TheChek News Flow

ChatGPT apps are a key piece of OpenAI’s long-shot bid to replace Apple. Many aren’t yet useful.

Sam Altman wants OpenAI to have an app store to rival Apple’s. Early tests suggest he’s got a long way to go.

If ChatGPT’s more than 800 million users want to buy groceries from Instacart, create a playlist with Spotify or find a hike on AllTrails, now they can do so inside the chatbot instead of opening an iPhone app.

That is a baby step toward what some argue could be a massive shift in how we use devices in the age of artificial intelligence: Having chatbots complete tasks instead of typing into smartphone apps. In theory that threatens Apple’s impregnable walled garden.

Lucky for the iPhone maker, traditional apps are too capable to be replaced quickly. OpenAI’s app strategy, launched this fall, is reminiscent of the early days of ChatGPT: An occasional wow moment surrounded by dysfunction, according to Wall Street Journal tests.

Instacart worked seamlessly. Many other apps can only answer basic questions, and are designed to steer chatbot users back to more capable smartphone apps or websites. Error messages and confusion are common.

In a media interview in December, Altman said people are too focused on the rivalry between ChatGPT and Google’s Gemini chatbot. He said his bigger foe is Apple, and OpenAI’s ambitious plans bear that out.

ChatGPT is morphing into an operating system. And OpenAI is designing a family of devices with ex-Apple designer Jony Ive. One of those, Altman said, he hopes will replace the iPhone.

Whoever provides the gateway to our favorite online services owns one of the most valuable tollbooths in cyberspace, said Gil Luria, an analyst with D.A. Davidson. Today that is Apple, and it charges developers hefty fees. As more consumers begin their online journeys talking to a chatbot, OpenAI’s position strengthens, he said.

An OpenAI spokeswoman said the company aims to release new products early so consumers and developers can learn how they work. She said OpenAI isn’t a company that waits for perfection, instead it improves products rapidly with frequent updates.

The Journal spoke to 12 app developers working with ChatGPT. All said they put their apps inside the chatbot because so many of their own users are there.

“How do these apps get invoked is the question, and could they be invoked from ChatGPT?” said Sachin Kansal, Uber’s chief product officer. “But apps still need a place to run, so I don’t think the role of Apple or Android gets diminished.”

Using Uber’s mini-app inside ChatGPT took more time than using the iPhone app, Journal tests showed. It estimates ride costs and ETAs, but can’t connect users to a ride directly. A button redirects users to an Uber webpage to book. But then a user must retype pickup and drop-off locations.

Connecting to Uber, as with other ChatGPT apps, was often difficult. Asked to “use the Uber app,” ChatGPT said it “can’t directly access the Uber app.” Users must know to begin their query “@uber” and phrase it precisely. An Uber spokeswoman described its ChatGPT app as a pilot and said the company is experimenting with different ways to best serve consumers.

A priority for smart digital assistants has long been booking restaurant reservations, dating back to when OpenTable was a launch partner for an app called Siri, before Siri was purchased by Apple. When the Journal asked ChatGPT to use OpenTable to make a reservation, it led to error messages. Booking a table via OpenTable’s website took seconds.

When the Journal asked ChatGPT to use Tripadvisor to find a cheap ski vacation, maps flashed on screen for 30 seconds before giving error messages. “Tripadvisor is being a little useless,” ChatGPT said, backfilling an answer with web search results.

The trick to OpenTable’s and TripAdvisor’s apps, spokeswomen for the companies said, was to know what they could do and phrase chatbot prompts appropriately. OpenTable is tuned to discover new restaurants and Tripadvisor to compare hotel options.

Yet the point of connecting a chatbot to apps should be to simplify tasks, or have AI complete them itself. Adding extra steps defeats the purpose.

News Corp, owner of the Journal, has a content-licensing partnership with OpenAI and a commercial agreement to supply news through Apple services.

One of ChatGPT’s better app experiences is with Instacart. In one test, ChatGPT created a weekly menu for a family of vegetarians and flawlessly filled a Costco grocery cart with all the ingredients. A checkout button goes directly to a user account on Instacart’s webpage, where one can pay and leave delivery instructions for the courier.

Instacart pays a transaction fee to OpenAI based on the value of the basket at checkout, a potentially lucrative way OpenAI can cash in on its popularity.

Instacart’s success probably isn’t an accident. Before she became a top OpenAI executive this past summer, Fidji Simo was Instacart’s chief executive. After switching sides, she broke a development logjam between the two companies.

