The launches will use Skyroot’s Vikram rockets, with the dedicated arrangement providing Reflect Orbital with greater certainty over launch schedules and mission requirements. The companies have not disclosed the value of the deal or the launch timelines.

Reflect Orbital is developing orbital mirrors designed to reflect sunlight towards specific locations on Earth. The company plans to use the technology to extend solar farms’ electricity generation beyond daylight hours and provide lighting for applications such as search-and-rescue operations.

“There’s a real launch capacity shortage right now. We’re excited to work with a new launch provider, Skyroot, to help ensure access to space,” said Ben Nowack, co-founder and CEO of Reflect Orbital.

The company said it was recently licensed by the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to operate its first spacecraft. It plans to continue working with astronomers, communities and regulators as it develops its technology.

Pawan Kumar Chandana, co-founder and CEO of Skyroot Aerospace, said the partnership would provide Reflect Orbital with launch schedule certainty and mission flexibility.

“Reflect Orbital represents the kind of ambitious global space mission the Vikram family is being built to serve. We are pleased to partner with Ben and the Reflect Orbital team across two dedicated launches,” Chandana said.

Skyroot looks to expand commercial launch business

Founded in 2018 by Chandana and Naga Bharath Daka, Skyroot is developing a family of launch vehicles under the Vikram brand for satellite deployment. The company sent its Vikram-S rocket to space in 2022, becoming the first Indian private company to do so, according to the company.

Skyroot has also said its Vikram-1 rocket successfully reached orbit on its maiden flight in July 2026, marking a milestone for India’s private space sector.

In May 2026, the company raised nearly $60 million at a valuation of $1.1 billion, making it India’s first space-tech unicorn, according to its announcement.

Skyroot Aerospace co-founders Pawan Kumar Chandana and Naga Bharath Daka were featured in Fortune India’s 40 Under 40 list for 2026. The duo founded the company in 2018 after leaving the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO).

This latest deal adds another international customer to Skyroot’s launch business, though the companies have not announced when the two missions will take place.

My baseline condition is that the parent controls and policies should be implemented as a default if they meet the requirements applicable to the Indian operation and relevant assurance supports their effectiveness. Rebuilding the same controls locally needs a specific justification and precise rationale. Separate approval processes, duplicate resources, overlapping tests and competing control owners can consume time and resources without addressing any additional risk.

Start with the applicable requirement

In the hypothetical case, suppose the legal assessment establishes that a specific category or type of customer records must be stored locally in India and that the proposed cross-border copy to the parent company’s cloud is prohibited. Strong encryption, restricted access and a favourable security audit do not resolve the localisation requirements.

The above assumption may not be applicable to every Indian citizen’s data or all cross-border data flows. The Reserve Bank of India’s payment-data FAQs, for example, permits overseas processing of payment transactions, provided that data is brought back to India and deleted from foreign systems within one business day or 24 hours of processing, whichever is earlier. They also specify separate storage provisions and controls for data related to cross-border transactions. Understanding the exact scope and its exceptions is vital before choosing a quick fix.

Management should therefore establish the requirement before choosing the remedy. For an AI service, that means reviewing where covered information appears throughout the workflow of the service, including any prompts, retrieved records, outputs, logs and backups that contain it. A localised datastore in India for a global application does not resolve the issue if a restricted copy of the data is quietly retained overseas in any form either online or an offline backup.

The countermeasures might require rearchitecting the data paths, storage setup, retention, lifecycle policies and system rules. Where a compensating control is proposed, management must establish that the applicable requirements allow it and that it meets the requirements. Calling a measure compensating does not establish either point.

A robust risk framework provides the blueprint for triaging and scaling the right remediation. Governance assigns responsibility, resources and escalation paths. Governance controls may fulfil compliance requirements regarding managerial oversight, tracking and accountability.

However, management must not mistake formal oversight or signoffs for operational compliance. When a regulation mandates a specific technical outcome such as data localisation, a board approval does not fulfil the regulatory obligation if the data continues to flow overseas.

