More stories

  • in

    Southwest Airlines reduces cancellations after chaos sparked traveler outrage

    Southwest apologized to customers for the chaos that has disrupted travel since Saturday.
    The airline said bad weather and air traffic control issues initiated the problems that were worsened by its own staffing shortfall.
    Southwest had struggled with insufficient staffing over the summer to meet a packed schedule.

    Travelers wait to check in at the Southwest Airlines ticketing counter at Baltimore Washington International Thurgood Marshall Airport on October 11, 2021 in Baltimore, Maryland.
    Kevin Dietsch | Getty Images

    Southwest Airlines canceled 87 flights, or 2% of its schedule, on Tuesday, a sign the carrier is stabilizing its operation after chaos over the weekend disrupted the travel plans of tens of thousands of customers.
    The Dallas-based airline since Saturday has canceled close to 2,400 flights, according to flight-tracking site FlightAware, blaming several factors including its own staffing shortfall, particularly with backup pilots and flight attendants to step in when things go wrong.

    The disruptions peaked at more than 1,100 cancellations on Sunday, as about 30% of Southwest’s flights were canceled as the carrier attempted its biggest schedule since April 2020.
    “Southwest Airlines extends a tremendous apology to our Customers and Employees for the flight cancellations and delays which occurred over the weekend and on Monday,” the airline said in a statement on its website Tuesday.
    The carrier said bad weather and air traffic control issues in Florida kicked off its problems, leading to planes and crews being out of place and snowballing into hundreds of cancellations.
    Casey Murray, president of the Southwest Airlines Pilots Association, which represents the carrier’s more than 9,000 pilots, told CNBC that the airline’s poor planning was to blame for the issues. The airline has already scaled back its fall schedule due to disruptions throughout the summer following complaints from exhausted crews.

    A traveler walks past a Southwest Airlines airplane as it taxies from a gate at Baltimore Washington International Thurgood Marshall Airport on October 11, 2021 in Baltimore, Maryland.
    Kevin Dietsch | Getty Images

    Mike Van de Ven, Southwest’s chief operating officer who was promoted to president last month, told staff on Sunday that it could cut its schedule further and that it is trying to build a “staffing cushion.”

    Over the weekend, 2,176 Southwest flights were canceled because of unavailable crews, the pilots’ union told members late Tuesday.
    Murray told CNBC that pilots picked up most of the open trips caused by the disruption.
    The union said October is on track to be the second-worst month for pilot fatigue calls since August, which was a record 633. The airline trimmed its schedule shortly after that.
    It also said that sick calls are higher compared with previous Octobers.
    “But those past Octobers weren’t affected by the chronic manning problems and cumulative fatigue that have occurred since June,” the union wrote. “When you look at 2021 data, the sick rate is slowly creeping up as our crews continue to get worn down by the operation. The fatigue data corroborates that statistic.”

    WATCH LIVEWATCH IN THE APP More

  • in

    Consumers are splurging on diamonds. Signet Jewelers just hiked its full-year outlook — again

    Signet Jewelers agreed to buy Diamonds Direct USA for $490 million in cash.
    Signet, which owns jewelry chains Kay Jewelers, Zales and Jared, also hiked its outlook for the fiscal third quarter and for the year.
    It’s the second time Signet has raised its fiscal 2022 forecast in recent weeks.

    Signage for Kay Jewelers, a subsidiary of Signet Jewelers Ltd., is displayed on the exterior of a store in New York.
    Bloomberg | Bloomberg | Getty Images

    Signet Jewelers on Tuesday said it agreed to buy the off-mall jewelry chain Diamonds Direct USA for $490 million in cash, in a bid to reach younger shoppers and inch closer to hitting its annual revenue goal of $9 billion.
    Signet, which owns jewelry chains Kay Jewelers, Zales and Jared, also raised its outlook for the fiscal third quarter and for the year. It’s the second time Signet has increased its fiscal 2022 forecast in recent weeks. The company said consumer demand is high ahead of the holidays, and it’s not experiencing any supply chain disruptions like many of its peers in the retail industry.

