WSJ : Hegseth Vows to Put U.S. Weapons Production on Wartime Footing

Hegseth Vows to Put U.S. Weapons Production on Wartime Footing
Bureaucracy puts military in danger of falling behind rivals, defense secretary says; contractors told to speed production

  • The U.S. military plans to overhaul its weapons acquisition process to accelerate purchases and broaden its supplier base.
  • Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced that the new strategy, “Arsenal of Freedom,” will streamline program offices and encourage investments to shorten development timelines.
  • The Pentagon seeks to bring in more technology companies, which has created tension with traditional defense contractors.

Pentagon leaders are putting their weapons suppliers in the crosshairs.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said Friday that the U.S. military will shake up the way it buys weaponry, equipment and software by making purchases more quickly, and from a broader range of potential suppliers. The plan would streamline Pentagon program offices, develop incentives for new investments and potentially box out suppliers that miss deadlines.

Hegseth said the overhaul was needed to break the cycle of decadelong weapons- development timelines, which he said have put the U.S. military at risk of falling behind geopolitical rivals such as China. He said he would clear testing requirements that can slow purchasing and empower military officials to order commercial products on the open market when custom-made military technology takes too long.

“We need to save the bureaucracy from itself,” Hegseth said Friday at an address to dozens of defense-industry executives in Washington.

The Trump administration aims to extend Pentagon efforts to bring into the fold more technology companies, many backed by Silicon Valley investors. The push has exposed tensions between the old-guard contractors such as Boeing and Lockheed Martin—which have for decades feasted on much of the military’s nearly trillion-dollar annual budget—and a new crop of politically connected tech companies.

The Pentagon’s acquisition regime dates to the Vietnam War era, according to Steve Blank, a national security expert at Stanford University. The system worked well enough against the Soviet Union, he said, but can no longer keep up with the competition.

“China implemented a system like Silicon Valley when we were still using a system that looked like Ford or General Motors,” Blank said. “At the turn of the century, China basically had a coast guard. Now they have a larger navy than we do.”

‘Wartime speed’
Some principles of the Pentagon’s new “Arsenal of Freedom” acquisition strategy date to the Biden administration or earlier. Other proposals share similarities with Republican-proposed legislation in Congress.

Two pieces of proposed legislation, the Senate’s FoRGED Act and House SPEED Act both would encourage the military to issue contracts more quickly by skirting many of the detailed requirements that have governed past programs.

“In the defense world, you build to the terms of the contract—no more, no less,” said Jerry McGinn, an industrial-base expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. As a result, he said, the U.S. military supply chain “is not currently performing at the level that it needs to.”

Hegseth that the military is already moving at “wartime speed” to develop its Golden Dome antimissile shield and strengthen the supply of critical munitions. Deputy Defense Secretary Steve Feinberg has overseen both efforts.

“Our contractors need to change and do better,” Feinberg said Friday. “Contractors who are willing to change with us will prosper and grow. Those who don’t and resist it will be gone.”

Some military departments already have begun to overhaul their bureaucracy. The Army has started dissolving roughly a dozen “program executive offices” and reorganized them into six portfolios under more powerful executives. Officials say the goal is to thin the number of officials needed to sign off on a new contract.

The Pentagon earlier this year reorganized an office set up to deploy thousands of low-cost drones, partly because of concerns that the effort wasn’t moving quickly enough. The move shifted work from the Replicator program to a new unit called the Defense Autonomous Warfare Group, or DAWG.

Incentives and investment
Hegseth on Friday also promised new incentives to encourage companies to hit production targets and invest in new production capacity. In some cases, the U.S. has already invested directly in companies like MP Materials to guarantee a safe supply of important resources such as rare earths.

The defense industry is noticing the Pentagon’s growing preference for nontraditional contractors. Executives at several startups say that major defense contractors are pitching them on partnerships, thinking their chances are better with a new face at their side.

“We are committed to expanding the commercial business model within a streamlined and less bureaucratic acquisition framework,” said Chris Kubasik, chief executive of defense giant L3Harris, ahead of Hegseth’s speech. He cited partnerships with defense startups as a sign of L3Harris’s responsiveness to the Pentagon’s new effort.

Other Pentagon priorities could require more time to see through. Hegseth’s plan calls for the military to maintain at least two sources for critical components to promote competition and avoid supply-chain disasters. Diversifying the supply of linchpin parts has frustrated Pentagon officials for years. Weapons systems ranging from jet fighters to missiles often feature some parts made by a single U.S. manufacturer, according to supply-chain experts.

Military officials have tried before to loosen the military’s hidebound acquisition process, with mixed results. Some Silicon Valley-backed executives warned that the shake-up could slow their progress before new weapons production can pick up steam.

Andy Lowery, CEO of the air defense company Epirus, said the streamlined structure could complicate his company’s effort to secure a final contract for counterdrone technology after years of Army tests.

“I’ve seen things sit in a quagmire because nobody knows who’s in charge,” Lowery said. “It’s a risk to us.”

WSJ : Pfizer and Metsera Reach Deal Expected to Top $10 Billion

Pfizer and Metsera Reach Deal Expected to Top $10 Billion
Pfizer prevails over Novo Nordisk after an unusual bidding war

  • Pfizer agreed to acquire Metsera for over $10 billion.
  • The deal followed a bidding war with Novo Nordisk.
  • Metsera is developing a once-monthly injection, as well as pills.

Pfizer PFE 0.04%increase; green up pointing triangle has agreed to buy the weight-loss drug startup Metsera MTSR 2.00%increase; green up pointing triangle in a deal that could be worth more than $10 billion, besting Novo Nordisk NOVO.B -5.13%decrease; red down pointing triangle following a heated bidding war.

Under the terms of the cash deal, Pfizer will pay $65.60 a share upfront and a contingent value right worth up to $20.65 a share, Metsera said Friday.

In September, Pfizer had agreed to buy Metsera for up to $7.3 billion. But Novo Nordisk then took the unusual step of trying to outflank Pfizer, setting off a bidding war.

Pfizer said it expected to close the transaction after Metsera shareholders vote on the deal Thursday.

“We look forward to quickly leveraging the scale of our global clinical, manufacturing and commercial infrastructure to accelerate Metsera’s portfolio and working to bring these important therapies to patients around the world,” Pfizer said.

Novo Nordisk didn’t immediately respond to requests seeking comment.

Pfizer prevailed after increasing its bid by 5 cents a share, matching Novo Nordisk’s most-recent offer, according to a person familiar with the matter.

Metsera said a recent call from the Federal Trade Commission warning about potential risks to proceeding with a Novo Nordisk deal played a role in the decision to take Pfizer’s offer.

In light of the call, Metsera’s board determined a deal with Novo Nordisk “presents unacceptably high legal and regulatory risks to Metsera and its stockholders compared to the proposed merger with Pfizer,” Metsera said.

The fight over Metsera was unusual, because Novo Nordisk reopened the bidding after Pfizer had clinched a deal.

The duel showed the attraction of the $72 billion global obesity drug market, one of the fastest-growing categories in pharmaceuticals, led by Novo Nordisk’s Wegovy and Eli Lilly’s Zepbound injections.

Metsera promised Pfizer a foothold in the market, after Pfizer’s earlier attempts at weight-loss pills struck out during testing.

The startup is developing a once-monthly injection, as well as pills.

