TheChek News Flow

Contrairement à une idée répandue, la péninsule Arabique a connu, avant l’avènement de l’islam, une histoire politique, culturelle et religieuse d’une grande richesse. A l’occasion de l’Aïd-el-Kébir, fête marquant la fin du hadj, le pèlerinage à La Mecque, zoom sur l’histoire de cette région qui a vu naître la religion des musulmans.

Non, l’Arabie d’avant Mahomet n’était pas qu’un désert aride peuplé de tribus querelleuses, hermétiques à toute forme d’organisation politique, de culture et de religiosité. Depuis plusieurs décennies maintenant, les spécialistes de l’histoire de la région s’efforcent de démentir cette représentation erronée et parfois bien ancrée dans les imaginaires.

En cause : une construction idéologique héritée des débuts de l’islam. Comme pour toutes les autres religions révélées, il était en effet important d’introduire l’idée d’une rupture. Les premiers théologiens musulmans ont donc systématiquement déprécié les temps qui avaient précédé la révélation coranique, les englobant sous l’appellation de la jâhiliyya, « le temps de l’ignorance ».

Cette image n’est pas sans fondement, nuancent les historiens. Mais elle correspond à une période de régression qui s’étend seulement sur deux générations avant l’hégire [« émigration », en arabe : cette date fait référence à l’année 622 de notre ère, qui marque le début du calendrier musulman après l’exil de Mahomet et de ses fidèles, persécutés par les Mecquois, à Médine]. Cette image gomme ainsi toute une histoire politique, culturelle et religieuse plus ancienne qui, elle, fut extrêmement riche.

Une Arabie urbanisée il y a 3 000 ans

Les études des vestiges archéologiques de la région (notamment les millions de textes épigraphiques retrouvés gravés sur des roches du désert), véritablement entamées dans les années 1970 et qui se sont accélérées à partir des années 2010 (après le développement de la recherche par le royaume saoudien, qui y voit notamment un intérêt touristique), permettent progressivement de réparer cette injustice.

Les premières traces d’urbanisation en Arabie remontent au Ier millénaire avant l’ère chrétienne, à des dates variables selon que l’on se situe dans le nord du Hedjaz (ouest de la péninsule), sur la rive du golfe Arabo-Persique ou en Arabie du Sud-Ouest (Yémen et régions voisines). « Le point commun au développement de toutes ces zones de peuplement, c’est l’agriculture irriguée, explique Jérémie Schiettecatte, archéologue, chargé de recherche au CNRS et auteur de L’Arabie à la veille de l’islam (De Boccard, 2009). En Arabie du Sud, on installe des systèmes de dérivation des crues provoquées par la mousson. En péninsule d’Oman, dans l’est, on creuse des canalisations souterraines qui vont chercher l’eau dans les nappes phréatiques. Dans le nord, on creuse des puits. »

La mise en place de réseaux commerciaux à grande distance, liée à la domestication du dromadaire, est l’autre facteur essentiel de ce développement. Des connexions s’établissent alors entre les grands centres de peuplement de l’Arabie (Yathrib – actuelle Médine –, Sanaa, Marib, Tayma…), mais aussi plus largement avec la Mésopotamie et la ville de Gaza, point de destination de grandes caravanes à partir duquel les marchandises – principalement des épices, de l’encens et des aromates – sont ensuite exportées en Méditerranée.

De nombreux monuments et objets ont également été découverts sur les sites de villes antiques, surtout dans le sud-ouest de la péninsule, autrefois riche et fertile, qui a inspiré l’expression « Arabia felix » (Arabie heureuse) aux Romains. Ces temples, palais, ouvrages hydrauliques, statues ou pièces d’orfèvrerie témoignent d’une grande prospérité et d’une réelle maîtrise de savoirs techniques variés. Des milliers d’inscriptions ont été retrouvées, dont les plus vieilles datent du VIIIe siècle avant notre ère.

Dans le sud de l’Arabie, un alphabet, dit sudarabique, est utilisé pour écrire quatre langues différentes. L’exacte similitude entre l’ordre de cet alphabet et celui d’un abécédaire cunéiforme retrouvé en Israël et daté du XIIIe siècle avant notre ère a nourri un temps l’idée que l’écriture aurait été apportée dans la région par une population du sud du Levant au début du Ier millénaire avant notre ère. L’autre hypothèse, plus crédible selon Jérémie Schiettecatte, est celle d’un fonds culturel commun propre à l’ensemble de l’Arabie occidentale qui déboucha, au début du Ier millénaire avant notre ère, sur l’émergence de cultures nuancées d’une région à l’autre.

La construction d’une identité arabe

Les fouilles ont également permis de découvrir un art propre à l’Arabie préislamique. « L’albâtre ou la calcite, par exemple, étaient très utilisés en Arabie du Sud, qui comptait d’importants gisements », précise Jérémie Schiettecatte. Avec le développement du commerce caravanier, de nouveaux motifs iconographiques vont apparaître dans la production sudarabique, à l’instar du taureau ailé emprunté à l’art mésopotamien.

Puis, à partir des conquêtes d’Alexandre le Grand (356 av. J.-C., 323 av. J.-C.), du fait de la multiplication des contacts avec la Méditerranée, les arts hellénistique et romain font leur apparition, souvent adaptés localement. C’est le cas du rinceau de vigne, de la feuille d’acanthe dans les chapiteaux de colonnes ou de la chouette d’Athéna sur les pièces de monnaie. On observe également cette tendance dans la posture et le drapé des statues.

Dans le Golfe et dans le nord du Hedjaz, les textes en langue étrangère (akkadien, araméen, nabatéen, grec ou latin) ne sont pas rares, constate également Christian Robin, historien, directeur de recherche émérite au CNRS et coauteur de l’Islam et l’examen scientifique. Une quête renouvelée (Cerf, 2024).

La culture arabe infuse, elle aussi, celle de ses voisins, notamment en Mésopotamie où se sont sédentarisées des populations arabes bien avant l’hégire. C’est particulièrement flagrant à Palmyre, cité caravanière, et dans sa région, explique Françoise Briquel-Chatonnet, directrice de recherche au laboratoire Orient et Méditerranée du CNRS. L’historienne décrit ainsi un bas-relief sculpté sur une poutre du temple de Bêl, une divinité mésopotamienne. Il représente, selon elle, une scène religieuse typiquement arabe. Pour preuve, une petite tente installée sur le dos d’un chameau, spécifique aux processions arabes.

