Manchester One plans include four-storey extension

One of Manchester’s original 1960s skyscrapers is set to undergo a ‘statement of intent’ makeover with a four-storey ‘extension’ coming.

The 21-storey Manchester One block on Portland Street towered over Manchester when it opened as St Andrew’s House in 1962, the same year the CIS Tower emerged on the other side of town as Britain’s tallest building, 118m (387 feet) high. The 77m (252 ft) tall skyscraper is now home to Gaydio radio station and the Polish consulate, among others.

But despite still being home to dozens of firms, owners Bruntwood SciTech plan to redevelop it with a £17m ‘statement of intent’ revamp.

“Manchester One has been an enduring fixture of the city for decades and is synonymous with Manchester’s skyline,” said Matthew Morten, director at Bruntwood SciTech.

“These proposals represent our commitment to ensuring it remains both sustainable and inspiring, and the £17 million investment is a clear statement of intent about the building’s importance to both our portfolio and to Manchester.

“We’re reimagining this building with our customers at the heart of every decision. This transformation is about creating a best-in-class environment that helps businesses attract and retain the talent they need, supports work-life balance through dedicated wellness facilities and flexible workspace, and ultimately enhances productivity. It’s a place that continues to support not just work, but wellbeing, collaboration, sustainability and community.

“Manchester remains integral to our vision, and sustained investment here and across our cities is central to our growth strategy and our determination to provide the infrastructure that enables businesses and cities to thrive.”

Most notably, the plans include a four-storey ‘extension’ to the building at street level, with the green-clad addition serving as the building’s main reception with a double-height ceiling providing space for a cafe open to the public.

The original tower’s facades will undergo a full makeover to ‘refresh’ its appearance. Floorplans will also be changed, resulting in an extra 30,000 sq ft (2,787 sqm) over both buildings.

Developers submitted a planning application for the revamp on Wednesday (February 4), and are hopeful to begin building work this summer before opening the space in early 2028, the Local Democracy Reporting Service understands.

Ryan Wesley Routh, the 59-year-old Hawaii man who opened fire on former President Donald Trump during a golf outing in September 2024, was sentenced to life in federal prison without parole on Feb. 5, 2026, concluding one of the most high-profile political violence cases in recent U.S. history.

U.S. District Judge Aileen M. Cannon handed down the maximum sentence after Routh pleaded guilty in October 2025 to two counts of attempted assassination of a major presidential candidate, two counts of assault on a federal officer, and multiple firearms charges. The life term was mandatory under federal sentencing guidelines for the attempted assassination counts, which carried a statutory maximum of life imprisonment.

Routh showed no visible emotion as Cannon delivered the sentence in a packed federal courtroom in Fort Pierce. He declined to make a statement during the hearing, though his defense attorney read a brief prepared remark in which Routh expressed regret for the pain caused to Trump’s family and Secret Service agents but stopped short of apologizing for the act itself.

“I never intended to harm anyone that day,” the statement read. “I was trying to send a message about the direction of the country. I understand now how wrong and dangerous my actions were.”

Prosecutors described Routh’s September 15, 2024, attack as a meticulously planned, politically motivated attempt to kill the Republican presidential nominee. According to the 48-page criminal complaint and subsequent filings, Routh camped for nearly 12 hours in shrubbery along the perimeter of Trump International Golf Club in West Palm Beach, armed with a Czech-made Vz.61 Skorpion submachine gun, two AK-style rifles, a GoPro camera, and ceramic body armor plates.

At approximately 1:31 p.m., as Trump’s golf cart approached the fifth hole, Routh emerged from cover and fired four to six rounds toward the former president from roughly 400–500 yards away. Secret Service agents immediately returned fire, forcing Routh to flee. He abandoned his rifle, scope, and backpack — which contained the GoPro set to record the attack — and drove away in a black Nissan Xterra.

A witness at a nearby road flagged down a Palm Beach County sheriff’s deputy, providing Routh’s license plate. Florida Highway Patrol troopers stopped the vehicle on Interstate 95 in Martin County about 40 miles north of the golf course. Routh surrendered without resistance.

