Weekend reading links

1. Foreign capital flows into US equities even as they slow down and even reverse in the debt markets. 

Foreign investors made a record $942bn in net purchases of US equities and investment fund shares in the 12 months to July, accelerating a shift in overseas investment towards American stocks and away from debt. The flows represented the highest rolling 12-month total in Treasury data going back to 1985. Net purchases of US equities and investment fund shares by foreign investors jumped to $426bn in the second quarter, up 62 per cent from the same period in 2025, and surpassing the previous quarterly record of $299bn in 2022, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis... The foreign inflows coincided with a gain of about 20 per cent for Wall Street’s benchmark S&P 500 in the year to July... Foreign demand for US debt moved in the opposite direction. Overseas investors bought a net $188bn of US debt securities in the second quarter, down from $314bn in the first. That came as China’s reported holdings of US Treasuries fell to $618bn, their lowest level since August 2008, as Beijing diversifies into gold, agency bonds and other assets.

2. Markets step in to correct state capability failures - judicial delays edition.

The country suffers from one of the world’s largest judicial backlogs, approximately 54 million pending cases, and inside many of them is big money that one party owes another, that the claimants can’t afford to pursue through years of litigation. An investor could identify favourable cases, fund the legal proceedings, and keep a percentage of the claim if they won. Pool enough of these claims together and it looks something like a private equity fund, except the underlying asset is the claim to a future payout rather than ownership in a company. 

Cut to January 2026, and Kundan Shahi’s litigation company, Legalpay, has committed Rs 100 crore over the next 18 months to financing commercial and insolvency disputes. The firm has already worked with the likes of Zepto, Pwc, and Deloitte and claims to deliver returns exceeding 30% internal rate of return (IRR) to its investors... From the US and UK to Hong Kong, Singapore, and Australia, third-party litigation funding has matured into a fully-fledged asset class, with the former president of the UK Supreme Court calling it “the lifeblood of the justice system”... Burford Capital, listed on the NYSE and LSE, manages a 7.5 billion dollar portfolio of legal claims and claims to have delivered a 26% IRR on concluded cases over 15 years... In May 2026, Five Rivers Capital, a Mumbai firm backed by a global legal finance company, surfaced as the first Indian litigation finance vehicle registered with Sebi as a Category II AIF. The firm is reportedly in talks to raise about $25–$50 million, though it has yet to close the fund or deploy any capital.

3. Attracting foreign universities to establish campus in India has for long been the target of attention for state governments. Now that 17 universities have set up shop, the demand side weaknesses are becoming apparent. 

In its second year, Deakin University had all of 46 students. Another Australian university, Wollongong, started its India campus with just nine students in 2024 and added 19 more in the second year. Considering the bar for entry is the bare minimum—there is no entrance exam for a start—those are dismal numbers. The reasons aren’t hard to fathom. Indian students looking to study abroad broadly fall into two categories. They either want an education from a prestigious institution or they desire to leave the country and see a student visa as an easier way out. The universities establishing campuses in India don’t cater for either.

“I don’t see these universities bringing any cutting-edge programmes here. It’s more of the same,” says a study-abroad consultant who works with some of them. “There are computer science and business courses that attract a certain student, but they aren’t creating programmes that you don’t usually find in India, like quantum computing or spacetech.” If the country hoped that foreign universities would bring world-class research or future-facing tech to India, it might be disappointed. The “lab-lite” courses they offer are cheap to run and easy to scale, allowing them to operate out of corporate complexes rather than expansive campuses. It’s a low-risk, high-margin play. They promise a degree stamped with a “top 500” brand name but without the research-intensive environment that made it a brand in the first place. And yet, they aren’t cheap. A master’s degree from one of these universities costs Rs 15–25 lakh a year. At that pricing, they have competitors to deal with.

4. Excellent long read from Gill Plimmer on how the privatised UK water utilities have skimped on investments and discharged untreated water into the country's rivers polluting and making them toxic. 

Just eight days after Macquarie sold its final stake in Thames Water in March 2017 — leaving behind a debt pile that had grown to £10.8bn — Thames Water received a then-record £20.3mn fine for allowing 1.4bn litres of raw sewage to flow into the River Thames. The untreated effluent had entered the river at six different sites in Oxfordshire and Buckinghamshire, suffocating bream and trout, killing herons and waterfowl, and putting boating companies out of business... Thames Water had been dumping sewage to save money on maintenance during a period when investors received big dividends and its executives huge salaries. No one was held to account. The company’s chief executive, Martin Baggs, had left six months earlier and before the court case started with a £2mn pay package. Baggs went on to join the board of Thames 21 — a non-profit that protects the river... Between 1991 and March 2025, the 16 privatised water monopolies raised a staggering £82bn in debt while simultaneously paying out £85bn in dividends to their shareholders, according to research by the FT.

5. Robin Wigglesworth has a very good long read on the repo markets, which he describes as being similar to the dark matter in astrophysics.

The repo market is often described as the plumbing of finance. Like the pipes around your house, it ensures that money flows from where it is abundant to where it is needed. And if it breaks down, then things quickly get smelly... It is huge, powerful and omnipresent, and most easily observed through its impact on other bodies... the US Treasury calculates that the US market alone is now roughly $12.6tn, and the International Capital Markets Association, a trade body, recently estimated that the European repo market stands at almost €14tn... when it very occasionally comes under pressure, it is enormously unsettling to the rest of the financial universe.

6.  Private equity has become the lightning rod for housing supply crunch in the US during the mid-term elections, on the back of rising home purchases by firms in recent years.

