Raphael Stevens

More stories

  • 175 Shares169 Views

    in Business

    Nike renews uniform partnership with NBA, WNBA as NFL opens bidding process to competitors

    Nike will be the exclusive uniform provider for the NBA and WNBA for another 12 years.
    The sneaker giant, which also designs uniforms for the MLB and NFL, has shored up its relationship with one of its most important allies as it struggles with falling sales and looks to hang on to its contract with the NFL.
    Nike’s previous contract with the NBA was reportedly worth $1 billion and its latest contract is “much bigger,” a person familiar with the matter told CNBC.

    The NBA logo is seen outside an NBA store in New York on July 8, 2024.
    Angela Weiss | AFP | Getty Images

    Nike will be the exclusive uniform and apparel provider for the National Basketball Association and Women’s National Basketball Association for another 12 years after they renewed their partnership with the sneaker giant, the leagues announced Monday.
    Under the terms of the deal, Nike will be the leagues’ global outfitting, merchandising, marketing and content partner until 2037. The company will also be in charge of designing and manufacturing uniforms, on-court apparel and fan merchandise.

    Nike’s last deal with the basketball leagues, which kicked off during the 2017-18 NBA season, was reported to be worth $1 billion and marked the first time an apparel partner had its logo on an NBA or WNBA jersey. It is unclear how much Nike’s contract renewal with the leagues is worth, but a source familiar with the deal characterized it as “much bigger” than the previous contract.
    As the largest athletic apparel company in the world, Nike has long been a favorite among professional sports leagues and their athletes. Even so, its contract renewal with the NBA comes at a time when the sneaker giant has had to work harder to maintain its critical partnerships, and new CEO Elliott Hill tries to regain market share lost in recent years.
    Nike is also the official uniform supplier of the National Football League and Major League Baseball, but those relationships have taken a hit as the company faces declining sales and criticism that it has fallen behind on innovation.
    The NFL’s deal with Nike expires after the 2027 season, but the league has opened up the process to other bidders and is already in talks with several companies interested in competing for the agreement, a source told CNBC.
    Nike’s contract with the MLB does not expire until 2029. However, it will have to repair its relationship with the league after it debuted new uniforms earlier this year that led to widespread complaints from players and fans that they were see-through, did not fit right and looked “amateurish,” ESPN reported at the time.

    Despite Nike’s recent stumbles, the NBA told CNBC it has no concerns about continuing its partnership with the apparel company.
    “From our perspective, we have 100% confidence in Nike on a long term global basis,” said Sal LaRocca, the NBA’s president of global partnerships. “They’re endemic to basketball. They’ve been a partner of ours in one form or another for well over 30 years.”
    LaRocca added the partnership has been so strong that the league did not even open the process up to other bidders.
    When asked about the MLB fiasco, LaRocca defended Nike and said those kinds of issues come with the territory.
    “I think any company that is on the edge of innovation and is always looking to push the envelope for improvement may run into some unintended consequences,” said LaRocca.
    Nike has not faced significant criticism for its basketball uniforms. LaRocca said, “you’ll certainly see fresh new products on a regular basis from them.”
    Nike has had a marketing partnership with the NBA since 1992 — and with the WNBA since its 1997 founding — and the brand endorses most of the leagues’ biggest players, including LeBron James, Kevin Durant, Caitlin Clark and Sabrina Ionescu.
    As of Friday’s close, Nike’s stock has fallen about 24% this year and has underperformed both competitors and the S&P 500, which has gained about 23% this year. On Running and Deckers, two companies that have been taking market share from Nike, are up 79% and 43%, respectively.
    Historically, Nike has outperformed the S&P 500 by an average of about 8%.

