This article was written by

Follow

Analyst’s Disclosure: I/we have no stock, option or similar derivative position in any of the companies mentioned, and no plans to initiate any such positions within the next 72 hours. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Seeking Alpha’s Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. No recommendation or advice is being given as to whether any investment is suitable for a particular investor. Any views or opinions expressed above may not reflect those of Seeking Alpha as a whole. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank. Our analysts are third party authors that include both professional investors and individual investors who may not be licensed or certified by any institute or regulatory body.

Big ideas are easy to describe. Making them work across complex products, global teams and large organizations is much harder.

That is where Ned Curic has spent much of his career.

Across nearly three decades, Curic has worked in aerospace, enterprise technology, software, connected vehicles and automotive product development. His career has included roles at Northrop Grumman, Microsoft, Toyota, Amazon and Stellantis.

Today, he is responsible for Product Development & Technology and is a member of the Stellantis Leadership Team.

The common thread across those roles is not simply innovation. It is the work required to turn new technology into systems that can operate reliably, integrate with other technologies and scale across real products.

How Ned Curic Built a Career Around Complex Systems

Curic began his career in 1996 in Engineering Systems at Northrop Grumman.

Aerospace and defense engineering leaves little room for disconnected thinking. Systems must work together. Decisions made in one area can affect performance elsewhere. Reliability, architecture and integration matter as much as individual components.

That systems perspective became useful as Curic moved into other industries.

After a short period in the financial sector, he joined Microsoft in 2000. His work there covered consulting, product, security and advisory roles.

The breadth mattered.

Product development is rarely only a software problem or only an engineering problem. Security, architecture, customer requirements, infrastructure and operating constraints all interact. Curic’s time at Microsoft gave him exposure to those different layers during a period of major change in enterprise technology.

Why Automotive Became a Systems and Software Challenge

Curic entered the automotive industry in 2013 as Group Vice President and Chief Technology Officer at Toyota Motor North America.

By then, vehicles were becoming more dependent on software, connectivity and data. That created a different engineering challenge.

A vehicle may contain many technologies, but customers experience one product. Software cannot be treated as an isolated feature. Hardware, software, data, interfaces and services need to work as a system.

For established manufacturers, this also creates an industrial challenge. New ideas have to move beyond demonstrations and prototypes. They have to meet requirements for reliability, safety, cost, manufacturing and long-term support.

That shift from individual technologies to integrated platforms became an important part of Curic’s automotive career.

Building Toyota Connected and New Product Capabilities

In 2015, Curic became Co-founder, Executive Vice President, Technical Director and Board Member of Toyota Connected.

The move reflected a broader change taking place across the automotive industry. Connected services were becoming part of the product itself, rather than an optional layer added after vehicle development.

Building that capability required more than developing individual applications.

Data systems, software platforms, customer experiences and vehicle technologies had to be connected. Teams with different disciplines also had to work across organizational boundaries.

The challenge was therefore both technical and operational: create new capabilities while making sure they could function inside the requirements of a global automotive business.

That experience placed Curic directly in the transition from traditional vehicle engineering towards more software-intensive product development.

Bringing Consumer Technology Into the Vehicle

Curic joined Amazon in June 2017 as Vice President of Alexa Automotive.

Voice technology had already gained traction in homes. Bringing it into vehicles created a different set of constraints.

Automotive systems need to operate in changing environments. They interact with existing vehicle functions. Interfaces have to reduce friction rather than create more of it. New services also need to integrate with technology that may have been designed years earlier.

Curic’s work at Amazon placed him at the intersection of consumer software and automotive engineering.

It was another example of a recurring challenge in his career: taking technology that works in one environment and adapting it for a much more complex product system.

Product Development and Technology at Stellantis

At Stellantis, Curic is responsible for Product Development & Technology and is a member of the Stellantis Leadership Team.

The scale of that responsibility changes the nature of innovation.

A new technology is not successful simply because a prototype works. It has to move through engineering, integration, validation and production. It may need to work across different vehicle programmes, markets, brands and regulatory environments.

That requires end-to-end accountability.

Architecture decisions need to account for how technologies will interact later. Engineering teams need clear ownership across boundaries. Product development must consider how new capabilities can be industrialized rather than developed as isolated experiments.

Artificial intelligence adds another layer. AI can support engineering work, improve development processes and help teams handle growing product complexity. But useful deployment still depends on strong data, clear systems architecture and disciplined engineering judgement.

