TheChek News Flow

E.l.f. Beauty, Ulta and Unilever deals signal an optimistic outlook for the remainder of 2025.

Beauty bankers are optimistic that the recent spate of deals will continue into the second half of this year and into 2026.

After a standstill, a number of deals have been made in recent months, including E.l.f.’s acquisition of Rhode, Ulta snapping up Space NK and Unilever’s purchase of Wild and Dr. Squatch, not to mention L’Oréal’s rattatat deals with Color Wow and Medik8.

“The recent deal announcements send a really positive signal to the market, to all players involved in the market — from founders and management teams to private equity — that may be looking at deals but were concerned that strategics weren’t also going to show up at the table,” Ashleigh Barker, a director at Lincoln International’s consumer group, said.

“I do think that we will continue to see more deals getting launched through the remainder of the year, as well as heading into Q1 of next year, perhaps not with a flurry of deals that we often talk about once we get to this post-Labor Day period, but there are several opportunities that are contemplating the specific timing of when they want to go to market,” she continued.

“Whether it’s in the fall or in early 2026, it feels like people are getting ready for processes,” said an industry source, who added that potential buyers would favor newer entrants to market over the swath of color brands that launched sale processes in 2024. “Makeup by Mario stopped, Kosas stopped, and I haven’t heard a peep about Merit.”

The focus is more on skin care and hair care than makeup, from a category perspective. “Byoma is definitely getting done,” the source said, who added that a couple of hair brands, namely Amika, Camille Rose and Jolie, would be anticipated targets.

Dermatological skin care brands are still in demand, highlighted by L’Oréal’s acquisition of Medik8.

Other brands ripe for the picking are Westman Atelier, as reported, Salt & Stone, Biologique Recherche and Maesa, said a source. Trinny London is also said to be exploring its options, with sales around $85 million, and is asking for revenue multiples of 4x or 5x.

As far as what makes a viable asset, “the biggest question for our community in today’s world is the distribution question,” the source said. “Sephora is not helping brands long term, I think it will hurt some more. Indie beauty brands are going to have to compete with K-beauty brands at a lower price point.”

That being said, retail is still one of the most important factors for potential acquirers, the source said. “Retail is where you have sustainable businesses — if you can deliver sustainable business, that’s what strategics care about.”

I want to be clear from the outset. I’ve never been a car enthusiast. My driving history includes a hand-me-down Volvo with a hole in the floorboards and a series of aggressively practical vehicles, including a VW Golf and a Mazda SUV in which I hauled my family around for 12 years. Then I leased a BMW i4 electric car.

What drew me to the i4? Unlike other electric vehicles, BMWs don’t look like something out of the Jetsons; I like that they’re understated cars that happen to be electric. I liked that they’re far less common than other EVs in Northern California. Plus, the i4 comes in something like a dozen colors, including “Brooklyn Gray,” which – I know I sound ridiculous – delighted me in ways that Tesla’s handful of options never could. I’d read online that early adopters were having software issues, but with visions of my sleek new BMW dancing in my head, I conveniently filed that information away. Those first few drives felt exhilarating, too. The car was beautiful, the ride was smooth, and I felt like we were going places.

Nearly two years later, I’m doing something I never thought I’d do: eagerly awaiting the end of a lease on a luxury car because its software is such a disaster that it makes my rusted-out Volvo look like a paragon of reliability.

A love story gone awry

Let me count the ways this relationship has gone wrong, starting with the most basic function: getting into my own car. On multiple occasions, I’ve stood in parking lots, unable to unlock its doors with my phone despite the BMW Digital Key being specifically designed for this purpose. This sounds trivial until you’re juggling melting groceries while looking like you’re trying to steal your own car.

Digital key issues have become so widespread that BMW owners have at times shared elaborate multi-step workarounds that read like instructions for disarming a bomb: “1. Open the BMW app on your phone and use it to unlock the door. 2. Sign in with your BMW ID in iDrive. 3. Place your iPhone in the vehicle’s charging tray. 4. Wait for the digital key to reappear in the Wallet app. 5. Double-click the side button, authenticate with Face ID, and—finally—start the car.”

The user profile system is another exercise in futility. I’ve been unable to create guest profiles without being demoted to the bottom of the user hierarchy. What this means in practice is that if anyone else drives my car – even once – the vehicle will grab their phone and playlist the moment they’re within Bluetooth range. BMW has over-engineered their profile system to the point where it requires explicit linking steps that should really happen automatically.