The drug candidates could also have bolstered the portfolio at Novo Nordisk, which has lost its anti-obesity lead to Eli Lilly. Novo Nordisk replaced its chief executive and shook up its board this year.

The FTC has already approved Pfizer’s acquisition of Metsera, Pfizer said last month. During the bidding war, the drugmaker kept working on its plans for combining with Metsera, the person said.

WSJ : Riding in a Chinese Robotaxi Is Pretty Smooth—That’s a Problem for Waymo

Riding in a Chinese Robotaxi Is Pretty Smooth—That’s a Problem for Waymo
While U.S. companies dominate their home market, other countries look to China for driverless technology

  • Chinese robotaxi companies like Baidu, Pony AI, and WeRide operate hundreds of driverless vehicles commercially.
  • Baidu has completed over 14 million rides as of August and is expanding into Europe, Asia, and the Middle East.
  • Despite rapid growth and global expansion, the robotaxi business model remains unproven, with companies still bleeding cash.

BEIJING—I got a glimpse of a technology that soon could be spreading around the world—if not the U.S.

It is a Chinese robotaxi. One of the two I tried featured executive-style chairs and ample luggage space where the front passenger would usually sit. With no human behind the wheel, it sailed smoothly through the streets of Beijing, dodging the occasional double parker or illegal turner. Soon, I almost forgot a computer program was doing the driving.

The technology and rider experience are generally similar to the U.S. driverless taxis operated by Waymo, a subsidiary of Google parent Alphabet. As Waymo and Elon Musk’s Tesla robotaxi dominate Americans’ attention, Chinese companies are building businesses in their home market while also putting stakes down in Europe, the Middle East and Southeast Asia.

All those companies hope to dominate a global market that UBS analysts say could be worth hundreds of billions of dollars someday if self-driving tech keeps advancing.

In China, three Nasdaq-listed Chinese companies—Baidu, Pony AI and WeRide—each have hundreds of robotaxis on the road operating commercial paid services without a human safety driver.

“Our vehicle’s hardware cost is much, much lower than Waymo’s. That will be a very good advantage for these Chinese companies,” said Leo Wang, Pony AI’s chief financial officer.

HSBC analysts project that China’s robotaxi fleet will grow to tens of thousands of vehicles by the end of next year. That is up from a few thousand today, with the three companies testing autonomous vehicles in around a half-dozen countries outside of China.

By contrast, Waymo is operating test vehicles in only one country outside the U.S.—Japan—with plans to launch in London. Tesla’s robotaxis operate in Austin, Texas, and still have human safety drivers.

A Waymo spokesman said the company is “the world leader in autonomous driving technology” and pointed to its extensive public disclosure about safety performance. The company is “continuously driving our costs down as we scale,” he said.

On my two rides, one with WeRide and the other with Pony AI, I found the vehicles navigated with humanlike judgments about risk. In one case, the WeRide vehicle was driving in the left lane of a two-lane street, when a human driver double-parked in the right lane and got out of his car. The WeRide software tapped the brakes, but didn’t freeze: Once the person moved toward the curb, it accelerated past the doubled-parked car.

The biggest of the Chinese operators is Baidu, a Chinese internet company known for its search engine. Baidu operates more than 1,000 driverless vehicles, mostly in China. It said it has completed more than 14 million rides as of August. Waymo said in May that its total surpassed 10 million, and it has said it is operating at least a quarter-million fully autonomous rides each week.

In July, Baidu reached a deal with Uber Technologies to deploy thousands more vehicles in Asia and the Middle East that riders will access through their Uber app. The following month, Baidu agreed with Lyft to deploy thousands of vehicles in Europe, starting with Germany and the U.K. next year, and it is looking to expand into Southeast Asia in coming months.

Americans aren’t likely to see any of the Chinese vehicles on their streets. The U.S. effectively blocks the import of Chinese electric vehicles through high tariffs, and both the Biden and Trump administrations have expressed concern about Chinese vehicles scooping up data about Americans’ whereabouts.

Industry executives say the global battle is still in its early stages, and the operations outside the U.S. and China are generally small tests. Waymo’s financial muscle and experience with a range of U.S. markets would give it an edge if it chooses to accelerate its global expansion, and the Chinese forays into Europe must contend with competition from Volkswagen.

For their part, robotaxi operators in China can tap efficient local EV factories for lower-cost vehicles, giving them the leeway to build in luxury features such as a massage chair, as in the latest Apollo Go model, or the big seat with armrests that I enjoyed in the WeRide vehicle.

“It’s not just about the tech, it’s about the passenger experience,” said WeRide’s marketing chief, Maeve Zhang. “You can interact with the vehicle to say, maybe, ‘Play me some Taylor Swift.’ ”

Another China-based global competitor is Momenta, which has drawn investment from Mercedes-Benz, General Motors and Toyota. It doesn’t make its own cars but supplies its driver-assistance software to hundreds of thousands of human-driven vehicles and collects anonymized video and data for AI to digest. It is analogous to the countless texts that power the large-language models used by chatbots.

Uber plans to use Momenta’s technology in robotaxi services in Europe, starting with Munich next year.

Robotaxi companies are augmenting the real-world videos with training in simulated scenarios that help robotaxis deal with once-in-a-blue-moon cases, said Wang, the Pony AI executive. “As long as you can come up with good synthetic data and you can mimic the reality, then it becomes a very powerful tool,” he said.

The business model for robotaxis is still unproven, as GM demonstrated last December when it scrapped its Cruise robotaxi program after $10 billion in development costs.

For Pony AI and WeRide, revenue from robotaxis, while growing, is still in the single-digit millions of dollars per quarter, and they are bleeding cash. Both companies listed their shares in Hong Kong on Thursday, adding to existing Nasdaq listings, and the shares skidded in their Hong Kong debut in a reflection of investor doubts about profitability.

Safety remains a concern. The Chinese robotaxi companies have generally avoided injury-causing accidents but have had other incidents, including a Pony AI car catching fire in May. No one was hurt.

Musk, speaking on a Tesla earnings call in October about robotaxis, said “people just don’t quite appreciate the degree to which this will take off.” But, echoing other industry executives, he said Tesla would be “paranoid about deployment because, obviously, even one accident will be front-page headline news worldwide.”

WSJ : Riding in a Chinese Robotaxi Is Pretty Smooth—That’s a Problem for Waymo

Riding in a Chinese Robotaxi Is Pretty Smooth—That’s a Problem for Waymo
While U.S. companies dominate their home market, other countries look to China for driverless technology

Chinese robotaxi companies like Baidu, Pony AI, and WeRide operate hundreds of driverless vehicles commercially.
Baidu has completed over 14 million rides as of August and is expanding into Europe, Asia, and the Middle East.
Despite rapid growth and global expansion, the robotaxi business model remains unproven, with companies still bleeding cash.

BEIJING—I got a glimpse of a technology that soon could be spreading around the world—if not the U.S.

It is a Chinese robotaxi. One of the two I tried featured executive-style chairs and ample luggage space where the front passenger would usually sit. With no human behind the wheel, it sailed smoothly through the streets of Beijing, dodging the occasional double parker or illegal turner. Soon, I almost forgot a computer program was doing the driving.

The technology and rider experience are generally similar to the U.S. driverless taxis operated by Waymo, a subsidiary of Google parent Alphabet. As Waymo and Elon Musk’s Tesla robotaxi dominate Americans’ attention, Chinese companies are building businesses in their home market while also putting stakes down in Europe, the Middle East and Southeast Asia.