7. Tej Parikh points to an India shock arising from the large and rising pool of migrants from India. The country is the largest contributor to migrants, 18.5 million globally in 2024, and making 70% of all US H1-B beneficiaries. 

These migrants contributed $150 billion in remittances in 2025, or 3% of GDP. 

Such large migrants invariably invites discontent in these times.

Indeed, anti-Indian sentiment is on the rise. Just this month, the Republican nominee for a seat on Texas’s oil and gas regulator sparked allegations of racism for a social media post aimed at South Asian students. Last year, Indian-origin migrants were explicitly targeted in “March for Australia” rallies. Anti-South Asian slurs in online spaces in the US have also surged. The backlash could hinder the Modi government’s strategy. As it happens, US President Donald Trump has raised scrutiny of and fees for H-1B visas.

8. Very good article about the Gurugram story.  

As of June, Gurugram housed North India’s largest office space, with 100 million square feet built and counting. The who’s who of global MNCs — Apple, Google, Microsoft, Amazon — have a presence here, if not their India headquarters... the data shows that Gurugram’s share in Haryana’s employment in the organised sector has risen from 17.35 per cent in FY06 to 67.62 per cent in FY24, meaning that roughly two in every three organised-sector jobs in Haryana sat inside this one district... Gurugram made up 1.2 per cent of the total number of shops and commercial establishments in Haryana in 2006, which ballooned to 13.51 per cent in 2024. It also made up 67 per cent of the people employed in these sectors in 2024, versus about 26 per cent in 2006.

9. Good graphical feature on PE's problem of exits.

The private equity sector is managing a record $4.7tn in assets. But a growing portion of these assets are unsold companies, an increasing share of which have been held for five years or more. The median holding time is a record seven years. Most unspent capital, or "dry powder", was raised before 2024.

This has caused the distribution of cash to its investors to plunge since 2021.

And the share of exits through continuation funds (dedicated pools of cash from new investors to buy companies from themselves) has climbed sharply.

10. Nvidia announces the biggest share buyback in history worth $150 bn, beating Apple's record $110 bn in 2024.

11. Solar plus battery convergence with thermal power in India.

Solar Energy Corporation of India (SECI) ran an auction to buy electricity capacity where they (SECI) demanded the availability of a thermal generator. A bidder who plans to use solar or wind is then forced to load up with the batteries required, to charge in the day, so as to deliver thermal-style availability. This auction discovered a price of ₹5.25 per kWh, guaranteed for 25 years. It is hard to identify a single comparable price for coal thermal in India because coal-extraction rights are given by the state in non-market ways. But if we look at recent new coal-power contracts in India, they are priced at ₹5.38-6.30 a unit. The SECI-discovered thermal-mimicking price for renewable power is now 10 per cent cheaper than that for new coal.

12. This makes great sense, and is something this blog has been advocating, especially the demand-side creation, for India's semiconductor chip design ambitions. 

What is missing is capital that funds Indian fabless companies all the way to commercial tape-out, not just prototypes. DLI must be expanded. ISM 2.0 should create a Chip Design Commercialisation Fund at Rs 1,000-crore scale — modelled on NIIF — and designate at least two sovereign AI inference chip programmes with guaranteed government offtake. Those two changes, delivered in the next budget, would do more for India’s semiconductor future than more wire-bond packaging projects.

13. Surjit Bhalla says that India's external linkages in terms of FDI and FPI look dismal.

In 2025-26 India recorded a record FDI inflow of $94.5 billion. In the same year, foreign investors repatriated or disinvested $53.6 billion, leaving $40.9 billion. Indian firms invested $33.3 billion abroad. Net foreign direct investment — just $7.65 billion. About 0.18 per cent of GDP — and that is the good news, being a recovery from 0.02 per cent in 2024-25. Still the second-lowest in three decades... Reinvested earnings of foreign firms — profits earned here and not taken home, a figure not part of India’s FDI statistics until the definition changed in 2000-01 — were $25.6 billion in 2025-26, more than three times net FDI. Retained earnings are not a new commitment to India... In 2025, Indian equities underperformed emerging markets by the widest margin since 1993, and trailed Asia-Pacific by the most since 1998. Foreigners withdrew $17.7 billion. This year till August 19, India was down 9.1 per cent in dollar terms while emerging markets were up 20.6 — a gap of 30 percentage points in under eight months. Korea was up 77.6 per cent, Taiwan 58. Another $10.5 billion has left.

14. Graphical explanation of why the US Treasury Bonds are climbing,

15. Starbucks was once hailed as a poster child for ESG practices. In a remarkable reversal, it has now scaled back or scrapped its green goals and fired sustainability staff. 

The coffee shop chain has revised or dropped pledges to halve water use and waste, while a goal to cut carbon emissions by 50 per cent is under review. The pullback comes amid a broader US corporate retreat from environmental commitments as political pressure rose under President Donald Trump and ambitious targets prove hard to meet. But Starbucks stands out because few companies made sustainability so central to their corporate identity. The Seattle-based group announced its targets in 2020, when then chief executive Kevin Johnson declared in a public letter that “sustainability has been at Starbucks’ core since the beginning and consistent with our belief that we can build a great business that scales for good”. The letter, which pledged transparency about its progress, is no longer on the company’s website, while many targets were absent or amended in Starbucks’ annual Global Impact Report published this summer.

16. Good NYT article on how Asia managed to survive the Iran war till date. This is how India managed to maintain oil supplies.

And this is how the natural gas supplies were substituted.

The political challenge in the US of being a socialist without being woke

In a recent op-ed, Janan Ganesh made the provocative point that if the Democratic Party in the US could muster a liberal without being woke, then he/she would march to the Presidency. So why is it hard for such a candidate to emerge?

