sales

Brooke Knowles knew she wanted the black puppy posted on the Facebook page of a self-described home breeder of Coton De Tulears. He looked like he’d have an outgoing personality.

She put down a nonrefundable deposit and drove to Temecula to pick him up. She paid about $2,000 and named him Ted.

Before she even left for home, Ted vomited and had diarrhea on the grass outside. He was lethargic, his chest soaked with drool.

A closer look later at the paperwork provided by the seller revealed something else unsettling: Ted wasn’t bred in California. He had been imported from a kennel in Utah.

“I thought that I was getting a dog that had been bred at his home,” Knowles said in a series of interviews with The Times. “This poor puppy, he was so traumatized.”

On Thursday, Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a series of animal welfare bills into state law that will restrict puppy sales and strengthen protections for buyers like Knowles. The bills were introduced as a result of a Times investigation last year that detailed how designer dogs are trucked into California from out-of-state commercial breeders and resold by people saying they were small, local operators.

The three bills Newsom signed into law are:

• Assembly Bill 519 by Assemblymember Marc Berman (D-Menlo Park) bans online marketplaces where dogs are sold by brokers, which is defined as any person or business that sells or transports a dog bred by someone else for profit. That includes major national pet retailers, including PuppySpot, as well as California-based operations that resell puppies bred elsewhere. The law applies to dogs, cats and rabbits under a year old. It does not apply to police dogs or service animals and provides an exemption for shelters, rescues and 4H clubs.
• AB 506 by Assemblymember Steve Bennett (D-Ventura) voids pet purchase contracts involving California buyers if the seller requires a nonrefundable deposit. The law also makes the pet seller liable if they fail to disclose breeder details and medical history.
• Senate Bill 312 by state Sen. Tom Umberg (D-Orange) requires pet sellers to share health certificates with the California Department of Food and Agriculture, which would then make them available without redactions to the public.

The bills were supported by California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta, who said they are “an important step in shutting down deceptive sales tactics of these puppy brokers.”

“Sunlight is the best disinfectant, and it’s time to shine a light on puppy mills,” Newsom said in a statement. “Greater transparency in pet purchases will bring to light abusive practices that take advantage of pets in order to exploit hopeful pet owners. Today’s legislation protects both animals and Californians by addressing fraudulent pet breeding and selling practices.”

Lawmakers said new laws close loopholes that emerged after California in 2019 banned the sale of commercially bred dogs, cats and rabbits in pet stores. That retail ban did not apply to online sales, which surged during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The Times’ investigation found that in the years after the retail ban took effect, a network of resellers stepped in to replace pet stores, often posing as local breeders and masking where puppies were actually bred. Some buyers later discovered they had purchased dogs from sellers using fake names or disposable phone numbers after their pets became ill or died.

Times reporters analyzed the movement of more than 71,000 dogs coming into California since 2019 by requesting certificates of veterinary inspection, which are issued by a federally accredited veterinarian listing where the animal came from, its destination and verification that it is healthy enough to travel.

The California Department of Food and Agriculture has long received those health certificates from other states by mistake — the records are supposed to go to county public health departments — and, in recent years, made it a practice to immediately destroy them. Dog importers who were supposed to submit the records to counties largely failed to do so.

The Times obtained the records by requesting the documents from every other state. In the days following the story’s publication, lawmakers and animal advocates called on the state’s Food and Agriculture Department to stop “destroying evidence” of the deceptive practices by purging the records. The department began preserving the records thereafter, but released them with significant redactions.

In one instance, the state redacted the name and address of a person with numerous shipments of puppies from Ohio. The Times obtained the same travel certificates without redactions from the Ohio Department of Agriculture. The address listed on the records is for a Home Depot in Milpitas. The phone number on some of those travel certificates belongs to Randy Kadee Vo.

The Times’ reporting last year found Vo’s name and various Bay Area addresses, including a warehouse, were listed as the destination for 1,900 dogs imported into California since 2019. At the time, he disputed that number but declined to say how many he had imported. People who bought puppies from Vo told The Times that they were told they were buying puppies that were locally bred.

Shortly after The Times questioned Vo about the imports, a different name, along with the Home Depot address, began appearing on health certificates with his phone number. Vo did not respond to a request for comment.

The Times identified hundreds of records detailing other sellers with names that appear to be fake or addresses that go to unaffiliated businesses, shopping centers and commercial mailbox offices.

While the new laws were championed by animal welfare groups, some have questioned how adequately the laws will be enforced by state officials — particularly when it comes to policing out-of-state facilities selling online and then shipping puppies directly California buyers.

“Enforcement will now fall on nonprofits like ours to monitor and report issues that we see, in hopes that the agencies act,” said Mindi Callison, head of the Iowa-based anti-puppy-mill nonprofit Bailing Out Benji.

Callison said lawmakers should next turn their focus to requiring California breeders to be licensed, similar to standards in Iowa, Missouri and other states. California does not have a statewide licensing program, instead relying on local jurisdictions for oversight. While some cities and counties require breeders to be licensed and inspected, little information is available online to help consumers vet them.

“There is a higher risk of dogs being kept in inhumane conditions in states where there are no regulations to follow and have no eyes on them,” Callison said.

Opponents of the legislation argued that California’s previous attempts to cut off the supply from puppy mills by banning pet store sales only fueled an unregulated marketplace — and warned banning brokers will do the same.

“Eliminating these brokers will not reduce demand for pets; it will simply force more Californians into unregulated, riskier marketplaces,” said Alyssa Miller-Hurley of the Pet Advocacy Network, which represents breeders, retailers and pet owners, in a letter opposing the legislation.

For consumers like Knowles, the lack of transparency when buying her puppy Ted has been long-lasting and costly. More than a year after Knowles took the puppy to her home in Long Beach, he developed stomach issues that got so bad he wound up in the emergency room. She also had doubts that her puppy was a purebred Coton De Tulear as advertised.

She said a pet DNA test confirmed those suspicions and connected her with other people whose dogs were purchased from the same seller. The test results said one of the dogs share the same amount of DNA as people do with their full siblings – and that they’re mutts.

“We call him the most expensive rescue dog we’ve ever had,” Knowles said of Ted, who is now on a restrictive diet. “Our group started to call our dogs ‘Fauxtons,’ since they weren’t Cotons.”

Knowles sued the seller, Tweed Fox of Carlsbad Cotons, over the test results showing Ted was not a purebred puppy, but said she lost.

“Really the core issue is … masquerading to be something you’re not,” she said.

Fox told The Times that he began sourcing from a Utah company during the Covid pandemic, when the demand for puppies spiked beyond the number he was able to breed at home.

He thought the Utah puppies were purebreds because they came with the proper registration paperwork, but said that “turned out not to be the case.” He said he did not mislead customers because he was in fact a home breeder, and only advertised the out-of-state puppies as Coton de Tulears, “which is what I thought I was purchasing.”

“You only can breed so many in a home,” he said. “I thought I was providing equal quality puppies at the time, and apparently, I wasn’t at that point, except for my own home bred.”

Fox said he has since moved to Dallas, where he breeds and sells Cotons. While the California broker law won’t impact him now that he’s left the state, he said he refuses to buy anyone else’s puppies for resale.

“I only sell my own,” he said. “I’m not in the business to cheat people out of anything.”

In this podcast, Motley Fool contributors Travis Hoium and Lou Whiteman and analyst Emily Flippen discuss:

• Apple‘s headset strategy.
• Tesla‘s delivery numbers.
• Earnings trends to watch.

To catch full episodes of all The Motley Fool’s free podcasts, check out our podcast center. When you’re ready to invest, check out this top 10 list of stocks to buy.

A full transcript is below.

This podcast was recorded on Oct. 03, 2025.

Travis Hoium: Are smart glasses the future of technology hardware? Motley Fool Money starts down.

Welcome to Motley Fool Money. I’m Travis Hoium joined by Lou Whiteman and Emily Flippen. We’re going to jump right in today, and the big topic I thought for this week was Apple at least reportedly pulling back on their lighter Vision Pro headset. They’re going to be moving in the same direction, it looks like as Meta has with their Ray Ban glasses, this AR technology. Emily, what are your thoughts on this whole space and where Meta and Apple fits into it?

Emily Flippen: I’m incredibly disappointed by Apple here. Look, Apple invested a lot of time and resources into convincing all of us that the future was in these lightweight, daily wearable glasses that were the visionary of spatial computing. Then a year later, just backtracks and it’s not clear to me if this is, a desperate pull for them to say, no, me, too, when they see the innovation that Meta is doing and literally the metaverse, or if this is just throwing stuff at the wall to see what sticks. But in my opinion, I just am so incredibly bearish. Pivoting toward heavy duty VR glasses when it seems like we have years and years of evidence coming out of Meta that consumers just do not want this.

Travis Hoium: It seems like a space where they’re throwing stuff at the wall, and we don’t know exactly what’s going to stick. But at least we know these lightweight things are going to stick a little bit. That seems like a little bit of the move in the right direction, Lou, but it’s still it seems like this is a money losing proposition for the foreseeable future.

Lou Whiteman: We should say that this is one report, and we don’t know what’s going on, really. Apple has $65 billion in cash. I feel like they can do both. But look, the cynical take here is, I can’t figure out to spin is Meta was right or Apple is really that desperate. Because in a way, this seems like it’s validation of everything Meta is doing. In a way, it’s Apple are they really just they need something? I agree with Emily. I see more potential in the Vision Pro. There’s also more of a chance an outright flop. I don’t get the obsession with glasses right now, and I’m worried to see everyone pushing in that direction.

Travis Hoium: One of the things that was interesting when the Vision Pro came out is look, I’ve been in the VR space for almost a decade now, and what was unique about it is it was almost like an AR pair of glasses while actually being VR. The pass through was better than we’ve ever had in any other device. It seemed like they were, even at that time, moving toward this AI future but the technology wasn’t quite there yet. They hadn’t miniaturized things enough to get to even where Meta and Ray Ban are with their current glasses. Maybe we were headed this direction all along, and like Lou said, they’re walking and chewing gum at the same time. They’re probably doing both of these things, but they’re maybe now saying, hey, look, the Vision Pro has been a flop, and people are at least a little excited about these sunglasses or these glasses from Meta. Emily, is that maybe the right way to think about it? They’re seeing what’s gonna work and what’s not, and they’re seeing Meta’s success. They have always been a follower. They’re never usually the first company to release a device, so maybe that’s the right strategy.