    Signet is benefiting from a pent-up demand among couples who put engagement and wedding plans on pause during the pandemic. As venues reopen and consumers feel comfortable to travel again, the pace of weddings and other celebrations with loved ones is picking back up.
    “Customers are showing positive response to our new product launches, and the reduction in government stimulus and customer shift to spending on entertainment and travel are having less impact than we previously anticipated,” said Chief Financial Officer Joan Hilson, in a press release.
    Signet made sure to receive holiday products early this year, she added. The company said it uses air freight to transport the vast majority of its merchandise, so it is not dealing with the ongoing ocean freight congestion.
    Signet now sees its third-quarter revenue ranging between $1.42 billion to $1.45 billion, up from a previous range of $1.26 billion to $1.31 billion.
    For the year, it expects revenue to be between $7.04 billion and $7.19 billion, up from prior guidance of $6.80 billion to $6.95 billion.

    Signet said it remains on track to shutter more than 100 locations this year and open 100, primarily under its Banter by Piercing Pagoda banner.
    The company expects to complete the Diamonds Direct acquisition in its fourth quarter.
    Signet shares jumped more than 4% in premarket trading on the news, having closed Monday down roughly 4%. The stock has tripled year to date. Signet has a market value of about $4.4 billion.
    Read the full press release from Signet here.

    WATCH LIVEWATCH IN THE APP More

  • in

    Here's how to choose the right financial advisor for you

    Fewer than one-fifth of Americans work with a financial advisor, a 2019 CNBC-Acorns survey found.
    Choosing a financial planner is one of the most important money decisions you’ll ever make, according to John Loper of the CFP Board.
    Here’s how to find and vet the best financial advisory firm for you.

    Ariel Skelley | DigitalVision | Getty Images

    If you’re remodeling your kitchen, you probably turn to a licensed contractor. Planning an expensive European vacation or Hawaiian honeymoon? You may very well have a travel agent handle the booking.
    So, why, when planning your financial future, wouldn’t you seek out professional help?

    It’s common sense. Yet only 17% of Americans avail themselves of a financial advisor, the 2019 Invest in You Savings Survey from CNBC and Acorns found — and 75% handle their money themselves.
    Picking the right financial professional can take some homework — you’ll want to do your due diligence in terms of research, but also meet up (in person or online) with a potential planner, too. CNBC can help, with its third annual FA 100 list of the nation’s top financial advisory firms.
    “Choosing a financial planner is one of the most important financial decisions you will make,” said John Loper, a certified financial planner and managing director, professional practice, at the CFP Board. “This decision takes some research, but partnering with the right financial planner can provide confidence today and a more secure tomorrow.”
    More from FA 100:FA 100: CNBC ranks the top-rated advisory firms of 2021How the pandemic has changed the financial advice businessHere’s how top financial advisors are hiring young talent
    First, you’ll have to wade through a thesaurus’ worth of titles and terminology.

    Think you need a “financial advisor”? Well, there are financial advisors, and then there are fee-only financial advisors, fee-based advisors, hybrid advisors and dually registered ones not to mention the alphabet soup of advisor certification acronyms, such as CFP, which stands for certified financial planner, and ChFC, or chartered financial consultant.
    Here’s a brief look at some of the types of financial advisor you might encounter:

    Financial advisor: This is a generic, catch-all term for financial planners who provide money-related advice in exchange for compensation. Advisors offer an array of services, from investment management and estate planning to income-tax preparation. They generally must be licensed in order to conduct business with the public.Financial advisors may go by various titles, including wealth manager, investment advisor and financial consultant. Some advisors may be stockbrokers, insurance agents, estate planners and bankers, as well, among other professions.
    Fee-based financial planner: This is an advisor whose income is based on a combination of commissions on financial products they sell and fees for financial planning.
    Fee-only financial planner: An advisor whose earnings come from direct fees to clients, rather than commissions or other sources. They may charge by the hour or with flat fees.
    Hybrid advisor: This advisor has passed the General Securities Representative Exam; has a separate license to give financial-planning advice; and owns their own registered investment advisory (RIA) firm registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission or analogous state securities regulatory authority.
    Dually registered advisor: These advisors wears two hats. They are affiliated with a broker-dealer and are registered under that broker-dealer’s corporate firm.