We live in polarised times, where the overlap between the right and left, or Republicans and Democrats (in the US case), on issues has become vanishingly small. This poses a problem for the median voter theorem, which states that in a majority-vote electoral system, candidates will position themselves to appeal to the median voter. Polarisation weakens the conditions under which the median-voter theorem predicts convergence. The nature of the US political system compounds this problem.

The US Presidential candidates have to fight through primaries, progressively winning over their opponents and accumulating votes through a series of compromises. The candidates dropping out keep transferring their endorsement to a remaining candidate in return for support on some of their causes. This plays out till the last candidate remains. 

The very nature of this process entails accommodation. This accommodation was fine as long as there was large overlap between the left and right within the same party on issues and the tails on both sides were small. These compromises would come out as centre-right or centre-left. In this context, candidates constantly adjust their platforms to appeal to moderate voters. 

But the greater ideological sorting and partisanship means a significant and growing proportion of the electorate now occupy the tails. 

They are also the most politically active electorate. The most politically polarized being more actively involved in politics results in the amplification of the voices that are the least willing to see the parties meet each other halfway.

This necessitates compromises and the candidates must constantly adjust their platforms to accommodate at least some elements of the extreme left/right positions. 

For the Democrats, it then becomes necessary to accommodate at least some elements of the woke position - progressive cultural positions on immigration, taxation, race, gender and social policy. This, in turn, leaves them vulnerable to being branded as woke-washed. This, in turn, scares away the median voter, who gravitates to the right or doesn’t turn up to vote. The challenge becomes even more daunting as progressive-woke candidates gradually make deep inroads into the Democratic Party.

What complicates matters is that woke positions can create a gap between the Democratic activist base and moderate voters, especially when voters perceive the party as more culturally radical than its candidates actually are. Therefore, accommodating any of these views can concern even moderates. But without accommodation, the likelihood of electoral success in the primaries decreases. This logic applies just as much to Republicans. 

All this creates a potential gap between nomination and election. A candidate with strong support among a party’s ideological base can succeed in a primary even when their positions differ substantially from those of the broader electorate. The electorate that determines the nominee can therefore be systematically different from the electorate that determines the winner in the general election.

This may create particular challenges when a party’s activist base is substantially more progressive than its broader coalition on issues such as taxation, government spending and the role of government. Positions embraced by activists may be less popular among moderate voters, and opponents may amplify that gap by portraying them as more radical than the candidate or party actually is. A Democratic party candidate may be more vulnerable here than a Republican counterpart. 

One way out of this gridlock is that the candidate first satisfy one electorate to win the nomination and then appeal to a substantially broader electorate to win the general election. This has its set of practical problems, especially for Democrats given the substantial divergence between the progressive ideologicals and the broader coalition, and the substantial share of those who describe themselves as progressives. 

A second route would be to nominate a candidate whose personal appeal and policy positioning extend beyond the ideological base from the outset. The objective would be to assemble a sufficiently broad coalition of moderates, independents and swing voters to offset any loss of enthusiasm among the ideological edges. But this requires a candidate who can hold the party coalition together while also establishing credibility with voters outside it. That is a demanding political task since the candidate must satisfy enough of the primary electorate to win the nomination without becoming so identified with the ideological base that they narrow their appeal in the general election.

TOD is critical for the commercial viability of Indian metros

I have blogged here making the case for doing Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) around mass transit stations in India, here about the challenges with TOD implementation, and here about the low traffic realisation problems facing metro railway systems in India and the ₹1.07 lakh crore (undiscounted) fiscal burden. 

This post will argue that TOD is the critical requirement for the commercial viability of India’s regional and metro railway systems. TOD is a combination of densified, mixed-use development (supply-side), and walkable streets andintegrated feeder services (demand-side) around mass transit stations. 

In other words, regional and metro railway systems in India can become commercially viable only if they can induce ridership, and this shift would require adoption of TOD at both ends of the commute. 

But India’s regional and metro railway systems are encumbered by structural problems compounded by bad design.

For a start, unlike the successful global mass transit systems which precede real estate development and emerge from an integrated land use and transit plan, Indian railway systems follow it. They try to retrofit into the built-up city and suburbs. Second, as I wrote here, Indian regional and metro rail systems unfairly put the burden of capex on the operating entities without endowing them with the real estate that can be monetised to finance capex. Third, the railway construction entity does not control land use decisions, and those making them do not bear the consequences if their decisions erode the financial viability of the mass transit systems. Finally, making matters worse, they are primarily railway construction corporations, for whom urban planning integration and real estate development are afterthoughts. This is unlike in Japanand other East Asian cities where the metro operators are primarily real estate developers who also build and operate railway networks. 

Given the circumstances of India’s mass transit journey, the best that can now be done is to create conditions to induce ridership and improve commercial viability of metro and regional railway systems. And, as aforesaid, TOD is central to this objective. 

The first order requirement is to induce ridership. This can come from two directions. At the intensive margin, ridership can be induced by shifting existing car users to mass transit. At the extensive margin, it would involve locating commuters within walkable distance of the station and expanding geographical access through feeder services, and shortening the transit trip. 

The intensive margin relies on modal shift among people whose destination and origin are fixed, whereas the extensive margin creates new origin-destination pairs of which mass transit is the obvious mode from the outset. An important, but less discussed, mechanism of the extensive margin is that of trip shortening. The regional or metro rail shortens the commute time to distant places (besides also eliminating the hassle of car-based trips) and brings workplaces closer (in time) to homes and thereby expands its potential users. This trip-shortening effect is typically larger than the modal-shift effect, and second only to ridership induced by locating people inside the TOD zone.

