Over the last few days, the Indian Rupee (INR) has been depreciating against the Dollar (USD). The Rupee dropped to a fresh low against the Dollar to an exchange of Rs 84.38 on Thursday. 

This depreciation against the Dollar in recent days following Trump’s election victory, as expectations rise that his policies may further strengthen the dollar index. 

Few market experts with whom THE WEEK spoke feel that given the resilience of the Indian economy, this rupee dip appears temporary and will appreciate in the days to come, and some of them say that it will be a while before the Rupee heads back. 

“Adding to our economy’s strength, the Fed’s past two interest cuts will bring a gradual increase in dollar supply which could support the Rupee’s recovery. However, it’s crucial to closely monitor Trump’s proposed trade policies, such as imposing tariffs of 10 per cent or more on all US imports and potential hikes on Chinese imports, to assess their long-term effects on the Rupee,” remarked Edul Patel, Co-founder and CEO of Mudrex. 

ALSO READ | Did you notice these five important changes to your health insurance? No-claim bonus and more…

Experts feel that the Rupee has hit fresh record lows over the past few sessions due to a host of domestic and global factors. Many feel that the Rupee may continue to remain weak over the near term. “We expect the US Dollar index to strengthen further on growth optimism over Donald Trump’s victory in the US Presidential elections as his pro-growth stance has to be funded by enhanced borrowings, leading to further weakness in the US bonds. As the US bond yields are likely to rise further on Trump’s win, it may be negative for the domestic currency,” Anuj Choudhary, research analyst at Sharekhan by BNP Paribas, told THE WEEK. 

He remarked that the emerging market currencies are vulnerable. The Chinese economy is also not performing that well, which has led to weakness in the Yuan. This may strengthen the Dollar further and weigh on risk currencies such as the Rupee. “Unless China announces a huge stimulus that may impress the markets/investors, we do not expect the Yuan to recover. In fact, if Trump hikes tariffs on imports from China, the Yuan may need to be devalued further to make Chinese exports competitive. This would again be negative for the Rupee,” added Choudhary. 

ALSO READ | Who is Rishit Jhunjhunwala, the new CEO of Truecaller?

This expert is of the opinion that the domestic economy is not faring too well either. There have been huge FII outflows over the past couple of months. If the trend continues, further foreign outflows can be seen, which could lead to higher demand for the Dollar. India’s CPI rose to 5.49 per cent in September, overshooting RBI’s target of 4 per cent for market expectations of 5 per cent. RBI has projected India’s inflation for FY25 at 4.5 per cent, despite concerns over inflation. Rising food inflation may also continue to mount pressure on the Rupee. 

Interestingly, in his speech, Donald Trump said that he was going to stop all wars. In such a case, there could be some cooling off in commodity prices, and the risk premium would decline. 

“A decline in crude oil prices would benefit the Rupee as it is the biggest contributor to India’s import bill. This may support the Rupee at lower levels. Any fresh foreign inflows amid improved global risk sentiments may also support the Rupee at lower levels. The Indian bonds may get support from India’s bonds inclusion in the FTSE Russell’s major global bond Index next year. FOMC rate cuts and the possibility of the RBI cutting rates in December or January may limit the downside in the Indian bonds, which may support the Rupee. In the near term, we expect the Indian Rupee to trade in the range of 84 or 83.80 on the lower side. On the higher side, we expect the Rupee to test at 84.80 or 85 levels. The trend is bearish for the domestic currency,” explained Choudhary. 

ALSO READ | SBI quarterly results beat estimates, but shares tank

The recent all-time low of the Rupee against the Dollar reflects global uncertainties, but strategic developments could alter the outlook. It is expected that the Rupee will remain under pressure in the short term until more clarity emerges on the geopolitical and global trade landscape; however, the medium-term outlook looks positive. With Donald Trump winning the US election for a second time, his historically positive relationship with India could play a vital role in supporting the Indian currency. “Trump’s administration previously promoted pro-India policies that strengthened trade and investment ties, and this established rapport could foster more favourable trade terms, boost bilateral investments, and potentially stabilize foreign inflows into India. Such an alignment would benefit both markets, as stronger economic cooperation could attract investment, drive trade, and support broader financial stability,” Rohit Beri, the CEO and CIO of ArthAlpha. 

This expert adds that for India, this could mean a bolstered rupee as more US–India trade and investment flows in. Meanwhile, the US could gain from a stable partner in India, with growth-driven collaboration across technology, manufacturing, and energy. “The positive economic cycle generated could lead to job creation, market expansion, and innovation sharing, setting up a strong foundation for the future of both economies,” remarked Beri. 

The results of this week’s US election will make sober reading for anyone who dreads the prospect of a Donald Trump second term.

