More stories

  • in

    Hawaiian Airlines debuts free inflight Wi-Fi from SpaceX’s Starlink

    Hawaiian Airlines is rolling out complimentary Wi-Fi via SpaceX’s Starlink onboard commercial flights this week.
    It is the first major U.S. airline to offer the satellite-based service.
    “We think it is really going to set an entirely new standard for connectivity on airplanes,” Peter Ingram, CEO of Hawaiian Airlines, told CNBC.

    A Hawaiian Airlines A321 aircraft with Starlink WiFi installed.
    Hawaiian Airlines

    Hawaiian Airlines is rolling out complimentary Wi-Fi via SpaceX’s Starlink on board commercial flights this week, the companies told CNBC, the first major U.S. airline to offer the satellite-based service.
    “SpaceX has really cracked the code – literally, in terms of the technology – to be able to deliver a wide bandwidth of very high quality connectivity to an airplane with a global reach,” Peter Ingram, Hawaiian Airlines CEO, told CNBC.

    Hawaiian’s plan for complimentary Wi-Fi comes as airlines ramp up their offerings for high-speed connectivity. JetBlue Airways offers Wi-Fi on board for free, and last year Delta Air Lines launched onboard internet free of charge for members of its loyalty program, after years of planning.
    Hawaiian has an extensive network of flights over the Pacific Ocean, serving the mainland U.S., Japan, Australia and New Zealand, among other destinations, from Hawaii.

    Sign up here to receive weekly editions of CNBC’s Investing in Space newsletter.

    “It really feels like an experience that should not be possible when you get on a commercial airline flight. And you’re able to connect to the internet and experience it in a way that’s similar, if not better, than what you can experience in your own home,” Chad Gibbs, SpaceX’s vice president of Starlink business operations, told CNBC.
    “We now have a totally different paradigm, which is that we have incredible amounts of capacity and bandwidth that we can bring to the plane,” Gibbs added.
    Hawaiian signed an agreement with SpaceX in April 2022, looking to utilize the Starlink network – which consists of more than 5,000 satellites in low Earth orbit and boasts more than 2.3 million customers worldwide. The airline didn’t previously offer inflight Wi-Fi.

    A Starlink terminal installed on a Hawaiian Airlines aircraft.
    Hawaiian Airlines

    The companies did not disclose the deal’s value or how much it costs to install each of the aviation-specific Starlink terminals on a commercial aircraft.
    Ingram emphasized, however, that “the costs of this have gone down from what the early Wi-Fi systems were.” He noted Hawaiian is “actively” installing Starlink terminals, with six completed on its Airbus A321 planes so far.
    In total, Hawaiian expects to add Starlink to 18 of the A321 jets and 24 of its A330 aircraft later this year.
    “We think it is really going to set an entirely new standard for connectivity on airplanes,” Ingram said.
    The companies originally planned to begin installing the Starlink terminals last year, but Ingram said that SpaceX needed to launch more next-generation Starlink satellites and receive certification from the Federal Aviation Administration before installation could begin.
    SpaceX has been steadily pursuing the licenses needed for a wide variety of aircraft. It’s received certification for smaller jets, with semi-private charter JSX beginning to use the service in late 2022.
    “To date Starlink has been used on over 30,000 flights, on flights across the U.S. and around the world,” Gibbs said.
    In addition to Hawaiian, SpaceX has announced Starlink inflight Wi-Fi deals with Latvia’s airBaltic, Japan’s Zipair and Qatar Airways.
    The addition of Starlink service comes to Hawaiian shortly after the airline struck a deal late last year to be acquired by Alaska Airlines in a $1.9 billion deal.
    — CNBC’s Leslie Josephs contributed to this report. More

  • in

    J&J, Merck and Bristol Myers CEOs defend high drug prices in Senate hearing, as Biden tries to cut costs

    The CEOs of Johnson & Johnson, Merck and Bristol Myers Squibb defended high drug prices in the U.S. at a Senate hearing.
    J&J CEO Joaquin Duato, Merck CEO Robert Davis and Bristol Myers Squibb CEO Chris Boerner said their drug prices reflect the value of their drugs to patients and each company’s high investments in research and development, among others.
    CEOs said they would welcome cheaper copycats of their drugs.
    The push to cut drug prices is one of the rare hot-button issues that unites the two major political parties.

