FT : Sotheby’s offers to pay sellers interest as art market struggles

Sotheby’s offers to pay sellers interest as art market struggles
Patrick Drahi-owned auction house contends with heavy debt burden in shrinking market

Sotheby’s is offering sellers interest of 7 per cent to delay paying out their sale proceeds as the auction house grapples with a cash squeeze in a poor art market.

In mid-2025, Sotheby’s introduced an “extended settlement terms payments option”, according to three people familiar with the scheme.

One of the people said that the auction house had offered to pay a rate of 8 per cent following the sale of more than $30mn of property if the seller allowed Sotheby’s to hold on to some of their funds for at least six months. It has since reduced the rate on offer following cuts by the US Federal Reserve last year.

Sotheby’s had previously retained some clients’ money beyond the period specified in its terms and conditions, a second person familiar with the company said.

Franco-Israeli billionaire Patrick Drahi acquired the auction house in 2019 through a leveraged buyout, and Sotheby’s has had to contend with a heavy debt burden at a time when demand for fine art has been in decline.

The global art market shrank 16 per cent between 2022 and 2024, according to a report by Art Basel and UBS, before eking out growth of 4 per cent last year.

Sotheby’s annual pre-tax loss more than doubled to $248mn in 2024. Accounts for that year showed that it had more than $1bn of “client payables” outstanding — money it owes to clients — which was lower than $1.7bn at the end of 2023. Its total sales in 2025 were $7.1bn, up from $6bn the year before.

Drahi is known for his flair for financial engineering and has also used various methods to delay supplier payments at his troubled Altice telecoms empire.

Sotheby’s carries a junk credit rating due to its high debt load, with rating agency S&P warning in November that it could lower it further if the auction house is “unable to address its upcoming debt maturities in a timely fashion”.

The auction house had previously been delaying making payments to some clients because of poor cash flow at certain times of year, the second person familiar with Sotheby’s said.

“It was extremely common because of the extraordinary financial strain that the company was under in 2024 and 2025 for the company to routinely just hold client payments at the end of difficult quarters,” they said.

Monies due to clients then would sometimes be held over to the start of the next quarter, the person said. “Many clients who are wealthy wouldn’t notice this.”

Sotheby’s said the “extended settlement terms payment option” was “one of a number of innovations” that offered clients “greater optionality and financial flexibility”.

The company said: “Sotheby’s is in a particularly strong financial position having led the art market in 2025 . . . We operate in accordance with longstanding market and industry practices and offer clients a range of settlement options.”

Sotheby’s standard terms state that it will pay sellers 45 days after a sale, assuming the buyer has paid. Rival Christie’s pays out after 35 days.

One art adviser whose client sold a collection of dozens of items at Sotheby’s said their client received payment eight months later than they had anticipated.

The auction house’s terms said it would only pay the seller once it had received payment for every item in the collection, a position the adviser characterised as unusual.

A person familiar with Sotheby’s practices said that the payment terms were “a function of specific contract considerations and not the normal course of business”.

FT : Boss of state-controlled Poste Italiane defends €10bn bid for Telecom Itali

Boss of state-controlled Poste Italiane defends €10bn bid for Telecom Italia
Matteo Del Fante: ‘We have demonstrated that we are a market company’

Poste Italiane’s chief executive has defended the former postal monopoly’s €10bn bid for Telecom Italia after criticism that the deal would return the business to a state-backed national champion.

Poste last month offered to buy the telecoms group in a cash-and-share deal, having already amassed a 27.5 per cent stake that made it the largest shareholder.

Matteo Del Fante said Poste would be a good owner of Telecom Italia (TIM), which was privatised in 1997 and whose shares have more than doubled over the past year.

“Since we acquired the TIM stake the company outperformed . . . we are confident we deserve the same trust now that we have launched the takeover offer,” he said in an interview.

Poste’s bid has drawn criticism from some analysts and industry experts, who argue it amounts to a step back towards state control of large enterprises, years after both the post and telecoms groups were privatised.

“We have demonstrated that we are a market company,” said Del Fante. 

A tie-up between the two groups would leave Rome with a diluted stake of just over 50 per cent in the combined entity.

“This deal would increase the group’s free float as the state’s stake in the merged entity falls from 65 per cent to 50 per cent and new shares are issued to TIM investors,” said Del Fante. “In that sense, it is a move towards the market.”

Since Telecom Italia’s privatisation, it has burned through chief executives as its equity value slumped under the weight of a vast debt pile. To reduce that debt burden, in 2022 it carved out its fixed-line network and sold it to KKR in a €22bn deal.

Its share price fell from €8 at its peak in 2000 to €0.25 at the beginning of 2025 before Poste began building its stake.

Poste Italiane, meanwhile, has been on an upward trajectory since it was partially privatised in 2015, with Rome retaining a 65 per cent stake. Its share price has tripled to €21 over the past decade.

During his nine-year tenure, Del Fante focused on transforming Poste from a postal business into a technology and services group.

Poste already owns Poste Mobile, a mobile business with about 5mn customers, which would be folded into the TIM brand after the deal. The combined group would overtake Vodafone-Fastweb as Italy’s largest operator after their merger.

Under the offer TIM shareholders would receive €0.167 in cash plus 0.0218 newly issued Poste shares for each TIM share tendered.

