L'Informé : L’organisateur des ventes privées d’Hermès et de LVMH est sur le mar

L’organisateur des ventes privées d’Hermès et de LVMH est sur le marché
Arlettie connaît l’une des plus fortes croissances du marché français de l’e-commerce. Elle se cherche un nouveau propriétaire.

Dans le monde pailleté du luxe, Arlettie - inconnue du grand public - est probablement devenue l’une des entreprises françaises les plus incontournables du moment. Hermès, Bulgari, Buccellati, Burberry, Fendi, Gucci, Ami, APC… La plupart de ces grandes marques passent par ses services pour organiser leurs ventes privées. De quoi rendre les finances d’Arlettie florissantes… et donner l’envie aux actionnaires de matérialiser une partie de cette réussite. Selon nos informations, Arlettie pourrait être vendue près de 300 millions d’euros d’ici la fin de l’année.

Pour parvenir à ses fins, l’entreprise toujours contrôlée par ses deux fondateurs, Muryel Lanneau et Thibaut Caillemer, a jeté son dévolu sur une banque d’affaires : Evercore. Cette dernière a été choisie parmi une demi-douzaine d’autres prétendantes qui avaient été invitées à candidater. Cette future recomposition du capital pourrait aussi permettre aux partenaires financiers d’Arlettie de réaliser une belle plus-value.

BNP Paribas Développement et Capza (par le biais de leur fonds Transition) sont respectivement entrés au capital en 2017 et en 2023. À eux deux, ils détiennent près de 40 % des titres, le solde étant entre les mains de la direction et de Philippe Hayat, managing partner de Serena Capital. Cette figure du venture capital a croisé la route des deux fondateurs en 2013, au moment de leur première croissance externe. Adèle Sand, structure historique de Muryel Lanneau et Thibaut Caillemer, rachète alors le troisième acteur français du marché, Catherine Max, avant de rebaptiser l’ensemble Arlettie un an plus tard.

Arlettie fait partie des entreprises ayant réalisé les plus belles trajectoires entre 2020 et 2023 dans le secteur de l’e-commerce, selon une enquête menée par Les Echos Week-end et Statista. Elle a ainsi été classée en deuxième position, avec un taux de croissance annuel moyen de 48,6 %. Elle affichait un chiffre d’affaires de 89 millions d’euros en 2023. Et, surtout, selon l’Informé, elle prévoit un Ebitda d’environ 12 millions d’euros cette année. Puis une petite vingtaine en 2026.

Contactés, les actionnaires d’Arlettie et la direction n’ont pas souhaité commenter.

>>> US Research Calls I

Research Calls I
  • Upgrades
    • Deere (DE) upgraded to Buy from Hold at Melius Research, tgt $750
    • Invitation Homes (INVH) upgraded to Buy from Neutral at Citi, tgt $35
    • MasTec (MTZ) upgraded to Buy from Neutral at Goldman Sachs, tgt $168
    • Ormat Technologies (ORA) upgraded to Overweight from Equal Weight at Barclays, tgt $86
    • Prudential plc (PUK) upgraded to Buy from Hold at Deutsche Bank
    • Sarepta (SRPT) upgraded to Outperform from Sector Perform at Scotiabank, tgt $80
    • Urban Outfitters (URBN) upgraded to Hold from Underperform at Jefferies, tgt $70
  • Downgrades
    • AMH (AMH) downgraded to Neutral from Buy at Citi, tgt $41
    • Brown-Forman (BF.B) downgraded to Neutral from Outperform at BNP Paribas Exane, tgt $28
    • CrowdStrike (CRWD) downgraded to Market Perform from Outperform at Bernstein, tgt $371
    • McDonald's (MCD) downgraded to Hold from Buy at Loop Capital, tgt $315
    • MYR Group (MYRG) downgraded to Neutral from Buy at Goldman Sachs, tgt $168
  • Others
    • American Integrity Insurance (AII) initiated with an Outperform at William Blair, tgt
    • Amneal Pharmaceuticals (AMRX) initiated with a Buy at Goldman Sachs, tgt $12
    • Atai Life Sciences (ATAI) initiated with a Buy at Lucid Capital, tgt $12
    • Chagee (CHA) initiated with an Outperform at CICC, tgt $41.50
    • Climb Bio (CLYM) initiated with an Outperform at Oppenheimer, tgt $10
    • Cybin (CYBN) initiated with a Buy at Lucid Capital, tgt $106
    • Hut 8 (HUT) initiated with a Buy at Roth Capital, tgt $25
    • QXO (QXO) initiated with an Outperform at Wolfe Research, tgt $44
    • Solaris Energy (SEI) initiated with an Overweight at Barclays, tgt $42
    • Senti Bio (SNTI) initiated with a Buy at Laidlaw, tgt $5
    • Solventum (SOLV) initiated with a Sector Weight at KeyBanc
    • Sweetgreen (SG) initiated with an Equal Weight at Barclays, tgt $16
    • Teva (TEVA) initiated with a Buy at Goldman Sachs, tgt $24
    • Teradata (TDC) resumed with Neutral from Sell at UBS, tgt $24
    • Viatris (VTRS) initiated with a Neutral at Goldman Sachs, tgt $10

