The advert on the seat of the London black cab features pictures of the Eiffel Tower, the Statue of Liberty and the Kiyomizu-dera – a temple in Japan.
The strap: “We may have London in our name, but we create possibility in 190 markets.”
To critics, that ad serves as an example of exactly what is wrong with the London Stock Exchange Group. It is downplaying London rather than promoting it.
Since 1571 the Royal Exchange has been at the heart of the Square Mile. A source of wealth, and pride. Not everyone in the City thinks the operators of the market – the LSEG – is giving it proper attention.
For the LSEG – a worldwide seller of data to investors – the LSE is only 4% of revenues.
That’s a problem, say critics. It has little care for this moribund market which few want to join.
The LSEG insists the exchange is integral to its operations. It has to say that.
The old LSE fended off foreign takeovers for decades, notably from Germany and the US.
Since the LSEG’s major shareholders are US private equity giant Blackstone and Qatar, and it is run by former US Goldman Sachs banker David Schwimmer, some say it might as well be sold to foreigners who care more for the future of the market.
Or some UK white knight, though it is hard to see who that might be, especially given how close the LSEG is seen to be to the government.
One critic – it is notable how nervous senior City players are at sticking their neck out to attack the exchange – says: “I think if you look at how tech has changed our lives and reduced costs over the last 10-20 years it has been immense. The LSE needs to be at the heart of that mission, not just focusing on improving profitability. But if you've got a monopolistic player in cahoots with the regulator and Westminster, that's what will happen.”
Clearly, something needs to change.