    (L-R) Joaquin Duato, CEO of Johnson & Johnson, Robert Davis, CEO of Merck, and Chris Boerner, CEO of Bristol Myers Squibb, testify before the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee at the Dirksen Senate Office Building on February 08, 2024 in Washington, DC. The Committee held to hearing to investigating the cost of prescription drugs. (Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)
    Kevin Dietsch | Getty Images News | Getty Images

    The CEOs of Johnson & Johnson, Merck and Bristol Myers Squibb defended high drug prices in the U.S. at a Senate hearing Thursday, as the White House and lawmakers on both sides of the aisle work to rein in high health-care costs for Americans.
    The push to cut drug prices is one of the rare hot-button issues that unites the two major political parties, though they often back different approaches to reducing costs.

    The Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee hearing comes at a pivotal time, as the Biden administration starts a long-awaited process to negotiate drug prices directly with manufacturers — which is expected to ease pressure on seniors’ wallets.
    At the hearing, Merck CEO Robert Davis and Bristol Myers Squibb CEO Chris Boerner did not commit to cutting the prices of certain drugs in the U.S. to match the lower prices in other high-income countries, such as Canada and Japan.
    But they said they would welcome cheaper copycats into the market when the main patents on each of their top-selling drugs expire. Drugmakers are notorious for using different strategies to extend the exclusivity of lucrative drugs.
    J&J CEO Joaquin Duato also committed to lowering the price of its immunosuppressive medication Stelara in 2025, when competing drugs will be allowed to enter the market.
    Roughly 9 million American adults did not take their drugs as prescribed in 2021 due to the high cost of medications, according to a federal survey. Prescription drug prices in the U.S. are more than 2.5 times as high as those in other high-income nations, another federal report showed.

    The Senate panel said that’s especially true for some of the top drugs from the three drugmakers testifying Thursday, including Stelara, Merck’s immunotherapy drug Keytruda and Bristol Myers Squibb’s blood thinner Eliquis. Eliquis and Stelara are both among the first 10 drugs subject to the Medicare price talks.
    “The overwhelming beneficiary of these high drug prices is the pharmaceutical industry,” Sen. Bernie Sanders, who chairs the Senate Health panel, said during the hearing.

    Robert Davis, CEO of Merck, testifies before the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee at the Dirksen Senate Office Building on February 08, 2024 in Washington, DC.
    Kevin Dietsch | Getty Images News | Getty Images

    The three CEOs acknowledged the high cost of health-care in the U.S, but said their prices reflect the value of their life-saving drugs to patients and the broader health-care system, along with their high investments in research and development.
    They also claimed that medicines reach patients far faster in the U.S. than they do in other countries, and contended pharmacy benefit managers — middlemen who negotiate drug discounts on behalf of insurers and other payors — often pocket savings instead of passing them down to patients.
    “Patients bear the brunt of a complex U.S. system that sees increasing health care costs and a lack of affordability. We have to make the system work better for them,” said Boerner, adding that drugmakers “have a role to play in addressing affordability.” 
    But he added that Bristol Myers Squibb supports policies that “lower patient out-of-pocket costs without ultimately harming innovation.” Boerner did not point to specific policies.

    Drugmakers want to protect innovation

    Duato noted that J&J prices its drugs to meet its commitment to innovate and develop new medicines for patients, which requires a “massive” investment. J&J has spent nearly $78 billion in research and development since 2016, he said. 
    Merck, for its part, invested $46 billion in R&D between 2011 to 2023, and expects to spend another $18 billion in the 2030s, Davis noted during his opening remarks. 
    Meanwhile, Bristol Myers Squibb has spent more than $65 billion in R&D over the past decade, according to Boerner.
    Still, a report released Tuesday by the committee said J&J and Bristol Myers Squibb each spent $3.2 billion more on stock buybacks, dividends and executive compensation than they did on R&D for finding new drugs in 2022. Merck, however, spent less on executive compensation than on R&D that year, the report said.
    “I think most Americans would be pretty surprised, given how much the industry talks about research and development, that you are actually spending more money, shelling out money to investors and buying back stock than you are on research and development,” Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., told the CEOs.
    But Duato argued that paying dividends is how J&J remains operational and sustainable, which enables the company to develop medicines in the first place.

