TheChek News Flow

FSB enforces crackdown on use by state officials after claiming it uncovered an espionage operation using Apple devices

Russian authorities have banned thousands of officials and state employees from using iPhones and other Apple products as a crackdown against the American tech company intensifies over “espionage” concerns. 

The trade ministry said that from Monday it will ban all use of iPhones for “work purposes”. The digital development ministry as well as Rostec, the state-owned company that is under sanction by the west for supplying Russia’s war machine in Ukraine, have said they will follow suit or have already introduced bans.

The ban on iPhones, iPad tablets and other Apple devices at leading ministries and institutions reflects growing concern in the Kremlin and the Federal Security Service spy agency over a surge in espionage activity by US intelligence agencies against Russian state institutions.

“Security officials in ministries — these are FSB employees who hold civilian positions such as deputy ministers — announced that iPhones were no longer considered safe and that alternatives should be sought,” said a person close to a government agency that has banned Apple products.

A month after President Vladimir Putin launched his full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February last year, he signed a decree demanding that organisations involved in “critical information infrastructure” — a broad term that includes healthcare, science and the financial sector — switch to domestically developed software by 2025.

The move reflected Moscow’s longstanding desire to make state institutions switch away from foreign technology. Some Russian analysts suggested the current edict will do little to assuage suspicions that western intelligence agencies are able to access sensitive information on Russian government activity.

“Officials truly believe that Americans can use their equipment for wiretapping,” said Andrey Soldatov, a Russia security and intelligence services expert. “The FSB has long been concerned about the use of iPhones for professional contacts, but the presidential administration and other officials opposed [restrictions] simply because they liked iPhones.”

Similar bans are already in place or about to be enforced in the finance and energy ministries and other official bodies, said the person close to the government agency. The ministries and the government did not respond to requests for comment.

The trade ministry’s ban includes emailed correspondence relating to work activities, said its deputy head Vasily Osmakov, a measure that is being matched by other ministries. Another person close to one ministry said: “The specialists of IT department report when someone opens their work email from an iPhone. It’s easy to control.”

A Rostec representative told the Financial Times that the restrictions apply to all Apple devices. But their use for personal purposes is still allowed.

“Everyone complains that it’s inconvenient and they have to carry another phone or tablet,” the person close to a ministry added.

Alexey Lukatsky, a Russian cyber security veteran, doubted whether officials will make a permanent switch to using devices running the rudimentary Russian-made Aurora operating system.

“There were restrictions on the use of work email on devices not certified [by security services] before. But most officials did not comply. The question is whether they will comply now.”

Moscow’s crusade against Apple began after the FSB, the main successor to the Soviet-era KGB, announced on June 1 that it had uncovered a “spying operation by US intelligence agencies using Apple devices”.

“Everyone in the presidential administration is aware that the iPhone is a completely transparent device and its use for official purposes is unacceptable and prohibited,” Putin’s spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said last month.

According to the FSB, several thousand iPhones — both with Russian SIM cards and those registered with Moscow diplomatic missions in Nato countries as well as Israel, Syria and China — were “infected” with monitoring software that indicated Apple’s “close co-operation” with the US National Security Agency.

The FSB claimed without showing any evidence that Apple provides US intelligence services “with a wide range of control tools over individuals of interest to the White House”.

Apple denied the allegations, saying in a statement that it “has never worked with any government to build a backdoor into any Apple product, and never will”.

“When a big tech company . . . claims it does not co-operate with the intelligence community — either it lies shamelessly or it is about to [go bust],” Dmitry Medvedev, deputy head of Russia’s Security Council and one of the fiercest hardliners, said about the statement.

Medvedev’s reaction illustrates Russia’s disengagement from the west Russia. In 2010, Medvedev, then a relatively progressive president, visited the US to promote “restarted” relations between the two countries. On a visit to Silicon Valley he was the proud recipient of an iPhone 4 from Steve Jobs, former Apple chief executive.

Catastrophic’ outlook for German construction adds to Olaf Scholz’s woes

Developers are scrapping plans to build homes amid rising inflation, high interest rates and labour shortages

Olaf Scholz came to power promising to alleviate Germany’s housing shortage by building 400,000 homes every year.

But nearly halfway through his term, the chancellor’s failure to reach that goal weighs heavily on millions of Germans struggling with high inflation, unemployment and rising rents.

Just 295,300 dwellings were built in Germany in 2022, well short of the chancellor’s target. Industry executives expect the numbers for this year and next to be even lower — bad news in a country that is facing a shortage of 700,000 homes, according to the German Property Federation.

“The outlook for 2024-25 is catastrophic,” said Dirk Salewski, head of BFW, the German association of independent real estate and housing companies. “We are seeing a massive slump in demand for new developments.”