Aligning third-party assurance with operational realities and deployment context

Once the arrangement is compatible with the local requirements, existing third-party audit & assurance functions can help validate the decision to rely on parent controls. The useful question is what the auditor examined and how it relates to the GCC’s specific operational environment and service architecture deployed by the local entity. One must look closely at the scope, criteria, testing timelines, and exceptions, alongside the specific compliance burdens retained by the local team.

An independent review of the parent infrastructure and the global framework may provide useful evidence about shared identity management or infrastructure security. Management should establish separately whether it covers the relevant Indian system configuration, architecture, data handling and AI permissions. If the global audit report provides sufficient coverage, and findings prove compliance, it should be adopted immediately; if material gaps remain or reveal any blind spots, the local team should do a targeted review.

Consider a hypothetical scenario where the case summarising AI agent is upgraded to an active agent capable of altering customer databases. The original third party report may not cover the new additional permissions or affect data integrity. The GCC team must assess the gap, verify the specific controls and get sufficient evidences covering this expanded privilege footprint. Rather than commissioning another round of full scale system audit, the team should conduct a targeted delta review for isolating the new functionalities while using the audit evidence already verified by the parent company.

NIST’s discussion of agent identity and authorisation supports this focus on delegated permissions and existing identity foundations. The practical implication for a GCC is to examine the authorisation granted to the AI agent. Don’t assume the risk is the same just because the AI agent name hasn’t changed.

Independent audits can also help establish whether local requirements have been met when those requirements are included in their scope. Indian GCCs need evidences to check for two distinct boxes: compliance with the local regulations and effectiveness of the parent’s controls. Ultimately, any audit report is only useful if it answers the specific question you are asking.

Keep local tailoring precise and target-driven

A local requirement does not automatically justify a separate control framework. Suppose the parent can retain ownership of the common AI platform while configuring the Indian workflow so that the prohibited data copy is no longer created. If the changed arrangement meets the requirement and is verified, there may be no reason to duplicate the remaining controls.

Any request for local customisation must outline the unmet requirement, the affected activity, the change needed and who will verify it. The parent should provide a practically doable route to implement that change. This gives both teams a clear way to decide whether an exception is necessary and whether the proposed remedy or countermeasure is proportionate.

In the same hypothetical scenario, an interim option could be to keep the affected data records out of the AI agent’s scope and handle those cases through an alternative compliant existing process. That alternative option needs its own assessment, including if keeping the data separate is practically possible and the extra operational workload it creates. This interim step shouldn’t become a convenient loophole to keep using a noncompliant system.

For the board overseeing the Indian entity, management should make the paths forward and key trade-offs clear: the scope that can proceed, the restrictions needed and the impact to the business. Technical teams will implement and validate if the fix works. Directors can challenge the decision to rely on global infrastructure, question the reasons for trusting global controls and if unresolved matters have received the necessary attention.

Choose intentionally, not as a default

There are clear practical advantages to accepting parent controls if local compliance rules are satisfied and the existing audit evidence applies to the Indian operation. There are equally strong cases for stepping in with a local fix where a local obligation remains unmet. If no compliant arrangement or countermeasure is available for an activity, the recommendation is to restrict that activity rather than assume group approval resolves it.

Meeting the legal rules is only the first step; commercial decisions remain, including whether the AI agent produces satisfactory business outcomes, real operational value and whether its residual operational risks are tolerable. Never assume that a compliant system is automatically an effective one. NIST’s voluntary AI Risk Management Framework separately addresses legal requirements, business workflows, real world operating environments and assessment of control effectiveness.

The logic behind using parent controls should be reviewed again when any material changes affect it, such as a new data path, wider AI agent permissions or a different supplier. Existing audit assurance can be used where it’s relevant and applicable for the parts that have not changed. The reassessment should focus on the changes, their dependencies and target the new risk profile without reopening a full audit.

