Category: Uncategorized

The London Underground is braced for a week of chaos next month as thousands of staff walk out in a fresh dispute over pay and working conditions.
The RMT union confirmed that a series of rolling strikes will begin on September 5, involving signallers, engineers and service control staff across multiple Tube lines. Drivers are not included in the action, but disruption to services is expected to be widespread.
RMT general secretary Eddie Dempsey said members were striking in response to years of fatigue, unsocial shift patterns and what they regard as inadequate pay. “Our members are doing a fantastic job to keep our capital moving,” he said. “They’re not after a king’s ransom, but fatigue and extreme shift rotations are serious issues impacting on their health and wellbeing – all of which London Underground management has failed to address.”
The union has rejected a 3.4% pay rise offered by London Underground, arguing that it falls short of inflation and ignores wider concerns about working hours. RMT balloted more than 10,000 members, with around 6,000 voting in favour of strike action.
City Hall urged both sides to avoid disruption. A spokesman for Mayor Sadiq Khan said: “Nobody wants to see strike action or disruption for Londoners. The mayor urges the RMT and TfL to get around the table to resolve this matter.”
TfL, which employs around 28,000 staff, insisted its offer was fair and affordable. A spokesperson said: “We are committed to ensuring colleagues are treated fairly and, as well as offering a 3.4% pay increase, we have made progress on concerns about fatigue and rostering. But a reduction in the contractual 35-hour working week is neither practical nor affordable.”
The timing of the strikes will cause maximum disruption. They coincide with Coldplay’s sold-out Wembley Stadium finale, the BBC Proms at the Royal Albert Hall, Post Malone’s Tottenham Hotspur Stadium performance and a full fixture list of Premier League and Women’s Super League football.
Business groups and opposition politicians have warned of the economic fallout. Keith Prince, London Assembly Conservatives’ transport spokesman, said: “London will be thrown into chaos by these strikes, putting jobs and our economy at risk. TfL must resolve this before it takes place.”
With Britain already losing more than 280,000 working days to strikes in the first half of the year, the announcement piles further pressure on the Labour Government, which pledged to bring stability to industrial relations after inflation-busting public sector pay deals.
Read more:
London Tube faces week-long strike as RMT rejects pay offer

Welsh IT and technology solutions specialist Team Metalogic has been named one of the world’s top 200 managed service providers, achieving 187th place in the prestigious MSP 501 list compiled by Channel Futures.
The Caerphilly-based firm is the only Welsh company to feature in the 2025 rankings, placing 11th across the UK and Europe. The MSP 501 is regarded as the global benchmark for excellence in the sector, recognising the most successful and innovative providers based on growth, recurring revenues, service innovation and client outcomes.
With more than 150,000 managed service providers worldwide, competition for a spot on the list is fierce. The global market, valued at nearly $300 billion in 2023, is forecast to more than double by 2030.
In addition to its overall ranking, Team Metalogic has also been named to the Next Generation MSP list, a select group of providers recognised for embracing emerging technologies and pioneering service models.
Founded in 2003 by CEO Mike Parfitt with “one laptop and one desk”, the company now employs 17 people and generates annual revenues of £2.2 million. It works with ambitious clients across regulated and growth-focused sectors such as community banks, investment firms, law practices, dental businesses, retail and healthcare. Recent successes include helping one dental practice increase turnover fifteenfold through strategic technology planning.
Parfitt said the accolade was both a proud moment for Wales and recognition of his team’s long-term commitment “The MSP 501 is recognised as the global benchmark for excellence among managed IT service providers. To represent Wales on a global stage and see our name alongside some of the biggest providers in the industry is an honour.
This recognition is about our results, but the real reason we achieve them is our people. Our culture, our shared purpose and our commitment to building long-term relationships are what make the difference.”
He added that Team Metalogic’s role has evolved from providing traditional IT support to acting as a strategic growth partner: “Whether a client has two employees or two hundred, we align the right technology to their goals so they can grow faster, work smarter and do it more sustainably. That’s why I believe we’ve been recognised as a Next Generation MSP.”