While some analysts have said Poste may have to sweeten its bid to win over TIM investors, Del Fante said his company’s offer — representing a 9 per cent premium to the pre-bid share price — was a good deal for shareholders.

“The offer is fair, we plan to start paying a dividend, something TIM shareholders have not received for five years,” Del Fante said. 

Poste said it had paid €9bn in dividends over the past nine years and that it expected these to continue at a similar level. TIM shareholders would get a 2 per cent payment shortly after completion, followed by 4 per cent in 2027, rising to about 8 per cent in 2028, Del Fante said.

“If you own TIM today and accept the offer, you continue to share in the upside . . . The point is not just the value we offer upfront, but the chance to benefit from future synergies and a stronger growth trajectory under Poste,” he said.

Del Fante expects the deal to close by September. The combined group would become Italy’s largest employer, with more than 150,000 staff.

“Poste has historically been a consumer business, TIM is stronger with corporate clients and public administration. That would broaden our customer base and strengthen our technological offering,” said Del Fante.

FT : Weight-loss drugs and Mars bars: Novo Nordisk’s comeback bid

Weight-loss drugs and Mars bars: Novo Nordisk’s comeback bid
The maker of Wegovy and Ozempic wants to learn lessons from consumer groups to crack the US market

Two years ago, Novo Nordisk was Europe’s most valuable company, as excitement about its weight-loss treatment catapulted it to $650bn in market capitalisation.

Now the maker of Wegovy, the obesity medication, and Ozempic, the diabetes treatment, is no longer even among the continent’s top three pharmaceutical groups. Its shares have halved over the past year, leaving it worth far less than the UK’s AstraZeneca or the Swiss pharma giants Roche and Novartis.

The chief executive appointed to stop the rot says Novo failed to get to grips with the changing dynamics of the market, notably the US, where drugs are sold much more like consumer products than in Europe.

Mike Doustdar, an Iranian-born and US-raised Austrian national, has vowed to move on from a mindset that treated obesity “single-handedly from the element of medical need”.


As the company tries to step up efforts to sell directly to consumers in the US, which accounts for more than half its sales, Novo is looking to veterans from consumer goods giants such as Mars, H&M and Procter & Gamble to help it catch up with its great rival Eli Lilly — whose market value briefly surpassed $1tn last year.

The issue for the company is whether a stalwart of Danish industry can transform itself into an American-style group convincingly enough to turn the tables.

The issue for the industry is what the broader consequences are of US-led consumerisation — and what the options are for European groups at a time when President Donald Trump has a pharmaceutical agenda of his own.

“We have had to learn new skills we did not have,” says Doustdar as he contemplates the battle between Wegovy and Ozempic, which account for almost all the company’s revenues, and their equivalents at Lilly, Zepbound and Mounjaro.

“The whole thing that happened with social media, that had not happened with diabetes, cancer or inflammation before,” the Novo chief adds in an interview.

“One patient tells another patient about a fantastic drug and then the patient themselves go[es] to procure it without [necessarily following] what the doctor says.”

By the spring of last year, Novo Nordisk was in need of a new direction.

It had been taken by surprise by the deluge of demand for weight-loss drugs, nor was it well versed in selling pharmaceuticals direct to consumers. Lilly, steeped in the ways of the US market, where medicines are routinely advertised on television, was able to steal a march on its rival.

Novo modelled its sales forecasts on Saxenda, an older drug based on liraglutide, a less effective compound than semaglutide, the active ingredient in both Wegovy and Ozempic.

But after the US Food and Drug Administration approved Wegovy in 2021, there were more prescriptions for the drug in five weeks than Novo had received in five years for Saxenda, according to a person familiar with the company’s operations.

So-called compounding pharmacies, chemists that produce custom-made drugs using the active ingredient of branded medicines, pounced after the FDA declared a shortage in 2022, churning out their own versions of weight-loss drugs to 2mn US patients in the year to November 2024.

Novo has since invested over $4bn to step up US production and has launched lawsuits against US compounders. Wegovy and Ozempic were removed from the shortage list in 2025.

But Lilly’s expertise in the US market and Zepbound’s record have been difficult to fight.

“Given in the US drugs can be directly promoted to patients, the combination of Zepbound’s stronger weight loss and perceived better tolerability, combined with Lilly’s strong and consumer-focused marketing, have seen Lilly taking the dominant new patient share,” says James Gordon, head of European pharma research at Barclays.


One industry veteran says the closest comparison to the consumer focus on weight-loss drugs was the launch of Viagra in the 1990s.

Against that backdrop, Novo’s board decided it was time for chief executive Lars Fruergaard Jørgensen to go.

They turned to Doustdar, the executive overseeing all international operations outside the US. It marked the ultimate promotion for an executive who joined Novo more than 30 years ago as an office clerk in Vienna.

Novo’s challenges are both a warning and opportunity for the wider pharmaceutical industry.

Online retailers and social media recommendations are now far from being just a US phenomenon: a plethora of such sellers now market weight-loss drugs in the UK, continental Europe and Asia.

Doustdar says that while obesity remains a chronic, multi-faceted condition sometimes serious enough to require hospitalisation, some uses of weight-loss drugs “are borderline cosmetic treatment” that “five or 10 years ago, we were not discussing”.