Ultimately, the board only needs to ask one specific question: does this parent company’s global platform and arrangement meet our applicable requirements, and what evidence or documentation supports that claim for our operation? A satisfactory answer should allow the Indian business to use the group's capabilities confidently, leave room for necessary local changes and spend its compliance resources and audit budget on compliance gaps or unresolved risks that need closing.

(The author is Founder and CTO, Move78 International and EU AI Compass, and works across cybersecurity, cloud risk, technology risk and AI governance. Views are personal.)

According to BCG’s AI Radar 2026 survey of 2,400 executives worldwide, the growing enthusiasm for AI is translating into a likely doubling of investments to 1.7% of their revenues.

But returns from AI implementation haven’t, until now, kept pace with the enthusiasm and investment appetite that business leaders have for the technology.

Evidence for this came from a BCG research study of 1,250 firms worldwide last year, which showed that delivering significant bottom-line value has been beyond the reach of the vast majority of these companies. Only 5% of the companies reported achieving AI value at scale. Another 35% reported seeing some returns but admitted they were not moving far enough or fast enough. 60% of these companies have lagged in building critical AI capabilities and reported minimal revenue and cost gains.

The top 5% AI leaders delivered three times greater cost reduction, 1.6 times higher EBIT margins, and 2.7 times the return on invested capital than their peers.

The obvious question is: what did these companies do differently?

First, they pursue a multi-year strategic ambition concentrating AI where it could create the greatest business value.

One of the biggest mistakes companies make is trying to spread AI across dozens of pilots in the hope that some of them will eventually deliver value. Pilots are relatively easy to launch because they avoid the more difficult challenges of data gaps, legacy systems, and cross-functional dependencies. The result is often a collection of disconnected experiments that consume budgets and management attention without improving business performance.

Leaders approach AI as board- and CEO-sponsored initiatives, ensuring they don’t end up being isolated experiments. They concentrate investment on a handful of business domains where AI could have the biggest impact, nearly 70% of AI’s value potential lies in these core functions research and development, sales & marketing, manufacturing, procurement, and supply chain planning.

Nestlé illustrates this approach well. The world’s biggest food and beverage company set out to reimagine procurement as a strategic lever for growth using AI-enabled simplification to unlock the capital needed to reinvest in AI, innovation and brand-building.

While the company aimed to reduce costs by CHF 2.5 billion ($3.15 billion) by 2027, it generated close to CHF 700 million ($900 million) of that in the first year itself, with the annual savings rate increasing from 3% to 5%. What makes this more than a cost story is the ambition behind it: every Swiss franc saved is being reinvested into innovation, brand-building, and long-term growth.

The Nestlé AI-enabled initiative is an example of what’s possible when strategy, execution, and culture come together at scale.

Second they used AI to reshape and reinvent businesses, not simply automate existing work.

Many organisations view AI primarily as a productivity tool. But the leaders look beyond automation to reshape and reinvent businesses. Nearly 90% of these companies expect most of their AI value to come from reinventing business processes rather than making existing ones more efficient.

A global beauty products company implemented a change in its sales and marketing as it sought to address multiple issues with customers’ online experience. These problem areas included highly fragmented sources of information, a lack of personalized guidance, and an inability to access important product information before making a purchase decision. The company introduced the industry’s first large-scale virtual beauty assistant, integrated into the company’s websites and e-commerce journeys extending across more than 20 markets and covering eight brands. The virtual assistant was deployed in less than 12 months, and the company expects to gain $100 million in incremental revenue from the initiative—doubling the ROI of traditional e-commerce customer pathways.

Third, they recognise that AI transformation is fundamentally about people and organisations.

AI leaders assign their best people to AI projects, signalling the initiative’s importance in the scheme of things. They are also more likely to explicitly define how behaviours need to change, and introduce incentives for the same.

Further, they invest adequately in helping people to adapt to new roles, as AI reshapes work. An effective AI operating model does not focus on replacing people with technology; it entails reimagining the company around AI.

