Latest news with #PEP
Time of India
28-05-2025
- Business
- Time of India
Health-tech startup Gabit ropes in Ranbir Kapoor to scale mass appeal; plans wellness portfolio expansion
New Delhi: Gabit , a wellness and healthtech startup founded by former Zomato co-founder Gaurav Gupta , has onboarded Bollywood actor Ranbir Kapoor as its brand ambassador, aiming to strengthen consumer connect as it scales its portfolio and presence. 'We've built Gabit with a clear mission to help people live healthier and longer by addressing the interconnected pillars of well-being,' Gaurav Gupta, Founder and CEO, Gabit told ETRetail in an interview. 'Everything we offer—from our smart ring to AI-powered health insights —is designed in-house and tested to global standards.' Launched in 2024, Gabit has raised $9.5 million in seed funding from investors including Norwest Venture Partners, Amit Agarwal, Deepinder Goyal, and Kunal Shah. Its full-stack health ecosystem integrates a smart ring with AI-powered coaching and personalized wellness plans across four core pillars: fitness, nutrition, sleep, and stress. Full-stack offerings and expansion A key differentiator for Gabit is its AI-based coach, 'PEP', which helps users interpret their health data and provides actionable recommendations. 'If your energy is low or sleep is poor, PEP tries to decode the why behind it using your tracked markers,' Gupta explained. The company is expanding into supplements and has already entered the skincare segment with its Minimal Sunscreen, which Gupta said has gained strong traction. 'We are launching a curated nutrition line with our own R&D and manufacturing through trusted partners in India and overseas,' he noted. Overall growth In less than a year, Gabit claims to be leading India's smart ring category and is witnessing strong repeat engagement, driven by the simplicity of its app and integrated health stack. Gupta added that the company is also seeing interest from international markets and may explore global expansion after consolidating its presence in India.
The Hindu
27-05-2025
- Politics
- The Hindu
People's Education Policy: A challenge to NEP 2020
The implementation of the National Education Policy 2020 is in full swing. Various aspects of the policy are being implemented by the Centre, central agencies, as well as State governments and their agencies, albeit with some caveats here and there. The three-language policy, for instance, has drawn opposition in some States. But the general thrust of the policy, which draws from the Kasturirangan Committee's recommendations, is being applied, and rules have been framed for application across much of India. While supporters of the NEP laud it as ground-breaking and one that would help India leap into the future, detractors have said that while its diagnosis of the Indian education system is not far off the mark its cure is worse than the disease. They say the NEP will do more harm than good. The draft People's Education Policy, unveiled recently for public comments, takes this approach. From the splitting of school-college years to the emphasis on foundational literacy and numeracy, the PEP seeks a complete reversal of all the key aspects of NEP, calling for strengthening formal education, a massive increase in government funding, a return of education to the State list, and so on. Let's join us on a webinar to critically understand and discuss what the alternative policy is saying. The Hindu will host a live webinar titled 'People's Education Policy: A challenge to NEP 2020', on Saturday, May 31, 5:00 p.m. The panellists include: Prof. Arun Kumar, Former Professor, CESP, JNU; Prof. Sachidanand Sinha, Former Professor, CSRD, JNU; Ramnath Sankaran, Engagement Lead, CEGIS; K. Ramachandran, EdTech Entrepreneur. The session will be moderated by M. Kalyanaraman, who heads The Hindu's Education vertical. Register now for free to ask questions and interact with the panellists. Those who ask the three best questions will receive a free online subscription to The Hindu. Panellists Prof. Arun Kumar, Former Professor, CESP, JNU Arun Kumar joined JNU in 1984 and retired as the Sukhamoy Chakravarty Chair Professor in the Centre for Economic Studies and Planning, Jawaharlal Nehru University, in 2015. He was the Chairperson of a Commission on Unemployment set up by Civil Society Groups, and its Report was released in October 2022. Before this, he was the Malcolm Adiseshiah Chair Professor in the Institute of Social Sciences from 2017 to 2022. He was a member of the team to study the black economy for CBDT (1982-85). He has a Ph.D. in Economics from JNU and a Master's in Physics from both Princeton University, U.S., and Delhi University. He is a gold medalist of the Delhi Higher Secondary Board and Delhi University. He has specialized in Development Economics, Public Finance and Public