Thursday, July 10, 2025

 
Home Blog Page 36

How to Oust a Difficult Co-founder Legally and Smoothly

Entrepreneur
-
0
How to Oust a Difficult Co-founder Legally and Smoothly


Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.

Imagine this. Jean and John, who met at a startup incubator, founded a company together. But as they grew, Jean realized that she and John weren’t aligned on many things, including what the company’s future should look like. Neither John’s goals nor his behavior reflected the company’s mission, so Jean ousts John from the business.

Reasons for a co-founder’s departure

There are a number of reasons that a co-founder may want to part ways with another co-founder.

1. Lack of dedication

A startup that wants to scale for a big exit typically requires founders who dedicate long hours for little pay (at least at the beginning). While some founders, like Jean, are willing to do that, some, like John, are not. Jean was willing to put in as many hours as it took to meet her responsibilities. John, on the other hand, arrived late and left early, demonstrating that he wasn’t dedicated to his role — or the company.

2. Difficult to work with

Some founders are simply difficult to work with. They’re not collaborative, they’re closed off to others’ input or they belittle or micromanage their employees. While in the office, John’s attitude was one of superiority. He felt that certain tasks were below him and that others should do the “heavy lifting.” He criticized his employees at every opportunity, lowering morale and eventually pushing a very dedicated, key employee out of the company.

3. Lack of alignment with vision

While a dream team of co-founders might be committed and great as colleagues, they might have different visions about the company’s future. For example, they may disagree on a pivot other founders believe is necessary. Jean wanted to focus on R&D to ensure ongoing innovation, but John was focused on expanding the company. In addition to his behavior, this lack of alignment caused so much tension that Jean started the process of terminating her co-founder.

Related: So Your Co-Founder is Threatening to Quit Unless You Give Them More Equity. What Should You Do?

Legal considerations

In addition to mistakes that can be made during the termination process, there are several legal considerations to keep in mind when co-founders separate.

1. Complying with employment law

Founders are almost always employees by law. When terminating an employee, keep in mind — and meet — the legalities of termination, including filing certain paperwork and notices, and meeting deadlines for paying the final paycheck, for example. When the tension between Jean and John began, Jean documented each instance so she had relevant backup at the time of John’s termination.

2. Is your relationship buttoned up?

Make sure you are not giving an ousted co-founder leverage. Breaking promises or not protecting the company legally in its founding documents on IP assignments or confidentiality obligations means that they now have valuable IP the company needs.

3. Do you have the legal right?

It’s critical to ensure that a co-founder has the legal right to terminate another co-founder. If they do not, they should take the necessary steps to secure those rights; it might not be as simple as telling them they are fired. For example, the company’s bylaws might allow a co-founder to be terminated only if the board votes to do so. The ousting founders need to make sure they can — and do — get board support.

When John’s performance began to decline, Jean consulted with the company’s board to ensure the board was informed from the outset.

More legal considerations: What NOT to do

While there are considerations to make so as not to run into legal issues, there are also considerations for what NOT to do.

1. Don’t think about a separation agreement

A legally binding separation agreement can get you a release of claims, potentially non-disparagement terms and other benefits for the company, including agreements to not sue. Investors will want to see this if at all possible in diligence. It’s worth some money to get this.

As soon as John’s performance started suffering and other employees began complaining about his behavior, Jean consulted an employment attorney to prepare the paperwork necessary for a separation agreement, enabling the process to be completed without worrying about a potential lawsuit.

2. Forget to cut off access to systems

To prevent an ousted co-founder from accessing company information post-termination, ensure that they can no longer access the company’s systems. Disgruntled employees with access to company data can cause major problems.

Once John was officially “out,” all access to company information was cut off; Jean knew that, if given the opportunity, John would have tried to access certain data once he exited the company.

3. Bash the ousted founder to employees, investors and other stakeholders

Sometimes in trying to explain the ousted founder’s departure, founders will resort to speaking negatively about them; this opens the company to defamation liability. It can also reflect badly on the company and the founding terms. Finally, it can lead to the ousted founder becoming more hostile toward the company.

Despite their differences, Jean maintained reasonable levels of professionalism. Although the process was stressful for her, her team and ultimately the company, John’s ouster and the reasons behind it remained within the executive leadership team.

Related: 4 Sane Strategies for Maintaining Healthy Co-Founder Relationships

Ramifications of skirting the law

All of this advice hinges on the remaining founders meeting the requirements to legally terminate a co-founder. When they don’t, there are ramifications.

1. Incurring penalties and legal claims

First, by not complying with employment laws, penalties can be incurred, and legal claims are given to the ousted founder; these can add up. For example, in California, if all wages aren’t paid on the final day of employment, the ousted founder is entitled to a penalty equal to one full day of wages for every day until they are fully paid (up to 30 days).

Jean’s diligence in consulting a startup attorney prepared her for the separation. In addition to the separation agreement, Jean presented John with his final paycheck at the termination meeting.

2. Post-termination negotiations

If you don’t button up your relationship with the founder prior to termination, you will be stuck post-termination negotiating for what you need. At this point, you are unlikely to have much leverage.

3. No separation agreement

If you fail to get a separation agreement, investors may push on you in diligence to get one later; this is often difficult. Also, you may subject the company to claims that would have been released if money was offered as severance at the outset. Note that a founder may sign a separation agreement quickly if it’s offered with a positive message and incentives. The absence of an up-front offer can result in litigation, and demands may increase.

The bottom line

While there are myriad factors that contribute to the ousting of a company founder, it behooves those on the company side to make appropriate preparations to avoid legal troubles.

Ready to break through your revenue ceiling? Join us at Level Up, a conference for ambitious business leaders to unlock new growth opportunities.



This story originally appeared on Entrepreneur

Hakeem Jeffries Has Been Fighting And Preventing A Final Vote On BBB For Nearly 7 Hours

PoliticusUSA
-
0
Hakeem Jeffries Has Been Fighting And Preventing A Final Vote On BBB For Nearly 7 Hours


PoliticusUSA is 100% independent news that you can rely on, but we need your help. Please consider supporting us by becoming a subscriber.

House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) is doing so much more than talking on the House floor for hours. Jeffries is helping Democrats sharpen their identity.

At the time of this writing, Jeffries has been speaking for what is approaching seven hours, and he is holding up the final vote on Trump’s tax cuts for the rich by discussing things like how money is being taken away from people on SNAP and given to Elon Musk.

Jeffries said:

In my view, the lie being told, Mr. Speaker, by some in this town that this effort, this one big, ugly bill is somehow about combating waste, fraud and abuse. One of the reasons why we know common sense dictates that this one big, ugly bill has nothing to do with meaningfully going after waste, fraud, and abuse is that, on average, SNAP beneficiaries receive $6 per day. It’s to try to help them not go hungry, to try to make sure that veterans and children and seniors don’t go hungry.

Mr. Speaker, I think it’s important for the American people to process. That’s what SNAP on average provides, $6 per day. At the same time, Elon Musk, his federal contracts, as we understand it, amount to $8 million per day. Mr. Speaker, if Republicans were really serious about targeting waste, fraud and abuse in the United States of America, start there, $8 million per day. Start right there.