Investigators later recovered a handwritten letter Routh had mailed to a prominent media outlet days before the attack. In it, he offered $150,000 to anyone who could “finish the job” if he failed, referred to Trump as “the most dangerous man in the world,” and expressed support for Ukraine while criticizing Trump’s foreign policy positions.

Federal Case & Guilty Plea

Routh was indicted on Oct. 3, 2024, on 10 felony counts, including attempted assassination, assault on federal officers, possession of a machine gun, and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. Prosecutors built a comprehensive case showing premeditation: Routh had researched Trump’s golfing schedule, purchased the Skorpion submachine gun illegally in North Carolina in August 2024, and practiced at a remote shooting range in Hawaii before traveling to Florida.

On Oct. 28, 2025, Routh abruptly changed his plea to guilty on all counts in a deal that spared him the death penalty. In exchange, prosecutors agreed not to seek capital punishment and to recommend concurrent life sentences rather than stacked terms.

During the plea hearing, Routh admitted under oath that he “knowingly and intentionally attempted to kill Donald J. Trump by shooting at him with a firearm.” He also acknowledged that his actions placed Secret Service agents in immediate danger.

Victim Impact & Sentencing Hearing

Thursday’s sentencing hearing lasted nearly three hours. Prosecutors called four witnesses: two Secret Service agents who returned fire, a golf course employee who first spotted Routh’s rifle barrel protruding from the bushes, and Trump himself, who appeared via videoconference from Mar-a-Lago.

Trump, who was not physically injured in the incident, gave a 12-minute statement describing the moment he heard bullets “whizzing by” and agents shouting “get down.” He called Routh “a deranged individual fueled by hate” and urged the judge to impose the maximum penalty to send a message against political violence.

“I’ve been through a lot, but that day was different,” Trump said. “It wasn’t just me they were coming for — it was the movement, the people who believe in America First. We cannot allow this kind of hatred to go unpunished.”

Routh’s defense team called two witnesses: a forensic psychologist who diagnosed him with delusional disorder and a sister who described a history of untreated mental illness, homelessness, and financial despair. The defense asked for leniency, arguing that Routh’s actions stemmed from severe mental illness rather than pure political malice.

Judge Cannon rejected the mental-health mitigation argument, stating that Routh’s planning, research, and attempt to record the attack demonstrated “a high degree of culpability and a depraved indifference to human life.”

Broader Context & Political Fallout

The attack was the second apparent assassination attempt on Trump in 2024, following Thomas Matthew Crooks’ shooting at a Butler, Pa., rally on July 13, 2024, which wounded Trump’s ear and killed one spectator. The incidents fueled intense national debate over political rhetoric, Secret Service protocols, and the rise of domestic extremism.

Routh’s case drew particular attention because of his eclectic political history. Voter records showed he voted in Democratic primaries in North Carolina and Hawaii, donated small amounts to Democratic candidates, and expressed support for Ukraine in online posts. Yet he also voiced frustration with both parties and appeared disillusioned with the political system overall.

The sentencing closes the criminal chapter but leaves open questions about security failures at Trump’s golf club and whether additional charges will be pursued against any individuals who may have assisted Routh. The Secret Service and FBI continue to investigate potential accomplices, though no additional arrests have been announced.

Trump, now in his second term, referenced the incident frequently during 2025 campaign-style rallies, using it to rally supporters and criticize opponents. The former president issued a statement after the sentencing: “Justice has been served, but we must remain vigilant. The radical left’s hatred will not stop us from Making America Great Again.”

For the families of the Secret Service agents and golf course staff who faced direct danger, Thursday’s life sentence brought a measure of closure. One agent, speaking anonymously, told reporters outside the courthouse: “We signed up to protect, not to be targets. Today the system worked.”

Routh was immediately remanded to federal custody and is expected to be transferred to a high-security facility within weeks. His attorneys have indicated they will not appeal the sentence.

