标签： Oceania

As the 2026 FIFA World Cup kicks off in North America this week, one unexpected winner is already emerging: Chinese sports merchandise manufacturers, who are capitalizing on massive domestic fan enthusiasm for global football to boost a struggling consumer economy. Even though China’s men’s national team failed to qualify for the tournament — marking its 24-year absence since its only World Cup appearance in 2002 — consumer demand for official football-themed memorabilia has hit unprecedented levels, turning small plush charms into unexpected bestsellers.

At a factory in Yiwu, eastern China’s renowned global wholesale manufacturing hub, workers are working around the clock to fulfill orders for one viral product: palm-sized plush goat keychains decked out in Lionel Messi’s Argentina national team number 10 jersey. The plush is a playful nod to Messi’s widely accepted nickname as the GOAT — short for “Greatest of All Time” — and designed to clip onto backpacks, purses, and keys for a subtle display of fan loyalty. This star product is just one line from All Star Partner, a Chinese licensed merchandise manufacturer that holds official branding contracts with top national teams including Argentina.

Company CEO Luo Bin told reporters that overall sales have jumped five-fold this year compared to volumes during the 2022 Qatar World Cup, a staggering growth that has exceeded all internal projections. The plush charm trend began organically a few years ago, when the company first tested the concept by dressing an ordinary plain teddy bear in a football kit. The product sold tens of thousands of units immediately after launch, convincing the firm that the niche had massive untapped potential. Today, the catalog extends far beyond Messi’s goats: shoppers can find soft toys modeled after Cristiano Ronaldo, fluffy roosters wearing France national team polos, and teddy bears clad in Spain’s iconic red kit, all competing for space in a market that also includes pop-culture hits like Pop Mart’s wildly popular Labubu collectibles.

Luo acknowledges that the tiny plush pendants offer little practical utility, which makes their sky-high popularity a telling sign of shifting consumer priorities in China amid a period of slowed economic growth. “Perhaps now because of the economic environment… people’s choices are no longer practical ones,” he explained. “People now care a lot about emotional value. That is, ‘I want to buy something that I really love. That, when I look at it, makes me really happy.’”

That sentiment resonates deeply with young Chinese consumers, who are increasingly turning to low-cost sports merchandise as an accessible outlet for stress and emotional fulfillment. On a recent weekday at a local All Star Partner retail outlet, casual shoppers browsed through rows of jerseys, plush charms, keychains, pet toys, and event-themed travel accessories. Football fan Fang Tian, who has followed the World Cup since 2014, noted that young people today face mounting social and economic pressure, and affordable fan merchandise provides both an emotional outlet and an accessible way to engage with the sport they love.

Influencer Zhu Hui added that the $11.60 Messi goats — which many buyers note look more like fluffy lambs than full-grown goats — are the undisputed top seller at the store. “I’ve found that Chinese people are actually highly enthusiastic about football stars, and (their enthusiasm) lasts a long time,” the 28-year-old said. “My friends are all willing to fight to stay up to watch the games.”

Data from FIFA backs up that observation: during the 2022 Qatar World Cup, Chinese users accounted for half of all global digital and social platform viewership, despite the absence of the home nation’s team. For long-time fans like 43-year-old Shang Jianxing, a self-described England superfan from Zhejiang, the growing popularity of football culture in China signals a shifting landscape for the sport domestically.

Shang, who chased his love for England stars David Beckham and Michael Owen to North London where he studied business between 2003 and 2008, has attended multiple World Cups in person and plans to travel to the U.S. to watch this year’s semi-final. He bought a Portugal-themed pet carrier for a friend ahead of this year’s tournament, and said he sees football slowly evolving from a niche interest to a widespread way of life for Chinese fans. Like many Chinese supporters, he watched the national team’s 2002 campaign — its only World Cup appearance to date, where it lost all three group matches without scoring a single goal — and holds out hope for a return to the global stage.

Shang points to the expansion of youth football development programs across China as a promising sign for the men’s national team, which has long faced widespread criticism for its poor international performance. “It’s a pity China has missed out on every World Cup except 2002, given football’s popularity at home,” he said. “I think sooner or later the Chinese team will play in the World Cup again.”