Instacart’s chief technology officer, Anirban Kundu, recalled in an interview how OpenAI’s original plan was a nonstarter. The AI company had pushed Instacart to share inventory data so it could work out grocery orders entirely inside ChatGPT. But pricing and availability of perishable goods can change hourly, so Instacart wanted the chatbot to call its servers for real-time data.

When Simo joined OpenAI, her new company acceded to the wishes of her old company, Kundu said. The Instacart team worked out of the OpenAI office, sharing a room and a Slack channel with their OpenAI counterparts while they worked through multiple iterations of the integration over three months, said Kundu.

More integrations like Instacart’s should worry Apple. Meanwhile, it is easier to open up an iPhone app.

DAX:

MDAX:

SDAX:

Industry insiders have warned the process could take years — and cost tens of billions of dollars

Venezuela’s opposition leader had a simple message for the US energy industry last March: Come and get our oil.

Speaking by video to executives at CERAWeek in Houston, María Corina Machado promised that Venezuela’s oil sector, nationalised in the 1970s and further expropriated under Hugo Chávez in the 2000s, would be thrown open to private capital.

Production would be “fully driven by the private sector”, the assets of state-owned oil company Petróleos de Venezuela (PDVSA) would be auctioned and investors would be protected by new contracts as well as international arbitration and oversight from the IMF and World Bank.

Machado took the same message to financiers last October in Washington, according to Luisa Palacios, the former chair of Citgo, the US refining arm of PDVSA, who is now at Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy. “I’ve seen the numbers, I have seen the plan,” Palacios said. 

While Machado now appears to have been sidelined, the prize she offered of Venezuela’s “unimaginably vast” oil wealth is fully in play after the US ousted Nicolás Maduro from power last weekend.

But restoring Venezuela’s oil industry after years of corruption, mismanagement and decay will be neither quick nor cheap. Industry insiders warned it could take years, and tens or even hundreds of billions of dollars, at a time when US oil majors are under pressure from weaker crude prices.

Donald Trump said a US takeover of Venezuela’s oil industry would generate “tremendous amount of wealth” that could support a new government and compensate US oil companies who had their assets seized under Chávez.

Venezuela holds about 17 per cent of global crude reserves, but production collapsed by more than 75 per cent between 2013 and 2020. The US now pumps more than 10 times as much oil.

Even so, access to Venezuela’s fields would help US majors replenish reserves and provide heavy crude for Gulf Coast refineries that were designed decades ago to process oil from Venezuela, Canada and Mexico, rather than the lighter shale grades produced domestically.

US imports of Venezuelan crude sat at just 135,000 barrels a day (b/d) at the end of last year, down from 1.4mn b/d in 1998. Energy Aspects, a consultancy, estimated US refineries could readily absorb an additional 1mn b/d. Increased flows would also reduce reliance on Canada, whose exports to the US have tripled over the same period.

Control over Venezuelan supply would also allow Washington to squeeze China, currently Caracas’ largest buyer. “We’re not going to allow the western hemisphere to be a base of operations for adversaries, competitors, and rivals of the United States, simple as that,” Marco Rubio, US secretary of state, told NBC’s Meet the Press on Sunday. 

Palacios argued the primary beneficiaries should be Venezuelans themselves. “Oil is central to this story, but not necessarily because the US wants to secure oil resources,” she said. 

“The way this country makes its living in international markets is by selling oil. With the destruction of the oil industry came the destruction of the economy.” 

Reviving exports is essential to restoring fiscal revenues, reinvigorating the economy and slowing the exodus of migrants across Latin America and into the US, an argument likely to resonate within a Trump administration focused on immigration. 

Selling oil to the US rather than China would also improve cash flow: much of the exports to Beijing are used to service at least $10bn in outstanding loans.

The rest of the China-bound oil is snapped up by smaller, independent “teapot” refineries, which have benefited from cut price deals and stand to lose out if shipments are diverted elsewhere.

“China’s teapots have been slurping up discounted oil. Good for them. It’s over,” said Bob McNally, president of Rapidan Energy. “Are they going to be happy? No. Do I think it threatens their oil supply? Absolutely not . . . They can get the heavy sour oil from other places.”

Among American companies, Chevron is uniquely positioned. It employs about 3,000 people in Venezuela and operates under a special licence allowing it to export heavy crude to US Gulf Coast refineries. 