    CEOs say medicines reach Americans faster

    Senators highlighted the disparity between drug prices in the U.S. and in other high-income countries. For example, Sanders said the current annual cost of Eliquis is $7,100 in the U.S., but just $900 in Canada. 
    He asked Boerner to commit to lowering the price of Eliquis in the U.S. to the drug’s price in Canada.

    Bristol Myers Squibb CEO Chris Boerner testifies before a Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee hearing on high drug prices on Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S., February 8, 2024. REUTERS/Leah Millis
    Leah Millis | Reuters

    But Boerner said he could not make that commitment, primarily because the two countries have “different systems that prioritize very different things.” He noted that medicines in Canada are often harder to access and take considerably longer to reach patients in Canada than they do in the U.S.
    Merck’s CEO offered a similar response after Sanders asked him to commit to lowering the price of Keytruda in the U.S. to its price in Japan. The panel said the current annual cost of Keytruda is $191,000 in the U.S., but significantly lower in Japan, at $44,000. 
    “I think it’s also important to point out that the access [to drugs] in the United States is faster and more than anywhere in the world,” Davis said. 
    He added that Keytruda has many more approved treatment uses in the U.S., which is partly why the price of the drug is higher than in other countries. 
    Keytruda has 39 approved uses, or indications, across 17 cancer tumor types in the U.S., Davis said. That number is in the 20s in Europe and even lower in Japan, he added.
    But those other indications often give a drug other patents, which allows companies to extend a medicine’s exclusivity on the market. Senators noted that Merck holds 64 active patents and 51 pending patents on Keytruda. 
    Meanwhile, J&J currently has 15 active patents and 21 pending patents on Stelara. Bristol Myers Squibb holds 18 active patents and two pending patents on Eliquis.
    “Pharmaceutical companies are doing everything that they can to keep their prices and their profit sky high….one way that companies do this is by filing dozens, even hundreds of frivolous patents that lock in their exclusive right to sell their drug for decades,” said Sen. Maggie Hassan, D-N.H.
    Don’t miss these stories from CNBC PRO: More

  • in

    New Kia Carnival minivan will be offered as a hybrid and maintain its SUV design

    Kia is adding a hybrid model to its Carnival minivan to meet increasing consumer demand for the technology and assist in meeting federal fuel economy standards.
    Hybrid vehicles typically include a traditional internal combustion engine combined with EV technologies such as an electric motor and small battery.
    The Carnival hybrid is expected to go on sale alongside an updated version of the traditional minivan in the summer.

    2025 Kia Carnival 

    CHICAGO – Kia Motors is adding a hybrid model to its Carnival minivan to meet increasing consumer demand for the technology and assist in meeting tightening federal fuel economy standards.
    Hybrids are a growing option for automakers as they strive to make vehicles more efficient and avoid costly federal fuel economy and emissions standards. They’re also less expensive and a less dramatic adjustment for consumers who want to go greener but aren’t ready to purchase all-electric vehicles.

    EV sales have been slower than planned in the U.S. auto industry, though they’re expected to grow.
    Hybrid vehicles typically include a traditional internal combustion engine combined with EV technologies such as an electric motor and small battery. They function like traditional vehicles and do not need to be plugged in like EVs or plug-in hybrid electric vehicles.
    Kia America Vice President of Marketing Russell Wager told CNBC that adding the hybrid option for the Carnival was about giving customers choices. The South Korean automaker aims to have electrified models across its lineup.
    “It’s just going to add a whole extra audience, because we didn’t have a hybrid,” Wager told CNBC.
    The Carnival hybrid, announced at the Chicago Auto Show, is expected to go on sale alongside an updated version of the traditional minivan in the summer. Both models feature updated styling and interior technologies compared with the current model, which made waves in the family hauler segment for its SUV-inspired design when it was introduced in 2021.

