News related to
should

Swatch Group’s first‑half figures underscore a deepening crisis in its key Asian markets after the Swiss watch‑maker disclosed a 7.1 per cent drop in sales, generating CHF 3.059 billion, falling short of market forecasts of CHF 3.2 billion. Operating profit plunged 67 per cent year‑on‑year to CHF 68 million, signalling an urgent warning to investors and management alike.

China, alongside Hong Kong and Macau, remains the primary weak spot, contributing 27 per cent of total revenues. Falling demand across these regions continues to undermine core sales and profit performance. Despite encouraging double‑digit growth in North America and market share gains in countries such as Japan, India and the Middle East, these gains have yet to compensate for the shortfall from Greater China.

Net profit attributable to owners collapsed to CHF 3 million, compared with CHF 136 million during the same six‑month period last year. This dramatic decline illustrates the scale of the downturn, making it Swatch’s worst half‑year performance in recent memory.

Analyst commentary has been scathing: Vontobel described this period as “an ugly half year for Swatch Group in all respects”. The fallout from slowed Chinese consumer activity has been compounded by negative currency effects—Swiss franc appreciation cut CHF 113 million from turnover relative to constant‑currency comparisons.

Adding fresh complexity, new U. S. tariffs threaten to raise costs on Swiss watch imports by up to 31 per cent. Industry stakeholders now warn that these levies could further weigh on margins, with retailers like Watches of Switzerland projecting a margin squeeze in the year ahead.

Beyond external pressures, a growing number of investors are scrutinising Swatch’s internal governance. Shareholder activism has surfaced, with calls for more oversight of the centrally controlled Hayek family, whose dual‑class voting structure remains a source of contention. Net profits collapsed by 75 per cent to CHF 219 million in 2024, but critics assert that this malaise runs deeper. GreenWood Investors, led by Steven Wood, has launched a push to join the board, advocating for brand revitalisation, governance reforms and a strategy pivot toward luxury exclusivity akin to Hermès and Ferrari.

Management, though addressing short‑term volatility, emphasises Swatch’s entrenched strengths. Its vertically integrated manufacturing, with over 150 production sites, and the success of the affordable MoonSwatch line demonstrate resilience. The company has pledged that cost‑cutting measures and a pipeline of new product launches—particularly in the U. S. and Japan—should drive a rebound in the second half of the year.

The first‑half slump follows broader downturns last year, when revenue declined 12.2 per cent to CHF 6.74 billion in 2024, and operating profit fell 75 per cent to CHF 304 million. That drop reinforced trading floor rumours of governance fatigue and brand dilution at high‑end labels like Omega and Breguet.

Economically, China’s consumer landscape remains unsettled. A combination of property market stress, slower GDP growth and official campaigns discouraging conspicuous consumption have dampened luxury spending. Swiss watch exports to China and Hong Kong plunged by double digits in early 2024, while only the lower‑priced Swatch line bucked the trend in the region, gaining 10 per cent in sales volume.

Swatch Group’s corporate ambition to maintain full production capacity and avoid layoffs during weak demand, while strategically commendable, has weighed on margins—especially in the production segment. Management asserts this decision safeguards long‑term capabilities and is now beginning to bear fruit, with production margins improving since June.

Mixed signs beyond China offer guarded optimism. North America posted record sales, Japan recorded robust growth, and emerging markets like India and the Middle East offered upside. These regions now form the central axis of Swatch’s recovery strategy.

China has introduced the world’s first oil tanker equipped with adjustable sails, marking a notable step in maritime decarbonisation. The 250‑metre vessel features automated sails that harness wind power, cutting diesel use by up to 14.5 tonnes per day—equivalent to around 5,000 tonnes of CO₂ emissions annually.

The ship was launched at a major Chinese port on 13 July 2025. Naval engineers report that the sails adjust in real time to wind conditions, seamlessly integrating with traditional propulsion systems. Under favourable conditions, the sails alone can provide up to 10% of the vessel’s forward thrust, reducing reliance on fossil fuels and trimming operational costs.

