Evelyn Reynolds

Elon Musk, the Tesla chief executive, may be able to exploit his rivals’ weaknesses, but the United Automobile Workers union also has the electric carmaker in its sights.The United Automobile Workers strike against the Michigan automakers would seem to be nothing but good news for Tesla, the electric vehicle maker that has upended the industry and stolen customers from Ford Motor, General Motors and Stellantis, which owns Jeep and Ram.Unencumbered by an activist union, Tesla can take advantage of the work stoppages to add to its substantial lead in battery technology and software. As the three established automakers face increases in labor costs and struggle to master electric vehicles, Tesla can twist the knife by lowering car prices because it is much more profitable than most automakers.But the U.A.W.’s determination to secure a big victory for its members, amid a nationwide resurgence in union activism, harbors risks for Tesla and Elon Musk, its chief executive, who has attacked and ridiculed unions on his social media network, X, formerly Twitter.The U.A.W., which has failed to organize Tesla’s factory workers in the past, is gearing up for another attempt, a top union official said.“There is a group of Tesla workers who are actively talking about forming a union and creating the best representation they can for themselves and their co-workers through collective bargaining,” said Mike Miller, the director of the U.A.W.’s Region 6, which includes California and Nevada, where Tesla makes cars and batteries. Tesla also has a large factory in Austin, Texas, not too far from a unionized G.M. factory in the Dallas-Fort Worth area.In an interview, Mr. Miller declined to provide more details or identify the Tesla workers, saying they needed time to prepare before going public. This union organizing effort is separate from a campaign at a Buffalo plant where Tesla makes electric vehicle chargers and employs data entry workers.But as representatives of the national union demand 40 percent wage increases from the Detroit automakers, along with significant gains in benefits, they are certainly thinking about the signal that any deal would send to nonunion workers at Tesla.Tesla has upended the industry and stolen customers from Ford Motor, General Motors and Stellantis and dominates the market for electric vehicles.Jim Wilson/The New York Times“Clearly the narrative out there is that this can’t be good for the Big Three, and if it’s not good for the Big Three, it’s good for Tesla,” said Rahul Kapoor, a professor of management at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania.But he added, “If I’m an autoworker with wages lower than what Ford and G.M. are paying, and I hear there is a substantial increase, it’s very likely I would want to take that into account.”The president of the U.A.W., Shawn Fain, fired a warning shot at Mr. Musk Sunday on CBS News’s “Face the Nation.”“Most of these workers in those companies are scraping to get by so that greedy C.E.O.s and greedy people like Elon Musk can build more rocket ships and shoot theirself in outer space,” he said.A lot has changed since 2016, when a group of workers at Tesla’s auto assembly plant in Fremont, Calif., began an organizing drive that never acquired enough momentum to come to a vote.Back then, Tesla was a struggling upstart flirting with bankruptcy. Now, Tesla dominates the market for electric vehicles, with a 60 percent share in the United States. It is worth vastly more on the stock market than the three established U.S. automakers combined. It is arguably in a better position to reward workers than its rivals.Yet labor organizing is arduous. Activists must get at least 30 percent of workers to sign union cards and force a vote overseen by the National Labor Relations Board. Companies often do all they can to dissuade workers from joining, hiring lawyers and consultants who specialize in defeating union campaigns.Even if a majority of workers cast ballots in favor of a union, winning pay increases and better benefits comes only after negotiations that can drag for years. Amazon workers at a Staten Island warehouse voted in April 2022 to unionize, but Amazon has challenged the result and has yet to begin bargaining on a contract.Still, Tesla would be a tempting target for unions. The company reported profit of $2.7 billion on sales of $25 billion in the second quarter, giving it a profit margin of about 11 percent. That profit margin is more than that of Ford or G.M., even after an exceptionally profitable period for those companies. Stellantis, which was created by the 2021 merger of Fiat Chrysler and Peugeot, reported an 11 percent profit margin in the first six months of the year, but lost market share in the United States.Tesla’s stronger financial performance has allowed it to significantly cut car prices, making it harder for the established carmakers to gain ground in electric vehicles. The least expensive Model 3 sedan costs about $33,000 after federal tax credits, less than comparable gasoline vehicles.The climate for organized labor is better than it has been for years. President Biden is a big supporter of unions. Hollywood writers and actors are on strike, a high-profile manifestation