The industry is facing a perfect storm as interest rates and energy prices climb sharply, supply chain disruptions push up the cost of building materials and an acute shortage of skilled workers plays havoc with construction schedules.

The situation could deteriorate still. Building contractors have reported a sharp decline in orders — an alarming sign in a sector with long lead times. FIEC, Europe’s construction industry federation, said they fell 9.7 per cent in real terms in 2022, compared with the year before.

“Right now, building firms have full order books stretching into next year,” said Tim-Oliver Müller, head of HDB, the German construction industry association. “But there are no new orders coming in. And that is very worrying.”

The downturn could exacerbate an already overheated housing market where demand vastly outstrips supply. Empirica Regio, a research firm, has identified a “supply gap” of 23,177 dwellings in Berlin, 13,632 in Hamburg and 10,577 in Munich. In all three cities, rents are exploding.

Many contractors blame the government for the slowdown, saying it is imposing ever more burdensome environmental rules on developers, including a ban on new oil and gas-fired boilers, due to be adopted this year. They also criticise its decision last year to halt targeted support for new energy-efficient buildings.

The government insists it is taking steps to help the industry. It has launched a €2bn subsidy programme for “climate-friendly” construction, including €350mn a year in cheap loans for families on low incomes seeking to buy their own home. It is also providing €14.5bn in financial support for the building of social housing by 2026.

But experts say the subsidies — especially the cheap loans — will have little effect. “You only qualify if your house meets the highest energy-efficiency standards, and such houses are 20 per cent more expensive to build,” said Salewski. “How can people afford that?”

Please use the sharing tools found via the share button at the top or side of articles. Copying articles to share with others is a breach of FT.com T&Cs and Copyright Policy. Email licensing@ft.com to buy additional rights. Subscribers may share up to 10 or 20 articles per month using the gift article service. More information can be found at https://www.ft.com/tour.

https://www.ft.com/content/a859ecc4-4d9a-4a5a-b0c0-3c4fb1390298

The upshot of the slowdown is clear, said Franz-Bernd Große-Wilde, chief executive of Spar- und Bauverein Dortmund, one of Germany’s oldest housing co-operatives. Decisions made today to shelve projects risk creating a substantial housing “gap” in two to three years. “It’s just going to become much harder for people to find a flat,” he said.

Established in 1893 to provide affordable housing for Dortmund’s industrial workers, the Spar- und Bauverein exemplifies the wider trend. For the first time in nearly 20 years, it has scrapped plans to build apartments.

“We’re taking a break from new projects,” said Große-Wilde. “With costs rising and fewer government grants on offer, you get less for every euro you invest.” 

He said the company wouldn’t launch any more developments until all the others in planning have been executed. “That’s unusual compared to our approach over the last 15-20 years,” he said. Reflecting the move, its annual investment budget is to fall by €10mn to €40mn.

The company’s approach is typical for much of the industry. Investment in residential construction fell by 8.5 per cent to €9bn last year compared with 2021, while the number of building permits for new dwellings dropped by 27.3 per cent in the first four months of 2023, compared with the same period last year.

Residential completions are expected to fall from 295,300 in 2022 to 242,000 in 2023 and 214,000 in 2024, according to the GdW, a trade body representing housing associations. That compares with an annual average of 405,000 between 1950 and 2022.

Germany is not the only European country experiencing such headwinds. Building investment is expected to drop by 5 per cent in Spain and 5.7 per cent in Italy this year, according to FIEC. And France experienced a 15 per cent decline in housing starts and a 30 per cent fall in permits for new housing in the first four months of this year compared with the same period in 2022.

But the chill the sector is experiencing is particularly worrying in Germany, where the construction industry employs 2.5mn people, received €476bn in investment in 2022 and is a big driver of economic growth.

Concern about the state of the sector intensified in January when Vonovia, Germany’s largest property company, announced it was putting all its new building projects on ice. 

Daniel Riedl, a member of Vonovia’s executive board, said it would have to charge rent of €20 a square metre in any new buildings to cover current construction costs of €5,000 a sq m — compared with €12 a sq m a couple of years ago. Yet such rents would, he added, be “completely unrealistic” for large parts of Germany, where the average rent is €7.5 a sq m.

Smaller companies, such as the BGFG building co-operative in Hamburg, are also slowing down their activities. It has shelved plans to construct 140 dwellings, the last stage of a large residential development on the Elbe River, south-east of Hamburg centre.

Peter Kay, BGFG’s chief executive, said the problem was not just higher material costs, but the fact that some materials had disappeared from the market completely. BGFG used to make its windows from Siberian larch, which has been banned under anti-Russia sanctions. “The alternative is oak and that is a lot more expensive,” he said.

