Raphael Stevens

More stories

  • 188 Shares159 Views

    in Finance

    Buying a house of ‘Home Alone’ or John Lennon fame? There’s a premium for that

    A number of famous homes are for sale. They include the houses in “Home Alone” and “Full House,” as well as properties owned by Beatles member John Lennon and Yoko Ono, and actor Paul Reubens, known for his character Pee-wee Herman.
    Renowned homes typically fetch a price premium, according to luxury real estate agents.
    Wealthy buyers who view the homes as collectibles are generally willing to pay anything, they said.

    The original house used in the “Home Alone” movies on Nov. 8, 2021.
    Erin Hooley/Chicago Tribune/Tribune News Service via Getty Images

    An array of iconic homes are for sale — and buyers will almost certainly pay extra for that pedigree.
    However, that premium is hard to quantify since some uber-wealthy buyers will pay almost anything to own a piece of pop culture, according to real estate experts.

    “It’s like owning a Picasso” or a Fabergé egg, said Tomer Fridman, a real estate agent based in Los Angeles who specializes in luxury and celebrity homes.
    “You’re buying something that’s super unique and something that is very rare,” he said.

    Buying for ‘Hollywood cachet’

    Among recent notable listings: The Victorian home depicted on the sitcom “Full House” hit the market Thursday in San Francisco for $6.5 million. Last month, the “Home Alone” house — the brick estate famously boobytrapped by character Kevin McCallister — listed for $5.25 million.
    John Lennon and Yoko Ono’s first New York City home, a two-story SoHo loft, also hit the market for $5.5 million in May. The Los Angeles home of the late Paul Reubens, best known for his character Pee-wee Herman, is also for sale, for about $5 million.
    More from Personal Finance:36% of Americans think real estate is best long-term investmentInvestor home purchases jump for the first time in two years20% down payment is ‘definitely not required’ to buy a house

    Luxury real estate prices recently hit a record high. The uber-wealthy are largely insulated from high mortgage rates since many can afford to make all-cash deals, according to real estate experts.
    Famous homes generally command even loftier price tags than their market equivalents, those experts said.
    Josh Altman, a luxury real estate agent in Los Angeles who is featured on the Bravo show “Million Dollar Listing,” estimates the premium can be perhaps 5% to 10% if the home is tied to a “household name” celebrity.
    “There’s definitely this Hollywood cachet of ‘I bought so-and-so’s house,'” said Altman. His firm’s clients have included stars like Justin Bieber, James Cameron, Alicia Keys and Britney Spears.
    “Home Alone” is “one of the most famous movies ever,” he added. “That’ll definitely get a premium, in my opinion.”

    The rich often pay ‘whatever it takes’

    The ultimate price tag on such homes generally doesn’t matter to their uber-wealthy buyers, said Fridman, who has sold properties owned by celebrities including Marilyn Monroe, Sylvester Stallone, and Kylie Jenner and Travis Scott.
    Many view the house as a collector’s item and make an “emotional purchase,” Fridman said.
    Sellers can rake in a premium for a particular famous property via an initial pie-in-the-sky asking price or if potential buyers get into a bidding war, experts said.
    “They’re one of one,” said Amanda Pendleton, a home trends expert at Zillow. “Some people with means will pay whatever it takes to own that home.”

    Fans gather to take photos at 1709 Broderick Street, the house depicted in the filming of the TV show “Full House.” 
    Carlos Avila Gonzalez/San Francisco Chronicle via Getty Images

    The listing for the “Home Alone” property, outside Chicago, leans into its collector status, spotlighting the “rare opportunity to own one of the most iconic movie residences in American pop culture.”
    An offer is pending on that home and was made within a week of being on the market, said Andrea Gillespie, a spokesperson for Coldwell Banker Real Estate. The sellers’ asking price is more than triple the $1.585 million they paid in 2012.
    The listing for John Lennon and Yoko Ono’s residence — the first time it’s been for sale in 53 years — also plays up its former occupants’ fame.
    “Anywhere that they lived is going to have some sort of value,” according to Philip Norman, author of the biography “John Lennon: The Life,” recently told The New York Times.
    Buyers of the “Full House” home have the option of getting handprints in concrete stones of the show’s cast members, including Bob Saget and John Stamos, according to Architectural Digest.