    Then there’s the matter of professional certifications — those aforementioned acronyms. It’s said there are more than 200 designations available to financial advisors but the one you’ll likely see most often is the CFP certification awarded by the CFP Board.
    “CFP professionals have the knowledge required to deliver holistic financial planning,” Loper said. “This is important because when choosing a financial advisor, you want them to develop a comprehensive plan and help you find the appropriate path to achieving your financial goals.”

    CFPs are working professionals with degrees from accredited colleges who’ve undergone a rigorous program of study, must pass a three-hour exam and adhere to stringent ethical guidelines. They also have to complete 30 hours of continuing education and pay a licensing fee every two years.
    Other advisor designations include not only the ChFC from The American College of Financial Services but also chartered financial analyst (CFA), life and annuity certified professional (LACP) and certified divorce financial analyst (CDFA) — each with its own requirements and focus.
    “Most people think all financial planners are certified, but this isn’t true,” Loper noted. “Just about anyone can use the title ‘financial planner’ but many of them may not be required to put your best interests first.”

    Where to find an advisor

    Where to find a potential advisor match?
    First, ask around — word-of-mouth recommendations from family, friends and colleagues can be invaluable as a first line of vetting. Then, there are online resources, as well. The CFP Board, for example, offers a searchable online database of CFPs at LetsMakeAPlan.org and the Institute for Divorce Financial Analysts offers one for CDFAs at Institutedfa.com/find-a-cdfa.
    Speaking of databases, you can further vet a financial advisor by searching for regulatory violations, customer complaints and other adverse information at two online resources: BrokerCheck, from the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, or FINRA, and the Investment Adviser Public Disclosure website from the SEC.

    It is important to interview the advisors you are considering to find the one who is the best fit for you.

    John Loper
    managing director, professional practice, at the CFP Board

    Once you’re actually speaking to an advisor, you should have a list of questions ready. Here are 10 recommended by the CFP Board:

    What are your qualifications and credentials?
    What services do you offer?
    Will you have a fiduciary duty to me?
    What is your approach to financial planning?
    What types of clients do you typically work with?
    Will you be the only advisor working with me?
    How will I pay for your services?
    How much do you typically charge?
    Do others stand to gain from the financial advice you give me?
    Have you ever been publicly disciplined for any unlawful or unethical actions in your career?

    This is not the time to be shy, according to Loper.
    “It is important to interview the advisors you are considering to find the one who is the best fit for you,” he said. “Ask them about their qualifications and credentials, and if they have a fiduciary duty.”

    CFPs, for example, commit to act as a fiduciary at all times when providing financial advice, Loper added. That means they “must place your interests first when providing financial advice — even when they have a conflict of interest,” he said. Other financial advisors may operate only under a so-called suitability standard of care, meaning their recommendations to clients need only be suitable, and not necessarily the most advantageous.
    “You should also check to see if others gain from the financial advice they give you, as well as their approach to financial planning,” Loper said. More

  • in

    Stocks making the biggest moves in the premarket: GlaxoSmithKline, CureVac, Airbnb and more

    Take a look at some of the biggest movers in the premarket:
    GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) – The drugmaker’s U.S.-listed shares jumped 3.1% in the premarket following a Bloomberg report that the company’s $54 billion consumer products unit is attracting buyout interest from private-equity firms. Glaxo would only say it is “far advanced” with plans to separate the consumer business.