« Jusque vers le IIe siècle de notre ère, il n’existe aucune manifestation perceptible d’une identité “arabe” commune aux populations de l’Arabie déserte, précise cependant Christian Robin. Le terme “arabe” n’est évoqué que dans des sources externes en langues étrangères pour désigner les “autres”, ceux qui sont en marge des grandes puissances. »

Une identité arabe va finir par émerger, notamment en opposition à l’ancienne identité sudarabique. Mais c’est un long mouvement. « Au IIIe siècle, des gens de l’Arabie déserte se qualifient eux-mêmes d’“Arabes”. Et en 332, un souverain du désert de Syrie, le Nasride Imru’al-Qays, se proclame “roi de tous les Arabes”, énumère le spécialiste. Surtout, une écriture arabe va progressivement se former avec des règles qui ne sont plus celles de l’araméen ni du sudarabique. La première inscription que l’on retrouve en écriture arabe date de 470, donc 150 ans avant l’Hégire ! »

Du poly au (x) monothéisme(s)

Les vestiges découverts en Arabie – les inscriptions surtout – renseignent par ailleurs sur les cultes, les institutions politiques et l’organisation sociale. Ils racontent l’histoire de sociétés structurées en « royaumes », chacun dirigé par un personnage portant le titre de malik, « roi ». Les populations sont relativement modestes, mais pas dérisoires. On estime que la plus grosse ville découverte à ce jour, Marib, la capitale du royaume de Saba (actuel Yémen), a compté jusqu’à 50 000 habitants dans l’Antiquité.

Longtemps, chaque tribu ou royaume a disposé de son propre panthéon. Les divinités sont sollicitées pour toutes sortes de préoccupations, de la fécondité des femmes, des bêtes ou du sol, à la protection contre la maladie, en passant par la prospérité de la famille et de la tribu. Le flou perdure sur la nature de ces divinités. Certaines théories font le lien avec les astres ou avec les animaux représentés par les motifs iconographiques. Sans convaincre. « On ne dispose aujourd’hui d’aucun élément solide », explique Christian Robin.

Au fil des siècles, les royaumes les plus puissants annexent leurs voisins. En Arabie du Sud, on passe ainsi de plus de douze royaumes à seulement quatre entre le VIIIe et le IVe siècle avant notre ère. Sept siècles plus tard, un cinquième royaume, né de la sécession de tribus au IIe siècle avant notre ère, va progressivement conquérir et unifier toute l’Arabie méridionale : c’est le royaume de Himyar, qui domine le Yémen et ses environs de l’an 275 jusqu’au milieu du VIe siècle environ – une inscription de l’an 550 de notre ère atteste de la soumission de Yathrib, actuelle Médine, au pouvoir himyarite encore à cette époque.

Chaque population annexée ou conquise abandonne son panthéon de divinités et sa langue au profit de ceux du royaume dominant. Si bien qu’une unification linguistique et religieuse s’opère progressivement. Par la suite, l’Arabie connaît les mêmes évolutions spirituelles que le reste du monde méditerranéen avec l’arrivée du judaïsme (religion adoptée par le roi de Himyar en 380), puis du christianisme (adopté par le roi de Himyar au début du VIe siècle) et la fin progressive du polythéisme. Les dernières traces archéologiques écrites mentionnant un culte polythéiste dans la région datent d’environ 400, soit 170 ans avant la naissance présumée de Mahomet − ce qui ne veut pas dire que le polythéisme ait disparu au sein de la population.

Les conversions au monothéisme recouvrent des motivations diverses. Elles peuvent répondre, au moins dans les classes supérieures, à une aspiration à un autre type de religion, plus individuelle et qui implique une notion de jugement. Elles peuvent aussi être commerciales : « Quand vous faites du commerce longue distance, appartenir à la même religion est un gage de confiance », suggère Christian Robin. Elles sont enfin politiques : une nouvelle religion est un moyen efficace de créer une unité dans un royaume construit à force de conquêtes et d’annexions. Ainsi, le judaïsme tombait sans doute à point nommé pour le royaume de Himyar. Christian Robin insiste sur le caractère individuel et volontaire des conversions : « Dans une même tribu, on voit des chrétiens, des juifs et des païens en proportions variables. »

Quoi qu’il en soit, lorsque Mahomet quitte La Mecque en 622, il ne reste plus grand-chose de cette riche histoire. Des crises politiques, sanitaires, climatiques et économiques ont provoqué dans les dernières décennies l’effritement des royaumes et une réémergence de la prédominance tribale. Des terres qui étaient cultivées sont abandonnées, de nombreuses villes sont désertées et laissées en ruine.

Dans la seconde moitié du VIe siècle, les productions épigraphiques et artistiques, qui s’étaient déjà raréfiées, cessent. Signe, pour Christian Robin, de l’effondrement de la civilisation sudarabique et d’un appauvrissement général.

Tools are set to make some skills redundant and free up time for more value-added tasks

The accounting and finance professions have long adapted to technology — from calculators and spreadsheets to cloud computing. However, the emergence of generative artificial intelligence presents both new challenges and opportunities for students looking to get ahead in the world of finance.

Research last year by investment bank Evercore and Visionary Future, which incubates new ventures, highlights the workforce disruption being wreaked by generative AI. Analysing 160mn US jobs, the study reveals that service sectors such as legal and financial are highly susceptible to disruption by AI, although full job replacement is unlikely.

Instead, generative AI is expected to enhance productivity, the research concludes, particularly for those in high-value roles paying above $100,000 annually.

But, for current students and graduates earning below this threshold, the challenge will be navigating these changes and identifying the skills that will be in demand in future.

Generative AI is being swiftly integrated into finance and accounting, by automating specific tasks. Stuart Tait, chief technology officer for tax and legal at KPMG UK, describes it as a “game changer for tax”, because it is capable of handling complex tasks beyond routine automation.

