Latest news with #CondeNast
NDTV
23-05-2025
- Business
- NDTV
Failed Schengen Visa Dreams: Indians Lose Rs 136 Crores In 2024
Quick Read Summary is AI generated, newsroom reviewed. India ranks third in losses from Schengen visa rejections, with ₹136 crore lost in 2024 due to 1.65 lakh denied applications. The rejection rate is 15%, mainly by France. Increased fees and high rejections raise concerns for travel and tourism. India is third, among countries with the highest losses from Schengen visas. In 2024, there was a total financial loss of about ₹136 crore in non-refundable fees from over 1.65 lakh Schengen visa application rejections from India. The other two countries are Algeria and Turkey. The rejection rate stands at 15% per data from the European Commission. According to a report by Conde Nast, about 11.08 lakh Schengen visa applications have been lodged from India, of which 5.91 lakh were approved and 1.65 lakh were denied. Turkey, Morocco and China also add to the list of countries with a high rejection rate. The total number of rejected Schengen visa applications went past 17 lakhs in 2024. This generated €145 million (₹1,410 crore) in fees from unsuccessful applicants, of which Indians contributed €14 million (₹136.6 crore) to. Most of the Indian visas were rejected by France, which accounts for 31,314 applications. After this there are Switzerland, Germany, Spain and Netherlands which account for 26,126, 15,806, 15,150, 14,569 rejections respectively. Moreover, the application cost for Schengen visas have also been increased from €80 to €90, for Indian applicants aged 12 and above. Children below 12, students, representatives of non-profit organisations, and other special cases, have been exempt from the increased fee structure. The high rejection rate and financial losses have caused concern among travel agencies and travellers alike. In addition, this impacts tourism, businesses and academic opportunities between the countries too. It also highlights the need for clearer guidelines and more efficient application processes to facilitate travel between India and European countries
News18
23-05-2025
- Business
- News18
Indians Lost Rs 136 Crore On Failed Schengen Visa Applications In 2024: Report
More than 1.65 lakh Schengen visa applications from India were rejected in 2024, resulting in a financial loss of approximately Rs 136 crore due to non-refundable fees. With the average application fee at €85 (about Rs 8,270), India ranks third among countries with the highest monetary losses from rejected Schengen visa applications, surpassed only by Algeria and Turkey. A Conde Nast report stated that of the 11.08 lakh total Schengen visa applications submitted from India, 5.91 lakh were approved, while 1.65 lakh were declined. Data from the European Commission indicated that the rejection rate was close to 15 per cent.
Time of India
23-05-2025
- Business
- Time of India
Indians lost Rs 136 crore in failed Schengen visas, with over 1.65 lakh applications rejected in 2024
In 2024, over 1.65 lakh Schengen visa applications from India were rejected, leading to a total financial loss of approximately ₹136 crore in non-refundable fees. Each visa application cost an average of €85 (₹8,270), placing India third among countries with the highest losses from rejected Schengen visas. Only Algeria and Turkey recorded greater losses. According to a Conde Nast report, out of 11.08 lakh total Schengen visa applications lodged from India, 5.91 lakh were approved and 1.65 lakh were denied. The rejection rate stood at nearly 15%, according to data released by the European Commission. India shared the burden of high rejection numbers with Algeria, Turkey, Morocco, and China. The global total of rejected Schengen visa applications surpassed 17 lakh in 2024, generating €145 million (₹1,410 crore) in fees from unsuccessful applicants. Indian applicants contributed €14 million (₹136.6 crore) to this total. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Trade online with TMGM TMGM Sign Up The highest number of Indian visa rejections came from France, which alone denied 31,314 applications. This resulted in a monetary loss of about ₹25.8 crore for Indian applicants. Other countries contributing significantly to the rejection losses included: (Join our ETNRI WhatsApp channel for all the latest updates) Switzerland : 26,126 rejections, costing ₹21.6 crore Germany : 15,806 rejections, costing ₹13 crore Spain : 15,150 rejections, costing ₹12.5 crore Netherlands : 14,569 rejections, costing ₹12 crore The Schengen visa fee for Indian applicants aged 12 and above was increased mid-year from €80 to €90, averaging €85 for the year. This fee