    Infamy sells, too

    Infamy can also fetch a higher price, said Arto Poladian, a Redfin luxury real estate agent in Los Angeles.
    In 2021, Poladian sold the so-called LaBianca house — the home where Charles Manson’s followers killed Leno and Rosemary LaBianca in 1969 — for $1.875 million.
    The property’s notoriety generated interest and attracted more prospective buyers — “and ultimately with that interest you get a little bit of a higher premium than without it,” Poladian said.
    The listing was geared to buyers like “history buffs” or those who wanted to “add their touches to reimagine one of LA’s most unique properties.”

    It’s like owning a Picasso.

    Tomer Fridman
    luxury real estate agent

    Sometimes, even being in the vicinity of a famous residence can help, he added. For example, in 2018 he sold the house next door to the one used for the filming of the original “The Karate Kid” movie.
    “Any type of famous home — or a home next to a famous home — will draw interest from prospective buyers and lookie-loos,” he said.
    There’s sometimes a ceiling to what super fans are willing to pay, said Pendleton.
    She cited the “Brady Bunch” house as an example: The Studio City, California, home — which was remodeled to look identical to the home on the TV series — sold for about $3.2 million in 2023 after months on the market; it had been listed for $5.5 million.
    The publicity attached to certain properties is likely a “turnoff” for some would-be buyers, Pendleton said.

    Similarly, a superstar’s home won’t command as much of a premium if it’s not updated and move-in-ready, said Poladian.
    For example, Kanye West — the rapper who now goes by Ye — bought a Malibu, California, mega-mansion for $57.3 million in 2021. However, he has struggled to sell the home, which he gutted and left in disrepair; he listed the home last year for $53 million but recently dropped the price to $39 million. (A contractor also sued West in January and a lien was placed on the property, potentially complicating a sale.)
    “Kanye West can’t give his house away in Malibu,” said Altman, the Los Angeles real estate agent.
    Ultimately, though, a home’s value — whether a sprawling, renowned estate or a run-of-the-mill bungalow — is in the eye of the beholder.
    “At the end of the day, a home is worth whatever the person is willing to pay for it,” Pendleton said.

    Don’t miss these exclusives from CNBC PRO More

  • 138 Shares189 Views

    in Finance

    Retail investors may be a step closer to investing in unicorns

    An alternative trading platform CEO wants to revolutionize private equity investing to help mitigate a stalling initial public offering market.
    So, Forge Global’s Kelly Rodriques partnered with Accuidity to launch the Forge Accuidity Private Market Index this spring.

    The ultimate goal: Give more investors easier access to unicorns.
    “This is a major financial innovation that’s just happening now,” Rodriques told CNBC’s “ETF Edge” this week. “There is a future … where index products and other financial innovations are making it possible for every investor to participate.”
    The Forge Accuidity Private Market Index consists of 60 private companies including SpaceX, Stripe and Epic Games, according to Forge Global’s website. But as of right now, access is still closed off to everyday investors. 
    “Today, the regulations are such that you need to have a minimum net worth to meet the threshold of being accredited,” Rodriques said. 
    That means even with Forge’s new initiative, only institutional investors and individuals with a high net worth can purchase shares. But anyone, accredited or not, can sell their shares of private companies on the platform. However, those same companies still have a right to refuse transactions on the platform.  

    Rodriques hopes as interest in private investing increases, those regulations will shift. 
    “We see a world very soon, where nonaccredited investors can come into a basket of index stocks and make a bet across 60 to 70 names, thematics, the same way you do in the public market, and that will really open it up,” he said.
    Disclaimer More

  • 175 Shares139 Views

    in Business

    The Covid-19 pandemic worsened a child care crisis, and it’s costing U.S. businesses billions

    During the Covid-19 pandemic, child care took center stage as day cares shuttered, schools went remote and parents attempted to juggle their children with their jobs.
    A shortage of workers and available slots for children has weighed on the sector since.
    The nation’s infant-toddler child care crisis costs the U.S. an estimated $122 billion in lost earnings, productivity and revenue every year, according to projections from advocacy group ReadyNation.