With industry analysts calling on the group to learn from the fast-moving consumer goods business, Poul Weihrauch, chief executive of confectionery to petcare group Mars — and Danish national — joined Novo’s board as an observer in March, with an expectation that he will be made a non-executive member next year. His brief is to boost consumer engagement for Novo’s obesity portfolio.

The group’s new US manager is Jamey Millar, a veteran of Procter & Gamble as well as Optum, the UnitedHealth Group subsidiary that is one of America’s largest pharmacy benefit managers. Helena Saxon, another new board member, is an executive at H&M.

To focus more on cosmetic demands, Novo has partnered with telehealth companies Hims & Hers, Ro, Weight Watchers and LifeMD to sell directly to consumers. It also runs an in-house ecommerce platform, NovoCare.

It has recently introduced rolling monthly subscriptions through its telehealth partners, providing higher discounts to customers who sign up for longer periods.

Such moves are part of its attempt to adapt to the changing nature of the US market as Trump pressures pharma groups to cut prices in the country to the levels charged in Europe and elsewhere.

Novo is counting on higher volumes to make up for the loss of premium prices. In February it announced plans to slash the list prices of key drugs in the US by up to half, starting from next year. Wegovy currently costs around $349 a month in the US for a 2.4mg dose, and just above £200 in the UK.

There have been some successes. Novo’s introduction of the Wegovy pill in January qualifies as one of the most successful drug launches in pharmaceutical history, racking up 600,000 US prescriptions thanks to its low starting price and first-mover advantage.

But its monopoly in oral weight-loss treatments was shortlived; Lilly’s rival product, Foundayo, went on sale last week.

“We anticipate equally competitive strategies from Lilly,” says Evan Seigerman, an analyst at BMO Capital Markets. “Lilly has successfully demonstrated skill in leveraging second-mover advantage to win in markets.”


Other challenges loom outside the US. Semaglutide is coming off patent in countries including India, Canada, Turkey, Brazil and China this year — opening the door to cheaper generic competition in markets that account for around a third of the world’s obese adults, according to health data consultancy Iqvia.

India in particular is a key market, according to Emil Larsen, Novo’s vice-president of international operations, the post previously held by Doustdar. Novo currently serves more patients in Denmark, home to just six million people, than it does in the world’s most populous country.

“There’s already a crowded marketplace [in India] and it will get more crowded,” Larsen says. “Our ambition is to remain competitive at where the prices land over the coming months.”

Reversing Novo’s recent decline will require a company that is at heart Danish to become much more American in its modus operandi, a reality that has caused some unease in the small Scandinavian kingdom.

Ahead of Doustdar’s appointment, outside investors wanted a US-focused executive to take the reins. But within the country, some asked why a Danish executive did not get the job.

“There are some private shareholders who don’t understand why the chief executive can’t be a Danish national,” says Jesper Kongskov, a prominent business commentator in Denmark. “But this is a big international company . . . we’re such a small country that with big companies we have to look outside to find the right CEOs.”

As part of the boardroom manoeuvrings that ousted Doustdar’s predecessor Jørgensen last May, the Novo Nordisk Foundation — the non-profit that is the pharma group’s largest shareholder — installed its chair, Lars Rebien Sørensen, as chair of the company too.

That was also a departure from Danish tradition. Foundation owners, commonplace at big Danish companies, are generally expected to have an arm’s length relationship to allow board independence.

Some of the roughly 680,000 Danes who own Novo stock directly would also like the annual meeting to be held in Danish.

Doustdar acknowledges national sensitivities, noting that although he had never previously worked at headquarters he has spent his entire career at Novo, operating in Switzerland, Austria, Turkey, Malaysia and Greece.

“I was appointed as a lifetime person not to change the culture of the company,” Doustdar says.

“I was appointed to bring speed, patient-centricity, competition knowledge — that exists in all companies but more when you’re in the front lines than when you’re in the centre.”

Still, the first act of his tenure, announcing the loss of 9,000 jobs last September, including 5,000 in Denmark, was not particularly well received by Danish shareholders. That was followed in February by deep cuts to Novo’s guidance on sales and profits for the current financial year, which it expects to fall by as much as 13 per cent.

Doustdar has signalled a willingness to boost growth through acquisitions, attempting to gatecrash its US rival’s efforts to buy US biotech Metsera last year.

Pfizer prevailed in the end, but Novo acquired US liver disease biotech Akero Therapeutics for $5.2bn, a move Doustdar says is part of a strategy of expanding into treatments for obesity-related diseases.

That has prompted questions about whether Novo will expand beyond its core therapeutic area of obesity and diabetes, which accounted for more than 90 per cent of its 2025 sales. Some investors worry that the group’s focus is too limited, though one fund manager observes that the sector “isn’t as narrow as people think it is”.

“There are so many different streams within obesity and comorbidities that you can treat,” adds the investor, who first bought Novo shares two decades ago.

Others are more concerned that the pharmaceutical industry may be learning too much from its counterparts in the consumer goods business.

Dr Marie Spreckley, a weight management researcher at the University of Cambridge, said the consumerisation of weight-loss drugs should not detract from the fact that such medicines remain “medical interventions”.

Without professional oversight, she notes, patients could suffer consequences such as bone density and muscle loss, and adds that the focus on consumer sales “leads to questions about inequality . . . People living in more deprived areas tend to be affected more by obesity and weight problems.”

