PFI
Trondheim, Norway
PFI
Trondheim, Norway

Time filter

Source Type

News Article | February 27, 2017
Site: www.businesswire.com

LONDON--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Assured Guaranty (Europe) Ltd. (AGE)* announced that it has guaranteed principal and interest payments on approximately £98 million par of bonds, issued by Uliving to refinance student halls of residence at the University of Essex Colchester campus. As a result of the guarantee, the bonds are rated AA by S&P. The publicly listed, 42-year bond priced on 22 February 2017 taking advantage of the current low long term real rates by issuing at a negative real yield (prior to factoring in inflation). The sponsor, Uliving, was established in 2009 to develop student accommodation projects in partnership with universities. The bonds will refinance a project that has been operational since 2013 and consists of two buildings on the University’s Colchester campus, providing a total of 1,429 student rooms. "We are now seeing a stronger flow of refinancing opportunities like this one, across various sectors and PFI projects, because of the current low interest rate environment, coupled with the increased number of investors choosing to invest in longer maturities in order to match their liabilities. These are excellent conditions to refinance with a wrapped bond and reduce the cost of debt.” Assured Guaranty closed a similar transaction for the University of London at the end of December. “There is strong demand from investors for highly rated infrastructure bonds as a direct result of Solvency II. In this transaction, as with others we have closed, a wrap proved to be the most cost-effective solution to deliver this refinancing." As the financial guarantor, AGE guarantees timely payment of scheduled principal and interest to bondholders throughout the life of the bond, in accordance with the terms of its financial guarantee. * AGE (company number 2510099) is authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority. AGE provides its financial guarantee together with a co-guarantee from its affiliate Assured Guaranty Municipal Corp. (AGM). Through its subsidiaries, Assured Guaranty Ltd. (AGL and, together with its subsidiaries, Assured Guaranty) is the leading provider of financial guarantees for principal and interest payments due on municipal, public infrastructure and structured financings. Its subsidiary AGM guarantees international infrastructure and U.S. municipal bonds - and was previously named Financial Security Assurance Inc. (FSA) before becoming an Assured Guaranty company in July 2009. AGE, a subsidiary of AGM, is Assured Guaranty’s European operating platform. AGL is a publicly traded (NYSE: AGO), Bermuda-based holding company. More information on AGL and its subsidiaries can be found at AssuredGuaranty.com. Any forward-looking statements made in this press release reflect Assured Guaranty’s current views with respect to future events and are made pursuant to the safe harbour provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Such statements involve risks and uncertainties that may cause actual results to differ materially from those set forth in these statements. These risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to, those resulting from Assured Guaranty’s inability to execute its strategies; the demand for Assured Guaranty’s financial guarantees; further actions that the rating agencies may take with respect to Assured Guaranty’s financial strength ratings; adverse developments in Assured Guaranty’s guaranteed portfolio; and other risks and uncertainties that have not been identified at this time, management’s response to these factors, and other risk factors identified in AGL’s filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which are made as of 27 February 2017. Assured Guaranty undertakes no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by law.


Joint Ventures between Carillion and KBR (50:50) have been awarded construction and facilities management support services contracts to support the Army Basing Programme (a series of unit moves and re-roles within the UK, and the return and resettlement of troops from Germany by 2019) - with delivery across Salisbury Plain Training Area and at Aldershot - in total worth over £1.1 billion. The Aspire Defence Capital Works Joint Venture will design and construct 130 new buildings, together with extensions and alterations to existing buildings and associated infrastructure. The construction works have an estimated value of £680 million, of which Carillion's share will be 50 per cent or some £340 million. Work is expected to start immediately with completion scheduled for 2020. The Aspire Defence Services Joint Venture will provide facilities management and maintenance for the assets to be constructed and also for the increased military population across the garrisons under the Project Allenby/Connaught (PAC), a 35-year contract let by the UK Ministry of Defence to Aspire Defence Limited in 2006. This contract variation will add approximately a further £430 million of support services revenue over the remaining 25-year contract, of which Carillion's share will be approximately £215 million. This additional service provision will begin as soon as construction of the first asset is completed, which is expected to be in May 2017, and will run until 2041. Since contract signing in 2006, Aspire Defence Capital Works has continued to deliver the construction element of PAC, the largest infrastructure Private Finance Initiative (PFI) project ever let by the UK Ministry of Defence, with approximately 550 new and refurbished buildings completed to date, on time, safely and to budget in an eight-year programme, enhancing soldiers' living and working accommodation at Tidworth, Perham Down, Bulford, Larkhill, Warminster and Aldershot. Aspire Defence Services has been successfully delivering hard and soft facilities management and maintenance services under PAC for a decade. 'We are delighted that Aspire Defence Limited and its sub-contractors Aspire Defence Capital Works and Aspire Defence Services have been selected by the Ministry of Defence to deliver this major element of the Army Basing Programme. I believe this reflects in the successful delivery of new living and working accommodation along with associated assets for Project Allenby/Connaught, together with the high-quality, value for money services that will continue to be provided for this project. We look forward to continuing our strong relationship with Aspire Defence Limited and to working together on behalf of the Ministry of Defence to create the accommodation and deliver the facilities manage services needed for the successful delivery of its Army Basing programme.'