of labor activism. In August, United Parcel Service employees won their biggest raises ever in a contract negotiated by the International Brotherhood of Teamsters.Tesla did not respond to a request for comment, but Mr. Musk seemed to acknowledge the union threat last week, saying on X that his workers were better off than employees of G.M., Ford and Stellantis. “We pay more than the U.A.W.,” he said, although he added that “performance expectations are also higher.”A Hummer electric vehicle on display at the Detroit Auto Show. G.M. and the other two established U.S. automakers have struggled to master electric vehicles.Brittany Greeson for The New York TimesThe traditional automakers quarreled with Mr. Musk’s math, saying that they pay their workers substantially more and that a big raise would only widen the gap and undermine their ability to invest in electric vehicle and battery factories. Ford says its hourly employees make an average of $112,000 per year including benefits, compared with about $90,000 at Tesla.The Ford figures do not include stock options that Tesla grants employees, and that can be worth a lot. Mr. Musk has said that some production workers have become millionaires from their shares in the company.Stock options can be lucrative but also risky. Tesla has not detailed how often or in what amount it distributes options to rank-and-file workers. In regulatory filings, the company has said the options that those workers receive have a vesting period, meaning that employees must remain at the company for a certain period to cash them in.Tesla workers may lose their options if they are fired or forced to quit because of injury or poor health, said Bryan Schwartz, a lawyer in Oakland, Calif., who has represented the company’s employees in lawsuits against the company.“There are lots of issues with options to the degree workers can really count on them,” Mr. Schwartz said.Stock awards fluctuate in value along with Tesla’s share price. The stock peaked at more than $400 in late 2021, plummeted to a little more than $100 last year and rebounded this year to $270. The uncertainty may be unsettling for workers trying to make mortgage payments and pay for child care.“If I was a Tesla worker, with all these other companies making E.V.s, I would prefer a wage,” said Rick Eckstein, a professor of sociology at Villanova University who follows labor issues.Tesla has a reputation as a tough place to work, with long hours and punishing deadlines. Mr. Schwartz has sued Tesla on behalf of Black employees who say they faced discrimination in promotions and work assignments and were subject to racist abuse. Tesla has denied the accusations.Any union drive would face forceful opposition from Mr. Musk. The National Labor Relations Board has found that Mr. Musk illegally threatened employees in 2018 by implying they would lose their stock options if they voted to unionize. The labor board also found that Tesla illegally fired one of the lead organizers.An appeals court upheld the board’s decision. Tesla, which argues that Mr. Musk and the company did nothing wrong, is appealing the court ruling.Without doubt, the strike poses huge risks for the Detroit automakers, which were slow to take Tesla seriously and stand to lose precious time they need to catch up.“The real winner in the U.A.W. strike will likely be the auto company that has been winning all along,” Gary Black, managing partner of the Future Fund, an investment firm that owns Tesla stock, said on X.But any schadenfreude among Tesla investors could be brief.“The strike could be a bellwether,” said Mr. Eckstein of Villanova. “It’s a hot time in the labor movement.” More

The United Auto Workers union is threatening to expand strikes on Friday if it does not make significant progress in talks with General Motors, Ford and Stellantis.Negotiations between each of the three large U.S. automakers and the United Auto Workers union remain far from being resolved, but one of the companies — Ford Motor — has averted a second strike in Canada.Late on Tuesday, the company reached a tentative labor agreement with Unifor, Canada’s main auto union. The deal was announced minutes before an 11:59 p.m. deadline set by the union for a strike by its 5,600 members at Ford.Neither side disclosed the terms of the agreement, but Unifor said the company had made a “substantive offer.”“We believe that this agreement will solidify the foundations on which we will continue to bargain gains for generations of autoworkers in Canada,” Unifor’s national president, Lana Payne, said in a statement.Unifor’s talks with Ford, General Motors and Stellantis, which owns Chrysler, Jeep and Ram, started on Aug. 10 but have been overshadowed by the U.A.W. contract talks in the United States.Ford has an assembly plant and two engine plants in Canada. Unifor selected Ford as the “target” of its talks, meaning it focused on securing the best deal it could from the company before turning to the other two automakers. Now, it will seek to strike similar agreements with G.M. and Stellantis.Ford’s deal in Canada appears to have little bearing on the U.A.W. strikes in the United States.Last Thursday, the U.A.W. told nearly 13,000 workers to leave their jobs at three