The Microsoft brand logo on display October 2016 on Sixth Avenue in New York City. On Monday, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission sued the software giant for allegedly misleading more than 2.5 million Australian users over subscriptions to Microsoft 365. File Photo by John Angelillo/UPI | License Photo
Oct. 27 (UPI) — Australia’s consumer authority accused Microsoft of “deliberately” hiding subscription information from its Australian customer base.
On Monday, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission sued the software giant for allegedly misleading more than 2.5 million Australian users over subscriptions to Microsoft 365.
“Following a detailed investigation, the ACCC alleges that Microsoft deliberately hid this third option, to retain the old plan at the old price, in order to increase the uptake of Copilot and the increased revenue from the Copilot integrated plans,” stated ACCC Chair Gina Cass-Gottlieb.
Australia’s CCC launched its Microsoft inquiry after reports that Microsoft allegedly misled its customers about price increases and options over subscriptions following the integration of its “Copilot” AI tool.
It alleged that Microsoft told users a higher price must be paid to keep subscriptions, which was to include Microsoft’s Copilot, or be forced to cancel.
According to Cass-Gottlieb, the ACCC will seek a penalty to demonstrate that non-compliance with Australia’s consumer laws was “not just a cost of doing business.”
Microsoft said it was reviewing the Australian government’s claim, adding that consumer trust and transparency were “top priorities.”
Last year in December, British digital rights advocacy groups launched a billion-dollar lawsuit against Microsoft, alleging it overcharged clients of its Windows Server software used in cloud computing.
The United States, Canada and Australia partnered over the summer in a global probe to identify hackers who attacked a security flaw in Microsoft software to internationally infiltrate agencies and businesses.
“We remain committed to working constructively with the regulator and ensuring our practices meet all legal and ethical standards,” a Microsoft spokesperson told ABC News in Australia on Monday.
A quiet $100 change could matter more to Apple’s financials than flashy features.
Apple(AAPL -3.17%) shares dipped slightly on Tuesday as the tech giant unveiled its latest iPhones. The company behind the world’s most popular premium smartphone now has fresh hardware headed to stores later this month. Investors will be watching early demand closely, but one detail from the event deserves special attention: pricing. Apple raised the starting price of the iPhone 17 Pro to $1,099 in the U.S., $100 above last year’s Pro entry point.
Apple’s iPhone business has already regained momentum. In the quarter ending Jun. 28, Apple posted record fiscal third-quarter revenue, with double-digit growth in iPhone and an all-time high in services. Management also highlighted growth across every geographic segment and said the installed base of active devices hit a new high. Those are the right conditions heading into a price-supported product cycle.
Image source: Getty Images.
Recent results point to a healthier iPhone backdrop
Apple‘s fiscal third quarter showed the core engine is running well again. Total revenue rose to $94.0 billion, up 10% year over year, while iPhone revenue climbed 13% to $44.6 billion from $39.3 billion a year ago. Services revenue reached $27.4 billion, also a record for the June quarter. All of this pushed earnings per share for the quarter up 12% year over year. This mix shows iPhone still doing the heavy lifting while services keeps compounding on a larger base.
Apple CEO Tim Cook captured the tone in the company’s fiscal third-quarter release in late July: “Today Apple is proud to report a June quarter revenue record with double-digit growth in iPhone, Mac and services and growth around the world, in every geographic segment.” That comment, paired with an all-time-high installed base noted by the CFO, underscores the company’s momentum as new models arrive later this month.
Apple stock’s valuation reflects high expectations. As of Tuesday’s close, the stock traded around the mid-30s on a trailing price-to-earnings basis and sported a market cap near $3.5 trillion. Premium valuation multiples require sustained growth, so whether the iPhone lineup can support another leg higher matters for returns from here.
A Pro price bump and a new Air could lift iPhone revenue
The most consequential change this fall may be simple: Apple lifted the iPhone 17 Pro’s starting price to $1,099 from $999 for last year’s 16 Pro. Even before any unit growth, that change can nudge average selling prices higher, especially if Pro models continue to draw enthusiasts who want the iPhone models with the best cameras and performance. Apple also doubled the entry storage on 17 Pro to 256GB, which supports the higher entry price while still benefiting revenue recognition.