The car’s CarPlay integration ranges from poor to actively dangerous. Software updates routinely break CarPlay functionality, requiring complete reboots of its iDrive infotainment system. The reverse camera issue is particularly maddening; put the car in reverse while using CarPlay navigation, and when you shift back to drive, you’re dumped onto the home screen instead of returning to your directions.

The backup camera itself is practically useless in low light conditions, and the screen frequently becomes scorching hot to the touch.

Then there’s the lights issue. Unless I remember to manually lock the car after walking away from it, I’ll occasionally notice later that the exterior lights are still ablaze in my driveway. I thought it might be human error the first time it happened. By the third time, I realized that it’s a “feature” where the i4 enters a “pseudo-sleep mode” that keeps lights and other systems running indefinitely. Multiple owners report the same issue: park the car, walk away, return later to find their vehicle lit up like a beacon and draining the battery.

Beyond the feeling on a near-daily basis that the car has amnesia, there are legitimate safety concerns. The 2022 i4 was subject to six recalls in its first year, including one so serious that BMW told owners their cars were fire risks when parked and advised them to “stop driving this vehicle immediately.” Since then, other recalls have included battery control units that can cause a sudden loss of power.

BMW releases software updates for the i4 approximately every few months, but the process is fraught with issues. Updates routinely break connected services, causing owners to lose access to traffic information, weather data, remote parking functions, and even the MyBMW app connectivity.

The over-the-air update system itself is unreliable, with owners reporting updates that get stuck at various percentages for days, forcing trips to dealers for manual installation.

What’s especially galling is that BMW positions these vehicles as premium products. If you’re buying rather than leasing, the i4 starts at over $50,000, with well-equipped models pushing $70,000 or more. Meanwhile, owners of less expensive vehicles, including Hyundais and Lexus models, report bulletproof connectivity and seamless user experiences.

I’m not saying the company rushed these cars to market without adequately testing their digital ecosystem, then decided to treat their customers as beta testers without taking their well-being into account, but I’m also not not saying that.

I genuinely wanted this relationship to work. The i4 is gorgeous, drives beautifully, and represents everything I thought I wanted in an electric vehicle. But I can’t continue a relationship where the most basic functions – unlocking doors, connecting my phone, getting directions – require the patience of a saint. (I do not have the patience of a saint.)

Even my tech-savvy husband, who is usually the first to suggest user error, recently emerged from the car after a particularly frustrating software meltdown and announced that he would “need to meditate for a bit.”

Car ownership shouldn’t be a constant source of aggravation. I shouldn’t have to maintain a mental database of workarounds for features that should just work. I shouldn’t dread software updates because they might break something that was (mostly) functional.

So BMW, I’ve had it. You made a gorgeous car, then sabotaged it with software so crummy that it’s almost comical. I thought we’d drive into the sunset together. Instead, I’m driving my i4 back to the dealership as my lease is over. I’m surprised to say I can’t wait.

Deal struck with Liechtensteinische Landesbank, which is retreating from the UAE

Rothschild & Co is expanding its Middle East wealth business through a deal with Liechtensteinische Landesbank (LLB), as international banks beef up their offerings for rich clients in the fast-growing Gulf region.

The two-century-old bank, which opened a wealth management division in Dubai only last year, has struck an agreement with LLB to pick up its Middle East clients as the Liechtenstein-based bank retreats from the United Arab Emirates.

The deal comes as ultra-wealthy people flock to the low-tax UAE with many fleeing changing taxation regimes in Europe and the UK, according to lawyers and advisers.

If LLB’s clients accept Rothschild as their new wealth manager, the bank said it would potentially pick up SFr1bn ($1.2bn) in assets as part of the deal.

“We are turbocharging our Middle East presence with this deal,” said Laurent Gagnebin, Rothschild’s chief executive of wealth management in Switzerland, describing the acquisition as “a decade of growth in one go”. Gagnebin said he was confident clients would remain with Rothschild.

Rothschild already has investment banking and alternative investments divisions in the Middle East, which Gagnebin said would complement the wealth management unit and were a “key differentiator” to other Swiss private banks in the region.

Other Swiss banks including Lombard Odier, UBS, Julius Baer and Pictet have a presence in the Middle East and many are also expanding.

Many Swiss-based family offices have relocated to Dubai in recent months as regulation and taxes have eroded the Alpine country’s attractiveness for some wealthy individuals.

“This represents our high conviction in the UAE’s potential, given the increasing concentration of both regional and global wealth here,” said Alexandre de Rothschild, the bank’s executive chair. 