As Doustdar battles to modernise Novo’s approach to marketing, reinvigorate its sales growth and restore its standing with investors, the halcyon days of 2023 feel a long time ago.

“You could say they believed they could walk on water. That’s what success does to you,” says one Danish business executive of Novo’s fall from grace. “They can turn things around but it will not be an easy task.”

WSJ : AI Is Using So Much Energy That Computing Firepower Is Running Out

AI Is Using So Much Energy That Computing Firepower Is Running Out
AI companies are rationing offerings and products, rankling users—a warning sign for a boom that depends on rapid adoption

  • The artificial intelligence gold rush is rapidly drying up the supply of computing power, leading to product issues and reliability problems.
  • Anthropic experiences frequent outages and limits user token usage, while OpenAI scrapped its Sora app to free up compute.
  • CoreWeave raised prices over 20% and extended contracts, as spot-market Nvidia GPU rental costs rose 48% in two months.

The artificial intelligence gold rush is rapidly drying up the supply of the one resource that AI developers can’t do without: computing power.

The sharp capacity crunch has caused consternation among power users, forced companies to scuttle products and led to reliability problems. The issues are a warning sign for the AI boom, as they may limit the utility of powerful new AI tools just as massive amounts of users have begun to rely on them to boost productivity.

Over the past few months, demand has exploded for “agentic” AI, autonomous tools that use the technology to independently perform tasks, from writing software code to scheduling house tours for real-estate brokers. Companies have been scrambling to secure the availability of computing capacity needed to serve a growing base of customers who are also significantly increasing their AI use.

“Everyone’s talking about oil, but I think what the world is mainly short of is tokens,” said Ben Pouladian, an engineer and tech investor based in Los Angeles. A token is a unit of measurement in AI to track how much computing resources are being used for a task. “AI is at this point no longer just some chatbot that we ask for a recipe while we stand in front of the fridge. It’s orchestrating tasks, it’s getting smarter,” Pouladian said.

All of it points to a classic problem that has popped up in technology booms throughout history, from the 19th-century railroad expansion to the telecom and internet explosion of the early 2000s. Demand is growing far faster than companies are able to access resources and build out infrastructure. Historically, price increases have been among the only ways to address a supply crunch, but such a move could be perilous for frontier AI companies, who are in a ferocious competition to gain users.

Hourly rental prices for GPUs, the microchips used to train and run AI models, have surged since the fall. Anthropic, the maker of popular chatbot Claude and viral coding app Claude Code, has been plagued recently by frequent outages. The company has begun metering computing supply to users during peak hours, but the rollout has been marred by customers who have complained that they are reaching the limit far too quickly.

OpenAI scrapped its Sora video-generation app in part to free up computing resources to power coding and enterprise products that would work on a new AI model, code-named Spud, The Wall Street Journal reported.

Token use in OpenAI’s API—a platform where mostly enterprise users access its software—rose from six billion a minute in October to 15 billion a minute in late March.

“I do spend a lot of time trying to find any last-minute compute available,” Sarah Friar, OpenAI’s chief financial officer, said in a recent public video interview with an investor. “We’re making some very tough trades at the moment on things we’re not pursuing because we don’t have enough compute.”

Toward the end of last year, CoreWeave, one of the largest publicly traded AI cloud companies, raised prices by more than 20% and started asking smaller customers to sign contracts committing them to use the company’s services for at least three years, up from one year before. Bank of America analysts reinstated coverage of the company with a “Buy” rating late last month, saying demand for its services is likely to outstrip supply through at least 2029.

Spot-market prices to access Nvidia’s GPUs, or graphics processing units, in data-center clouds have risen sharply in recent months across the company’s entire product line, according to Ornn, a New York-based data provider that publishes market data and structures financial products around GPU pricing.

Renting one of Nvidia’s most-advanced Blackwell generation of chips for one hour costs $4.08, up 48% from the $2.75 it cost two months ago, according to the Ornn Compute Price Index.

“There’s a massive capacity crunch that’s unlike anything I’ve seen in the more than five years I’ve been running this business,” said J.J. Kardwell, chief executive of Vultr, a cloud infrastructure company. “The question is, why don’t we just deploy more gear? The lead times are too long. Data center build times are long, the power that’s available through 2026 is already all spoken for.”

Since mid-February, outages for systems across Anthropic have become so common that some of its enterprise clients are switching to other AI model players.

David Hsu, founder and CEO of software development platform Retool, said he prefers to use Anthropic’s Opus 4.6 model to power his company’s AI agent tool because he believes it is the best model for enterprise. He recently changed to OpenAI’s model to power his company’s agent. “Anthropic has just been going down all the time,” he said.

The reliability of core services on the internet is often measured in nines. Four nines means 99.99% of uptime—a typical percentage that a software company commits to customers. As of April 8, Anthropic’s Claude API had a 98.95% uptime rate in the last 90 days.

“That is not normal,” said Amir Haghighat, co-founder and chief technology officer at Baseten, an AI inference startup. “Think about AWS, databases, RDS or Stripe—these need to be very resilient with a very high uptime. But that is not the world we live in when it comes to AI. That’s not the quality of service that you want to be getting from the company that’s providing intelligence for your application.”


