>>> EL NIÑO 2026 UPDATE — STRENGTH TAIL BECOMES BASE CASE 13 Aug NOAA CPC: >90%

EL NIÑO 2026 UPDATE — STRENGTH TAIL BECOMES BASE CASE

13 Aug NOAA CPC: >90% probability very strong El Niño NH winter 26-27, 69% probability of a historic event (>+2.5°C RONI in OND) — would exceed every El Niño since 1950.

July Niño-3.4 at +1.4°C (from +0.4°C in May). Subsurface anomalies +10°C at depth. Atmospheric coupling confirmed (SOI ~-2σ).

The strength distribution we flagged as "undecided" in our 16 May field guide has resolved at the extreme end. What was the tail bet is now NOAA's central case.

Attached:
(1) 16 May macro field guide — the original thesis (17p)
(2) 16 Aug 90-day follow-up — scorecard, updated trade grid, H2 26 / Q1 27 trigger calendar (6p)

Highlights from the follow-up: reinsurance long paid, cocoa long broken (closed), palm oil basket partially played but under-sized for a historic event. Two new expressions initiated: long Thai rice (India export policy trigger), long Peruvian anchovy / short soymeal (fishmeal supply shock, 1997-98 / 2015-16 playbook).

Next CPC discussion 10 Sep. ABARES Sep/Nov the main agricultural triggers.

Happy to discuss.

LC
Graham Advisors

WSJ : Why Big Tech’s AI Spending Is $3 Trillion Higher Than It Seems Massive spe

Why Big Tech’s AI Spending Is $3 Trillion Higher Than It Seems
Massive spending commitments for data-center leases and chips aren’t shown on companies’ balance sheets


Each quarter, big tech companies disclose their massive capital expenditures on artificial-intelligence infrastructure, from data centers to chips.

But those figures don’t come close to expressing the full extent of future spending to which Google parent Alphabet, Meta Platforms, Oracle and many others have committed. That is because a huge swath of their coming financial obligations aren’t reflected on their balance sheets.

Nine top tech companies had some $3 trillion of off-balance-sheet commitments mostly related to AI, according to a Wall Street Journal analysis of footnotes in their most recent securities filings. Those obligations are growing faster than traditional “capex,” which totaled about $600 billion over the past year they reported, and were about triple what the companies owe under their outstanding leases and long-term borrowings.


America’s blue-chip tech companies are placing these huge bets based on assumptions about what the demand for AI computing—and availability of AI hardware—will be in several years. Their hope is that they will easily meet all their obligations with future revenue as consumers and businesses adopt AI in every facet of American life.

If those assumptions about technology and demand prove wrong, these deals to clinch future capacity could become a monstrous burden for the tech companies and their investors.

Meta’s gigantic “Hyperion” data-center project in Louisiana, which is the size of about 1,700 football fields, helps explain how big obligations wind up off tech companies’ balance sheets.


Meta initially agreed to lease Hyperion for a four-year term starting in 2029, with options to renew for up to 20 years. It guaranteed that it would make bondholders whole if it doesn’t stay the entire two decades. The company doesn’t think payments under that guarantee are probable, so it hasn’t recorded any liability on its balance sheet.

In accordance with accounting rules, Meta’s Hyperion lease obligations will remain off balance sheet until it starts paying rent. It said its aggregate initial lease commitment is about $12.3 billion. Meta disclosed $347 billion in total obligations for leases that haven’t kicked in yet, including for Hyperion, as of June.

Across the companies the Journal analyzed, promises of payments under these uncommenced leases totaled $1.2 trillion in off-balance–sheet obligations, or about four times more than what was disclosed a year earlier. In addition to Meta, the Journal reviewed commitments for Alphabet, Amazon.com, Microsoft, Oracle, Nvidia, Broadcom, SpaceX and Advanced Micro Devices.

Data centers get stuffed with a lot of hardware, including the Nvidia chips that are used to train and run models and memory chips that store information. To buy all that, companies sign long-term contractual agreements well in advance to lock in production from their suppliers.

Those and other purchase obligations at the companies the Journal examined stand at a whopping $1.9 trillion. Under accounting rules, purchase commitments typically remain off balance sheet until a product or service is delivered.


Alphabet’s purchase commitments and contractual obligations have exploded and stood at $811 billion as of June 30. As with other companies, it is hard to tell from its disclosures what precisely it intends to buy. The company said the commitments primarily relate to “technical infrastructure and inventory” and “agreements to secure energy for data center usage.”

Alphabet also didn’t detail why those obligations increased so much from the $332 billion it reported three months earlier. The commitments span several years, with obligations under its energy agreements lasting as far out as 2054.

Off-balance-sheet exposures at some companies include agreements to buy other companies’ stock in the future or backstop leases for other tenants. Nvidia committed to make $27 billion in equity investments between April 26 and the end of its fiscal year in January 2027.

There are reasons to believe tech companies will make good on all their obligations. Optimists see the skyrocketing demand for AI tools—which has lifted the stock market and led to shortages of key hardware—as a proof point that demand is going to be strong for years, and the money to pay off all these bills will be rolling in.