structure excludes certain categories such as children below 12, students, representatives of non-profit organizations, and other special cases. Applying this average fee across all Indian applicants, the country spent nearly ₹916 crore on Schengen visa fees in 2024. Live Events MORE STORIES FOR YOU ✕ Travellers on Schengen visas can add two more countries to their Europe itinerary from 2025 Travelling to Georgia? Indian passport holders to benefit from relaxed visa policies Indians can now apply for a multiple entry Schengen visa with longer validity « Back to recommendation stories I don't want to see these stories because They are not relevant to me They disrupt the reading flow Others SUBMIT The high rejection numbers and associated financial losses have raised concerns among travel agencies and frequent travelers. Visa refusals affect not only the applicants but also impact tourism, business exchanges, and academic opportunities between India and Schengen countries. The European Commission did not provide detailed demographic data on the rejected applications, but the volume and cost highlight the challenges Indian travelers face in securing Schengen visas. With more Indians seeking to visit Europe for tourism, education, and work, the visa approval process remains a critical area of focus.
New Statesman
21-05-2025
- Entertainment
- New Statesman
Gertrude Stein's quest for fame
Photo by Cecil Beaton / Conde Nast via Getty Images Gertrude Stein is, famously, one of those authors whose name is better known than her works. This was so during her lifetime, as the biographer Francesca Wade demonstrates in her readable and illuminating account of Stein's life and literary afterlife. Wade explores how we have come to perceive Stein, as a writer and as a character. And a 'character' she was: a self-created literary phenomenon, keen to have her name in the press and to have herself talked about, for good or ill. It was FR Leavis who made the comment that Edith Sitwell belonged 'to the history of publicity rather than poetry', and the same could have been said of Stein, her American contemporary and acquaintance. The story of her journey from her birth in 1874 to a cultured and wealthy middle-class émigré Jewish family in Pennsylvania to the Rue de Fleurus and the salons of turn-of-the-century Paris, and of her survival with her companion Alice B Toklas in France through two world wars, is gripping and full of surprises. Her friendships and quarrels with celebrities such as Hemingway, Picasso and Matisse have been well documented: less so her intrepid wartime adventures at the wheel of her Ford motor car, 'Auntie'; her love of a succession of dogs called Basket; and her brief flirtation after the Armistice with the notion of translating Pétain's speeches into English. One of the most curious features of Stein's career was her compulsion to keep, preserve and deposit every scrap of her own literary output, a habit which must have made the biographer's task both more arduous and, one hopes, ultimately more rewarding. Wade has examined on our behalf the vast archive Stein left, and untangles for us the complicated posthumous story of her acolytes, admirers, editors and bibliographers and their relationships with Toklas, the survivor: nearly half of the volume is devoted to what occurred after Stein's death at the age of 72 in July 1946. By the time we reach this point in the narrative, we have become familiar with and fond of Stein's eccentricities: her generosity and stubbornness and courage and wit and relentless self-promotion. Her earlier years, less well known by most of us, are recounted with insight: her studies at Radcliffe and Harvard; her developing understanding of her own sexuality, which she addressed in her early fiction; and her relationships with philosopher and psychologist William James, and her brother, the art collector and critic Leo (with whom she lived in Paris until they fell out – Stein's description of her estrangement from Leo is peculiarly and delightfully Steinian: 'Little by little we never met again'). The growth of her extraordinary self-confidence, and the style with which she expressed it, are carefully traced, and remain astonishing. She entitled herself, and she succeeded in living up to her own expectations of fame. However, all was not plain sailing in her drive for recognition. Although she was comfortably off financially, and lived a pleasantly independent rentier life, she longed to be a popular commercial success, and not surprisingly she found it very hard to find publishers to take her on. Her work was too difficult, too obscure, too provocative. She had many overtures but few