FT : Nato spending growth lifts small French defence firms

Nato spending growth lifts small French defence firms
Investors bet on rising sales of products ranging from drones to night-vision goggles

Nato spending commitments are helping to make France’s defence sector a rare bright spot for the country’s struggling economy, with small companies benefiting as well as bigger businesses.

France boasts large defence companies including Dassault, Thales and Safran, but the fortunes of Exosens, a specialist in light-amplification tubes, illustrates how smaller businesses are also benefiting from greater defence spending. The maker of technology behind night-vision goggles is now valued at about €2.2bn after a stock surge this year.

At a tour of the Exosens factory in south-west France, chief executive Jérome Cérisier said he was preparing for an increase in longer-term orders, as Europe reckons with the need to bolster its defence capabilities.

“We’re at a major geostrategic turning point and even an end to the war in Ukraine will not fundamentally change that situation,” he told the Financial Times.

The Banque de France has identified the defence sector as one of the few drivers of business investment in the stagnant French economy amid Europe’s response to US President Donald Trump’s call to raise defence spending.

Exosens made its market debut in June 2024 just days before President Emmanuel Macron called snap parliamentary elections, shocking France and cooling business activity. While the country’s SBF 120 stock market index has been largely treading water since then, Exosens stock has almost doubled.

The company’s sales rose 20 per cent in the first half of the year to €225mn, with operating profits also up a fifth to €27mn. Key clients include the German military and Greek night-vision goggle maker Theon.


Other small French defence companies to benefit from investor interest include Exail Technologies, a provider of marine navigation systems and drones, whose shares have risen about 420 per cent this year, as well as private firms such as drone producer Delair and MC2-Technologies, which makes high-frequency technology aimed at neutralising drones.

MC2’s deputy director Alexandre Sibon said the company would increase revenue by 30 per cent this year, from a low base of €15mn, as Nato countries invest in “electronic warfare”.

He said there were plenty of announcements of support for the company: “We’re waiting for that to translate into orders.”

While Exosens does not have major contracts with the French military, Macron has set a long-term goal to double the French armed forces’ budget to €100bn a year. Although stretched public finances will make that difficult, the vast majority of spending will flow to French defence companies.

At its factory, Exosens demonstrated its latest generation of light-intensification tubes installed in goggles that bathed pitch-dark demonstration rooms in a greenish tinge.

The tube works by converting light to electrons, multiplying these electrons with a specially designed plate and converting them back into light when they hit a phosphorous screen. The resulting image was a 30 per cent improvement in quality compared with previous products, the group said.

At up to €4,000 per tube, the so-called 5G product would cost more than existing technology, but had already received 5,000 orders and been adopted by special forces units, Exosens said this month.

“If you need to see 20 metres further in front of you than others, a few hundred euros is not the question. Demand will be there,” said Frédéric Guilhem, chief commercial officer of its night vision business, which makes up about three-quarters of the company’s sales.

Exosens said its technology was favoured by European buyers because no parts were made in the US, meaning it did not depend on export licences from Washington, unlike similar technology by its US competitors Elbit America and L3, the company said.

“It’s possible Americans have products that are comparable but they are not available [to Europe]. We are the only ones able to offer them . . . the US doesn’t want to send the same thing that the US armies have,” Guilhem added.

Aurélien Sivignon, equity analyst at ODDO BHF, said Exosens’ non-American supply chain was a major “competitive advantage” but it would need to grow its capacity to meet demand. The company is investing in expanding manufacturing at its factory in Brive as well as building a US presence.

Such expansion means betting on sustained increases in defence spending. Companies such as Exosens are still waiting for more clarity on the scale of Nato countries’ investments, but investors are already swinging behind the European defence sector. French lender BPCE became the first European bank to issue a bond dedicated to defence companies worth €750mn earlier this month.

Philippe Jeanne, BPCE’s head of financial management, said there was no “reticence” from investors, compared with the previous discomfort with defence investment over ethical concerns. “It’s not just war in Ukraine. It’s also the disengagement of the US . . . it obliges everyone to adapt,” he said.

Exosens chief executive, Cérisier, is also confident of continued growth for the company as Europe boosts defence spending, which he says has been lacking: “I think there has been a profound wake-up call and that will lead to significant higher defence activity in the long-term.”

FT : US and investors gambling on unproven nuclear technology, warn experts

US and investors gambling on unproven nuclear technology, warn experts
Small reactors could prove too costly to be viable despite $9bn investment in power for AI boom

The US government and investors have made a $9bn gamble on small nuclear reactors to power the AI boom and lower emissions — but experts warn the technology could prove too costly to be viable.

Data compiled by the FT shows that since 2019, government agencies including the energy and defence departments have committed over $6bn to developers of small modular reactors (SMRs) through awards, loans and cost sharing agreements.

Private investment has also soared, with over $3bn raised in the same timeframe.

The technology promises a one-stop solution to data centres’ power needs by providing clean, reliable and cheap electricity for companies to train and run their AI models. Investor enthusiasm has lifted the share prices and valuations of companies with little or no revenues or operating projects.

“There’s a lot of cheerleading happening, but the amount of capital that you need to cross the finish line is huge,” said Chris Gadomski, head of nuclear research at BloombergNEF, which estimates data centre power needs will more than double by 2035.

“What I see happening with SMRs and data centres reminds me of the internet boom and bust of the early 2000s.”

Small modular reactors generate up to 300 megawatts of power each — a fraction of the roughly 1,000 megawatts produced by reactors at utility plants like Georgia’s Vogtle, the largest in the country.

But questions linger over whether the technology can produce electricity which is cost competitive with bigger nuclear plants, renewables and natural gas.