The frequent outages at Anthropic are happening as the AI lab is experiencing explosive growth. At the end of 2025, the company hit $9 billion in annual run rate, which means the company was on track to make that amount of revenue in the next 12 months. By February, that figure ballooned to $14 billion. Two months later, it doubled to $30 billion.

In late March, Anthropic suddenly announced it would limit the amount of tokens that users could burn through during peak hours from 5 a.m. to 11 a.m. Pacific Time on weekdays. Customers have taken to social media to complain about the change. “I haven’t hit my Claude Code terminal limit in weeks but this week I hit it in like 45 minutes,” wrote one user on X.

“We’ve been working hard to meet the increase in demand for Claude,” wrote Boris Cherny, creator and head of Claude Code, on X. “Capacity is a resource we manage thoughtfully and we are prioritizing our customers using our products and API.”

WSJ : Iran’s Nuclear Program Has Survived, Posing Problem for U.S. Negotiators

Iran’s Nuclear Program Has Survived, Posing Problem for U.S. Negotiators
Vice President JD Vance said U.S. needs a commitment that Iran won’t seek to revive atomic program

  • Iran retained most nuclear bomb tools after five weeks of U.S. and Israeli bombing, challenging U.S. negotiators.
  • Iran still holds nearly 1,000 pounds of near-weapons-grade uranium, half buried at its Isfahan nuclear site, according to the U.N. atomic agency.
  • White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said getting Iran to give up highly enriched uranium is a top U.S. priority.

Iran survived five weeks of punishing U.S. and Israeli bombing with most of the tools it needs to make a nuclear bomb intact, officials and experts say, posing a challenge for U.S. negotiators as the issue once again bedevils talks with Tehran.

Vice President JD Vance pointed to Iran’s nuclear ambitions on Sunday as the core dispute after the two sides were unable to reach an agreement during 21 hours of talks in Islamabad, Pakistan.

“The simple fact is that we need to see an affirmative commitment that they will not seek a nuclear weapon and that they will not seek the tools that would enable them to quickly achieve a nuclear weapon,” he said.

Iran blamed the failure of talks on Washington’s refusal to back down from what it described as maximalist demands.

The problem for the U.S. is that two rounds of fighting have dismantled much of Iran’s nuclear program, but they have not yet delivered blows that would put a weapon out of reach.

U.S. and Israeli strikes in recent weeks destroyed labs and research facilities that the two countries say Iran used for its nuclear weapons-related work, such as gaining the knowledge it needs to build a warhead. They also further damaged its enrichment program, taking out a site for making yellowcake—the raw material that can be turned into enriched uranium.

But Iran still likely has centrifuges and a site deep underground where it may be able to enrich uranium, experts say. Crucially, it held on to its stockpile of nearly 1,000 pounds of near-weapons-grade uranium—half of it buried in caskets in a tunnel deep under its Isfahan nuclear site, according to the United Nations’ atomic agency.

“Iran is not going to trade those away easily. Its demands are going to be higher than they were” during talks in February for surrendering the material, said Eric Brewer, a former White House official who worked on Iran during the first Trump administration.

President Trump weighed a military operation to seize Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium during recent weeks of fighting, The Wall Street Journal has reported. But such an operation would be complex and dangerous.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said ahead of the talks that getting Iran to give up its highly enriched uranium was at the top of the priority list for U.S. negotiators. “We hope that takes place through diplomacy,” she said.

For now, U.S. officials have said Tehran isn’t enriching uranium and that the fissile material is being monitored by satellite. U.S. and U.N. atomic agency officials have said there is no sign the highly enriched uranium has been moved since last June’s U.S. and Israeli attacks.

It isn’t clear whether talks between Washington and Tehran will continue in the coming days during what is supposed to be a two-week window for diplomacy. Either side could choose to resume the military conflict that paused Tuesday.

If the U.S. does seek a deal, it will have to find a way to address Iran’s nuclear threat, along with Tehran’s control of the Strait of Hormuz, which gives it the ability to squeeze the global economy.

Much of the damage to Iran’s nuclear program occurred during the 12-day war last year. The U.S. dropped its Massive Ordnance Penetrator bombs on two uranium enrichment sites—Fordow and Natanz—and destroyed nuclear-related buildings at Isfahan with Tomahawk missiles. Vance said Sunday that the U.S. had destroyed Iran’s uranium enrichment sites.

During the recent five weeks of fighting, the U.S. focused on striking Iran’s missile stockpiles and launchers and other conventional military assets, which it said threatened to make it too costly to attack Iran’s nuclear program in the future. Israel, meanwhile, went after the nuclear program.

Israeli officials say they struck a range of sites where they believe that Iranian nuclear-weapons work was going on, including labs, a university, a facility outside Tehran and a building at the Parchin military site where Iran was conducting high-explosives tests. They also targeted Iranian nuclear scientists—as they did in last year’s war—although they haven’t said who or how many.

Yet, Iran likely still has most of what it would need to build a bomb, including centrifuges and its stockpiles of enriched uranium. The tunnels at Isfahan are also thought to house an enrichment site that Iran declared last June but that has never been inspected, according to current and former officials familiar with Iran’s nuclear program. The International Atomic Energy Agency says the site may not be operational. Iran also has a highly fortified tunnel complex in the so-called Pickaxe Mountain, near the Natanz facility, where it could potentially do nuclear work out of reach of even the most powerful U.S. weapons.