Policy, and Macroeconomics. Prof. Sachidanand Sinha, Former Professor, CSRD, JNU Prof Sachidanand Sinha is a Former Professor, Centre for the Study of Regional Development, JNU, New Delhi. His research revolves around access to education and health facilities, particularly with reference to marginalised sections, inaccessible terrain, etc. He had worked with the GoI on the identification of educationally backward districts. He currently serves as the President All India Save Education Committee Delhi Chapter. Ramnath Sankaran, Engagement Lead, CEGIS Ramnath anchors CEGIS' engagements in Education and HR with the Government of Tamil Nadu. Before joining CEGIS, he spent over two decades at Infosys, gaining experience in sales, designing, and delivering large and complex programs, as well as assembling and leading cross-functional teams. Ramnath made a conscious shift from the technology sector to explore his interest in Public Policy and effective governance. He is passionate about creating equity for children by improving access to better education and is keen to create impact at scale. K. Ramachandran, EdTech Entrepreneur K Ramachandran ( KRC) is an entrepreneur, freelance journalist, writer. In his 18-year career in journalism, KRC has covered education and urban development. In 2007, he shifted careers to head the industry - academia interface program at a leading IT and Consulting Services company. He was involved in curriculum making committees on many occasions of universities, colleges and industry forums like Nasscom and the CII. He became a co-founder of 361 Degree Minds, a digital education and edtech company. Currently he heads Strategy and large initiatives at 361 Degree Minds. (For any suggestions or feedback, please reach out to us at education@
Reuters
27-05-2025
- Business
- Reuters
South Africa's Pep owner Pepkor reports 12.4% earnings rise
JOHANNESBURG, May 27 (Reuters) - South African discount retailer Pepkor Holdings (PPHJ.J), opens new tab reported on Tuesday a 12.4% rise in half year earnings, while revenue grew 12.8%. The owner of PEP and Ackermans clothing brands said headline earnings per share (HEPS) from continuing operations rose to 84.3 cents in the six months to March 31, up from 75 cents a year ago. Normalised HEPS grew by 18.9%.
The Hindu
26-05-2025
- Politics
- The Hindu
People's Education Policy challenges NEP 2020, seeks rollback of key measures
Even as the implementation of many aspects of the National Education Policy 2020 is in full swing, the All India Save Education Committee has released a draft alternative to it. Termed, 'Draft People's Education Policy 2025: An Alternative to NEP 2025', it delivers a robust critique of NEP 2020 while proposing some alternatives. The People's Education Policy (PEP) refers to several attempts to recast the education system in the past including when the Congress government under Rajiv Gandhi proposed a New Education Policy. It says the diagnosis of the ills plaguing the Indian education system is correct but the NEP 2020 will only exacerbate the situation. The PEP notes falling percentage allocation in Central budget, slashing of UGC funds, restricting government funds to National Research Foundation and so on. It critiques the approach of PPP model, privatization, academia-industry collaboration and so on. 'Privatization, commercialization, and corporatization of education would hinder education's universalization,' it says. The PEP critiques the World Bank's Strengthening Teaching-Learning and Results for States (STARS) project, launched in India in 2021, for promoting a market-driven framework and fostering direct partnerships between education institutions and industries. As a result, industry representatives will dictate curricula, syllabi, pedagogy, and evaluation methods, 'severely compromising the autonomy of universities and academic bodies,' it says. The concept of Outcome-Based Education (OBE), now central to the NEP 2020 framework, may have some relevance in technical training or skill development, its wholesale application across all streams of knowledge is fundamentally flawed, says the draft policy. The HEGC, which has replaced the University Grants Commission (UGC) in matters of funding, brings funding mechanisms under tighter central control. The Higher Education Commission of India (HECI), once fully operationalized, will further erode university autonomy by regulating academic standards, curriculum frameworks, and institutional accreditation through centralised bodies, it says. NEP 2020 and its implementation frameworks promote the entry of foreign universities into India, ostensibly to raise standards of education. 