UK's Senior reports 10% rise in profit on civil aerospace and defence demand
Rising air travel demand, driven by growing disposable income along with increased defence spending amid heightened geopolitical tensions, has benefited firms like Senior, a key supplier to Boeing (BA.N), opens new tab and Airbus (AIR.PA), opens new tab.
The company reported an adjusted operating profit of 31.2 million pounds ($265,760.00) for the half-year ended June 30, compared with 28.3 million pounds a year ago.
Senior reiterated its expectations for 2025 and said trading had been in line with expectation.
($1 = 0.7526 pounds)
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scottish Sun
9 minutes ago
- Scottish Sun
Brit holiday pub locked in legal battle with Wetherspoons because of its jokey name WeatherSPAINS
The owners are determined to fight on PUB WAR Brit holiday pub locked in legal battle with Wetherspoons because of its jokey name WeatherSPAINS Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) A BRIT holiday pub is facing legal action from Wetherspoons over its jokey name WEATHERSPAINS. But the landlord of the popular Costa del Sol boozer has vowed to fight the pub goliath. Sign up for Scottish Sun newsletter Sign up 6 Andy Inman, 61, co-owns Weatherspains with his partner Mayka Sanchez Credit: Solarpix 6 Part of the pub's sign has now been covered as a precautionary measure Credit: Solarpix 6 The establishment has been running for seven years without issue Credit: Solarpix Andy Inman, 61, who co-owns Weatherspains in Benalmadena with Spanish partner Mayka Sanchez, 51, says J D Wetherspoons has accused them of breaching European copyright law. The British pub chain has even asked a Spanish judge to prevent Weatherspains from trading under its name and threatened to launch a full-on legal battle. Andy and Mayka, who have run the popular boozer without issue for seven years, have now been forced to cover up part of the sign outside until the dispute is resolved. But speaking to The Sun from their pub overlooking the Med, Newcastle-born Andy vowed to fight on. He said: 'We've dealt with everything Wetherspoons have thrown at us and won't give up.' While Malaga-born Mayka, raged: 'We have to defend ourselves from what Wetherspoons are saying. 'I own the Weatherspains brand and the trademark is registered here and in Europe and we have no intention of changing the name. 'I'm confident the judge will not agree with the British pub chain's demands and stop us calling ourselves something we've copyrighted. 'And if this does go to a full lawsuit we've done our homework and we're ready for the fight.' Andy said the spat began last August when a man came into their bar claiming to rep Spoons. 'He left me a warning letter claiming we were infringing their trademarks and giving us a September deadline to rename the bar,' he said. I went to the UK's biggest Wetherspoons with rooftop bar overlooking the beach 'He didn't leave a business card and the deadline came and went and nothing happened. 'When he came back in January Makya got our lawyers to talk to Wetherspoons and they've ended up hiring a Spanish law firm to launch the legal action they've decided to pursue.' The name above the door currently says just 'Spains' and the couple has suspended the boozer's Facebook account and tweaked the pub menu. 6 Owner Andy confirms the bar has not undergone a name change Credit: Solarpix 6 It's door just currently says 'Spains' Credit: Solarpix British tourists and expats who wash down (EUROS 12.50) £11 home-made chicken curries with (EUROS 3.50) £3 large glasses of sangria are now given menus that say 'The Weather of Spain' at the top. When approached by The Sun, J D Wetherspoons, which has over 800 UK pubs, claimed the dispute had been resolved after the owners of Weatherspains had agreed to permanently change the bar's name. But Newcastle-born Andy, 61, who ran an asbestos firm in the UK before moving to Spain 17 years ago, says that's just not true. In a statement J D Wetherspoons said: 'Wetherspoon is a registered trademark in the UK, EU and nine other countries, which prevents the use of identical or similar trade marks in these territories. 'A pub in Benalmadena, a popular holiday destination with British tourists, was trading under the name Weatherspains. 'J D Wetherspoon attempted to engage with the establishment on several occasions to request a change of name, prior to legal action being taken. 'The bar has since changed its name to The Weather of Spain, which brings this matter to a satisfactory conclusion.' But Andy fumed: 'It's not true that we haven't engaged with Wetherspoons. I covered up the 'Weather' part of Weatherspains on the sign outside the bar on Monday, but it's just a precaution. 'To be honest most customers haven't even picked up on it and I tell the ones that do that it's down to an electrical fault.' Sean Lolan, 52, from Bath, a regular who owns a nearby bar, said: 'It's a big fish trying to swallow a small fish. And for what reason? 6 Sean Lolan, 52, is a regular customer and supporter of Weatherspains Credit: Solarpix 'If Wetherspoons felt they had a good market here in Spain they would have gone for it. 'The name of this bar represents the country it's in. It's 'Weather' not ' Wether' and it's in Spain. 'Andy's a lovely guy who's helped me a lot with my business.' Holidaymaker Susan Black, 50, from Irvine in Scotland, said: 'The terrace of our Wetherspoons back home overlooks an Asda car park so the sea view from here is a lot nicer. 'I think Weatherspains is a clever play on words but that's all I see it as.' But tourist Athon Dorran, 18, moaned: 'I was hoping to get a venom cocktail like the one Wetherspoons do back home which has got vodka, Southern Comfort, Blue WKD and orange juice in it, but sadly they don't do them here."
