FT : The UK police’s latest problem: crowds of unruly teens

The UK police’s latest problem: crowds of unruly teens
Disorder in London and other cities threatens public sense of order, even though it may fall short of widespread criminality

When police officers were called to Clapham High Street, south London, on the evenings of March 29 and 31, they faced a baffling situation.

Hundreds of teenagers had met up nearby, using TikTok and other platforms, and were running through shops — shouting, swearing and filming each other.

The incident, and the copious amounts of video it generated, set back efforts by London Mayor Sadiq Khan to project an image of London as safe and orderly. Thinus Keeve, retail director of retailer Marks and Spencer, complained about “brazen shoplifting”.

There have also been similar, rowdy “link-ups” in Solihull, in the West Midlands, also on March 31, in Rochdale, Greater Manchester, on April 1, and in Birmingham on April 8.

Together they illustrate how difficult it has become for police forces to deal with antisocial behaviour. Police are often unfamiliar with the messaging networks — including TikTok and Discord servers — that young people use to arrange the link-ups. In videos from Clapham, officers are mainly seen remonstrating with the youngsters and shooing them out of shops, not arresting them.

London’s Metropolitan Police has said that contrary to some reports, the force did not witness shoplifting or widespread criminal damage during the disorder. It arrested only six people over the two nights, although it said it would examine videos for further evidence of crimes.

The sudden arrival of large numbers of young people presents an “almost impossible” challenge for police, said Ciaran Thapar, director of public affairs at the Youth Endowment Fund, a charity that combats youth violence. “If you have numbers that high of young people meeting up, it’s going to be really hard to control.”

Dal Babu, a former Metropolitan Police commander, said the best response would be to crack down on those making money from online content of the link-ups. “It’s fuelled by the entirely unregulated internet,” he said.

Khan, the mayor, launched a separate broadside on social media companies this week for spreading disinformation about London’s crime rates and multiculturalism.

Lib Peck, director of the violence unit in the London mayor’s office, said enforcement such as arrests had a part to play in tackling link-ups.

But she added: “We also need to be looking at the causes. What we want to be doing is inspiring young Londoners to get engaged in things that interest them and can take them on to meaningful jobs.”

The “link-up” phenomenon is undoubtedly unwelcome for the police. One Clapham video shows people cowering in fear from the crowds of young people.

In Birmingham, hundreds of teenagers descended on the city centre’s shopping district during Wednesday afternoon’s sunny weather, some wearing balaclavas or spraying water guns.

West Midlands Police said it had intelligence in advance of the gathering. Officers used pepper spray and issued 12 dispersal notices to break up some of the crowds, who remained until early evening, as well as seizing water pistols and issuing three community resolutions for cannabis possession.

The force also carried out eight stop-and-searches and said detectives were going through CCTV footage, including investigating an alleged assault. No arrests have so far been made.

Last weekend, Greater Manchester Police placed a Section 34 dispersal order — a reactive measure — on Rochdale town centre after youths harassed shop workers and reportedly caused criminal damage. No arrests were made but six individual dispersal notices were issued to teenagers.

Anthony King, chair of the Our Town community project in Croydon, said some young people from projects with which he was involved had travelled five miles to Clapham after seeing social media posts about the meet-up.

“[One] young man said, ‘We were only there to hang out. It was fun. We didn’t mean it to get out of hand,’” King said. “They’re just looking for things to do and be entertained and engaged.”

King, speaking on the sidelines of a holiday club he was organising, called for more investment in more constructive activities to channel teenagers’ energy.

Rio Carter, 16, one of those at the holiday club, said: “It just takes kids a while to mature . . . I genuinely think people just walking by shouldn’t be scared, because it’s very rare for a young person to get hurt or hurt a random person walking by. Nowadays this is what kids do for fun, whereas 20 years ago they would just go to the park.”

Carter said he had decided not to organise mass meetups after a bad experience in which police imposed a dispersal order when he attempted to arrange such an event.

Steven Buckley, lecturer in digital media sociology at City St George’s University of London, said research suggested people who participated in mass social media meetups did so mainly out of boredom: “So much of their life is now digitised online that they want to meet people in the real world.”

“I’m not saying police should be monitoring every Discord chat,” Buckley said, but he added it would be worth maintaining a police presence in some of the online spaces concerned. “That’s where the problems are.”