U.S. plants: a G.M. pickup truck factory in Wentzville, Mo.; a Ford truck and sport utility vehicle plant in Wayne, Mich.; and a Stellantis S.U.V. plant in Toledo, Ohio.The talks appear to have progressed only a little since the strikes began on Friday. On Wednesday, the U.A.W. said it was reviewing a new offer from Stellantis but declined to provide details.Josh Boyd, with his daughter, is an auto mechanic at the headquarters’ technical center. He said he was ready to walk out if asked by the union.Nick Hagen for The New York TimesThe union is seeking a 40 percent increase in wages over four years, saying the pay of the automakers’ chief executives rose by roughly that much over the previous four years. The companies have offered raises of just over 20 percent.The U.S. union also wants more workers to qualify for pension plans, company-paid health care for retirees, shorter working hours and other improvements. And the U.A.W. is seeking an end to a practice under which new hires are paid about $17 an hour — a bit more than half the top union wage of $32 an hour.At $32 an hour, a U.A.W. member working 40 hours a week is paid about $67,000 a year. In recent years, the companies have paid workers profit-sharing bonuses of $9,000 to $15,000.Outside Stellantis’s North American headquarters in Auburn Hills, Mich., on Wednesday, workers who are not on strike picketed in support of the work stoppage, chanting, “No justice, no Jeeps.”Josh Boyd, 36, an auto mechanic who works at the headquarters’ technical center, said he was ready to walk out if asked by the union. “There’s always uncertainty, but there’s also excitement,” he said. “I think we’re going to get a good contract.”Mr. Boyd, who carried his young daughter on his shoulder, said that he earned $32 an hour, but that his family of three was stretched. “Day care is $250 a week,” he said. “I’ve got a mortgage. My wife is in school, so we are on one income.”LaShawn English, a regional U.A.W. director, said the wage increases offered by the automakers would apply to most but not all workers.Nick Hagen for The New York TimesLaShawn English, who was elected this year as the director of the U.A.W.’s Region 1, which includes parts of Michigan and Canada, said the wage increases offered by the automakers would apply to most but not all workers. Among those who would not get the same raises are temporary workers who make up about 12 percent of Stellantis’s unionized work force of 43,000.“It’s not just about the higher-wage workers,” she said. “We have to move everybody forward. We can’t leave people behind.”Earlier on Wednesday, Stellantis presented a new offer to the union but did not disclose details other than to say it primarily addressed issues other than wages. The company also said it had to lay off 68 workers at a machining plant in Ohio, and might have to lay off 300 more in Indiana because of the U.A.W.’s strike at its Toledo plant, which makes Jeeps.On Tuesday, the U.A.W. president, Shawn Fain, said the union might expand the strike to additional plants this week if it did not make significant progress toward an agreement. Mr. Fain is expected to announce additional strike locations Friday morning with workers leaving their jobs at noon.In the past, the U.A.W. typically struck at all locations of one automaker at a time. Mr. Fain was elected president of the union this year on promises to take a more combative approach. His unusual strike strategy, frequent media appearances and strident criticisms of management appear to have caught the automakers off guard.On Friday, Mr. Fain appeared at a rally of several hundred workers in Detroit along with Senator Bernie Sanders, the Vermont independent.On Wednesday, G.M.’s second-highest-ranking executive, its president, Mark Reuss, sought to rebut Mr. Fain’s criticisms in an opinion essay in The Detroit Free Press.He said G.M. had offered to increase wages 20 percent over the next four years, which would lift the top wage to more than $39 an hour, or about $82,000 a year, based on a 40-hour workweek. Entry-level workers now earning $17 an hour would reach $39 an hour after four years.“U.A.W. leadership claims G.M. pays its team members ‘poverty’ wages,’” Mr. Reuss wrote. “This is simply not true.”While G.M. is making near-record profits — it made almost $10 billion in 2022 — Mr. Reuss said the company was investing heavily to make the transition to electric vehicles, including $11 billion this year. He added that the company could not afford to pay what the U.A.W. was seeking if it wanted to remain competitive and healthy.“The fundamental reality is that the U.A.W.’s demands can be described in one word — untenable,” he wrote, adding, “As the past has clearly shown, nobody wins in a strike.”Separately, the U.A.W. said on Wednesday that 190 union members went on strike at a Tuscaloosa, Ala., plant owned by ZF, a company that supplies axles to Mercedes-Benz. More

new video loaded: More