    Don’t miss these insights from CNBC PRO More

  • 88 Shares199 Views

    in Finance

    Hizbullah’s sprawling financial empire looks newly vulnerable

    Residents of Beirut are, by now, used to warnings from the Israel Defence Forces ahead of bombing runs. Typically, these instruct locals to stay away from a tower block suspected of harbouring fighters, or perhaps a school said to double as a weapons cache. The warning on October 20th was a little different. It told people to steer clear of branches of al-Qard al-Hassan (AQAH), a bank. More

  • 213 Shares109 Views

    in Finance

    Why abortion access is a personal finance issue, says demographer who studies the effects of unwanted pregnancy

    Diana Greene Foster led The Turnaway Study, a landmark research study on the socioeconomic outcomes for Americans who are “turned away” from abortion.
    Foster, a demographer and professor at the University of California San Francisco, found higher instances of poverty and a greater likelihood of bankruptcies and evictions for women who couldn’t get an abortion.
    Abortion is on the ballot in 10 states. One poll suggests it’s the most important issue for young women on Election Day.

    Arizona residents rally for abortion rights on April 16, 2024 in Phoenix, Arizona.
    Gina Ferazzi | Los Angeles Times | Getty Images

    Abortion is an important issue for many voters, especially young women, heading into the November election.
    Abortion access is about more than politics or health care; it’s also a personal finance issue, said Diana Greene Foster, a demographer who studies the effects of unwanted pregnancies on people’s lives.

    Foster, a professor at the University of California San Francisco, led The Turnaway Study, a landmark research study on the socioeconomic outcomes for Americans who are “turned away” from abortion. The study tracked 1,000 women over a five-year period ending January 2016. The women in the study had all sought abortions at some point before the study commenced; not all received one.
    More from Personal Finance:How to lower health-care costs during open enrollmentOzempic is driving up the cost of your health careWorking moms are still more likely to handle child care
    In November, voters in 10 states — Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Maryland, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New York and South Dakota — will choose whether to adopt state ballot measures about abortion access.
    Such ballot measures follow a U.S. Supreme Court decision in 2022 that struck down Roe v. Wade, the ruling that had established a constitutional right to abortion in 1973.
    Nationally, women under age 30 rank abortion as the most important issue to their vote on Election Day, according to the KFF Survey of Women Voters, which polled 649 women from Sept. 12 to Oct. 1. It ranked as the third-most-important issue among women voters of all ages, behind inflation and threats to democracy, according to the poll from KFF, a provider of health policy research.

    Abortion is among the least-important issues for registered Republicans, according to a Pew Research Center poll of 9,720 U.S. adults conducted Aug. 26 to Sept. 2.
    CNBC spoke with Foster about the economics of abortion access and the financial impacts of the end of Roe v. Wade.
    The conversation has been edited and condensed for clarity.

    Low earners most likely to seek an abortion

    Greg Iacurci: Can you describe the population of women who typically seek abortions in the U.S.?
    Diana Greene Foster: One good thing about The Turnaway Study is that our demographics closely resemble national demographics on who gets abortions.
    More than half are already parenting a child. More than half are in their 20s. A small minority are teenagers, even though lots of people think teenagers are the main recipients.
    It’s predominantly people who are low-income. That’s been increasingly the case over time. It’s become disproportionately concentrated among people with the least economic resources.
    GI: Why is that?
    DGF: I think wealthier people have better access to contraceptives, even after the Obamacare-mandated coverage. Not everyone benefits from that. Not all states participate in that.
    [Medical providers] still give contraceptives out. There are 20 states that have laws that say you should be able to get a year’s supply at a time, but almost nowhere is that actually available. The law says you should be able to get it, but you don’t. I led the studies that showed that if you make people go back for resupply every month or three months, as is very commonly done, you’re much more likely to have an unintended pregnancy. The laws have changed, but practice hasn’t changed. Access is not perfect yet.
    Also, some people have abortions who have intended pregnancies because something went wrong with their health, with the fetus’s health, with their life circumstances. So even contraceptives aren’t the ultimate solution.