For now, though, Chinese merchants are reaping the benefits of that widespread passion, turning global football fever into a rare bright spot for a domestic economy that has struggled with stagnant consumer spending in recent years. What started as a small experiment with a plush teddy bear in a football kit has grown into a multi-million dollar business, proving that even without a national team in the tournament, China’s fan market remains one of the most lucrative in global football.

One of Australia’s largest pharmaceutical powerhouses has launched a potential game-changing expansion into the United Kingdom’s retail health market, after confirming it has entered early-stage negotiations to acquire British health and beauty chain Boots in a deal valued at approximately $14 billion Australian dollars.

In an official statement filed with the Australian Securities Exchange (ASX) this week, parent company Sigma Healthcare – which completed its $34 billion merger with Australian retail pharmacy brand Chemist Warehouse only last year – confirmed that “preliminary discussions” are underway regarding the sale process for Boots, the UK’s biggest independent pharmaceutical chain by market share.

“Sigma continuously reviews opportunities that would create value for shareholders and has engaged in preliminary discussions in relation to the sale process,” the statement read. A subsequent spokesperson for Chemist Warehouse also clarified that talks remain in the very early stages, and no final agreement has been reached regarding a potential transaction.

Per reporting from the Financial Times, Boots’ current owner, US-based private equity firm Sycamore Partners, has received expressions of interest from multiple retail groups across North America and Australia. Alongside Sigma Healthcare, Canadian supermarket giant Loblaws and national pharmacy operator Shoppers Drug Mart are also listed as potential bidders for the iconic British brand. Industry analysts expect the final sale price to land around $10 billion US dollars, equal to $14.3 billion Australian dollars.

Founded 177 years ago, Boots is a staple of British high streets, operating roughly 1,800 physical locations across the UK and employing more than 50,000 people. The brand has become a household name for both pharmaceutical products and general health and beauty retail, making it a high-value target for global retailers looking to break into the UK market.

If Sigma completes the acquisition, the purchase would mark the company’s second major investment in the UK in less than six months. Back in May, the Australian group purchased a 75% controlling stake in British pharmacy operator Greenlight Healthcare, which runs 22 community locations, in a move that first brought the Chemist Warehouse brand into the UK market. Beyond the UK and its home market of Australia, Sigma already maintains a presence across New Zealand, Ireland and the United Arab Emirates’ Dubai, as part of its ongoing global expansion strategy.

Shortly after the announcement of preliminary talks, Sigma Healthcare’s shares took a notable dip on the ASX, falling more than 7% to close at $2.72 AUD per share, as investors reacted to the news of the potential large-scale acquisition.

After months of failed attempts to secure a rescue deal for the struggling outdoor living retailer, Barbecues Galore, one of Australia’s most recognizable home goods brands, is winding down operations permanently, putting approximately 500 workers out of employment.

Founded in 1975 by Max Mason, the family-rooted chain built its reputation over nearly five decades selling barbecues, outdoor furniture and backyard leisure goods, becoming a household name across the country thanks to its iconic bright red branding. But mounting financial pressures pushed the company into voluntary administration in February this year, as leaders sought time to restructure and find a path back to sustainable operations.

Receiver and administrator teams initially held out hope of avoiding full liquidation. They entered negotiations with property landlords and key suppliers to renegotiate more favorable commercial terms that would allow the chain to resume stable operations. However, those talks collapsed in recent weeks after failing to produce a viable rescue agreement, forcing administrators to announce a full wind-down of the business.

Starting next week, all 62 company-owned locations will begin closing processes, while 27 franchise-operated stores will enter transitional arrangements ahead of their eventual shutdown. From June 16, the company will begin selling off all remaining assets to settle outstanding obligations.

In an official statement, administrators confirmed that all employee entitlements, including unpaid wages, superannuation and accrued leave, will be paid in full to affected workers. For customers holding unused gift vouchers, the chain has set new redemption terms that remain in place through the end of June: customers must spend $2 of their own money for every $1 in voucher value to redeem their credits.

