Understanding Business Risks

They Don’t Teach You in MBA School. They say hotels fail because of poor markets, high costs, or low occupancy. But that’s only the surface. Dig deeper, and you’ll find 10 repeating patterns—blind spots even seasoned investors fall into. I’ve seen these unfold across decades of hoteliering. And almost every time, failure wasn’t inevitable. It was a slow leak, not a sudden burst. Let me share what the Vesta Report and experience taught me. These aren’t just mistakes—they’re myths we believed, and paid the price for. 1. Hiring Cheap, Paying Dearly You saved a few lakhs hiring a discount GM. But you lost crores in GOP. Great talent costs more—but it earns trust, builds teams, and drives top lines. Never settle for mediocrity in leadership. 2. Misreading the Market Wave Buy high, sell low—and blame the economy? That’s not strategy. It’s roulette. Hotel cycles are predictable—if you study RevPAR trends, pipeline data, and capital flows. Ride the wave, or be crushed by it. 3. Location Blindness You can’t renovate your way out of a bad location. Crime, poor access, or declining demand generators will erode value—no matter how plush your bedsheets are. 4. Over-Leveraging Dreams Spreadsheets don’t sweat. Cash flows do. Leverage magnifies risk. And when markets dip, high-interest debt eats equity like fire through silk. Discipline beats optimism. 5. The Illusion of Proformas Brokers paint dreams. Reality lives in historicals. Most first-timers invest in pitch decks. The pros invest in due diligence. Always. 6. Underestimating Cost Overruns That unapproved doorknob? It might cost you lakhs in rework. Planning saves money. Poor planning bleeds confidence, timelines, and cash. 7. Ignoring Future Competition You opened today. Ten more open tomorrow. Welcome to oversupply. If you’re not tracking new builds and approvals, you’re not running a business—you’re playing blindfold chess. 8. Running Out of Oxygen (aka Working Capital) Hotels are living organisms. They need capital to breathe. When you cut reinvestment, reduce buffers, and run lean—you starve the soul of your business. And once service dips, reviews follow. 9. Stubborn, Slow, Inflexible Management If your systems are old, your mindset older, and your tech slower than your guest’s mobile network—you’re already losing. Agility is no longer optional. 10. Forgetting the Service Soul When we forget that we’re in the business of care, not keys—guests leave. Staff disengage. And hotels crumble. Poor service and poor maintenance kill faster than poor strategy ever will. ⸻ Hotels don’t fail overnight. They fail because leadership fell asleep at the wheel. Don’t be that investor who reads reports only after the failure. Be the one who learns before the fall. Which one of these 10 hit hardest for you? Let’s open the floor to real stories and tough truths. #HotelInvestments #HospitalityLeadership #WhyHotelsFail #GRTHotels #grthotelsandresorts #LeadershipLessons #ThePromiseOfMore

🔔 Are LVMH's Q3 results a warning for the luxury sector? 👇 World’s largest luxury group, LVMH, reported a 5% drop in its fashion and leather goods segment in Q3, missing analysts’ expectations of 0-2% growth. 📉 This unexpected decline sent its stock down 7% on the Paris market, raising concerns about the broader industry, as LVMH typically outperforms competitors. 🇨🇳 🇯🇵 🇺🇸 🇪🇺 The slowdown was driven by weak Chinese consumer confidence, with Asia (excluding Japan) sales falling 16%. Japan’s growth also slowed to 20%, down from 57% last quarter. In comparison, the US and Europe saw flat performance, with 0% and 1% growth, though trade tensions between these regions remain a concern. 💰 To protect margins, LVMH raised prices but this strategy risks alienating aspirational consumers, further complicating its efforts to balance exclusivity with demand. Individual segments tell the same story : • Fashion & leather goods: 5% drop, with Dior’s growth momentum slowing. • Watches & jewelry: 4% decline, despite Tiffany’s renovations. • Wine & spirits: 7% drop, hit by trade tensions and a poor champagne harvest. Looking ahead, LVMH remains optimistic about China’s long-term growth but acknowledges persistent economic headwinds. 🎄 As the holiday season approaches, results from Kering and Hermès will indicate whether these challenges are industry-wide. 🤔 My thoughts? The luxury goods market is entering a critical phase where growth can no longer be taken for granted. Brands will need to adapt to softening demand & geopolitical risks. The market’s future success will belong to those that move beyond tradition and redefine luxury in ways that resonate with evolving consumer expectations: mainly revolving around digital innovation & experiential retail. The upcoming holiday season will reveal which companies are prepared to adapt... #luxury #business #retail #fashion #markets #innovation #lvmh