The $238 million in grants will set up eight research hubs, as a small slice of the federal money that will go to chip companies and research facilities in the coming months.The Biden administration on Wednesday announced that it was awarding $238 million through the Defense Department to set up eight hubs around the United States for promoting innovation in the semiconductor industry.The funds are one of the earliest releases of the nearly $53 billion in grants and subsidies that Congress and the Biden administration have approved to build up the domestic semiconductor industry, which U.S. officials say has been left vulnerable by decades of offshoring.The Biden administration has a variety of funding programs in the works to encourage chip research institutions and manufacturers to set up operations in the United States. Most of these programs are run through the Commerce Department, and many will begin handing out money this fall.While U.S. companies still design many of the world’s most advanced chips, much of the manufacturing of the technology has been outsourced to foreign locations, including Taiwan, leaving U.S. chip supply vulnerable if, for example, the Chinese government were to invade Taiwan.The awards announced Wednesday will go to research institutes, consortiums and universities located in New York, Arizona, Indiana, Ohio, California, North Carolina and Massachusetts, defense officials said.Each hub will receive $15 million to $40 million to fund the development of new chips for use in electromagnetic warfare, artificial intelligence, 5G and 6G wireless technologies, and quantum computing, among other areas. While the research will be directed at meeting the needs of the Defense Department, it is also expected to be useful for commercial applications.Kathleen Hicks, the deputy defense secretary, said in a news conference Wednesday that the hubs would “tackle many technical challenges relevant to D.O.D.’s missions, to get the most cutting-edge microchips into systems our troops use every day: ships, planes, tanks, long-range munitions, communications gear, sensors and much more.”The funding also aims to accelerate what the industry refers to as the “lab-to-fab transition,” the process of taking new chip technologies and turning them into viable commercial products.David A. Honey, the deputy under secretary of defense for research and engineering, said the hubs would bring more prototype work to the United States.“Now we’ll be able to get it done here,” he said. “And also we’re building out in the areas that are just not available anywhere else.”The Commerce Department is separately setting up a string of research hubs for the semiconductor industry, collectively called the National Semiconductor Technology Center, drawing on $11 billion in funding it received for research and development.Appearing before the House Science, Space and Technology Committee on Tuesday, Gina Raimondo, the commerce secretary, said that her department was on track to formally unveil that technology center this fall.She also said that the department had received about 100 applications from companies hoping to receive grants that will be available to manufacturers.While Ms. Raimondo acknowledged that the grant program faced challenges, like securing enough workers to staff new chip plants, she said that if properly implemented, the program would make the United States “the premier destination in the world” for chip design, research and manufacturing.“That’s the vision that we’re trying to achieve with your support,” Ms. Raimondo told lawmakers.Ms. Raimondo was also questioned about the release in prior weeks of an advanced smartphone by Chinese telecom giant Huawei. The company is under heavy U.S. trade restrictions, administered by the Commerce Department, that theoretically should have prevented such an innovation.Ms. Raimondo said that she was upset by the development, but added that the U.S. government did not have any evidence that Chinese companies could manufacture the more sophisticated chips at scale.Ms. Raimondo said that the United States could take various defensive measures to limit China’s access to advanced technology, but “my strongly held view is that what we do on offense matters so much more.”“The reality is that over the past 30 years, this country has taken its eye off the ball of manufacturing,” she continued. “And when you don’t manufacture you lose out on innovation, and you become dependent on other countries.” More

A looming government shutdown could prevent the Federal Reserve from raising rates in November, Bank of America says.
Policymakers would have only limited access to inflation data with departments shut that produce key reports.
If the impasse lasts longer than a month, “we think the prudent course of action would be for the Fed to stay on hold in November,” Bank of America said.

An eagle sculpture stands on the facade of the Marriner S. Eccles Federal Reserve building in Washington, D.C.
Andrew Harrer | Bloomberg | Getty Images

A looming government shutdown could prevent the Federal Reserve from raising rates in November, but not for the reason you might think, according to Bank of America.
Not only would the shutdown potentially slow down the economy and make a rate hike the wrong move, but a long impasse would mean central bank policymakers have only limited access to inflation data, the investment bank noted. That’s because unfunded agencies such as the departments of Labor and Commerce wouldn’t be producing key data reports on price trends.