For the more anxious set on Wall Street, it is a worrying sign that some tech companies that once seemed to have fortress balance sheets have needed to tap the capital markets frequently.

Alphabet and Amazon recently posted results showing negative free cash flow, meaning their capital spending exceeded the cash they brought in from operating their businesses.


And that is before considering the implications of trillions in off-balance–sheet commitments. Whether or not the revenues ever arrive, purchase commitments and signed leases can’t be canceled, for the most part.

If things go wrong, tech companies will be paying an expensive tab for infrastructure that they can’t profitably use. These obligations could also lead increasingly indebted companies to have to borrow even more.

“As these off-balance sheet commitments become more frequent, larger, and more complex, it is becoming increasingly difficult for investors to assess companies’ total potential leverage,” Morgan Stanley accounting analysts wrote in April.

WSJ : Iran’s Secret Plan to Escalate the War Intercepted communications and othe

Iran’s Secret Plan to Escalate the War
Intercepted communications and other intelligence suggest a strategic shift by hard-line leaders to raise the costs for the U.S. and its regional allies

  • Iran’s hardline leaders have prepared for a larger conflict with the U.S. instead of putting faith in a mid-June memorandum of understanding.
  • Iran’s efforts include giving the Revolutionary Guard more control of the army and ramping up missile and drone output.
  • The Revolutionary Guard has coordinated with allied militias in Yemen and Iraq to expand the battlefield and target Saudi shipping and oil sites.

After President Trump signed a memorandum of understanding with Iran in mid-June, administration officials fanned out to build support for an agreement they hoped would reopen the Strait of Hormuz and start winding down the war.

Iran’s hard-line leaders huddled in Tehran and came up with a different plan, according to Iranian and Arab officials. In their view the pact was likely just an attempt by the U.S. and Israel to take pressure off the global economy and buy time for a bigger attack down the road. Instead of putting faith in talks, they took the past two months to prepare for a bigger fight.

Their efforts include giving the powerful Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps more control of the country’s regular army, appointing hardened veterans of the war with Iraq and past internal crackdowns to key posts, expanding domestic counterintelligence operations and ramping up production of missiles and drones. The leadership quickly seized the initiative, attacking ships to tighten Iran’s grip on Hormuz and expanding the battlefield to the Red Sea, which Saudi Arabia has used to get around Iran’s chokehold on the Persian Gulf.

Arab intelligence officials have picked up evidence—including communications between Iran and militia allies in countries such as Yemen and Iraq—of a strategic shift inside the country’s hard-line leadership to get their forces ready to widen the war and raise the costs for the U.S., officials familiar with the findings say. Alarming weaker Gulf countries like Kuwait, Iran’s leaders are increasingly talking about offensive operations on enemy territory.

Their overriding goal is to inflict enough pain to ensure the kind of attacks Iran has endured with the 12-day war last year and the continuing conflict aren’t repeated.

“There is also a widespread view in Iran that the main war has not yet begun,” said Mohammad Hassan Sangtarash, a Tehran-based defense analyst close to the Iranian government. “What we have seen so far is increasingly interpreted through the lens of ‘salami-slicing’ tactics—limited, incremental escalation designed to weaken capabilities before a larger confrontation.”

The Iranian preparations point to an enormous gulf between how Washington and Tehran are perceiving this stage of the war. The divergence has driven a hard-line negotiating stance and reluctance to close deals by Iran’s leaders that has persistently flummoxed Trump, who has called them crazy and accused them of lying.


Iran’s readiness to fight also highlights a deep lack of trust that is likely to keep the two sides from reaching a durable deal to end the conflict any time soon.

Iran’s proclamations include plenty of bravado. The country’s military and economic base have been battered by U.S. and Israeli airstrikes. More pragmatic members of the leadership including Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian have repeatedly warned Iran needs to negotiate a deal to end the war that brings sanctions relief or face the collapse of its economy.

But Iran is rebuilding its infrastructure and restoring access to missile bases much more quickly than expected, a concern to Israeli officials who are familiar with the progress. It also has successfully targeted U.S. bases and retains enough firepower to threaten ships and Gulf energy infrastructure. Arab officials are bracing for continued fighting and an extended disruption of energy supplies.

For the regime, “the baseline is war,” said Alan Eyre, a former senior U.S. diplomat and nuclear negotiator with Iran. “Iran will remain on a wartime footing, preparing for a subsequent attack.”

When Trump signed the memorandum of understanding with Iran on June 17 at the French palace of Versailles, it looked like the biggest hurdle would be convincing American critics that it wasn’t overly generous to Tehran.

The deal promised sanctions waivers to let Iran sell its oil, access to billions of dollars in frozen cash and the prospect of a $300 billion fund to rebuild the country. Iran’s main obligation was to open the Strait of Hormuz to shipping traffic and then negotiate in good faith on its nuclear program.

When Iran started shooting at ships the U.S. was guiding through the strait three weeks later in early July, it caught the U.S. by surprise.

“The very dangerous people from Iran, they’re sick,” said Trump, who also called Iran’s leaders scum. “There’s something wrong with them.”

