>>> US After Hours Summary: VTYX +60.3% surges on WSJ report that LLY in advance

After Hours Summary: VTYX +60.3% surges on WSJ report that LLY in advanced talks to acquire co; PENG +4.5%, AIR +2.8% higher on earnings; MBLY +10.9% to acquire Mentee Robotics

After Hours Gainers:

Companies trading higher in after hours in reaction to earnings/guidance: PENG +4.5%, AIR +2.8%

Companies trading higher in after hours in reaction to news: VTYX +60.3% (LLY in advanced talks to acquire VTYX according to WSJ), MBLY +10.9% (to acquire Mentee Robotics), GLUE +8.6% (to present interim MRT-8102 Phase 1 study results), MSTR +5% (MSCI announces it will not exclude digital asset treasury cos from MSCI Indexes), ALMS +4.1% (commences $175 mln stock offering), BMNR +2.2% (MSCI announces it will not exclude digital asset treasury cos from MSCI Indexes), MUR +1.5% (achieves appraisal success at Hai Su Vang Field; reaffirms 2026 CAPEX guidance), ATR +1.5% (to collaborate with OURA to advance migraine insights), DRS +0.8% (names new COO), CARL +0.5% (announces publication of new study), BTC +0.5% (MSCI announces it will not exclude digital asset treasury cos from MSCI Indexes), PLUG +0.4% (license agreement with Walmart), CTO +0.4% (provides update), CAT +0.3% (names new chairman)

After Hours Losers:

Companies trading lower in after hours in reaction to earnings/guidance: None.

Companies trading lower in after hours in reaction to news: DRUG -3.4% ($100 mln stock offering), PRAX -2.5% (stock offering), HBAN -1.2% (HBAN and CADE shareholders approve merger), SKT -0.9% ($200 mln exchangeable notes offering)

FT : Polymarket refuses to pay bets that US would ‘invade’ Venezuela

Polymarket refuses to pay bets that US would ‘invade’ Venezuela
Prediction market disputes US raid amounted to an invasion in fight over more than $10.5mn in wagers

Polymarket is disputing the mission to capture Nicolás Maduro constituted an invasion and said it will only settle a prediction contract if the US military takes control of Venezuelan territory.

The decision by the prediction market has angered gamblers and added to the controversy surrounding a successful wager on the timing of Maduro’s capture that netted more than $400,000 in winnings for a mystery trader. The dispute over the definition of “invade” highlights just one of the controversies faced by the mostly unregulated industry.

Polymarket — which only recently gained regulatory approval to operate legally in the US — says on its website that it will resolve the “Will the US invade Venezuela by . . .?” contract if the US “commences a military offensive intended to establish control over any portion of Venezuela” by one of three dates. 

“The resolution source for this market will be a consensus of credible sources,” it adds.

Prediction platforms such as Polymarket do not typically make directional wagers in their own markets. Rather, they act as an intermediary matching long and short positions and adjudicating the outcome of events, collecting a fee in the process.

After Maduro’s capture and extraction from his Caracas compound by US special forces early on Saturday, President Donald Trump said the US would dictate the Latin American nation’s policies to be carried out by leaders of the remaining regime.

Prices on the question jumped shortly after the raid but fell below 5 per cent when the platform chose not to settle the contract. The platform resolved a similar contract — “US forces in Venezuela by . . .?” — in favour of the “yes” position a few hours after the raid on Saturday.



There is currently more than $10.5mn wagered on the contract — the majority on a January 31 deadline, with the remainder on contracts ending in March and December. Users who had in some cases bet tens of thousands of dollars on a US invasion have taken to Polymarket’s comment section to vent their frustration.

“Polymarket has descended into sheer arbitrariness,” said a user called Skinner. “Words are redefined at will, detached from any recognised meaning, and facts are simply ignored. That a military incursion, the kidnapping of a head of state, and the takeover of a country are not classified as an invasion is plainly absurd.”

Polymarket did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The bet on Maduro’s capture has revived concern about traders unfairly capitalising on their information edge, after another incident last year in which a trader successfully wagered on the winner of the Nobel Peace Prize. The timing of the bets on the Venezuela contracts appeared to indicate the trader had advance knowledge of the military action.

The anonymous account, created on December 26, placed a series of wagers on four questions related to US actions in Venezuela in the days ahead of Trump’s operation.