All those companies hope to dominate a global market that UBS analysts say could be worth hundreds of billions of dollars someday if self-driving tech keeps advancing.

In China, three Nasdaq-listed Chinese companies—Baidu, Pony AI and WeRide—each have hundreds of robotaxis on the road operating commercial paid services without a human safety driver.

“Our vehicle’s hardware cost is much, much lower than Waymo’s. That will be a very good advantage for these Chinese companies,” said Leo Wang, Pony AI’s chief financial officer.

HSBC analysts project that China’s robotaxi fleet will grow to tens of thousands of vehicles by the end of next year. That is up from a few thousand today, with the three companies testing autonomous vehicles in around a half-dozen countries outside of China.

By contrast, Waymo is operating test vehicles in only one country outside the U.S.—Japan—with plans to launch in London. Tesla’s robotaxis operate in Austin, Texas, and still have human safety drivers.

A Waymo spokesman said the company is “the world leader in autonomous driving technology” and pointed to its extensive public disclosure about safety performance. The company is “continuously driving our costs down as we scale,” he said.

On my two rides, one with WeRide and the other with Pony AI, I found the vehicles navigated with humanlike judgments about risk. In one case, the WeRide vehicle was driving in the left lane of a two-lane street, when a human driver double-parked in the right lane and got out of his car. The WeRide software tapped the brakes, but didn’t freeze: Once the person moved toward the curb, it accelerated past the doubled-parked car.

The biggest of the Chinese operators is Baidu, a Chinese internet company known for its search engine. Baidu operates more than 1,000 driverless vehicles, mostly in China. It said it has completed more than 14 million rides as of August. Waymo said in May that its total surpassed 10 million, and it has said it is operating at least a quarter-million fully autonomous rides each week.

In July, Baidu reached a deal with Uber Technologies to deploy thousands more vehicles in Asia and the Middle East that riders will access through their Uber app. The following month, Baidu agreed with Lyft to deploy thousands of vehicles in Europe, starting with Germany and the U.K. next year, and it is looking to expand into Southeast Asia in coming months.

Americans aren’t likely to see any of the Chinese vehicles on their streets. The U.S. effectively blocks the import of Chinese electric vehicles through high tariffs, and both the Biden and Trump administrations have expressed concern about Chinese vehicles scooping up data about Americans’ whereabouts.

Industry executives say the global battle is still in its early stages, and the operations outside the U.S. and China are generally small tests. Waymo’s financial muscle and experience with a range of U.S. markets would give it an edge if it chooses to accelerate its global expansion, and the Chinese forays into Europe must contend with competition from Volkswagen.

For their part, robotaxi operators in China can tap efficient local EV factories for lower-cost vehicles, giving them the leeway to build in luxury features such as a massage chair, as in the latest Apollo Go model, or the big seat with armrests that I enjoyed in the WeRide vehicle.

“It’s not just about the tech, it’s about the passenger experience,” said WeRide’s marketing chief, Maeve Zhang. “You can interact with the vehicle to say, maybe, ‘Play me some Taylor Swift.’ ”

Another China-based global competitor is Momenta, which has drawn investment from Mercedes-Benz, General Motors and Toyota. It doesn’t make its own cars but supplies its driver-assistance software to hundreds of thousands of human-driven vehicles and collects anonymized video and data for AI to digest. It is analogous to the countless texts that power the large-language models used by chatbots.

Uber plans to use Momenta’s technology in robotaxi services in Europe, starting with Munich next year.

Robotaxi companies are augmenting the real-world videos with training in simulated scenarios that help robotaxis deal with once-in-a-blue-moon cases, said Wang, the Pony AI executive. “As long as you can come up with good synthetic data and you can mimic the reality, then it becomes a very powerful tool,” he said.

The business model for robotaxis is still unproven, as GM demonstrated last December when it scrapped its Cruise robotaxi program after $10 billion in development costs.

For Pony AI and WeRide, revenue from robotaxis, while growing, is still in the single-digit millions of dollars per quarter, and they are bleeding cash. Both companies listed their shares in Hong Kong on Thursday, adding to existing Nasdaq listings, and the shares skidded in their Hong Kong debut in a reflection of investor doubts about profitability.

Safety remains a concern. The Chinese robotaxi companies have generally avoided injury-causing accidents but have had other incidents, including a Pony AI car catching fire in May. No one was hurt.

Musk, speaking on a Tesla earnings call in October about robotaxis, said “people just don’t quite appreciate the degree to which this will take off.” But, echoing other industry executives, he said Tesla would be “paranoid about deployment because, obviously, even one accident will be front-page headline news worldwide.”

FT : Tech moguls turned away as Lisbon airport hits private jet limit

Tech moguls turned away as Lisbon airport hits private jet limit
Some delegates to Web Summit technology conference are being forced to land in Spain

Tech moguls flying on private jets to the Web Summit technology conference in Portugal are being forced to land as far away as Badajoz in Spain, as the main Lisbon airport struggles to accommodate a growing number of visitors using personal aircraft. 

Web Summit organisers have warned that the airport is turning away some private jets, after receiving complaints from some delegates about being required to use landing sites that are several hours’ drive away. 

It is the first time the event — an industry gathering with thousands of visitors across start-ups, government delegations and technology A-listers — has experienced a bottleneck, in a sign that more of its visitors are choosing to fly in privately. 

“Please be advised that there is currently a shortage of private jet slots during Web Summit at Lisbon Airport (LIS) and surrounding smaller airports,” the event organisers said. “Lisbon Airport is experiencing difficulty managing the volume of traffic, resulting in a lack of available take-off and landing slots for all operations.”

The bottleneck is partly down to more people attending the conference. Web Summit, which moved from Ireland to Lisbon around a decade ago, has ballooned into one of the tech world’s largest shows. 

The number of start-ups exhibiting at the show, which spans multiple event halls and a stadium, has grown more than six-fold in the past decade to more than 1,000 this year. 

But there is also a trend towards private jet use among tech company founders. “It’s the new Lamborghini,” said one person who works in the sector. 

Jet rental businesses have sought to cash in on entrepreneurs wanting to enjoy the trappings of their position. One company, KlasJet, advertised “tailored private and group charter flights” to the event. “Fly smarter to Web Summit Lisbon,” its Facebook advert, posted in late October, said.

Additionally, more than 75 governments will send delegations to the event this year, either chaperoning start-ups seeking investment, or as officials and ministers seek to meet entrepreneurs working in areas such as AI — often taking government or royal jets to cater for large parties.

The event organisers said, “some guests, in particular those with larger planes, have found the only viable landing slots during Web Summit are now upwards of two hours’ drive from Lisbon, including in Spain.”

“These are circumstances outside of our control, and we apologise that we cannot do more to help secure slots. We would strongly advise flying commercial into Lisbon.”

KlasJet said that the Portuguese city was “always . . . strict with their slots, even if we’re using them quite frequently during the year”. The company said that airlines typically try to book landing slots as early as possible for major events, such as Web Summit.

Lisbon is building a new airport for around €7bn, which is due to open in 2034. The airport did not immediately reply to requests for comment. The airport has been criticised in the past over its private jet capacity. 

In May, Matthew Prince, CEO of IT group Cloudflare, who is speaking at Web Summit next week and has offices in the city, wrote on X that Lisbon airport was a “shitshow”.