Iran has previously refused to give up its uranium-enrichment program. Iran claims its nuclear activities are for peaceful purposes. White House special envoy Steve Witkoff has said Tehran can demonstrate that by ending its domestic enrichment and accepting delivery of enriched uranium from abroad.

During talks in February, Tehran offered to dilute its 60%-enriched uranium to at most a 20% level, according to people involved in the talks. While it takes around a week to enrich 60% material to weapons grade, it takes a few weeks to enrich 20% to that level. Under the 2015 nuclear deal, Iran’s uranium stockpile was capped at 3.67% enrichment for 15 years.

The key uncertainty about the attacks on Iran’s nuclear program since Feb. 28 is the extent of damage done to Iran’s ability to build a nuclear warhead. It takes experienced scientists to safely mold volatile fissile material into uranium metal for a warhead and to build in other crucial components.

Experts are almost certain that Iran has never built a warhead. It would be difficult for Iran to do it now without being detected, given the deep intelligence penetration Israel and the U.S. have gained over Iran’s nuclear work.

The extent of the damage Israel has done to Iran’s ability to weaponize its nuclear program isn’t yet clear, but it may be significant, said David Albright, a former weapons inspector who closely follows Iran’s nuclear program as the president of the Institute for Science and International Security.

FT : Elon Musk hits legal losing streak ahead of showdown with OpenAI’s Sam Altm

Elon Musk hits legal losing streak ahead of showdown with OpenAI’s Sam Altman
The world’s richest man has lost in cases ranging from shareholder fraud to claims that his rivals stole AI secrets

Elon Musk has suffered the worst streak of courtroom losses in a career punctuated by legal battles, showing the pitfalls of his aggressive litigation tactics and polarising public persona ahead of a showdown with Sam Altman and OpenAI later this month.

Since January, Musk has faced setbacks in cases about OpenAI allegedly stealing secrets from his xAI start-up, advertisers’ boycott of X and two suits about his 2022 takeover of the social media group, then called Twitter, including a fraud verdict that could cost him billions of dollars.  

The billionaire’s legal team has responded by complaining about “bias” against the world’s richest man. They have objected to a Delaware judge “liking” a LinkedIn post critical of Musk and challenged the Twitter verdict over what they called a “bizarre and highly questionable” joke involving the marijuana reference “4.20” in a jury document.

As he prepares for the trial against OpenAI later this month in Oakland, California, in which Musk claims the AI start-up sold out its charitable purpose, the seemingly endless courtroom battles have exposed Musk to embarrassing questions and irked his own staff. 

Some lieutenants see them as a hindrance to improving performance at X and xAI and organising their merger with SpaceX ahead of its initial public offering, planning for June at a $1.75tn valuation.*

“For the most part, Elon is a pretty thoughtful, reactive CEO,” said one lawyer who has worked with him. “He takes advice more than expected, especially on the technical nature of the law at critical junctures.”

“But he has a lot going on in his life, which is a distraction,” they added. “This ego pissing match with Sam at OpenAI, for example.”

Musk has tried to leverage his massive, freewheeling social media presence to reinforce his case against OpenAI, deriding his opponent as “Scam Altman” and pledging to donate any damages in the case to charity. 

But the series of recent decisions highlights the pitfalls of Musk’s online persona, with his frequent posts opening him to legal attacks and alienating swaths of public opinion.

His lawyers in the Twitter fraud case argued that he could not receive a fair trial in San Francisco — following his alliance with US President Donald Trump — because “we have so many people in the [jury pool] who hate him”.

Musk wants to convince a jury in Oakland to block OpenAI’s transition to a for-profit company and remove Altman, who he accuses of abandoning its original non-profit charter mission to enrich himself. 

Altman and Musk, who co-founded OpenAI together, have become increasingly bitter rivals since Musk walked out of the lab in 2018.

The $852bn start-up failed to get the case dismissed. But the judge’s early comments have been unsympathetic to Musk’s claim for $134bn in damages, which she described as like “pulling these numbers out of the air”.

Marc Toberoff, Musk’s attorney, said his client’s public commitment to donate any damages to OpenAI’s charitable arm made it “abundantly clear” that the case “has always been about OpenAI’s abuse of the public’s trust, not Elon Musk”.

Evidence introduced in the case could be salacious. The judge upheld a motion to exclude questions about whether Musk used ketamine at Burning Man in 2017, the desert festival in Nevada he attended during important negotiations with OpenAI executives.

Lawyers for OpenAI repeatedly asked Musk in a deposition “Do you know what rhino ket is?”, referring to a mixture of ketamine and amphetamines taken recreationally. Musk said no and that he did not recall taking it.

William Frentzen, a lawyer for OpenAI, argued the information was relevant because “Burning Man was when a lot of these decisions were made . . . If you asked me if I was on ketamine at my jazz fest, I’d be able to say no.”

However, the judge denied a motion to exclude evidence related to Shivon Zilis, an “at times a romantic” partner of Musk and mother of at least four of his children. She was a board member at OpenAI until 2023 and is still an executive at Musk’s brain-implant company, Neuralink.

Musk has meanwhile accused Altman and OpenAI’s president Greg Brockman of “conspiracy to commit fraud and steal the charity”.