Don’t take it, don’t rip it from the mouths of children, seniors, or veterans, if Republicans were really serious about targeting waste, fraud and abuse, start right there with Elon Musk. And we’ll join you. We’ll welcome you into the warm embrace of the house democratic caucus to target waste, fraud and abuse. Start right there. You can start right there, Mr. Speaker. Start right there.

Video of Jeffries:

Jeffries also discussed the secret deal that Mike Johnson made to get the votes to pass the bill:

Jeffries said,”So many of our colleagues on the other side of the aisle had principled opposition just a few hours ago and now seem prepared to fold on the floor of the House of Representatives? Don’t you have some responsibility, Mr. Speaker, to say to the American people what happened, what deals were cut, what occurred in the back room? It will all come out. One way or the other.”

The extreme cruelty of this legislation is helping to remind Democrats of who they are and what they stand for. The high priced Democratic consultants had it all wrong. Democrats don’t need to move to the middle.

Hakeem Jeffries is showing that Democrats are strongest when they be true to who they should be and fight for their values.

A Democratic House will have time to go to war with Trump before these cuts take place, and with speeches like this, Democrats are showing why they deserve to be back in power.

What do you think of Rep. Jeffries’s speech? Share your thoughts in the comments below.

Leave a comment



This story originally appeared on Politicususa

How to stop LG & Samsung smart TV tracking, screen captures

AppleInsider
-
0
How to stop LG & Samsung smart TV tracking, screen captures


Even when used as a monitor for your Mac, an LG or Samsung smart TV will periodically capture what’s on screen and send it to company servers. Here’s how to stop that terrible behavior.

Smart TVs from LG and Samsung are increasingly being used as monitors for Mac and PC, given that they are generally cheaper than an OLED display. The trade-off that you get for an inexpensive TV is adware. To accomplish this goal, they can capture screenshots of everything on screen, and sell it to just about anybody who asks, or they use that data themselves for targeted home screen advertising.

This isn’t a giant problem when you’re watching television. But when you’re working on your Mac on a television, that capture can include sensitive documents, emails, private work, and everything else that happens on your computer.

Here’s what you need to know, and how to turn it off on a LG or Samsung OLED display.

How LG and Samsung smart TVs collect your data

Smart TVs are not just screens you watch. They are also sensors that watch you. LG and Samsung smart TVs both include technology called Automatic Content Recognition, or ACR.

The feature captures small snapshots of what’s on your screen or snippets of audio, then sends that data to external servers to identify exactly what you are watching.

ACR works even when the TV is used as a PC monitor or connected via HDMI. A 2024 study by University College London and collaborators found LG TVs capturing screenshots as frequently as every 10 milliseconds.

Samsung TVs do so every 500 milliseconds — even when displaying content from external devices. Opting out of ACR in settings completely stops this network traffic.

Each snapshot is matched to a massive database to determine the exact program or ad. They allow companies to build a detailed profile of your viewing habits.

These TVs also track other information, such as which streaming apps you use, how long you watch them, and what you click on in the menus. If you use voice commands, the TV may send audio recordings to the cloud for processing.

When voice assistants are enabled, the microphones can be listening for wake words at all times.

Both companies transmit this information over the internet to their servers. LG uses Alphonso, an advertising technology partner, to manage much of its ACR data. The TV contacts Alphonso servers with domains like “alphonso.tv” to share content recognition data.

Samsung handles much of its ACR in-house, contacting multiple Samsung-controlled domains.

Smart TVs routinely check for software updates, fetch ads, and collect app usage stats. They also perform analytics over encrypted web connections, making them hard to block without specific tools.

The data isn’t collected for your benefit. LG and Samsung use it to sell targeted advertising and to share with partners.

For example, LG’s privacy policy explicitly notes that personal information, including viewing history, may be sold or shared with third parties. Samsung also uses viewing data to power personalized ads and recommendations.


LG’s ACR feature is branded as Live Plus

Most people don’t realize that they have opted in to being monitored. Even when privacy laws require opt-out choices, the settings are often buried deep in menus.

How to disable data collection on LG smart TVs

LG’s ACR feature is branded as Live Plus. The service monitors what you watch and sends data to Alphonso for content recognition and advertising. Disabling Live Plus and other ad tracking features is essential for improving privacy.

Follow these steps on recent LG webOS models. The exact wording may vary slightly depending on your TV’s year and software version, but the process is generally consistent.

  1. Press the Home button on your LG remote.

  2. Select the Settings icon, then choose All Settings to open the full menu.

  3. Go to General, then System, and select Additional Settings.

  4. Find Live Plus and toggle it Off.

  5. Return to General and select Home Settings.

  6. Turn off both Home Promotion and Content Recommendation.

  7. Go back to General, then Additional Settings, and select Advertising.

  8. Enable the option labeled Limit Ad Tracking.

  9. Return to the main Settings categories and go to Support.

  10. Choose Privacy & Terms.

  11. Look for Do Not Sell My Personal Information and toggle it On.

After completing these steps, Live Plus will no longer gather data about what you watch, and advertising tracking will be significantly reduced.

LG doesn’t currently offer a comprehensive online privacy dashboard for managing these settings remotely. It has a privacy site with forms to request data deletion or opt-out.

However, LG often requires your TV’s serial number and other details. Using the TV’s built-in settings remains the most practical way to disable tracking.

Keep in mind that turning off these settings will reduce personalized recommendations on your home screen. You will lose suggestions tailored to your viewing habits, but you will keep full access to apps and streaming services.

How to disable data collection on Samsung smart TVs

Samsung’s Automatic Content Recognition feature is called Viewing Information Services. The option is enabled by default on most Samsung TVs and collects data about everything you watch, including HDMI inputs.

The good news is you can turn it off through the TV’s settings.

Here is how to disable ACR and other tracking features on recent Samsung Tizen models. The menu layout can vary slightly by year, but the basic approach remains similar.

  1. Press the Home button on your Samsung remote to open the home screen.

  2. Select Settings and choose All Settings to open the full menu.

  3. Go to General & Privacy.

  4. Select Terms & Privacy or Privacy Choices, depending on your model.

  5. Find Viewing Information Services and turn it Off to stop the TV from analyzing what you watch.

  6. Look for Interest-Based Advertising or Interest-Based Advertisements and turn it Off. This setting may also appear as Interest-Based Ads Service.

  7. Confirm your changes if prompted.

Your Samsung TV will now have ACR tracking turned off and targeted advertising disabled.

To disable voice data collection on your Samsung TV, go to Settings under Voice Recognition or Voice Assistant and turn it off if you’re concerned about privacy.

Samsung also offers an online Privacy Dashboard for users with Samsung accounts linked to their TVs. You can manage Viewing Information Services and Interest-Based Advertising for all Samsung devices connected to that account.

If you live in a region with data privacy laws such as California’s Consumer Privacy Act, you can also visit Samsung’s privacy website to submit a request not to sell or share your personal information.

The process may require you to provide your ZIP code or Samsung account details, and Samsung notes that it can take up to 45 days to process.

Disabling these options on your Samsung TV stops the collection of detailed viewing data for advertising and analytics. You will still be able to use streaming apps and watch content normally, but you will lose personalized recommendations based on your viewing habits.