    Vadym Buinov | Moment | Getty Images

    The Covid-19 pandemic brought to the surface both cracks and resilience in the American economy, with child care taking center stage as day cares shuttered, schools went remote and parents attempted to juggle their children with their jobs.
    While employment in the child care sector has made a post-pandemic return to baseline, according to the latest data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, a shortage of workers and available slots for children in some areas is weighing on the sector.

    Costs are also going up for families. A February report from Bank of America showed costs for families increased between 15% and nearly 30% in terms of the average child care payment per household, year on year, during the fourth quarter of 2023. The largest increase was seen among households with average incomes of between $100,000 and $250,000 annually.
    Policy advocates argue that child care, including for infants and toddlers, is an economic issue that affects all Americans, not just those with young kids.
    Billions in stabilization funds from the American Rescue Plan Act earmarked for the child care sector expired last fall, which could lead to increased costs for families or centers closing their doors.
    ReadyNation, an advocacy group of more than 2,000 business executives, lobbies in support of policies and programs at both state and federal levels that support a strong workforce and economy, including child care.
    The group released a report in 2023 that found the nation’s infant-toddler child care crisis costs the U.S. an estimated $122 billion in lost earnings, productivity and revenue every year. That is up from $57 billion in 2018, before the pandemic exposed and exacerbated holes in the system for working families and the companies that rely on them.

    ReadyNation’s study found a combination of “Covid-19 and insufficient policy action have now significantly worsened the crisis.”
    “All taxpayers are impacted by this. We need to realize that the loss of taxpayers is $1,470 every year per working parent because of lower income taxes being paid and lower sales taxes because of lack of purchasing power from people that are unemployed,” said Nancy Fishman, national director of ReadyNation.
    Part of the nationwide solution is supporting what the group calls the “workforce behind the workforce” — early child care providers.
    “Supporting the early childhood workforce could include such things as making sure child care providers have access to benefits. We all know how much benefits matter, whether it’s health-care benefits, or the ability for them to find high-quality child care for their own children,” Fishman told CNBC. “Programs that support additional training and education for child care providers are important as well.”

    Solutions in the Golden State

    In California alone, the economic toll including lost earnings, productivity and revenue is an estimated $17 billion, ReadyNation projects. That is higher than any other state in the country, according to the group’s estimates.
    While child care jobs in the state have rebounded to a 2020 baseline as of this spring, according to analysis from the Center for the Study of Child Care Employment, other states have seen larger job gains post-pandemic.
    Some child care workers in California organized in 2019, with the Child Care Providers United, which today represents more than 40,000 home-based licensed and license-exempt, friends and family, child care providers. The providers are a part of the state subsidy program in California, and the union is a partnership of SEIU Locals 99 and 521, as well as UDW/AFSCME Local 3930.
    The group won its first contract in 2021 and gained access to first-in-the-nation retirement benefits.
    The union says child care providers currently get reimbursed at a percentage of what it costs them to provide care in the state. Average child care provider pay is $7 to $10 an hour, with many providers reporting no take-home pay, it said.
    Providers are currently advocating through the state budget process to be reimbursed for the full cost of providing care to create more dignity in their work, keep providers open and attract new providers to the workforce.
    Deborah Corley-Marzett operates an in-home center for subsidized care in Bakersfield, California. She told CNBC she would like to hire more staff to help support her and the children, but it is difficult to find the right fit and offer competing wages in this environment. Low-wage workers in the state’s fast-food sector, for example, just secured a historic $20 an hour minimum wage, pressuring other sectors to keep up.
    “I have a staff shortage problem. I literally can’t afford to hire someone to come in and work in the mornings with me right now. I can’t afford it,” Corley-Marzett said. “I don’t have enough children right now. But I can’t physically take on any more children.”
    Lawmakers argue progress has been made, but there is more work to do. State Senator Nancy Skinner, a Democrat representing parts of the Bay Area and chair of the California Women’s Caucus, said the group continues to prioritize early child care and education. The group advocated for a $2 billion increase in the state’s spending over the course of the past two years toward early care and education, for a total of $6.5 billion.
    The Caucus’ current focus is maintaining steady rate reimbursement rates for child care providers as the state stares down a budget deficit.
    “We have low unemployment, but many sectors of the economy are looking for workers,” Skinner told CNBC. “If your family is in a situation where you can’t go to work because you don’t have adequate child care, or you can’t afford child care, then you cannot fulfill that job that’s sitting there, vacant and waiting for you.”