In fact Iran was pursuing a two-track policy. While his diplomats pursued a peace deal with the U.S., Iranian leader Mojtaba Khamenei was taking steps to prepare the security apparatus for an expanded confrontation that may be initiated by Tehran itself.

The Revolutionary Guard used the calm created by the memorandum of understanding to lay the groundwork with allied militias around the region to step up attacks if needed, sending advisers to Iraq, Yemen and Lebanon to discuss the plans, the officials familiar with recent Arab intelligence findings said.

The intelligence including intercepted communications showed the Revolutionary Guard sending commanders to areas controlled by Yemen’s Houthis to plan for a stepped-up confrontation with Saudi Arabia in coordination with Iraqi militias that also are backed by Iran.

The Revolutionary Guard supervised deployments of missiles, naval weapons and drone launchers to positions overlooking the Red Sea. It also provided the Yemeni militants with intelligence, target lists including Saudi ports and energy facilities, and advice on sheltering from Saudi retaliation, the officials said.

The result was fighting that escalated through late July. The Houthis struck Yemeni government forces backed by Saudi Arabia and declared the Bab al-Mandeb Strait that links the Red Sea to world markets closed to Saudi Arabia. The militant group has fired on Saudi ships, complicating the kingdom’s efforts to export its oil and raising the supply risks for global markets.

Around the same time, Saudi Arabia said Iran-backed militias in Iraq had launched drone attacks on its oil facilities.

The Revolutionary Guard threatened Gulf states that it would destroy their energy facilities if the U.S. were to hit similar sites in Iran—going as far as sending detailed lists of individual targets to its Arab counterparts, the officials said.

Iran also escalated its attacks on American troops. Tehran surprised the U.S. by firing five ballistic missiles at Jordan during a lull in the conflict. The attack came two weeks after another Iranian strike in Jordan killed three U.S. servicemembers.

Officials in the Gulf grew more alarmed as they watched the scope of attacks grow and Iranian missiles evade U.S. defenses and hit targets more precisely in Jordan, Kuwait and Bahrain. The fighting spilled into August, with Iran striking six United Arab Emirates ships over the past two weeks as they tried to transit the Strait of Hormuz.

“We took full advantage of the ceasefire period,” Revolutionary Guard spokesman Brig. Gen. Hossein Mohebbi said in an interview with the Guard-affiliated Tasnim news agency in July. “We enhanced our capabilities, accelerated our missile production rate and improved missile accuracy.”

Behind the scenes, Supreme Leader Khamenei was positioning his forces for a more aggressive fight, lining up seven key security leaders to run revamped military and repression institutions in a reorganization that was unveiled a week ago.

The appointments came with aggressive goals that included tightening the military chain of command, turning an ideological militia into a neighborhood intelligence agency and emphasizing an offensive approach.

Mohsen Rezaei, who led the Revolutionary Guard during the war with Iraq in the 1980s, was named secretary of Iran’s top decision-making body, the Supreme National Security Council, where he will be Khamenei’s representative. In the past week, the council squelched progress on a deal to gradually open Hormuz.

To step up internal security, Khamenei returned veteran Hossein Taeb, a close associate who led a deadly crackdown on protests in 2009, to the helm of the Basij. The supreme leader tasked him with pivoting the volunteer force into a “popular intelligence network” in the wake of two wars that showed how thoroughly Iran had been breached by Israeli intelligence.

Iranian government advisers see the next stage of the confrontation going beyond conventional warfare to include external attempts to foster domestic unrest. The government brutally suppressed protests over the country’s economic crisis in January and fears it’s only a matter of time before the continued deterioration under U.S. pressure brings demonstrators back to the street.

Khamenei also consolidated Revolutionary Guard influence over the regular army by unifying control of the two military arms under Brig. Gen. Ali Abdollahi, a veteran Revolutionary Guard senior commander and military leader who has aggressively advocated attacks on Arab states hosting U.S. bases around the Persian Gulf.

New Revolutionary Guard Commander in Chief Ahmad Vahidi—who has been unofficially on the job since March—was formally given the position and tasked with “powerful offensive operations against the enemy,” the decree appointing him said Monday. The next day, Gen. Mohammad Reza Naghdi, an adviser to Vahidi, said the paramilitary force must be prepared to take operations into enemy territory.

“Vahidi’s elevation is consistent with a leadership preparing the security establishment for a period of sustained confrontation rather than a return to normal peacetime politics,” said Saeid Golkar, an expert on Iran’s security services at the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga.

The Revolutionary Guard—an armed force nearly 200,000 strong—has devised new plans for further escalation including pre-emptive strikes, according to Iranian officials and public statements. Among the options: sabotaging internet cables in the Persian Gulf, creating political unrest in countries with Shia communities such as Kuwait and Bahrain, and potentially even ground operations in Kuwait.

Kuwait takes those risks seriously. In early May, the tiny Gulf sheikhdom said its security forces had intercepted six Revolutionary Guard troops that used a rented fishing boat to land on a Kuwaiti island separated from Iran only by a thin strip of Iraqi territory. Some Iranian political figures have suggested the Revolutionary Guard could launch ground raids via southern Iraq if the U.S. were to threaten Iranian territory like Kharg Island.

