Business

Jellycat, the British toymaker behind viral plush toys such as sad-faced eggs and smiling peanuts, is set to pay its owners a £110m dividend after profits more than doubled in 2024.

The privately owned company reported pre-tax profit of £139m, up from £67m the previous year, as revenues surged 66% to £333m in the 12 months to 31 December, according to its latest Companies House filings.

Founded in London in 1999, Jellycat has become a global sensation thanks to its quirky designs and strong presence on social media. Its toys are now sold in 80 countries, with demand boosted by adults as much as children.

Chief executive Arnaud Meysselle said the brand was “humbled” by its rapid growth and would continue to expand its character-led range.

“We will keep bringing more characters to life,” he said.

Founder and chairman Thomas Gatacre added that the company’s mission was “to create joy and try to be the most loved soft toy company in the world.”

The proposed £110m payout marks a 75% increase on the £63m dividend paid the previous year, underlining the profitability of Jellycat’s expansion.

Gatacre noted the team had been running “faster than ever” to keep up with surging demand, while emphasising the company’s focus on responsible production and durability:

“We strive to ensure every Jellycat arrives in tip-top condition, built to last, and made responsibly.”

Jellycat’s success has also been fuelled by immersive retail experiences. Pop-ups in major cities have become social media phenomena, drawing long queues of adult fans.
• At London’s Selfridges, Jellycat sells plush fish and chips, served by staff play-acting with fryers and vinegar shakers.
• In New York, a Jellycat diner has become a must-visit attraction.
• Paris boasts its own Jellycat patisserie, with themed toys snapped up by locals and tourists alike.

These pop-ups generate viral content, with millions of views online as fans showcase their finds — essentially turning customers into brand ambassadors.

With demand still outstripping supply and a booming fan base, Jellycat appears well positioned for continued global expansion. The company’s blend of viral marketing, retail theatre and emotional appeal has not only transformed its balance sheet but also reshaped how soft toys are marketed worldwide.

Read more:
Jellycat to pay £110m dividend as profits more than double on global plush toy craze

Tesco has warned that the UK grocery sector faces an intensifying price battle in the run-up to Christmas, even as it raised its full-year profit forecast after winning market share over the summer.

The UK’s largest supermarket group now expects to deliver annual profits of up to £3.1bn, £100m higher than previous guidance, after its decision to cut prices on 6,500 products by an average of 9% drew in more customers. Tesco said its grocery inflation was running “well behind” the latest industry rate of 4.9%, according to figures from Worldpanel.

Tesco chief executive Ken Murphy acknowledged that rivals had already signalled their intention to compete aggressively on pricing. Earlier this year, Asda pledged to deploy a “significant war chest” to drive down costs.

“Some of our competitors went pretty strong on their statement of intent at the start of the year and have acted on that. It doesn’t feel that rational. We are anticipating the second half could be more intensive, not less,” Murphy said.

He added that Tesco would be “pulsing in strong deals” over the next three months but warned that shoppers were already showing signs of nervousness ahead of the November budget.

Tesco reported a 5.1% rise in group sales to £33bn in the six months to 23 August, with UK like-for-like sales up 4.9%. Trading was boosted by the warm summer, which lifted sales of barbecue foods, and by a shift in consumer behaviour, with customers buying more premium ready meals and fresh produce to cook at home rather than eating out.

Pre-tax profits fell 6.3% to £1.3bn, reflecting restructuring charges, the separation of Tesco’s banking division, and its investments in price reductions.

The retailer said it had offset some of the financial pressures through efficiency savings and AI-driven forecasting, using technology to better predict demand, cut waste, and optimise staffing.

But Murphy criticised government policy on business taxation, pointing to £235m in higher employer national insurance contributions and £90m from a new packaging levy this year.

“Enough is enough,” he said, calling on ministers to exclude retailers from higher business rates on larger premises and to deliver on promises of a fairer system.