News Article | February 27, 2017
Site: www.businesswire.com

Antoine Frérot, Veolia Environnement’s Chairman & CEO commented: “2016 represents another year of strong results growth for Veolia. Our margins have continued to improve and we achieved net free cash flow of nearly €1 billion. Revenue also improved significantly in the fourth quarter, with 1.9% growth at constant exchange rates. These good results were achieved due to the efforts of each and every one of our Group’s employees, and I would like to thank them. At the end of 2015, we presented our 3-year development plan. It is based on controlled and profitable growth and accompanied by continued cost reduction efforts. Our ambition remains intact. The last quarter of 2016 showed that Veolia has demonstrated the capacity to generate growth and I wish to further accelerate growth by committing additional resources. In addition, our business situation has toughened during recent months. In order to finance reinforced commercial efforts and address this new reality, we are intensifying our cost savings program to drive €800 million in savings over the 2016-2018 period compared with the previous expectation of €600 million. These additional efforts will enable Veolia to continue on the path of profitable growth.” By business, and at constant exchange rates, Water revenue declined by 1.5% to €11,138 million due to lower construction revenue, while Waste revenue increased 0.5% to €8,401 million given a 0.6% increase in revenue due to higher volumes and service price increases of 0.8%. Energy revenue increased 0.4% to €4,851 million, including the impact of lower energy prices, as well as a slightly favorable weather effect (+€35 million) and good volumes in China. Excluding the impact of lower energy prices and construction revenue, each business increased revenue at constant exchange rates by +1.8%, +1.6% and +3.2%, respectively.The reinforcement of the percent of revenue generated by industrial clients continues, representing 45% of 2016 revenue compared with 44% in 2015. * At constant exchange rates ** Equivalent to €3.4bn to €3.6bn (excluding IFRIC 12) and before taking into account the unfavorable exchange rate impacts recorded in 2016 Definitions of all financial indicators used in this press release can be found at the end of this document. Veolia group is the global leader in optimized resource management. With over 174,000 employees worldwide, the Group designs and provides water, waste and energy management solutions that contribute to the sustainable development of communities and industries. Through its three complementary business activities, Veolia helps to develop access to resources, preserve available resources, and to replenish them. In 2015, the group Veolia supplied 100 million people with drinking water and 63 million people with wastewater service, produced 63 million megawatt hours of energy and converted 42.9 million metric tons of waste into new materials and energy. Veolia Environnement (listed on Paris Euronext: VIE) recorded consolidated revenue of €25.0 billion in 2015. www.veolia.com Veolia Environnement is a corporation listed on the Euronext Paris. This press release contains “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the provisions of the U.S. Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Such forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance. Actual results may differ materially from the forward-looking statements as a result of a number of risks and uncertainties, many of which are outside our control, including but not limited to: the risk of suffering reduced profits or losses as a result of intense competition, the risk that changes in energy prices and taxes may reduce Veolia Environnement’s profits, the risk that governmental authorities could terminate or modify some of Veolia Environnement’s contracts, the risk that acquisitions may not provide the benefits that Veolia Environnement hopes to achieve, the risks related to customary provisions of divesture transactions, the risk that Veolia Environnement’s compliance with environmental laws may become more costly in the future, the risk that currency exchange rate fluctuations may negatively affect Veolia Environnement’s financial results and the price of its shares, the risk that Veolia Environnement may incur environmental liability in connection with its past, present and future operations, as well as the other risks described in the documents Veolia Environnement has filed with the Autorités des Marchés Financiers (French securities regulator). Veolia Environnement does not undertake, nor does it have, any obligation to provide updates or to revise any forward looking statements. Investors and security holders may obtain from Veolia Environnement a free copy of documents it filed (www.veolia.com) with the Autorités des Marchés Financiers. This document contains "non‐GAAP financial measures". These "non‐GAAP financial measures" might be defined differently from similar financial measures made public by other groups and should not replace GAAP financial measures prepared pursuant to IFRS standards.. FINANCIAL INFORMATION FOR THE YEAR ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2016 Under concession contracts with local authorities, infrastructure is accounted, as appropriate, as an intangible asset, a financial receivable, or a combination of the two. Veolia may have a payment obligation vis-a-vis the grantor to utilize the associated assets. In July 2016, IFRIC published a verdict regarding these payments and concluded that in the case of fixed payments required by the operator, an asset and a liability should be recorded (intangible model) Veolia identified the contracts concerned and will apply the new IFRIC 12 measures retroactive to 1/1/2015. The most significant contracts concerned are our water concessions in the Czech Republic and Slovakia. RECONCILIATION OF 2015 AND 2016 FIGURES EXCLUDING AND INCLUDING IMPACTS OF THE ADOPTION OF THE IFRIC 12 INTERPRETATION Revenue, net free cash flow and net financial debt are not impacted by the adoption of the IFRIC 12 interpretation. The data for the year ended December 31, 2016, presented in this press release do not include the impact of the re-presentations relating to the adoption of the IFRIC 12 interpretation. (1) Including the share of current net income of joint ventures and associates viewed as core Company activitie (2) See definition in Appendix (3) Subject to the approval of General Shareholders’ Meeting of April 20, 2017 The main foreign exchange impacts were as follows: C] INCOME STATEMENT EXCLUDING THE IMPACT OF IFRIC 12 Group consolidated revenue stood at €24,390.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2016, compared to €24,964.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2015, a decrease of -0.4% at constant exchange rates. Excluding Construction revenue 5 and the impact of lower energy prices, revenue increased +2.0% at constant exchange rates. Revenue posted an upturn of +1.9% at constant exchange rates in the 4th quarter (after -2.1% in the 1st quarter, +0.1% in the 2nd quarter, and -1.7% in the 3rd quarter at constant exchange rates), reflecting the Group’s return to growth. Excluding Construction and the impact of energy prices, 4th quarter revenue rose by +3.4% at constant exchange rates (compared to +1.2% in the 1st quarter, +1.9% in the 2nd quarter, and +1.6% in the 3rd quarter). The municipal sector generated 55% of 2016 revenue (i.e. around €13 billion), and the industrial sector generated 45% (i.e. around €11 billion). The change in revenue between 2015 and 2016 breaks down by main impact as follows: The foreign exchange impact on revenue amounted to -€473.2 million (-1.9% of revenue) and mainly reflects fluctuations in the value of the euro against the U.K. pound sterling (-€275.8 million), the Argentine peso (-€90.6 million), the Japanese yen (+€43.9 million), the Polish zloty (-€38.9 million), the Mexican peso (-€27.3 million), and the Chinese renminbi (-€29.2 million). The decrease in Construction revenue (-€484 million, representing -1.9% of Group revenue) essentially concerns Veolia Water Technologies and SADE for -€345 million, as well as the completion of construction work on the Leeds and Shropshire PFI incinerators in the United Kingdom (-€80 million). Group revenue was affected by the decline in energy prices (-0.5%), primarily in the United States and in Central Europe. The positive business momentum (Commerce/Volumes and scope impact) of +€423 million was due to: Favorable price effects were the result of tariff indexations that remain positive, although moderate, and the favorable price impact from recycled materials (+€15 million, particularly paper). The revenue trend in the 4th quarter of 2016 was marked by a turnaround, driven by the growth of Europe excluding France and the Rest of the world: Revenue in France for the year ended December 31, 2016 was €5,417.7 million, down by -1.0% compared with the prior year. Excluding the impact of Construction activities and energy prices, revenue decreased -0.9%. Revenue in the Europe excluding France segment for the year ended December 31, 