Additionally, Apple introduced iPhone Air — the thinnest iPhone yet — with a polished titanium frame and new Ceramic Shield 2 front and back that Apple says is more scratch- and crack-resistant than prior models. Priced below the Pro line at $999, Air offers a sleeker and tougher design that should appeal to mainstream upgraders who have waited. Together with iPhone 17, this broadens the ladder for buyers and may support both units and richer configurations. Preorders begin Friday, with availability next week.
These product dynamics line up with the fundamentals Apple reported in late July: iPhone is growing again, services is setting records, and the installed base is larger than ever. A higher Pro entry price, a compelling non-Pro option in Air, and the usual mix of trade-in and carrier promotions could translate into higher iPhone revenue in fiscal 2026, potentially in the double digits, if Apple sustains healthy Pro demand and nudges more mainstream buyers to upgrade. The risks are clear, including price sensitivity at the high end, macro softness in key regions, and intense competition. But Apple’s scale, brand strength, and rapidly growing services business help cushion those pressures.
In short, Apple just made its most popular premium phones more valuable — and more expensive — while adding a new, tougher design at a slightly lower price point than Pro. If that combination drives strong Pro mix and steady upgrades, it can lift average selling prices and total iPhone revenue next year. With services already at record levels and the installed base expanding, that is a reasonable path for the stock to maintain a premium valuation over time, allowing the stock price to grow with earnings growth.
Daniel Sparks and his clients have positions in Apple. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Apple. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.
“The Wizard of Oz” is certainly the right movie to face the great and powerful ambitions of Sphere, the most expensive entertainment venue in Las Vegas history. Since 1939, the treasured classic has hailed the awe of gazing into a glowing globe, whether it’s glinting atop a fortune teller’s table, transporting the meddlesome Glinda the Good Witch or spying on a teenage girl and her companions like a sinister security camera.
Special effects are central both to “Oz’s” appeal and its plot: The big reveal is that technicians, not wizards, pull the levers that make an audience gasp. For Sphere — officially, there’s no “the” — those tools include three football fields of bright 16K LED screens that curve around its domed interior, with another 10 on the outside that light up Vegas day and night with rotating animations. (I saw blue gingham, scarlet sequins and thatches of burlap and straw.) Sphere cost an estimated $2.3 billion to build and must have an electricity bill scarier than the Wicked Witch. You can make out Dorothy’s slippers from an airplane.
Share via
With no heel clicks needed, I was whisked to “The Wizard of Oz’s” Sphere premiere in a red sedan by a Lyft driver named — no fooling — Ruby, who said she was grateful that the Backstreet Boys’ recent stint at the arena “made Vegas busy for a minute.” There’s a lot of financial pressure on “Oz’s” girl from Kansas. Adapting the film to Sphere’s stunning dimensions took about $100 million. Although the arena seats 17,600 when full, “Oz” showings only offer a slice of the middle section, roughly a third of its capacity. A trimmed 70-minute edit of the movie is playing two to three times a day, nearly every day, through the end of March 2026, with a ticket price that currently starts at $114.
Eighty-six years ago, when a kiddie fare cost 15 cents, my then-6-year-old grandmother watched the theater blink from sepia to vivid color splendor. That innovation gets credited to Hollywood, but the idea of contrasting lush and luminous Oz against soul-drainingly monochrome Kansas is actually right there on Page 1 of L. Frank Baum’s book, published in May 1900, a self-proclaimed effort to write a “modernized” fairy tale that swaps Old World elves for American scarecrows. “When Dorothy stood in the doorway and looked around, she could see nothing but the great gray prairie on every side,” Baum wrote, adding that her house and her weary aunt and uncle and everything else were gray too, “to the edge of the sky in all directions.”
That’s exactly what Sphere was designed to do: stretch to the edge in all dimensions. It exists neither to save film nor supplant it, but to augment a rectangular screen with new digital and (controversially) generative-AI-supplied imagery, timed props and seats that vibrate whenever the Wicked Witch cackles.
Despite my queasiness about cutting “Oz” by half an hour, the experiment is a romp. I was immersed in — or, more accurately, surrounded by — scenes from one of my favorite movies, a pivotal blockbuster whose artistic influence extends from David Lynch to Elton John to Salman Rushdie. Even more giggle-inducing, I was pelted with scented foam apples and dive-bombed by half a dozen drone-piloted flying monkeys.
