Chinese, Russian and Indian leaders hope their meeting in Beijing this week projects unity and helps usher in a new world order.
They want to offer an alternative to American superpower hegemony. And with Donald Trump taking a wrecking ball to the old world order, they believe this is their moment.
But don’t get carried away. Much of this is kabuki theatre, long on posture and short on substance.
Image: World leaders gather in Tianjin, China, for the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) summit. Pic: Reuters
Take Russian leader Vladimir Putin. He hopes the event puts Russia on a par with China in the eyes of the world, in turn validating his war in Ukraine and propping up his standing back home.
But in reality, Russia is on the way to becoming a vassal state to Beijing. Trade between the two countries has shot up by two thirds since the start of the Ukraine war, most of it on China’s terms.
China gets Russian oil, on the cheap, because sanctions stop Putin selling it elsewhere and in return Russia buys a lot of Chinese goods. China has Russia over a barrel literally and is taking full advantage.
China’s leader Xi Jinping says the threesome should see themselves as “partners not rivals”. But Indian leader Narendra Modi knows economic frictions between the two countries and border disputes undermine all that.
And then there’s tension between China and Russia over North Korea. North Korea is on Chinese turf, in mafia terms, but Putin has been muscling in increasingly cosy with the hermit kingdom’s leader Kim Jong Un.
So the threesome bromance flowering this week is not all that it seems.
There are cracks that a competent US administration could seek to exploit.
The Trump team may not do so based on current form. It is letting the Ukraine war continue instead of applying the kind of pressure on Russia its allies believe will bring it to an end.
Instead of courting the only democracy in the troika India, Trump has worked hard to alienate, imposing 50 percent tariffs.
The one winner in all this is China, the rising power the Trump administration says it’s most worried about.
Xi Jinping may say he wants a multipolar world. In reality, he wants the world reordered to suit Chinese interests. And nothing this week will deter him from pursuing that end.
As students across the country head back to class, one thing won’t be coming with many of them: their cell phones. This year more states than ever are banning students’ devices during school hours.
In Texas, every public and charter school student will be without their phones during the school day this fall. Brigette Whaley, an associate professor of education at West Texas A&M University, expects to see “a more equitable environment” in classrooms with higher student engagement.
Last year, she tracked the success of a cell phone ban in one west Texas high school by surveying teachers throughout the year. They reported more participation by students, and also said they saw student anxiety plummet – mainly because students weren’t afraid of being filmed at any moment and embarrassing themselves.
“They could relax in the classroom and participate,” she said. “And not be so anxious about what other students were doing.”
The findings in west Texas align with results from many of the states and districts that are heading back to school without phones: Students learn better in a phone-free environment. Getting cell phones out of the classroom is a rare issue with significant bipartisan support, allowing a rapid adoption of policies across red and blue states alike.
Some 31 states and the District of Columbia now restrict students’ use of cell phones in schools, according to Education Week.
Not everyone is on board
The rapid adoption of these policies, Whaley says, can sometimes make for uneven enforcement. While most teachers at the school she studied supported the ban, there was one teacher who refused, which caused problems for other teachers.
Alex Stegner, a social studies and geography teacher in Portland, Ore., said his school saw similar results when it adopted a ban during the 2024-25 school year. Their old policy had each teacher at Lincoln High School collect phones at the start of class in a lock box.
He says some teachers left the boxes open, others closed them but did not lock them. And he, along with some of his colleagues, locked the phones up: “I was committed to kind of going all in with it and I liked it.”
He said last school year was the first year in a decade he didn’t spend class time chasing cell phones around the room.
Now, as the cell phone restriction goes statewide this school year, Lincoln enters into its second year with some kind of ban, things are changing a bit.
This year students’ phones will be locked away for the entire day, not just class time.
Stegner thinks it will be a learning curve not just for teachers and students. His school has already been fielding calls from anxious parents worried about not being able to contact their kids throughout the day.
Even so, he expects parents to relax as the school year goes on: “I do think that there seems to be this kind of collective understanding that we’ve got to do something different.”
The cost of going phone-free
Like a lot of schools, Lincoln High School will be distributing individual locked bags, called Yondr pouches, to students this year. The same ones that were used in the district Whaley studied in Texas, and for about 2 million students nationwide.
Stegner worries about transitioning the responsibility of holding on to phones from teachers to students: “I heard stories last year about Yondr pouches that were like … cut open, destroyed.”
The pouches cost about $30 each, so for a school like Lincoln with more than 1,500 students, this year’s policy comes with a high price tag.
Other states have anticipated the high cost and set aside money for districts to make the transition. In Delaware, Rosalie Morales oversees the state’s pilot program for cell phone bans and the $250,000 attached to it. As the program enters its second year, she’s surveyed the schools that participated last year.
“The response from teachers is definitely supportive,” Morales says. “You’ll see a different response from students.”