How to block smart TV telemetry at the network level

Disabling tracking in LG and Samsung smart TVs’ settings doesn’t stop them from contacting company servers for updates and telemetry. For enhanced privacy, block these connections at the network level.

Tablet screen displaying NextDNS website promoting a new firewall for internet security, with a call to action button labeled 'Try it now'.
NextDNS

This approach involves using DNS filtering, router firewall rules, or network segmentation to prevent your TV from contacting known tracking servers.

Use DNS blocking or a Pi-hole

One popular method is to run a DNS-based blocker such as Pi-hole on your home network. Pi-hole acts as your local DNS server, intercepting requests from all devices and blocking those that match a blacklist.

You can add LG and Samsung telemetry domains to your Pi-hole blocklist. When your TV tries to reach these addresses, it will receive no response.

The method blocks tracking without interfering with necessary streaming traffic if you whitelist essential domains.

Cloud-based DNS filtering services like NextDNS or Control D also offer prebuilt blocklists for smart TV telemetry. Some services even have dedicated Samsung TV filters or IoT telemetry filters. These can be enabled with a few clicks and managed from a simple web dashboard.

Use router firewall rules

If your router supports outbound filtering, you can create firewall rules to block your TV’s traffic to specific IP addresses or domains. Additionally, custom firmware such as OpenWrt or Asuswrt-Merlin allows for similar functionality.

Assign your TV a static IP address in your router settings. Then block that IP from accessing known telemetry server IP ranges. You can also allow it only to reach specific whitelisted services such as Netflix or YouTube.

Firewall rules give you more granular control but may be harder to maintain. Smart TV vendors often change server IP addresses, use cloud providers like AWS or Akamai, or shift endpoints over time.

Domain-based blocking is often more flexible than hard-coded IP rules for this reason.

Network segmentation

Another advanced technique is to place your TV on a separate network or VLAN with restricted internet access. You can create an IoT VLAN where smart home devices have internet access only to approved services and cannot reach other parts of the network.

Network segmentation prevents the TV from scanning your main network or accessing sensitive devices. You can also limit its outbound connections to only streaming services you approve.

Some users set up network proxies or sinkholes to inspect, log, and selectively block TV traffic. For example, Pi-hole logs will show every DNS query your TV makes.

You can identify new tracking domains and update your blocklists accordingly. Proxies require some technical familiarity but provide ongoing control as vendors change their infrastructure.

Be careful with overblocking

Blocking too many domains can interfere with your TV’s basic functions. For example, blocking update servers can prevent firmware updates, which may carry important security fixes.

Tablet screen displaying a website for a customizable DNS service with features to secure, filter, and control networks. Includes buttons for a free trial and demo.
Control D

If you block all SamsungCloudSolution domains, some streaming apps such as YouTube may fail to load. They rely on Samsung’s backend services for authentication or metadata.

A careful strategy is to start with a core list of known tracking domains, then test your TV. If an app breaks, you can check logs to identify which domain to whitelist. Over time, you can build a custom blocklist that balances privacy and usability.

Implications of disabling tracking and blocking data flows

Before you turn off every tracking feature or block all known telemetry domains, it is important to understand the trade-offs involved.

Disabling ACR and other tracking features will remove personalized recommendations from your TV’s home screen. You will no longer see suggestions based on what you watch.

For example, LG’s Live Plus recommendations row will disappear. While many users see this as a small sacrifice for privacy, it does reduce some of the “smart” features that the TV offers.

Even with tracking turned off, you may still see some generic ads or promotions on the TV’s interface. Samsung’s Smart Hub might continue to show banners for new apps or Samsung products, though they should no longer be tailored to your viewing history.

On LG TVs, disabling Home Promotion can eliminate most home-screen ads. Turning on Limit Ad Tracking ensures any remaining ads in streaming apps are no longer personalized.

Turning off tracking doesn’t affect your ability to watch content through HDMI inputs or use major streaming apps. Services like Netflix and YouTube will still work as expected. However, network-level blocking can sometimes break app functionality.

For example, if you block all SamsungCloudSolution domains, apps such as YouTube may fail to load because they rely on Samsung’s backend services. Careful blocking is essential.

Samsung QLED 8K TV displaying a scenic sunset over a beach with ice formations on the sand and gentle waves in the background.
Samsung handles much of its ACR in-house

You could start with a minimal blocklist and test your TV to identify which domains are necessary for basic functions. It will help determine which domains can be safely blocked.

If you disable voice recognition or assistant features, you will lose the ability to control your TV with voice commands. You will need to use the remote for searches and navigation.

Disabling assistants can be an acceptable trade-off for users concerned about privacy. Turning off voice recognition prevents the TV from constantly listening for wake words or recording commands.

Blocking certain domains can stop your TV from receiving firmware updates. That can have security implications over time.

If you choose to block update servers entirely, consider periodically unblocking them. Then, check for updates manually or using USB update files if your manufacturer provides them.

Some users leave specific update domains unblocked while blocking known telemetry and ad domains.

Legal and service implications

Disabling tracking features doesn’t violate any user agreements. Manufacturers provide these settings for users who want more privacy.

Your warranty will remain intact, although you may be prompted to review privacy settings after firmware updates.

Blocking domains at the network level is entirely within your rights on your own network. Streaming services will continue to work as long as you maintain access to their required domains.

With the right balance, you can enjoy the benefits of a connected TV while keeping your personal viewing habits private.

Common telemetry and ad server domains

LG and Samsung use a range of domains to manage telemetry, advertising, updates, and app analytics. Blocking these domains can help reduce tracking. You should review them carefully to avoid breaking essential services.

LG smart TV domains

  • lgtvsdp.com: Used by LG’s service platform for ACR data and other service communications.

  • lgsmartad.com: Advertising domain that delivers smart TV ads and tracks impressions.

  • lgappstv.com: Supports LG’s App Store and service platform. Subdomains may report app usage or fetch advertising.

  • lgtvonline.lge.com: LG Electronics’ main smart TV service domain for various online features.

  • alphonso.tv: Alphonso is LG’s ACR partner. When Live Plus is on, the TV sends snapshots here for content recognition.

  • lgtvcommon.com: Used by multiple LG services.

  • ngfts.lge.com: LG’s cloud backend that may appear in network logs.

  • lgad.cjpowercast.com: An advertising server, often seen through content delivery networks like Akamai.

Samsung smart TV domains

  1. samsungcloudsolution.com and samsungcloudsolution.net: Major telemetry and cloud service domains. Blocking these can stop a lot of tracking, but some subdomains are essential for updates.

  2. samsungacr.com: Dedicated ACR logging service for sending screen fingerprints.

  3. internetat.tv: Used for Smart Hub services, with subdomains for logging and single sign-on.

  4. samsungads.com and samsungadhub.com: Advertising platforms that deliver targeted ads and track ad impressions.

  5. samsungrm.net: Likely used for remote management or analytics reporting.

  6. samsungotn.net: Delivers over-the-network firmware updates. Blocking this can prevent your TV from getting important software updates.

  7. samsungqbe.com and samsungosp.com: Related to Samsung’s content services and app platforms.

  8. api.samsungyosemite.com: Supports Samsung’s app store and hub API services.