“If the shutdown lasts for a month or more, the Fed would essentially be flying blind at its November meeting, having learned very little about economic activity and price pressures since the September meeting,” Bank of America U.S. economist Aditya Bhave said in a note.
While Bhave said a long shutdown is not expected, if it lasts longer than a month, “we think the prudent course of action would be for the Fed to stay on hold in November. Could the Fed hike in December instead? That is again a close call, but we think a skip in November more likely means the hiking cycle has ended, unless inflation clearly picks up again.”
The Fed relies closely on reports from Labor and Commerce to gauge inflation.
In particular, it focuses on Commerce’s personal consumption expenditures price index as a yardstick for where inflation is headed for the longer term. Labor’s consumer price index is a widely followed measure by the public and also figures into Fed calculations.
While they aren’t the only inflation gauges central bank officials use, not having them around in November would complicate the rate decision.

To be sure, markets think the Fed is done already anyway.
Pricing in the fed funds futures market indicates a less than 30% probability of a final hike in November, according to the CME Group’s FedWatch measure. The tool indicates the central bank could start cutting by June 2024.
Bank of America, though, expects the Fed to approve one more hike, which would take its key borrowing rate to a target range of 5.5%-5.75%. Bhave said that if the shutdown only lasts a few weeks, the Fed would have enough time to gather data and likely raise rates again, though he said a hike wouldn’t be certain if inflation continues to moderate.
The Fed concludes its two-day meeting on Wednesday, with markets overwhelmingly expecting rates to stay put.
— CNBC’s Michael Bloom contributed reporting.
Correction: Another hike by the Fed would take its key borrowing rate to a target range of 5.5%-5.75%. An earlier version misstated the range. More

The United Auto Workers union said workers would walk out of more plants on Friday if it didn’t make progress in talks with General Motors, Ford and Stellantis.The United Auto Workers said on Tuesday that the union would expand its strike against three U.S. automakers on Friday if it was unable to make substantial progress in contract talks with them.Nearly 13,000 U.A.W. members walked off the assembly lines at three plants last Friday, one each at the three companies — General Motors, Ford Motor and Stellantis, the parent of Chrysler. The union has demanded a 40 percent wage increase over four years, better benefits and other changes. The automakers, which are based in or have a big presence in Michigan, have offered raises of about half as much.In a video posted on Facebook on Tuesday, the union’s new president, Shawn Fain, said workers could walk out of more plants at the end of this week.“If we don’t see serious progress to noon Friday, Sept. 22, more locals will be called on to stand up and go on strike,” he said. “We’re going to keep hitting the companies where we need to.”Separately on Tuesday, Mr. Fain responded to criticism by former President Donald J. Trump, who is expected to visit the Detroit area next week.“Every fiber of our union is being poured into fighting the billionaire class and an economy that enriched people like Donald Trump at the expense of workers,” Mr. Fain said. “We can’t keep electing billionaires and millionaires that don’t have any understanding of what it is like to live paycheck to paycheck and struggle to get by and expecting them to solve the problems of the working class.”In an interview on NBC’s “Meet the Press” last weekend, Mr. Trump said Mr. Fain and the union were “failing” workers in the shift to electric vehicles that has been championed by President Biden.“The autoworkers are being sold down the river by their leadership,” he said, adding: “All of these cars are going to be made in China. The electric cars, automatically, are going to be made in China.”Mr. Biden has expressed support for the striking workers, although the U.A.W. has not endorsed his re-election thus far. The union has long backed Democratic presidential candidates, but some of its members supported Mr. Trump in the last two elections.Here Are the Plants Where U.A.W. Strikes Are HappeningSee the plants owned by Ford, General Motors and Stellantis where U.A.W. members are on strike.The union and the companies, which are engaged in three separate negotiations, remain far apart. The companies have offered raises of about 20 percent, but Mr. Fain has said that doesn’t go far enough to make up for the impact of inflation and concessions the union made over the last 15 years.The union also wants pensions to cover more workers, company-paid health care for retirees, shorter working hours and measures that make it harder for the companies to close plants in the United States. The automakers have rejected most of those other demands.In statements and interviews, auto executives have said meeting all of the union’s demands would put them at a severe competitive disadvantage to nonunion plants operated by Tesla and foreign automakers such as Toyota and Volkswagen. G.M., Ford and Stellantis already have higher labor costs than most nonunion car companies.The three automakers have said they cannot afford substantial raises and new benefits because they are investing tens of billions of dollars to develop electric vehicles and build battery plants. More

