UNIQLO to Open First Bengaluru Store on August 29
Located in the heart of one of India's most vibrant and tech-driven cities, the 9,012 sq. ft. store will offer UNIQLO's signature LifeWear range for men, women, children, and babies. LifeWear features everyday essentials designed with Japanese precision—minimal, high-quality, functional apparel built for comfort, style, and seasonless wear.
Bestsellers like HEATTECH, AIRism, and PUFFTECH will be available, tailored for Bengaluru's dynamic climate and lifestyle. The store aims to cater to the city's growing young, professional, and fashion-forward population.
Kenji Inoue, CFO & COO of UNIQLO India, commented: 'We've seen growing love for the brand through our e-commerce platform in Bengaluru. This store launch brings us closer to our South Indian consumers with a full, immersive retail experience.'
This entry into Bengaluru marks a key chapter in UNIQLO India's retail journey, following its presence in Northern and Western India. More details on opening day offers and events will be revealed soon via the official UNIQLO India app and social media channels.
Stay tuned as Bengaluru gets ready to welcome UNIQLO's minimal, functional style—designed for everyday living.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
3 hours ago
- Mint
Tariff war delays Tata Steel UK breakeven, says CEO Narendran
Mumbai: Tata Steel's plans to turn around its loss-making UK operations have been delayed by at least six months due to global trade disruptions and the spillover effects of US tariffs, the company's top executives said in an interview. Despite the setback, the executives expressed confidence about the company's broader international strategy, including securing Dutch government support to decarbonize its Netherlands operations, and defended its capacity expansion plans in India amid global concerns of steel overcapacity. India's second-biggest steelmaker by capacity had earlier guided for an Ebitda (earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortization) breakeven in the UK by the end of the second quarter of FY26. The new target is the final quarter of this fiscal year. In its April-June quarter results announced on Thursday, Tata Steel reported that its UK operation's Ebitda loss narrowed to £41 million in the June quarter of this fiscal compared to £80 million reported in the last quarter of FY25. The company's chief executive officer T.V. Narendran said while there was a delay in achieving Ebitda breakeven due to the direct and indirect effects of the tariffs announced by US President Donald Trump, the company was moving in the right direction. 'Because of tariffs, our exports to the US (from the UK) are impacted," Narendran said. Even the company's customers like British carmakers were facing the heat from the tariffs, compounding the business impact for Tata Steel, he added. An influx of steel from other countries also made a difference. 'Japanese and Korean steel, which would have otherwise gone to the US, is looking for alternate markets. It came to the UK because the UK has not been as fast as the EU in setting tighter quotas for imports," the chief executive said. Chief financial officer Koushik Chatterjee added that the journey from Ebitda breakeven to net profit breakeven for Tata Steel UK would not take that long. 'The good thing is that there is no tax implication in the UK because we have a huge amount of unabsorbed tax losses. The asset value is low, so the depreciation is low and debt is mostly working capital," said Chatterjee. 'So once we get to Ebitda positive with sufficient cushion, it's not a big ask (to achieve net profit)," he said. Earlier this month, at the Tata Steel annual general meeting, Tata Sons chairman N. Chandrasekaran set a new goal of achieving net profit from the company's UK operations in the current fiscal year. 'I feel that the UK should be PAT (profit after tax) positive, so the company is working towards making it profitable," said Chandrasekaran, who echoed shareholder concerns. 'We expect the UK this year to perform much better than last year and it will definitely be Ebitda positive." Tata Steel shares closed 2.12% lower on Thursday on the BSE at ₹157.92, underperforming the benchmark Sensex, which fell 0.36% on the stock exchanges. The Netherlands' Scenario Meanwhile, the steelmaker said its negotiations with the Dutch government were progressing well for fiscal support to overhaul its steelmaking operations in the Netherlands towards more environmentally sustainable processes. It plans to replace two blast furnaces over the coming years with electric arc furnaces (EAFs)–like it did in the UK–to cut emissions. All stakeholders, including Tata Steel India, Tata Steel Netherlands, the Dutch government, and the local provincial government will soon sign a non-binding letter of intent. That will be followed by a binding agreement once the Netherlands elects a new government later this year. 'Even though the current Dutch government has fallen and elections are scheduled for October, our project is part of a Parliament-endorsed initiative. That allows us to continue negotiations and proceed with the non-binding agreement," said Chatterjee. The agreement on the blast furnaces involves two phases. During phase one, the company will install an EAF and then shut down one blast furnace. The second phase is planned for the mid-2030s when the remaining blast furnace will be shut. Blast furnaces are large units that use the heat from coke to convert iron ore into purified molten metal for further processing into steel. EAFs do this process using electricity without any coke, thus cutting emissions. India needs more capacity The oldest steelmaker in Asia responded to theNew York Times'claim that there was oversupply of steel in the world and that Tata Steel's operations were suffering due to this overcapacity. The two executives defended the company's strategy to expand capacity. 'The larger question isn't about overcapacity,"said Narendran. 'It's about where that capacity exists and whether it's in a competitive geography. For a country like India, which will consume 500 million tons of steel, should we really import 300 million tons from China? And what happens if China stops supplying tomorrow?" Steel is a strategic resource for national infrastructure, automotive, defence, and capital goods sectors, making self-sufficiency critical, Narendran pointed out. 'Even Europe, which was unsure about keeping its steel industry alive, now wants to retain capacity," he said. 'Every geography wants to ensure it can meet its own demand." The top executive questioned why high-cost steel producers like Japan and South Korea export significant volumes of steel despite lacking cost or raw material advantages. 'At least China offers cheap steel. But why should Japan or Korea be exporting steel when they're not low-cost producers?" he said. According to Chatterjee, overcapacity discussions, particularly by Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), often ignore ground realities. 'Europe and the US de-industrialized by outsourcing to China," he said. 'Now, with changing global priorities like supply chain security and carbon taxes, countries are reassessing. For India, with its abundant raw materials, skilled labour and growing infrastructure needs, not building capacity would be foolish." The issue of overcapacity exists in regions where it's no longer needed. Rationalizing it globally is the real issue. Steel should be produced where it's most competitive, said Chatterjee.