Parfitt said the firm’s strong culture was what drove both client loyalty and staff retention.
“You can have the best technology in the world, but it’s the people who make it work. Our team’s drive, care and shared sense of purpose are our real differentiators. They’re the reason clients stay with us, trust us, and grow with us.”
He concluded: “To rank 187th in the world and 11th in the UK and Europe is something we’re hugely proud of. With more than 150,000 managed service providers globally, it’s a real achievement to stand out at this level. It reflects not only how far we’ve come, but also the trust our clients place in us every day.”
Read more:
Welsh IT firm ranked among world’s top 200 managed service providers

Hospitality businesses across Britain are being forced to shut their doors at least one day a week as soaring wage costs and higher taxes pile pressure on the sector.
A new survey by leading trade bodies found that almost three quarters of pubs, restaurants and cafes were operating at or below 85 per cent of their normal capacity, with many cutting back opening hours in a scramble to save cash.
The closures follow the Chancellor Rachel Reeves’s decision to raise employers’ National Insurance contributions (NICs) by £25 billion and increase the minimum wage in April. While summer trading has remained strong, the rise in labour costs has tipped many operators into crisis.
The survey, carried out by the British Institute of Innkeeping, the British Beer & Pub Association, UKHospitality and Hospitality Ulster, revealed that 73 per cent of businesses had less than six months of cash reserves, while one in five had none at all.
To offset the new costs, 79 per cent of businesses said they had raised prices for customers, more than half had cut staff numbers, and many were reducing operating hours.
According to UKHospitality, Reeves’s tax raid has added £3.4 billion in costs to the sector, prompting 84,000 job losses since last year’s autumn Budget.
Andrew Griffith, the shadow business secretary, accused the Government of ignoring industry warnings: “The Government stubbornly ignored clear warnings about the jobs tax and state-imposed wage rises from hospitality businesses because Reeves thought she knew better. Now, instead of a roaring summer trade, businesses can’t afford the staff they need and are watching their cash reserves fade faster than a tan after a holiday.”
Figures from the Recruitment and Employment Confederation showed hospitality job vacancies fell by more than 22,000 in June compared with a year earlier. Wider ONS data also recorded a decline in national vacancies to 718,000 in the three months to July, down 44,000 on the previous quarter.
The British Beer & Pub Association last month warned that one pub a day is expected to shut this year, as landlords battle the combined pressures of Reeves’s tax rises, higher wages and stubbornly high energy bills.
In a joint statement, the trade bodies behind the survey said: “Unsustainable tax increases are squeezing businesses, stifling growth and investment, and threatening local employment, especially for young people. It is forcing businesses to make impossible decisions to cut jobs, put up prices, reduce opening hours and limit the support they want to give their communities.”
They called on the Government to roll back April’s NIC changes, reduce VAT, and cut business rates to safeguard jobs and investment.
A Government spokesperson defended its record, saying: “Pubs, cafes and restaurants are vital to local communities, that’s why we’re cutting the cost of licensing, helping more pubs, cafes and restaurants offer pavement drinks and al fresco dining, and extending business rates relief for these businesses – on top of cutting alcohol duty on draught pints and capping corporation tax.”
But industry leaders argue such measures fall short of tackling the structural costs created by the recent Budget, warning that without further action Britain’s hospitality sector faces a winter of closures.
Read more:
Tax raid forcing pubs and restaurants to close one day a week

A new study has set out a strategic digital roadmap to fast-track the UK steel industry’s transition to net zero, warning that overcoming skills shortages, regulatory hurdles and investment uncertainty is vital if the sector is to meet its climate goals.
The research, developed by academics at the University of Warwick and supported by the InterAct programme, identifies 12 critical barriers to the adoption of Industrial Digital Technologies (IDTs). These include everything from regulatory complexity to a lack of skilled workers and funding pressures.