The user bet more than $32,000 that Maduro would be removed from power by the end of January, when the “yes” position was trading at an average of 7 cents — implying a 7 per cent likelihood of his ousting. This market paid out at 100 cents when Maduro was flown out of the country on January 3, netting the trader a $400,000 profit. 

The account made smaller bets on the presence of US forces in Venezuela — buying at 12 cents and redeeming at 100 — and the submission of a War Powers act declaration to Congress — buying at about 5 and selling at 51 cents. 

The account also made a well-timed trade on the controversial “invade” market, betting $1,000 on January 1 when it was priced at 6 cents. The account sold at 18 cents while bettors were confused whether its terms were satisfied — locking in a 200 per cent return before the price fell back to 5 cents.

Congress member Ritchie Torres this week proposed legislation that would prohibit insiders “from engaging in covered transactions involving prediction market contracts”.

CrunchBase : Crunchbase Predicts: 15 Companies That Could Go Public In 2026 As T

Crunchbase Predicts: 15 Companies That Could Go Public In 2026 As The IPO Market Gains Momentum


After a prolonged slowdown, the IPO market is showing clearer signs of life. As our 2026 IPO outlook forecast details, improving public-market conditions, stabilizing interest rates and renewed investor appetite for growth are setting the stage for a wider reopening of the listing window.

Against that backdrop, a growing cohort of late-stage private companies now looks increasingly prepared to make the leap. Using Crunchbase’s predictive intelligence tools — which evaluate factors including funding history, growth signals, investor mix and market timing — we’ve curated a list of 15 companies across AI, enterprise software, fintech, space, defense, healthcare and consumer tech that could realistically go public in 2026, should market momentum continue to build.