“There was always a view within Chevron that it would stay in Venezuela because at some point this exact scenario is going to happen,” said a former executive. “They have a very deep knowledge of the patch. They have always got that plan on the shelf, they don’t even really need to dust it down,” the person added. 

The appeal is clear: Venezuela’s reserves are large, mapped and carry no exploration risk. Advances in technology have lowered the cost of producing heavy crude, making it competitive with US shale. Analysts say output could rise by up to 500,000 b/d relatively quickly.

Meanwhile, ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips are seeking a total of $10bn in compensation following the seizure of their assets in the early 2000s. 

“It would be premature to speculate on any future business activities or investments,” said a ConocoPhillips spokesman. “We will continue with our collection efforts, which are made in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations.” 

Exxon did not respond to a request for comment.

When Darren Woods, Exxon’s chief executive, was asked by Bloomberg in November if he would be interested in returning to Venezuela, the CEO said: “We’ve been expropriated from Venezuela two different times. We have our history there.”

“We’d have to see what the economics look like. So I wouldn’t put it on the list or take it off the list”.

Several other western firms, including Spain’s Repsol, France’s Maurel & Prom, and Italy’s Eni, may also be interested. Repsol and Eni have been lobbying the Trump administration for a special licence to enable them to receive payment in Venezuelan oil for the gas they provide to the country.    

The industry’s past weighs heavily. “Assurances on contracts are critical,” Palacios said, noting repeated discrepancies between promises and practice.

Companies will be reluctant to commit capital without clarity on what a new regime in Caracas looks like and that it will not be tempted by expropriations even in the far future.

“It’s just 20 to 25 years ago they were kicked out. So, once burned twice shy. They’ll be cautious,” said McNally. “Nothing’s going to happen overnight. It’s a long and winding road.”

Palacios added that international oil companies would also struggle to partner with PDVSA because of its poor safety and environmental record. “They need to be able to operate in an independent way so they can control their procurement and their operations,” she said. 

Finally, she said Venezuela would have to find a route back to sources of international finance after being cut off when US sanctions were imposed in 2017. Venezuela’s high risk might mean “a significant increase” in the cost of borrowing, she added. 

The scale of decay is uncertain. Since a 2002-2003 oil workers’ strike, PDVSA has been used as a cash machine for the military, leading to an exodus of skilled staff and crumbling infrastructure, wrote Helima Croft, RBC Capital Markets analyst. Untangling Chinese and Russian interests will also be fraught.

Croft told the FT that “snatching and grabbing Maduro may have been the easy part. The harder challenge is how do you build this country back. Our record on nation-building is anything but spectacular”. 

Donald Trump’s toppling of President Nicolás Maduro opens door to US investors eyeing world’s largest crude reserve

former top Chevron executive is raising $2bn for Venezuelan oil projects as investors race to answer Donald Trump’s call to pour “billions of dollars” into the country after the US toppled its president Nicolás Maduro.

Ali Moshiri, Chevron’s former head of Latin American operations, told the Financial Times his Amos Global Energy Management fund had identified multiple Venezuelan assets and was talking to institutional investors about a private placement to kick-start investment.

US special forces’ capture of Maduro on Saturday and Trump’s call for US companies to revive Venezuela’s oil industry had created a sudden opportunity, Moshiri said.

“We have been anticipating this breakthrough for a while and our $2bn private placement memorandum is ready to go with several investment targets identified,” he said in an interview.

“I’ve had a dozen calls over the past 24 hours from potential investors. Interest in Venezuela has gone from zero to 99 per cent.”

The US assault on Caracas and Trump’s warning that Washington would dictate terms to Venezuela’s new leaders has raised the prospect of a corporate rush into a country boasting the world’s largest oil reserves.

It marks a potential new era for the companies. The last major opening of a country’s reserves was in 2009 in Iraq, where auctions for oilfields drew multibillion-dollar bids six years after the US invasion.

But the three US oil majors have cautiously greeted Trump’s call for investment due to concerns about political instability, a history of expropriated assets in Venezuela and the vast sums required to boost production.

One industry insider said the chief executives of ExxonMobil, Chevron and ConocoPhillips were blindsided by the US military action.

“None of the industry players that have the capital and the expertise to invest in Venezuela were advised or consulted prior to either the removal of Maduro or the president making his statements yesterday,” said the insider.

Amos’s fundraising effort will mark an early test of Wall Street’s appetite to bankroll the rebuilding of Venezuela’s decrepit oil infrastructure, which has been degraded after years of mismanagement and sanctions.