“There are two abandoned military bases each with twice the number of runways as LIS that they won’t even let private plane[s] use,” he added. 

FT : Pfizer wins $10bn bidding war for weight-loss start-up Metsera

Pfizer wins $10bn bidding war for weight-loss start-up Metsera
Biotech says it opted for revised offer from US pharma company after rival Novo bid raised antitrust concerns

Pfizer has clinched a deal worth up to $10bn to buy weight-loss start-up Metsera, capping a dramatic takeover battle after Ozempic maker Novo Nordisk tried to gatecrash its earlier bid.

After a week-long bidding war which was prompted by Novo submitting an unsolicited offer for Metsera in late October, the weight-loss biotech said late on Friday that it had opted to pursue a deal with Pfizer because of antitrust concerns raised by the US competition watchdog over Novo’s offer.

Pfizer’s new deal to buy Metsera values the biotech at as much as $2.7bn more than an earlier agreement from September. As part of the deal, Metsera’s shareholders will receive $65.50 a share in cash upfront and a further $20.65 a share based on certain clinical trial milestones being met.

Metsera said it had received a call from the US Federal Trade Commission warning about the unusual structure of Novo’s deal, leading it to conclude that it “presents unacceptably high legal and regulatory risks”. Novo, alongside Eli Lilly, is one of the dominant players in the weight-loss drug market with its Ozempic and Wegovy medicines.

The unusual two-step structure of Novo’s deal, which offered to pay Metsera’s shareholders more than $7bn almost immediately upon signing via a dividend, prompted Pfizer to file lawsuits to block the acquisition and drew warnings from the FTC that it “may violate” antitrust rules.

In a letter to Metsera’s board earlier this week, the FTC said it could demand “the refund of any monies paid upfront”. Metsera added on Friday that one of the risks of Novo’s deal was “that the initial dividend may never be paid or may be subsequently challenged or rescinded”.

Metsera, which was founded just three years ago and has 100 employees, has among the most promising pipelines of experimental weight-loss treatments, including a longer-acting, monthly injectable, a weight-loss pill and drugs using a different chemical mechanism, Amylin.

The takeover battle drew back and forth jousts from Pfizer and Novo. Under its new chief executive Maziar Mike Doustdar, Novo is trying to reverse a 50 per cent share price slide as investors fear it is being beaten by Eli Lilly in the weight-loss drug race. Meanwhile, Pfizer is trying to buy a foothold in the lucrative market after its medicine being developed in-house flopped in clinical trials earlier this year.

At an appearance at the White House announcing a drug pricing deal on Thursday, Doustdar said Novo had outbid Pfizer and goaded its US rival to boost its bid.

“Our message to Pfizer is: if they would like to buy the company, then put your hand in your pocket and bid higher, it’s a free market,” he said, adding that “this has nothing to do with the FTC”.

On an earnings call earlier this week, Pfizer chief executive Albert Bourla criticised Novo’s Metsera bid. “It is an illegal attack by a foreign company to do an end run around antitrust laws, taking advantage of the government shutdown.”

FT : Edmund de Waal on the ‘dangerous’ ceramics of Axel Salto

Edmund de Waal on the ‘dangerous’ ceramics of Axel Salto
The Danish artist died more than 60 years ago, but his provocative, otherworldly work makes for a compellingly futuristic exhibition

Thirty years ago, I saw the work of Axel Salto for the first time. Large vases with strange sprouting growths and dripping, sanguine glazes, something with the head of a faun, objects that looked as if they had been found on a forest floor, all crowded into a vitrine in a poorly lit museum in Copenhagen. The silent museum was full of Danish discretion. And these ceramics looked as if they were barely contained by their glass case. They wanted out. They looked dangerous.

I was writing a book on 20th-century ceramics, attempting to map why artists, potters and designers feel compelled to pick up clay. I started to read the scant texts on Salto in English. And was gripped. Here was someone who offered more than ruralist solace: someone I wanted to spend time with. And I have. The decades pass and I am still gripped by this poet who used clay, this potter who wrote that a ceramic vessel can be provocative, can express anxiety as well as delight.  

For the last few years, I have been delving deeper into Salto’s huge archives of drawings, his notebooks, writings and ceramics — and now, finally, Playing with Fire, the first major exhibition of his work in Britain, opens in November in the beautiful Chipperfield-designed galleries of the Hepworth Wakefield. Previously seen at the CLAY Museum of Ceramic Art in Denmark and at the recently opened Kunstsilo in Norway, it is my attempt to bring Salto the painter, graphic artist, textile designer, book illustrator, magazine publisher, writer of manifestos and poetry, an evangelist for play and a powerful advocate for art in children’s lives, and — above all — a fearsome artist with clay, into the glorious light.


Salto was born in Copenhagen in 1889 and studied at the Royal Danish Academy of Fine Arts. He encountered Picasso and Matisse in Paris in 1916, founded a formidable literary magazine, and then spent most of the 1920s in France. Salto began to make and design ceramics early in his career, working both with stoneware and with the Royal Porcelain Factory in Copenhagen, and it is estimated that he made over 3,000 ceramics by the time of his death in 1961.

I was determined not to curate a retrospective: Salto resists tidiness. In the archives are photographs of his own exhibitions in the 1950s, how he layered his paintings and covetable textiles, placed his pots low down or at eye level, relished surprise. So this exhibition is a series of encounters with him through his exploration of colour and line and metamorphosis. One whole section centres on play. Salto believed that you have to make a mess, that you have to pick things up and handle them and put them down and change them. So we have made a play pavilion where you can recreate his 1943 children’s book that shows tumbling acrobats and falling crockery, picking up woodblock stamps, pressing them into ink blocks and making your own images. In the other iterations of the exhibition, this space has been full of inky adults. It is a joy.

But the first encounter is the kiln. It had to be.


There is a photograph of Salto that I love. It was taken in 1956 and he is standing inside his kiln surrounded by stacked saggars, the rough protective containers in which pots are fired. He is looking at the three tall tapering forms held on a textured drum, sinister and ritualistic. The work is “Kraftens Kerne” (“The Core of Power”), and it seems to be looking back at him.

I took this image as the impetus to create a dark and shadowy room — a kiln — in which dozens of Salto’s ceramics are on open display. It feels as if these objects have just been unpacked, still in the zone of transformation that he wrote about so lyrically. They seem to be held in the point of change: glazes are caught in flux, vases swell as if about to burst. The vase, he writes, “is like a living organism; the body buds, the buds develop, and sprouting, even prickly, vases are the result of this life”. From his twenties until the very end of his life he returned repeatedly to Ovid’s Metamorphoses, translating them into Danish, illustrating them, sculpting Acteon again and again. He calls this moment of metamorphosis “the burning now”.

Surrounding Salto’s kiln are the huge black vessels I started making in Denmark last year, working with the extraordinary team at the Tommerup Ceramic Workshop. They are by far the largest vessels that I have ever made: pots to touch, to sound, to be large enough to lean against. They are made with a rough red clay that fires to a black of such density that it seems close to silver in some lights. While they were still damp I started writing into them, but the writing became scribing, marking, erasing, scribbling. I began with parts of Rilke’s Duino Elegies but soon these words disappeared into the clay, overwritten and smudged back into the surface. They hold flaws and coincidences, record the passage of fire on clay.