Industry experts describe this as a breakthrough. Dr Li Wei, a maritime technology specialist at a prominent Chinese university, observed that “this marks the first large‑scale application of intelligent sail technology in an oil tanker” and said that the design “could serve as a blueprint for future green tankers”. While alternative zero‑carbon fuels remain the focus of long‑term strategies, sail augmentation presents a practical interim solution.

The initiative aligns with global regulatory pressures. The International Maritime Organization has committed to halving greenhouse‑gas emissions from shipping by 2050. Flettner‑style rotor sails—used on vessels like the Viking Grace ferry—have shown up to 20% fuel savings on optimal routes. China’s innovation refines that concept by adding adjustable sail arrays tailored for large oil carriers, suggesting broader applicability.

Major energy and shipping firms are reportedly evaluating roll‑outs. A senior executive at a state‑affiliated shipping group noted plans to retrofit a fleet of oil and chemical tankers with adjustable sails by 2027, contingent on performance data. Initial trials aim to quantify actual fuel savings, spreadsheeting data on fuel burn, wind usage hours, and analytics from the ship’s sail‑control system.

Yet questions remain. Retrofit costs, structural modifications, and maintenance demand rigorous cost‑benefit analysis. Port infrastructure adaptation—such as clearance for sails and crew training—must also be addressed. Critics argue that, while useful, sail technology cannot fully eliminate emissions without complementary measures like low‑carbon fuels and electrification.

Nevertheless, China’s venture may shift the conversation. Shipbuilders in Europe, Japan and South Korea are racing to develop hydrogen‑ or ammonia‑powered vessels. China’s move showcases an alternative decarbonisation route by optimising existing diesel‑powered fleets. Multi‑source interviews show growing interest from global charterers, some of whom are signalling willingness to pay premium freight rates for lower‑emission vessels.

Maritime insurers are recalibrating risk models, acknowledging that adjustable sails could affect stability and route safety. The new tanker reportedly features advanced ballast‑control systems to compensate for wind forces and automated cut‑out mechanisms during storms.

Trade analysts say China’s state‑backed strategy gives it leverage in global standards talks. Should pilot data validate the 14.5‑tonne daily fuel savings estimate, Chinese shipyards could license or export the design. Such a trend could trigger wider international adoption, pressuring other nations to follow suit.

Shipowners are watching. A European tanker operator, examining images and footage, expressed interest but noted the need for “transparent data on lifecycle emission reductions and economic viability over 20‑year vessel lifetimes.”

Current trials will last six months to a year, tracking metrics like fuel consumption, sail uptime, and maintenance costs. A detailed performance report is expected by mid‑2026, after which retrofit plans may accelerate.

Dubai authorities have issued a warning after a surge in phishing emails impersonating companies such as McAfee Security and PayPal. These messages falsely claim that debit transactions of around AED 1,400 or AED 2,200 have been processed, instructing recipients to cancel the payment within 24 hours. The ruse prompts panicked victims to call a provided number, where scammers gain remote access to their computers and harvest sensitive personal and financial data.

Law enforcement agencies in the emirates highlight this scam as a sophisticated iteration of classic technical support fraud. Dubai Police reported nearly 500 arrests related to phone-based fraud last year, while Sharjah Police uncovered another gang that misused remote-access prompts to defraud residents of AED 3 million via 173 bank accounts. Cybercrime units from across the UAE have reiterated that legitimate companies never solicit remote access, issue invoices from personal accounts, or demand immediate cancellation via unsolicited calls.

Cybersecurity experts confirm that such scams operate by embedding urgency and trusted branding within fraudulent invoices. In some cases, genuine McAfee or PayPal logos are used, with phishing emails exploiting official domains like “@paypal. com” to evade security filters. Most alarmingly, McAfee Labs noted that PayPal-related phishing attempts have spiked sevenfold compared to a month earlier, indicating that cybercriminals are increasingly refining their tactics.

These email scams typically follow a multi-stage process. Victims first receive a customised invoice claiming unauthorised charges. Alarmed by the sum, recipients are directed to call a phone number that leads to a scam call centre. Once connected, scammers initiate remote access software—such as AnyDesk—using the pretext of ‘fraud prevention’, and subsequently extract bank details, personal data and in some cases install malware.