offers. She found a home in little magazines such as Paris's surrealist journal transition, which welcomed experimental work, but she had to pay the costs of some of her publications. For example, in 1922 she forked out $2,500 to the Four Seas Company of Boston to take on her collection of 52 short pieces, Geography and Plays, for which she wrote her own autobiographical note praising her 'brilliant work' on the brain as a medical student and the 'profound influence of Cézanne' on her writing. This volume was greeted by what Wade describes as 'some of the most hostile reviews Stein ever received': the Baltimore Sun announced that 'Miss Stein applies cubism to defenceless prose', one critic described her work as '419 pages of drivel', and the New York Herald Tribune compared her to the emperor with no clothes. It was hard going, but she persevered unapologetically with her unique agenda, seeming to believe, as she bravely declared in The Autobiography of Alice B Toklas, that bad attention was better than no attention at all. She soldiered on, and her reputation grew, for both good and ill, and by 1926 she was sufficiently esteemed by academe to received dual invitations to lecture at both Oxford and Cambridge. She describes herself as having been intensely anxious and nervous before these performances, but she spoke to packed houses and received many questions and rapturous applause. She fielded the questions with wit, according to herself and others, and the events made her feel 'like a prima donna'. She was backed up, in Cambridge, by Harold Acton and the Sitwells. It is worth noting that her Cambridge lecture was two years ahead of Virginia Woolf's seminal 'A Room of One's Own', first delivered in 1928. At this period, the Woolfs were considering taking some of her work for the Hogarth Press: she had tried to persuade them to publish her immensely long and unwieldy novel The Making of Americans, but Virginia could not 'brisk [herself] up to deal with it'. But they did publish her lecture, 'Composition as Explanation', and the Sitwells gave a dinner for her in London where she met EM Forster. Stein conquered both Paris and London on her own terms. Nearly ten years later, in 1934, she conquered America. Returning to her native land for a lecture tour after an absence of decades, she was able to celebrate the success of what many consider her most readable work, The Autobiography of Alice B Toklas, published in 1933. She and Toklas were on the road (and in the air, as they took their first aeroplane) for seven months and took in 37 states. 'Gertrude Stein has arrived,' announced the ticker tape in New York to greet them. And arrived she had. They met many celebrities, including Eleanor Roosevelt, who invited her to tea in the White House. Stein enjoyed explaining her idiosyncratic prosody to her audiences, her love of long sentences and her antipathy to the 'servile comma', about which she is very funny. Her glory was compounded in the same year by the production of her opera Four Saints in Three Acts,with music by Virgil Thomson (with whom she had a characteristically turbulent friendship) and choreography by Frederick Ashton. It was 'a knockout and a wow', according to her most devoted admirer (and eventually her executor) Carl Van Vechten, and it transferred to Broadway, where 'it played for six weeks to sell-out houses, the longest run for an opera in the city's history'. It was quoted in the Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers movie Top Hat and in the Charlie Brown comic strip. The chronology of her American triumphs is a little confusing – but that is probably because so much was going on. She had at last achieved the fame for which she had always longed. The stories of Stein's professional success and the intimate details of her domestic and sexual life are equally interesting, and both are well told. But they do leave one with an important question: do they make her work any more readable, any more accessible? The oeuvre which she strove with such determination to see in print is certainly accessible now, in that you can buy (as I did) the Delphi edition of her Collected Works on Kindle for £2.99. Stein would surely have been delighted to have reached the mainstream via a new technology (even if the text of the Kindle edition raises its own problems, as one is often unable to decide whether certain eccentricities, such as the persistent spelling of words like 'roumanian' with a lower case 'r', are hers or the device's, which gives an added piquancy to the pursuit of Stein's genius). I failed to tackle The Making of Americans but reread the Autobiography and enjoyed some of her early and more