“Gen AI for tax research and technical analysis will give an efficiency gain akin to moving from typewriters to word processors,” he says. The tools can answer tax queries within minutes, with more than 95 per cent accuracy, Tait says.

While such advances present challenges for workers, including potentially making some tasks and skills redundant, they also offer opportunities. Simon Stephens, AI lead for audit and assurance at Deloitte UK, says: “One way it will help is by automating large portions of manual data entry, saving time whilst allowing people to focus on more value-added and often more interesting tasks.” He suggests junior staff could en­gage in more complex, discerning work earlier in their careers.

In response to these changes, financial training programmes are evolving to place a much sharper emphasis on AI. David Shrier, professor of practice in AI and innovation at London’s Imperial College Business School, observes: “We absolutely need finance education to produce students who are fit for purpose in this new world.”

HEC Paris, for instance, already trains students to use generative AI for financial data analysis. Soon, it will be used for decision-making, too. It is about readying them for the “possibility that gen-AI will replace spreadsheets”, notes Evran Örs, academic director of HEC’s Master in International Finance programme.

Similarly, Cambridge Judge Business School in the UK has introduced technical courses and recruited specialist practitioners for its Master of Finance degree, aimed at professionals with work experience. Marwa Hammam, co-director of the programme, notes that all students now cover the foundational concepts of machine learning and its practical applications in trading, asset management, accounting, and auditing.

Beyond technical abilities such as data analysis, however, soft skills such as critical thinking, leadership, and networking are increasingly important for finance professionals, experts say.

Angela Gallo, director of the banking and international finance MSc at Bayes Business School in London, stresses the enduring relevance of interpersonal skills in a more automated sector. “While automation has improved efficiency, it has sometimes sacrificed client relationships,” she says. “AI could restore the importance of those relationships.”

Gérard Despinoy, executive director of the Master in Finance at France’s Essec Business School, suggests finance graduates should strengthen their programming skills, particularly in VBA, Java, R or Python. Mastery of these languages can streamline financial analysis, automate routine tasks, and enable the development of fresh financial solutions, he says.

Students can acquire these skills through coursework, industry certifications, and online learning platforms. Andrew Harding, chief executive of management accounting at the Association of International Certified Professional Accountants, highlights the importance of life-long professional development to stay competitive in an evolving job market: “Accounting and finance professionals must adapt their mindset to learn, unlearn, and relearn,” he says.

The integration of AI is also creating new roles and career paths. Marc Chapman, a career consultant at Essec, cites jobs such as algorithmic trader and AI financial analyst, in which machine learning could be used to pore over financial data, predict market trends, and automate processes. “There should be interesting career opportunities with banks seeking to boost efficiency using digitisation,” says Chapman.

Looking ahead, experts stress the importance of long-term career planning and being adapt­able to technological changes. But students of finance should not discount the basics. “The core competencies of accounting and finance professionals will still matter in the future,” says Harding. “Technologies like AI are tools for professionals to use as powerful co-pilots, not replacements.”

Indeed, many experts agree that these technological advances should be considered as opportunities for growth. As Feng Li, professor and chair of information management at Bayes Business School in London, notes: “AI is a long way from automating jobs. The future belongs to those who can use AI to do their jobs more efficiently and effectively.”

Billionaire under sanctions could get $300mn in controversial US-Congo deal

Washington proposal would ease restrictions on Israeli tycoon Dan Gertler imposed over alleged corrupt dealing

Dan Gertler, a billionaire under sanctions, is set to receive hundreds of millions of dollars as part of a controversial US plan to lift restrictions on the Israeli tycoon if he sells his remaining mining interests in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Gertler was sanctioned by the US Treasury in 2017 for alleged corrupt dealing in Congo, but retains lucrative royalty streams from three mining projects there.

Under the US proposal, the Treasury would provide Gertler with “special” licences to sell the three royalty streams back to the Congolese government and would eventually grant him a “general” licence to regain access to the US financial system.

The total amount Gertler would receive is yet to be decided, but US officials expect it to be somewhere around $300mn, according to two people who asked not to be identified discussing the financial terms of the deal, which have not previously been reported.

The US officials behind the proposal argue that removing Gertler from Congo would create more opportunities for US-friendly companies to access metals such as a copper and cobalt. Both minerals are vital to the buildout of clean energy infrastructure.

The Biden administration has placed access to such critical minerals at the heart of its policies on central Africa and has sought to deepen ties in Congo since the election of President Félix Tshisekedi in a rigged vote in 2018.

Congo is the world’s largest source of cobalt and Africa’s biggest producer of copper, but the country’s mining sector is dominated by Chinese companies.

The Gertler proposal has provoked criticism from civil society groups and at least four members of US Congress, who warned last month that lifting the Treasury’s restrictions in a deal that further enriched the billionaire would undermine the credibility of the US sanctions regime.

“We fear that if sanctions are removed, Mr Gertler will profit massively off his ill-gotten assets to the detriment of the Congolese people,” the Congress members wrote in a letter to Treasury secretary Janet Yellen that was reported by the New York Times.

US officials emphasise that Gertler would remain on sanctions lists and the general license restoring his access to the US financial system could be revoked at any time if he breaks any of the terms of the agreement.

Gertler arrived in Congo as a 23-year-old diamond trader in 1997 and thanks to a close friendship with former president Joseph Kabila amassed huge power and influence in the country’s mining sector.

Gertler argues that he took a risk by investing in Congo early, when it was still in middle of a civil war. Ultimately, he secured access to some of the country’s most lucrative mineral assets and partnerships with international companies, including Swiss commodities house Glencore and Kazakh mining group ENRC.

When the US imposed sanctions on Gertler in 2017, the Treasury said corrupt transactions involving his companies had cost the Congolese state more than $1.36bn in revenues between 2010 and 2012 alone. Gertler has repeatedly denied all allegations of corruption.

Shortly before he was placed under sanctions, Gertler sold his equity stakes in two Glencore mining projects, Kamoto and Mutanda, but retained royalty streams worth approximately 2.5 per cent of sales from each project. He also retains a similar royalty stream from a third copper-cobalt project, know as Metalkol, controlled by Eurasian Resources Group, the successor company to ENRC.

The present value of the royalty streams depends on assumptions about the life of each mine, level of production, metal prices and how to discount future cash flows.