It all comes back to fire. In an early text Salto describes a climb up Vesuvius and the descent into the crater, the pumice stone under his feet, the moving, metallic lava, stone and fire. All kinds of things can go wrong in a kiln. If the heat isn’t evenly distributed then pots can dunt: they crack. Sometimes you discover this when you unbrick the kiln, sometimes days afterwards. And vessels can warp, move back to the state when you had just thrown them. Clay finds you out. That nudge, the fissure smoothed over by a thumb, the handle joined in a hurry, a declivity: it all comes back. Salto loves the “flaw or coincidence” that occurs in the kiln, because it holds the possibility that it “can be transformed into something beautiful and maybe point to new directions which will lead to new results”. A denser mottled glaze that might make, perhaps, the fur of a faun, a weathered rock, the broken colours of a seashell.

But more often a pot has just gone wrong.

I know a lot about this. All potters do. I built my first kiln in Herefordshire 43 years ago. It looked like a very small chapel. I built it so poorly that I found myself awake at three in the morning trying to coax the temperature higher, caulking the gaps between bricks, altering the dampers to see if I could get more pull of air through the kiln, praying. Hundreds and hundreds of pots dunted. Dozens I chucked over the hedge into the stream below the workshop. I broke several thousand.

This is common territory for all of us who use clay. But Salto understood the image of breaking is also a transformation. In the exhibition is a painting “that depicts a tray with cups falling to the ground. The painting is a depiction of the burning now, the tense and uneasy but yet strangely enchanted second it takes, from the moment when the cups start to slide until they are shattered against the ground. The falling, turning cups stop in the air for a moment like a bush that grows from the bottom cup that has already burst, but whose shards still stand in the air during the reaction of the moment of the blasting.”

Here is time standing still, the slowing of world and body and breath. There is nothing you can do to catch this cascade of cups as they fall. Your experience of this moment is both caught in the knowledge of what is happening and has happened, the slippage and the sound of breakage.

The burning moment defies the banality of a present or past or future tense. Transformation is fissile. Objects hold their transformative, burning-now in trust. If you can change you can change again. The smashed cups talk to the clay in the potter’s hand.

Breaking, dropping, falling cups are an act of remaking too.

Making and unmaking and remaking, the beginning and ending of life as clay. One thing becoming something else, becoming other. A burning, breaking, glorious, noisy, now.

FT : Can a ship-shaped Shanghai shop put wind in China’s luxury sales?

Can a ship-shaped Shanghai shop put wind in China’s luxury sales?
Louis Vuitton’s cruise liner installation is drawing crowds, but a lasting sector recovery remains elusive


As you round the corner on Shanghai’s Shimen Second Road, a giant ship appears like an apparition. Suspended from its hull, the anchor that descends to the street is in the shape of two six-foot-tall letters: LV.

“The Louis”, a ship-shaped exhibition space and store, is the brainchild of Louis Vuitton and an attempt to navigate the choppy waters of China’s luxury market. Once the driver of global growth, it is now a source of uncertainty for the world’s biggest brands.

“It’s not often you see a brand making this big an investment . . . and I know it’s not long-term,” said Grace Sze, a tourist from Hong Kong queueing to enter. “To spend that much money, I think it’s amazing.”

Louis Vuitton has not disclosed the cost of its new ship, which has an exhibition, including a robotic arm testing the hinges on vintage Louis Vuitton suitcases, a café and a gift shop where small handbags are available for Rmb15,500 ($2,104).

But the group’s owner LVMH said it had helped drive a 7 per cent year-on-year increase in China sales in the third quarter, albeit from a low base. In Shanghai, the brand says it has drawn in hundreds of thousands of visitors since it opened in June.

“It’s a lot of fun, a lot of excitement,” said LVMH chief financial officer Cécile Cabanis. “All our neighbours are very happy that it’s driving so much traffic.”


But glamorous installations like this aside, there is a persistent sense of caution in China’s luxury market. Brands are retreating to the most exclusive locations, adjusting to slower growth and changing consumer sentiment.

As a four-year property slowdown grinds on and consumer prices remain stuck in deflation, there are signs of people are reining in their spending and looking for discounts.

In their most recent results, brands insisted the market had stabilised but continued to warn about the outlook.

“Overall the macro has not changed fundamentally,” Cabanis said, citing continued pressures in the property market and around employment. “We consider it’s still going to take time until we have a rebound.”

Other luxury groups including Prada, Hermès and Kering — owner of Gucci — said they saw early signs that the Chinese market had stopped declining. But improvements came against a low base.


“Chinese consumption remains under pressure,” said Nick Anderson, an analyst at Berenberg.

From the early 2000s, China was the luxury industry’s engine of growth as rapid economic expansion fuelled a rising middle class keen to display its new wealth. By the time the Covid-19 pandemic arrived, Boston Consulting Group estimated the country made up a quarter of global demand.

But after China’s strict Covid lockdowns came to an abrupt end in 2022, the rebound in consumer spending was much smaller than expected, weighing heavily on the global luxury market, which according to Bain entered its first slowdown in 15 years in 2024.

“During the boom times [brands] overextended and covered too many cities,” said Nick Bradstreet, head of Asia Pacific retail at estate agent Savills.

Before Covid, they would target 40 to 50 cities across China and “the only discussion would be how long it’s going to take to get there”, he said. But today, they target fewer places, and the 10 biggest cities account for 70 per cent of all the country’s luxury sales.


The Louis Vuitton ship exterior is not permanent but is expected to remain in place for four years, according to a person familiar with the details. Other brands have also sought to draw in crowds with exhibitions, including a Gucci event in Shanghai this year celebrating its signature Bamboo bag, where craftspeople were flown in from Italy.

Outside, crowds of tourists stop to take photos to the extent that signs with “filming guidelines” have been put up nearby.

“It makes sense that LVMH did this while the market is down,” said one industry veteran. “The Chinese market was not improving, so they needed to do something to move the market for themselves.” 

But they also questioned its appeal to the industry’s core consumers. “The ship is fun and exciting to people who have seen it on TikTok, but would you ever see Hermès or Chanel park a cruise ship in the middle of a city?”


Anderson suggested the pre-Covid global luxury boom was driven by one-off factors, including US stimulus and the rise of the Chinese consumer. The global market for luxury goods is expected to grow between 0 and 4 per cent in 2025, according to Bain’s estimates. Between 1996 and 2024, the rate was 5 to 6 per cent a year.

Much of the outlook hinges on a handful of China’s biggest cities, and whether the huge crowds drawn to spectacles like the Louis Vuitton ship are willing to spend.

Ms Lei, visiting from Shanghai’s Pudong district, did not get anything but already has two Louis Vuitton bags, bought about a decade ago. “Now it’s a time of decline for the economy,” she said, but added: “If I like it . . . I can definitely buy it.”

FT : How this 31-year-old made $250mn in 30 months

How this 31-year-old made $250mn in 30 months
Christopher Eppinger kept trading Russian oil when sanctions meant others stopped

One day in June, a tall, clean-cut 30-year-old, wearing shorts and Loro Piana loafers, ambled into La Guérite, one of the most exclusive restaurants in one of the most exclusive towns in France. Tables here are so coveted that even the wealthiest of its clientele book weeks in advance and have to wait in line under the sweltering sun to make the short crossing to the tiny Mediterranean island off the coast of Cannes where it is located. But the young man strolled straight to the front of the queue, on to the first available boat and onwards to his usual table at the restaurant.

