- Cliff Equity
- Posts
- 📈 Saudi Arabia Catches ‘Em All – For $3.5bn!
📈 Saudi Arabia Catches ‘Em All – For $3.5bn!
Starmer’s Welfare War: Labour MPs Revolt!
This is Cliff Equity, the UK’s business newsletter that keeps you informed on what’s important in tech, business and finance in less than 5 minutes
In today’s stories:
Saudi Arabia Catches ‘Em All – For $3.5bn!
Starmer’s Welfare War: Labour MPs Revolt!
John Lewis Profits Soar, Bonuses Not So Much
The summary: Saudi Arabia’s latest power-up in gaming sees it snag Niantic for $3.5bn, tightening its grip on the industry, sparking debates on influence, and proving that when it comes to global dominance, it’s not just oil wells—it’s Poké Balls too!
The details:
Gotta Buy 'Em All! Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund (PIF) is splashing out $3.5bn (£2.7bn) for Niantic’s gaming division, including Pokémon Go—proving that even oil-rich nations can’t resist the lure of catching ‘em all.
Leveling Up the Gaming Empire The deal is part of Saudi’s grand plan to dominate gaming, following its £4bn takeover of Scopely last year. With stakes in Nintendo, EA, and Take-Two, plus its grip on eSports, Riyadh is making sure the industry plays by its rules.
Niantic: Still Evolving Pokémon Go’s head honcho, Ed Wu, insists the game’s future remains bright under its new overlords—though whether players are ready for a PIF-powered Pokédex remains to be seen.
Big Money, Bigger Controversies While Saudi Arabia continues its shopping spree across gaming, sports, and beyond, its record on human rights casts a long shadow—raising ethical questions that won’t be disappearing like a low-level Zubat.
Why it matters: Saudi Arabia isn’t just buying games—it’s buying influence, using its oil-fuelled war chest to reshape the gaming industry while polishing its global image. For Niantic, this means Pokémon Go’s next evolution could come with a side of geopolitical debate, as players ponder who's really calling the shots behind their Pokéballs. And for the wider industry, it’s yet another reminder that big money doesn’t just talk—it rewrites the rulebook.
The summary: Starmer’s bold welfare shake-up is ruffling feathers in his own party, but with billions at stake and an election on the horizon, he’s walking the tightrope between fiscal responsibility and keeping Labour’s heart intact—no pressure!
The details:
Starmer's Rebellion: Labour MPs are fuming over plans to freeze disability benefits, with some so livid they might actually vote against their own government—unheard of levels of mutiny. No 10 is scrambling to sweet-talk them with "moral arguments," but the anger is real.
Cuts, but with a Side of Compassion? Rachel Reeves wants to slash £6bn from benefits while ploughing £1bn into getting the long-term sick back to work. The Treasury was sceptical, but Liz Kendall fought to keep the employment schemes alive—cue the internal Labour tug-of-war.
PIP on the Chopping Block: The biggest chunk of savings will come from tightening eligibility for Personal Independence Payment (PIP) and potentially freezing it. No means-testing (yet), but regular in-person assessments might be back—because apparently, phone calls are too lenient.
Labour: Party of Work (and Tough Choices): Starmer is selling the cuts as a necessary fix to a "broken" welfare system, arguing that protecting the most vulnerable and pushing the work-capable back into jobs aren’t mutually exclusive. With a looming election, Labour is desperate to prove it's fiscally responsible—just not too Tory about it.
Why it matters: Keir Starmer’s grand plan to prove Labour is tough on welfare without looking heartless is backfiring spectacularly, as his own MPs threaten a mutiny over disability benefit cuts. If he pushes ahead, he risks alienating the very voters Labour needs to win the next election; if he backs down, he’s left with a gaping fiscal hole and a credibility crisis. Meanwhile, the Tories are probably watching with popcorn in hand, enjoying the rare sight of Labour tearing itself apart over austerity.
The summary: John Lewis is investing big in stores and staff pay while skipping bonuses for another year, all in a bid to grow profits and keep their competitive edge, though it’s a bit of a balancing act!
The details:
Profits up, but no bonus—again! John Lewis has tripled profits to £126m, yet for the third year running, staff (aka "partners") won’t see a bonus. Instead, £600m is earmarked for upgrading stores and logistics.
Shops shut, but sales steady. Despite closing 16 John Lewis stores and 20+ Waitrose outlets, overall sales climbed 3% to £12.8bn, with Waitrose outperforming thanks to sharper prices and fewer stock shortages.
The price of nostalgia. John Lewis’ profit took a hit (£689m down to £45m) after reviving its “never knowingly undersold” price-matching scheme—turns out, sentimentality is expensive.
A promise of prosperity—eventually. Chair Jason Tarry insists there’s “significant opportunity for growth” and aims for £400m profit by 2028. Until then, staff must settle for a 7.4% pay rise rather than a bonus.
Why it matters: Well, it seems John Lewis is trying to balance the books by investing in stores and staff pay, but at the cost of a bonus for employees – for the third year running. While they’re pushing for long-term growth, it’s a bit like promising a holiday in 2028, but giving your mates a slightly bigger cup of tea now. In the meantime, the company’s focus on price-matching and steady sales shows they're trying to keep their crown, but it’s looking a bit patchy around the edges.
Trending stories
How would you rate today's edition: |