“The Wizard of Oz” has always braved new technology. An early adopter of Technicolor, it boasted a lighting budget nearly double that of its rival, “Gone With the Wind,” yet the latter gobbled nearly every Academy Award and poached “Oz’s” director, Victor Fleming, who swapped projects halfway through and won an Oscar for his vision of Sherman’s March instead of the Yellow Brick Road. In the 1950s, when the rest of Hollywood was terrified of television, “Oz” agreed to be the first theatrical movie to screen in full on a prime-time network. TV transformed the prestige money-loser into a hit. Sphere has turned “Oz” into a flash point in the industry’s fundamental fight over the use of AI. Artists and audiences alike fear a future in which, behind the curtain, there might not be a man at all.
I like my art made by human beings. But I’m no nostalgist. “Oz” was a book, a musical, a silent short and a cartoon before MGM made the variant we adore. It should be a playground for invention.
Entering Sphere, the escalators are tinted sepia and the soundscape hums with birdsong and lowing cattle. The implication is that we’ve not yet been whirled over the rainbow. Preshow, the view from one’s seat is of being in a massive old opera house with dusky green drapes flanked by rows of orchestra seats. None of the proscenium is actually there, nor are the musicians heard running scales and rehearsing “Follow the Yellow Brick Road.”
The simulation of human handicraft — of stagehands and horn players hiding in the wings — is unnerving. But it gets you thinking about the actual, contemporary people who are behind that curtain. Visual artists who labored on the Sphere project have justly grumbled that their sweat has gotten publicly dismissed as AI. An actual symphony orchestra rerecorded “Oz’s” mono score on the very same MGM stage used in 1939, allegedly with some of the same instruments. It sounds fantastic, and it’s so loyal to every jaunty warble that audiences might not notice.
A few scenes have been lopped off entirely. The Cowardly Lion no longer trills about becoming king of the forest. The majority of the shots have been micro-trimmed to be snappier, a pace that wouldn’t suit stoners’ penchant for synchronizing the movie to Pink Floyd’s dreamy, woozy “The Dark Side of the Moon.” Occasionally, the camera’s placement appears to have been adjusted to allow the visuals to expand to fill the space. Inside Dorothy’s Kansan house, a once-shadowed frying pan on the wall now dangles front and center, as does a digitally added “Home Sweet Home” needlepoint nailed to the threshold. (The plotting has become so brisk that we might otherwise miss the message that there’s no place like it.)
The tweaks can be subtle and lovely. Dorothy belts “Over the Rainbow” underneath newly actualized bluebirds and an impressively ominous sky. When the tornado happens, the tech changes hit us like a cyclone. We’re pulled through the window and into the eye of the storm, where a cow spirals around like it wants to outdo the scene-stealing bovine from “Twister.” A great, giddy blast of air from the 750-horsepower fans blew my bangs straight off my forehead. I kept one eye on the screen while trying to catch a flurry of tissue-paper leaves. The wow factor is so staggering that you might not spot that Sphere’s founder and chief executive, James Dolan, and Warner Bros. president and CEO David Zaslav have superimposed their faces on the two sailors twirling past in a rowboat — an apropos in-joke for people concerned the moguls have been swept away by their own bluster.
“Anyone can blow wind into your face,” Dolan said to the premiere audience before the film began. “Not everyone can make you feel like you’re in a tornado.” Wearing the Wizard’s green top hat and suit and with his microphone dropping out inauspiciously, Dolan never introduced himself, but he did compliment the other creators of the event, who also wore costumes. (I overheard that some of them thought Dolan was kidding about dressing in character until they found themselves spending four hours getting groomed to look lionesque.)
Just a week earlier, in trial runs, perfumes were piped into the air so people could get a whiff of the Emerald City. (Gauging by the souvenir candles in Sphere’s gift shop, it is chocolate mint.) They’ve currently been scaled back out of concerns that it all might get too overwhelming. Having figured out how to do sight, sound, feel and smell, Dolan conceded that only one sense remains: “We still haven’t figured out taste.”
Taste is definitely still a concern. Oddly, Sphere’s “Oz” loses a dram of its spellcraft once audiences touch down in Munchkinland. Seeing the newly added tops of Oz’s trees makes the fantastical place look smaller.