They’re not wild about it
When asked if the ban should continue, 83% of the participating Delaware teachers said yes, while only 11% of students agreed. Morales hopes that as time passes, that will change as students see the benefits.
Zoë George, a student at Bard High School Early College in New York City, is not quite there yet. For now, she sees her state’s ban as “annoying” especially as she starts her last year of high school.
“I wish that they would hear us out more,” she says.
She’s worried about the implications for homework and school work during free periods, and says often students use their phones to get work done. Her school also typically allows students to leave campus for lunch, but with a bell-to-bell cell phone policy, that gets harder.
“It’s not the worst because it’s my last year,” George says. “But at the same time it’s my last year.”
She’s sad she won’t get to take pictures and videos of her friends throughout the day, it feels like she won’t have memories like she does from her other years of school.
Next year she hopes to be at college and is looking forward to the freedom.
I’m wondering whether RELX (LSE: REL) might be the best share to buy in September, after last month’s dip has given me a rare chance to add it to my Self-Invested Personal Pension at a lower valuation.
The Anglo-Dutch information and analytics group is an unsung FTSE 100 hero, selling subscription-based data and decision tools to businesses in more than 180 countries. Over five years, the share price has more than doubled, rising 102%, with dividends on top of that. Yet, last month, the stock suddenly dropped 11.69%, leaving it 3.7% lower over 12 months.
That’s a striking reversal for a company that has delivered annualised returns of around 15% for half a decade. The question is whether this is just a temporary pause, or a sign that it’s gone as far as it can.
RELX is a FTSE 100 winner
The August slump followed RELX’s half-year results on 24 July. Yet the numbers were strong. Revenue climbed 7% to £4.74bn while adjusted operating profit rose 9% to £1.65bn. The board lifted the interim dividend by 7% to 19.5p. In my view, there was nothing in that update to justify a sharp sell-off.
It may simply be that expectations were too high. RELX was trading on a price-to-earnings ratio of around 32 at the start of August, leaving little room for disappointment. The slump has trimmed that to 28.7. It’s not cheap, but by its recent high-flying standards, it is that little bit cheaper.
Risks to weigh up
Artificial intelligence is an issue here. When AI first emerged, many feared it could allow clients to replicate services in-house. Then the story switched, as people believed it will help RELX enhance its offerings. It’s too early to know for sure, but I’m wondering whether last month’s talk about an AI bubble may have had an impact on sentiment.
There are other risks too. Corporate spending is cyclical, and if businesses tighten budgets, demand could slow. With inflation and interest rates sticky, that could be an issue for some while yet. Regulatory scrutiny over data use is another factor. And with a market cap of £62bn, sheer scale may limit the speed of future growth. As every good investor knows, no company is risk-free, however strong its track record.
Dividend growth adds appeal
The trailing yield of 1.84% looks modest, but RELX has raised its payout every year this century, apart from a single hold in 2010. Over the last 15 years, dividends have compounded at 7.95 a year, comfortably beating inflation. That makes it a hidden income play as well as a growth stock.
For long-term Stocks and Shares ISA investors, this looks like a high-quality business with strong recurring revenues and dependable dividend growth. I’m now planning to start building a position in my SIPP.
I think RELX is one others investors might consider buying too, with a long-term view.
Children somersaulted into a pool as adults sipped cocktails and dined on burgers, blue- and orange-striped umbrellas shielding them from the summer sun. Nearby, families squared off on newly redone tennis courts. But it was impossible not to notice, beyond the cool splashing and camaraderie, a charred and empty landscape.
The Altadena Town & Country Club — a storied establishment that has been a center of play as well as employment in the foothill town for more than a century — was destroyed in the Eaton fire. On Sunday, it reopened.
The noise of the crowd that gathered was a marked change from the silence that had reigned over Altadena since January’s firestorm.
Rep. Judy Chu (D-Monterey Park), whose congressional district includes Altadena, spoke at the reopening and recalled touring the area of the country club two nights after the Jan. 7 disaster.
“I could not believe my eyes,” Chu said. “I still saw flames around the different parts of the ruins.”
Los Angeles County suffered numerous devastating losses during the the Eaton and Palisades fires in January. At least 31 people were killed (though the death toll may be much higher) and more than 9,000 structures were destroyed.
The loss of the club, which first opened in 1910, didn’t just affect its members. The facilities also played host to local fundraisers, municipal government meetings, Altadena Rotary Club gatherings, high school proms and church events, among other things.
“While it’s a private club,” board President Rebecca Stokes said, “the ATCC is very open to the community and important to the community.”
With a luxurious pool, multiple tennis and pickleball courts, a fitness center, dining options and several ballrooms, the club offered members the feel of an all-inclusive resort with the convenience of a community recreation center — all for the price of $465 a month. On Sunday, the main hall, the swimming pool and the pickleball and tennis courts were on full display as construction continued on other facilities.