Despite the warnings of a looming supermarket price war, Tesco remains confident heading into the festive period, where it expects strong consumer demand for value-driven deals.

With household budgets under strain and competitive intensity building, Murphy insisted Tesco would continue to focus on delivering the best value for shoppers while protecting long-term profitability.

Read more:
Tesco warns of Christmas price war as household budgets tighten

Currys, the UK’s largest electricals retailer, has scrapped its board-level ESG committee, effectively ending formal oversight of environmental, social and governance issues at the highest level of the company.

The decision comes as regulation and investor expectations on sustainability tighten across the UK and Europe, raising questions about the message it sends on corporate governance priorities.

Although Currys has stressed that it remains committed to its ESG objectives, critics argue the move is poorly timed. Under new frameworks such as the UK’s Sustainability Disclosure Requirements and the EU’s Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive, boards are under mounting pressure to demonstrate clear accountability for ESG.

Ciarán Bollard, CEO of The Corporate Governance Institute, warned that dissolving the committee could undermine confidence in Currys’ approach “Statements of this kind are becoming more common. We hear companies say: ‘we are stepping back from formal ESG structures, but our commitment remains.’ In the United States, this has often been driven by political hostility towards ESG. The UK, however, is a very different environment.”

He added that while governance models vary, the absence of a dedicated board-level committee risks diluting focus: “A board-level committee ensures focus, visibility and responsibility. Without that, ESG risks becoming fragmented and treated as a peripheral issue rather than embedded in strategy. That can create challenges for compliance, investor relations and reputation over time.”

The closure of Currys’ ESG committee highlights a tension for UK boards: how best to integrate ESG into governance structures at a time of rising regulatory demands.

Bollard said the decision risks sending “the wrong signal” to stakeholders: “In the UK, stepping back from formal ESG oversight as standards rise is likely to raise more questions than it answers. The lesson for boards is clear: commitments to ESG are judged not just by what is said, but by the governance structures that underpin them.”

While no single model of ESG oversight is mandatory, the development is being seen as a broader test case for UK corporate governance. Businesses face the dual challenge of demonstrating long-term resilience while navigating new reporting regimes.

For investors and regulators alike, governance structures remain a critical marker of whether a company’s ESG promises carry real weight.

Read more:
Currys’ closure of ESG committee sparks debate on UK corporate governance priorities

Series, the viral college networking startup, has appointed a humanoid robot as its Chief Marketing Officer (CMO) — and launched the announcement with a campus-wide takeover at Harvard.

The robot, named Uri, is a Unitree G1 humanoid powered by advanced AI and lifelike movement. Last week it paraded through Harvard Square and into the stadium stands during the Harvard vs Brown football game, drawing cheers from students and crowds of curious spectators. The campaign generated 1 million social media views within 24 hours, making it one of the most talked-about campus activations of the season.

Series, which positions itself as the next-generation social networking platform for students, says appointing Uri reflects its disruptive ethos.

“Most CMOs cost $100,000–$300,000 a year. Ours is a fraction of that, and it gains more attention than most celebrities do in any given room,” said Nathaneo Johnson, CEO and co-founder of Series. “That’s marketing.”

Uri’s first campaign included unveiling a giant 12ft x 8ft Series composite banner of Harvard students, handing out matcha drinks to fuel conversations, and becoming a photo magnet in Harvard Square.

While the appointment has a viral edge, the startup insists this is about more than novelty. Uri is designed to interact directly with students and Series users, engaging audiences through natural speech, real-time movement and adaptive learning.

The Unitree G1 boasts 43 degrees of freedom, 3D LiDAR environmental sensing, depth cameras and reinforcement learning capabilities, allowing it to operate seamlessly in dynamic social settings.

By combining robotics with social networking, Series is testing how AI can participate in strategic and creative leadership, not just automate routine tasks.

Since launch, Series has facilitated 700,000+ messages between students, with a 95% acceptance rate on match suggestions. Its vision is to make AI and robotics a core part of student networking, blending technology with the deeply human need for connection.

