Evelyn Reynolds

The entertainment behemoth spent decades avoiding even the whiff of controversy. But it has increasingly been drawn into the partisan political fray.Since its founding in 1923, Disney has stood alone in Hollywood in one fundamental way: Its family-friendly movies, television shows and theme park rides, at least in theory, have always been aimed at everybody, with potential political and cultural pitfalls zealously avoided.The Disney brand is about wishing on stars and finding true love and living happily ever after. In case the fairy tale castles are too subtle, Disney theme parks outright promise an escape from reality with welcome signs that read, “Here you leave today and enter the world of yesterday, tomorrow and fantasy.”Lately, however, real world ugliness has been creeping into the Magic Kingdom. In this hyperpartisan moment, both sides of the political divide have been pounding on Disney, endangering one of the world’s best-known brands — one that, for many, symbolizes America itself — as it tries to navigate a rapidly changing entertainment industry.In some cases, Disney has willingly waded into cultural issues. Last summer, to applause from progressives and snarls from the far right, Disney decided to make loudspeaker announcements at its theme parks gender neutral, removing “ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls” in favor of “dreamers of all ages.” But the entertainment giant has also found itself dragged into the fray, as with the recent imbroglio over a new Florida law that among many things restricts classroom instruction through third grade on sexual orientation and gender identity and has been labeled by opponents as “Don’t Say Gay.”At first, Disney tried not to take a side on the legislation, at least publicly, which prompted an employee revolt. Disney then aggressively denounced the bill — only to find itself in the cross hairs of Fox News hosts and Florida’s governor, Ron DeSantis, who sent a fund-raising email to supporters saying that “Woke Disney” had “lost any moral authority to tell you what to do.” Florida lawmakers began threatening to revoke a 55-year-old law that enables Walt Disney World to essentially function as its own municipal government. (Disney had already been at odds with the governor on pandemic issues like a vaccine mandate for employees.)In trying to offend no one, Disney had seemingly lost everyone.Disney employees and supporters, at a park in Burbank, Calif., last month, protested Disney’s reaction to a new law in Florida.J. Emilio Flores for The New York Times“The mission for the Disney brand has always been really clear: Do nothing that might upset or confuse the family audience,” said Martin Kaplan, the Norman Lear professor of entertainment, media and society at the University of Southern California and a former Walt Disney Studios executive. “Fun for all. Nothing objectionable. Let’s all be transformed by the magic wand. But we are so divided today, so revved up, that even Disney is having a hard time bringing us together.”Avoiding socially divisive topics, of course, in itself reflects a certain worldview. The Walt Disney Company’s namesake founder, after all, was an anti-union conservative. Main Street U.S.A. patriotism is on prominent display at Disney’s theme parks. The traditional Christmas story is told each December at Disney World in Florida and Disneyland in California with Candlelight Processional events, Bible verses and all.It took the company until 2009 to introduce a Black princess.But in recent years, there has been a noticeable change. Robert A. Iger, who served as chief executive from 2005 to 2020, pushed the world’s largest entertainment company to emphasize diverse casting and storytelling. As he said at Disney’s 2017 shareholder meeting, referring to inclusion and equality: “We can take those values, which we deem important societally, and actually change people’s behavior — get people to be more accepting of the multiple differences and cultures and races and all other facets of our lives and our people.”In essence, entertainment as advocacy.Mr. Iger was the one who pushed forward the global blockbuster “Black Panther,” which had an almost entirely Black cast and a powerful Afrocentric story line. Under his tenure, Disney refocused the “Star Wars” franchise around female characters. A parade of animated movies (“Moana,” “Coco,” “Raya and the Last Dragon,” “Soul,” “Encanto”) showcased a wide variety of races, cultures and ethnicities.Read More on the Walt Disney CompanyDisney World: Celebrations for the theme park’s 50th anniversary are underway. The company hopes they will help with its pandemic recovery.‘Don’t Say Gay’ Bill: Amid employee walkouts and official statements, Disney has become entangled in a battle over the Florida legislation.Streaming: As it faces pressure to keep its streaming business growing, the company announced a cheaper, ad-supported version of Disney+.A Documentary: A movie directed by the granddaughter of one of the Disney founders offered a harsh portrait of pay inequality at the company.The result, for the most part, has been one hit after another. But a swath of Disney’s audience has pushed back.Robert A. Iger, center, Disney’s chief executive from 2005 to 2020, pushed the company to emphasize diverse casting and storytelling.Gareth Cattermole/Getty Images“Eternals,” a $200 million Disney-Marvel movie, was “review bombed” in the fall because it depicted a gay superhero kissing his husband, with online trolls flooding the Internet Movie Database with hundreds of homophobic one-star reviews. In January, Disney was accused by the actor Peter Dinklage and others of trafficking in stereotypes by moving forward with a live-action “Snow White” movie — until it was revealed that the company planned to replace the seven dwarfs with digitally created “magical creatures,” which, in turn, prompted complaints by others about the “erasure” of people with dwarfism.Disney executives tend to dismiss such incidents as tempests in teapots: trending today, replaced by a new complaint tomorrow. But even moderate online storms can be a distraction inside the company. Meetings are held about how and whether to respond; fretful talent partners must be reassured.As Disney prepared to introduce its streaming service in 2019, it began an extensive review of its film library. As part of the initiative, called Stories Matter, Disney added disclaimers to content that the company determined included “negative depictions or mistreatment of people or cultures.” Examples included episodes of “The Muppet Show” from the 1970s and the 1941 version of “Dumbo.”