Connect with us

Features

The British Invasion: Douglas Murray and Colonel Richard Kemp, Tel Aviv International Salon, Dec.21, 2023

Douglas Murray (left) and Richard Kemp appearing in Tel Aviv Dec. 21, 2023

By GABRIEL EMMANUEL In 1964 the Beatles were banned from performing in Israel (to the Jewish state’s everlasting shame and embarrassment). Nearly 60 years later a British invasion of a different sort took place and the crowd reaction was almost like a mini Beatlemania.

Some 600 or more twenty and thirty somethings packed themselves into a meeting room at the Carlton Hotel in Tel Aviv that was meant to accommodate only about a third of that size. The featured speakers were former Commander of the British forces in Afghanistan, Richard Kemp, and author, political commentator, Douglas Murray, whose book “War on the West”(2018) quickly became a New York Times bestseller. Both Kemp and Murray have spent the past two and a half months in Israel covering the war. “I’ve almost made Aliya” quipped Kemp as the talk was about to begin. When the charismatic Murray entered the room a little late for reasons which he would come to share, the audience broke into spontaneous applause.

While Colonel Kemp has been known for years for endorsing the IDF as the “most moral army” in the world, Douglas Murray shot to fame at the opening of the present conflict with his acerbic response to an interviewer’s question as to whether Israel’s response to the atrocities of Oct. 7 could be considered “proportionate”. In a segment on British Talk TV https://talk.tv/top-stories/31465/douglas-murray-proportionality-in-conflict-is-a-joke that went instantly viral Murray responded “There is some deep perversion in Britain whenever Israel is involved in a conflict and it’s the word you just used – proportion, proportionate, proportionality. Only Britain is really obsessed with this…Proportionality in conflict rarely exists but if we were to decide that we should have this fetish about proportionality then that would mean that in retaliation for what Hamas did in Israel on Saturday (Oct. 7, G.E.) then Israel should try and locate a music festival in Gaza for instance (and good luck with that), and rape precisely the number of women that Hamas raped, kill precisely the number of young people that Hamas killed. They should find a town of exactly the same size of Sderot… and make sure they go door to door and kill precisely the correct number of babies that Hamas killed in Sderot and shoot in the head precisely the same number of old age pensioners that Hamas shot in the head on Saturday…Proportionality in conflict is a joke,” spurned Douglas adding, “that it is only the Israelis that when attacked are expected to have precisely a proportionate response.”


Given the British gentlemens’ philo-semitic reputations the audience broke out with mixed laughter and applause when the two were introduced as the “two most beloved “Goyim” in all of Israel. Non-plussed by the off-colour moniker, Kemp stated proudly that “I am also an extremely talented “Shabbat Goy” the result of having been residing in a hotel with many displaced persons from Kiryat Shmona “who have used my services quite extensively.”
Asked by another Brit, moderator Deborah Danon, what drew each of them to supporting Israel in a topsy turvy world that was largely hostile towards the Jewish State, each had similar reasons for doing so. “I was taught when I was very young to know right from wrong,” said Kemp, “and it’s my duty to support those who are right. There is no question who is in the right in this fight,” he added.


Moreover, underscoring his 30 years spent fighting terrorists in Afghanistan and Iraq Kemp felt duty bound “to do what little I can do to help fight this fight with you because it’s not just your fight it’s a fight for Western civilization; the same ideology that’s attacking you now has attacked us in the past and will intensify its attacks in the future.”


Apologizing for his late entrance for having been held up in an interview on the Piers Morgan show (“It’s quite hard to get Piers to stop talking”) Murray offered another reason responsible for drawing him over to Israel’s side. “Aside from my love for this country and its people,” he said, “I also see something which I think any writer or journalist should see and get very annoyed by, which is lies. When it’s lies about an entire nation and people, when I hear someone like this blowhard I heard earlier (on Piers Morgan, G.E.) accusing Israel of ‘genociding’ the Palestinians, I can’t sit here and not say something. I’m not going to allow these canards, smears and lies and defamation to just go on…I don’t like lies being told and Israel has been on the receiving end of some of the biggest, longest, deepest and most wounding lies of our era,” said Murray. Demonstrating his effortless ability to deftly cross over from political commentary to artful literary imagery he caps the thought with finesse: “So I believe in the simple cause of “moral hygiene” that it’s necessary to try and clean some of that up.”