    Greater likelihood of poverty and evictions

    GI: What are the economic findings of your research?
    DGF: When we follow people over time, we see that people who are denied an abortion are more likely to say that their household income is below the federal poverty line. They’re more likely to say that they don’t have enough money to meet basic living needs like food, housing and transportation.

    Diana Greene Foster
    Courtesy: Diana Greene Foster

    Wanting to provide for the kids you already have is a common reason for abortion. We see that the existing children are more likely to be in poverty and in households where there aren’t enough resources if their mom couldn’t get an abortion.
    [They’re also] more likely to have evictions, have a larger amount of debt if they’re denied an abortion.
    GI: Can we quantify those impacts?
    DGF: For example, six months after seeking an abortion, 61% of those denied an abortion were below the poverty line compared to just under half — 45% — of those who received an abortion. The higher odds of being below the [federal poverty line] persisted through four years.
    And based on credit reports, we find that women who were denied abortions experienced significant increases in the amount of their debt 30 days or more past due, to an average of $1,749.70, a 78% increase relative to their pre-pregnancy [average]. The number of public records, such as bankruptcies, evictions and court judgments, significantly increased for those denied abortions, by 81%.
    GI: Why does this happen?
    DGF: Having a kid is a massive investment. Deciding to parent a child relies on an amount of social support and housing security and access to health care, and our country isn’t at all set up to provide those things for low-income people.

    Why costs are both rising and falling for women

    GI: Your study took place at a time when Roe v. Wade was still the law. That’s no longer the case. How do you expect these economic consequences might be impacted?
    DGF: In The Turnaway Study, people were denied abortions because they were too far along in pregnancy, but now you can be denied an abortion at any point in pregnancy in something like 13 states. So, it potentially affects a much larger group of people.
    But there have been other changes which have to do with resources to help people travel and information about how to order medication abortion pills online. So, it isn’t the case that everyone who wants an abortion is now carrying a pregnancy to term.
    There has been a lot of effort to circumvent state laws, and I think The Turnaway Study really reveals why. People understand their circumstances, and they are very motivated to get care, even when their state tries to ban it.
    GI: What are the financial impacts some women in those states might encounter?
    DGF: I’m actually studying the economic costs of the end of Roe and travel [expense]. Costs went up by $200 for people traveling out of state. People were delayed more than a week.
    Under Roe, people could drive to an abortion clinic or get a ride; [after Roe ended,] they were much more likely to be flying, having to take more modes of transportation. Over half stayed overnight. They traveled an average of 10 hours. That means taking time off work, too. So, it dramatically increased the cost for those who traveled to get an abortion.

    There are people who ordered pills online who are not [included] in the study. For those people, the cost may have gone down, because it’s possible to order pills online for less than $30.
    But you have to know about it, and you have to have an address, and you have to have internet, and it takes a level of knowledge to be able to pull that off. There can be a need for follow-up medical care, so you have to be able to get that. More

  • 125 Shares99 Views

    in Business

    The next big career track at business schools: Family offices

    Top universities are tapping into the family office boom, with a growing number of programs and courses aimed at training the next generation of family office leaders.
    The University of Chicago Booth School of Business launched the Booth Family Office Initiative, a combination of research programs, courses and summits aimed at current and future family office executives.
    Talent is scarce, and family offices are battling for experienced investors, accountants, lawyers and estate planners.

    The University of Chicago Booth School of Business.
    Courtesy: The University of Chicago Booth School of Business.

    A version of this article first appeared in CNBC’s Inside Wealth newsletter with Robert Frank, a weekly guide to the high-net-worth investor and consumer. Sign up to receive future editions, straight to your inbox.
    Top universities are tapping into the family office boom, with a growing number of programs and courses aimed at training the next generation of family office leaders.