However, while convenience (of avoiding road traffic and walkability at both ends) can induce some mode shifts, getting people who would otherwise not prefer living near a station at all to relocate entails going beyond convenience and also making the place itself liveable and financially attractive. Further, the inducement is significantly likely only if there is a workplace within walkable distance at the other end of the commute.

In the case of metros, it is about densified developments (at both home and work sides) around stations with walkable streets, supplemented with feeder services. In the case of regional railway systems, this is the classic downtown-satellite town mode of development. However, in India, since the satellite towns are already well-developed towns and cities, the station vicinity requirements are similar to the metros.

The walkability part is critical, and one completely overlooked. Densification alone without the ease of walkability at both ends will not induce ridership. Walkability and street connectivity are central to expanding the pool of users. If a commuter who lives 800 metres from a regional railway station still needs to find an auto or shared vehicle because the intervening streets are not well connected, unwalkable, and unsafe, the catchment effective radius collapses to perhaps 200 metres, and the ridership projection drops accordingly.

The demand side (walkability) and the supply side (density) are complements, not substitutes. Building one without the other produces either pleasant low-rise neighbourhoods that don’t fill the trains, or towers in traffic that people can’t walk through. Further, the walkability (and associated liveability), in addition to the mass transit commute convenience, are perhaps critical for also incentivising people to trade-off living in a cheaper and larger housing unit distant from the zone with a pricier and smaller one inside the TOD zone. 

Finally, the mixed-use part is also important. For one, it should provide market participants the flexibility to determine the demand responsive and commercially viable nature of development around the nodes. Further, a node that densifies the area around a station but retains single-use zoning (apartments that connect to the city’s existing car-commute grid) will produce less additional ridership than a node that places offices, retail, and housing within walking distance of each other and of the station. The ridership gain from the second type of node comes not only from the peak commute trip but from the off-peak trips that only a genuinely mixed-use, walkable neighbourhood generates. The former will end up creating a mass transit system that is used only in the 3-4 hours of peak commute times. Mixed-use is therefore critical to generating two-way, all-day ridership.

In other words, ridership of a transit system is determined predominantly by the land use in its catchment — how many people live, work, shop, and study within a walkable distance of its stations, and whether those people can get to and from the station without a car. Building the station but leaving the land use unchanged will not change much. It will produce the infrastructure, but underproduce the demand. This has been India’s metro reality. 

All this means that densified, mixed-use, walkable zones around the station, with convenient feeder services, or TOD, is an essential requirement to achieve significant inducement of ridership. 

The case for TOD is likely more relevant and its impacts greater for Indian cities than counterparts in developed countries. For one, the spatial mismatch between job availability (in the city centres) and affordable housing (in the periphery) is very large. A system that closes this gap generates much greater welfare gain, and therefore much greater demand, than the same system operating in a less mismatched city. 

Further, given India’s low car ownership base, the marginal ridership gain from TOD does not come mainly from convincing existing car users to take the train, but from improving trip quality for those already transit-dependent, and from expanding the pool of riders. Finally, India has a low-hanging fruit to harvest in terms of its low FAR baseline, which allows for significant densification and location of potential transit riders. Relaxing FAR therefore would have an unusually high ridership yield per unit of policy change in Indian cities.

The summary from the Indian context is that the inducement from modal shift is likely marginal, and confined to only those whose commute is already partly walkable and partly by car, or whose car commutes are very long. The larger and more structurally significant opportunity is at the extensive margin from locating new workers and from bringing the workplace closer to homes. TOD is therefore the primary demand generation mechanism for a rail transit system. 

Unfortunately, India’s TOD policies have consistently focused on the supply side (FAR uplift), and that too inadequately, while under-specifying the demand side (street design, parking, block structure). Getting both right is the institutional challenge. It is also something that the argument for TOD-for-viability of metros implicitly assumes but rarely makes explicit.

Thoughts on private equity in consumer service businesses

It has always been a matter of debate that there may be a trade-off between building an enduring business and maximising short- to medium-term returns on those business investments. The private equity model of investment, it has often been argued, inclines to the latter. 

I have written here about the incentive incompatibility problem when returns- maximising investors like private equity pursue infrastructure assets with their low but stable returns. More generally, when asset ownership and operation and maintenance are separated, and especially when the former is dispersed, the incentive distortions compound. 

With headline returns capped by regulation, the PE investors must find alternative channels to squeeze more out of their investments. Leverage and asset stripping become the preferred strategies. The British water privatisation is only the most totemic illustration of these trends. 

In this context, I have also blogged here and here, and here about the trend of rising PE investments in the locally operated regular consumer services — healthcare, education, residences, student housing, pet care, salons, mobile trailers, pubs, home repair services, etc. In all these cases, incentive distortions similar to infrastructure have now been widely documented. 

The strategy in all these cases is to target service-based businesses with long-term demand (especially those requiring O&M, and the possibility of subscriptions and service contracts), aggregate or roll up small local providers, and centralise their operations to harvest economies and efficiencies of scale. On top is the purchasing (and bargaining) power with suppliers and customers. And on the bottom-line side, undertake aggressive cost-cutting and asset stripping. 

On the financial side, the strategy is to harvest the scale arbitrage — acquire a large enough regional or sub-regional entity at 6–8x EBITDA, add 10-50 more smaller entities at 5–7x, centralise back-office and procurement, load up debt, and exit the consolidated entity at 10–12x before the consequences of cost optimisation show up on service quality. The primary driver of returns is less operational improvements, but the arbitrage of paying small-company multiples and selling at large-company multiples. This is financial engineering applied to a captive demand. The new buyer, in turn, would be motivated by another business model for the same business. 

