After more than a quarter of a century pouring Old Speckled Hen down the throats of British shoppers, Greene King has decided enough is enough.

The Suffolk pub group has agreed to sell its best-known supermarket ale to Damm UK, the British arm of the family-owned Spanish brewer behind Estrella Damm, in a deal that effectively ends its ambitions in the off-trade.

The price has not been disclosed, but the strategic message is loud. Old Speckled Hen, which Greene King has owned since acquiring Morland Brewery in 1999, accounts for more than half of the company’s off-trade sales, the volumes that flow through Tesco, Sainsbury’s, Asda and the independents rather than across the bar. By handing the brand to Damm, chief executive Nick Mackenzie is conceding that the supermarket beer aisle is no longer a battleground worth fighting in.

“This has been a long-term decision,” Mackenzie told The Times, pointing to the structural challenges facing cask ale and the wider beer category. Selling through pubs, restaurants and bars, he added, “is where our long-term strategy and focus is”.

Why a spanish brewer was the natural buyer

For Damm, the deal is the logical next step in a UK push that began in 2023, when it picked up the former Charles Wells brewery in Bedford. The site, rechristened Damm Eagle Brewery, has since been the focus of a £70m investment programme designed to make it the company’s flagship outside Spain, as The Grocer reported when the upgraded facility opened last autumn. Folding Old Speckled Hen, together with Old Golden Hen, Old Crafty Hen and Old Hen sister brands, into that operation gives Damm a heritage British cask name to sit alongside its lager imports, and the volume to keep its new lines humming.

Brewing of the Hen family is expected to migrate from Greene King’s Westgate Brewery in Bury St Edmunds to Bedford by June next year. Crucially for drinkers, the beers will still pull through in Greene King’s 1,600 managed pubs and on supermarket shelves once the transition is complete, according to the Morning Advertiser, which first detailed the wider brewing reset.

A tighter, on-trade-led brewing model

The transaction sits inside a much bigger reshaping of Greene King’s production footprint. The group is pouring £40m into a new, smaller brewery on the edge of Bury St Edmunds, alongside a fresh distribution depot. From next year it will brew only its core on-trade portfolio, Greene King IPA, Abbot Ale and the newer Hazy Day, at the site, replacing the historic Westgate Brewery in the town centre. Belhaven Brewery in Dunbar, East Lothian, is untouched by the changes.

“We are reflecting the size of the new brewery to reflect the market we are now operating in, and the market has changed pretty significantly,” Mackenzie said. “We believe we can control what we can control by focusing on our beers in our pubs.”

That candour will land uncomfortably with brewery staff. Greene King has declined to put a number on the jobs at risk, but a consultation began on Tuesday. The new plant is designed to be more efficient and to need fewer hands. For an industry already navigating brutal economics, the UK lost 100 breweries in 2024 alone, as Business Matters reported in its review of rising brewery insolvencies, it is another sign that scale-back, not expansion, is the order of the day.

The off-trade retreat in context

The decision to walk away from supermarkets is striking, given how much energy big brewers have historically spent on shelf space. But the maths has changed. Off-trade beer is a heavily promotional, low-margin game dominated by global lager brands, while cask ale, once a supermarket fixture, has been in slow retreat as drinkers gravitate to lager, world beers and low-and-no alternatives.

For Greene King, which still pulls a competitive pint through its own estate, the calculus is simpler than ever: a barrel sold in a managed pub earns far more than the same barrel battling for promotional slots in a multiple grocer. The Old Speckled Hen sale crystallises that logic.

The wider strategic reset under hong kong ownership

The brewing shake-up is the latest move in a sweeping rethink of the business under Hong Kong owner CK Asset Holdings, which bought Greene King for £4.6bn in 2019 in a deal led by billionaire Li Ka-shing. Last year the group posted revenues of £2.53bn but slipped to a £23.4m pre-tax loss, with net debt, excluding lease liabilities, running at around £2bn and annual servicing costs of close to £95m.