Amid uncertainty for the company’s film and TV divisions, the investment over the next decade doubles the outlay in the last 10 years.Disney’s theme parks will generate an estimated $10 billion in profit this year, up from $2.2 billion a decade ago. Not bad for a 68-year-old business, especially considering the devastation wrought by the pandemic just a couple of years ago.But how much boom is left?Last month, when Robert A. Iger, Disney’s chief executive officer, singled out the parks division as “a key growth engine” on an earnings-related conference call, Wall Street furrowed its brow. Disneyland in Anaheim, Calif., has long been viewed as maxed out, with little room to expand. Walt Disney World near Orlando, Fla., has become a question mark, given that Mr. Iger has said the company’s legal battle with Florida’s governor, Ron DeSantis, could imperil $17 billion in planned expansion at the resort over the next decade. Disney’s overseas parks — aside from Tokyo Disney Resort, which it receives royalties from but does not own — have sometimes struggled to turn a profit.On Tuesday, Disney offered a clearer picture of the opportunity it sees, which can only be described as colossal: The company disclosed in a security filing that it planned to spend roughly $60 billion over the next decade to expand its domestic and international parks and to continue building Disney Cruise Line. That amount is double what Disney spent on parks and the cruise line over the past decade, which was itself a period of greatly increased investment.In the past decade, Disney has opened the Shanghai Disney Resort, more than doubled its cruise line capacity and added rides based on intellectual properties like “Star Wars,” “Guardians of the Galaxy,” “Tron,” Spider-Man, “Avatar” and “Toy Story” to its domestic parks. Disney has also poured money into its Paris and Hong Kong parks, with themed expansions tied to “Frozen” and other Disney films scheduled to open soon. Three more ocean liners are on the way, bringing the Disney fleet to eight ships, and Disney is nearing completion of a new port on a Bahamian island. (Disney already has one private island port.)If that is what $30 billion can buy, imagine what $60 billion might bring.“There are far fewer limits to our parks business than people think,” Mr. Iger said in an email.“The growth trajectory is very compelling if we do nothing beyond what we have already committed,” he continued, referring to attractions and ships that have been announced but are not yet operational. “By dramatically increasing our investment — building big, being ambitious, maintaining quality and high standards and using our most popular I.P. — it will be turbocharged.”Josh D’Amaro, chairman of the parks division, noted that films like “Coco” and “Zootopia” had not yet been incorporated into the parks in a meaningful way.Todd Anderson for The New York TimesDisney shares fell 3 percent on Tuesday on the news, to about $82. Analysts said some investors had been worried about the company’s ability to generate free cash flow at a time when its television business — traditionally a major generator of cash — has been undercut by streaming services.Disney already has a sizable amount of debt, largely because of the pandemic. The company suspended its semiannual shareholder dividend in 2020 to preserve cash, but is expected to restart dividend payments later this year.“We’re incredibly mindful of the financial underpinning of the company, the need to continue to grow in terms of bottom line, the need to invest wisely so that we’re increasing the returns on invested capital, and the need to maintain a balance sheet, for a variety of reasons,” Mr. Iger said on Tuesday afternoon in a blog post.Disney is expanding the investment after a stretch of trouble in almost all its divisions. Cable television, including ESPN, has become a shadow of its former self, the result of cord cutting, advertising weakness and rising sports programming costs. Disney had a disappointing summer at the box office, with movies like “Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny” and “Haunted Mansion” selling sharply fewer tickets than anticipated. The company’s Disney+ streaming service continues to lose money; Mr. Iger has said it will be profitable by fall 2024, but some investors are skeptical.In contrast, Disney’s parks and cruise business has been a bright spot, in many ways propping up the whole company. In the most recent quarter, Disney Parks, Experiences and Products generated $2.4 billion in operating income, an 11 percent increase from a year earlier. Disney Media and Entertainment Distribution had $1.1 billion in operating profit, an 18 percent decline.Spending per guest at Disney parks has increased 42 percent since 2019, in part because of higher prices for tickets, food, merchandise and hotel rooms.An attraction based on “Moana” at Disney World is among those that have already been announced but are not yet open to the public.Todd Anderson for The New York TimesStill, increased investment in theme parks brings increased risk. It is a business that will always be sensitive to factors beyond Disney’s control: swings in the economy, gas prices, hurricanes, earthquakes, tension between the United States and China. Disney has greatly increased security, deploying undercover guards and installing metal detectors, but these teeming resorts — Disney parks attracted an estimated 121 million visitors last year — could become ghost towns if a violent event took place.Josh D’Amaro, chairman of Disney Parks, Experiences and Products, said people who focused on such risks overlooked the resilience of theme park fans. He noted that customers had come flooding back when Disney parks reopened during the pandemic.