Emily Flippen: Yes, that’s a really generous interpretation, I think, Travis. I think this is an issue. Really, I think it’s an issue of bloat. I say that as somebody who is a fan of Apple. Ultimately, Apple is still a hardware business when push comes to shove. They have to be on the bleeding edge of whatever the new exciting hardware accessory is, even if that ends up getting commoditized, because otherwise, they could lose their position as one of the largest companies in the world. I understand the desperate need to be there. If Meta is onto something, Apple needs to be right there too. But here’s the problem when you have so many extra billions of dollars in cash flow, is that it really does allow you to lack discipline where you choose to invest your CAPEX. I wish there was more focus coming out of the Apple Management team. Again, to your point, we don’t exactly know how many resources are being put behind this larger version of these AR VR glasses. But I really do think that it’s disappointing to see them spread out their attention when the Vision Pro hasn’t lived up to its potential yet, and there is potential there. They might be a little early, but they invested more time and resources into convincing consumers about why this would be an addition to their everyday life. That can actually be onto something great. My concern is that when you do two things poorly, you do nothing well. I wish they would just focus on doing one thing well.

Lou Whiteman: Here’s a question, and I don’t know if this will end up being bullish or bearish, but, the Apple value proposition from the start was always, it just works. In a way that was tech for the normies. I’m a normie, so I appreciate that. I am yet to be convinced that the normies want these glasses, that there really is the market that they think there is. To me, I don’t see it doing anything right now that you can’t do on your phone, so it’s an accessory to the phone, not a replacement. The watch is, too. The watch has done pretty well, but the watch is half the price of these. Do we want.

Travis Hoium: The watch is also nowhere near the market share that the iPhone.

Lou Whiteman: It is a niche product. Do we want an accessory that costs as much as the phone? I doubt it. The Glass Half Full is, Apple really sees a chance to do what they did with the iPhone relative to the Palm Pre and all those. They really have come up with something that is that next step. Glass Half Empty is that this is going to just be like the watch and be just another product out there that can’t move the needle. When in theory, if they get the Vision Pro right over time, that could be a whole new product category. This is, again, what are we swinging for hits or swinging for home runs? Because this feels like going for a base hit and giving up on the home run swing.

Travis Hoium: I’ll start with you, Lou, do you think the combination of artificial intelligence and these different form factors. Usually the technology revolutions, the disruption that happens, it comes with a new form factor. The mainframe, the PC, the smartphone, brought about all new winners, new business models. We’ve been talking about new form factors in AI for quite a while. The pendant didn’t seem to stick. It seems like glasses has a chance. But then you run into this strange, I don’t know if it’s an uncanny valley where I can see some real value in, look, I can see in our recording, I can see your names. Sometimes I look down there when I’m reading the outro. I don’t know why. I just do it. I’m meeting new parents as my kids go to school. I know I’ve met you before. I know you said your name, but I can’t remember. If it just popped up on my glasses, that’d be great. On the flip side of that, if we’re constantly recording everything all the time, that seems like a pretty dystopian vision of the future. It seems like we do need that killer app and we’re just not there yet, and nobody’s quite figured that out. Is that a fair critique of this next gen issue? It’s almost like we’re in the Apple Newton phase of the industry. We’re 10 years too early.

Lou Whiteman: Let me give you a more subtle critique. Because I’m not going to go dystopian, although I see that, I see the fear. But look, we talk about what a distraction the phone is when you’re driving, when you’re walking down the street, whatever. Maybe, yes. If it just popped up Emily’s name, if I couldn’t think of it, that would be a help. But 90% of the things, be it directions, watching Netflix for gosh sakes while you’re driving or something. All of these things that seem to be obvious use cases, that just doesn’t seem like a good idea for me. Again, it does feel like that, yes, it’s a neat accessory onto the phone, but largely, the reason this is the next big thing is, I think, because no one has any better ideas, not because it is a great idea.

Emily Flippen: That’s an interesting way to put it. I’ll just quickly tap off by saying, I wish Apple was OK with being second, in some cases. I think when you look at the success of the smartphone, Apple wasn’t the first company to come out with a smartphone, but they waited for the proof and the pudding there with Blackberry before they entered the market and destroyed it. The same is true for smart watches. They waited for Garmin and others to come out, fit bit to show the demand for watches, and then said, let’s take this market that already exists, and let’s crush it. The market doesn’t exist right now for these glasses. I think that’s part of the problem that Apple’s running up against.

Travis Hoium: When we come back, we are going to get to Tesla’s phenomenal delivery numbers for the third quarter of 2025 and see what the future looks like because this may be a peak for a while. You’re listening to Motley Fool Money.

One of the other big pieces of news for the week was Tesla had a phenomenal quarter. Deliveries were 497,099 vehicles. That was a 7.4% increase from a year ago. The problem is, the $7,500 tax credit ended at the end of the third quarter. Emily, is this going to be as good as it gets for Tesla, at least for the foreseeable future?

Emily Flippen: I think it’s a fair statement. I do think two things can be true at once, which is, that this was a great delivery month they put up, but it was also this deadline sprint that you mentioned for people to place orders before the tax credit expired. If I had to estimate, I would imagine that we’re probably looking at a softer fourth quarter here, despite how strong the third quarter was in terms of deliveries, but at the same time, I’m still really bullish on the entire EV sector, especially in the United States, but across the world. I think the rumors of its death, so to speak, have been greatly exaggerated. There’s a lot of people out there, a lot of investors who think that without government incentives, demand for electric vehicles just won’t be there. It’s an interesting argument, and it’s one that I think we’re going to get some more evidence toward or against as we see these tax credits expire, but big picture, we’ve seen higher interest rates, and that softens demand for more expensive cars. EVs are still on average, more expensive than more traditional vehicles, and you still need to have the installation and charging options. A lot of people choose to finance those if they have them installed on their house. Of course, with higher interest rates, less people being willing to finance at higher rates. There’s a lot of factors that are going against EV adoption right now that are unlikely to persist over the long term. That’s the thing where I’m like, it’s great to see a Sean Carter from Tesla. I’m not expecting that to persist for Tesla or any other EV maker. I think Ford‘s CEO, which is commenting earlier this week that he expects EV market share to drop by half for this foreseeable future. Crazy numbers. But when I zoom out 10 years, I’m very not worried about electric vehicles here.

Lou Whiteman: Here’s the interesting thing to me. These are the times autos are very cyclical. These are the times when historically, the big giants of the industry, based at Detroit, through most of the industry, they’ve used their balance sheet to muscle out competitors. When pricing becomes a problem, when affordability becomes a problem, and Ford today still has that great captive Auto Finance unit. GM is rebuilding theirs, where they really can offer you a deal you can’t refuse. Someone else who’s smaller, in this case, a Rivian, back in the day with others just can’t afford to. On paper, Tesla is better positioned to do that than even the Detroit companies. They have a great balance sheet. However, Tesla, unlike all of these companies, also has a huge long list of things other than consumer finance they want to put their money to. I feel like to some extent, Tesla’s near term destiny is in their own hands. If they want to minimize the blow of the tax credit, I think they have the wherewithal to do that. I don’t know if for long term investors, that would be the best use of their capital, though, but I mean, I do think it’s an interesting moment. In terms of the big picture for EVs, for me, right now, it makes sense that hybrids are where it’s at because I think hybrids offer you a better deal, and I’m biased because I have a hybrid. Maybe I’m saying that. To me, the future of EVs is not tied to tax credits. It’s not tied to what Elon Musk thinks when he wakes up in the morning. You tell me how and when that Model 2 hits the streets. You tell me if that Model 2 really is a $25,000 car. I will tell you what I think the near term future for Tesla EVs are. Similarly, all of these companies, Ford has a pickup truck. That’s a very similar value proposition. Tell me whether or not those actually can be made at profit anytime soon. That, I think, is going to be the answer to the question of how quickly and how strongly we see EVs take off from here, not a $7,000 tax credit.

Emily Flippen: Why are we so focused on Tesla and Ford when we actually already have evidence that is the case. BYD out of China has been making profitable, low cost electric vehicles that are getting worldwide adoption. We don’t see them a lot here in the United States because of our own tariff regime and lack of importing there. But I do think that we have evidence that this battery company, originally a battery company now a big car company can do it. There’s no reason to believe that others can’t eventually get there, as well. But that evidence exists. It’s just a matter of, to your point, Lou, how quickly?

Travis Hoium: Absolutely. Speaking of companies that are growing in EVs, I think this one’s fascinating is General Motors, do you know how much their EV growth was year over year? Gulf the third quarter, 105% to 144,668 vehicles. The Equinox EV, which is their entry level, $35,100. I believe that’s less than you can get a Tesla for today. It does seem the dynamics have shifted quite a bit. What will be fascinating, they’re still focusing on big trucks and SUVs. That’s where the money is made, even though Tesla used to be high margin. Their margins are now lower than the traditional automakers today. It’s partly because they’re not making these expensive trucks and SUVs, which are selling like crazy today. This is going to be fascinating because it does seem like one thing that’s going to be consistent is the market will probably not be growing as much as it would have had that $7,500 tax credit remained, and therefore, it’s going to be more competitive because there is more supply coming into the mat.

Lou Whiteman: The one caveat there, I would say on just looking at GM numbers is, I think the dealer model provides more incentive to try and get move metal before the tax credit disappears because as soon as it’s on location, that’s the dealers problem, not the automakers problem. The dealers don’t have that balance sheet to put to work. They wanted to move that metal. But we’ll see if it holds up, that’s great for GM.

Travis Hoium: I want to get your thoughts on we have the end of the third quarter just happened this week on Tuesday. That means the earning season is going to be coming very soon. Emily, what are you looking at for this earning season as it starts next week and the week after?

Emily Flippen: I’m actually looking for companies that are very obviously sandbagging with guidance. I say that, I think we all expect for guidance this quarter to come in weaker. It was that case last quarter. We are living in a really uncertain environment now, so it makes sense that not only are companies expecting their profit margins to be squeezed, especially with weak consumer spending, they don’t know what’s going to happen with inflation or tariffs, whatever the overhang may be. I always love it when a company’s management team is always a bit more pessimistic than I’m, and sometimes I can be a red flag, but sometimes I can also be a buying opportunity. For instance, I think about Dutch Bros, who when you look back at their business at this point last year, kept guiding for low to mid single digit same store sales growth, so much weaker than what they were putting up because management was just that uncertain about the cannibalization that’d be happening with their business or consumer spending. Quarter after quarter, they just kept hitting it out of the park they only recently raised guidance. But that mismatch, in my opinion, between a really conservative management team and a really strong business, where I can see their path to out performance, even more than maybe management can, can be appealing because if you see shares fall really dramatically based on weak guidance that you think is a hurdle that can be easily passed, it can be a buying opportunity.

