Financial Data and Key Metrics Changes - Global RevPAR grew by 0.1% in Q3 2025, consistent with Q2 performance, driven by strong trading in EMEA-A and improvement in Greater China [4] - Year-to-date global RevPAR increased by 1.4% [20] - In the Americas, RevPAR decreased by 0.9% in Q3, with the U.S. down 1.6% due to slower trading conditions [4][5] - EMEA-A saw RevPAR growth of 2.8% in Q3, with year-to-date growth at 3.8% [5] - Greater China experienced a 1.8% decline in RevPAR in Q3, an improvement from previous quarters [6] Business Line Data and Key Metrics Changes - Rooms revenue for business days increased by 4% globally, while leisure and groups saw declines of 2% and 4% respectively [7] - System growth included the opening of 14,500 rooms across 99 hotels globally in Q3, marking a 17% year-on-year increase [8] - The Americas' gross system growth was 3.6% year-on-year, with 2,700 rooms opened in Q3 [9] - EMEA-A region achieved gross system growth of 10.4% year-on-year, with 4,200 rooms opened in Q3 [10] - Greater China reported gross system growth of 12.8% year-on-year, with 7,600 rooms opened in Q3 [11] Market Data and Key Metrics Changes - In EMEA-A, RevPAR growth varied by market, with the U.K. up 2.8% and the Middle East up 9.5% [6] - Greater China showed strong growth in Tier one cities, while Tier two to four cities faced declines [7] - The U.S. market continues to experience challenges with government travel down 20% compared to the previous year [5] Company Strategy and Development Direction - The company plans to launch a new collection brand focused on the premium segment, initially targeting the EMEA-A region [17][18] - The new brand aims to expand the company's offerings and attract more owners to its enterprise platform [17] - The company is optimistic about long-term demand drivers, despite short-term challenges in the U.S. market [16][30] Management's Comments on Operating Environment and Future Outlook - Management expressed confidence in the return to growth in the U.S. as economic uncertainty subsides [5] - The company remains on track to meet full-year profit and earnings expectations, with consensus for operating profits at $1.259 billion, implying 12% growth [14][15] - Management highlighted strong fundamentals in the U.S. economy, including low unemployment and resilient consumer spending [30][32] Other Important Information - The company is 78% through its $900 million share buyback program, reducing share count by 3.9% [12] - IHG plans to change the currency of its ordinary shares traded on the London Stock Exchange from British pounds to U.S. dollars starting January 2026 [13][14] Q&A Session Summary Question: Net system growth for 2026 and RevPAR outlook - Management is comfortable with consensus expectations for net system growth at around 4% for 2026, supported by strong signings and conversions [24][26] - RevPAR is expected to remain flat in Q4, with management confident in achieving growth in 2026 based on economic fundamentals [28][30] Question: New brand launch and U.S. demand weakness - The new brand launch is focused on the EMEA region due to a larger addressable market of independent hotels [39] - Weakness in U.S. leisure demand is attributed to several factors, including lower international inbound travel and temporary market conditions [44][45] Question: Ruby brand performance and churn rates - Ruby is performing well with five signings and 20 open hotels, with plans for further expansion in the U.S. [59] - Management aims to reduce churn rates to 1.5% over time, with no immediate need for brand refreshes [63] Question: U.S. occupancy and industry dynamics - Management noted that improved revenue management strategies have led to higher rates, leaving room for occupancy growth [71] - The company is optimistic about returning to pre-COVID occupancy levels, despite current challenges in the U.S. market [73]