    2025 Kia Carnival interior 

    Kia did not release pricing or fuel economy expectations for the new models. The current Carnival starts from about $33,000 to $47,000. With a 3.5-liter V6 engine, it achieves up to 20.6 miles per gallon combined city/highway, with a total range of 418 miles.
    That V6 engine will continue to be offered alongside the 1.6-liter four-cylinder turbo-hybrid engine that produces 242 horsepower and 271 foot-pounds of torque, according to Kia.
    Kia expects the hybrid model to account for half of the Carnival’s sales, according to the company.
    It will be Kia’s fourth hybrid. The automaker also offers three plug-in hybrid electric vehicles.
    Aside from the hybrid option, the updated minivan includes a redesigned front and back, including new lights and a larger, more open grille on the front of the vehicle. The updated interior includes Kia’s new infotainment system and other newer tech. It continues to offer “VIP lounge seating” with power controls and leg extensions, much like a traditional reclining chair.

    2025 Kia Carnival “VIP lounge seating” with power controls and leg extensions much like a traditional reclining chair.

    While the U.S. minivan segment is a far cry from its peak of roughly 1.5 million vehicles in the mid-1990s, some auto companies such as Hyundai and Chrysler remain in the category.
    Kia parent Hyundai, which sold fewer than 44,000 Carnivals last year, achieved 14% market share of the roughly 305,500-unit minivan market last year in the U.S., according to auto data firm Motor Intelligence.
    Chrysler was the segment leader last year with sales of its Pacifica minivan, including a plug-in hybrid electric version, at more than 120,550 units, or roughly 40% market share.
    “We don’t like being where we are ranked in our market share,” Wager said. “We think we can compete with any of the others in the segment.”
    Wager said the Carnival, which is imported from South Korea, is capacity constrained, meaning Kia could sell more in the U.S. if they could import more of the vehicles.
    He said the company is increasing production capacity of the Carnival for the U.S.
    The added capacity as well as additional production of other Kia models should assist the automaker in topping its record U.S. sales of 782,451 vehicles last year.
    “Our goal is to sell more than we sold for last year’s record sales,” Wager said. More

  • in

    Delta to open a new tier of ‘premium’ airport lounges this year in high-end travel push

    Delta has struggled with overcrowding in its popular Sky Club lounges.
    The carrier plans to open “premium” lounges in New York, Los Angeles and Boston this year.
    The new tier of airport lounges is similar to a strategy that American and United have for international business-class travelers.

    Delta’s new Sky Club airport lounge at New York’s John F. Kennedy International Airport.
    Leslie Josephs/CNBC

    Delta Air Lines’ popular airport lounges are getting a more exclusive tier, in the airline’s latest push to cater to high-spending travelers.
    The first “premium” lounge is scheduled to open in June at New York’s John F. Kennedy International Airport, and at 38,000 square feet, it will be the largest of the carrier’s lounges, Delta said on Thursday. Other high-end Delta lounges will open in Boston and Los Angeles later this year.

    Delta has been building up its network of Sky Clubs in recent years to cater to swarms of travelers as more people gain entry through memberships, airline status, credit card benefits or flying in a premium cabin. Last year, Delta said it would limit entry into its lounges in the coming years, but softened some changes after a customer uproar.
    The new strategy shows Delta moving away from a one-size-fits-all approach for its airport travelers. The airline is joining United Airlines, which operates Polaris lounges, and American Airlines’ which has Flagship lounges, along with standard airport clubs.
    Delta didn’t disclose the entry requirements for the new lounges. It said the JFK location will have a full-service restaurant and “wellness” areas.
    Delta also said it plans to open standard Sky Clubs in Charlotte, North Carolina and a new location in Seattle later this year. The carrier is planning to expand clubs in Miami and New York’s LaGuardia.
    The new clubs come as Delta is focusing on the increasing importance of travelers flying toward the front of the plane. The airline said “premium” revenue from business class or premium economy tickets grew 26% last year to generate $19.1 billion in sales, while its main cabin ticket sales rose 20% to $24.5 billion. More