conventional shorter pieces. Wade alerts us to the fact that Wars I Have Seen, including its portrayal of village life during wartime near the French-Swiss border, was in its day 'hugely successful', and it is indeed a relatively straightforward read, raising interesting questions about why Stein and Toklas were left unmolested by Pétain's anti-Semitic regime. Stein's politics were inconsistent, and she was on good terms with both collaborators and Resistance fighters: the story of the Vichy government official Bernard Faÿ and his putative protection of Stein and Toklas is particularly intriguing. Wade's biography is a fine introduction to the riches of Stein's formidable output, and an encouragement to those unfamiliar with this terrain to travel further. Much has been written about Stein from many critical and ideological viewpoints, and specialists will surely find statements here to correct or dispute, but for the general reader this is an incentive to read on and explore her world. Richard Ellman's masterly biography of James Joyce (of whose success Stein was jealous) has persuaded many readers to tackle Finnegans Wake, while Hugh Kenner's The Pound Era (1971) re-established the poet Ezra Pound as one of the great modernists. Leon Edel's The Life of Henry James is another notable marker. Biography can be the gateway to understanding and, more than that, to enjoyment. The Delphi modernists list now includes Carson McCullers, Dos Passos, Camus and Katherine Mansfield. Gertrude Stein is one of its boldest choices and, with Francesca Wade's guidance, should tempt more of us to get beyond a rose is a rose is a rose. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe Gertrude Stein: An Afterlife Francesca Wade Faber & Faber, 480pp, £20 Purchasing a book may earn the NS a commission from who support independent bookshops [See more: Edward St Aubyn's comedy of horrors] Related
Daily Mail
20-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Daily Mail
Meghan Markle stood back from royal duties while working as unpaid guest editor of notorious Vogue issue, according to royal expert
Meghan Markle 's notorious Vogue cover raised eyebrows for her 'snubbing' of the late Queen and apparent 'dig' at Kate Middleton. The Duchess of Sussex guest-edited the September 2019 Forces for Change issue of British Vogue which featured 15 'trailblazing change makers' on its cover. It became the fastest-selling issue in the magazine's 104-year history, selling out in ten days - but questions were raised over why the Duchess only carried out 22 royal engagements in the seven months she spent as an unpaid guest editor. Among the advocates featured on the cover were Greta Thunberg, Sinéad Burke, actors Gemma Chan and Jameela Jamil and then-New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern. But critics pointed out that the Queen was not among the 15 'women she admires' featured, and neither were nurses, doctors, lawyers and teachers. Ingrid Seward of Majesty magazine told the Sun: 'The Duchess of Sussex has done a huge favour for the House of Conde Nast and rather less for the House of Windsor'. In the book Battle of Brothers, royal author Robert Lacey wrote about the huge unpaid time commitment Meghan made to the magazine. He wrote: 'In the same seven months, January to July 2019, the Court Circular showed the Duchess of Sussex carrying out just 22 royal engagements, less than one per week - though this period did include Meghan's maternity leave, along with a three-day tour to Morocco with Harry. 'But why had this "powerhouse" recruit to the highest echelons of the House of Windsor spent seven months labouring so intensively on behalf of British Vogue - entirely unremunerated it must be emphasised again - while doing hardly any work at all for the British Royal Family?' Meghan was at bottom of royal family engagements list for 2020 while Princess Anne was the most active royal. Compared to Kate's performance in previous years when she took maternity leave, Meghan was left failing to live up to her example. In 2018, Kate, Duchess of Cambridge, took time away from royal duties while she took time off after the birth of her son, Prince Louis. According to the Court Circular, during 2018, the Duchess of Cambridge undertook 42 engagements, while Meghan Markle undertook 45 engagements. By comparison, according to the Court Circular, Meghan Markle undertook 28 engagements this year, meaning the Duchess of Cambridge took on an additional 14 engagements during the year she gave birth compared to her sister-in-law. This equates to an additional 50 percent on Meghan Markle's working commitments during 2019. Meghan recently revealed that she