Lou Whiteman: It’s so funny you say that because I was thinking the other day. I was like, I’m more excited about the opportunity to go shopping this earning season than normal. I do think that that’s yeah, we’re ripe for it, I think. All the containers are there. As far as what I’m looking for, I’ll go big picture. I’m focused on margins just across the board. I’m really curious how much the macro is eating into margins. We know there’s tariffs out there. We know that the consumer is struggling to get a feel for how much that companies are eating it. I think I’m more interested in looking at margin change over time than I’m even, revenue growth or earnings growth. I want to know not what happened in the last three months. I want to know what to expect the next three, six months to come, and I think that is at least a little bit of a window into what’s going on out there.

Travis Hoium: Lou, do you think tariffs is going to be a bigger topic of discussion or less than it was over the last two quarters? I’ll say maybe the second quarter, first quarter was a lot of, we have no idea what’s going on. Second quarter, companies have gotten their heads around it. Third quarter, now we’re really in it. Are we going to hear a lot about it, or is it going to just be in the background?

Lou Whiteman: I think we’re going to hear a ton about it, but I think it’s going to be in the guidance side because we’re in the holiday quarter now, and I think that that’s going to be front of mind. Travis, I’ve used this with you before the boiling frog analogy that you, tariffs are not a light switch. It’s just over time, suddenly what happened? The holiday season seems like if I was a CEO, that would be front of mind for me at the holiday season. I think you’ll be hearing about it a lot in the guidance.

Travis Hoium: It is going to be fascinating to see what companies can who has pricing power. Who doesn’t? Who has to, like you said, eat those tariffs and who’s able to pass them on to customers and where they’re impacting a lot to learn over the next few weeks. When we come back, I’m going to have Emily and Lou take an over or under position on a bunch of predictions for the rest of the year you’re listening to Motley Fool Money.

Welcome back to Motley Fool Money. Today, we’re going to play a little game called over-under. I’m going to give a prediction about something that’s going to happen in the economy or the market, and Emily and Lou are going to guess whether they think there’s going to be an over or under. Let’s start with the topic that we discussed earlier, Metas Glasses. They sold about 1 million pairs of these smart glasses in 2024. That’s a pretty big number. My question is, are they going to sell over or under 5 million units in 2028? Emily, I’m going to have you go first over or under 5 million.

Emily Flippen: I feel this will come as no surprise for anybody who listen to the first half of the show, but I have to go under here. I just don’t see the use cases for it on Meta side. When you look at Metas financials, this business spent more on CapEx in the last 12 months than the business generated in operating income or an operating cash flow in all of 2022. They are just throwing money at the wall, and it’s amazing to me how much money they’re investing into various things, but nothing is sticking with consumers. Ultimately, you can’t force a consumer to come out and buy a new product if they don’t see a use case for it. It’s amazing to me that they even sold 1 million units in 2024. That is peak hype, in my opinion. Unless something really sticks here for Meta, I expect that number to actually fall over the course of the next.

Lou Whiteman: Wow. I’m going to use Emily’s words and come to the conclusion that over. Because, yes, Zuck needs this, and Zuck is more than willing to spend money, and Zuck is still hurting about.

Travis Hoium: You may just give them away.

Lou Whiteman: I wasn’t going to go quite that far, but since you got there, I don’t think that profitability, I’m glad we’re talking volume. We’re talking units, not profitability or success here.

Travis Hoium: But, I don’t think we’re under the delusion that these are going to be profitable in the next three years.

Lou Whiteman: My guess is, he’s going to move these darn things. Come high or high water.

Travis Hoium: This will be interesting because I do think the adoption of the VR space really hit a wall. But glasses are different. Glasses are a little bit more passive. They’re not quite lower cost, which is, I think, interesting $800 for these new display glasses. But there’s definitely a market for it. The other thing to think about, too, is if you bought one in 2024, when are you going to want to update that? If there’s not a lot of new features, that could be a headwind, too. We’ll be fascinated to see how successful or unsuccessful Meta is moving into more of the glasses space. Let’s go to the overall economy, and I want to get your thoughts on mortgage rates. The reason that I think this is important is housing is a huge driver of the economy. It’s huge portion of our money is spent on rents, on mortgages. It provides tons of jobs. Higher mortgage rates, at least than we’ve had over the past decade, has been a real headwind. Fed funds rate is coming down. The rate that the Fed controls is coming down. The problem is, the longer term rates that drive mortgage rates and the borrowing rates for companies is not coming down at the same rate. Right now, we have a mortgage rate average of about 6.3% a year from now, do you think those mortgage rates are going to be over or under 6%? Down just slightly from where we are today, Lou how you go?

Lou Whiteman: Getting a real time lesson in the limits to the Fed’s power. Wait, there’s just so much going on other than the Fed that’s driving these long term rates. I’m going under, and I’m not sure it’s a good thing. I’m all over the place. What’s going to happen in the economy in the next year? But I’m increasingly worried, I think, and I think that there’s going to need to be more and more aggressiveness. I think housing is a natural place for both politics and policy to get involved here. I don’t want to go too much under there, but I have a feeling we’ll be eventually pushed downward one way or the other.

Emily Flippen: Might be a hot take here, but we’re sitting at about 6% right now, and I think the general expectation is that the market can handle the housing market can handle these high rates for very much longer, and that the Fed is going to continue to cut rates, which eventually, hopefully, even though there is obviously a disconnect here between the Fed is doing and what lenders are doing, that will eventually come down, but I have to say over. I think mortgage rates are going to be over 6% one year from now. The reason is is because I don’t actually think we’re going to get as many rate cuts as the market is expecting. I think that tepidness is going to pull over into the market for mortgages. The reason I say that is because a lot of the inflation data, despite the fact that it has cooled off, and it’s down, although obviously not to Fed’s target rates, I expect that we probably heat up as a lot more of these price increases from tariffs are passed along to consumers in the back half of this year, a lot of that evidence has shown that companies so far have eaten the price of these tariffs, and that is eventually that dam is eventually going to break. In my opinion, that’s unfortunately going to impact interest rates.

Travis Hoium: I do think it is interesting that we have not really seen we’ve been talking about this on these shows for months. We have not really seen the impact of tariffs yet. The inventory cycle for a lot of these companies is not a month or two. If tariffs went in place, April 2, it’s not like you’re going to see that in stores, even in June. They were planning in April now for the holidays. This is when we’re going to see those price increases. I have kids. We’re buying stuff for them all the time, and you’re seeing those prices go up. I’m interested to see if that impacts consumers. Emily, is your point just that the market is going to say, you know what? Sure, these rates are going to come down short term, but long term, they’re going to have to go back up to fight inflation.

Emily Flippen: I think it’s going to be a combination between a weaker labor market and inflation here that’s going to put the Fed in a bit of an odd position. Ultimately, I think, whenever you see broader economic concerns in combination with the dynamics that we’re seeing in terms of the housing market today, I would just be surprised if rates fall that dramatically within one year. I hope I am wrong. I do tend to be a pessimist, and I like to be pleasantly surprised. I hope a year from now we’re sitting here in October 2026, talking about our nice four per to 5% mortgages. But that feels like a pipe dream to me these days.

Lou Whiteman: You know what’s fascinating, Emily, I’m pessimistic, too, but I think in the near term, it’s easier to play games with it, and in the long term, it eventually comes back to bite you. I’m focused on the one year, too, but who knows? That’s what makes market.

Travis Hoium: Let’s quickly do an over under on the number of fed rate cuts in the next 12 months. Emily, it sounds you’re going under three. That’s where I’m going to set the bar. But is that officially your call?

Emily Flippen: It is. In fact, I’ll tell you what. In the next 12 months, I will even go further. I think we have maybe one rate cut.

Travis Hoium: The market is pricing into this year.

Emily Flippen: Yes.

Travis Hoium: You don’t think that’s going to happen in 12 months?

Emily Flippen: I don’t talked about this on Motley Fool Money in the past, I believe. I think I expected one rate cut in September, which we got. Despite the fact that all of the blind polling here from the Federal Reserve does indicate that even the people on the panel themselves expect a number of rate cuts over the remainder of the year.

Emily Flippen: We don’t have, obviously, with the government shutdown, our most recent jobs data, and inflation has not moderated. I can’t emphasize this enough. It has not moderated to the extent that the Fed wants it to moderate. It’s still well above their target rate. We’ve actually seen it accelerates on a month over month basis, and there’s a fair bit of evidence that despite the fact that tariffs have not had the impact that I think a lot of economists and investors fear to this point, which is wonderful, that that shoe is, in my opinion, likely to drop toward the back half of the year. Again, I really hope I’m wrong here. I really hope mortgage rates come down. I really hope we have three rate cuts. But I’m betting on one rate cut in the next.

Lou Whiteman: I really hope I’m wrong, Ron Gur, because for the record, I agree. If you want me, I play pundit. I agree with everything Emily said. I was reluctant to even cut the first time. I was scared about that, and I don’t want rate cuts. I’m worried about inflation. But again, I think politics plays into this, and especially as the year goes on with the Fed. I think market dynamics is providing pressure. Officially, I would push to three. I think we are at three. But, if anything, if you force me not to push, I’m going to take the over. That scares me a bit, but I do think that just the pressure on the Fed to cut rates is only going to accelerate as Pal steps away and as other changes, and as just assist the situation, I’m afraid we are going to deteriorate some from here.

Travis Hoium: Lou, I did allow you to push on that one, but this one, we’re going to make things a little bit more difficult. NVIDIA is the most valuable company in the world, $4.6 trillion market cap; Microsoft, 3.9, Apple, 3.8 trillion. My question for you, is NVIDIA going to be over or under the 1.5? Basically, are they going to be first or are they going to be lower than first? Most valuable company on January 1st, 2030. You have a little over four years between now and then. Are they going to maintain this ranking?

Lou Whiteman: Any good gambler has to take the field on that. I’m going to take the field and say under. However, NVIDIA is a pretty good choice to be there. It’s a great company. They have staying power. But no, if you’re going to give me every company or NVIDIA and have it play out four years, I’ll take everybody else.

Emily Flippen: Unfortunately, if you look historically speaking, companies that are the largest in the world when you zoom out in a 5-10 year period don’t tend to maintain that positioning. I have to agree with Lou here, I to take the under. That being said, if anybody can do it, it’s NVIDIA. This would be, and you hate as an investor to say this time is different, but this could be the exception to the rule.

Travis Hoium: We’ll end on this one. I want to get your S&P 500 picks over the next 12 months. Over or under 7,000. As we’re recording, we’re at about 6,750. I’m giving a little bit of a gain, 5% gain or so. Do you think a year from now we are under 7,000 on the S&P 500, Emily?

