International SPACs: Did the Rest of the World Learn?

The American SPAC boom of 2020-2021 wasn't just an American phenomenon. It spread across the Atlantic and the Pacific, reaching Europe, Asia, and everywhere in between. Amsterdam became the European SPAC capital. London reformed its listing rules to attract blank-check companies. Singapore and Hong Kong created SPAC frameworks from scratch. The question: did tighter international regulations produce better outcomes, or did the SPAC virus simply mutate for new markets?

The answer is nuanced but mostly discouraging. International SPACs generally performed slightly better than their American counterparts — but "slightly better than catastrophic" is still bad. The fundamental incentive misalignment of the SPAC structure transcends borders.

Europe: Amsterdam's Brief Reign as SPAC Capital

In 2020-2021, Amsterdam's Euronext exchange became the surprise epicenter of European SPAC activity. The Netherlands' relatively flexible listing rules and its status as the EU's largest equity trading venue (post-Brexit migration from London) made it the natural home for European SPACs.

European SPAC activity peaked at 38 IPOs in 2021 — a fraction of the 613 U.S. SPAC IPOs that year, but still a dramatic increase for a market that had virtually no SPAC activity before 2020.

Notable European SPAC Outcomes

Cazoo (AJAX/CZOO): The most high-profile European SPAC disaster. Cazoo, a UK online used car dealer, went public via a U.S.-listed SPAC (Ajax Financial Alternatives I) in 2021 at an $8 billion valuation. The company burned through cash at an extraordinary rate, slashed operations across Europe, and the stock fell from $10 to under $0.05 — a 99.5% decline. Cazoo went through a pre-pack administration in June 2024.

Polestar (GGPI/PSNY):Swedish EV maker Polestar went public via a U.S.-listed SPAC at a $20 billion valuation. Despite having actual production and Volvo/Geely backing, the stock has fallen over 90%. European engineering couldn't overcome the SPAC valuation problem.

Signa Sports United (TKWY): Berlin-based online sports retailer went public via a SPAC in 2021 at a $3.2 billion valuation. Filed for insolvency in October 2023. Another European SPAC bankruptcy.

The United Kingdom: Regulatory Reforms That Came Too Late

The UK's Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) took a more cautious approach to SPACs than any other major market. Pre-2021, UK listing rules effectively prohibited SPACs by requiring trading suspension upon merger announcement — making SPACs illiquid and unattractive.

In August 2021, the FCA reformed its rules to allow SPACs to trade through the merger process, but with significant protections:

• Minimum £100M raise requirement: Eliminated small, lower-quality SPACs
• Ring-fenced trust account: Proceeds held separately with independent trustee
• Time limit: 2-year deadline for deals, with possible extension subject to shareholder approval
• Shareholder redemption vote: Required before merger
• Board independence: At least one-third independent directors required

The result? Almost no SPACs listed in London. The rules were so restrictive that sponsors preferred Amsterdam or simply stuck with the U.S. The UK's careful approach protected investors — by ensuring there was virtually nothing to invest in.

Asia: Singapore and Hong Kong Join the Party

Singapore

The Singapore Exchange (SGX) introduced its SPAC framework in September 2021, making it the first major Asian exchange to formally permit SPACs. Key features included:

• Minimum market cap of S$150M (~$110M USD)
• Maximum 24-month deadline with extensions up to 36 months
• Warrants limited to 50% of shares issued (vs. unlimited in U.S.)
• Minimum 50% diluted equity held by independent shareholders post-merger
• Sponsor promote moratorium of 6-12 months post-merger

Three SPACs listed on the SGX: Vertex Technology Acquisition Corp, Pegasus Asia, and Novo Tellus Alpha Acquisition. Results were mixed — Vertex completed a merger with Taiwanese chip company Mflex while the others struggled. The Singapore market was simply too small and too cautious to sustain a SPAC boom.

Hong Kong

The Hong Kong Stock Exchange (HKEX) launched its SPAC regime in January 2022 — arriving fashionably late to the party, just as the global SPAC market was collapsing. HKEX rules were the most restrictive of any major exchange:

• Minimum HK$1B (~$128M USD) raise
• Only professional investors could trade SPAC securities pre-merger
• Open market trading by retail investors only after de-SPAC completion
• At least one PIPE investor required, providing at least 25-50% of de-SPAC value
• Independent third-party investment validation (a "de-SPAC target valuation")

Hong Kong's restriction on retail pre-merger trading was the most significant innovation: it essentially eliminated the retail FOMO trade that drove U.S. SPAC mania. Only five SPACs listed on HKEX, and market enthusiasm was muted. The rules worked as investor protection — but destroyed the business case for sponsors.

The Grab SPAC: Southeast Asia's $40 Billion Story

The largest SPAC merger in history — by far — was a Southeast Asian company: Grab Holdings, the Singaporean "super app" that merged with Altimeter Growth Corp in a deal that valued the company at approximately $40 billion. The deal closed in December 2021.

Grab was the anti-SPAC in many ways: it was a real company with millions of users, billions in revenue, and dominant market share in ride-hailing and food delivery across Southeast Asia. Its sponsor, Brad Gerstner of Altimeter Capital, was a respected tech investor, not a celebrity or financial engineer.

And yet: Grab stock debuted at $13.06 and immediately crashed. It fell to $2.00 within a year. By late 2023, it had recovered somewhat to the $3-4 range, but investors who bought at the merger price had still lost 60-70% of their investment. Even the biggest, most legitimate SPAC in history couldn't overcome the structural problems of SPAC valuation and dilution.

Did Tighter Regulations Help?

The international evidence is clear on one point: markets with stricter SPAC regulations had fewer SPACs — and therefore fewer investor losses. Hong Kong's restriction on retail trading, the UK's high listing requirements, and Singapore's warrant limitations all served to reduce the volume and the damage.

But the evidence is also clear that regulation alone can't fix the SPAC model. European SPACs, despite somewhat tighter rules than the U.S., still produced terrible outcomes for investors. Polestar, Cazoo, and Signa Sports all failed despite European oversight. The fundamental problem — sponsors who are incentivized to do any deal, and inflated valuations that set companies up for failure — exists regardless of regulatory regime.

International SPAC data from Euronext, SGX, HKEX, LSE filings, and SPAC Research. Regulatory details from FCA, MAS, and SFC publications.