Salewski of the BFW said the figure for completions last year was a “success” considering the effect of the war in Ukraine and its impact on supply chains. “The short- to medium-term outlook is a lot worse than the results for 2022.”

UBS hands EY one of biggest audit deals in global banking

Contract for bank enlarged by Credit Suisse takeover will require firm to call in staff from other countries

UBS executives have chosen EY for one of the world’s most lucrative banking audit contracts after deciding to retain the Big Four firm following its takeover of Credit Suisse. 

EY, which has been UBS’s external auditor since 1998, will audit the enlarged bank from 2024, according to people with knowledge of the decision. The size of the contract means EY will have to call in staff from other countries to work on the audit, two people said.

PwC, which had been Credit Suisse’s auditor, will audit the stricken bank’s accounts for 2023, according to people with knowledge of the matter.

UBS’s state-orchestrated takeover of Credit Suisse was completed last month but integrating the business into the wider group is expected to take several years.

The audits of UBS and Credit Suisse were already among the biggest in Europe on a standalone basis. Last year, UBS paid EY $70mn in fees, while Credit Suisse paid PwC $90mn — a 10 per cent rise on the year before — according to the banks’ annual reports. 

The audit fee for the combined group is expected to be less than the sum of the standalone audits but would still be one of the highest in global banking.

HSBC paid its auditor PwC $148mn last year, more than any other bank in Europe, while Barclays paid KPMG £71mn. Wall Street trio Citigroup, JPMorgan Chase and Goldman Sachs each paid their auditors between $95mn and $103mn, according to Ideagen Audit Analytics data. 

EY did not comment on whether it had been retained by UBS but said: “The size and scale of the global EY financial services audit practice means we are able to access resource and specialist skills from across our network.” 

The firm has 20,000 banking audit staff globally and its international operations are more closely integrated than its rivals, making it easier to share resources across borders, according to one person familiar with the business. Auditor appointments are subject to shareholder approval. 

EY has continued to win banking audits despite reputational damage stemming from its role in signing off the accounts of German fintech group Wirecard, which collapsed in a fraud scandal in 2020. 

Last year EY won a share of the €60mn-a-year audit contract of France’s largest bank BNP Paribas, prompting senior partner Omar Ali to tell staff the firm was “now the clear market leader in financial services audit in Europe”. 

EY already audits Deutsche Bank, Germany’s biggest lender, for which it was paid €68mn last year. But it has been barred from bidding for new audits of German-listed companies for two years after its failures at Wirecard. 

PwC took over as Credit Suisse’s external auditor from KPMG in 2020. Its role was thrust into the spotlight this year when Credit Suisse was forced to delay the publication of its annual report after a last-minute query from the US Securities and Exchange Commission.

When the report was finally published, just days before Credit Suisse collapsed in March, it identified “material weaknesses” in the bank’s internal controls over financial reporting.

PwC said these were a result of the fact that “management did not design and maintain an effective risk assessment process to identify and analyse the risk of material mis-statements in its consolidated financial statements”.

The issue caused friction between senior Credit Suisse executives and PwC auditors, according to three people familiar with the matter.

Conflict of interest rules mean EY is likely to have to end its consulting work for Credit Suisse as it takes on the audit of the combined business. 

Two years ago, Credit Suisse hired EY to review anti-money laundering procedures in its Asian wealth business following its involvement in several scandals in the region, including the Malaysian 1MDB embezzlement case.

Asked by the Financial Times about whether it had been asked to assess EY’s independence as auditor of the combined UBS-Credit Suisse group, the Swiss Federal Audit Oversight Authority said it could not comment because the matter was “under consideration”.

UBS, Credit Suisse and PwC declined to comment. 

Writers and actors join picket line to protest reduced pay in streaming era and the threat from AI

Hollywood has not seen anything like it in more than 60 years: thousands of striking actors and writers picketing together outside movie and TV studios, where production has ground to a halt. 

Demetri Belardinelli, who has acted in TV shows such as Silicon Valley, was among hundreds of picketers outside Walt Disney’s Burbank studios in sweltering heat on Friday. He and 160,000 other members of the SAG-AFTRA union had voted to strike a day before, after talks with the studios collapsed. 

Belardinelli and the other actors took their places on the picket lines alongside members of the Writers Guild of America, who have been on strike since May 2, escalating pressure on the Hollywood studios. 

“This is a much-needed surge of energy and people,” Belardinelli said as passing cars honked their horns in solidarity. “None of us want to continue this strike. But the [studios] have to meet our demands.” 

The Screen Actors Guild has not gone on strike in 43 years, and it has been even longer since the actors and writers have picketed at the same time. Their last joint industrial action was in 1960, when Ronald Reagan was the head of the Screen Actors Guild. 