Anecdotal evidence from victims underscores the psychological impact of the scam’s design. One government employee from Dubai reported receiving an email from someone named “Jarred” bearing a McAfee invoice. Convinced that she had skipped a subscription renewal, she reached out via the provided number to cancel. Similar stories have surfaced across the UAE, often involving the extraction of remote passwords and sensitive credentials.

Authorities emphasise vigilance. They advise members of the public to verify any invoice or billing-related email by visiting official websites or contacting customer support via verified communication channels. Users should never allow remote access in response to unsolicited calls.

Globally, this scam mirrors trends seen in the UK and North America. Consumer watchdog Which? identified parallel phishing campaigns wherein emails purporting to be from McAfee or AVG warned of antivirus renewals. These messages aimed to persuade users to scan QR codes or download malicious software to seize device control. York University’s Information Security team also identified fake McAfee renewal notices that claimed subscription charges had been processed, urging recipients to call to reverse the transaction, only to be prompted for remote access.

PayPal’s system has also been exploited via its official invoice and address‑confirmation tools. Scammers can trigger legitimate PayPal alerts by entering a user’s email, bypassing email filters and lending credibility to the scam. Subsequent messages urge recipients to call fake “support” phone numbers, leading to remote-control software installation under the guise of account verification.

Security specialists recommend the following countermeasures:
Always verify invoices by logging into the official company site or app rather than interacting with email links or phone numbers.
Inspect email senders carefully to ensure they match legitimate company domains.
Avoid granting remote access or installing software when prompted by unsolicited callers claiming to represent vendors.
Register suspicious emails with relevant authorities—PayPal’s phishing email forwarding service, and McAfee’s scam reporting email addresses are official avenues.

Email marketing firms and cybersecurity analysts also note that the sharp rise in such scams reflects a broader shift by criminals towards hybrid phishing campaigns that combine urgency, trusted branding and remote access elements. Authorities across the UAE continue to intensify public awareness efforts, urging residents to scrutinise any invoices involving unfamiliar charges above AED 1,000.

The Indian rupee weakened further against the UAE dirham, trading at approximately ₹23.36-23.40 per dirham amid a stronger US dollar and heightened global trade tensions. This decline continues the trend from earlier in the month, providing a beneficial window for expatriates in the Gulf remitting funds home.

Market pressures stemmed from fresh US tariff threats under President Trump, triggering broader dollar appreciation and weighing on emerging-market currencies. The dollar index hovered near 98, while US non-deliverable forwards priced in a rupee rate around ₹85.90-86 per dollar.

Currency exchange houses in Dubai report a steep drop in the rupee–dirham rate. It has fallen from around ₹23.29-23.30 recently to lows of ₹23.36-23.40. Analysts suggest the trend may extend to ₹23.50 or possibly ₹23.60, especially if additional US tariffs are imposed on broader trade partners without a trade deal with India.

Financial managers in Dubai believe that non‑resident Indian workers are taking advantage of these levels. One treasury manager anticipates further rupee weakness until India finalises any trade arrangements with the US. Exchange-house sources confirm a decline in remittances during July—attributed partly to summer holidays—but note an uptick in transfers as expatriates act on the current exchange rates.

The backdrop of US trade policy remains a significant influence. US announcements of 30% tariffs on EU and Mexico imports effective August 1, and potential large levies on BRICS nations, have contributed to dollar strength and weighing on Asian currencies including the rupee. Although India has not yet received formal tariff notices, market participants are interpreting ongoing trade rhetoric as negotiating tactics, cushioning immediate currency volatility.

A weakened rupee benefits remitters, who can convert savings at more favourable rates. Gulf-based exchange officials report NRIs are actively sending funds home wherever possible. One senior official described a notable spike in AED‑INR transactions when the rate hit ₹23.50, marking the lowest point since early April.

Typically, remittance volumes dip in summer due to travel and expenses, yet this year’s trend bucks the seasonal norm. An Economic Times analysis notes a sustained surge in fund transfers since mid‑June, with industry sources commenting: “Last Thursday was one of the best days in recent weeks for AED‑INR remittances”.