“These stereotypes were wrong then and are wrong now,” the disclaimers read.The Stories Matter team privately flagged other characters as potentially problematic, with the findings distributed to senior Disney leaders, according to two current Disney executives, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss confidential information. Ursula, the villainous sea witch from “The Little Mermaid” (1989), was one. Her dark color palette (lavender skin, black legs) could be viewed through a racial lens, the Stories Matter team cautioned; she is also a “queer coded” character, with mannerisms inspired in part by those of a real-life drag queen.Tinker Bell was marked for caution because she is “body conscious” and jealous of Peter Pan’s attention, according to the executives, while Captain Hook could expose Disney to accusations of discrimination or prejudice against individuals with disabilities because he is a villain.At least some people inside Disney are concerned that such sensitivities go too far. One of the executives worried that looking at artistic creations through a “politically correct filter” could chill creativity.Disney declined to comment for this article.All of this comes at a perilous time for Disney, which is racing to remake itself as a streaming titan as technology giants like Amazon and Apple move deeper into the entertainment business and traditional cable networks like Disney-owned ESPN slowly wither. Disney is also coping with a disruptive changing of the guard, with Mr. Iger stepping down as executive chairman in December.Mr. Iger occasionally spoke out on hot-button political issues during his time as chief executive. His successor, Bob Chapek, decided (with backing from the Disney board) to avoid weighing in on state political battles. Disney lobbyists would continue to work behind the scenes, however, as they did with the Florida legislation.Bob Chapek, Disney’s chief executive, was met with employee protests and then a right-wing backlash after he avoided publicly weighing in on the new Florida law.Chris Pizzello/Invision, via Associated Press“Our diverse stories are our corporate statements — and they are more powerful than any tweet or lobbying effort,” Mr. Chapek wrote in an email to Disney employees on March 7. “I firmly believe that our ability to tell such stories — and have them received with open eyes, ears and hearts — would be diminished if our company were to become a political football in any debate.”In the case of Florida, the approach backfired, first with employee protests and a walkout and then with a right-wing backlash. The Fox News host Tucker Carlson said Disney had “a sexual agenda for 6-year-olds” and was “creepy as hell.” Tweets with the #boycottDisney hashtag accumulated millions of impressions between March 28 and April 3, according to ListenFirst, an analytics firm.Disney executives have long held the position that boycotts have a minimal impact on the company’s business, if any. Disney is such a behemoth (it generates roughly $70 billion in annual revenue) that avoiding its products is almost impossible.But the same vast reach that makes Disney hard to boycott also makes it an increasingly visible part of the country’s cultural debates. Hardly a month goes by without some kind of dust-up, usually with sexual identity and gender as the prompt.On “Muppet Babies” last summer, Gonzo wore a princess gown to a party, defying Miss Piggy’s request that boys dress as knights.Disney ChannelLast summer, “Muppet Babies,” a Disney Junior series for children ages 3 to 8, gently explored gender identity. Gonzo donned a gown, defying a directive from Miss Piggy “that the girls come as princesses and the boys come as knights.” Out magazine wrote that the episode “just sent a powerful message of love and acceptance to gender-variant kids everywhere!” And a far-right pundit blasted Disney for “pushing the trans agenda” on children, starting an online brush fire.Around the same time, some L.G.B.T.Q. advocates were criticizing Disney over “Loki,” a Disney+ superhero show. In the third episode of “Loki,” the title character briefly acknowledged for the first time onscreen what comic fans had long known: He is bisexual. But the blink-and-you-missed-it handling of the information angered some prominent members of the L.G.B.T.Q. community. “It’s, like, one word,” Russell T. Davies, a British screenwriter (“Queer as Folk”), said during a panel discussion at the time. “It’s a ridiculous, craven, feeble gesture.”The Disney+ show “Loki,” starring Tom Hiddleston, was criticized for the way it handled the title character’s brief acknowledgement that he is bisexual.Marvel/Disney+The fighting will undoubtedly continue: The Disney-Pixar film “Lightyear,” set for release in June, depicts a loving lesbian couple, while “Thor: Love and Thunder,” arriving in July, will showcase a major L.G.B.T.Q. character.Last month, when Disney held its most-recent shareholder meeting, Mr. Chapek was put on the spot by shareholders from the political left and right.One person called Disney to task for contributions to legislators who have championed bills that restrict voting and reproductive rights. Mr. Chapek said that Disney gave money to “both sides of the aisle” and that it was reassessing its donation policies. (He subsequently paused all contributions in Florida.) Another representative for a shareholder advocacy group then took the microphone and noted that “Disney from its very inception has always represented a safe haven for children,” before veering into homophobic and transphobic comments and asking Mr. Chapek to “ditch the politicization and gender ideology.”In response, Mr. Chapek noted the contrasting shareholder concerns. “I think all the participants on today’s call can see how difficult it is to try to thread the needle between the extreme polarization of political viewpoints,” he said.