Using a seven-layer framework, the study maps out how these challenges interconnect and ranks which need to be prioritised by policymakers and industry leaders. The aim is to guide the steel industry — which comprises more than 1,100 companies and contributes £2.3 billion to the UK economy — towards more resource-efficient and sustainable production.
While steel is endlessly recyclable, its production is highly energy-intensive, accounting for a significant portion of global CO₂ emissions. That makes decarbonisation a pressing priority, both nationally and internationally.
“Our research provides targeted, actionable recommendations that empower decision-makers to focus their efforts where they’ll have the greatest impact,” said Dr Taofeeq Ibn-Mohammed, one of the study’s authors. “A strategic blend of policy reform, technological innovation, organisational change and smart economic planning is key to overcoming these barriers and building a greener, more competitive steel industry.”
The findings have already been presented at AISTech, the Iron and Steel Technology Conference in the US, where they were welcomed by global industry stakeholders. A practitioner’s report is now in preparation to provide practical guidance for UK companies.
Dr Aitana Uclés Fuensanta, the project’s lead researcher, said: “This is the first empirical analysis of its kind to map the causal relationships between barriers to IDT adoption. Our insights will enable stakeholders to prioritise action, share best practices, and drive meaningful progress toward net zero.”
The study is part of the wider InterAct programme, which is funded through the government’s Made Smarter Innovation initiative. InterAct brings together academics, manufacturers, policymakers and digital technology providers to examine how new technologies can support sustainable change in UK industry.
Professor Jill MacBryde, co-director of InterAct at the University of Strathclyde, said: “The work undertaken by the University of Warwick team represents a crucial step towards a more sustainable future for the steel sector. By focusing on the human, regulatory and operational issues as well as the technology itself, this roadmap shows a clear path forward.”
The methodologies developed in the research are also being applied to other energy-intensive industries such as ceramics and glass, helping to reinforce the UK’s role as a leader in industrial sustainability innovation.
Read more:
UK steel industry given digital roadmap to reach net zero

King’s College, Cambridge has revealed the 24 startups selected for its first-ever incubator programme, SPARK 1.0, an initiative designed to turn research-backed ideas from students and alumni into investable companies.
The new scheme, created by King’s Entrepreneurship Lab (King’s E-Lab) in partnership with Founders at the University of Cambridge, aims to support the next generation of entrepreneurs tackling global challenges ranging from disease prevention to climate resilience and fertility support.
King’s College has long been associated with transformative breakthroughs in science and technology, counting Alan Turing, Geoff Hinton and Fred Sanger among its alumni. Now, SPARK 1.0 aims to continue that legacy by nurturing founders working across software, AI, life sciences, semiconductors and sustainability.
The programme received more than 180 applications, with 24 companies chosen. Of these, 42% are still at the idea stage, 40% already have an early-stage product, and 17% have initial users. Half of the selected companies are led by women.
The ventures include:
• Dielectrix, developing next-generation semiconductor dielectric materials.
• GreenHarvest, using satellite data to predict climate-driven changes to crop yields.
• Dulce Cerebrum, building AI models to detect psychosis from blood tests.
• Neela Biotech, working on carbon-negative jet fuel.
• Egg Advisor, a digital fertility platform for women freezing their eggs.
• Zenithon AI, applying machine learning to advance nuclear fusion.
Other companies span agritech, medtech, e-mobility, AI-powered mental health and novel therapeutics.
The four-week incubator, which begins at the end of August, will provide hands-on mentoring, workshops and access to Cambridge’s network of investors and entrepreneurs. Founders will leave with a validated business model, a clear product pathway, and the chance to pitch for £20,000 in seed funding at Demo Day.
They will also be able to compete for additional angel investment and join a wider Cambridge innovation community.
Kamiar Mohaddes, co-founder and director of King’s E-Lab, said the aim was to encourage more students to see entrepreneurship as a viable path: “Cambridge has been responsible for many world-changing discoveries, but entrepreneurship isn’t the first thought of most people studying here. SPARK is a catalyst to help students turn bold ideas into ventures that contribute meaningfully to the economy.”