  9. syncplusconfig.s3.amazonaws.com: Used to fetch configuration files for Samsung’s SyncPlus advertising and content recognition service.

  10. time.samsungcloudsolution.com: Used for time synchronization. Blocking this can cause time-based errors or failures in apps that check for a valid system clock.

Most telemetry traffic uses standard web ports, primarily TCP port 443 for HTTPS. Because this port is also used for streaming apps like Netflix or YouTube, blocking by port isn’t practical.

Domain-based blocking provides much more granular control. When building your blocklist, consider leaving essential update and time services unblocked or periodically unblocking them to allow firmware checks.

Key differences between LG and Samsung tracking

LG and Samsung share many similarities in how they collect data, but there are also important differences in how they implement telemetry and how easy it is to disable.

LG outsources much of its ACR technology to Alphonso, which handles content recognition and advertising. When Live Plus is enabled, LG TVs mainly contact Alphonso domains.

In contrast, Samsung manages ACR in-house and uses multiple Samsung-controlled domains. Samsung’s system is often more complex, involving different services for logging, advertising, and cloud features.

LG labels its tracking feature as Live Plus and hides the toggle under Additional Settings. Samsung calls its system Viewing Information Services and typically places it under a dedicated Privacy menu.

The naming and locations differ, but the underlying functions are very similar.

LG usually requires users to accept many user agreements during setup, which effectively opts them in by default. Users must manually opt out later.

Samsung TVs also typically have tracking enabled by default. In regions with strict privacy laws such as the European Union or United Kingdom, Samsung often ships TVs with ACR disabled until the user opts in.

Disabling tracking isn’t a one-click process on either brand. On LG TVs, tests have shown it can take over 25 separate menu actions to fully opt out of Live Plus and data selling.

Samsung requires users to uncheck multiple settings and sometimes confirm changes through their online privacy dashboard. Neither company makes it particularly easy or obvious, which can discourage users from completing the process.

LG’s policies explicitly acknowledge selling user data by default, especially in the United States. The company provides a Do Not Sell My Personal Information toggle to comply with regulations such as the California Consumer Privacy Act.

Samsung also engages in extensive data sharing. Users often need to submit a web form or use the Samsung account dashboard to request full opt-out from data sales.

Online privacy management

Samsung offers an online Privacy Dashboard linked to your Samsung account. The dashboard makes it easier to review and adjust tracking settings across all Samsung devices.

LG lacks a comparable, user-friendly online dashboard. Instead, LG relies on TV-based settings and a more cumbersome online form for data deletion or opt-out requests.

Both brands use targeted advertising in their TV interfaces. Samsung has been known to insert ads in the Smart Hub menu and even overlay pop-up banners during live TV viewing on some models.

LG typically confines ads to the home menu or content recommendations. Samsung’s larger advertising ecosystem can lead to more extensive cross-device tracking and more personalized ad experiences if tracking remains enabled.

Overall, LG and Samsung rely on detailed tracking to fuel their advertising businesses. Neither brand offers a completely tracking-free experience by default.

Users must actively navigate menus, read policy details, and make deliberate choices to protect their privacy.



This story originally appeared on Appleinsider

Expect CBS News to undergo a major overhaul under Skydance boss David Ellison

NYPost
-
0
Expect CBS News to undergo a major overhaul under Skydance boss David Ellison


If it were, say, just a decade ago, cachet and power would be conferred on Skydance founder and CEO David Ellison, the soon-to-be chief of Paramount and its once-holy grail of TV news, CBS.

Too bad it’s not 10 years ago.

The names Edward R. Murrow, Mike Wallace and Walter Cronkite — the people who built CBS News into the paragon of TV journalism — might come up in casual conversations among old-timers like yours truly, reminiscing about how network news once controlled the ­political and social agenda.

Or maybe they would surface in a journalism class after CBS’s current management last week settled a weird lawsuit, filed by President Trump, in order to keep in the good graces of the White House and get the Skydance-Paramount merger through his FCC regulators.

Skydance Media CEO David Ellison attends the premiere of “Fountain of Youth” at the American Museum of Natural History on Monday, May 19, 2025, in New York. Evan Agostini/Invision/AP

But I can guarantee that the 42-year-old Ellison — the son of mega-billionaire Larry Ellison of Oracle fame, who is a MAGA supporter of the president — isn’t thinking about the CBS News legacy as he prepares to complete his $8 billion combo.

In fact, from what I hear, continuing in the grand tradition of Murrow, Wallace and Cronkite is not at the top of Ellison’s mind because, for one, it ain’t so grand any longer, and two (maybe most important), he knows it’s a lousy business.

It’s not worth the trouble that it generates. We don’t even know if it’s profitable since Paramount doesn’t disclose the news division’s P&L statements. Plus, its product has moved so far to the left that it angers more than half the country.

Full disclosure: I don’t know David Ellison personally but people I trust do, and they tell me he’s substantive, much more than a lucky sperm kid that being Larry’s son confers. His independent studio Skydance has produced such recent blockbusters as “Top Gun: Maverick” and “Mission: Impossible — The Final Reckoning.”

He doesn’t get his news from ­TikTok — far from it.

For the time being, he wants to keep the news division but also move away from its progressive leanings.  (A person close to him says look for investments in “truth-based” news.)  He does appreciate the CBS News legacy that he is about to buy — as long as the numbers are working and he believes they aren’t, I am told.

Sports as crown jewel

And that’s where things could get scary for the news division.

Ellison, I am told, equates CBS with football more than he does with Cronkite. If he’s looking to grow stuff, he and his point man in running the new company, former NBCU chief Jeff Shell, are looking at CBS Sports as the tip of the spear.

Everything else is about to get the mother of all efficiency reviews, my sources say.

Layoffs are likely, as are smaller salaries and squeezed budgets.

In Ellison’s worldview, CBS News’ legacy has cachet but when an anchor like Tony Dokoupil gets upbraided by management — as he did last year — for questioning the work of far left author Ta-Nehisi Coates, and Coates’ rationalization of the Oct. 7 massacre, something needs to change.

It’s been a long road from the time Ellison first bid on Paramount, the fading media empire created by dealmaker Sumner Redstone and left to his daughter, Shari. About two years ago David saw a distressed property he could buy on the cheap, decimated more than most of big media by cord-cutting and the vicissitudes of the business, but with prominent legacy properties and a major studio.

Initially, Shari was a reluctant seller. She soon came to understand that Paramount’s fortunes weren’t getting better and her own fortune was evaporating fast. Ellison has the money (his dad’s and a partner in private equity firm RedBird Capital) to make the new company work, and help her preserve a semblance of her dad’s fortune.

With Shari out of the way, Ellison then had to deal with the incoming Trump administration. The president and his dad are famously pals, Larry being a long-time political supporter. But friendship only goes so far in assuaging Trump’s hatred for many elements of the mainstream media, and CBS is at the top of his hate list.

Conservatives have for years complained about the increasing bias of CBS that went beyond the adversarial nature of Murrow, etc.

Trump was the first to do something about it.

With the deal facing a regulatory review, his Federal Communications Commission opened an investigation into bias at CBS since it operates over public airwaves (as opposed to cable), examining whether its news meets “public interest” guidelines, and throttled the deal.