2016 amounted to €8,286.3 million, up +0.1% at constant exchange rates compared to the year ended December 31, 2015. Revenue posted an upturn of +1.5% at constant exchange rates in the 4th quarter, after virtual stability throughout the year: -0.9% in the 1st quarter, +0.3% in the 2nd quarter, and -0.6% in the 3rd quarter. Excluding the impact of Construction activities and energy prices, revenue increased +2.3% at constant exchange rates for the year. This increase breaks down as follows: Revenue in the Rest of the World segment for the year ended December 31, 2016 was €6,028.4 million, up +3.7% at constant exchange rates compared to the year ended December 31, 2015. After a decrease of -2.4% at constant exchange rates in the 1st quarter, revenue continuously improved throughout the year: +1.9% in the 2nd quarter, +6.3% in the 3rd quarter, and +9.1% in the 4th quarter. Excluding the impact of Construction activities and energy prices, Rest of the World revenue increased +5.0% at constant exchange rates. Rest of the World revenue reflects solid growth across the region, with the exception of Australia: The good growth in the Rest of the World segment was offset by lower revenue in Australia (-3.1% at constant exchange rates). In the Waste business, the increase in collection and treatment activities only partially offset the fall in industrial services. The Global Businesses segment reported revenue of €4,626.2 million for year the ended December 31, 2016, down -4.1% at constant exchange rates compared to the year ended December 31, 2015. After a decrease of -5.2% at constant exchange rates for the nine months period ended September 30, 2016, the decline in 4th quarter revenue was less significant at -1.1% at constant exchange rates. Excluding the impact of Construction activities and energy prices, revenue increased +3.0% at constant exchange rates. The change in revenue was mainly due to: Water revenue declined -1.5% at constant exchange rates year-on-year, and increased +1.8% at constant exchange rates excluding the impact of the Construction activity and energy prices. This decline can be explained as follows: Waste revenue rose +0.5% at constant exchange rates year-on-year, and +1.6% at constant exchange rates excluding the impact of the decrease in Construction activity, in relation, overall, to a positive volume impact of +0.6%, and a service price impact of +0.8%, and more specifically: Energy revenue rose 0.4% at constant exchange rates year-on-year, and increased +3.2% at constant exchange rates excluding the decrease in energy prices (impact of -€115 million). This increase can be explained as follows: Changes in EBITDA by segment were as follows: In 2016, the Group’s consolidated EBITDA amounted to €3,056.0 million, an increase of 4.3% at constant exchange rates compared to 2015, generating an improvement in the EBITDA margin (12.5% in 2016, compared to 12.0% in 2015). This improvement in EBITDA was primarily due to operational efficiency, with cost savings in the amount of €245 million. Changes in EBITDA by segment between 2015 and 2016 were as follows: The change in EBITDA between 2015 and 2016 breaks down by main impact as follows: The foreign exchange impact on EBITDA was negative, amounting to -€71.4 million. It mainly reflects fluctuations of UK the pound sterling (-€38.2 million), South American currencies (-€14.7 million, essentially the Argentine peso), the Chinese renminbi (-€8.7 million) and the Polish zloty (-€8.3 million). Prices effects, net of cost inflation, had a negative impact, notably in France, in line with the very low indexation of contracts. The impact of French Water contract renegotiations amounted to -€31 million. The volumes, commerce and scope impacts are favorable, in the amount of +€38 million: Cost-savings plans contributed €245 million. They mainly cover operational efficiency (for 42%) and purchasing (35%). They were achieved across all geographical zones: France (31%), Europe excluding France (26%), Rest of the World (26%), Global Businesses (12%) and Corporate (5%). Other changes mainly concern one-off items in the amount of -€46 million, particularly in France. Changes in current EBIT by segment were as follows: The Group’s consolidated current EBIT for the year ended December 31, 2016 amounted to €1,383.9 million, up significantly by +8.5% at constant exchange rates compared to 2015. This positive increase in Current EBIT was mainly due to: The foreign exchange impact on Current EBIT was negative at -€43.8 million and mainly reflects fluctuations of the UK pound sterling (-€24.1 million), South American currencies (-€7.5 million, including the Argentine peso), and the Chinese renminbi (-€7.7 million). The reconciling items between EBITDA and Current EBIT as of December 31, 2016 and 2015 are as follows: Depreciation and amortization charges (-€1,394.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2016) are up +3.1% at constant exchange rates, or -€42.7 million compared to depreciation and amortization charges for the year ended December 31, 2015 (-€1,380.6 million) mainly due to acquisitions and the commissioning of new assets. Capital gains and losses on disposals of industrial assets for the year ended December 31, 2016 concern capital gains on the disposal of industrial assets in relation to the continuous review of industrial asset portfolios. The share of current net income of joint ventures and associates comprises the UK entities (Water and Waste) for €9 million (versus €15.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2015, due to movements in scope), and Chinese Water and Waste entities for €44.3 million (compared to €44.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2015). The Chinese Water concessions nevertheless rose at constant exchange rates (€35.8 million in 2015, versus €36.2 million in 2016). Net charges to operating provisions for the year ended December 31, 2016 include net provision reversals, particularly usual provision reversals related to landfill site remediation (mainly in France and the United Kingdom), and provision reversals in relation to the removal of certain risks in France and Italy. For the year ended December 31, 2015, this heading included a provision reversal for the “Olivet” contracts in the Water activities in France and the removal of certain risks in France and Australia. 2.3 Analysis of EBITDA and Current EBIT by segment EBITDA in France fell -8.1% during the year. In the Water business, cost savings only partially offset contractual erosion of -€31 million (margin degradation), lower volumes, and the negative impact of price effects net of inflation. EBITDA also fell in the Waste business despite cost savings. The decline is due to a decrease in revenue, unfavorable price impacts net of inflation, and the absence of non-recurring items that benefited 2015. Current EBIT fell in France due to the fall in EBITDA. The EBITDA of the Europe excluding France segment increased significantly in most countries and particularly: The rise in EBITDA in Europe excluding France also reflected cost savings efforts undertaken in all geographic areas. Current EBIT in Europe excluding France increased due to the improvement in EBITDA and the positive change in operating provisions and in particular related to landfills in the UK. Rest of the World EBITDA grew significantly in Asia, as well as in Latin America and North America. Asia EBITDA posted solid growth throughout the year, driven by cost reductions and the increase in revenue, particularly in China and Japan. In China, EBITDA benefited from the substantial increase in Industrial water (integration of the Sinopec contract), Hazardous Waste (commissioning of the Changsha incinerator) and heating networks, particularly Harbin. EBITDA in Latin America was up sharply in the 2nd half, particularly in Argentina, in line with the change in revenue. Following a decline in the first half, particularly regarding Energy, North America EBITDA rebounded in the 2nd half thanks to cost-cutting efforts and the integration of the Chemours Sulfur Products division’s assets, which offset the decline in revenue in industrial services and the lower gas price in Energy. Rest of the World Current EBIT was up at constant exchange rates, but to a lesser extent than EBITDA growth, penalized by higher depreciation and amortization charges relating to the integration of the Chemours Sulfur Products division’s assets, the negative change in operating provisions in the US and Australia, and the early repayment of a receivable in Korea. Results of the Chinese Water concessions, recorded within the share of net income (loss) of joint ventures and associates rose at constant exchange rates. EBITDA of the Global Businesses segment is up significantly: Current EBIT of Global Businesses also rose thanks to the increase in EBITDA and the favorable comparison effect in relation to asset impairments in Hazardous waste in 2015. The cost of net financial debt totaled -€423.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2016, versus -€445.