“What we want Disney to be is a place where people can come together,” he continued. “My opinion is that, when someone walks down Main Street and comes in the gates of our parks, they put their differences aside and look at what they have as a shared belief — a shared belief of Disney magic, hopes, dreams and imagination.” More

The ultimate arbiter of a sovereign default is an open question but markets may have the final word.WASHINGTON — Russia is ambling toward a major default on its foreign debt, a grim milestone that it has not seen since the Bolshevik Revolution more than a century ago and one that raises the prospect of years of legal wrangling and a global hunt by bondholders for Russian assets.The looming default is the result of sanctions that have immobilized about half of Russia’s $640 billion of foreign currency reserves, straining the country’s ability to make bond repayments in the currency the debt was issued in — dollars. Girding for a default, Russia has already pre-emptively dismissed it as an “artificial” result of sanctions imposed by the United States and its allies, and it has threatened to contest such an outcome in court.The coming fight, which would probably pit Russia against big investors from around the world, raises murky questions over who gets to decide if a nation has actually defaulted in the rare case where sanctions have curbed a country’s ability to pay its debts.Russia does not appear likely to take the declaration of a default lightly. If that should occur, it would raise Russia’s cost of borrowing for years to come and effectively lock it out of international capital markets, weighing on an economy that is already expected to contract sharply this year. It would also be a stain on the economic stewardship of President Vladimir V. Putin that would underscore the costs Russia is incurring from its invasion of Ukraine.At stake for Russia, which has already suffered the abrupt rupture of decades of crucial business ties with the United States, Europe and other nations, is one of the underpinnings of economic growth: the ability to smoothly borrow money from outside its borders.Since Russia’s predicament is so unusual, it remains something of an open question who is the ultimate arbiter of a sovereign debt default.“This points to the squishiness and patchwork nature of sovereign debt markets,” said Tim Samples, a legal studies professor at the University of Georgia’s Terry College of Business and an expert on sovereign debt. “I think this is set to be convoluted and disputed for a variety of reasons.”Mr. Samples suggested that there could be a “cascade” of events that brings Russia to a default.The most direct verdict could come from the big credit ratings agencies, which have already signaled that Russia’s credit worthiness is eroding and that a default could be on the horizon.This past week, Moody’s warned that Russia’s payment of about $650 million of dollar-denominated debt in rubles on April 4 could be considered a default if it does not reverse course and pay in dollars by May 4, when a 30-day grace period concludes. That followed a similar warning earlier in the week by S&P Global, which placed Russia under a “selective default” rating.But it is not clear how the ratings agencies will weigh in if Russia fails to make payments after its grace periods run out because of European Union sanctions that have restricted the agencies from rating Russia. Spokesmen from Moody’s and S&P did not comment. A Fitch spokesman said he could not offer any comments on Russia’s creditworthiness in light of the sanctions.The Biden administration put additional pressure on Russia earlier this month when the Treasury Department started blocking Russia from making debt payments using dollars held in American banks. That new restriction was intended to force Russia to choose between draining the remaining dollar reserves it has in Russia or using new revenue (from natural gas payments, for example) to make bond payments and avoid defaulting on its debt.Russia can still make payments on Russian sovereign debt as long as it is not trying to use funds from Russian government accounts that are held in American financial institutions.After the grace period on the foreign currency bond payments expires on May 4, the next key moment will be May 25. That is when American bondholders will no longer be able to accept Russian debt payments under a temporary exemption that the Treasury Department has allowed.The Russian central bank’s offices in Moscow. A default would raise Russia’s cost of borrowing and effectively lock it out of international capital markets.The New York TimesWhile the verdict of the ratings agencies carries significant weight, bondholders will determine the consequences of Russia failing to make payments that were due or that violate the terms of its contracts. The bondholders could take a wait-and-see approach or declare that the bonds are immediately due and payable, which could cause other bonds with “cross default” provisions to also be in default.Another potential arbiter of default is the Credit Derivatives Determination Committee, which is a panel of investors in the market for default insurance, or credit-default swaps. The committee is deliberating whether Russia’s payments in rubles constitute a “failure to pay,” which would kick-start insurance payouts. The panel already ruled that the state-owned​​ Russian Railways JSC was in default for missing a bond interest payment.To some analysts, that decision and the payments in rubles mean that Russia already is technically in default.“If Russia doesn’t pay on time, doesn’t pay in the currency in the contract, that’s a default — it’s crystal clear,” said Timothy Ash, a senior sovereign strategist at BlueBay Asset Management. “For all intents and purposes, Russia is already in default.”The Russia-Ukraine War and the Global EconomyCard 1 of 6Rising concerns. More