The moderator then asked a pertinent question: “In a world of Tik Tok where Jesus is Palestinian, do you wonder if this is just a Myth of Sisyphus syndrome where you are just pushing that rock up the hill and do you ever ask yourself just what’s the point?”
“Never, actually,” Murray replied emphatically. “Even if it was the case what option have you got? Just to sit at the bottom of the hill and get crushed by the rock?” he asks rhetorically.
Despite the omnipresence of social media in the world, where lies are able to “rocket around the world” Murray holds fast to a different view. “if you live in a world where 99 lies are being told and one person tells the truth, the truth will win,” he asserts and gives the example of writers such as Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn whose work was effective in bringing down the entire Soviet Empire. “The validity of a truth in an era of lies cannot be underestimated,” he says.
From the topic of lies it was an easy segue to Hamas battle figures. “I don’t know what the latest exaggerated figure is from Hamas about the number of people that have been killed in Gaza” says Kemp, “I just know that it has to be defeated. If it means that a very large number of people whether military or civilian have to die in that process then unfortunately that’s the case because no sovereign, democratic state can exist under this threat so it must be eliminated, it’s as simple as that,” states Kemp in a no nonsense, tell it like it is, military analysis. Despite the unreliability of figures Kemp posits that based on the figures he’s received from Israeli sources of 8,000 or 9,000 or more have been killed from Hamas and Islamic Jihad, which would represent about 30% of the total number of terrorists. “That’s a very significant proportion,” he says, “that’s in excess of 30% of their fighting capability. The whole edifice then begins to crumble and I think we’re going to see that,” he says with conviction.

“I’ve been in Gaza on a number of occasions. I’m deeply impressed by the IDF combat effectiveness. This is going to come down at some point,” Kemp says quite bluntly.
Kamp makes regular visits to the soldiers in hospital and knows the tragedy of war from close up. “Tragically, many Israeli soldiers will die and have died already,” he concedes, “but they will undoubtedly prevail in the end.” He contrasts the irony with Hamas: “They want the I.D.F. to kill their civilians. They want as many civilians killed as possible because that then provokes the inevitable international demand for ceasefire, condemning Israel for War Crimes,” he concludes while shaking his head at the anticipated perversion of justice.

Asked about pressure from the United States, Douglas Murray elucidated his view that “You should be courteous to your allies but not subservient to them,” earning a strong round of applause. “The future of this State, of the Jewish people must be in the hands of the Jewish people,” he continued.” It cannot be in the hands of anyone else. It cannot be in the hands of people who, for instance say the day after the massacre of October 7th that this is why we need to double down on the two state solution. It just can’t be in the hands of people going at that kind of slow speed”, he says.


Had the events of Oct.7th happened in the U.S.A., Murray points out, proportionately over 120,000 Americans would have been massacred on one day. “Nobody can tell me that the Americans would have listened to anyone then, nor should they, “he adds. The one potential outcome of the war that Murray absolutely rejects is that the situation might return to the status quo ante of October 6th. “Israel must be allowed to win,” he asserts. “It cannot simply always be encouraged to fight for a stalemate.” Regarding the as of yet unresolved situation with Hezbollah, Murray poked fun at the thought that we will all have to relearn the map of the North and become experts again on the Litani River. “Since 2006 it’s just been a replay of the same thing,” he says. “It just feels like Groundhog Day,” he quips to the amused young people in the room. And then in a more somber tone: “Anything other than actual victory by the Israelis in this conflict is unacceptable because all of these efforts to make Israel fight into a stalemate will simply prepare the groundwork for the next war and this country deserves not to be forced into perpetual war,” he emphasizes.


