Latest News
See the latest news and get GPT analysis of articles
'Chopped'-winning celeb chef who didn't pay rent for over 4 years gets evicted 2024-06-05 21:21:57+00:00 - By clicking “Sign Up”, you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy . You can opt-out at any time by visiting our Preferences page or by clicking "unsubscribe" at the bottom of the email. Access your favorite topics in a personalized feed while you're on the go. download the app Sign up to get the inside scoop on today’s biggest stories in markets, tech, and business — delivered daily. Read preview A celebrity chef who skirted rent payments for four and a half years has officially been evicted from his Brooklyn apartment, according to media reports. Madison Cowan, who won the Food Network's "Chopped" in 2010 and "Iron Chef" in 2012, had already vacated his Boerum Hill, Brooklyn apartment before the landlord and a city marshal arrived Tuesday morning to evict him under a court order, the New York Post reported. This story is available exclusively to Business Insider subscribers. Become an Insider and start reading now. Cowan first moved into the 1-bedroom $2,700/month apartment in October 2019, but he hasn't paid any rent since January 2020, the Post reported. In his first few years of rent-free living, Cowan took advantage of a pandemic-era eviction moratorium, and when that expired, he avoided five eviction orders by repeatedly filing appeals, according to the outlet. Related Video Cowan chose not to appeal the judge's sixth eviction order delivered two weeks ago, the Post reported. Cowan — who has catered to celebs like Scarlett Johansson, Mos Def, and Halle Berry, according to his website — told the judge in May that he was "seriously impacted by the pandemic," WABC reported. "I couldn't get a job," he said, according to WABC. "It all went away." But the more than $145,000 he owes is seriously impacting his landlord, Gus Sheha. Advertisement "We're just happy that he is out," Sheha told The Post. "I would hope others see this and understand what type of tenant he was and are not left in the same position I was." Related stories "Unfortunately, it is small landlords who get hurt the most here and could potentially go bankrupt when you have tenants not paying the rent for four and a half years," Sheha added. Sheha told the Post that he doesn't expect to ever see any of the money Cowan owes him, adding that hiring another lawyer would be too expensive. Issues between landlords and tenants have made national headlines this year. Advertisement In Queens, New York, a couple is in a legal battle with a man refusing to leave their recently purchased $2 million home. According to the squatter, he had permission from the previous owner to remain in the home. Unfortunately for the couple, New York City law grants those who live at a residence for more than 30 days temporary rights, as they are seen as tenants. The couple has struggled to remove the squatter and have been countersued for harassment. Advertisement In Texas, a man bought a home for $175,000 only to find the previous occupant still living there. And she wasn't alone. Her pet goat was alongside her. "I tried approaching the door, and it was a pretty big goat," he told Fox News. "It wasn't friendly either. I couldn't get past the damn goat." And between October 2023 and February 2024, a group of squatters stayed in a 5,875-square-foot mansion in Beverly Hills and were even making money by hosting parties and charging entrance fees that went up to $1,500. They also posted rooms for rent on Booking.com, charging $150 to $300 a night. The four-bedroom home had a pool, a spa, and a cabana — a lush dwelling while not paying rent.
Lululemon shares pop 10% despite lackluster earnings report and guidance 2024-06-05 21:19:00+00:00 - A staff member holds a thermometer to measure the temperature of a customer at an entrance to a Lululemon store, following the Covid-19 outbreak, in Shanghai, China, on June 21, 2022. Lululemon 's growth in the Americas, its largest market, appears to be stalling after the retailer on Wednesday reported flat comparable sales in the region and weak guidance for the current quarter. The athletic apparel retailer handily beat Wall Street's earnings estimates, but only narrowly topped revenue expectations. Lululemon's full fiscal-year guidance suggests the company is betting conditions will improve in the back half of the year. Here is how Lululemon did in its first fiscal quarter compared to what Wall Street was anticipating, based on a survey of analysts by LSEG: Earnings per share: $2.54 vs. $2.38 expected $2.54 vs. $2.38 expected Revenue: $2.21 billion vs. $2.19 billion expected Despite the tepid growth, Lululemon's stock jumped 10% in extended trading Wednesday. The company also announced it would add $1 billion to its stock buyback program. The company's reported net income for the three-month period that ended April 28 was $321 million, or $2.54 per share, compared to $290 million, or $2.28 per share, a year earlier. Sales rose to $2.21 billion, up about 10% from $2 billion a year earlier. In a news release, CEO Calvin McDonald touted the "strong momentum" the company is seeing in its international markets and hinted that it needs to do more work in the Americas to grow in the region again. "We are pleased by the progress we are making to optimize our U.S. product assortment," said McDonald. "Looking ahead, we continue to have a significant runway for growth and are confident in our team's ability to powerfully deliver." Last quarter, McDonald said the company was seeing consumer dynamics change in the Americas, but also noted Lululemon fumbled by not having the right sizes and colors in its stores, which hit sales. During a call with analysts on Wednesday, McDonald said those issues continued during the fiscal first quarter. He said Lululemon's color assortment was too narrow in leggings, and the company was once again out of stock of the sizes its customers wanted. McDonald added the company did not buy enough of the items that were landing with consumers, leading to products being out of stock. He said he expects the company to be in a better inventory position in the second half of the year. Lululemon is still growing in the Americas, but at a much slower pace than last year. During the first quarter of this year, sales in the Americas increased 3%, versus a 17% jump in the year-ago period. Comparable sales were flat from last year. Across the business, Lululemon's comparable sales grew 6%, below the 7% uptick that analysts had expected, according to StreetAccount. As growth in the Americas slows, Lululemon issued weak guidance for the current quarter. It expects revenue to be between $2.40 billion and $2.42 billion, just below estimates of $2.45 billion, according to LSEG. It guided earnings per share to be between $2.92 and $2.97, compared to estimates of $3.02, according to LSEG. The company appears to be expecting conditions to improve in the second half of the year. For the full year, Lululemon expects earnings per share to be between $14.27 and $14.47, ahead of the $14.11 that analysts had expected. It's expecting revenue to be between $10.7 billion and $10.8 billion, which is in line with expectations, according to LSEG. Lululemon, still widely considered to be a best in class retailer and a market leader, has hit a bit of a rough patch as of late. Its stock is down 40% year to date as of Wednesday's close, as investors become concerned about its growth prospects. It recently announced that its longtime chief product officer Sun Choe would be resigning, which caused shares to fall. Lululemon could also soon find itself on the other side of trends. Denim is having a major moment with consumers, and investors have been concerned that shoppers could be swapping athleisure for jeans, which could hit Lululemon's topline. Read the full earnings release here.
Trump's gun license expected to be revoked after conviction in hush money trial 2024-06-05 21:15:00+00:00 - Former President Donald Trump's gun license is expected to be revoked now that he has been convicted on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records, according to a New York Police Department spokesperson. Trump's gun license for New York City had been suspended upon his indictment, the spokesperson said. The Trump campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the expected revocation, which was first reported by CNN. Gun licenses are often revoked after convictions in New York. It is unclear when the former president has last held a gun, but his gun license for New York City was active at the time of his indictment in the hush money case in March 2023, according to the NYPD spokesperson. He has been under Secret Service protection since 2015, when he became the Republican nominee for president. Trump was found guilty last Thursday on all 34 counts of falsifying business records, a historic verdict marking the first time in history that a former U.S. president has been convicted. He is set to be sentenced on July 11, just days before the Republican National Convention where he will be formalized as the party's nominee for president. The former president last month delivered a keynote speech at the National Rifle Association's annual meeting, where the group formally endorsed him. During his speech, Trump urged gun owners to vote.
Boeing CEO to testify in Senate hearing June 18 2024-06-05 21:13:00+00:00 - Boeing CEO Dave Calhoun speaks briefly with reporters as he arrives for a meeting at the office of Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., on Jan. 24, 2024. Boeing CEO Dave Calhoun will testify before a Senate panel on June 18 to answer lawmaker questions about whistleblower allegations and quality control at the aircraft maker as it navigates a safety crisis. "I look forward to Mr. Calhoun's testimony, which is a necessary step in meaningfully addressing Boeing's failures, regaining public trust, and restoring the company's central role in the American economy and national defense," said Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., chairman of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. "Years of putting profits ahead of safety, stock price ahead of quality, and production speed ahead of responsibility has brought Boeing to this moment of reckoning, and its hollow promises can no longer stand," he said. The hearing comes after a company engineer alleged the assembly of Boeing's 787 Dreamliners put excessive stress on the planes and reduce their lifespans, allegations Boeing called inaccurate. The Federal Aviation Administration is investigating. "We welcome the opportunity to appear before the Subcommittee to share the actions we have taken, and will continue to take, to strengthen safety and quality and ensure that commercial air travel remains the safest form of transportation," Boeing said in a statement. "We are committed to fostering a culture of accountability and transparency while upholding the highest standards of safety and quality." Boeing has been trying to regain its footing in the wake of two deadly crashes of its bestselling 737 Max in 2018 and 2019. But a door plug that blew out of a nearly new 737 Max 9 during an Alaska Airlines flight in January put fresh scrutiny on the manufacturer from lawmakers and the FAA. Calhoun in March said he would step down by year's end, part of a broad executive shake-up at the plane maker.
