Will Polston is an Essex-based business strategist and performance coach who works with ambitious entrepreneurs through one-to-one coaching, masterminds and events under his Evolution Institute banner.

A former broker, he won Business Enabler of the Year at the Business Champion Awards in 2023, the same year he published his book North Star Thinking, with a foreword by Dr John Demartini. He tells Business Matters why achievement and fulfilment are not the same thing, and why direction should come before speed.

What do you currently do at Evolution Institute?

The simplest way I describe what I do is that I help ambitious entrepreneurs unlock their next level of potential, performance and purpose.

I meet entrepreneurs who have created financial freedom but sacrificed their time freedom to get it. Others finally reach the revenue number they have been pursuing for years, only to realise it has not changed how they feel. Some have built companies that are so dependent on them personally that they have unintentionally become the constraint on the next stage of growth.

What I help them do is get clear on what they actually want their business and life to look like, understand what is stopping them from creating it, and align the two around what I call their North Star: their life mission, their definition of success, rather than one borrowed from somebody else.

Sometimes that involves mindset and behavioural change. Often, it means helping someone make the transition from constantly operating their business to designing a business that can function and grow without everything having to pass through them.

I have now spent more than 7,000 hours coaching one-to-one and worked with over 2,500 business owners through coaching, events and workshops. Alongside that, I am an author, speaker, entrepreneur, investor and NED across other businesses. In 2023 I was named Business Enabler of the Year at the Business Champion Awards. The thread running through everything I do is the same: helping people transform excuses into results and live a life they love.

What was the inspiration behind your business?

There is a belief at the centre of my story that I formed when I was around 10 years old: money equals happiness.

My dad worked in London, and I remember seeing him come home tired, stressed and unhappy. He eventually left that job intending to go into business with one of my uncles. When that business did not happen, I watched him become unhappy and withdrawn.

At the same time, I had two uncles who were financially successful. One was a millionaire and one was a billionaire, and both were comfortable and happy. The conclusion felt obvious: Dad does not have much money and is not happy; my uncles have money and are happy; therefore, money must be the thing that creates happiness.

I became incredibly driven to earn. I had multiple paper rounds, washed cars, bought and sold things at school and started working as a pot boy in a bar when I was 14.

Later, I moved into broking and began achieving many of the things I had assumed would make me happy. The problem was that I still did not feel fulfilled, and that was difficult to reconcile because the belief I had built my life around simply was not producing the outcome I expected.

In 2013 I attended a personal development seminar and had what I can only describe as an eye and heart-opening realisation. I called it my lightning moment. The thing that had affected me so deeply as a child was never really my dad’s financial situation. It was seeing somebody I loved not fulfil what I believed was his potential, and seeing the impact that had on him and on our family.

That realisation changed my direction completely. What began as a journey to understand myself gradually became my mission: helping people fulfil more of what they are capable of so they do not reach the end of their lives wondering what they might have done.

Who do you admire?

I have never really approached admiration by deciding there is one person I want to emulate completely. I am much more interested in asking: what is the specific quality, behaviour or way of thinking that I can learn from?

My Uncle Mark was one of my earliest influences. When I was young, he represented possibility.

Tony Robbins has influenced me significantly through his understanding of human behaviour and his ability to communicate ideas in a way that gets people to act. Dr John Demartini, who wrote the foreword to my book, has also had a profound impact on how I think about human behaviour, values and perception.

I might admire one person’s communication, another’s leadership or another’s generosity. That links closely to modelling, one of the NLP tools I have used for many years. Rather than thinking, “I want to become that person,” I think: what do they believe, think or do that creates a result I respect, and what can I learn from it?

Looking back, is there anything you would have done differently?

I have made bad decisions. There have been failures, businesses that have not gone the way I expected and periods when I pushed myself too hard. There are, though, a few things I would tell a younger version of myself.

The first is straightforward: save and invest at least 10 per cent of everything you earn from the beginning, and treat that money as capital rather than spending money.

The deeper lesson would be to understand much sooner that achievement and fulfilment are not the same thing. For a long time, I was moving extremely quickly towards a destination without ever really stopping to ask whether it was a destination I wanted. There is nothing inherently wrong with pursuing more money, a larger company or greater success. The danger is believing those things will finally make you enough, significant or happy.

I would still tell my younger self to be ambitious. I would simply tell him to get clear on the direction before pressing harder on the accelerator.

What defines your way of doing business?

For me, it comes back to alignment before acceleration.

We live in a business culture that celebrates “more”: more turnover, more customers, more employees, larger offices, higher valuations and faster growth. But more is only useful if it is taking you somewhere you want to go.