There is also the tension between building long-term sustainable business and the pursuit of short-term returns maximisation. In other words, long-horizon value creation trades off against short-horizon, leveraged returns maximisation. It is like the comparison between a business that earns a steady 8% over 30-40 years, and another that targets 15% over 7-8 years in addition to the 2:20 fees. 

In short, the PE model’s problem appears to be that it seeks to maximise returns within a hold period that is too short to bear the consequences of its own cost optimisation. This causes a temporal mismatch — returns are harvested before the deferred maintenance, staff morale declines and attrition, community erosion, and quality degradation. 

Apart from the adverse impact on the quality of service delivery, there are also the negative externalities ranging from a change in the ownership of local businesses (with disruptive impacts on local communities) and increased prices of services, to bankruptcies and closures with attendant job losses. So much so that private equity has become a lightning rod for rising housing prices in the US mid-term elections. 

FT has an article that points to PE firms buying up swimming pools in the UK and offering maintenance services. 

Private equity-backed swimming pool “platforms” have been buying up hundreds of local builders and repair services. The goal is to create national scale in an industry dominated by pint-sized companies. SPS Poolcare and Pool Troopers, two of the largest consolidators, between them bought more than 200 businesses before merging themselves earlier this year. Main Street Capital, a small listed private equity firm, has marked up the value of its equity holding in Cody Pools sevenfold since buying in at the height of the coronavirus pandemic.

The trend might sound surprising to anyone focused on public markets, where many investors ended up deep underwater after a wave of enthusiasm crested in 2021… while buying a pool is about as discretionary as it gets, upkeep on an existing pool is not. There are north of 10mn installed in the US, and they all need regular cleaning and repair. Servicing businesses can therefore offer the sort of subscription-like revenue that buyout firms love. And although construction is in a cyclical slump, there are reasons to expect longer-term growth as climate change makes outdoor pools attractive in more areas.

This mirrors PE investments elsewhere in retail. The FT article writes

Compare the heating, ventilation and air conditioning sector, where there have been more than 1,100 acquisitions since 2020, according to data from Capstone Partners. Mid-market specialists have had success rolling up small companies until they create a group big enough to appeal to bigger buyout specialists, as shown by Blackstone’s $2.5bn purchase of Champions Group earlier this year. Pools are just one riff on a wider home-enhancement theme. Other firms are trying the same playbook with trades like garage doors, pest control and plumbing.

The trajectory outlined above is largely a narrative formed by observations. What does the evidence say?

I have written extensively on infrastructure, consolidated here. See also this recently. The sector with the largest and most conclusive empirical evidence base, and at least less than positive impact of PE is healthcare. In a systematic review in The BMJ, covering 55 studies from 2000-23, Alexander Borsa and others found definitive evidence. Of the 27 studies assessing quality, 21 found harmful impacts; of the 12 studying costs to patients or payers, 9 found increased costs, and none found decreased costs; and of the 8 studying health outcomes, 3 found harmful, 2 beneficial, and 3 neutral impacts. 

This mirrors findings across the segments in health care. Atul Gupta et al, found that PE ownership of nursing homes raised short-term mortality by about 10% or about 20,000 additional deaths over the sample (1,674 PE-owned nursing homes from 2000-17, and covering 4.2 million patients), increased spending by 11%, reduced nurse staffing, and decreased compliance with care standards. 

On dental practices, Kamyar Nasseh et al, found that PE-acquired dental practices raised list prices by 3.3%, and shifted procedure mix from preventive toward higher-reimbursement restorative, specialty, and surgical procedures. Sailesh Konda and Joseph Francis showed that PE-owned dermatology practices saw 4.7–17% more patients per dermatologist, raised prices for routine visits by 3–5%, and employed four advanced practitioners per ten dermatologists (vs three in non-PE practices). 

In the most dramatic evidence of revenue-maximising treatment intensity replacing clinical judgment, PE-managed neonatology practices were associated with 70% higher common NICU days and 54% higher physician spending. Finally, this study by MIT Sloan found that negotiated prices between hospitals and insurers rose 32% after PE investment. It also found that PE firms burden acquired health care organizations with unmanageable debt, stealthily decrease health care competition, often increase costs for patients and payers, can compromise patient care, and can harm health care workers and providers. 

Its findings and recommendations are striking:

Private equity firms’ focus on short-term revenue generation and investor profit also can lead them to strip acquired facilities of their assets, force those entities to raise prices through anticompetitive practices, reduce staffing to dangerously low levels, avoid investment in critical infrastructure, and eliminate vital services—to the detriment of patients, workers, and entire communities… Policymakers must take steps to safeguard the health care system against harmful private equity practices by enhancing regulatory oversight over health care acquisitions, rolling back reporting exemptions on financial transactions in private markets, and changing the incentive structures to limit private equity firms’ interest in engaging in financially risky behaviors that run counter to the public interest.

The empirical evidence in other consumer services is thinner, perhaps only because of lack of studies. There is no peer-reviewed equivalent of the Borsa review for HVAC, pool services, pest control, pubs, pet grooming or salons. This will change in the years ahead as PE ownership in these businesses surge. 

However, in all these cases, there are several anecdotal and journalistic examples of high-profile failures. They are most likely a good representative sample of the general direction of impacts from PE in those market segments. But in the absence of empirical evidence, supporters of PE will continue to argue in their favour. 

This cannot detract from the emphatic finding that the distortionary impacts of PE ownership of businesses are documented wherever the research has been done. 

