E-Commerce Update - Brizy Expands Into E-Commerce With New Shops Feature
In other market news, was trading firmly up 23.6% and finishing the session at HK$11.14.
To gain an edge in the fast-evolving E-Commerce landscape, revisit our Market Insights article highlighting the transformative impact of logistics automation. Get in fast!
closed at $76.39 up 4.1%.
ended the day at $219.92 down 0.2%. Xockets filed patent infringement lawsuits against the company and AWS four days ago.
settled at $110.71 down 2.9%. Last quarter, the company repurchased 56 million shares for $805 million.
Amazon.com is rapidly advancing AWS and AI-driven services enhancing potential revenue growth. Discover the full narrative on this transformative shift.
Get an in-depth perspective on all 259 E-Commerce Stocks, including Yunnan Botanee Bio-Technology GroupLTD, Intellect Design Arena and IONOS Group, by using our screener here.
Interested In Other Possibilities? Trump has pledged to "unleash" American oil and gas and these 22 US stocks have developments that are poised to benefit.
This article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned.
Sources:
Simply Wall St
"Brizy Launches Brizy Shops: Design Your Dream Online Store, Code-Free" from Brizy.io on GlobeNewswire (published 30 June 2025)
Companies discussed in this article include SEHK:2586 NYSE:NKE NasdaqGS:AMZN NYSE:BABA and OTCPK:MALG.
This article was originally published by Simply Wall St.
Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team@simplywallst.com
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
an hour ago
- Newsweek
Some Social Security Recipients Will See Wage Garnishment in Just Weeks
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. In roughly 20 days, some Social Security recipients could experience wage garnishment as a higher Social Security claw back rate returns. Roughly 2 million Americans owed money to the Social Security Administration due to overpayments in 2023, according to KFF and Cox Media group. Starting July 24, the higher wage garnishments will go into effect until the full overpayment has been resolved. Why It Matters President Donald Trump has implemented a wide range of changes to the Social Security Administration (SSA). In addition to ending the use of paper checks by October, Trump also appointed former Fiserv CEO Frank Bisignano as the new SSA commissioner. The Department of Government Efficiency also instructed the agency to cut 7,000 SSA jobs. For beneficiaries who have been mistakenly overpaid, losing Social Security benefits could have severe consequences on their ability to pay for basic necessities. Roughly 21 percent of married couples and 45 percent of single recipients rely on Social Security for 90 percent or more of their income, according to SSA estimates. A sign is seen outside a US Social Security Administration building, November 5, 2020, in Burbank, California. A sign is seen outside a US Social Security Administration building, November 5, 2020, in Burbank, California. VALERIE MACON/AFP via Getty Images What To Know In some circumstances, the SSA overpays Social Security recipients due to either miscalculations on their part or the recipient failing to update their earnings information. In March, the SSA said it would be bringing back its 100 percent claw back rate for Social Security recipients who were mistakenly overpaid by the government. During Joe Biden's presidency, that rate was set at 10 percent to allow seniors more breathing room to pay for their basic necessities. However, the SSA updated that garnishment rate to 50 percent in April. "When we determine an individual receiving Title II benefits is overpaid, we send them a notice requesting a full and immediate refund and inform them of their right to request reconsideration or a waiver of recovery," the SSA said in April. "We usually provide 90 days for the individual to request a lower rate of withholding, a reconsideration, or waiver." The 90-day period from the SSA's statement on April 25 ends July 24, meaning more than a million recipients could see their payments impacted. However, those who have been overpaid can file for an overpayment waiver. Form SSA-632BK asks for forgiveness for the overpayment if it was not your fault and it would create financial hardship. To get this approved, you'll need proof that repaying the money would create a significant hardship. Beneficiaries can also file Form SSA-561 to appeal the claim you were overpaid. Newsweek reached out to the SSA for comment via email. What People Are Saying Kevin Thompson, the CEO of 9i Capital Group and the host of the 9innings podcast, told Newsweek: "Most recipients don't realize they've been overpaid until they receive a letter from the SSA. Without regularly reviewing your earnings history and benefit statements, overpayments can go unnoticed. Even if the error wasn't your fault, you're still responsible for repayment—unless you appeal, request a waiver, or set up a payment plan within the 90-day period." What Happens Next The loss of income could be dire for many Social Security recipients who rely on the benefits for most if not all of their income. A recent report from Gallup found 86 percent rely on Social Security as a "major" or "minor" income source. "The consequences can be significant, especially for retirees living on a fixed income. With inflation still elevated, a 50 percent reduction in benefits could severely impact housing, food, and healthcare," Thompson said. "For many, Social Security is their only source of income—making these garnishments potentially devastating."
Hamilton Spectator
an hour ago
- Hamilton Spectator
What if killing Canada's digital services tax is just the beginning for Donald Trump?