AI and enterprise tech
Crusoe Energy Systems: When the window is open, you make your move. That’s something IPO market timers take to heart. But while well-funded private companies are aware of this cyclicality, actually prepping and orchestrating a public debut takes the kind of prep that doesn’t always align with the perfect window. That said, AI infrastructure unicorn Crusoe Energy Systems is certainly scaling in a direction that points to a public exit, a likelihood that Crunchbase predictions affirm with a “probable” rating on a listing for the Denver-based company. Crusoe closed on a $1.4 billion Series E in October at a valuation of more than $10 billion. With generative AI platforms currently expanding and investing at an unprecedented rate, the timing is certainly right for the kind of growth metrics IPO investors appreciate.
Databricks: Databricks has been on our list since the end of 2021, when it missed the IPO window. Crunchbase’s predictive tools label it a “very likely” IPO candidate and that makes sense. The 12-year-old, San Francisco-based company is well placed to go public. As of Q3, it announced it is growing more than 55% year over year, with an over $4.8 billion revenue run rate as of its December funding announcement. Of that revenue, $1 billion was from its AI products. Net retention was above 140% and the company has been free cash flow positive for more than 12 months. Its valuation in recent months has soared. It was valued at $100 billion in September and in December at $134 billion in a round led by Insight Partners and public market investors Fidelity and J.P. Morgan Asset Management.
Cohere: Competition among model developers is heating up. AI lab Anthropic has reportedly engaged Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosatii to begin to explore an IPO, according to the Financial Times. While 2026 might be too early for Anthropic to go public, another, less-known model developer could make a public-market debut this year. Cohere, co-headquartered in Toronto and San Francisco, focuses on supporting sovereign and secure AI for enterprise and governments. Its customers hail from across North America, APAC and EMEA, and include Oracle, Dell and Royal Bank of Canada. Aidan Gomez, its founder and CEO, spoke at a Bloomberg event in London expressing an interest in a public listing in the near future for the 6-year-old company, which was recently valued at $7 billion with $150 million in annual recurring revenue. Crunchbase predicts it is a “probable” IPO candidate.
Canva: Design platform Canva is another strong contender to go public in 2026. The 13-year-old Sydney, Australia-based company was valued at $42 billion in its most recent funding — a share sale for employees led by public market investor Fidelity. As of its August 2025 funding, Canva’s annualized revenue has reached $3.3 billion. The company, which Crunchbase bills a “probable” IPO candidate, claimed 240 million monthly users designing with its tools at that time. And adding further validation of Canva’s public-market readiness, competitor Figma went public in July 2024 at a valuation of $16.1 billion. (Although, Figma’s stock is slightly up as of mid-December but remains well below its first-day massive IPO pop of 255%.) As of Q3, Figma, by comparison, has reached $1 billion in annual revenue run rate.
Quantinuum: Before the AI boom, quantum computing was the hot, capital-intensive tech that got VCs and technologists excited. While AI has eclipsed investor interest in quantum, the latter continues to draw big checks from investors, who see enormous potential for the technology to facilitate breakthroughs in areas ranging from drug discovery to cybersecurity and defense. At least one quantum startup is actively mulling an IPO. That’s Quantinuum, which Crunchbase labels a “probable” IPO candidate. That prediction squares with other reporting, including a March 2025 Barron’s report that cited a source with direct knowledge of the matter saying parent company Honeywell is aiming for a 2026 or 2027 listing. The Broomfield, Colorado-based startup, formed in 2021 via the merger of Honeywell Quantum Solutions and Cambridge Quantum, has raised $925 million from venture investors to date, including a $600 million Nvidia-backed Series B in August at a $10 billion pre-money valuation.
Space and defense tech
K2 Space: Space tech has been a strong area for venture investment of late, and with the prospect of a SpaceX IPO in 2026, it’s an increasingly buzzy sector for public markets as well. Among recently funded startups in the sector, Torrance, California-based K2 Space is a standout on several fronts. For one, it’s a fundraising machine, securing more than $400 million across three rounds since 2024. That culminated in a $250 Series C led by Redpoint last month at a $3 billion valuation. The company, founded in 2022, develops large, high-power satellite platforms and has secured $500 million in signed contracts across commercial and U.S. government customers. Crunchbase predicts it’s “probable” that the startup will IPO.
SpaceX: This one is kind of a gimme. Late last year, Elon Musk-led SpaceX was reported to be eyeing an IPO that would be the largest VC-backed listing of all time — by about 10x — at a target valuation of $1.5 trillion. The company is already one of the most valuable private businesses in the world. Its reported IPO ambitions make a lot of sense, given the capital-intensive nature of space exploration, aforementioned investor appetite for space tech, and its revenue: an estimated $15 billion in 2025, much of it from its fast-growing StarLink satellite internet business. Founded in 2002, SpaceX has raised nearly $12 billion in its lifetime, according to Crunchbase, which pegs a “very likely” IPO probability on the Hawthorne, California-based company. Investors include Andreessen Horowitz, Sequoia Capital, Craft Ventures, Valor Equity Partners and Founders Fund, among others.
Anduril Industries: Venture investment into defense tech hit an all-time high last year, and no company received more money than Anduril. Of the more than $7.7 billion that flowed to defense-related startups in 2025, roughly a third went to Anduril in its $2.5 billion Series G at a $30.5 billion valuation. The startup, founded in 2017 by Oculus founder Palmer Luckey, is well-connected in the Trump administration and has been the beneficiary of the U.S. military’s efforts to modernize its defense and war technologies, including a contract with the DoD to supply VR/AR headsets to the U.S. Army. The company has raised $6.3 billion to date from investors including Founders Fund, the U.S. Department of Defense, Andreessen Horowitz and General Catalyst. The Costa Mesa, California-based company is deemed a “very likely” IPO candidate.
