Business
Debt-laden SpiceJet’s Q4 FY24 net Profit increased Sixfold to Rs 119 Crore.
(VOR News) – SpiceJet achieved a net profit of Rs 119 crore for the fourth quarter concluded on March 31. The company made this announcement on Monday.
Compared to the Rs 17 crore it had registered for the same period last year, this amount signifies a six-fold rise. The airline declared that its profit for the reported quarter was 386 crore, up from the 344 crore it achieved for the fourth quarter of FY23, based on EBITDA.
The financially troubled airline released its third- and fourth-quarter fiscal year 2024 figures on Monday. As to the announcement, SpiceJet recorded a deficit of Rs 301.45 crore for the December quarter, in contrast to a profit of Rs 106.82 crore during the same time in FY23.
A regulatory filing states that the revenue from operations for the fourth quarter of fiscal year 24 was 1,719.37 crore, a 20% drop from the $2,144.85 crore of revenue for the same period in fiscal year 23.
SpiceJet recorded a post-tax loss of Rs 409 crore for the fiscal year that ended on March 31, 2024, as opposed to the net loss of Rs 1,503 crore that it reported for the fiscal year that ended on March 31, 2023. This decline is a noteworthy fall of almost 73%.
The fourth quarter net profit for fiscal year 2024 jumped by a factor of six to 119 crore as compared to the same period in the previous fiscal year. We are happy to share this outcome.
Ajay Singh, Chairman and Managing Director of SpiceJet, said, “The results are a reflection of our unrelenting efforts to improve operational efficiency and our dedication to reversing the firm’s fortunes.”
In January of this year, SpiceJet received in-principle clearance from the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) for a fund infusion of 2,242 crores of Indian rupees.
SpiceJet also raised 1,060 crores in two tranches using preferential issuance.
We firmly think that SpiceJet is in a wonderful position to soar to even higher heights in the upcoming fiscal quarters.
“As we move forward, we are investigating the possibility of acquiring new funds in order to further strengthen our expansion strategies and capitalize on the growing demand in the Indian aviation market,” stated Singh.
The airline, whose financial issues with its former promoter and aircraft lessors have often put it in the news, declared that it has reached a settlement agreement with Export Development Canada (EDC) for $22.5 million to settle $90.8 million (INR 755 crore) in liabilities.
We were said to have settled liabilities totaling more than fifty million dollars with a number of lessors.
In compliance with Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, several lessors of engines and aircraft have filed applications claiming that they were unable to make payments.
The airline has said that the amounts being sought are not debts and that it is embroiled in several disputes on the matter.
Therefore, SpiceJet is preventing these problems from occurring.
“The management is of the opinion that there are SpiceJet fair chances of having a favorable outcome for the company,” it said.
“This conclusion is based on the review of applications that have been submitted as well as the legal interpretation of the law, which is supported by the opinions of legal representatives.”
As on December 31, 2023, the company’s net loss (after comprehensive income) for the quarter and nine months that ended on that date was Rs 300 crore and Rs 523 crore, respectively. Furthermore, the company had a negative net worth of Rs 3,322 crore and negative retained earnings of Rs 7,939 crore as of that date.
“Adjustments on account of implementation of Ind AS 116, adverse foreign exchange rates, operational disruption during Covid 19, followed by sub-optimal operations due to liquidity constraints faced by the company,” stated SpiceJet. “These factors have been the primary drivers of losses over the course of the past few years.”
The statement went on to say that the company has chosen to defer payments to several different partners due to its current operating and financial circumstances.
SOURCE: TNIE
SEE ALSO:
BlackRock once Featured the Gunman who Shot Donald Trump.
The Credit Suisse Review criticizes SNB and Finma, as expressed by SZ.
Burberry’s stock plummeted 16% following a profit warning and CEO replacement.
Business
Internet Archive Loses Major Copyright Case Court Rejects Their Arguments
The Internet Archive has lost a critical legal battle, potentially affecting the future of internet history. Today, the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit decided against the long-running digital archive, affirming a previous decision in Hachette v. Internet Archive, which determined that one of the Internet Archive’s book digitization initiatives infringed copyright law.
Notably, the appeals court’s ruling rejects the Internet Archive’s argument that its lending practices were shielded by the fair use doctrine, which permits for copyright infringement in certain circumstances, calling it “unpersuasive.”
In March 2020, the Internet Archive, a San Francisco-based nonprofit, launched the National Emergency Library, or NEL. The epidemic had forced library closures that prevented students, scholars, and readers from accessing millions of books, and the Internet Archive has stated that it was answering to calls from common people and other librarians to assist individuals at home in obtaining the books they required.