The margins of “The Wizard of Oz” have been expanded by generative AI to fit the enormous venue.
(Rich Fury / Sphere Entertainment)
You feel for the design teams. They’ve been challenged to magnify a 4-foot matte painting of the arched hallway into the Wizard’s throne room — initially done in pastels on black cardboard — into a 240-foot-tall tableau. One of the 1939 film’s production designers, Jack Martin Smith, said that his instructions were to make Oz “ethereal” and “subdued.” Descriptions of the cornfield’s hand-painted muslin background make it sound like a proto-Rothko. Now, you can see every kernel. The razor-sharp mountains on the horizon don’t inspire your imagination — they make you think of Machu Picchu.
More troublesome are the Munchkins and the citizens of Emerald City. Tidied into high definition, they often appear restless. As Dorothy pleads for the Wizard not to fly away without her, we’re distracted by hundreds of waving extras who visibly don’t give a hoot what happens to the girl. Worse, they occasionally seem to glitch. If that’s the best AI can do in 2025, then Sphere isn’t a resounding endorsement.
By contrast, Judy Garland’s performance, delivered at just age 16, feels monumental. Her big brown eyes dominate the screen. When the heartbroken girl sobs that the Wicked Witch has chased away her beloved Toto, I found myself annoyed by a flying monkey on the left side of the frame who simply looked bored.
The field of poppies is dazzling; the additional deer, ants and rodents skittering across the golden sidewalk are simply strange. Overall, you’re so caught up observing the experience itself that the emotions of the story don’t register as anything more than theme-ride hydraulics. Still, it’s nice to have a sweeping view of the first film’s prosthetic makeup: the Cowardly Lion’s upturned nostrils, the Scarecrow’s baggy jowls, the real horses painted purple and red with Jell-O. (Due to pace tightening, we only see two ponies, not all six).
I recoiled when the Wizard’s disembodied head loomed above. Who decided to make him look like a cheesy martian? Flipping through sketches from 1939 afterward, I realized that he always looked that bad. His gaunt cheekbones just weren’t as obvious before. Nevertheless, be sure to look to the right when Toto reveals Oz’s control booth. In a clever touch, Sphere lets us continue to see the monstrous green face, now neutered and ridiculous, mouth along as the panicked geek apologizes for being a humbug.
Can Sphere win big on its risky gamble that there’s no place like dome? It’s not the first Las Vegas attraction to bet on our love for the MGM extravaganza. “The Wizard of Oz” has been tangled up with Las Vegas’ fortunes for more than half a century, ever since real estate investor Kirk Kerkorian purchased MGM Studios in 1969 and, one year later, auctioned Dorothy’s slippers to help fund the construction of the first MGM Grand Hotel and Casino. The second MGM Grand, the one that opened in 1993, was branded for “The Wizard of Oz” — that’s why it’s green like Emerald City — and during the first year, visitors could walk through an animatronic forest of lions, tigers and gamblers.
The Strip was once a magical place where innocents like Dorothy flocked to get into trouble, often in encounters with sleight-of-hand hucksters like Professor Marvel. Hopes are high that tourists will come back to be transported to Oz, even at a ticket price that costs a chunk of the family farm. The hurdle is that although audiences have become begrudgingly accustomed to spending more than $100 to see their favorite bands, they’re still seeing an actual band and not a shortened version of a movie that’s popular in part because everyone grew up watching it on TV for free.
But on opening night at least, the crowd was treating the cinema like a concert. Many folks were in some sort of costume, including me. (I couldn’t resist wearing a pair of red shoes.) When I complimented a man’s blue gingham suit, he handed me a handmade beaded, Taylor Swift-style bracelet that read: Toto Too.
If fans like him turn this techno-incarnation of “Oz” into a hit, Sphere has said it would consider following it up with a similar presentation of “Gone With the Wind.” Imagine the smell of the burning of Atlanta. Much better than the air of burning money.
But experts have warned it could lead to surge pricingCredit: Not known, clear with picture desk
Brands owned by the group are now letting AI set prices in real-time, reacting instantly to trends, demand and what rivals are charging.
The retail giant has teamed up with AI firm Peak to make it all happen.