According to Colonel Kemp’s analysis much of what has transpired in the world in terms of instability with the Ukraine and now Gaza has to do with a weak image projected by President Joe Biden. On the other hand, Kemp considers that Biden has been strongly in favour of Israel and the U.S. unlikely to pressure Israel to desist its military operations. For this dichotomous view Kemp actually earned applause from both Biden supporters and detractors.


The moderator brought up the tragic issue of the three hostages who had been mistakenly killed by Israeli troops. Douglas Murray reflected on the incident and said that he was genuinely shocked by “the lack of empathy for Israel internationally”. A glaring example of such a lack of empathy he suggested could be found with the posters of the hostages in various cities around the world. What followed was another of Murray’s innovative insights: “If you put up a poster of a missing cat or dog in your neighbourhood you would not expect anyone to rip it down,” he matter of factly suggests. “And if anyone did rip it down you would think that person was subhuman. You would think what kind of a sick person are we dealing with here?” he asks. “And this wasn’t dogs or cats. These were Jewish children. And in city after city sociopaths tore down these posters…This lack of empathy has been there since the day (Oct.7th G.E.) itself. And the media treats it as more evidence of the brutality of the Israeli soldiers – they even kill their own! Imagine the lives of those soldiers who shot those three hostages, how they must have felt. And yet instead of recognizing what a tragedy that is for everybody involved they use it as a weapon against Israel!” Murray’s damning condemnation resounds through the packed but quiet room. “That really has slightly startled me in this conflict,” he continued to reflect in an afterthought.


The door was left open for a little humour when the Moderator, in her last question, asked about the Day After. Colonel Kemp was first to pick up the gauntlet: “I think we need a two state solution with the United Nations supervising it,” he said without flinching and with a stiff British upper lip to boot which held tightly in place until the audience stopped laughing. And then more seriously his sober insight: “The I.D.F. has no option, whatsoever, apart from to stay in control of Gaza from now on. It doesn’t matter what anyone else thinks; it doesn’t matter what President Biden might wish to happen…What is absolutely certain is that the I.D.F. must maintain security control of Gaza. It means either a permanent IDF presence inside the whole of Gaza or it means the creation of a one or two mile buffer zone on the inside of the Gaza border which no one is allowed to go into and which the I.D.F can police.”
Kemp had nary a kind word to say about the folks on the other side:”The reality in Gaza is that the vast majority of the population of allegedly innocent civilians support Hamas, even when they see the horrors that Hamas has brought on them, they still support Hamas . And there will be efforts to have a Hamas 2,” the Colonel warned.


Murray concurs that it is a “very bleak necessity” but that Israel will need to stay in Gaza. For how long? “Call me a pessimist,” says Kemp, “but I would say forever.” Like his colleague, Murray also spends some of his days visiting the wounded in hospitals. On a recent visit he met one of the victims, a farmer, from a border Kibbutz who had lost his wife, son and both of his legs in the Hamas attack of Oct.7th . “He said something that has really stuck with me,” Murray recalled, “He said, ‘I have been a leftist all my life. I now want to look out on nothing but potato fields from here to the Mediterranean.’ Who can risk living beside these people? Nobody else in the world would be expected to have to put up with that. I don’t think the Israelis have to be an experiment test case either. I think you should have the right to live in peace and to know that the border you have does not contain genocidal maniacs on the other side who wish to kill you all.”


In the question period which followed, Murray was asked what changes he would like to see in present day Britain. “Obviously the first thing I’d do would be to make Richard Kemp Minister of Defence,” he suggests to uproarious laughter from the crowd. “I assume you’ll be Prime Minister, will you,” Kemp shot back. Feigning humility, Murray wistfully demurred saying only, “If the nations calls…” Presumably, they may one day.