Industry analysts have framed the collapse as a stark indicator of the challenges facing brick-and-mortar retailers in Australia’s current economic climate. Roger Montgomery, a prominent retail industry analyst, called the end of Barbecues Galore a “tragic final chapter” for a brand that embedded itself in Australian backyard culture. “If you can’t sell barbecues to Aussies, who can you sell them to?” Montgomery noted, underscoring how severe broader economic headwinds have become for even well-established, culturally resonant local businesses.

Australia’s second-largest grocery retailer Coles will not learn the full legal consequences of its deceptive discounting practices for several more months, after a recent Federal Court hearing laid out the timeline for the ongoing case brought by the country’s top consumer regulator. Last month, Justice Michael O’Bryan of the Federal Court issued a landmark ruling finding Coles had misled Australian consumers through false discount claims on hundreds of everyday household products sold as part of its high-profile ‘Down Down’ national promotional campaign. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC), Australia’s independent consumer protection and competition watchdog, first initiated legal proceedings against the supermarket giant over questionable pricing practices across 245 products between February 2022 and May 2023. The ACCC has alleged that Coles deliberately manipulated prices during a period of soaring nationwide inflation, temporarily inflating baseline prices before marketing a subsequent ‘now’ price as a discount to consumers. These false discount claims were prominently displayed on large red in-store stickers that clearly showed a higher ‘was’ price alongside the advertised ‘now’ discounted price. The case returned to the Federal Court on Wednesday morning to lock in procedural next steps for both the ACCC’s enforcement action and a separate class action lawsuit filed on behalf of thousands of consumers who were impacted by the misleading pricing. Justice O’Bryan has ordered all involved parties to collaborate to draft a joint agreed statement of facts covering the majority of the 245 products at the center of the case, aligned with his earlier liability ruling. To streamline the initial trial process earlier this year, legal teams selected 14 representative products to test the arguments, and the remaining 231 products are scheduled to be finalized in advance of an August case management hearing. A two-day penalty hearing has been tentatively scheduled for December 16, where the ACCC and Coles will present legal submissions on what financial and legal penalties are appropriate for Coles’ violation of Australian consumer law. The court confirmed the ACCC is seeking both a significant financial penalty and declaratory relief that formally confirms Coles broke the law. The separate consumer class action, which has proceeded alongside the ACCC’s case to date, may be heard alongside the penalty hearing or split into a separate proceeding at a later date, depending on the court’s final decision. During the main liability trial, the court heard evidence that Coles had previously maintained an internal 12-week policy requiring products to be sold at a new baseline price for three months before the retailer could advertise it as a discount, a rule designed specifically to avoid misleading consumers about the authenticity of price cuts. However, amid intense price competition that witnesses described as a “race to the bottom” between Coles and its primary rival Woolworths, paired with widespread supplier price increases during the inflationary period, Coles cut this required waiting period from 12 weeks to just four weeks. Justice O’Bryan’s ruling confirmed that if Coles had retained the original 12-week waiting policy, ordinary consumers would have viewed the resulting price changes as genuine discounts. Notably, the judge also found that the underlying price increases implemented by Coles reflected actual supplier cost increases rather than artificially inflated baseline prices, a key point of distinction in the ruling. Coles has defended its conduct throughout the case, arguing that all price adjustments were legitimate responses to widespread inflation, and that the ‘Down Down’ campaign was intended to signal to consumers the retailer was working to keep grocery costs low. Following the liability ruling, ACCC Chair Gina Cass-Gottlieb confirmed the watchdog would push for a harsh penalty to act as a deterrent for similar misleading conduct across the retail sector. “While the level of penalty is a matter for the court to determine, the ACCC will be seeking a significant deterrent for such conduct,” Cass-Gottlieb said. “We will certainly make strong submissions on the level of penalty.” Justice O’Bryan has also issued suppression orders for certain commercial figures included in his ruling, to protect Coles’ commercially sensitive information including supplier costs, supplier funding support, and the retailer’s gross margin calculations. The case will next return to court for a case management hearing in August, with the final penalty decision not expected until early 2025 at the earliest.