The NEL was an extension of the Open Library, an ongoing digital lending experiment in which the Internet Archive scans physical copies of library books and allows individuals to borrow digital versions as if they were conventional reading material rather than e-books. The Open Library lent the books to one person at a time—but the NEL eliminated this ratio requirement, allowing a large number of people to borrow each scanned book at once.
Shortly after its inception, the NEL faced criticism, with some authors claiming that it amounted to piracy. In response, after two months, the Internet Archive abandoned its emergency strategy and imposed lending caps. But the harm had been done. Major publishing giants, including Hachette, HarperCollins, Penguin Random House, and Wiley, filed the complaint in June 2020.
In March 2023, the district court found in favour of the publishers. Judge John G. Koeltl determined that the Internet Archive had created “derivative works,” claiming that its copying and lending had “nothing transformative” to offer. Following the initial verdict in Hachette v. Internet Archive, the parties reached an agreement, the specifics of which have not been released; however, the archive has filed an appeal.
According to James Grimmelmann, a professor of digital and internet law at Cornell University, the ruling is “not terribly surprising” in light of recent court interpretations of fair use.
Internet Archive won the appeal
The Internet Archive won the appeal, but only narrowly. Although the Second Circuit upheld the district court’s first decision, it underlined that it did not regard the Internet Archive as a commercial business, emphasising that it was clearly a charitable organisation. Grimmelmann believes this is the appropriate decision: “I’m glad to see that the Second Circuit fixed that mistake.” (He joined an amicus brief in the appeal, saying that classifying the use as commercial was incorrect.)
“Today’s appellate decision upholds the rights of authors and publishers to license and be compensated for their books and other creative works, and reminds us in no uncertain terms that infringement is both costly and antithetical to the public interest,” Association of American Publishers president and CEO Maria A. Pallante said in a statement.
“If there was any doubt, the Court makes clear that under fair use jurisprudence there is nothing transformative about converting entire works into new formats without permission or appropriating the value of derivative works that are a key part of the author’s copyright bundle.”
In a statement, Internet Archive director of library services Chris Freeland expressed dismay with “today’s opinion about the Internet Archive’s digital lending of books that are electronically available elsewhere.” We are reviewing the court’s decision and will continue to defend libraries’ right to own, lend, and preserve books.
Dave Hansen, executive director of the Author’s Alliance, a nonprofit organisation that frequently advocates for increased digital access to books, also spoke out against the verdict. “The authors are researchers. “Authors read,” he says. “IA’s digital library assists authors in creating new works and encourages their desire to have their works read. This verdict may boost the bottom lines of the largest publishers and most well-known authors, but it will harm more people than it will help.
Difficult period for copyright law
The Internet Archive’s legal problems are not ended. In 2023, a collection of music labels, including Universal Music collection and Sony, sued the archive for copyright infringement on a music digitization project. That case is still working its way through the courts. The damages might total up to $400 million, posing an existential danger to the nonprofit.
The new ruling comes at a particularly difficult period for copyright law. There have been scores of copyright infringement cases filed against large AI businesses that provide generative AI tools in the last two years, and many of the defendants contend that the fair use doctrine protects their use of copyrighted data in AI training. Any big lawsuit in which judges reject fair use grounds is widely monitored.
It also comes at a time when the Internet Archive’s critical role in digital preservation is becoming increasingly apparent. The archive’s Wayback Machine, which catalogues website copies, has proven to be an invaluable resource for journalists, scholars, lawyers, and anybody interested in internet history. While there are other digital preservation programs, including national efforts by the US Library of Congress, there is nothing comparable available to the public.
Business
Hewlett Packard Won’t Drop Its UK $11 Billion Claim Against Tech Mogul Mike Lynch, Who Died When His Yacht Sank
LONDON — Hewlett Packard Enterprise announced Monday that it will not dismiss its U.K. claim for damages against the estate of British tech entrepreneur Mike Lynch, who died when his superyacht drowned last month.
In 2022, Britain’s High Court decided primarily to favor the US technology giant, which accused Lynch and his former finance director of fraud concerning its $11 billion acquisition of his software company Autonomy. Hewlett-Packard is seeking up to $4 billion in damages, and the judge is anticipated to make a ruling on the exact amount shortly.
AP News Image
Hewlett Packard Won’t Drop Its UK Claim Against Tech Mogul Mike Lynch, Who Died When His Yacht Sank
Mike perished when his yacht, the Bayesian, fell in a storm off Sicily on August 19. His widow, Angela Bacares, may now be liable for the damages.