“This move reflects our belief that robotics and AI will co-create the future of connection,” Johnson added. “Uri’s capabilities are far beyond novelty — it’s about setting a culture of constant innovation.”

The Harvard campaign is just the beginning. Uri will lead a Series College Tour, appearing at universities across the US as the company continues to challenge how young people connect, network and build opportunities in an increasingly tech-driven world.

Read more:
Harvard campus takeover: Viral startup Series appoints humanoid robot as CMO

Currys, the UK’s largest electricals retailer, has scrapped its board-level ESG committee, effectively ending formal oversight of environmental, social and governance issues at the highest level of the company.

The decision comes as regulation and investor expectations on sustainability tighten across the UK and Europe, raising questions about the message it sends on corporate governance priorities.

Although Currys has stressed that it remains committed to its ESG objectives, critics argue the move is poorly timed. Under new frameworks such as the UK’s Sustainability Disclosure Requirements and the EU’s Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive, boards are under mounting pressure to demonstrate clear accountability for ESG.

Ciarán Bollard, CEO of The Corporate Governance Institute, warned that dissolving the committee could undermine confidence in Currys’ approach: “Statements of this kind are becoming more common. We hear companies say: ‘we are stepping back from formal ESG structures, but our commitment remains.’ In the United States, this has often been driven by political hostility towards ESG. The UK, however, is a very different environment.”

He added that while governance models vary, the absence of a dedicated board-level committee risks diluting focus: “A board-level committee ensures focus, visibility and responsibility. Without that, ESG risks becoming fragmented and treated as a peripheral issue rather than embedded in strategy. That can create challenges for compliance, investor relations and reputation over time.”

The closure of Currys’ ESG committee highlights a tension for UK boards: how best to integrate ESG into governance structures at a time of rising regulatory demands.

Bollard said the decision risks sending “the wrong signal” to stakeholders: “In the UK, stepping back from formal ESG oversight as standards rise is likely to raise more questions than it answers. The lesson for boards is clear: commitments to ESG are judged not just by what is said, but by the governance structures that underpin them.”

While no single model of ESG oversight is mandatory, the development is being seen as a broader test case for UK corporate governance. Businesses face the dual challenge of demonstrating long-term resilience while navigating new reporting regimes.

For investors and regulators alike, governance structures remain a critical marker of whether a company’s ESG promises carry real weight.

Read more:
Currys’ closure of ESG committee sparks debate on UK corporate governance priorities

Tesco has warned that the UK grocery sector faces an intensifying price battle in the run-up to Christmas, even as it raised its full-year profit forecast after winning market share over the summer.

The UK’s largest supermarket group now expects to deliver annual profits of up to £3.1bn, £100m higher than previous guidance, after its decision to cut prices on 6,500 products by an average of 9% drew in more customers. Tesco said its grocery inflation was running “well behind” the latest industry rate of 4.9%, according to figures from Worldpanel.

Tesco chief executive Ken Murphy acknowledged that rivals had already signalled their intention to compete aggressively on pricing. Earlier this year, Asda pledged to deploy a “significant war chest” to drive down costs.

“Some of our competitors went pretty strong on their statement of intent at the start of the year and have acted on that. It doesn’t feel that rational. We are anticipating the second half could be more intensive, not less,” Murphy said.

He added that Tesco would be “pulsing in strong deals” over the next three months but warned that shoppers were already showing signs of nervousness ahead of the November budget.

Tesco reported a 5.1% rise in group sales to £33bn in the six months to 23 August, with UK like-for-like sales up 4.9%. Trading was boosted by the warm summer, which lifted sales of barbecue foods, and by a shift in consumer behaviour, with customers buying more premium ready meals and fresh produce to cook at home rather than eating out.

Pre-tax profits fell 6.3% to £1.3bn, reflecting restructuring charges, the separation of Tesco’s banking division, and its investments in price reductions.

