Cleos, the 60% example may well come to pass. However, that would give GE the board majority and while the Board has fiduciary duties to the minority which differ by the amount of ownership GE will have, the board will emphasize what GE wants and they will pick the managers who will operate arcam to the satisfaction of GE. They just won't disclose their marching orders and will be subtle in their bias towards ge wishes and there is nothing wrong with that. Majority rules with certain minority protections.
Other than FAA requirements to join multiple supplier programs, I do not see a lot of disclosure or cooperation amongst competitors. The key is did GE buy arcam to make profit in which case it will make machines and price them to satisfy competitors. Or did they do it for strategic reasons, in which case they might refuse to sell to competitors or design and price them to be unattractive. That is their call. But if strategic, they will not disclose that intent obviously so as not to anger government and competitors. We shall see how that shakes out. But Arcam sure hasn't disclosed its competitive secrets even to us. At best companies buy the printers and they play with them, although arcam has provided assistance. This will be minimized if GE bought for strategic reasons. Acam will only help Avio and other GE entities.
We won't know if GE plans Arcam to be profit or strategic, but it is clear that competitors, stakeholders and the EU have been silent.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