Gerard Grech CBE, managing director of Founders at the University of Cambridge, added that the initiative comes at a time when Cambridge is seeking to double its tech and science output in the next decade: “Tech already contributes £159 billion to the UK economy and three million jobs. This grassroots energy is where the next wave of transformative businesses will come from.”
Provost of King’s College, Gillian Tett OBE, said the programme demonstrated the strength of Cambridge’s AI and life sciences ecosystem: “Through SPARK, we can support students, researchers and alumni to make the leap from lab to marketplace. This isn’t just a game-changer for King’s, but for all of Cambridge.”
The incubator is supported by Cambridge Enterprise and made possible by a personal donation from King’s alumnus Malcolm McKenzie, chair of the E-Lab’s senior advisory board.
The programme is free for eligible Cambridge students, postgraduates, post-docs, researchers and alumni who graduated within the past two years.
With its first cohort now underway, SPARK 1.0 marks a significant step in Cambridge’s efforts to ensure its world-class research translates into high-growth startups.
Read more:
Cambridge unveils first SPARK incubator cohort of 24 startups

Amazon is facing a multibillion-pound legal challenge in the UK after being accused of artificially inflating prices paid by tens of millions of British consumers.
The Association of Consumer Support Organisations (ACSO), a non-profit group, has applied to launch a collective legal action on behalf of 45 million customers who bought products from Amazon since 2019. It alleges that the e-commerce giant prevented independent sellers from offering cheaper prices on their own websites, thereby restricting competition and driving up costs for consumers.
If successful, the “opt-out” claim could see millions of Britons automatically entitled to refunds, without having to join the action individually.
Matthew Maxwell-Scott, founder and executive director of ACSO, said: “Millions of people in the UK make purchases on Amazon every day. Despite the company’s assurances that it is above all else ‘customer-obsessed’, we consider there are strong grounds to argue that UK consumers have paid higher prices because of Amazon’s pricing policies. This action will ensure that consumers can obtain redress for the considerable losses they have suffered.”
The lawsuit echoes long-running battles between Amazon and regulators abroad. In the US, the Federal Trade Commission filed a case in 2023 claiming Amazon used its “monopoly power to inflate prices” by penalising sellers who offered discounts elsewhere. Although parts of that claim were dismissed, the case is proceeding to trial.
The move underlines the growing prevalence of US-style class actions in Britain since reforms under the Consumer Rights Act 2015. Collective cases have become a mounting risk for multinational corporations, with researchers at the European Centre for International Political Economy warning in June that mass litigation could cost the UK economy £18bn by deterring investment.
Amazon has faced scrutiny in Britain before. A 2013 probe into its pricing practices led to voluntary changes to address regulator concerns. But ACSO argues its business model continues to prevent “healthy price competition”.
Amazon has rejected the claims. A spokesman said: “This claim is without merit and we’re confident that will become clear through the legal process. Amazon features offers that provide customers with low prices and fast delivery. In fact, according to independent analysis by Profitero, Amazon has maintained its position as the lowest-priced online retailer in the UK for the fifth consecutive year.
“We remain committed to supporting the 100,000 independent businesses that sell their products on our UK store, which generate billions of pounds in export sales every year.”
The case will be closely watched by retailers and investors given its potential scale. Amazon’s UK business serves more than 45 million customers and supports around 100,000 third-party sellers. A ruling against the company could open the door to one of Britain’s largest ever consumer compensation awards.
It also comes at a delicate time for the company’s regulatory standing in the UK. Doug Gurr, Amazon’s former UK boss, was earlier this year appointed to lead the Competition and Markets Authority, the very watchdog that has previously examined its pricing practices.