Florida locals endorse Disney World's new $17 billion development 2024-06-05 21:03:57+00:00 - The Central Florida tourism board will vote on a development plan with Disney next week. Local small businesses urged board members to approve the deal in a public hearing. The proposed development deal could allow Disney to expand its existing Florida properties. Sign up to get the inside scoop on today’s biggest stories in markets, tech, and business — delivered daily. Read preview Thanks for signing up! Access your favorite topics in a personalized feed while you're on the go. download the app Email address Sign up By clicking “Sign Up”, you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy . You can opt-out at any time by visiting our Preferences page or by clicking "unsubscribe" at the bottom of the email. Advertisement Local businesses are throwing their support behind Disney's $17 billion development deal, saying it could invigorate the local economy and boost sales. The Central Florida Tourism Oversight District's board of supervisors discussed the pending development deal in a 25-minute meeting on Wednesday at its Lake Buena Vista headquarters. The development agreement could usher in a new era of expansion for Disney, which reigns king in Central Florida with its four major theme parks and deep ties in the community. The deal also symbolizes a detente between Disney and Gov. Ron DeSantis, who essentially commandeered control of the tourism district after a legal battle with the company. This story is available exclusively to Business Insider subscribers. Become an Insider and start reading now. Have an account? Log in .
Georgia court postpones Trump’s election interference case pending appeal 2024-06-05 21:01:00+00:00 - The Georgia state election interference case against Donald Trump and several co-defendants is officially paused while they seek to disqualify Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis on appeal. The stay order from the state appeals court Wednesday follows that court earlier this week setting a tentative October hearing date for the appeal. The order further affirms the already apparent reality that there won’t be a pre-election trial in this case against the presumptive GOP nominee and others. This is a developing story. Please check back for updates. Subscribe to the Deadline: Legal Newsletter for weekly updates on the top legal stories, including news from the Supreme Court, the Donald Trump cases and more.
The best Apple Watch in 2024: Pick the right wearable for you 2024-06-05 20:56:34+00:00 - When you buy through our links, Business Insider may earn an affiliate commission. Learn more Every Apple Watch is an extension of your iPhone that delivers notifications, takes or makes calls, sends messages, and shows you a variety of information depending on the widgets you choose. Each model, however, comes with (or without) various features, and their price tags reflect that fact. The best Apple Watch for you will fit your needs, whether it's health monitoring tools or an always-on display. Our pick as the best Apple Watch for the vast majority of people is the Apple Watch Series 9. It features an always-on display, a fast processor, enhanced screen brightness, and a handy new single-handed gesture that improves accessibility. The second-generation Apple Watch SE is a more affordable and basic version of the Series 9 that doesn't include an always-on display or an ECG sensor. It's still a fantastic smartwatch for the price that comes with everything most people would ever need. Our top picks for the best Apple Watch Best overall: Apple Watch Series 9 - See at Amazon Best budget: Apple Watch SE (2022) - See at Amazon Best for fitness and outdoors: Apple Watch Ultra 2 - See at Amazon Best overall Apple Watch Series 9 (41mm, GPS) The Apple Watch Series 9 includes the latest S9 processor, a 2000-nit always-on Retina display, expanded Apple Health integrations with Siri, and a unique single-hand gesture to answer calls and interact with widgets. View at Amazon View at Walmart View at Best Buy What we like Check mark icon A check mark. It indicates a confirmation of your intended interaction. Double Tap Gesture is a great improvement for the Apple Watch's accessibility Check mark icon A check mark. It indicates a confirmation of your intended interaction. Faster chipset improves overall functionality and performance What we don’t like con icon Two crossed lines that form an 'X'. Battery life still maxes out at 18 hours con icon Two crossed lines that form an 'X'. Low Power Mode turns off a lot of useful features The Apple Watch Series 9 is our pick as the best wearable in Apple's lineup. No other wearable offers the same premium combination of smartwatch functionality, fitness and health tracking capability, and overall value as the Series 9. Although the Series 9 isn't a massive leap over the previous generation Series 8, it did introduce a few new features, like a faster processor, on-device Siri access, SmartStack functionality, and a brighter display. Other additions include updated hiking and cycling feedback, more mental health tools, and a new ultra-wideband chip that greatly improves location accuracy. The Series 9 boasts a fast, powerful processor, intuitive smartwatch functionality, and the useful new Double Tap Gesture. Rick Stella/Business Insider While those upgrades are useful, my favorite new feature is the double tap gesture, which allows you to interact with the watch by double-tapping your thumb and index finger. Doing this controls an app's primary button, so you can answer or hang up a phone call, start or stop a timer, or snap a photo while in the camera. The brighter screen is also a nice new touch, allowing for (even) better visibility in bright conditions, even if it wasn't much of a problem in the last few generations. The screen can also dim to one nit, which is especially useful in a movie theater or wherever darkness is key, like putting a baby in a crib (speaking from personal experience). Another feature I found highly useful was the new Smart Stack display, which is essentially a customizable group of widgets accessible on the watch's home screen. These can include a glance at the weather, whatever calendar events you might have for the day, or even a snippet of the news. Overall, the Series 9 is a powerful smartwatch. There are many differences when comparing the Series 9 vs. the Ultra 2, but the new Double Tap Gesture, brighter screen, Smart Stack display, and improved health and fitness tracking tools make the Series 9 noticeably more capable than the Series 8. These features make it the best Apple Watch you can buy. However, note that the blood-oxygen measuring feature on the Apple Watch Series 9 is currently disabled due to a patent dispute. Read our full Apple Watch Series 9 review. Best budget Apple Watch SE (2nd Gen) 40mm The second-generation Apple Watch SE is an impressive entry-level wearable that shares the same processor as the Series 8 and Ultra. It doesn’t have the advanced health sensors of premium models, but it offers enough features to satisfy most people. View at Amazon What we like Check mark icon A check mark. It indicates a confirmation of your intended interaction. Same processor as Series 8 and Ultra Check mark icon A check mark. It indicates a confirmation of your intended interaction. Excellent value as an entry-level smartwatch Check mark icon A check mark. It indicates a confirmation of your intended interaction. Impressive battery life What we don’t like con icon Two crossed lines that form an 'X'. No always-on display con icon Two crossed lines that form an 'X'. Lacks advanced health sensors con icon Two crossed lines that form an 'X'. Smaller display than Series 8 The second-generation Apple Watch SE is surprisingly affordable for such a feature-packed smartwatch and is, by far, the best Apple Watch for those on a budget. It's nearly, if not just as capable as the Series 9 and Ultra 2 for tracking fitness, sleep, checking notifications, taking calls, and ensuring you're OK with health and safety features like Crash Detection, Fall Detection, heart rate monitoring, sleep tracking, and more. The Apple Watch SE is notably missing an always-on display, which can be the biggest deciding factor whether you go for the SE or the Series 9 (or the Ultra 2). Compared to the Series 9, the SE doesn't feature an electrocardiogram sensor for ECG readings or skin-temperature sensors for advanced period tracking and additional sleep tracking measurements. The second-gen SE is the best option for first-time wearers or casual users who won't be bothered by the lacking always-on display. Antonio Villas-Boas/Business Insider For first-time buyers, the SE will make you wonder how you ever lived without one. It's incredibly convenient to get notifications, send texts, make calls, and customize the Apple Watch face with all the widgets and information you find useful — and it does all this without you needing to pull out your phone. At least, opting for the SE lets you get a better idea of the Apple Watch's baseline features starting at $249. From there, you can consider if features like always-on display and the latest health sensors are worth the upgrade. If not, then the second-gen SE is your best option. Read our full Apple Watch SE (2022) review. Best for fitness and outdoors Apple Watch Ultra 2 The Ultra 2 is Apple's biggest smartwatch that features the highly useful Action Button, has multi-day battery life, and has a rugged design that's perfect for athletes. View at Amazon What we like Check mark icon A check mark. It indicates a confirmation of your intended interaction. Multi-day battery life Check mark icon A check mark. It indicates a confirmation of your intended interaction. Durable, rugged design Check mark icon A check mark. It