    CureVac (CVAC) – The drugmaker’s shares tumbled 15.5% in the premarket after the company said it would discontinue the development of its most advanced Covid-19 vaccine candidate. The decision came after the European Medicines Agency told the company it would not fast-track the approval process.
    Airbnb (ABNB) – Cowen upgraded Airbnb to “outperform” from “market perform,” saying the Street is underestimating 2022 bookings growth and that the increase in alternative lodging will be a permanent part of the travel landscape. Airbnb shares gained 2.4% in the premarket.
    Signet Jewelers (SIG) – The jewelry retailer announced the acquisition of rival Diamonds Direct for $490 million in cash, and said the deal would add immediately to earnings. Signet rallied 3.1% in premarket action.
    Nike (NKE) – Nike rose 1.3% in premarket trading after Goldman Sachs initiated coverage with a “buy” rating, citing a healthy industry backdrop as well as strong growth initiatives by the athletic footwear and apparel maker.
    Fastenal (FAST) – The industrial products maker matched estimates with quarterly earnings of 42 cents per share, with revenue essentially in line with forecasts. Fastenal said it continued to experience inflation related to materials and transportation costs, and its shares fell 1% in the premarket.

    Southwest Airlines (LUV) – Southwest Airlines said it is hoping to normalize its schedule by Wednesday, after canceling 28% of its flights this past weekend and 10% on Monday. Southwest has cited bad weather in Florida and staffing issues for the higher level of cancellations.
    MGM Resorts (MGM) – MGM Resorts was upgraded to “outperform” from “neutral” at Credit Suisse, which set a price target for the resort operator’s stock at $33 per share. Credit Suisse feels MGM has not been given enough credit by the market for its ongoing transformation. MGM rallied 2.4% in premarket trading.
    Tesla (TSLA) – Tesla sold just over 56,000 vehicles made in China during September, the largest monthly total since it started production in Shanghai two years ago. Tesla rose 1% in premarket trading.
    Square (SQ) – Square was upgraded to “overweight” from “neutral” at Atlantic Equities, which cites valuation, strong growth prospects and a disruptive business model. The payment service’s stock rose 1.6% in the premarket.
    Moderna (MRNA) – Moderna added 1% in premarket trading, ahead of Thursday’s Food and Drug Administration panel meeting on the company’s application for approval of booster shots utilizing its Covid-19 vaccine. Briefing documents are scheduled to be posted this morning, shedding some light on the prospects for approval.

    WATCH LIVEWATCH IN THE APP More

  • in

    Market is about to see the strongest earnings season of year, history shows

    Earnings may give stocks a major boost starting this week.
    Ally Invest’s Lindsey Bell finds the third quarter is undeniably the most powerful earnings season for Wall Street.

    “We’re starting to think about the end of the year into next year, and you start to hear corporate management teams talk about that,” the firm’s chief investment strategist told CNBC’s “Trading Nation” on Monday. “That gets investors revved up about what’s yet to come.”
    Bell highlights the bullish trend in a special chart. It shows the S&P 500’s average change by earnings season since 2000.

    Arrows pointing outwards

    According to the data, the index is up 2.5% in the mid-October to late November time frame, which coincides with third-quarter earnings. Second-quarter and fourth-quarter earnings season both fall 0.3%, on average.
    Bell anticipates the pattern will continue.
    “This is the first quarter in four quarters that we’re actually seeing earnings estimates move a little bit lower into the reporting period,” said Bell, a CNBC contributor. “At the same time, we’ve also seen the market move lower going into the reporting period. We haven’t seen that for a good four or five quarters. So, the set up looks good for stocks.”

    However, she has inflation on her watch list as a potential headwind.
    “It’s all going to come down to the commentary about margins and pricing power,” Bell added. “The performance is going to be on a one-off basis. And, it’s going to really favor companies that are high quality that can handle higher costs and are also able to pass through pricing power to the consumer.”

    ‘That reopening trade is coming back alive’ More

  • in

    Lawmakers slam UK's Covid response, say 'herd immunity' strategy a public health failure

    The U.K government’s approach to tackling the coronavirus outbreak at the start of the pandemic has been called one of the country’s worst ever public health failures.
    The damning assessment of the government’s initial Covid response comes after an inquiry by British lawmakers.
    The report found that the government made major mistakes at the start of the global outbreak, including its apparent decision to allow Covid to spread throughout the population.