Gertler is likely to argue that the combined value of the royalty streams is greater than $300mn. In a lawsuit against Glencore in 2018, Gertler’s companies said future royalties from Kamoto were worth $2.29bn and those from Mutanda were worth $695mn.

US officials estimate that last year Gertler earned about $120mn from the royalty payments, which he received in euros to avoid the US sanctions.

The proposed deal has been shared by the Congolese government with Gertler’s representatives, who are yet to respond. However, US officials are increasingly confident it will happen, despite some remaining opposition from within the administration.

Gertler, the Treasury, the state department, the Congolese government, Glencore and ERG all declined to comment.

FT survey shows leading US and European companies in sector looking to recruit tens of thousands this year

Global defence companies are recruiting workers at the fastest rate since the end of the cold war as the industry seeks to deliver on order books that are near record highs.

A Financial Times survey of the hiring plans of 20 large and medium-sized US and European defence and aerospace companies found they are looking to recruit tens of thousands of people this year.

Three of the largest US contractors — Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman and General Dynamics — have close to 6,000 job openings they need to fill, while 10 companies surveyed are seeking to increase positions by almost 37,000 in total, or almost 10 per cent of their aggregate workforce.

“Since the end of the cold war, this is the most intense period for the defence sector with the highest increase in order volume in a rather short period of time,” said Jan Pie, secretary-general of ASD, the European aerospace and defence trade association. 

Governments around the world have ramped up military spending since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine and amid widespread geopolitical tensions. The sudden spike in orders after decades of low volumes, combined with competition for digital skills from technology groups and a labour market still dealing with Covid-era staff shortages, are some of the factors driving the industry-wide hiring spree.

Companies said they are looking to fill positions across the board, from apprentices to late-stage career executives. Engineers, software developers and cyber-security analysts as well as welders and mechanics are in demand. 

Antonio Liotti, chief people officer at Italian defence champion Leonardo, said it was conducting “an intense search for new hires, even more intense than during previous conflicts such as Iraq or Afghanistan”. 

The contractor, which is part of the tri-national programme with BAE Systems in the UK and Japan’s Mitsubishi Heavy Industries to build a new fighter jet, is looking to hire 6,000 new employees including replacements, by the end of 2024. It expects to recruit for 8,000 to 10,000 new positions between 2025 and 2028, notably industrial and software engineers. 

The search for new hires, Liotti added, was not just driven by conflict but also by greater competition from adjacent industries such as “high-tech companies and consultancies”. Other factors, including people seeking a greater work-life balance and “quiet quitting”, were also playing a role. 

Companies that produce ammunition, notably Rheinmetall and Nammo, which have had to increase output significantly to replenish government stockpiles, are among those with the most aggressive hiring plans. 

Nammo said it had “never seen a situation like this before”. The company, which is part-owned by the Norwegian and Finnish governments, increased its headcount by 15 per cent from 2,700 in 2021 to 3,100 in 2023. It currently employs around 3,250 people and says a “doubling of the company size [by the end of] 2030 seems reasonable”. 

Rheinmetall of Germany on Friday said it was looking to hire hundreds of employees from leading car parts manufacturer Continental, which has been suffering from anaemic auto sector demand.

France’s Thales, which makes the shoulder-fired Starstreak missile donated to Ukraine from western government stockpiles, said it has recruited 9,000 people — 11 per cent of its current workforce of 81,000 — in its defence operations over the past three years.

BAE ramped up recruitment significantly last year but had already stepped up hiring to deliver on long-term programmes such as the Global Combat Air Programme and the Royal Navy’s Type 26 frigates. 

In the UK, “we’ve doubled our early-careers intake in the past five years and are recruiting around 2,700 apprentices and graduates this year as well as thousands more experienced professionals”, said Tania Gandamihardja, the company’s group HR director. 

Europe’s missile champion MBDA, owned by BAE, Airbus and Leonardo, which makes the air-launched missiles Storm Shadow and Scalp, used to devastating effect in Ukraine, plans to hire more than 2,600 people this year — 17 per cent of its current workforce of 15,000.

Dassault Aviation, which builds the Rafale fighter aircraft, has seen no direct increase in orders from Ukraine, but given the length of manufacturing cycles in the sector, has been consistently hiring staff.

Manufacturers in nuclear defence, especially those involved in the trilateral Aukus submarine programme between the UK, the US and Australia, are among those seeing the highest spike in the shortage for skills.

Several companies, including Rolls-Royce and Babcock International, recently opened their own nuclear skills academies while Thales UK, which provides sonar for all of the Royal Navy’s submarines, has launched a sonar academy.

The UK government has separately launched a nuclear skills task force to train the tens of thousands of workers needed across the country’s civil nuclear and military programmes. 

The hiring and training effort is “unprecedented in recent times”, said Beccy Pleasant at the Nuclear Skills Delivery Group, which forecasts that more than 30,000 additional roles will be needed in the nuclear defence sector between now and 2030.

Companies have also stepped up engagement with universities and other organisations to build a future workforce pool.

Cranfield University, which has close links with the sector, is offering new courses, notably in digital forensics to help people learn how to attribute cyber attacks among other things.

“There is a recognition that you can’t just assume academia will churn out the people that you want to recruit . . . companies are now going up the people supply chain,” said Heather Goldstraw, Cranfield’s director of defence.

One particular challenge for the industry is that some roles require additional security clearances. RTX, which owns missile and sensor maker Raytheon, said earlier this year that it was “continuing to experience challenges hiring highly qualified personnel including engineers, skilled labourers, and security clearance holders”. 

Others, such as Germany’s Renk, said they might have to look abroad. Chief executive Susanne Wiegand said: “We also need other qualified good people from abroad, because in Germany we cannot find, all of us together as the defence industry, sufficient people for the jobs.”

Private-equity investor plans to take minority stake in firm known for its ubiquitous advertisements

Advent International is nearing a deal to acquire a minority stake in money-management firm Fisher Investments.

A deal valuing Fisher at nearly $13 billion could be unveiled by Monday, according to people familiar with the matter, assuming there isn’t a last-minute hitch.