Emily Flippen: This is an interesting question because I think everyone in their dough will tell you right now that the S&P 500 is overvalued. The market is overvalued. We have all of these headwinds, consumers are feeling hurt. The government, as we are talking, is literally shut down, and the stock market is up. Make that make sense, exactly. There is this real disconnect that’s happening between the American consumer, the American economy, and, I guess, general vibes of the American people here versus what we’re seeing in the market. I fear that the irrationality, to some extent, can maintain over the course of the next year because it hasn’t made a lot of sense to this point. That being said, I can’t get behind why that would be. I have to take the under. I think it’s less than five. In fact, I think the stock markets probably down from where we are today a year from now. Again, I hope I’m wrong, and pessimists sound smart, optimists tend to make more money, so I’m staying fully invested, regardless of what my short-term prediction is for the markets. But it’s hard for me to rationalize how the market could go up from here, given the factors and the headwinds that we’re seeing in the broader economy.

Lou Whiteman: It’s hard to disagree with that. I’ve been all doom and gloom when we were talking about the Fed and stuff, but here’s the deal. I do think that it’s “priced in.” I think one of the weird things is Liberation Day was such a shock that we just normalized that or became immune to that real quick. I am more confident that we aren’t going massively in one direction or the other. I think it’s going to just be a grind, but I’m going to take the over. I think that we can just grind along almost regardless of what’s going on on Main Street for a while.

Travis Hoium: When we come back, we will get to stocks on our radar. You are listening to Motley Fool Monday.

As always, people on the program may have interest in the stocks they talk about, and the Motley Fool may have formal recommendations for or against, so don’t buy or sell stocks based solely on what you hear. All personal finance content follows Motley Fool editorial standards and is not approved by advertisers. Advertisements are sponsored content and provided for informational purposes only. To see our full advertising disclosure, please check out our show notes. One of the interesting news items for the week is Spotify founder and CEO, Daniel Ek, is stepping down. He is going to be replaced by co-CEOs Gustav Soderstrom and Alex Norstrom. Emily, this has been a phenomenal run for Spotify and for Ek over the past three years. I think they’ve solidified their business model, but going with the co CEO strategy seems to be a trend, too. What did you take away from this announcement?

Emily Flippen: I was really disappointed by this announcement because, as you mentioned, Travis, wow, it looks good for Spotify over the last couple of years; it wasn’t always the case. When Spotify first went public, part of my conviction behind the business was the way that Dan Ek talked about the company being very focused on the long term, and investors can forget that there is a period for Spotify there, a very long period where investors were very pessimistic, believing that Spotify would never be able to get its gross margin above 30% because of the limits and the caps on the way that the licensing agreements for music operated. Dan Ek had a really impressive long-term vision for what the Spotify platform could be, and he really did execute well on that, raised prices when it was appropriate, while expanding into things like audiobooks and podcasting, of which so many people, even internally in Spotify, were very skeptical about his investments there. Ek led that initiative. It’s disappointing to see him leave, even though he will stay on his executive chair. I don’t love co-CEOs in general, but I will say if anybody can pull it off, it’s possibly this pair. Norstrom and Soderstrom have already acted together as co-presidents of Spotify. They seem to have different expertise, one more product, one more operational. Hopefully they’ll find a way to marry in that sense, but the devil’s always in the details, and it’s scary when you have a founder, CEO leaving the helm of a great company.

Lou Whiteman: Everything in my gut makes me want to hate the co CEO structure. You need one person in charge. I think I need to get over that, though. We’ve seen it in a lot of companies. I do think, look, the CEO title has always been vague. It means different things in different companies. It’s too much for one human being to do all the work of a big company. Average tenure of CEOs is falling, so you need to have a lot of talent there. I think if you look at this case, and I think there’s a good chance it works. I think the idea of just we’re almost just recategorizing what we call people. When inevitably, nobody was multitasking everything, and everybody had different roles, anyway. I think what’s evolving more is just how we describe these things, not how companies work. You need the right people. You need well-defined roles. You need, maybe a founder as executive chairman to play referee if needed. I think it can work, and I need to be less scared of it. Hopefully for the best year.

Travis Hoium: It has been interesting to see Netflix has done a similar thing, where they have different expertise. It does seem like a two-headed dragon at the top, and these companies are so big now that maybe that makes sense because it’s a huge job to fill. Let’s get to the stocks that are on our radar. We’re going to bring in Dan Boyd from behind the glass. Lou, I’m going to have you go first. What’s on your radar this week?

Lou Whiteman: Dan, I’m looking at Delta Airlines, ticker DAL. They kick off transport earnings next week, Thursday, I think, should set the tone not just for airlines, but could provide insight into the consumer, into big macro, and all that. Baseline expectations is that corporate travel is holding up better than tourists. International is steady, and premium products are in demand. If that proves true, that is really good news for investors not just in Delta, but United too, which I think Delta and United, probably the best stocks in this sector. Very curious to hear what they have to say and what we can read into the entire sector from them.

Travis Hoium: Dan, what do you think about getting into airline stocks?

Dan Boyd: Now, Lou, you are a Georgia guy. How much of this is blind Homerism?

Lou Whiteman: I haven’t lived in Georgia that long.

Dan Boyd: You’re saying none?

Lou Whiteman: No.

Dan Boyd: I don’t believe it. I don’t believe that for a second.

Lou Whiteman: Dan, as someone who flies Delta regularly, I have all the reason in the world to hate them, trust me.

Dan Boyd: Fair enough.

Lou Whiteman: Emily, what’s on your watch list?

Emily Flippen: Well, hopefully, a stock that generates a little less hate than Delta Airlines. I’m looking at Mercado Libre. The ticker is MELI. Mercado Libre shares are down about 15% this week because this e-commerce behemoth that operates in South America looks like it’s getting a bit of renewed competition from Amazon. Amazon announcing that in their attempt to expand their presence in Brazil, they’d be waiving additional fees for sellers and fulfillment by Amazon throughout the country over the holiday season. In my opinion, this is a great buying opportunity, Dan. You have to listen to me here because Mercado Libre’s been there, done that. Sea Limited, with the Shoppe app, tried to move into Brazil in Latin America, South America, a couple of years ago, and got absolutely trounced by Mercado Libre. Mercado Libre has by far the biggest lead in this space. I couldn’t be less concerned for the lead they have here, and with shares off around 15%. What’s a better time to be buying?

Travis Hoium: Dan, Emily’s going with a long-term winner compared to the troubling industry in the airlines. What do you think about Mercado Libre?

Dan Boyd: She said, you have to listen to me. Travis, so I guess I have to listen to Emily now.

Emily Flippen: Let this be a lesson to ask for what you want in life.

Travis Hoium: What’s going on your watch list? Is it officially Mercado Libre?

Dan Boyd: It’s definitely going to be Mercado Libre. I think the price point might be a little too good to ignore these days.

Lou Whiteman: For Lou Whiteman, Emily Flippen, our production leader, Dan Boyd, and the entire Motley Fool team, I’m Travis Hoium. Thanks for listening to Motley Fool Money. We’ll see you here tomorrow.

Sept. 25 (UPI) — The United States on Thursday sanctioned one person and five entities for their role in generating money for North Korea and its weapons programs.

“This action aims to disrupt illicit networks that facilitate these attacks and simultaneously cutting off funding for the DPRK unlawful weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and ballistic missile programs,” the State Department said in a statement.

DPRK are the initials of North Korea’s official name, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.

The department accused those blacklisted Thursday of generating revenue for Pyongyang by conducting arms deals with Myanmar’s military regime, which has been fighting a brutal civil war — resulting in civilian deaths and the destruction of civilian infrastructure — since its coup of February 2021.

Myanmar-based Royal Shune Lei Co. Limited and key personnel, including Kyaw Thu Myo Myint and Tin Myo Aung, who assisted in arms deals for the Myanmar Air Force with Kim Jong Ju, a Beijing-based deputy representative of the Korean Mining Development Trading Co., were sanctioned Thursday.

“Also known as the 221 General Bureau, KOMID serves as the DPRK’s primary arms dealer and exporter of ballistic missile-related equipment,” the State Department said.

The designations also sanction Aung Ko Ko Oo, director of Royal Shune Lei. The State Department also named Nam Chol Ung, a North Korean national who laundered foreign earnings through a network of businesses in Southeast Asia. Nam is a representative of the Pyongyang’s Reconnaissance General Bureau.

“These actions underscore the United States’ commitment to disrupting the networks that support DPRK’s destabilizing activities and to promoting accountability for those who enable Burma’s military regime,” the State Department release said.

MillerKnoll (MLKN -4.42%) reported first-quarter fiscal 2026 results on September 23, 2025, with consolidated net sales of $956 million, up 10.9% year over year, and adjusted earnings per share (EPS) rising 25% to $0.45. The quarter featured strong execution in contract segments, ongoing tariff headwinds, and an accelerated U.S. retail expansion.

The following insights highlight key drivers and risks shaping the long-term investment thesis.

Gross margin expansion signals improved execution

Gross margin reached 38.5% despite $8 million in net tariff-related costs, and adjusted operating margin in North America Contract expanded 200 basis points year over year to 11.4%. The company generated $9 million in operating cash flow, ended the period with $481 million in liquidity, and maintained a net debt to EBITDA ratio of 2.92 turns, well below covenant thresholds.

“In the first quarter, we generated adjusted earnings of $0.45 per share, significantly outperforming the midpoint of our guidance and 25% ahead of prior year, driven by better than expected sales and strong gross margin performance that benefited from leverage on our sales growth. Consolidated net sales in the first quarter were $956 million, above the midpoint of our guide. Versus prior year, net sales were up 10.9% on a reported basis and up 10% organically, driven by strength in all segments of the business.”
— Kevin Veltman, Interim Chief Financial Officer

This margin outperformance demonstrates management’s ability to drive profitable top-line growth and cost discipline in a challenging macro and tariff environment, reinforcing MillerKnoll’s business model resiliency.

Retail expansion and new products fuel growth

MillerKnoll opened four new retail stores in North America and plans to open a total of 12 to 15 U.S. locations in fiscal 2026, aiming to more than double its DWR (Design Within Reach) and Herman Miller store footprint over several years. New product launches accounted for more than 20% year-over-year order growth in retail, with North America web traffic up 17% and net sales in the region up 7% year over year.

“For the full fiscal year, we anticipate opening a total of 12 to 15 new stores in the U.S., as we execute on our strategy to more than double our DWR and Herman Miller store footprint over the next several years. Onto our retail assortment expansion initiatives. This year, we’re launching 50% more product newness than we did in fiscal 2025. And new product is already positively impacting our performance with new product order growth of over 20% in the quarter. This bodes well for the future.”
— Andi Owen, Chief Executive Officer

This aggressive cadence of retail expansion and product innovation indicates MillerKnoll’s prioritization of omni-channel growth and customer acquisition, supporting a long-term growth thesis.