Some Gulf officials said Iran’s recent behavior is fueling uncertainty about relations with the much larger, newly more aggressive neighbor after the war. They say it remains difficult to assess the extent of the damage the U.S. and Israel did to the Revolutionary Guard’s capabilities. Still, it’s clear the organization hasn’t been defeated or deterred, and its hold on Hormuz has strengthened its regional position, they said.

That reality has helped push Gulf states to support even unfavorable deals that would acknowledge Iranian oversight of the strait if it stops further escalation. But regional leaders are also growing more frustrated by the lack of fundamental changes in Tehran’s behavior in response to diplomatic outreach.

Iran’s security-minded leadership, they said, appears to be growing more confident in its demands.

Mediators in the talks said Iranian diplomats agreed early in the month on a deal with Oman to set up and oversee routes through Hormuz that would lead to the gradual reopening of the strait. Those efforts were blocked by the Revolutionary Guard, which went back to attacking ships.

With negotiations blocked and Iran not backing away from escalating the fight, Trump has stepped back to see if the economic pressure from sanctions and the Navy’s blockade will soften Iran’s position, U.S. officials said.

But Iran’s leaders are deeply skeptical of Trump’s motives and are slipping into a survival economy aimed at holding out.

People close to Iran’s top negotiators have warned peace talks could be just an interlude before more conflict. Mehdi Mohammadi, a strategic adviser to chief Iranian negotiator Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, described the current stalemate Tuesday as the calm before the storm.

In an earlier social-media post, Mohammadi said the drivers of continued conflict include a “generational project for blood vengeance” for the killing of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, Mojtaba’s father, in the opening strikes of the war.

“The Iranian nation still has much unfinished business with Trump,” said Mohammadi, who is also a member of Iran’s negotiating team. “Iran is prepared for the great confrontation.”

FT : How Ralph Lauren won the workwear wars as America returned to the office Pe

How Ralph Lauren won the workwear wars as America returned to the office
People are hanging up the casual aesthetic of the pandemic years to dress up again

The US is finally dressing up again — and just in time to revive a handful of old-school American brands.

Ralph Lauren and Tapestry have been the winners of a return-to-office trend as America’s formal dress upswing lands at the right moment in their turnaround efforts.

Last week, Ralph Lauren reported a 13 per cent increase in revenue in its most recent quarter on strong sales growth for its “inclusive luxury” products. Handbag maker Coach, which comprises the large majority of Tapestry’s business, reported 15 per cent sales growth on Thursday.


A major driver of the brands’ recent success was the accelerating return to in-office work, said Laurent Vasilescu, a retail analyst at BNP Paribas. “One more day back in the office is 20 per cent where your wardrobe has to move, where you can’t wear sweatpants,” he said.

US companies from Amazon to JPMorgan announced return-to-office mandates in 2025, pushing up the average number of days required in offices nationwide by 9 per cent from August 2024 to August 2025, according to Flex Index. 

Ralph Lauren and Coach beat out preppy rivals to capitalise on the workwear boom: J Crew has struggled to mount a coherent strategy under private equity management, and the brand’s comparable sales fell 8 per cent last year. Shares in Gap have fallen 18 per cent this year, due in part to a slump in dress sales at Old Navy.

Before the coronavirus pandemic, sales growth at Ralph Lauren and Coach had been stagnant for years. Ralph Lauren launched a strategic plan in 2018, pulling back sharply on discounting. By 2022, the brand had cut its off-price sales and exited hundreds of poorly performing department stores. Tapestry also began reducing discounted inventory in 2020.

Both brands also roughly doubled their marketing spending during the turnaround period: Ralph Lauren from about 4 per cent of revenue in 2018 to nearly 8 per cent this year, and Tapestry to 10 per cent of net sales from 2020 to 2025.

The efforts took a while to pay off. Sales grew sluggishly at both brands between 2020 and 2023 as Americans stuck to casual work-from-home dressing. Sales of athletic wear and athleisure — a pandemic dressing staple — grew more than 40 per cent from 2020 to 2023, according to market researcher Euromonitor.

“Dress-up categories, suitings or dress shirts or social dresses, have definitely taken a hit,” Macy’s then-chief executive Jeffrey Gennette told investors in 2020. “Those categories are going to be compressed for a while.” 

Five years later, Macy’s had a new message from the front lines of retail: “We’re in a dress-up cycle,” chief executive Tony Spring told investors in December, citing strong sales in tailored clothing, dress shoes and handbags.

In the first half of 2025, sold-out listings for loafers grew 26 per cent at big US and UK retailers, while sneaker sell-outs declined 8 per cent, according to market research business Edited. Survey data from GlobalData shows that 59 per cent of Americans report dressing “smart”, up from 49 per cent in 2022.

Meanwhile, growth of the activewear market slowed dramatically to 7 per cent between 2023 and 2025, according to Euromonitor.


The bets made by Ralph Lauren and Coach are paying off, as dressier trends push Americans to “investment pieces” that are still within reach to an audience that cannot afford designer brands. The two brands have found the “sweet spot”: more affordable than designer, better quality than fast fashion, said Jessica Ramirez, a retail consultant. Both brands have said they are growing most quickly with Gen-Z.