Read more:
Amazon faces multibillion-pound legal action over alleged price inflation for UK shoppers

Backed by fertiliser giant Mosaic, the Oxford-based venture accelerates field testing of its precision biostimulant technology
SugaROx, a UK-based agricultural technology company developing precision biostimulants, has secured a £1 million seed round extension to accelerate manufacturing and field testing of its flagship product.
The funding includes a £400,000 strategic investment from The Mosaic Company, one of the world’s largest fertiliser producers, with the remainder provided by existing backers including Future Planet Capital, Regenerate Ventures, and UK angel investors.
Biostimulants are among the fastest-growing crop input categories globally, with an estimated compound annual growth rate of 11 per cent. SugaROx is seeking to position itself at the forefront of the market with its proprietary ingredient, Trehalose-6-Phosphate (T6P).
The T6P biostimulant works by inhibiting SnRK1, an enzyme that signals energy scarcity in plants, thereby improving crop yield and resilience. Safety tests completed earlier this year confirmed a favourable regulatory outlook, encouraging potential partners to request samples for large-scale trials.
SugaROx is targeting a UK market launch for its T6P wheat biostimulant in 2027, followed by entry into the EU in 2028. Trials in soybean and maize began this year, with ambitions to expand into the US and Brazilian markets shortly after.
Mark Robbins, chief executive of SugaROx, (pictured) said the new funding was critical in meeting demand for product samples. He said: “In response to increasing demand, we decided to accelerate our manufacturing timeline, fast-tracking the shift from in-house lab production to a pilot facility,” he said. “The Innovate UK grant and additional investment allow us to do exactly that.”
The deal also builds on a £2.4 million Innovate UK grant awarded last year to help scale manufacturing of T6P. Mosaic’s involvement gives SugaROx access to its US trial network and digital platform TruResponse, which allows field results to be visualised and analysed at scale.
Dr Cara Griffiths, chief technical officer and co-founder of SugaROx, said: “With Mosaic we gain access to an established network of trial sites for validation of our first product in the US at scale. Mosaic will also provide us with access to TruResponse, a digital platform to visualise field results, which will be extremely valuable for our research.”
Founded to commercialise research into plant biochemistry, SugaROx aims to bring science-backed innovation into a market increasingly focused on sustainable crop production.
Robbins added: “We have the ambition to transform the biostimulants industry with science-based solutions – something that is only achievable in collaboration with other players.”
Read more:
UK biostimulant startup SugaROx raises £1m to fast-track crop trials

At some point in their history, businesses commonly have need for external funding to help their growth trajectory.
However, acquiring investment has its dangers and pitfalls and the last thing the Board will want is to invest time and money getting to the point of securing the funding only for it to be pulled.  As a commercial lawyer with decades of handling funding rounds, James Fulforth, Senior Partner and Partner in Kingsley Napley’s Commercial, Corporate and Finance team explains some of the reasons why fundraises can go wrong and therefore how best to avoid such a scenario.
Valuation and financials
Investors will wish to see a credible valuation for the company which is raising investment, and the more substance that lies behind this, the better. Is the company already trading? If yes, what financials are available? If any year end accounts have been finalised, these should be disclosed, but ideally they will be accompanied by up-to-date management accounts.
If initial trading is modest, then the focus will be more on forecasts for future periods. These will generally be incorporated within the company’s business plan.
Even if the company has researched the position carefully, financial projections are by their nature highly speculative which is why they are rarely supported by warranties in the transaction documentation. If investors do invest in an early round, future relations between founders and investors will be happier if trust is established early on. If the initial valuation proves too frothy, relations may start to sour quickly, and founders will spend more time on managing relations with grumpy stakeholders than on building their business.
Far better to take a realistic, even conservative, approach to valuations and projections, to avoid overselling the idea, and to then exceed those expectations.
Proposition
The credibility of the company’s business plan will depend on the nature of the product or service, the market, and the degree to which data is available to support the company’s analysis. Investors will consider the extent to which a product or service has already been developed, launched and tested.