Mortgage costs have jumped as the Federal Reserve has raised rates. With higher rates come fewer offers.Luis Solis, a real estate agent in Portland, Ore., marked a milestone weekend late last month. It was the first time in two years that one of his listings made it to Monday without any offers.This particular house was listed at $500,000, and after a Saturday open house there were promises of at least three bids, including one for $40,000 over the asking price. Then Monday came, and there were none. Then Tuesday, and Wednesday. An offer finally came in, but instead of being 10 to 15 percent higher than the listing — something that became almost standard at the height of the coronavirus pandemic’s housing market — it was right at $500,000. And it was the only one. And the buyer took it.“We didn’t have the competing offers that would drive up the price,” Mr. Solis said. “It’s not crazy like it was.”Taking some air out of the crazed market — and the hot economy in general — is precisely what the Federal Reserve wanted to do when it raised its key interest rate in March and signaled more increases to come. Mortgage rates have surged in response, jumping to 5 percent from slightly more than 3 percent since the start of the year.That rise means the monthly payment on a $500,000 house like the one Mr. Solis just sold would be about $500 more a month than it was at the end of last year, assuming a fixed-rate mortgage and 20 percent down payment. And the higher cost comes on top of a more than 30 percent rise in home prices over the past two years, according to Zillow.Now early data and interviews across the industry suggest that many buyers have finally been exhausted by declining affordability and cutthroat competition, causing the gravity-defying pandemic housing market to start easing up.Open houses have thinned. Online searches for homes have dropped. Homebuilders, many of whom have accrued backlogs of eager buyers, say rising mortgage rates have forced them to go deeper into those waiting lists to sell each house. In a recent survey of builders, Zelman & Associates, a housing research firm, found that while builders were still seeing strong demand, cancellations had inched up, though still well below historically low levels. Builders have also grown increasingly concerned about rising mortgage rates and surging home prices.“There is a lot more concern than there had been,” said Ivy Zelman, chief executive of Zelman & Associates.By any standard that prevailed before 2020, this would be a hot real estate market. Home prices remain high, and not only is there little sign they will fall anytime soon, but many economists predict a continued rise through the year. Still, after two years of torrid demand, agents had become accustomed to fielding multiple offers for each listing and setting price records each weekend. That frenzy, brought on by pandemic migrations and the growing centrality of the home as a space where people both live and work, is now subsiding.“We’re seeing some early indications that a growing share of home buyers, especially in expensive coastal markets, are getting priced out,” said Daryl Fairweather, chief economist at Redfin.Understand Inflation in the U.S.Inflation 101: What is inflation, why is it up and whom does it hurt? Our guide explains it all.Your Questions, Answered: Times readers sent us their questions about rising prices. Top experts and economists weighed in.Interest Rates: As it seeks to curb inflation, the Federal Reserve announced that it was raising interest rates for the first time since 2018.How Americans Feel: We asked 2,200 people where they’ve noticed inflation. Many mentioned basic necessities, like food and gas.Supply Chain’s Role: A key factor in rising inflation is the continuing turmoil in the global supply chain. Here’s how the crisis unfolded.For buyers, however, the market will still feel plenty competitive. Even if prices aren’t rising at the pace of the past two years, homes are selling within a week of being listed and posting no significant price declines.Construction in Missoula, Mont. Among homebuilders, “there is a lot more concern than there had been,” said Ivy Zelman of Zelman & Associates.Tailyr Irvine for The New York TimesThat rising mortgage rates have not had more of an effect shows how difficult it is to tamp down prices and bring demand into balance in an economy where a lack of supply — marked by half-empty car lots, furniture order backlogs and a paucity of homes for sale — is playing a guiding role.In the prepandemic world of bustling offices and smoothly functioning supply chains, such a steep rise in mortgage rates, on top of years of double-digit price appreciation, would have economists predicting a severe drop in demand and maybe even falling prices. Those trends would have echoed through the broader economy, with fewer people spending on moving vans and new couches, and as existing homeowners felt on less solid financial footing and potentially curbed their own spending. Instead, economists are predicting that prices will continue to rise — by double digits in some forecasts — through the year.