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2015, representing a decrease of €22.3 million. This decline in the cost of net financial debt mainly reflects the repayment of the inflation-indexed bond using available cash in June 2015, bond refinancing under better conditions, the Group’s active debt management, and a positive exchange rate impact of €6 million, offsetting the increase in the cost of foreign exchange derivatives. The financing rate fell from 5.0% for the year ended December 31, 2015 to 4.95% for the year ended December 31, 2016. OTHER FINANCIAL INCOME AND EXPENSES Other current financial income and expenses totaled -€30.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2016, versus €27.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2015. Other current financial income and expenses included the impacts of financial divestitures for €12.8 million, and notably impacts related to fair-value remeasurement of previously-held equity interests in France and China. For the year ended December 31, 2015, capital gains or losses on financial divestitures amounted to €59.5 million, including the capital gain on the disposal of the Group’s Israel activities. Net gains/losses on loans and receivables for the year ended December 31, 2015 included the interest on the loan to Transdev, repaid in full in March 2016. Other non-current financial income and expenses for the year ended December 31, 2016 primarily concern the Group’s sale of 20% of Transdev. The income tax expense for the year ended December 31, 2016 amounted to -€192.3 million, compared to -€199.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2015. The tax rate for the year ended December 31, 2016 declined to 25.7% (versus 28.0% for the year ended December 31, 2015), after adjustment for the impact of financial divestitures, non-current items within net income of fully controlled entities, and the share of net income of equity-accounted companies. 2.6 Current net income (loss) / Net income (loss) attributable to owners of the Company The share of net income attributable to non-controlling interests totaled €102.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2016, compared to €101.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2015. Net income attributable to owners of the Company was €382.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2016, compared to €450.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2015. Current net income attributable to owners of the Company was €609.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2016, compared to €580.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2015. Based on a weighted average number of outstanding shares of 549.0 million (basic) and 568.5 million (diluted), compared with 548.5 million as of December 31, 2015 (basic and diluted), earnings per share attributable to owners of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2016 was €0.57 (basic) and €0.55 (diluted), compared to 0.69 (basic and diluted) for the year ended December 31, 2015. Current net income per share attributable to owners of the Company was €1.11 (basic) and €1.07 (diluted) for the year ended December 31, 2016, compared to €1.06 (basic and diluted) for the year ended December 31, 2015. The dilutive effect taken into account in the above earnings per share calculation concerns the OCEANE bonds convertible into and/or exchangeable for new and/or existing shares issued in March 2016, as well as the shares attributed under the long-term incentive plan set up in 2015. Net income (loss) attributable to owners of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2016 breaks down as follows: The reconciliation of Current EBIT with operating income, as shown in the income statement, is as follows: Net income (loss) attributable to owners of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2015, breaks down as follows: The following table summarizes the change in Net Financial Debt and net Free Cash Flow: Net free cash flow amounted to €970 million for the year ended December 31, 2016, versus €856 million for the year ended December 31, 2015. The increase in net free cash flow compared to December 31, 2015 primarily reflects the improvement in EBITDA, the favorable change in operating working capital requirements, lower restructuring charges, partially offset by the increase in net industrial investments in line with fewer industrial divestitures in 2016. Total Group gross industrial investments, including new operating financial assets, amounted to €1,485 million in 2016, compared with €1,484 million in 2015. Industrial investments, excluding discontinued operations, break down by segment as follows: Gross industrial investments for maintenance and contractual requirements totaled €1,280 million in 2016 (vs. €1,217 million in 2015), representing 5.2% of revenue (stable compared to 2015). Financial investments amounted to -€881 million for the year ended December 31, 2016 (including the net financial debt of new entities and acquisition costs) and include the acquisition of Kurion in the US (-€296 million), the Chemours’ Sulfur Products division (-€290 million) the Pedreira landfill in Brazil (-€71 million), and the Prague Left Bank district heating network (-€70 million). For the year ended December 31, 2015, financial investments for -€270 million were mainly related to the purchase of minority stakes in the Water business in Central Europe. Financial divestitures totaled €380 million for the year ended December 31, 2016 and include the sale of 20% of Transdev for €216 million (including disposal costs). For the year ended December 31, 2015, financial divestitures included the divestiture of Group activities in Israel. Financial divestitures, including the reimbursement by Transdev Group of the shareholder loan in March 2016 for €345 million (recorded under “Change in receivables and other financial assets”), amounted to €725 million for the year ended December 31, 2016. This transaction therefore had a total impact of €565 million on Group net financial debt (excluding disposal costs). Loans to joint ventures, recorded under “Change in receivables and other financial assets” totaled €165.6 million as of December 31, 2016 (versus €509.9 million as of December 31, 2015) and included loans to the Chinese concessions of €124.1 million (€116 million as of December 31, 2015). As of December 31, 2015, loans to equity-accounted entities also included loans to Transdev Group of €345.4 million repaid in full as of December 31, 2016. The change in operating working capital requirements (excluding discontinued operations) totaled +€270 million as of December 31, 2016, compared to +€203 million as of December 31, 2015. This increase was attributable to the change in inventories (+€35 million), operating receivables (+€84 million) and operating payables (+€151 million). As of December 31, 2016, net financial debt after hedging6 was borrowed at 92% at fixed rates and 8% at variable rates. The average maturity of net financial debt was 9.3 years as of December 31, 2016 vs. 8.8 years as of December 31, 2015. The leverage ratio for the year ended December 31, 2016, i.e. the ratio of closing Net Financial Debt (NFD) to EBITDA, decreased compared to December 31, 2015: Liquid assets of the Group as of December 31, 2016 break down as follows: The increase in net liquid assets mainly reflects the offering of bonds convertible into and/or exchangeable for new and/or existing shares (OCEANEs) for a nominal amount of €700 million, the issue of a renminbi-denominated bond on the Chinese domestic market in September 2016 for a nominal amount of €136 million equivalent and the issue of euro-denominated bonds for a nominal amount of €1.1 billion in October 2016, partially offset by upcoming bond maturities in 2017, including the euro-denominated bond maturing in January 2017 for a nominal amount of €606 million, the euro-denominated bond maturing in June 2017 for a nominal amount of €250 million, the renminbi-denominated bond maturing in June 2017 for a nominal amount of €68 million equivalent, and the floating-rate euro-denominated bond maturing in May 2017 for a nominal amount of €350 million. Veolia Environnement may draw on the multi-currency syndicated credit facility and all credit lines at any time. On November 6, 2015, Veolia Environnement signed a new multi-currency syndicated loan facility in the amount of €3 billion initially maturing in 2020, extended to 2021 in October 2016 and extendable to 2022 with the possibility for drawdowns in Eastern European currencies and Chinese Renminbi. This syndicated loan facility replaces the two syndicated loan facilities set up in 2011: a 5-year multi-currency loan facility of €2.5 billion, and a 3-year loan of €500 million for drawdowns in Polish zlotys, Czech crowns and Hungarian forints. This syndicated loan facility was not drawn down as of December 31, 2016. In 2015, Veolia Environnement renegotiated all its bilateral credit lines for a total undrawn amount of €925 million as of December 31, 2016. As of December 31, 2016, the letter of credit facility was drawn by USD 176.3 million. The portion that may be drawn in cash amounted to USD 8.7 million (€8.2 million euro equivalent). It is undrawn and recorded in the liquidity table above. The