In addition to the return to the office, Americans are also dressing better by choice, influenced by high inflation and a difficult job market, Ramirez said.

“As times get tougher with jobs and the economy, people tend to dress up more,” she told the FT. “There’s a lot of people who want to defend their job, so the way you show up to work or the way you show up to an event becomes even more important.” The trend had seeped into Americans’ non-working hours, Ramirez added, where they are wearing less athleisure.

Angel Valladares, 38, has been a fan of Coach for more than a decade and is excited to see his peers increasingly wearing the brand. These days, “guys are trying to have fashion sense”, he said on Wednesday.

Valladares likes Coach, and guesses his peers suddenly do too, “because it’s affordable, relatively speaking, but still quality”.

On a September call with investors, David Lauren, an executive at Ralph Lauren and the founder’s son, described the brand as offering a vision of “inclusive luxury” across its stores, restaurants and cafés.

“People dress up to be part of this world,” he said.

In fact, Ralph Lauren was lucky that it was pitching its turnaround at a time when consumers wanted to dress up at all, said Neil Saunders, managing director at GlobalData Retail.

The brand’s “efforts that go back years have culminated at a point in time when people are looking for their styles”, as have Coach’s, said Saunders.

“It’s a very happy coincidence in a way.”

FT : Don’t dismiss the mini-middle powers Qatar, Oman, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan an

Don’t dismiss the mini-middle powers
Qatar, Oman, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan hold leverage in crucial areas

Middle powers have been having a moment since Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney’s Davos speech in January. There has been much excitement about countries such as Canada, India, Brazil, South Africa and Mexico and whether they can restrain great powers or build coalitions as the rules-based order weakens. Many governments have rushed to claim the middle-power title.

But there are also countries that cannot set the wider international agenda but can still make a difference. These might be described as “mini-middle powers”: states with limited overall power but real leverage in a few areas: energy, transport routes, regional security, mediation, finance, technology, geography or access to actors that larger states struggle to reach. What matters is not simply having one of these advantages, but being able to use it.

Qatar and Oman are diplomatic mini-middle powers. Qatar has turned gas wealth, finance and access to hard-to-reach actors into an outsized diplomatic role. Oman relies on discretion, strategic position and the ability to keep channels open between adversaries. For both, mediation is not just a diplomatic role but a source of leverage.

Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan hold leverage when it comes to geography and infrastructure. Azerbaijan exports energy, sits on east-west trade routes and carries weight in South Caucasus politics and security. Kazakhstan’s oil, uranium and its position between Russia and China give it influence beyond the region. Uzbekistan’s demographic weight as Central Asia’s most populous country and central location give it growing leverage in regional trade and diplomacy.

The Middle Corridor shows how this works. Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan are central to this Asia-Europe route, while Uzbekistan is strengthening its links to the corridor. It is more cumbersome than the northern route through Russia, but it gives governments and businesses an alternative. The three are also developing a Caspian green-energy corridor that could carry Central Asian renewable power through Azerbaijan, connecting with the planned Black Sea electricity cable to Europe.

Yet discussion of the South Caucasus and Central Asia is still framed too often as a contest between Russia, China and the west. That misses how many countries in the region operate. Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan maintain relationships in several directions because geography, trade and security make exclusive alignment risky.

Thus they work with Russia, China, Turkey, the EU and the US while seeking to preserve room for manoeuvre among them. Qatar and Oman have close security ties with Washington but keep channels open to US rivals — allowing them to resist pressure from any one side. After Russian air defences brought down an Azerbaijan Airlines passenger jet in December 2024, Baku’s response was unusually blunt given the imbalance in power. It demanded that Moscow accept responsibility, punish those at fault and pay compensation, while keeping the broader relationship intact. Russia later acknowledged the role of its air defences in causing the crash and agreed to pay compensation.

The mini-middle powers’ influence is strongest when others need something they control. Azerbaijan’s oil and gas matter more when buyers are looking for alternative supplies. The Middle Corridor has gained from disruption to trade through Russia, yet governments along the route know that if western business with Russia resumes, some freight may shift north again. For Qatar and Oman, mediation becomes more valuable when the parties themselves are no longer talking. These countries will not set the terms of the next international order. But those who seek to shape it will often depend on their routes, resources or diplomatic access. Larger powers will find it hard to succeed without their co-operation.

FT : Olympus boss tries to beat buyout firms at their own game Bob White adopts

Olympus boss tries to beat buyout firms at their own game
Bob White adopts private equity-style tactics to deflect takeover interest and boost share price

The boss of Olympus is using private equity-style tactics in his bid to turn around the medical imaging device maker and pre-empt takeover bids.

Bob White is fighting to boost a share price that has fallen by about 15 per cent over the past two years, as the Japanese group reels from a long-running US regulatory compliance saga and his predecessor’s exit on illegal drug charges.

He told the FT he is taking a leaf out of private equity’s playbook by adopting the kind of restructuring actions they would look to implement, including cutting 2,000 jobs, overhauling its regional set-up and selling assets to simplify its portfolio.