Mint
5 hours ago
- Mint
Japan's Dai-ichi Life Eyes M&A in Southeast Asia to Grow Abroad
Dai-ichi Life Holdings Inc. is considering mergers and acquisitions in Southeast Asia as part of its plan to expand overseas, eyeing a growing but increasingly crowded market. Japan's biggest listed life insurer is looking at the Philippines and Malaysia as emerging markets that offer business opportunities as more households ascend to middle class, said Brett Clark, Senior Managing Executive Officer in charge of the firm's Asia-Pacific region outside of Japan. Dai-ichi Life is also interested in expanding its customer base in Singapore, which has a lucrative market serving high net worth individuals but is also highly competitive, he said in an interview. 'The whole of Asia Pacific is a competitive market and so we're not complacent,' Clark said. 'We would prefer to avoid small and subscale positions in many markets and would rather have larger and scaled positions in fewer markets.' Major Japanese life insurers are seeking to expand profits from overseas operations, as a declining birth rate and an aging population in the home market limit potential for growth. But the biggest insurance markets in the US and Europe are already crowded, and competition is heating up in Asia, particularly in developed economies like Singapore. Sumitomo Life Insurance Co., for one, boosted its presence in the city state in a big way last year, making Singapore Life Holdings Pte a wholly owned subsidiary. Dai-ichi Life plans to generate about half of its group adjusted profit from overseas life insurance operations in the fiscal year ending March 2031, with half of that coming from the Asia-Pacific region outside of Japan. The firm aims to increase profit from the region to ¥1.5 trillion from ¥576 billion over the period. Group adjusted profit is used to calculate shareholder returns, adjusting net income for accounting gains and losses. 'If we could add an operating unit in Singapore or Malaysia or the Philippines, that would be ideal for us sometime over the next few years,' Clark said. Potential measures include investments in local insurers, and it's also considering asset management firms as M&A targets, he said. Dai-ichi Life already has operations in Australia, India, and some Southeast Asian markets including Vietnam. Clark, in fact, was an executive at Tower Australia Group Ltd. when Dai-ichi acquired it in 2011. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
Time of India
9 hours ago
- Time of India
Federal court question Trump's tariff authority; cites limit of emergency law, case likely headed to Supreme Court
Appellate judges question Trump's authority to impose tariffs (Image credits: AP) Appellate judges expressed skepticism Thursday over US President Donald Trump's legal rationale for imposing broad tariffs without congressional approval, raising doubts about his use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to justify the move. During a 99-minute hearing before the US court of appeals for the federal circuit, members of the 11-judge panel repeatedly challenged the Trump administration's unprecedented interpretation of the 1977 law, which allows the president to seize assets and block financial transactions during a national emergency. The law, originally signed by former President Jimmy Carter, makes no mention of tariffs. 'IEEPA doesn't even mention the word 'tariffs' anywhere,' said Circuit Judge Jimmie Reyna as quoted by AP. Attorney Brett Schumate, representing the Trump administration, acknowledged that 'no president has ever read IEEPA this way,' but argued that the country's trade deficit constituted a national emergency requiring such action. He insisted the law grants the president 'broad and flexible' authority in emergencies, but claimed Trump was not seeking 'unbounded authority.' Chief Circuit Judge Kimberly Moore questioned that logic. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like This Japanese AI invention allows you to speak 68 languages instantly. The idea? Genius. Enence 2.0 Undo 'If the president says there's a problem with our military readiness and he puts a 20% tax on coffee, that doesn't seem to necessarily deal with (it),' she said. Neal Katyal, attorney for the plaintiffs, called the administration's argument a 'breathtaking' overreach. 'It amounts to saying the president can do whatever he wants, whenever he wants, for as long as he wants, so long as he declares an emergency,' he said. No ruling was issued Thursday, but the case is widely expected to reach the US Supreme Court. The legal battle stems from Trump's so-called 'Liberation Day' tariffs imposed on April 2, which levied new duties on nearly all imports. The lawsuit does not challenge tariffs targeting China or those on steel, aluminum, and autos, many of which remain under former President Joe Biden. In May, a three-judge panel of the US court of international trade ruled that Trump exceeded his authority. The current appeal seeks to overturn that decision. Trump addressed the case on his Truth Social platform, posting: 'If our Country was not able to protect itself by using TARIFFS AGAINST TARIFFS, WE WOULD BE 'DEAD,' WITH NO CHANCE OF SURVIVAL OR SUCCESS.' The lawsuit is one of at least seven filed against Trump's tariff policies, with plaintiffs including 12 US states and several businesses, such as a wine importer and a plumbing supply company. Although the US Constitution gives Congress the power to impose tariffs, decades of delegation have allowed presidents increasing control over trade policy. Trump capitalised on this, raising the average US tariff to over 18%- the highest rate since 1934, according to Yale University's Budget Lab.