The Altadena club, which first opened in 1910, celebrated its reopening on Sunday.
(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)
The country club was the location of filming over the years. Don Draper (Jon Hamm) checked in when the establishment stood in for a hotel in an episode of “Mad Men,” Ed Sheeran and Justin Bieber indulged in some poolside lounging at the 115-year-old institution in the music video for their single “I Don’t Care.” Jamie Lee Curtis fumbled her way through a game of pickleball there in the film “Freakier Friday.”
But beyond its history and amenities, the club was important to the Altadena economy as it employed around 120 people, many of whom were locals. Now there are about a dozen, split between full- and part-timers, who work at the facility. Stokes said the hope was to continue to rehire more staff once the club’s dining facilities were in full operation.
Nearly eight months after the fires, hundreds of community members braved the 95-degree heat for Sunday’s celebration and soft launch.
Philip Pearson, an 18-year member of the club, was happy for the event but still felt off-balance.
“It’s awesome to have everyone back here, but it’s not the same,” he said.
His family was among the lucky few whose homes were not leveled in the fire. After being displaced for seven months, the family moved back in three weeks ago.
“It’s weird. You turn the corner on the drive up here and you think it’s going to be the same and you’re just hit again and again with the fact that this is never really going to be the same, so you make the best of it,” the 49-year-old said. “So to have this kind of event today is really great.”
Of the club’s members, 17% lost their homes, and many more were or are still displaced.
Sunday’s function was the product of great effort, Stokes told The Times.
“We’re adjacent to the municipal golf course that was used by the Army Corps of Engineers as a debris removal staging area, and until May, we thought that they would be there until year-end, but they got their work done in record time,” Stokes said. “And so we realized we could get back on-site earlier, and we just decided to go for it.”
Community members gather at the Altadena Town & Country Club.
(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)
She has yet to move back into her Altadena home since the fire and has been living out of the “suitcases that we packed on Jan. 7.” Although her home still stands, many of her neighbors’ homes burned down.
“I think it’s going to be really inspiring for the community at large when they’re driving down Mendocino Avenue to see some hustle and bustle and really positive activity going on,” Stokes said. “One of the strange things after the fire is, I’d run into neighbors in Target and we’d hug and cry and catch up. We used to be within walking distance. … Now we don’t know where community members are anymore.”
She said she hoped that having the rebuilt club as a community focal point would be “very healing.”
Stokes said the club was cognizant of ongoing air quality and soil toxin issues in the area.
Before the club reopened, she said, members wanted “the operations be finished at the golf course that was putting a lot of silica into the air.”
Extended exposure to silica dust can cause scarring and inflammation in the lungs, which in turn can lead to more severe pulmonary diseases, according to the American Lung Assn.
“We’ve done air quality monitoring. We have done soil testing, and fortunately our soil itself didn’t require any remediation,” she said.
Rep. Judy Chu presents the Altadena Town & Country Club leadership with a certificate at the reopening.
(Jason Armond/Los Angeles Times)
Chu said she hoped that the day’s celebration stood as a testament to the community’s resilience.
“It is the reflection of all the energy and commitment of the people associated with this center. Rebuilding this space has been no small task,” Chu said.
Before all the speakers wrapped up, Stokes made an announcement to club members.
“On the subject of dues, we’ve heard your feedback. We’ve sharpened our pencils and we’ve recalibrated our financial models,” Stokes said. “My announcement is that dues are suspended at least through year-end.”
In Karachi, Pakistan’s economic capital and largest city, fear has become a commodity. In 2024, Forbes Advisor ranked Karachi as the second-most dangerous city in the world for tourists. Due to the ineffectiveness of law enforcement agencies in curbing this violence, private security companies are thriving and expanding their clientele beyond affluent residential areas to include schools, shopping malls and corporate headquarters. This rapidly expanding and largely unregulated private security sector is turning Karachi’s chronic insecurity into a lucrative business. FRANCE 24’s Shahzaib Wahlah, Sonia Ghezali and Ondine de Gaulle report.
The grooming gangs of the UK blanketed the country. The elites turned their heads the other way.
The grooming gang scandal is a stain on British history. How did we allow hordes of gangs of Muslim Pakistani men to prey on white English girls?
When Sikh girls were targeted, the Sikh community united, forming vigilante groups to protect them. Since the early 1980s, British Sikh organizations have documented sexual abuse and exploitation of young Sikh females by grooming gangs populated by perpetrators of primarily Pakistani Muslim heritage. The Sikh community cared for their girls. The English seemingly did not. In fact, the media, politicians, police, and child services willfully ignored it.
This article chronicles the groundbreaking civil case brought by a Rotherham survivor, anonymized as “Elizabeth,” against her convicted rapist, Asghar Bostan. As the first known instance of a grooming gang survivor securing financial compensation directly from her abuser, this case offers a blueprint for hundreds of other survivors seeking justice.