The Wall Street Journal reported earlier this year that Advent was in talks to acquire Fisher. In response to the story, Fisher said the company “is not being bought by Advent International, or anyone else.”

Fisher manages more than $275 billion for more than 150,000 clients around the world, including 120,000 U.S. private clients.

The firm manages money for pension funds, governments and college endowments, and has a sizable 401(k)-advisory business. Billionaire Ken Fisher founded the firm, known for its ubiquitous advertisements, in 1979.

For Advent, the deal would add to its roster of investments in the financial-services sector.

Last year, the firm appointed Tricia Rothschild as an operating partner focused on new investments in wealth and asset management. Rothschild previously spent more than 25 years at Morningstar.

In April, Advent agreed to buy Canadian payments processor Nuvei in a deal valued at about $6 billion including debt.

The private-equity firm amassed some $25 billion in 2022 for its latest buyout fund. Private-equity M&A is on the upswing compared with a quiet 2023 as firms grapple with challenges including elevated interest rates.

While funding to AI-related startups remains strong, with nearly $30 billion raised so far this year alone, there are indicators that some of the earliest-stage investors are getting some AI fatigue.

Deal-making volume seems to be slowing in the second quarter — with just a couple of weeks left — compared to other recent quarters, when investors’ appetite showed little to no limits for the all-encompassing technology.

According to Crunchbase data, the number of funding deals is on pace to reach only about 900 this quarter — a seemingly significant drop from the 1,052 last quarter and a decline of nearly 30% from the same quarter last year.

Not surprisingly, it is the earliest funding rounds — angel, seed and early stage — at the root of the deal-making slowdown.

The good news for AI startups is that the dollar amount is up. The second quarter already is pacing to be one of the highest-dollar quarters since early 2022 with more than $16 billion already raised.

That is due in part to some huge rounds. Five raises hit $1 billion or more this quarter — including those by xAI (the biggest one), CoreWeave, Xaira Therapeutics and Scale AI.

However, deal volume is seemingly dropping — and that starts in the earliest rounds. Although it is difficult for seed rounds to make a dramatic shift in total dollars of any sector, it is the most likely to show changes in deal flow since it is the largest category by volume of deals.

Only 423 seed/angel rounds were announced through the first week of June, putting it on pace for likely just more than 600 funding rounds. That will be a steep decline from the 779 deals announced last quarter and likely a drop of about a third from Q2 last year.

The dollar amount also is on pace to be down, but again — with seed and angel rounds being small by their very nature — it isn’t a pronounced drop to the overall total of funding AI startups receive.

Total dollar amount for the quarter seems likely to hit between $1.3 billion and $1.4 billion, just a tick below the $1.6 billion in Q1 and the $1.5 billion in Q2 2023.

The number of early-stage deals also slowed. While the quarter is on pace for a similar amount of deals compared to Q1, that is still more than a 15% decline from Q2 last year.

The somewhat good news for early-stage funding is that the dollar amount is up. Already $9.8 billion has been raised in early-stage deals, compared to the $6.4 billion last quarter or the $4.7 billion raised in Q2 last year.

However, even that comes with a large caveat; that difference is mainly due to one round. xAI’s $6 billion round — with investment from the likes of Valor Equity Partners, Andreessen Horowitz and Sequoia Capital — greatly skews the early-stage funding numbers, making up nearly 60% of the total.

To be honest, it likely is too early to tell if the deal volume slowdown means anything quite yet.

It could mean some investors are becoming less willing to back the youngest AI startups and instead are willing to invest in bigger rounds for somewhat more proven companies even if the valuations are significantly higher.

In addition, since seed and growth-stage investor mindsets are often different, perhaps AI fatigue is setting in among early investors who are tiring of the story and escalating prices.

One thing to keep in mind is that as early-stage volume ticks down, that could mean fewer companies looking for large growth rounds in the next 18 to 24 months, since some may never have received the early funding when they were young to get to later-stage funding.

Nevertheless, the dollar amount is up and investors still seem eager to pour in billions to nearly anything AI related — just perhaps not in the same number of deals as before.

The data contained in this report comes directly from Crunchbase, and is based on reported data. Data reported is as of June 6, 2024. Companies included in the data fall within Crunchbase’s artificial intelligence industry group tag. Some of the decline in deal counts may be attributable to the tendency for smaller, seed-stage rounds to be added to the Crunchbase dataset several weeks or months after they close.

Seed and angel consists of seed, pre-seed and angel rounds. Crunchbase also includes venture rounds of unknown series, equity crowdfunding and convertible notes at $3 million (USD or as-converted USD equivalent) or less.

Early stage consists of Series A and Series B rounds, as well as other round types. Crunchbase includes venture rounds of unknown series, corporate venture and other rounds above $3 million, and those less than or equal to $15 million.

Late stage consists of Series C, Series D, Series E and later-lettered venture rounds following the “Series [Letter]” naming convention. Also included are venture rounds of unknown series, corporate venture and other rounds above $15 million.

Technology growth is a private-equity round raised by a company that has previously raised a “venture” round. (So basically, any round from the previously defined stages.)

Fashion investors and M&A bankers get ready. A lot of brands are going to be on the market over the course of the next few months.

Fashion is in a perfect storm. Global demand is down. MatchesFashion’s collapse is threatening to put dozens of brands out of business. Saks is still delaying payments to brands. China, once the biggest growth engine, has become a tough place for business. This week, Richemont’s Yoox-Net-A-Porter announced that it was pulling out of China and that its joint venture with Alibaba, Feng Mao, was in liquidation.

China used to be seen as an untapped reservoir of demand. Not anymore. Demand for luxury goods having fallen off a cliff, brands are rethinking their strategy. Stella McCartney recently closed all of its boutiques in China, as Miss Tweed reported earlier this month.

And the United States is not doing well either. Business with major luxury brands such as Burberry or Kering’s Gucci and Balenciaga is down since the beginning of the year at many US department stores, industry sources say. Saks.com is committed to paying brands but the online fashion retailer is still delaying payments by several months after securing $60 million of extra liquidity at the end of April. Saks.com operates independently but works closely with Saks Fifth Avenue stores through a series of agreements. Both businesses are under the umbrella of Hudson’s Bay Co.