Greater Manchester Police, however, said the trouble in Rochdale was specifically linked to TikTok. The force had already been working with schools and community groups, it said, including voluntary “acceptable behaviour contracts” with youths aimed at reducing antisocial behaviour.

Babu, the former Met Police commander, and Thapar, of the Youth Endowment Fund, both attributed the police’s difficulty in tackling the link-ups to the loss of more than 20,000 police officers during the decade of austerity cuts after 2010. Both the past Conservative and current Labour governments have sought to reverse the cuts.

Peck, of the mayor’s office, was more optimistic that the problem could be brought under control. The number of young people murdered annually in London is running at about a third of the level it was seven years ago. That follows a concerted effort to engage those at risk of becoming involved in violence in activities such as boxing clubs or the creative arts.

Such activities had the potential to generate meaningful, real-life relationships for young people, Peck said.

“What I have seen is the connection. That can ground the young person and put them back on the right path.”

FT : Superyacht maker Sanlorenzo rides personalisation wave

Superyacht maker Sanlorenzo rides personalisation wave
Italian group looks to sustain sales boom with hyper bespoke vessels including its latest built around a living tree

Italian superyacht maker Sanlorenzo is betting on hyper-personalisation to attract more wealthy customers in the Americas and Asia, with recent commissions including a vessel built around a living tree that rises through its decks.

As with luxury cars made by Ferrari and Rolls-Royce, rich individuals are willing to spend large amounts to make their superyachts highly personalised, which has pushed up revenue and profits for Sanlorenzo despite disruptions caused by the global trade war.

Following a four-year process involving 18 months of weekly calls, its latest 74-metre 74Steel yacht Virtuosity, expected to cost more than €100mn, was customised for a Canadian who wanted his ship to feature a large tree and aquarium. 


“This is a clear example of how the company has so much flexibility to really have every product tailor-made,” chief executive Massimo Perotti told the FT, adding that personalisation accounted for roughly 20-25 per cent of the group’s revenue. “We tend to make more profit with personalisation.” 

Perotti bought the yacht maker in 2005 and has increased its revenue from €40mn in 2004 to €960mn last year. Its share price has doubled since it listed in Milan in late 2019, as the global superyacht market has grown to reach annual sales of more than €25bn.

The group generated about 60 per cent of its revenue in Europe last year, with the Americas accounting for 21 per cent and Asia-Pacific for 10 per cent. Perotti said the company was aiming in coming years to expand the sales ratio in the Americas to 30 per cent and in Asia-Pacific to 15 per cent. 

While the US remained an important growth market, he expects expansion to be restricted by higher tariffs and a stronger euro against the dollar, while he sees potential in Canada as well as central and South America.

“Probably the Middle East, due to the war in Gaza and the war in Iran, for a few years will be quiet,” he added. 


Global sales of superyachts — typically defined as a leisure vessel more than 24 metres in length — soared following the Covid pandemic with a record 1,203 ships built or on order in 2023, compared with 830 in 2019, according to research company Boat International. Sales fell last year to 1,138 superyachts, with about half of production based in Italy.

Sanlorenzo, whose superyachts sell for an average of €12.5mn, pursues a similar strategy to Ferrari in creating “scarcity” and pricing strength by limiting volumes. Perotti said its limited output, of only about 70 yachts a year, also strengthened the group’s resilience to economic cycles. 

The group, which last year poached executives from Aston Martin, will open its first showroom in central London on Tuesday as it seeks to attract more wealthy customers in the UK and build its presence at a time when the British shipbuilding industry has come under severe financial pressure. 

“The UK is out of Europe but . . . if we have to choose a capital of Europe, London for sure is the most important place in respect to Paris, Berlin, Rome or Milan,” Perotti said. “Most of the super-rich have a house in London, like they have a house in New York.”

Barron's : SuperYachts Are Going Through a Growth Phase: More, Bigger, and Prici

SuperYachts Are Going Through a Growth Phase: More, Bigger, and Pricier.

Despite tariffs and wars, the $13.8 billion super-yacht business is cruising. Last year, 360 preowned superyachts of at least 30 meters—nearly 100 feet—sold for $6.4 billion, up 36% from 2024, notes Fraser Yachts in its 2026 Global Superyacht Report. Another 211 new superyachts were sold, up from 199 a year ago, with 19 over 260 feet, compared with 13 in 2024. In all, the superyacht world includes over 6,200 vessels, up from 4,550 a decade ago.