Health and consumer tech
Innovaccer: Innovaccer, provider of AI-enabled data and intelligence platform for healthcare providers, hits a lot of the checklist items we see in pre-IPO startups. It’s been around for a while (founded in 2014), raised considerable capital, secured a big Series F early this year, and has high-profile strategic backers including Kaiser Permanente. With 1,200 employees across five global offices, San Francisco-based Innovaccer is also a fairly large operation at this point, and certainly looks scaled enough for a public market debut, all factors that contribute to its “probable” IPO prediction from Crunchbase.
Nothing: Hardware-maker Nothing is taking a more unconventional path to a potential IPO. The London-based startup is working to be “IPO-ready” in three years, CEO and co-founder Carl Pei told TechCrunch last month. In the meantime the company is giving fans of its smartphones and other gadgets a chance to invest at a $1.3 billion Series C valuation via platforms like Wefunder and Crowdcube. “The timing will depend on market conditions and what makes sense for the business at that point in time,” Pei told the publication. Crunchbase puts a “probable” prediction on an IPO for Nothing, which has reportedly posted fast growth, particularly in markets like India, the U.K. and Japan. The company has said it hit more than $1 billion in lifetime sales last year and has sold more than 7 million devices. Along with its crowdfunding campaigns, Nothing has raised more than $446 million from venture investors including Tiger Global Management and GV, per Crunchbase.
Cybersecurity
Huntress: Cybersecurity has long been one of the most robust and predictable areas for venture investment. One of the faster-growing startups in the sphere is Huntress, which offers cybersecurity products for small and medium-sized businesses that don’t have the resources for a fully staffed 24/7 security team. Crunchbase pins a “probable” IPO prediction on the company, and CEO Kyle Hanslovan has also indicated a Huntress listing is a strong possibility in coming years. Interviewed on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange in late October, he said that the Columbia, Maryland-based company has posted 60% year-over-year growth and is on track to hit $185 million to $190 million in revenue this year. Demand for its offerings has only increased as generative AI has aided scammers and hackers to craft more sophisticated phishing and other cyber attacks, he said. The company has raised nearly $310 million from investors to date, per Crunchbase, including a June 2024 Series D led by Kleiner Perkins, Meritech Capital Partners and Sapphire Ventures.
Ledger: Crunchbase says it’s “probable” that crypto wallet startup Ledger will IPO. That’s down from a “very likely” prediction last year, but other signs continue to point to the likelihood of an offering for the Paris-based startup, which provides a hardware wallet to secure crypto private keys. That means Ledger, founded in 2014, is well-positioned at the intersection of two currently hot industries: cybersecurity and blockchain. It has raised some $577 million from venture investors including Molten Ventures and Samsung Ventures, per Crunchbase. CEO Pascal Gauthier told European tech publication Sifted in mid-2025 that Ledger is actively thinking about a U.S. stock market debut, likely within the next three years. He reiterated that an IPO is actively under consideration in an interview with Financial Times last year, adding that the company’s revenue had hit triple-digit millions in 2025 amid soaring demand for secure crypto storage devices spurred by rising hacks. Ledger secures about $100 billion worth of bitcoin for its customers, he said. Gauthier has previously said an estimated 20% of the world’s crypto assets are protected by his company’s wallets.
Fintech
Plaid: With a “very likely” IPO prediction from Crunchbase, 2026 could be the year that Plaid, a fintech company that connects bank accounts to financial applications, finally decides to go public. In April, the company sold about $575 million worth of common stock at a $6.1 billion post-money valuation. At the time, Plaid told TechCrunch that it would not go public in 2025, but confirmed that an IPO was a milestone the company continued “to track towards.” The startup has not revealed specifics around revenue, noting only that 2025 was a record-setting year in which revenue grew over 25%. Plaid has raised about $1.3 billion from investors such as Andreessen Horowitz, Franklin Templeton, BoxGroup, Index Ventures and BlackRock.
Revolut: Revolut, a digital bank based in London, is a “very likely” candidate for an initial public offering, per Crunchbase predictions. In November, it completed a secondary share sale, boosting its valuation to $75 billion. That was a 67% jump compared to the $45 billion that Revolut was valued at in August 2024 when it announced a separate secondary share sale to provide liquidity to employees. Investors include Coatue, Greenoaks, Dragoneer Investment Group, Fidelity Management & Research Co., Nvidia’s venture capital arm NVentures, Andreessen Horowitz and Franklin Templeton. Revolut has seen impressive growth since its 2015 inception. In 2025, it achieved $1 billion in annualized revenue and surpassed a 65 million customer base across 100 countries. The company likely won’t IPO until it secures its full U.K. banking license, for which it is still awaiting approval.
Monzo: Monzo, another U.K.-based banking platform, is also said to be eyeing an IPO in 2026 and Crunchbase pegs a “very likely” prediction for an offering too. Timing of the IPO is so sensitive for the company now that its CEO TS Anil was pushed out of the head role due to his reported attempts at a listing earlier than some directors apparently wanted. He also reportedly indicated he might leave soon after. In June, Monzo reported revenue of more than $1.35 billion and “a sharp rise” in annual profit. It also increased its customer base by 25% to 12.2 million in its last fiscal year. The company was valued at $5.9 billion in October 2024 after selling shares to a group of existing investors. Backers include General Catalyst, HSG, Accel, Stripe and Thrive Capital.
An IPO prediction is never a promise. But as market conditions shift and investor appetite broadens, these companies are flashing more of the signals that tend to precede a public offering.
Met