Getting more serious Murray took aim at the “appalling” pro Hamas demonstrations which took place in London and included one on Remembrance Day. “I think it’s been shameful,” he said. “I want no Hamas supporters in my country. And that’s quite easy to arrange in my view,” he added making reference to a case in point of Muhammud Sawalha, a key Hamas terrorist from the West Bank who subsequently obtained British citizenship. “To get a British passport you must, among other things sign a form that says you are a person of good character. I submit that he is not a person of good character,” said Murray, “and that he lied on his form when he said that he was. I would like to see his citizenship stripped and I would like to see him deported and to try his luck in Gaza.” On a humorous roll, Murray recalled the case of a young lady whose British passport was recalled when she returned from having joined Isis and tried to pretend – once the Caliphate fell apart – that she didn’t know that they were actually a “murderous, head-hacking group” and besides, “we all make mistakes”. She shouldn’t get her passport back argued Murray maintaining vociferously that “If you’re with an Islamist death cult you should not be allowed to be in Britain.”


Colonel Kemp fielded a question about another hot potato issue, that of missiles being fired from Yemen which no one seems to be doing anything about. “Yemen has been firing missiles into Israel since the war began including the first ever in history engagement in space when a Houthi ballistic missile was intercepted by an Israeli Aero missile outside the earth’s atmosphere. They’ve been firing numerous missiles and drones towards Israel, all of which have been shot down.” Unless a message is sent soon to Yemen and Iran by the U.S. Kemp warns that war in Lebanon will be inevitable.


A visiting American Major with a pronounced Midwestern drawl asked Colonel Kemp if he could explain the concept known as “the fog of war”. “It’s an extraordinary thing that doesn’t apply anywhere else in life,” said Kemp, “you have very often young, inexperienced soldiers in the reserves with a limited amount of recent training and then suddenly they are thrown into Gaza which I would say is one of the most treacherous and demanding battlefields that anyone has fought on in the history of warfare. And they’re expected to always make the right decision. That simply cannot happen. We all make mistakes. And that’s when nobody is shooting at us. Nobody is trying to kill us. We haven’t suffered lack of sleep for days on end, we’re not cold, hungry, we’re not terrified and yet we still make mistakes. So how can these guys not make mistakes? And the enemy is trying to fool you all the time, trying to make you think that the reality in front of your eyes is not the reality in front of your eyes. And the difference is when a soldier makes a mistake very often people die as a consequence.” The reference that was embedded on most peoples’ minds was the recent tragic killing of the three Israeli hostages by friendly fire.


Murray was asked about the effect of “hasbara” (P.R. G.E) in the current war. “I believe they should be given some credit for they have done a better job that any time previously that I have been covering since 2006”, he said. Taking the Al-Shifa hospital as an example, Murray pointed out that Israel “got on top of it very fast” like releasing the closed circuit TV footage of the hostages being led in to the hospital and showing the weapons cache that was discovered there. But at the same time, he underscores why not even the best P.R. may succeed in certain circumstances. “The minute they show that the hospital has an arms dump inside it and has a load of kalashnikovs and grenades , Jeremy Bowen of the BBC goes on and is asked about it and says, ‘well, it is not inconceivable that the kalshnikovs belonged to the hospital’s security department’. On the television the next day I said, ‘yes, and it’s possible the grenades were for the cardiology department’.” Murray’s point is well taken. No matter how strong the evidence is, it is not necessarily strong enough to overcome bias.


Kemp concurs, “This extraordinary propaganda campaign against Israel – everything that Israel does is wrong. For the past 10 years the BBC has not allowed me to speak on any program about Israel. Any other security issue, any other country I’m on all the time on the BBC just not about Israel. I got a call a few weeks back asking if I would do an interview about Israel. I almost fell off my chair,” recalls Kemp. “Then I realized what was going on. They had been heavily criticized and were under a lot of pressure for their lies about Al-Alhi hospital attack (where Israel was wrongly blamed for the bombing, G.E.) They felt we need to show how broadminded we are, so we’ll even get this extremist Kemp on to speak. So that’s how I became a human shield for the BBC”, Kemp concluded with a wry smile.