A Scandal Ignored for Decades The grooming gang scandal first surfaced in a 1975 Rotherham Advertiser report, but it was much later when national journalists covered it. Julie Bindel wrote about it in The Sunday Times in 2007, followed by Andrew Norfolk’s front-page coverage in The Times in 2012. For years, the only politician to speak out was Labour MP for Keighley, Ann Cryer, who raised alarms after mothers reported their 12- and 13-year-old daughters being sexually exploited by older Asian men, with police and social services refusing to act. The first trial and convictions took place in 1997 in Leeds.
Since then, over 450 men have been convicted in over 75 trials across 40 towns, from Rotherham to Rochdale, Oxford to Bradford. Yet, not one of these cases resulted in financial compensation from perpetrators to victims, despite convictions for heinous crimes. In Yorkshire, a region with a Christian heritage dating back to Roman times, towns like Bradford now have 100 mosques and a 25% Muslim population, a demographic shift intertwined with the scandal’s narrative. This story exposes the English establishment’s failure to confront these gangs, leaving survivors like Elizabeth to fight for justice.
The Case: Elizabeth v. Asghar Bostan
August 2020: A Survivor’s Fight Begins In August 2020, Alan Craig and Baroness Cox met Elizabeth in Rotherham, South Yorkshire. Elizabeth was raped as a teenager by Asghar Bostan, a taxi driver convicted on 9 February 2018 at Sheffield Crown Court for two counts of child rape (2000-2002) under Operation Stovewood, the National Crime Agency’s investigation into Rotherham child sexual exploitation (1997-2013). He received a 9-year sentence. Moved by her courage, the team, supported by Hearts of Oak, vowed to seek financial justice through a civil suit. Peter McIlvenna helped secure £30,000 from Lord Pearson of Rannoch and Lord Vinson to cover legal costs, as Elizabeth could not afford the tens of thousands required.
September 2020: Assembling the Legal Team Finding a lawyer for this unprecedented case was challenging. Robin Tilbrook, a determined solicitor, agreed to represent Elizabeth and instructed a barrister. Inspired by the adage, “It always seems impossible until it’s done,” often attributed to Nelson Mandela, the team aimed to make history.
October 2020: A Parole System Betrayal In October 2020, Elizabeth learned Bostan had been moved to an open prison without her knowledge, after serving only 32 months. Open prisons allow weekend releases, leaving Elizabeth terrified he could harass her. The Ministry of Justice offered a bland apology, admitting the oversight. Assessed as a low abscond risk, no clear evaluation addressed his potential to reoffend.
December 2020 – March 2021: The Transcript Battle Securing court transcripts from Bostan’s 2018 trial was arduous. Lord Pearson requested them via the House of Lords Library, which contacted Sheffield Crown Court. The judge approved release on 13 January 2021, but the full four-day hearing transcript cost over £2,000, deemed too expensive by the Library. Partial transcripts, covering only the final judgment, arrived in mid-February. The team paid for additional parts, exposing a system where even Parliament struggles to access legal records.
July 2021: Barrister Engaged While awaiting transcripts, Tilbrook instructed a barrister to advance the civil claim.
November 2021: First Court Hearing On 15 November 2021, Liz v. Asghar Hussain Bostan was heard at the Royal Courts of Justice. After 2.5 hours, the judge granted anonymity for Elizabeth, waived the five-year limitation for personal injury claims, and froze Bostan’s assets, a key step forward.
August 2022: Rapist Freed Early Bostan was paroled in August 2022 after serving half his 9-year sentence, with conditions barring him from Rotherham. The lack of electronic monitoring heightened Elizabeth’s fears.
October 2022: Second Hearing for Extensions A second hearing extended the asset freeze and requested a £10,000 fee exemption. The judge, surprised by delays in issuing the exemption, intervened.
January 2023: Claim Submitted After securing the £10,000 fee waiver, the team submitted Elizabeth’s compensation claim, challenging a system that burdens victims with financial barriers.
March 2023: Landmark Damages Award On 27 March 2023, the High Court ordered Bostan to pay £425,934.09 in damages, later revised to ~£450,000 with interest. Bostan, who did not engage, faced default judgment and potential bankruptcy.
September 2023: Interim Charging Order An interim charging order was granted against Bostan’s property, preventing its sale or transfer.
November 2023: Final Charging Order The charging order was finalized, securing Elizabeth’s claim against Bostan’s assets.
January 2024: Parole Breach Bostan was spotted one mile from Elizabeth’s home, breaching parole conditions. Without electronic monitoring, his movements went unchecked until reported, leading to his recall to prison.
May 2024: Second Fee Exemption The court approved another £10,000 fee waiver, underscoring the system’s relentless demands. The courts always want their pound of flesh!