Pricing actions and tariff mitigation protect margins

Net tariff-related expenses reduced gross margin by $8 million and are expected to pressure next quarter’s results by $2 million to $4 million. Management asserts that mitigation measures, including surcharges and price increases introduced in June, will restore margin in the second half of the fiscal year.

The company’s backlog declined $67 million to $691 million, as previously signaled due to fourth-quarter order pull forwards triggered by announced tariff surcharges and list price changes.

“The point of the net is to say we’ve been working on pricing. We put a surcharge in place. We had a price increase in June as well. And the way it works for us is those take a little while to flow through back and through our contracts with customers. So the net impact in the short term is the $8 million that we called out from a pressure perspective. We expect that to be less in Q2, $2 million to $4 million of net impact. And then when we get into the back half of the year, we believe our pricing mitigation actions will be offsetting those costs based on the current tariff environment.”
— Kevin Veltman, Interim Chief Financial Officer

Effective pricing and mitigation strategies are critical to offsetting external cost pressures and maintaining profitability as tariffs persist.

Looking ahead

Management expects net sales between $926 million and $966 million, gross margin of 37.6% to 38.6%, and adjusted EPS between $0.38 and $0.44 for the next quarter. Tariff impacts are forecast to reduce gross margin by $2 million to $4 million, but company actions are anticipated to fully offset these costs in the second half of the year. No full-year margin or EPS guidance was provided due to macro uncertainty.

Vince(VNCE 94.33%) reported second quarter fiscal 2025 earnings on August 6, 2025. Net sales reached $73.2 million, down 1.3% year-over-year (YoY), while adjusted net income excluding a one-time employee retention credit was $4.9 million ($0.38 per share), supported by a 300 basis point year-over-year gross margin improvement and strong direct-to-consumer (DTC) sales growth of 5.5%. This summary provides singular insights on margin expansion, supply chain risk management, and multi-channel execution, all critical to the long-term investment thesis. For reference, the second quarter fiscal 2025 period ended July 31, 2025.

Gross margin expands as Vince mitigates tariffs

Gross profit increased from $35.1 million to $36.9 million compared to the second quarter fiscal 2024, with gross margin expanding 300 basis points to 50.4% compared to the second quarter fiscal 2024, despite higher tariffs and freight costs. This margin strength resulted from a combination of strategic pricing, reduced discounting, and improved product cost management, against a backdrop of a less favorable macro environment for apparel manufacturers.

“Gross profit in the second quarter was $36.9 million or 50.4% of net sales. This compares to $35.1 million or 47.4% of net sales in the second quarter of last year. The increase in gross margin rate was primarily driven by approximately 340 basis points due to the favorable impact of lower product costing and higher pricing, approximately 210 basis points due to favorable impact of lower discounting, partially offset by approximately 170 basis points due to higher tariffs and 100 basis points due to higher freight costs.”
— Yuji Okumura, Chief Financial Officer

Effective margin management demonstrates that Vince’s value proposition and pricing power help offset inflationary and regulatory headwinds.

Vince rapidly diversifies supply chain to curb concentrated risk

In fiscal 2024, the company sourced approximately 80% of its products from China, with aggressive initiatives under way to cap exposure to any single country at 25% by the 2025 holiday season. Such rapid supply chain adaptation is notable given persistent apparel industry vulnerabilities to shifting tariffs and global sourcing disruptions.

“So the product that’s hitting the floor now fall, that really wasn’t impacted. I mean, that was already produced. That was kind of the stuff that was being held. It’s really as we get the prespring or holiday, where we made a lot of the movement. And as we mentioned before, it’s somewhat less about China now because these tariffs keep moving around. It’s really more about not being overexposed in any one country. And, you know, we’re targeting 25% to kinda be that cap in terms of any one country, and I think we’ll get there, for holiday and certainly as we get into spring.”
— Brendan Hoffman, Chief Executive Officer

Vince is shifting to a multi-country sourcing strategy to limit exposure to any single country, targeting a 25% cap per country.

DTC sales growth offsets wholesale softness for Vince

The DTC segment posted 5.5% year-over-year growth, propelled by both retail and ecommerce, even as the wholesale channel declined 5.1% year-over-year due to temporary shipment delays. Store investments, including remodels and new locations in Nashville and Sacramento, target underpenetrated regions and support omnichannel growth strategy.

“With respect to channel performance, our direct to consumer segment increased 5.5% with both our ecommerce and store channels contributing to the growth. This was offset, however, by a 5.1% decline in our wholesale segment as full shipments went out later than the prior year as tariff mitigation strategies pushed the timing of receipts back by approximately three weeks. Despite the impact on the top line, the delays in our supply chain enabled us to elongate our spring selling season, contributing to strong gross margin performance for the quarter.”
— Yuji Okumura, Chief Financial Officer

Looking Ahead

Management guides to net sales flat to low single digit year-over-year growth for the third quarter fiscal 2025, operating income margin between 1% and 4%, and adjusted EBITDA margin (non-GAAP) between 2% and 5%. Planned reinvestments in marketing and retail initiatives, along with anticipated incremental tariff costs of approximately $4 million to $5 million (with half expected to be mitigated), temper the margin outlook for the back half of fiscal 2025. No additional new store openings are scheduled beyond Sacramento in October 2025.

Canadian PM Carney also announced a fund of $5 billion in Canadian dollars ($3.6bn US) to help firms in all sectors hurt by tariffs.

Canada will waive a requirement that 20 percent of all vehicles sold next year be emissions-free, part of an aid package designed to help companies deal with damage done by tariffs from United States President Donald Trump.

Prime Minister Mark Carney made the announcement on Friday.

The 20 percent target was mandated by the Liberal government of then-Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in 2023.

Carney, Trudeau’s successor, said waiving the rule would help the industry deal with punitive US measures that are also targeting the steel and aluminium sectors.

“This will provide immediate financial relief to automakers at a time of increased pressures on economic competitiveness,” Carney told a televised press conference.

Ottawa will also launch an immediate 60-day review to reduce costs linked to the EV sales requirement.

The Canadian Vehicle Manufacturers’ Association welcomed the move, saying the push for mandates imposed unsustainable costs on companies and threatened investment.

Carney said it was too soon to draw any conclusions about whether Ottawa should lift the 100 percent tariffs it imposed on Chinese-made electric vehicles last year. China on Friday prolonged a probe into imports of canola from Canada, one of the world’s leading suppliers.

Carney, who won an April election on the need to diversify the economy away from the US, said Ottawa would set up a new fund worth $5 billion Canadian dollars ($3.6bn US) with flexible terms to help firms in all sectors affected by tariffs.

The US measures are “causing extreme uncertainty that is holding back massive amounts of investment”, he said.

Ottawa will introduce a new policy to ensure the federal government buys from Canadian suppliers and is also introducing a new biofuel production incentive, with more than $370 million Canadian dollars ($267m US) for farmers to address immediate competitiveness challenges.

Carney did not mention specific new aid for the steel and aluminium sectors. When pressed, he said companies could apply for help from existing funds.

This year has been a tough one for many retailers, with global tariffs and trade wars raising costs and creating plenty of uncertainty. Consumers, meanwhile, have been cutting back on discretionary spending as they look to tighten up their budgets.

One retailer that has felt the effects of this in a significant way is Target (TGT -3.60%), whose sales have been stagnant. And over the past 12 months, its valuation nosedived by 37%. Its performance has been so bad that the stock is trading around the levels it fell to during the brief market crash in 2020.

The trouble is, it may not necessarily be due for a rally just yet, even despite its beaten-down valuation. And the company recently announced a new CEO, which investors and analysts aren’t convinced will rectify the situation. Could Target’s stock be headed for even more of a decline in the future, or is it a worthwhile contrarian pick to add to your portfolio today?

Image source: Getty Images.

Investors worry an internal hire may be a mistake for Target

On Aug. 20, Target announced that Michael Fiddelke will take over as CEO of the company on Feb. 1, 2026. Current CEO Brian Cornell is stepping down but will be on the company’s board of directors. Cornell says that Fiddelke, who is currently Target’s chief operating officer and who has been with the company for 20 years, is the best-suited person to lead the company’s turnaround efforts.

The words of confidence, however, didn’t seem to have much of an effect on investors, with shares of Target declining after the news. Investors may have been hoping for a more aggressive effort to turn the business around, similar to Starbucks‘ move to grab high-profile executive Brian Niccol a year ago, who came over from Chipotle Mexican Grill. While that hasn’t paid off for Starbucks just yet, the Niccol hire has been seen as a bold move for the struggling coffee chain to help make significant changes necessary to improve its operations.

The danger with an internal hire, particularly of an existing executive, is that it might mean more of the status quo for the business, and a continuation of a process and strategy that hasn’t been working. Target’s results have been lackluster of late, and significant changes may be needed to get investors bullish on the retail stock.

Target has been struggling to grow its sales in recent years

The problem for Target may be more to do with macroeconomic conditions rather than poor management decisions. As consumers are scaling back on discretionary spending, many retailers have been struggling to generate any growth. Target’s lackluster sales growth has been going on for a couple of years now, coinciding with rising interest rates, which have increased costs for consumers and businesses alike.

TGT Revenue (Quarterly YoY Growth) data by YCharts

In Target’s most recent quarter, which ended Aug. 2, the company’s net sales totaled $25.2 billion and were down 0.9% year over year. And with costs still rising, its operating income fell by more than 19%, to $1.3 billion. For the full fiscal year, which ends in January, Target continues to expect a low-single digit drop on the top line.

For Fiddelke, it won’t be an easy task to fix Target’s problems given that they may be stemming from economic factors. Even if he were to make drastic changes, they could be costly, at a time when it may be more important for the business to trim expenses rather than to experiment with store designs or product mix. Weathering the storm may be the key at this point for Target.

Target’s business isn’t broken, but investors will need patience with the stock

Target is facing some tough times right now, but I don’t believe the business is in awful shape and that it needs significant changes. It wasn’t all that long ago, during the pandemic, when sales were soaring as consumers had an excess of discretionary income at their disposal. Now, however, as that situation has changed, the reverse is happening and sales aren’t looking so strong anymore.

For long-term investors who can afford to be patient with the stock, Target may be worth investing in today, even though it may still go lower in the short term. It trades at a price-to-earnings multiple of 11, which is incredibly cheap when you consider the S&P 500 average is 25. It may take some time for the stock to turn things around, but Target also offers a compelling 4.7% dividend yield that can compensate you for your patience.