Financial Data and Key Metrics Changes - Global RevPAR grew by 0.1% in Q3 2025, consistent with Q2 performance, driven by strong trading in EMEAA and improvement in Greater China [4][5] - Year-to-date global RevPAR increased by 1.4% [25] - In The Americas, RevPAR decreased by 0.9% in Q3, with a 1.6% decline in the U.S. due to slower trading conditions [5][6] - EMEAA saw a RevPAR increase of 2.8% in Q3, with year-to-date growth at 3.8% [7][8] - Greater China experienced a 1.8% decline in RevPAR in Q3, an improvement from previous quarters [8][9] Business Line Data and Key Metrics Changes - Rooms revenue for business days increased by 4% globally, while leisure and groups saw declines of 2% and 4% respectively [9] - System growth included 14,500 rooms opened across 99 hotels globally in Q3, marking a 17% year-on-year increase [10] - The Americas had a gross system growth of 3.6% year-on-year, with 2,700 rooms opened in Q3 [12] - EMEAA's system growth was 10.4% year-on-year, with 4,200 rooms opened in Q3 [13] - Greater China achieved a gross system growth of 12.8% year-on-year, with 7,600 rooms opened in Q3 [14] Market Data and Key Metrics Changes - In EMEAA, RevPAR growth varied by market, with strong performance in Southern Europe and a 9.5% increase in The Middle East [8] - The U.S. market continues to face challenges with government travel down 20% compared to the previous year [6] - Demand in Greater China is supported by the growing middle class, despite a decline in RevPAR [9] Company Strategy and Development Direction - The company plans to launch a new collection brand targeting the upscale to upper upscale segment, initially focusing on the EMEAA region [22][23] - The strategy includes expanding the portfolio of world-class brands and enhancing the enterprise platform for owners [22][23] - The company aims to maintain strong development activity, with 2025 projected to be one of the largest years for openings and signings [21][22] Management's Comments on Operating Environment and Future Outlook - Management expressed confidence in long-term demand drivers despite current slower trading conditions in the U.S. [21][22] - The outlook for 2025 includes expectations for operating profit growth of 12% and adjusted earnings per share growth of 15% [20] - Management highlighted positive economic fundamentals in the U.S., including strong employment and consumer spending [44][45] Other Important Information - The company is 78% through its $900 million share buyback program, which has reduced the share count by 3.9% [16] - A bond issuance of $4.1 billion is outstanding with a blended borrowing cost of around 4.3% [16] - The company plans to change the currency of its ordinary shares traded on the London Stock Exchange from British pounds to U.S. dollars starting January 2026 [17][18] Q&A Session Summary Question: Net system growth outlook for 2026 - Management is comfortable with the consensus of around 4% net system growth for 2026, supported by strong signings and conversions [32][36] Question: RevPAR expectations for 2026 - Management indicated that RevPAR is expected to remain flat in Q4, with a comfortable outlook for 2026 based on economic fundamentals [39][42] Question: Credit card fees increase - Management confirmed an increase of approximately $40 million in credit card fees for 2025, with a gradual increase over the next three years [52] Question: New brand launch details - Management will provide more details on the new brand launch in the coming months, including timing and projections [79] Question: Performance of Ruby brand - The Ruby brand is performing well with five signings since opening and plans for further expansion in the U.S. [89] Question: U.S. market occupancy concerns - Management acknowledged lower occupancy in the U.S. compared to pre-COVID levels but expressed optimism for recovery driven by improved revenue management and economic fundamentals [101][106]

Core Viewpoint - The competition between open-source and closed-source AI models is intensifying, with open-source models like DeepSeek and Qwen leading China's tech advancement globally. However, concerns about the profitability and economic impact of open-source models persist [1]. Group 1: Open-source vs Closed-source - Open-source software is characterized by community involvement beyond organizational boundaries, allowing for sustainable development and ecological growth [3]. - The distinction between open-source and closed-source languages is crucial, as open-source fosters broader participation and innovation [5]. - The coexistence of open-source and closed-source models is expected in the Web3.0 era, with both contributing to software development and user choice [6][9]. Group 2: Economic Impact of Open-source - Japan's experience with Ruby demonstrates that open-source languages can significantly enhance regional IT industries, allowing smaller contractors to engage in larger projects [10]. - The presence of Ruby in Shimane Prefecture has led to the establishment of a local ecosystem that attracts talent and fosters economic growth [10][11]. - The local government's support for Ruby-related projects has been successful, but there are concerns about potential complacency among companies due to guaranteed work [14]. Group 3: Lessons for China - China can learn from Japan's open-source initiatives to develop its own regional economic engines, particularly in the context of AI models like DeepSeek and Qwen [11]. - The importance of education in promoting open-source understanding and participation is emphasized, suggesting that fostering a culture of open-source can lead to better talent retention in local areas [13]. Group 4: Future of Programming Languages - The rise of AI may challenge traditional programming languages like Ruby, but the need for skilled programmers who understand both high-level and low-level languages remains critical [15]. - The potential for natural language programming through AI could lead to a divide between those who understand programming and those who rely solely on AI-generated solutions [17].