In March, Greene King confirmed it would sell 150 of its managed pubs and convert another 150 into tenanted houses as part of a refreshed estate strategy. Combined with the brewing slimdown and the Old Speckled Hen disposal, the picture is of a group methodically shedding the things it does not need to own and concentrating capital on what it considers core, wet-led, managed pubs where it controls the customer, the menu and the margin.

“For us, this is about how we future-proof the wider business and how we leverage our model,” Mackenzie said.

What it means For SME drinks and hospitality operators

For independent brewers and smaller pub operators, the implications cut both ways. The exit of a heritage cask brand from Greene King’s in-house portfolio frees up roughly half a pump line’s worth of off-trade attention and could give regional cask ale producers a slightly better shot at supermarket buyers. Equally, Damm’s decision to back a British ale at scale signals continued international appetite for UK-brewed brands, and reinforces Bedford’s emergence as a serious brewing cluster.

The blunter truth, though, is that one of the country’s most recognisable cask ales is now under foreign ownership because its British parent has concluded that supermarkets are not where its future lies. In an industry still struggling with input costs, business rates and shrinking discretionary spend, that is as honest a piece of strategic communication as the sector has heard for some time.

---

Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi) on Tuesday clarified that clients under the non-discretionary portfolio management services (ND-PMS) framework can pledge securities held in their demat accounts, provided the pledge is initiated solely at the client’s discretion and for the client’s own benefit.

The clarification came through an informal guidance letter issued by Sebi to Geojit Financial Services Limited in response to queries regarding the permissibility of pledging securities purchased under the ND-PMS framework.

The brokerage had sought clarity on whether such pledges would violate provisions of the SEBI (Portfolio Managers) Regulations, 2020, particularly restrictions relating to borrowing on behalf of clients.

Non-discretionary portfolio management services (ND-PMS) allow investors to access expert investment research and execution while retaining full control over their portfolios. The portfolio manager provides tailored, data-driven recommendations, but no trades are executed without the investor’s explicit consent.

In its response, Sebi said that under ND-PMS arrangements, portfolio managers operate strictly according to client instructions, with the final investment decision resting entirely with the client. Since the securities remain under the beneficial ownership of the client, the regulator said clients are free to use those securities as collateral for loans.
Sebi further clarified that such pledging would not be construed as borrowing of funds or securities by the portfolio manager under Regulation 23(8) of the PMS Regulations, as long as the borrowing arrangement is directly between the client and the lender.
The market regulator also addressed concerns regarding regulatory reporting and assets under management (AUM) calculations. It said pledged securities can continue to be included in the portfolio manager’s AUM and regulatory disclosures until the pledge is actually invoked, since beneficial ownership remains with the client until that stage.
The clarification is expected to provide operational flexibility for portfolio managers and clients using ND-PMS structures, particularly high-net-worth investors seeking liquidity against their investment portfolios without liquidating holdings.

Sebi, however, noted that the guidance was issued based on the facts presented in the application and does not constitute a formal board decision or override any other applicable legal or regulatory requirements.

(Disclaimer: The recommendations, suggestions, views, and opinions given by the experts are their own. These do not represent the views of The Economic Times.)

For all the column inches lavished on hoodie-wearing teenage coders and so-called “Silver Starter” retirees launching second-act ventures from the kitchen table, the typical British entrepreneur looks remarkably like the one who turned up at Companies House a quarter of a century ago. They are 43 years old, mid-career, and, by the looks of it, completely unmoved by fashion.

That is the central finding of a sweeping new study by company formation agent 1st Formations, which has crunched more than 9.2 million UK director appointments stretching back to the year 2000. Across 26 years of dot-com booms, banking collapses, a Brexit referendum and a global pandemic, the average age at which Britons take the plunge into running their own company has scarcely shifted, hovering between 41 and 44 throughout.