Kansas City Chiefs fans sure are excited about the upcoming season.

Fanatics, the official online sportswear retailer for the NFL, reports that sales of Chiefs tight end Travis Kelce jerseys jumped a whopping 200% on Tuesday.

Clearly, fans were doing some early packing for the team’s season opener against the Chargers in São Paulo, Brazil, on Sept. 5. Those fans simultaneously realized they didn’t have enough gear to properly represent the reigning AFC champions at Corinthians Arena.

What other possible explanation could there have been?

There’s no way that Kelce had his biggest day in jersey sales since Super Bowl Sunday in February just because he and pop superstar Taylor Swift announced their engagement.

Right?

Haha, wrong — at least, it would seem that way, based on the typical behavioral patterns of Swifties.

Kansas City tight end Travis Kelce kisses pop superstar Taylor Swift after the Chiefs defeated the San Francisco 49ers in Super Bowl LVIII on Feb. 11, 2024, in Las Vegas.

(John Locher / Associated Press)

Kelce and Swift’s romance can be traced back to July 2023, when Kelce was able to pass along a friendship bracelet with his phone number to Swift’s camp at an Eras tour concert in Kansas City. They officially became an item that fall.

Swift attended her first Chiefs game on Sept. 24, 2023. Fanatics reported at the time that sales of No. 87 Chiefs jerseys experienced a 400% boost over the previous day, placing Kelce among the top five NFL players in jersey sales for that day.

On Aug. 13, Swift made her first-ever podcast appearance on “New Heights,” which is hosted by Kelce and his brother Jason Kelce, the former Philadelphia Eagles center. A total of 1.3 million people tuned in simultaneously after the episode dropped, setting a Guinness World Record for most concurrent views for a podcast on YouTube.

Kelce and Swift’s joint Instagram post regarding their upcoming nuptials has received more than 33.4 million likes. Billboard reported Wednesday that it has been reposted more than any other in the site’s history, passing the 1-million mark in its first six hours.

• Share via Close extra sharing options

So, yeah, it would seem pretty on-brand for Swifties to celebrate by purchasing large volumes of Travis gear.

By the way, if you think those numbers are impressive, just imagine what the jersey sales will be like if the couple decides to hyphenate their names after saying “I do.” What self-respecting Swiftie would want to be without a “Kelce-Swift” (“Swift-Kelce”?) jersey as part of their wardrobe?

US chipmaker reports revenue of $46.74bn for second quarter, defying fears that AI may be overhyped.

Chip giant Nvidia has set a new sales record, a sign that demand for artificial intelligence remains strong despite fearsthe technology may be overhyped.

Nvidia, the world’s most valuable company, on Wednesday reported revenue of $46.74bn for the three months that ended in July, a rise of 56 percent year-on-year.

Profit for the quarter was $26.42bn, a yearly rise of 59 percent.

Nvidia’s latest earnings report had been hotly anticipated as the tech giant is widely seen as a barometer of the AI boom, which has lifted the US stock market from all-time high to all-time high.

Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang said that production of Blackwell Ultra, Nvidia’s latest platform using its most advanced chips, was ramping up “at full speed” and demand for the company’s products was “extraordinary”.

“The AI race is on, and Blackwell is the platform at its centre,” Jensen said.

Looking ahead, the Santa Clara, California-based tech giant predicted revenue of $54bn, plus or minus 2 percent, for the July-September quarter, which would be slightly above market expectations.

Despite the robust results, Nvidia’s stock price fell more than 3 percent in after-hours trading, an indication of the sky-high expectations attached to the chipmaker, which is valued at more than $4.4 trillion.

Nvidia’s sales notably did not include any shipments to China, whose market is subject to US government export controls intended to blunt Beijing’s ability to develop AI.

US President Donald Trump’s administration earlier this month lifted a ban on sales of Nvidia’s H20 chip, which was designed specifically for the Chinese market, following concerted lobbying by Huang.

As part of its agreement with the Trump administration, Nvidia agreed to pay the US government 15 percent of revenues from chip sales in China.

The lifting of the ban on the H20 raises the possibility that Nvidia could have potentially enormous untapped sales potential in the world’s second-largest economy, though its prospects have been complicated by a recent directive by Beijing urging local firms against doing business with the company.

“Just imagine what will happen to this stock if the China business even comes half back to life,” The Kobeissi Letter, a newsletter following capital markets, said.

“Jensen Huang will undoubtedly be working overtime on the China situation. The AI Revolution is in full swing.”

Fuelled by explosive demand for its AI, Nvidia’s revenue has grown at breakneck speed over the past two years.

The company posted triple-digit revenue growth for five straight quarters between mid-2023 and 2024.

Since the start of 2023, the price of Nvidia shares has multiplied more than 11 times over, with the stock up more than 30 percent so far this year.

The firm’s stellar performance, underpinned by multibillion-dollar AI investments by tech giants including Microsoft, Meta and Amazon, has stoked discussion about whether AI could be in a bubble.

In an interview with The Verge earlier this month, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, who oversaw the release of the groundbreaking AI model ChatGPT, said he believed that investors were “overexcited” about the technology.

The record for the amount paid for a basketball card is about to be broken by Kobe Bryant on what would have been his 47th birthday … with some help from his “big brother,” Michael Jordan.

The 2007-08 Upper Deck Exquisite Collection Dual Logoman Autographs card featuring Bryant and Jordan is up for bid online at Heritage Auctions. Bidding closes Saturday at 8 p.m. PDT, with extended bidding available at that time.

As of early Friday afternoon, bidding for the one-of-one card had reached $7.015 million, including the 22% buyer’s premium added to the successful bid. That already shatters the current record price garnered by a basketball card — the $5.9 million paid for the 2009-10 Panini National Treasures Stephen Curry Logoman Autograph card in a 2021 private estate sale.

With more than a day still remaining for bids, it’s still tough to tell what the new record might end up being.

“Most likely, it’ll end up somewhere in the $8-million range,” Heritage director of sports collectibles Chris Ivy told The Times late Friday morning, although he added that he “wouldn’t be shocked” if it went for $10 million or more.

The most anyone has paid for any sports card is $12.6 million for a 1952 Topps Mickey Mantle card in a 2022 Heritage auction. The Curry card currently sits at No. 4 among all sports cards.

The Dual Logoman Autographs series of cards features the images and signatures of two iconic players, as well as NBA logo patches from a game-worn jersey from each player. Jordan appeared on eight such cards and Bryant was on 11, but this is the only one that paired the two of them.

“It’s the only one that has Kobe and Jordan on it, and it has both their Logoman logos, and it’s signed by both,” Ivy said, “and so kind of all those factors combined together to make this the top card for modern card collectors. And we’re seeing that in the price that it’s generating right now.”

Chicago Bulls’ Michael Jordan eyes the basket as he is guarded by the Lakers’ Kobe Bryant on Feb. 1, 1998, at the Forum.

(Vince Bucci / AFP via Getty Images)

Cards featuring Jordan and Bryant individually haven’t brought in nearly as much cash, with Jordan’s top seller going for $2.93 million in 2024 and Bryant’s going for $2.3 million earlier this month.

Ivy said it is a coincidence that the auction is ending on Bryant’s birthday.

The beloved Los Angeles icon and daughter Gianna were among the nine people who died in a Jan. 26, 2020, helicopter crash in Calabasas. Jordan was one of the speakers at the father and daughter’s public memorial held on Feb. 24, 2020, at Staples Center.

“Maybe it surprised people that Kobe and I were very close friends,” Jordan said. “But we were very close friends. Kobe was my dear friend, he was like a little brother.”

He added: “What Kobe Bryant was to me was the inspiration that someone truly cared about the way that I played the game or the way that he wanted to play the game.

“He wanted to be the best basketball player that he could be. And as I got to know him, I wanted to be the best big brother that I could be. To do that you have to put up with the aggravation, the late-night calls or the dumb questions. I took great pride as I got to know Kobe Bryant that he was just trying to be a better person, a better basketball player.”

After a wave of rushed buying, driven by looming tariffs, US car sales have started to slow, weighing on carmakers.

New car sales fell by 300,000 in June from 15.6 million to 15.3 million, according to data released by Cox Automotive last month.

“Now we’ve got sales slowing because [the pre-tariff buying] surge pretty much pulled ahead a lot of people that might have been in the market this year, who wanted to buy before tariffs hit,” Mark Schirmer, director of industry insights at Cox Automotive, told Al Jazeera.

This will only get harder for carmakers, dealerships and shoppers down the road.

“Price rises together with demand destruction,” Sina Golara, assistant professor of supply chain management at Georgia State’s Robinson College of Business, told Al Jazeera. “If consumers don’t have the resilience to pay for those higher prices, they’ll take a step back.”

United States President Donald Trump’s erratic approach to tariffs, putting some in place and then taking them away, has made it difficult for businesses to plan. In April, car companies, including Stellantis, Ford and Volvo, suspended financial guidance as a result of the uncertainty.

Last month Volvo also said that tariffs will cost it $1.2bn in the second quarter. Ford then announced it expects a reduced annual profits to $3bn after taking an $800m hit from tariffs in the second quarter. GM announced that it expects a $5bn hit, and Toyota said it expects $9.5bn in tariff-driven blows to profits for the year.

In May, Ford also announced it would have to raise prices on some of its cars made in Mexico, including the Mustang Mach-E electric SUV, Maverick pick-up truck and Bronco Sport, in some cases by as much as $2,000, the Reuters news agency reported. Those cars began to reach lots last month.

As a result, consumers are overwhelmingly opting for used cars that are not subject to tariffs, including foreign-made ones, as they are already on US roads.

Used car sales are up 2.3 percent from this time last year, according to Used Car Index report, an auto industry insight platform by Edmunds.

In part, this is because of the limited supply of used cars. Edmunds’s report says that buyers, and sellers looking to upgrade but need the money from sale of a current car, are hesitant about undertaking expenses amid economic uncertainty.

The bigger impact of both those trends is of inventory piling up. On average, dealerships have 82 days worth of cars on the lot, a roughly 14 percent increase between May and June.

An expensive escalation

Cox forecasts prices could rise anywhere between 4 to 8 percent over the next six months as a result of the tariffs. The group expects new car sales of 13 million to 13.3 million this year.

“Tariffs will be inflationary on both the new and used vehicle market,” Schirmer said, adding, the main challenge right now is the unsold inventory that’s piling up.

Analysts believe that prices will continue to rise amid Trump’s tariffs, especially as companies try to move supply chains to the US, as demanded by Trump, an effort that is years in the making.