    A wife adjusts her husband’s mask before entering a shop in Hampshire, England, UK
    Peter Titmuss | Collection Mix: Subjects | Getty Images

    LONDON — The U.K government’s approach to tackling the coronavirus outbreak at the start of the pandemic has been called one of the country’s worst ever public health failures, following an inquiry by British lawmakers.
    The report, which examined the U.K.’s initial response to the Covid pandemic, found that the government made major mistakes at the start of the global outbreak, including its apparent decision to allow Covid to spread throughout the population in a bid to achieve “herd immunity,” and its hesitation to lock down the country.

    “Decisions on lockdowns and social distancing during the early weeks of the pandemic — and the advice that led to them — rank as one of the most important public health failures the United Kingdom has ever experienced,” the 150-page report, which was published on Tuesday following an inquiry by two parliamentary committees, found.
    The British government, led by Prime Minister Boris Johnson, was accused of dithering as the Covid pandemic hit Europe in early 2020 and appeared reluctant to impose restrictions on public life, travel or borders.
    Although it was never formally announced, the U.K.’s initial approach to Covid (which went from trying to ‘contain’ the spread of the virus, to trying to ‘delay’ it) was widely seen as a way to achieve “herd immunity.”

    ‘Serious early error’

    A high level of immunity to a virus in a population can be achieved by both natural infection (through the forming of antibodies when the body fights a virus) and by vaccination.
    The latter route is generally preferred as it avoids adverse effects such as excess deaths caused by a virus. However, with no Covid vaccines available at the start of the pandemic, some countries, like the U.K. and Sweden, appeared to favor allowing the virus to spread among the population to some extent in a bid to achieve a level of herd immunity in their populations.

    The strategy saw Covid-19 cases rapidly sweep through the U.K., however, causing thousands of deaths among elderly people and strains on the National Health Service. The British government (and later, the Sweden too, to a lesser extent) changed tack and imposed a nationwide lockdown on March 26.
    The inquiry, which involved evidence from over 50 “witnesses” including high-profile public officials and health experts who have advised the government throughout the pandemic, was damning in its assessment of the government’s initial approach, noting that it “amounted in practice” to an ill-fated pursuit of herd immunity.
    “When the Government moved from the ‘contain’ stage to the ‘delay’ stage, that approach involved trying to manage the spread of Covid through the population rather than to stop it spreading altogether. This amounted in practice to accepting that herd immunity by infection was the inevitable outcome, given that the United Kingdom had no firm prospect of a vaccine, limited testing capacity and there was a widespread view that the public would not accept a lockdown for a significant period,” the report said.
    By doing this the U.K. “made a serious early error in adopting this fatalistic approach and not considering a more emphatic and rigorous approach to stopping the spread of the virus as adopted by many East and South East Asian countries,” the inquiry found.

    Medics take a patient from an ambulance into the Royal London hospital in London on January 19, 2021.
    Tolga Akmen | AFP | Getty Images

    Groupthink

    The report added that the the fact that the U.K. approach reflected a consensus between official scientific advisers and the government indicated “a degree of groupthink” which “meant we were not as open to approaches being taken elsewhere as we should have been.”
    The inquiry, which was overseen by the House of Commons’ Science and Technology Committee and Health and Social Care Committee (which consist of lawmakers from the U.K.’s main three political parties)  examined six key areas of the country’s response to Covid-19. These included how prepared the U.K. was for a pandemic and its willingness to use non-pharmaceutical interventions such as border controls, social distancing and lockdowns to control the pandemic.
    Read more: As Covid mutations spread, will herd immunity ever be possible?
    It also looked at the use of test, trace and isolate strategies and the impact of the pandemic on social care and specific communities and, lastly, the procurement and roll-out of Covid-19 vaccines.
    Highlighting its findings, the inquiry concluded found that:

    “The delays in establishing an adequate test, trace and isolate system hampered efforts to understand and contain the outbreak and it failed in its stated purpose to avoid lockdowns.”