Pizza Hut will close about 250 locations in the U.S. through June as its parent company, Yum! Brands, moves to shut underperforming stores and reassess the brand’s long-term strategy, executives said.

Yum! Brands Chief Financial Officer Ranjith Roy said during an earnings call that the closures will primarily target weaker-performing Pizza Hut restaurants as part of a broader effort to modernize the chain.

The closures are tied to the company’s “Hut Forward” initiative aimed at refreshing Pizza Hut’s marketing, updating its restaurant model and improving franchise performance. Yum! said it is also reviewing broader strategic options for Pizza Hut, signaling the changes could be part of a deeper reset for the brand.

The closures will affect “underperforming” Pizza Hut restaurants. (Michael Nagle/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

BAHAMA BREEZE TO CLOSE ALL ITS RESTAURANTS

The pullback comes as Pizza Hut continues to struggle in the U.S., even as other Yum! Brands post strong results. Pizza Hut’s domestic same-store sales declined, while Taco Bell and KFC delivered solid growth and expanded their footprints.

Despite the U.S. closures, Yum! said that Pizza Hut is still growing internationally. The chain opened more than 440 gross new locations globally in the fourth quarter and nearly 1,200 restaurants in 2025 across 65 countries.

Yum! Brands said it will close about 250 locations. (Robert Gauthier/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images)

Yum! said the closures will be concentrated in the first half of the year, temporarily reducing Pizza Hut’s global store count before growth resumes later in 2026.

The closures are tied to the company’s “Hut Forward” initiative. (Klaudia Radecka/NurPhoto via Getty Images)

“To help set expectations on key Pizza Hut business metrics for 2026, from a unit standpoint, we expect strong gross openings globally, which are seasonally weighted toward the back half of the year,” Roy said.

CLICK HERE TO GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO

The moves come as Yum! reported strong earnings and raised its dividend, underscoring that the Pizza Hut closures reflect brand-specific challenges rather than broader weakness at the company.

In recent years, Invisalign has become one of the most sought-after orthodontic solutions in Singapore. With its clear aligners, discreet appearance, and modern treatment approach, Invisalign appeals to both working professionals and teenagers who want straighter teeth without traditional metal braces.

However, many patients are surprised when they start comparing prices and notice a significant variation in the Invisalign cost in Singapore between clinics.

Some dental practices quote prices that seem affordable, while others charge considerably more for what appears to be the same treatment. This disparity often leads to confusion and hesitation. Understanding why Invisalign pricing differs from clinic to clinic can help patients make informed decisions, avoid hidden costs, and select a provider that delivers both safety and results.

This article explores the real factors behind Invisalign pricing in Singapore, breaking down what you are truly paying for and why cheaper is not always better when it comes to orthodontic care.

Understanding Invisalign Treatment in Singapore

Invisalign is not a one-size-fits-all dental service. It is a customized orthodontic treatment that relies on advanced technology, clinical expertise, and ongoing patient monitoring. Each aligner is designed using digital scans of the patient’s teeth and adjusted gradually to guide tooth movement over time.

In Singapore, Invisalign treatments must be prescribed and supervised by licensed dental professionals. The process typically includes consultation, 3D imaging, treatment planning, aligner fabrication, and multiple follow-up visits. These elements directly influence the Invisalign cost in Singapore and explain why prices are not standardized across all clinics.

Key Factors That Influence Invisalign Cost in Singapore

Dentist’s Experience and Accreditation

One of the most significant pricing factors is the dentist’s level of training and experience with Invisalign. Dentists who have completed advanced Invisalign certifications or have treated a high volume of cases often charge more for their services. Their fees reflect not only technical expertise but also the ability to handle complex orthodontic issues effectively.

Experienced Invisalign providers typically offer more accurate treatment planning, reduced risk of complications, and better long-term outcomes. While less experienced clinics may offer lower prices, patients may face longer treatment times or additional corrective procedures.

Case Complexity and Treatment Duration

Not all Invisalign cases require the same level of correction. Minor spacing issues or mild crowding often fall under Invisalign Express or Lite plans, which cost less. In contrast, patients with severe crowding, bite misalignment, or jaw issues require comprehensive treatment plans involving more aligners and longer durations.