  • in

    Under Armour shares jump after it raises profit expectations amid sliding sales

    Under Armour delivered a mixed set of results for its 2023 holiday quarter after it saw slow sales in its wholesale channel and soft demand in North America.
    The athletic apparel retailer cut its full-year sales outlook slightly, but said it expects its profits and gross margin to rise more than it previously did.

    The interior of an Under Armour store is seen on November 03, 2021 in Houston, Texas.
    Brandon Bell | Getty Images

    Under Armour said Thursday that its holiday-quarter sales slowed, but its earnings beat estimates as the athletic apparel retailer worked to rein in costs.
    Soft demand in North America and a slowdown in wholesale orders led revenue to drop 6% during the period, but the company posted big gains in its gross margin.

    Under Armour now anticipates full-year sales will decline slightly more than it previously expected. Even so, it raised its expectations for full-year gross margin and earnings just weeks away from the end of its fiscal year.
    The company’s shares were up 3% in morning trading. 
    Here’s how Under Armour did in its third fiscal quarter compared with what Wall Street was anticipating, based on a survey of analysts by LSEG, formerly known as Refinitiv:

    Earnings per share: 19 cents adjusted vs. 11 cents expected
    Revenue: $1.49 billion vs. $1.50 billion expected

    The company’s reported net income for the three-month period that ended Dec. 31 was $114.1 million, or 26 cents per share, compared with $121.6 million, or 27 cents per share, a year earlier. Excluding one-time items related to the sale of its MyFitnessPal platform, tax impacts and litigation reserves, Under Armour’s adjusted net income was about $84 million, or 19 cents per share. 
    For the full fiscal year, which is expected to conclude at the end of March, Under Armour is projecting sales to fall by 3% to 4%, compared with its previous expectation of down 2% to 4%. Wall Street had expected sales to drop 2.8%, according to LSEG. 

    The retailer is expecting to bring in earnings per share of 57 cents to 59 cents, up from a previous range of 47 cents to 51 cents. It anticipates it will post adjusted earnings per share of 50 cents to 52 cents.
    Wall Street had expected earnings of 49 cents per share, according to LSEG.
    During the quarter, Under Armour saw its gross margin jump by 1 percentage point to 45.2%, driven by lower freight expenses and partially offset by increased promotions and sales to off-price channels. For the full year, the company is now expecting its gross margin to be up by 1.2 to 1.3 percentage points, compared with a prior expectation of 1 to 1.25 percentage points. 
    “Despite a mixed retail environment during the holiday season, our third quarter revenue results were in line with our expectations; we were able to deliver better than anticipated profitability and remain on track to achieve our full-year outlook,” Under Armour CEO Stephanie Linnartz said in a statement. “As we close out fiscal 2024 and our strengthened leadership team begins to come up to speed in the quarters ahead – we are working to reset Under Armour toward a path of improved revenue growth and enhanced value creation in the future.”
    During the quarter, Under Armour’s wholesale revenue, which accounts for about 60% of sales, dropped 13% to $712 million. Partners like Dick’s Sporting Goods, Kohl’s and JD Sports pulled back on orders as they grapple with their own demand and inventory challenges. It’s a theme across the apparel sector as wholesalers looked to tighten their order books in an uncertain economy.
    Like its peers, Under Armour has been working to expand its sales directly to consumers through its stores and website. During the quarter, Under Armour saw those direct sales rise 4% to $741 million, driven by a 5% uptick in store revenue and a 2% jump in digital sales.
    Read the full earnings release here.
    Don’t miss these stories from CNBC PRO: More

  • in

    Spirit Airlines narrows loss to $184 million, says it’s on the path back to profitability

    Spirit Airlines posted another loss at the end of last year.
    CEO Ted Christie said the domestic air travel market is improving.
    The budget airline and JetBlue are appealing a judge’s ruling that blocked their planned merger.