indicates a confirmation of your intended interaction. Uses the unique Action button What we don’t like con icon Two crossed lines that form an 'X'. Expensive con icon Two crossed lines that form an 'X'. Only available in one sizing option con icon Two crossed lines that form an 'X'. Limited customization options for the Action Button The Apple Watch Ultra 2 doesn't represent a drastic improvement over its predecessor, but it did usher in a few new features designed specifically for the outdoor user. These include the brightest screen of any Apple Watch, which allows for improved visibility in bright light conditions, an upgraded altitude range, and new water sports features for scuba diving and freediving. The Ultra 2 also shares some new features that debuted on the Series 9, such as the new double tap gesture, the new S9 processor, and on-device Siri access. The double tap gesture, specifically, improves the wearable's accessibility. With this feature active, users can simply double-tap their thumb and index finger to interact with the watch, be it to start or stop an alarm or pick up or end a phone call, among others. Much of the rest of the Ultra 2 is rolled over from the original model, including its overall design, which features a corrosion-resistant titanium casing and a 49mm screen. The Apple Watch Ultra 2 is the best option for outdoor enthusiasts and those who want longer battery life. Rick Stella/Business Insider Battery life is a major highlight of the Ultra 2, as it can last upwards of three days on a single charge, which is roughly double what we've gotten out of the Series 9. The exact amount of battery life depends on how often the GPS is used, and whether the Always-On display is on, but the difference in the frequency of charging the Ultra 2 compared to the Series 9 is apparent. Arguably, the Ultra line's best feature, the unique Action Button, returns and functions the same on the Ultra 2 as on the previous model. It is still capable of starting and stopping workouts or being programmed to sync with various shortcuts. The sum of these parts may not be enough to sway the casual user into spending $800 on the watch, but it remains a highly worthwhile tool for avid outdoor enthusiasts and serious athletes. (Note that the blood-oxygen measuring feature on the Apple Watch Ultra 2 is currently unavailable due to a patent dispute.) Read our full Apple Watch Ultra 2 review. Avoid these Apple Watch models Though it's possible to find refurbished and inexpensive versions of the Apple Watch Series 3, we wouldn't recommend it, namely because the model is discontinued and no longer supports the latest versions of WatchOS. It should go without saying that we don't recommend the Series 1 or 2 either. If you can find Series 5 or 6 refurbished for between $100 and $150, they include an always-on display, a major advantage over the Series 4 and even the current SE. Plus, they'll have more life in terms of support and performance than the Series 4. Still, buying an older refurbished Apple Watch could be more of a hassle than it's worth. Older models have shorter support windows than newer and current models, so you'd have to buy another Apple Watch sooner than you might want to if you want to keep up with security and watchOS updates. What to look for in an Apple Watch The latest Apple Watch models offer a fresh slate of worthwhile features. Rick Stella/Business Insider There are many reasons to buy one of the best Apple Watches; understanding them can help you know what to look for. Each Apple Watch is also among the best fitness trackers you can buy and offers unique health monitoring tools that can positively impact your wellness. For health and fitness tracking, you'll want to review which model offers what sensors. The latest Apple Watch models include a heart rate monitor, the newest gyroscope, and a high-g accelerometer that powers Apple's Crash Detection feature. For day-to-day tasks, you'll more or less get the same experience thanks to each watch supporting the latest WatchOS software. But if you want an always-on display, which we think could make or break a decision, you should consider the Series 9 as your best Apple Watch. Likewise, if you want the biggest screen and the best battery life, there's the Ultra 2. After that, it's deciding whether you want the smaller or larger models of a specific Apple Watch series. It's mostly down to personal preference and your comfort levels, and it makes no difference to battery life. Larger screens make it easier to read and control with on-screen items, but smaller models are still large enough to offer a good experience. How we test Apple Watches We test Apple Watches by using them personally and putting them through a variety of objective tests. Rick Stella/Business Insider We can assess the best Apple Watch in a relatively short time thanks to our extensive personal experience with the wearables, as we've reviewed them professionally through the generations. The best way to test these wearables is to wear and use them daily with an iPhone as if they were our own for at least a week, often longer. We focus on ease of use, performance, usefulness, features and sensors, battery life, and how their price relates to the overall experience. During testing, we assess all these aspects during various activities, like a workout, running errands, lounging, sleeping, and traveling (when possible). We actively test notifications, calls, messages, settings and options, and customization, and we note where an Apple Watch excels or lacks. We don't perform tests that could damage our review unit or ourselves (Crash Detection). At the same time, we don't take special care of our Apple Watch review units and subject them to typical wear and tear from normal usage. We also look at how the new models compare to older models and lay out the benefits of upgrading from various older models. Looking at the specific model changes and upgrades year-over-year helps us choose the overall best models. The best Apple Watch bands to buy Choose the right Apple Watch band for your needs. Business Insider One of the Apple Watch's best features is its ability to use different watch straps and band types. This versatility allows you to swap on the best Apple Watch bands suited to a specific activity or event, such as a sports band for working out or a metal band for wearing to work. For more style inspiration, check out our other band guides: Be sure to pick up one of the best Apple Watch screen protectors, too. FAQs What is the difference between GPS and GPS + Cellular models? A GPS-only model is cheaper than cellular models and lets you carry out tasks like receiving text messages, answering phone calls, and receiving notifications when it's connected and close to your iPhone via Bluetooth or WiFi. A GPS + Cellular model offers increased connectivity with the addition of built-in cellular. That means you can receive text messages, answer calls, and stream music — even if you don't have your iPhone with you. You just need to add the watch to your current carrier plan. Most carriers charge $10 a month for a watch-compatible cellular plan. Does the Apple Watch use data? Only the GPS + Cellular models with a separate data plan use data from your carrier if you don't have your iPhone nearby. Otherwise, Apple Watches are simply extensions of your iPhone and don't use more data than you would on your iPhone if it's nearby. Do Apple Watches work with Android? The short answer is no. An Apple Watch will not pair seamlessly with an Android phone. Even if you get a GPS + Cellular model that doesn't rely on an iPhone connection, an iPhone is required for setup and app downloads. While the Apple Watch is one of the best smartwatches, Android users should instead consider purchasing one of the best Android smartwatches to use something that's 100% compatible with their phone. Is the Apple Watch waterproof? No Apple Watch is "waterproof," but models have varying degrees of water resistance, which means they can sustain splashes and submersion down to a certain depth. The SE and Series 9 can go down as far as 50 meters, or around 164 feet. The Ultra 2 supports depths of 100 meters, or 328 feet, and 40 meters (131 feet) for recreational dives. What is the best Apple Watch for kids? If you want a way for your kid to stay connected without giving them a smartphone, an Apple Watch could be your answer. For kids, we recommend the second-generation Apple Watch SE in the 40mm, GPS + Cellular model. You can use Family Setup, which allows you to choose what apps and services your kids can access and who they can call or send messages to. Is the Series 8 outdated with the release of the Series 9? No, not at all. Although Apple no longer sells the Series 8, that doesn't mean it's no longer supported. The Series 8 is compatible with the latest operating system, WatchOS 10, which debuted alongside the Series 9 and Ultra 2, so many of the software features debuted on the latest models will also be available on the Series 8 once it upgrades to WatchOS 10. How often should I upgrade my Apple Watch? The decision to upgrade to a newer Apple Watch depends on several factors. First, is there a new feature native to one of the newer models you'd like to use? For instance, the new Double Tap Gesture released on the Series 9 and Ultra 2 can only be used on those models. You may also consider upgrading if your watch isn't compatible with the latest operating system. Regarding the new WatchOS 10, any Series 4 or newer model is compatible. Another reason you may want to upgrade is if you'd like to move from the Series line to the Ultra line. In this scenario, even Series 9 users may consider upgrading to the Ultra 2 to take advantage of its unique features, like its longer battery life, the useful Action Button, and the bigger design.