A stubbornly steady number

The data tracks a gentle drift upwards in the early years of the millennium, with the mean founder age sitting at 42 across 2000 to 2009 before nudging to 44 between 2010 and 2019. From 2011 right through to 2023, it parked itself stubbornly at 44, before easing back to 43 in both 2024 and 2025 – the first material decline in more than a decade.

The pattern holds with eerie consistency against the backdrop of the past quarter-century’s defining moments. The dot-com boom of 2000 produced an average founder age of 41. By 2008, with Lehman Brothers collapsing and the financial system in freefall, that figure had crept to 43. The post-recession recovery and the Brexit referendum vote of 2016 both registered 44. The pandemic year of 2020 did the same. And the current AI and green-energy gold rush, far from minting a wave of twentysomething founders, has so far produced an average age of 43, almost identical to the figure recorded at the dawn of the millennium.

The numbers cover an extraordinary span of would-be company directors, from 16-year-olds, the legal floor set by the Companies Act 2006, to a 110-year-old who took on a directorship in 2012. The average age of the oldest founder in any given year is 91, suggesting the entrepreneurial itch is one that lasts the best part of seven decades.

Why mid-career still wins

The picture is at odds with much of the cultural mythology around start-ups, which tends to oscillate between dorm-room prodigies and silver-haired second-acters. Yet the figures align with a broader truth about the country’s business base: small and medium-sized enterprises make up 99.9% of the UK’s private sector and employ roughly 16.9 million people, according to the latest Department for Business and Trade business population estimates. The economy’s beating heart, in other words, is run by people who have already spent a couple of decades in someone else’s payroll.

Graeme Donnelly, founder and chief executive of 1st Formations, argues that the sheer volume of data strips the romance out of the debate. “When you are analysing over 9 million data points, the noise of ‘trends’ disappears and the reality emerges,” he says. “British business thrives on experience. Today, the average age to start a business matches that of the millennium’s start.

“While younger generations enter the business world and veterans continue to grow, the heavy lifting of the economy is done by the 43 Club. These are professionals who have spent decades honing their craft before taking the leap.”

It is a useful corrective. The classic mid-life founder profile, a manager with a hard-won contact book, a mortgage to defend and a working understanding of cash flow, has long been the unglamorous engine room of British enterprise, even as media attention drifts elsewhere.

The Gen Z asterisk

That said, the picture at the edges of the dataset is changing fast. A Glassdoor-Harris poll cited in the study suggests 57% of Gen Z workers now run some form of side hustle, fuelled by social platforms that allow a teenager in a bedroom to test a product on a global audience for the price of a ring light. Business Matters has previously reported on the growing army of UK side-hustlers turning hobbies into income streams, as well as the broader entrepreneurship boom among young Britons, two-thirds of whom now say they intend to work for themselves.

At the other end of the spectrum, the rise of the so-called Silver Starter, older founders launching their first venture after 50, continues apace, supported in part by a significant uptick in over-50s drawing on the British Business Bank’s Start Up Loans scheme.

The slight dip in average founder age to 43 in 2024 and 2025 may yet prove the start of something more meaningful. The current cohort is starting businesses against a backdrop of accessible AI tooling, lower fixed costs and a sharp pivot towards the green economy, all of which lower the barriers that traditionally kept first-time founders in mid-career rather than their twenties.

What it means for SME Britain

For lenders, advisers and policy-makers wondering where to point their attention, the message from the 1st Formations data is more nuanced than the headlines suggest. The growth at the margins – teen side-hustlers and seasoned career-changers, is real and worth nurturing. But the Federation of Small Businesses’ latest data on the UK’s 5.5 million-strong small business population underlines that the country’s economic resilience still rests on the experienced middle: people who have done their time, know their market, and decide, somewhere around their forty-third birthday, that they would rather build something of their own.

Through dot-com, downturn, Brexit and Covid, that has been the one constant. Britain, it turns out, prefers its founders battle-tested.