    Last week, the University of Chicago Booth School of Business launched the Booth Family Office Initiative, a combination of research programs, courses and summits aimed at current and future family office executives. The initiative includes a council of 50 family office leaders and Booth alumni who will help steer the program.
    “If you think of the family office market, the amount of capital overseen, and the importance of family offices commercially, in investing and philanthropy, the growth has been significant,” said Paul Carbone, co-founder and vice chairman of Pritzker Private Capital and a member of the Family Office Initiative Steering Committee. “The challenges they face have only grown. Here at Booth we have a deep intellectual capital base that can be applied to these questions.”
    The Booth Initiative is part of a surge in family office programs at top universities. Business schools at Harvard, Columbia, Northwestern, Pepperdine and other universities have started offering courses aimed at family offices or family-owned companies.
    Yet the Booth program marks the biggest university bet on family offices in 20 years. In 2004, the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania and the CCC Alliance, the family office peer group, teamed up to form the Wharton Global Family Alliance. With research, roundtables, courses, special presentations and workshops, the Wharton Global Family Alliance has become a leading resource for family offices and the broader wealth-management industry.

    Get Inside Wealth directly to your inbox

    For top universities, family offices offer a rich potential source of research funding and business school students, along with expertise in one of the fastest-growing fields in finance. For family offices, the programs can help train the next generation of family office leaders at a time when talent is scarce and family offices are battling for experienced investors, accountants, lawyers and estate planners.

    The number of family offices has grown to more than 8,000 from about 6,000 in 2019, according to Deloitte. Their assets are expected to top $5.4 trillion by 2030, up from $3.1 trillion today. As more wealthy alumni launch family offices or work for one, they’re becoming an important pipeline of donors and funding. Trust companies, private banks and consulting firms eager for family office clients are also potential sponsors for the programs.

    “It’s a great opportunity for Booth School, the students and the community,” said John C. Heaton, a finance professor at Booth who will start teaching a new MBA course next year called “The Family Office.”
    The core of the Booth and Wharton programs is research. Private banks and wealth management firms already publish a steady stream of family office surveys and analyses. Yet the universities say their research will be more rigorous and objective.
    Booth, for instance, said it’s working with software companies that provide back-office platforms for family offices to get anonymized, aggregated data on their portfolios and investment changes.
    “That’s real data, not filtered opinions about what people are doing,” Heaton said.
    The initiative will decide what to research based on suggestions from its family office council. When Booth asked family offices for research priorities, for instance, the top answer was behavioral economics. Booth is famous for its behavioral economics program, so helping family office professionals navigate the interpersonal relationships with families and their decision-making process will be useful, Carbone said.
    “It was surprising to us that the No. 1 issue wasn’t investing or risk management,” Carbone said. “It was about the human dynamics.”
    Wharton’s research is also driven by questions from family offices. Along with regular research papers, it produces an annual, 100-page “benchmarking study” covering a broad array of topics that’s only available to the participating family offices.
    Raphael “Raffi” Amit, professor of management at the Wharton School who founded and leads the Wharton Global Family Alliance, said one issue he looked at in this year’s benchmark study was the rise of direct deals. While more family offices are bypassing private equity funds to invest directly in private companies, for instance, few have the necessary expertise.
    “Most of these families don’t staff up with private equity professionals,” he said. “Those are professionals who know how to evaluate a transaction, structure a transaction, manage the exit, how to add value. They do club deals. But putting it politely, the jury is still out whether this strategy will actually work.”
    Universities can also offer an increasingly rare experience for family office professionals — non-commercial gatherings. With the majority of family-office conferences becoming overrun by sponsors, salespeople and vendors, family offices are turning to universities to convene more “pure” gatherings of peers.
    Wharton’s annual Family Office Roundtable Forum, a collaboration between Wharton and leading families, has become one of the most coveted events of the year for family offices, limited to 60 or 70 invitations a year. Last year’s roundtable was in Tokyo, while the 2022 meeting was in Zurich.
    “We have a lot of family offices that want to come, but we had to cap it at 76 families,” Amit said. “We want to keep it private and small enough so people are sharing ideas and perspectives. It’s a pure play. There is no commercial agenda.”
    Booth is planning its own Family Office Summit next May. It’s inviting around 200 attendees from families and multifamily offices, including members of its family office council.
    “Families can go to a family office gathering every week if they want to,” Carbone said. “But we’re creating a safe network — no commercial angle and no one selling a product or service.” More