In a final story, also about the BBC, Kemp relates that he was once invited to the BBC studio in Jerusalem to do a number of interviews. In the interview which was live from London he was asked why the IDF were so keen to send in ground forces to Gaza. I explained “they don’t want to go in on the ground, they know the problems with that. So I was asked then why do the politicians want to go in on the ground. I said they don’t. I’ve spoken to them, the Prime Minister, the Defence Minister they will only go in if they have to. The interviewer was completely stumped at this and all he could say was, ‘yes, but you’re a Jew’. Now how do you answer that,” Kemp asked incredulously. Do I say in a belligerent tone, “how dare you accuse me of being a Jew!?” But instead I said simply, “I don’t have that honour.”


“If I can just say something” interjected Murray, “about the youth of this country. So young! So brilliant! So vivacious. I met a young woman the other day of 21 who was an expert on Yemen! Why her contemporary in America is being educated to become stupid and wicked!” his observation met by peals of laughter. Then more seriously, “I have been so moved by these young people. They will be an example not just to Israel but to the people of the world. And if I may leave you with one last thought,” he continued. “I know this period is incredibly troubling, disturbing, upsetting and much more for the people of this country. I think the country is still going through a trauma, trying to work out what was done to you in October. You asked at the beginning why we do this. I would just say whether I can answer it or not, it is the honour of my life to be standing in alliance with you.”


The evening done, the young people rushed the small stage to take selfies with both fine gentlemen. Douglas Murray and Colonel Richard Kemp. Two of Israel’s most beloved friends, indeed.

Gabriel Emanuel is a former Winnipegger.

An edited version of this article first appeared in the Jerusalem Post, December 29, 2023 .

Features

Israel Has Always Been Treated Differently

By HENRY SREBRNIK We think of the period between 1948 and 1967 as one where Israel was largely accepted by the international community and world opinion, in large part due to revulsion over the Nazi Holocaust. Whereas the Arabs in the former British Mandate of Palestine were, we are told, largely forgotten.

But that’s actually not true. Israel declared its independence on May 14,1948 and fought for its survival in a war lasting almost a year into 1949. A consequence was the expulsion and/or flight of most of the Arab population. In the immediate aftermath of the Second World War, millions of other people across the world were also driven from their homes, and boundaries were redrawn in Europe and Asia that benefited the victorious states, to the detriment of the defeated countries. That is indeed forgotten.

Israel was not admitted to the United Nations until May 11, 1949. Admission was contingent on Israel accepting and fulfilling the obligations of the UN Charter, including elements from previous resolutions like the November 29, 1947 General Assembly Resolution 181, the Partition Plan to create Arab and Jewish states in Palestine. This became a dead letter after Israel’s War of Independence. The victorious Jewish state gained more territory, while an Arab state never emerged. Those parts of Palestine that remained outside Israel ended up with Egypt (Gaza) and Jordan (the Old City of Jerusalem and the West Bank). They were occupied by Israel in 1967, after another defensive war against Arab states.

And even at that, we should recall, UN support for the 1947 partition plan came from a body at that time dominated by Western Europe and Latin American states, along with a Communist bloc temporarily in favour of a Jewish entity, at a time when colonial powers were in charge of much of Asia and Africa. Today, such a plan would have had zero chance of adoption. 

After all, on November 10, 1975, the General Assembly, by a vote of 72 in favour, 35 against, with 32 abstentions, passed Resolution 3379, which declared Zionism “a form of racism.” Resolution 3379 officially condemned the national ideology of the Jewish state. Though it was rescinded on December 16, 1991, most of the governments and populations in these countries continue to support that view.

As for the Palestinian Arabs, were they forgotten before 1967? Not at all. The United Nations General Assembly adopted resolution 194 on December 11, 1948, stating that “refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible.” This is the so-called right of return demanded by Israel’s enemies.

As well, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) was established Dec. 8, 1949. UNRWA’s mandate encompasses Palestinians who fled or were expelled during the 1948 war and subsequent conflicts, as well as their descendants, including legally adopted children. More than 5.6 million Palestinians are registered with UNRWA as refugees. It is the only UN agency dealing with a specific group of refugees. The millions of all other displaced peoples from all other wars come under the auspices of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). Yet UNRWA has more staff than the UNHRC.