>>> US Gapping down

Gapping down
In reaction to earnings/guidance
:
  • LULU -21.7%, DOCU -19.3% (also increases share repurchase authorization by $1 bln), BBCP -13.1%, IOT -12.8%, TTAN -10.9%, BRZE -8.6%, WOOF -7.7%, ZUMZ -5.5% (also authorizes new $15 mln share repurchase program), ABM -3.3%, AVGO -2.2%, MTN -0.9%
Other news:
  • VERA -29.1% (following Otsuka reported Sibeprenlimab Phase 3 Data show a statistically significant and clinically meaningful proteinuria reduction for the treatment of immunoglobulin A nephropathy)
  • ASR -5.3% (May passenger traffic)
  • MOS -5.2% (revises Q2 guidance)
  • BJRI -5% (names new CEO)
  • RCEL -2.6% (first clinical publication evaluating Cohealyx)
  • PAM -1.9% (discloses that Secretary of Energy has issued Resolution extending the transition period of Hidroeléctrica Diamante S.A. concession until October 19th)

>>> US Gapping up

Gapping up
In reaction to earnings/guidance
:
  • NX +13.2%, MANU +4.6%, BYRN +3.1%, AVO +3%, RBRK +2.7%, GIII +2.6%, GES +1.9%
Other news:
  • PVBC +5.5% (NBBK and PVBC to merge)
  • RKLB +4.2% (Musk/Trump dispute; possible impact on SpaceX)
  • WTRG +3.6% (Canada Pension Plan Investment Board confirmed block sale transaction)
  • BAK +3.3% (clarifies media reports)
  • MRT +2.9% (ride-hailing service reaches 2.15 mln riders and 314K registered drivers, exceeding June 30, 2025 targets a month earlier than planned)
  • HIVE +2.2% (achieves 58% peak hashrate growth in one month, remains on track to reach 25 EH/s by year-end)
  • ARBE +1.9% (files for $50 mln mixed securities shelf offering)
  • TGB +1.5% (resolves conflict concerning mineral tenures)
  • NAVI +1.5% (names new board chair)
  • IRBT +1.5% (discloses amended credit agreement; updated risk factors)
  • MSTR +1.5% (prices IPO of 11,764,700 shares of 10.00% Series A Perpetual Stride Preferred Stock (the STRD Stock) at $85.00 per share)
  • ARVN +1.4% (submission of NDA to FDA with its partner Pfizer (PFE) for vepdegestrant)

Wired : A GPS Blackout Would Shut Down the World - https://dub.sh/9rBUOGE

A GPS Blackout Would Shut Down the World
GPS jamming and spoofing attacks are on the rise. If the global navigation system the US relies on were to go down entirely, it would send the world into unprecedented chaos.

Around 12,500 miles above our heads, the satellites that make up the Global Positioning System (GPS) quietly keep the world running. A blackout would result in almost instantaneous chaos.