What Ned Curic’s Career Says About Industrializing Innovation

Curic’s career shows that bringing a major idea to life is rarely about one breakthrough moment.

It is usually a systems problem.

The work happens between concept and production. It involves deciding how technologies fit together, who owns each decision, how teams collaborate and whether a solution can perform reliably at scale.

Curic studied Informatics and Computer Science and earned his MBA from Pepperdine University’s George L. Graziadio School of Business and Management in 2012. That combination of technical and business training fits the type of problems he has worked on throughout his career.

From engineering systems to connected platforms and global automotive product development, his work has increasingly centered on one question: how do you take promising technology and make it work across the full product lifecycle?

That is a more demanding task than generating ideas. It is also where many of the most important technology decisions are made.

Amy Ingham

Amy Ingham is a reporter at Business Matters, covering UK business news with a focus on breaking news, business policy, late payments and insolvency. She joined the magazine in 2026 after completing the NCTJ Diploma in Journalism at Harlow College’s journalism school. Her recent reporting includes British Steel’s nationalisation and its impact on SME suppliers, the decline in late payments by large firms, and Insolvency Service director disqualifications. Reach her at aingham@cbmeg.co.uk.

REYNOLDSBURG, Ohio — Shares of Victoria’s Secret & Co. tumbled Thursday, falling $12.72, or 15%, to $72.09 as of 12:19 p.m. ET, after the lingerie and apparel retailer’s soft third-quarter profit outlook overshadowed a strong second-quarter earnings beat and an improved full-year revenue forecast.

The company reported second-quarter adjusted earnings per share of 95 cents, well ahead of the 75-cent consensus estimate compiled by analysts. Revenue rose 10% year over year to $1.61 billion, roughly in line with the $1.62 billion Wall Street had projected. Adjusted operating income for the quarter came in at $124 million, a significant improvement from the $55 million reported during the same period a year earlier.

Comparable sales climbed 9% during the quarter, topping the consensus projection of 8.8% growth. That figure, however, marked a notable deceleration from the 13% comparable-sales growth Victoria’s Secret delivered in the first quarter, a slowdown that added to investor unease heading into Thursday’s trading session.

The steep share-price decline was driven primarily by the company’s disappointing forward guidance for the current quarter. Victoria’s Secret projected third-quarter revenue of between $1.57 billion and $1.6 billion, modestly ahead of the Street’s $1.56 billion estimate. But the company’s third-quarter operating income outlook fell well short of expectations, with the midpoint of its guidance at just $15 million, compared with a Wall Street estimate of $24.4 million heading into the report.

Management attributed part of the gap to a planned increase in strategic marketing investment during the current quarter. Victoria’s Secret CEO Hillary Super framed the additional spending as a deliberate choice tied to the company’s broader turnaround strategy rather than a sign of weakening fundamentals.

“We see significant opportunity ahead and are doubling down on what is working,” Super said. “We are increasing our strategic marketing investment to expand our reach, deepen customer connection, and build on the brand heat we are creating.”

Complicating the picture further, Victoria’s Secret disclosed that its second-quarter operating income had been boosted by more than $140 million in one-time tariff refunds, a benefit that will not recur in future quarters and that masked the underlying trajectory of the company’s core profitability during the period just reported.

Despite the weak near-term profit outlook, Victoria’s Secret raised its full-year 2026 guidance on both revenue and operating income. The company lifted its full-year revenue guidance to a range of $7.1 billion to $7.18 billion, up from a previous range of $7.03 billion to $7.13 billion, and roughly in line with the $7.14 billion analyst consensus. Victoria’s Secret also raised its 2026 adjusted operating income guidance to a range of $560 million to $590 million, up from a prior range of $550 million to $580 million.

Guggenheim analyst Simeon Siegel acknowledged the strength of the quarter’s bottom-line results even while flagging concerns about the trajectory implied by the company’s updated guidance. Siegel described the results as featuring a “strong bottom-line beat,” while noting that the guidance implied fourth-quarter earnings appeared to be tracking below where Wall Street had previously expected them to land.