Republicans derail Right to Contraception Act in Senate vote 2024-06-05 20:52:50+00:00 - It was two years ago this month when Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas explicitly condemned the ruling in Griswold v. Connecticut, the 1965 case that struck down a state law that restricted married couples’ access to birth control, calling for it to be “reconsidered.” The far-right jurist had a lot of company: Around the same time, a variety of Republican senators and candidates were also eagerly rejecting the Griswold precedent. The Democrats’ Right To Contraception Act soon followed. The idea was rather straightforward: The legislation would codify in federal law American’s right to obtain and use contraceptives. It passed the House in July 2022, but the vote was far closer than it should’ve been: 195 Republicans voted against it. (Eight GOP members supported the bill, though several of them have since left Congress.) The measure advanced to the Senate, where it withered, unable to overcome a Republican filibuster. This year, Democrats tried again. The results were familiar. NBC News reported: Senate Republicans blocked legislation Wednesday that would enshrine a federal right to access contraception, sinking the Democratic-led measure. The vote on the Right To Contraception Act was 51-39, falling short of the 60 votes needed to defeat a filibuster and move forward in the chambers Republicans said the bill is unnecessary as the use of birth control is already protected under Supreme Court precedent. Note, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, who's championed the bill, switched his vote to "no" for procedural reasons, offering him the option of bringing back the legislation for another vote later this year. One of the more common complaints from GOP senators ahead of the vote was that Democrats were merely “fear-mongering,” pushing the legislation as an election-year stunt. Since contraception access isn’t in peril, Republicans argued, the Right to Contraception Act is wholly unnecessary. The truth, however, isn’t nearly that simple. Even if one is inclined to disregard Justice Thomas and other critics of the Griswold precedent, the threat to Americans’ access to birth control exists far outside Democratic Party talking points. It was just last month, for example, when Donald Trump surprised many by confirming — out loud, on camera, and on the record — that he was “looking at” possible restrictions on contraception. This is the same Republican who, while in office, made more difficult for many to obtain contraception. As Politico reported last month, the Trump administration allowed “more employers to opt out of birth control coverage in their workers’ health insurance” and imposed “restrictions on the Title X family planning program that triggered a mass exodus of clinics.” What’s more, as a Washington Post report explained today, there have been all kinds of relevant and unsettling developments unfolding at the state level. Republican lawmakers in Missouri blocked a bill to widen access to birth-control pills by falsely claiming they induce abortions. An antiabortion group in Louisiana killed legislation to enshrine a right to birth control by inaccurately equating emergency contraception with abortion drugs. An Idaho think tank focused on “biblical activism” is pushing state legislators to ban access to emergency contraception and intrauterine devices (IUDs) by mislabeling them as “abortifacients.” The same report added that in the wake of Roe v. Wade’s demise, many on the right have also tried to curtail birth-control access “by sowing misinformation about how various methods work to prevent pregnancy.” What’s more, Politico reported that under the “Project 2025” blueprint, a prospective second Trump administration is likely to “require coverage of natural family planning methods and remove requirements that insurance cover certain emergency contraception.” The same report added, “As part of their 2025 wish list, conservatives want to overhaul which forms of birth control insurance companies must cover for patients at no cost under the Affordable Care Act. For instance, they have drafted plans to allow insurers to drop coverage of the emergency contraceptive pill Ella, which some on the right believe is an abortifacient.” This is not, in other words, an election-season abstraction. The latest national survey from KFF, released in March, found that one in five adults believes the right to contraception is now in danger. Those concerns are well grounded, and they were ignored by Senate Republicans today.
These 38 GOP senators just voted against protecting contraception. Here's why. 2024-06-05 20:52:27+00:00 - By clicking “Sign Up”, you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy . You can opt-out at any time by visiting our Preferences page or by clicking "unsubscribe" at the bottom of the email. Access your favorite topics in a personalized feed while you're on the go. download the app Sign up to get the inside scoop on today’s biggest stories in markets, tech, and business — delivered daily. Read preview The Senate failed on Wednesday to advance a bill designed to protect access to contraceptives nationwide. Just two Republican senators — Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska — voted with Democrats to advance the bill. Nine Republicans did not show up to vote. The vote was teed up by Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer as part of an effort to highlight the different between the Democratic and Republican parties over reproductive rights ahead of an election where abortion is expected to play a major role. This story is available exclusively to Business Insider subscribers. Become an Insider and start reading now. Republicans derided the effort as a "show vote," arguing that no one is seriously interested in banning contraceptives such as condoms, Plan-B, or IUDs. Advertisement "Do people really think that even a significant minority of the Republican conference is against access to contraception?" said Republican Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina. "I don't even want to get into what I don't like about the bill." It's true that the effort is largely for show — Schumer and Democrats knew that the GOP-controlled House would not take up the legislation. To that point, the bill's "findings" section argues that access for contraception is "especially critical for historically marginalized groups" including "Black, indigenous, and other people of color," "immigrants," and "LGBTQ+ people." While not necessarily untrue, it's not the sort of thing one would put in legislation designed to attract the support of conservative Republicans. "It's a bill that has a lot of other garbage in it, and this is a messaging exercise," said Tillis. Advertisement But still — if Republicans aren't against contraception, why won't they just vote for the bill? Related stories If you ask them, it mainly comes down to religious freedom. 'The number one issue with it' The Democratic bill is designed to guarantee the right to access contraception, which was first established for married couples by the Supreme Court in its 1965 Griswold v. Connecticut ruling. Some experts have since worried that right could now be at risk in the wake of the overturning of Roe v. Wade in 2022. In his concurring opinion in that case, Justice Clarence Thomas argued that Griswold should be revisited. Advertisement But the bill includes a line stating that it "applies notwithstanding any other provision of Federal law, including the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993." That law essentially protects individuals' right to religious freedoms. Republicans argue waiving that law amounts to a "poison pill" in the bill that would force religious institutions to provide contraceptives. "They've said basically, contraception is gonna be allowed everywhere, regardless of your faith, your background, your institution," said Republican Sen. James Lankford of Oklahoma. "That's the number one issue with it." Like other Republicans, Lankford is also opposed to certain forms of medical care for transgender youth. The bill includes "sterilization" under its definition of contraception, which the Oklahoma Republican argued would interfere with state-level bans on gender-affirmed care for people under 18. Advertisement "This would remove that right from all those states to say they're protecting minors," said Lankford. 22 GOP senators, led by Sen. Rick Scott of Florida, signed a statement on Tuesday, declaring that there's "no threat to access to contraception" and that the bill "infringes on the parental rights and religious liberties of some Americans." Democrats have also attempted to pass similar legislation at the state level, but have been blocked by Republicans. Last month, Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin of Virginia vetoed a bill to protect access to contraception, arguing that it violated principles of religious freedom. The Republicans who voted to block the bill Here are the 38 GOP senators who voted to block the Right to Contraception Act: Advertisement John Barrasso of Wyoming Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee John Boozman of Arkansas Ted Budd of Indiana Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia Bill Cassidy of Louisiana John Cornyn of Texas Tom Cotton of Arkansas Kevin Cramer of North Dakota Mike Crapo of Idaho Ted Cruz of Texas Steve Daines of Montana Joni Ernst of Iowa Deb Fischer of Nebraska Chuck Grassley of Iowa Josh Hawley of Missouri John Hoeven of North Dakota Cindy Hyde-Smith of Mississippi Ron Johnson of Wisconsin James Lankford of Oklahoma Mike Lee of Utah Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming Roger Marshall of Kansas Mitch McConnell of Kentucky Markwayne Mullin of Oklahoma Rand Paul of Kentucky Pete Ricketts of Nebraska Jim Risch of Idaho Mike Rounds of South Dakota Marco Rubio of Florida Eric Schmitt of Missouri Rick Scott of Florida Tim Scott of South Carolina John Thune of South Dakota Thoms Tillis of North Carolina Tommy Tuberville of Alabama Roger Wicker of Mississippi Todd Young of Indiana The following 9 GOP senators did not vote:
Here are 3 ways Meta could pivot if 10% of its ad revenue were to disappear 2024-06-05 20:52:00+00:00 - Meta Platforms could see a slowdown in a big revenue driver later this year. Wall Street analysts looked at three ways the social media giant can offset such a scenario. The "revenue driver" in question is last year's advertising blitz from large online Chinese retailers that made up about 10% of Meta's overall revenue. As we reported in April , Temu and Shein were blanketing social media feeds to market their low-cost goods to American and European customers. That pace of spending, however, might not be as concentrated going forward. Temu is owned by Chinese tech giant PDD Holdings , which is listed on the Nasdaq. PDD, which operates discount e-commerce platform Pinduoduo in China, moved its headquarters to Ireland from Shanghai last year. Fast-fashion giant Shein was founded in China more than a decade ago but relocated to Singapore. Shein had been looking at an initial public offering in the U.S. but faced pushback from regulators and lawmakers. It has turned its effort to go public in London. Based on conversations with management, Bernstein analysts said in a note Wednesday that Temu has pulled back on U.S. ad spending over the past few months, and it's "diversifying into other geographies." Evidence of slower or moderating ad spending from big retailers with ties to the world's second-largest economy could force Meta to lean into some of its other strengths. In a note this week, Mizuho said Meta would be able to manage such a "Chinese advertising decline." Analysts at the firm conducted a stress test — benchmarking a worst-case scenario for Meta's Chinese ad revenue in the second half of 2024. They found that even by taking it to zero, the company would be able to "more than offset" that possible headwind to revenue growth through technology, partnerships, and events. The firm reiterated its $575 price target on Meta shares and top-pick designation. Mizuho analysts said Meta can leverage volume drivers such as increasing the ad load on Reels using artificial intelligence. This strategy combined with the launch of Meta's new ranking algorithm, called Meta Lattice, can help increase engagement through optimal video placement. Another incentive to improve Meta's ad monetization is analysts' expectations that Facebook Shops' partnership with Amazon , which allows customers to link their Facebook and Instagram accounts to their Amazon accounts, "could drive more retail media spending on the platform." Mizuho also believes special events like the U.S. presidential election and the Olympics should help support ad spending in the back half of the year. In our commentary earlier this year, we pointed out concerns from Esty CEO Josh Silverman that summed up the downside to the broader industry of continued Chinese retailers' ad spending at 2023 levels. "I think those two players are almost single-handedly having an impact on the cost of advertising, particularly in some paid channels in Google and in Meta," he said on Etsy's November earnings call, referring to Shein and Temu. That would seem to be a positive for Meta, but the risk is that if the ads got more expensive and smaller businesses didn't see a commensurate increase in return on investment, perhaps they would cutback their spending or look elsewhere to place ads. While the Club isn't writing that prospect off entirely, we're not expecting to see advertisers revolt or anything close to it, given the scale Meta offers and the company's continued embrace of artificial intelligence to improve ad targeting and return on investment. Meta is where the eyeballs are. (Jim Cramer's Charitable Trust is long META, AMZN. See here for a full list of the stocks.) As a subscriber to the CNBC Investing Club with Jim Cramer, you will receive a trade alert before Jim makes a trade. Jim waits 45 minutes after sending a trade alert before buying or selling a stock in his charitable trust's portfolio. If Jim has talked about a stock on CNBC TV, he waits 72 hours after issuing the trade alert before executing the trade. THE ABOVE INVESTING CLUB INFORMATION IS SUBJECT TO OUR TERMS AND CONDITIONS AND PRIVACY POLICY , TOGETHER WITH OUR DISCLAIMER . NO FIDUCIARY OBLIGATION OR DUTY EXISTS, OR IS CREATED, BY VIRTUE OF YOUR RECEIPT OF ANY INFORMATION PROVIDED IN CONNECTION WITH THE INVESTING CLUB. NO SPECIFIC OUTCOME OR PROFIT IS GUARANTEED. A smartphone is displaying Facebook with the Meta icon visible in the background. Jonathan Raa | Nurphoto | Getty Images
Senate Republicans block bill to protect access to contraception 2024-06-05 20:43:00+00:00 - WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans blocked legislation Wednesday that would enshrine a federal right to access contraception, sinking the Democratic-led measure. The vote on the Right to Contraception Act was 51-39, falling short of the 60 votes needed to defeat a filibuster and move the bill forward. Republicans said it was unnecessary because the use of birth control is already protected under Supreme Court precedent. Republican Sens. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine voted with Democrats in support of the bill. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., switched his vote to “no” for procedural reasons so he could bring up the bill again at a later date. Democrats expected the GOP to scuttle the measure and brought it up as an election-year "messaging" push to highlight the contrast between the two parties on reproductive rights, viewing it as a winning issue with independents and swing voters this fall. “We saw what the Supreme Court did on abortion, and now there’s a real risk they may do the same thing on contraception,” Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., said on MSNBC’s "Morning Joe." “I’m really sick of this idea that the Republicans think they can say two things simultaneously — they can talk to their extremist group and say, ‘I’ll give you everything you want. We are going to ban abortion, IVF, contraception, everything you want,’ and then try to say to the rest of America, ‘Boy, we don’t want any part in that.’” The legislation, led by Sens. Ed Markey, D-Mass., and Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii, would establish nationwide rights for individuals to “obtain contraceptives and to voluntarily engage in contraception” and protect health care providers who offer it. It defines contraceptives as “any drug, device, or biological product intended for use in the prevention of pregnancy” and prohibits the federal government or states from enforcing laws or standards that impede that right. It empowers the Justice Department and affected private entities to sue to enforce the new protections. Top Republicans blasted the vote as a partisan stunt. “This is a show vote. It’s not serious. It doesn’t mean anything. And, plus, it’s a huge overreach. It doesn’t make any exceptions for conscience, it creates mandates,” said Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, who is running to be the next GOP leader in the Senate. “It’s a phony vote because contraception, to my knowledge, is not illegal. And to suggest that somehow it’s in jeopardy, I think, should be embarrassing.” Democrats argue the bill is necessary because the Supreme Court cannot be trusted to uphold its precedent on protecting the use of contraceptives in the 1965 case Griswold v. Connecticut. They note that when the court invalidated federal abortion rights in 2022, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote separately that the court “should reconsider” other precedents like Griswold. And they cite a recent survey that found 1 in 5 Americans believe the right to contraception is under threat. “Today, we live in a country where not only tens of millions of women have been robbed of their reproductive freedoms — we also live in a country where tens of millions more worry about something as basic as birth control,” Schumer said on the floor. “That’s utterly medieval. It’s sickening. It should never happen here in the United States, but because of Donald Trump and the hard right, it’s reality.” Murkowski, who has long supported reproductive rights, at times putting her at odds with her party, said she had no problem voting for the bill. “If it's a messaging bill, my message is: I support a woman's access to contraception. Pretty simple. So if we're going to play messaging, that's my message,” Murkowski said. Partisan divides It’s one of several messaging bills being considered in Congress as the 2024 election nears. Senate Democrats recently brought up a bipartisan border security bill to try to neutralize their political vulnerability on immigration. And the Republican-controlled House recently voted on a bill to prevent noncitizens from voting, a practice that is already illegal and very rare, to elevate the issue with their voters. Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., said the contraception bill's concern was unfounded despite the overturning of Roe v. Wade and Thomas’ opinion. “Nobody’s going to overturn Griswold,” he said. “No way.” Hawley said he opposes the bill because it could veer into establishing rights for abortion medication. “It would also make the abortion drug mifepristone — not contraception, but mifepristone — available in all 50 states no matter what the state law is, and that would override my state’s law, bunch of states' laws. It would take it out of the hands of voters,” Hawley said. “That’s an abortion issue. That’s not a contraception issue.” Mifepristone is an abortion drug, not a contraceptive designed to prevent pregnancy. On Tuesday, Senate Republicans held a lengthy lunch meeting at which lawmakers disagreed on the path forward for Wednesday’s vote, according to two people in the room. Some Republicans felt it'd be beneficial to go on “offense” by voting to begin debate on the bill rather than filibustering it from the start. That includes Collins, who offered to strip out “the awful parts” of the bill, according to Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis. “I thought that was a good idea, as opposed to just voting and moving on,” Johnson said on Wednesday. Johnson, who has previously criticized GOP leadership for being too cooperative with Democrats, this time leveled criticism at party leaders during the meeting, primarily Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., for not negotiating ahead of time with Schumer, according to the sources. “There was no engagement. We had no leadership on this whatsoever. And listen, there are a lot of smart people in that room, but you know, you need a leader,” Johnson added. Cornyn pressed for “unanimity” during the meeting. Later, he said they discussed voting to begin debate and using that time to offer an alternative bill by Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa. Others said that extending the process would at the very least tie up the Senate floor so that Democrats couldn’t move forward with other planned messaging bills as soon as next week, including on IVF protections. But ultimately, the broad consensus during the meeting was to quickly move on from the contraceptives vote, according to the sources. Just days before the vote, 11 Senate Republicans — including Johnson and Ernst — signed a letter vowing to oppose all Democratic legislation and judicial nominees to protest Trump's guilty verdict in New York.