Trump also personally sued the network over a “60 Minutes” interview with his 2024 Democratic opponent Kamala Harris, saying the new magazine deceptively edited her infamous word-salad answers. OK, maybe it did. But Trump won the election so where are the “damages”?

Regulatory OK coming

Yet, as everyone who has been following my reporting knows, the lawsuit was inextricably tied to getting the deal done and Shari paid.

Now that it has been settled — for $16 million plus the expectation of much more in public service ads for pro-Trump causes — word is the regulatory nod is coming in a few weeks.

When that happens, Shari pockets about $2 billion, which sounds like a lot until you realize she was probably worth more than $40 billion when she inherited the property.

Paramount and CBS will then be Ellison’s problem.

If I were in the news division, I would be afraid, very afraid.



This story originally appeared on NYPost

How America’s ‘experts’ burned their last shreds of credibility

NYPost
-
0
How America’s ‘experts’ burned their last shreds of credibility

The first six months of the Trump administration have not been kind to the experts and the degree-holding classes.

Almost daily during the tariff hysterias of March, we were told by university economists and most of the PhDs employed in investment and finance that the United States was headed toward a downward, if not recessionary, spiral.

Most economists lectured that trade deficits did not really matter.

Or they insisted that the cures to reduce them were worse than the $1.1 trillion deficit itself.

They reminded us that free, rather than fair, trade alone ensured prosperity.

So, the result of Trump’s foolhardy tariff talk would be an impending recession.

America would soon suffer rising joblessness, inflation — or rather a return to stagflation — and likely little, if any, increase in tariff revenue as trade volume declined.

Instead, recent data show increases in tariff revenue.

Personal real income and savings were up.

Job creation exceeded prognoses.

There was no surge in inflation.

The supposedly “crashed” stock market reached historic highs.

Common-sense Americans might not have been surprised: The prior stock market frenzy was predicated on what was, in theory, supposed to have happened rather than what was likely to occur.

After all, if tariffs were so toxic and surpluses irrelevant, why did our affluent European and Asian trading rivals insist on both surpluses and protective tariffs?

Most Americans recalled that the mere threat of tariffs and Trump’s jawboning had led to several trillion dollars in promised foreign investment and at least some plans to relocate manufacturing and assembly back to the United States.

Would that change in direction not lead to business optimism and eventually more jobs?

Would countries purposely running up huge surpluses through asymmetrical trade practices not have far more to lose in negotiations than those suffering gargantuan deficits?

Were Trump’s art-of-the-deal threats of prohibitive tariffs not mere starting points in negotiations that would eventually lead to likely agreements more favorable to the United States than in the past, and moderate rather than punitive tariffs?

Would not the value of the huge American consumer market mean that our trade partners, who were racking up substantial surpluses, would agree they could afford modest tariffs and trim their substantial profit margins rather than suicidally price themselves out of a lucrative market entirely?

Illegal immigration: wrong again

Economists and bureaucrats were equally wrong on the border.

We were told for four years that only “comprehensive immigration reform” would stop illegal immigration.

Most Americans differed: They knew firsthand we had more than enough immigration laws, but had elected as President Joe Biden, who deliberately destroyed borders and had no intention of enforcing existing laws.

Every week, Post columnist Miranda Devine sits down for exclusive and candid conversations with the most influential disruptors in Washington. Subscribe here!

When Trump promised he would ensure that, instead of 10,000 foreign nationals entering illegally each day, within a month no one would, our experts scoffed.

But if the border patrol went from ignoring or even aiding illegal immigrants to stopping them right at the border, why would such a prediction be wrong?

Those favoring a reduction in illegal immigration and deportations also argued that crime would fall, and citizen job opportunities would increase, given an estimated 500,000 aliens with criminal records had entered illegally during the Biden administration, while millions of other illegal aliens were working off the books, for cash, and often at reduced wages.

Indeed, once the border was closed tightly, hundreds of thousands were returned to their countries, and employers began turning to US citizens.

Job opportunities did increase.

Crime did go down.

Legal-only immigration regained its preferred status over illegal entry.

Trump talked of trying voluntary deportation — again to wide ridicule from immigration “experts.”

But why would not a million illegal aliens wish to return home “voluntarily” —  if they were given free flights, a $1,000 bonus and, most importantly, a chance later to reapply for legal entry once they arrived home?

Iran fears came to naught

Many of our national security experts warned that taking out Iran’s nuclear sites was a fool’s errand.

It would supposedly unleash a Middle East tsunami of instability.

It would cause a wave of terrorism.

It would send oil prices skyrocketing.

It would not work, ensuring Iran would soon reply with nuclear weapons.

In fact, oil prices decreased after the American bombing. A twenty-five-minute entrance into Iranian airspace and bombing led to a ceasefire, not a conflagration.

As for a big power standoff, World War III and 30,000 dead, common sense asked why China would wish the Strait of Hormuz to close, given that it imports half of all Middle Eastern oil produced?

Why would Russia — bogged down in Ukraine and suffering nearly a million casualties — wish to mix it up in Iran, after ignominiously fleeing Syria and the fall of its Assad clients?

Russia usually thinks of Russia, period. It does not lament when tensions elsewhere are expected to spike oil prices.

Why would Russia resupply Iran’s destroyed Russian-made anti-aircraft systems, when it was desperate to ward off Ukrainian air attacks on its homeland, and Iran would likely again lose any imported replacements?

As for waves of terror, Hezbollah, Hamas and the Houthis have suffered enormous losses from Israel.

Their leadership has been decapitated; their streams of Iranian money have been mostly truncated.

Why would they rush to Iran’s side to war with Israel, when Iran did not come to their aid when they were battling and losing to the Israelis?

Has a theater-wide war really ever started when one side entered and left enemy territory in 25 minutes, suffering no casualties and likely killing few of the enemy?

As far as the extent of damage to Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, why should we believe our expert pundit class?

Prior to the American and Israeli bombing, many of them warned that Iran was not on the verge of obtaining a nuclear weapon, and therefore, there was little need for any such preemptive action.

Then, post facto, the same experts flipped.

Now they claimed, after the bombing severely damaged most Iranian nuclear sites, that there was an increased threat, given that some enriched uranium (which they had previously discounted) surely had survived and thus marked a new existential danger of an Iranian nuclear bomb.

Was Trump really going to “blow up,” “destroy” or “cripple” NATO, as our diplomatic experts insisted, when his first-term jawboning led from six to twenty-three nations meeting their 2% of GDP defense-spending promises?

Given two ongoing theater-wide wars, given Trump’s past correct predictions about the dangers of the Nord Stream II pipeline, given the vulnerability of an anemic NATO to Russian expansionism, and given that Russian leader Vladimir Putin did not invade during Trump’s first term, unlike the three presidencies before and after his own, why wouldn’t NATO agree to rearm with 5%, and appreciate Trump’s efforts both to bolster the capability of the alliance and the need to end the Ukraine war?

Why the ‘experts’ repeatedly fail

Why were our “scientific” pollsters so wrong in the last three presidential elections, and so at odds with the clearly discernible electoral shifts in the general electorate?