New mines now take nearly 18 years to go from discovery to first production. In the 1990s, it took just 6. That gap tells you everything about where the industry is today. The delays are everywhere. Permitting is slower. Financing is harder. Feasibility and construction get stuck in limbo. In the US, the average lead time is now over 19 years. Globally, it’s 15.5. And that’s just the average. Some projects are stretching to 30 or 40 years. Look at Donlin in Alaska, discovered in 1990, still not in production. Wafi-Golpu in Papua New Guinea has been stalled since 1990 too. Resolution in Arizona is still in limbo. Every project has its own mix of tribal, environmental, or regulatory hurdles. And every delay adds risk, cost, and uncertainty. This isn’t about bad geology. The resources are there. The challenge is everything that comes after the drill hits ore. Even after a positive feasibility study, it can take a decade to move. In some cases, the process stalls completely if political winds shift. If we want new supply, the timelines need to come down. Not by cutting corners, but by clearing bottlenecks. Exploration is already high-risk. If development becomes a multi-decade gamble, fewer will play. #Mining #Exploration #Development #Permitting #Metals #Copper Sources: https://lnkd.in/gVMDz9Gf https://www.harmony.co.za https://www.novagold.com

FASHON BRANDS TARGETED AS UNITED STATES SEES SHARP RISE IN GREENWASHING LAWSUITS: New research suggests fashion retailers face a heightened threat of being sued over making misleading green claims. The findings suggests the growth of sustainability reporting has led to a corresponding increase in false advertising class-action lawsuits that allege companies cannot substantiate their claims. Global law firm Mintz says there were at least 17 greenwashing class-action cases filed or decided within the two years prior to June 2023 in the US. Mintz also found a significant number of these class-action cases have survived initial motions to dismiss - a major hurdle to be navigated by groups making class action claims. The company said: “Class claims that proceed past a motion to dismiss stage, especially those that are certified, may have uncertain outcomes, be expensive to litigate, and can result in costly settlements for companies as well as significant reputational harm.” However, Mintz says a few simple measures can be taken by brands to ensure they are not successfully sued - pouring cold water on the notion of 'green-hushing' now being pushed by some parts of the fashion industry. The law firm suggests there are various reasons why courts have dismissed greenwashing lawsuits based on existing cases. One of these is where companies have “showed their work” by publicly outlining their methodology or the factual basis of their sustainability claims. Mintz also said companies should avoid making demonstrably inaccurate statements and using broad or vague terms. https://lnkd.in/eEgYjPnV

👥 Conversation between Credit Manager & Sales Manager- (Sales brings the horse, Credit checks if it can run the race): Sales Manager (Sanjay): “Ravi, you’re rejecting too many cases. Clients get frustrated, and we’re missing business. Targets are slipping because of you guys in credit.” Credit Manager (Ravi): “Sanjay, I understand your pain. But let me explain — sales looks at business potential, while credit looks at repayment potential. Both are different.” Sanjay: “But clients are asking for loans, isn’t that good for business?” Ravi: “Not always. A loan is not a sale of product like soap or clothes. It’s the sale of money. If the customer doesn’t return it with interest, the bank loses capital. That’s why credit teams ask tough questions.” Sanjay (smiling): “So, you’re not my enemy?” Ravi (laughs): “No yaar, we’re partners. Sales brings the horse, Credit checks if it can run the race.” Concepts Ravi Explains to Sanjay: 1️⃣ Risk Appetite vs Growth Appetite Sales chases numbers (disbursement, client onboarding). Credit focuses on asset quality & risk. 👉 Both are important. Too much growth = NPAs. Too much caution = no growth. 2️⃣ Good Customer vs Suitable Customer Not every client who “wants” money is suitable. A suitable borrower = stable business, repayment capacity, acceptable risk. 👉 Sales sees “yes,” Credit filters to “who actually qualifies.” 3️⃣ Short-Term Target vs Long-Term Portfolio Sales wants quarterly target achievement. Credit looks at 3–5 year loan health. 👉 Loan written today = risk for many years, not just this quarter. 4️⃣ Collaboration Instead of Conflict If Sales shares client info transparently, Credit can structure better deals. If Credit explains risks clearly, Sales can pitch realistically. 👉 Together they can grow safely. Lesson: Banking success comes when Sales drives growth and Credit controls risk. Both are two wheels of the same cycle — without balance, the journey fails. #BankingWisdom #CreditVsSales #RiskManagement #FinanceTips #CorporateLife #SustainableGrowth