The retailer said it had offset some of the financial pressures through efficiency savings and AI-driven forecasting, using technology to better predict demand, cut waste, and optimise staffing.

But Murphy criticised government policy on business taxation, pointing to £235m in higher employer national insurance contributions and £90m from a new packaging levy this year.

“Enough is enough,” he said, calling on ministers to exclude retailers from higher business rates on larger premises and to deliver on promises of a fairer system.

Despite the warnings of a looming supermarket price war, Tesco remains confident heading into the festive period, where it expects strong consumer demand for value-driven deals.

With household budgets under strain and competitive intensity building, Murphy insisted Tesco would continue to focus on delivering the best value for shoppers while protecting long-term profitability.

Read more:
Tesco warns of Christmas price war as household budgets tighten

London’s business community is facing a new and costly challenge. A recent surge in bed bug infestations has created significant headaches for landlords, property managers and small business owners across the capital.

From rental flats to serviced apartments and boutique hotels, infestations are spreading faster than many can contain — and the financial consequences are mounting.

Reports of bed bugs are not limited to residential tenants. Offices with soft furnishings, shared workspaces and even retail units have also experienced outbreaks, often traced back to staff or customers inadvertently carrying the pests in on clothing or bags. The challenge for businesses is that a single infestation can quickly escalate, leading to reputational damage, lost income, and in some cases, legal disputes with tenants or clients.

Landlords in boroughs such as Islington, Tower Hamlets and Hammersmith have been particularly affected, according to local property associations. One managing agent in North London described having to replace multiple sets of furniture across a block of flats after chemical sprays failed to stop recurring infestations. “It’s not just the cost of replacement,” the agent said. “It’s the fact that tenants lose confidence in the property and demand rent reductions or early exits.”

Traditional chemical-based treatments, once considered the default, are proving increasingly unreliable. Bed bugs have developed resistance to many insecticides, meaning infestations often return within weeks. DIY products sold online or in hardware stores are not strong enough to deal with large-scale outbreaks, and in many cases, they simply drive the insects deeper into walls, floorboards and furniture.

For this reason, more landlords and business owners are turning to bed bug pest control experts who can provide long-term solutions. One of the most effective approaches is whole-room heat treatment, which raises temperatures to 49–60°C — a level that penetrates mattresses, skirting boards and even electrical sockets, destroying bed bugs at every stage of life.

ThermoPest, a London-based company specialising exclusively in bed bug eradication, has seen a sharp rise in commercial enquiries this year. The firm works with landlords, letting agencies and business operators to deliver discreet treatments that minimise disruption and protect reputations.

A spokesperson for ThermoPest said: “We’ve seen a significant increase in calls from landlords and property managers who have tried chemicals and failed. In London’s competitive rental market, a single infestation can have major financial consequences. Our heat treatments give peace of mind — they work first time, and they don’t leave behind chemical residues that could affect tenants or staff.”

The economic costs of infestations can be substantial. Aside from treatment and furniture replacement, businesses risk loss of trade, negative online reviews, and potential disputes with insurers or tenants. For small firms operating on tight margins, these costs can be devastating.

As London continues to attract record numbers of tourists, students and short-term renters, experts warn that bed bugs are unlikely to disappear from the city’s agenda anytime soon. For landlords and SMEs, the message is clear: early intervention with specialist support is the only way to avoid long-term damage. And with dedicated companies like ThermoPest leading the charge, London’s property sector finally has a dependable partner to meet the challenge head on.

Read more:
London’s Property Sector Warned as Bed Bug Infestations Hit Businesses and Landlords

Greggs is increasing prices on some of its best-known menu items as the bakery chain seeks to offset rising employment costs while managing softer sales growth.

From Thursday, customers will pay 5p more for certain baked goods such as the empire biscuit, while breakfast deals will also rise in price. The two-part breakfast deal, which includes a roll and a drink, will increase from £2.95 to £3.15, while the three-part version, adding a side like a yoghurt pot or hash browns, will rise from £3.95 to £4.15.