Still, sales trail 2021’s pandemic peak, when 497 preowned and 319 new vessels were sold. Postpandemic sales dipped, then rebounded. They could rise more, says Fraser CEO Anders Kurtén, if more big boats—200 to 230 feet—were on the market.


Last year, Breakthrough, a 390-foot yacht powered by hydrogen fuel cells, sold for $793 million—tops among new yachts, says Fraser. The largest vessel sold last year, at 446 feet, was Flying Fox, which Luxury Launches reported was bought by a member of the Abu Dhabi royal family. Among new boats, the trend is toward “larger, highly bespoke builds,” says Fraser, with average length rising to 159 feet.


One trend: sustainability. Power sources like fuel cells are now more feasible. Kurtén points to diesel-powered yachts less than 20 years old that can slash emissions by converting to hydrotreated vegetable oils. Then there’s wind. Amazon.com founder Jeff Bezos’ 410-foot sailing yacht Koru —estimated cost: $500 million—remains an outlier. Only 14% of superyachts for sale feature sails.

>>> SpaceX IPO + Musk Empire | L;Chekroun | 11 April 2026

SpaceX IPO + Musk Empire | Graham Advisors Research | 11 April 2026

Two notes attached — published 5 April, five days before Barron's cover story + Barrons Article from today

NOTE 1 — SpaceX IPO: Initiation of Coverage
Verdict: extraordinary company, wrong terms for institutional buyers.
— Business mature worth $350–450B (20–26% of IPO valuation)
— 2025: $18.5B revenue / ~$5B net loss / xAI capex $13B alone
— Multiple: ~95x 2025 revenue — zero margin for execution error
— Fair institutional entry: $900B–$1.1T (35–45% post-IPO correction)
— Dual-class: minority shareholders structurally voiceless

NOTE 2 — The Musk Empire Consolidation (Research Preview)
The six things the financial press missed:
— This is primarily a compensation engineering event, not an industrial thesis
— Musk: 43% SpaceX vs 13% Tesla — patrimonial gravity has shifted
— $150–200B in forced passive index buying — the real value mechanism
— Nasdaq J+15 rule change + 5–8% float = unprecedented liquidity squeeze
— IPO must precede merger for Delaware fairness opinion — not accidental
— $2T valuation: institutional pushback now documented

Full institutional note (trade framework, 7 investor profiles, 4-scenario
merger matrix, kill-switch analysis) available on request — reply to this message.

[ATTACHMENT 1: SpaceX_Graham_EN_11April2026.pdf]
[ATTACHMENT 2: SpaceX_MuskEmpire_TEASER_11April2026.pdf]

Barron's : SpaceX Is Going Public. Why a Tesla Merger Could Be Musk’s Real Endga

SpaceX Is Going Public. Why a Tesla Merger Could Be Musk’s Real Endgame.
From the biggest IPO on record to the largest M&A deal in history?

SpaceX’s initial public offering may be the largest IPO ever, but it might just be a prelude to the largest merger ever—a combination of Tesla with Elon Musk’s space venture.

On April 1, SpaceX reportedly filed confidentially for an IPO. It’s likely to raise $75 billion, more than double the $29 billion Saudi Aramco raised in 2019, and three times the $25 billion Alibaba Group Holding raised in 2014. Its valuation could come in close to $2 trillion, immediately making the company the sixth-most valuable in the U.S. Not bad for a venture that was worth only $350 billion a year ago and was founded by a 30-year-old who thought it was dumb to dispose of rockets as if they were plastic straws.

SpaceX’s IPO would be remarkable on its own, but it might only be the first step in a process Musk calls “convergence,” the act of combining all his companies into one. That process is well under way. Just two months ago, SpaceX merged with Musk’s xAI in a deal that valued the X parent at $250 billion. A combination of Tesla and SpaceX, to create a $3.5 trillion behemoth, would yield an AI-infused industrial megaconglomerate that would instantly become one of the most valuable companies in the world—and the premier manufacturing company on the planet.

Advertisement - Scroll to Continue


“I think it’s probable,” says Baird analyst Ben Kallo. “It looks like that’s going to happen.”