“I don’t think it’s going to stop the housing market,” said Mike Fratantoni, chief economist at the Mortgage Bankers Association.The problem is there are so few homes for sale that even a slower market is unlikely to create enough inventory to satisfy demand anytime soon. For years the United States has suffered from a chronically undersupplied housing market. Home building plunged after the Great Recession and remained at a recessionary pace long after the economy and job market had recovered. Even today, the pace of home building remains below the heights of the mid-2000s, before the 2008 financial crisis and housing market crash.This makes it a good time to be a seller — assuming you don’t need to buy. Christopher J. Waller, a governor at the Fed, is living this out.“I sold my house yesterday in St. Louis to an all-cash buyer, no inspection,” Mr. Waller said in panel discussion on Monday. “But I’m trying to buy a house in D.C., and now I’m on the other side, going: ‘This is insane.’”He noted that the sharp rise in mortgage rates over recent months should have an effect on what happens with housing.The recent lack of new building was not for lack of interest. Members of the millennial generation, now in their late 20s to early 40s, are in their prime home buying years. Their desire to buy houses and start families has collided with scant supply, leading to an increase in prices.Shutdowns in the early months of the pandemic slowed home building, but housing starts have been on an upswing lately. New home completions remain low, however, because the tight labor market and supply chain disruptions have homebuilders scrambling to find wood, dishwashers, garage doors — and workers.Inflation F.A.Q.Card 1 of 6What is inflation? More

The Biden administration said on Friday that it intended to nominate Michael S. Barr, a law professor and a former Obama administration official, to be the Federal Reserve’s vice chair for supervision.The position — one of America’s top financial regulatory spots — has proved to be a particularly thorny one to fill.The administration’s initial nominee, Sarah Bloom Raskin, failed to win Senate confirmation after Republicans took issue with her writing on climate-related financial oversight and seized on her limited answers about her private-sector work. Senator Joe Manchin III, Democrat of West Virginia, joined Republicans in deciding not to support her, ending her chances.Mr. Barr, the dean of the University of Michigan’s public policy school, could also face challenges in securing widespread support. He was a leading contender to be nominated as comptroller of the currency but ran into opposition from progressive Democrats.Some of the complaints centered on his work in government: As a Treasury Department official during the Obama administration, Mr. Barr played a major role in putting together the Dodd-Frank Act, which revamped financial regulation after the 2008 financial crisis. But some said he opposed some especially stringent measures for big banks.Other opponents when his name was floated for that post focused on his private-sector work with the financial technology and cryptocurrency industry.But President Biden described Mr. Barr as a qualified candidate who would bring years of experience to the job.“Barr has strong support from across the political spectrum,” the president said in a statement announcing the decision. He noted that Mr. Barr had been confirmed to his Treasury post “on a bipartisan basis.”Senator Sherrod Brown, the Ohio Democrat who chairs the Senate Banking Committee, said in a statement, “I will support this key nominee, and I strongly urge my Republican colleagues to abandon their old playbook of personal attacks and demagoguery.”Ian Katz, managing director at the research and advisory firm Capital Alpha, put Mr. Barr’s chance of confirmation at 60 percent. “Barr is seen by many as more moderate than Sarah Bloom Raskin,” Mr. Katz wrote in a note ahead of the announcement but after speculation that Mr. Barr might be chosen.Mr. Barr completes Mr. Biden’s slate of candidates for the central bank’s five open positions.The other picks — Jerome H. Powell for another term as Fed chair, Lael Brainard for vice chair, and Lisa D. Cook and Philip N. Jefferson for seats on the Board of Governors — await confirmation. Those nominations have gotten past the Senate Banking Committee, the first step toward confirmation, and a vote before the full Senate is expected in the coming weeks.Mr. Biden said he would work with the committee to get Mr. Barr through his first vote quickly, and he called for swift confirmation of the others. More

Supplies are not keeping up with demand, and costs may go higher, experts say.A stunning rise in the cost of jet fuel has sent airfares soaring, and industry experts say they are likely to go higher. For now, though, travel-starved consumers seem more than willing to pay up.Jet fuel prices have settled somewhat since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine sent them skyrocketing last month, but the market remains extremely volatile. The problem is particularly severe in New York, where the cost of the fuel rose about fourfold to just over $7.50 a gallon before dipping back to $5.30 in recent days.Supply is broadly constrained and prices have spiked across the country. The Energy Department this week said that the inventory level for East Coast jet fuel stood at 6.5 million barrels, the lowest since the agency began keeping track in 1990.“Jet fuel has made the most parabolic move I’ve ever seen for any transportation fuel,” said Tom Kloza, global head of energy analysis at Oil Price Information Service. “It’s just insane.”The surge in prices has implications not only for airfares but also for the already high costs of global shipping. On Wednesday, for example, Amazon announced plans to impose its first “fuel and inflation surcharge” for sellers whose goods it stores and delivers.Airlines have been able to pass on some of their added fuel expense to consumers, many of whom are more than eager to travel after being denied the opportunity for two years.At the start of this year, the average cost of a round-trip domestic flight was $235, according to Hopper, an airfare-tracking app. Since then, ticket prices have risen 40 percent, to $330. Adit Damodaran, an economist at Hopper, which tracks prices for flights and hotels, said the company expects another 10 percent rise, to $360, by the end of May, before prices drop again in the summer.