decrease in net liquid assets mainly reflects upcoming bond maturities before June 30, 2017, including the euro-denominated bond maturing in January 2017 for a nominal amount of €606 million, the euro-denominated bond maturing in June 2017 for a nominal amount of €250 million, and the renminbi denominated bond maturing in June 2017 for a nominal amount of €68 million equivalent, partially offset by an offering of bonds convertible into and/or exchangeable for new and/or existing shares (OCEANEs) for a nominal amount of €700 million .E] RETURN ON CAPITAL EMPLOYED EXCLUDING THE IMPACT OF IFRIC 12 Veolia Environnement uses the ROCE indicator (return on capital employed) to track the Group's profitability. This indicator measures Veolia Environnement's ability to provide a return on the funds provided by shareholders and lenders. The Group distinguishes between: The return on capital employed indicators are defined in the appendix. In both cases, the impacts of the Group’s investment in the Transdev Group joint venture, which is not viewed as a core Company activity and whose contribution is recognized as a share of net income of other equity-accounted entities, are excluded from the calculations. Current EBIT after tax is calculated as follows: (*) Including the share of net income (loss) of joint ventures and associates. Average capital employed for the year was calculated as follows: The Group's post-tax return on capital employed (ROCE) is as follows: The Group's post-tax return on capital employed (ROCE) was 7.2% for the year ended December 31, 2016 versus 6.8% for the year ended December 31, 2015. The increase in the return on capital employed between 2016 and 2015 was primarily due to improved operating performance. Unlike post-tax ROCE, the capital employed used for the pre-tax ROCE does not include investments in joint ventures and associates. The Group’s pre-tax return on capital employed (ROCE) by segment is as follows: Cost of net financial debt is equal to the cost of gross debt, including related gains and losses on interest rate and currency hedges, less income on cash and cash equivalents. Operating cash flow before changes in working capital, as presented in the consolidated cash flow statement, is comprised of three components: operating cash flow from operating activities (referred to as “adjusted operating cash flow” and known in French as “capacité d'autofinancement opérationnelle”) consisting of operating income and expenses received and paid (“cash”), operating cash flow from financing activities including cash financial items relating to other financial income and expenses and operating cash flow from discontinued operations composed of cash operating and financial income and expense items classified in net income from discontinued operations pursuant to IFRS 5. Adjusted operating cash flow does not include the share of net income attributable to equity-accounted entities. Net income (loss) from discontinued operations is the total of income and expenses, net of tax, related to businesses divested or in the course of divestiture, in accordance with IFRS 5. The term “change at constant exchange rates” represents the change resulting from the application of exchange rates of the prior period to the current period, all other things being equal. The municipal sector encompasses services in the Water, Waste and Energy business lines aimed at users, performed under contracts with municipal governments, groups of municipal governments, or regional or national governments. The industrial sector covers Water, Waste and Energy management services, offered to industrial or service sector customers. EBITDA comprises the sum of all operating income and expenses received and paid (excluding restructuring charges, non-current WCR impairments, renewal expenses and share acquisition and disposal costs) and principal payments on operating financial assets. The EBITDA margin is defined as the ratio of EBITDA to revenue. To calculate Current EBIT, the following items will be deducted from operating income: (*) Correction of an erratum in the figures of the consolidated statement of financial position- equity and liabilities: page 35 Current net income is defined as the sum of the following items: Current net income earnings per share is defined as the ratio of current net income (not restated for the cost of the coupon attributable to hybrid debt holders) by the weighted average number of outstanding shares during the year. Net industrial investments, as presented in the statement of changes in net financial debt, include industrial investments (purchases of intangible assets and property, plant and equipment, and operating financial assets), net of industrial asset divestitures. The Group considers discretionary growth investments, which generate additional cash flows, separately from maintenance-related investments, which reflect the replacement of equipment and installations used by the Group as well as investments relating to contractual obligations. Net financial investments, as presented in the statement of changes in net financial debt, include financial investments, net of financial divestitures. Financial investments include purchases of financial assets, including the net financial debt of companies entering the scope of consolidation, and partial purchases resulting from transactions with shareholders where there is no change in control. Financial divestitures include net financial debt of companies leaving the scope of consolidation, and partial divestitures resulting from transactions with shareholders where there is no change in control, as well as issues of share capital by non-controlling interests. Net free cash flow corresponds to free cash flow from continuing operations, and is calculated by: the sum of EBITDA, dividends received, changes in operating working capital and operating cash flow from financing activities, less net interest expense, net industrial investments, taxes paid, renewal expenses, restructuring charges and other non-current expenses. Net financial debt (NFD) represents gross financial debt (non-current borrowings, current borrowings, bank overdrafts and other cash position items), net of cash and cash equivalents, liquid assets and financing-related assets, including fair value adjustments to derivatives hedging debt. Liquid assets are financial assets composed of funds or securities with an initial maturity of more than three months, easily convertible into cash, and managed with respect to a liquidity objective while maintaining a low capital risk. The leverage ratio is the ratio of closing Net Financial Debt to EBITDA. The financing rate is defined as the ratio of the cost of net financial debt (excluding fair value adjustments to instruments not qualifying for hedge accounting) to average monthly net financial debt for the period, including the cost of net financial debt of discontinued operations. The pre-tax return on capital employed (ROCE) is defined as the ratio of: Capital employed used in the ROCE calculation is therefore equal to the sum of net intangible assets and property, plant and equipment, goodwill net of impairment, operating financial assets, net operating and non-operating working capital requirements and net derivative instruments less provisions. It also includes the capital employed of activities classified within assets and liabilities held for sale, excluding discontinued operations. The post-tax return on capital employed (ROCE) is defined as the ratio of: Capital employed used in the post-tax ROCE calculation is therefore equal to the sum of net intangible assets and property, plant and equipment, goodwill net of impairment, investments in joint ventures and associates, operating financial assets, net operating and non-operating working capital requirements and net derivative instruments less provisions. It also includes the capital employed of activities classified within assets and liabilities held for sale, excluding discontinued operations. For both pre-tax and post-tax ROCE, the impacts of the Group’s investment in the Transdev Group joint venture, which is not viewed as a core Company activity and whose contribution is recognized as a share of net income of other equity-accounted entities, are excluded from the calculations. 1 Excluding representation related to IFRIC 12 fixed payments 2 At constant exchange rates At current consolidation scope and exchange rates: Revenue declined 2.3% and was stable (+0.1%) in the 4th quarter. EBITDA increased 2.0%, current EBIT increased 5.2% and current net income-Group share increased 5.1%. Excluding net financial capital gains current net income increased 13.2%. 3 At constant exchange rates 4 Equivalent to €3.4bn to €3.6bn (excluding IFRIC 12) and before taking into account the unfavorable exchange rate impacts recorded in 2016 5 Construction activities concern the Group’s engineering and construction businesses (mainly Veolia Water Technologies and SADE), as well as construction completed as part of operating contracts. 6 Including the restatement of €1,067 million of the carry-over of cash related to the pre-financing of future bond maturities in 2017.