“You would see traffic jams, a lot more traffic accidents, because transportation is going to see the first most immediate impact,” says Dana Goward, the founder of the Resilient Navigation and Timing Foundation, a charity which works to strengthen GPS.

Thousands of planes in the air, which use GPS among other systems for navigation and precision landing, would face a wave of uncertainty. Then other critical parts of society—from financial transactions to energy production systems—which have come to rely upon the precision positioning, navigation and timing (PNT) provided by the US-owned constellation of 31 GPS satellites may start to stutter. The ripples would be felt around the world.

“If it was a catastrophic moment that happened at a blink of an eye and we lost GPS entirely, you would see this global seizure of everything that moves, every piece of data that moves, every human that moves. All of that would shut down,” says Erik Daehler, the vice president of defense, satellites, and spacecraft systems at Sierra Space. The timing signals included in GPS would be one of the most impactful losses. Cell phone connections would likely collapse. Billions would quickly be wiped from stock markets amid the disruption.

A GPS outage could be particularly ruinous to the United States, which has a heavy reliance on its sovereign space system and has dragged its feet in building backups that can provide the required resilience needed to keep the country running. The US has fallen behind, the National Space-based PNT Advisory Board warned last year. In contrast, China has reinforced its own more modern satellite navigation system—BeiDou—with a sprawling network of fiber-optic cables and terrestrial radio signals.

The conditions needed to cause the entire GPS network to be entirely knocked out would be extraordinary and likely would come with wider societal ramifications. Such an outage, for instance, could be caused by China or Russia firing anti-satellite weapons against the GPS satellites (the US also has anti-satellite weapons), a powerful geomagnetic storm, or an escalation in the capabilities of electronic warfare.

Despite the improbability of a total outage, GPS isn’t infallible. It has its demons. “What really happens is, regionally, GPS gets messed with and jammed and interfered with on a regular basis,” Daehler says. Thousands of planes and ships are having their GPS interfered with each week, and signals are regularly disrupted around war zones.

“America is not well prepared at all,” Goward says. More should be done to build out PNT systems that can act as a backstop to the space-based GPS signals, he says. “There’s not a general overall awareness. We certainly don’t have a resilient PNT architecture or a PNT architecture of any kind other than GPS.”

The GPS constellation of 31 satellites, which has received several hardware updates over the years, has been in operation for the past 40 years. The system typically broadcasts at 100 percent availability and provides accurate location data to within 7 meters.

The GPS satellites are just one of the four so-called global navigation satellite systems (GNSS) in operation. As well as China’s BeiDou, there is Russia’s GLONASS and Europe’s Galileo constellation. Over the past half decade, though, GNSS signals have increasingly been attacked as the technology to disrupt them has become cheaper and more sophisticated. Most commonly, disruption happens around Russia, Israel, Myanmar, the South China sea, areas of the Middle East, and the Baltic countries in Europe.

Broadly, there are two main forms of attack against GNSS signals: jamming and spoofing. Jamming involves blocking signals so that positioning isn’t available, while spoofing involves creating mock signals that make something appear somewhere else on the map. Ships have been made to appear inland at airports, while planes are made to look like they are flying in tight circles. In one video shared by the Resilient Navigation and Timing Foundation that appears to show GPS interference, a plane’s systems blast out a warning message to “pull up” when its pilots reported they were flying higher than Mount Everest.

“I’m most concerned about aviation,” says Todd Humphreys, the director of the University of Texas at Austin’s radio navigation laboratory. “At least one fatal aviation accident in Europe can be traced to GNSS interference as a primary cause. A deliberate attack against US aviation, as opposed to the collateral attacks in Europe, would cause astounding economic harm.” The number of spoofing incidents last year was 500 percent higher than in 2023, according to aviation officials.

The US Space Force, which is responsible for the GPS satellites, did not respond to a request for comment for this article from WIRED.

Across the US, PNT data is crucial to almost all critical infrastructure—from communications and health care monitoring systems to food production and wastewater management—but GPS is often the “sole” source of this information, according to the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, making the systems more vulnerable. (The military uses a more robust GPS setup than commercial applications).