October 2024: Order of Sale Issued With the final fee exemption secured, Tilbrook issued an order to sell Bostan’s property, advancing the compensation process.
June 2025: Parole Denied On 25 June 2025, Elizabeth delivered a victim impact statement via video link at a Parole Board hearing, facing Bostan and his solicitor. She called the process torturous, as the legal system seemed to punish victims further. The Board denied parole, requiring Bostan to serve his full sentence until February 2027.
September 2025: Awaiting Final Enforcement As of September 2025, the team, with support from Hearts of Oak, awaits a final court date to enforce the sale of Bostan’s property, completing the compensation process.
The Heroes in This Long Fight
Elizabeth: Her inner strength and tenacity turned a tragic story into a hopeful outcome for herself and other survivors. Baroness Cox: As Secretary of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Honour-Based Abuse, she has been a tireless voice for these girls. Lord Pearson of Rannoch: The only outspoken House of Lords member for survivors, he raised crucial funds for this case. Robin Tilbrook: His legal expertise drove this unprecedented fight for financial justice.
The Villains The courts and Ministry of Justice dragged their feet, further punishing survivors with delays, £10,000 fees, and parole oversights. Even a judge was shocked at the inaction, showing the systemic barriers to justice.
A Call to Action Elizabeth’s case is a blueprint: secure funding, assemble a legal team, obtain transcripts, seek anonymity and fee waivers, freeze assets, and pursue damages through charging orders and property sales. We urge survivors to follow this path and call on donors to fund a hundred more cases. Elizabeth’s victory proves justice is possible. #LFG!
Research suggests when we eat our meals could be crucial for maintaining a healthy heart. Scientists from the University of Southampton and Mass General Brigham in the United States discovered that previous studies had connected night shift work to heart problems.
They say their latest research demonstrates that consuming food during daylight hours may help reduce these dangers.
The study, published in the journal Nature Communications, examined 20 healthy volunteers who spent a fortnight in a controlled environment mimicking night shifts, consuming meals either during nighttime or daytime hours.
The scientists then evaluated how meal timing affected participants’ heart disease risk factors, including markers of the autonomic nervous system, plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 (a compound that raises blood clot risk), and blood pressure.
They discovered no harmful effects on these risk factors amongst those who ate during daylight hours, reports Surrey Live.
Professor Frank Scheer, a professor of medicine and director of the Medical Chronobiology Programme at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, explained: “Our prior research has shown that circadian misalignment – the mistiming of our behavioural cycle relative to our internal body clock – increases cardiovascular risk factors. We wanted to understand what can be done to lower this risk, and our new research suggests food timing could be that target.”
Given this finding, are there particular types of food that are especially beneficial for our cardiovascular health?
We spoke to a dietitian and a cardiologist, who revealed some of the advantages that the following six foods can offer for our heart…
1. Salmon
“I’d recommend including foods like salmon, which is packed with omega-3 fatty acids that can help reduce inflammation and support healthy cholesterol levels,” says Dr Jay Shah, cardiologist and chief medical officer at Hilo.
Rosie Carr, dietitian at healthy eating plan Second Nature suggests baking salmon with a drizzle of lemon juice and herbs in the oven at 180°C for 15-20 minutes, or poaching it in a fragrant broth for a tender, moist result.
2. Oats
“Whole grains like oats provide complex carbohydrates that help maintain steady blood sugar levels, preventing the inflammatory spikes that can damage blood vessels over time,” says Carr.
They are also packed with soluble fibre which Shah says helps to reduce ‘bad’ LDL cholesterol.
“I often suggest overnight oats or porridge with berries as an easy daily option,” recommends Shah.
3. Leafy greens
“These foods are rich in dietary nitrates that convert to nitric oxide in the body, helping blood vessels dilate, improving blood flow, and lowering blood pressure,” says Carr. “Regular consumption has been linked to improved exercise performance and cardiovascular function.”
Kale and spinach are also packed full of potassium. “Leafy greens are brilliant for their potassium content and they help to balance sodium levels in the body,” says Shah.
“They can be easily added to soups, stews or stir-fries as a healthy addition.”
4. Extra virgin olive oil
“Extra virgin olive oil is rich in monounsaturated fats, and powerful antioxidants called polyphenols that reduce oxidative stress and inflammation,” explains Carr. “Chronic low-grade inflammation contributes to heart disease by impacting the health of our arteries.”
The dietitian recommends using it as a finishing oil on vegetables, in homemade salad dressings, or for low-temperature cooking.
“You could also drizzle it over wholegrain bread instead of butter,” adds Carr.
5. Tomatoes
“Tomatoes are a lycopene-rich food, and lycopene is a powerful antioxidant that reduces inflammation and prevents cholesterol oxidation,” explains Carr. “Interestingly, cooking tomatoes increases the bioavailability of lycopene.