Thursday’s decline stands in sharp contrast to the stock’s performance over the preceding months. Shares of Victoria’s Secret had surged 57% year to date through Wednesday’s close, reflecting substantial investor confidence in the company’s ongoing turnaround efforts under Super’s leadership. That rally had been fueled in part by a blowout first-quarter earnings report released earlier this year, when the company posted net sales of $1.56 billion, up 15% year over year, alongside adjusted earnings per share of 60 cents that nearly doubled analyst expectations of 32 cents at the time. Multiple analysts, including those at JPMorgan, Morgan Stanley, UBS and Telsey Advisory, had raised their price targets on the stock in the weeks leading up to Thursday’s report, reflecting elevated expectations heading into the print that may have amplified the market’s disappointment once the softer third-quarter guidance was disclosed.

Market analysts characterized Thursday’s selloff as reflecting a guidance-quality concern rather than a fundamental deterioration in the company’s underlying business. One analysis from Investing.com described the situation as “a guidance-quality problem, not an earnings-collapse problem,” noting that while the company’s full-year outlook actually improved following the report, the market’s attention centered squarely on the softer near-term operating income trajectory implied for the third quarter.

The broader stock market provided little cover for Victoria’s Secret’s decline Thursday, with the S&P 500 trading essentially flat and the Dow Jones Industrial Average edging modestly higher during the session, underscoring that the drop in Victoria’s Secret shares was driven almost entirely by company-specific factors rather than broader market conditions.

Victoria’s Secret has continued to face scrutiny over its underlying operating margin trends even amid periods of strong top-line growth. In a separate analysis of an earlier quarterly report this year, market commentators noted that the company’s operating margin had weakened to 10.1%, down from 12.7% in the same quarter a year earlier, a decline attributed to rising marketing and administrative expenses that offset gains from higher sales. That pattern of strong revenue growth paired with margin pressure has become a recurring theme in the market’s response to the company’s recent earnings reports.

Victoria’s Secret shares have proven notably volatile over the trailing 12 months, with the stock recording 42 separate moves greater than 5% in either direction over that period, according to data compiled by market analysts, reflecting the market’s heightened sensitivity to each successive earnings report as investors continue evaluating the progress of the company’s broader turnaround strategy.

The company’s third-quarter results will be closely watched heading into the critical holiday shopping season, when Victoria’s Secret’s increased marketing investment is expected to be tested against the backdrop of broader consumer spending patterns and continued competitive pressure within the intimate apparel and beauty retail sector. With full-year guidance now raised despite the softer near-term outlook, investors and analysts are likely to continue debating whether Thursday’s sharp share-price decline represents a buying opportunity tied to a temporary spending-driven dip in profitability, or a more meaningful signal of margin pressure that could persist as the company continues investing in its turnaround efforts under Super’s leadership.

OpenAI on Thursday unveiled GPT-6 Astra, a new artificial intelligence (AI) model the tech company says features major improvements in computer use, coding, scientific research and professional work.

The San Francisco-based company said Astra is rolling out starting Thursday to enterprise customers with Daybreak access. In the coming days, it will also roll out to ChatGPT Plus, Pro, Business and Enterprise users, as well as through the OpenAI API and Amazon Web Services.

“GPT-6 Astra is built on advances across pre-training, reinforcement learning, and alignment, bringing together years of research and big bets,” OpenAI said. “Astra is state-of-the-art on computer use, browser use, software engineering, cybersecurity, science, and professional work.”

OPENAI, 100+ COMPANIES WARN OF COMING SURGE IN AI-POWERED CYBERATTACKS, CALL FOR GLOBAL DEFENSE PUSH

OpenAI’s headquarters in San Francisco Aug. 14, 2025. (Smith Collection/Gado/Getty Images)

The new model can carry out “tedious” computer-based tasks, such as filling out online forms, updating customer records, organizing calendars and conducting research.

OpenAI also said Astra can create documents, spreadsheets and presentations.

“GPT-6 Astra is the best model for software engineering to date,” the company added.

OPENAI SAYS AI MODEL HACKED ANOTHER COMPANY’S SYSTEMS DURING INTERNAL TEST

OpenAI also said Astra can create documents, spreadsheets and presentations. (Samuel Boivin/NurPhoto via Getty Images)

The tech company also said that Astra represents a significant jump in cybersecurity capabilities.

“As we discussed in our safety update, Astra is a significant jump in cyber capabilities and meets the Critical threshold in cybersecurity under our Preparedness Framework,” OpenAI said.

The company also touted Astra’s performance in math and science, calling Astra a “major advance for scientific discovery, mathematics, and health.”