“The tariff ‘relief’ is like putting a band-aid on a bullet wound with US car companies now dealing with the repercussions moving forward as this Twilight Zone situation will change the paradigm for the US auto industry for years to come,” Dan Ives, analyst at Wedbush Securities, said in a note provided to Al Jazeera.

In the meantime, the cost to import a car is expected to increase by $1,000 this year to $5,700, according to Cox Automotive.

“The US imports a little less than half of the new vehicles sold, but dependence on imports varies substantially by segment. The most dependent segments are at the two ends of the price spectrum – the most affordable vehicles and luxury vehicles. Most of the vehicles priced under $30,000 would face added costs that would make them unaffordable,” Cox Automotive chief economist Jonathan Smoke said in a June conference call shared with Al Jazeera.

EVs hit hard

Trump’s new tax legislation – signed into law last month and which cut the EV tax credit of up to $7,500 – has already led to a significant pullback specifically for the electric vehicle marketplace as demand for the products begins to fall.

“Our forecast had been for approximately 10 percent of new vehicle sales this year to be EV. We slightly lowered that to 9 percent,” Schirmer added.

Volvo reported a 26 percent decline in sales for electric vehicles (12 percent overall). Ford EV sales tumbled by 31 percent. Rivian saw sales decline by 23 percent. Tesla saw a decline of 13.5 percent globally as CEO Elon Musk’s political involvement hindered the brand’s reputation. The cuts to the EV tax credit is expected to cost Tesla $1.2bn every year, JP Morgan forecast.

“Several dealers have also stated that these [EV tax credits] are the main drivers [for consumers]. So without those incentives, there would definitely be a significant hit through EV sales,” Golara added.

General Motors has been the exception to the rule. The Michigan-based auto giant doubled its EV sales in recent months.

Despite the dip in sales, Golora believes that the setback in the EV market is temporary.

“It’s [the EV market] still compelling in the long run because many manufacturers have already reached a decision that this is where the industry is going,” Golara said.

“Investment [in EV production] doesn’t look like a lost one. The payback period will be longer.”

Manufacturing strains

While US manufacturing ticked up overall in June, when it comes to motor vehicle and parts production, it is a different story. Production tumbled by 2.6 percent for the month as demand began to slow.

US auto manufacturing employment is also down. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, employment in auto manufacturing in the United States has tumbled by 35.7 percent since this time last year and down 2.4 percent from this time last month.

Al Jazeera reached out to the United Auto Workers for comment about the effect on car manufacturing jobs, but the organisation did not respond.

“Demand was not growing as fast as needed, and many manufacturers were caught by surprise. That’s a problem, and it is kind of a longer-term, structural issue,” Golara said.

Trade experts express concern about reported deal linking exports controls to monetary payments.

Nvidia and AMD have agreed to give the United States government a share of revenues from chip sales in China as part of a deal to secure export licences for their products, US media have reported.

Under the agreement reached with US President Donald Trump’s administration, Nvidia will share 15 percent of revenues from sales of its H20 AI chip, while AMD will pay the same percentage of MI308 chip revenues, multiple outlets reported on Sunday.

The unorthodox agreement, which has no known precedent, comes after the Trump administration last month agreed to reverse a ban on the sale of Nvidia’s H20 chips to China.

The Financial Times, which first reported the news, said the Trump administration had yet to decide how it would use the collected revenues.

AMD did not respond to a request for comment.

Nvidia neither confirmed nor denied the deal, but said it follows US government rules for doing business in overseas markets.

“While we haven’t shipped H20 to China for months, we hope export control rules will let America compete in China and worldwide,” a company spokesperson said.

“America cannot repeat 5G and lose telecommunication leadership. America’s AI tech stack can be the world’s standard if we race.”

Following reports of the deal, which was confirmed by The New York Times, Bloomberg, The Wall Street Journal and the BBC, trade experts expressed concern about the implications of linking controls on sensitive technology to monetary payments.

Christopher Padilla, the former head of the US Commerce Department’s International Trade Administration, called the agreement “astonishing”.

“If the Trump administration is allowing companies to buy their way past export controls imposed to protect US national security, we are in very dangerous waters,” Padilla said in a post on LinkedIn.

“A mix of bribery and blackmail that is certainly unprecedented and possibly illegal.”

Peter Harrell, a nonresident fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said the deal set a worrying precedent.

“The Chinese would pay a lot for F35s and advanced US military technology, too,” Harrell said in a post on X.

“Regardless of whether you think Nvidia should be able to sell H20s in China, charging a fee in exchange for relaxing national security export controls is a terrible precedent.”

I stepped on my bathroom scale the other morning and could not believe the three digits staring up at me.

And I mean that literally — the scale was rigged.

I know this because I’ve been dieting my butt off, and I swear I’ve dropped 20 pounds. So the first thing I did was ask my wife whether she messed with the scale as some kind of prank.

She said no, adding, “Maybe you’re retaining liquids.”

Steve Lopez

Steve Lopez is a California native who has been a Los Angeles Times columnist since 2001. He has won more than a dozen national journalism awards and is a four-time Pulitzer finalist.

I threw the scale out immediately. Then I went back into the bathroom, took one look in the mirror, and got another shock.

That couldn’t be me in the reflection. No way.

I’ve got more hair than that. Everybody knows it, and people comment on it. I go onto social media and people are asking one another, almost every day: “How does he maintain such a full mane and youthful glow?”

I called my barber and fired him.

It’s not the barber, my wife said. You should take another look in the mirror.

Our columnist was dismayed when he discovered the Bible ranks higher in book sales than his own works. “That should be on the list of fake miracles, right up there with the loaves and fishes,” he writes.

(Marta Lavandier / Associated Press)

She’s been somewhat out of sorts lately, ever since I went on Nextdoor to wish all my neighbors a happy Independence Day, including “all you scum I wouldn’t speak to IF YOU WERE THE LAST ONES at the picnic.”

Half the time, my wife doesn’t even live with me, and I don’t know where she is. It’s odd, because the marriage is perfect. People ask us what the secret is, and I say it’s hospitality. We open our hearts and our home to others, and we were planning on building a backyard ballroom until our financial advisor told us we were already running up massive debt.

I sued him for negligence and financial fraud.

My wife brought home a couple of refugees sponsored by her church, and I went along with it, even though I think it’s wrong to blame coyotes every time a neighborhood pet disappears. We were having a cup of coffee and a few pastries, and one of them took a second almond croissant. And then, even before he finished it, he reached out and grabbed a bear claw.

There I am, watching it disappear, and between bites, this freeloader starts telling us our country has to offer more help to his country.

I couldn’t take it anymore.

“I wanted the bear claw!” I said. “You didn’t even say thanks for the croissant, and now you want a third pastry? Get out of my house!”

To calm myself, I slipped into the living room to relax with a book. I picked one that was on a shelf next to three books I’ve written, which made me curious about how sales have been going lately.

So I went to Amazon to check the rankings.

The first book I checked was ranked 3,907,369. I swear on the Bible, which, by the way, was ranked 206 on the bestsellers list.

Really?

Matthew, Mark, Luke and John have been in the ground for what, a couple of thousand years? Nobody can tell you whether any of them knew a Magi from a Musketeer, not to mention that the Roman Empire they worked under was a failed administration. And their book is selling better than mine by a mile?

That should be on the list of fake miracles, right up there with the loaves and fishes.

A dispute with a neighbor over a property line ? “The boundaries are rigged.”

(A dispute with a neighbor over a property line ? “The boundaries are rigged.”)

My book is a great book. It’s already listed up there with the all-time classics, and it got starred reviews everywhere. At Barnes & Noble, they keep it in the Beautiful Books section. When I was on a book tour, I had the biggest crowds ever. Way bigger than Hemingway. People are still talking about it.

So to cut to the chase, I gave my sales rank a Triple F rating.

Fake.

False.

Fony.

And I fired my book agent.

I checked out some of the books ranked higher than mine — other than the “holy” Bible — and it didn’t take long to figure out what’s going on.

First of all, a lot of the people allegedly “buying” books don’t exist. Somewhere between 30% and 40% of the people who go onto the review section and claim they love Stephen King books are actually dead.

And then you have a lot of people coming into this country illegally, ghastly people, and they are voting in elections and they are voting on books, too, because they’re being put up to it, and being well-compensated, I might add.

Little-known fact:

The vote-counting machines and the book-counting machines are made by the same company.

You know what they should call that company?

RIGGED!

Not to be obsessive, but I’ve heard it said that Stephen King doesn’t care for me much, and that’s fine. Water off a duck’s back. My dog has more talent than that guy. All he does is write stories about killers and horrible, sick people.

He should write a book about my neighbor, if he likes deranged people so much. Most neighbors love me; they’re kissing my you-know-what. But then there’s this guy, whom I’m having investigated. I went out to the curb to throw the bathroom scale away, and what do I see? That jackalope is putting his trash can on my property. I’m the one who’s encroaching, he tells me, and I should go to the county offices and check the property records.

Well, it just so happens that I already checked the records, and they’re inaccurate. It figures, because that last county administration was the worst in history. A bunch of corrupt, evil people. Who should have been impeached. They hired incompetents as surveyors, so don’t stand on the street and tell me where I can and can’t put my trash can, because the boundaries are rigged and I’m having them rewritten.

My lawyers are on it, and we will win this case on Day One, guaranteed, with time left over for a round of golf.

Note to self:

On the way home, pick up a bathroom scale.

[email protected]

In 2024, Argentina’s far-right President Javier Milei launched an economic overhaul that slashed public spending, gutted state institutions and triggered massive protests.

The government dubbed it “chainsaw economics”. Critics say it’s deepening poverty and pushing the country into chaos, while Milei continues to make headlines for bizarre behaviour, including claims he takes political advice from his dead dog’s clones.

So who is really running Argentina – and at what cost?

Mehdi Hasan goes head-to-head with Diana Mondino, who served as Milei’s foreign minister before being abruptly fired. She defends the president’s policies, brushes off Milei’s personal attacks, and distances herself from his more extreme views, including his support for organ sales and his insults towards the late Pope Francis.

Joining the discussion are:
Matias Vernengo – Economics professor at Bucknell University and former official at Argentina’s Central Bank
Maxwell Marlow – Director of public affairs at the Adam Smith Institute
Martina Rodriguez – Member of the Argentina Solidarity Campaign and the Feminist Assembly of Latin Americans

A majority of people in five nations – Brazil, Colombia, Greece, South Africa and Spain – believe that weapons companies should stop or reduce trade with Israel as its onslaught on Gaza continues, a poll released on Thursday reveals.

Spain showed the highest support for weapons deals to be halted, with 58 percent of respondents saying they should stop completely, followed by Greece at 57 percent and Colombia at 52 percent. In Brazil, 37 percent of respondents believed arms companies should completely stop sales to Israel, while 22 percent believed they should be reduced. In South Africa, those levels stood at 46 and 20 percent, respectively.