The memorandum for investors prepared by Amos, which has been seen by the FT, is dated December 2025. It shows the fund intends to acquire 20,000-50,000 barrels a day of oil production and 500,000 barrels of reserves from the state oil company Petróleos de Venezuela (PDVSA). It anticipates an exit within five to seven years and a return on investment of two and a half times.

Other private investors have also signalled their potential interest in Venezuela following the US intervention.

Harold Hamm, the US shale tycoon and a prominent donor to Trump, told the FT his company Continental Resources would consider investing in Venezuela under the right circumstances.   

“While we do not have any immediate plans with respect to Venezuela, we believe the country has significant resource potential and with improved regulatory and governmental stability we would definitely consider future investment,” he said. 

While private investors are expected to move quickest in heeding Trump’s call, industry analysts said only US majors would have the heft and expertise to rebuild the nation’s vast and complex heavy oil sector.

Chevron, which is already operating in the country under a special licence provided by the Trump administration, is considered the best placed producer to step up investments. But it said it was focused on employee safety and integrity of its assets.  

Its rival ExxonMobil has not responded to requests for comment about its intentions in Venezuela. It is still seeking payment of a $1.6bn arbitration award linked to the expropriation of assets almost two decades ago by Hugo Chávez, Maduro’s predecessor.

ConocoPhillips, which won an $8.4bn arbitration award over the expropriation of its Venezuelan assets, said it would continue efforts to collect its award and it was “premature” to speculate on future activities.

While Trump was explicit in calling for US companies to invest, his secretary of state Marco Rubio left the door open to producers from allied countries — but not those from America’s enemies.

China is Venezuela’s biggest oil customer and its companies, as well as Russian companies, have been investors in its upstream.

“What we’re not going to allow is for the oil industry in Venezuela to be controlled by adversaries of the United States,” he told NBC News’ Meet the Press. “Why does China need their oil, why does Russia need their oil, why does Iran need their oil? . . . This is the western hemisphere, this is where we live.”

Some European companies with operations in Venezuela — Spain’s Repsol and Italy’s Eni — could invest if US sanctions were lifted, said analysts. But they would wait to see whether the fiscal terms for non-US companies were favourable.

Moshiri has attempted to buy Venezuelan assets in the past. In 2022 he signed a joint venture with Gramercy Funds Management to invest in the offshore Gulf of Paria. Amos later agreed to buy some Venezuelan oil and gas assets owned by China’s Sinopec.

Moshiri said the deals fell through because the investment fund was not able to obtain a licence from the Biden administration.

“Now with Trump administration, which is more commercially friendly and economically driven, we are starting a new fund and are very confident.”

The dynamic M&A scene is telegraphing significant shifts, redefining the future of brands, their creative direction, and market strategies.

The M&A scene in Italy was particularly brisk up until the end of the year, and other potential deals may be on the horizon. Perhaps even more interesting, the acquisitions have observers wondering about the future of the brands as the new investors may veer from the well-trodden path, forge alliances, install another C-suite or new designers, and cater to a different customer.

For example, Etro is entering another phase with a new pool of investors, including the Turkish Rams Global; Mathias Facchini, who helms Swinger International, and SRI Group, which are buying the minority stake owned by the Etro family. This will lead to the exit of the founding family. L Catterton remains the majority shareholder, after acquiring the stake in July 2021.

While Fabrizio Cardinali remains chief executive officer and there is no indication that Etro would ever want to close its fashion division, under the lead of Marco De Vincenzo, sources believe the arrival of Rams Global signals the owners’ increased interest in the brand’s residential projects. Last year, Etro and Rams Global unveiled plans to design the interiors of the Tower Rams Beyond in Istanbul. It was followed by another residential project in Phuket, by Amal Development in collaboration with The One Atelier.

Speaking of Swinger International, which owns the Genny brand, it has also been especially active, taking control in December of Philippe Model Paris from Alessandro Benetton’s 21 Invest, pointing to a new focus for the Italian fashion group on the footwear division.

This is a segment that continues to interest investors. Before Christmas, international venture capital and private equity firm HSG said they were acquiring a majority stake in Golden Goose, with investment company Temasek and True Light Capital joining as minority investors.

Funds advised by Permira, as well as other existing shareholders including Carlyle, retain a minority stake in the footwear brand.

Silvio Campara remains CEO, while former Gucci executive Marco Bizzarri has been named non-executive chairman. Since HSG has backed more than 160 companies in its portfolio that have listed on public stock exchanges, an IPO could once again be in the cards for Golden Goose, after it pulled the plug on its listing in June 2024. Speaking with WWD after the new investor structure was revealed, Campara said “the international and diverse pool of investors” would be an asset in any potential future IPO.