Core Viewpoint - The competition between open-source and closed-source AI models is intensifying, with open-source models like DeepSeek and Qwen leading China's tech advancement globally. However, concerns about the profitability and economic impact of open-source models persist [1]. Group 1: Open Source vs Closed Source - Open-source software allows community participation beyond organizational boundaries, which is essential for sustainable development and ecological growth [4]. - The distinction between open-source and closed-source languages is significant, with open-source languages like Ruby fostering broader collaboration and innovation [6]. - The coexistence of open-source and closed-source models is expected, with both contributing to competitive software ecosystems [7]. Group 2: Economic Impact of Open Source - Japan's experience with Ruby demonstrates that open-source languages can empower smaller contractors to engage in larger projects, enhancing local economic development [10][11]. - The presence of Ruby's creator in Shimane Prefecture has been pivotal in establishing a local ecosystem that supports larger engineering projects [11]. - The development of a robust open-source community can help retain local talent and stimulate regional economic growth, as seen in Shimane [12]. Group 3: Lessons for China - China can learn from Japan's open-source initiatives to build a new regional economic engine, especially in light of the risks associated with reliance on closed-source AI models [13]. - The importance of open-source algorithms in AI development is emphasized, advocating for a competitive landscape that includes both open-source and closed-source options [13]. - Educational initiatives to promote understanding of open-source principles are crucial for fostering a skilled workforce capable of contributing to open-source projects [16]. Group 4: Challenges and Future of Programming Languages - The rise of AI in programming may lead to a divide between those who understand programming and those who rely solely on AI-generated code, potentially impacting the future of programming languages like Ruby [19][21]. - The need for education in programming remains critical, as reliance on AI could diminish human cognitive skills in understanding IT [21]. - The balance between efficiency gained through AI and the necessity for human understanding of programming concepts is a key consideration for the future [21].

Core Points - The recent controversy in the Ruby community revolves around the management of the RubyGems and Bundler projects, with accusations of a "hostile takeover" by Ruby Central, the non-profit organization overseeing these tools [1][11][12] - Long-time maintainers, including Ellen Dash, have expressed their outrage over being removed from their roles without prior notice or explanation, leading to significant community backlash [5][10][14] - Ruby Central's justification for these actions is centered on enhancing security and governance, citing the need to protect the Ruby ecosystem from supply chain attacks [11][12] Summary by Sections Project Management and Governance - RubyGems and Bundler, essential tools for the Ruby programming language, have been maintained by a dedicated team for years without formal compensation [2] - The abrupt removal of maintainers, including Ellen Dash, was executed by Marty Haught, Ruby Central's open-source director, raising questions about governance practices [5][6][11] Community Response - The Ruby community has reacted strongly against Ruby Central's actions, with many developers expressing disappointment and anger on social media [14][16] - Critics argue that Ruby Central's actions reflect a shift towards corporate influence over community-driven projects, undermining the principles of open-source collaboration [14][16] Future Implications - The incident highlights the ongoing struggle between professional management and community autonomy in open-source governance, emphasizing the need for transparency and communication [20] - As core maintainers resign, the new management team faces scrutiny to prove their capability and maintain community trust [20]