The level of anger and mistrust between the unions and the studios — which are represented by the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers — is high, veterans of previous Hollywood labour negotiations say. Many in the industry are girding for a lengthy strike at a moment when the major studios are in retrenchment mode. 

Disney, Warner Bros and Paramount are slashing costs following multibillion-dollar investments in streaming and sharp declines in the linear TV business. Their share prices are also under pressure. 

Now work on new films and TV shows has stopped, which will disrupt future releases just as the industry has started to recover from the production disruptions caused by Covid-19. “If the WGA writers strike was an annoyance for Hollywood production, the SAG-AFTRA actors strike is much more disruptive,” said Tim Nollen, an analyst at Macquarie, in a research note. 

Key sticking points for both the writers and actors include royalties — which have declined significantly in the streaming era — and establishing rules over the use of artificial intelligence. Writers fear being paid far less to adapt basic scripts generated by AI programmes, while actors are concerned that their digital likenesses will be used without compensation.

“Both the writers and the actors have noticed a substantial change in the way we are paid and in the way we are treated by big streamers and legacy companies alike,” said Emily Cheever-Mallonee, a writer who was serving as a strike captain outside Disney. “It is worth fighting for residuals at a time when you have some of the biggest hits on streamers paying us less money than ever.”

The strikes come as cinema owners are enjoying their first full summer movie slate since 2019. SAG rules prevent actors from promoting new movies, including the release of the highly anticipated Barbie and Oppenheimer on July 21. Such promotion is vital to raising awareness of films, studio executives and analysts say. Universal, which is distributing Oppenheimer, said the film’s New York premiere has been cancelled.

Bob Iger, Disney’s chief executive, told CNBC on Thursday that it was the “worst time in the world” for work stoppages, given the industry’s nascent recovery from the Covid-19 pandemic. “There’s a level of expectation that they have that is just not realistic.”

Iger made the comments while he was at the Allen & Co conference in Sun Valley, Idaho, which has been dubbed “billionaires’ summer camp”. Earlier in the week, Disney had announced that Iger’s tenure would be extended by two years and that his annual bonus scheme had been increased by five times. 

Members of both unions were enraged by his comments, and picketers outside Disney have started carrying signs mocking them. “Bob Iger’s Salary Isn’t ‘Realistic,’” read one. Fran Drescher, the actress who is serving as president of SAG, said she found Iger’s remarks to be “terribly repugnant and out of touch, positively tone-deaf”.

Iger has long been considered Hollywood’s de facto leader, and many in the industry had hoped he might be able to use his clout to broker some kind of settlement between the studios and the unions. But the hostile reaction to his comments only emphasised the angry divide between the two sides.

“It’s funny that he was saying that at a billionaire’s ranch, coming after [Disney] announced how much money he was going to be making in the next few years,” said Cheever-Mallonee. “I think that the public sees through the B.S. when a multimillionaire is saying something like that.”

Given the distance between the studios and the unions, she predicted that relations will become “a little nastier” before a resolution is found. 

Last month, more than 300 leading Hollywood stars, including Jennifer Lawrence and Meryl Streep, wrote to SAG-AFTRA leadership supporting possible strike action. “This is no time to meet in the middle,” they wrote, signalling that they wanted the union to take a tough line. 

One Hollywood executive argued that the unions had walked away from a strong pay offer from the studios, especially given the rocky state of the film and TV business. “With an industry crawling its way out of the near-death experience of three years of the pandemic, this is the essential moment to meet in the middle,” the executive said. “We can argue what the middle is, but let’s compromise.” 

The strike will also have an impact on the California economy. The last writers strike, which lasted 100 days in 2007-08, cost the state an estimated $2bn — but it did not shut down production as extensively as this one is likely to do. It will also have knock-on effects to other small businesses that struggled through the pandemic, from cinemas to florists, caterers, hairdressers and others. 

“We definitely understand that this strike is disrupting not just our work, but the workers that are not unionised and that cannot really stand here with us,” said Cheever-Mallonee. “We’re essentially fighting for the continuation of all of our jobs. We don’t strike lightly and we don’t strike for fun, right?”

Republicans add measures against abortion, diversity and transgender rights to spending bill

The Pentagon’s annual funding bill is set to become the focus of a political showdown after Republicans inserted “anti-woke” social provisions into the legislation.

The bill — known as the National Defense Authorization Act — is normally shielded from the most bitter partisan bickering and often passes with support from both political parties.

But on Friday, Republicans in the House of Representatives passed their version of the legislation, worth $886bn, by adding measures designed to curb abortion rights, diversity training and medical care for transgender patients in the military.