Christopher Eppinger has been a regular since soon after he bought a €7mn villa in the hills on the mainland. On one of the whitewashed walls near where he was sitting, a solitary bronze plaque read: “Christopher Eppinger. The Legend of La Guérite. 300 bottles of Cristal, June 13, 2024.” It commemorated Eppinger’s 30th birthday, which was held on the terrace here a year earlier. It really was legendary, Eppinger told me as he ordered us his usual lunch: burrata, truffle pasta, lobster, côte de boeuf. The party started the night before at Eppinger’s mansion, where some of the guests arrived by helicopter, and continued the following day at La Guérite, where 300 golden bottles of Louis Roederer champagne, adorned with flaming sparklers, were carried into the restaurant on waiters’ shoulders.

Eppinger speaks with unfiltered confidence. His texts come in torrents, sometimes laced with abrasive and offensive language. At one point during our lunch, he pointed towards the ridge line of a hill in the distance, to the house he’d bought in 2024. He had named it Villa Mirta after his grandmother.

The house, which was undergoing a €14mn renovation, was just visible across the expanse of blue, as was a second property he was renovating for €5mn for his parents. The properties were just a part of his growing global portfolio, which includes several homes in Dubai. In time for his 40th, maybe he would add an island of his own.

Eppinger is able to afford such largesse because, between 2022 and 2025, he traded some $2bn worth of oil, making personal profits of more than $250mn. He is by no means the only trader to have made a fortune from the upheaval in the energy markets wrought by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the subsequent global sanctions. But Eppinger, who was 27 when the war began, is almost certainly the youngest.

Following the 2022 invasion, western powers responded to Russian aggression with wide-ranging sanctions, and several of the world’s biggest traders, such as BP and Shell, quickly ceased all dealings with the country. Privately held commodity giants meanwhile pared back large parts of their business. Because oil was ultimately deemed too important to the global economy, the west eventually settled on a price cap designed to allow Russia to keep exporting while limiting the revenue it could earn. And so, a handful of risk-takers stepped in to profit from doing business that others were reluctant to touch.

The price cap proved especially helpful, Eppinger said. “It was a little bit of a black box” to begin with and then “I was sure I [could] do it in a legal structure”. Eppinger sipped on his Coke Zero. Had there been a complete embargo, as some traders had expected, then he would not have touched Russia at all. “Then I would’ve been a criminal.”

That risk perhaps explains why Eppinger is the only trader to have agreed to talk publicly about that period. Most of those who remained involved with Russian oil, whether or not they sought to comply with the west’s rules, have tried to say as little as possible about it. Eppinger, by contrast, named his company after himself.

Eppinger and his lawyers said that all of his trades have complied with the west’s rules and that his company, CE Energy, ceased trading Russian oil completely in February. But sanctions are political, not merely legal tools. In talking to the Financial Times, Eppinger was taking a big risk, offering an account of how the industry really responded to the west’s restrictions and how Russian oil then moved through the global energy system. Eppinger’s account was backed up by financial records, emails and chat messages, as well as interviews with more than a dozen people in the industry who have dealt with him.

Before, during and after lunch, he repeatedly asked me whether telling his story could get him sanctioned. And yet, he also seemed excited by the risk. Eppinger said he wanted to talk because he planned for this to be the start of his career and felt he would have to answer these questions eventually. “Because I’m not going to stop,” he said. “I’m not going to sit on the money and live from interest. I want to add another zero to my net worth and buy more Picassos.”

Eppinger was born in a small town north of Hamburg in 1994 into a fairly typical middle-class family. His parents, who were both born in the Soviet Union, had moved to Germany in the 1980s. His mother was a doctor and his father worked as an engineer. Less typically, Eppinger said all he ever wanted to be was an oil trader.

An only child, Eppinger regularly watched television with his German grandmother and was captivated by JR Ewing, the Stetson-wearing oil baron in the US television series Dallas. Andre van Gils, the father of Eppinger’s closest childhood friend, was something of a JR himself. Van Gils had been an early employee of the European oil-trading giant Vitol before setting up his own trading firms, minting a fortune along the way. As a teenager, Eppinger regularly spent holidays at the van Gils’ house in St Moritz. The veteran trader, then in his sixties, regaled Eppinger with trading tales.

One night at Chesa Veglia, an Italian restaurant, van Gils introduced the teenage Eppinger to Marc Rich, the infamous founder of Glencore who had fled to Switzerland in the 1980s after being indicted in the US for tax evasion linked to trading sanctioned oil with Iran. (Rich, who died in 2013, was later pardoned by Bill Clinton.) “I started to understand that the actual lawyers, doctors, engineers and all these [people with the] universities’ highest degrees are not sitting in St Moritz and drinking the champagne,” Eppinger said. “It’s actually these people who basically do something, who smell the sulphur . . . and do it globally, not only in Europe.” These were people who thought “outside of the box”.

Eppinger studied business at a university in Hamburg but itched to be out in the real world. At the end of his first year, aged 21 and with the help of another family friend, he got an internship with Kazakhstan’s national oil company, KazMunayGas, in the country’s capital, Astana. Officially, he was rotating through the firm’s asset management and strategy departments. But Eppinger spent most of the time making friends he thought would help him in the future.

Eppinger later parlayed his experience into a full-time job with a Hamburg-based commodity house, SET Select Energy. He hit it off with Select’s founder, Thure von Wahl, who had his own storied trading history. Von Wahl soon dispatched Eppinger back to Kazakhstan with $1mn to start a crude-processing business. He was 23.

One of Eppinger’s friends from KazMunayGas introduced him to a young Kazakh named Ilyas Tasmagambetov, who was the nephew of one of the country’s most powerful politicians. Tasmagambetov was now running an oil refinery that needed money, and Eppinger had it. “We went to all the local crude suppliers . . . and I bought it in cash on the f*cking crude production fields,” Eppinger recalled. “We were trucking the oil into the refinery by weird small old cars. Everything is stinking. Minus 40C in winter, plus 40C in summer. You have sulphur in the air. If you’re there for too long, your teeth are starting to hurt . . . ” For Eppinger, it was paradise.

The profits were split between Select and Tasmagambetov’s refinery, but Eppinger made a side deal with his friends for a cut of the refinery’s end. He was getting paid twice. (Select and von Wahl declined to comment.) After two and a half years at Select, Eppinger set up his own company, based in Hamburg, and attempted to do the processing business himself. He raised about $900,000 from investors, put in $200,000 of his own money and sent it all to a new set of Kazakh partners. They promptly took the cash and disappeared.

The taxi snaked up a series of steep switchbacks before coming to a halt outside a grand villa with a classic canal-tile roof, manicured gardens and sweeping views of the Mediterranean. The house had previously been owned by one of France’s most infamous drug dealers, Eppinger said. “Everything was in marble, everything was pink, everything was gold.”

Now, all of that had been ripped out leaving gaps where the windows had been and dusty concrete floors. But the emptiness accentuated the home’s immense proportions, making it feel even more like a drug baron’s lair. The renovations at Villa Mirta were being led by a German architect and a British interior designer, with input from a director from London’s prestigious Gagosian gallery.