News Article | March 14, 2014
Site: www.theguardian.com

The British economic recovery remains unbalanced – too driven by a credit and house price boomlet subsidised by the government's Help to Buy scheme. By raising prices of homes, especially in London and the south-east, Help to Buy defeats the purpose of extending access to housing. The six-point plan proposed here would result in a more durable recovery powered by much-needed investment in infrastructure and housing. It begins with two fundamental reforms: switching to a fiscal target that takes account not just of government debt but of assets, and setting up a national land bank, learning from international experience. The ratio of government debt to national income matters: interest has to be paid on debt, and current national income is a rough proxy for the future national income that will generate the tax revenue to service the debt. But the current exclusive concern with debt is a big mistake: the government's asset position is just as important because assets help to generate the future income to service the debt or can be sold to pay down debt. For example, roads generate revenue directly, even without road pricing or toll roads, from taxes on petrol and licences, and indirectly from the economic activity they lubricate. The real rate of return in Britain on such infrastructure investment – for example, upgrading the A1 in the north-east – greatly exceeds the current cost of funding. Further, much of government-owned land is obviously saleable and not hard to value. It makes no sense to include only financial assets in government net debt and exclude potentially saleable land. The first announcement of the budget should therefore state that, in future, the government will target the growth of debt minus assets. Increasing government debt would then not be a concern if it was matched by an increase in assets such as publicly owned productive infrastructure and land. This better target would also discourage the accounting practices of the Brown era, when expensive PFI contracts were used to fund public sector investment without recognising the underlying liabilities. The second fundamental announcement in the budget, made possible by the first, should be the setting up of a national land bank. This acquires land cheaply and holds it for future release for housing and commercial development. In countries such as South Korea, Singapore, Taiwan and Hong Kong, national land banks have played major roles in urban development, supplying land for housing, generating planning gain to pay for infrastructure and in controlling real estate prices. In Britain, with sometimes hundred-fold price differences between land with and without planning permission, a government land bank could buy land without residential or commercial planning permission but with potential for future development. In future, this would be a source of land release for housing and other development, capturing planning gain for the taxpayer. Such land purchases would initially have zero impact on correctly measured net debt, but future revaluation gains would bring down net debt, while the cashflow from sales would lower future government deficits. This radical step, together with better incentives for local authorities to grant planning permissions, would transform the supply of housing in under-housed Britain. Currently, young people without wealthy and generous relatives have great difficulty getting onto the housing ladder. According to the census the fraction of owner occupiers among those aged 25 to 34 has declined from 58% in 2001 to 40% in 2011. The land bank proposal would allow house prices relative to income gradually to decline in coming decades, helping the "lost generation" of those born after 1979. The next four decisions would complement these two fundamentals: 2. Restrict Help to Buy to regions outside London and the south-east but retain Help to Build everywhere to encourage house building. 3. Announce a mansion tax in which the excess of current values above £3m is taxed at 1%. Britain has the lowest property tax rates for the super-rich among advanced countries. The proposed tax rate would still be lower than in many other countries such as the US. Measures 2 and 3 would take some of the heat out of housing markets in London and the south-east. 4. Take advantage of low borrowing costs in index-linked gilts to fund more than the current government deficit by issuing large amounts of index linked gilts. "Overfunding" of this kind was used in the 1980s. It would save the taxpayer money in the long run. It would also have the advantage of lifting current yields and so reducing the apparent deficits in defined-benefit pension schemes. This should boost company investment in the real economy. These measures for balanced and sustained growth and a more equal society need a government capable of taking the long view currently lacking in Westminster. • John Muellbauer is a professor of economics at Nuffield College and INET Oxford


