SESSION 2018

UE 122 – ANGLAIS APPLIQUÉ AUX AFFAIRES

Durée de l’épreuve : 3 heures

Le corrigé comporte : 5 pages

I - COMPRÉHENSION : 5 points
II - VERSION : 5 points
III - EXPRESSION ÉCRITE EN LANGUE ANGLAISE : 4 points
IV - ESSAY : 6 points

CORRIGÉ

I – COMPRÉHENSION (5 points : 0,5 par bonne réponse ET justification)

QCM: Choisissez la bonne réponse parmi a, b ou c.

Une seule réponse à chaque fois.

Vous justifierez votre choix par une citation brève tirée de l’article (sauf pour la dernière question)
Les affirmations suivent l’ordre du texte (pas forcément de corrélation entre n° de question et n° de
paragraphe)

1. En Grande-Bretagne, les OPA (offres publiques d’achat) géantes de firmes étrangères :

b) se sont parfois soldées par de retentissants échecs.
Pfizer’s abortive hostile bid for the Anglo-Swedish drugmaker AstraZeneca…

2. L’offre qui concerne le groupe Unilever :

a) a été rejetée par l’entreprise britannique.
The bid was swiftly dumped after a withering rejection from the target.

3. Le contexte économique du Brexit et de l’élection de Donald Trump :

a) pourrait s’avérer bénéfique sur le marché des capitaux.
This will partly be driven by people reacting opportunistically to the dislocation in values that has
occurred because of Trump and Brexit.

4. Ce qui ralentit les négociations commerciales avec les firmes britanniques :

c) le manque de confiance des investisseurs étrangers.
The big uncertainty in some dealmakers’ minds is how the government and ministers might react to
an M&A boom…

1
5. Vu des États-Unis :
b) mieux vaut ne pas se lancer dans des OPA trop politiques.
The possibility of an ugly face-off over Unilever.
Ou
“This government is turning French — it is dirigiste and protectionist,” says one senior US dealmaker.

6. La défiance face aux OPA :

b) peut se lire comme un rejet d’un certain capitalisme.
to defend important sectors of the British economy from short-term stock market actors and raiders.

7. Le plus grand risque pour la Grande-Bretagne :

c) reste la vente au rabais de ses enseignes phares.
the two recent corporate takeover attempts have set government nerves jangling about the possibility
of a fire sale of British companies.

8. Le nombre d’OPA en Grande-Bretagne :

c) avait déjà baissé avant même le référendum sur la sortie de l’UE.
…bidders had braced themselves for the worst ahead of the EU referendum.

9. Aujourd’hui, les grandes entreprises britanniques :

a) restent ouvertes à des offres d’acquéreurs étrangers.
But two major British companies — …— have agreed to be acquired since the Brexit vote.

10. Finalement, l’impact du Brexit :

b) n’a pas modifié les flux de capitaux à l’international.
Another driver of takeover activity is the continuing availability of finance…

EXERCICE 2 – VERSION (5 points)

Traduisez en français les phrases suivantes, toutes tirées de l’article :

1. Later that week came an even bigger shock, with the leak of a £115bn approach by the aggressive cost-
cutting US conglomerate Kraft Heinz to acquire Unilever. (1.5 pt)
Mais le coup dur est venu quelques jours plus tard avec la révélation de l’offre de rachat de Unilever
(s’élevant) à 115 milliards de livres par le conglomérat américain Kraft- Heinz, connu pour son
obsession de la réduction des coûts.

2. Exactly how far ministers will go to protect British companies is an issue given added urgency by
Theresa May’s new industrial policy. (1.5 pt)
Mais jusqu’où iront les ministres pour défendre les entreprises britanniques?
Voilà une question que la politique industrielle de Theresa May a rendu encore plus brûlante.

3. The pound has bottomed and might rally once the UK leaves the EU. (1 pt)
La livre a atteint son plus bas niveau et pourrait se redresser dès le départ du Royaume Uni de
l’Union Européenne.

4. There is little sign of a sustained pick up in takeover activity, observers say. (1 pt)
Les observateurs ont fait remarquer qu’il n’y avait pas de réels signes d’un maintien du boom de
rachats.

2
III - EXPRESSION ÉCRITE EN LANGUE ANGLAISE (4 points= 15 X 0,25 et 0.25 en plus
pour l’ensemble)

Le mémo suivant provient de la Chambre de Commerce Britannique de Londres (London Chamber of

Commerce and Industry) qui se propose de faire un point à son réseau de banques, entreprises et
commerces de la capitale sur les défis et opportunités que représentera pour eux le Brexit, avec la sortie
prévue du Royaume-Uni de l’UE en 2019.