    Don’t miss these exclusives from CNBC PRO More

  • 125 Shares99 Views

    in Business

    Nadella, Narayen among tech CEOs investing in cricket’s American dream

    As the Men’s T20 Cricket World Cup, co-hosted by the U.S. for the first time, ramps up, investors have pumped nearly a billion dollars into building the sport in America.
    Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella and Adobe CEO Shantanu Narayen are among the executives investing in the new U.S. professional league, Major League Cricket.
    “What gets me excited is seeing if cricket can become a mainstream sport in the U.S.,” said venture capitalist Soma Somasegar, who with Nadella is a key owner of Seattle’s cricket team, the Orcas.

    Cricket may not be as popular a sport in the U.S. as elsewhere in the world, but some high-profile CEOs and investors are trying to change that.
    As the Men’s T20 Cricket World Cup, co-hosted by the U.S. for the first time, ramps up, investors have pumped nearly a billion dollars into their American ambition.

    Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella and Adobe CEO Shantanu Narayen are among the executives investing in the new U.S. professional league, Major League Cricket. Other cricket investors include Iconic Ventures, Madrona Venture Group and executives from Google.
    “What gets me excited is seeing if cricket can become a mainstream sport in the U.S.,” said Soma Somasegar, venture capitalist and managing director at Madrona.
    Somasegar and Nadella are among the key owners of Seattle’s cricket team, named the Orcas. They’re also investors in the overall league.
    “Satya [Nadella] and I have been talking about bringing cricket to America for many years,” Somasegar told CNBC.
    Nadella is such a diehard cricket fan that Microsoft has a cricket field at its campus in Bellevue, Washington.

    Monank Patel of the U.S. national cricket team celebrates his half century (50 runs) during the ICC Men’s T20 Cricket World Cup match between the U.S. and Pakistan at Grand Prairie Cricket Stadium in Dallas, June 6, 2024.
    Matt Roberts | ICC | Getty Images

    “A lot of us immigrants grew up with this sport. We’d study and watch cricket. On repeat,” said Somasegar.
    In total, nearly $850 million is currently in the process of being invested in building a viable cricket league in the U.S., people familiar with the funding said. The people asked not to be named because the funding information is private.
    Currently, there are six professional teams in Major League Cricket, with each team expected to spend roughly $75 million to $100 million in the coming years. That includes the cost of putting together a team, hiring the right talent and building stadiums where live cricket matches can be played.
    Adding to the fanfare is the T20 World Cup, which is being held at three locations in the U.S. and several in the West Indies throughout June.
    On Thursday, in a stunning blow, the U.S. team beat Pakistan in a match held near Dallas. Fans are now counting down to the highly anticipated India vs. Pakistan match Sunday at the newly developed Nassau County stadium in New York.
    The last time India and Pakistan matched up, more than 300 million people in India tuned in to watch the game, according to The New York Times.
    Ticket reseller StubHub said the average price of tickets for Sunday’s rivalry match is $1,300. The average price for the other 54 matches of the tournament is $120, the company said.
    Venture capitalist Anurag Jain, part owner of Major League Cricket team the San Francisco Unicorns, said the U.S. national team is primarily made up of players in the league.
    “The goal is to make cricket a mainstream sport,” said Satyan Gajwani, the vice chairman of Times Internet, the digital arm of the Times of India. He heads up Willow TV, which has the exclusive streaming rights for cricket in North America, including the T20 World Cup.
    Gajwani is also one of the investors in the U.S. league. He said his group is going after the incredibly loyal fans from South Asia who live in the U.S.
    “You essentially have 5 million really hard-core fans that love cricket,” Gajwani told CNBC, referring to the South Asian diaspora in the U.S.
    He added that expats from the U.K. and Australia who live in the U.S. are also big consumers of cricket.
    South Asians on average have the highest gross income of any ethnic group in the U.S., according to research from Indiaspora, a nonprofit community of Indian leaders around the world.
    “That leaves a lot of discretionary income that is available to be spent on sports and entertainment,” said M.R. Rangaswami, founder and chairman of Indiaspora.
    Rangaswami, who said he will be at the match Sunday, acknowledged that the U.S. sports scene is tough to crack, with Americans consumed by basketball and football. He said a potential entry point could be through fans of baseball, which has some resemblance to cricket.
    — CNBC’s Jessica Golden contributed to this report. More