Rival online fashion retailer Moda Operandi has also been looking for extra funding since the beginning of the year and is understood to be close to reaching a deal, industry sources say. Based in New York, Moda Operandi sells designer clothes and many small fashion brands. It has burned through hundreds of millions of dollars in the past five years and it’s still searching for a path towards profitability.

YOOX-Net-A-Porter (YNAP) is also looking for buyers. Richemont is hopeful of clinching a deal before the end of the year even though most major private equity firms have walked away after seeing the amount cash YNAP continues to burn, estimated to be more than €300 million a year, as Miss Tweed reported last month.

“This is the longest downturn we’ve seen in years,” one manager of a US-based wholesale business said. “We don’t know how long it’s going to last but we all hope that things should improve towards the back end of the second half.”

Online fashion retailers have been hit by the double whammy of low consumer demand and brands becoming direct competitors, focusing on growing their own e-commerce businesses. Fashion and luxury brands have been squeezing the margins they give third-party retailers, keeping their best-sellers for their own websites and boutiques. A significant number of mega brands have been ending ties with online and bricks-and-mortar wholesalers altogether to better control image and price.

Second-hand retailer Vestiaire Collective is also not doing great, market sources say. The company is finding it tough to convince enough people to sell their clothes, handbags and shoes to cover its high operating costs. Most affluent shoppers are not that keen on selling their belongings over the Internet, it turns out. The second-hand market is here to stay but it’s not an easy business to be in.

YNAP and Farfetch, which was bought in a distressed sale by South Korea’s Coupang in December, officially say that they are doing their best to pay for stock within the agreed timeframe, around 45 days. However, some brands have complained about delays.

“Farfetch is fully committed to brands and boutiques and understands the importance of cash flow for their business,” a spokesman for Farfetch told Miss Tweed. “Through our longstanding Farfetch Capital program, they even have the option to access their monthly net proceeds early should they wish to do so.” YNAP and Richemont never reply to Miss Tweed’s emails.

Brands should be happy to get any money at all. At MatchesFashion, they get zero. More than 500 fashion and luxury brands have been told that they were unlikely to get any money for the products they shipped to Matches before the online distributor went into administration in early March. The amounts represent paltry sums for big labels such as Burberry, Gucci and Prada, but for hundreds of much smaller brands it’s a huge hit. Many are getting ready to find new investors and take out loans to survive, industry sources say. They are preparing their data sheets and prospectuses for potential investors and will be marketing themselves starting this summer, industry sources predict.

Some brands have already gone under. Last month, The Vampire’s Wife, known for its Gothic romantic dresses, ceased trading. The brand said the “upheaval in the wholesale market” was to blame, but Matches’ administration must have contributed to the brand’s financial problems.

Designer Roksanda Ilincic found a white knight in retail entrepreneur Damian Hopkins, who purchased the fashion label she founded in 2005. Roksanda’s financial woes stemmed not only from Matches’ non-payment but also from having to pay rent arrears that it had accumulated since the pandemic. Just before the deal was signed with Hopkins, Ilincic had filed a notice of intent to appoint an administrator.

A few weeks ago, designer Roksanda Ilincic found a white knight in retail entrepreneur Damian Hopkins, who purchased the fashion label she founded in 2005. Roksanda’s financial woes stemmed not only from Matches’ non-payment but also from having to pay rent arrears that it had accumulated since the pandemic. Just before the deal was signed with Hopkins, Ilincic had filed a notice of intent to appoint an administrator.

Matches owes brands a total of £36 million, according to documents provided by Teneo, the administrators appointed to manage the business and recover the funds it is planning to receive from selling the stock online and property. Well-known independent labels such as Anya Hindmarch, Self-Portrait, Frame Denim and Joseph have unpaid bills totaling several hundreds of thousands of pounds. Totem, for example, is owed nearly £1 million, Teneo’s documents dated mid-April show.

Miss Tweed wrote to all these brands and others high on the list of Matches creditors. None of them replied. They may be concerned that if they admit they are in trouble, retailers might demand harsher payment terms. “I have tried to talk to other brands like mine that tried to get their stock and their money back from Matches, but they are closing up because they are afraid of the consequences I think,” the CEO of one medium-size brand told Miss Tweed on condition of anonymity. Brands have been told that they are likely to get less than a penny back for every pound owed and that the outcome depends more on the sale of Matches’ property assets than on the sell-through of their stock.

The British Fashion Council (BFC) is trying to come up with solutions to help British brands affected by Matches’ collapse. For some labels, 20-30 percent of their revenue came from doing business with Matches, according to industry sources working with the online fashion retailer. The BFC is talking to several financial institutions and is proposing to raise money from philanthropists and foundations to help them support smaller brands with either low-cost loans or, if brands prefer, equity investment. But the process is taking a lot of time – which brands don’t have.

“We are concerned that many brands are going to face serious financial difficulties,” a spokesperson on behalf of the BFC told Miss Tweed. “At a time of numerous challenges within the UK fashion and retail market, particularly in light of recent high-profile failures within the luxury e-commerce markets, the British Fashion Council is working hard to ensure that UK designers are provided with best-in-class business guidance and support, both directly from the BFC and also from our partner professional advisors, whilst continuing to seek innovative financial solutions.”

The BFC has also been working on trying to find outlets and locations to help brands sell their stock if they are able to reclaim it from Matches at the end of the administration period. They now have a clearer understanding of which brands are likely to see stock returned from Matches and are in talks with several organizations to help brands find routes to monetize the reclaimed stock. Value Retail, the company that runs outlets such as Bicester Village outside London and La Vallée Village near Paris, has been approached to help brands sell their stock. For the moment, nothing has been decided, sources close to the matter say.

According to Teneo, some 190 brands have made retention-of-title claims on stock worth £22.8 million, but as of mid-April it had accepted those titles for only around 15 percent of that amount, or £3.4 million. It’s not clear whether more brands have obtained the right to get their stock back in recent weeks.

What is clear is that, since Matches continues to trade and sell stock, money is being raised, but it will go first into the pockets of Frasers Group. The group is a secured creditor since it owns the company’s debt, and as such it comes before the brands in terms of access to cash.