But the difference goes beyond the anomaly of two structures and two bureaucracies. In fact, they have two strikingly different mandates. UNHCR seeks to resettle refugees; UNRWA does not. When, in 1951, John Blanford, UNRWA’s then-director, proposed resettling up to 250,000 refugees in nearby Arab countries, those countries reacted with rage and refused, leading to his departure. The message got through. No UN official since has pushed for resettlement.

Moreover, the UNRWA and UNHCR definitions of a refugee differ markedly. Whereas the UNHCR services only those who’ve actually fled their homelands, the UNRWA definition covers “the descendants of persons who became refugees in 1948,” without any generational limitations.

Israel is the only country that’s the continuous target of three standing UN bodies established and staffed solely for the purpose of advancing the Palestinian cause and bashing Israel — the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People; the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestinian People; and the Division for Palestinian Rights in the UN’s Department of Political Affairs.

Israel is also the only state whose capital city, Jerusalem, with which the Jewish people have been umbilically linked for more than 3,000 years, is not recognized by almost all other countries.

So from its very inception until today, Israel has been treated differently than all other states, even those, such as the Democratic Republic of Congo, Somalia, and Sudan, immersed in brutal civil wars from their very inception. Newscasts, when reporting about the West Bank, use the term Occupied Palestinian Territories, though there are countless such areas elsewhere on the globe. 

Even though Israel left Gaza in September 2005 and is no longer in occupation of the strip (leading to its takeover by Hamas, as we know), this has been contested by the UN, which though not declaring Gaza “occupied” under the legal definition, has referred to Gaza under the nomenclature of “Occupied Palestinian Territories.” It seems Israel, no matter what it does, can’t win. For much of the world, it is seen as an “outlaw” state.

Henry Srebrnik is a professor of political science at the University of Prince Edward Island.

Continue Reading

Features

Why New Market Launches Can Influence Investment Strategies

New market launches play a critical role in shaping how investors plan, diversify, and execute their financial strategies. When a company transitions from private ownership to public trading, it creates fresh opportunities for capital participation, valuation discovery, and long-term growth assessment. An upcoming IPO often attracts retail and institutional investors alike, as it offers an opportunity to invest at an early public stage. These launches influence market sentiment, sector momentum, and portfolio allocation decisions, making them an important consideration for anyone seeking to align investment strategies with evolving market dynamics. Understanding how new listings affect pricing, risk, and long-term potential helps investors make more informed, disciplined choices.

Understanding the Role of New Market Launches

New market launches introduce fresh capital, innovation, and competition into public markets. They often signal broader economic trends and provide insights into emerging sectors. For investors, these launches are more than just new tickers—they shape market behavior and strategic planning.

Expanding Market Opportunities

New listings expand the investable universe by introducing companies that were previously inaccessible. This allows investors to explore new industries, technologies, or business models, helping diversify portfolios and reduce reliance on mature or saturated sectors.

Price Discovery and Valuation Dynamics

Initial listings go through a price-discovery phase in which demand and supply determine valuation. This process can create short-term volatility but also offers strategic entry points for investors who understand fundamentals and market sentiment.

Capital Flow Redistribution

When new companies enter the market, capital often shifts from existing stocks to new offerings. This redistribution can influence sector performance and temporarily affect broader indices, thereby altering portfolio allocation strategies.

Reflection of Economic Confidence

A steady flow of new listings often reflects positive economic sentiment and business confidence. Investors monitor these signals to gauge market health and adjust their equity exposure accordingly.

Increased Market Liquidity

New launches contribute to overall market liquidity by increasing the number of tradable shares. Increased liquidity improves price efficiency and offers investors more flexibility in executing trades.

How New Listings Shape Investor Decision-Making

Investment strategies are not static; they evolve based on market conditions and available opportunities. New market launches influence how investors assess risk, timing, and portfolio balance.