Vous devez compléter cette correspondance uniquement avec :

les mots de liaison
les expressions des hausses ou baisses
les formes comparatives
et formules types de la correspondance commerciale
afin de rétablir le sens et la correction grammaticale.

Il y en a 15 en tout. Ne recopiez que le segment avec son numéro.

London Chamber of Commerce and Industry

33 Queen St, London EC4R 1AP

Londonchamber.co.uk

September 2017

Dear all / Dear colleagues / Dear members (1)

Following / Further to / Due to / Because of/ Given (2) the growing number of enquiries we have
received about the impacts of Brexit on your businesses, we have decided to send you all a brief
analysis of the situation.

As you (must / surely) (3) know by now, the procedure to leave the European Union was officially
launched last March.

Here are some facts concerning what to expect in the next 2 years:
Be prepared for the shocking truth:
Tariffs for exports to the EU will certainly skyrocket / rise sharply / increase considerably (4) which
means that profits will plummet / will drop significantly / will dip/ will collapse (5).

Worse still / Last but not least / Moreover / In addition… (6): some of our major banks like HSBC
have warned they would transfer their offices from the City to Paris or Dublin!

Some recommendations now:

Make sure (7) that you all comply with the new regulations related to employment of EU nationals.

3
 We know this is a tough time.

However / Luckily (8) there are also some more hopeful news:
Brexit means less (9) regulation and more (10) freedom to set up trade agreements with countries like
China or Australia.

Our corporate tax is of 20%, which is 5% lower than (11) average.

There is one last final hope that we will still stay in the single market unless (12) our country fails in
its negotiations with Brussels.

We would be grateful if you could / We would appreciate it if you could / Please (13) send your
feedback on this note.

We apologise for / Our apologies for / We are sorry for / We are aware of (14) the lack of details
of this short memo - we are planning to send a longer document after reading your commentaries.

Regards (15)

Tom Hamsworth
Managing Director of the London Chamber of Commerce and Industry

IV – ESSAY (6 points)

Answer the following questions:

a) Why do countries choose to adopt protectionist measures in their international trade relations
(find 3 main causes and describe them in full sentences)?
b) How can they protect their economy? Give 3 examples of such methods.

You can answer separately or add the examples to question a.

150 words approx.

There are many reasons leading a country to implement protectionist measures.

- Concerning developing countries, they can argue that such or such sector of the economy is in its
“infant stage” and that it needs time to reach a bigger market share and achieve profitable economies of
scale (économies d’échelle) and therefore develop their own competitive advantage.

In that case, the country will decide to raise the price of the “rival” foreign goods concerned.

Another tool is to “manipulate” the country’s currency and devaluate it so as to make exports
cheaper (typical case of the Chinese Yuan).

They may also choose to subsidise their “national champions” or even make direct payment to firms.
China is the best example of state financial intervention in businesses or state “patronage” for its private
firms like Lenovo.

4
The result being that the local products become cheaper, so it’s good for exports too.

- Another motive to be found particularly in the developed world is the desire to protect an industry
which is ailing (souffrante) because of the increased competition from emerging economies and the risk
to lose one’s competitiveness entirely.

They will raise tariffs and import taxes.

- In addition, to fight against what they consider as unfair competition (such as dumping) countries that
rely on imports a lot like the USA will do the same.

- To protect jobs governments can choose to nationalise an industry, as was the case in France with the
ship building group STX in Saint Nazaire, jointly owned with Italy. Italy having a majority stake, the
risks are that they have a larger control over the future of this site and could sell it off to China at some
point, causing massive layoffs of French workers and causing France to lose its patents (intellectual
property). France opted for a temporary nationalisation at some point (then Italy got a majority stake).

- Reshoring means repatriating some units of production back home. This was the promise of the Trump
administration (for car factories in Mexico for example).

- Let’s not forget that tariffs represent a huge source of revenues, something poorer countries desperately
need given that they lack big firms (so no corporate taxes) and collect little income tax from a poor
population.

- The search for strong safety standards provides a good “excuse” to limit imports, especially in the food
industry. China and India are known for being very strict in the enforcement of their tough regulations.
For example, Nestle had to destroy $50 million worth of its Maggi noodle line in India following
allegations that they contained monosodium glutamate.

- Very restrictive conditions can be imposed to any foreign investor wishing to penetrate a local market:
forced joint ventures (as was the case for Starbucks in India, it had to strike a deal with Tata Coffee),
transfers of technology, acquisition of the foreign firm (Uber was acquired by Chinese Didi app).

- The wish to preserve one’s cultural heritage can drive countries to take actions against foreign
“invasion”: Canada protects its press and publishing industries by taxing US imports of books and
magazines a hefty 80%!