Has an expert been engaged to produce a report on the product, service or market, and can such a report be regarded as independent and therefore credible? How original is the business idea, and is it possible to protect the intellectual property underlying it? If there is little substance behind the proposition, then even if the financial performance and valuation is modest, investors will struggle to see future value.
But highly detailed analysis may be of limited value if the founders are unable to articulate the company’s proposition in their pitch. Much will depend on the individuals concerned and the character of the founder team. More introverted individuals may have the technical skills, but they will need to be complemented by those with energy, charisma and leadership.
Many successful businesses are led by gifted individuals, but raising investment involves stiff competition. Balanced founder teams tend to appear a more compelling offering.
Preparation
Careful preparation prior to the fund raising is critical. A well-researched plan and a strong pitch will have little traction with experienced investors if the same level of professionalism has not been applied to the management of the company. The same applies to the organisation of the due diligence process, and the way in which founders engage in the process.
While family and friends may be prepared to rely on their trust in the founders, more sophisticated investors will require detailed answers to detailed questions. Most important is capital structure. Have all share issues and share options been documented properly?
Have terms with key suppliers, customers, employees and consultants been agreed and written down? To what degree are such terms standardised? Has the company acquired ownership or a licence over all key assets, such as intellectual property? What governance is in place around data, cyber security, and regulatory issues? Potential investors may wish to go back to when the company was founded, so ideally founders should start addressing any gaps in these elements early on.
Any obvious issues which are uncovered may be difficult to fix quickly, and may compromise an awful lot of hard work in devising and selling the proposition.
These are not the most exciting elements of running a business, and some founders will simply not have the desire or the skillset to give them much focus but, once again, the key is to have someone in the team who is prepared to understand the detail and to directly address any wrinkles that inevitably emerge.
Other investors
Securing a lead investor is often key to attracting additional investors, especially if that investor is well-known or has significant expertise in a particular sector. Even if that’s not the case, a lead investor is often someone who has already spent time in getting to know the company’s product, service or team, and provided they appear credible and are able to articulate their views to other investors in the course of due diligence, they will help reassure smaller investors and build momentum.
However, founders should be cautious of getting too close to one investor, and again they should carry out their own research on the background and track record of that individual or institution. If a lead investor pulls out of the round, others may follow.
If this happens shortly before completion, the damage may be significant. If a company is fortunate enough to have the option of choosing between investors, it should be strategic about who it collaborates with, and it may not wish to put all eggs in the same basket.
The ideal investor or investors will not only provide capital but also commercial experience and real knowledge of the sector. They may even be a suitable person for the company to have on the board.
Founder terms
Finally, founders should be realistic about their personal compensation and the terms under which they hold shares. Even though they may own a substantial percentage of fully vested shares prior to the fund raise, investors will wish to include appropriate protections, and these may include requiring the founders to offer up their shares for sale in certain circumstances.
Again, the protections required will vary, depending on the nature of the parties involved and their experience, but also on the other elements already touched upon, ie the valuation, track record of the founders, nature of the preparation and dynamic between the investor group.
If a founder can confidently justify the overall proposition, negotiations will be easier. But an unrealistic founder may fall at the last hurdle. These matters need careful consideration alongside advisers and, much like a company’s valuation, the key is to be reasonable and to think long-term.
This also applies to other employees’ compensation. Investors will wish to see that employees are properly incentivised to stay and perform and to add value to the company. Companies that don’t offer equity to their employees (for example, through EMIs) risk losing important talent to competitors.
Securing funding has its pitfalls, and expert advice should always be sought to help guide your business through the process but, if properly managed and executed at the right time, the result can prove transformational for your business.
Read more:
5 Reasons Why Fundraising can Go Wrong

Soho House, the exclusive members’ club chain that has become synonymous with celebrity culture and creative-class networking, is to return to private ownership in a $2.7bn (£2bn) deal, just four years after its high-profile listing on the New York Stock Exchange.