No matter what happens, the SpaceX IPO is coming first, and it’s the better business. Yes, it could help rescue Tesla—whose shares have fallen almost 30% after hitting a record high in December —from its current stagnation. But for now, investors may be better off focusing on SpaceX and holding off on buying both stocks.

SpaceX is already staggeringly successful—and has a knack for making others in the industry look a little foolish. It took only six years from its founding in 2002 for SpaceX to become the first privately funded organization to put a liquid-fueled rocket into orbit. Few understood exactly what was happening. In 2015, SpaceX President Gwynne Shotwell was chided in Congress about how her company could afford to offer launches at a price far below the $400 million of America’s dominant commercial launch provider, ULA, a 50/50 joint venture between Boeing and Lockheed Martin.

“It is hard for me to say,” she replied. “I don’t know how to build a $400 million rocket.” By 2017, SpaceX was reusing rockets, dramatically lowering the cost to reach orbit.

More recently, SpaceX posted a picture of its improved Raptor rocket engines, leading Tory Bruno, at the time the head of ULA, to comment that there was “no need to exaggerate” SpaceX’s tech by showing “partially assembled” engines. SpaceX responded by posting a video of the engine running. “Works pretty good for a ‘partially assembled’ engine,” said Shotwell. The tech, which integrated cooling and sensors inside components, appeared almost magical—even to industry insiders.


Investors have to put a multiple on that magic when SpaceX goes public. Currently worth $1.25 trillion after the xAI merger, SpaceX will be aiming for a valuation of up to $2 trillion, or roughly 75 times estimated 2026 sales and 160 times estimated earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization, or Ebitda.

It’s an eye-popping valuation, and not one that lends itself to comparison—not even to Tesla, which trades for closer to 100 times estimated Ebitda. But SpaceX is unique. It handles more than half of the world’s orbital launches, helped by its massive cost advantage from reusable rockets. It also built Starlink, a profitable space-based broadband product, which had more than nine million subscribers at the end of 2025, up roughly 100% year over year, each paying at least $600 a year for the service. SpaceX is “a cash machine,” says Rainmaker Securities managing director Greg Martin, who believes SpaceX’s Ebitda profit margins were as high as 50% before the xAI merger.

For SpaceX’s valuation to make any kind of sense, the company will have to keep those margins high as it grows—and that means making it even cheaper to go to space. SpaceX’s partially reusable Falcon 9 costs an estimated $2,000 to $3,000 per kilogram to reach low Earth orbit, 1/20th the cost relative to the Space Shuttle. SpaceX’s huge, fully reusable Starship could cut costs relative to Falcon by another 80% to 90%.

Musk’s big bet with SpaceX is on space-based data centers, which he believes could be cheaper to operate than terrestrial ones in two to three years, even if they’re more expensive to build. Musk spent an estimated $3 billion to $4 billion on xAI’s Colossus I data center, equipped with 100,000 Nvidia
H100 GPUs, in Memphis. Right now, SpaceX might require 1,000 satellites in 100 launches to put that number in space, which could cost double that amount. With Starship, however, the number of flights to build the equivalent data center gets cut by 75%, and the total cost might be only 20% higher.

The savings from running the space-based data centers would be enormous. SpaceX wouldn’t have a $200 million annual power bill to run Colossus, as xAI does, and there would be no Memphis residents complaining about the hum or impact on water prices. With additional satellite, chip, rocket, and cooling work, plus rising costs for terrestrial power and construction, it isn’t hard to imagine a world where it’s more cost-effective to build in space.

And it would be big business, if successful. OpenAI is spending $60 billion a year, with Oracle, for 4.5 gigawatts of compute capacity. Musk wants to put 100 gigawatts into space. That’s $1.3 trillion in annual compute sales, based on Oracle’s metrics. For SpaceX, success could mean the difference between an astronomical valuation and something far lower.

“If orbital data centers aren’t a thing…that’s definitely a [valuation] drag,” says Martin. “If they are a thing, it’s a $10 trillion company.”

SpaceX isn’t alone in dreaming about a sci-fi future. In November, Alphabet unveiled Project Suncatcher, which aims to put AI compute into space in 2027. In March, Nvidia unveiled its Space-1 Vera Rubin Module, chips optimized for space-based computing.