Frasers Group, which bought Matches in December, last month acquired the intellectual property assets of Matches, including its company name, trademark and database. The move would allow it to relaunch the business on a new platform at a later stage. Financial details of the transaction were not disclosed, and Frasers did not wish to reply to any of Miss Tweed’s questions.

Frasers Group is controlled by founder Mike Ashley, one of Britain’s most colorful and controversial businessmen. Ashley has been on a buying spree in recent years, cornering the sports goods retail market under his Sports Direct retail chain and buying stakes in many different retailers. Frasers Group also owns the fashion luxury multi-brand Flannels and, since 2022, the prestigious Savile Row tailor Gieves & Hawkes. Ashley also has a 36 percent stake in British leather goods brand Mulberry.

Some industry sources think that Frasers may have struck some deals with big brands since it continues to sell their stock via the group’s Flannels retail chain and online platform. It may be able to convince them to work with the new MatchesFashion when it relaunches the retailer – if it does at some point, as industry insiders expect. “Some brands will refuse to talk to Matches after what happened, but others will have no choice but to agree to work with them because they need to sell their stock,” a source close to Matches said.

Golden Goose Tests Investors’ Trend Forecasting Chops

The footwear brand is hoping for a $2 billion market capitalisation with its initial public offering, which means selling the market on distressed sneakers being more than a fad.

Golden Goose, which is expected to start trading on the Milan bourse on Friday, has the benefit of learning from its predecessors’ mistakes. Demand was strong for the company’s shares last week, but only after it priced them at €9.50 to €10.50 apiece, implying a roughly $2 billion valuation. Earlier this year, top shareholder Permira had reportedly been angling for north of $3 billion.

More importantly, the brand is setting itself up to be more than a one-hit wonder – or, as brands from Levi’s to Moncler have done, keep customers hooked by endlessly iterating on the hero product. Luxury sneakers are a crowded category, and demand is uncertain amid a broader downturn in high-end fashion. But expensive sneakers mostly exist as extensions of luxury brands; they might occupy a few tables in a Gucci store, or share a wall with the rest of the footwear range at Louis Vuitton. At Golden Goose’s 200 locations, they’re the main attraction. Golden Goose is leveraging this advantage with in-store customisations such as graffiti or hand distressing, the sort of flourishes that encourage repeat visits and can’t easily be duped.

Golden Goose is also ramping up its marketing efforts – pitching itself as a “cultural brand” like Louis Vuitton or Moncler. Collaborations and performances with Native American activist Quannah Chasinghorse, architect Fabio Novembre and K-pop musician Sunmi could help forge connections with niche communities and tell stories about something other than shoes. That will also reduce the brand’s reliance on mainstream stars like Taylor Swift choosing to lace up a pair of distressed sneakers to drive hype.

So far Golden Goose’s strategy has propelled a brand many dismissed as a flash in the pan to a €500 million a year business. The question now is whether customers will come back for a second pair. The brand says it has a healthy number of repeat purchases, but the key to long-term success is whether this formula will work in new markets, and new products, such as handbags.

This week was an exciting one for the AI community, as Apple joined Google, OpenAI, Anthropic, Meta and others in the long-running competition to find an icon that even remotely suggests AI to users. And like everyone else, Apple has punted.

Apple Intelligence is represented by a circular shape made up of seven loops. Or is it a circle with a lopsided infinity symbol inside? No, that’s New Siri, powered by Apple Intelligence. Or is New Siri when your phone glows around the edges? Yes.

The thing is, no one knows what AI looks like, or even what it is supposed to look like. It does everything but looks like nothing. Yet it needs to be represented in user interfaces so people know they’re interacting with a machine learning model and not just plain old searching, submitting, or whatever else.

Although approaches differ to branding this purportedly all-seeing, all-knowing, all-doing intelligence, they have coalesced around the idea that the avatar of AI should be non-threatening, abstract, but relatively simple and non-anthropomorphic. (They seem to have rejected my suggestion that these models always speak in rhyme.)

Early AI icons were sometimes little robots, wizard hats or magic wands: novelties. But the implication of the first is one of inhumanity, rigidity and limitation — robots don’t know things, they aren’t personal to you, they perform predefined, automated tasks. And magic wands and the like suggest irrational invention, the inexplicable, the mysterious — perhaps fine for an image generator or creative sounding board, but not for the kind of factual, reliable answers these companies want you to believe AI provides.

Corporate logo design is generally a strange concoction of strong vision, commercial necessity and compromise-by-committee. And you can see these influences at work in the logos pictured here.

The strongest vision goes, for better or worse, to OpenAI’s black dot. A cold, featureless hole that you throw your query into, it’s a bit like a wishing well or Echo’s cave.

Biggest committee energy goes, unsurprisingly, to Microsoft, whose Copilot logo is effectively indescribable.

But notice how four of the six (five of seven if you count Apple twice, and why shouldn’t we) use pleasant candy colors: colors that mean nothing but are cheery and approachable, leaning toward the feminine (as such things are considered in design language) or even the childlike. Soft gradients into pink, purple and turquoise; pastels, not hard colors; four are soft, never-ending shapes; Perplexity and Google have sharp edges, but the former suggests an endless book while the latter is a happy, symmetrical star with welcoming concavities. Some also animate in use, creating the impression of life and responsivity (and draw the eye, so you can’t ignore it — looking at you, Meta).

Overall, the impression intended is one of friendliness, openness and undefined potential — as opposed to aspects like, for example, expertise, efficiency, decisiveness or creativity.

Think I’m overanalyzing? How many pages do you think the design treatment documents ran for each of these logos — over or under 20 pages? My money would be on the former. Companies obsess over these things. (Yet somehow miss a hate symbol dead center, or create an inexplicably sexual vibe.)

The point, however, is not that corporate design teams do what they do, but that no one has managed to hit on a visual concept that unambiguously says “AI” to the user. At best these colorful shapes communicate a negative concept: that this interface is not email, not a search engine, not a note app.

Email logos often figure as an envelope because they are (obviously) electronic mail, both conceptually and practically. A more general “send” icon for messages is pointed, sometimes divided, like a paper plane, indicating a document in motion. Settings use a gear or wrench, suggesting tinkering with an engine or machine. These concepts apply across languages and (to some extent) generations.