Complex cases demand more chair time, frequent monitoring, and potential refinements. These additional resources directly increase the Invisalign cost in Singapore for more advanced orthodontic needs.

Technology and Diagnostic Tools Used

Clinics that invest in modern dental technology often charge higher fees. Advanced tools such as iTero digital scanners, 3D treatment simulations, and AI-assisted treatment planning significantly enhance accuracy and comfort.

Traditional dental impressions can still be used, but they are less precise and may require adjustments later. Clinics offering state-of-the-art diagnostics often deliver smoother treatment experiences, fewer delays, and more predictable results, which justify the higher Invisalign cost in Singapore.

Clinic Location and Operating Costs

Location plays a subtle but important role in Invisalign pricing. Dental clinics located in central business districts or premium medical hubs often face higher rental, staffing, and operational costs. These overheads influence service pricing, including orthodontic treatments.

However, a higher price does not always equate to better care. Patients should assess the clinic’s credentials, technology, and treatment approach rather than focusing solely on location-based pricing differences.

What’s Included in the Treatment Package

One common reason for pricing discrepancies is what the quoted Invisalign fee actually includes. Some clinics advertise lower prices but exclude essential services that later increase the final cost.

A comprehensive Invisalign package may include:

• Initial consultation and digital scans
• Custom aligners and refinements
• Regular follow-up appointments
• Retainers after treatment completion

Clinics offering all-inclusive packages often appear more expensive upfront but may provide better overall value and cost transparency.

The Importance of Follow-Up Care and Monitoring

Invisalign treatment requires consistent monitoring to ensure teeth move as planned. Clinics that emphasize follow-up care often schedule regular reviews and make timely adjustments when needed.

Lower-cost clinics may reduce the number of included visits, which can compromise treatment quality. Adequate monitoring ensures safe tooth movement, reduces discomfort, and minimizes the risk of relapse, all of which are critical considerations when evaluating Invisalign cost in Singapore.

Invisalign vs Traditional Braces: Cost Perspective

While Invisalign generally costs more than conventional braces, many patients in Singapore consider it a worthwhile investment. Invisalign aligners are removable, easier to clean, and significantly less noticeable. These benefits often translate into improved oral hygiene and greater confidence during treatment.

From a cost perspective, Invisalign also reduces emergency visits associated with broken wires or brackets. Over time, this can offset part of the higher initial expense, especially for adults with busy schedules.

How to Choose the Right Invisalign Provider in Singapore

Selecting the right clinic involves more than comparing prices. Patients should prioritize clinical expertise, treatment transparency, and patient reviews. A reputable Invisalign provider will explain the treatment process clearly, discuss realistic outcomes, and provide a detailed cost breakdown.

Asking the right questions during consultation can reveal whether the quoted Invisalign cost in Singapore aligns with the quality of care offered. Trust and communication between patient and dentist are essential for successful orthodontic tre atment.

Invisalign Cost Transparency and Patient Expectations

Clear communication about pricing helps manage patient expectations and build trust. Clinics that explain why certain treatments cost more demonstrate professionalism and ethical practice.

Patients should be cautious of clinics that promise unusually low prices without discussing treatment complexity or long-term outcomes. Invisalign is a medical procedure, not a cosmetic shortcut, and quality care should always take priority.

Key Takeaways on Invisalign Cost in Singapore

Understanding the factors behind Invisalign pricing empowers patients to make informed decisions. The Invisalign cost in Singapore reflects a combination of professional expertise, technology, treatment complexity, and clinic standards.

Choosing a clinic based solely on price may lead to compromises in care quality. Patients who invest in experienced providers often benefit from smoother treatments, predictable outcomes, and long-term dental health.

In Singapore’s competitive dental landscape, trusted providers such as Nuffield Dental emphasize clinical excellence, transparent pricing, and patient-centered care, helping individuals achieve confident smiles with peace of mind.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

1. What is the average Invisalign cost in Singapore?

The Invisalign cost in Singapore typically ranges from SGD 4,500 to SGD 9,000, depending on case complexity, treatment duration, and clinic expertise.