“Not only are the current prices that travelers are paying extremely high compared to historic price data, but the rate of increase has also been particularly steep since January,” he said.In addition to the rising cost of jet fuel, Mr. Damodaran said, the surge in airfares can also be attributed to typical seasonal patterns and the fact that demand was suppressed at the start of the year as the Omicron coronavirus variant spread.Some airlines have also cut flights in response to persistent staff shortages, creating greater competition and driving up fares for the flights that remain.Carriers typically pass on to consumers as much as 60 percent of a volatile rise in the price of fuel, experts said, a process that usually takes months. This time, however, the industry has been able to pass along costs more quickly, in large part because of high demand and a shift in consumer behavior during the pandemic toward buying tickets closer to the date of travel.“We are successfully recapturing a significant portion of the run-up in fuel,” Ed Bastian, the chief executive of Delta Air Lines, told investment analysts and reporters on a call on Wednesday. “This is occurring almost in real time, given the strong demand environment.”Mr. Bastian said that Delta, the first major carrier to report financial results for the first three months of this year, had seen a strong rebound so far and that it was preparing for a robust spring and summer.Delta paid an average price of $2.79 per gallon of jet fuel in the quarter, up 33 percent from the last quarter of last year. The price included a saving of 7 cents per gallon from the airline’s oil refinery outside Philadelphia. Delta said it expected the price of fuel to rise another 15 to 20 percent over the next three months, to between $3.20 and $3.35 per gallon, a range that includes an approximately 20-cent savings attributable to the refinery.Prices for jet fuel, like gasoline and diesel, generally go up and down with crude oil.In February, American Airlines reported that the price it paid per gallon of jet fuel had risen more than a third over the past year, from $1.48 in 2020 to $2.04 in 2021. At the time, it said that each sustained one-cent rise in the per-gallon price would increase its fuel expense for 2022 by about $40 million. This week, American estimated that it had paid $2.80 to $2.85 per gallon in the first quarter of the year.Rising fuel costs and fares seem to be doing little to dissuade consumers. Mr. Bastian said Wednesday that March was Delta’s best sales month ever, beating a record set in 2019, despite having 10 percent fewer seats available. That comes as fares for domestic flights were up about 20 percent across the board between March 2019 and March 2022, according to an analysis by the Adobe Digital Economy Index, which draws on online sales from six of the top 10 U.S. airlines.Refueling at San Francisco International Airport. Some jet fuel shipments were diverted from the East Coast to the West as California prices began to climb.Justin Sullivan/Getty Images“We’ve all been stuck at home for two years, and I think now that we have the opportunity to get out, there’s going to be a lot of willingness to pay,” said Joe Rohlena, lead airline analyst for Fitch Ratings. “If it remains expensive to travel further out, then you may see that kind of willingness to pay higher ticket prices back off.”The Russia-Ukraine War and the Global EconomyCard 1 of 6Rising concerns. More

Retail sales increased 0.5% in March, boosted by a big jump in gasoline prices.
Import prices climbed 2.6%, the biggest one-month jump since 2011.
Jobless claims rose by 185,000 and were up more than expected.

Customers pushing shopping carts shop at a supermarket on April 12, 2022 in San Mateo County, California.
Liu Guanguan | China News Service | Getty Images

Consumers continued to spend in March even as inflation rose to its highest level since late 1981, according to government data released Thursday.
Retail sales climbed 0.5% from the previous month, slightly less than the 0.6% Dow Jones estimate and a deceleration from the upwardly revised 0.8% gain in February.

The move came with inflation rising 1.2% for the month as measured by the consumer price index.
Retail sales data is not adjusted for inflation. Consequently, the biggest gain in sales for the month game at gas stations, which saw an 8.9% increase in sales as gasoline prices rose 18.3% during the period. The sector has seen a 37% sales burst over the past year.
By contrast, online sales slumped sharply, falling 6.4% for the month. General merchandise stores saw a gain of 5.4%, sporting goods and electronics stores both had 3.3% gains, and sales at food and beverage stores along with bars and restaurants rose 1%.
Retail sales broadly rose 6.9% from a year ago, a period during which CPI inflation surged 8.5%, the highest level since December 1981.
In other economic data, initial jobless claims rose to 185,000 for the week ended April 9, an increase of 18,000 from the previous week and above the estimate of 172,000. Continued claims, which run a week behind the headline number, fell by 48,000 to 1.475 million.

Also, inflation continued to hit imports, with prices rising by 2.6%, the largest monthly increase since April 2011, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported. That was higher even than the 2.2% estimate.
On a 12-month basis, import prices jumped 12.5%, the largest such gain since September 2011.
Correction: The consumer price index rose 1.2% in March. An earlier version misstated the percentage.