Not every icon can allude so clearly to its corresponding function. How does one indicate “download,” for instance, when the word differs between cultures? In France, one telécharges, which makes sense but isn’t really “download.” Yet we have arrived at a downward-pointing arrow, sometimes touching down on a surface. Load down. Same with cloud computing — we adopted the cloud despite it being, essentially, a marketing term for “a big datacenter somewhere.” But what was the alternative, a tiny datacenter button?

AI is still new to consumers who are being asked to use it in place of “other things,” a highly general category that purveyors of AI products are loath to define, since to do so would imply that there are some things AI can do and some it can’t. They are not ready to admit this: The whole fiction depends on AI being able to do anything in theory, it being but a matter of engineering and compute to achieve it.

In other words, to paraphrase Steinbeck: Every AI considers itself as a temporarily embarrassed AGI. (Or I should say, is considered by its marketing department, since AI itself, as pattern generator, considers nothing.)

This week was an exciting one for the AI community, as Apple joined Google, OpenAI, Anthropic, Meta and others in the long-running competition to find an icon that even remotely suggests AI to users. And like everyone else, Apple has punted.

Apple Intelligence is represented by a circular shape made up of seven loops. Or is it a circle with a lopsided infinity symbol inside? No, that’s New Siri, powered by Apple Intelligence. Or is New Siri when your phone glows around the edges? Yes.

The thing is, no one knows what AI looks like, or even what it is supposed to look like. It does everything but looks like nothing. Yet it needs to be represented in user interfaces so people know they’re interacting with a machine learning model and not just plain old searching, submitting, or whatever else.

Although approaches differ to branding this purportedly all-seeing, all-knowing, all-doing intelligence, they have coalesced around the idea that the avatar of AI should be non-threatening, abstract, but relatively simple and non-anthropomorphic. (They seem to have rejected my suggestion that these models always speak in rhyme.)

Early AI icons were sometimes little robots, wizard hats or magic wands: novelties. But the implication of the first is one of inhumanity, rigidity and limitation — robots don’t know things, they aren’t personal to you, they perform predefined, automated tasks. And magic wands and the like suggest irrational invention, the inexplicable, the mysterious — perhaps fine for an image generator or creative sounding board, but not for the kind of factual, reliable answers these companies want you to believe AI provides.

Corporate logo design is generally a strange concoction of strong vision, commercial necessity and compromise-by-committee. And you can see these influences at work in the logos pictured here.

The strongest vision goes, for better or worse, to OpenAI’s black dot. A cold, featureless hole that you throw your query into, it’s a bit like a wishing well or Echo’s cave.

Image Credits: OpenAI/Microsoft

Biggest committee energy goes, unsurprisingly, to Microsoft, whose Copilot logo is effectively indescribable.

But notice how four of the six (five of seven if you count Apple twice, and why shouldn’t we) use pleasant candy colors: colors that mean nothing but are cheery and approachable, leaning toward the feminine (as such things are considered in design language) or even the childlike. Soft gradients into pink, purple and turquoise; pastels, not hard colors; four are soft, never-ending shapes; Perplexity and Google have sharp edges, but the former suggests an endless book while the latter is a happy, symmetrical star with welcoming concavities. Some also animate in use, creating the impression of life and responsivity (and draw the eye, so you can’t ignore it — looking at you, Meta).

Overall, the impression intended is one of friendliness, openness and undefined potential — as opposed to aspects like, for example, expertise, efficiency, decisiveness or creativity.

Think I’m overanalyzing? How many pages do you think the design treatment documents ran for each of these logos — over or under 20 pages? My money would be on the former. Companies obsess over these things. (Yet somehow miss a hate symbol dead center, or create an inexplicably sexual vibe.)

The point, however, is not that corporate design teams do what they do, but that no one has managed to hit on a visual concept that unambiguously says “AI” to the user. At best these colorful shapes communicate a negative concept: that this interface is not email, not a search engine, not a note app.

Email logos often figure as an envelope because they are (obviously) electronic mail, both conceptually and practically. A more general “send” icon for messages is pointed, sometimes divided, like a paper plane, indicating a document in motion. Settings use a gear or wrench, suggesting tinkering with an engine or machine. These concepts apply across languages and (to some extent) generations.

Startup Battlefield 200

Application Extended | Due June 17

Win $100,000 & Showcase At Disrupt 2024 San Francisco, October 28-30

Apply Now

Not every icon can allude so clearly to its corresponding function. How does one indicate “download,” for instance, when the word differs between cultures? In France, one telécharges, which makes sense but isn’t really “download.” Yet we have arrived at a downward-pointing arrow, sometimes touching down on a surface. Load down. Same with cloud computing — we adopted the cloud despite it being, essentially, a marketing term for “a big datacenter somewhere.” But what was the alternative, a tiny datacenter button?

AI is still new to consumers who are being asked to use it in place of “other things,” a highly general category that purveyors of AI products are loath to define, since to do so would imply that there are some things AI can do and some it can’t. They are not ready to admit this: The whole fiction depends on AI being able to do anything in theory, it being but a matter of engineering and compute to achieve it.

In other words, to paraphrase Steinbeck: Every AI considers itself as a temporarily embarrassed AGI. (Or I should say, is considered by its marketing department, since AI itself, as pattern generator, considers nothing.)

In the meantime, these companies must still call it by a name and give it a “face” — though it is telling, and refreshing, that no one actually chose a face. But even here they are at the whim of consumers, who ignore GPT version numbers as an oddity, preferring to say ChatGPT; who can’t make the connection with “Bard” but acquiesce to the focus-tested “Gemini”; who never wanted to Bing things (and certainly not talk to the thing) but don’t mind having a Copilot.

Apple, for its part, has taken the shotgun approach: You ask Siri to query Apple Intelligence (two different logos), which occurs within your Private Cloud Compute (unrelated to iCloud), or perhaps even forward your request to ChatGPT (no logo permitted), and your best clue that an AI is listening to what you’re saying is … swirling colors, somewhere or everywhere on the screen.

Until AI is itself a bit better defined, we can expect icons and logos representing it to continue to be vague, unthreatening, abstract shapes. A colorful, ever-shifting blob wouldn’t take your job, would it?