“Despite Italy’s strong exposure to contagion and the rigid configuration of the lockdown, observers and international operators have avoided drastic judgments and evaluations on the possibility of Italy’s recovery – says Guido Rosa, president of Aibe -. There is no underlying distrust following the measures taken to deal with the pandemic. Basically, a suspension of the judgment prevails, in the face of a context that is difficult to foresee and to interpret clearly. Therefore, a “cold” and rational assessment of the effects of the pandemic on the Italian economy is obtained, without excessive alarmism, but far from giving easy reassurances “. A new investigation will follow in September.
Three evidences emerged, the most marked being the risk of selling off on companies in our country. In fact, the panel’s orientation towards the question regarding the possibility of a “shopping” of Italian companies taking place at this stage was also clear, also favored by a greater weakness on the capitalization side. 84% of the responses believe that the hypothesis of the extension of the control of Italian companies by foreign subjects is likely and therefore considers this situation profitable especially in areas of activity of election of the made in Italy, as a good part of the manufacturing, agri-food, fashion.
This survey confirms the values already detected by the annual Aibe-Index survey on the attractiveness of the Italian system. The particularly depressed stock market prices, combined with the economic difficulties of many companies, could lead to accelerate the acquisition processes by international operators.
The survey also revealed a fair degree of confidence in the Mes (European Stability Mechanism) to support the recovery phase in Europe. The subject of intense debate among member countries is criticized in Italy because of the conditionality with which this instrument has been used in some countries to restore financial stability after the crisis of 2008. The survey showed that 34.7% of the responses considers the use of MES useful, while about a third of the Panel draws attention to the potential for intervention that is conferred on the European Investment Bank.
Just under a quarter of the responses consider it important to extend the intervention of the European Central Bank in the purchase of public debt securities of the countries – thus giving not only continuity, but also a more decisive direction to the quantitative easing exercised by the Bank in recent years – while only 10 responses out of 100 consider it useful to resort to the cancellation of part of the debt held by the Central Bank.