At the time of writing, the Democrats have lost (or are on course to lose) the electoral college, the popular vote, all seven swing states and control of both Houses. All this to a convicted felon who tried to overturn the previous election and was assumed to be so toxic that no one would dream of voting for him.

There are many ways to describe this outcome, but “complete and total catastrophe” will probably do. In fact, the defeat is so comprehensive that it might force the Democrats (once they get over the shock) to ask the kind of difficult questions they have hitherto ignored. Failure can be very clarifying, if the right lessons are learned.

But if that’s true of political parties, it’s true of the media as well.

There was an interesting moment during The Rest is Politics live coverage of the US election. All the panellists, bar historian Dominic Sandbrook, predicted a Kamala Harris victory (in the case of former MP Rory Stewart, by a comfortable margin). This led to much handwringing as the scale of Trump’s victory became apparent.

A polarised, 24/7 media addicted to sensation and desperately chasing clicks is a media ill-served to do its job

Picking over the bones, main host Alastair Campbell reflected on his recent appearance on MSNBC:

“There was no real news being told. It was just endless ventilations of the same opinions about how awful Trump was, about how awful Vance was. And, of course, you go to the other side, you turn on Fox News, and they’re doing the opposite.

“I don’t see how we get to [a] sensible, rational, democratic debate if the media just become extensions of the players that the public are meant to be looking at to make a choice.”

In response, Sandbrook made a telling point:

“I think the one thing that people who are very interested in politics get wrong about politics, more than anything else, is that most ordinary people are not interested in politics. Do not follow it, do not care, do not understand, or do not care to understand…

“As far as I can tell from the exit polls, the single biggest issue for people was the issue that is almost always the single biggest issue in every election, which is the economy. Are you better off? And I think the inflation a couple of years ago clearly really hurt the Democrats, because Harris was tarnished by that. So all the things that we think should have destroyed Trump… a lot of people probably weren’t even aware of those things.”

This view of politics was pithily summarised by the Democrat strategist James Carville back in 1992: “It’s the economy, stupid.” It’s something that the financial sector knows only too well, since it can’t afford to get it wrong. So, why does the media need to relearn this lesson every election cycle?

To be fair, journalists are not fortune tellers, any more than pollsters, economists, financial advisers and all the other people trying to understand societal trends. Reading the minds of voters is an inexact science, to put it mildly.

But a polarised, 24/7 media addicted to sensation and desperately chasing clicks from what it perceives as its tribe is a media ill-served to do its job: getting at the underlying truth and making the world comprehensible, without fear or favour.

In the absence of solid policy announcements, guesswork ruled the day, much of it ill-informed and damaging

This isn’t just an American problem. While the fixed-term nature of US politics almost guarantees a drawn-out cycle filled with sound and fury, the same is not true (or doesn’t have to be true) of British politics. And yet, similar mistakes are replicated.

To cite a statistic you’ve probably heard hundreds of times, the 117-day gap between the UK election on 4 July and the Labour government’s first Budget on 30 October was the longest in over 50 years.

The delay was mainly due to odd electoral timing (thanks, Mr Sunak), the summer recess and a clear desire by the new government to thoroughly roll the pitch before delivering the tricky news (a £40bn tax hike, in case you missed it).

But whether by accident or design, it led to the most discussed, analysed and often misrepresented Budget in living memory.

Ever since chancellor Rachel Reeves stood up in the Commons and announced the discovery of a £22bn ‘black hole’ in the public finances (to well-rehearsed cries of “Shameful!” by the Labour frontbench), commentators were furiously speculating on the course this government might take.

That’s what commentators do, you might argue. But in the absence of solid policy announcements, guesswork ruled the day. And as Greg Neall pointed out earlier this week, much of it was ill-informed and frankly damaging.

The government plays its own part in this, of course. Indeed, there’s a conspiracy theory doing the rounds that Sir Keir Starmer and co deliberately stoked the negativity so that the actual Budget would look benign in comparison.

Clever politics, if so. But that won’t be any consolation to all those advisers who have spent two months fielding anxious calls from clients (such queries are up by 50% by some calculations). Or to those who might have taken rash decisions based on false evidence.

That’s what a quality media should be interrogating. There’s more ‘content’ out there than ever before, but most of it consists of hastily written opinion pieces that cost a lot less than proper journalism and have about a tenth of the value. Rather than enlighten, they largely exist to confirm our prejudices.

If we fail to understand voter behaviour, we’ll get the politicians we deserve

To return to America for a moment, when Donald Trump first emerged as a political force back in 2016, right-wing commentators started accusing his more forceful critics as suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS, as no one calls it).