Democrats are likely to fight back by seeking to exclude the provisions.

The latest tensions suggest that Capitol Hill is about to embark upon a new period of brinkmanship, just weeks after the US came within days of a debt default because of divisions over budgetary policy and the need to raise the country’s borrowing limit.

Steve Scalise, the House majority leader, told reporters the bill was “an important victory for every American in this country that wants to see our military focused on our enemies abroad — not on wokeness and all of the indoctrination attempts you’re seeing within the Pentagon”.

At the same press conference, Kevin McCarthy, House speaker, declared: “We don’t want Disneyland to train our military.”

Unless the stand-off is resolved quickly, it risks becoming a hindrance for Washington as it presses ahead with efforts to support Ukraine against Russia’s full-scale invasion and attempts to bolster its presence in the Indo-Pacific region.

The Pentagon is already suffering through a domestic political firestorm as Tommy Tuberville, a Republican senator from Alabama, is holding up the Senate confirmation of top military officers. Tuberville is protesting against the defence department’s new policies that facilitate access to abortion after the Supreme Court struck down the constitutional right to the procedure.

Democrats have responded angrily to Republicans’ attempts to tie military spending to social policy demands.

“They chose culture war over national security,” Elissa Slotkin, the Michigan Democratic congresswoman and a former Pentagon official, said on the House floor. Hakeem Jeffries, the Democratic leader in the lower chamber, issued a statement with other party leaders accusing Republicans of turning “what should be a meaningful investment in our men and women in uniform into an extreme and reckless legislative joyride”.

The House bill clashed with a bipartisan defence spending bill that will be considered in the Senate, which is controlled by Democrats, next week.

Talks to resolve the differences could take several more weeks, potentially getting close to the September 30 deadline when funding for all federal agencies, including the Pentagon, is set to expire. Funding bills for other US federal agencies are also in peril and fears of a widespread government shutdown in October are rising.

Since striking an agreement with President Joe Biden to avert a debt default in early June, McCarthy has faced a backlash from the right flank of his party, leading him to take a harder line in this summer’s spending fights.

But lobbyists for defence companies still praised the defence spending legislation passed in the House as a step forward towards eventual passage.

“The last year and a half — with a land war in Europe and escalating threats in the Indo-Pacific — has made it even more clear that we must bolster our nation’s national security innovation base to fulfil defence needs, leverage our technological prowess, and accelerate the pace of acquisition,” said Eric Fanning, chief executive of the Aerospace Industries Association, which represents the top US defence companies.

Fast-fashion giant is diversifying its products as it wrestles with weak sales

H&M HM.B -0.32%decrease; red down pointing triangle Hennes & Mauritz is moving further beyond its eponymous clothing label, doubling down on beauty products, housewares and selling products from other brands to draw in more shoppers.

The retailer is opening stand-alone beauty and home stores even as it continues to close its namesake clothing shops. Meanwhile, it is expanding the handful of other chains it owns including upmarket brand Cos and street-fashion label Weekday. It is also selling more third-party brands, including Adidas and New Balance sneakers, in its stores and online.

The moves come as H&M works to develop its growth strategy in a bid to revive stagnant sales.

“We have really been looking into customer demand,” Chief Executive Helena Helmersson said in an interview. While that has partly involved refreshing H&M’s core clothing ranges to re-engage the consumer, she said, “part of this work is asking: How can we broaden what we offer?”

Sales growth at H&M, once a rapidly growing pioneer of fast fashion, has stalled in recent years. Excess inventories and the Covid-19 pandemic depressed sales, and now online fashion rivals including Shein are challenging the company on speed and price.

Moreover, Helmersson said, H&M had lost some cachet in particular with young female consumers, its core demographic, but is making progress in winning them back. The brand lost ground against rivals several years ago because its clothes were perceived as less trendy and its stores lacked excitement, according to analysts.

H&M’s revenue in 2022 was approximately the same as six years earlier. Growth has remained underwhelming so far this year. The company reported a 9% rise in revenue for the six months ended May 31, although its growth rate was 1% when stripping out currency fluctuations.

In response, analysts say, the Swedish company is diversifying.

Against the backdrop of the closure of hundreds of regular H&M fashion stores in recent years, the company has increased the number of H&M Home-branded stores—which sell everything from sofas to kitchenware to bed linen—to 32 from 11 before the pandemic.

It has also added homeware sections to 399 regular stores, and says its range is now available in most countries where it operates online. The company doesn’t break out sales of homewares but said the business performed well last year.

H&M is now looking to make a similar push into beauty and personal-care products. The company opened two flagship H&M Beauty-branded stores in Norway in April, selling body wash, razors and nail polish, among other products. The range is also sold online in several countries, with some products available in regular stores.