WHY MORE FILMS WOULD GET MADE IF FILMMAKERS SPENT MORE TIME LEARNING BUSINESS AND FINANCE In independent film, great scripts and talent are only half the equation. The other half is business. And the truth is simple: if filmmakers spent significantly more time understanding business, finance, structure, and professional etiquette, far more movies would actually get made. Filmmaking is art, but film production is commerce. Studios, financiers, private equity, family offices, senior lenders, and strategic partners make decisions based on risk, structure, collateral, returns, and credibility. If you don’t understand their language, you’re asking them to take on risk they can’t quantify. You can’t pitch a film without understanding how money flows. Most filmmakers don’t fully understand how equity, debt, tax credits, gap, presales, waterfalls, senior lenders, and delivery obligations work. If you can’t explain where the money comes from, how it’s protected, and how it gets paid back, you’re not pitching — you’re guessing. Professional etiquette matters. You can’t reach out to people asking for free advice, asking them to do work they normally get paid for, or asking for introductions without providing value. Deals get done when both sides benefit. Deals fall apart when one side only cares about what they need. The industry responds to people who understand the business. Financiers back filmmakers who show they understand structure, risk mitigation, budgets, incentives, and realistic timelines. They look for professionalism, clarity, and discipline — not desperation, ego, or entitlement. More knowledge equals more greenlights. When filmmakers understand business: budgets become realistic, schedules become achievable, pitches become credible, investors become comfortable, deal structures become clear, and risk becomes manageable. And when risk becomes manageable, deals close. Creativity still wins — but professionalism opens the door. No one expects filmmakers to become bankers. But understanding the basics of finance, incentives, capital structure, repayment, and investor expectations dramatically increases the likelihood that a project gets financed and delivered. The filmmakers who take the business seriously — who invest time learning the financial mechanics, the etiquette, the structure, and the language — are the ones who get the most movies made.

I have recently been asked to share my learnings about Business Continuity (BC) with the IIRSM emerging risk leaders group. I decided to start with some of the common misunderstandings about BC that I have come across in the past year. 1. BC is just a disaster recovery plan Reality: Disaster recovery is a specific term used for IT systems and data recovery after an event but it is often used in error for the recovery of facilities too. While disaster recovery focuses on restoring technology, BC ensures that essential processes, people, suppliers, facilities, and communications can continue during disruption. Why it matters: Focusing on IT means other operations may be missed. BC focuses on the recovery of critical processes and disaster recovery focuses on 'reconstruction' to resume normal operations. 2. BC can sit with our risk management function Reality: Risk management aims to reduce the likelihood of threats. BC assumes that threats will still materialise and focuses on how to operate despite them. When BC sits in the risk management function, less resource may be allocated to the discipline. Why it matters: Risk management without BC is like having fire prevention measures without a fire evacuation plan. 3. A Crisis management team and BC management team are the same Reality: Crisis management is about leading the organisation and making board decisions during an unexpected event. If you have a good BC management team, then an event is less likely to become a reputational crisis! In smaller organisations they may be the same team. Why it matters: Crisis management is the captain steering the ship; BC is the crew keeping the engines running. I see crisis management as the Gold (strategic) level and BC teams as the Silver (tactical) level. 4. BC is just making sure you have contingency plans in place Reality: A contingency plan focuses on specific scenarios, where BC is broader and more strategic, focusing on continuing operations, regardless of the cause of disruption. Why it matters: A contingency plan is an immediate and short term response to a specific problem or risk identified, where a BC plan covers the full timeline - before, during and after a disruption - to minimise operational downtime and maintain essential processes over a longer duration. 5. Resilience and BC are interchangeable terms Reality: BC is the capability to keep essential functions running during disruption whilst Resilience is the capacity to adapt and emerge stronger over time. BC is a tool within resilience-building, but resilience also involves culture, adaptability, and long-term strategy. Why it matters: A resilient organisation can adapt to unknown threats. BC alone may be too narrow. How They Fit Together Risk Management, Crisis Management, Disaster Recovery and Business Continuity are all very different, but interconnected, parts of Organisational Resilience. No one is more or less important than the other to keep a business, in business.