As with all such debates, the reality is perhaps more nuanced. The evidence from competitive, non-essential service markets like manufacturing, technology, and business services is mixed. For example, Steven J Davis, John Haltiwanger, and others have found that PE-owned manufacturing plants had higher productivity growth. 

I can think of some determinants of a business that increase the likelihood of incentive distortions. One, a service where quality is hard for the buyer to observe at the point of purchase creates perverse incentives. Two, the nature of these kinds of consumer services calls for stewardship and trust, which are most often overwhelmed by market incentives. Three, captive or sticky demand arising from switching costs, essential need, or geographic lock-in, is another factor that encourages market abuse. Four, there is a moral hazard arising from a regulatory backstop or a third-party payer that socialises costs. Finally, a short holding period allows the owner to exit before the consequences of underinvestment show up. 

Healthcare and infrastructure are vulnerable to all these determinants, and others in varying combinations and degrees. The evidence is strongest in healthcare, and the same structural incentives apply wherever the determinants are met. However, the absence of evidence elsewhere reflects the absence of research, not the absence of harm.

All this comes in addition to questions on the financial side too, about the superiority of PE as an investment strategy. I have blogged earlier here and here about Ludovic Phalippou’s extensive research on PE returns (here and here). Across three large datasets for the period 2006-20, PE funds delivered net Multiple of Money (net-of-fee) of ~1.55–1.63x, or about 11% annually, matching public equity indices in the same period. During that time, roughly $230bn in carry accrued to a small number of managers, with the number of PE multibillionaires rising from 3 in 2005 to 22 by 2020. Much of the apparent outperformance, he shows, came from choice of benchmark rather than from the returns themselves.

Weekend reading links

1. China's effect on solar power in a graphic.

At the turn of the millennium, solar panels cost $5-$6 per watt of generation capacity. Today, they sell for around 12 cents per watt, a level described as “offensively cheap” by Dave Jones, co-founder of think-tank Ember. That reduction is entirely the result of an explosion in China’s production capacity, which, according to research firm Wood Mackenzie, stands at roughly 1.36 terawatts, even as Beijing tries to rein in output to combat price deflation.

And rooftop solar generation is causing a loss of good customers across utilities, triggering a 'utility death spiral'. 

Shoprite, Africa’s biggest supermarket group, says the company could “power an entire suburb” with the panels it has been installing on its roofs and trucks in South Africa and Namibia since 2015. But what has been good for Shoprite, which now has around 43MW of peak capacity at its disposal and is looking at battery storage, constitutes a problem for state power utility Eskom. It estimates that rooftop solar panels and batteries, mostly installed by businesses and wealthier customers in response to years of rolling blackouts, were responsible for around 7 per cent of the 11.7 terawatt-hour reduction in its electricity sales for the year ending March, compounding a sharp fall in industrial use exacerbated by high prices. 

The lower revenues come as Eskom needs to fund the upkeep of the grid, which allows households to export electricity during the day, and the power stations that fill the generation gap when it’s dark or cloudy, or when power stored in batteries is insufficient to meet demand. “Everyone who has rooftop solar in any major city, they are still connected to the grid,” says its chief executive, Dan Marokane. “Three weeks ago . . . the whole country had to rely on Eskom generation for three days,” he adds, due to prolonged cloudy weather slashing output from rooftop panels... In Australia, operators of the high-voltage transmission system have grappled with too little demand as consumers draw power from their rooftop panels rather than the grid. Very low demand can make it harder to run certain power plants needed to keep the whole system stable.

2. AI is transforming warfare, and the Russia-Ukraine war is the testing ground for these technologies. 

AI technology has changed how the war in Ukraine is fought. At the start of the conflict it could take 20 minutes to identify a target and launch a strike. Now that process can take less than two minutes, sometimes just seconds... When militaries talk about AI, they are not talking about a single system. They are referring to software being used at different stages of warfare — collecting and processing data, helping commanders identify and prioritise targets and allowing drones to keep operating when communications are jammed. AI-enabled software can process “mass data at a scale, a speed that human staff officers can’t do”, says Anthony King, professor of war studies and director of the University of Exeter’s Strategy and Security Institute. Rather than altering the sharp end of a conflict, King says the primary function of AI has been to improve “situational awareness and intelligence”. The technology can help commanders make battlefield predictions, from the sustainability of a campaign to the rate at which munitions are being depleted.

3. What are the fiscal costs of immigrants?

The UK's comparatively low rates of tax and social insurance contributions for low-paid workers plus a relatively flat state pension mean that people (immigrant or otherwise) who do small amounts of paid work or remain on low incomes contribute little to the exchequer but still benefit from robust state support. In Germany or France’s fiscal systems, someone with the same weak employment and earnings patterns would generate much larger receipts from tax and social insurance due to the flatter tax regime, and would receive a comparatively smaller pension since these are linked more tightly to lifetime earnings.

The result is that in order to be a net fiscal contributor over their lifetime, the average couple arriving in the UK at age 30 needs the primary earner to have a salary at the 55th percentile of the overall earnings distribution, compared to the 45th in France and 28th in Germany. This is according to a new working paper on the fiscal impacts of immigration in different European countries by Usama Polani, a researcher at the Stanford Institute for Economic and Policy Research. Put another way, for immigration to be financially beneficial to the state, the UK needs to attract migrants with much higher pay and rates of employment than its peers.