The next step in the push into cosmetics will be to open more beauty stores in Europe, Helmersson said.

H&M has since last year also embraced selling other companies’ products, including in its stores.

It now offers more than 70 other brands, including Crocs, Levi’s and Superdry, and says it plans to add more. In markets where H&M offers third-party labels, online consumers have the option of searching products by brand to see which are available alongside H&M’s own ranges.

“We see that customers spend more time with us if we offer a broader range of products,” Helmersson said. The company has also launched a sportswear brand, H&M Move, and started to sell secondhand clothing through its Sellpy resale platform.

Another area of focus for H&M is expanding its other brands, including Cos, Weekday and women’s-accessories label & Other Stories.

Sales growth at the company’s so-called portfolio brands, which also include Monki and Arket, has been much stronger than at its namesake operations. Last year, their sales rose 22%, roughly double the rate of the overall company.

Cos in particular has benefited from an effort to position the brand further upmarket by making improvements to the collection, including the recent launch of upscale occasionwear by Cos Atelier, Helmersson said. H&M doesn’t break out sales numbers by brand.

This group of brands constituted 12% of the company’s 4,399 worldwide stores as of May 31, with various new openings planned for this year, including Cos launching in Mexico.

The smaller brands are also available online in dozens of markets where they don’t have a physical presence and have been introduced to the main H&M online store in some markets.

H&M recently said it would combine its Weekday and Monki brands, as well as revive its Cheap Monday affordable-denim brand several years after shutting it.

Helmersson said the move was partly intended to create a destination led by Weekday that would appeal to younger consumers.

While analysts expect H&M’s performance to improve this year, with demand for its clothing lines picking up in early summer, some say that breaking into new categories could be a challenge.

The beauty industry, for example, is already crowded and fiercely competitive, said Jelena Sokolova, an analyst at Morningstar.

Still, broadening what is on offer in the typical H&M store, while maintaining a focus on affordable and attractive fashion, “could help make H&M more exciting again,” she said.

Pharma giant Eli Lilly announced today that it is buying Versanis Bio, a startup developing drugs with applications in obesity treatment, in a transaction valued at up to $1.93 billion.

Lilly did not specify how much of the purchase will be upfront and how much will be contingent on Versanis meeting future milestones tied to clinical progress and sales. Given that Versanis is still an early-stage company, it’s likely most of the payment will be tied to meeting milestones.

Still, it’s a big number, especially considering that Oakland-based Versanis was only founded in 2021. That year, the company raised its only known venture round, a $70 million Series A led by Atlas Venture and Medicxi.

Notably, Versanis is one of a number of recently funded startups working on treatments for obesity and to promote weight loss. Using Crunchbase data, we curated a list of nine companies that last raised capital in the past year:

Investors turned their attention to biotech and health, as more than half the big rounds this week fell into that bucket. Biotech was the big winner, getting three rounds in the top five and four all told on the list. In general, it was a pretty slow week, but that is not out of the ordinary for this time of year.

1) Septerna, $150M, biotech: Biotech leads off this week, as South San Francisco, California-based Septerna closed a $150 million Series B led by new investor RA Capital Management. Septerna focuses on small molecule drugs that target proteins called G protein-coupled receptors, which control signals across cellular membranes and are often targeted by drug developers. Septerna is one of them, and is developing a treatment for hypoparathyroidism, a condition characterized by the deficiency of parathyroid hormone — which controls blood calcium and phosphate levels. Founded just last year, the company has now raised $250 million, per Crunchbase.

2) Hyperice, $100M-plus, health: Back in 2020, wellness brand Hyperice raised a $48 million Series A from noted athletes such as NBA stars Chris Paul and Anthony Davis, which puts the firm at a $700 million valuation. Since then, the Irvine, California-based company — which sells a variety of devices to help people move and recover better — has been a little quiet on the fundraising front. However, this week it locked up a $100 million-plus investment from private equity firm Atlas Credit Partners. No new valuation was given. Hyperice said it will use the cash to grow after introducing five new products in the last year. The firm has raised nearly $148 million, per Crunchbase.

3) SpyGlass Pharma, $90M, biotech: More biotech, as Aliso Viejo, California-based SpyGlass Pharma locked up a $90 million Series C led by RA Capital Management. The ophthalmic therapeutics company has developed a system that helps deliver medical therapy to address glaucoma management as well as other chronic ophthalmic diseases when implanted at the time of cataract surgery. Founded in 2019, the firm has raised nearly $110 million, according to Crunchbase data.