Rothschild said it would also take over LLB’s Dubai office. Following the deal, Rothschild’s Middle East wealth management unit will have 25 staff — 20 of whom will come from LLB, which opened its office in Abu Dhabi two decades ago, followed by a Dubai outpost in 2008. 

Some private bankers complain that a rush into the Middle East wealth management market has stoked intense competition for qualified talent in Dubai, the region’s financial hub.  

But success is far from guaranteed. Despite its 20-year history in the UAE, LLB said it was withdrawing from the country to focus on its international clientele closer to home in Liechtenstein, Switzerland, Austria and Germany. The bank is listed in Switzerland with a market cap of SFr2.6bn.

Rothschild says it employs 4,600 bankers across 40 countries. Its asset management business manages €38bn, while its alternative investments unit Five Arrows oversees a further €29bn.

European banks push for lower cross-border hurdles

Call for end to ‘fragmented approach that is trapping capital and liquidity’ and putting lenders at disadvantage to US rivals

European banks are intensifying their calls for regulators to remove obstacles to cross-border banking services in the EU, claiming they are increasingly being put at a disadvantage against bigger US rivals.

In a report released on Tuesday, many of the top lenders in Europe criticise regulators for trapping hundreds of billions of euros in capital and liquidity behind national barriers, being too slow to approve mergers and failing to harmonise EU rules.

“In theory, you can collect deposits in Germany and make loans in Italy — just like you can get deposits in Kansas and lend them in California — but in reality you can’t because of national barriers,” said a senior executive at a large European bank.

The Association for Financial Markets in Europe, which published the report, called on the European Central Bank and national authorities to remove many of the hurdles to cross-border banking services, saying this was necessary to boost EU financial stability and growth prospects.

“For banks operating within the banking union on a cross-border basis, their profitability is severely hindered by the fragmented approach that is trapping capital and liquidity,” said Adam Farkas, head of the AFME. “Changing this would be transformational in terms of economic efficiency.”

The renewed lobbying effort comes as US and UK regulators adopt a more bank-friendly approach in response to political pressure to reduce the burden of regulation on the sector — raising fears of European lenders being left behind. 

EU banks have long been frustrated by a political impasse over creating a pan-European deposit insurance scheme. But Farkas said that even without this “there is still plenty that can be done to significantly improve how the banking union functions”.

The EU has been slower to cut red tape despite the shake-up recommended in last year’s landmark report by Mario Draghi, the former Italian premier and head of the European Central Bank. 

Draghi called for the EU to set up a 28th regime for the largest banks in the bloc that supersedes the rules of its 27 member countries. Brussels is consulting on creating such a regime — but one aimed at innovative start-ups, not big banks.

The AFME said it had identified “a number of critical implementation gaps” in the Eurozone’s banking union, citing ECB estimates that €225bn of capital and €250bn of liquidity have been trapped by national restrictions that impede cross-border activities.

Cross-border mergers between EU banks have “consistently declined over the last two decades, limiting consolidation and efficiency gains”, the report said, blaming “cumbersome authorisation processes involving multiple authorities”. 

Banking mergers and acquisitions in the EU took 285 days to complete on average over the past three years, 100 days more than a decade ago, the AFME said. That compares with 219 days for the average US banking deal, 173 days in the UK and 85 in Switzerland.

There have been signs of a pick-up in cross-border EU banking deals, such as the €6.4bn bid by France’s BPCE for Portugal’s Novo Banco in June. But such moves often stir up political opposition, as with the investment by Italy’s UniCredit in Germany’s Commerzbank.

Last year the number of mergers between Eurozone banks rose slightly, but it remained at one of the lowest levels for the past three decades, according to Dealogic. 

Once Eurozone banks grew beyond €451bn of total assets, the AFME estimated they suffered from negative synergies, as their administrative costs started to rise in relation to total assets. “The limits to economies of scale and the lack of a completed banking union means that EU banks cannot match the size and profitability of their US counterparts,” it said.

The lobby group said the EU had more onerous requirements than the US or UK for banks to raise an extra layer of debt that regulators can wipe out or convert to equity in a crisis — known as MREL, or minimum requirement for own funds and eligible liabilities.

It also called for waivers to free up trapped capital and liquidity and a simplification of national macroprudential capital buffers in different EU countries. “If you can’t move funds across borders, what is the point of expanding cross-border?” said the senior executive at a large European bank.

Donald Tusk’s government in drive to move away from coal dependence and bolster energy security

Some 20km off Poland’s Baltic coast, five wind turbines rise high above the waves, with their red-tipped blades cutting through the sea air.