“Every time there has been a moment of crisis or concern, we have managed to bounce back faster than anyone expected,” he said.Mr. D’Amaro declined to specify how the company planned to spend the $60 billion. But he gave hints, noting that Disney movies like “Coco,” “Zootopia,” “Encanto” and others had not yet been incorporated into the company’s parks in meaningful ways.“Imagine bringing Wakanda to life,” he said, referring to the fictional “Black Panther” kingdom. “In terms of bringing the latest Disney-Marvel-Pixar intellectual property to the parks, we haven’t come close to scratching the surface. And we have learned that incorporating Disney I.P. increases the return on investment significantly.”A rendering of an area adjacent to Disneyland in California that Disney wants to redevelop, adding rides based on movies like “Avatar.”DisneyDisney owns 1,000 undeveloped acres across its existing theme park resorts, Mr. D’Amaro noted. (For comparison, he said, that’s the size of seven Disneylands.) One of the biggest areas of opportunity, he said, involves the original Disneyland, which opened in 1955. If the company can persuade the City of Anaheim to change a plan, adopted in the 1990s, that limits where hotels, parking lots and attractions can be built, Disney intends to redevelop land adjacent to Disneyland, greatly expanding capacity. Disney also plans to turn a parking area south of the park into a themed shopping, dining and hotel district.Disney released a 17,000-page environmental impact study for the project last week. The Anaheim City Council is expected to vote on the changes in mid- to late 2024.How much Disney invests in Florida may depend on the courts, where the company is battling Mr. DeSantis and his allies for control over Disney World’s growth plan. Angered over Disney’s criticism of a Florida education law, Mr. DeSantis in April ended the company’s long-held ability to self-govern its 25,000-acre resort as if it were a county. Disney maintains that prior contracts preserve its ability to control development, however.“We want to keep growing and investing and have ambitious plans in Florida,” Mr. D’Amaro said. “For the benefit of our guests, our cast members and the economy of central Florida, we hope the conditions will be there for us to do so.” He declined to comment further.At the moment, Disney does not plan to build parks in new countries or cities. (In the past, the company looked at building a park in India, for instance, and expanding beyond Hong Kong and Shanghai in China.) Rather, the company will focus on developing new ports for its ships.Starting in 2025, a new cruise ship — the biggest in Disney’s fleet so far, with space for more than 6,000 guests — will be based in Singapore. Disney’s ships have grown increasingly themed, with characters and artwork from franchises like “Frozen,” “Star Wars” and Marvel’s Avengers incorporated into restaurants and entertainment zones.“It’s like bringing a theme park to a new part of the world,” Mr. D’Amaro said of Disney Cruise Line, which has recently been booked to 98 percent of capacity. More

The Federal Reserve is unlikely to declare victory this week. But investors will watch for any hint that the end to rate increases is coming.Federal Reserve officials are expected to leave interest rates unchanged at their meeting on Wednesday, buying themselves more time to assess whether borrowing costs are high enough to weigh down the economy and wrestle inflation under control.But investors are likely to focus less on what policymakers do on Wednesday — and more on what they say about the future. Wall Street will closely watch whether Fed policymakers still expect to make another interest rate increase before the end of the year or whether they are edging closer to the next phase in their fight against rapid inflation.Central bankers have already raised interest rates to a range of 5.25 to 5.5 percent, the highest level in 22 years. By making it more expensive to borrow to buy a house or expand a business, they are trying to slow demand across the economy, making it harder for companies to charge more without losing customers and slowing price increases.Officials predicted in their last quarterly economic forecast — released in June — that they were likely to make one more rate increase before the end of 2023. They have kept that possibility alive throughout the summer even as inflation has begun to fade meaningfully. But key policymakers have sounded less intent on making another move in recent weeks.The Fed’s chair, Jerome H. Powell, had suggested in June that further adjustment was “likely.” More recently, including during a closely watched speech in August, he said policymakers could nudge rates up “if appropriate.”Jerome H. Powell, chair of the Federal Reserve, said in August that policymakers could nudge rates up “if appropriate.”T.J. Kirkpatrick for The New York TimesFed officials will release economic projections after their gathering this week, which takes place on Tuesday and Wednesday, offering a fresh look at whether most policymakers still think one final rate increase is likely to be necessary. The projections will also show how officials are interpreting a confusing moment in the economy, when consumer spending has been stronger than many economists expected even as inflation has cooled down a bit more quickly.Taken together, the revised forecasts, the Fed’s statement and a news conference with Mr. Powell after the meeting could give the clearest signal yet about how close the central bank thinks it is to the end of rate increases — and what the next phase of trying to fully wrangle inflation might look like.