Chile’s Power Grid Collapsed: Could This Happen in Your Country? Yesterday, 90% of Chile lost power after a single failure in a 500 kV transmission line triggered cascading shutdowns. Millions were left in the dark, exposing the fragility of modern grids. What happened? 1. Metro systems stopped 2. Traffic lights failed, causing chaos 3. Mobile networks collapsed 4. Copper mines, including BHP’s Escondida, shut down Why does this matter? 1. Grid fragility is real: One weak link can bring down an entire system. 2. Industry impact is massive: Copper prices jumped as mines shut down. 3. Essential services rely on resilience: Hospitals and emergency response struggled to stay online. 4. Government intervention: A state of emergency was declared to restore order. Not the first time! Chile boasts one of the best power networks in South America, yet this isn’t the first major blackout: A. 2010: A power plant failure plunged much of Chile into darkness after an 8.8M earthquake. B. 2025 (yesterday): This was Chile’s worst blackout in over a decade, forcing a curfew and halting daily life. Why transmission networks are more critical than ever: 1. As we transition to net-zero, electricity demand is increasing, and grids are becoming more complex with high renewable penetration, electrification, and interconnections. 2. Transmission networks must be modernised and expanded to handle these changes, or grid instability will become more frequent. 3. Yesterday's blackout is a clear warning that without resilient infrastructure, achieving net-zero targets will be at risk. This isn’t the only major grid failure recently: a. Just last year, a severe blackout in South-East Europe exposed vulnerabilities in cross-border coordination. Read here: https://lnkd.in/eSBDWWMP b.  Even yesterday, I discussed the IEA’s latest report, which warns that power grids worldwide are at risk due to underinvestment and supply chain delays. Read here: https://lnkd.in/eyuJzETP Together with Prof. Aoife Foley, Chair in Net Zero Infrastructure at The University of Manchester, we are working to find innovative solutions to manage power system events like this as we move toward net-zero targets. With growing electrification and climate risks, what’s the biggest challenge to grid stability in 2025? Drop your thoughts below! #EnergyResilience #GridFailure #ChileBlackout #PowerSystems #Infrastructure #RenewableEnergy #FrequencyStability #VoltageStability #NetZero #Blackout #GridSecurity Source of image: NationalGrid

Climate change is a systemic problem Systemic problems create interconnected risks 🌍 Climate impacts do not unfold in isolation. They influence environmental, social and economic systems in ways that reinforce each other over time. Environmental pressures escalate as temperatures rise. Soil degradation, water scarcity, biodiversity loss, air pollution and marine impacts reduce ecosystem resilience and increase exposure to climate risks. Social risks intensify as conditions shift. Public health challenges expand due to heat stress and changes in disease patterns. Climate driven disruption increases forced migration. Inequality grows because communities with fewer resources face higher vulnerability and fewer adaptation pathways. Economic pressures emerge across value chains. Food insecurity rises as agricultural systems face climate stress. Energy poverty increases when infrastructure cannot keep pace with extreme weather. Housing and labor markets experience volatility as climate impacts disrupt local conditions. Resource related tensions become more common when availability shifts across regions. These dynamics show why climate action requires a systems perspective. Environmental, social and economic changes are interconnected. Each reinforces the next and shapes long term exposure. For companies, this positions sustainability as a strategic requirement. Effective decisions depend on understanding cascading risks, sector specific vulnerabilities and the relationships between climate drivers and business outcomes. This is central to governance, resilience and long term value creation. As expectations on disclosure, risk management and strategic alignment continue to grow, organizations that adopt a systems approach will be better prepared to anticipate change and respond with clarity. Which of these systemic pressures is most relevant for your sector today? I posted this diagram a while back and recent conversations have highlighted how important it is to understand climate change and its interconnected risks. #sustainability #sustainable #esg