Commissioned by the Global Energy Embargo for Palestine network, endorsed by the left-wing Progressive International organisation, and fielded by the Pollfish platform last month, the survey comes in the wake of a call by Francesca Albanese, the United Nations special rapporteur on the occupied Palestinian territory, on countries to slash financial relations with Israel as she decried an “economy of genocide“.

“The people have spoken, and they refuse to be complicit. Across continents, ordinary citizens demand an end to the fuel that powers settler colonialism, apartheid and genocide,” said Ana Sanchez, a campaigner for Global Energy Embargo for Palestine.

“No state that claims to uphold democracy can justify maintaining energy, military, or economic ties with Israel while it commits a genocide in Palestine. This is not just about trade; it’s about people’s power to cut the supply lines of oppression.”

The group said it chose the survey locations because of the countries’ direct involvement in the import and transport of energy to Israel.

More than 1,000 respondents in each nation were asked about governmental and private sector relations with Israel to measure public attitudes on responsibility.

Condemnation of Israel’s action in Gaza as the humanitarian crisis escalates was the highest in Greece and Spain and lowest in Brazil.

Sixty-one percent and 60 percent in Greece and Spain respectively opposed Israel’s current “military actions” in Gaza, while in Colombia, 50 percent opposed them. In Brazil and South Africa, 30 percent were against Israel’s war, while 33 percent and 20 percent, respectively, supported the campaign.

To date, Israel’s genocide in Gaza has killed more than 60,000 people – most of them women and children. Now home to the highest number of child amputees per capita, much of the besieged Strip is in a state of ruin as the population starves. As the crisis worsens, arms dealers and companies that facilitate their deals are facing heightened scrutiny.

In June, as reported by Al Jazeera, Maersk divested from companies linked to Israeli settlements, which are considered illegal under international law, following a campaign accusing the Danish shipping giant of links to Israel’s military and occupation of Palestinian land.

On Tuesday, Norway announced that it would review its sovereign wealth fund’s investments in Israel, after it was revealed that it had a stake in an Israeli firm that supplies fighter jet parts to the Israeli military. In recent months, several wealth and pension funds have distanced themselves from companies linked to Israel’s war on Gaza or its illegal occupation of the West Bank.

Responding to the poll, 41 percent in Spain said they would “strongly” support a state-level decision to reduce trade in weapons, fuel and other goods in an attempt to pressure Israel into stopping the war. This figure stood at 33 percent in Colombia and South Africa, and 28 and 24 percent in Greece and Brazil, respectively.

“The message from the peoples of the world is loud and clear: They want action to end the assault on Gaza – not just words,” said David Adler, co-general coordinator of Progressive International. “Across continents, majorities are calling for their governments to halt arms sales and restrain Israel’s occupation.”

HOMEWARE giant Wayfair has slashed its UK workforce by more than half in just two years, as it grapples with tumbling sales and a sharp drop in profit.

The US-based furniture retailer, which operates across Britain, cut staff numbers from 847 in 2022 to just 405 by the end of 2024, according to fresh filings with Companies House.

2

The dramatic reduction follows a tough period for the business, with UK turnover plunging from £83.4million in 2022 to just £59.4million last year.

Profits also took a hit, with pre-tax earnings slipping from £2.6million to £2.2million over the same period.

Wayfair said it had made a 17 per cent cut to administrative expenses and was now focused on “driving cost efficiency” and “nailing the basics” as it tried to steady the ship.

Despite the ongoing slowdown, bosses remain upbeat about the retailer’s long-term prospects and said the group is working towards maintaining profitability and generating positive free cash flow.

The wider company reported a net revenue of $11.9billion (£8.8billion) globally last year – down $152million (£112million) on the year before.

International sales fell to $1.5billion (£1.1billion), while revenue in its core US market dropped to $10.4billion (£7.7billion).

Wayfair recorded a net loss of $492million (£363million) despite raking in $3.6billion (£2.7billion) in gross profits.

There was some relief in early 2025, as first-quarter results showed a $1billion (£740million) rise in total revenue, thanks to a modest recovery in US sales.

However, international takings continued to fall, dipping by $37million (£27million) to $301million (£223million).

Wayfair isn’t the only retailer feeling the pinch on the high street. Furniture favourite MADE.com collapsed into administration in 2022 after failing to find a buyer, leading to hundreds of job losses.

Habitat also shut down all standalone stores in 2021, moving exclusively online after years of underperformance.

Even major players have been forced to adapt.

Wilko closed its doors for good in 2023 after nearly a century in business, with more than 400 stores shutting and 12,000 staff affected.

Argos has continued to reduce its physical footprint, shutting dozens of standalone shops and moving into parent company Sainsbury’s stores to save costs.

Retail experts say changing consumer habits, rising costs and weaker demand are continuing to batter the home and furniture sector.

Many shoppers have tightened their belts amid soaring bills and higher interest rates, with big-ticket items like sofas and beds often the first to be cut from household budgets.

Wayfair bosses said the company remains “resilient” in the face of economic uncertainty and is pressing ahead with its long-term strategy to streamline operations and stay competitive.

2

July 31 (UPI) — The U.S. Senate has approved weapons sales to Israel, despite the fact that a majority of Senate Democrats voted against the measure.

Twenty-seven of the 47 Democrats voted Wednesday in favor of two resolutions to block U.S. military sales to Israel, a change from the historically typical bipartisan support such resolutions are expected to receive.

The resolutions were sponsored by Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., who said in a press release Wednesday that “the members of the Senate Democratic caucus voted to stop sending arms shipments to a Netanyahu government which has waged a horrific, immoral, and illegal war against the Palestinian people.”

“The tide is turning,” he added. “The American people do not want to spend billions to starve children in Gaza.”

Sanders’ resolutions may have failed, but the 27 senators in support is the most he has received in the three times he sponsored them. His first attempt in November of last year received 18 Democratic votes, and a second attempt in April scored 15.

However, 70 senators voted against Sanders’ first resolution that sought to block over $675 million in weapons sales to Israel.

His second resolution, which would have prohibited the sale of thousands of assault rifles, lost more support as it was defeated by a 73-24 margin.

Vice Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., voted in support of Sanders’ resolutions for the first time.

“Tonight I voted YES to block the sale of certain weapons to Israel to send a message to Netanyahu’s government,” she posted to X Wednesday. “This legislative tool is not perfect, but frankly it is time to say ENOUGH to the suffering of innocent young children and families.”

“Tonight, I voted in favor of blocking the Trump Administration from sending more weapons to Israel,” said Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., in an X post Wednesday, after voting yes for the first time.

“My votes tonight reflect my deep frustration with the Netanyahu government’s abject failure to address humanitarian needs in Gaza and send a message to the Trump administration that it must change course if it wants to help end this devastating war,” she concluded.

“The Democrats are moving forward on this issue, and I look forward to Republican support in the near future,” Sanders further noted in his release.

BBC

‘Hot buyers’

‘Overvaluing properties massively’

June 26 (UPI) — Tesla CEO Elon Musk fired the carmaker’s vice president of manufacturing and operations following a falloff in auto sales in the nation’s largest markets this year.

Omead Afshar oversaw more than six upper-level employees in the company, including Troy Jones, Tesla’s vice president of sales in North America, and Joe Ward, vice president of the Europe, Middle East and Africa region.

The firing was first reported by Bloomberg News.

Afshar is the second high-level employee to leave the company recently. His termination follows the resignation of Milan Kovac, who was the company’s head of its Optimus humanoid robotics program.

Kovac said in a post on X that he was leaving Tesla to spend more time with his family. Musk later thanked Kovac publicly for his time with the company.

In 2022, Afshar was the subject of an internal investigation at Tesla that focused on his involvement in trying to secure construction materials for a secret project for Musk that included hard-to-get glass.

Prior to his job as Tesla vice president, Afshar worked for SpaceX, Musk’s aerospace company. Afshar’s X account, which had not been updated, said he still works for Tesla, and he praised Musk for his leadership and work ethic following the launch of the company’s Robotaxi service in Austin, Texas.

“Thank you, Elon, for pushing us all,” Afshar wrote.

Tesla’s stock price has dropped 19% this year, and took an especially hard hit following Musk’s association with President Donald Trump, who appointed Musk to oversee the Department of Government Efficiency.

DOGE took a broad and aggressive approach to eliminating federal employees, downsizing federal agencies and ending diversity, equity and inclusion programs at some of the nation’s largest companies and universities.

The company sold fewer cars in 2024 than it did in 2023, the first time sales dropped since Tesla began mass producing EVs. Its profits fell 71% in the first quarter of 2025. European sales dropped 28%, and dropped for a fifth straight month in May.

The European Automobile Manufacturers Association said buyers are shifting to cheaper Chinese models.

June 26 (UPI) — Tesla CEO Elon Musk has fired the carmaker’s vice president of manufacturing and operations following a falloff in auto sales in the nation’s largest markets this year.

Omead Afshar oversaw more than a half dozen upper-level employees in the company, including Troy Jones, Tesla’s vice president of sales in North America, and Joe Ward, vice president of the Europe, Middle East and Africa region.

The firing was first reported by Bloomberg News.

Afshar is the second high-level employee to leave the company recently. His termination follows the resignation of Milan Kovac, who was the company’s head of its Optimus humanoid robotics program.

Kovac said in a post on X that he was leaving Tesla to spend more time with his family. Musk later thanked Kovac publicly for his time with the company.

In 2022, Afshar was the subject of an internal investigation at Tesla that focused on his involvement in trying to secure construction materials for a secret project for Musk that included hard-to-get glass.

Prior to his job as Tesla vice president, Afshar worked for SpaceX, Musk’s aerospace company. Afshar’s X account, which had not been updated, said he still works for Tesla, and he praised Musk for his leadership and work ethic following the launch of the company’s Robotaxi service in Austin, Texas.

“Thank you, Elon, for pushing us all,” Afshar wrote.

Tesla’s stock price has dropped 19% this year, and took an especially hard hit following Musk’s association with President Donald Trump, who appointed Musk to oversee the Department of Government Efficiency.

DOGE took a broad and aggressive approach to eliminating federal employees, downsizing federal agencies and ending diversity, equity and inclusion programs at some of the nation’s largest companies and universities.

The company sold fewer cars in 2024 than it did in 2023, the first time sales dropped since Tesla began mass producing EVs. Its profits fell 71% in the first quarter of 2025. European sales dropped 28%, and dropped for a fifth straight month in May.

The European Automobile Manufacturers Association said buyers are shifting to cheaper Chinese models.