Psychiatrist Henry Jarecki says he had 'consensual' relationship with Jeffrey Epstein victim 2024-06-05 20:42:00+00:00 - Henry Jarecki attends The Accompanied Literary Society's Summer Benefit at The Hudson Sky Terrace at The Hudson Hotel in New York City, June 11, 2007. Famed psychiatrist and former commodities trader Henry Jarecki on Wednesday said he had a "consensual, non-secretive and mutually respectful relationship" with a victim of Jeffrey Epstein who is now suing Jarecki for allegedly raping and sex trafficking her. Jarecki, 91, said the consensual relationship with the woman occurred more than a decade ago. His accuser was one of a group of women who received compensation from a fund set up for victims of the convicted sex offender Epstein, her attorney told CNBC. Jarecki's statement, sent to CNBC by his lawyer Sarita Kedia, came two days after the Epstein victim, identified as Jane Doe 11, filed a civil lawsuit against the married psychiatrist in Manhattan federal court. That complaint accuses Jarecki of "coercing her into being his modern-day sex slave" after the wealthy money manager Epstein sent her to his "close" friend Jarecki to treat her for depression she says was as a result of Epstein's sexual abuse. The suit alleges that Jarecki was Epstein's "go-to doctor" for his sexual abuse victims. And it says Jarecki, then around 80 years old, raped the accuser during her first visit with him. In his statement Wednesday responding to the suit, Jarecki said, "False accusations have been made against me by lawyers seeking money on behalf of a woman with whom I had a consensual, non-secretive, and mutually respectful relationship over a decade ago, when she was a successful professional in her late 20s." "I have never engaged in any abusive conduct with her or anyone else," Jarecki said. "I will contest these demonstrably untrue claims in the appropriate forum." Brad Edwards, a lawyer for the accuser, in an email to CNBC wrote, "A 'consensual' relationship to describe a patient 60 years his junior, referred by Jeffrey Epstein, and known to be a sexual abuse victim, is a creative 'defense,' if nothing else." The lawsuit against Jarecki alleges he repeatedly raped the accuser starting in 2011 through December 2014, and ultimately forced her to have sex with other men while he watched. The suit seeks unspecified monetary damages for sexual battery, sex trafficking, and intentional infliction of emotional distress.
Nvidia passes Apple in market cap as second-most valuable public U.S. company 2024-06-05 20:42:00+00:00 - Nvidia passed Apple in market cap on Wednesday as investors continue betting on the chipmaker behind the artificial intelligence boom. It is now the second-most valuable public company, behind Microsoft. Nvidia also hit a $3 trillion market cap milestone on Wednesday after shares rose over 5%. At market close, Nvidia had a market value of $3.019 trillion, versus Apple’s, which stood at $2.99 trillion. Microsoft is the most valuable publicly traded company, with a market cap of $3.15 trillion, as of Wednesday. Nvidia shares have risen more than 24% since the company reported first-quarter earnings in May and have been on a tear since last year. The company has an estimated 80% market share in AI chips for data centers, which are attracting billions of dollars in spending from big cloud vendors. Investors are also becoming more comfortable that Nvidia’s huge growth in sales to a handful of cloud companies can persist. For the most recent quarter, revenue in its data center business, which includes its GPU sales, rose 427% from a year earlier to $22.6 billion, about 86% of the company’s overall sales. Meanwhile, Apple shares are up only about 5% this year, as the iPhone maker’s sales growth has stalled in recent months. In its most recent quarterly earnings report, Apple said overall sales dropped 4% and iPhone sales fell 10% from the year-ago period. Apple faces strategic questions and issues about demand in China, manufacturing and mixed reactions to its new virtual reality headset, Vision Pro. Apple was the first company to reach a $1 trillion and $2 trillion market cap. It long held the title of most valuable U.S. company but was passed by Microsoft earlier this year. Microsoft has also benefited from investor demand for AI infrastructure. Nvidia has been more volatile as a stock than Apple. Founded in 1991, the company was primarily targeting gaming, selling hardware to play 3D computer games. More recently, it sold cryptocurrency mining chips and cloud subscription services. Nvidia shares have gone parabolic as its AI business has developed, rising more than 3,290% over the past five years. The company announced a 10-for-1 stock split in May.
IRS decides people who got money from Norfolk Southern after Ohio derailment won’t be taxed on it 2024-06-05 20:35:22+00:00 - Most people who received money from Norfolk Southern in the wake of last year’s fiery train derailment in eastern Ohio won’t have to pay taxes on millions of dollars in aid payments after all. The Internal Revenue Service said Wednesday that most of the payments people who live near East Palestine, Ohio, received to help them pay for temporary housing or replace their belongings aren’t taxable because the Feb. 3, 2023, derailment that forced thousands of people to evacuate their homes qualified as “an event of a catastrophic nature.” The railroad estimates that it has paid more than $21 million to residents after the derailment as part of more than $107 million in assistance it has offered to the communities affected by the catastrophic train crash. The fact that residents were told they had to pay taxes on the money from the railroad was a sore spot for the people who are still struggling to recover from the derailment. “I don’t know why they didn’t do that from the very beginning,” East Palestine resident Misti Allison said. “The IRS ruling is a positive step in the right direction, but it’s menial in the big picture. I do hope that President Biden holds true to his promise that what Norfolk Southern ‘cannot make whole’ that ‘the government will make whole.’” Residents are weighing whether to accept a share of a $600 million class action settlement Norfolk Southern agreed to or opt out of that deal so they can file their own individual lawsuits. Later this month, they’ll be able to hear the result of the National Transportation Safety Board’s investigation into the derailment at a hearing in East Palestine. Previously, the safety board said the crash was likely caused by an overheating bearing on one of the railcars that wasn’t caught soon enough by trackside sensors to prevent the derailment. U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown of Ohio said it shouldn’t have taken the IRS this long to realize the derailment was a disaster. “This is a long overdue step — the people of East Palestine should never have had to pay taxes on assistance they needed in the wake of the train derailment,” Brown said. Norfolk Southern also praised the IRS decision. “We’re proud of the investments we’ve made in East Palestine and commend the IRS for taking action to relieve residents of an additional federal tax burden,” the railroad said in a statement. The IRS said some payments would be taxable if they were for lost income or payments to businesses or payments the railroad made to get access to land during the ongoing cleanup. Residents who filed their taxes already before the normal April 15 deadline will have to amend their returns and request a refund for the taxes they paid on payments from the railroad.
Private equity investment in NFL teams is coming, Washington Commanders owner Josh Harris says 2024-06-05 20:33:00+00:00 - "Raising that amount of capital was unique; it had never been done before," Harris said. "I think it may be leading to some rethink into the consideration of letting private equity, as an example, or institutional investors into the NFL." Harris said the process "created a little bit of a wake-up call at the NFL," adding that existing NFL rules regarding putting together groups to buy a team "are restrictive." "Unless you're one of the wealthiest 50 people [in the world], writing a $5 billion equity check is pretty hard for anyone," Harris told CNBC "Squawk Box" co-anchor Andrew Ross Sorkin at the CNBC CEO Council Summit in Washington, D.C., on Tuesday. To buy the team, Harris helped put together a 20-person group that includes NBA legend Magic Johnson, former Google CEO Eric Schmidt, and David Blitzer, the Blackstone Group senior executive who had partnered with Harris to buy the 76ers and Devils. While part of that was driven by the fact that Amazon founder Jeff Bezos was also a bidder for the team, former owner Dan Snyder and the issues that surrounded his tenure , and the normal challenges of buying one of the NFL's 32 teams, simply putting together the capital to buy the team was a huge hurdle. Harris, who owns several other sports teams including the NBA's Philadelphia 76ers, the NHL's New Jersey Devils and the English Premier League's Crystal Palace — and has struck hundreds of deals as one of the founders of Apollo Global Management — said the deal to acquire the Commanders "was one of the hardest deals" he's ever been a part of. In 2023, private-equity investor Josh Harris headed a group that paid $6.05 billion for the Washington Commanders, which still stands as not only the most money spent to purchase an NFL team but any professional sports team. As the business that surrounds sports has continued to grow, so too have team valuations, in some cases 10% to 15% annually. In 2018, hedge fund manager David Tepper set the then-NFL record for a team purchase when he spent $2.275 billion to buy the Carolina Panthers. In 2022, an ownership group led by Walmart heir Rob Walton bought the Denver Broncos for $4.65 billion. That trend of rising team prices is happening across sports, with United Wholesale Mortgage CEO Mat Ishbia paying $4 billion to buy the Phoenix Suns in 2022, eclipsing the then-NBA record of $2.35 billion paid by Joe Tsai for the Brooklyn Nets. Hedge fund manager Steve Cohen paid $2.4 billion for the New York Mets, passing the then-MLB record $2.15 billion Guggenheim Baseball Management paid for the Los Angeles Dodgers in 2012. Harris noted that while the growth of the underlying businesses of the teams and media rights has kept valuations growing and cash flows high, the capital-intensive nature of running a team has grown too, between player salaries, staff and the cost of maintaining or building an arena or stadium. "You need capital, and so freeing up other sources of capital to help grow these businesses is the right answer," Harris said. While U.S. pro sports leagues had prohibited private equity investors previously, they've largely softened their stances in recent years, aside from letting any firm be a controlling owner of a team. However, the NFL is still against PE ownership, a position that is currently under review by the league as team values have continued to rise. "We've got a lot of interest in the private equity space," NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell said at the league's spring meeting in May. "We are making real progress on potential private equity. We're going to continue to be very deliberate, but I expect there to be something by the end of the year." Goodell said at the meeting that the league's owners agreed to raise the debt limit for franchise acquisition to $1.4 billion, an increase of $200 million and another challenge that Harris noted in the purchase of the Commanders. Ross Sorkin asked Harris if allowing private equity investors into sports would have any negative impacts on the teams or the league's overarching strategy as those investors look toward an exit. Harris noted that in the NBA, institutional investors can't be controlling owners and "no one can force an exit; the primary owner decides pretty much everything." Stanley Kroenke, who owns several professional sports teams including the NFL's Los Angeles Rams, said at the CNBC x Boardroom Game Plan Summit last year that rising NFL team values are now getting out of reach of even billionaires, and that is an issue the league is watching and where he has been among owners pressing for new thinking. "I've told them we will have to relax some of the rules. ... The NFL is a league of rules, we have lots and lots of rules, and lots of people agree with me, but won't do anything," Kroenke said. The sky-high valuations will put more pressure on the league to find a solution, Kroenke said, because the NFL valuations are so different today than when he first got into the league. While the entry of more professional investors into sports has certainly changed the business that surrounds it, Harris said there still is a significant difference between the business world and sports. "In business, the key is EBITDA or stock price. In sports, it's about winning games and delivering championships for the city; the second job is to create memories and be a steward to these franchises," he said.