2. Why is Invisalign more expensive at some clinics?

Higher prices often reflect advanced technology, experienced orthodontists, comprehensive treatment packages, and thorough follow-up care.

3. Does insurance cover Invisalign treatment in Singapore?

Most dental insurance plans in Singapore do not fully cover Invisalign, but some corporate or premium plans may offer partial orthodontic benefits.

4. Are cheaper Invisalign options safe?

Lower-cost Invisalign treatments can be safe if provided by licensed and experienced dentists. Patients should ensure the clinic includes proper monitoring and refinements.

5. How long does Invisalign treatment usually take?

Treatment duration varies, but most Invisalign cases in Singapore take between 12 to 24 months, depending on the severity of misalignment.

A prediction market company best known for allowing users to bet on world events is stepping into New York City’s food scene — if only briefly — with the launch of what it’s calling the city’s first-ever free grocery store.

Polymarket will be open for New Yorkers in Lower Manhattan starting at 12PM from Feb. 12 through Feb. 16, according to the NYC for Free website. It’s being described as the city’s first free grocery store, “fully stocked” and requiring no purchase.

Polymarket posted on X, Tuesday, that the idea took “months of planning.” In addition to paying for the lease, the company said it had donated $1 million to Food Bank For New York City to support “an organization that changes how our city responds to hunger.”

MYSTERY BETTOR WON $400K PREDICTING MADURO CAPTURE BEFORE U.S. FORCES MOVED IN: REPORT

Daily hours and the grocery store’s closing date are subject to change, according to the website.

An inside view of The Polymarket shows the variety of free food available. (Photo courtesy of Polymarket)

Photos on social media show the market offering a variety of food staples — from produce, milk, eggs and bread to brand-name snacks such as Pringles, Sour Patch Kids and Oreo cookies.

Polymarket did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment on why it is opening what it calls the city’s first free grocery store.

The store is located in downtown Manhattan.

The announcement comes just days after rival Kalshi made a similar move, when owner George Zoitas gave hundreds of shoppers at Westside Market in the East Village $50 each toward their groceries.

GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO BY CLICKING HERE

The bold marketing tactics by both Polymarket and Kalshi may be seen as a nod to New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s pledge to open government-run grocery stores. Mamdani told Fox News Digital during his campaign that it will be possible for a “partnership” between the city and grocery store and bodega owners, despite his plan to open five city-run stores.

Mamdani appeared to poke fun at the announcement in an X post on Wednesday afternoon, replying directly to Polymarket’s post with a photo of a satirical headline that read, “Heartbreaking: The worst person you know just made a great point.”

READ MORE FROM FOX BUSINESS

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.

Indian stocks, Desai argues in a strategy report, now offer an unusual mix of “inexpensive relative valuations, poor trailing performance, strong policy stimulus and a consequent growth upcycle, an undervalued currency, weak foreign positioning and potentially a new buyback cycle.”

The 12-month trailing performance is “the worst in history” even as relative valuations are “approaching previous troughs”, with foreign portfolio investor (FPI) positioning having weakened steadily over the past four years. “India could be a pain trade, which may just accelerate the returns on stocks,” the report notes, adding that an undervalued rupee and a friendlier tax regime are likely to trigger “more buybacks” and keep net equity supply modest.

On the macro front, Morgan Stanley sees “a sharp turn in earnings growth over the coming months” as India’s growth cycle accelerates on the back of a coordinated reflation effort by the Reserve Bank of India and the government. The report cites the combination of rate cuts, bank deregulation, liquidity infusion, continued capex, tax reductions and a “relatively stimulating budget” as evidence that “India’s hawkish macro set-up post-Covid is now unwinding.”

Trade deals and a thaw in relations with China are seen as additional tailwinds to growth and risk appetite.