This, the theory goes, is an irrational inflation of the threat Trump poses, based purely on a snobbish dislike of the guy. This blinds people to the true nature of his appeal.

I’m no Trump supporter, and I regard claims of ‘TDS’ as a dishonest attempt to deflect criticism of Trump’s many appalling traits. If anyone’s deranged, I’d argue, it certainly isn’t me.

However, if there’s any truth to the critique, it’s the way in which it’s led the media to prioritise outrage over a sober analysis of the economic issues that – as Sandbrook so eloquently puts it – drive voter behaviour. And if we fail to understand voter behaviour, we’ll get the politicians we deserve.

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

Roula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.

We’ve written a lot about the US election in recent days, so it’s time for some Anglocentric overcorrection.

To wit: Deutsche Bank has initiated a sell rating on Greggs, dragging shares in the UK’s vaunted sausage roll maker down 6.3 per cent to a nine-month intraday low:

In a note published this morning, DB analysts Tim Barrett and Richard Stuber said they expect UK chancellor Rachel Reeves’ plans to raise the UK’s minimum hourly wage by 6.7 per cent to £12.21 — and increases to employer national insurance contributions — to cost Greggs about £45mn in 2025 and £50mn in 2026. That translates into a 23 per cent profit-before-tax downgrade for both years.

The pair trimmed their target price from £26 to £24, distinguishing themselves in so doing as the only analysts out of 15 tracked by Bloomberg who no longer think investors should buy or hold the stock.

[High-resolution version]

How might Greggs respond to rising costs? Probably by raising prices and slashing the bonus they distribute to employees, team DB write:

Most obviously, Greggs could pass this additional cost on through price rises. With approximately £2bn of sales, this would require approximately 2.5% increase to offset this cost alone. We already had assumed 5% increase in company-managed LFL sales in FY25 and FY26. Price rises are easier to pass through if competitors either act ‘rationally’, ie all raise their prices, or if there is rising/higher general inflation. 

On the former it is difficult to be confident others will price-up. In theory, Greggs should outperform (lower price point, greater scale etc) but we see this as upside risk rather than a base case. On the latter, the recent CPI prints and forecasts are actually slowing. We have seen this reflected in slowing quarterly LFLs. These slowed from +17.0% in 1Q23 to +5.5% in 3Q24 and growth was largely price driven. Management confirmed that during 2023 volume trends were relatively stable throughout the year.   

Greggs distributes 10% of profits to employees, equivalent to £17.6m in FY23 (£19.6m total cost including additional NIC). This is equivalent to nearly half of the total impact and therefore management could decide to be less generous to employees.  

Advertisement

DB notes that Greggs had slipped 13 per cent from its September high in the lead up to its third-quarter trading update, when the food-to-go retailer announced rising sales, a flurry of new shop openings and — crucially — the rollout of a new pumpkin spice doughnut to compliment the return of its seasonal drinks range.

But neither pumpkin-flavoured pastries and lattes nor Greggs’s new all-day breakfast baguette and Mexican bean & spicy cheese flatbread seem to excite DB’s Tim and Rich. There’s no accounting for taste (which, to be fair, has worked in Greggs’s favour in the past).

Further reading:
— London Greggs ‘bans’ customers from wearing headphones or using mobile (Evening Standard)
— Greggs on a roll as low prices and savvy marketing aid rapid expansion (FT)

IF YOU’VE got a pair of old trainers in the back of your wardrobe then now is the time to check how much they could be worth.

This year several pairs of trainers have been sold for record-breaking prices as so-called “sneaker heads” race to get their hands on the collectable shoes.

3

A pair of rare Nike trainers fetched £68,937 on one luxury resale website.

Meanwhile, a set of six Air Jordan trainers worn by Michael Jordan himself fetched £6.3million at auction in February.

While a pair you may have at home is unlikely to fetch that much, you could make several thousand pounds.

Trainers that have not been worn tend to increase in value the most, said Drew Haines, director of merchandising at trainer resale website StockX.

He said: “The resale value of coveted models tends to appreciate steadily over time when kept in a new and unworn condition with original packaging.

“One thing to also remember is that a large number of people purchase trainers to wear rather than to sell.”

This means that there is a lower number of trainers in circulation which can be sold to collectors or investors.

The brand of trainers is also important as not all types increase in value at the same pace.

The top most searched for trainer brands this summer were Adidas, New Balance, Sketchers, Nike and Converse, according to eBay.

If you have a pair from one of these brands then you could be in for a windfall.

Other lesser-known brands including On Running and HOKA have also become more popular, eBay said.

Keep an eye out for seasonal trends, which could increase how much you can sell a pair for.

For example, eBay saw running shoes gain popularity before marathon season.