They reckon this AI system will mean more targeted discounts, so you’re more likely to see deals on stuff you actually want.
It also means the brands can avoid having piles of unsold clothes hanging around.
Dan Finley, chief executive of Debenhams Group, said: “We’ve totally changed how we do pricing.”
“AI helps us make faster, smarter choices, so we can give our customers better value.”
But experts are wary, warning that shoppers could be at the mercy of surge pricing, where AI algorithms automatically raise prices during periods of high demand.
Consumer champion Martyn James warns that “corporate-speak” can obscure the real purpose of these changes.
While the company talks about “automated pricing” and targeted discounts, James points out that “there is also nothing to stop the business increasing prices on demand either.”
He fears that without proper oversight, shoppers could be vulnerable to AI-driven “surge pricing,” as has been seen with hotels and Uber.
Edinburgh’s Bold Transformation: From Debenhams to Pod Hotel
Echoing these concerns, consumer expert Scott Dixon believes this is about protecting profits first and foremost.
He said: “The use of AI clearly benefits Debenhams as they can protect profit margins, cut waste and implement surge pricing in-line with increased demand.
“Debenhams needs to show AI is working for its customers, not just shareholders.”
He also warns of potential price hikes during peak shopping periods like Black Friday and Christmas, stating that dynamic pricing is only fair if it works both ways.
Debenhams Group brands
DEBENHAMS Group (formerly known as Boohoo Group) has a whole stable of well-known brands under its umbrella:
Boohoo: The original online fashion giant known for its trend-led pieces and affordable prices.
PrettyLittleThing: Another fast-fashion favourite, offering a similar vibe to Boohoo but with its own distinct style.
BoohooMAN: Bringing the Boohoo formula to menswear, with on-trend clothing and accessories for guys.
Karen Millen: A more premium brand offering sophisticated and stylish clothing for women, often with a focus on occasion wear.
Debenhams: The department store itself, now operating as an online marketplace selling a wide range of fashion, beauty, and home products.
The group also owns labels, including Nasty Gal, Coast, Misspap, Oasis, Warehouse, Burton, Wallis, and Dorothy Perkins.
Several retailers, including ASOS and Iconic London, are using AI to make online shopping more interactive.
One example is Nibble, an AI negotiation platform that lets shoppers haggle for discounts before adding items to their cart.
The technology enables a back-and-forth negotiation with a bot, and some users have reportedly secured discounts of up to 40% on ASOS Sample Sale purchases.
The option to negotiate only appears if it’s offered before adding an item to your cart.
In some cases, the feature is timed to pop up when a shopper hesitates over the buy button or seems ready to leave the site.
How to compare prices to get the best deal
JUST because something is on offer, or is part of a sale, it doesn’t mean it’s always a good deal.
There are plenty of comparison websites out there that’ll check prices for you – so don’t be left paying more than you have to.
Most of them work by comparing the prices across hundreds of retailers.
Here are some that we recommend:
Google Shopping is a tool that lets users search for and compare prices for products across the web. Simply type in keywords, or a product number, to bring up search results.
Price Spy logs the history of how much something costs from over 3,000 different retailers, including Argos, Amazon, eBay and the supermarkets. Once you select an individual product you can quickly compare which stores have the best price and which have it in stock.
Idealo is another website that lets you compare prices between retailers. All shoppers need to do is search for the item they need and the website will rank them from the cheapest to the most expensive one.
CamelCamelCamel only works on goods being sold on Amazon. To use it, type in the URL of the product you want to check the price of.
The ruling comes as US Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy is set to pause federal funds to New York state.
New York City has won a temporary reprieve in its legal battle against the administration of US President Donald Trump, which had threatened to withhold federal funding from New York state unless the city ended its congestion pricing programme.
United States District Judge Lewis Liman held the hearing on the matter on Tuesday and granted a temporary restraining order that will allow the programme to keep running until at least June 9 as the administration and state-level officials battle over the future of congestion pricing.
A day earlier, US Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy said he believed the federal government would withhold government approvals in the state, which would have frozen contracts for highway and transit projects.
Congestion pricing is likely to move forward indefinitely despite the federal administration’s objections because the Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) – New York City’s mass transit system, which is operated as a state-level agency – “showed a likelihood of success”, according to the judge.