Where were crackpot ideas like defund the police, transgender males in women’s sports and open borders first born and nurtured?

Answer: the university, and higher education in general.

The list of wrongheaded, groupthink, and degreed expertise could be vastly expanded.

We remember the “51 intelligence authorities” who swore the Hunter Biden laptop was “likely” cooked up by the Russians.

Our best and brightest economists signed letters insisting that Biden’s multitrillion-dollar wasteful spending would not result in inflation spikes.

Our global warming professors’ past predictions should have ensured that Americans were now boiling, with tidal waves destroying beachfront communities, including Barack Obama’s two multimillion-dollar estates.

Our legal eagles, after learning nothing from the bogus Mueller investigation and adolescent Steele dossier, but with impressive Ivy League degrees, pontificated for years that Trump by now would be in jail for life, given 91 “walls-are-closing-in” and “bombshell” indictments.

So why are the degreed classes so wrong, and yet so arrogantly never learn anything from their past flawed predictions?

One, our experts usually receive degrees from our supposedly marquee universities.

But as we are now learning from long overdue autopsies of institutionalized campus racial bias, neo-racial segregation, 50%-plus price-gouging surcharges on federal grants, and rabid antisemitism, higher education in America has become anti-Enlightenment.

Universities now wage war against free-thinkers, free speech, free expression and anything that freely questions the deductive groupthink of the diversity/equity/inclusion commissariat, and global warming orthodoxies.

The degreed expert classes emerge from universities whose faculties are 90 to 95% left-wing and whose administrations are overstaffed and terrified of their radical students.

The wonder is not that the experts are incompetent and biased, but that there are a brave few who are not.

Two, Trump drove the degreed class insane to the degree it could no longer, even if it were willing and able (and it was not), offer empirical assessments of his policies.

From his crude speech to his orange skin to his Queens accent to his MAGA base to his remarkable counterintuitive successes and to his disdain for the bicoastal elite, our embarrassing experts would rather be dead wrong and anti-Trump than correct in their assessments — if they in any small way helped Trump.

Three, universities are not just biased, but increasingly mediocre and ever more isolated from working Americans and their commonsense approaches to problem solving.

PhD programs in general are not as rigorous as they were even two decades ago.

Grading, assessments, and evaluations in professional schools must increasingly weigh non-meritocratic criteria, given their admissions and hiring protocols are not based on disinterested evaluation of past work and expertise.

The vast endowments of elite campuses, the huge profit-making foreign enrollments, and the assured, steady stream of hundreds of billions of dollars in federal aid created a sense of fiscal unreality, moral smugness, unearned superiority and ultimately, blindness to just how isolated and disliked the professoriate had become.

But the public has caught on that too many Ivy-League presidents were increasingly a mediocre, if not incompetent, bunch.

Most university economists could not run a small business.

The military academies did not always turn out the best generals and admirals.

The most engaging biographers were not professors.

And plumbers and electricians were usually more skilled in their trades than most journalist graduates were in their reporting.

Add it all up, and the reputation of our predictors, prognosticators and experts has been radically devalued — to the point of utter worthlessness.

Victor Davis Hanson is a distinguished fellow of the Center for American Greatness.



This story originally appeared on NYPost

UK restores diplomatic ties with Syria | World News

SkyNews
-
0
UK restores diplomatic ties with Syria | World News


The UK has re-established diplomatic ties with Syria, David Lammy has said, as he made the first visit to the country by a British minister for 14 years.

The foreign secretary visited Damascus and met with interim president Ahmed al Sharaa, also the leader of the rebel group Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), and foreign minister Asaad al Shaibani.

It marks the latest diplomatic move since Bashar al Assad’s regime was toppled by rebel groups led by HTS in December.

In a statement, Mr Lammy said a “stable Syria is in the UK’s interests” and added: “I’ve seen first-hand the remarkable progress Syrians have made in rebuilding their lives and their country.

“After over a decade of conflict, there is renewed hope for the Syrian people.

“The UK is re-establishing diplomatic relations because it is in our interests to support the new government to deliver their commitment to build a stable, more secure and prosperous future for all Syrians.”

Image:
Foreign Secretary David Lammy with Syria’s interim president Ahmed al Sharaa in Damascus. Pic: X / @DavidLammy

The Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office has also announced a £94.5m support package for urgent humanitarian aid and to support the country’s long-term recovery, after a number of British sanctions against the country were lifted in April.

While HTS is still classified as a proscribed terror group, Sir Keir Starmer said last year that it could be removed from the list.

The Syrian president’s office also said on Saturday that the president and Mr Lammy discussed co-operation, as well as the latest developments in the Middle East.

Read more:
Wildfires break out in Greece, Turkey and Syria
Putin ‘mocking Trump’s peace efforts’, Poland says
Hamas gives ‘positive’ response to ceasefire proposal

Follow The World
Follow The World

Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim every Wednesday

Tap to follow

Since Assad fled Syria in December, a transitional government headed by Mr al Sharaa was announced in March and a number of western countries have restored ties.

In May, US President Donald Trump said the United States would lift long-standing sanctions on Syria and normalise relations during a speech at the US-Saudi investment conference.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

From May: Trump says US will end sanctions for Syria

He said he wanted to give the country “a chance at peace” and added: “There is a new government that will hopefully succeed.

“I say good luck, Syria. Show us something special.”



This story originally appeared on Skynews

As the CDC weighs flu shots without thimerosal, here’s what to know : Shots

NPR
-
0
As the CDC weighs flu shots without thimerosal, here’s what to know : Shots


Though most flu vaccines don’t include the preservative thimerosal, advisers to the CDC have recommended against using it.

Marie D. De Jesus/Houston Chronicle/Hearst Newspapers/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Marie D. De Jesus/Houston Chronicle/Hearst Newspapers/Getty Images

The federal government could soon recommend that people only receive flu shots made without an ingredient called thimerosal.

The preservative has been absent from the majority of flu vaccines for nearly two decades, but was on the agenda of a committee that advises the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on vaccine policy.

The June meeting was the first since earlier in the month, when Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. sacked all 17 previous members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, or ACIP, and installed his own slate of seven.

Thimerosal has been a target of groups that question vaccine safety. That’s despite “a long record of safe and effective use” as a vaccine preservative, according to the Food and Drug Administration.

New committee members Dr. Robert Malone, left, and Dr. Joseph Hibbeln during the first meeting of the CDC's Advisory Committee On Immunization Practices at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta, Ga. , Photographer: Ben Hendren/Bloomberg via Getty Images

In three separate votes, ACIP recommended that children, pregnant women and all adults receive single-dose flu immunizations with vaccines that don’t contain thimerosal. The next step would be a decision by Kennedy or the CDC on the recommendations.

“It’s sort of like they turned this meeting into solving a problem that doesn’t really exist anymore,” says Dr. Jesse Goodman, a former chief scientist at FDA who is now at Georgetown University.

The lone committee member to vote against the recommendations was Dr. Cody Meissner, a professor of pediatrics at Dartmouth College.

“Of all the issues that ACIP needs to focus on, this is not a big issue,” he said. “The risk from influenza is so much greater than the non-existent, as far as we know, risk from thimerosal.”

He added: “There is no scientific evidence that thimerosal has caused a problem.”