Past efforts to build SMR projects in the US have been plagued by delays and cost overruns.

In 2023, NuScale — which has a design approved by US regulators — was forced to cancel a project after costs ballooned more than 120 per cent. The three operating SMRs worldwide, which are located in Russia and China, exceeded their original cost estimates by 300 to 400 per cent. 

Estimates of SMR’s “levelised cost of energy” — power cost that should be charged for the project to break even — produced by independent analysts and the companies themselves vary significantly.

According to data from Wood Mackenzie, by 2030 SMRs should generate power at $182 per megawatt hour compared with $133 per megawatt hour for conventional nuclear.

Natural gas is expected to sit at $126 per megawatt hour, while onshore wind and solar, backed up by battery, are projected to be around one-third less expensive.


According to Oklo, the SMR developer backed by Sam Altman and energy secretary Chris Wright, its technology will generate power for $90 per megawatt hour, while NuScale says its power cost is $64 per megawatt hour.

Some nuclear engineers say larger reactors are cheaper to build, citing the greater need for steel, concrete, safety systems, cooling pipes and sensors required for multiple smaller units.

“There are many companies that think if they go Henry Ford and build an assembly line, everything will be cheap,” said Nick Touran, a nuclear engineer and consultant. “There are massive economies of scale that they’re neglecting.”

Supply chain bottlenecks also weigh heavily on reactor costs.

Most SMRs are designed to use high-assay low-enriched uranium, a denser fuel than what is used in larger reactors. Since its production is dominated by Russia and there is only one plant in the US licensed to produce at scale, companies are reliant on government stockpiles.

“We need the supply chain to be built out,” said Dimple Gosai, head of US cleantech and sustainability equity research at Bank of America, who estimates that elevated fuel costs could add up to $20 per megawatt hour to developers’ power costs.

However, advocates say the cost of SMRs will track downwards over time.

“Any first plant will have challenging economics,” said Simon Irish, chief executive of Terrestrial Energy, which says its power cost is $69 per megawatt hour. “But from there we roll downhill.”

Valar Atomics founder and chief executive, Isaiah Taylor, said SMRs’ lower safety requirements enable cost savings. “If you start small, you have intrinsic safety, which you can use to make it simpler and deploy a lot faster,” he said.

Others point out that although its supply is stretched, uranium prices are less volatile than natural gas.

“You get a more stable and predictable 60-year price on a nuclear plant,” said X-energy chief executive J Clay Sell.

SMR companies are increasingly signing power supply deals with utilities and tech companies, with over 32 gigawatts of commitments since 2023.


Some deals, such as one between Google and Kairos, a reactor developer, for the latter to provide 500 megawatts by 2035, are binding agreements, but most are exploratory agreements.

Still, even nonbinding deals are a “significant step forward”, says David Brown, director of Wood Mackenzie’s Energy Transition Practice, since investors are warier of nuclear than other technologies and offer developers higher interest rates.

“It’s a big vote of confidence in the sector and shows there’s a path to commercial viability.”

FT : OpenAI and Jony Ive grapple with technical issues on secretive AI device

OpenAI and Jony Ive grapple with technical issues on secretive AI device
ChatGPT maker is working with former Apple design boss to launch a palm-sized personal assistant next year

OpenAI and star designer Jony Ive are grappling with a series of technical issues with their secretive new artificial intelligence device, as they push to launch a blockbuster tech product next year.

The San Francisco-based start-up run by Sam Altman acquired the former Apple design chief’s company io for $6.5bn in May, but the pair have shared few details on the projects they are building.

Their aim is to create a palm-sized device without a screen that can take audio and visual cues from the physical environment and respond to users’ requests.

People familiar with their plans said OpenAI and Ive had yet to solve critical problems that could delay the device’s release.

Despite having hardware developed by Ive and his team — whose alluring designs of the iMac, iPod and iPhone helped turn Apple into one of the most valuable companies in the world — obstacles remain in the device’s software and the infrastructure needed to power it.

These include deciding on the assistant’s “personality”, privacy issues and budgeting for the computing power needed to run OpenAI’s models on a mass consumer device.

“Compute is another huge factor for the delay,” said one person close to Ive. “Amazon has the compute for an Alexa, so does Google [for its Home device], but OpenAI is struggling to get enough compute for ChatGPT, let alone an AI device — they need to fix that first.”

A person close to OpenAI said the teething troubles were simply normal parts of the product development process.

Multiple people familiar with the plans said OpenAI and Ive were working on a device roughly the size of a smartphone that users would communicate with through a camera, microphone and speaker. One person suggested it might have multiple cameras.

The gadget is designed to sit on a desk or table but can also be carried around by the user. The Wall Street Journal previously reported some of the specifications around the device.

One person said the device would be “always on” rather than triggered by a word or prompt. The device’s sensors would gather data throughout the day that would help to build its virtual assistant’s “memory”.

OpenAI overtook Elon Musk’s SpaceX to become the world’s most valuable private company this week, after a deal that valued it at $500bn. One of the ways the ChatGPT maker is seeking to justify the price tag is a push into hardware.

The goal is to improve the “smart speakers” of the past decade, such as Amazon’s Echo speaker and its Alexa digital assistant, which are generally used for a limited set of functions such as listening to music and setting kitchen timers.

OpenAI and Ive are seeking to build a more powerful and useful machine. But two people familiar with the project said that settling on the device’s “voice” and its mannerisms were a challenge.

One issue is ensuring the device only chimes in when useful, preventing it from talking too much or not knowing when to finish the conversation — an ongoing issue with ChatGPT.