Searches on eBay globally for “mesh runners”, a type of jogging shoe, were up 75% year-on-year in February.

Most popular trainers sold in the UK

Here are the most popular trainers sold in the UK on StockX this year:

• Air Jordan 1 Mid Light Smoke Grey – £99
• Nike Air Force 1 Low White 07 – £68
• Air Jordan 4 Retro Military Blue 2024 – £146
• Nike Air Max Plus 25th Anniversary – £125
• Air Jordan 4 Retro Bred Reimagined – £129

As more people want to buy this type of shoe, it could mean that you can put up your asking price.

What should I do if I have an expensive pair?

Regular maintenance is important to preserve the value of your rare shoes.

Invest in some specialised shoe cleaning products to keep them in top condition.

It’s also important to store your shoes carefully to prevent them from deteriorating.

Proper storage and keeping them away from harsh weather conditions will preserve their quality and resale value.

Keep them in a cool, dry place and away from direct sunlight to help avoid any discolouration or material degradation.

You can store them in their original box or invest in clear shoes boxes to help them stay in mint condition.

The shoe box itself is a large part of the resale value of a pair of trainers.

Never throw the box away and make sure that it does not get crumpled, damaged or discoloured.

How do I sell my trainers online?

First you should check to see how much similar pairs of trainers have sold for to assess how much yours could be worth.

Check several resale websites such as eBay, StockX, Depop and Vinted to see how much others have sold their pair for.

EBay has a function which allows you to search for the item you want to sell and then filter the results by sold items.

This will allow you to view the price the item has previously sold for and get an understanding of how much other people listed it for.

StockX has a price guide which shows the full price and past sales of different models of shoe.

Once you know how much your shoes are worth you can choose to sell them online or by auction.

If you sell your trainers through a resale website then you will need to create an account and set up a profile.

To do this you will need to go onto the website and enter a few basic details such as your name, mobile number and email.

Next you should take pictures of your trainers and their box.

3

Advertisement

Make sure to take a photo of any damage or wear on the surface, sides and base of the shoe.

Go onto the manufacturer’s website and find a professional photo of the trainers.

This will help anyone interested in your shoes to visualise what they looked like when they were first bought.

Next upload your photos to the resale website and begin to build a listing for the shoes.

You will need to write a description of the item and should include the make, model and name of the trainers.

If you have any proof of the authenticity of the trainers then you should say that this can be provided.

You can prove that your trainers are genuine with a receipt, bank or credit card statement.

You may also be asked to complete a few questions on the condition, size, style, colour and type of shoe.

If you sell trainers using certain retail websites then they may need to authenticate the shoes before your buyer receives them.

For example, eBay has an authentication centre where items are physically inspected by experts before they are sent to the buyer or returned to a seller.

Items that have passed an authentication test will be marked with a blue tick.

How can I sell my trainers at auction?

If you have very valuable trainers then it could be worth selling them at auction to make sure you get as much as you can for them.

Specialist auctioneers including Sotheby’s and London Auctions will sell your trainers by auction, marketplace or private sale.

You do not need to live near the auctioneer to sell with them.

3

To start the process contact the auctioneer and send them a photograph of your shoes.

A specialist will then review your submission and you should be sent a free estimate of how much the trainers could be worth.

If you agree to go ahead then the auctioneer will be able to guide you through the process of selling your trainers.

They may sell them one client, list them online or include them in an upcoming auction.

Selling an item through an auctioneer may mean that you have to pay other fees such as storage, commission and buyer’s premium costs. 

Check how much the fees are before you agree to a sale.

Do you have a money problem that needs sorting? Get in touch by emailing money-sm@news.co.uk.

Plus, you can join our Sun Money Chats and Tips Facebook group to share your tips and stories

Thousands of drivers working for ride-hailing and food delivery app Bolt have won a legal claim to be classed as workers in the UK rather than self-employed.

The ruling means drivers could be entitled to holiday pay and minimum wage, which lawyers said could lead to compensation worth more than £200m.

Bolt said it was reviewing its options, including grounds for appeal.

It pointed out that the findings of the Employment Tribunal were confined to drivers who were not on multiple ride-hailing apps.

About 10,000 current and former Bolt drivers took legal action against the Estonian-headquartered firm at a London employment tribunal.

They argued they were formally workers under British law.

Bolt said it had “always supported” the “choice” of drivers “to remain self-employed independent contractors”.

But the tribunal found that “overwhelmingly, the power lies with Bolt”.

“There is nothing in the relationship which demands, or even suggests, agency” on the part of the drivers, it said.

The tribunal added that “the supposed contract between the Bolt driver and the passenger is a fiction designed by Bolt – and in particular its lawyers – to defeat the argument that it has an employer/worker relationship with the driver”.