  • 188 Shares179 Views

    in Business

    FDA approves GSK’s RSV vaccine for high-risk adults ages 50 to 59, expanding shot’s reach

    The Food and Drug Administration expanded the approval of GSK’s respiratory syncytial virus vaccine to adults ages 50 to 59 who are at increased risk of getting severely sick from the virus. 
    The agency first approved GSK’s jab in May 2023 for patients 60 and above, who are more vulnerable to severe cases of the virus. 
    The FDA’s expanded approval could help GSK maintain its dominance in the RSV market, which includes shots from Pfizer and Moderna.

    A view shows GlaxoSmithKline headquarters in London, Britain, January 17, 2022.
    Hannah Mckay | Reuters

    The Food and Drug Administration on Friday expanded the approval of GSK’s respiratory syncytial virus vaccine to adults ages 50 to 59 who are at increased risk of getting severely sick from the potentially lethal virus. 
    The shot, called Arexvy, is the first vaccine cleared by the FDA to protect that population from RSV. The agency first approved GSK’s jab in May 2023 for patients 60 and above, who are more vulnerable to severe cases of the virus. 

    RSV causes thousands of hospitalizations and deaths among seniors each year, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. But the virus can also cause severe illness in adults 50 and up — or even younger — with underlying chronic conditions such as asthma, diabetes and congestive heart failure.
    About 13 million Americans ages 50 to 59 are at high risk of severe illness from RSV, said Phil Dormitzer, GSK’s head of vaccines research and development and infectious disease research, in an interview. 
    “It’s useful both because, of course, you can meet the medical needs of that age group,” Dormitzer told CNBC, “but it’s also nice for pharmacists to have a single vaccine that they can administer to a wider population, so that provides simplicity.”
    GSK’s shot won’t reach that new patient population just yet. An advisory panel to the CDC will vote later in June on recommendations for GSK’s vaccine, along with a rival shot from Pfizer and a newly approved jab from Moderna. 
    The FDA’s expanded approval could help GSK maintain its dominance in the RSV market later this fall and winter, when the virus typically spreads more widely in the U.S. The British drugmaker’s shot booked around £1.2 billion in sales last year, outpacing the $890 million (about £699 million) in revenue that Pfizer’s vaccine raked in. 

    GSK Chief Commercial Officer Luke Miels said on an earnings call in May that the company remains “very confident” that Arexvy can bring in more than £3 billion in peak annual sales over time.
    Dormitzer said GSK had a successful last RSV season, but noted that the company will always “take the competition seriously.” 
    He said Arexvy showed strong efficacy in patients who have underlying medical conditions. 
    In a late-stage trial, a single dose of the shot elicited an immune response in high-risk adults ages 50 to 59 which wasn’t worse than that observed in people 60 and above. 
    A previous late-stage trial on that older age group found the shot was nearly 83% effective at preventing lower respiratory tract disease caused by RSV and around 94% effective at preventing severe disease. 
    Safety data in adults ages 50 to 59 was also consistent with data in adults 60 and above, according to GSK. Side effects included fatigue, headache and muscle pain, among others, which were mostly mild to moderate in severity. 
    A single dose of GSK’s shot was only slightly less effective in adults 60 and up after two seasons of the virus, showing 67.2% efficacy against lower respiratory tract illness. Dormitzer said the company will test the vaccine’s efficacy over three RSV seasons to see if it can provide even longer protection. 
    GSK is also studying Arexvy in other patient groups to expand the shot’s reach in the future. The company is expected to announce trial data later in 2024 on two separate patient groups: people ages 18 to 59 who are at increased risk of severe RSV, and adults with weakened immune systems.
    Dormitzer added that the company is also expanding the shot’s reach in other countries. Regulatory agencies in Europe, Japan and other areas are currently reviewing GSK’s application to expand Arexvy’s approval to high-risk adults ages 50 to 59. 
    GSK’s shot is approved in nearly 50 countries, a spokesperson for the company told CNBC.   More