Live Events

This macro backdrop feeds directly into the re-rating argument. Desai highlights that “the falling intensity of oil in GDP and rising share of exports in GDP, especially services, and fiscal consolidation imply a lower saving imbalance,” which in turn should allow “structurally lower real rates.”
At the same time, lower inflation volatility, driven by supply-side reforms and flexible inflation targeting, should mean “volatility in interest rates and growth rates is likely falling in coming years.” Morgan Stanley’s base case sets a December 2026 Sensex target of 95,000, implying upside of 13% and a trailing P/E of 23.5 times, above the 25-year average of 22 times, to reflect “greater confidence in the medium-term growth cycle in India, India’s lower beta, a higher terminal growth rate and a predictable policy environment.” The base case rests on continued gains in macro stability through fiscal consolidation, increased private investment and a sustained positive gap between real growth and real rates, alongside “robust domestic growth, steady global growth and benign oil prices.”

The bull case, with a 30% probability, pegs the Sensex at 107,000 by December 2026, assuming oil prices “persistently below US$60 per barrel”, successful reflation that lifts growth estimates, and a curtailment of the global trade war, with Sensex earnings compounding at 19% annually over FY25–28.

Also Read | Gold and silver ETFs crash up to 10% for the second day. What should investors do?

The bear case, assigned a 20% probability, takes the Sensex down to 76,000 if oil spikes above US$90 per barrel, the RBI is forced to tighten, global growth slows materially and the US slips into recession, with earnings growth moderating to 15% and equity multiples de-rating to reflect a weaker macro environment.

Underlying the optimism is a call that the earnings cycle is turning. The firm’s proprietary leading earnings indicator “is suggesting improving earnings growth”, while its composite valuation indicator, which blends 11 absolute and relative metrics, points to “equity returns of around 16% in the next 12 months.” Sensex earnings in the base case are projected to compound at 17% annually through FY28, with the top-down framework for the broader market showing EPS growth of 22% in FY26, 20% in FY27 and 17% in FY28.

Positioning and sentiment are the other key pillars of the re-rating thesis. India’s weight in global emerging market funds relative to its MSCI EM weight, and FPIs’ shareholding gap between the top 75 companies and the broader market, suggest “India could be the pain trade in 2026” if global investors are forced to add to underweight positions. Morgan Stanley’s proprietary sentiment indicator, which combines flows, volatility, trading activity and breadth, is firmly in the “buy zone”, indicating a contrarian opportunity.

Meanwhile, the real effective exchange rate is near multi-year lows, historically a supportive backdrop for equities, even if the past relationship with stocks has weakened.

The portfolio stance reflects a conviction that a macro trade is now unfolding. “Domestic cyclicals over defensives and external-facing sectors,” the report says, with an overweight stance on financials, consumer discretionary and industrials, and underweight calls on energy, materials, utilities and healthcare.

Within sectors, the strategists argue that rising credit growth and low credit costs, a recovery in urban consumption and robust government as well as private capex make a strong case for domestic cyclicals to lead, while defensives and global cyclicals lag.

Desai sums up the backdrop as one where Indian equities are backed by policy, earnings and positioning, but not yet fully priced for the improving structural story. With “high growth with low volatility” and a gradual shift in household balance sheets towards equities, Morgan Stanley sees the conditions in place for Indian stocks to “enjoy a rare combination” that, in its view, justifies a re-rating over the next couple of years.

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

It’s not the model. It’s not the team. It’s the unit economics.

Venture capital poured a record $202 billion into AI startups in 2025, capturing half of all global funding. Yet the math remains brutal: 90% of AI companies will fail, a rate significantly higher than the 70% seen in traditional tech startups. According to Alexander Kopylkov, a venture capital investor focused on long-term business fundamentals, this failure rate is not driven by lack of innovation, but by broken unit economics. “Everyone can build a demo,” he notes. “The survivors are the ones who can build a business.”

The Burn Problem

Many AI startups at Series A are burning $2 to $5 for every $1 of new revenue. This burn multiple, a metric popularized by investor David Sacks, has become the defining number VCs scrutinize in 2026.