4. The government seeks to restructure the governance of the storied Indian Statistical Institute (ISI). 

The ISI Bill 2026 seeks to repeal the earlier ISI Act 1959, changing the institute’s status from a registered society to a body corporate. This would replace its 1,800-plus-member general body and 33-member board with an 11-member board, with seven members aligned with the government and four representing ISI... The new board will be leaner by a factor of three: the President of India will be the visitor and will appoint the chairperson as well as four experts of her choice, joined by two representatives from Mospi. The four remaining members will come from ISI... The academic council, which discusses general syllabi, the number of students to be admitted, and new courses, has so far comprised all ISI professors, representatives from all constituencies, and the director as chairperson. The new bill changes that. Under it, the academic council is reduced to a small body, mostly made up of government representatives. The dean of studies is not a part of this council in the proposed bill.

5. Oil prices over the last fifty years.

Oil production is also less concentrated in the Middle East. The US is now the world’s largest producer, ensuring it will not have a supply shortage, and Canada, Brazil, Guyana, Venezuela have all increased production during the Iran crisis. More importantly, a barrel of oil matters less to the global economy than it used to. Oil’s share of global energy demand has fallen below 30 per cent from a peak of 46 per cent half a century ago. At the same time, the amount of energy needed to produce a unit of GDP has fallen by more than a third since 1990. Ben May, head of global macroeconomic research at Oxford Economics, says the inflationary impact of the Iran war has been dulled because “we went into the crisis with favourable oil supply” at a time when overall economic demand was “steady rather than spectacular”. When the war began, by contrast with the 1970s energy shock, the world had strategic reserves, an oil glut and growing supplies of liquefied natural gas, and a sophisticated trading system in which thousands of tankers criss-crossed the globe.

6.  NYT has this investigation of how online gambling giant DraftKings is using algorithms to target gamblers who are likely to lose the most.

So in 2023, DraftKings took customer betting records and built a machine learning model, a form of artificial intelligence that seeks patterns in data, to answer the question: Who was more likely to respond to promotions by gambling — and losing — more?... DraftKings makes money when gamblers lose money. And the model sought to identify those it could get to lose the most. It scored each customer based on their habits: The higher the score, the more money a gambler was likely to lose for each promotion offered... DraftKings has continued to hone its methods, using data science, to target losing gamblers with promotions that encourage more betting, according to six former employees who worked on them. 

At the same time, four other former employees said, DraftKings has stalled or squashed efforts to use similar technology to predict who might develop a gambling problem based on their betting activity... documents show how the model... analyzed dozens of data points for each gambler, including how frequently they played, their daily account balances and how much they typically lost compared with how much they bet. It also incorporated another model that calculated how likely a user was to stop gambling. This betting data may also contain signs that a person is headed for trouble. Yet when employees developed a machine learning model that would have assigned users “risk scores,” the company sidelined it, according to two former employees who worked on that project...

Promotions, which take on forms like a free bet, a “profit boost” or a deposit bonus, play a vital role in DraftKings’s business: The company brought in around $8.7 billion in gross revenue from sports and casino gamblers last year, and gave out about $3 billion in promotions, according to research by Citizens Bank... they were effective because they take advantage of gamblers’ psychology. “I feel I’m getting free money,” he said, “but really it’s dragging me back in.” Several gamblers told The Times that promotions fueled their addictions....

In 2018, when the Supreme Court ruled that states could legalize online sports gambling, it ushered in a new era in which betting has moved beyond casinos and racetracks. Professional sports games are now saturated with celebrity advertisements, encouraging people to wager on their phones. DraftKings and its rival FanDuel dominate this new industry, which has expanded into online casino games and, more recently, prediction markets. DraftKings says it has 11 million customers, compared with five million in 2022.... Silicon Valley firms spent years analyzing every digital interaction to predict what will keep users clicking on advertisements. Now, as companies like DraftKings have made gambling accessible to millions on smartphones, they too have collected an extraordinary wealth of data.

7. The imposition of the 0.4 per cent MDR fee on UPI transactions of more than Rs 2000 has generated intense debate. Janak Raj has a very good article. 

8. Some facts about the SpaceX business model assumptions.

Analysts have the company delivering revenues of over $650 billion, with an operating profit of over $335 billion by 2031. The company itself is projecting revenues of $1 trillion by 2030 (that is 25 per cent of India’s current gross domestic product). The models have the company generating no free cash flow through 2031, with capex of over $1.76 trillion from 2026 to 2031. Total annual capital expenditure for listed Nifty500 companies in India is about $100 billion. Such is the scale and ambition of SpaceX.

9. The cost differential between imported and domestically manufactured solar cells is significant, and assumes importance in light of the restrictions on the use of imported cells for grid-scale solar plants.  

The ALMM List-II mandate requiring domestically manufactured cells for utility-scale projects from 1 June 2026 tightened cell supply and lifted prices... The shift to domestic sourcing can sharply increase costs for projects that were originally bid on the assumption that imported cells would be used... Sudharman Ezhil, director and CEO of Natrinai Ventures (NGE Green Energy), said the cost difference between a domestic-cell plant and a non-DCR plant is currently at least ₹70 lakh to ₹1.2 crore per MW. "On a 50 MW project, that is ₹35–60 crore that was not in anyone's bid model," Ezhil said. According to him, projects bid before mid-2025 assumed imported cells at ₹14–15 per watt. The same module using a domestic cell now costs ₹24–25 per watt, he said. "That alone moves the total project cost by 15–20%," Ezhil said. He said the issue is not limited to cost. "Cell manufacturing is far more complex than module assembly, process control, wafer quality, yield, and India's listed cell capacity is a fraction of its module capacity," he said. Developers are therefore dealing with both higher procurement costs and uncertainty over the long-term performance of newly listed domestic cell lines. Projects awarded at tariffs of around ₹2.50–2.60 per unit were bid when costs were lower. Once a power purchase agreement is signed, developers have limited ability to pass on higher project costs through the agreed tariff... The domestic content requirement (DCR) premium alone could increase utility-scale tariffs by ₹0.25–0.40 per unit, even before the cost of storage is included.