'However, these foreign institutions will primarily cater to the rich elite, charging exorbitant fees and operating as profit-making enterprises,' it says. The DPEP opposes four-year UG programme, splitting courses and awarding certificates, diplomas and so on, saying this will create hierarchies among students. It is against centralized admissions tests such as NEET, CUET and so on, and wants admission decisions to universities. The DPEP demands that education should go back into the State list but federal funding should continue and increase. The credit framework, learning levels, and learning outcomes prescribed in NEP 2020 are all tools of centralism and attempt to enforce a national curriculum, according to it. It opposes the No-Detention Policy under the Right to Education Act, too, and prescribes annual examinations for each year. It faults the NEP 2020 for not mandating fee committees to prevent profiteering and allowing commercialization. The draft policy critiques the promotion of Indian Knowledge Systems for attempting to rewrite history, attempting to inculcate a communal bias among students, and promoting unscientific, magical outlooks. The promotion of online learning commodifies education, where each credit is essentially sold for a price, and formal learning is diminished. The proposal for digital universities further illustrates this shift towards a market-driven approach to education, where students will need to purchase access to the necessary products to earn credits while likely working at a young age. Main proposals of the PEP The PEP proposes universal, free education, not just a focus on literacy and numeracy, and seeks to end central schemes such as SSA, RMSA and so on. It rejects the RTE Act and says that instead of private schools being asked to take in poor students, the government must expand on school allocation and commit to teaching all of them. State governments must finance all education and be in-charge. Center should support. The PEP wants to reinstate the 10+2+3 system. It wants formal, classroom education to take precedence, and, for that reason, wants to defocus on online courses. To achieve this, it wants to appoint permanent teaching positions, opposes vocationalisation of academic streams. Early Childhood Care and Education is welcome but the NEP 2020 doesn't recommend a uniform system of schooling and allows multiple types, it charges. Many children will go to Anganwadi centers while some will go to government schools and a few to private. It also advises Anganwadi workeres should be delinked from Ministry of Women and Child Development and brought to Education Ministry. Exchange programmes such as semester-abroad based on MoUs are acceptable if scholarships or are funded, but foreign universities should not set up branch campuses. Twinning, joint degree programmes not allowed. No to integration of Ayush with modern medicine The PEP says a national-level standard-setting body shall maintain uniform standards of medical education across the country. State-level academic bodies shall use these standards as guidelines. 'Considering India's socio-economic, cultural, and linguistic diversity, a single national-level entrance or exit examination is unsuitable. Universities must have the autonomy to decide on syllabi, curricula, and examination systems.'
Globe and Mail
23-05-2025
- Business
- Globe and Mail
Prediction: PepsiCo's Dividend Yield Just Peaked at 4.4% Because the Dividend King Stock Is Too Cheap to Ignore
It's been a rough go of it for PepsiCo (NASDAQ: PEP) investors lately. The stock is hovering around a five-year low and is down over 27% in the past year. Despite the downward pressure on the stock price, Pepsi has continued to raise its dividend like clockwork. Earlier this month, it boosted its quarterly payout to $1.4225 per share or $5.69 per year -- marking the company's 53rd consecutive annual dividend increase. Where to invest $1,000 right now? Our analyst team just revealed what they believe are the 10 best stocks to buy right now. Continue » Pepsi stock now sports a forward yield of 4.4% -- the highest ever. Here's why I think its yield just peaked and why the dividend stock is a no-brainer buy now. Pepsi's dividend yield is on the rise Pepsi is part of an elite group known as Dividend Kings -- companies that have increased their payouts for at least 50 consecutive years. The yield will increase when a company's stock price grows more slowly than its dividend. Whereas if a stock price goes up faster than the dividend growth rate, the yield will go down. In this vein, dividend yield can be misleading. A company can have a steadily growing and dedicated dividend program, but a low yield because the stock price does well. For example, Microsoft has increased its dividend every year for 15 consecutive years, and most of its recent raises have been about 10% per year. But its yield has gone down over time because the stock price has increased by several fold. In contrast, Pepsi's dividend yield has gone up because the company