OTTAWA—Call it a prudent climbdown, a show of weakness, or an unavoidable concession. There are several ways to look at Prime Minister Mark Carney's 11th-hour decision to cancel the federal government's Digital Services Tax last weekend. But what if it's also a tangible example of exactly what Carney warned would happen? The Liberal leader won a minority government on April 28 with a pitch that no one was better placed than himself to protect Canada from Donald Trump. The U.S. president has mused about using 'economic force' to annex Canada. As if taunting or teasing this country, he questions why it exists, and keeps floating the prospect of it becoming the '51st state' of the U.S. Two days before the election, Carney spelled out how he understood all of this. 'The U.S. is trying to put economic pressure on us to gain major concessions, to the extreme of a level of integration of our countries that would impinge our sovereignty,' Carney said that day in King City, north of Toronto. Carney, in his final campaign conference, ruled out any prospect the U.S. would use military Flash forward to last week. There was Trump, posting on social media that Canada's incoming Digital Services Tax — a policy that would force American tech giants and other firms, including Canadian ones, to pay up — was nothing short of a 'blatant attack' on the United States. Trump declared he had cut off all negotiations to resolve the trade war that started earlier this year with his wave of tariffs on Canadian goods. In other words, Canada's most important commercial and military partner, the destination for 76 per cent of all exports last year , was willing to ditch talks and dictate terms that could jeopardize thousands of jobs and hundreds of billions of dollars in economic activity. All over a domestic policy the Americans didn't like. Barely 48 hours later, shortly before midnight on a Sunday, the government announced the tax was dead. Not only would Canada not implement the policy as planned, it would repeal the 2024 law that created it. Is this Trump using economic pressure to force Canada's hand? 'It is exactly that,' said Lawrence Herman, a veteran trade lawyer and special counsel with the firm, Cassidy Levy Kent. 'It's an example of, on a particular issue, how much pressure can be brought to bear to force Canada to abandon not only a policy, but a law that has been in force for 18 months.' In Herman's view, the decision looks like a 'significant retreat' by the government, which shows 'how dependent we are on a reasonable relationship' with Canada's largest trading partner. Other policies that Trump has complained about, such as the supply management system for dairy and poultry, could be next, he said. Pete Hoekstra, the U.S. ambassador to Canada, told the CBC this week that he has a 'strong belief' Canada could water down that system by changing a law designed to protect it if that becomes part of a new trade deal. 'It's not a particularly good start to this so-called new economic and security relationship,' Herman said. He was referring to Carney's stated goal of talks that are now continuing under an agreement struck at the Group of 7 summit in the Alberta Rockies last month to strive for a deal to redefine the relationship by July 21. Others have been harsher in their judgment. Lloyd Axworthy, a former Liberal foreign affairs minister, posted online that Carney was acquiescing to Trump in a way that contradicts his 'elbows up' mantra on the campaign trail. 'Forget any dreams of a more sovereign, self-directed Canada. We're doubling down on the corporate cosiness and U.S. dependency that's defined our last half-century,' he wrote on Substack. Axworthy did not respond to an interview request Thursday. For Jean Charest, a former Quebec premier who sits on the government's Canada-U.S. advisory council, the situation illustrates the 'chaos' of dealing with Trump, whose administration is grappling with trade talks and tariffs threats against most countries on the planet. This meant that Carney's government was operating 'in a world of very bad choices,' Charest said. Deciding to scrap the Digital Services Tax, in that context, was 'certainly a legitimate choice,' he said. 'We are not in an ordinary world of negotiations,' Charest added. 'It would be nice to think, 'You give, I give ... we compromise.' It doesn't work that way with Donald Trump, and we're making our way through this by trying to protect essentially what's the most important for us in the short term, and that's a negotiation that has some legs.' Charest noted that there was opposition inside Canada to the Digital Services Tax, which would have applied back to 2022 with a three per cent tax on Canadian revenues from digital services companies with more than $1.1 billion in global earnings and $20 million inside Canada. The U.S. also pushed back against the policy when Joe Biden was in power. David Pierce, vice-president of government relations with the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, said his business lobby group felt the Digital Services Tax should be paused. He also said it would have been wrong to proceed with it after the U.S. dropped a controversial provision from Trump's major budget bill last week: the so-called 'revenge tax' that would have hit the U.S. assets of foreign businesses and individuals. That decision came as the G7 agreed to exempt American firms from a co-ordinated effort to ensure corporations pay a minimum tax, which was 'absolutely a win' for the U.S. Even so, Pierce said Canada likely had no choice but to drop the policy, given Trump's exploitation of Canada's 'weakness' — its major economic reliance on trade with the U.S. 