TheChek News Flow

It is the latest decision in favor of the Sandro and Maje parent company.

PARIS – SMCP will get its shares back.

The Singapore High Court has ruled that Dynamic Treasure Group must return the 15.5 percent stake it holds to European TopSoho, the parent company of SMCP, which had been transferred illegally.

The court ordered that Dynamic Treasure Group has one week to return the shares, or appeal the decision. In a statement, the company said it will “keep the market informed about the effective completion of the return of this stake.”

This is the latest twist and turn in a case stemming from 2021, when 15.5 percent of the share capital of Sandro, Maje and Claudie Pierlot parent company SMCP “disappeared” from France and reappeared in the British Virgin Islands two-and-a-half months later.

This follows a similar decision by the English High Court in July 2024, which canceled the sale of the shares to Dynamic Treasure Group.

It’s also the second ruling in the case within a month as it winds through courts and regulators in multiple jurisdictions.

In June, French regulatory body Autorieté des Marchés Financiers (AMF) fined the company and its shareholders for a series of irregularities.

First, the regulatory body sanctioned former majority shareholder European TopSoho, director of European TopSoho Chenran Qiu and Dynamic Treasure Group, which received the shares, for disclosure violations and market manipulation.

The shares were moved from Luxembourg to the British Virgin Islands without notifying the authorities. They effectively “went missing” until they reappeared in the accounts of Dynamic Treasure Group, also controlled by Qiu, weeks later. European TopSoho had sold them to DTG for a symbolic one-euro price.

In the interim, European TopSoho also issued a press release denying Qiu was involved in Dynamic Treasure Group, misleading the market.

As a result, the AMF issued a series of fines. Qiu was sanctioned with 1 million euros, European TopSoho 400,000 euros, and Dynamic Treasure Group 300,000 for a total of 1.7 million euros.

Separately, the AMF fined SMCP 20,000 euros for an unrelated leak of their financial information in 2021, when it accidentally published quarterly results on its website before market close.

The London-based GLAS is the trustee for European TopSoho creditors including BlackRock, Carlyle, Anchorage, Boussard and Gavaudan that united to save the group with the issuance of bonds, and effectively SMCP’s largest shareholder. They announced last year their intention to offload 37 percent of the group’s shares.

That move could trigger a mandatory takeover action under French law if a single purchaser snaps them up.

SMCP has been on the road to recovery as it seeks to replace the market share it lost in China by expanding into new regions in Asia, including the Philippines, Indonesia and India.

It recruited former Loewe executive Kleine Tan to take up the role of chief executive officer of SMCP Asia in April, tasked with implementing the company’s “strategic road map in the region, notably our network optimization in China,” she said in a statement shared first with WWD at the time.

Strikes by Ukraine and Israel show modern militaries need to blend military tech old and new.

When Ukrainian drones struck deep inside Russia last month and damaged strategic bombers once considered untouchable, it sent shock waves through military circles. Operation Spider’s Web was more than a display of technological ingenuity; it challenged longstanding assumptions about modern warfare. An outgunned but nimble force using off-the-shelf drones disrupted a far larger adversary. Speed, asymmetry and creativity outmatched legacy systems.

Weeks later, Israel’s strike on Iranian nuclear facilities offered a sharper, more enduring lesson: The future of warfare isn’t about drones replacing jets—it’s about integration. While Ukraine revealed how smart, agile tactics can disrupt an adversary, Israel put on a masterclass in modern warfare by blending conventional and new battlefield technologies.

In Israel’s opening strike, more than 200 aircraft dropped 300 precision munitions on 100 Iranian targets, according to the Israel Defense Forces. Simultaneously, Israeli quadcopters launched from a clandestine drone base inside Iran destroyed missile launchers aimed at the Jewish state. Using vehicles reportedly smuggled into Iran, Israeli operatives deployed weapons systems and precision missiles to destroy antiaircraft batteries. Acting on intelligence collected over decades, Israel targeted and killed dozens of Iranian military and nuclear officials. Human intelligence, cyber operations, unmanned systems and manned air power operated in the pre-emptive strike—it was a feat of modern military orchestration.