    “The initial decision to delay a comprehensive lockdown — despite practice elsewhere in the world —reflected a fatalism about the spread of Covid that should have been robustly challenged at the time.”

    “Social care was not given sufficient priority in the early stages of the pandemic.”

    “The forward-planning, agility and decisive organisation of the vaccine development and deployment effort” was a big positive, and should be a guide to future government practice.

    In addition, the inquiry found that the U.K.’s preparedness for a pandemic had been widely acclaimed in advance, but performed less well than many other countries in practice. It also said that the pandemic underlined the need for an urgent and long term strategy to tackle health inequalities.

    Britain’s Prime Minister Boris Johnson, wearing a face mask to prevent the spread of the coronavirus, visits a pharmaceutical manufacturing facility during a visit to the north east of England on February 13, 2021.
    WPA Pool | Getty Images News | Getty Images

    Nonetheless, there were also bright spots in the report and examples of “global best practice,” with praise for the government’s procurement and rapid rollout of Covid vaccines which saw the U.K. order, authorize and deploy Covid vaccines before most countries. To date, government data shows that 85.5% of the U.K. population over the age of 12 is fully vaccinated, with booster shots now being rolled out to the most vulnerable.

    ‘Big mistakes’ in dark times

    The U.K. has been sorely hit by the pandemic, recording over 8.2 million cases of the virus and over 138,000 deaths. Critics argue that inadequate responses by the government in some areas of the pandemic, such as the test and trace system which has been wracked with issues during the pandemic, has cost thousands of lives.
    In its conclusions, the inquiry noted that both the positive and negative consequences of the government’s response to the pandemic must be reflected on to ensure that lessons are learned, in the hope that these can inform future responses to emergencies.
    Read more: Here’s why herd immunity from Covid is ‘mythical’ with the delta variant
    In all, 38 recommendations were made in the report that lawmakers said could better equip the U.K., including that a “greater diversity of expertise and challenge” both from home and abroad should be called upon to help plan for any future pandemics.
    Issuing a joint statement summarising their findings, the heads of the two parliamentary committees that oversaw the inquiry said that the U.K. response “combined some big achievements with some big mistakes.”
    “Our vaccine programme was boldly planned and effectively executed. Our test and trace programme took too long to become effective. The government took seriously scientific advice but there should have been more challenge from all to the early U.K. consensus that delayed a more comprehensive lockdown when countries like South Korea showed a different approach was possible,” Jeremy Hunt, chair of the Health and Social Care Committee, and Greg Clark, chair of the Science and Technology Committee, said.
    They acknowledged that so much was unknown at the start of the public health emergency that it was “impossible to get everything right” and thanked a variety of sectors, from the NHS and public workers to the scientific community and millions of volunteers, “who responded to the challenge with dedication, compassion and hard work to help the whole nation at one of our darkest times.” 

    WATCH LIVEWATCH IN THE APP More

  • in

    ‘No single company can address the climate crisis alone’: Business leaders on why co-operation is so important

    IOT: Powering the digital economy

    Competition and going it alone can drive innovation and success.
    When it comes to the environment and climate change, however, collaboration is crucial.

    Whether it’s a sportsperson trying to outdo their rival on the playing field or a tech giant attempting to develop the latest cellphone and dominate the market, competition and going it alone can drive innovation and success.
    When it comes to the environment and climate change, however, things are different.

    As COP26 nears, calls for an approach which focuses on working together in favor of a common goal —keeping emissions low and putting plans in place to address the challenges our planet will face over the coming years and decades — are growing louder by the day.
    There are always exceptions and getting people to find common ground is hugely challenging, but this focus on collaboration is beginning to span politics, civil society and business.
    Thierry Delaporte is CEO of Wipro, which describes itself as an “information technology, consulting and business process services” firm.
    During a recent debate moderated by CNBC’s Steve Sedgwick, Delaporte emphasized the need for different parties to work together. “The reality is that no single company can address the climate crisis alone,” he said.
    “To really have a big impact and to really drive … real results to net zero we need to standardize [a] net zero approach to ensure the progress is made efficiently and effectively,” he went on to explain.