WSJ : Eli Lilly, AI Drug-Discovery Company Nimbus Partner on Oral Obesity Treatm

Eli Lilly, AI Drug-Discovery Company Nimbus Partner on Oral Obesity Treatment
Nimbus, an artificial-intelligence drug-discovery company, says that it is eligible for upfront and near-term milestone payments totaling $55 million

  • Eli Lilly and Nimbus Therapeutics have partnered to develop an oral obesity treatment.
  • Nimbus said it is eligible for upfront and near-term milestone payments totaling $55 million, as well as up to $1.3 billion in development, commercial and sales milestones.
  • Pharmaceutical companies are accelerating oral weight-loss treatments following the success of GLP-1 medications.

Eli Lilly LLY 1.43%increase; green up pointing triangle and Nimbus Therapeutics have entered into a multi-year collaboration and exclusive licensing agreement to develop an oral treatment for obesity and other metabolic diseases.

Nimbus, an artificial-intelligence drug-discovery company, said Tuesday that it is eligible for upfront and near-term milestone payments totaling $55 million, as well as up to $1.3 billion in development, commercial and sales milestones along with tiered royalties on global net sales.

The partnership comes as pharmaceutical companies are racing to develop and market orally-administered weight-loss treatments, inspired by the runaway success of GLP-1 treatments.

Novo Nordisk shares jumped after the company said its Wegovy weight-loss pills, the first GLP-1 pill approved specifically for weight loss, had hit pharmacies across the U.S.

Lilly, which makes the diabetes and weight-loss drugs Mounjaro and Zepbound, is also developing an experimental GLP-1 weight-loss pill.

Lilly shares were trading up 1.7%, to $1,059.45, early Tuesday afternoon.

Nimbus and Lilly have previously collaborated on targeting AMPK in cardiometabolic diseases.

“We are pleased to deepen our collaboration with Nimbus, a team that has demonstrated exceptional ability to tackle complex drug discovery challenges,” said Ruth Gimeno, vice president of Lilly’s diabetes and metabolic research and development group.

“Working together to develop this novel obesity therapy represents an important addition to Lilly’s efforts to advance innovative treatment options for patients with metabolic disorders,” Gimeno added.

FT : Europe doesn’t need driverless cars

Europe doesn’t need driverless cars
The roadways are already safe and robotaxis risk increasing traffic

David Zipper - The writer is a senior fellow at the MIT Mobility Initiative

Get ready, Europe. The robotaxis are coming. This year, Londoners could see driverless cars from China’s Baidu and Waymo, the self-driving subsidiary of Google’s Alphabet. Tensor Auto and GreenMobility are planning to launch autonomous cars in Copenhagen while Stellantis and Pony.ai want to do the same in Luxembourg. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has voiced her support: “Self-driving cars are already a reality in the United States and China. The same should be true here in Europe.”

She is right about the first part. Autonomous rides are available in Chinese cities like Beijing and Wuhan and in the US, where I live, driverless cars from Waymo, Zoox and Tesla navigate the streets of cities like San Francisco, Los Angeles, Phoenix and Austin. Waymo is reported to provide 450,000 paid trips per week.

Driverless journeys can be pleasantly private, albeit too expensive for most people to take them regularly (Waymo rides often cost around a third more than Uber taxis). But to win over regulators and the general public, American robotaxi companies have also presented themselves as an urgently needed solution to the country’s abysmal record of crash deaths. 

Such messaging is of dubious relevance to Europe, however, where roadways are already much safer than those in the US. Furthermore, Europeans are more likely to bike and ride public transportation — travel modes that are vulnerable to a deluge of self-driving cars.

So why, exactly, does Europe want robotaxis?

Driverless cars are often perceived as an embodiment of innovation and their developers have long claimed that computers can operate vehicles more safely than humans. They will not drive inebriated, exhausted or distracted.

Unaffiliated experts, such as Phil Koopman at Carnegie Mellon, say it is still too soon to know whether robot drivers are really safer. But a technological fix for crashes would be a godsend in the US, where the death count rose by over 25 per cent between 2010 and 2023. An American is more than twice as likely to die in a crash as a Canadian or Korean and more than three times as likely as an Israeli or Spaniard.