There’s been a lot of activity in the eyewear segment as well, with giant EssilorLuxottica’s increased investments in the med-tech segment.

While rumors swirl around the company, which could potentially take a stake in the Giorgio Armani group, as per the late designer’s will, EssilorLuxottica in December acquired Signifeye, a Belgian ophthalmology platform that operates 15 eye care centers and clinics in the Flanders region. Before that, it took over ophthalmology platform Optegra, just the latest in a string of such deals.

In addition to frames, lenses, medical instruments and science-backed eye care solutions, the group’s offer includes AI-powered innovative technologies and wearables, teaming with Meta to create performance AI glasses. In addition to its own brands ranging from Ray-Ban and Oakley to Persol, the group produces and distributes eyewear for companies spanning from Giorgio Armani, Brunello Cucinelli and Burberry to Chanel, Michael Kors, Moncler, Prada and Ralph Lauren, to name a few.

Consolidating two major players in the eyewear industry, and creating yet another dominant force in luxury and lifestyle eyewear, in September, VSP Vision, parent company of Marchon, entered into an agreement to acquire Marcolin from PAI Partners and other minority shareholders. Marchon produces for brands ranging from Calvin Klein and Donna Karan to Ferragamo and Karl Lagerfeld, while Marcolin has a perpetual license with Tom Ford and produces for brands including Zegna, Christian Louboutin, and Max Mara to name a few.

In December, Safilo Group, which produces for brands including Boss, Carolina Herrera, David Beckham and Tommy Hilfiger, among others, said it had acquired 25 percent of U.K. eyewear firm Inspecs Group, providing the Italian eyewear company with a new strategic opportunity.

BasicNet Group is also moving into a new segment by acquiring beachwear specialist Sundek, a deal unveiled in December, a month after the group inked a deal to buy Woolrich from L-Gam.The deals follow the appointment of Alessandro and Lorenzo Boglione, the sons of the company’s founder and president Marco Boglione, as co-CEOs. The publicly traded, Turin-based company already comprises brands like Kappa, Robe di Kappa, K-Way, Superga, Sebago and Briko.

The sale of Twinset last June to Borletti Group and Quadrivio & Pambianco, manager of the Made in Italy Fund II, by The Carlyle Group led to the exit of CEO Alessandro Varisco and the appointment of Gabriele Maggio as his successor in December.

While Lorenzo Bertelli has taken on the role of executive chairman of Versace and Emmanuel Gintzburger at the moment remains CEO of the brand, eyes are on the future of its creative direction. Since the exit of Dario Vitale and the closing of the acquisition by Prada Group in December, sources say Pieter Mulier, creative director of Maison Azzedine Alaïa, is expected to be joining the Milan-based brand — unless Alaïa parent Compagnie Financière Richemont puts the brake on the designer’s move.

It will also be interesting to see how LuisaViaRoma CEO Tommaso Maria Andorlini will stabilize the business and retool the strategy of the troubled e-tailer following the exit of investor Style Capital last month.

There are still a few brands that sources say are being shopped around, from Sergio Rossi and Caruso, both under the Lanvin Group, to Missoni. In November, sources said Authentic Brands Group, the owner of Reebok, Champion and other high-profile brands, was in exclusive negotiations to purchase the Italian label. The Missoni family owns 58.8 percent of the shares of the company while an investor, Fondo Strategico Italiano, bought a 41.2 percent stake in 2018. WHP Global was said to also be looking at Missoni, but its interest has reportedly waned.

Observers also wonder about the Roberto Cavalli brand since owner Hussain Sajwani is shifting his attention to a project that is aiming to support the growing demand for data storage and processing related to AI and other technologies. In June, the company issued a statement that it is “working to find the best path to growth, which includes exploring strategic partnerships.”

What will happen to Aeffe is another open question. The financially troubled fashion group, which controls the Alberta Ferretti, Moschino and Pollini brands, in October filed an application for access to the negotiated settlement of the group business crisis (CNS). Sources believe executive chairman Massimo Ferretti, who has been rationalizing the group’s retail network and embarked on a cost-cutting strategy, may be eyeing a delisting. In addition, former Burberry and Ferragamo CEO Marco Gobbetti, who joined Aeffe’s board in August, has been working to find new growth avenues that could even lead to a sale.