Chief executive Roisin Currie said the group remained committed to keeping prices as low as possible but added: “We are operating in an inflationary environment.”

The price hikes were announced alongside third-quarter results showing like-for-like sales up 1.5% in the 13 weeks to 27 September, slowing from 2.6% growth in the first half of the year.

Greggs had previously warned that summer heatwaves dampened demand for hot baked goods in July, forcing it to cut annual earnings guidance. The company now expects full-year operating profit to be “modestly” below the £195.3m recorded in 2024, with analysts forecasting around £176m.

Encouragingly, trading conditions improved in August and September, allowing Greggs to hold its revised guidance. That reassurance triggered a 7.2% share price rally, lifting the stock to £17.20 and squeezing hedge funds who had shorted the shares. Greggs remains one of the most shorted companies in London, with 5.1% of its stock on loan to investors betting against it.

Greggs, which operates 2,675 shops, opened a net 57 new outlets this year but now expects to add around 120 net stores in 2025 — down from earlier guidance of 140–150, citing “timing of opportunities.” The chain continues to expand in supermarkets including Tesco and Sainsbury’s, while targeting new transport, roadside and retail park locations.

Currie dismissed talk of “peak Greggs,” insisting the company could grow its estate to more than 3,000 shops long term. She pointed to evolving customer tastes, with the bakery introducing high-protein options such as egg pots and protein shakes alongside its traditional sausage rolls and steak bakes.

Analysts remain cautious. Panmure Liberum noted that while slower store openings were a concern, an improving cost outlook supported confidence in Greggs’ guidance. Clive Black at Shore Capital warned that falling like-for-like volumes posed longer-term questions about whether Greggs has reached its growth ceiling, commenting:

“Like-for-like volume is not the be-all and end-all, but it is going to be a key concern of existing and prospective investors.”
Despite lingering doubts, the market rally suggests investors see Greggs’ cost discipline and resilience as positives — at least for now.

Read more:
Greggs lifts prices to offset rising wage costs as investors rally behind stock

The government will fast-track legislation to permanently ban fracking in the UK, in a move designed to block Reform UK’s pledge to revive the controversial practice.

Ed Miliband, energy secretary, confirmed the ban will be introduced as part of the North Sea transition plan, due this autumn. Any future attempt to restart fracking would require a parliamentary repeal, forcing MPs — many representing constituencies above shale gas deposits — to vote in favour of drilling.

Addressing Labour’s party conference, Miliband said campaigners would be sent to nearly 200 constituencies affected by shale gas reserves to mobilise opposition.

“We will legislate at the earliest opportunity to protect communities from fracking,” he said.

A permanent ban was already a Labour manifesto commitment, but Wednesday’s announcement set out the legislative route, underscoring Labour’s strategy to neutralise Reform’s energy platform.

The UK currently operates under a moratorium on fracking, which involves blasting a mixture of sand, water and chemicals into shale rock to release gas. The method has been widely criticised for its environmental risks, particularly the risk of earthquakes.

The last UK fracking project, at Preston New Road in Lancashire, triggered nearly 200 tremors in under a year before being halted.

Reform UK leaders Nigel Farage and Richard Tice have argued that fracking could reduce energy bills, but experts have repeatedly rejected the claim, citing geological challenges and limited resource potential in the UK compared to the US.

Fracking remains unpopular with the public, and divisions have already emerged within Reform. Lancashire council, under Reform control, has stated it would not welcome drilling in the county.

The issue has a history of destabilising governments. In 2022, Liz Truss’s premiership faltered after she attempted to push through fracking support, only for her MPs to rebel during a Labour-led vote on the issue — a moment of chaos that hastened her downfall.

While Reform has sought to draw parallels with the American shale boom, experts note that the UK’s higher population density and faulted geology make extraction more disruptive, less efficient and far riskier.

By legislating now, Labour aims to lock in its pledge, protect communities overlying shale gas, and draw a sharp dividing line with Reform ahead of key local and national contests.