Are we saying another round of defaults, restructurings, and consolidation in the solar industry? 

10. China ramps up gold imports in efforts to diversify its reserves.

China has spent a record sum importing more than 1,000 tonnes of gold this year as the central bank and local investors pour cash into bullion amid rising geopolitical tensions abroad and poor returns on local assets. The world’s second-largest economy spent $158.8bn on gold in the first eight months of the year. That compared with spending of $96.5bn for all of 2025 on 886 tonnes of gold... Chinese investors are increasing gold purchases as part of broader efforts to diversify their assets. Chinese holdings of US Treasuries fell to $618bn in July — the lowest level since August 2008...  

Domestic investment options in China are more limited since the country’s property market began collapsing in 2021. The benchmark CSI 300 index is down 1.8 per cent for the year and is still more than a fifth below its peak in early 2021. Meanwhile, yields on Chinese government bonds are close to record lows.

11. The yen carry trade, which has been an important driver of cross-border capital flows and a major buyer of US Treasuries, apart from contributing to keeping down the value of the yen, may be reversing after nearly three decades. 

The yen carry trade is the term for when hedge funds and others use Japan’s currency to access low-cost financing to make bets in markets across the world. For almost 30 years, investors have borrowed the cheap, stable yen in order to fund higher-yielding investments elsewhere, exploiting differences in interest rates and, in particular, the fact that until this month the central bank benchmark rate had not risen above 1 per cent since 1995. But every so often, those differences threaten to shrink, or the value of the yen shifts with unexpected speed. Investors exit carry trades and dump the acquired assets — fuelling spectacular spasms in global markets from emerging economy debt and Nasdaq stocks to cryptocurrencies and luxury property. For this reason, the health of the global economy is deeply connected to the state of the yen, making the carry trade a proxy — albeit an opaque one — for risk...

Even though its true size is extremely hard to gauge, the current value of the carry trade may far exceed $2tn, making it probably the biggest it has ever been, the world’s regulators heard from the experts in Tokyo. The concern that the cheap yen may be anchoring US Treasuries and may have helped inflate a bubble in AI-related shares, they added, leads the list of worries. Many strategists now say that one of the top risks for the year is the danger that the carry trade unwinds... In previous reckonings of the carry trade, the overseas investments of Japanese companies were rarely considered... According to data from Citi, the total outstanding Japanese stock of foreign direct investment, incorporating equity capital, reinvested earnings and debt capital, reached ¥384tn in 2025, meaning it has increased from 20 per cent of GDP in 2014 to more than half today. Citi estimates that non-financial corporations in Japan now hold more overseas assets than banks, pension funds and insurance companies...

For years, the speculative carry trade and the enormous underlying outflow of corporate Japan’s investment created downward pressure on the yen. Now, analysts are wrestling with the prospect of that being reversed - even if many believe that Japanese households and companies are too conservative to move with speed. The mere fear of such an outcome could start a carry trade unwind in motion as investors rethink how safe their current positions really are... A sharp carry-trade reversal, or a massive but gradual repatriation of Japanese capital taking advantage of decades-high yields on domestic bonds, could prove extremely painful to Bessent and other finance ministers across the world. During its era of rock-bottom yields at home, Japan has been a reliable source of demand to absorb record levels of rich-world sovereign borrowing.

12. Anthropic's spectacular pre-IPO valuation run up.

Founded in 2021, the creator of Claude hadn’t even produced a dollar in revenue until 2023. By August, it was making around $65bn on an annualised basis, although such unofficial numbers should be treated with kid gloves. This growth seems to have come as a surprise to Amodei too. Only 18 months ago, Anthropic expected its revenue in 2027 to be just $12bn. Now, some investors predict a revenue run-rate of $320bn by the end of next year. They are not impartial, of course. But if they are right, then $2tn would represent a valuation of just seven times its 2028 sales. That’s a little less than Microsoft, according to LSEG. SpaceX, meanwhile, trades at 16 times that year’s revenue. Take that as the benchmark — they are both companies with wild aspirations and charismatic leaders — and Anthropic could in future be worth $5tn.

13. Big Tech guarantees are surging and risks spinning out of control. Morgan Stanley analysts estimate $3.1 trillion in guarantees issued by the seven hyperscalers and chipmakers.

Big Tech companies are rapidly expanding their use of guarantees to back debt for AI data centres and chips, issuing up to $300bn in commitments in less than a year while recording little of that exposure on their balance sheets... These arrangements, under which tech companies guarantee a minimum future value for chips or data centres, join a growing set of creative financing structures embraced by Big Tech to accelerate the AI infrastructure boom... They typically backstop debt that is issued not by the tech companies themselves but by special-purpose vehicles that own the infrastructure, allowing the tech groups to lend their financial strength to the deals without needing to fully book the liabilities. The rise of guarantees adds a layer of exposure if Big Tech’s multitrillion-dollar bet on AI does not pay off because of disappointing usage, an oversupply of computing power or the failure to build sustainable business models around the technology... Their introduction to AI financing has unlocked cheaper financing for projects with these guarantees, which typically price at just a 100 to 150 basis-point premium to the guarantor’s own debt... Because the guarantor only covers the gap between the sale price and the guaranteed value, residual value guarantees “get more efficient balance-sheet treatment than a typical payment guarantee.”