Many VCs [1] and Hollywood [2] came to the opposite conclusion:
[1] https://www.cityam.com/london-named-europes-best-startup-eco...
[1] https://www.cityam.com/london-named-europes-best-startup-eco...
For some businesses the new trade situation is not bad, for some it is but you can't really argue that thanks to the increased red tape in trade and human resources companies are choosing UK to invest in certain industries that UK has been traditionally a powerhouse.
There's no benefit for businesses when you artificially limit the talent pool and increase bureaucracy for hiring people. There's also no benefit in introduction of border checks in trade.
Well, maybe it can be argued that thanks to the government being the first step in HR, British companies can overwork and underpay their foreign hires just like it's done in the USA thanks to the H-2B visa making the workers afraid of losing their job. However, if you are going to argue that thanks to the new visa rules UK companies are able to practically enslave their previously free workers, better show some numbers. I don't think that thanks to Brexit companies can now pay less to their EU workers who are afraid to lose their visa sponsorship. Even if UK companies are able to force EU employees to less pay and more work, it's very early to show up in any way because EU citizens had the chance to preserve their rights up until less than a year ago.
Just don't present it like as if it is "thanks to Brexit". Brexit made things harder but it didn't kill it for everyone, except maybe for Intel.
That really depends on what definition you personally choose for "decisive", "develop", and "prosper".
The EU is by far the largest trading partner of the UK[¹]. It's unreasonable to presume that a nation can improve their current state once they choose to introduce bureaucratic hurdles, delays, and additional cost on any dealings with their largest trading partner.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_largest_trading_pa...
I can definitely tell you (anecdotally, first-hand) that Brexit hasn't offered any benefits so far, but has made several other activities far more painful that they were before. Not enough to kill a business, but absolutely certainly the sort of thing that will cause some businesses that were previously viable to no longer be so – or to shift resources out of the UK and into the EU.
https://www.privateequitywire.co.uk/2021/08/25/305322/uk-bas...
UPD: some people seem to get offended so much when it comes to sheer numbers instead of a matter of opinions
The continent has actually very rapidly caught up in terms of share of money raised over recent years. In 2020, VC funding in the UK only grew by 1.7% compared to 70% in Ireland, 25% in France, 11% in Germany, Scandinavia and so on. European share of the market is actually very quickly accelerating
https://pitchbook.com/news/articles/hot-or-not-where-europea...
https://news.crunchbase.com/news/european-vc-funding-h1-2021...
growing high from significantly lower numbers always looks better in terms of % increase
But as "single most" - fair enough.
Yes, there continue to be lots of funding deals in London. That's something that neither supports nor contradicts your initial point that "VCs came to the opposite conclusion" – all it tells us is that the UK remains competitive regardless of Brexit.
I wouldn't be surprised that if the trend continue, Europeans will work even more for UK startup than they did before (i'm really tempted, i wanted to work for companies in East NA and be based in the caraibean, but Spain is at least as interesting place to live (and way cheaper) and UK salaries are very competitive, especially when considering paid leave)
When a bunch of trading barriers appear, cutting off players from participation in a market, startup opportunities will abound - that’s not surprising.
Similarly, an epidemic of window-smashing might see record VC investment in window repair startups - that hardly refutes the broken window fallacy. The signal that is ‘increased investment activity’ doesn’t necessarily point to economic health.
plus
looking in [1] at Total United Kingdom, 2018 --> $2.74 billion
vs
"The industry's annual semiconductor sales revenue has since grown to over $481 billion, as of 2018" [2]
So all in all, value lost in this limited context (of 3 discussed industries) due to Brexit. (granted, two are global numbers (call it 'potential') and one is a purely UK number (of which you're guaranteed 100%)
[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_industry [1]: https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=VC_INVEST# [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semiconductor_industry
edit: i don't know how to read --> 274 billion to 2.74 billion, drop ratio in text.
also, you're missing the point that whilst filming/entertainment on its own might be producing lower yield than a semiconductor producer's yield, it employs many more surrounding industries with their own revenue yield that is not included into total numbers.
Intel revenue 2020: 77.87 billion [1]
Now, granted, just because intel has a plant in the UK doesn't move all that revenue over to the UK all of a sudden, they have 8 fab plants [3], so each fab plant comes in at just under 10 billion USD (assuming they're all equal (and equal contributors to revenue), which i don't know and wouldn't expect to be), some countries have more than one fab plant too.
but, we'll also filter to the film industry in the UK, we'll even take the best year, giving us 4 billion GBP in 2004 [2]
(keep in mind GBP and USD here, and VEEEERY rough mathematics and assumptions)
So even on the best day - your ENTIRE (maybe even both, i can't even be bothered to calculate) cited industry/industries in the UK is smaller in revenue than one fab plant that you missed out on.
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel [2]: https://www.statista.com/statistics/297182/film-industry-rev... [3]: https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/support/articles/000...
edit: minor fixes
Entertainment employs these from engineering side too, in addition to the industries that specialise solely on art, fashion, and event management - these entities are not included in your comparison of total revenues. For instance, nobody buys tourist tickets and books hotels to go to see a new chip from an Intel factory. Thousands of people from abroad do it to visit filming- and entertainment- related events such as red carpets and conventions. These are also the events where celebrities spend money and donate to popular causes.
Here, i'll do the same (with the same hand waviness):
Your list states people in the "industries that specialise solely on art, fashion, and event management" - Intel's supply chain supports thousands of logistics jobs (pilots, truck/HGV drivers, mining raw materials) - the film industry does not have this at scale.
My point is, you have moved from "intel doesn't want to be here - but these two industries do! so intel must be wrong"
to saying that even though the net loss to the UK is larger in terms of the pure industry, that their surrounding industries bring in money (but apparently intel's doesn't compare to film industry awards ceremonies, which are HUGE MONEY)
This is not the argument I wanted to make, but here: the chip industry enables the video game industry, which on it's own is larger than the movie industry. If you want to compare surrounding industries, there, I'm Done. [1]
[1]: https://www.statista.com/topics/1763/gaming-in-the-united-ki...
exactly, even if you don't like it. I'm pointing at the opportunities that are being created regardless of any single entity's presence in the region, that you are not including into your original comparison. Other big profitable industries find the UK appealing for large long-term investments. You argue that there's "value lost in this limited context", I argue that the context is wrong and there's a bigger picture where Intel's current hesitation to establish a plant in the UK due to Brexit ramifications is irrelevant. It's irrelevant because Intel is a single player that will not necessarily hold its leadership in the next 10 years, whereas big industries such as Entertainment and Construction have already chosen and commited to their choice by making transactions and building the stuff in the UK, that is many independent companies that form those industries have made this decision and Brexit was not a decisive factor to them. And if it wasn't a decisive factor, then there should be other more important factors that make the UK more appealing to each and every one of them.
> > This is not the argument I wanted to make, but here: the chip industry enables the video game industry, which on it's own is larger than the movie industry. If you want to compare surrounding industries, there, I'm Done.
Intel is not the entire chip industry, thankfully.