But what is thimerosal and what would happen if it is effectively banned from flu shots? Here are four things to know.

  1. It’s a preservative that contains mercury

Thimerosal is a chemical compound that’s about 50% mercury by weight, according to the FDA, and has been used in trace amounts as a preservative in vaccines and medicines since the 1930s.

A group of medical experts that advise the CDC largely determine which vaccines people should receive, what gets covered by insurance and which shots are made available free of charge to millions of low-income children.

The compound is used in vials containing multiple doses of the flu vaccine. Its job is to keep the vial from getting contaminated between patients and potentially getting someone sick, says Dr. Michelle Fiscus, chief clinical officer of the Association of Immunization Managers.

“If you’re constantly going in and out of the vial to draw up a new dose, you run the risk of getting bacteria or fungus into that vial,” says Fiscus. “And we don’t want those vaccines to be contaminated.”

She says although most flu vaccines come in single-dose prefilled syringes today, the multi-use vials are cheaper and take up less space in refrigerators. So for some health centers, they’re more practical.

“When we’re coming into flu season, it’s not uncommon to get all of your flu vaccine upfront at the beginning of the season. And sometimes storage in the refrigerator can be an issue,” Fiscus says.

Still, they’re not common. According to the CDC, 94% of flu shots in the 2024-25 season were thimerosal-free or thimerosal-reduced.

  1. Thimerosal has been used infrequently since 2001

In 1997, the FDA Modernization Act required the government to evaluate mercury in childhood vaccines.

But the heavy metal comes in different forms. Methylmercury is the compound found in seafood that doesn’t break down easily and can be toxic. Ethylmercury, the form in thimerosal, has a different risk profile.

“It didn’t distinguish between that kind of mercury and ethylmercury, which is a form of mercury that’s very quickly managed by the body and eliminated through the kidneys,” says Fiscus. “And ethylmercury is where thimerosal is derived.”

Thimerosal was removed from most childhood vaccines in 2001, even though there was no evidence showing it caused harm to vaccine recipients, Fiscus says.

  1. It has a discredited link to autism 

Concerns that vaccines cause autism originated with a now-retracted 1998 study by Dr. Andrew Wakefield, which focused on the MMR vaccine against measles, mumps and rubella. Wakefield lost his medical license and The BMJ, a prominent medical journal, called it an “elaborate fraud” in a 2011 editorial.

Despite that, speculation about a link between vaccines and autism — once championed by Kennedy himself — continued and expanded to include thimerosal, even though a link to autism has been repeatedly disproven.  

A 2004 report published by the National Academies of Sciences Engineering and Medicine reiterated that thimerosal wasn’t associated with autism. Subsequent studies in 2006, 2007, 2009 and 2010 showed thimerosal was not associated with autism or neurophysiological problems, according to the CDC.

What’s more, Georgetown’s Goodman points out that despite thimerosal’s removal from most vaccines, autism rates have continued to rise over the last 20 years, “which certainly would not be consistent with having anything to do with childhood vaccines.”

  1. Most people won’t notice if thimerosal is no longer recommended in shots

Since most flu shots are administered with single-dose syringes, most people probably won’t notice this fall and winter if the CDC decides to effectively ban thimerosal, Fiscus says.

Still, a thimerosal ban could present some challenges because health centers begin ordering flu vaccines in February for the next flu season. It’s possible manufacturers will have to swap them out.

Sanofi, which makes multidose vials of a vaccine called Fluzone as well as single-dose syringes, says only a “very small number” of its doses contain thimerosal. “We acknowledge the recommendation of the new ACIP. We now await the decision by the CDC on the path forward. We will have sufficient supply of Sanofi flu vaccine to support customer preference for this season.”

Seqirus, the other company that makes multidose vials of flu vaccine containing thimerosal, said in a statement to NPR that they “represent a very small proportion” of its total vaccine supply. “We are committed to supporting our customers in fully transitioning to single-dose syringes and do not expect any impacts to our supply or shipment timing this season.”

The committee’s process could be a sign of things to come

Fiscus, from the Association of Immunization Managers, says the committee’s decision to only recommend single-dose flu shots without thimerosal shows that it is willing to make a decision without following protocol and considering the scientific evidence.

“Is this now going to be the standard?” she says. “That’s very concerning if that’s where this is heading.”

Goodman also worries that these moves will ultimately undermine confidence in vaccines in the United States and abroad.

“One of my real concerns is that although the flu vaccines aren’t perfect, they save lives. When they’re given, they’re still underutilized,” he says. “If there’s more difficulty in accessing them or affording them, at the end of the day, people would get hurt.”



This story originally appeared on NPR

Could this small-cap AIM share be the next big UK growth stock?

Motley Fool
-
0
Could this small-cap AIM share be the next big UK growth stock?


Image source: Getty Images

Growth shares typically boast rapid revenue and earnings increases, often with high price-to-earnings (P/E) ratios reflecting the market’s expectations. They tend to be more volatile but, over time, successful growth stocks can dramatically outperform other stocks. 

As an income investor, I tend to favour large-cap dividend shares to build wealth. However, I’m well aware that growth stocks have their place in a diversified portfolio. As someone who appreciates the importance of diversification, I believe it’s sensible to hold a blend of growth and income stocks to capture the best of both worlds.

Some of the best opportunities come from small-cap companies that plough profits back into expansion. Picking the right ones can deliver even greater long-term returns than dividends — albeit with more bumps along the way.

A promising UK tech stock

Beeks Financial Cloud (LSE: BKS) is a good example of an up-and-coming UK growth stock. It’s a small-cap worth just £147.5m that provides cloud computing infrastructure to the financial services sector.

Recently, it landed a lucrative contract with the Australian Securities Exchange (ASX) to support its new ‘Colocation on Demand’ service. The deal exemplifies the company’s niche appeal in providing low-latency, high-security cloud solutions to trading venues and banks.

Since its 2017 listing, Beeks shares have climbed nearly 400%, despite a 23% dip this year following an explosive 181% rally in 2024. This volatility’s par for the course with small-cap growth stocks, and highlights why patience is often required.

Growth and fundamentals

Revenue surged by 25.7% last year, while diluted earnings shot up by an astonishing 273%. The business also beat earnings forecasts by 20% in its FY2024 results. This level of momentum partly explains its lofty P/E ratio of 66, which may seem excessive, but could prove reasonable if earnings continue to compound.

Growth alone doesn’t always tell the whole story, so it’s important to dig deeper. Encouragingly, Beeks’ balance sheet looks solid, with almost no debt, £40m in equity and £5.1m in free cash flow.

Still, there are risks. As a small-cap, Beeks faces low liquidity, which can amplify share price swings. Any hiccup in contract wins or execution could be punished harshly by the market. Additionally, the broader cloud infrastructure industry is highly competitive, with pricing pressures and rapid technological shifts that could squeeze margins.

My verdict

Stepping back, this is why I favour holding growth stocks like Beeks alongside steadier dividend plays such as insurers or utilities. Growth shares offer the tantalising prospect of notable gains driven by earnings and market share capture. However, they usually pay minimal dividends, trade on higher multiples, and can tumble sharply if results disappoint or interest rates rise.