experienced postpartum preeclampsia after giving birth to one of her children. Compared to Kate's performance in previous years when she took maternity leave, Meghan - pictured in 2019 - was left failing to live up to her example At the time the magazine's then-editor-in-chief Edward Enninful (pictured in 2019) spoke of the Duchess of Sussex's decision to leave herself off the cover – unlike Kate when she appeared in the magazine in June 2016 At the time the magazine's then-editor-in-chief Edward Enninful spoke of the Duchess of Sussex's decision to leave herself off the cover – unlike Kate when she appeared in the magazine in June 2016. He said: 'From the very beginning, we talked about the cover - whether she would be on it or not. In the end, she felt that it would be in some ways a 'boastful' thing to do for this particular project. 'She wanted, instead, to focus on the women she admires.' Royal commentator Rob Jobson told Sky News Meghan's cover was 'right on and ticks all the boxes', but warned against getting involved in politics by asking the New Zealand Prime Minister to take part. He also commented on Meghan working on the guest edit while on maternity leave - when she did not meet the US President. He added: 'She picked a conversation she had with Michelle Obama, this was done while she was on maternity leave, but she wasn't around for when Donald Trump was here for the state visit. 'You have got to be quite careful, if you want a voice, that is great. That is perfect if you are not necessarily a member of the Royal Family. 'But, she has got to be very careful not to be partisan and I think that whilst you are using this for a force of good, you have just got to be a little bit careful on the politics side.' Lacey wrote: 'Many of the papers had identified Meghan's proclaimed refusal to be 'boastful' by appearing on the front of her issue as a not-so-sly put-down to Kate, whose face had featured on the cover of her own Vogue a few years earlier.' Kate starred on the cover of Vogue as part of a National Portrait Gallery Vogue exhibition for its centenary edition. Princess Diana featured on the cover three times, and Princess Anne also appeared in September 1971, May 1973 and November 1973. In the middle of Meghan's Vogue cover photo slots on was a mirror 'so the reader can see themselves among all these other forces for change.' Lacey added: 'Somehow, a mini-mirror of reflective silver foil would be duly printed on the cover of Meghan's feminist portrait gallery - and there would be a few small, scarecly conspicuous working photographs of Meghan inside the magazine. The magazine was awarded The Diversity Initiative of the Year PPA Award for its September Issue despite being criticised for multiple reasons - including for not including any white men on the cover. Meghan was the first person to guest edit the September issue – which is considered the magazine's most important issue of the year, according to Enninful. He said: 'To have the country's most influential beacon of change guest edit British Vogue at this time has been an honour, a pleasure and a wonderful surprise. 'As you will see from her selections throughout this magazine, she is also willing to wade into more complex and nuanced areas, whether they concern female empowerment, mental health, race or privilege.' The following year Enninful addressed criticism Meghan had received when she joined the Royal Family. He defended the Duchess, calling her a 'brave woman' and describing the treatment of her as 'very unfair' and 'harsh'. Meghan is pictured with Prince Archie in July 2019 Meghan Markle told photographer 'I want to see freckles' and gave 'clear instructions' for her 15 Vogue cover stars to look natural The photographer who captured portraits for Meghan Markle 's edition of Vogue has revealed the royal phoned him with 'clear instructions' for the magazine's 15 cover shots. Peter Lindbergh said Meghan phoned him on the morning of a photoshoot in New York, telling Vogue: 'My instructions from the Duchess were clear: 'I want to see freckles!'