MarketStudyReport.com adds “2017 Top 5 Automotive Wheel Bearing Manufacturers in North America, Europe, Asia-Pacific, South America, Middle East and Africa" new report to its research database. The report spread across 168 pages with table and figures in it. This report studies Automotive Wheel Bearing in Global market, especially in North America, Europe, Asia-Pacific, South America, Middle East and Africa, focuses on the top 5 Automotive Wheel Bearing Players in each region, with sales, price, revenue and market share for top 5 manufacturer, covering SKF Schaeffler NTN NSK ILJIN JTEKT Wanxiang Nachi-Fujikoshi GKN Hubei New Torch TIMKEN GMB Corporation Harbin Bearing FKG Bearing CU Group Wafangdian Bearing PFI Xiangyang Automobile Bearing Xiangyang Xinghuo Shaoguan Southeast Changzhou Guangyang Changjiang Bearing Browse full table of contents and data tables at  https://www.marketstudyreport.com/reports/2017-top-5-automotive-wheel-bearing-manufacturers-in-north-america-europe-asia-pacific-south-america-middle-east-and-africa/ Market Segment by Regions, this report splits Global into several key Regions, with sales, revenue, market share of top 5 players in these regions, from 2012 to 2017 (forecast), like North America (United States, Canada and Mexico) Asia-Pacific (China, Japan, Southeast Asia, India and Korea) Europe (Germany, UK, France, Italy and Russia etc. South America (Brazil, Chile, Peru and Argentina) Middle East and Africa (Egypt, South Africa, Saudi Arabia) Split by Product Types, with sales, revenue, price, market share of each type, can be divided into Gen.1 Gen.2 Gen.3 Split by applications, this report focuses on sales, market share and growth rate of Automotive Wheel Bearing in each application, can be divided into Passenger Vehicle Commercial Vehicle 9 Global Automotive Wheel Bearing Players Profiles/Analysis 9.1 SKF 9.1.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base, Sales Area and Its Competitors 9.1.2 Automotive Wheel Bearing Product Types, Application and Specification 9.1.2.1 Type 1 9.1.2.2 Type 2 9.1.3 SKF Automotive Wheel Bearing Sales, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017) 9.1.4 Main Business/Business Overview 9.2 Schaeffler 9.2.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base, Sales Area and Its Competitors 9.2.2 Automotive Wheel Bearing Product Types, Application and Specification 9.2.2.1 Type 1 9.2.2.2 Type 2 9.2.3 Schaeffler Automotive Wheel Bearing Sales, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017) 9.2.4 Main Business/Business Overview 9.3 NTN 9.3.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base, Sales Area and Its Competitors 9.3.2 Automotive Wheel Bearing Product Types, Application and Specification 9.3.2.1 Type 1 9.3.2.2 Type 2 9.3.3 NTN Automotive Wheel Bearing Sales, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017) 9.3.4 Main Business/Business Overview 9.4 NSK 9.4.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base, Sales Area and Its Competitors 9.4.2 Automotive Wheel Bearing Product Types, Application and Specification 9.4.2.1 Type 1 9.4.2.2 Type 2 9.4.3 NSK Automotive Wheel Bearing Sales, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017) 9.4.4 Main Business/Business Overview 9.5 ILJIN 9.5.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base, Sales Area and Its Competitors 9.5.2 Automotive Wheel Bearing Product Types, Application and Specification 9.5.2.1 Type 1 9.5.2.2 Type 2 9.5.3 ILJIN Automotive Wheel Bearing Sales, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017) 9.5.4 Main Business/Business Overview 9.6 JTEKT 9.6.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base, Sales Area and Its Competitors 9.6.2 Automotive Wheel Bearing Product Types, Application and Specification 9.6.2.1 Type 1 9.6.2.2 Type 2 9.6.3 JTEKT Automotive Wheel Bearing Sales, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017) 9.6.4 Main Business/Business Overview 9.7 Wanxiang 9.7.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base, Sales Area and Its Competitors 9.7.2 Automotive Wheel Bearing Product Types, Application and Specification 9.7.2.1 Type 1 9.7.2.2 Type 2 9.7.3 Wanxiang Automotive Wheel Bearing Sales, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017) 9.7.4 Main Business/Business Overview 9.8 Nachi-Fujikoshi 9.8.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base, Sales Area and Its Competitors 9.8.2 Automotive Wheel Bearing Product Types, Application and Specification 9.8.2.1 Type 1 9.8.2.2 Type 2 9.8.3 Nachi-Fujikoshi Automotive Wheel Bearing Sales, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017) 9.8.4 Main Business/Business Overview 9.9 GKN 9.9.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base, Sales Area and Its Competitors 9.9.2 Automotive Wheel Bearing Product Types, Application and Specification 9.9.2.1 Type 1 9.9.2.2 Type 2 9.9.3 GKN Automotive Wheel Bearing Sales, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017) 9.9.4 Main Business/Business Overview 9.10 Hubei New Torch 9.10.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base, Sales Area and Its Competitors 9.10.2 Automotive Wheel Bearing Product Types, Application and Specification 9.10.2.1 Type 1 9.10.2.2 Type 2 9.10.3 Hubei New Torch Automotive Wheel Bearing Sales, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017) 9.10.4 Main Business/Business Overview 9.11 TIMKEN 9.11.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base, Sales Area and Its Competitors 9.11.2 Automotive Wheel Bearing Product Types, Application and Specification 9.11.2.1 Type 1 9.11.2.2 Type 2 9.11.3 TIMKEN Automotive Wheel Bearing Sales, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017) 9.11.4 Main Business/Business Overview 9.12 GMB Corporation 9.12.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base, Sales Area and Its Competitors 9.12.2 Automotive Wheel Bearing Product Types, Application and Specification 9.12.2.1 Type 1 9.12.2.2 Type 2 9.12.3 GMB Corporation Automotive Wheel Bearing Sales, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017) 9.12.4 Main Business/Business Overview 9.13 Harbin Bearing 9.13.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base, Sales Area and Its Competitors 9.13.2 Automotive Wheel Bearing Product Types, Application and Specification 9.13.2.1 Type 1 9.13.2.2 Type 2 9.13.3 Harbin Bearing Automotive Wheel Bearing Sales, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017) 9.13.4 Main Business/Business Overview 9.14 FKG Bearing 9.14.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base, Sales Area and Its Competitors 9.14.2 Automotive Wheel Bearing Product Types, Application and Specification 9.14.2.1 Type 1 9.14.2.2 Type 2 9.14.3 FKG Bearing Automotive Wheel Bearing Sales, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017) 9.14.4 Main Business/Business Overview 9.15 CU Group 9.15.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base, Sales Area and Its Competitors 9.15.2 Automotive Wheel Bearing Product Types, Application and Specification 9.15.2.1 Type 1 9.15.2.2 Type 2 9.15.3 CU Group Automotive Wheel Bearing Sales, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017) 9.15.4 Main Business/Business Overview 9.16 Wafangdian Bearing 9.16.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base, Sales Area and Its Competitors 9.16.2 Automotive Wheel Bearing Product Types, Application and Specification 9.16.2.1 Type 1 9.16.2.2 Type 2 9.16.3 Wafangdian Bearing Automotive Wheel Bearing Sales, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017) 9.16.4 Main Business/Business Overview 9.17 PFI 9.17.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base, Sales Area and Its Competitors 9.17.2 Automotive Wheel Bearing Product Types, Application and Specification 9.17.2.1 Type 1 9.17.2.2 Type 2 9.17.3 PFI Automotive Wheel Bearing Sales, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017) 9.17.4 Main Business/Business Overview 9.18 Xiangyang Automobile Bearing 9.18.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base, Sales Area and Its Competitors 9.18.2 Automotive Wheel Bearing Product Types, Application and Specification 9.18.2.1 Type 1 9.18.2.2 Type 2 9.18.3 Xiangyang Automobile Bearing Automotive Wheel Bearing Sales, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017) 9.18.4 Main Business/Business Overview 9.19 Xiangyang Xinghuo 9.19.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base, Sales Area and Its Competitors 9.19.2 Automotive Wheel Bearing Product Types, Application and Specification 9.19.2.1 Type 1 9.19.2.2 Type 2 9.19.3 Xiangyang Xinghuo Automotive Wheel Bearing Sales, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017) 9.19.4 Main Business/Business Overview 9.20 Shaoguan Southeast 9.20.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base, Sales Area and Its Competitors 9.20.2 Automotive Wheel Bearing Product Types, Application and Specification 9.20.2.1 Type 1 9.20.2.2 Type 2 9.20.3 Shaoguan Southeast Automotive Wheel Bearing Sales, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017) 9.20.4 Main Business/Business Overview 9.21 Changzhou Guangyang 9.21.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base, Sales Area and Its Competitors 9.21.2 Automotive Wheel Bearing Product Types, Application and Specification 9.21.2.1 Type 1 9.21.2.2 Type 2 9.21.3 Changzhou Guangyang Automotive Wheel Bearing Sales, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017) 9.21.4 Main Business/Business Overview 9.22 Changjiang Bearing 9.22.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base, Sales Area and Its Competitors 9.22.2 Automotive Wheel Bearing Product Types, Application and Specification 9.22.2.1 Type 1 9.22.2.2 Type 2 9.22.3 Changjiang Bearing Automotive Wheel Bearing Sales, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017) 9.22.4 Main Business/Business Overview To receive personalized assistance write to us @ [email protected] with the report title in the subject line along with your questions or call us at +1 866-764-2150


NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group, Inc. (MUFG) today announced it was named 2016’s Global Bank of the Year by Project Finance International, the second consecutive year the bank has captured the magazine’s top annual honor. Among MUFG’s 2016 accomplishments, the honor reflects MUFG’s role as the most active Lead Arranger for project financings in the Americas for the eighth year in a row.1 One of the world’s leading financial groups, MUFG also was a significant participant in client transactions which were recognized by PFI with the following awards for the Americas: “This award is an indication of how well a team can perform when it has the full faith and cooperation of its clients,” said Jon Lindenberg, MUFG’s Deputy Head of Investment Banking and Head of Project Finance for the Americas. “My MUFG colleagues and I are proud to support our clients as they create some of the world’s most innovative and advanced projects. Further, we would like to thank PFI, one of the most respected publications in our industry, for recognizing MUFG’s commitment and efforts in this critical sector.” Headquartered in New York, MUFG Americas Holdings Corporation is a financial holding company and bank holding company with total assets of $148.1 billion at December 31, 2016. Its main subsidiaries are MUFG Union Bank, N.A. and MUFG Securities Americas Inc. MUFG Union Bank, N.A. provides an array of financial services to individuals, small businesses, middle-market companies, and major corporations. As of December 31, 2016, MUFG Union Bank, N.A. operated 365 branches, comprised primarily of retail banking branches in the West Coast states, along with commercial branches in Texas, Illinois, New York and Georgia, as well as two international offices. MUFG Securities Americas Inc. is a registered securities broker-dealer which engages in capital markets origination transactions, private placements, collateralized financings, securities borrowing and lending transactions, and domestic and foreign debt and equities securities transactions. MUFG Americas Holdings Corporation is owned by The Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd. and Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group, Inc., one of the world’s leading financial groups. The Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd. is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group, Inc. Visit www.unionbank.com or www.mufgamericas.com for more information. About MUFG (Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group, Inc.) MUFG (Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group, Inc.) is one of the world's leading financial groups, with total assets of approximately $2.6 trillion (USD) as of December 31, 2016. Headquartered in Tokyo and with approximately 350 years of history, MUFG is a global network with more than 2,200 offices in nearly 50 countries. The Group has more than 140,000 employees and about 300 entities, offering services including commercial banking, trust banking, securities, credit cards, consumer finance, asset management, and leasing. The Group's operating companies include Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ, Mitsubishi UFJ Trust and Banking Corporation (Japan's leading trust bank), and Mitsubishi UFJ Securities Holdings Co., Ltd., one of Japan's largest securities firms. Through close partnerships among our operating companies, the Group aims to "be the world's most trusted financial group," flexibly responding to all of the financial needs of our customers, serving society, and fostering shared and sustainable growth for a better world. MUFG's shares trade on the Tokyo, Nagoya, and New York (MTU) stock exchanges. Visit www.mufg.jp/english/index.html.