Read more:
Labour accelerates UK fracking ban as Ed Miliband counters Reform push

There have been long-standing concerns about the use of Non-disclosure agreements (NDAs), particularly relating to sexual harassment allegations. Those concerns have grown with the momentum of the MeToo movement.

The use of NDAs stands at a critical crossroads. Imminent and future legal reforms are poised to fundamentally alter their scope and enforceability in the context of discrimination and harassment.

NDAs have historically been used as a crucial way of maintaining corporate confidentiality and protecting intellectual property and trade secrets. They are routinely used throughout the entire employment lifecycle, from hiring through ongoing employment and extending to an employee’s exit. Nonetheless, substantial legislative changes are set to limit their scope significantly.

How are legislative changes reshaping NDAs?

The Government is set to ban the use of controversial NDAs where workers have complained about workplace harassment or discrimination. This proposal is part of the Employment Rights Bill. If enacted, new rules will make confidentiality clauses in settlement agreements (or other agreements) void, to the extent that they attempt to prevent individuals from discussing allegations of or disclosing information about harassment or discrimination. The rules also extend to the employer’s response to the allegations.

There will be limited circumstances where NDAs can still be used in relation to harassment and discrimination complaints, known as “excepted agreements”. Future regulations are expected to define an “excepted agreement” narrowly, allowing such NDAs only under specific conditions -most notably, when a worker actively requests one.

There is currently no information about when these NDA proposals will be implemented. Although the Government published a roadmap in July 2025 outlining the phased implementation of the Employment Rights Bill, the NDA proposals were made after the roadmap’s publication.

The Victims and Prisoners Act 2024

By contrast, under section 17 of the Victims and Prisoners Act 2024 (“the Act”), any NDAs entered into on or after 1 October 2025 will be unenforceable against individuals who are, or who reasonably believe themselves to be, victims of crime – specifically when they disclose information about relevant conduct to certain parties and for clearly defined purposes.

The Act protects “permitted disclosures” made by victims to:

Law enforcement agencies and investigative authorities
Qualified legal professionals
Regulated professionals, including members of the healthcare sector
Registered victim support organisations
Regulatory or supervisory bodies
Authorised representatives
Immediate family members, specifically being a victim’s child, parent, or partner.

The Act adopts an inclusive definition of “victim.” Under section 1, a victim is anyone who has suffered harm as a direct result of criminal conduct in England and Wales, or who reasonably believes they are a victim. Notably, this definition extends to individuals who have witnessed criminal conduct and experienced harm as a result.

“Harm” is defined broadly to include physical, mental, or emotional suffering, as well as economic loss. Importantly, there is no requirement for the offence to have been officially reported, nor must there be a charge or conviction for someone to be recognised as a victim under the Act.

What steps should organisations take?

·        Implement a clear anti-harassment policy if you don’t already have one, and ensure this includes an effective complaints procedure.

·       Provide training to workers and managers on harassment and discrimination.

·       Foster an inclusive culture in the workplace.

·       Review contract templates, especially NDAs, but also contracts of employment and settlement agreements to ensure they align with the latest legal standards.

·       As well as the above, and in relation to the new Act, set out clearly the circumstances when disclosures are permitted in NDAs. This will eliminate potential ambiguities regarding parties’ rights and obligations. By doing so, businesses can safeguard transparency and compliance in a rapidly evolving environment.

Conclusion

The introduction of these legislative reforms is another step toward prioritising individual rights over the broad use of confidentiality clauses. For employers, this means taking a proactive approach to ensure alignment with new transparency-focused standards.

While NDAs still serve a valid purpose in protecting legitimate business interests, their use in cases of harassment or discrimination is now subject to stricter scrutiny. That scrutiny will be even greater when the NDA provisions in the Employment Rights Bill come into force.

Read more:
Reshaping Confidentiality: The Changing Landscape of Non-Disclosure Agreements