WATCH LIVEWATCH IN THE APP More

The $15 billion rapid-delivery start-up decided to do business differently from rivals like Instacart. A changing environment is testing its model.From its beginning in 2013, Gopuff aimed to do rapid delivery differently.The start-up’s founders, Yakir Gola and Rafael Ilishayev, based the company in Philadelphia, away from other delivery ventures in Silicon Valley and New York. They opened warehouses and bought their own merchandise, instead of acting as middlemen who connected retailers and restaurants with customers. And they promised speed, delivering food and other items in 30 minutes or less.By late last year, Gopuff had amassed $3.4 billion in funding, bought the alcohol and beverage retailer BevMo! and was valued at $15 billion. This year, it appeared poised to go public.“We built a sustainable business that thrives and that is set up to win long term,” Mr. Gola, 29, said in an interview last month. Gopuff, he added, is “a disrupter.”Now the question is whether Gopuff has done delivery differently enough. In the past few months, the start-up environment has changed from boom to uncertainty, as tech stocks have cratered, inflation has risen, interest rates have increased and the economic outlook has darkened.In response, Gopuff recently put off its public listing and is trying to raise $1 billion in debt that could potentially be turned into stock. The unprofitable company also lowered its drivers’ minimum pay in California. This year, it has done two rounds of job cuts, including last month when it laid off about 450 people, or 3 percent of its 15,000 workers.Gopuff faces a dismal history of failed delivery start-ups, from Webvan and Kozmo.com in the early 2000s to Buyk, 1520 and Fridge No More in the past few months. Delivery — with high labor and transportation costs, stiff competition and lofty marketing expenses — is notoriously expensive and logistically complicated to provide and make money on.While delivery companies such as DoorDash and Grubhub have gone public, many of them lose money, and some have later been acquired. And with the bump in pandemic orders tailing off, many of these companies are hitting hurdles. Last month, the grocery delivery start-up Instacart cut its valuation to about $24 billion from $39 billion.“These companies are fine during a very ebullient and frothy capital markets environment,” said Ken Smythe, the chief executive of Next Round Capital Partners, which advises investors buying and selling stakes in start-ups. “The world has changed significantly in the past 60 days.”Gopuff’s delivery people are gig workers. The business also has warehouses where its workers are full-time employees.Gabby Jones for The New York TimesIn the interview, Mr. Gola acknowledged that delivery was “very logistically complex — it takes a lot of time and a lot of effort and capital.” But having warehouses and inventory is the only way to profit over time, he said, because it allows the company to make money from selling goods and not just charging delivery fees.“Once you can execute, and obviously that’s hard, it wins in the long term,” he said.Gopuff added that it was putting a public offering on the back burner because the stock market had been volatile and it had enough cash on hand. The layoffs were part of a global restructuring, it said.Mr. Gola and Mr. Ilishayev met as students at Drexel University in Philadelphia in 2011. In their sophomore year, they founded Gopuff for college students, offering fast late-night deliveries of junk food, condoms and smoking paraphernalia. They called themselves a “one-stop puff shop,” which led to the name Gopuff. Deliveries were available until 4:20 a.m.To set themselves apart from DoorDash and Instacart, which connect customers to restaurants and grocery stores via their apps and rely on gig workers, Mr. Gola and Mr. Ilishayev decided Gopuff would buy goods from distributors and wholesalers and have warehouses. Its warehouse workers would be full-time employees, though its delivery drivers and bike messengers would be contractors.Mr. Gola, who dropped out of college, and Mr. Ilishayev, who graduated from Drexel with a degree in legal studies, became co-chief executives of Gobrands, Gopuff’s parent company. To fund the business, they sold used office furniture on Craigslist and eBay. They also offered discounts on orders to attract customers and charged just $2.95 for delivery.As Gopuff gained traction beyond Drexel students, Mr. Gola and Mr. Ilishayev expanded their product offerings and set up warehouses in Boston, Washington and Austin, Texas. Starting in 2016, the company raised money from venture firms such as Anthos Capital and, later, investors including the Japanese conglomerate SoftBank.“We saw it in the data: customers coming back multiple times every month, very strong customer retention, customers who would stick around forever, basically,” said Jett Fein, a partner at Headline, a venture capital firm that invested in Gopuff.In 2020, the pandemic sent Gopuff’s business into overdrive as people shied away from shopping in person and relied on deliveries. Billions of dollars in new venture capital flooded in.Mr. Gola and Mr. Ilishayev went on a spending spree. That November, Gopuff acquired the California retailer BevMo! for $350 million, giving it a foothold in the state as well as the chain’s liquor licenses. In Europe, it bought the delivery start-ups Fancy and Dija.The company also started offering a $5.95 monthly subscription for delivery and began an advertising business.Gopuff now has nearly 700 warehouses that deliver to 1,200 cities in North America and Europe. It also has several retail locations in New York, Texas and Florida, where customers can walk in and shop.But profits have been elusive. The start-up is not cash-flow positive, which means it is spending more money than it is taking in, said Scott Minerd, the chief investment officer of Guggenheim Investments, which has invested in Gopuff. He added that the company had paused some plans to open new warehouses.Gopuff spends more on property and salaries of warehouse workers than its rivals, said John Mercer, head of global research at the firm Coresight Research. Discounts to attract customers have also eaten into revenue.Gopuff said it made money in its first three years. Its 2020 revenue was $340 million, according to a company document for potential landlords that was obtained by The New York Times. The document also showed that Gopuff’s cash balance dropped $111 million that year to $521 million.Revenue totaled $2 billion last year, Gopuff said. The company also lost $500 million, which was first reported by Axios.Some of its spending has gone toward handling delivery issues, said four former warehouse and district managers, three of whom declined to be identified because of severance agreements with the company. Several said they had sometimes spent hundreds or thousands of dollars a day on Instacart or at grocery stores to replenish Gopuff’s “never out of stock” staples like bacon, eggs and milk.At other times, suppliers sent pallets of items like ice cream that were not needed and could not be stored.