Brands
Pepsico gets Delhi HC order to delete fake social media posts on Kurkure
MUMBAI: Kurkure, one of the favourite snacks of Indian kids, has gone through malign campaigns on social media questioning its food quality. Viral posts said that the snack can catch fire easily, implying it contains plastic. Now PepsiCo is fighting back legally to convince consumers that it isn’t true. Recently, the firm also spent Rs 20 million to curb the rumours, according to media reports.
It has secured an interim order from the Delhi High Court (HC) which allows PepsiCo to ask to delete hundreds of such maligning posts on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and YouTube. According to media reports, 20,000 Facebook posts, 3,412 Facebook links, 242 YouTube videos, 6 Instagram links, and 562 tweets about Kurkure have been ordered to be deleted. The order came following a petition moved by the company in May this year.
“Fake news suggesting that Kurkure has plastic in it has adversely affected brand’s reputation. Due to such fake and defamatory content circulating on the social media, PepsiCo India was constrained to move the Delhi High Court…this step has been taken to protect brand equity, a matter that we take very seriously at PepsiCo,” the company said as quoted by Quartz.
All the posts harmed brand reputation widely. PepsiCo India was forced to move the Delhi High Court and it issued an interim order on 1 June. The court will next hear the matter on 1 November.
PepsiCo India claimed in a blog that the snack burns not because it contains plastic, but because one of its main ingredients happens to be starch. “Also the vegetable oil that is used as another primary ingredient, expedites the burning. This holds true for all regular snack items like papads, poppadoms, papdis, that contain carbohydrates, proteins and fat,” the blog said.
Brands
UK’s OnlyFans seeks US investor at $3bn valuation after owner’s death
The adult video platform is seeking stability after the death of its billionaire owner
LONDON: OnlyFans is looking for a new partner. The London-based adult video platform is in advanced talks to sell a minority stake of less than 20 per cent to Architect Capital, a San Francisco-based investment firm, in a deal that would value the business at more than $3bn (£2.2bn).
The move is driven by an urgent need for stability. Leonid Radvinsky, the Ukrainian-American billionaire who owned OnlyFans, died of cancer last month at the age of 43, leaving the future of one of Britain’s most profitable privately held businesses suddenly uncertain.
The choice of Architect Capital is not arbitrary. The firm has deep expertise in financial services, which aligns neatly with OnlyFans’ ambitions to offer banking products to its creators, many of whom have long struggled to access basic financial services because of the nature of their work.
The numbers behind OnlyFans are, by any measure, staggering. The platform posted revenues of $1.4bn in the year to 30th November 2024, with a pre-tax profit of $684m, up four per cent on the prior year. Payments to creators totalled $7.2bn over the same period, a rise of nearly ten per cent. Radvinsky personally collected $701m in dividends from the business in 2024 alone, on top of more than $1bn in such payments he had already received. The platform, run through its parent company Felix International, hosts 4.6m creator accounts, with performers keeping 80 per cent of subscription proceeds and the platform pocketing the remaining 20 per cent. It has 377m fan accounts in total.
The current minority stake talks represent a notable scaling back of ambitions. In January, OnlyFans was reported to be in discussions with Architect about selling a majority stake of 60 per cent. Before that, the company had explored a sale to a consortium led by Forest Road Company, a Los Angeles-based investment firm. Neither deal materialised.
OnlyFans has built an enormously lucrative business on content that mainstream finance has long refused to touch. Now, with its owner gone and a $3bn valuation on the table, it is looking for the kind of respectable institutional backing that might finally persuade the banks to take its calls.