“There is no one sector that doesn’t use GPS, and some are more reliant than others. Users in these sectors are not all acutely aware of the risks associated with their dependency on it and the ways that the system can be disrupted or degraded,” says Caitlin Durkovich, a former national security official and critical infrastructure expert.

Building a “layered” approach could help to make GPS less vulnerable to attack, experts say. Both Europe’s Galileo and China’s BeiDou are newer than GPS and, in some ways, more resilient. Last year, the National Space–based PNT Advisory Board produced a comparison of GPS and BeiDou that flagged a broader series of backups to Beijing’s system.

While GPS satellites are located only in middle Earth orbit, BeiDou has satellites in multiple orbits and is further along in deploying them into low Earth orbit. China also has a terrestrial radio broadcast network, called eLoran, and has laid 20,000 kilometers of fiber-optic cables that link up with 295 timing centers to broadcast alternatives.

“In the case of BeiDou, the system’s enhanced resiliency and capability should be considered an element of ‘soft power’ and an element of great power competition,” the advisory board wrote last year. The board, led by Admiral Thad Allen, a former leader of the US Coast Guard, called for a more joined-up approach to managing PNT across the US government and for GPS to be specifically designated as “critical infrastructure.”

“I think there has to be a federal role in this, both because the system and signals are operated and provisioned by the federal government. But because of the complexity of the system and the fact that you need a common standard,” Durkovich says.

“We’d like to see a core national PNT architecture,” Goward says. “Then we would suggest some form of fiber network and a terrestrial broadcast. We think it would be a substantial deterrent and it would actually make space-based systems safer because folks would be less likely to interfere with it.”

Across the country, there are various levels of backup systems in place that have been sporadically introduced and multiple ongoing efforts to improve the GPS setup. Financial institutions, for instance, have been deploying atomic clocks to ensure they have backups for the timing element provided by GPS and telecoms networks have some capacity in place.

“It’s not to say that the US doesn’t have a robust timing infrastructure, actually it’s quite robust,” says Jeremy Bennington, the vice president of PNT Assurance at Spirent Communications, adding that much of it is spread across commercial entities, a stark difference to China’s national approach. “I do think that a backup is going to be required so that you end up with that layered approach.”

The calls to modernize PNT have increasingly become more urgent. In 2020, a first-term Trump executive order called for making PNT systems more resilient. At the end of March this year, the Federal Communications Commission opened an inquiry to identify GPS alternatives that can provide backups. “Relying on GPS alone as the primary source of PNT data leaves America exposed to a single point of failure and leaves our PNT system open to disruption or manipulation by adversaries,” the FCC said at the time.

There are multiple ways to add more resilience and upgrade the existing GPS system. The military has long been working on upgrades to be used in defense situations. Bennington says that GPS satellites could be added to other orbits and the further rollout of more capable signals. Daehler and colleagues at Sierra Space are working on creating ways to reduce the impact of jamming and spoofing.

Lisa Dyer, the executive director of the GPS Innovation Alliance, says the GPS system could build in authentication to confirm its signals are genuine, like Galileo and BeiDou. Dyer says that rolling out the newer L5 signal can also build in more protection for planes and aviation. “To me that's an important national objective of the United States: that GPS remains the de facto international navigation standard,” Dyer says.

There are also hardware updates happening, though some of them are slow and have dragged on for years. The US Space Force has recently been funding multiple companies to develop low Earth orbit satellite GPS constellations and quickly launching systems into space. Elsewhere, quantum technologies are being used to create new navigation systems. SandboxAQ, a Google spinout, is working on magnetic navigation.

Ultimately, as well as better government management around GPS, organizations need to spend money to upgrade their systems and protections, Bennington says. That means spending money. “If GPS jamming or spoofing were to happen at any major airport, whether it's Heathrow, Frankfurt, Munich, New York, the amount of cancellation and delays in the cost incurred by the airlines just in several hours would be more than the cost to upgrade their fleets,” he says.