As with everything Musk, the SpaceX IPO isn’t without controversy. While combining SpaceX’s infrastructure with xAI’s artificial intelligence might make sense on paper, it creates risks that the company didn’t need to take. Competition in the AI space is brutal, and xAI doesn’t make money. It also faces lawsuits over nonconsensual sexual imagery generated by Grok, among other privacy issues. Yet despite those risks, xAI was valued at $250 billion at the time of the merger, less than the $852 billion for OpenAI and the $380 billion for Anthropic, but not bad for a venture burning an estimated $1 billion a month by the end of 2025.

Tesla might be the bigger issue. The electric-vehicle maker’s stock is trading at its lowest level since September, yet still fetches 190 times estimated 2026 earnings, which have been falling. Many don’t even consider it a car company anymore, despite its main businesses being energy storage and electric vehicles. Instead, its valuation is largely a reflection of physical AI—robo-taxis and robots and other manifestations of the real with artificial intelligence.

Cars pay the bills, but AI creates the value, which has created an odd situation on Wall Street. RBC values the robo-taxi business and self-driving businesses at about $840 billion, while Morgan Stanley puts Tesla’s autonomous-driving technology at closer to $1.2 trillion and robots at $270 billion. Deutsche Bank values Tesla’s robots at closer to $400 billion. While those estimates are all over the place—and don’t include cars or power—they’re a sign that Wall Street’s bulls believe Tesla is on the cusp of unlocking a new era of earnings growth by merging AI with machines.

When that new era arrives is anyone’s guess. In January 2026, Musk promised that Tesla robo-taxis would be in nine cities in the first half of 2026; they are in just one— Austin, Texas. Musk also said the third generation of Tesla’s humanoid robot, Optimus, would be revealed in the first quarter, but missed that deadline too, raising concerns that China’s robot rivals may have an insurmountable lead in the technology.

That’s typical Musk. J.P. Morgan analyst Ryan Brinkman points out that Tesla delivered just 360,000 cars during the first three months of 2026, well short of the 1.4 million Wall Street predicted back in 2022. The lack of EV growth and AI delays are among the reasons Tesla stock is down 20% this year. But even those losses might not reflect the possible downside.

“Incredibly, Tesla shares are [more than] 50% higher now than when delivery volumes peaked in June 2022,” writes Brinkman, who has an Underweight rating and $145 price target on the stock, down 58% from a recent $347.

A merger of SpaceX and Tesla could solve Tesla’s growth problems. The links between the two companies have been accelerating since the start of 2025. It began when Musk merged X with xAI in March of that year, and then integrated the xAI chatbot Grok into Tesla vehicles in July. In January, Tesla announced a $2 billion investment in xAI, resulting in Tesla owning a small stake in SpaceX following the completion of that merger in February.

Last month, Musk announced Macrohard —a joint SpaceX-Tesla project to create an Amazon Web Service-like business using the computing capacity that lies inside Tesla vehicles. xAI will create a digital assistant, like many other agents, to make work more efficient, with the software running on idle Tesla vehicles. It’s a cost-effective way to boost AI computing power, potentially generating new revenue for both companies. AWS generated $129 billion in 2025 sales, up 20%, and almost $46 billion in 2025 operating profit, nearly 60% of Amazon.com’s total operating profit. xAI, SpaceX, and Tesla are also working to create a “Terafab” semiconductor manufacturing operation, which Musk called “the most epic chip-building exercise in history.”

The logic seems obvious: “He’s trying to tie the two companies closer together so that he can, in the very near future, combine SpaceX and Tesla,” says ARK Investment Management’s Nick Grous, though the firm notes that such a process will likely take time.

For Future Fund co-founder Gary Black, the math doesn’t add up. SpaceX is likely to trade at 160 times estimated 2026 Ebitda, a roughly 60% premium to Tesla’s lofty valuation. At recent levels, that means Tesla investors would contribute roughly 55% of the earnings and get only 40% of the stock in a combined company. “It’ll never happen,” says Black. “Why would Tesla shareholders dilute themselves?”