  • 150 Shares159 Views

    in Business

    McDonald’s tells U.S. restaurants it’s not a ‘political brand’ after Trump visit

    McDonald’s said it is not a political brand and is not endorsing a presidential candidate after former President Donald Trump visited a location in Feasterville, Pennsylvania.
    Trump often accuses Harris of lying about working at McDonald’s for a summer in her twenties but has offered no proof backing up the claim.
    Corporate America has grown more cautious about wading into politics, fearing backlash from customers.

    Republican presidential nominee and former U.S. President Donald Trump works behind the counter during a visit to McDonalds in Feasterville-Trevose, Pennsylvania, U.S. October 20, 2024. 
    Doug Mills | Via Reuters

    Though President Donald Trump visited a Pennsylvania McDonald’s location on Sunday, the fast-food giant is trying to stay neutral in the presidential race.
    “As we’ve seen, our brand has been a fixture of conversation in this election cycle. While we’ve not sought this, it’s a testament to how much McDonald’s resonates with so many Americans. McDonald’s does not endorse candidates for elected office and that remains true in this race for the next President,” the company said in an internal message viewed by CNBC and confirmed by a source familiar with the matter.

    Trump learned how to operate a fry cooker and work the drive-thru line during his short shift at a Feasterville, Pennsylvania, restaurant. He used the stunt as an opportunity to take more shots at his opponent, Vice President Kamala Harris.
    Trump often accuses Harris of lying about working at McDonald’s for a summer in her 20s, but has offered no proof backing up the claim. Harris has denied the accusation. McDonald’s and its franchisees don’t have all of their employment records for workers dating back to the early 1980s, when the 60-year-old Harris would have worked there, the company said in the Sunday memo.
    “Though we are not a political brand, we’ve been proud to hear former President Trump’s love for McDonald’s and Vice President Harris’s fond memories working under the Arches,” McDonald’s said.
    Both McDonald’s and the franchisee who operates the location emphasized that the chain opens its doors to “everyone.”
    “As a small, independent business owner, it is a fundamental value of my organization that we proudly open our doors to everyone who visits the Feasterville community,” franchisee Derek Giacomantonio said in a statement. “That’s why I accepted former President Trump’s request to observe the transformative working experience that 1 in 8 Americans have had: a job at McDonald’s.”

    Although McDonald’s publicly supported the Black Lives Matter movement in 2020, it has tried to portray itself as an apolitical brand to avoid alienating customers. It follows a broader shift in Corporate America away from politics or initiatives perceived as ideological.
    A number of companies, including Ford, Lowe’s and Harley-Davidson, have walked back their diversity, equity and inclusion policies and practices this year.
    And that’s a change that many Americans want; only 38% of U.S. adults believe that businesses should take public stances, down from 48% in 2022, according to a Gallup-University of Bentley study conducted this spring. 
    But McDonald’s has already been involved with another controversy this election cycle.
    In late May, several viral social media posts criticized the burger giant’s affordability, citing everything from an $18 Big Mac meal at a Connecticut location to charts that alleged the chain’s prices had more than doubled over the last five years. Republicans latched onto the controversy, tying a jump in McDonald’s menu prices to Biden’s economic policy in a bid to win over voters fed up with inflation.
    To quell the controversy, McDonald’s U.S. President Joe Erlinger wrote an open letter and released fact sheets about the company’s pricing.
    — CNBC’s Kate Rogers contributed reporting. More

  • 125 Shares149 Views

    in Finance

    KKM Financial’s Essential 40 stock fund is now an ETF

    The Nasdaq MarketSite in New York, US, on Monday, Sept. 16, 2024. 
    Yuki Iwamura | Bloomberg | Getty Images

    KKM Financial has converted its Essential 40 mutual fund into an ETF, joining the growing shift by asset managers to a more tax-efficient fund model.
    ETFs make it easier for investors and financial advisors with taxable accounts to choose when to create capital gains or losses. This differs from mutual funds, which can sometimes hit their investors with an unwanted tax bill due to withdrawals or portfolio changes.