The courts said this is because the plan was already reviewed by state, local and federal agencies, according to the New York Times newspaper.
“Congestion relief is perfectly legal and thoroughly vetted. Opponents exhausted all plausible arguments against the programme, and now the increasingly outlandish theories are falling flat, too,” Danny Pearlstein, policy and communications director for the Riders Alliance, a transportation advocacy group, told Al Jazeera.
New York Governor Kathy Hochul called the judge’s decision “a massive victory” for New York commuters.
“So here’s the deal: Secretary Duffy can issue as many letters and social media posts as he wants, but a court has blocked the Trump Administration from retaliating against New York for reducing traffic and investing in transit … Congestion pricing is legal, it’s working and we’re keeping the cameras on,” the governor’s office said in a statement.
“It’s really upsetting that it came to this point to begin with. We should not be in a position where the federal government is trying to stop New York state from enacting its own policy and trying to blackmail New York state when it doesn’t follow their [the US Department of Transportation’s] lead,” Alexa Sledge, communications director for the advocacy group Transportation Alternatives, told Al Jazeera.
New York state launched the programme in January. Drivers have to pay congestion pricing tolls of $9 per day for driving during peak times in parts of Manhattan. The state made the programme in an effort to cut congestion in the nation’s most populous city as well as raise funds for NYC’s mass transit system.
“New York state should be able to make their own laws, and they should be able to run their own streets. And so hopefully, this can be the end of this,” Sledge said.
Meeting its goals
Since the programme began earlier this year, it has fulfilled many of its goals. Within a month of congestion pricing, subway ridership increased by six percent, and bus ridership by nine percent. Traffic decreased by 11 percent.
In March, the MTA forecasted that congestion pricing would bring in $500m in revenue for the system, which will fund a swath of new transit-system projects including station upgrades and zero-emissions buses. At the time, a Siena College poll found that 42 percent of New Yorkers wanted to keep the programme, while 35 percent wanted to get rid of it.
Neither the MTA nor the US Department of Transportation was immediately available for comment.
Faustina (left) wishes driving lessons were cheaper, while Keith says the driving test backlog means his son Brandon (right) needs to take lessons for longer
Paige Williams is desperate to pass her driving test.
Her three-year-old son sometimes has “meltdowns” on public transport, where he might scream, cry or throw himself on the floor, she says. She just wants to be able to visit family and go on day trips more easily.
But the 28-year-old single mum, from Barnsley, is having to drastically cut back on how much she spends on food, gas and electricity to be able to afford her £35-an-hour lessons, which she’s been having since September.
“It’s literally scrimping and scraping to be able to manage to get one lesson a week,” she says.
As the cost of driving lessons continues to rise alongside an already high cost of living, experiences like Paige’s may be becoming increasingly common.
The BBC has spoken to more than a dozen learners and parents of learners who say they’re frustrated by how much they have to pay – and also to instructors who argue that the prices are justified.
Driving instructors can charge what they like, and the DVSA does not release official statistics on average lesson costs.
But a DVSA survey completed by more than 5,000 approved driving instructors (ADIs) in September shows how prices have shot up in recent years.
In the survey, the most common price bracket for an hour lesson was £36 to £40 per hour.
Just 31.5% of driving instructors said they charged £35 or less per hour – that number had halved since the DVSA’s June 2023 survey.
While 20.8% said they charged more than £40 an hour – nearly triple as many as in June 2023.
For many people, driving is essential for taking their kids to school, going to work or carrying out caring responsibilities.
Public transport might be unaffordable, inaccessible or simply not available for some people.
Two-thirds of people in Great Britain who commute to work drive in, and 45% of five-to-10 year olds are taken to school by car, Department for Transport figures from 2023 show.
Faustina Kamara, a 23-year-old in Birmingham, needs a licence for her dream job – being a runner in the media industry.
But the £60 cost of her two-hour driving lessons means she’s only having them once a fortnight, which isn’t as frequently as she’d like, and means it will delay when she can take her test.
She says she’d love to have lessons weekly but it would mean she’d have to cut back on spending money seeing her friends.
Other people also say that the high cost of driving lessons means it’s taking them longer to learn to drive.
Rather than having the two lessons a week she would have liked, Sandra Onuora, a 30-year-old civil servant in Newcastle, had three per month until she passed her test in March.