Eppinger, who looked at more than 20 properties before finding this one, was temporarily renting a different property for himself, his parents, his assistant, his housekeeper, his personal trainer and his one-year-old golden retriever, Bob. (For this story, I stayed at Eppinger’s home for two nights and accompanied him on a private jet.)

A team of Kurdish builders was ferrying cement back and forth as Eppinger and I toured the house. In the entrance hall, above our heads, they had demolished a mezzanine level to create a huge central atrium with 5m-high ceilings, where he imagined welcoming future guests. Off to one side, Eppinger showed me spaces intended for a 22-person dining room, a breakfast room, a cigar room and his office.

I’m not ashamed of anything that I’ve been doing. I’m not scared to tell the people that the source of my business was Russian oil

The Gagosian director, who was immaculately dressed in blue jeans, cowboy boots and a Gucci checked blazer, was chatting with the interior designer as we approached. She has helped Eppinger assemble a growing art collection and was there to discuss where certain pieces might be displayed. On an iPad she showed him a red hammer and sickle painted by Andy Warhol in 1976. Eppinger wanted to buy it to hang in the bar.

Eppinger, who is scared of heights, then led us up a crumbling spiral staircase and across a precarious wooden plank into what will be the master bedroom. For this room, Eppinger said he wanted to buy something by an Old Master, such as Caravaggio. Several of Caravaggio’s major works depicted decapitations, Eppinger explained. He wanted “something really intense”.

Elsewhere in the house, next to the underground gym, in the “wet area” that will be connected to the steam room, Eppinger planned for a famous mosaicist, Pierre Mesguich, to use solid gold to create a snake that rises from the corner of the room and gets larger as it moves across the wall like an “LSD dream”, he said. “He’s the OG of mosaics.”

Once completed, this sanctuary will be the base for his operations, at least for part of the year. Actually, his phone is the base for his operations. Eppinger said he never touches a computer and negotiates new contracts, executes trades and argues with lawyers and counterparties all from his iPhone. “It’s so f*cking busy down there,” Eppinger said, waving an arm in the direction of Cannes. “Then you come here and you can be by yourself . . . I’m waking up. I’m going for a run. I’m doing my calls. I’m having all my screaming matches in the forest. I have my lunch. I jump into the pool. It’s just beautiful.”

In the months I spoke with Eppinger, he appeared to have a trader’s ability to make friends wherever he went. But there also seemed to be a combativeness lurking beneath the surface. “The whole industry is all ego-driven men, and it’s like a playground in high school, where everybody wants to beat each other up,” he told me. “You want to bully people and other people want to bully you, and it’s kind of the survival of the strongest.”

In the summer of 2021, Eppinger was back at square one. An investor in the failed Kazakh venture had accused him of fraud and his reputation in Hamburg suffered badly. (The investor later tried unsuccessfully to bring criminal charges against him. Eppinger has always denied wrongdoing and offered to repay the investor in full, according to correspondence seen by the FT.)

Eppinger called everyone he knew in the industry, looking for a fresh start. He landed a job at a small trading house in Dubai, and an opportunity soon presented itself in the form of a refinery in the Emirati port city of Fujairah. The facility took crude oil from Africa and low-sulphur fuel oil from Russia and refined it to make marine fuel, which it sold to the many ships that refuelled at the port. It was owned by the German utility Uniper.

Amid European uproar at the invasion, Uniper’s management in Düsseldorf decided it could no longer import Russian fuel oil or deal with its normal supplier due to that trader’s long-standing ties to Russian producers. It began to look for new supply and Eppinger, who had already built a close relationship with Lars Liebig, the refinery’s managing director, sensed a chance. He set about sourcing the oil himself.

After several dead ends, a contact suggested Eppinger try Mercantile & Maritime Group. M&M was a large international trading firm founded by a wealthy Pakistani-born trader named Murtaza Lakhani. In May 2022, it supplied Eppinger’s company, CE Energy, with a cargo of almost 60,000 tonnes of fuel oil from tanks in Europe for onward sale to Uniper. “The first cargo made me my first million bucks,” Eppinger said.

Hungry for more, Eppinger went looking for additional suppliers and agreed to buy 98,000 tonnes of fuel oil from Kazakhstan. Uniper knew the oil from the landlocked country would be loaded on to a ship at a Russian port, but when the cargo was already on the water, the refinery refused to take it. Uniper’s head office had received a report questioning the oil’s origin, claiming it had actually been produced in Russia, according to correspondence seen by the FT.

The next month was a blur. Eppinger owed his supplier about $100mn but now he had no buyer. Every day the ship idled off the coast of Fujairah cost him tens of thousands of dollars in additional shipping fees. It was an enormous exposure that threatened to destroy his fledgling operation. He hired the powerful US legal firm Latham & Watkins, which successfully obtained further documentation showing the oil’s origin as Kazakhstan and forced Uniper to accept the cargo.

But the episode was a wake-up call. There were no restrictions yet on buying Russian oil, but the continued expansion of western sanctions against Moscow was clearly making customers jumpy. The stand-off had also damaged Eppinger’s relationship with Uniper, so he started to look at alternative ways to deliver oil. From then, rather than dealing with the refinery directly, he would supply another company in Fujairah, Gulf Petrol Supplies LLC (GPS), which would in turn sell to Uniper.

Most importantly, rather than receiving the oil by ship, M&M introduced him to a new company, Tejarinaft, which had recently been incorporated in one of Dubai’s free zones and could deliver fuel oil once it had already arrived in the United Arab Emirates, through what is known as an inter-tank transfer. Tejarinaft started to supply CE Energy with as much as 180,000 tonnes of fuel oil a month, most of which it sent to GPS for onward sale to Uniper. (GPS did not respond to requests for comment.)

The Tejarinaft fuel oil had originally come from Russia, Eppinger said. But by the time it arrived with CE Energy, through the Fujairah tank system, it had a certificate showing that it had been blended in the UAE, which was good enough for CE Energy’s lawyers and, apparently, good enough for Uniper. CE Energy used the same fuel oil to supply Vitol, which also has a refinery in Fujairah. (Uniper and Vitol declined to comment.)

I’m not going to live from interest. I want to add another zero to my net worth and buy more Picassos

It also helped that another major barrier to entry had fallen. After the invasion, the reluctance of most banks to engage in any Russian business meant Russian producers were forced to sell to middlemen like Tejarinaft on open credit, allowing everyone in the supply chain to delay payment until after they had been paid by the end customer. The system provided a rare opportunity for tiny companies such as CE Energy, which never had more than a handful of staff, to move billions of dollars of oil and net outsized profits.

The price cap for refined oil came into effect in February 2023. Rather than halting CE Energy’s operations, Eppinger said the restrictions made things clearer. From then, every cargo he traded with a Russian certificate of origin was bought at a price below the cap, he said. A table of the company’s sale and purchase contracts provided by CE Energy’s lawyers supported this claim.

In other cases, the cargoes Eppinger bought were certified as having originated or been blended outside of Russia. Eppinger’s lawyers advised that under the west’s sanctions regulations, there was no requirement to verify the documentation. “When somebody has a certificate,” Eppinger explained, “by an authority, which is accepted by the government, then it’s a fact.”

In total, between 2022 and 2025, CE Energy traded 3.3mn tonnes of oil, supplying customers in countries including Nigeria, the Bahamas and Spain. In Brazil, it sent Russian diesel to Brazilian energy company Raízen, which is co-owned by Shell. In China, the UAE and Malaysia, it delivered Vitol more than 300,000 tonnes of fuel oil direct from Russian ports, in addition to nearly 400,000 tonnes it supplied to the trader through the Fujairah tank system. (Raízen and Shell declined to comment.)

