Brands
Netflix names Magali Huot director games marketing – mainstream games
Former dentsu and YouTube Gaming leader joins to steer mass appeal titles
LOS ANGELES: Netflix has appointed Magali Huot as director of games marketing for its mainstream games division, reinforcing its push to widen the appeal of its interactive entertainment slate.
Based in Los Angeles, Huot joins from dentsu, where she most recently served as svp, global gaming strategy. During her time there, she helped brands treat gaming not as a niche vertical but as a core marketing channel, shaping partnerships that connected culture, community and commerce.
Before dentsu, she spent nearly four years at YouTube, including as head of games publishers at YouTube gaming and senior gaming product marketing manager. She built the platform’s first global games publishers practice, formalising a data led approach to partner selection and creating scalable programmes across the Americas, EMEA and Apac.
Her work included amplifying major in game cultural moments in Fortnite, featuring artists such as Travis Scott and Ariana Grande, as well as advancing creator partnerships and live event strategies to deepen platform engagement.
Earlier, at Warner Bros. Entertainment, she served as director, content marketing across the games portfolio, leading campaigns for titles including Mortal Kombat 11. Her remit spanned strategic partnerships, esports programmes, branded content and experiential activations.
From launching Ubisoft’s first social media war rooms to developing large-scale publisher collaborations, Huot has built her career at the intersection of entertainment and interactive culture.
At Netflix, she now takes on the task of making mainstream gaming as intuitive and inviting as pressing play on a favourite series.
Brands
Maharashtra panel orders Lodha to refund Rs 5 crore to homebuyers
Consumer court flags unfair practices in long-running property dispute case
MUMBAI: In a sharp rebuke to one of India’s biggest real estate players, the Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has directed Macrotech Developers to refund nearly Rs 5 crore to a senior citizen couple, Uttam and Anindita Chatterjee. The ruling, delivered on March 13, 2026, calls out the developer for “deficiency in service” and “unfair trade practices”, bringing closure to a dispute that has stretched over a decade.
The case traces back to 2015, when the couple booked a 3-BHK flat at World Towers in Lower Parel for Rs 12.22 crore, with possession promised within a year. What followed was a series of changes that complicated matters. After deciding to exit the project, they were persuaded to shift to a 4-BHK in another development priced at Rs 8 crore, with delivery scheduled for 2018. However, within months, the price was allegedly increased to Rs 10 crore. After demonetisation reshaped the market, similar flats were reportedly being offered at lower prices, but the couple were not given the benefit.
Despite paying over Rs 2.83 crore, the couple neither received possession nor clarity. Instead, in 2018, the developer unilaterally cancelled the booking, retained part of the amount as earnest money, and argued that the buyers were investors rather than consumers. The commission rejected this claim, observing that casual references to “investment” do not take away consumer rights when the purchase intent is residential.
The bench also held that the developer could not penalise buyers for payment delays while failing to meet its own delivery commitments. It noted the lack of formal documentation for revised terms and termed the prolonged retention of funds without delivering a home as exploitative.
As part of its order, the commission directed the developer to refund Rs 2.83 crore paid by the couple, along with interest at 10 per cent per annum, amounting to around Rs 2.12 crore. In addition, Rs 1 lakh has been awarded for mental agony and Rs 50,000 towards litigation costs, taking the total payout to over Rs 5 crore. The developer has been asked to comply within two months.
For now, the ruling serves as a reminder that in real estate, shifting terms and delayed promises can carry a significant cost.