The lesson is clear: Successful military operations no longer depend only on overwhelming firepower or technological novelty. They now require synthesis—air and ground, legacy and next-generation, human and machine.

Israel’s opening strike redefined how the IDF thinks about conflict. According to a former IDF general I spoke with days after the operation, Israeli military leaders accelerated their planning cycles from five years to five months. The pace of technological change, the blurring of operational environments and the shifting tactics of adversaries demanded the faster timeline. To stay ahead on the battlefield, there is no longer time for slow adaptation.

This is a warning to democracies, especially the U.S. The wars of the 21st century won’t be won by choosing between drones and jets, analog and digital, artificial intelligence and human intuition. They will be won by militaries that combine them—creatively and continuously.

Ukraine’s drone campaign exemplifies adaptation. Facing a vastly superior military, Kyiv equipped commercial drones with explosives and software. Ukraine destroyed more than 40 Russian aircraft hundreds of miles from the front for a fraction of the cost of a single fighter jet.

But while cheap drones represent the tip of the spear, they aren’t the spear itself. Israel’s air assault required a blend of stealth and brute force, AI and human judgment, unmanned systems and pilots. This was military doctrine catching up to technology.

That distinction is where the U.S. military faces its most serious challenge. America’s legacy weapons platforms—tanks, ships, aircraft—remain formidable, but they are often disconnected from one another and from the networked, AI-enabled architecture that defines modern conflict. Innovation is bolted onto outdated hardware rather than built into the organization’s DNA. AI enhances precision targeting but rarely informs strategy. Interoperability between old and new remains patchy, held back by legacy procurement and bureaucratic stovepipes.

Meanwhile, competitors are rapidly advancing. In 2021 China stunned U.S. officials with a hypersonic missile test that circumnavigated the globe. Gen. Mark Milley, then chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, testified that it was “very close” to China’s Sputnik moment. The real shock was the integration behind the weapon: space-based guidance, hypersonic propulsion and precision targeting functioning in coordination. Beijing rewired its military around how that capability fits into the broader strategy.

By contrast, the U.S. often treats technological upgrades as plug-ins rather than catalysts for larger transformation. This leaves critical gaps—against China, and even against ragtag adversaries in Afghanistan and Iraq who showed they can outmaneuver American forces with cheaper tech and ingenuity.

To close this gap, democracies must embrace the entrepreneurial power of the private sector. Venture-capital firms and startups are increasingly driving battlefield innovation. In Silicon Valley and Tel Aviv, small companies often push the edge of what’s possible faster than traditional defense contractors. But for this innovation to translate into strategic advantages, defense establishments must connect emerging technologies with military requirements. That means rethinking procurement, creating incentives for experimentation, and making startup integration the norm.

If the U.S. can’t reconcile its industrial-age forces with digital-age demands, even a massive defense budget won’t guarantee superiority. AI and unmanned systems must be treated as integral components of training, war-fighting culture, and objectives. A truly modern military trains every commander to think with drones, and it writes AI into the rules of engagement. Integration is a continuous process of aligning tools, talent, and tactics with the future fight.

That future fight is here. Hypersonic weapons, cyberattacks, and autonomous swarms are already operational. Militaries must move faster—on the ground and especially in their thinking. What will separate winners from losers in this new era will be the creativity and coherence with which militaries combine their assets. Ukraine’s battlefield improvisation and Israel’s strategic integration both underscore this point: Tools matter, but how you use them matters more.

The U.S. military can either lead this transition or risk being overtaken by forces quicker to adapt. Democracies, constrained by public accountability and limited by budgets, have no choice but to do more with less—and to do it smarter. They must lead this evolution not only with brute force, but with imagination.