    A Spirit Airlines plane awaits takeoff at LaGuardia Airport in New York
    Leslie Josephs/CNBC

    Spirit Airlines’ fourth-quarter loss narrowed to nearly $184 million, but its CEO said that the carrier is on a path back to profitability and that the domestic air travel market is improving.
    The airline is trying to find its footing after domestic fares fell, a Pratt & Whitney engine issue grounded some of its Airbus planes and a judge blocked JetBlue Airways’ planned acquisition of the carrier earlier this year. The two airlines are appealing that decision.

    The failed merger has helped drive Spirit’s stock down more than 57% so far this year as investors fretted about its financial future. Spirit’s looming debt payments ahead have prompted some calls that the airline could have to restructure, or even liquidate.
    On Thursday, Spirit reiterated that it “is aware of its 2025 and 2026 debt maturities and is assessing options to address those maturities when the time is appropriate.”
    The budget airline has spent months looking for ways to cut costs, including adjusting its network and shifting its aircraft delivery schedule.
    “The Spirit team is 100% clear and focused on the adjustments we are currently deploying and will continue to make throughout 2024 to drive us back to cash flow generation and profitability,” CEO Ted Christie said in an earnings release.
    Spirit still expects to lose money in the first quarter, however, and said it projects revenue of between $1.25 billion and $1.28 billion, above analysts’ forecasts.

    Here’s what Spirit reported for the fourth quarter compared with what Wall Street expected, based on average estimates compiled by LSEG, formerly known as Refinitiv:

    Adjusted loss per share: $1.36 vs. an expected $1.46
    Total revenue: $1.32 billion vs. an expected $1.32 billion

    Spirit’s net loss of $183.65 million, or $1.68 per share, is improvement from a net loss of $270.66 million, or $2.49 per share, during the year-ago quarter. Adjusting for one-time items the carrier reported a net loss of $1.36 per share.
    Revenue was down 5% to $1.32 billion.
    The carrier plans for 2024 capacity to be flat to up mid single digits compared with last year, and up 1.5% in the first quarter, Spirit said.
    Weaker domestic airfares have had an outsized affect on budget airlines, which largely focus on U.S. routes. Added capacity has prompted them to discount flights, especially during off-peak periods.
    Spirit said fare revenue per passenger fell 25% in the fourth quarter to $48.24, while nonticket revenue per passenger, which includes Spirit’s myriad fees like seat assignments and carry-on bags, dropped 6.6% to $66.60. Passenger flight segments were up 12% in the fourth quarter from the same period of 2022.
    Spirit said it expects to have an average of 25 Airbus aircraft grounded this year because of the Pratt & Whitney engine issues.
    Those disruptions are expected to peak at 40 aircraft grounded in December. Spirit said expects to have 215 airplanes in its fleet by the end of the year.
    The Miramar, Florida-based airline again said that talks for compensation with Pratt & Whitney, a unit of RTX, have progressed and that “while no agreement has been reached to date, the Company believes the amount of compensation it will receive will be a significant source of liquidity over the next couple of years.”
    Don’t miss these stories from CNBC PRO: More