Additionally, future-built firms invest in broad-based employee enablement. They pair bold training ambitions with widespread engagement.

Fourth, they use fit-for-purpose technology and data.

Future-ready companies are aware that capturing value from AI requires more than just adding new tools; it requires a rewiring of the firm’s architecture and processes around the new technology.

Future-built firms are three times as likely to operate a central, integrated AI platform as the backbone for their AI deployment. They reinforce their data foundation with strong governance and are three times as likely to enforce enterprise-wide data policies through central oversight teams, ensuring quality, trust, and responsible use.

To summarise, AI transformation is inherently harder than previous technology transformations.

It is important to know that organisations where CEOs set clear priorities, hold leaders accountable, track value, and devote sufficient focus to change management turn early AI momentum into a lasting advantage.

Time is short. The technology is advancing fast, making catching up more difficult with each passing week. Future-built companies are pulling away, widening the value gap, and putting slow movers in a deeper value hole. The others need to move now.

(The author is Managing Director & Senior Partner, BCG. Views are personal.)

The two-year programme will target girls aged 14 to 20 in rural and urban communities, starting in Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh before expanding to other states, the organisations said on Wednesday.

The initiative will combine in-person and digital training, with grassroots organisations helping implement the programme. Non-profit Girl Effect is supporting the development of its curriculum and learning resources.

The training will focus on confidence-building, decision-making and leadership, alongside the safe use of digital tools and financial services. It will also provide information on pathways to further education, employment and entrepreneurship.

“I believe every girl should have the confidence to dream big, the courage to lead, and the opportunity to fulfil her aspirations,” said Isha Ambani, director at Reliance Foundation.

She said the partnership aims to equip girls and young women with skills to realise their potential and benefit their households and communities.

Focus on education and employment

Stéphane de La Faverie, president and chief executive officer of The Estée Lauder Companies and president of its charitable foundation, said the programme would help girls develop skills needed to participate in the workforce.

The Estée Lauder Companies Charitable Foundation has worked with non-governmental organisations in India for more than 20 years, supporting initiatives in health, education and entrepreneurship, according to the announcement.

Reliance Foundation, the philanthropic arm of Reliance Industries, said it has supported education, sports and livelihood opportunities for women and girls through various initiatives since 2010.

The organisations have not disclosed the programme's budget or the number of participants expected to be enrolled in each state.

In its 77-page confirmatory order, the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi) also directed the company and Mehta to continue cooperating with the ongoing investigation and provide all documents, information and explanations sought by the regulator.

The regulator also directed the newly appointed forensic auditor to complete its work expeditiously and asked the investigating authority to conclude the investigation at the earliest.

The noticees have been directed to provide the documents, information and explanations sought by the investigating authority within the stipulated timelines.

The order follows an ex-parte interim order passed by Sebi on June 3, 2026, after its examination raised concerns over the company's financial disclosures, consolidation of accounts and failure to furnish complete information sought by the regulator and the forensic auditor.

Sebi's examination covered the period from April 2020 to March 2024, following a complaint alleging that substantial trade receivables had remained outstanding for more than two years.

The regulator noted that the company had failed to furnish the financial statements of its subsidiaries and step-down subsidiaries, despite statutory requirements. It also did not provide the requisite party-wise details of sales, purchases, debtors, creditors and inventory, citing confidentiality agreements and restrictions under Swiss law.

Sebi further observed that Rajesh Exports had reported substantially higher consolidated revenues by including revenues attributable to its overseas subsidiaries and step-down subsidiaries, while inconsistencies were found in the consolidation of accounts.

The regulator had appointed BDO India Services Pvt Ltd as forensic auditor on December 3, 2024.

However, Sebi said the company and the other noticee had submitted incomplete information despite being given sufficient time and had failed to cooperate with the forensic auditor, hampering the completion of the forensic audit report and the investigation.

The confirmatory order examines several issues, including alleged misrepresentation in standalone and consolidated financial statements, incorrect consolidation of accounts, claims relating to investments in gold mines in Africa, adjustment of trade receivables against trade payables and alleged misuse of funds.