If the US doesn't win the electronic warfare fight, the joint force will 'lose' and 'lose very quickly,' Air Force commander says 2024-06-05 20:32:27+00:00 - By clicking “Sign Up”, you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy . You can opt-out at any time by visiting our Preferences page or by clicking "unsubscribe" at the bottom of the email. Access your favorite topics in a personalized feed while you're on the go. download the app Sign up to get the inside scoop on today’s biggest stories in markets, tech, and business — delivered daily. Read preview Future wars could be decided by electronic warfare like Russia and Ukraine are using right now to interrupt communications, defeat unmanned platforms, and even degrade precision weaponry. For the US, if it doesn't dominate that invisible domain and win the fight in the electromagnetic spectrum, it will "lose" and do so "very quickly," an Air Force wing commander said. This story is available exclusively to Business Insider subscribers. Become an Insider and start reading now. At the C4ISRNET Conference on Wednesday, US Army Brig. Gen. Ed Barker, the Program Executive Officer for Intelligence, Electronic Warfare and Sensors, and US Air Force Col. Josh Koslov, commander of the 350th Spectrum Warfare Wing, discussed the challenges facing the US in the electronic warfare space and the efforts to find solutions to these problems. "Electronic warfare is a fire," not unlike certain other weapons systems like artillery, Koslov said, "and the ability to integrate those fires in support the joint force's commander's scheme of maneuvers is more important now than ever." Related Video A man holds a portable electronic warfare system at an event in Ukraine earlier this year. Global Images Ukraine via Getty Both Barker and Koslov noted that dominating the electromagnetic spectrum in a fight against near-peer adversaries like China and Russia would be a close one in a war and that the US must maintain the edge. "The spectrum is a bad place to be second, and if we lose in the spectrum, or are unable to effect the spectrum, the joint force will lose, and we're going to lose very quickly," Koslov said. The US has acknowledged the growing importance of electronic warfare in its warfighting strategies, recognizing not only the need to figure out how to defend against the enemy's use of it but also how to fight with it. Related stories Electronic warfare is a broad term for fighting involving elements of the electromagnetic spectrum. Increased US interest in it more recently has been driven by the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, where electronic warfare tactics, such as GPS spoofing and signal jamming, have shaped the fighting. Advertisement A soldier with the US Army's 1st Infantry Division trains on electronic-warfare equipment on September 6, 2019. US Army/Staff Sgt. Simon Mictizic The US has been watching the war closely to determine key takeaways, and it's been, as a defense expert previously told Business Insider, an "intelligence bonanza" for American forces. One thing the US has observed in Ukraine is the degradation of some of its more advanced, precision-guided weapons systems by Russian jamming. In March, Daniel Patt, a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute, wrote in a statement to Congress that the 155mm GPS-guided Excalibur artillery shell "had a 70% efficiency rate hitting targets when first used in Ukraine" but that "after six weeks, efficiency declined to only 6% as the Russians adapted their electronic warfare systems to counter it." Russian efforts have also impacted the GMLRS launched by the HIMARS and JDAMs. Volunteers and Ukrainian military personnel attend a presentation of radio-electronic warfare (WB) and radio-electronic intelligence (PER) systems of the Ukrainian company Kvertus in Lviv region on May 28, 2024, amid the Russian invasion of Ukraine. YURIY DYACHYSHYN/AFP via Getty Images Patt explained that "the peak efficiency of a new weapon system is only about 2 weeks before countermeasures emerge." That information could prove vital for a future great-power fight against an adversary like China or Russia. Advertisement At the C4ISRNET conference, Barker called the electromagnetic spectrum another "terrain" of battle. "We have to treat the EMS as terrain," he said. "You have to be able to hold terrain, you have to be able to maneuver inside of it, and you also have to be able to affect the enemy." Barker mentioned a recent electronic warfare tabletop exercise, which looked at over 70 different capabilities spread across the joint force and how they fit into the various battlefield strategies and potential fighting scenarios. A Russian R-330Zh Zhitel electronic-warfare jamming station during an exercise in July 2018. Denis Abramov/Russian Defense Ministry via Mil.ru He said the exercise helped them to identify "gaps we need to focus on," such as understanding more about what both allies and adversaries look like in the spectrum, as well as needing a "layered approach" to fighting electronic warfare. It's a complex problem, and he said there's no "silver bullet." Advertisement At the conference, both Barker and Koslov highlighted the importance of having systems communicate with one another about key data and noted that when the US acquires new technology from industry partners, prioritizing electronic warfare defenses and capabilities is vital. Barker said "we're realizing that we have to build, essentially, an EW arsenal across the landscape to be able to go at these different kinds of threats."
McConnell suggests 'discipline' for Dem senators pressuring Supreme Court over Alito flags 2024-06-05 20:30:00+00:00 - Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., speaks during a press conference following the weekly Senate caucus luncheons on Capitol Hill in Washington, April 9, 2024. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., suggested Wednesday that the Supreme Court should punish at least two Democratic senators over their calls for Justice Samuel Alito to recuse himself from key cases related to former President Donald Trump. Sens. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut and Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island are bound by court rules that "provide for discipline against those who engage in conduct unbecoming an officer of the court," McConnell said on the Senate floor. Numerous Democrats in both chambers of Congress have called out Alito following reports that flags associated with pro-Trump efforts to overturn the 2020 election results were flown at his homes. But McConnell singled out Blumenthal and Whitehouse because they are members of the Supreme Court bar. He argued that the two Democrats ran afoul of the American Bar Association's code of judicial conduct by "privately" asking Chief Justice John Roberts "to change the course of pending litigation." They are therefore "potentially engaged in unethical professional conduct before the court," McConnell said of Blumenthal and Whitehouse, both of whom are members of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Whitehouse, in a statement to CNBC, said, "When Mitch McConnell, Leonard Leo and the Wall Street Journal editorial page are all criticizing you about the Supreme Court, it's a pretty good sign you're on the right track." Whitehouse also pushed back on McConnell's description of his communications with Roberts as "private." "This was a public letter to the Court on an administrative matter pointing out the lack of any meaningful ethics process to enforce our recusal law, and asking the Chief Justice to act in his administrative role as chief," he said. "This was not some secret request for a justice to rule one way or the other on the merits of a case." The responses from Roberts and Alito confirm that they also viewed the communication as public, Whitehouse added. A spokesperson for Blumenthal did not immediately respond to CNBC's request for comment. Whitehouse and Senate Judiciary Chairman Dick Durbin, D-Ill., in a late May letter urged Roberts to make Alito recuse himself from any cases related to the 2020 election and the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot. That includes a pending case before the court on whether Trump is immune from prosecution on federal election interference charges related to the Jan. 6 insurrection, they noted. Blumenthal separately wrote Roberts last week to ask that he convince Alito and Justice Clarence Thomas to recuse themselves from the same cases over their alleged conflicts. If the conservative justices refuse, the senator said, Roberts should stop assigning them court opinions or circuit justiceships. Alito rejected the calls to take himself off the cases, arguing that his wife was the one responsible for flying an upside-down U.S. flag outside his Virginia residence and an "Appeal to Heaven" flag outside a vacation home. Roberts declined to meet with Durbin and Whitehouse. McConnell in Wednesday's remarks dismissed Democrats' concerns about Alito's flag controversy as "profoundly unserious." But he said that the senators' efforts go "beyond the standard disgraceful bullying my Democratic colleagues have perfected," because "recusal is a judicial act."