  • in

    The false promise of Indonesia’s economy

    In politics, repetition is a crucial part of any campaign. But for Indonesian voters, who go to the polls to elect a new president on February 14th, one pledge is starting to sound a little too familiar. Candidates hoping to lead the world’s third-largest democracy have now, for the better part of two decades, been vowing to raise the country’s growth rate to 7%.Joko Widodo, the outgoing president known as Jokowi, was elected on such a promise in 2014. So was his predecessor, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, who came to office in 2004. This time, two of the three contenders are making similar pledges. Ganjar Pranowo, former governor of Central Java, has a growth target of 7%. Prabowo Subianto, Indonesia’s minister of defence and the front-runner, has suggested that double-digit growth is possible.image: The EconomistSo far, two decades of promises have fallen short. Indonesia’s economy grew by around 5% last year, close to the average rate over the past two decades. The country’s last 7% expansion was in 1996, the year before the Asian Financial Crisis (see chart 1). Since Indonesia’s transition to democracy in 1998, promises of higher growth have been far more common than the policies that might encourage such a shift.The outgoing president has achievements to flaunt. A decade ago the country was one of the “Fragile Five”, a group of emerging-market economies vulnerable to high interest rates abroad and a strong dollar. Today its current account is roughly balanced and its external debts modest. After legislative and legal speed bumps, Jokowi’s omnibus bill, which cuts restrictions on foreign investment and simplifies licensing, finally became law last year. Indonesia’s infrastructure has improved over the past decade, helped by the construction of thousands of kilometres of roads.Yet the government’s proudest achievement is its nickel-focused industrial policy. The metal is used in electric-vehicle batteries, and Indonesia has the world’s largest deposits. Export of most raw ore has been banned since 2014, the aim being to force companies to process and manufacture in Indonesia. BYD, Ford and Hyundai are among the carmakers now investing in the country. Exports of ferronickel, a processed form of the metal, rose from $83m in 2014 to $5.8bn in 2022.Although openness to investment from both China and the West and an enormous stockpile of a vital battery metal is proving to be a powerful combination, there are risks to the approach. One is technological. Cullen Hendrix of the Peterson Institute for International Economics, a think-tank, notes that lithium-iron phosphate batteries, which contain no nickel, are becoming more popular. Sodium-ion batteries, which need neither nickel nor lithium, could surpass both types. Last month JAC Motors, a Chinese carmaker backed by Volkswagen, a German one, delivered the first commercial vehicles powered by sodium-ion batteries to customers.There are also signs that Indonesian policymakers are learning the wrong lessons from their nickel success. Despite obvious opportunities in the sunny archipelago, solar-power investment is suppressed by rules that panels must contain lots of domestically produced materials. Last year TikTok, a short-form video platform, was prodded into a shotgun tie-up with Tokopedia, an Indonesian e-commerce firm. It paid $840m for a 75% stake in the firm after new regulations halted its own e-commerce operations in the country.Moreover, Indonesian businesses remain stifled by local regulations, despite reforms introduced by the omnibus law. Rules requiring imports to be screened at particular entry points are equivalent to a 22% tariff, according to research by the World Bank—more than twice the South-East Asian average. Indeed, non-tariff barriers impose costs equivalent to 60-130% of the cost of computers, electronics and transport equipment. The election campaign has featured few concrete economic-policy proposals, but none of the candidates has expressed any zeal for peeling back the country’s many trade restrictions.Indonesia’s industrial policy undermines officials when they seek to attract investors who do not need the country’s resources. Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam, which place fewer restrictions on outside investors, are more obvious destinations for firms looking for alternatives to Chinese manufacturing. As a consequence, Indonesia’s exports of electronics are not just lower than any other large economy in South-East Asia; they have grown more slowly, too (see chart 2). The share of Indonesian exports heading to America is lower than in any of its local competitors.Although Indonesia is a relatively young country, by the time of the next presidential election in 2029 this tailwind will have disappeared. The country’s dependency ratio—the number of children aged under 15 and adults over 65 per 100 working-age adults—will begin to rise steadily from that year. Without more effective attempts to boost the economy, talk of 7% growth will remain illusory. ■For more expert analysis of the biggest stories in economics, finance and markets, sign up to Money Talks, our weekly subscriber-only newsletter. More