GOP AGS WARN OPENAI’S ALTMAN TO PRESERVE RECORDS IN AI AGENT HACKING PROBE

The company also touted Astra’s performance in math and science, calling Astra a “major advance for scientific discovery, mathematics and health.” (Serene Lee/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images)

GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO BY CLICKING HERE

“Astra is our most aligned model. Astra excels at exercising care, respecting task boundaries, and communicating transparently,” the company said. “This work is the latest product of our long-running research program focused on training models that remain aligned with human intent from start to finish.”

The company has faced heightened scrutiny over AI safety after OpenAI-built agents breached their testing environment and accessed open-source platform Hugging Face.

OpenAI said Astra was not involved in that incident.

Reuters contributed to this report.

When Does a Clear Product Window Improve Consumer Buying Decisions? is a practical packaging question, not just a design theme.

For food, supplement, pet treat, beauty, household, and specialty-product brands, the package must protect the product, support efficient operations, communicate clearly, and remain consistent from one order to the next. The central issue in this topic is using clear windows only when product visibility meaningfully reduces uncertainty and supports the buying decision. A visually attractive result can still fail if the structure is hard to fill, the material is poorly specified, or the final pack behaves differently from the approved proof.

A dependable process begins with measurable product information and ends with testing under realistic conditions. This guide explains how U.S. brands can move from a commercial goal to a production-ready specification. It also separates reasonable packaging benefits from claims that require product-specific evidence. That distinction matters for food contact, shelf life, environmental statements, and any promise about protection.

Define the Product Before the Package

Document the complete sale unit before choosing size, material, or graphics. Record maximum and minimum dimensions, weight, shape, surface sensitivity, temperature, moisture or oil exposure, sharp edges, and normal manufacturing tolerances. Use the largest and heaviest realistic samples rather than one ideal item. The relevant product set may include dry foods, supplements, pet products, beauty items, household goods, or other products suited to flexible packaging.

Map how the pack will be received, stored, assembled, filled, sealed or closed, labeled, displayed, shipped, opened, and disposed of. Identify who performs each step and how much time is available. Note where reduced barrier, glare, visible product settling, weaker shelf presence, or an unappealing view after transport may occur. A written product-and-journey brief gives the converter a problem to solve and prevents the project from being reduced to a request for “premium quality” without an operational definition.

Turn Marketing Goals Into Measurable Requirements

Translate broad goals such as premium, convenient, protective, or affordable into observable results. A premium pack might require controlled color, clean edges, smooth opening, and consistent fit. Convenience may mean one-handed opening, clear instructions, or fast packing. Protection should refer to specific hazards and acceptance criteria. Affordability should be evaluated through total cost, not only price per unit.

For this topic, the specification should address window size, position, clarity, barrier impact, seal distance, and artwork hierarchy. Rank requirements as essential, preferred, or optional. This prevents decorative additions from displacing a feature that controls performance. It also makes quotations easier to compare. When suppliers propose alternatives, ask which requirement changes, what data supports the recommendation, and whether a new sample or validation step will be required.

Use the Primary Anchor as a Real Buying Decision

When evaluating Custom Mylar Bags with Window, the keyword should represent a defined packaging format rather than a vague product label. Ask the supplier to state construction, dimensions, tolerances, materials, print method, finish, closure or retention features, packing quantity, and quality criteria. If the product is intended for food, supplements, cosmetics, or another regulated use, confirm that every relevant component is suitable for its intended contact and conditions.

Request a dieline and representative physical sample before approving production. Fill it with actual products and repeat the normal packing process. Photograph front, back, sides, opening sequence, shelf view, shipping configuration, and the customer’s first view. This reveals problems that a flat PDF cannot show, including blocked branding, difficult access, excessive movement, or information placed where folds and labels interfere.

Choose Materials by Function, Not Nickname

Packaging names used in the market do not fully describe performance. The starting material decision here is a multilayer film structure selected by measurable moisture, oxygen, light, aroma, chemical, and puncture requirements. Ask for measurable information that relates to the product and route. Depending on the format, that may include thickness or caliper, board grade, flute, barrier data, sealant layer, density, recovery behavior, recycled-content evidence, or surface compatibility.

Do not assume that a thicker material is automatically better. Excess material can increase cost, slow conversion, or transmit force instead of managing it. Conversely, reducing material without testing can create failures. Evaluate the complete construction, because inks, coatings, adhesives, windows, zippers, laminations, and inserts can change performance and end-of-life options. Keep supplier specifications with the approved sample so future reorders can be checked against the same baseline.