  • 175 Shares159 Views

    in Finance

    Synapse bankruptcy trustee says $85 million of customer savings is missing in fintech meltdown

    There is an $85 million shortfall between what partner banks of fintech middleman Synapse are holding and what depositors are owed, according to the court-appointed trustee in the Synapse bankruptcy.
    Customers of fintech firms that used Synapse to link up with banks had $265 million in balances.
    But the banks themselves only had $180 million associated with those accounts, trustee Jelena McWilliams said in a report filed late Thursday.
    What’s worse, it’s still unclear what happened to the missing funds, she said.

    Jelena McWilliams, chair of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), during a Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee hearing in Washington, D.C., U.S., on Tuesday, Aug. 3, 2021.
    Al Drago | Bloomberg | Getty Images

    There is an $85 million shortfall between what partner banks of fintech middleman Synapse are holding and what depositors are owed, according to the court-appointed trustee in the Synapse bankruptcy.
    Customers of fintech firms that used Synapse to link up with banks had $265 million in balances. But the banks themselves only had $180 million associated with those accounts, trustee Jelena McWilliams said in a report filed late Thursday.

    The missing funds explain what is at the heart of the worst meltdown in the U.S. fintech sector since its emergence in the years after the 2008 financial crisis. More than 100,000 customers of a diverse set of fintech companies have been locked out of their savings accounts for nearly a month after the failure of Synapse, an Andreessen Horowitz-backed startup, amid disagreements over user balances.
    While Synapse and its partners, including Evolve Bank & Trust, have lobbed accusations of improperly moving balances or keeping incorrect ledgers at each other in court filings, McWilliams’ report is the first outside attempt to determine the scope of missing funds in this mess.

    Much unknown

    Since being named trustee on May 24, McWilliams has worked with four banks — Evolve, American Bank, AMG National Trust and Lineage Bank — to reconcile their various ledgers so customers could regain access to their funds.
    But the banks need much more information to complete the project, including understanding how a Synapse brokerage and lending business may have impacted fund flows, said McWilliams. She said Synapse apparently commingled funds among several institutions, using multiple banks to serve the same companies.
    What’s worse, it’s still unclear what happened to the missing funds, she said.

    “The source of the shortfall, including whether end-user funds and negative balance accounts were moved among Partner Banks in a way that increased or decreased the respective shortfalls that may have existed at each Partner Bank at an earlier time, is not known at this time,” McWilliams wrote.
    McWilliams, former chair of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and current partner at the law firm Cravath, didn’t respond to requests for comment.

    Spreading the pain

    McWilliams’ task has been made harder because there are no funds to pay external forensics firms or even former Synapse employees to help, she said in her report. Synapse fired the last of its employees on May 24.
    Still, some customers whose funds were held at banks in what’s called demand deposit accounts have already begun getting access to accounts, she said.
    But users whose funds were pooled in a communal way known as for benefit of, or FBO, accounts, will have a harder time getting their money. A full reconciliation will take weeks more to complete, she said.
    In her report, McWilliams presented several options for Judge Martin Barash to consider at a Friday hearing that will allow at least some FBO customers to regain access to their funds.
    The options include paying some customers out fully, while delaying payments to others, depending on whether the individual FBO accounts have been reconciled. Another option would be spreading the shortfall evenly among all customers to make limited funds available sooner.