Core Viewpoint - The emergence of large language models (LLMs) represents a transformative change in software development, comparable to the shift from assembly language to the first generation of high-level programming languages [5][10]. Group 1: Impact of LLMs on Programming - LLMs not only enhance the level of abstraction in programming but also compel a reevaluation of what it means to program with non-deterministic tools [7][10]. - The transition from deterministic to non-deterministic programming paradigms expands the dimensions of programming practices [8][10]. Group 2: Historical Context of Programming Languages - High-level programming languages (HLLs) introduced a new level of abstraction, allowing programmers to think in terms of sequences, conditions, and iterations rather than specific machine instructions [8][9]. - Despite advancements in programming languages, the fundamental nature of programming has not changed significantly until the advent of LLMs [6][9]. Group 3: Embracing Non-Determinism - The introduction of non-deterministic abstractions means that results from LLMs cannot be reliably reproduced, contrasting with the consistent outcomes from traditional programming [10][13]. - The industry is experiencing a radical transformation as developers learn to navigate this non-deterministic environment, which is unprecedented in the history of software development [13].

Financial Data and Key Metrics Changes - RevPAR grew by 1.8%, reflecting the company's geographic footprint and brand depth [6] - Gross system growth was 7.7% and net system growth was 5.4%, driven by development activity and record openings [6] - EBIT increased by 13% and adjusted EPS grew by 19% [6] - The company completed 47% of its $900 million share buyback program, returning over $1.1 billion to shareholders this year [6] Business Line Data and Key Metrics Changes - The Americas fee revenues were down about 1% despite a 1.5% RevPAR growth and around 1.5% adjusted net unit growth [10] - The company signed over 51,000 rooms across 324 hotels, a 15% increase over 2024 [6][20] - Openings in The Americas were up 40% year over year, contributing to future fee growth [24] Market Data and Key Metrics Changes - The company reported a constructive outlook for US demand and hospitality performance, with stable inflation and interest rates [14][15] - In China, the company sees the economy bottoming out, with GDP growth of about 5% in Q2 and expectations for improved RevPAR trends in the back half of the year [66][68] Company Strategy and Development Direction - The company is focused on high-growth opportunities, including investments in technology and expanding its luxury and lifestyle brands [52][54] - The company aims to grow both new builds and conversions, with a strong pipeline of openings and signings [63][110] - The branded residential segment is expected to contribute consistently to fee growth, with 30 properties currently open and more in development [33] Management's Comments on Operating Environment and Future Outlook - Management expressed confidence in achieving full-year profit and EPS consensus, despite uncertainties in the short term [15][85] - The company noted that the fundamentals for US hospitality remain strong, with job growth and corporate capital investment driving demand [14][15] - Management is optimistic about the long-term growth potential in China, despite current challenges [66][68] Other Important Information - The company has been investing in technology and process improvements to enhance operational efficiency and scalability [94] - The company expects to see continued margin growth driven by cost savings and ancillary revenue streams [95] Q&A Session Summary Question: Current trading outlook for Q3 and Q4 RevPAR in the U.S. - Management does not provide guidance but feels comfortable with full-year profit and EPS consensus, indicating a stable outlook for U.S. demand [12][15] Question: Explanation for the decline in Americas fee revenues despite RevPAR growth - Management attributed the decline to high-fee hotels exiting and renovations impacting available rooms, but does not see it as a long-term issue [20][22] Question: Insights on branded residential contribution to profitability - Management is excited about the growth trajectory in branded residential, which is expected to contribute consistently to fees [31][33] Question: Investment focus among technology pillars - Management emphasized ongoing investments in technology, particularly in PMS and RMS systems, to ensure competitiveness [34][38] Question: Update on the performance of the Garner brand - Management reported strong progress with 51 open Garners and a robust pipeline, indicating significant international demand [78][79]