Sebi observed that the noticees had failed to rebut the prima facie findings recorded in the interim order.

Reiterating the restrictions, Sebi directed that Mehta "shall continue to be restrained from buying, selling or otherwise dealing, directly or indirectly, in the securities of Rajesh Exports Ltd, in any manner whatsoever, until further orders".

The company was directed to continue making true, fair, accurate and complete disclosures of its financial statements, related-party transactions and other material information in accordance with applicable laws.

Rajesh Exports is listed on the BSE and the National Stock Exchange. The company sells gold products in domestic and overseas markets and operates retail showrooms under the Shubh Jewellers brand.

(Except for the headline, Fortune India has not edited the content of this PTI report.)

Because those preferences are dynamic—continuously altered by context, culture, function, trends and technology—hospitality learnt to optimise service through standardisation.

During the liberalisation and hyper-globalisation of the 1980s through the 2000s in particular, multinational hotel brands became a textbook example of what George Ritzer coined “McDonaldization”—a template of homogenised services built on four core principles: calculability, efficiency, predictability and control. Repeatable design typologies, highly codified operating procedures, globally recognisable service standards and increasingly integrated supply systems meant that individuality, environmental concern and cultural alignment could become subordinate to the demands of consistency and risk minimisation.

Over time, hospitality’s mass commoditisation and homogeneity triggered consumer fatigue. The resulting friction combined with emerging climate consciousness drove an appreciation for localisation, cultural authenticity, eco-responsive development and thoughtful service. Over the last two decades in particular, hotels have keenly adopted, tested and refined this holistic, human-centric, and personalised model.

This is where India has a compelling advantage. India’s national market is composed of extraordinary variations in language, landscape, culture, cuisine, climate, infrastructure and heritage. This wealth of multi-faceted diversity serves as a well-calibrated testing ground for operational excellence and innovation.

India demands both consistency and adaptability - the ability to deliver dependable standards while allowing each place to remain uniquely itself. This tension could become the foundation of a distinctly Indian hospitality philosophy: one that combines the rigour and reliability of global standards with the responsiveness, resource-consciousness and cultural specificity that individual places demand.

The opportunity India has is not to reject standardisation or any other process of optimisation and efficiency. It is, rather, to test and discern which operational components benefit from standardisation and which deliver their highest value in more organic and dynamic forms. For instance, safety, hygiene, training, technology and service quality all benefit from consistency. The guest experience, however, is unlikely to be memorable if delivered with clinical uniformity. Architecture, design, materials, food, wellness offerings and, especially, a property’s relationship with its surrounding environment and local communities must remain responsive to local culture, economy and infrastructure.

The future of hospitality—a category that India has the opportunity to define and lead—will be one in which we can regulate consistency without collapsing the art of service into templated sameness.

A guest should be able to rely on the quality of their experience without being able to predict every aspect of it. In a market as varied as India, that distinction is particularly valuable: standards can create confidence, while region-specific offerings create memory, meaning as well as an intuitive association with both the property and the brand.

Crucially, India also has the scale to turn this philosophy into a polished operating model rather than a collection of isolated experiments.

According to the World Travel and Tourism Council, domestic visitor spending in India reached $203 billion in 2025, accounting for 86% of total travel and tourism spending in the country. At the same time, the geography of hotel development is changing rapidly. HVS ANAROCK’s India Hospitality Industry Overview 2025 found that Tier 3 and Tier 4 cities accounted for 44% of all hotel keys signed and 55% of all properties signed during the year, making smaller cities and emerging destinations an increasingly important part of India’s hospitality growth story.

This expansion creates a further opportunity. As travel and hospitality move deeper into smaller cities and emerging destinations, operators will have to respond to environmental, social and economic contexts that are fundamentally different from urban centers or metros. The Indian traveller is changing too. According to Booking.com and Accenture’s How India Travels 2025 report, 80% of Indian travellers spend most of their holiday at the property, compared with a global average of 51%. The property itself is therefore becoming a larger part of the destination experience, increasing the value of food, design, wellness, programming and cultural connection as meaningful differentiators rather than peripheral additions.