At least three-quarters of all the oil CE Energy supplied came from Tejarinaft and two other companies also introduced to Eppinger by Lakhani. By 2024, the pair would meet regularly in Dubai, have an expensive meal and discuss trades, Eppinger recalled. They also regularly discussed trades by text, WhatsApp messages show. In May that year, he partied with Lakhani, now in his sixties, at the Monaco Grand Prix.

But their relationship eventually broke down, partly over money. In voice messages he sent to Eppinger, which the FT has heard, Lakhani credited himself for much of Eppinger’s financial success. Eppinger bristled at the idea. At times, Eppinger flooded Lakhani’s phone with offensive, racist messages. (He told me he regretted sending them and had apologised.)

Lakhani’s lawyers said he wound down “commercial activity with Russia” following the February 2022 invasion and referred M&M’s “Russian trading clientele” to other companies. Lakhani’s involvement with the three companies he introduced to CE Energy was “strictly advisory”, they said. Lakhani “does not own or control” any of the businesses but has provided them with “ad hoc advice and assistance”, they added. A lawyer representing Tejarinaft’s registered owner said Lakhani had provided “ad hoc client introductions” but had no “direct or indirect relationship” with the company.

As the Cessna 680 accelerated down the runway at Nice in June, Eppinger and his commercial director Liebig relaxed into the aircraft’s plush leather seats. Liebig, who had joined CE Energy from Uniper, was visiting from Dubai, where Eppinger had just renamed the company Petrichor, having decided it had outgrown using his initials.

Eppinger had stopped all activity earlier in the year after outgoing US president Joe Biden announced sanctions against several Dubai-based traders. The moves appeared to indicate a new willingness to sanction companies for trading Russian oil at any price. Following consultation with his lawyers, Eppinger decided the west’s enforcement of the rules had become too unpredictable, making the risks of continuing too great. This also meant the open credit that had facilitated his activities would no longer be available, so Eppinger and Liebig were headed to Geneva for a first round of discussions with banks about future non-Russian business. The plan was to be open with the lenders about the company’s previous trades. “I can’t hide it because every banker who gets my numbers will understand where it’s coming from. It’s not dropping on you just like a present from God,” he said.

“I’m not ashamed of anything that I’ve been doing,” he said. “Maybe I will have to answer the question of ‘Has everything been below the cap?’, but it was below the cap, so . . . I’m not scared to tell the people that the source of my business was Russian oil.” He was optimistic that the banks would see value in the company’s balance sheet and provide the credit lines needed to take his company to the “next level”. “I’m good at relationships. Can I trade better than a trader at Vitol? No. Can I leverage my contacts better? Yes.”

In a later conversation, Eppinger admitted that he had once felt jealous of older traders, like van Gils, von Wahl, perhaps even Lakhani, who had lived through great disruptions, such as the collapse of the Soviet Union and the commercial opportunities it generated. “I was literally sad that the ’90s passed without me,” he said. But he wasn’t any more. “I think what has been happening right now is very similar,” he said. “There will be an opportunity every five years but, in between those opportunities, it’s important to . . . be able to execute when you have to execute.” Earning more money was no longer his main goal. “It is not about the number, it’s about staying in the game.”

After we landed in Switzerland, a waiting car whisked us to lunch with a potential new chief financial officer. I left Eppinger and Liebig to have their bank meetings. Afterwards, Eppinger seemed happy. Several of the discussions had gone well, he thought. He’d told the bankers he had travelled to Switzerland with the FT, he said. They replied that they planned to read the resulting article closely.

FT : More than 1mn paid highest rate of tax last year due to frozen thresholds

More than 1mn paid highest rate of tax last year due to frozen thresholds
Fiscal drag accounts for two-thirds of those paying the additional rate of income tax

The number of people who paid the highest rate of income tax topped 1mn for the first time in 2024-25, after long-frozen thresholds dragged 720,000 people into the additional rate band, new data shows.

If the top 45 per cent tax rate had moved in line with inflation it would be worth £211,562 today and would exclude two-thirds of people currently paying it, according to calculations by Bowmore Financial Planning, an advisory firm, underlining the impact of the existing freeze ahead of the autumn Budget.

A freedom of information request it submitted to HM Revenue & Customs showed 720,000 people paid the 45 per cent additional rate in the 2024-25 tax year on income above £125,140, but below £211,562. A further 385,000 people who had income above £211,562 in 2024-25 paid the additional rate, the FOI showed.

“The way that this stealth tax has operated for 12 years means more and more people are being dragged into paying the highest rate of tax,” said John Clamp, chartered financial planner at Bowmore Financial Planning.

“When the 45 per cent rate was introduced, it was meant for those on what were then the very highest salaries — the equivalent of over £210,000 today. Now, it’s hitting people earning almost £100,000 less than that.”

Clamp added that higher earners often had higher costs and many people were reluctant to boost their earnings if, as a result, they fell into the additional tax rate band.

“It’s perhaps unsurprising productivity is stagnating. If extra work barely boosts take-home pay because of frozen tax bands, people are less inclined to work longer hours or push themselves — and that ultimately drags on the economy,” he said.

The additional rate of income tax was introduced as an emergency measure in 2010 to help raise extra money following the global financial crisis. It was originally set at 50 per cent for incomes over £150,000. The rate was reduced to 45 per cent in 2013 and in 2023 the threshold was lowered from £150,000 to the current £125,140.

Since April 2022, the government has frozen several allowances and tax thresholds, including income tax thresholds, rather than raising them in line with inflation. The move has increased tax receipts as higher pay tips more workers either into the tax system or on to higher rates, a phenomenon known as “fiscal drag”.

The freeze is set to remain in place until 2028, but many commentators expect chancellor Rachel Reeves to extend it at the Budget on November 26, as she tries to fill a fiscal hole of between £20bn-£30bn.

In a speech on Monday, Reeves left open the question of whether Labour would break its manifesto promise not to raise income tax rates.

Asked if she was prepared to break it, even if that might cost the party the next general election, Reeves said: “We have got to do the right thing.”

She added: “If you’re asking what comes first, the national interest or political expediency, it’s the national interest every single time for me and it’s the same for Keir Starmer too.”

The Treasury said: “The UK’s income tax system is highly progressive with an internationally high personal allowance. These figures relate to the previous government’s 2022 Autumn Statement. This government inherited the previous government’s policy of frozen tax thresholds and lowered additional rate threshold.”

Given the large amount of money that Reeves needs to raise, many tax experts believe she will decide to raise revenue by making changes to income tax, either by raising rates or lowering thresholds.

HMRC’s statistics estimate a 1p increase in the basic rate of income tax would raise £8.2bn from those liable to this rate in 2028-29, while a 1p increase would raise £2.1bn on higher-rate taxpayers and £230mn from additional-rate taxpayers.

Gary Ashford, partner at Harbottle & Lewis, a law firm, said he was “struggling to understand why you would have made [Monday’s] speech if you weren’t going to raise income tax”.

“I do think we could end up with her choosing income tax, as whatever way you try and do the maths, you’re not going to get anywhere close to what she needs without it.”

Alongside big changes to income tax, he predicted a complicated Budget with “multiple measures”.