  • in

    Bankers have reason to hope Trump triumphs

    Have you noticed that America’s bankers are seething over proposed new capital rules? What gave it away? Perhaps it was the advertisements that warn of dire consequences for the economy, which blare out during prime-time spots in Sunday-night football games. Maybe it was the not-at-all-veiled threats from executives. Suing your regulator is “never a preferred option”, Jeremy Barnum of JPMorgan Chase told investors on a recent earnings call, but “it can’t be taken off the table.” Or perhaps it was the deluge of letters that recently arrived in the postboxes of the Federal Reserve and other banking agencies.America’s process for creating new bank rules has many stages. Regulators publish their agenda in the Federal Register, a scintillating journal published every weekday, which chronicles plans for rules, proposed rules, finalised rules and so on. They talk to industry members and carry out impact analyses. Back-and-forth between industry and overseer, at this stage, is done over coffee, often in private rooms in federal buildings. Then a “Notice of Proposed Rulemaking” is published, the “comment period” begins, interested parties submit letters to regulators—and the battle emerges into the open.The process is normally pretty technical. It has been anything but for proposals on how to implement Basel III, known as “Basel III endgame”, that were first published in July. Bosses of large banks seem to have been personally offended by them. Perhaps their thought process goes as follows: are we really so incompetent at managing risk that system-wide capital levels must be raised by 16%? After grievances piled up, the comment period was extended from November 30th to January 16th.Now all complaints have been filed, and letters published, the depth of opposition is clear. Latham & Watkins, a law firm, finds that whereas 347 submissions disagreed in whole or in part with the rules, just nine supported them as proposed. A wide range of groups found fault. It is hard to imagine another cause that would unite BlackRock and Goldman Sachs with the National Association for the Advancement of Coloured People, environmentalists, estate agents and most sitting senators.The rules are long and complicated, and so are the complaints. But they boil down to three themes. First, a big increase in capital is unnecessary. Second, the rules will hamper banks’ ability to intermediate capital markets. Third, they will crush lending to important parts of the economy, such as housing and environmental projects (especially ones favoured by President Joe Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act).Last year bank bosses seemed resigned to their fate. Marianne Lake of JPMorgan described the proposals as “a little bit like being a hostage”. The requirement was so shocking at first that “even if it changes a bit, you sort of are grateful for that, but it’s still probably going to be high.” They now seem more confident that the rules will be amended. “I don’t think anyone [thinks] that this is going to move forward as proposed,” said Denis Coleman of Goldman Sachs on January 16th.Fed governors usually try to come to a consensus on regulatory matters. This time, however, they are split, with Michelle Bowman and Christopher Waller, two Donald Trump appointees, opposing the rules when they were first proposed. On January 16th Mr Waller told the Brookings Institute, a think-tank, that it “might even be best to just pull it back” and start again. On January 17th Ms Bowman told the Chamber of Commerce, a lobbying group, that agencies should make “substantive changes” to the rules. Even Jerome Powell, the Fed’s chairman, has expressed reservations.Capital punishmentThere are three ways things can proceed. Regulators could press on undeterred, and finalise the rules. This would almost certainly result in the lawsuit to which Mr Barnum alluded. Any legal action would centre on procedural issues—bank lobbyists argue that agencies have violated legislation requiring data and analysis behind proposals to be made available to the public. (Banks allege it was not; the agencies have not yet responded.)The two other options are equally unpalatable: agencies could make more substantial changes to the rules or they could pull them back and start again. Either approach would require a repeat of the proposal-and-comment cycle.A difficult situation is made still more difficult by the fact that the agencies are starting to run out of time. The Congressional Review Act allows an incoming Congress to throw out any rule that is finalised less than 60 legislative days before it assumes power. Given the forthcoming presidential election and time off for summer recess, that deadline is closer than it seems. It will fall in July. If rules are not finalised soon and Mr Trump, who watered down bank capital requirements when last in office, wins the election in November, it seems likely that extra-tough standards would be tossed out entirely.Thus bankers have every incentive to delay the time at which the rules might be finalised. Will that sway their politics? Bank bosses are not typically big political donors. According to data compiled by Open Secrets, a non-profit outfit, neither Jamie Dimon of JPMorgan nor David Solomon of Goldman Sachs has given money during this presidential campaign. Among more junior staff, there does not seem to have been a rightward swing. If anything, donations from people employed by JPMorgan, Citigroup and Bank of America favour Democrats by a wider margin than in 2020. Perhaps some things are more important than capital requirements—which is not what you would gather from listening to bank advertisements. ■For more expert analysis of the biggest stories in economics, finance and markets, sign up to Money Talks, our weekly subscriber-only newsletter. More