“I say operate as if they sit at the table,” White said in an interview in Tokyo. “I don’t operate from a position of fear . . . I don’t think there’s any strategy in the private equity playbook that we aren’t [using].”

Some of the world’s largest private equity firms have informally approached Olympus about acquiring the 107-year-old business but have not yet submitted offers, according to people familiar with the matter.

The company said it did not comment on market speculation.

Olympus’s attraction is its dominant global position in medical endoscopes — thin tubes equipped with cameras used for non-surgical internal inspections. The number of procedures could triple to 600mn annually thanks to the rise of AI and robotics.

Buyout executives in Tokyo suggest privately that the market will give White time to demonstrate he can turn around Olympus and that they must wait before any bids have a chance of succeeding.

Strong first-quarter results boosted the share price earlier this month, but analysts asked whether those gains were sustainable. “The question now is whether momentum in North America can stay strong as rivals launch new products,” said analysts at SMBC Nikko.

Any takeover of Olympus, whose market value stands at ¥2.3tn ($14.7bn), could rank as Japan’s biggest private equity deal.

It could eclipse the roughly ¥2tn buyouts of Toshiba by Japan Industrial Partners in 2023, and Toshiba Memory, now called Kioxia, completed in 2018 by a Bain Capital-led consortium.

White is a veteran of the medtech industry who was at Medtronic before becoming chief executive of Olympus just over a year ago. The American, a rare foreign boss in Japan, cited the launch of a strategic review of its surgical endoscopy business as one of his big private equity-style moves.

Olympus has been roiled by scandals since British chief executive Michael Woodford exposed an accounting fraud in 2011 that had concealed $1.7bn of losses. In late 2024 Stefan Kaufmann was pushed out of the top job over allegations that he purchased illegal drugs.

Endoscopes helped steady the company through the aftermath of the first scandal and have become its main business. In 2020 Olympus offloaded the camera unit that the company was famous for, while Bain Capital later bought other non-core operations, such as the microscopy and life sciences business, for $3.1bn.

Just weeks into White’s tenure, its feud with the US Food and Drug Administration escalated, however, and continues to influence the share price. A range of Olympus medical devices are banned from the US because of a product safety alert that followed three warning letters in 2022 and 2023 about manufacturing quality issues.

White’s new style of leadership helped a nascent turnaround in financial earnings in May, prompting shares to slightly recover, and the internal cultural changes mean he believes that “there’s zero difference between what the FDA wants and what we want”.

Stephen Barker, an analyst at Jefferies, said that White marked a break from a “highly insular leadership structure” at a company characterised by weak internal controls and governance.

One person close to Olympus management said that persistent weakness in the share price had prompted the company to consider defence options.

Any takeover offer for the company would be politically controversial in Japan, as Olympus is one of the country’s most famous brands and plays a critical role in the domestic healthcare system.

“The heart of Olympus will always be in Japan,” said White.

reuters : Jane Street took $15 billion hit in July tied to Situational Awareness

Jane Street took $15 billion hit in July tied to Situational Awareness, AI selloff, sources say

  • Jane Street generates more than $40 billion in trading revenue year to date, source says
  • Executives tell employees firm closed significant risk in areas that lost money in July
  • Jane Street says it is pulling back on risk-taking in some strategies after recent losses

NEW YORK, Aug 14 (Reuters) - Jane Street took a $15 billion hit in ​July from its exposure to AI-focused hedge fund Situational Awareness and other tech stocks that were battered by the market selloff, according to two people familiar ‌with the matter and a note seen by Reuters.

The secretive Wall Street trading firm, however, has generated trading revenue of more than $40 billion year to date, one of the sources said, easily outstripping trading revenue at the largest banks and other market-making rivals. That total is more than the $39.6 billion that Jane Street generated for all of last year.

In July, Situational, which is run by Leopold Aschenbrenner, a former OpenAI researcher, offloaded the bulk ​of its stock portfolio in what was a fire sale to billionaire Ken Griffin's Citadel after being hurt by the AI selloff that triggered margin calls at the firm. ​Situational counts Jane Street among its investors.

In a note to employees on Friday, executives at Jane Street said July was a "bad month" for ⁠the firm, blaming the drawdown at Situational for contributing to its poor performance during the month.

"We have an investment in Situational Awareness, an externally managed AI-focused hedge fund, that became large ​by performing well in the first half of the year. They had a large drawdown that left our stake about flat on the year, but still up over the entire period ​we have been invested," according to the note to employees that was seen by Reuters.

"We generally worry most about sharp drawdowns, and buy puts that would help in those scenarios. The losses in AI stocks were relatively spread out throughout the month, so those short-term hedges provided little help," the note added.

The firm also took a hit from its long positions in non-AI stocks in Asia, many of which had outperformed the ​markets earlier in the year.

"We largely lost on the same portfolio of trades that had strong outperformance in the second quarter. AI-exposed stocks were down a lot during July, several of ​the largest memory and semiconductor stocks were down around 50%," Jane Street said in the note.

Jane Street did not respond to a request for comment.