FT : EU agrees to increase flight delay times before compensation kicks in

EU agrees to increase flight delay times before compensation kicks in
Countries finally settle on timeframe for compensation after 12 years of negotiations

EU countries have agreed to increase the amount of time passengers will have to wait before they can claim compensation for a delayed flight after 12 years of negotiations.

Passengers will only be able to apply for compensation for short-haul flights if they are delayed for four hours or more, while for long-haul flights they will have to wait six hours, EU transport ministers said on Thursday.

Currently, passengers can apply for compensation if any flight is more than three hours delayed.

Ministers also agreed, as part of revisions to 31 different air passenger rights, to increase the amount of compensation marginally for those delayed on short-haul flights from €250 to €300, but cut it for long-haul flights from €600 to €500.

Other rights agreed included automating forms for compensation, restrictions to grounds for denying reimbursement and putting more responsibility on airlines to provide rerouting and accommodation when there are long delays, as well as strengthened rights for passengers with disabilities.

The revision of the EU’s air passenger rights was first proposed in 2013 by the European Commission, but it has taken 12 years for EU states to come to an agreement on the timeframe for compensation.

Airlines argued that mandating a longer delay threshold would give them a “fighting chance to minimise delays and avoid flight cancellations”, the industry body Airlines for Europe (A4E) said in a letter to the German minister for transport this week.

A4E represents Europe’s major airlines, including Lufthansa, Air France-KLM and Ryanair.

It said that 70 per cent of flights that end up being cancelled could be saved at a five-hour threshold “benefiting up to 10mn passengers per year”.

“Europe has been waiting for transparent and workable passenger rights for 12 years and member states have fallen at the final hurdle to deliver . . . member states have diluted the European Commission’s original proposal and introduced even more complexity,” A4E said in a statement.

The European Commission originally proposed extending the time to five hours for short-haul flights and nine for long-haul.

Politicians, however, have veered away from delivering the politically unpalatable message that passengers will have to lose out. Germany was one of the strongest opponents of increasing the limits, along with Spain.

In a statement on Thursday, German lawmakers from the European People’s Party, Europe’s largest political group, said that “decreasing the rights to compensation for air passengers would be a step in the wrong direction. Reimbursement after a three-hour delay has been standard for many years and should remain so”.

“No politician wants to say more than four hours,” one senior EU diplomat said.

The member states will have to negotiate with the European parliament before the revisions become final law.

FT : US sidelines Europe and turns to Gulf to drive Iran nuclear talks

US sidelines Europe and turns to Gulf to drive Iran nuclear talks
Saudi Arabia and UAE have become crucial intermediaries in effort to resolve stand-off after opposing landmark 2015 deal

Gulf states have eclipsed Europe as central players in the US’s efforts to secure a new nuclear deal with Iran, a stark reversal of roles a decade after they were sidelined and frustrated by an earlier landmark agreement with Tehran.

In part, the shift underscores how US President Donald Trump’s pursuit of his America First policy, and marginalising of traditional European allies, has created space for middle powers in the Gulf and elsewhere to try and influence America’s foreign policy.

While the Obama administration engaged in a multilateral process involving the UK, Germany, France, Russia and China for the 2015 agreement, known by its acronym the JCPOA, Trump is in effect pushing for a bilateral agreement with the Islamic republic, seeking a quick deal and threatening military action if diplomacy fails.

But the change also reflects a marked détente between the Gulf’s powerhouses — Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates — and Iran.

The Sunni states, who have for decades viewed the predominantly Shia republic as a hostile and destabilising rival, have sought to de-escalate tensions with Tehran and avoid another eruption of conflict in the Middle East.

As a consequence, Riyadh and Abu Dhabi have gone from being among the loudest cheerleaders of Trump’s decision to abandon the JCPOA in 2018 and impose “maximum pressure” on Iran to publicly backing diplomatic efforts to resolve the nuclear stand-off between Tehran and the west.

It means the Gulf states are leveraging their ties with Trump to act as important counterweights to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who is lobbying for military action.

Ali Vaez, an Iran expert at Crisis Group, said the Gulf’s buy-in was a “game changer” because of their influence in Washington.