    ‘This is a crisis’

    At the start of the public hearing on Friday, McWilliams told Barash that her recommendation was that all FBO customers receive partial payments, which “will partially alleviate the effects to end users who are currently waiting locked out of access to their funds” while keeping a reserve for later payments.
    But comments from Barash cast doubt on how that would move forward.
    While profusely thanking McWilliams for her work, the judge said that he “struggled” with “what I can do, and how I can help.”
    The case is “uncharted territory” and because the depositors’ funds weren’t the property of the Synapse estate, Barash said it wasn’t clear what the bankruptcy court could do.
    “This is a crisis, and I would like to see a resolution, but I’m not sure if people are looking for court orders, what I can provide in terms of court orders,” Barash said.

    Don’t miss these exclusives from CNBC PRO More

  • 125 Shares109 Views

    in Business

    United Airlines starts serving passengers personalized ads on seat-back screens

    United Airlines launched Kinective Media, a platform that aims to connect brands to customers via the carrier’s seat-back screens and app.
    The carrier is already working with Norwegian Cruise Lines, Macy’s and IHG Hotels & Resorts.
    The airline is in the process of upgrading its narrow-body planes to add seat-back screens.

    Passengers on a Boeing 737 Max-8 plane during a United Airlines flight departing from Newark Liberty International Airport (EWR) in Newark, New Jersey, US, on Wednesday, March 13, 2024.
    Bing Guan | Bloomberg | Getty Images

    Now playing on United Airlines’ seat-back screens: personalized ads.
    The carrier on Friday said it launched a media platform to serve travelers personalized advertisements on seat-back screens and in its app, among other platforms, as it seeks to leverage customer data.

    United said its new platform, Kinective Media, is already working with Norwegian Cruise Line, Macy’s, IHG Hotels & Resorts, TelevisaUnivision and JPMorgan Chase, which offers a host of co-branded credit cards with United.
    The platform is the latest example of airlines trying to drum up new lines of revenue and leverage their lucrative loyalty programs. Delta Air Lines said in early 2023 that it would start offering free Wi-Fi to customers if they were registered members of its SkyMiles frequent flyer program.
    “Unlike some commerce media platforms, United gives brands across a wide range of industries the ability to reach engaged customers throughout the entire marketing funnel — from brand consideration to conversion — in a way that’s highly personalized and relevant, and we’re already seeing impressive results,” Richard Nunn, CEO of United’s MileagePlus loyalty program, said in a news release.
    United declined to provide projected sales from the initiative.
    Customers can opt out of seeing targeted ads through a United web page, and United says advertisers can’t access customers’ personally identifiable information, the airline said.

    “There is the potential for 3.5 hours of attention per traveler, based on average flight time,” United said.
    The airline is in the midst of a massive upgrade of its narrow-body cabins, including its in-flight entertainment system with new screens and other features, though supply chain problems have delayed some of the aircraft revamps.

    Don’t miss these exclusives from CNBC PRO More

  • 200 Shares179 Views

    in Finance

    Apollo’s co-president said it is one of the few private equity firms OK with higher rates

    Back in December 2023, when the market was pricing in six or so rate cuts, Apollo Asset Management Co-President Scott Kleinman had a more contrarian view: He said he’d be betting against any rate cuts in 2024. 
    That call so far has paid off. But higher-for-longer rates haven’t necessarily been a tailwind for the private equity industry as they keep financing costs higher.

    The buyout deal count in the year through May 15 is tracking down 4% globally on an annualized basis compared with the already-muted activity from 2023, according to a report from Bain & Co. And the lack of investing has left a mountain worth $1.1 trillion of dry powder within buyout funds that ultimately needs to be deployed. 
    However, Apollo’s Kleinman said he’s “very comfortable” with rates where they are now. 
    “We’re probably the only private equity firm that has been hoping for higher rates for many, many years,’ Kleinman said in an interview for the Delivering Alpha Newsletter from the SuperReturn Conference in Berlin. “As a value-oriented investor, higher rates force more value discipline on corporate valuations, which just means more interesting companies to buy and more reasonable valuations.” 
    As for Kleinman’s current view on rates? He said, “It is possible that one cut gets thrown in there, maybe, for political reasons, perhaps, but certainly, the data we’re looking at, wouldn’t call for a rate cut.” 

    Don’t miss these exclusives from CNBC PRO More