'MORE SELECTIVE ABOUT RISK'
The latest disclosures from Jane Street underscore ‌the extent of ⁠the steep losses that the selloff inflicted on Wall Street's biggest financial firms. The July loss meant that the firm recorded its first negative month of trading revenue since 2016, while its revenue is down roughly 25% from its peak at the end of June, the firm said in the note.

Reuters reported earlier in August that several of the world's most prominent hedge funds were rocked by drawdowns due to their exposure to the AI trade.

Jane Street, which has about 3,500 employees and was launched in 2000, provides market liquidity by buying and selling a range of ​financial products, including ETFs, equities, bonds, options, commodities ​and currencies on exchanges and trading ⁠venues worldwide.

The firm, which to date has not taken on any outside capital, currently has direct market access to more than 200 trading venues across the globe. Jane Street's capital structure allows the firm to take larger positions when providing liquidity and hold such positions through periods ​when such risks pay off.

Over the past few years, Jane Street has grown to become a market-making juggernaut, gaining an edge through real-time ​pricing tools that have ⁠been built over 25 years by leveraging data and research.

Still, Jane Street was not immune to the unwinding of the AI trade despite its dominance, as the July losses forced it to exit several of its riskiest positions in recent weeks — a fact that it acknowledged in its note to employees.

"Despite the large year to date increase in trading capital, the recency of these losses has caused ⁠us to ​locally be more selective about risk," the note said.

Jane Street said it closed a significant portion of risk in ​the specific areas where the firm lost money in July, while also having pulled back on risk-taking in other strategies.

"Our positions currently seem appropriate for our present risk tolerance," the note said. "Market volumes have been strong, and we’ve ​continued to make improvements to our short time horizon strategies, that trading seems more profitable than ever," it added.

Reporting by Anirban Sen in New York; Editing by Megan Davies and Lisa Shumaker

Reuters : Trump wants more economic pressure on Iran. What are his options? By A

Trump wants more economic pressure on Iran. What are his options?

WASHINGTON, Aug 16 (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump on Friday vowed to hit Iran hard economically, a day after Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said that Washington would impose measures on Tehran that have "never been seen" as soon as next week.

The United States, United Nations and European Union have applied sanctions, implemented trade embargoes and frozen assets since the late 1970s over ​Iran's nuclear program, human rights violations and support for militant groups.

Make sense of global markets with the Trading Day newsletter. Sign up here.

Since the Iran war began in February, Washington has levied additional maritime, energy and financial sanctions ‌and started a naval blockade.

Data from the U.S. Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) shows the agency has imposed sanctions on more than 1,000 people, vessels and aircraft since Trump began his second term.

Recent measures have targeted Iran's shadow oil fleet; shipping insurers; entities and people enabling Iran's acquisition of weapons; and digital exchanges, freezing an estimated $500 billion in Iran-linked cryptocurrency.

Experts say the Trump administration also can try these options:

SANCTIONS ON CHINESE 'TEAPOT' ​REFINERS
Chinese independent refineries known as "teapots" account for a quarter of Chinese refinery capacity. They operate with narrow and sometimes negative profit margins.

China buys more than 80% of Iran's ​shipped oil, according to 2025 data from analytics firm Kpler. Independent refiners absorb much of this trade, exposing them to so-called secondary measures ⁠that penalize entities helping a primary sanctions target.

Past U.S. sanctions have deterred larger independent refiners from buying Iranian oil. But the independent refineries are somewhat immune since they have little exposure ​to the U.S. financial system, sanctions experts say.

SANCTIONS ON CHINESE BANKS
OFAC has imposed secondary sanctions on smaller China- and Hong Kong-based entities accused of processing billions of dollars in Iranian oil and ​helping to fund weapons procurement.

Treasury has warned two larger Chinese banks they could face secondary sanctions if Iranian funds were found moving through their systems, but has stopped short of designating them.

Hitting those two banks, which U.S. officials have not publicly identified, or imposing other sanctions could have a chilling effect on bigger financial institutions, sanctions experts said, although they warned it could also trigger retaliatory actions by Beijing.

Trump administration officials have ​sought to play down tensions between Washington and Beijing ahead of an expected meeting between Trump and President Xi Jinping later this year. They worry that China could curtail exports of ​critical minerals that are essential to advanced technology production at a time when the U.S. and Western allies are still trying to develop their own supplies.

'WHACK-A-MOLE'
The United States could continue targeting Iranian individuals and ‌entities, as well ⁠as others in China and the Gulf, that are helping Tehran evade sanctions to collect revenues for its war effort.

Treasury recently issued sanctions against firms that are springing up to facilitate Iran's trading of oil revenue for imports. But such measures amount to a "whack-a-mole" approach that has not altered Iran's behavior, said Brett Erickson, managing principal of Obsidian Risk Advisors, noting that Tehran simply creates new entities to replace them.

Miad Maleki, a sanctions expert with the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said Bessent was likely signaling a sharpened enforcement push against oil shippers, purchasers and currency ​exchangers who help Iran pay for its ​imports.
Further aviation sanctions were also possible, aimed ⁠at degrading Iran's ability to move trade now that the U.S. has blockaded shipping via the Strait of Hormuz, he added.