“The concept is that you should have a friend who’s a computer who isn’t your weird AI girlfriend . . . like [Apple’s digital voice assistant] Siri but better,” said one person who was briefed on the plans. OpenAI was looking for “ways for it to be accessible but not intrusive”. 

“Model personality is a hard thing to balance,” said another person close to the project. “It can’t be too sycophantic, not too direct, helpful, but doesn’t keep talking in a feedback loop.”

OpenAI’s device will be entering a difficult market. Friend, an AI companion worn as a pendant around your neck, has been criticised for being “creepy” and having a “snarky” personality. An AI pin made by Humane, a company that Altman personally invested in, has been scrapped.

Still, OpenAI has been on a hiring spree to build its hardware business. Its acquisition of io brought in more than 20 former Apple hardware employees poached by Ive from his alma mater. It has also recruited at least a dozen other Apple device experts this year, according to LinkedIn accounts.

It has similarly poached members of Meta’s staff working on the Big Tech group’s Quest headset and smart glasses.

OpenAI is also working with Chinese contract manufacturers, including Luxshare, to create its first device, according to two people familiar with the development that was first reported by The Information. The people added that the device might be assembled outside of China.

OpenAI and LoveFrom, Ive’s design group, declined to comment.

FT : EU pushes new AI strategy to reduce tech reliance on US and China

EU pushes new AI strategy to reduce tech reliance on US and China
Brussels to unveil plan targeting digital sovereignty as it warns technology can be ‘weaponised’ by geopolitical rivals

The EU must promote homegrown artificial intelligence platforms and decrease its reliance on foreign providers, Brussels has said, as it prepares to set out a new plan to compete against the US and China in the global race for the revolutionary technology.

According to a draft proposal seen by the Financial Times, the European Commission’s new “Apply AI strategy” will promote European-made AI tools to provide security and resilience while boosting the bloc’s industrial competitiveness. The strategy highlights the need to improve AI usage in sectors including healthcare, defence and manufacturing.

The Commission aims to “strengthen EU AI sovereignty” by accelerating the development and use of homemade artificial intelligence technologies, including policies to “accelerate the adoption of European scalable and replicable generative AI solutions in public administrations”, the draft says.

The strategy, which could change before it is made public, is set to be presented by the EU’s tech chief Henna Virkkunen on Tuesday.

It warns of “external dependencies of the AI stack” — the infrastructure and software needed to build, train and manage AI applications — which it says “can be weaponised” by both “state and non-state actors”, posing a risk to supply chains.

Such concerns have risen since Donald Trump’s return to the US presidency, which has sparked widespread concerns about the bloc’s reliance on American tech and calls for digital independence in Europe.

Meanwhile, China is challenging the US as a global leader in AI development, stoking fears that Europe may have little influence over future use of the technology.

In recent years, Europe has become home to a number of promising AI companies, from French model maker Mistral to German defence tech group Helsing. But the EU still relies on the US and Asia for much of the software, hardware and critical minerals needed to develop AI.

According to the draft, public administrations have a central role to play to “help AI start-ups grow through increased demand for European-made open source AI solutions”.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said at an event on Friday that the bloc wants to “speed up AI adoption across the board” via the Apply AI strategy in order to ensure that Europe doesn’t miss out on the new technology.

Brussels wants to position AI not merely as a productivity tool, but as a “strategic asset” that must be tightly integrated into the EU’s institutional, industrial and security systems.

To implement the actions in the strategy, such as supporting AI adoption in manufacturing and the health sector, the commission is mobilising €1bn from existing financing programmes.

The bloc also wants to prioritise implementation of European AI-enabled tools in defence, as European capitals rapidly increase their defence spending in response to the threat from Russia and fears of US disengagement from European security under Trump.

Brussels plans to “accelerate the development and deployment of European AI-enabled” command and control (C2) capacities.

C2 systems, which are used to instruct troops and manage battlefield operations, are one of the so-called critical enablers that European militaries currently rely heavily on the US to provide through Nato.

The Commission also wants to “support the development of sovereign frontier models” for space defence technology.

>>> USDA and APHIS confirm new avian flu cases confirmed in 4 states, 1 province

USDA and APHIS confirm new avian flu cases confirmed in 4 states, 1 province
- The virus was recently confirmed in Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin and Utah

The spread of highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) in North America has intensified, as new confirmed cases have been reported in the United States and Canada.

Five new flock infections have been reported in the United States alone, while one has been reported in Canada.

The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) and the Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship (IDALS) both reported that the presence of H5N1 HPAI has been confirmed in a commercial turkey flock in Calhoun County, but neither agency has yet reported how many birds were involved.

The situation was confirmed on October 2, and represents the first time HPAI has appeared in a commercial flock in Iowa since March 17.

IDALS reported that this is the eighth time in 2025 that HPAI has been found in Iowa, with five of those instances involving commercial operations and the other three involving backyard flocks. The other four commercial poultry cases occurred in Buena Vista (2) Sac and O’Brien counties.

TechCrunch : Tesla’s insurance arm accused of ‘egregious delays’ and ‘systemic f

Tesla’s insurance arm accused of ‘egregious delays’ and ‘systemic failures’ by CA regulator

Tesla has been hit with an enforcement action by California’s Department of Insurance (CDI) for routinely denying or delaying customer claims despite years of warnings from the state regulator, according to a new pair of filings.

Tesla’s insurance arm, along with its partner State National Insurance Company, engaged in “willful unfair claims settlement practices” including “egregious delays in responding to policyholder claims in all steps” of the process and “unreasonable denials,” CDI wrote. This has allegedly caused “financial harm” and “distress to policyholders.”