Atomic watchdog’s withdrawal comes despite no independent assessment of damage to Tehran’s nuclear facilities

Israel intends to maintain “aerial superiority” over Iran to protect itself from future threats from the Islamic republic, the country’s defence minister has said, as the UN confirmed it had pulled out the inspectors who have provided information on the progress of Tehran’s nuclear programme.

The comments by Israel Katz came ahead of the announcement by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the UN’s nuclear watchdog, that a team of its inspectors had left Iran on Friday after staying in Tehran throughout last month’s 12-day war with Israel.

“The Israel Defense Forces’ mission now is to prepare a ‘blue and white’ enforcement plan to ensure Iran will not be able to threaten Israel again,” Katz told his country’s military on Thursday night, in an apparent reference to the colours of the Israeli flag.

His office did not share further details, but the outline echoed how Israel has interpreted a ceasefire with Hizbollah in Lebanon, where the air force has carried out near-daily air strikes even after the formal cessation of hostilities in November 2024.

Katz’s instructions came at a time when there is less information available about Iran’s nuclear activities than before the war.

There has been no independent assessment of the damage to Iran’s nuclear facilities since US President Donald Trump announced a ceasefire last week.

The location of the country’s enriched uranium stockpiles — including 400kg that had been enriched to about 60 per cent purity, or near weapons grade — remains unknown.

Friday’s announcement by the IAEA that it had withdrawn its remaining inspectors, the chief independent source of information about the nuclear programme for more than two decades, came after Iran’s parliament passed a law suspending co-operation with the agency.

In a post on X, Rafael Grossi, the UN agency’s director-general, said it was of “crucial importance” that the IAEA discuss with Tehran how it could resume “its indispensable monitoring and verification activities in Iran as soon as possible”.

Iran’s foreign minister Abbas Araghchi said the Islamic republic remained committed to its obligations under the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, and Steve Witkoff, US special envoy to the Middle East, may meet Iranian officials in Europe next week, according to a report by Axios.

The status of Iran’s nuclear programme — and how much the US and Israeli attacks have set back the country’s atomic ambitions — represents one of the most contentious issues about the recent war.

While Trump has said the programme has been “obliterated” by the US attacks on Iran’s nuclear facilities, the Pentagon said this week that it had been “degraded . . . by one to two years”.

Tehran insists its atomic programme is purely peaceful, but Israel has long regarded the possibility of a nuclear-armed Iran as an existential threat while refusing to declare its own secret arsenal.

Katz said in his comments on Thursday night that he had instructed the military to ensure that Israel’s air force, the most technically advanced in the region, maintains its “air superiority and the ability to enforce the restrictions on Iran”.

“The state of Israel is determined to lead an active defence policy against Iran,” he said.

During last month’s war, the Israeli air force quickly took control of Iran’s skies after destroying the country’s limited aerial defences.

That enabled Israeli warplanes to strike across Iran at will, and cleared the way for the US assault on fortified underground nuclear facilities.

The Iranian armed forces’ chief of staff, Major General Abdolrahim Mousavi, warned Israel of a forceful reaction to any further military aggression.

“We had designed a crippling plan [in response to Israel’s offensive], but we did not get an opportunity to implement it when the conflict was halted,” the top military commander said on Friday.

“If they attack Iran once again, they will see what we will do in response. In that case, even the US may not be able to save [Israeli President Benjamin] Netanyahu.”

Also speaking on Friday, Iran’s President Masoud Pezeshkian reiterated Tehran’s commitment to diplomacy, adding the Islamic republic was seeking to resolve issues through dialogue, before it was attacked by Israel.

“Iran still considers negotiation and diplomacy as an effective means of resolving differences,” he said during a visit to neighbouring Azerbaijan, adding, “The other side, however, will need to demonstrate through action that it remains committed to this approach.”  

Before Israel’s unexpected assault in June, Iran had fired missiles at Israel on two previous occasions in retaliation for Israeli assassinations in Tehran and of Iranian military staff in a diplomatic compound in Syria.

Josh Schulman is approaching the first anniversary of what has been an eventful period as chief executive of luxury fashion business Burberry.