For context, top-performing SaaS companies operate at burn multiples below 1.5x. The gold standard is 1x or below: spend a dollar, earn a dollar.

Kopylkov breaks it down into first principles: AI startups face a structural cost problem that traditional software companies don’t. “Where a SaaS company spends 15-20% of revenue on infrastructure, AI companies often start at 40-50%,” he explains. “That gap has to close, or the company dies.”

The infrastructure burden isn’t the only culprit. AI startups also face escalating talent costs, with machine learning engineers commanding salaries that dwarf traditional software roles. Add in the constant need to retrain models, maintain data pipelines, and keep pace with rapidly evolving foundation models, and the cost structure becomes punishing.

What the Survivors Look Like

Citing data from multiple VC surveys, Kopylkov notes that companies achieving sub-1.5x burn multiples share three characteristics: disciplined hiring, laser focus on product-market fit before scaling, and AI-enhanced operational efficiency.

The survivors also share something else: enterprise customers. Anthropic, one of the few AI companies demonstrating sustainable economics, generates 70-80% of its revenue from enterprise clients. Its annualized revenue run rate grew from $87 million in early 2024 to $7-9 billion by late 2025, not through hype, but through solving compliance and safety problems that large institutions will pay for.

Kopylkov emphasizes that enterprise focus isn’t just about bigger contracts. “Enterprise customers have longer sales cycles, but they also have lower churn, higher lifetime value, and more predictable revenue,” he says. “That predictability is what lets you plan, hire, and scale without gambling your runway.”

For founders, Kopylkov recommends a simple framework: Before raising your next round, answer three questions. Is your burn multiple under 2x? Do you have 18+ months of runway? Are your gross margins above 50%, or trending there fast?

If the answer to any of these is no, investors in 2026 will notice. The due diligence has gotten sharper, and the patience for aspirational projections has worn thin.

The Consolidation Is Coming

The era of experimentation is ending. According to a TechCrunch survey of 24 enterprise-focused VCs, 2026 is the year enterprises start consolidating AI investments and picking winners.

Andrew Ferguson of Databricks Ventures put it plainly: “Today, enterprises are testing multiple tools for a single-use case. As enterprises see real proof points from AI, they’ll cut out some of the experimentation budget, rationalize overlapping tools, and deploy that savings into the AI technologies that have delivered.”

In his view, this consolidation will accelerate through 2026 and into 2027. The startups that survive won’t be the ones with the best pitch decks. They’ll be the ones with the clearest ROI.

For Kopylkov, this winnowing is inevitable. “When every startup claims to be AI-powered, the label becomes meaningless,” he says. “Buyers are getting smarter. They’re asking harder questions about what’s actually under the hood and whether the product delivers measurable value. The companies that can’t answer those questions convincingly won’t make it to 2027.”

The Opportunity in the Wreckage

Despite the grim statistics, Kopylkov sees opportunity. The 90% failure rate isn’t a reason to avoid AI, it’s a filter.

“The companies that get through are battle-tested,” he says. “They’ve proven they can acquire customers efficiently, retain them, and improve margins over time. That’s exactly what you want to invest in.”

Kopylkov compares this shift to the dot-com era: plenty of destruction, but the survivors like Amazon, Google, and eBay went on to define the next two decades of technology. The pattern is familiar: irrational exuberance, painful correction, and then durable growth built on real fundamentals.

The difference in 2026 is that investors aren’t waiting for the crash to demand fundamentals. They’re demanding them now. The funding environment has shifted from “move fast and figure it out” to “show me the numbers.”

For Kopylkov, this is healthy. “Capital discipline forces founders to think like operators, not just visionaries,” he says. “The best companies emerging from this period will have both.”

“2026 is a fundamentals-first year where capital rewards revenue growth, efficiency, and real AI advantage—and punishes anything that is AI veneer on old ideas.”
— Anders Ranum, Partner, Sapphire Ventures

For founders building AI companies today, the message is clear: the hype got you in the door. The unit economics will determine whether you stay.