Europe is in a different situation. Smaller cars, higher transit use and more pedestrianised areas make roads safer. In 2023, the European Union averaged roughly 4.5 crash deaths per 100,000 residents, less than half the American equivalent. Roads in non-EU member states like Britain and Norway were even safer. A handful of Nordic cities like Helsinki have almost eliminated fatal crashes by slowing cars down.

This means the upside of robotaxis in Europe is lower. And there are considerable downsides to introducing autonomous cars into transportation networks that do not revolve around motor vehicles. Robotaxis have caused relatively few problems in car-centric American cities like Phoenix. But in San Francisco they have blocked bike lanes and obstructed transit vehicles. Such mishaps should be a warning for European leaders not to let their cities become beholden to the automobile.

Technological marvels they may be, but robotaxis are still cars and cars are a uniquely inefficient means of moving large numbers of people when space is at a premium. By inviting robotaxis into their narrow, busy streets, European cities risk worsening congestion. In California, data shows that Waymos spend almost half their time “deadheading” — driving around empty — which increases traffic. Gridlocked cities would undermine the quality of life and economic productivity that European leaders like von der Leyen want.

Robotaxi deployment has been compared to a race — one European carmakers have yet to start. If so, this is a race Europeans should skip altogether.

FT : Pubs criticise prospect of licensing reforms in face of higher business rat

Pubs criticise prospect of licensing reforms in face of higher business rates
Sector calls on ministers to provide urgent financial support following Budget measures

Pub bosses have criticised Sir Keir Starmer’s suggestion that higher business rates bills can be softened by licensing reforms, as they called on the prime minister to provide urgent financial support.

Industry leaders met Treasury minister Dan Tomlinson to discuss the burden of business rates on the hospitality sector, with a Budget increase in the tax paid on commercial properties adding to pressure on pubs.

The increases in pubs’ costs stem largely from higher “rateable values” — estimates of a premises’ annual rent used to calculate rates — which have risen considerably since the last pandemic-era valuation.

In some cases, rateable values have doubled or trebled, although a typical increase is about 30 per cent. Pubs are also facing the withdrawal of Covid support, which offered 40 per cent relief on rate bills.

The prime minister on Monday said pubs would “struggle” as a result of the higher rateable values, telling LBC that “because of revaluation, that means that some will have their bills going up”.

The government was putting transitional relief in place — though pubs say bills will still be significantly higher in three years’ time — and looking at “licensing freedoms”, he added.

Downing Street said on Tuesday that it was exploring “speeding up licensing reforms, slashing red tape, helping more venues stay open later, offering pavement drinks and putting on one-off events”.

But Jonathan Neame, chief executive of pub group Shepherd Neame, dismissed licensing reforms as “a shallow political smokescreen, which will make little or no difference to the hospitality sector”.

David Wigham, managing director of Admiral Taverns, said: “Licensing reforms does nothing to tackle the rising costs that the government is causing.”

“The government needs to offer financial support to the industry and the business rates reduction that we were led to believe was coming,” he added.

Anger within the industry over the changes has led to Labour MPs being banned from more than 1,000 pubs across the UK following a grassroots campaign, with landlords arguing the November Budget has triggered an existential threat.

Alex Reilley, executive chair of Loungers, which has 250 cafés and bars across the UK, said he did not “know of a single hospitality business that is calling for more relaxed licensing laws to allow for extended opening hours. On the contrary, in an attempt to make their business viable, [a] large number of hospitality businesses are reducing their hours.”

Pubs could not afford the extra costs of operating for longer, Reilley added, noting that customers were “eating and drinking earlier than they were pre-Covid”.

Andy Spencer, chief executive of Punch Pubs, which has about 1,250 venues in the UK, said that while it was “encouraging to hear the government acknowledge the pressure pubs are under, warm words alone won’t be enough”.

One hospitality sector boss said: “If a pub isn’t viable because of government cost pressures, it’s irrelevant what time they can open and close or have alfresco seating.”

After the meeting with Tomlinson, Emma McClarkin, chief executive of the British Beer and Pub Association, said the government “understands the strength of feeling amongst the sector” and was “in listening mode”.

“We will be meeting again in the coming weeks,” she added.