Before getting obsessed with scale, I want to understand what the business is actually meant to create for the person behind it. How much money do they truly want? How much time? When that is clear, you can start designing a business that supports it intentionally.

Another principle is personal responsibility. One phrase I come back to repeatedly is: excuses or results, you choose. It is about directing your effort towards what you can influence rather than handing your power over to what you cannot.

I am also far more interested in transformation than short-term motivation. The work that interests me is changing the thinking, identity, behaviour and structures underneath the result, so the change lasts.

Ultimately, I believe business should create value for customers, opportunity for the people within it, and a great life for the people who own it.

What advice would you give to someone starting out?

Do not repeat the mistake I made by unconsciously adopting somebody else’s idea of what success is supposed to look like. Before you become consumed with the question, “How do I build a successful business?”, ask yourself, “What do I want this business to make possible?”

Create a North Star that is larger than a turnover figure or exit valuation.

Then get incredibly close to the problem you want to solve. Talk to customers and listen to them properly. Find out what is frustrating them and what they will actually pay to solve.

I would also find mentors earlier. Look for people who have already produced the result you are trying to create and use that to shorten your own learning curve.

Be disciplined with cash. Learn how to sell. Do what you say you will do. Protect your reputation.

Above all, do not put your life on hold while waiting for the business to become “successful”. You can create something significant and still enjoy the process of creating it. By all means build a business you are proud of. Just make sure you are also creating a life you actually want to live and love.

This article was written by

Follow

Analyst’s Disclosure: I/we have a beneficial long position in the shares of PDD either through stock ownership, options, or other derivatives. 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.

March and April remain the months when many broadband and mobile contracts become more expensive. But while the increases are still happening, the way they are calculated has changed significantly.

Until recently, many of Britain’s largest telecoms providers linked annual increases to inflation, typically adding a further percentage on top. A contract might, for example, have increased each year by the Consumer Prices Index (CPI) plus 3.9%.

That made the eventual cost difficult to predict when customers signed up. Inflation would not be known until months or even years later, meaning someone entering an 18 or 24-month broadband contract could not know exactly what they would be paying towards the end of it.

Ofcom changed the rules from 17 January 2025. Providers can no longer include inflation-linked or percentage-based price rises in new contracts. Any increases written into a contract must instead be clearly stated in pounds and pence before the customer signs up, along with when they will take effect.

The annual price rise, however, has not disappeared.

Ofcom’s latest pricing analysis found that in-contract increases announced for fixed broadband customers in 2026 ranged from £2 to £4 per month.

That means a household paying £25 per month could see its broadband bill rise to £29 following a £4 increase. Over a full year, that is an additional £48.

The change has therefore made broadband price rises more predictable, but not necessarily insignificant.

It also creates an unusual effect for customers on cheaper broadband packages.

A fixed £3 monthly increase represents a 12% rise on a £25 tariff. The same £3 added to a £50 package represents a 6% increase.

In percentage terms, customers starting with some of the cheapest broadband deals can therefore experience the largest increases.

Tharindu Fernando, co-founder of Full Fibre Broadband Deals, which tracks pricing across the UK broadband market, says customers increasingly need to look beyond the headline price when assessing the cost of a new contract.

“A £3 monthly increase doesn’t sound particularly large when you’re signing up, but that’s another £36 a year. On a £25 broadband package, it represents a 12% increase,” Fernando says.

“The important number isn’t necessarily what the service costs in the first month. With 18 and 24-month contracts, it’s increasingly useful to look at what you’ll actually pay across the entire minimum term.”

The new system represents a fundamental change from the inflation-linked model.

Before the rules changed, a customer might have known the formula behind a future increase but not the actual amount. Under the new system, someone signing a contract should be able to see in advance what their monthly payment will become and when.

Ofcom introduced the rules after concluding that inflation-linked increases left consumers carrying financial risk they could neither predict nor easily understand.

The regulator has stopped short of controlling how large contractual increases can be. Providers remain free to set their prices, including scheduled increases, provided the amount and timing are clearly disclosed under the applicable rules.

There is also still a legacy of the old system.

Contracts signed before 17 January 2025 may contain inflation-linked or percentage-based increases. This meant some customers continued to face increases calculated under the previous model during 2026, while newer customers were already moving onto fixed pounds-and-pence increases.

The transition is gradually working its way through the market as older contracts expire.

The wider picture is also more complicated than annual increases alone suggest. Ofcom’s latest research found that prices for many faster broadband products have been falling in real terms, while customers who are out of contract can often make substantial savings by switching or agreeing a new deal.