Develop Artwork on the Final Dieline

Build artwork only after structure and dimensions are stable. Establish safe areas, bleed, seals or glue zones, scores, cut lines, windows, barcodes, variable-data areas, and any surfaces that become hidden after forming. Use a clear hierarchy for brand, product name, variant, quantity, instructions, and required information. Small type should be reviewed at final printed size, not enlarged on a monitor.

Color targets should be defined with the printer rather than judged from different screens. Check how white ink, transparent areas, metallic effects, matte surfaces, uncoated board, or dark solids influence appearance. For a product range, use controlled positions and typography while allowing variants to differ through planned color or imagery. Version numbers, approval dates, and named approvers reduce the chance of an outdated file returning to production.

Plan Manufacturing and Conversion

Understand the sequence used to make the package. In flexible packaging, artwork may be separated, printed, laminated, cured, slit, formed, fitted with closures, and sealed into pouches. Each stage introduces tolerances that should be considered in the design.

Ask which setup costs apply and which changes trigger new plates, cylinders, tooling, dies, or proofs. Confirm lead time from final artwork approval rather than from the first inquiry. Discuss how units will be packed for delivery and whether they need time to condition before use. A schedule should include sampling, revisions, compliance review, production, freight, incoming inspection, and a buffer for correction. Launch dates built only around the press date are fragile.

Keep the Secondary Anchor Properly Integrated

The wider decision about custom packaging should be addressed several stages after the primary format is defined. It may describe the broader packaging family, a related structure, or the system that connects multiple SKUs. Use shared rules for logo placement, typography, product information, labels, testing, and supplier records while allowing each pack to meet its own physical requirements.

Create a packaging matrix with SKU, compatible products, dimensions, material, print version, features, storage location, minimum order quantity, lead time, and reorder point. Remove duplicate formats that perform the same job without a clear advantage. Standardization can simplify training and purchasing, but it should not force products with different hazards into one unsuitable pack. The goal is controlled variety, not one-size-fits-all packaging.

Test Under Realistic Conditions

Testing should reflect the actual distribution and customer journey. The most relevant checks here include filled samples under shelf lighting, storage trials, photography, and consumer viewing distance. Define pass-or-fail criteria before testing: acceptable movement, no loss of closure, no product contact with sensitive surfaces, readable barcode, controlled cosmetic damage, and an agreed packing time. Include product and packaging tolerances, not only ideal samples.

For food or other sensitive products, packaging cannot establish shelf life or safety by itself. Product formulation, processing, sanitation, temperature, water activity, oxygen, and storage time can all matter. Vacuum packaging is not a substitute for required refrigeration or other safe handling. Brands should validate claims and storage instructions for the actual product. Keep dated samples, photographs, measurements, and results so approvals are traceable.

Control Cost Without Removing Essential Performance

Compare supplier prices against one written specification. Confirm material, dimensions, print, finish, closures or insert components, tooling, setup, packing quantity, freight, duties if applicable, tolerances, and lead time. A lower quote may reflect a different structure rather than a better price. Calculate total cost using assembly labor, storage, damaged goods, excess inventory, obsolete artwork, rework, and cash tied up in minimum quantities.

Short runs can reduce inventory risk but usually carry a higher unit cost. Larger runs can reduce unit price while increasing commitment. Choose quantity using credible demand, shelf-life or artwork-change risk, storage capacity, and supplier lead time. Before scaling, test a realistic pilot. Removing a necessary barrier layer, support point, or quality check to save a small amount can create a much larger operational cost.

Handle Compliance and Claims Carefully

The FDA treats packaging components that contact food as food-contact substances, and their regulatory status depends on intended use and conditions. Suppliers should be able to identify relevant materials, inks, adhesives, and barriers for the proposed application. Brands remain responsible for product labeling and claims that apply to their category. When the legal position is unclear, obtain qualified advice before production rather than relying on a generic certificate.

Environmental language also needs evidence. The FTC Green Guides address claims such as recyclable, recycled content, degradable, and compostable. Multi-material flexible pouches, windows, adhesives, coatings, foams, and combined inserts may not be accepted in every local system. Avoid broad “eco-friendly” statements. Describe the actual material or verified attribute, qualify limitations where needed, and make disposal instructions understandable.

Create an Incoming Quality-Control Routine

Approve a controlled reference sample for structure, fit, print, color, finish, and function. At receipt, inspect units from multiple cartons or rolls rather than the easiest sample on top. Check dimensions, cutting, seals or glue, registration, odor, surface damage, assembly, fit, and any closure, window, divider, or insert. Load real products periodically because empty packaging can hide failures.