The former head of US fashion businesses Coach and Michael Kors got to work straight away, setting out a new strategy aimed at returning the business to its roots as a specialist in British outerwear, following a costly and unprofitable incursion into the leather goods market — Burberry declared a £66mn loss in the year to March, as sales slid by 17 per cent.

End markets remain unhelpful. UBS analysts expect demand for luxury goods to remain weak until at least the second half of next year, with demand from both US and Chinese consumers remaining subdued.

Schulman’s turnaround plan involves substantial cost cuts — in May, he increased Burberry’s annual cost saving target to £100mn, from £40mn previously, putting 1,700 jobs at risk. RBC Capital Markets analyst Piral Dadhania has pinpointed its 422-strong store network, which is “outsized” relative to its revenue base, as an area that could be pared back.

Schulman clearly has confidence in his plan, and the Burberry board has confidence in him — it awarded him a bonus of £1.2mn (equivalent to his annual salary) for last year, with the requirement that he spends at least half of it on shares.

Perhaps too much shouldn’t be read into his recent £320,000 purchase, then. With the share price doubling over the past three months, Burberry’s shares trade at an 11 per cent premium to brokers’ consensus forecasts and at a forward price/earnings ratio of over 60. Although there’s an argument to be made for the potential for big earnings upgrades, this puts it well ahead of fellow posh coat makers Moncler and Canada Goose, whose shares trade at 21x and 15x, respectively.

Regulator flags policies to boost innovation in devices to help patients control devices and robotic limbs with their thoughts alone

China has unveiled policies to support the development of the medical use of brain-computer interfaces (BCI), technology that enables brain signals to control external devices.

The National Medical Products Administration said on Thursday that it would introduce supportive policies for medical devices based on the technology, which could allow people with missing or damaged body parts to control computers and robotic limbs using their thoughts.

The support for medical applications of brain-computer interfaces is among a range of innovation-boosting measures proposed by the agency, which regulates medications and medical devices.

“[We will] strengthen the standardisation research of new biomedical materials, including medical materials for additive manufacturing, flexible electrodes for brain-computer interfaces, and gene-engineered synthetic biomaterials,” it said.

The agency added that it would promote “research on safety and efficacy evaluation methods for medical devices based on brain-computer interface technology”.

Research is under way in healthcare and medical sciences on how the technology can be used to repair or reinstate functions for people with impairments caused by neuromuscular disorders such as stroke and spinal cord injuries.

There are also hopes that it could be an effective treatment for movement disorder cerebral palsy or the rare neurodegenerative disease amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). The technology might also help to restore damaged sight or hearing.

“Medical robots, advanced medical imaging equipment, artificial intelligence medical devices and new types of biomedical materials are key areas that shape the new quality productive forces of medical device manufacturing,” the agency said.

“[We should] promote the application of more new technologies … in the healthcare sector to better meet the health needs of our people and enhance the international competitiveness of China’s advanced medical devices.”

The agency also said that it would accelerate the development of general standards and establish standardisation technical organisations for medical robots and AI-powered devices. Approval procedures for equipment with high clinical application value will also be streamlined.

“[We will] continue to implement special innovative reviews for high-end medical devices that are the first of their kind in China, top in the world and have significant clinical application value,” the agency said.

“[We will also] strengthen communication between applicants and review experts, and enhance technical guidance for the research, development and registration of innovative medical devices.”

Research on BCI technology began in the 1970s when scientists showed that brain signals could be recorded and translated into commands, allowing users to control machines with their thoughts.

While early research focused on helping people with disabilities, today’s BCIs have expanded into a wide range of applications, from wearable devices for gaming to hands-free drone control.

In February, Tianjin and Tsinghua University researchers said they had developed the world’s first two-way adaptive brain-computer interface, allowing the brain and device to learn from each other.

The team said the system could eventually be integrated into portable and wearable BCI devices, making it suitable for consumer and medical applications.