If India can solve for this complexity at scale, the resulting models will have relevance far beyond its own national borders. Many hospitality operators

around the world are presently contending with similar challenges: how to expand without compromising on brand culture, how to explore new markets without inviting overtourism, how to regulate quality without wasteful excess, how to operate responsibly under resource constraints and how to meet increasingly sophisticated demands for personalisation as well as authenticity. India is positioned to navigate these challenges not only as case-specific solutions but also as sustainable, large scale, systems.

The real measure of India’s hospitality innovation is, therefore, not whether Indian hospitality models can simply be replicated elsewhere. Instead, India’s global contribution to hospitality may come from a model of thinking—a philosophy of service—that travels across borders. One that demonstrates how consistency and individuality co-exist, how scale need not dilute character or culture, and how global standards need not produce global sameness. Instead of only remaining a market for global formats, India can become one the places in the world where the next generation of hospitality is imagined.

(The author is Director at Anticipatory and Executive Vice Chair of Tamara Leisure Experiences. Views are personal.)

An 886-acre enclave between Ahmedabad and Gandhinagar—GIFT City (Gujarat International Finance Tec-City)—is rapidly rising in popularity for global Indian families remitting funds to avail investment opportunity into India.

The lure of GIFT City isn’t merely a patriotic nod to India’s financial modernisation. Rather, this shift is a calculated strategy driven by regulatory and tax benefits. As GIFT City operates outside mainland India’s jurisdiction, it is excluded from the capital controls, compliance hurdles and tax complexities that potentially trap or trim NRI wealth in India.

The complexities of repatriation

A prudent NRI investor can’t overlook the regulatory boundaries under Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA) when trying to repatriate capital from India. Let’s take the example of an NRI selling their equity stake in an unlisted Indian startup. In such instances, the funds may end up in the Non-Resident Ordinary (NRO) account of the NRI.

In accordance with the present FEMA regulations, am NRI is permitted to repatriate up to $1 million per financial year from eligible NRO account balances. That ceiling is a major hinderance for an NRI or a global Indian family office looking for easy flow of foreign exchange across regulatory borders.

In addition to this cap under FEMA, there are tax compliances that make repatriation daunting for many. Repatriating mainland NRO funds necessitates Form 15CA and Form 15CB—an arduous digitised declaration, along with a Chartered Accountant’s certificate verifying that all applicable taxes have been withheld at source. These additional procedures require coordination, costs and at times complex discussions between banks and Indian advisors hoping to satisfy numerous agencies involved in the process of repatriation.

Moreover, wrongly classifying overseas remittances or mixing the freely repatriable Non-Resident External (NRE) funds with restricted NRO funds can draw more than just a regulatory rap. The consequences may attract penalties and compounding proceedings, along with months of administrative logjam with the AD Bank.

These complexities are exacerbated as NRIs are now wary of Reserve Bank of India (RBI) and tax agencies have who have been infamously highlighted for their heavy handed approach towards venial breaches or weak bookkeeping on cross border capital flows.

The IFSC solution

GIFT City has now been offered as a solution to address the above issues having been carved out of the current mainland regulations.

Under Regulation 3 of the Foreign Exchange Management (International Financial Services Centre) Regulations, 2015 any financial institution or branch of a financial institution set up in the IFSC and permitted or recognised as such by the Government of India or a Regulatory Authority is treated as a “person resident outside India”.

In simple terms: GIFT City operates as an offshore financial centre from a legal, and jurisdictional lens, despite being physically located in Gujarat.

The gains for NRIs include:

1. GIFT City investments by NRIs in foreign currency can be freely repatriable, without the $1 million annual cap applicable to NRO balances

2. Capital gains, dividends or interest income can move in and out of India in Foreign currency which eliminates currency conversion friction and exchange-rate depreciation risk.

