Odd Muse
Social media is the secret to this fashion brand's success, according to its founder, Aimee Smale, 28, whose early marketing efforts involved taking selfies while modelling her designs in her family home. She started Odd Muse as a lockdown hobby while a fashion student in 2020 and just four years later generates annual sales of £25 million. Best known for its party dresses, the Essex firm now has two permanent stores — one in Soho, central London, and another in New York.
oddmuse.co.uk
Explore the Sunday Times 100 — interviews, company profiles and more
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
19 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
City giants: Face-to-face annual meetings vital for share owner rights
Face-to-face shareholder meetings are 'a cornerstone of the financial system' and key to sustainable economic growth, a group of powerful City investors has told The Mail on Sunday. In a big boost to this paper's push to stop annual meetings becoming online-only, the Governance for Growth Investor Campaign (GGIC) says it is 'vital' they operate 'in a way which allows for genuine interaction with shareholders'. The Mail on Sunday is campaigning for all FTSE 100 companies to hold physical annual general meetings (AGMs) in the UK, and to make it easier for shareholders to vote via a platform or nominee so their voices can be heard – a move hailed by retail investor group ShareAction. It follows a trend by firms such as drug giant AstraZeneca, defence contractor BAE Systems and toothpaste-maker Haleon to move their AGMs to a digital-only format, effectively barring share owners from attending in person. On Friday, Nationwide came under fire at its virtual AGM for not allowing any of the 16 million members who own Britain's biggest mutual to attend in person, leading to charges that bosses were not being properly held responsible. 'Virtual-only AGMs make it harder for shareholders to hold firms to account and support the long-term value creation vital for sustainable economic growth,' said GGIC leader Caroline Escott. 'Hearing other shareholders' views, and being heard in turn, without our perspectives being filtered by management, is a key shareholder right,' added Escott, who is head of investment stewardship at train workers' pension fund Railpen. The GGIC is an alliance of pension schemes controlling £150 billion of assets, including BT's retirement fund and the Church of England Pensions Board on behalf of 11 million members. Escott added: 'The right of shareholders, as the owners of capital, to freely and genuinely engage with boards and executives is a cornerstone of our financial system. 'It's therefore vital AGMs are run in a way that allows for genuine interaction with shareholders.' The move to virtual-only meetings is shrouded in legal uncertainty, with Ministers under pressure to clarify the law about the physical location of AGMs. A review is expected later this year. Escott added: 'It's just one of the important shareholder rights that we must protect in the UK if we are to achieve the thriving UK companies, capital markets and economy that we all want to see.' And it's good enough for Warren Buffett! Directors tempted to stage digital-only annual meetings should follow the example of legendary US money manager Warren Buffett, says Ann Francke, head of the Chartered Management Institute. The 94-year-old, pictured right, has turned the in-person meeting of his Berkshire Hathaway fund into 'the focus of his leadership'. Each year, he outlines his strategy and decisions to 40,000 people who pack out an arena in Nebraska. Buffett may be stepping back from his role, but his commitment to openness has won the loyalty of investors, transforming Berkshire from a small textile firm into a $1 trillion conglomerate. The event will continue under Greg Abel, his successor. Francke said that in-person meetings show a willingness in bosses to be held accountable, adding: 'Directors need to be able to look shareholders in the eye: it's hardly much to ask and the process needs to be as inclusive as possible. 'I do believe that we behave differently when we are face-to-face.' It also means bosses have to be more authentic, and cannot avoid awkward issues or angry shareholders.
Daily Mail
19 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Big Pharma booms despite Trump tariff headache
Britain's two biggest drug makers are expected to reveal a profit surge this week as demand booms despite a looming threat of tariffs from the US. GSK, led by Emma Walmsley, is expected to report profit of £4.4 billion for the first half of this year on Wednesday, up from £2.9 billion the previous year, while sales are expected to inch up to £15.3 billion from £15.2 billion in 2024. AstraZeneca, the largest company on the London Stock Exchange, is forecast to report a half-year profit of £5 billion, which is £1.1 billion more than the year before, with sales expected to have increased 8 per cent to £20.6 billion. The sector is under pressure due to the threat of tariffs from the US, a critical market for both companies. President Donald Trump this month threatened to slap a 200 per cent levy on drug imports as part of an escalation of his trade war. His threats have pushed many firms to begin moving factories to – and making larger investments in – the US to protect themselves from retaliation. Last week, AstraZeneca announced plans to invest £37 billion in the US, which accounts for 42 per cent of its sales. The move has also fuelled fears it could switch its London stock market listing to the US, which would be a hit to the City. GSK suffered a blow in the US last week when American regulators recommended against approving the relaunch of its key blood cancer drug Blenrep, which had been pulled from the country in 2022 due to concerns about its side-effects.