“In his first term, Trump had Netanyahu and MBS [Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman] advising against a deal with Iran,” Vaez said. “Now he has Saudi Arabia urging him to strike a deal with Iran, and MBS is more influential than Netanyahu, so it’s very important.”

The indirect talks between the Trump administration and Iran have been facilitated by Oman, which has long maintained good relations with Tehran and sought to position itself as a neutral power in the Middle East. Muscat hosted secret US-Iran talks between Tehran and the Obama administration in early 2013 before the negotiations became public and moved to Geneva and Vienna.

This time, Oman’s efforts are being supported by Qatar, a small nation that hosts Washington’s biggest military base in the region and retains strong ties with Iran.

Iranian foreign minister Abbas Araghchi met Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman al-Thani in the days leading up to Trump’s trip to the Gulf last month.

Doha, often used as a conduit for messages between Washington and Tehran, then hosted Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian shortly after the US president left.

Crucially, Saudi Arabia — which restored relations with Iran in 2023 after a six-year hiatus — has added its weight to the Gulf’s push for peace.

In April, Prince Mohammed dispatched his brother and defence minister, Prince Khalid bin Salman, to Iran for talks with senior officials, including supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

The highest ranking Saudi royal visit to the republic in decades, it was intended to underline Riyadh’s support for a deal between Iran and the US.

A Saudi official said the message to Iran’s leaders was that the kingdom wanted to maintain dialogue with the republic and would not be part of any hostile action. It also urged Tehran to reach an agreement with Trump, the official added.

The Gulf’s fear is that if diplomacy fails and the US and Israel launch strikes against Iran, it would trigger a war in which Tehran could retaliate by attacking oil and other infrastructure across the region, either directly or through proxies — as happened in 2019.

“We don’t want a misunderstanding to start a war between Iran and the US,” the Saudi official said.

The UAE, which Trump chose as a courier to send a letter to Khamenei this year, has made similar comments.

After Araghchi met his Emirati counterpart Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed last month, the UAE said the pair discussed the importance of the nuclear negotiations “in consolidating the foundations of security and stability in the region”.

It is a marked contrast to Saudi and Emirati leaders’ frustrations with former president Barack Obama, who infuriated them by neither engaging more when negotiating the JCPOA, nor addressing their concerns about Iran’s missile programme and support for regional militants.

Iran, meanwhile, wants the Gulf states to be “integral to the negotiating process, to ensure they are not spoilers and because they are going to be the underwriters of this deal economically, if not politically,” said Sanam Vakil, director of the Middle East programme at Chatham House.

The Gulf states could also have a role if the talks succeed as the discussions include the possibility of setting up a consortium, which would involve the US and regional states, to develop facilities for low-level uranium enrichment.

The idea is viewed as a potential compromise to bridge the gap between Iran’s insistence that it has that right to enrich uranium, and Trump’s public demand Tehran dismantle its programme.

“The consortium could create a situation where you can bind regional countries together in a regional venture in a way that has no precedent,” said Vaez.

The UAE, for example, already has a nuclear power plant but agreed with the US to forgo domestic enrichment, while Saudi Arabia wants to develop its own programme and enrich uranium domestically.

In contrast to Gulf states, European governments integral to the JCPOA negotiations appear marginalised.

European officials have held several rounds of lower level talks with Iranian counterparts since September, but European diplomats acknowledged their involvement in US-Iran negotiations was limited.

Tensions have for several years also been on the rise between European states and Iran.

Tehran blames the Europeans, who opposed Trump’s decision to abandon the deal, for not doing more to ensure the republic received the economic benefits of the JCPOA after the US withdrew from the accord.

The Europeans, meanwhile, are increasingly worried about Iran’s aggressive nuclear advances and have threatened to trigger a so-called snapback process this year that would reimpose UN sanctions if Iran’s activities are not reined in.

A western diplomat in Tehran warned that if the talks fail, Trump may use them as a “scapegoat” and pressure them to trigger the snapback mechanism.

“The Europeans are very marginalised,” said Vakil. “This is exactly where they don’t want to be, they are not in the room, not discussing their issues and backed into a corner over snapback. It’s the worst possible scenario for them.”