    Delaporte also spoke of the need for a good relationship between governments and firms.
    “It must be … substantially easier for companies of all size, all sectors across the globe to also move towards achieving a net zero future,” he said.
    “The connection with … other companies, the ecosystem, the communication and the cooperation with administrations in the respective countries is absolutely essential for us to drive … substantial results.”

    Read more about clean energy from CNBC Pro

    During the discussion Adair Turner, who is chairman of the Energy Transitions Commission, stressed the importance of the relationship between government and business. 
    “There’s this endless iterative process between government setting frameworks, setting, for instance, carbon prices, setting regulations that make it clear that the private sector is going to have to respond,” he said.
    Turner went on to flesh out his argument, explaining the private sector would then do what it does, namely cost reduction and innovation, to deliver within those targets at least cost.
    “This is a process that never ends but it needs to involve both strong action by governments and strong action by the private sector, including by private sector finance — asset managers, banks, etcetera.”
    One example of climate-related collaboration is the Science Based Targets initiative, or SBTi, a partnership between the World Wide Fund for Nature, World Resources Institute, CDP (formerly the Carbon Disclosure Project) and United Nations Global Compact.
    The latter’s CEO and executive director, Sanda Ojiambo, explained to CNBC how the SBTi was leveraging the four organizations’ strengths.
    Leading companies, she said, had “been setting emissions reduction targets in line with the latest climate science advanced by the SBTi.”
    Earlier this year, the SBTi published a progress report for 2020. Among other things, this looked at emissions reductions from 338 firms it described as having “approved science-based targets.”

    “The 338 companies in our analysis collectively reduced their annual emissions by 25% between 2015 and 2019 — a difference of 302 million tonnes, which is equivalent to the annual emissions of 78 coal-fired power plants,” the report said.
    For Ojiambo, getting the message out there and communicating progress is a crucial tool.
    “It’s been really important to demonstrate that, with science-based targets, progress has happened,” she said.
    “For us, it’s important to have a standard and it’s important to not only raise the ambition but make sure that actions are grounded in science and we’re able to track and measure that progress.” More

  • in

    Stock futures are flat in overnight trading after a losing day

    Stock futures were little changed in overnight trading on Monday after Wall Street kicked off the week on a sour note.
    Futures on the Dow Jones Industrial Average dipped 20 points. S&P 500 futures and Nasdaq 100 futures were both down by 0.1%.

    The market suffered losses to start the week with the blue-chip Dow shedding 250 points. The S&P 500 fell 0.7% Monday with nine of the 11 sectors registering losses, while the tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite dipped 0.6%.
    “There are a lot of headwinds out there as we embark on corporate earnings, and traders will be looking for any and all indications of guidance — especially as the threat of slower growth looms large,” said Chris Larkin, managing director of trading at E-Trade Financial. “As new data emerges and traders gain some potential insight into growth prospects, it may be wise to prepare for more bumps in the road.”
    JPMorgan Chase and other big banks are about to kick off the third-quarter earnings season later this week. Earnings growth is expected to grow about 30% year over year this quarter following a 96.3% expansion in the second quarter, according to Refinitiv.

    Stock picks and investing trends from CNBC Pro:

    “Expectations for third quarter earnings have been coming down in recent weeks and that should create some room for upside surprises, which is good for overall market sentiment,” said Rod von Lipsey, managing director at UBS Private Wealth Management.
    Investors will monitor the latest employment data on Tuesday as the Labor Department releases its Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey. Economists polled by Dow Jones expect 10.9 million job openings in August, unchanged from the total in July.

    The stock market went through a bumpy ride in September, with the S&P 500 falling 4.8% for its worst month since March 2020 and breaking a seven-month winning streak.
    Wall Street major strategists are seeing muted returns for the rest of 2021 as the average year-end S&P 500 target stands at 4,433, less than 2% from Monday’s close, according to the CNBC Market Strategist Survey.

    WATCH LIVEWATCH IN THE APP More