---

The Newcastle firm has been backed by NPIF II – NEL Debt Finance, managed by NEL Fund Managers

Renewables specialist CrowdedHouse Energy has secured six-figure investment it says will put it on a footing for growth. The Newcastle firm provides commercial solar technology including rooftop photovoltaics and a parking canopy system.

It handles design, consultancy, installation and ongoing maintenance for customers. Investment comes from NPIF II – NEL Debt Finance, managed by NEL Fund Managers as part of the Northern Powerhouse Investment Fund II (NPIF II).

It has allowed CrowdedHouse to bring in new equipment for its Scotswood Road, Newcastle, factory, creating new production capabilities. By bringing fabrication in-house, the business says it has reduced reliance on suppliers, improved efficiency and shortened lead times for clients.

Richard Blackwell, CEO of CrowdedHouse Energy, said: “NEL’s investment has been pivotal for CrowdHouse Energy. Their support has been outstanding, providing clear guidance, structure, and an outside perspective that has helped us make better decisions as we scale.

“Beyond funding, NEL has strengthened our confidence to invest in key areas, improve operations, and continue delivering high-quality projects, putting us in a strong position for sustainable growth.”

Jane Siddle, NEL investment executive, added: “Our investment is a clear endorsement of CHE’s vision and their steadfast dedication to advancing exceptional renewable energy projects. CHE plays an instrumental role in driving the North East towards a sustainable, net zero future.

“We are genuinely delighted to support CHE as they further develop their manufacturing abilities and continue to introduce cutting-edge solutions in commercial solar technology.”

The £660m Northern Powerhouse Investment Fund II covers the entire North of England and provides loans of between £25,000 to £2m and equity investment up to £5m for small and medium-sized businesses to start up, scale up or stay ahead.

Sarah Newbould, senior investment manager at the British Business Bank said: “Through the Northern Powerhouse Investment Fund II, we are proud to support businesses like CrowdHouse Energy that are aligned with the Government’s Industrial Strategy, creating highly-skilled jobs, driving regional economic growth and playing a vital role in the UK’s transition to a net zero economy.”

Like this story? For more deals news you can visit our dedicated page for the latest news and analysis here.

Bharat Electronics reported a 5% year-on-year (YoY) rise in consolidated net profit for the March quarter, supported by steady execution in defence projects and higher operational revenue. The state-run defence electronics company posted profit after tax of Rs 2,226 crore for Q4FY26 compared with Rs 2,127 crore in the corresponding quarter last year. BEL’s board recommended a final dividend of Rs 0.55 per equity share with face value of Rs 1 each for FY26, subject to shareholder approval at the upcoming annual general meeting.

Revenue from operations rose 11% YoY to Rs 10,224 crore from Rs 9,150 crore in the year-ago period. Total income for the quarter increased to Rs 10,335 crore against Rs 9,344 crore a year earlier, reflecting growth of around 11%. The company’s profit before tax stood at Rs 2,917 crore during the quarter compared with Rs 2,867 crore in Q4 FY25, registering a rise of 2%.

BEL’s total expenses increased to Rs 7,417 crore from Rs 6,477 crore in the corresponding quarter last year as the company ramped up production and project execution. Cost of materials consumed during the quarter rose to Rs 4,794 crore from Rs 4,429 crore in the previous year period. Employee benefit expenses increased 8.5% YoY to Rs 831 crore compared with Rs 766 crore last year. Other expenses also climbed sharply to Rs 1,117 crore from Rs 819 crore in Q4 FY25.

Despite the increase in costs, the company maintained healthy profitability due to strong revenue growth and stable execution across its defence electronics portfolio.