Its 2026 analysis found that in-contract customers typically paid less than those who had fallen out of contract. For standalone broadband and common broadband bundles, average savings for customers who were in contract ranged from £7 to £9 per month.

That makes the annual spring increase only one part of what households actually pay.

A customer whose bill rises by £3 per month may still have a competitively priced contract. Someone whose monthly price has not recently increased could nevertheless be paying considerably more if their minimum term has ended and they have moved onto an out-of-contract rate.

For consumers, the new pricing rules at least make one part of the equation easier to understand.

The old question was how high inflation might be when the next annual increase arrived. Increasingly, the relevant numbers are already sitting in the contract.

As another March and April approach, Britain’s annual broadband price rise has not vanished. It has simply become easier to see coming.

London records the 9th-highest per-capita anti-ageing search intensity of any major UK city at 60.29 per 100,000 residents, while generating the highest absolute search volume in the country at 5,540 average monthly searches.

Cream and topical products account for 84.7% of London’s monthly anti-ageing searches, highlighting strong demand for targeted skincare.

Four individual search terms tie for the joint-highest volume in the city, each drawing 720 average monthly searches.

New research into Google search behaviour across 50 major UK cities, carried out by UK wellness brand Kollo Health, has identified London as the 9th-highest city in the country for per-capita anti-ageing search interest. With 60.29 searches per 100,000 residents, London outpaces 41 other cities analysed.

Despite that 9th-place ranking, London generates the highest absolute anti-ageing search volume of any city in the study at 5,540 average monthly searches, more than seven times the volume of the next-highest city, Birmingham, at 750. The gap reflects the effect of measuring per capita against London’s population of over 9.1 million: in raw terms its search volume dwarfs every other city, but once adjusted for population size, eight smaller cities record higher rates. The nearest city above London in the rankings is Birmingham at 8th with 62.53 per 100,000, just 3.7% higher than London’s rate.

Top 10 UK cities for anti-ageing search interest

Scarlett Gray, Registered Dietitian at Kollo Health, said: “London’s sheer volume of anti-ageing searches is unmatched by any other UK city. While the per-capita rate places it 9th, the scale of interest across a population of over nine million residents is remarkable. The data suggests that anti-ageing skincare is a mainstream concern for Londoners, with a clear demand for targeted products such as creams and eye treatments.”

The figures are drawn from Google Keyword Planner search data, normalised against 2026 population estimates from World Population Review; the full dataset is available for review.

Four of the world’s most important semiconductor companies, Nvidia, Samsung Electronics, SK Hynix and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, have each posted exceptional stock performance in 2026, fueled by surging demand tied to artificial intelligence infrastructure. Investors weighing which of the four to prioritize face a genuinely complex decision, since each company occupies a distinct position within the AI chip supply chain, carries a different valuation profile, and faces its own particular risks. This is not investment advice; it is a factual look at how the four companies compare, intended to help readers make their own informed decision.

Nvidia remains the dominant designer of graphics processing units used to train and run AI models, a position that has made it the most closely watched name in the sector. The company does not manufacture its own chips; as a fabless designer, it relies on TSMC to produce them. Nvidia has continued ramping production of its next-generation Vera Rubin AI platform and has announced collaborations with both TSMC on chip design and manufacturing and with SK Hynix on advanced AI memory. Analysts at Zacks Investment Research have noted that Nvidia faces increasing competition in AI accelerators and custom silicon, and its valuation reflects a premium tied to expectations of continued rapid growth, with analysts projecting a 52% jump in revenue and a 63% increase in earnings for the fiscal year that recently began. Nvidia’s stock has also shown more volatility than some of its peers this year, falling approximately 13.1% over one recent 30-day stretch even as the broader AI investment theme remained intact.

TSMC occupies a distinct and, according to several analysts, uniquely defensive position within the sector. As the world’s leading contract chip manufacturer, TSMC holds more than 60% of the global foundry market and leads in advanced process technology at 3-nanometer scale and below. Rather than depending on any single customer, TSMC manufactures chips for Nvidia, Apple, Broadcom, AMD, Qualcomm and numerous other companies, giving it a business model some analysts describe as more diversified and defensive than either a pure chip designer or a pure memory producer. TSMC has projected more than 30% revenue growth in 2026, with high-performance computing chips accounting for 61% of its first-quarter revenue. One analyst writing for 24/7 Wall St. argued that Taiwan Semiconductor “stands out as the best value because it’s got Nvidia’s business, custom silicon business, exposure to edge AI, physical AI, and, perhaps most importantly, it’s at the frontier of chip manufacturing,” while cautioning that a stumble at TSMC would ripple across the entire semiconductor sector given its central role in global chip production.

Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix, South Korea’s two dominant memory chip makers, have both posted extraordinary stock gains in 2026, driven primarily by their leadership in high-bandwidth memory, or HBM, chips essential to AI accelerators. SK Hynix shares have surged more than 200% year-to-date during some stretches in 2026, while Samsung has also posted triple-digit percentage gains over the same period, with both companies benefiting directly from what analysts have described as a memory chip “supercycle.” Memory prices were projected to rise a further 40% through the second quarter of 2026, according to Counterpoint Research. Ben Barringer, head of technology research at Quilter Cheviot, told CNBC that “the recent rally across the semiconductor space has been driven largely by the memory side of the market rather than logic chips,” underscoring how central Samsung and SK Hynix have become to this particular phase of the AI investment cycle.

Despite those dramatic gains, Samsung and SK Hynix have continued trading at notably lower valuations than either Nvidia or TSMC. Both companies carried forward price-to-earnings ratios below 6, compared with roughly 22 for Nvidia, even as Samsung and SK Hynix’s net profits were expected to grow by as much as 400% and nearly 300%, respectively, in 2026, far outpacing TSMC’s projected profit growth of around 50%. Christine Phillpotts, a portfolio manager for emerging market equities at Ariel Investments, told NAI 500 that “the ultimate point of debate is how quickly supply will increase to meet demand,” reflecting a broader market disagreement over whether the memory sector’s current strength represents a durable structural shift or a more traditional cyclical boom that could eventually reverse.

That valuation gap forms the core of the debate among analysts covering the sector. Some argue memory chip stocks deserve their lower valuations because memory earnings have historically proven more cyclical and volatile than logic chip businesses like Nvidia’s or TSMC’s. Others contend the current AI-driven demand cycle is fundamentally different from past memory cycles, arguing Samsung and SK Hynix’s low valuations relative to their earnings growth make them attractive on a pure value basis.

SK Hynix has also described its own strategic ambitions beyond simply supplying memory chips, stating on its website that it aims to evolve from a memory supplier into what it calls a “Full Stack AI Memory Creator,” positioning itself as a co-designer and ecosystem partner working directly alongside AI computing customers rather than purely as a component vendor.

Ultimately, each of the four companies offers a different risk and reward profile. Nvidia offers direct exposure to AI chip design leadership but carries a premium valuation and faces rising competition. TSMC offers diversified exposure across nearly every major AI chip designer with what several analysts consider a more defensive business model, albeit also at a valuation premium relative to memory peers. Samsung and SK Hynix offer direct exposure to the memory supercycle at considerably lower valuations, paired with the historically greater cyclicality that has characterized the memory chip business over past decades. Given these differing profiles, individual investors are encouraged to weigh their own risk tolerance, time horizon and portfolio diversification needs, and to consult a qualified financial advisor, rather than relying on any single comparison to determine which of these four companies best fits their specific investment goals.

Alabama teenagers using TikTok will soon face two-hour daily limits, overnight curfews and an end to the app’s customized “For You” page after the social media giant reached a $100 million settlement with the state.

TikTok reached the first-of-its-kind settlement just days before the lawsuit was scheduled to go to trial. Rather than imposing only financial penalties, the agreement requires the company to overhaul several of its core features for minors.

“TikTok has agreed to give parents real control over what their kids see and how much time they spend on the app,” Republican Attorney General Steve Marshall said in a statement. “We’ve said from day one that our number one goal was to stand up for Alabamians when they are being harmed, and today, we did exactly that.”

FLORIDA SUES NETFLIX, ALLEGES STREAMER TRACKED CHILDREN AFTER PROMISING FAMILIES PRIVACY

TikTok said the settlement reflects its ongoing efforts to improve safety features for teens.

“TikTok’s priority has always been fostering a safe and positive space where people can be creative, discover what they love, and connect with their community,” a TikTok USDS Joint Venture spokesperson said. “This builds on our commitment and core objective to continually enhance our robust safety tools to protect teens.”

Marshall filed the lawsuit against TikTok in April 2025, alleging the company intentionally designed the app to keep children scrolling while misleading parents about its safety features and the risks it posed to minors.

The lawsuit alleged TikTok’s recommendation algorithm exposed children to content involving self-harm, eating disorders, suicide, drugs and sexually explicit material, while overstating the effectiveness of tools such as Restricted Mode and age-verification features.

Within 45 days, TikTok must implement sweeping changes to how minors use the app. Among the most significant is disabling the personalized “For You” page for children. The algorithm-driven feed, which recommends videos based on a user’s viewing habits, is widely considered the centerpiece of TikTok’s engagement strategy.