CDI first approached Tesla about these issues in 2022, according to the filings, yet it claims things have only gotten worse. “In 2025, the Tesla Companies have already had more complaints, more justified complaints, and committed more violations than in the three previous years combined,” the regulator wrote.

Tesla and State National could face penalties up to $5,000 for each “unlawful, unfair, or deceptive act” and up to $10,000 for each “willful” act, according to the filings. The companies have 15 days to respond.

The enforcement action could have knock-on legal effects for Tesla. In July, the company was hit with a proposed class action lawsuit over allegations that the company purposely delayed and minimized claim payouts. CDI wrote Friday that Tesla’s actions may have created “potential third-party liability exposure.” Tesla and State National did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Tesla launched its in-house insurance product in 2019. The idea was to offer cheaper premiums and faster service. But it got off to a rocky start. The website repeatedly crashed, and when it didn’t, it offered quotes that were far higher than owners expected. Still, Musk promised it would be a “revolutionary” product.

Just three years later, according to CDI’s filings, the regulator noticed a “marked uptick in claims-related consumer complaints” against Tesla. So in December 2022, CDI started meeting with Tesla and State National.

The regulator said it learned Tesla’s “Head of Claims” position had been vacant for months. It also accused the companies of not reporting the claims-handling problems.

As a result, CDI subjected Tesla and State National to a sort of probationary period: the regulator monitored the companies’ efforts to reduce these violations for six months. Tesla and State National “conceded” that they had underestimated the volume of claims and the staffing required to handle them, according to CDI, and promised to beef up hiring.

It took Tesla until April 2023 to hire a new Head of Claims. Through the rest of that year, Tesla and State National “reported improvements in the quality” of their claims handling and the “resolution of consumer complaints.”

Later that year, Reuters published an investigation into Tesla’s insurance arm that showed things weren’t so rosy.

CDI came to the same realization in 2024. The regulator noticed a “significant increase” in both consumer complaints against Tesla and “violations of the law,” according to the filings. CDI had received just 83 consumer complaints against Tesla in 2022, but in 2024, that number jumped to 829. In 775 of those cases, CDI found Tesla had violated the state’s insurance code.

Things have only gotten worse, according to CDI. Through September 22 of this year, the regulator has received 1,481 complaints against Tesla, and identified 1,969 insurance code violations.

In total, since 2022, CDI said Tesla has accumulated nearly 3,000 violations of state insurance law. The majority of those violations involve Tesla failing to respond to customers within the mandatory 15-day period. CDI said it identified 166 violations in which Tesla filed to conduct a “thorough, fair, and objective investigation” into a claim.

“CDI repeatedly notified [Tesla] of its claims-mishandling issues and violations of law,” the regulator wrote. “While [Tesla] repeatedly committed to improvements, the number of justified complaints and violations continued to mount, demonstrating [Telsa’s] failure to correct its practices.”

The Information : The Chinese Billionaire Whose Robots and Cars Should Worry Det

The Chinese Billionaire Whose Robots and Cars Should Worry Detroit—and Silicon Valley
Billionaire He Xiaopeng has a certain daringness—and finally, real revenue growth.

For years, Chinese billionaire He Xiaopeng has been pegged as an Elon Musk wannabe, and his electric vehicle company, XPeng, as a mere Tesla copycat. And until recently the company seemed laggardly, raising questions about whether it would survive.

All of that is changing quickly. In other words, XPeng has moved up a stair from the realm of mere novelty to unignorable player with intimidating products and shrewd commercial instincts. He may soon be a force that Silicon Valley and Detroit alike must reckon with.

The 12-year-old company is on a roll: Its car sales are on track to more than double year on year in 2025 to more than 400,000 units, driven by demand for the Mona M03, a $17,000 EV; its share price has more than doubled year to date; and it seems to be on track to notch its first profitable quarter. XPeng has just released a knock-your-socks-off $30,700 luxury sedan, and it could end the year as the world’s sixth or seventh largest EV seller, neck and neck with Hyundai Motor, regarded as one of the industry’s best EV makers.

He’s next two products, which he will unveil later this month, will show him starting to break away from his image as Musk Lite: XPeng will introduce the latest version of Iron, its humanoid robot. Then, in an event in Dubai, it will launch the X3-F, a $280,000 minivan whose features will include a two-passenger electric helicopter folded up in the back—a product that even the famously iconoclastic Musk has not attempted.

If He is trying too hard or reaching too far, Chinese first movers are reaching with him. In an appearance I attended last month in Munich, He said XPeng had 6,000 pre-orders for the vehicle, including from two aviation companies that intend to use them for high-end tours of the Yangtze River Delta. He has plans to export them, though that will be subject to often strict regulation in each country.

“It’s dead serious,” Bill Russo, a former Chrysler executive in China and now CEO of Automobility, a Shanghai-based auto industry consulting firm, told me of the minivan-helicopter. “First of all, it grabs everyone’s attention, which is the point. It gets talked about, written about. They are dead serious about delivering it and showing that they have the chops to be able to engineer a product like that.”

In terms of its sales potential, Russo said, “It’s China, and you got that many rich people that want to have the cool crap.”

Next year is shaping up to be even better: On top of commercially releasing its humanoid robot and minivan-helicopter, XPeng plans to launch a driverless robotaxi powered by its own artificial intelligence chip, which the company also uses in its other products. In a licensing deal, XPeng will supply the guts and software for two Volkswagen-branded electric SUVs to be released in China, and will also provide its technology for the German giant’s combustion cars for the country, validation for XPeng as a go-to tech partner to the West.

In multiple ways, XPeng is a portrait of what most big and small Western rivals would like to be but aren’t—technologically and commercially daring, sexy and, perhaps most pointedly, possibly about to be profitable with its EVs.