He posted excerpts from Brockman’s journal, uncovered in discovery, where he wrote “this is the only chance we have to get out from Elon . . . Financially, what will take me to $1bn?”

“Greg’s diaries haven’t helped them,” said a partner at a venture capital firm invested in both OpenAI and Musk’s rocketmaker SpaceX. “But [OpenAI] have the least sympathetic counterparty in the world with Elon.”

Musk’s unpopularity has become an increasing problem for his high-priced legal team, often led by Alex Spiro of Quinn Emanuel, which has gained attention for its aggressive tactics.

The billionaire faced a backlash since donating more than $250mn to Trump’s 2024 campaign and leading government cost-cutting at the so-called Department of Government Efficiency, which has hurt Tesla’s sales.

Musk’s abrasive style and championing of rightwing views have made him a divisive character for jurors, while his unbridled use of social media has cost him.

The Twitter fraud verdict in March centred on tweets in which Musk threatened to walk away from the $44bn takeover to gain leverage in negotiations, even though he knew he could not back out. 

“It may not have been my wisest tweet,” Musk said during his testimony in the case. A judge in March allowed a separate investor lawsuit about Musk’s tweets ahead of the Twitter buyout to proceed.

Spiro has urged the judge to review the outcome, accusing the jury of bias and of mocking Musk to “send a message” on their verdict form. 

In a computation of how much his tweets depressed the Twitter share price when he threatened to walk away, the jury wrote the number $4.20 in blue ink compared with black for the rest of the list.

Musk himself posted a picture on X of the judge presiding over the case wearing a red bow tie, writing: “Probability of me getting a fair trial if this is how the judge dresses is 0.0%.”

Until recently, Musk’s legal record had been formidable.

His lawyers fended off an earlier Tesla shareholder lawsuit about whether he had really “secured” funding to buy the carmaker when he announced the bid in a tweet, at $420 a share — a reference to April 20, a day celebrated by marijuana smokers.*

Musk also won cases ranging from objections to the 2016 merger between Tesla and struggling SolarCity, which was run by Musk’s cousin, to a defamation case brought by a British cave diver in 2018 after the billionaire called him “pedo guy” during efforts to rescue trapped children. 

And he successfully fought to have his $56bn Tesla pay deal reinstated after it was voided by a Delaware judge, who ruled the company’s board was too close to Musk.

Musk recently sought revenge against the judge, Chancellor Kathaleen McCormick. Quinn Emanuel successfully argued she should remove herself from current cases involving Musk and Tesla after she “supported” a LinkedIn post celebrating the San Francisco fraud verdict. McCormick has said she did not know how her account liked the post.

The post read: “Sorry, Elon. Sorry, Quinn Emanuel. Thanks $2 billion for your help in this trial. It was a pleasure working against you.”

Having moved Tesla’s incorporation to Texas, he still faces a Delaware suit in which shareholders claim Musk put his personal ambition to buy Twitter above the interests of investors in the carmaker. 

Some experts say shareholder lawsuits are serving to impose accountability on Musk when Trump-appointed regulators have softened their enforcement.

However, Musk’s $630bn fortune means he can easily swallow these judgments.

“Damages are not just supposed to be compensation, they are meant to be prohibitions,” said Ann Lipton, a law professor at the University of Colorado. “Musk can pay the money without even noticing, which gives him permission to violate the law that most of us don’t have.”

FT : Could US pensioners be swallowed by the next credit wave?

Could US pensioners be swallowed by the next credit wave?
Trump wants retirees’ money in private credit, but it’s a bad idea at this stage of the cycle

Donald Trump wants average Americans to start investing in private credit. A couple of weeks ago, the president cleared away legal barriers to employers that want to let workers put their 401(k)-retirement money into riskier but potentially higher-yielding assets like private equity, real estate funds and so on. Big institutions and rich people do it, he says, so why shouldn’t everyone else?

I would argue that the government shouldn’t be encouraging average Americans to go into such alternative investments right now because we are likely entering the very tail-end of a risky credit cycle that could blow up. This isn’t a radical statement. It has become widely understood that, following the global financial crisis of 2008, risk moved from the formal banking sector into the private credit market. But to understand why this moment is so very delicate, it helps to go back further in history for lessons, to the junk bond crisis of 1989-90.

Former Biden administration Securities and Exchange Commission chair Gary Gensler, now a professor at MIT who teaches among other courses “Disrupting Wholesale Finance”, explains it thus.

Levered lending credit cycles move in waves. For the past five decades or so, each wave has been about 15-20 years long. And each has had a transition point that was associated with a new kind of debt financing.

In every one of these cycles, Gensler says, “a fulcrum opens up gaps in the marketplace”. Financial innovators pile in, and incumbents begin to lose market share to new players who are doing new kinds of deals.

Start with the first wave: the leveraged buyout story, which began in the mid to late 1970s, when a small network of individual financiers like Henry Kravis, George Roberts, Thomas Lee, Teddy Forstmann and others developed the junk bond market. Fortunes were made and eventually lost amid the collapse of Drexel Burnham Lambert in 1990; the savings and loan crisis that stretched into the mid-1990s; the recession of 1990-91, and a Gulf war that — interestingly, given what’s happening now in Iran — coincided with that slowdown.

