2023–FY2025; product pages and blog; CEO and executive statements from Wise reports; and Wise investor reports highlighting key metrics. All data and quotes are from official Wise materials. Disclaimer: Fintech Wrap Up aggregates publicly available information for informational purposes only. Portions of the content may be reproduced verbatim from the original source, and full credit is provided with a "Source: [Name]" attribution. All copyrights and trademarks remain the property of their respective owners. Fintech Wrap Up does not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or reliability of the aggregated content; these are the responsibility of the original source providers. Links to the original sources may not always be included. For questions or concerns, please contact us at
Telegraph
37 minutes ago
- Telegraph
A British Leyland of TV is the Government's worst idea yet
A show about a good-looking human rights lawyer who becomes a triumphant, reforming prime minister? Or a mini-series about a brilliant, glamorous economist who becomes Britain's first female chancellor? Perhaps a movie about a fiery red-head who works her way up from poverty to become the most powerful woman in the country? As the Government paves the way for a potential merger between ITV, Channel 4, and Channel 5 to create a single, state-backed commercial broadcaster, it is not hard to imagine the kind of shows it might commission. But hold on. A British Leyland of television is the Government's worst idea yet. What the industry actually needs is more competition – not less. It may still be a few years off. But Sir Keir Starmer's Labour Government is very clearly paving the way for a major consolidation of the British broadcasting industry. Last week, as part of its shiny new 'industrial strategy', it opened the door to removing the barriers that prevent a merger between the existing terrestrial broadcasters. Apparently, ministers will examine 'possible consolidation between broadcasters', along with 'closer strategic partnerships'. Meanwhile, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) and Ofcom will be asked to review their definitions of 'television advertising' to include YouTube and Netflix, which again will make mergers easier. Add it all up, and it is not hard to see where this is going. We will need a single, state-backed commercial broadcaster to cope with a changing market, stand up to the American streaming giants, and preserve what used to be one of the UK's strongest industries. Heck, they could even bring in the marketing whizzes who gave us Great British Energy and Great British Railways to come up with the branding for Great British Television. Of course, we all understand that something needs to be done. In a world where streaming dominates, and with most people under 30 barely even aware of what traditional broadcasting through signals and aerials was, the industry is in an increasingly dire position. ITV, the biggest of the three, has seen its share price slump from 265p 10 years ago to just 80p now, and the broadcaster is only worth £3bn. There has already been plenty of speculation about a break-up, perhaps with a sale of its production unit, or else a full-scale takeover of the company, probably by a foreign buyer. Channel 4 has been slashing jobs and cutting back on its programming budget as it grapples with a declining advertising market. Meanwhile, Channel 5, which has never been a huge success since it was launched in 1997, is also potentially in play as its American owner Paramount prepares for a takeover by media company Skydance. Why not put all three together and create a new British-owned powerhouse in commercial broadcasting?