The Guardian
10 minutes ago
- The Guardian
The Guardian view on water boss's undisclosed bonus: Labour won't fix a system it won't confront
Despite the noise around England's sewage scandal, the political response so far has mostly generated headlines, not real consequences. Ministers performatively 'rage' about polluting water companies. Regulators are rejigged. Laws are passed. Yet little actually changes. The latest manoeuvre by Yorkshire Water is a case in point – and a revealing one. In March, the company was ordered to pay £40m for the 'unacceptable impact' of sewage spills blamed on poor maintenance. It was one of six firms caught by Labour's new bonus ban for the most serious polluters, passed under the Water (Special Measures) Act earlier this year. But the company confirmed to the Guardian that its chief executive, Nicola Shaw, received an additional £660,000 for 'investor-related' work last year – on top of her £689,000 take home pay. The money did not come from Yorkshire Water directly, but from Kelda Holdings, the firm's offshore parent. Using complex corporate structures to sidestep regulatory scrutiny is not a new trick. Many water companies are structured to allow financial engineering to take place at one remove from the regulated business. But Yorkshire's executive reward scheme reveals something important about the nature of the bonus ban itself: its design left scope for avoidance. If companies can reclassify pay or shift it between entities, enforcement becomes a matter of interpretation. Ministers say they are 'aware' of the payments and Ofwat is 'assessing' them. But this is a now-familiar Whitehall formulation – passive, conditional and hollow. The environment secretary, Steve Reed, appears to have a habit of making threats he doesn't back up. When Southern Water, also under the bonus ban, nearly doubled the pay package awarded to its CEO to £1.4m, Mr Reed's response was to urge him to turn it down. No ministerial direction to investigate. No legal challenge or legislative amendment. Just a suggestion. Why the timidity? Because Labour's tough talk on water is just words. It won't touch the system that enables this behaviour, and ministers bend over backwards to reassure markets they never will. The Treasury wants Thames Water kept private – warning Mr Reed a £4bn rescue through nationalisation would gut his entire budget. No wonder he keeps shroud-waving about the cost of public ownership The government seems dazzled by private providers. Regulators are being asked to offer 'forbearance', as Mr Reed's Independent Water Commission suggested. No doubt they had in mind Thames Water, which is facing an estimated £1bn in Ofwat performance penalties. The logic seems to be that enforcement risks spooking the investors needed to fund long-overdue infrastructure upgrades. But this reveals the real problem. England's water system has been financialised to the point of dysfunction. Layered holding companies, offshore entities and opaque capital structures mean regulators are chasing shadows. Attempts to govern via gesture – bonus bans, naming and shaming – are no substitute for structural reform. Most countries retain public ownership, recognising water as a public good, not a commodity. The idea that better people could fix the system is a fantasy – decades of extraction, debt-loading and dividend grabs show the model itself is broken. If Labour truly wants to clean up the nation's waterways, it must confront a hard truth: the incentives of private capital and the obligations of public interest, health and accountability do not align. Until then, expect more sewage, more euphemisms and more payments that defy the spirit – if not always the letter – of the law. Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.
Telegraph
10 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Judge to decide fate of River Island after landlord rebellion
A High Court judge is set to decide the fate of River Island this week after the retailer's radical rescue plan failed to secure sufficient support from landlords and lenders. River Island is seeking to close 33 stores, cut rents on a further 71 shops and write off a series of debts, including business rates to councils, to get itself out of severe financial distress. The retailer has warned it will essentially run out of money by the end of the month if unable to back out of those payments, as previously revealed by The Telegraph. Around 80pc of River Island's creditors by value chose to support its plan, drawn up by advisers at PwC, during a vote held last Friday. It needed approval from at least three quarters of creditors to unlock an emergency loan from its own founders, the billionaire Lewis family. However, the company did not secure 75pc of the vote in every individual class of creditor, with some landlords resisting the plans. There are 10 creditor categories, ranging from councils owed business rates to landlords. Store owners include British Land, the Crown Estate and Mike Ashley's Frasers Group. Of the stores that River Island is not proposing to close, the company is aiming for three-year rent cuts of between 75pc and 25pc. The owners of 24 shops are asked to accept zero rental payments. The plan will be put before the High Court on Thursday for a formal decision on whether to approve the restructuring. A spokesman for River Island said: 'River Island circulated its proposals for a restructuring plan to creditors on June 20. In combination with the company's ongoing transformation strategy, the plan is a proactive measure to place the company on a firm footing. 'We have been having positive conversations with key stakeholders and are confident that we will achieve approval of the plan in the coming days.' River Island employs 5,300 staff in its stores and another 950 at its headquarters in Hanger Lane, West London. It blamed its liquidity crisis on 'a sharp rise in the cost of doing business over the last few years' and the shift to online shopping, burdening it with 'a large portfolio of stores that is no longer aligned to our customers' needs'. Some landlords have expressed frustration at the fact that they face financial pain as a result of what they claim is the retailer's mismanagement. 'This is family-run, they've just overstretched, and it's unfair that the landlords will struggle because they haven't maintained their relevance,' one landlord, whose stores are unaffected, previously told The Telegraph.