Financial Performance - H1 2025 global RevPAR increased by 1.8%[15], with ADR up by 1.4%[15] and occupancy up by 0.3%pts[15] - Fee margin increased by 3.9%pts to 64.7%[15], with TTM EBITDA reaching $1.259 billion, a 10% increase[15] - Adjusted EPS increased by 19% to 242.5¢[15], and free cash flow reached $302 million[15] - The interim dividend increased by 10% to 58.6¢[15] System Growth and Development - Gross system growth increased by 7.7% YOY, and net system growth increased by 5.4% YOY[15] - A record 31.4k rooms (207 hotels) were opened in H1, a 75% increase YOY[15] - Signings reached 51.2k rooms (324 hotels), a 15% increase YOY[15] - The pipeline consists of 338k rooms (2,276 hotels), representing 34% of the current system size[16] Capital Returns - $423 million (47%) of the $900 million share buyback program has been returned, representing 2.4% of the opening share count[15] - The company expects to return >$1.1 billion in 2025, representing 5.9% of the opening market cap[15] Strategic Priorities - Loyalty enrolments increased by 22% YOY in H1[102], with ~65% of room nights booked by members[102] - Co-brand fee revenue is on track to double by 2025 and more than triple by 2028[114] Regional Performance - Americas RevPAR increased by 1.4%[184], with a fee margin of 82.7%[184] - EMEAA RevPAR increased by 4.1%[188], with a fee margin of 65.8%[188] - Greater China RevPAR decreased by 3.2%[192], with a fee margin of 57.9%[192]

Core Insights - The article illustrates the paradox of success in technology, where a highly efficient system can lead to the perception that fewer developers are needed, ultimately jeopardizing the use of that technology [1][29]. Group 1: Technical Debt - The company had a traditional tech stack and needed to develop a real-time service to support 100,000 concurrent users, displaying user activity information [2]. - The initial choice of Ruby was deemed inadequate, prompting discussions on technology selection [3]. Group 2: Technology Selection Battle - The development team proposed using Rust, but management was cautious and requested comparisons with other languages [4][5]. - Concept validation versions were created using Elixir, Rust, Ruby, and Node.js, with Rust being developed by a novice [5][6]. Group 3: Performance Results - The performance results showed Rust as the fastest and most memory-efficient option, followed by Elixir, Node.js, and Ruby [8][10]. - The final decision favored Rust not only for its performance but also for its versatility in future applications [10]. Group 4: Rapid Development - Due to time constraints, a single developer with Rust experience was tasked to lead the project, collaborating closely with the team [11][13]. - The architecture was designed to handle 100,000 connections efficiently, utilizing a WebSocket-based API and in-memory data storage [14]. Group 5: Performance Challenges - The service performed stably under the expected load, but management later decided to shift it to maintenance mode, leading to a lack of oversight [16]. - The service was initially successful, but as the company expanded, management questioned the need for Rust developers due to the service's stability [19][20]. Group 6: Management Decisions - The new director's perspective led to the departure of experienced Rust developers, as they were deemed unnecessary due to the service's lack of issues [22]. - The decision to abandon Rust in favor of more mainstream technologies raised concerns about the existing Rust service's future [23]. Group 7: Node.js Rewrite Attempt - The attempt to rewrite the service in Node.js failed due to its single-threaded nature, which could not handle the required load [24][25]. - The company resorted to using a third-party service, which also proved inadequate [26]. Group 8: Lessons Learned - The Rust service continued to operate effectively but without a dedicated maintenance team, highlighting the risks of having a highly efficient system [28][29]. - The article concludes that sometimes, a less-than-perfect system may be perceived as safer, emphasizing the impact of management changes on technical decisions [29].

Group 1 - The article discusses a situation where a successful Rust project led to its eventual discontinuation within a company due to management changes and a lack of understanding of its value [1][6][9] - The company initially chose Rust for a real-time service due to its superior performance in tests compared to other languages like Ruby and Node.js [3][4][5] - After the successful implementation of the Rust service, the company shifted its focus, leading to the disbandment of the Rust development team and a lack of further investment in Rust technology [6][7][8] Group 2 - The new management, upon realizing the Rust service was stable and required little maintenance, decided to phase out Rust in favor of more familiar technologies like Ruby and Node.js [7][8][9] - The attempt to rewrite the Rust service in Node.js failed due to the inherent limitations of Node.js in handling high concurrency, highlighting the complexity of such a transition [9][10] - The article reflects a broader industry trend where successful projects can be undervalued or misunderstood by new management, leading to missed opportunities for innovation [10]