Analysts emphasize that the current remittance window aligns with forex volatility and the dollar’s rally—driven by global trade uncertainty and safe‑haven demand. Surprisingly, gold, not the dollar, has been the primary beneficiary of geopolitics in recent weeks, offering an unusual twist in safe‑asset flows.

Looking ahead, significant factors likely to influence the rupee–dirham rate include the trajectory of US-India trade talks, the rollout of any new American tariffs, and global investor risk appetite. Should a US‑India agreement emerge, the rupee could stabilise or recover; however, absent any deal, dollar strength may persist.

For expatriates in the Gulf, the current divergence between weaker rupee and firmer dollar represents a strategic opportunity. With the potential for rupee to decline further, remittances increase the value of transfers sent home in the near term.

European Parliament approved the removal of the United Arab Emirates from its “high-risk third countries” list for money laundering and terrorist financing, a decision aligned with its earlier removal by the Financial Action Task Force in February 2024 and marking a pivotal regulatory victory. This shift reduces the compliance burden on trade and financial flows, enhancing Abu Dhabi’s ambitions to deepen ties with Brussels and attract global investors.

Parliament’s vote endorsed the European Commission’s update to the list, which also saw the UAE’s delisting alongside jurisdictions like Gibraltar, Barbados and Panama, while new entries such as Monaco and Kenya were added. The move followed intense technical dialogue between Emirati authorities and EU institutions, satisfying the bloc’s concerns with enhanced cooperation on financial intelligence sharing and asset recovery.

Mohamed bin Hadi Al Hussaini, the Minister of State for Financial Affairs, described the decision as a “strategic milestone” that underscores global recognition of the UAE’s robust framework. He emphasised that this represents a shift toward positioning the UAE as a transparent, resilient and globally trusted financial centre – a foundation for attracting sustained investment.

These reforms follow a sweeping crackdown on non-compliance, with over AED 339 million in fines levied by the Central Bank on exchange houses, banks and insurers. The fines were part of a wider national strategy enacted under Federal Decree‑Law 20/2018 and its amendments, stretching regulatory oversight to real estate, precious metals, auditing and digital asset sectors.

Hamid Saif Al Zaabi, Secretary‑General of the National Anti‑Money Laundering and Combating the Financing of Terrorism Committee, told WAM that the EU’s removal affirms successful system‑wide integration across public and private sectors. He described the outcome as the result of a sustained national strategy dating back to 2014, supported by Cabinet-approved action plans and ongoing capacity‑building initiatives.

Despite commendations for its progress, Transparency International cautioned that delisting should not be interpreted as full clearance. The organisation noted persistent challenges in real estate safeguards and oversight of politically exposed persons, calling for ongoing vigilance and structured dialogue.

Financial experts note that removal from the EU’s list could yield significant economic dividends. The International Monetary Fund estimates capital inflows may surge by as much as 7.6 per cent of GDP, with foreign direct investment potentially rising by around 3 per cent. Gulf region analysts view delisting as unlocking smoother trade with Europe across sectors such as renewable energy, fintech and digital infrastructure.

Diplomatic messaging framed the delisting as a mutual strategic victory. UAE Minister Ahmed bin Ali Al Sayegh called it “independent recognition” of Abu Dhabi’s dedication to high international standards. EU Ambassador to the UAE Lucie Berger described it as deepening trust and advancing a shared commitment to economic safeguard and global security. Simultaneously, EU trade officials suggested that the move removes political and regulatory barriers ahead of ongoing free trade agreement negotiations with the UAE.

While the FATF had cleared the UAE in early 2024, the EU’s delayed action mirrored its own rigorous oversight cycle. In March 2023, the EU flagged the UAE for strategic deficiencies before launching a renewed process that incorporated enhanced inter-agency cooperation and legal reform.

Next on the UAE’s reform agenda is ensuring resilience in emerging risk domains such as cryptocurrency laundering and cross-border terror financing. Analysts emphasise that maintaining international trust will require sustained enforcement, legislative updates scheduled for later this year and deeper public–private collaboration.