“That was all I could afford,” she says. And even then, “I had to take a lot of money from my savings” for her £39-an-hour lessons, she adds.
Because she had to space out her lessons more, she had to wait longer until she felt ready to take her test.
She’d spend hours every week travelling between her home, her son’s childminder’s and her office, taking six buses every weekday.
“It was a rough year,” says Sandra. She would return home “so exhausted”.
Sandra Onuora
Sandra says she had to take “a lot of money from my savings” to pay for her driving lessons
And just as driving lessons become more expensive, some learners are also finding they’re having to take more of them.
Keith Rose hasn’t been able to book a driving test near where he lives in Bridgwater, Somerset, for his 17-year-old son, Brandon.
The best option he could find is an hour’s drive away in Newport, Wales, and isn’t until September.
Keith says that his son is ready to take his test, but will need to keep taking lessons at a cost of £76 for a two-hour session to maintain his skills.
“We’re being forced into spending money that we don’t need to,” Keith says.
Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander has acknowledged that waiting times for tests are too long and pledged to reduce the average waiting time for a driving test to no more than seven weeks by summer 2026.
Instructors say that they have little choice but to charge these kind of rates if they want to make a profit.
“Prices for driving lessons are where they should be, having been probably under-priced for many years,” says Stewart Lochrie, the owner of a driving school in Glasgow and chair of the Approved Driving Instructors National Joint Council (ADINJ).
“I think the price was overdue a reset.”
Stewart notes that the UK’s more than 41,000 approved driving instructors are having to pay more for the expenses associated with their jobs like buying or leasing a car, fuel, insurance and maintenance.
“We have costs to cover as well and if the things that we need to run our business go up, then our prices will have to go up as well,” he says.
Pro Vision Photography Ltd
Stewart says driving lessons have likely been “under-priced for many years”
The rising price of lessons “isn’t really translating to a pay increase in our pockets,” adds Terry Edwards, a driving instructor in Ashford, Kent.
His expenses include around £280 a month on fuel, £135 on insurance and £440 on car payments.
Other costs include servicing, repairing and cleaning his car.
Terry charges £39 an hour, but offers a discount for buying in bulk. While customers “don’t generally push back” against his prices, some “try and be a bit cheeky” and ask for discounts, he says.
For Amy Burnett, a pharmacy advisor in Glasgow, the prices are so high that she’s avoiding learning for the time being. The only instructors she’d found with availability charge between £50 and £60 an hour, she says.
“I’m living pay cheque to pay cheque as it is,” the 22-year-old says.
But she sees being able to drive as an investment in her future – she’d have more freedom and she’s had to limit her previous job searches to roles accessible by public transport, she says.
Amy hopes to pass her test by the time she’s 24 – if she can find a more affordable instructor with availability in her area, she says.
Paige, the mum in Barnsley, is sure her frugality will be worth it in the end. Being able to drive would make it much easier for her to return to work, she says.
And it would make journeys with her son much less stressful, she says. Most of all, she wants to take her two children to the seaside.
“It’d be so good for my son Ronald, with his sensory needs,” Paige says. “Getting to go on the little arcade rides and seeing his little face would be lovely.”
Daniel Cruz was brought in from the Burbank-based media and entertainment giant last fall to work some magic with a college operation in need of new concepts. Six consecutive years of running in the red has led to a staggering $219.5-million deficit that won’t be wiped away with the waving of any wand.
One solution might be surprisingly simple: Give the fans what they want, and they’ll keep coming back.
That’s why Cruz has spearheaded efforts to overhaul the school’s ticket operations and build a courtside lounge inside Pauley Pavilion, not to mention maximize revenue from a planned field-level club at the Rose Bowl. They’re all measures intended to enhance the fan experience and build brand loyalty.
“Essentially, what I’m trying to do is just trying to set us up for success and do things differently,” said Cruz, UCLA’s new deputy athletics director and chief revenue officer, “because the old way of how college athletics normally conducts business, it’s not working.”
As part of a partnership scheduled to be announced Tuesday, UCLA is switching from its longstanding in-house ticketing agency to Elevate, which will modernize operations and build a customer database that allows more targeted marketing. Elevate will handle both primary and secondary ticket sales, preventing unaffiliated brokers from undermining sales and devaluing tickets.