LAND BLOCKADE
Some U.S. and Israeli officials have floated the prospect of a land blockade, which would require assistance from Iran's neighbors: Iraq, Turkey, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Turkmenistan, Azerbaijan ​and Armenia.

The Trump administration has varying degrees of closeness with all those countries except Afghanistan, but that border is mountainous and extremely difficult ​to patrol anyway.

Trump may ⁠have leverage over Pakistan, which recently sought a $10 billion currency swap line from Treasury, and Turkey, which is seeking to rejoin the U.S. F-35 warplane program.

A land blockade could increase pressure on the Iranian people by halting their imports of food, energy and textiles, but experts say such a move would be difficult to execute and might not result in protests or internal pressure.

SECONDARY TARIFFS
Trump has repeatedly ⁠threatened tariffs on ​goods from countries that do business with Iran, although the Supreme Court struck down the legal basis for ​such taxes.

The Senate passed a sweeping Russia sanctions bill last week that included new Iran sanctions and would give Trump new tariff powers that he could potentially use against countries that aid Iran's commerce and weapons procurement.

That legislation must ​still pass the U.S. House of Representatives, which could prove challenging given widespread concerns among Democrats and some Republicans about the tariff measures.

Reporting by Andrea Shalal; Editing by Sergio Non and Sanjeev Miglani

>>> Preview: Upcoming Asia session events for Monday, Aug 17th, 2026 **All times

Preview: Upcoming Asia session events for Monday, Aug 17th, 2026 **All times listed for economic events are denominated in Eastern Standard Time (Add 4 hours for GMT equivalent)

*** As always times are subject to change ***
- 18:30 (NZ) New Zealand July Performance Services Index: No est v 50.6 prior
- 18:45 (NZ) New Zealand July Food Prices M/M: No est v 0.6% prior
- 18:45 (NZ) New Zealand July Retail Card Spending M/M: No est v -1.4% prior; Total M/M: No est v -1.2% prior
- 19:01 (UK) Aug Rightmove House Prices M/M: No est v -1.0% prior; Y/Y: No est v -0.4% prior - 19:50 (JP) Japan Q2 Preliminary GDP Q/Q: 0.5%e v 0.5% prior; GDP Annualized Q/Q: 2.0%e v 1.8% prior; GDP Nominal Q/Q: 1.2%e v 0.6% prior; GDP Deflator Y/Y: 2.3%e v 3.2% prior
- 19:50 (JP) Japan Q2 Private Consumption Q/Q: 0.4%e v 0.3% prior; Business Spending Q/Q: +0.5%e v -0.7% prior; Inventory Contribution to GDP: 0.0%e v -0.1% prior; Net Exports Contribution to GDP: 0.3%e v 0.3% prior
- 20:30 (SG) Singapore July Non-oil Domestic Exports Y/Y: 26.1%e v 20.7% prior; Electronic Exports Y/Y: No est v 105.1% prior
- 21:30 (CN) China July New Home Prices M/M: No est v -0.2% prior; Used Home Prices M/M: No est v -0.3% prior
- 22:00 (CN) China July Retail Sales Y/Y: 1.5%e v 1.0% prior; Retail Sales YTD Y/Y: 1.4%e v 1.3% prior - 22:00 (CN) China July Industrial Production Y/Y: 5.0%e v 5.3% prior; Industrial Production YTD Y/Y: 5.3%e v 5.4% prior
- 22:00 (CN) China July YTD Fixed Assets Ex Rural Y/Y: -6.2%e v -5.7% prior - 22:00 (CN) China July Surveyed Jobless Rate: 5.1%e v 5.0% prior
- 22:00 (CN) China July YTD Property Investment Y/Y: -18.9%e v -18.0% prior; Residential Property Sales Y/Y: No est v -13.7% prior - 22:30 (TH) Thailand Q2 GDP Q/Q: -0.4%e v +0.7% prior; Y/Y: 1.8%e v 2.8% prior
- 00:00 (MY) Malaysia July CPI Y/Y: 1.9%e v 1.9% prior - 00:30 (JP) Japan Jun Final Industrial Production M/M: No est v 1.3% prelim; Y/Y: No est v 4.2% prelim; Capacity Utilization M/M: No est v 0.1% prior
- 00:30 (JP) Japan Jun Tertiary Industry Index M/M: -1.0%e v +1.1% prior
- No set time: (CN) China July FX Net Settlement - Clients (CNY-denominated): B v 391.3B prior
- No set time: (PH) Philippines Jun Overseas cash remittances: $B v $2.7B prior; Y/Y: % v 2.0% prior

>>> Pres. Trump: The Senate must vote on the NO MORE CHANGING THE CLOCKS ACT as

Pres. Trump: The Senate must vote on the NO MORE CHANGING THE CLOCKS ACT as soon as possible - Truth Social

- "The Senate must vote on the NO MORE CHANGING THE CLOCKS ACT as soon as possible. More sun later in the day is better (including for fighting crime!), but, even more importantly, NO MORE RIDICULOUSLY CHANGING CLOCKS AND WATCHES TWICE YEARLY, with all of the disruption and chaos it causes. FINALLY, GET IT DONE!!! President DJT"