'We just hope that this now paves the way for a good renewed deal,' said Pierce. The ultimate goal of the federal government in that deal, at least publicly, has been to return to the terms of the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA), which Trump signed in 2018 during his first term, after disparaging North American free trade as unfair to his country. That would mean lifting the rounds of tariffs Trump has imposed since the winter, with import duties tied to concerns about drugs and migration over the border, and others that Trump slapped on Canadian autos, steel and aluminum in a bid to promote those sectors in the U.S. Canada has responded with countertariffs on its own that the government says hit more than $80 billion worth of American imports to Canada. Canada's lead trade negotiator with the Trump administration, Ambassador Kirsten Hillman, was not available for an interview this week, the embassy in Washington told the Star. Charest, however, said he believes it is possible that Canada could accept some level of tariffs in a July 21 deal, so long as they have no material effect. Such 'zero-effect' tariffs could only kick in at levels of trade that Canada doesn't or likely won't achieve, for example. Yet there's a question of how much any deal can be relied upon, so long as Trump is in the White House, unilaterally imposing tariffs that Canada views as 'illegal' violations of the 2018 trade deal. 'Trump is arguing about supply management and the (Digital Services Tax), but it's the U.S. that is in flagrant breach of its trade obligations. It's abandoned the CUSMA, virtually behaving as if it did not exist and the U.S. signature has no meaning,' Herman said. 'So we are in a world where rules and the rules-based system, and the stability that that treaty was supposed to provide, have gone by the board.' That means, at least for now, the Carney government is operating in a world where Canada's foremost ally, the colossus to the south, will use economic force to get what it wants.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
While private companies own 23% of EG Industries Berhad (KLSE:EG), individual investors are its largest shareholders with 32% ownership
Significant control over EG Industries Berhad by individual investors implies that the general public has more power to influence management and governance-related decisions A total of 13 investors have a majority stake in the company with 51% ownership 19% of EG Industries Berhad is held by insiders Trump has pledged to "unleash" American oil and gas and these 15 US stocks have developments that are poised to benefit. To get a sense of who is truly in control of EG Industries Berhad (KLSE:EG), it is important to understand the ownership structure of the business. We can see that individual investors own the lion's share in the company with 32% ownership. That is, the group stands to benefit the most if the stock rises (or lose the most if there is a downturn). And private companies on the other hand have a 23% ownership in the company. Let's delve deeper into each type of owner of EG Industries Berhad, beginning with the chart below. View our latest analysis for EG Industries Berhad Many institutions measure their performance against an index that approximates the local market. So they usually pay more attention to companies that are included in major indices. As you can see, institutional investors have a fair amount of stake in EG Industries Berhad. This can indicate that the company has a certain degree of credibility in the investment community. However, it is best to be wary of relying on the supposed validation that comes with institutional investors. They too, get it wrong sometimes. When multiple institutions own a stock, there's always a risk that they are in a 'crowded trade'. When such a trade goes wrong, multiple parties may compete to sell stock fast. This risk is higher in a company without a history of growth. You can see EG Industries Berhad's historic earnings and revenue below, but keep in mind there's always more to the story. Hedge funds don't have many shares in EG Industries Berhad. With a 10.0% stake, CEO Pang Kang is the largest shareholder. Qyh Capital Sdn. Bhd. is the second largest shareholder owning 6.7% of common stock, and KAF Investment Funds Bhd. holds about 4.9% of the company stock. After doing some more digging, we found that the top 13 have the combined ownership of 51% in the company, suggesting that no single shareholder has significant control over the company. Researching institutional ownership is a good way to gauge and filter a stock's expected performance. The same can be achieved by studying analyst sentiments. As far as we can tell there isn't analyst coverage of the company, so it is probably flying under the radar. The definition of an insider can differ slightly between different countries, but members of the board of directors always count. Management ultimately answers to the board. However, it is not uncommon for managers to be executive board members, especially if they are a founder or the CEO. I generally consider insider ownership to be a good thing. However, on some occasions it makes it more difficult for other shareholders to hold the board accountable for decisions. Our most recent data indicates that insiders own a reasonable proportion of EG Industries Berhad. Insiders have a RM211m stake in this RM1.1b business. This may suggest that the founders still own a lot of shares. You can click here to see if they have been buying or selling. With a 32% ownership, the general public, mostly comprising of individual investors, have some degree of sway over EG Industries Berhad. This size of ownership, while considerable, may not be enough to change company policy if the decision is not in sync with other large shareholders. It seems that Private Companies own 23%, of the EG Industries Berhad stock. It's hard to draw any conclusions from this fact alone, so its worth looking into who owns those private companies. Sometimes insiders or other related parties have an interest in shares in a public company through a separate private company. It's always worth thinking about the different groups who own shares in a company. But to understand EG Industries Berhad better, we need to consider many other factors. Consider for instance, the ever-present spectre of investment risk. We've identified 1 warning sign with EG Industries Berhad , and understanding them should be part of your investment process. Of course, you might find a fantastic investment by looking elsewhere. So take a peek at this free list of interesting companies. NB: Figures in this article are calculated using data from the last twelve months, which refer to the 12-month period ending on the last date of the month the financial statement is dated. This may not be consistent with full year annual report figures. Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team (at) article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