3. Tax incentives including a 10-year tax holiday under Section 80LA, zero capital gains tax on specified securities listed on IFSC exchanges.

4. Exemption from the cumbersome Portfolio Investment Scheme (PIS) approvals traditionally required by the RBI for NRI stock trading.

Smart money: Chasing smart ideas

In practice, this has transformed how global Indians approach cross-border transactions. Consider a Dubai-based family office looking to invest in Indian startups. Historically, the family faced an unappealing choice: invest directly under Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) rules—enduring rigid pricing guidelines and reporting requirements—or route the investment through Mauritius or Singapore, which increasingly invites tax-treaty scrutiny and General Anti-Avoidance Rules (GAAR).

Today, that same family has an option to establish or participate in a GIFT City Alternative Investment Fund (AIF) structure. With the International Financial Services Centres Authority (IFSCA) permitting 100% NRI ownership in IFSC funds, global families can pool foreign capital offshore and inject it into mainland Indian startups as domestic institutional capital—easily, transparently, and with seamless exit repatriation.

A similar shift is occurring across wealth management. Singapore was long the default hub for wealthy NRI single-family offices but rising local operating costs and heightened regulatory scrutiny have eroded that edge. Utilising IFSCA’s tailored family office frameworks, Indian promoters with global footprints are evaluating relocating their treasury operations to GIFT City, managing US equities, global debt, and Indian assets under a single, tax-neutral roof.

Efficiency, not evasion

It would be a mistake, however, to view GIFT City as a regulatory hideout. The IFSCA is building an institutional-grade jurisdiction modelled on the success of London and Singapore where compliance with global standards including Anti-Money Laundering (AML) standards and Financial Action Task Force (FATF) norms are founding principles for operations.

As for legit, NRI wealth, the Gift City option is compelling. Mainland India remains the engine to generate wealth, whereas GIFT City has become the vault where you may remit capital, invest through structures, hold for wealth creation and repatriate your capital without regulatory overhangs and long-term tax benefits. This offers NRIs the best of both worlds.

(The author is managing partner, Dewan P N Chopra & Co. Views are personal.)

The cuts will primarily affect the company's product, technology, legal and human resources teams, according to the memo from co-chief executives Greg Peters and Ted Sarandos.

“Our mission — to entertain the world — is ambitious, and delivering on it requires us to be disciplined about where we prioritize our people and resources,” the executives said in the email, according to the report.

“Our business is strong and growing, and we remain on track to deliver our full-year forecast,” they added.

Netflix had around 16,000 employees at the end of 2025. Its shares have fallen approximately 25% so far this year, although they rose 0.7% on Wednesday.

Competition puts pressure on viewer engagement

The layoffs come as investors question whether Netflix can sustain the growth that disrupted the US media industry and challenged traditional cable television businesses.

Viewer engagement, measured by the time users spend on the platform, has become an important concern for investors. YouTube and TikTok compete for viewers with free, user-generated content, giving them a cost advantage over subscription-based services such as Netflix.

The company's unsuccessful pursuit of Warner Bros Discovery's streaming and studio assets earlier this year also added to questions about its growth strategy. Paramount completed its $110-billion acquisition of Warner Bros earlier this month, bringing the assets under Skydance.

“They haven't been able to find like another line of major revenue,” Ross Benes, senior analyst at eMarketer, told Reuters, pointing to Netflix's continued dependence on subscriptions.

“Eventually, because they've kind of nearing a ceiling with that, they'll need another revenue stream to diversify, and that's where it's been more of a struggle,” he said.

Netflix looks beyond subscriptions

Netflix has been expanding into advertising, live programming and gaming as it looks to diversify revenue beyond subscriptions.

The company's last major round of layoffs came in 2022, when it cut around 450 jobs across two rounds after losing subscribers for the first time in more than a decade.

Netflix shares fell 1.33% to $69.53 in intraday trading on Wednesday, the stock has declined 42.8% over the past year.