If He did ever follow Musk, he is no longer doing so blindly, as is apparent in the two companies’ disparate visions for the mass market: Last year, Musk abandoned his long-stated goal of making a $25,000 EV for everyone; XPeng last year introduced the $17,000 Mona, which rapidly became the company’s most popular car and, according to He, already makes money.

I became convinced about XPeng on seeing and climbing into its flagship sedan, the newly redesigned P7. Rafik Ferrag, the car’s chief interior designer, told me the idea was to give it the elegant lines and broad stance of an ultrapremium luxury model and the roomy interior and plush upholstery of a first-class airplane cabin. I can tell you that the driver’s seat grabs your body in a snug, extravagant embrace. You sink sumptuously into the rear seat, which offers the legroom of a limousine. Everything is voice activated, or if you prefer, you can use the touchscreens in front and back. The base price is $30,700 in China—$42,000 fully loaded. Climbing out, my thought was: Watch out for XPeng.

In Munich, He spoke first to an audience in a global telecast, then went upstairs in an exhibition booth to meet with journalists. Among other things, he talked up the minivan-helicopter, which can be manually operated using a control stick and can also fly itself via an autonomous function. “We have to face the transformation of the transportation industry,” he said. “We know that cars were born in Germany. And airplanes were also born 100 years ago.…Now we want to organically combine cars and aircraft.

“We are not sure about the recognition or acceptance of our customers yet,” He said, but “our flying vehicle is easy to use, which means that you can land the aircraft in your own garage. And it can take off very safely and easily in a neighborhood.”

Should General Motors or Ford show some daring themselves and go into flying cars and robots? Perhaps—if they could pull it off.

–break–

XPeng is an example of how, across cutting-edge technology and products such as AI, EVs and robots, Chinese companies have proven to be extremely capable innovators. To a massive degree, they have also outdone U.S. companies in their capacity to rapidly deploy products, then drive down costs by building enormous plants to manufacture them.

One thing I noticed about the XPeng group was that, as much as they talk about edgy products and gadgetry, they were if anything understating the capabilities and timelines.

Take Wang Tan, vice president and chief designer of XPeng’s electric aviation unit, who designed the minivan-helicopter.

The company’s aviation efforts go back to 2021. XPeng threw $500 million at its electric aviation unit, and He set a deadline of 2024 for it to roll out an electric helicopter. Wang just missed—XPeng unveiled the aircraft in January.

Now the vehicle containing the helicopter is on track for release in the second half of next year: Last month, regulators in the United Arab Republic granted XPeng the right to fly the aircraft in tests, which it plans to do this month. Wang said he expects Chinese certification by the end of the year so the company can start selling it.

Wang does not expect owners to use the aircraft in cities, except perhaps for emergency medical teams. Instead, owners would drive to rural areas and fly from there. The aircraft have a range of nine to 15 miles and can fly at 180 miles an hour before the battery runs out; the battery in the SUV can recharge the aircraft six times, he said.

Wang obviously does not regard the vehicle as outlandish. What he does treat as a stretch is the actual flying car XPeng unveiled in Munich: a truly James Bondian vehicle that would allow people stuck in traffic, for instance, to lift off and get to an appointment.

This is a stretch but it’s not totally bonkers: XPeng actually flew a prototype of the flying car publicly in 2022. It was loud and slow. And it flew for just three minutes before it had to land because, at 1.6 tons, the batteries required to make it fly any real distance don’t exist today. But it is still rather mind-boggling that the car could fly at all.

I asked Wang what kind of battery would be necessary. He said the car would need roughly four to eight times the capability of current state-of-the-art EV batteries. “There is just too much deadweight,” he said.

I noted that no mainstream battery researchers appear even to be working on such a battery. That’s just a matter of time, he responded. “It will take 10 or 15 years,” he said.

This is why both Detroit and Silicon Valley have reason to worry: XPeng looks likely to not only sell a lot of cars in and outside China, but introduce a gonzo new idea of a car-and-tech company.

“If you look at all the major tentacles that they’re getting into, these are huge, huge, huge potential markets—robotics, flying cars, autonomy and [chips],” said Tu Le, a consultant on the Chinese car industry. “So technically, if they hit a bunch of triples, they’re going to be a pretty successful company.”

CrunchBase : A Growing Backlog Of Biotechs Haven’t Raised Funding Since The Boom

A Growing Backlog Of Biotechs Haven’t Raised Funding Since The Boom

As biotech startup funding continues to decline, the backlog of funded, private companies that haven’t raised capital in several years has grown quite large.

Per Crunchbase data, more than 200 private U.S. biotechs with $50 million or more in funding to date secured their last reported financing between three and five years ago. The list includes at least 15 biotech unicorns and emerging unicorns that haven’t raised known funding for at least the past three years.

From boom to not
Part of the reason for the backlog of companies with long funding lags is the shift in investor appetite for biotech. During the boom years from 2020 through 2022, startup investors put an average of $40 billion per year into the space — well above current levels.

Some of those were truly huge financings as well. The largest, in early 2022, went to Altos Labs, a San Francisco startup focused on cellular rejuvenation that launched with $3 billion in committed capital.

The biotech IPO market was also quite happening then compared to now. This offered companies yet another avenue to raise capital to fund research and clinical trials.

This year, by contrast, is on track to come in much lower. So far in 2025, only about $17 billion has gone to U.S. biotechs, per Crunchbase data. And of that, roughly half has gone to seed and early stage startups — leaving a smaller portion for late-stage financings for well-funded companies.


