Disclaimer: I don't work for Google so obviously I don't have any particular insight into their ranking methods.
But from the examples you quoted, there is at least one that has a clear local bond: lexingtoncatering.london.
So if I were an engineer at Google, I would certainly flag the .london as a TLD relevant for the UK and even more so for the greater London area.
The same reasoning could apply to .wales .cymru .paris etc. It seems reasonable to assume that geographic extensions would be handled in a specific manner. After all using a geoTLD is a declaration of intent. Whether it is effective remains to be seen and will depend on other factors, among which site contents, but the intent is clear. Your focus is on a well-delimited area/territory. Google surely understands that. They will nonetheless make the final decision over ranking. Yet your choice of extension may not materialize into a bonus.
As for the others I don't think they are arming themselves. They simply made the choice of branding and using generic extensions that do not tie them to a specific territory.
Even for a UK company; it would make sense not to use .co.uk but .com or something else if they are aiming for an international clientele.