“You’ve had many centrist Fed officials over the last few weeks say: We’re close to where we need to be — we may even be there,” said Michael Feroli, chief U.S. economist at J.P. Morgan.Mr. Feroli thinks that there is a roughly two-thirds chance that policymakers will still forecast another rate move, and a one-third chance that they will predict that the current setting is likely to be the peak interest rate.But even if the Fed signals that interest rates have reached their peak, officials have been clear that they are likely to stay elevated for some time. Policymakers think that simply keeping rates at a high level will continue to weigh on economic growth and gradually cool the economy.Mr. Feroli does not expect officials to start talking too decisively about the next phase — one in which rates come down — quite yet.“They haven’t won the war on inflation, so it’d be a little premature,” Mr. Feroli said.That said, the economic forecasts could offer some hints. Fed officials will release their projections for interest rates in 2024, 2025 and — newly — 2026 after this meeting. In June, their 2024 projections had suggested that officials expected to lower borrowing costs four times next year. The questions is when in the year those cuts would come, and what officials would need to see to feel comfortable lowering rates.Policymakers may offer little clarity on those points on Wednesday, hoping to avoid a big market reaction — one that would make their job of cooling the economy more difficult.If stocks were to shoot up as markets broadly began to anticipate that the Fed-induced financial and economic squeeze was likely to come sooner, it could make it cheaper and easier for companies and households to borrow money. That could speed up the economy when the Fed is trying to slow it down.Already, growth has been surprisingly resilient to the Fed’s high rates. Consumers and companies have continued to spend at a healthy clip despite the many economic risks on the outlook — including the resumption of federal student loan repayments in early October and a possible government shutdown after the end of this month.Consumer spending has been stronger than many economists had expected even as inflation has cooled down a bit more quickly.Karsten Moran for The New York TimesLeftover household savings from the pandemic, a strong labor market with solid wage growth, and various government policies meant to spur infrastructure and green energy investment may be helping to feed that momentum.The resilience could prompt another revision to the Fed’s economic forecasts on Wednesday, economists at Goldman Sachs said: Officials might mark up their estimate of the so-called neutral rate, which signals how high interest rates need to be in order to weigh on the economy. That would suggest that while policy was restraining the economy today, it wasn’t doing so quite as intensely as officials would have expected.The economy’s staying power could also prevent policymakers from sounding too excited about the recent slowdown in inflation.Consumer Price Index increases have cooled notably over the past year — to 3.7 percent in August, down from 9.1 percent at their 2022 peak — as pandemic disruptions fade and prices of goods that were in short supply fall or grow more slowly.The Fed’s preferred inflation indicator, which is released at more of a delay than the Consumer Price Index measure, is expected to have climbed slowly on a monthly basis in August after food and fuel prices are stripped out to give a clearer sense of the inflation trend.The moderation is unquestionably good news — it makes it more likely that the Fed could slow the economy just enough to cool price increases without tanking the economy. But policymakers may worry about fully stamping out inflation in an economy that is still growing robustly, said William English, a former Fed economist who is now a professor in the practice of finance at Yale.If consumers are still willing to spend, companies may find that they can still raise prices to pad or protect profits. Given that, officials may think that a more marked economic slowdown will be needed to bring inflation the whole way down to their 2 percent goal.“The economy stayed stronger for longer than they’d been thinking,” Mr. English said. Given that, Fed officials may maintain that their next move is more likely to be a rate increase than a rate decrease.Mr. English is skeptical that Fed officials think they can cool price increases fully without more of an economic slowdown.“I doubt they are expecting, as their most likely forecast, that they’re going to get an immaculate disinflation,” he said. “I think that is still their base case: The economy really does have to have a period of quite slow growth.” More