High profile companies see funding lag times
A number of the companies that have gone three-plus years without a round were fairly high-profile startups as well. Many are still chugging along, likely helped by having secured large commitments when funding flowed more freely.

For example Insitro, a startup focused on applying machine learning to drug discovery and development, raised $643 million between 2018 and 2021 but hasn’t raised a known round since. This spring, the company announced a 22% workforce cut in a move it said “extends our runway into 2027.”

Agtech unicorn Pivot Bio, which develops microbial nitrogen for farms, also hasn’t secured known financing in more than four years, per Crunchbase data. However, it should be noted that its last round — a $430 million Series D in 2021 — was pretty big. The company has a number of open positions and this spring announced plans to relocate a significant portion of its operations from Berkeley, California, to the Midwest.

Biotech Unicorns And Emerging Unicorns That Haven't Raised In 3+ Years


Ultima Genomics, developer of a low-cost sequencing platform, is another company that had a big round a few years ago and hasn’t raised since. The Newark, California-based startup launched in May 2022 with $300 in initial funding from backers including Andreessen Horowitz and Khosla Ventures. Of late, it’s been steadily announcing new partnerships.

Collectively, it’s a huge sum of commitments
If we look at all the well-funded biotechs in our query, they’ve collectively raised a tremendous amount of money.

In total, the 204 companies in our sample that haven’t raised for three-plus years previously pulled in $17.9 billion. That’s roughly equivalent to all the venture money that’s gone into biotech this year.

Will investors eventually see some return on investment for these commitments? Despite having some preternatural disposition toward pessimism, I’d say the outlook is reasonably positive.

For one, while the biotech IPO market has been quiet lately, cycles do turn. And when this one does, it looks like there’s a strong pipeline of compelling companies that could pursue listings. An uptick in M&A could also be in the cards.

Of course, not all these well-funded companies will prove successful, and some will likely fold in coming quarters and years. But hopefully, some of those that do make it will succeed in a big way.


Well-Funded Biotech Startups That Haven't Raised In 3+ Years

WWD : Pierpaolo Piccioli Shares His Vision for Balenciaga

Pierpaolo Piccioli Shares His Vision for Balenciaga
"I want to make the ordinary very extraordinary," he said in an expansive interview ahead of his debut Saturday night.

When Pierpaolo Piccioli landed in Paris to start working as Balenciaga’s new creative director last June, he went straight from the airport to the Balenciaga archive near Bourget, to which he would devote a total of three days, eager to inspect dresses that he had only ever seen in photos.

He would spend the next month working at Balenciaga headquarters, overlapping with the tenure of Demna, who would stage his final couture show on July 9 before taking the creative lead of sister house Gucci in Italy.

“So we had been sharing all the teams, all the spaces, and that was interesting, too,” he said. “To have two creative directors sharing the same house for one month, you learn the idea of respect, of tolerance, of sharing, which I think is important for life, not only for fashion.”

Those gestures say much about Piccioli, a thoughtful, driven and deeply humanist designer who was keen to know more about those who lead the house before them, to honor their contributions — and to get to the crux of how he would put his own stamp on Balenciaga.

From his deep dive into the archive, the Italian designer quickly distilled the essence of the Paris house, its legacy of disruption and the “culture of couture” forged by founder Cristóbal Balenciaga.

He was enthralled to discover how the legendary couturier translated very severe and austere lines into light and supple garments, meticulously choosing the right fabrics and putting air between them and the wearer.

“I understood that all his work was based on the idea of the body, starting from the body, sometimes going very far from the body, but always with the body at the center of his work,” Piccioli related during an interview at Balenciaga’s offices on the Rue de Sèvres, where his debut show is scheduled for Saturday night. “So I want to apply that method to my way of working on Balenciaga, putting humanity at the center of the research of fashion, and making it relevant for today.

“I want to get into reality through silhouette and fabrics. I didn’t want to be nostalgic. For me, it was important to be relevant for today, silhouettes that could be interesting today, but also wearable today… To make the ordinary very extraordinary.”

Even before he landed in Paris — his appointment was revealed last May — Piccioli had traveled to the founder’s birthplace and visited the Museo Cristóbal Balenciaga in Getaria, Spain.

There he was flabbergasted to discover video footage of a woman wearing a dark Balenciaga sack dress on the streets of Paris in the ’50s, encountering curiosity and visible scorn.

Piccioli saw only innovation and liberation.

“Seeing the reaction of people made me understand how relevant, how disruptive and how kind his work was, freeing women from the weight” of their clothes, he said, noting that Dior’s original New Look weighed roughly nine pounds, versus about one or two for the sack dress.

For the interview, Piccioli was dressed in black layers, his outfit sparked by a white and red pair of Triple S sneakers, size 42, which he purchased when Balenciaga first released them in 2017. The hefty shoes were emblematic of the brand’s renown within streetwear circles, prized for its oversize outerwear, slogan knits and distressed jeans.

Balenciaga has flirted with a variety of fashion directions under its previous creative directors, which also have included Josephus Thimister, Alexander Wang and Nicolas Ghesquière, who leaned into an experimental and at times futuristic approach that catapulted the house back into fashion’s big leagues.

Before parting ways with Valentino in March 2024, Piccioli had spent most of his career at the Roman house and sharing the creative director role jointly with Maria Grazia Chiuri from 2008 until 2016, when he took the lead. He started in fashion with a 10-year stint at Fendi, also working there alongside Chiuri.

Piccioli has been teasing his new vision for Balenciaga in a campaign that features his tattooed forearms writing with a brush and a pot of ink; a 1967 wedding ensemble by the founding Spanish designer that was also the first picture Piccioli ever uploaded on his personal Instagram page, and Roni Horn portraits of Isabelle Huppert circa 2005-2006, without makeup or red carpet attire.