4) Avnos, $80M, environmental engineering: Carbon storage and removal is big business and popular in venture right now. Los Angeles-based Avnos became one of the latest in the space to raise big cash, signing “multi-year strategic and investment partnerships” worth more than $80 million with ConocoPhillips, JetBlue Ventures and Shell Ventures. The company has developed a “hybrid direct air capture” unit for carbon dioxide removal. Avnos expects to deliver commercial-ready HDAC units by the end of 2025. This is the first disclosed round, per Crunchbase, for the company founded in 2021.

4) Crossbow Therapeutics, $80M, biotech: Are you getting the idea it was a big week for biotech and health? Cambridge, Massachusetts-based Crossbow Therapeutics joined the hit parade after raising an $80 million Series A funding round led by MPM BioImpact and Pfizer Ventures. The company is developing antibody therapies to treat a broad range of cancers. Founded in 2021, this is the company’s first announced funding, per Crunchbase.

5) Arthrosi Therapeutics, $75M, biotech: San Diego-based Arthrosi Therapeutics, a clinical-stage biotechnology company, closed a $75 million Series D led by Guangrun Health Industry. Founded in 2020, the company has raised more than $117 million, per Crunchbase.

6) Bobbie, $70M, food: San Francisco-based Bobbie, an organic infant formula company, raised a $70 million Series C led by PowerPlant Partners to acquire Nature’s One, a pediatric nutrition company. Founded in 2018, the company has raised nearly $92 million, according to Crunchbase.

7) HawkEye 360, $58M, aerospace: Herndon, Virginia-based HawkEye 360, a defense company for space-based radio frequency data and analytics, closed a $58 million Series D-1 led by funds and accounts managed by BlackRock. Founded in 2015, the company has raised more than $362 million, per Crunchbase.

8) Collective, $50M, fintech: San Francisco-based Collective, which offers an online back-office platform for self-employed business owners, locked up a $50 million round from a syndicate of investors including General Catalyst, QED and others. Founded in 2020, the company has raised nearly $79 million, per Crunchbase.

9) CurvaFix, $39M, medical devices: Bellevue, Washington-based CurvaFix, a developer of medical devices to repair fractures, closed a $39 million financing led by MVM Partners. Founded in 2013, the company has raised $60 million, per Crunchbase.

How PIF’s financial power bought a seat at the table

A truce between the sport’s most powerful bodies and the Saudi sovereign wealth fund has been in the works for months but fears grow that the battle is far from over

The US PGA Tour’s pact with Saudi Arabia’s sovereign wealth fund was meant to bring a peaceful resolution to golf’s civil war. Instead, the truce has provoked greater scrutiny and given rise to questions about how the oil-rich Gulf state’s billions are reshaping golf and sport, in general.

Documents published this week showed how the truce was months in the making, with initial contact going back to at least December last year, as the Saudis pushed for a central role in the business of golf and in the established US circuit.

Golf’s civil war spanned sport, finance and politics, pitting star players against each other and drawing interventions from the likes of Donald Trump. Last year, the former US president had predicted an “inevitable MERGER” with the Saudi-bankrolled breakaway competition LIV Golf, and celebrated the “big, beautiful, and glamorous deal” when it was announced.

That happened in early June, when PGA Tour commissioner Jay Monahan and Yasir al-Rumayyan, governor of the Saudi sovereign wealth fund — or Public Investment Fund, as it is known — put their differences aside, telling the FT and other media that they had agreed to end their costly legal battles, and that their competitions would not solicit one another’s players.

They also agreed to create a new company to house the commercial activities of the PGA Tour, the European Tour and the PIF’s LIV Golf, as part of a wider ranging commitment to work together.

That’s how the PGA Tour ended its longstanding resistance to Saudi Arabia’s grand vision for the sport. This was despite the lack of revenue tied to LIV, which has failed to build a sustainable business so far.

At a hearing this week, in front of the US Senate Homeland Security Committee’s investigations subcommittee, documents released highlighted how the $650bn PIF had used its financial heft to pressure one of the richest and most powerful US sports organisers into giving it an influential position in a sport that can open doors in the business world and other corridors of power.

As such, US senators are now scrutinising the tie-up, forcing PGA Tour power brokers to defend the deal. Senator Richard Blumenthal suggested the Senate hearing transcended golf, showing “how a brutal, repressive regime can buy influence — indeed even take over — a cherished American institution simply to cleanse its public image”.

In Blumenthal’s words, the Saudi regime had “killed journalists, jailed and tortured dissidents, fostered the war in Yemen, and supported other terrorist activities, including 9/11”.

PGA board member Jimmy Dunne’s response was telling: “My fear is if we don’t get this agreement, [the PIF] have a management team that wants to destroy the Tour.”

Although the PGA Tour and the PIF have agreed to end their highly public legal battles, they are yet to reach a definitive agreement.