The move comes after a volatile spell as a public company, during which its share price halved, investors questioned its accounting methods, and the business struggled to balance rapid global expansion with the exclusivity demanded by its more than 213,000 members worldwide.
The deal will see MCR Hotels, the third-largest hotel operator in the United States, lead a group of new equity investors. Actor and tech investor Ashton Kutcher, long rumoured to be a member, will join the board, while MCR’s chief executive Tyler Morse will serve as vice-chair.
Existing major backers will remain in place, including Ron Burkle, the US retail billionaire who holds a 40% stake, restaurateur Richard Caring with 21%, and Goldman Sachs, which has 8%. Founder Nick Jones (pictured), who opened the first Soho House in London’s Greek Street in 1995, retains his 5%.
New investors will buy shares at $9 apiece, an 83% premium on the price before takeover interest surfaced late last year. However, that still values Soho House below the $2.8bn peak it briefly reached in 2021. The $2.7bn enterprise value includes about $700m of debt.
When Soho House listed in 2021 under the name Membership Collective Group, it was pitched as a lifestyle stock for the Instagram age: a global network of clubs, hotels and restaurants with celebrity cachet and aspirational branding.
At its height, the company boasted revenues doubling in three years, rapid openings from Mumbai to Los Angeles, and waiting lists thousands strong. But the gloss faded quickly.
Shares slid from above $14 in August 2021 to $7.64 by last week, reflecting investor unease with its hefty losses — totalling $739m across its four years on the market — and the inherent contradiction of chasing rapid global growth while selling exclusivity.
Criticism also came from activist investors. Hedge fund Third Point, run by billionaire Dan Loeb, had urged Soho House to court fresh investors and even consider a competitive bidding process. Short-sellers such as GlassHouse Research raised questions about the company’s accounting, though these were rejected.
Chief executive Andrew Carnie said returning to private ownership would give Soho House the breathing space to pursue its expansion strategy without the quarterly scrutiny of Wall Street.
“Returning to private ownership enables us to build on this momentum, with the support of world-class hospitality and investment partners,” he said. “I’m incredibly proud of what our teams have accomplished and am excited about our future, as we continue to be guided by our members and grounded in the spirit that makes Soho House so special.”
Carnie has sought to make the company leaner in recent years. Management argues that operational efficiencies have improved profitability, with Soho House reporting three consecutive quarters of net profit.
For MCR Hotels, best known for assets such as New York’s TWA Hotel at JFK and the High Line Hotel, the deal provides a gateway into the lucrative high-end lifestyle sector. The group is also investing heavily in the UK, having acquired the BT Tower in London last year for £275m with plans to convert it into a hotel.
Ashton Kutcher’s appointment to the board reflects Soho House’s desire to blend cultural cachet with strategic investment nous. Kutcher has a track record in backing technology startups, from Uber to Airbnb, and is likely to bring both media attention and Silicon Valley credibility.
For a business that has long relied on its star-studded clientele — from Kate Moss and Kendall Jenner to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who had their first date at the Dean Street house — his arrival may also help bolster Soho House’s brand positioning as both aspirational and innovative.
The club now has 48 locations open or in development worldwide, with 10 in London alone. Annual fees range from £1,000 to £2,920, depending on access levels. But expansion at this pace has posed challenges: long-time members complain about overcrowding and a dilution of exclusivity, while rising fees risk pricing out younger creatives.
The deal is unlikely to alter the member experience in the short term. However, the backing of MCR Hotels could accelerate property development, with new sites expected across Europe, Asia and the US.
For investors, the transaction closes a turbulent chapter in Soho House’s history as a listed company. While the public markets struggled to value its hybrid model of hospitality, lifestyle, and membership, the private equity consortium appears to be betting on its ability to scale profitably away from Wall Street scrutiny.
The question is whether Soho House can retain its aura of exclusivity while expanding further into new cities and markets — or whether its greatest asset, its brand mystique, risks dilution in the pursuit of growth.
Read more:
Soho House to go private in $2.7bn deal as Ashton Kutcher joins board