“So, I recommend slow-roasting tomatoes with a bit of olive oil to concentrate flavours and boost lycopene availability, or incorporate tomato paste into stews and sauces.”
6. Fermented dairy (yoghurt, kefir)
“Fermented dairy products contain probiotics that may help reduce blood pressure and chronic inflammation,” says Carr. “The vitamin K2 in these foods helps prevent calcium from building up in arterial walls.
“I recommend using plain, unsweetened yoghurt as a base for breakfast bowls, as a substitute for sour cream, or in marinades.”
Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.
You have had a promising conversation with your customer. They nodded, said they liked your offer, maybe even said, “Yes, sounds good.” But then there was no follow-up, no payment from that customer and you see zero sales.
If this has happened more than a few times, you’re not alone. According to a HubSpot study, 60% of customers say “yes” or show interest during a sales process but end up ghosting before the transaction is completed, at least four times before they buy. So what gives?
In business, the gap between “yes” and “checkout” is where most opportunities quietly die. It’s not just a sales problem. It’s a clarity problem, a trust problem and sometimes just bad timing. Let’s break down some most common reasons people agree with your pitch but still walk away and what you can do to close the loop.
Sometimes your customer may say yes just to end the conversation and avoid conflict. In sales, politeness can be your biggest illusion. The prospect may have no real intention to buy, but they nod, smile and may say, “I’ll think about it,” or “Send me the link.” We often take that as a green light. But it is not.
What to do:
Instead of asking, “Are you interested?” you can ask something slightly more specific, such as “What concerns do you still have?” or “Is this something you’re ready for now, or down the line?”
Let them tell you the truth before you waste time chasing a dead lead.
2. They don’t trust something — yet
Trust is rarely built in a single conversation or one landing page. A customer might be sold on the product but unsure about your brand, your return policy or whether you’ll deliver what you promised. Even if they like what they hear, hesitation can creep in the moment they feel even slightly uncertain, especially in crowded markets.
What to do:
Make your trust signals visible and easy to verify. Add real testimonials (not vague ones), a money-back guarantee or some transparency around how long shipping or onboarding takes.
3. The decision wasn’t fully theirs
Customers will sometimes say yes because they want to buy, but they are not the final decision-maker. This is more common in B2B, but it happens in everyday transactions too (think of someone needing to check with their spouse or manager).
It’s not that they didn’t like your offer. They just weren’t authorized to pull the trigger.
What to do:
Ask directly, “Is there anyone else who needs to sign off on this?” earlier in the conversation. If the answer is yes, give them shareable materials, FAQs or a few quick demos that they can easily forward.
Timing is a silent killer in sales. You pitch something that makes sense, and the customer is also mentally on board, but their priorities can shift. They may say yes, but they mean, “Yes … eventually.” And that “eventually” can slip off their radar unless you follow up with the right nudge.
What to do:
Instead of just asking, “Are you ready to buy now?” give them a reason to act sooner. A limited-time benefit, a booking link with available slots or even a checklist to prep for onboarding can shift their mindset from eventually to let’s do it now.
Don’t push them, but you can try to shorten the gap between their interest and action.
5. The process was just slightly too complicated
It only takes a little bit of friction to lose a sale. One more form field, an unclear shipping note or maybe they have to complete too many steps to checkout. When people say yes, they’re thinking emotionally. But when they try to buy, logic will come. And if your checkout flow or subscription process makes them pause even for a second, they might not come back.
What to do:
Audit your purchase or sign-up process. Look for small steps that feel unnecessary or confusing. If you run an online store or take orders digitally, use tools that allow clear, intuitive checkout (with mobile in mind).
Even service businesses( whether selling bouquets or booking consultations) benefit from POS tools that can streamline customer flow without needing custom development.
6. The value didn’t match the price — in their mind
They might agree with you in theory, but when it came down to payment, they didn’t feel like it was worth it for them. That doesn’t mean your offer was overpriced, just that the value wasn’t clearly communicated in a way that resonated. People don’t buy features, they buy outcomes. So, if those outcomes are not obvious to them, your pricing will always feel high, even if it’s not.
What to do:
Focus less on what the product is and more on what it does for that specific customer. Use examples or quick before-and-after stories that will show transformation. Let them picture themselves with the result. Also, consider offering flexible pricing (even if it’s temporary) to meet them where they are.
Modern customers are distracted. They’re scrolling during meetings, browsing tabs between errands and half-reading product pages while standing in line at the grocery store. Even with the best intentions to buy, their attention is fragile. One notification or interruption, and your offer can fade into the noise. They may have been 90% there and then forgot entirely.
What to do:
Don’t assume a lost sale means disinterest. You can use light, timed follow-ups like abandoned cart emails, reminder messages or even a friendly “Hey, still interested?” nudge.