Meanwhile, income stocks tend to be more mature businesses with stable cash flows, offering consistent payouts and less dramatic share price moves. Balancing both styles allows investors to benefit from the explosive potential of growth stocks while cushioning portfolios with the reliable income of established blue-chips.

For me, Beeks Financial Cloud is a UK growth stock worth considering – so long as the risks are accounted for and the position is allocated accordingly. With a solid balance sheet and clear niche, it could be a long-term winner. But as always, diversification remains crucial to navigating the ups and downs of investing.



This story originally appeared on Motley Fool

Erika Jayne and Tom Girardi’s Divorce Case May Be Dismissed

RealityTea
-
0
Erika Jayne and Tom Girardi’s Divorce Case May Be Dismissed


Divorces are complicated. When the man you’re divorcing is a geriatric fraudster suffering from dementia and facing 7 years in prison for embezzling millions, things get really messy. That’s the unfortunate reality for Real Housewives of Beverly Hills star Erika Jayne, whose divorce from Tom Girardi remains in limbo.

Ahead of Tom’s fraud trial, some legal experts predicted the pair would remain married until death do them part. New legal documents reviewed by attorney Ronald Richards show that the courts are trying to push things forward.

Will RHOBH’s Erika Jayne finally divorce Tom Girardi?

“The family law judge has finally had enough and told her either get divorced or dismiss your case,” Ronald wrote, along with an order from the Superior Court of California.

The court order sets a case for “Order to Show Cause re: Failure to File Dismissal/Judgement on August 1, 2025.” Essentially, that means the courts are trying to move the process along. Their case can’t just sit on hold forever.

Previously, one of Erika’s lawyers, Jim Wilkes, explained that the divorce remained stagnant because of Tom’s inability to defend himself. He also pointed out that there’s nothing to fight for in the divorce.

“ It’s so easy to say that Erika did this or Erika did that. Erika was left with nothing in her name. Tom has nothing; what he had they found and they liquidated,” Jim explained.

Meanwhile, Ronald claimed that the lack of progress in the divorce could be for more strategic reasons. He said it could be a ploy to show “contrived outrage” about the fraud her husband committed. It’s a reminder that, despite Erika having a comeback in the entertainment industry, there are plenty of people who believe she was aware of the fraud.

For next steps in the divorce, we’ll have to wait until August 5. At that point, Erika might have to make a decision. She’ll have to move forward with trying to divorce her felonious husband, or sit back and wait for fate to handle it for her.

The Real Housewives of Beverly Hills is streaming on Peacock and Hayu in the UK and Ireland.

TELL US – DO YOU THINK ERIKA WILL PROCEED WITH DIVORCING TOM? WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON THE LACK OF PROGRESS IN THE PROCEEDINGS?




This story originally appeared on Realitytea

4 key trends dominating office design and planning: ABM CEO Scott Salmirs

Fortune
-
0
4 key trends dominating office design and planning: ABM CEO Scott Salmirs

Scott Salmirs has a unique view of the RTO tug of war between workers and bosses that has taken over American offices over the past few years. For 22 years, Salmirs has served as the CEO of ABM Industries, a company that maintains work spaces for more than half the companies on the Fortune 500. 

While it seems like the RTO battles have reached a plateau, with companies settling into a hybrid detente, Salmirs says the fight isn’t over; many CEOs are secretly hoping to add on another day to two of in-person work to employee schedules. That’s particularly true now that the labor market has shifted power away from workers, and back into the hands of bosses. 

“This return to office, it’s still happening, absolutely. I think with this economic climate, we’ll really see what companies are thinking,” Salmirs tells Fortune. 

But there are a few key changes that businesses are making to their offices as they try to lure workers back, says Salmirs. Many large companies are cutting headcount and streamline operations; as a result, they’re trading in more outdated buildings for smaller, higher-quality spaces in centralized locations as a way to attract workers. They’re also ditching their open-plan offices and adding more private spaces to make the space “more hospitable,” he says. And of course, bosses are making sure that the pantries are fully stocked with snacks.  

“They’re looking closely at pantries and what they’re serving, including the coffee, the snacks, all that good stuff,” he says. “It really matters to employees.”

Fortune sat down with Salmirs to discuss the future of office space and what workers can expect going forward.

Fortune: What kinds of trends are you seeing when it comes to RTO? 

Salmirs: There’s been this commercial real estate crisis, if you will, about people not coming to work, and what’s going to happen with office buildings. Predominantly Class A buildings have been really resilient. As people are coming back, the benchmark now is a solid three to four days per week. Over the last 18 months, it’s been more and more. 

But the little-known fact about this more difficult time that we’re having right now economically, is that it gives management teams the ability, especially with the hiring market not being great, to ask workers to come back into the office more. Four years ago there was no way that a management team could tell people they’re coming back. they’ll just go get another job. Not so much now.

What does the future of RTO look like? 

I think with this economic climate, we’ll really see what companies are thinking. It’ll be an incremental “one more day.” So if you’re at three, it’s going to be four, if you’re at four it could be five. This will be, in my mind, over the next six to nine months.

We were promised an office apocalypse a few years ago, when people were saying that corporate real estate would be empty. What are you seeing in the market right now?

We classify real estate into three buckets, class A, class B and class C. Class A is the good buildings, the ones with really good amenities, and those are doing great. I mean the leasing rates are off the hook, the occupancy rate is like 95%. It’s the B and C class spaces that are struggling a lot more. 

Say you have 20,000 square feet, and are in a class B building, paying $50 a square foot for rent. Now with not as many people coming in, you can pay $100 a foot for a 10,000 square foot building with top amenities in the best location because they know that if you want to get your people back to the office, you’ve got to give them good space. 

What are you seeing as the top priorities for companies right now when it comes to office space? 

I think it’s how they organize the space, because now that more people are coming back, there’s usually a shortage of private spaces. People used to want this big open plan where everyone was sitting at long desks. To get people back, companies are realizing that they have to give people some more privacy. So we’re seeing them convert open space into conference rooms, or areas with more secluded space.

Also, they’re looking closely at pantries and what they’re serving, including the coffee, the snacks, all that good stuff. It really matters to employees.

Since COVID, companies are also prioritizing clean spaces. We’re seeing a lot of [companies] making sure that they could say to employees that their workspace is healthy and clean. Some clients are moving some of our cleaning people on to the day staff, so they’re more visible, so people can see them cleaning and walking around the office.  

The most important thing is to really pay attention to people’s work habits. Are they working in groups collaboratively? Is it solo work? Are they on the phone a lot? Are they on video a lot? What we always say to our clients is that you really have to start with understanding the culture of the organization and the different use cases.



This story originally appeared on Fortune

1...353637...1,806Page 36 of 1,806

EDITOR PICKS

POPULAR POSTS

POPULAR CATEGORY

ABOUT US

Pagegoo.com serves as a news aggregator website. We provide the top trending news online. Our website exercises third-party content for information purpose only and are not liable for any web content related to or denoted to from these pages. All news, images & videos associated to content are hosted on third-party sites or users. We also often used third-party links.

Contact us: Info@Pagegoo.com

FOLLOW US

© 2025 Pagegoo.com. All Rights Reserved.