“In her humanity, not as celebrity,” Piccioli clarified.

There’s also a black-and-white image of Lucio Fontana about to slice a canvas. “That act was very meaningful, because he was creating a new world, a new possibility, and it was radical, but very spontaneous and instinctive,” the designer said.

As a foil to the nearly sci-fi sleekness of the wedding ensemble with its Darth Vader-esque hat, Piccioli also showcases the founder’s famous rose dress, memorable for its face-framing doughnut of scrunched fabric.

“In that tension lies the essence of Cristóbal, maximalism versus minimalism — both as deliberate and spontaneous gestures.”

In a wide-ranging conversation with WWD, the designer elaborated on his archive trawl, his initial intentions and his ambitions for Balenciaga:
WWD: Should we be surprised to find out you like Balenciaga sneakers?

Pierpaolo Piccioli: I love what has been done here. It’s not respectful, and not good for the house to deny what has been done before. I feel that a work in continuity and transformation makes the house richer, showing new sides, new aspects, new angles, new points of view.

WWD: Please tell us more of of your impressions after visiting the archive.

P.P.: As a designer, we all know the work of Cristóbal Balenciaga from afar — the volumes, the proportions. But when you see them up close, you really understand how many people have been inspired by Cristóbal. Those shapes were coming from from a very architectural point of view.

WWD: How did you start after gathering all those impressions?

P.P.: For me, researching fabrics was very important, and particularly the silk gazar used by Cristóbal, who developed a double-yarn version which allowed a more rigid structure but without any extra weight, so this allowed him to create his architectural silhouettes.

I decided to create fabrics with this idea in mind, but not only silk gazar. This collection is not at all an homage to Cristóbal. It’s my point of view, but I wanted to work on fabrics with the same kind of approach, with a tension between lightness and structure. So I created cotton gazar and wool gazar that could be more relevant for daily wear and life today.

It took time to arrive at the simple concept of the structure and the lightness, the silhouette and the air.


WWD: And what was your main takeaway from your exploration of the founder’s birthplace?

P.P.: I feel that Cristóbal was, like me, both instinctive and rational at the same time. So once I found the method that can be good for me and close to Cristóbal’s, you then have to let your instinct guide you. I want to incorporate my own sensibility and deliver in my own way. I also saw, of course, the work of Nicolas (Ghesquière) and Demna, of course.

WWD: And your impressions seeing the original clothes up close?

P.P.: The colors were sometimes almost violent. I felt from Cristóbal a deliberate gesture and intentionality of choosing one fabric, one color, one shape. And that’s my way of shaping a collection, also colors and fabric in one gesture only. I feel that some shapes have to be in one color, in one fabric. That’s the instinct.

WWD: So should we expect a colorful debut?

P.P.: Yes, there’s color and there will some prints. I found some scarves that were very interesting because there was just an intention of color, like a human brush stroke of color on a white surface. And there are prints that look like different fabrics, like tweed, but are actually printed on gazar or taffeta.

WWD: Were you given any specific directives or guidance from management?

P.P.: Not at all. I felt super free to follow my instinct and my vision about Balenciaga, and I felt trust from Gianfranco (Gianangeli), my CEO, and from all the team, too.

I believe that now more than ever, the role of a creative director can only fully flourish when it is met with genuine trust and meaningful support from the CEO. That alignment is what allows creativity to move beyond ideas and truly become impact.

In this company, I have been fortunate to find exactly that in Gianfranco. His support and confidence have not only strengthened my work, but also given me the sense of being understood and valued in what I bring. I am deeply aware of this, and sincerely grateful.

WWD: You said when you joined that you would honor all the designers that came before you. How?

P.P.: They’re part of the process. There are pieces like, say the T-shirt, one of the symbols of Demna, that I did with a very light jersey with a shape that can look like the very famous wedding dress.

Demna brought Cristóbal into the streetwear kind of reality. For me, this house is, of course, based on the idea of couture. So I want to use this idea of couture as culture to approach pieces that could be wearable, like a T-shirt, or a pair of jeans.

It’s not about elevating — I hate this word — but it comes from construction, study and research. Sometimes when you think about couture, you think only about beauty and not reality and coolness. I think coolness has something to do with reality.

WWD: What do you hope to accomplish with this first show?

P.P.: I decided to show only women’s because I felt that I had to redefine a new aesthetic for this house. Our job — and I repeat this to myself every day — is about witnessing our times through fashion and through an idea of beauty. My purpose is to define and to deliver my vision of beauty, but related to our times and to this house, so keeping the codes of the house, like disruption, creativity, adding probably humanity and couture as culture, but trying to do a reconciliation with everything that’s been done before.

WWD: Why did you decide to have your first show at Balenciaga headquarters?

P.P.: Because it’s a space that is warm. I wanted the intimacy of a salon de couture, but without the form of a salon de couture.

I like the also the idea that Demna did his retrospective exhibition here. So in a way, I’m starting where just left.

WWD: It’s not the easiest moment for business and luxury, and amid many creative changes. Does it affect you?

P.P.: Actually, I don’t feel this. We can deliver a different idea of fashion. In this game of musical chairs, we are actually people, and each of us reacts in his or her way. I’m one of the chairs, but I’m a person. I just do my own thing, and I don’t feel the pressure of being part of this game.

I still feel this job as an opportunity to express my ideas and my values through my creativity.

WWD: Under Demna, the house became known for black, oversized, and a streetwear sensibility. Should we expect any of that, or some of that, to continue?