Daily Mail
19 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
TONY HETHERINGTON: My friend has put thousands into a mysterious new company promising unrealistic returns
Tony Hetherington is Financial Mail on Sunday's ace investigator, fighting readers corners, revealing the truth that lies behind closed doors and winning victories for those who have been left out-of-pocket. Find out how to contact him below. A.M. writes: My friend has recently invested a few thousand pounds with Al-Tabbaa & Hackett, which promises unrealistic returns. She is now thinking of investing more. It seems to be a company recently formed by one individual, with an address at serviced offices in Covent Garden in London. I would be grateful if you could investigate. Tony Hetherington replies: Let's start by looking at Al-Tabbaa & Hackett Limited. It was set up on February 19 this year, with its owner and sole director named as 55-year-old Hasan Al-Tabbaa from Grimsby. Al-Tabbaa is an interesting character. He describes himself as an entrepreneur and inventor. Several years ago he appealed on Twitter for money to start a bank, promising shares worth ten times whatever investors gave him. His LinkedIn page describes him as having been chief executive of a technology company since 1986, when he was 16. But here's a funny thing. On July 7, a few days after I started asking awkward questions, all mention of Al-Tabbaa vanished from Companies House records. Al-Tabbaa & Hackett Limited now has no founder, no shareholder, no director, and probably no future. The man himself has not offered any explanation or comment, and officials at Companies House rarely discuss individual cases, but it is possible he did not in fact form the company. In the past year or so, Companies House says over 52,000 people were named in company formations without their consent. So, setting Al-Tabbaa completely aside, let's look at the website that persuaded your friend to part with thousands of pounds. The website was set up on May 1. It offers various deposit accounts, starting with the basic easy access account which claims to offer a 'guaranteed 2 per cent return per month'. Any scheme that claims to pay interest at 2 per cent a month has to involve huge risks, but the website says 'there is no risk involved' for the fund as the firm 'protects the capital for their investors'. That's hardly a convincing argument, so I fired off some questions via email. Firstly, I questioned a claim on review website Trustpilot under the heading 'Written by the company' that says the firm is 'one of the largest savings organisations in the UK and Europe'. When I asked for evidence of this, back came an email from Ibrahim Jemal, telling me: 'We do not claim to be one of the largest savings organisations in the United Kingdom and Europe'! Well how about the glowing reviews on Trustpilot, including one supposedly from a saver who has put money into the firm over the past couple of years, when its website is just two months old? The helpful Jemal suggested the customer might be from another country, yet Trustpilot says he is from Britain. In fact, the earliest review of the firm is dated May 19 this year. Jemal went further, insisting: 'We do not serve customers within the UK.' Really? The website says that in the event of any dispute, UK laws apply and 'the seat of arbitration shall be Manchester'. The phone number provided is a UK one. Since I started investigating, Jemal and his website have suggested that they are really in the UAE, and outside the jurisdiction of the UK Financial Conduct Authority. I have passed all of this over to the FCA, so we shall see. Meanwhile, your friend should try to get her cash out pronto. I suspect the real location for this bunch is Fantasy Island. RBS account mix-up C.Y. writes: I have received a letter from the Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS), saying my business account interest rate is dropping. I do not have any account with RBS, nor have I ever had one. Trying to discuss this by phone is impossible as they want the account number, and I have no such account. Tony Hetherington replies: You called the bank, you emailed the bank, and you tried to chat with the bank's online digital assistant. But every time, you ran up against the same stumbling block, which was that you could not tell them the number of the account for which you were supposed to be a signatory. To their credit, staff at RBS got to the bottom of this mystery within a day of my contacting them. You really were named on an RBS account. It belongs to an Army charity, and you are an Army veteran. In 2012, you were briefly a volunteer signatory on the charity's current account before switching roles within the organisation. However, although statements have always gone to the charity's treasurer, the bank was not asked to delete you as a signatory. You have now been taken off the account, so you should not hear from RBS again. But the bank has gone one surprisingly pleasant step further. Because it could not help you when you made contact, it has sent you what you have told me is a remarkably generous hamper of goodies. All in all, well done RBS!