“I have no idea how the peace deal will look,” said English golfer Lee Westwood, a former world number one who joined LIV last year.

PIF has emerged as one of the most aggressive sovereign wealth funds betting big on sport. Institutional investors increasingly view sport as an asset class in its own right, targeting lucrative media right and events revenues. Hence, sovereign wealth funds, which have access to long-term capital, are joining private equity firms in putting money into clubs and leagues.

This month, the Qatar Investment Authority took a stake in the owner of Washington’s professional basketball and hockey teams, a first for sovereign wealth fund money in US sport.

The PGA Tour has stressed that it will retain its position of authority, even though al-Rumayyan is set to chair the new company that the PGA Tour plans to establish with PIF. The tour, a tax-exempt non-profit organisation, would hold a majority stake in the new entity that would be bankrolled by the PIF.

Monahan, who has been taking leave for medical reasons, is designated to be the entity’s chief executive, with the tour appointing a majority of its board.

PGA Tour chief operating officer Ron Price has argued that the framework agreement is beneficial because it gives the US circuit control over operations and strategy. Saudi funding will also give the tour the firepower to invest in players, events, venues and technology, he wrote recently for The Athletic. Price stressed that the PIF will be a non-controlling, minority shareholder.

But a year before relenting to Saudi pressure, Monahan had posed a moral question to golfers considering a future beyond the PGA Tour. He referenced the 9/11 hijackers, most of whom were Saudi citizens. “As it relates to 9/11, I have two families that are close to me that have lost loved ones and so my heart goes out to them,” Monahan said in June last year. “I would ask any player that has left, or wants to leave, have you ever had to apologise for being a member of the PGA Tour?”

Monahan has since appeared to go back on the spirit of those words. Meanwhile, the PGA Tour, which suspended players lured by LIV, has come under antitrust scrutiny.

LIV golfer Phil Mickelson, for one, has taken the opportunity to respond. Mickelson, who despite ditching the PGA Tour had earlier called the Saudis “scary motherfnckers”, reacted to news of the merger between the PGA and LIV in a forthright tone: “Awesome day today.”

And, whether or not the PGA/PIF deal goes ahead, Saudi billions have already changed golf. The PIF has exposed the vulnerability of the non-profit PGA and European tours to the disruptive ambitions of a kingdom aiming to become both a tourist destination and a much bigger player on the world stage.

Qatar’s bold bet on US sport

Qatar has made no secret of its ambitions in global sport. It owns French football club Paris Saint-Germain, last year hosted the men’s World Cup, and in 2019 the World Athletics Championships — both rescheduled to bend summer sporting traditions to the realities of the Gulf state climate.

This week, however, it revealed one of its boldest bets yet: a $200mn investment by the Qatar Investment Authority into the Washington, DC-based sports and media portfolio, Monumental Sports and Entertainment. Beyond taking a 5 per cent stake in the company — which owns a trio of pro basketball and ice hockey teams — the investment marks the first such injection by a sovereign wealth fund into professional sports in the US.

The milestone reflects the rapid transformation of the American sporting sector, which only four years ago opened the floodgates to institutional investment. Since 2019, three of the Big Four professional leagues have amended bylaws to permit private capital stakes, and late last year, the National Basketball Association became the first to greenlight sovereign wealth investments.

But why the QIA, why MSE, and why now? The sports firm, valued at $4bn, was founded by former America Online executive Ted Leonsis and today owns basketball’s Washington Wizards and Mystics, ice hockey’s Washington Capitals, an assortment of esports teams and local sports channels, as well as the district’s Capital One Arena.

The group has received less of a fanfare than other notable US billionaire sports empires. Unlike Fenway Sports Group, Kroenke Sports and Entertainment, and Harris Blitzer Sports and Entertainment, MSE is entirely concentrated in one city, and Washington’s largely itinerant workforce makes it unique among major US sports markets.

Still, Leonsis and Co. are keen on expansion: they have bid for Major League Baseball’s Washington Nationals, though the sale is reportedly on pause through the ongoing season. And while the QIA does not receive a board seat or any operational control through their investment, a financial injection into an institution in the US capital may ultimately be a stroke of diplomacy.

Washington’s hometown paper, the Jeff Bezos-owned Post, has expressed scepticism about the investment, calling it “sportswashing” and noting the gulf between Monumental’s own embrace of LGBTQ inclusivity and the fact that homosexuality is outlawed in Qatar. Further, it was the Post’s own columnist, Jamal Khashoggi, who was dismembered in 2018 at a consulate of Saudi Arabia, Qatar’s rival in gulf state sports investments.

As both Qatar and Saudi Arabia pursue ever more ambitious sports investments, the reception in US of the MSE investment (and in turn, the firm’s performance), will be worth watching closely.