P.P.: Demna has been disruptive, like Nicolas has been disruptive, and Cristóbal has been disruptive. Disruptiveness is part of the DNA of this house, and I like this continuing this idea of disruptiveness.

You will see a silhouette that is different from what from what you see now, but in continuity with the work of the people who have been before.

WWD: What are your ambitions for the house, creatively and culturally?

P.P.: To me Balenciaga is, and must stay, the most relevant house in terms of creativity. To me it’s the most creative, the most disruptive, the most fashion. These past years, we have been talking a lot about business. But when talking about fashion, creativity has to be the leading force and the most relevant force.

WSJ : Stock Funds Hold a 11% Gain for 2025 So Far

Stock Funds Hold a 11% Gain for 2025 So Far
If the market’s rally holds, it’ll be a third straight year of double-digit gains. Plus: A Financial Flashback to 20 years ago, the Refco commodities debacle.

Is it time for fund investors to do a home-run trot yet?

With stock indexes smashing records, the average U.S.-stock fund rose 7.2% in the third quarter, to push the year-to-date gain to nearly 11%, according to LSEG data. Those are gaudy numbers for mutual funds and exchange-traded funds compared with earlier in the year, when it looked as if the stock market would register a poor year.

In fact, stock funds are now on pace to rise in double digits for three straight years, even though the 2025 performance won’t likely match last year’s 17.4% gain or the previous year’s 21%.

Stocks have shaken off the tariff-induced negativity of earlier in the year, and interest rates are declining.

“Stocks defied the typical September weakness,” says Adam Turnquist, chief technical strategist for LPL Financial. “Earnings momentum, a good-enough economy, the resumption of the rate-cutting cycle and continued signs of runway for the AI secular growth theme have been the primary catalysts.”

But some analysts caution that, like in baseball, those homers for stock investors could start turning into singles, or outs. Stock rallies that might be stretched, like this one, have a tendency to fizzle.

“October is known to be a volatile month for stocks, and with elevated valuations and stocks at record highs, investors should always expect pullbacks,” says Charlie Amato, chairman and co-founder of SWBC. Still, he adds, ”The backdrop for stocks remains strong, with growing corporate profits, the prospect for additional Federal Reserve rate cuts, and fading tariff uncertainty.”

Among fund categories, funds that hold stocks of large-capitalization “growth” stocks like Nvidia and Facebook parent Meta Platforms are strong, with the category up 15.2% for the year so far, including the third quarter’s 7.7% advance. Their counterparts, large-cap “value” funds—focusing on stocks believed to be trading below the companies’ fundamentals—have also stirred, and are up 12.9% so far in 2025.

International-stock funds rose 6.3% in the third quarter, to push their year-to-date advance to 17%. “While stock valuations are expensive, U.S. stocks have still underperformed overseas stocks so far in 2025 and have some catching up to do,” says Amato.

Bond markets continue to be heated, as investors buy corporate debt. Bond funds that are focused on investment-grade debt (the most common type of fixed-income fund) were up 0.8% in the quarter, and are now up 3.8% for 2025 so far.

Fund flows
Bond funds and international-stock funds drew cash in the third quarter, as some wary investors pared their exposure to U.S.-stock funds—particularly in July, when there were intense concerns over tariffs, a market worry that has since abated.


Investors sent a net $27.8 billion to international-stock mutual funds and ETFs in the third quarter, based on Investment Company Institute estimates, and $213.8 billion to bond funds.

But flows to U.S.-stock funds were a negative $345.6 billion for the quarter, including $299.5 billion pulled in July.

Winners’ Circle
Managers of large-cap growth funds again took most of the top positions in our latest Winners’ Circle review of the top-performing actively managed U.S.-stock mutual funds.

Taking the crown was Morgan Stanley Institutional Growth Portfolio (MSEQX), with a 72.4% total return for the past 12 months, based on Morningstar Direct data. Morgan Stanley Insight Fund (CPODX) was a close runner-up, with a 70.2% return.

These and other funds in the large-cap growth category benefited from the interest in artificial-intelligence companies and other tech stocks.

In the No. 3 position was Transamerica Capital Growth (IALAX), with a 66.4% return. The survey included 1,189 funds, which together posted an average 12-month return of 10.6%.

Few people outside Wall Street pay too much attention to commodities traders. But on Oct. 10, 2005, one of the world’s largest commodities brokers, Refco, collapsed. It was shocking news about a seemingly ever-present fixture in the commodities world.

“It was kind of like a smaller version of the Enron collapse,” says Art Hogan, chief market strategist at B Riley Wealth Management. It came on the heels of the 2002 Sarbanes–Oxley Act, a bill designed to prevent accounting fraud.

The first news of the Refco collapse began when its CEO, Phillip Bennett, stepped down, following the firm’s discovery that another company controlled by Bennett owed Refco $430 million. The debt was described to investors as “receivables,” aka money owed to Refco. There was no indication in filings that Bennett’s company owed the cash.

Following the discovery of the debt, Refco advised that financial statements from 2002 onward shouldn’t be relied upon. Refco stated that Bennett had repaid the debt, and the company had notified authorities. Refco stock dropped 45% to $15.60 a share in a single day, on the news.

“The decision for Refco to go public in August of 2005 was what opened a Pandora’s box,” Hogan says. “Bennett was able to get around all the bankers and auditors.” The IPO raised $583 million but was full of accounting malfeasance.

Refco filed for bankruptcy in October 2005. Bennett was sentenced to 16 years in prison in 2008.

“Despite the best of intentions, I made an unacceptable and appalling error,” Bennett said at sentencing. He was released in 2020, a judge calling him a “model prisoner.”