Also, make re-entry easy. If they do return, don’t force them to start over. Keep their cart, save their last viewed items and reduce the steps they need to take to finish what they started.
There’s still a lot that can derail a buying decision between agreement and action. The trick is to build systems, messaging and good follow-up strategies that carry people over that final stretch. Good luck!
You have had a promising conversation with your customer. They nodded, said they liked your offer, maybe even said, “Yes, sounds good.” But then there was no follow-up, no payment from that customer and you see zero sales.
If this has happened more than a few times, you’re not alone. According to a HubSpot study, 60% of customers say “yes” or show interest during a sales process but end up ghosting before the transaction is completed, at least four times before they buy. So what gives?
In business, the gap between “yes” and “checkout” is where most opportunities quietly die. It’s not just a sales problem. It’s a clarity problem, a trust problem and sometimes just bad timing. Let’s break down some most common reasons people agree with your pitch but still walk away and what you can do to close the loop.
Charles Bierbauer, former CNN correspondent and a past president of the White House Correspondents Association who later became dean of the University of South Carolina’s journalism program, has died. He was 83.
Bierbauer died Friday at his home in Spruce Pine, NC, where he had been living in retirement, according to university spokesman Jeff Stensland. No direct cause was given, but the family’s obituary said “his generous heart gave out after a good, long life.”
Bierbauer’s journalism career began in his native Pennsylvania, where early on he was a weekend reporter for media outlet WKAP.
Charles Bierbauer joined CNN a year after the network’s inception and covered the Pentagon, White House, Supreme Court, politics and presidential elections over the next 20 years. University of South CarolinaCNN reporter Charles Bierbauer (R) reads over the Supreme Court ruling while producer Matthew Byrne talks to the studio in front of the United States Supreme Court in Washington, December 12, 2000 REUTERS
After a year as a reporter for The Associated Press in Pittsburgh, Bierbauer worked for several other outlets, winning an Overseas Press Club Award in 1973 for his reporting on the Yom Kippur War.
According to his family, Bierbauer was once detained in Moscow’s Red Square while filming an anti-Soviet demonstration. While covering Muhammed Ali’s 1978 travels in the Soviet Union, Bierbauer was denounced by the Soviet press for “asking impertinent questions.”
After four years with ABC News, Bierbauer began two decades at CNN, starting just a year after the network’s inception.
Over the next 20 years, Bierbauer would cover the Pentagon, White House, the US Supreme Court and an array of political stories and presidential campaigns. He also hosted the weekly current events show “Newsmaker Saturday” for a decade and regularly traveled with presidents across the country and to dozens of foreign nations.
Afterward, Bierbauer moved to South Carolina, where he became the first dean of the state flagship university’s College of Information and Communications, a merger of the mass communications and library science programs. Launching Cocky’s Reading Express, a childhood literacy initiative, Bierbauer also led a multimillion-dollar fundraising and renovation effort that moved the school from the outdated Carolina Coliseum to a state-of-the-art building on South Carolina’s historic Horseshoe.
Charlie Gasparino has his finger on the pulse of where business, politics and finance meet
Sign up to receive On The Money by Charlie Gasparino in your inbox every Thursday.
Thanks for signing up!
While in academia, Bierbauer continued his passion for broadcasting by hosting a weekly current events program and moderating scores of debates among political candidates vying for offices in the state, through a partnership with SCETV.
Jay Bender, a former attorney for the South Carolina Press Association and retired professor who served under Bierbauer, remembered him as a distinguished broadcaster and educator.
“His contributions to the USC Journalism School as dean were significant,” Bender said, specifically mentioning the project that modernized the school and moved it to its current location.
Charles Bierbauer, middle, moderates a debate featuring then-Supreme Court justices Antonin Scalia, left, and Stephen Breyer, right, before the South Carolina Bar Association in 2012. AP
Tom Reichert, who succeeded Bierbauer as communications dean, echoed Bender’s sentiments, recalling his predecessor’s “profound impact on the program.”
“He is fondly remembered for many achievements, including fundraising and supporting students who went on to win Pulitzer Prizes,” Reichert said in a statement to The Associated Press. “He will be deeply missed.”
Bierbauer was married to Susanne Schafer, a longtime military affairs reporter for the AP. He earned degrees in journalism and Russian from Penn State University and is survived by Schafer, as well as four children and several grandchildren and a great-grandchild.
In a statement to the AP, a network spokesperson remembered Bierbauer as “a cherished member of the CNN family” and “tireless reporter and wonderful colleague.”
“Charles inspired me and helped me throughout my assignments at the Pentagon and the White House,” Wolf Blitzer, Bierbauer’s former CNN colleague, told the AP in a statement. “He was a good friend, colleague, and mentor, and I will certainly miss him.”
President Trump has signaled he’s considering correcting a 50-year mistake in US drug laws: Marijuana is in the same category as heroin and LSD.