After that bubble burst, there was eventually a second wave of debt financing, based not on individuals doing specific deals, but rather on emerging alternative investment platforms like Blackstone and Carlyle that didn’t depend on a single star player. These institutions built “platforms”, as Gensler puts it, that could invest in more sectors and assets at any given time, raising far more money.

Some of the largest institutions eventually took their management companies public (Blackstone did an IPO in 2007), which in turn created more pressure for them to keep growing to please shareholders. This wave coincided with the development of broadly syndicated loans, collateralised loan obligations, and a tech boom. It ended — roughly two decades later — with the global financial crisis, which was of course housing related but amplified by leverage in the CLO market.

The third wave — the one we are in right now, which began right after the financial crisis — is about the rise of private credit as an asset class that is now held by pension funds, college endowments, family offices, and increasingly, insurance companies and high-net-worth individuals. We are now nearly two decades into this wave, which happens to coincide with both a tech bubble and a war in the Middle East.

“As Mark Twain purportedly said,” Gensler concludes, “‘history may not repeat itself, but it often rhymes.’” True enough. There is an argument that the structure of private credit is different today than in the LBO era, for example, with gates and closed-end funds, and that trouble in the market would not necessarily be systemic.

Whether that’s true or not, private capital firms are looking to juice the credit boom further by opening the $10tn US 401(k) market to riskier alternative assets. And Trump, who wants the market up at all costs, intends to help them do that.

The question for investors and policymakers who care about average Americans is this: are average retirees poised to be the “slow deer”, as the old Wall Street argot has it, of this late-stage credit cycle? In other words, are they the less sophisticated market participants who get eaten?

I think the answer is yes. Warning signs about the risks of levered lending, which has worked its way deep into the financial system, are high. There is ample evidence that private levered loans are trading well below par. Funds are increasingly repacking ageing assets and trying to offload them in the burgeoning secondary market. Experts from Jamie Dimon to Jerome Powell have been pointing out the risks in the private credit markets for some time, and the dangers they pose to the financial system and real economy. Even Trump’s own Treasury department is talking to state insurance commissioners about the private loans piling up on their portfolios.

There’s no question we are at the tail-end of another private credit cycle. The only question is how it ends, and who gets hurt. When the junk bond market collapsed, it was worth a little over 3 per cent of the entire US economy at the time. Today, private credit is about $2tn, more than double that figure as a percentage of the US economy. Add to that global conflict, energy inflation and an AI bubble. Slow deer, beware.

>>> Q1 2026 EARNINGS MONITOR | WK 16 | 13-17 APR

◼ Q1 2026 EARNINGS MONITOR | WK 16 | 13-17 APR

══════════════════════════════════════════════════

MON 13 APR ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
GS US Goldman Sachs BMO | EPS $14.8e | Rev $15.1Be
FAST US Fastenal BMO | EPS $0.30e +15% YoY | Rev $2.2Be

TUE 14 APR ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
JPM US JPMorgan Chase BMO | EPS $4.62e | Rev $44.1Be
C US Citigroup BMO | EPS $1.85e | Rev $21.2Be
WFC US Wells Fargo BMO | EPS $1.24e | Rev $20.8Be
JNJ US Johnson & Johnson BMO | EPS $2.58e | Rev $22.7Be
BLK US BlackRock BMO | EPS $12.09e | Rev $6.5Be

WED 15 APR ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
ASML NA ASML Holding Pre-mkt CET | Rev €8.2-8.9Be | GM 51-53%
BAC US Bank of America BMO | EPS $0.83e | Rev $25.2Be
MS US Morgan Stanley BMO | EPS $2.27e +18% | Rev $15.8Be +12%
PNC US PNC Financial Services BMO | EPS $3.52e | Rev $5.5Be
MTB US M&T Bank BMO
PGR US Progressive BMO

THU 16 APR ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
2330 TT TSMC Pre-mkt Asia | Rev $34.6-35.8Be | +38% YoY
TSCO LN Tesco FY Results | Rev GBP36.3Be | Op profit GBP2.9-3.1Be
ABT US Abbott Laboratories BMO
BK US BNY Mellon BMO
CFG US Citizens Financial BMO
MMC US Marsh & McLennan BMO | EPS $3.22e +5.2% YoY
PEP US PepsiCo BMO | EPS $1.55e | Rev $18.9Be
PLD US Prologis BMO
TRV US Travelers BMO
USB US US Bancorp BMO
SCHW US Charles Schwab BMO
NFLX US Netflix AMC | Rev $12.17Be | OPM target 31.5%

FRI 17 APR ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
ERICB SS Ericsson 07:00 CEST | Networks margin guided 49-51%
TFC US Truist Financial BMO
FITB US Fifth Third BMO
STT US State Street BMO

══════════════════════════════════════════════════
NON-STANDARD REPORTERS (diff. exchange/fiscal cycle)
BALH SE Helvetia Baloise CHX annual results - TBC
300750 CH CATL A-share annual report window
600519 CH Kweichow Moutai A-share annual report window
002415 CH Hikvision A-share annual report window
762 HK China Unicom H-share reporting cycle
1098 HK Huadian New Energy H-share reporting cycle
S68 SP Singapore Exchange SGX Q3 FY results window
══════════════════════════════════════════════════
Source: Bloomberg, Company IR | NB: All times local market