Biden's Gaza cease-fire proposal has a glaring problem 2024-06-05 20:28:53+00:00 - The most important takeaway from President Biden’s speech Friday, which laid out a plan for a cease-fire and the release of prisoners and hostages in Israel’s nearly eight-month-long war on Gaza, is not that there is a plan on the table. Different versions of a deal have been on the table for months now, and Israel and Hamas have, at various times, both balked. The difference now is that Biden himself has made the details of this deal public to pressure both sides to accept. Significantly, as part of making that case, he also made clear that, in his view, Israel’s key war aim has been achieved. But Biden’s pressure will be more effective if he makes clear the lengths he will go to see this proposal become reality. The deal Biden outlined has three stages. In the first, there would be a cease-fire for six weeks, Israeli forces would withdraw from populated areas of Gaza, Israeli hostages and Palestinian prisoners would be released, and there would be a surge of humanitarian aid. During this time, Israel and Hamas would negotiate the terms of a permanent cease-fire, supported by the U.S., Egypt and Qatar. In the second stage, Hamas would release all remaining hostages, Israel would withdraw fully from Gaza, and the temporary cease-fire would become a “cessation of hostilities permanently.” The third phase involves a major reconstruction plan for Gaza and the return of the remains of all dead hostages. The president obviously is trying to box Netanyahu in. Biden presented the deal as an Israeli proposal, while also somewhat strangely urging Israeli leaders to support it. It soon became clear why, as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that, regardless of Biden’s description of the proposal, his conditions for ending the war “have not changed.” Since Friday, the administration has continued to speak as if Hamas is the roadblock to a deal: On Monday, State Department spokesperson Matt Miller repeated the patently false refrain that “the only thing standing in the way of an immediate cease-fire today is Hamas.” But it’s clear that the real pressure needs to be applied to the Israelis. Miller noted that the proposal announced Friday “is nearly identical to what Hamas said it would accept just a few weeks ago” — which Israel rejected. (That agreement reportedly included a cease-fire, a complete withdrawal of Israeli troops from Gaza, an exchange of captives, reconstruction of the territory and the lifting of Israel’s blockade.) Biden’s remarks Friday made explicit what U.S. officials have been saying to the media, and what many analysts predicted from the start: Hamas will not be eradicated in Gaza. “Indefinite war in pursuit of an unidentified notion of ‘total victory,’” Biden warned, “will not bring an enduring defeat of Hamas. That will not bring Israel lasting security.” The key sticking point in negotiations has been Hamas’ longstanding demand for a complete end to the war, not just a temporary cease-fire. But now Biden has publicly endorsed that position. The president obviously is trying to box Netanyahu in, to force him to choose a deal which, while clearly the right one for his country, could potentially collapse his own governing coalition. Two far-right members of the coalition, Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir, have said that they would bolt the government if Netanyahu agreed to a cease-fire before total eradication of Hamas. In response, Netanyahu is doing what he always does when faced with a tough choice: playing for time. By offering negative comments to the media, he is clearly trying to elicit a rejection from Hamas. It’s a familiar play from his previous negotiations with Palestinian leaders: Take provocative steps that indicate bad faith, and when the Palestinians walk away frustrated from negotiations that are going nowhere, blame the Palestinians for abandoning negotiations, backed by the usual chorus of Washington advocates who are always happy to play that song. And unfortunately, the administration’s politically expedient but incomplete and misleading framing of Hamas as the sole roadblock will have cued it up, although even Biden admitted to Time magazine that “there is every reason” to believe Netanyahu is prolonging the war for political reasons. It’s worth noting that Biden has also boxed himself in here a bit, too. By making the deal public, though, Biden is trying to make it harder for Netanyahu to pull the same old stunt. Throughout his decades-long political career, Biden usually has preferred to work behind the scenes. Going public like this is, for Biden even more than most presidents, an escalation. There’s just one problem: At least publicly, Biden has not been willing to describe an “or else.” What happens if Netanyahu simply delays and refuses? Will Biden be willing, at long last, to use some of the considerable leverage that the United States has over Israel, in the form of military aid and diplomatic cover? Past behavior suggests not. A few weeks ago, Biden finally publicly said that he would withhold some of the heaviest U.S. arms to enforce his red line against an Israeli operation in Gaza, only to back down in the face of withering criticism from Republicans in Congress and Democratic donors. It’s hard to imagine Netanyahu being intimidated by another bluff. This time, Biden needs to make clear Friday’s speech was no bluff. It’s worth noting that Biden has also boxed himself in here a bit, too. On Friday, the president said that Israel’s key objective had already been achieved: “At this point, Hamas no longer is capable of carrying out another Oct. 7.” So, what does Biden do if Netanyahu insists on continuing a war whose main objective Biden himself says has been satisfied? How could he conceivably characterize continuing such a war as “self-defense”? Again, Biden is a politician who often prefers to work quietly, cajoling and convincing out of public view. This approach has produced some surprisingly good results in terms of his legislative record as president. But a Gaza cease-fire isn’t like funding for a new highway overpass. Here Biden’s reliance on old school backroom politicking has an ever-growing body count that already stains his legacy. The Gaza catastrophe would be compounded if understandably outraged voters respond by delivering him a loss in November. Biden must be clear to Netanyahu, Hamas and to the world: There will be consequences for all for refusing this cease-fire agreement. And then he must ready to follow through and impose them.
F.D.A. Advisers Recommend a New Covid Vaccine Formula for the Fall 2024-06-05 20:21:20.936000+00:00 - A committee of advisers to the Food and Drug Administration voted on Wednesday to update the formula for the Covid vaccine ahead of an anticipated fall immunization campaign, now an annual step to try to offer better protection against versions of the virus in circulation. The unanimous vote by the 16 advisers recommends a formula aimed at combating the variant JN.1, which dominated infections in the United States in February, or a version of it. In recent weeks, JN.1 has been overtaken by descendants known as KP.2 and KP.3. In the coming weeks, the F.D.A. is expected to formally recommend a variant target for vaccine makers for the next round of shots in the late summer or early fall. Any decision involves some educated guesswork, given that any new vaccine formula won’t be available until months after a variant becomes dominant. “It’s becoming clear that the ideal timing for a vaccine composition decision remains elusive,” said Jerry Weir, an official with the F.D.A.’s vaccine division.
McDonald's loses "Big Mac" trademark as EU court sides with Irish rival Supermac's 2024-06-05 20:18:00+00:00 - Is the dollar menu making a comeback? Is the dollar menu making a comeback? 00:53 McDonald's lost a European Union trademark dispute over the Big Mac name after a top European Union court sided Wednesday with Irish fast-food rival Supermac's in a long-running legal battle. The EU General Court said in its judgment that the U.S. fast-food giant failed to prove that it was genuinely using the Big Mac label over a five-year period for chicken sandwiches, poultry products or restaurants. The Big Mac is a hamburger made of two beef patties, cheese, lettuce, onions, pickles and Big Mac sauce. It was invented in 1968 by a Pennsylvania franchisee who thought the company needed a sandwich that appealed to adults. The decision is about more than burger names. It opens the door for Galway-based Supermac's expansion into other EU countries. The dispute erupted when Supermac's applied to register its company name in the EU as it drew up expansion plans. McDonald's objected, saying consumers would be confused because it already trademarked the Big Mac name. Supermac's filed a 2017 request with the EU's Intellectual Property Office to revoke McDonald's Big Mac trademark registration, saying the U.S. company couldn't prove that it had used the name for certain categories that aren't specifically related to the burger over five years. That's the window of time in Europe that a trademark has to be used before it can be taken away. "McDonald's has not proved that the contested mark has been put to genuine use" in connection with chicken sandwiches, food made from poultry products or operating restaurants and drive-throughs and preparing take-out food, the court said, according to a press summary of its decision. After the regulator partially approved Supermac's request, McDonald's appealed to the EU court. Supermac's portrayed the decision as a David and Goliath-style victory. Managing Director Pat McDonagh accused McDonald's of "trademark bullying to stifle competition." "This is a significant ruling that takes a common-sense approach to the use of trademarks by large multi-nationals. It represents a significant victory for small businesses throughout the world," McDonagh said in a statement. The Irish company doesn't sell a sandwich called the Big Mac but does have one called the Mighty Mac with the same ingredients. McDonald's was unfazed by the ruling, which can be appealed to the European Court of Justice, the bloc's highest court, but only on points of law. "The decision by the EU General Court does not affect our right to use the 'BIG MAC' trademark," the company said in a press statement. "Our iconic Big Mac is loved by customers all across Europe, and we're excited to continue to proudly serve local communities, as we have done for decades."