“I would throw away $1,000, $2,000, $3,000 in inventory as soon as I received it because I had nowhere to put it,” said Anthony Nelson, who managed two Gopuff warehouses in Houston from 2019 through 2021. “That happened at least once or twice a week at bare minimum.”Mr. Gola said Gopuff bought items from Instacart or local retailers less than 1 percent of the time and threw out less inventory than the industry standard.The start-up has also faced questions over its use of gig workers, many of whom sign up for shifts with the company and report to managers. In 2018, the Labor Department found that Gopuff had misclassified delivery drivers in Pennsylvania as independent contractors.“Gopuff’s entire business model depends on flagrant misclassification of a kind that’s shocking well beyond what we see even from other gig companies,” said David Seligman, a lawyer who filed a 2017 class-action lawsuit claiming Gopuff wrongly categorized its drivers as contractors. The suit was settled in 2019.In November, hundreds of Gopuff gig workers went on strike, said Candace Hinson, a delivery driver in Philadelphia who helped organize the stoppage.Mr. Gola said the company used gig workers as drivers, rather than hiring employees, because “that’s what they want.” The company disputed that hundreds had gone on strike and said the workers’ action had not hurt its business.In the interview, Mr. Gola insisted that Gopuff would be the company to crack the instant delivery code.“The world is moving toward instant,” he said, “and Gopuff is at the forefront of that.” More

The administration’s economic advisers see climate change and other factors complicating global trade patterns for years to come.The coronavirus pandemic and its ripple effects have snarled supply chains around the world, contributing to shipping backlogs, product shortages and the fastest inflation in decades.But in a report released Thursday, White House economists argue that while the pandemic exposed vulnerabilities in the supply chain, it didn’t create them — and they warned that the problems won’t go away when the pandemic ends.“Though modern supply chains have driven down consumer prices for many goods, they can also easily break,” the Council of Economic Advisers wrote. Climate change, and the increasing frequency of natural disasters that comes with it, will make future disruptions inevitable, the group said.White House economists analyzed the supply chain as part of the Economic Report of the President. The annual document, which this year runs more than 400 pages, typically offers few new policy proposals, but it outlines the administration’s thinking on key economic issues facing the country, and on how the president hopes to address them.This year’s report focuses on the role of government in the economy, and calls for the government to do more to combat slowing productivity growth, declining labor force participation, rising inequality and other trends that long predated the pandemic.Understand Inflation in the U.S.Inflation 101: What is inflation, why is it up and whom does it hurt? Our guide explains it all.Your Questions, Answered: Times readers sent us their questions about rising prices. Top experts and economists weighed in.Interest Rates: As it seeks to curb inflation, the Federal Reserve announced that it was raising interest rates for the first time since 2018.How Americans Feel: We asked 2,200 people where they’ve noticed inflation. Many mentioned basic necessities, like food and gas.Supply Chain’s Role: A key factor in rising inflation is the continuing turmoil in the global supply chain. Here’s how the crisis unfolded.“The U.S. is among and remains one of the strongest economies in the world, but if we look at trends over the last several decades, some of those trends threaten to undermine that standing,” Cecilia Rouse, chair of the Council of Economic Advisers, said in an interview. The problem is in part that “the public sector has retreated from its role.”The report dedicates one of its seven chapters to supply chains, noting that the once-esoteric subject “entered dinner-table conversations” in 2021. In recent decades, Ms. Rouse and the report’s other authors write, U.S. manufacturers have increasingly relied on parts produced in low-cost countries, especially China, a practice known as offshoring. At the same time, companies have adopted just-in-time production strategies that minimize the parts and materials they keep in inventory.The result, the authors argue, are supply chains that are efficient but brittle — vulnerable to breaking down in the face of a pandemic, a war or a natural disaster.“Because of outsourcing, offshoring and insufficient investment in resilience, many supply chains have become complex and fragile,” they write, adding: “This evolution has also been driven by shortsighted assumptions about cost reduction that have ignored important costs that are hard to turn into financial measures, or that spilled over to affect others.”But some economists noted that making supply chains more resilient could carry its own costs, making products more expensive when inflation is already a major concern.Adam S. Posen, the president of the Peterson Institute for International Economics in Washington, said the pandemic and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine might lead companies to locate at least some of their supply chains in places that were more politically stable and less strategically vulnerable. But pushing companies to duplicate production could waste taxpayer dollars and introduce inefficiencies, raising prices for consumers and lowering growth.“At best you’re paying an insurance premium,” he said. “At worst you’re doing something for completely political reasons that’s very economically inefficient.”Other economists have emphasized that global supply chains are not always a source of fragility — sometimes they can be a source of resilience, too.Inflation F.A.Q.Card 1 of 6What is inflation? More