Skål for state-owned businesses

Absolut midsommar – keeping health care funded
pic: absolut.com

Is Sweden a socialist country?! Although even through the 80’s it was still a thing, the idea that the Swedish state owned more businesses than not has pretty much been put to rest by this time. Still, there are several huge businesses that are owned or partly owned by the state, who has proven to be, at best, only a so-so business partner. SvD‘s Torbjörn Isacson went through part of the list today, with Telia’s recent sale of its Turkish business as a starting point.

Sweden owns 39.5% of Telia. The next biggest owner of Telia is Blackrock, which owns 3.1%. It’s safe to say Sweden’s ownership is the big one. Although it’s a controlling interest, the state doesn’t control Telia. Telia has a board like any other public company, who does the day to day work (for more about Telia see this blog post). However when Telia loses value or does bad business decisions it’s the state that takes a major hit as any huge shareholder would. Also when Telia does a good deal and makes money the state makes money. In this case, this means Swedish taxpayers.

That’s why Telia’s recent sale of its holdings in the Turkish company Turkcell must make the news. Not only did Telia and its shareholders take a huge, huge loss because the board’s idea was a disaster, Telia sold its holding to a buyer whose CEO is Turkey’s authoritarian leader Recep Tayyip Erdogan. As shareholders, Sweden’s taxpayers should be in the know – but in reality taxpayers have perhaps even less power than an average shareholder since the Swedish state must resign its active partner role to prevent a truly socialist state of affairs (see China for comparison).

Still, that doesn’t mean that the state ignores its business holdings entirely. Just recently, SvD reports, the parliamentary committee on enterprise (näringslivsutskottet) called on the three top state-owned businesses – Vattenfall, Jernhusen and Swedavia – to answer some questions on business practices like annual dividends, and handling the corona epidemic.

Vattenfall has been a leading money-loser. If it’s not one thing, it’s the other: too much snow, too little sun, too little snow, too much sun – and we won’t even bring up wind – they’re all reasons why Vattenfall needs to raise prices on Swedish energy consumers. Then there are other issues like nuclear power and electricity infrastructure that the state of Sweden is directly responsible for but again, must somehow disengage from their effects on its own business, Vattenfall, which, again, is somehow the reason Vattenfall must raise it’s prices on Swedish energy consumers. But it isn’t only Sweden where Vattenfall has its business. Vattenfall has business all over the world and the current record-low cost of electricity is again a reason that Vattenfall is losing money.

Jernhusen owns buildings and other real estate all along the Swedish railroad network and also has dealings inside Norway. Swedavia runs the airports. Both of these were taking losses even before Covid pulled the rug out from under them. And then, of course, we have SAS of which Sweden and Denmark each own just under 15%.

Another 100% state-owned, and Covid-hit business like all others, is Svenska Spel where the lack of sports and the closing of casinos has been financially disastrous. One would think that the state would be happy about less gambling, but it’s uncomfortable when it’s also making money for the state. We all know PostNord, which is 70% owned by the Swedish state and 30% owned by Denmark (note: for some reason, however, voting power is split 50/50). It has the impossible task of trying to be profitable while being prevented from raising prices or laying off workers, or even quitting the business entirely, by its own owners.

To make matters worse, it was in the 100% state owned LKAB (Luossavaara-Kiirunavaara AB) mines in Gällivare that a cluster of Covid virus has recently exploded. But even before that a number of questions regarding work practices were piling up.

Corona makes life more difficult for basically everybody, and misbehaving companies are common. Plus, some essential services should be guaranteed by the state, even if they’re not profitable. But as a general rule, should states be in the business of making money? Oh. Wait. We can’t forgot the good news – Systembolaget! A sure money-winner in Covid times and not. Swedes will have to keep drinking to keep the money rolling in – good thing it’s Midsommar.

22 Nov. – moderation in advertising

An open road to the gold!” “Lightning fast payments!

too risky to see
pic: play.diabetes.org.uk

According to Swedish law, gambling advertisements must be on the temperate side, nothing too crazy: They must be in moderation (vara måttfull). In December of last year, the Swedish Consumer Agency’s ombudsman sued Elec Games, the owners of Ninja Casino, for breaking the law – for not being moderate in their advertisements.

As evidence in their lawsuit, KO (Consumer Ombudsman) named Ninja’s slogans such as “Play now!” “Your win at your bank in five minutes” and “250 games and chances for miljons of kronor are only a click away. What are you waiting for?” as being much too obtrusive. A pop-up ad was deemed particularly egregious. Everyone recognized that one person’s egregious could be another person’s yawn, so the court’s decision was looked forward to (SvD.se/case).

Today, the Patent and Market Court of Appeal (patent- och marknadsdomstolen) agreed with the plaintiff and ruled that Ninja Casino’s advertisements were over the line. 20 advertising phrases that Ninja used, as well as the pop-up ad, did not meet the requirement for moderation. Furthermore, any future slogans “with the same meaning” will also be considered in breach of the law. Should Elec games ignore the judgement, a half million kronor fine awaits them (SvD.se/gambling).

Gunnar Wikström, who worked the case for the Consumer Agency, said that the verdict was important to establish how the word “moderation” should be interpreted. “It’s a pretty general concept, and therefore this case could provide answers. It’s been said in the preparatory legislative work that it was up to the court to draw that line, and that’s what the court has done now. “

“The court has judged that there is a connection between gambling advertisements and gambling disorders, and has taken into special account the effect that advertising has on persons who have, or who are danger of developing, a gambling disorder” wrote Chief Judge Alexander ramsay in a statement (DN.se/gambling).

Ardalan Shekarabi, the Minister for Social Security, was understandably glad. Shekarabi brought the responsibility for the gambling issue with him from his previous job as Minister for Public Administration because it bothered him so much (see this post). “This is a huge victory for everyone who has been engaged in the fight against aggressive gambling ads” he said. “Now no gambling company can say that the law is unclear.”