Mike was acquitted in a separate US criminal trial of fraud and conspiracy in the agreement months before the sinking.
Hewlett Packard initially applauded its pricey 2011 acquisition of Lynch’s company but soon began to regret it. The corporation stated on Monday that it had “substantially succeeded” in its civil fraud allegations against Lynch and the former finance director, Sushovan Hussain.
“It is HPE’s intention to follow the proceedings through to their conclusion.”
However, the U.K. civil action judge has already concluded that the amount payable in damages will be “substantially less” than what the company is demanding.
The Lynch family’s spokesman declined to respond.
Mike and his daughter Hannah were among six passengers killed when the 56-meter (184-foot) luxury boat sank. One crew member, the boat’s chef, also perished, while 15 people escaped the accident. They gathered on the yacht to celebrate Lynch’s acquittal.
Hewlett Packard Won’t Drop Its UK Claim Against Tech Mogul Mike Lynch, Who Died When His Yacht Sank
Officials first reported that the boat was hit by a tornado over the water, known as a waterspout, but the weather phenomena was later identified as a downburst. Italian prosecutors are investigating the captain on possible accusations of manslaughter.
SOURCE | AP
Business
2024 | Elon Musk Hits Out At Judge Threatening To Suspend X In Brazil
Elon Musk has escalated his online attacks on a Supreme Court judge who has threatened to stop social media platform X in Brazil, labeling him “an evil dictator” in an ongoing battle between the two men.
Justice Alexandre de Moraes threatened to suspend X if Musk did not identify a new legal agent for the company in Brazil and pay any outstanding daily fines within 24 hours.
“Alexandre de Moraes is an evil dictator cosplaying as a judge,” the world’s richest person commented on X.
Elon Musk Hits Out At Judge Threatening To Suspend X In Brazil
Musk, who previously referred to de Moraes as “Darth Vader,” retweeted a statement from X’s Global Government Affairs team announcing that the judge’s “illegal demands and all related court filings” would be published in the coming days.
Brazil is a key market for social media networks. According to the Associated Press, around 40 million Brazilians, or roughly 18% of the population, use X at least once a month.
The trash-talking is the latest salvo in Musk’s spat with de Moraes, which revolves around free speech and alleged disinformation. X said earlier this month that it would suspend its business and lay off its employees in Brazil owing to what it described as “censorship orders” from the judge.
De Moraes had ordered the social media company to ban several X accounts he claimed were disseminating misinformation.
The most recent statement, signed by de Moraes, was also posted on the Supreme Court’s official X account, tagging both Musk and X’s Global Government Affairs account.
The Supreme Court statement was uploaded around 8:30 p.m. local time on Wednesday, giving Musk till Thursday evening local time to answer.
‘Censorship Orders’
On August 17, X issued a lengthy statement announcing that it would be forced to suspend operations and terminate employees in Brazil due to de Moraes’ “censorship orders.”
“Despite our numerous appeals to the Supreme Court not being heard, the Brazilian public not being informed about these orders and our Brazilian staff having no responsibility or control over whether content is blocked on our platform, Moraes has chosen to threaten our staff in Brazil rather than respect the law or due process,” according to the statement from X.
Elon Musk Hits Out At Judge Threatening To Suspend X In Brazil
“As a result, to ensure the safety of our employees, we have decided to close our activity in Brazil, effective immediately. The X service remains available to Brazilians. We are profoundly saddened to have been compelled to make this decision. Alexandre de Moraes is exclusively responsible.
“Due to demands by ‘Justice’ Alexandre [de Moraes] in Brazil that would require us to break (in secret) Brazilian, Argentinian, American and international law, X has no choice but to close our local operations in Brazil,” he said on X’s website.
SOURCE | AP
-
Business4 weeks ago
Are You A Cash App User? You May Be Eligible For A Piece Of This $15 Million Settlement
-
Celebrity4 weeks ago
Liza Minnelli Is ‘Mad As Hell’ And Writing New Memoir
-
Business4 weeks ago
Susan Wojcicki, Former YouTube CEO And Longtime Google Executive, Has Died At 56
-
Sports4 weeks ago
Lydia Ko Finally Gets Her Olympic Gold. It Puts Her Into The LPGA Hall Of Fame
-
News4 weeks ago
Travis Scott Is Arrested At A Paris Hotel After Altercation With A Security Guard, Prosecutors Say
-
Entertainment4 weeks ago
Samsung Is Recalling 1 Million Stoves To Prevent Pets From Setting Your Home On Fire