The TikTok app logo is shown on an iPhone on Friday, Jan. 17, 2025, in Houston.  (AP Photo/Ashley Landis / AP Newsroom)

The agreement also imposes two-hour daily limits, overnight curfews, mandatory “productive pauses” after 15 minutes of continuous use and then another pause at 60 and 90 minutes, bans cosmetic filters for children, strengthens age-verification measures and adds new safeguards limiting interactions between teen and adult accounts.

FEDERAL EMPLOYEES CAN DOWNLOAD TIKTOK ON GOVERNMENT DEVICES AFTER BYTEDANCE’S DIVESTITURE, DOJ SAYS

The changes are intended to curb addictive use among minors and strengthen protections for young users. If TikTok fails to comply with the settlement, the company could face an additional $300 million penalty.

The website for ByteDance Ltd.’s TikTok app is displayed on a smartphone in an arranged photograph in Beijing, China, on Wednesday, Sept. 2, 2020. (Photographer: Yan Cong/Bloomberg via Getty Images / Getty Images)

The settlement marks the latest setback for TikTok, which has faced bipartisan scrutiny in Washington for years. Although the social media platform avoided a nationwide U.S. ban earlier this year after its Chinese parent company agreed to divest control of its American operations, it continues to face lawsuits and ongoing questions over children’s safety and date privacy.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

In August, TikTok reached a $400 million settlement with the Justice Department over allegations that it violated children’s privacy laws and failed to adequately protect young users.

Fox News Digital reached out to TikTok for comment.

A recall has been issued for raw milk cheese after more than a dozen people were sickened with E. coli across several states.

The recalled products include Sierra Nevada Graziers grass-fed raw milk cheeses: medium cheddar, sharp cheddar, jalapeño jack, and Monterey jack sold at retail in 8-oz or 16-oz packages.

A total of 13 people have been sickened so far, including eight hospitalizations. The last onset of symptoms was on Aug. 26.

MORE THAN 12,000 POUNDS OF BACON RECALLED AFTER USDA ISSUES HIGHEST-RISK ALERT

Recalled cheese packages are shown. (FDA / Unknown)

“The FDA and CDC, in collaboration with state and local partners, are investigating a multistate outbreak of E. coli O26:H11 infections linked to Sierra Nevada Graziers grass-fed raw milk cheese,” the U.S. Food and Drug Administration said in a release. “FDA’s investigation is ongoing.”

When public health officials interviewed nine of those sickened, they all said they had eaten Sierra Nevada Graziers grass-fed raw milk cheese within the last week.

FDA WIDENS CYCLOSPORA OUTBREAK INVESTIGATION TO SIX MORE STATES AS CONFIRMED CASES TOP 6,000

The Sierra Nevada Cheese Company, LCC voluntarily issued the recall and is working with the FDA.

Three people were sickened in California and Nevada and one in Oregon, Utah, Colorado, Michigan, Kentucky, Tennessee and Georgia.

CYCLOSPORA OUTBREAK: IS IT STILL SAFE TO EAT AT RESTAURANTS? HERE’S WHAT TO KNOW

“Do not eat, sell, or serve recalled Sierra Nevada Graziers grass-fed raw milk cheeses,” the FDA said.

An E. coli case map. (FDA / Unknown)

It added, “This product has a long shelf life. Check your refrigerators and freezers for the recalled raw milk cheeses and throw them away. If you refrigerated or froze cheese without the original packaging and can’t tell if it’s part of the recall, throw it away.”

WHITE HOUSE ADDRESSES GROWING PARASITE OUTBREAK AFTER MORE THAN 400 AMERICANS SICKENED

The FDA is still investigating the source of the contamination, and to see if there are any other affected products.

Consumers who purchased the cheese should not only throw it away or return it for a refund, but also carefully sanitize any surfaces or containers the cheese touched.

MYSTERY PARASITE LEAVES AMERICANS BATTLING ‘EXPLOSIVE’ ILLNESS AS CDC INVESTIGATES

Number of Gram-negative Escherichia coli bacteria of the strain O157:H7, revealed in the 6836x magnified scanning electron microscopic (SEM) image, 2006. Image courtesy Centers for Disease Control (CDC) / National Escherichia, Shigella, Vibrio Refere (Smith Collection/Gado/Getty Images / Getty Images)

E. coli symptoms can start as late as nine days after eating the contaminated food and include severe stomach cramps, diarrhea, fever, and nausea.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

In severe cases, it can cause life-threatening conditions like chronic kidney disease, kidney failure and high blood pressure.