Risk Assessment and Appetite

Newly listed companies may carry higher uncertainty due to limited public financial history. Investors must evaluate their risk tolerance and decide whether early exposure aligns with their overall strategy.

Portfolio Diversification

Including new listings can enhance diversification by adding exposure to different revenue models or growth stages. This helps balance portfolios that may be overly concentrated in established companies.

Short-Term vs Long-Term Strategies

Some investors seek short-term gains driven by listing momentum, while others focus on long-term value creation. Understanding this distinction helps align new investments with broader financial goals.

Sector Rotation Strategies

New listings often emerge from high-growth sectors. Investors may rotate capital into these sectors early, anticipating future expansion and innovation-led growth.

Behavioral Influence on Markets

Public interest and media coverage surrounding new listings can influence investor behavior. Awareness of sentiment-driven movements helps investors avoid emotional decision-making.

Evaluating New Market Launches Effectively

Not all new listings present equal opportunities. A structured evaluation framework helps investors separate strong prospects from speculative risks.

Business Model Strength

Understanding how a company generates revenue and maintains profitability is a fundamental part of evaluating new market entrants. A well-defined business model shows how products or services create value for customers and how that value is monetized. Scalable models, diversified revenue streams, and predictable income sources often indicate stronger resilience and long-term investment potential, especially in competitive or evolving industries.

Financial Transparency

Clear and detailed financial disclosures help investors assess a company’s overall health and risk profile. Reviewing revenue growth, operating margins, debt obligations, and cash flow stability provides insight into financial discipline and sustainability. Transparent reporting practices reflect management accountability and reduce uncertainty, enabling investors to make informed decisions based on reliable data rather than speculation.

Competitive Positioning

A company’s ability to compete effectively within its industry is a key determinant of future performance. Investors analyze market share, differentiation strategies, pricing power, and barriers to entry to understand competitive advantages. Strong positioning suggests the company can defend its market position, withstand competitive pressures, and capitalize on emerging opportunities over time.

Management and Governance

Leadership quality plays a crucial role in long-term value creation. Experienced executives with a track record of execution, combined with robust corporate governance structures, signal operational credibility. Transparent decision-making, independent oversight, and ethical practices help reduce risk and align management actions with shareholder interests, particularly for newly listed companies.

Growth Sustainability

While rapid expansion can attract attention, sustainable growth is what supports lasting returns. Investors assess whether realistic assumptions, operational capacity, and consistent market demand support growth projections. Balanced expansion strategies that prioritize profitability, efficiency, and long-term planning are often viewed as more reliable than aggressive growth that strains resources or increases financial risk.

Strategic Timing and Market Conditions

The success of an upcoming IPO is closely linked to strategic timing and prevailing market conditions, which significantly influence investor response and post-listing performance. Market sentiment plays a decisive role, as optimistic, growth-driven environments often generate strong demand for new listings, supporting positive price momentum after debut. In contrast, cautious or volatile markets can suppress enthusiasm, limiting upside potential even for fundamentally strong companies. Alongside sentiment, macroeconomic factors such as interest rate trends, monetary policy direction, and fiscal measures shape capital allocation decisions. Lower interest rates generally encourage investors to seek growth opportunities through IPOs, while tighter policy conditions may dampen risk appetite. Together, timing, sentiment, and policy context form a critical framework for investors to evaluate entry strategies for upcoming IPOs.

Conclusion

New market launches have a meaningful influence on investment strategies by introducing fresh opportunities, shifting capital flows, and shaping market sentiment. From diversification and growth exposure to timing and risk management, these listings require thoughtful evaluation and disciplined execution. By understanding their broader impact and aligning participation with financial goals, investors can integrate new opportunities into well-structured portfolios while maintaining balance and long-term focus.

Continue Reading

Features

Are Niche and Unconventional Relationships Monopolizing the Dating World?

The question assumes a battle being waged and lost. It assumes that something fringe has crept into the center and pushed everything else aside. But the dating world has never operated as a single system with uniform rules. People have always sorted themselves according to preference, circumstance, and opportunity. What has changed is the visibility of that sorting and the tools available to execute it.