. Well, that was like running through open doors for me. I love freckles.' A close-up of model Adwoa Aboah on the cover, showing her freckled skin, proves the photographer followed Meghan's instructions to the letter. The photographer was personally chosen by the Duchess and editor-in-chief Edward Enninful, after he worked with Meghan for her 2016 Vanity Fair cover story, in which she spoke about her romance with Prince Harry for the first time. Enninful revealed that he and Meghan had 'exactly the same idea at exactly the same time' to select the German photographer to help create the cover of the September issue. The images were shot over three continents and several days in June, with separate shoots happening in New York, Sweden and London. It was shortly before the New York shoot that Meghan phoned Peter and explicitly told him she wanted to see 'freckles' in the photographs. He also revealed that 'natural' was a word that repeatedly came up in cover conversations, saying: 'I hate retouching, I hate makeup. I always say, 'Take the makeup off!' But he said he 'wouldn't just blame it on racism', adding: 'I think sometimes it takes a minute to understand the rules.' But the friendship between the former editor and Meghan came to an abrupt end. The Mail on Sunday recently reported that their friendship imploded during a disagreement over how Vogue planned to feature a glossy showcase of Meghan and Prince Harry's charitable work. The coverage, designed to tie in with Meghan's keynote appearance at the One Young World Summit in Manchester in September 2022, would have involved extensive features across the magazine and its digital editions. But Conde Nast insiders claim it was abruptly pulled and scrapped completely. A source said: 'The Duchess and her team had high expectations and were expecting she might get a print cover or at least a digital cover out of it, but Enninful was not able to meet those expectations. He already had a magazine cover in the bag for that month.' Shelving the project is said to have caused irreparable damage to their friendship. 'Edward was furious to have lost the project, as were the powers that be at Conde Nast,' a source told the MoS. 'The whole process became very difficult. Edward could only promise her a big showy feature inside the magazine and online – but she turned it down.' According to insiders, the project needed a full production team including photographers, videographers, stylists and editors to shoot exclusive images and film an in-depth video feature with the Sussexes. Sources claim that after Enninful explained he had another cover in mind, Meghan's team had asked if the couple could feature on Vogue's special digital cover instead, which is released alongside the print edition. But again, it is understood that Enninful declined. 'He didn't think it was appropriate to give her the cover,' the source explained. It was then that Meghan's team pulled the plug. Relations between the pair never recovered. Sources add that during the years that followed Enninful has increased his public involvement with the Royal Family and claim this is not something Meghan could easily overlook, particularly as he was initially supportive of her now-infamous 'Megxit' Oprah interview in 2021. Despite this Enninful attended King Charles's Coronation with American singer Katy Perry in May 2023. The Vogue issue undeniably had its successes - but the period of time during which Meghan was working with the magazine is now shrouded with controversy. Many of her decisions surrounding her 15 'changemakers' left a sour taste in some people's mouths - especially her decision not to include the Queen, somebody who seemingly helped Meghan adjust to new new royal life. Charles is pictured shaking hands with Enninful during The Sovereign's Creative Industries Garden Party at Buckingham Palace, on May 15, 2024 Enninful is launching a new 'magazine and platform' that is set to compete with former boss - and rumoured rival - Anna Wintour's Vogue. The two are pictured in November 2021 This uncomfortable feeling among royal observers was only worsened by Meghan's fallout with Enninful. This comes as it was reported earlier this month that Enninful is launching a new 'magazine and platform' that is set to compete with former boss - and rumoured rival - Anna Wintour's Vogue. Enninful, who was appointed fashion director of the edgy i-D magazine at just 18, announced his new venture on Instagram just two days after the Met Gala - unquestionably the most important night in fashion, which Wintour has presided over for three decades. In 2018, Vogue was forced to deny rumours that there was a 'growing rift' between Enninful and Wintour. It came after Enninful was said to have been left in tears when Wintour sat next to the Queen at London Fashion Week show - while was notably absent. An insider told the Daily Mail's Sebastian Shakespeare at the time: 'Edward was in tears when he found out. 'None of them knew about it. They had all flown to Milan for Milan Fashion week so they weren't even in London when it happened.' While Vogue's publishers Condé Nast strongly denied the claims, saying 'there is no truth to this', another source described how the animosity between them was growing, suggesting the pair no longer talked.