A change in pot’s legal status at the federal level is overdue: Trump would be right to downgrade cannabis from Schedule I, defined as drugs with no accepted medical use and a high abuse potential, to Schedule III, where it would join ketamine, certain barbiturates and some opioid-like meds.
The original classification was not evidence-based but Nixon-era political payback. But what is at stake is much more than simply to which drug-control schedule cannabis should be moved.
Trump faces a new reality: Cannabis in 2025 is fundamentally different and much more powerful than the one Richard Nixon politicized in the 1970s.
It means the president must calculate how to change the federal classification for marijuana while not giving a green light for the free-for-all some legalization advocates envision.
Today’s pot is nothing like the weed hippies smoked in the 1960s and ’70s. Getty Images
Part of the problem is why weed ended up on Schedule I in the first place.
President Nixon, who had campaigned on restoring “law and order,” created the National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse to give him cover for a hard-line stance.
When the panel — chaired by former Pennsylvania Gov. Raymond Shafer — returned in 1972 with a report urging decriminalization for personal use, Nixon was livid.
He shelved the findings and doubled down on the punitive approach, a decision more about punishing perceived political opponents and appealing to his conservative base than protecting public health.
Nixon (left) wasn’t happy with the results of the commission Shafer (right) chaired on pot policy. AP
In the five decades since, reform advocates have pointed to that history as proof the federal classification is irrational and outdated.
They note alcohol and tobacco, both with well-documented health risks, remain legal.
They also point to the 38 states that have legalized marijuana for medical use and 24 that allow recreational sales.
But this is not the 1970s cannabis the Shafer Commission considered relatively mild and socially manageable.
The marijuana sold today is dramatically different — and far more potent.
Back then, the average THC content — the psychoactive compound that produces marijuana’s high — was less than 2%.
Today, marijuana flower averages 15% to 20% THC, while extracts, oils and edibles can exceed 80% to 90%.
This isn’t a stronger beer or a bolder wine; it’s more like swapping a glass of table wine for a shot of pure grain alcohol.
That surge in potency has real consequences.
Emergency-room visits linked to marijuana have spiked in states where it’s been legalized.
Physicians report more cases of cannabis-induced psychosis, sometimes in patients with no prior history of mental illness.
A 2022 National Institutes of Health-funded study found that high-potency cannabis was associated with a fivefold increase in young men’s risk of developing schizophrenia.
Other studies have tied heavy use to cognitive decline, impaired memory and lower academic and occupational achievement — particularly when use starts in adolescence.
While legalization advocates often cite the harmless image of a baby boomer smoking the occasional joint, today’s market caters to heavy users consuming extremely high doses.
The public-health debate isn’t about that occasional puff. It’s about the normalization of high-potency marijuana that can hook users, impair judgment and — in a growing subset — trigger psychiatric crises.
The sensible path is what President Trump reportedly favors, reclassifying marijuana to a lower schedule. That acknowledges it does have accepted medical uses — from easing chemotherapy-induced nausea to controlling certain seizure disorders — and would remove some of the research barriers Schedule I imposes.
Because marijuana is in the same category as heroin, scientists must navigate a maze of federal approvals to study it, stifling the very research needed to set evidence-based policy.
But reclassification should not be mistaken for a stamp of approval to legalize recreational marijuana federally.
The stakes are different now. The industry is already racing ahead of regulators, pushing products of unprecedented strength, marketing aggressively to young people and — as Big Tobacco once did — downplaying risks.
President Trump, however, has the bully pulpit and should take a page from the federal government’s playbook on tobacco control.
Keep strict federal prohibitions on recreational marijuana sales, especially for high-potency products. Invest in public education campaigns that tell the truth about health risks, particularly for teens and young adults. Fund treatment programs for those already struggling with dependency or psychiatric complications.
And give the Food and Drug Administration the resources to regulate potency, labeling and marketing where states have failed.
None of this will satisfy the two loudest voices in the marijuana debate.
Legalization activists will decry it as prohibitionist overreach.
Hard-liners will resist any move that even hints at loosening the Schedule I label. But good drug policy doesn’t live at either extreme.
When Nixon rejected his own commission’s recommendations in 1972, he wasn’t thinking about science, public health or the long-term consequences of setting marijuana policy by political whim.
We have the benefit — and the burden — of hindsight. Trump can correct the historical wrong of marijuana’s Schedule I classification while confronting the uncomfortable fact that today’s cannabis is not the same drug the Shafer Commission studied.
That means resisting the urge to treat marijuana as just another lifestyle product and instead handling it like what it has become: a powerful psychoactive substance whose risks are still not fully understood.
Reclassification is overdue. Federal legalization is not.
Gerald Posner is the author of 13 books, most recently “PHARMA: Greed, Lies and the Poisoning of America.”