continues to boost its payout and its stock price has gone down. It wasn't long ago that Pepsi sported a yield of around 2% to 3%. But over the last five years, Pepsi has increased its dividend by 39%, but the stock price is flat -- pushing the yield to where it is today at a record high. I could see Pepsi's yield peaking here for the simple reason that its stock price will grow faster than its dividend growth rate, which should be about 5% to 7% per year based on the size of Pepsi's recent increases. A slowdown in consumer spending has impacted Pepsi Pepsi stock has fallen deeper and deeper into the bargain bin mostly because of sluggish sales growth and limited pricing power. Pepsi has a massively diversified business spanning beverages like flagship Pepsi and other soda brands, juices, water, sports drinks, energy drinks, and more. It also owns one of the largest snack brands in the world -- Frito-Lay -- and package food giant Quaker Oats. The company was hit hard by inflation and supply chain costs. It has been promoting value-added products to boost volumes while limiting price increases. However, consumer spending is tight, so Pepsi is facing a Catch-22. It either has to cut prices to boost volume or keep prices higher and sell fewer products. Both outcomes lead to sluggish growth. In terms of pricing power, Pepsi has proved arguably less elite than peers like Coca-Cola. However, that discrepancy is already reflected in Pepsi's valuation. Pepsi's valuation is beyond cheap Coke has higher margins than Pepsi due to its bottling partner network and pure-play focus on beverages. By contrast, Pepsi controls more of its operations and is more diversified. But historically, both stocks have fetched similar valuations -- as evidenced by their nearly identical five-year median price-to-earnings (P/E) ratios. Coke's P/E is above its five-year median, whereas Pepsi's is far below. However, Coke's forward P/E is well below the median, so the stock is still a good value. It's just that Pepsi has become too cheap to ignore. PEP PE Ratio (5y Median) data by YCharts It would be one thing if Pepsi's dividend were out of control and its balance sheet were riddled with debt -- but that's hardly the case. Pepsi's payout ratio is 78% at present. It's not great, as 50% to 75% is typically considered healthy. But it's not bad considering Pepsi is still raking in the free cash flow. Pepsi has a debt-to-capital (D/C) ratio of 72.5% compared to Coke's 65.2%. The higher the D/C ratio, the more a company relies on debt to finance its operations. So Pepsi is more dependent on debt than Coke, but its leverage is manageable. Pepsi has been taking on debt for the right reasons. The company has made several savvy acquisitions, including Sabra and Obela snack and dip products, Mexican-American food brand Siete Foods, and prebiotic soda brand Poppi. These acquisitions help diversify its food and drink lineup and cater to mini-meal and health-conscious consumers. A passive income powerhouse to buy on sale Pepsi's declining stock price showcases investor frustration with the company's lack of growth. However, long-term investors who care more about where a stock will be years from now than where it is today can capitalize on Pepsi's out-of-favor status by buying the stock at its dirt-cheap valuation and getting a record dividend yield in the process. If Pepsi shows signs of margin expansion and success with recent acquisitions, it wouldn't be surprising for the stock price to begin outpacing the dividend growth rate -- leading to a lower yield. However, that doesn't mean investors will get less passive income from buying the stock now. For example, buying Pepsi at the current price of about $130 per share and a dividend per share of $5.69 presents a forward yield of 4.4%. If Pepsi were to go up to $150 per share, investors buying the stock for $150 would only get a yield of 3.8%. But the yield on cost for investors buying the stock now would still be 4.4%. Add it all up, and Pepsi is a phenomenal opportunity for value investors looking for a stable source of passive income. Should you invest $1,000 in PepsiCo right now? Before you buy stock in PepsiCo, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy now… and PepsiCo wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $620,719!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $829,511!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor 's total average return is962% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to170%for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of May 12, 2025 Daniel Foelber has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Microsoft. The Motley Fool recommends the following options: long January 2026 $395 calls on Microsoft and short January 2026 $405 calls on Microsoft. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.