They look like an oddity, but Poland’s first offshore turbines will be joined by dozens more over the next year as an expansion of wind farms reshapes the country’s energy landscape and attracts foreign investors.

Poland has been a relative laggard in the transition to clean energy and depends on coal — considered the dirtiest fossil fuel — for just over half of its electricity generation compared with 12 per cent for the EU in 2023.

Warsaw previously prioritised the interests of its powerful coal industry over EU climate targets, despite strong winds and shallow waters along the Baltic coast making Poland an attractive location for offshore wind projects.

But the offshore sector has been gaining support from the government, which has also been motivated by the need for energy security after the country stopped importing Russian oil and gas following Moscow’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

“It wasn’t a question of wanting to stay away from Poland, but for a very long time the regulatory framework just wasn’t in place here,” said Toby Edmonds, executive vice-president for offshore projects at Northland Power.

The Canadian energy group is partnering Poland’s state-controlled oil and gas group Orlen in the €4.7bn Baltic Power project — the most advanced of three flagship ventures pairing domestic companies with foreign partners who provide technology expertise.

Speaking last month during a tour of the first cluster of installed Baltic Power turbines, Prime Minister Donald Tusk hailed the project as a “gigantic investment” that would bring Poland “closer to full energy security and independence”.

Orlen holds 51 per cent of the venture — with Northland owning the rest — which aims to activate its 76 planned turbines before the end of 2026.

Ørsted, the world’s largest offshore wind developer, is constructing a slightly larger wind farm with state-owned utility PGE nearby, while Polish company Polenergia is developing an offshore project with Norway’s Equinor.

The ventures are set to provide almost 6GW gigawatts of capacity by 2030 and, as more projects come on board, Tusk’s government aims for 18GW by 2040, equivalent to roughly half of Europe’s existing capacity.

Poland’s wind energy association has estimated that the country could eventually have 33GW and cover more than 50 per cent of the country’s existing electricity demand through offshore wind energy.

“The previous government was generally thinking about coal and not renewable resources,” said energy minister Miłosz Motyka, adding that the Tusk administration had created better conditions for foreign companies to support Poland’s energy transition.

About 15km down the coast, Ørsted and PGE’s Baltica 2 venture is progressing despite financial problems at the Danish company, which announced a $9.4bn rights issue last month. US President Donald Trump’s hostility to offshore wind has also dented confidence in the sector among some investors.

In late July Polish contractors began drilling cable trenches behind a tourist beach to allow offshore turbines to supply power via lines running beneath the seabed, and construction at sea is due to start next year. Ørsted said the project “will not be impacted by the rights issue”.

As a late entrant — Denmark inaugurated the world’s first offshore wind farm in 1991 — Poland is getting more modern and efficient technology. Baltic Power’s turbines can each generate 15MW, compared with 4MW for units installed at Northland’s Dutch wind farm a decade ago.

“We’re now using the largest and latest model of turbines available outside of China,” Edmonds said, while sailing around Poland’s new offshore turbines. “Poland is getting a real transfer of knowledge and experience in an industry that has been getting better and better.”

Other foreign companies are also moving in. Germany’s RWE is pursuing its own Polish offshore project, while Siemens Gamesa agreed in July to supply 26 turbines for a project by Ocean Winds, a joint venture between Portugal’s EDP Renewables and France’s Engie. 

The offshore wind drive is also spurring activity in the wider supply chain, with foreign companies heeding a call by Tusk for the “re-Polonisation” of the economy and support for domestic players.

Poland “can become an offshore hub for the Baltic region and the rest of Europe,” said Nils de Baar, from Danish manufacturer Vestas, which opened a Polish factory that produces nacelles for offshore turbines this year, and is considering adding a facility for offshore blades.

Rebecca Cooke, who oversees drilling for Ørsted, said local subcontractors were adapting quickly despite their lack of offshore experience, vindicating its decision not to take the “easy option” of bringing in international contractors.

“If your background is land-to-land drilling and suddenly you’ve got also to deal with the sea, it’s a big challenge,” she said.

Poland’s Baltic coast is also set to host the country’s first nuclear power plant, under a 2022 deal struck by the previous government with US companies Westinghouse and Bechtel. The plant is scheduled to become operational in 2036, and will use seawater to cool down its reactors.

“Poland’s energy transition, and its goals for decarbonisation and energy security, have created favourable conditions,” said Dan Lipman, a senior Westinghouse executive handling nuclear projects.