There’s also going to be dynamic pricing that will allow lower prices for less desirable games, something that was impossible under the school’s previous antiquated system.
“It’s going to be huge because we are now professionalizing how we go to market, how we price things,” Cruz said. “I get a lot of complaints from fans that they think ticket prices are too high for certain games and they may be right, so how do we pull those levers to make it accessible on games that it’s not full, so we can get people in?”
A new field-level club in the south end zone of the Rose Bowl could create heavy demand at a stadium that is routinely less than half full. The club, set to open in time for the 2026 season, is expected to host a restaurant-bar setup that will allow fans to walk onto the field, watch players come out of a nearby tunnel and grab something to eat before returning to a section of 1,200 plush, extra-wide seats.
The Rose Bowl is planning to build a new field-level club for fans attending UCLA football games.
(Wally Skalij / Los Angeles Times)
The Rose Bowl has agreed to foot the estimated $20-million construction cost and let UCLA keep the premium seating ticket revenue, Cruz said, as part of a mutually beneficial arrangement. The stadium will utilize the club for other events that it hosts such as concerts.
Given that the Rose Bowl has kept all of the existing suite revenue for UCLA games as part of its lease agreement with the school, the new arrangement could be considered something of a coup for the Bruins.
Another revenue opportunity involves a massive stage on the north side of the stadium overlooking the adjacent country club that will allow UCLA to bring in DJs and musical acts for pregame festivities. UCLA will sell cabana space, food and premium parking to provide a tailgate experience for both football fans and others who just want to have a good time.
“How do we attract fans who maybe don’t normally come to a football game, right?” Cruz said. “It’s a whole-day experience — come, enjoy concierge service with your friends, enjoy a great football game and that atmosphere that we’re trying to generate.”
Additional revenue has already been raised from sponsorships involving players wearing UCLA uniforms as part of new co-branded advertisements; for example, star center Lauren Betts is featured in multiple billboards for La Victoria salsas and sauces.
Cruz also has plans to elevate the fan experience at Pauley Pavilion. He wants to use the existing infrastructure to create a courtside donor lounge that could be in place before the start of next season. The lounge, which would provide a more upscale experience than the Pavilion Club, could come with a naming-rights deal and a membership fee for high-level donors.
There’s also been discussions about revamping the Pavilion Club to provide more segmented experiences; perhaps one section would cater to young alumni with a DJ and open bar while another would serve other alumni who want a more relaxed atmosphere where they can catch up with friends over a pregame meal.
“That’s a really big room, so how do we cut that up and divide that to make a better experience for everybody?” Cruz said. “We’ve got so many folks that we’re trying to cater to and I want to be sensitive to that and I want to create an experience for them that makes it so they want to come back.”
UCLA students cheer during a men’s basketball game against USC at Pauley Pavilion on March 8.
(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)
One development that could be a season away would certainly please fans who have groused about too many empty seats in the lower level being shown on television. Cruz said he wanted to flip the lower-level stands and team benches to the seating configuration that existed before the Pauley Pavilion renovations, allowing the students who pack their section to be showcased on broadcasts.
“That section is always full of students,” Cruz said. “We could be playing Idaho State and it’s full with students all the time, so the rest of the country needs to see that.”
Why not just move the TV cameras? Cruz said it would cost $6 million to transfer all the wiring and fiber optics built into the current platforms that were specially built for the cameras.
Men’s basketball coach Mick Cronin and Cori Close, his women’s basketball counterpart, have agreed to the potential move, Cruz said, as have the fans he’s canvassed about switching seats.
In the meantime, UCLA is partnering with a global sports and entertainment company to improve the in-game experience for fans, including new ways to keep the energy flowing during timeouts while the Bruins are in the midst of a big run instead of relying on scoreboard ads and awkward silences.
Cruz said he’s converting some of his department’s marketing staff into fan experience specialists to improve fan retention.
“How do we create an experience where it’s like, man, that was fun, I want to come back?” Cruz said. “That leads to more revenue and it also leads to a larger pathway for our alumni and students to make them want to come back. How do we create that cycle of, yeah, they care, they want us here, and I want to come back?”
If winning is the greatest promotion in sports, Cruz is trying to show that listening may not be far behind.