For the full financial year FY26, BEL reported consolidated revenue from operations of Rs 27,610 crore, up 16% from Rs 23,769 crore in FY25. Net profit for the year rose 14% to Rs 6,062 crore compared with Rs 5,323 crore in the previous financial year. Total income during FY26 stood at Rs 28,176 crore against Rs 24,511 crore in FY25, marking growth of nearly 15%. Profit before tax for the full year came in at Rs 8,053 crore, up 13% from Rs 7,099 crore in FY25.

The company also benefited from higher contribution from associate entities. Share of profit from associates accounted under equity method increased to Rs 1,216 lakh during the March quarter compared with Rs 601 lakh in the same quarter last year.

Nithin Kamath has warned that rapidly rising margin trading facility (MTF) exposure across brokerages could become a major risk for India’s stock market ecosystem if markets witness a sharp correction. In a detailed post on social media platform X, the Zerodha co-founder said MTF books continue to expand aggressively even though Indian equity markets have largely moved sideways in recent months.

Kamath contrasted the current situation with markets such as South Korea, where investors borrowed heavily during a sharp rally. “This isn’t like the Korean markets, for example, where the markets are up 150% in the last year alone, and people are borrowing to ride that rally. Our situation is different,” he said.

MTF allows investors to buy stocks by borrowing funds from brokers while pledging shares or margin as collateral. The product has grown rapidly over the past two years as retail participation in equities surged and investors increasingly used leverage to amplify returns, especially in mid-cap and small-cap stocks.

Kamath said one of the biggest risks emerges during sudden market declines when brokers may struggle to liquidate pledged stocks quickly enough to recover borrowed amounts. “The big risk with MTF is the risk of the stock becoming illiquid in case there’s a sharp market fall,” he said. He explained that if stock prices fall beyond the margin provided by customers, brokers are left exposed to losses. “If a stock moves more than the margin provided, say 20%, the bad debit is on the broker,” Kamath said, adding that recovery from customers in such situations is often difficult.

According to him, the risk becomes significantly larger when investors use pledged shares as collateral to build even bigger leveraged positions in the same stock. “A customer pledges Stock A, gets 80% margin on it, and uses that to take further positions worth 400% in the same stock,” he said.

Kamath warned that such structures can become extremely dangerous in mid-cap and small-cap shares where lower liquidity and circuit filters can prevent brokers from exiting positions during market stress. “If that stock is a mid or small-cap stock, circuits kick in, and there’s simply no exit if markets turn around,” he said.
He also revealed that nearly 50% of the industry’s MTF exposure currently lies in non-futures-and-options stocks, a segment generally considered less liquid compared with large-cap F&O counters. The Zerodha founder said his brokerage still does not allow customers to use collateral margin for MTF purchases, though competitive pressure in the industry may eventually force changes. “While we still don’t allow collateral margin for buying MTF, competitive pressure would mean we will have to,” he said.Kamath added that Zerodha’s own MTF book has increased significantly over the past 16 months but remains around 25% of the company’s net worth. For some brokers, however, he said MTF exposure may be as high as 500% of net worth, which is currently the maximum limit allowed by regulators.

The comments come at a time when India’s cash market volumes have slowed after last year’s strong rally, while leveraged trading products including derivatives and MTF continue to see elevated activity.

Brian Gilmartin, is a portfolio manager at Trinity Asset Management, a firm he founded in May, 1995, catering to individual investors and institutions that werent getting the attention and service deserved, from larger firms. Brian started in the business as a fixed-income / credit analyst, with a Chicago broker-dealer, and then worked at Stein Roe & Farnham in Chicago, from 1992 – 1995, before striking out on his own and managing equity and balanced accounts for clients. Brian has a BSBA (Finance) from Xavier University, Cincinnati, Ohio, (1982) and an MBA (Finance) from Loyola University, Chicago, January, 1985. The CFA was awarded in 1994. Brian has been fortunate enough to write for the TheStreet.com from 2000 to 2012, and then the WallStreet AllStars from August 2011, to Spring, 2012. Brian also wrote for Minyanville.com, and has been quoted in numerous publications including the Wall Street Journal.