Record supplier batch, inspection date, sample size, defects, photographs, and disposition. Track production measures such as packing speed, sealing rejects, damaged products, returns, complaints, and unused stock. If performance changes, investigate material, conversion, storage, equipment settings, product tolerances, and employee process before assuming one cause. Consistent records turn quality conversations into evidence and help improvements survive staff or supplier changes.

Conclusion

A successful package connects the commercial goal with product data, material performance, manufacturability, artwork, testing, cost, and compliance. For this topic, the central lesson is using clear windows only when product visibility meaningfully reduces uncertainty and supports the buying decision. None of these decisions should be made from an online image or a material nickname alone. Filled prototypes and written acceptance criteria reveal whether the idea works in the real operation.

The practical next step is to create one measurable brief, request a representative sample, and test it through packing, distribution, display, opening, and normal use. Record what passes, what fails, and what must change before volume production. That process helps brands protect products, control spending, present information clearly, and build a packaging system that can be repeated as orders grow.

SACRAMENTO, CALIF. — The California legislature has passed Assembly Bill 2244 that would establish a non-ultra-processed certified seal that food manufacturers could place on their products that meet standards for not being ultra-processed.

“While Washington, DC, is paralyzed by inaction, Republicans and Democrats in California are joining forces to empower consumers to avoid harmful ultra-processed foods,” said Jesse Gabriel, the assembly member who authored the bill. “Like the USDA Organic label, this new seal will provide consumers with clear, trustworthy information and make it easier for them to locate healthier foods that are free from harmful additives. Parents shouldn’t need a PhD in chemistry to understand what they’re feeding their kids.”

The bill passed by a vote of 32-0 in the state Senate and by a vote of 72-0 in the state Assembly. California Governor Gavin Newsom has until Sept.30 to decide whether to veto the bill or sign it into law.

No federal law defines ultra-processed food, but the US Department of Health and the US Department of Agriculture have submitted for final review a proposed definition.

The bill in California would establish a process overseen by the California Department of Health where food manufacturers could apply to accredited certification agents to use the non-ultra-processed certified label on their packaging.

A state law in California regarding certain school-related purposes defines ultra-processed food as any food or beverage that contains a specific substance and either high amounts of saturated fat, sodium, or added sugar or a non-nutritive sweetener or other substance. The law requires the California Department of Health to define ultra-processed foods of concern and restricted school foods by June 1, 2028.

CSE shares are trading at about 2,100 rupees, up from near 900 rupees in early June, when transactions were sporadic after years of inactivity, according to Dharawat Securities. UnlistedZone, another platform that facilitates transactions in unlisted shares, quoted CSE at 2,175 rupees.

Interest picked up after Swapan Dasgupta, the new finance minister of West Bengal, said on June 25 that the government was working toward reviving the exchange in the state capital. The rally gained further momentum after CSE outlined a broader strategy in its annual report released Aug. 19. The exchange’s board decided to approach the Securities and Exchange Board of India to request that its February 2025 application for a voluntary exit be put on hold, according to the report.

“Demand remains strong,” said Hitesh Dharawat of Dharawat Securities, which deals in unlisted stocks. The shares “have surged since the West Bengal government signaled plans to revive the exchange.”

CSE said in its annual report that it sees opportunities across bond markets, equity derivatives, currencies, commodities, carbon trading and mutual funds, while also developing offerings for small and medium-sized enterprises. CSE had 1,507 companies listed and about 500 registered stockbrokers as of March 2026, though there was no active trading on the exchange, the report showed.

Live Events

The renewed interest comes as the National Stock Exchange of India prepares for its long-awaited initial public offering, putting a spotlight on India’s exchange industry.
Investors have previously piled into unlisted shares of another Indian bourse on expectations of a turnaround. Metropolitan Stock Exchange of India attracted investments from firms including Billionbrains Garage Ventures Ltd., the parent of online brokerage Groww, and Zerodha’s Rainmatter Investments as part of a revival effort, local media reported.MSEI’s unlisted shares surged about 5-fold between December 2024 and January 2025 before losing about half their value since then, according to UnlistedZone. The exchange has yet to establish a significant presence in India’s equity trading market.

Any CSE revival would require regulatory approvals and potentially anchor investors that meet capital-adequacy and “fit and proper” requirements, according to the annual report.

A representative for CSE didn’t respond to requests for comment.