When Group Chats Go Wrong: 5 Key Learning Lessons Last week's headline-making leak of internal communications from the Whitehouse highlights a common digital workplace risk: the wrong eyes seeing the wrong messages. 𝗗𝗶𝗴𝗶𝘁𝗮𝗹 𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗺𝘂𝗻𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗠𝗶𝘀𝗵𝗮𝗽𝘀 𝗢𝗳𝘁𝗲𝗻 𝗙𝗼𝗹𝗹𝗼𝘄 𝗮 𝗣𝗿𝗲𝗱𝗶𝗰𝘁𝗮𝗯𝗹𝗲 𝗣𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗻: 🚩 𝗨𝗻𝗶𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗱 𝗔𝗰𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀: Whether through technical error or human mistake, sensitive information reaches unintended recipients. 🚩 𝗨𝗻𝗳𝗶𝗹𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗲𝗱 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗻𝘁: Candid opinions and sensitive information, never meant for wider audiences, suddenly become exposed. 🚩 𝗗𝗮𝗺𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗼𝗹: Rushed attempts to contain the situation often create additional awkwardness and scrutiny. 𝗥𝗲𝗺𝗼𝘁𝗲 𝗪𝗼𝗿𝗸 𝗖𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗘𝘁𝗶𝗾𝘂𝗲𝘁𝘁𝗲: 𝟱 𝗔𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗯𝗹𝗲 𝗣𝗿𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗲𝘀 ✅ 𝗔𝘂𝗱𝗶𝘁 𝗣𝗮𝗿𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗶𝗽𝗮𝗻𝘁 𝗟𝗶𝘀𝘁𝘀 𝗥𝗲𝗴𝘂𝗹𝗮𝗿𝗹𝘆: Schedule monthly reviews of all group chats to remove individuals who no longer need access. ✅ 𝗜𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗖𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗿 𝗡𝗮𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘃𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀: Label chats precisely (e.g., "Q1 Budget Planning - Confidential") to reduce confusion and mistaken additions. ✅ 𝗖𝗿𝗲𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗣𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗺-𝗦𝗽𝗲𝗰𝗶𝗳𝗶𝗰 𝗚𝘂𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗲𝘀: Designate specific tools for different sensitivity levels—Slack for general communication, encrypted platforms for confidential discussions. ✅ 𝗘𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗯𝗹𝗶𝘀𝗵 𝗮 𝗩𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗦𝘁𝗲𝗽: Before sharing sensitive information, verify all participants with a quick "confirming everyone here should be part of this conversation." ✅ 𝗗𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗹𝗼𝗽 𝗮 𝗠𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗸𝗲 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝘁𝗼𝗰𝗼𝗹: Create standard language for gracefully addressing accidental inclusions without additional awkwardness. Coaching can help; let's chat. Follow Joshua Miller 𝗟𝗶𝗸𝗲 𝘄𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗱 𝗯𝘂𝘁 𝘄𝗮𝗻𝘁 𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗲? 📬 Subscribe To My NEW LinkedIn Newsletter: “𝗧𝗟;𝗗𝗥 𝗘𝘅𝗲𝗰𝘂𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗖𝗼𝗮𝗰𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗴: 𝟮-𝗠𝗶𝗻 𝗣𝗲𝗿𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗧𝗶𝗽𝘀”  ↳ https://rb.gy/i1o47z #Communication #RemoteWork #WorkplaceSecurity #GetAhead #CareerAdvice #ExecutiveCoahcing #CoachingTips #Job