Online dating generated $10.28 billion globally in 2024. By 2033, projections put that figure at $19.33 billion. A market of that size does not serve one type of person or one type of relationship. It serves demand, and demand has always been fragmented. The apps and platforms we see now simply make that fragmentation visible in ways that provoke commentary.

Relationship Preferences

Niche dating platforms now account for nearly 30 percent of the online dating market, and projections suggest they could hold 42 percent of market share by 2028. This growth reflects how people are sorting themselves into categories that fit their actual lives.

Some want a sugar relationship, others seek partners within specific religious or cultural groups, and still others look for connections based on hobbies or lifestyle choices. The old model of casting a wide net has given way to something more targeted.

A YouGov poll found 55 percent of Americans prefer complete monogamy, while 34 percent describe their ideal relationship as something other than monogamous. About 21 percent of unmarried Americans have tried consensual non-monogamy at some point. These numbers do not suggest a takeover. They suggest a population with varied preferences now has platforms that accommodate those preferences openly rather than forcing everyone into the same structure.

The Numbers Tell a Different Story

Polyamory and consensual non-monogamy receive substantial attention in media coverage and on social platforms. The actual practice rate sits between 4% and 5% of the American population. That figure has remained relatively stable even as public awareness has increased. Being aware of something and participating in it are separate behaviors.

A 2020 YouGov poll reported that 43% of millennials describe their ideal relationship as non-monogamous. Ideals and actions do not always align. People answer surveys about what sounds appealing in theory. They then make decisions based on their specific circumstances, available partners, and emotional capacity. The gap between stated preference and lived reality is substantial.

Where Young People Are Looking

Gen Z accounts for more than 50% of Hinge users. According to a 2025 survey by The Knot, over 50% of engaged couples met through dating apps. These platforms have become primary infrastructure for forming relationships. They are not replacing traditional dating; they are the context in which traditional dating now occurs.

Younger users encounter more relationship styles on these platforms because the platforms allow for it. Someone seeking a conventional monogamous partnership will still find that option readily available. The presence of other options does not eliminate this possibility. It adds to the menu.

Monopoly Implies Exclusion

The framing of the original question suggests that niche relationships might be crowding out mainstream ones. Monopoly means one entity controls a market to the exclusion of competitors. Nothing in the current data supports that characterization.

Mainstream dating apps serve millions of users seeking conventional relationships. These apps have added features to accommodate other preferences, but their core user base remains people looking for monogamous partnerships. The addition of new categories does not subtract from existing ones. Someone filtering for a specific religion or hobby does not prevent another person from using the same platform without those filters.

What Actually Changed

Two things happened. First, apps built segmentation into their business models because segmentation increases user satisfaction. People find what they want faster when they can specify their preferences. Second, social acceptance expanded for certain relationship types that previously operated in private or faced stigma.

Neither of these developments amounts to a monopoly. They amount to market differentiation and cultural acknowledgment. A person seeking a sugar arrangement and a person seeking marriage can both use apps built for their respective purposes. They are not competing for the same resources.

The Perception Problem

Media coverage tends toward novelty. A story about millions of people using apps to find conventional relationships does not generate engagement. A story about unconventional relationship types generates clicks, comments, and shares. This creates a perception gap between how often something is discussed and how often it actually occurs.

The 4% to 5% practicing polyamory receive disproportionate coverage relative to the 55% who prefer complete monogamy. The coverage is not wrong, but it creates an impression of prevalence that exceeds reality.

Where This Leaves Us

Niche relationships are not monopolizing dating. They are becoming more visible and more accommodated by platforms that benefit from serving specific needs. The majority of people seeking relationships still want conventional arrangements, and they still find them through the same channels.

The dating world is larger than it was before. It contains more explicit options. It allows people to state preferences that once required inference or luck. None of this constitutes a takeover. It constitutes an expansion. The space for one type of relationship did not shrink to make room for another. The total space grew.

Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News