Tesla’s shareholder base isn’t like others—and SpaceX’s won’t be, either. Musk is thinking about shareholder ties, potentially allocating 30% of the IPO to retail shareholders. That’s higher than normal, but Musk knows the power of his retail shareholder base, who hold about 50% of Tesla’s shares available for trading, about twice the ratio for other large tech companies. Those shareholders have consistently aligned with Musk on issues of strategy and pay. What’s more, a Tesla-SpaceX combo could be worth $3.5 trillion-plus, more than Microsoft and Amazon.

Investors who want to bet on convergence could start with a small position in SpaceX once it goes public, and wait to see how things develop. But there are other ways to play the trends that a SpaceX-Tesla merger represents. A Musk conglomerate has elements of AI chip production and design, like Nvidia and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing. China’s BYD makes EVs like Tesla, and Hyundai Motor, the owner of Boston Dynamics, will compete with Tesla on robotics. Rocket Lab builds and launches satellites into space, while AST SpaceMobile is a Starlink competitor. Brookfield Renewable provides power, like Tesla’s energy storage business. Alphabet is developing foundational AI technology, competing with xAI.

A conglomerate made up of those companies would generate $600 billion in combined 2026 Ebitda, and trade for about 23 times estimated 2026 earnings.

That’s cheap, but what none of those companies have is Musk, an undeniably controversial figure for a host of reasons, including his political leanings, his unapologetic personality, and the sheer size of his wealth. He is also the pre-eminent builder in America, making data centers, solar panels, batteries, satellites, rockets, robots, and electric cars. It’s a manufacturing empire that attracts top talent, and has made getting an engineering job at SpaceX or Tesla harder than getting into Harvard.

Regardless of whether the convergence happens—or whether the combined Tesla-SpaceX succeeds—Musk is already doing more than just about anyone to reindustrialize America. “[He] is getting people excited about building stuff again, as opposed to sitting in a cubicle or working on the financialization of existing things,” says Sam Klar, portfolio manager of the GMO Domestic Resilience exchange-traded fund. Klar is a value investor, which means he isn’t likely to participate in the SpaceX IPO, but he’s happy that Musk is re-energizing the American manufacturing ethos.

It’s the most ambitious IPO and merger ever. If Musk builds it, will investors come?

TechCrunch : Waymo robotaxis are tracking potholes and sharing that data with Wa

Waymo robotaxis are tracking potholes and sharing that data with Waze users

Two Alphabet-owned businesses are teaming up to find potholes and share that information with cities.

Waymo and Waze announced Thursday a data-sharing pilot program that will funnel pothole data collected by robotaxis to a free Waze platform designed for cities. Any city or state where Waymo operates will be able to access that data as the program expands.

Waymo is already operating commercially in 11 cities and it’s testing in even more. For now, the pilot will focus on five initial markets — Austin, Atlanta, Los Angeles, Phoenix, and the San Francisco Bay Area, where Waymo says it has already identified about 500 potholes. The partnership is expected to expand to more cities over time.

Cities won’t be the only recipients of that data, however. Anyone with a Waze app in the cities where Waymo operates will also have access to that data, and by the way, help verify those pothole locations are accurate.

Waze users already have the ability to report potholes to the app. The pilot program aims to augment and expand that reporting, and make it readily available to cities.

Waymo robotaxis, which are loaded with cameras, lidar, radar, and other sensors, are ideal tools to collect data on potholes and other roadway dangers.

There are other companies that use sensors in cars, or even phones, to track traffic patterns and other information, which can be sold or shared. Waymo appears to be the first company to use robotaxis to do the job.

This Week Only: Save up to $500 for Disrupt 2026
Offer ends April 10, 11:59 p.m. PT

And it makes sense why. Robotaxi companies need to win cities over. Offering potentially beneficial data about potholes, or even other hazardous road conditions, could help build goodwill. And right now Waymo is largely bearing the brunt of this burden as it ramps up its expansion to more than 20 cities this year.

Waymo noted in its blog post that the idea came from city officials who have shared feedback over the years. Waymo said the pilot program intends to help fill reporting gaps and support cities’ efforts to maintain safer streets.

“Waymo is showing the good neighbor principle in action: sharing data that helps cities fix problems faster and make streets safer for everyone,” Sarah Kaufman, director of the New York University Rudin Center for Transportation, said in a statement on Waymo’s blog. “It’s a simple step, but it reflects a broader principle of responsibility, that companies operating on public streets can help improve them.”