News Article | November 15, 2016
Site: www.prnewswire.co.uk

Waterman Group is proud to announce its appointment to the Ministry of Defence's Army Basing Programme delivered by Aspire Defence which is set to vastly improve the working/living conditions and quality of life for thousands of Army soldiers. The work, known as the Army Basing Programme (ABP), is an extension of Project Allenby/Connaught (PAC) and covers garrisons across Salisbury Plain and at Aldershot. On 1st November, a construction and facilities management amendment worth over £1.1 billion was announced to the existing 35-year long PAC contract, the largest Private Finance Initiative (PFI) for defence estates let by the Ministry of Defence (MOD) to Aspire Defence Limited in 2006. Over the next four years under the ABP contract variation, new and enhanced garrison facilities will be completed at Bulford, Tidworth, Perham Down, Larkhill and Aldershot by Aspire Defence Capital Works (ADCW). By 2020, 130 new buildings and over 2,600 additional bed spaces for single soldiers will be created. Waterman will be retained as engineering designer for over 50% of the development programme. The value of the whole construction programme is anticipated to be circa £680 million. Nick Taylor, CEO of Waterman Group, states; "We are honoured to be involved in this prestigious scheme which will vastly improve the lives of British soldiers and civilians. We look forward to meeting the challenging requirements of the ABP and continuing to work with this experienced team at Aspire Defence, delivering each building on time and to the high level of quality expected of us." Waterman Group is a multidisciplinary consultancy providing sustainable solutions to meet the planning, engineering design and project delivery needs of the property, infrastructure, environment and energy markets. Founded in 1952 and listed on the London Stock Exchange since 1988, Waterman has grown into a leading engineering and environmental consultancy with offices throughout the UK, Europe and Australia. Waterman works with government agencies, local authorities, government-regulated industries and private sector clients to provide innovative, sustainable and economic solutions across a wide spectrum of business activities. The firm has extensive experience in property and buildings, environmental consultancy, power and energy, roads, highways and rail infrastructure, urban and regional planning. Award winning teams provide professional services throughout the complete life cycle of the asset starting from initial surveys and concept planning, through to design, delivery, project management, supervision and on-going maintenance. See more information on http://www.watermangroup.com


News Article | August 23, 2016
Site: www.greencarcongress.com

« Solid-state LiDAR company Quanergy raises $90M in Series B; valuation passes $1B | Main | Daimler-BYD JV introduces new DENZA 400 EV for China; up to 400 km on full charge » Globally, the use of methanol as an alternative fuel has attracted interest because of its low production cost, renewable capacity, and good combustion-related properties (higher thermal efficiency, higher engine power, and lower regulated emissions). In China in particular, there are abundant coal resources, and the technology of using coal to obtain methanol has been perfected with low cost; methanol fuel from coal has become one of the most popular alternative fuels for vehicles. However, the in-cylinder combustion of methanol also produces a considerable amount of extra toxic emissions, such as alcohols and aldehydes. A team at Zhejiang University has now investigated the impact of methanol–gasoline blends on the pollutant emissions of port-fuel injected spark ignition (SI) engines. A paper on their work is published in the ACS journal Energy & Fuels. … the in-cylinder combustion of methanol can also produce a considerable amount of extra toxic emissions, such as alcohols and aldehydes. Wei found that burning methanol−gasoline blends could lead to the rise of unburned methanol and formaldehyde emissions. Zhang investigated unregulated emissions from a low-content methanol−gasoline SI engine and found that the engine-out methanol and formaldehyde increased almost linearly with the methanol content in the mixed fuel. Unburned methanol is toxic and corrosive. It can poison the human nervous and blood systems. Formaldehyde has already been widely recognized as a strong carcinogenic and teratogenic substance, which has significant adverse effects on human health. With the wide promotion of methanol as an alternative fuel for vehicles and the growing emphasis on environment protections, methanol-induced unregulated emissions and their control in SI engines will become critical issues. The researchers used a GEELY MR479Q 4-cylinder 4-stroke port fuel injection (PFI) SI engine was selected as the test engine for burning different methanol−gasoline blends at wide-open throttle operating conditions. For the methanol−gasoline blends used in the engine tests, commercial 93# gasoline was used as the base fuel, and industrial-grade methanol with a purity of 99.9% was mixed in with fractions of 0, 10, 20, 30, 50, and 70% by volume (M0, M10, M20, M30, M50, and M70, respectively). No additives were used in the fuel blends. An AVL Fourier-transform infrared (FTIR) multicomponent gas analyzer measured all of the engine-out emissions for methanol−gasoline blends at each engine operating condition. Besides the regulated NO , CO, and non-methane hydrocarbon (NMHC) emissions, the species measured during the engine tests also covered various unregulated emissions, such as alcohols, aldehydes, olefins, alkyne, and aromatic hydrocarbons—the latter two being considered as the important soot precursors. NO , CO, and NMHC emissions were all reduced dramatically when the test engine was fueled with methanol−gasoline blends, and the reduction effect of regulated emissions became more apparent with increasing methanol content in the fuel blends. When fueled with M70, the reductions of NO , CO, and NMHC emissions of the test engine could be as much as 54.5, 70.9, and 79.9%, respectively, compared with those of pure gasoline. Other engine-out hydrocarbon emissions such as C H , C H , and soot precursors like C H and AHCs were also reduced with increasing methanol in the fuel blends. The methanol in the fuel blends also caused significant increases in engine-out CH OH and CH O emissions. When the engine was fueled with M70, the engine-out CH OH emission reached as high as 500 ppm, and the CH O emission was almost 4 times as much as that with M0. For the rest of the emissions, such as C H OH, C H O, and 1,3-butadiene (C H ), only a slight influence of methanol was observed during the engine tests.


SEATTLE, Dec. 8, 2016 /PRNewswire/ -- Milliman, Inc., a premier global consulting and actuarial firm, today released the results of its latest Pension Funding Index (PFI), which analyzes the 100 largest U.S. corporate pension plans. In November, the funded status for these pension plans...


BRAINTREE, Mass., Dec. 23, 2016 /PRNewswire/ -- The CPV Towantic Energy Center ("CPV Towantic") was recognized for its broadly received creative financing approach with an award just announced by Power Finance International ("PFI") for the Americas Power Deal of the Year for 2016....

Loading PFI collaborators
Loading PFI collaborators