    “When you look at the tax efficiency of an ETF compared to a mutual fund, it is much more advantageous,” said Jeff Kilburg, founder and CEO of KKM and a CNBC contributor. “A lot of the wealth advisors that I work with really have issues with the capital gain distribution typical to a mutual fund.”
    Many asset managers have been converting their mutual funds to ETFs in recent years, due in part to a 2019 SEC rule change that made it easier to run active investment strategies within an ETF. The number of active equity mutual funds has fallen to its lowest level in 24 years, according to Strategas.
    More broadly, many asset managers are pushing the Securities and Exchange Commission to allow ETFs to be added as a separate share class within existing mutual funds.
    The newly converted KKM fund will trade on the Nasdaq under the ticker ESN. The goal of the Essential 40 is to allow investors to “buy what you use” in one equal-weighted fund, according to Kilburg. Its holdings include JPMorgan Chase, Amazon, Waste Management and Eli Lilly, according to FactSet.
    “We believe without these companies, the U.S. economy would be hindered, or would be in trouble,” he said.

    The old mutual fund version of the Essential 40 had a three-star rating from Morningstar. Its best relative performance in recent years came in 2022, when it declined less than 11% — much better than the category average of about 17%, according to Morningstar.
    Equal-weighted funds can often outperform market-cap weighted indexes during downturns. They’ve also been a popular strategy this year, due in part to concerns that the market was too reliant on the so-called Magnificent Seven stocks. The Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF (RSP) has brought in more than $14 billion in new investor funds this year, according to FactSet.
    In 2024, the KKM fund was up about 16% year to date before its conversion, with roughly $70 million in assets, according to FactSet.
    The ETF will have a net expense ratio of 0.70%, equal to that of the old mutual fund. More

  • 175 Shares109 Views

    in Business

    Boeing machinists to vote on new proposal with 35% raises that could end strike

    Boeing and its machinists’ union have reached a new contract proposal.
    The deal could end a more than month-long strike that has hobbled the manufacturers’ production.
    The new proposal includes 35% wage increases over four years, a higher signing bonus of $7,000, guaranteed minimum payouts in an annual bonus program and higher 401(k) contributions.

    People hold sings during a strike rally for the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM) at the Seattle Union Hall in Seattle, Washington, on October 15, 2024.
    Jason Redmond | AFP | Getty Images

    Boeing and its machinists’ union have reached a new contract proposal, the union said Saturday, outlining a deal that could end a more than monthlong strike that has hobbled the manufacturers’ aircraft  production.
    The ratification vote is set for Wednesday.

    The new proposal includes 35% wage increases over four years, a higher signing bonus of $7,000, guaranteed minimum payouts in an annual bonus program and higher 401(k) contributions among other changes.
    Acting U.S. Secretary of Labor Julie Su met with both parties earlier this week. “With the help of Acting U.S. Secretary of Labor Julie Su, we have received a negotiated proposal and resolution to end the strike, and it warrants presenting to the members and is worthy of your consideration,” the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers District 751 said in a statement Saturday.
    “President Biden believes the collective bargaining process is the best way to achieve good outcomes for workers, and the ultimate decision on a contract will be for the union workers to decide,” a White House spokesperson said in a statement.
    The strike began Sept. 13 after more than 30,000 machinists overwhelmingly rejected a tentative agreement that included 25% wage increases over four years. Boeing later made a sweetened offer but the union blasted it saying it was not negotiated.
    “We look forward to our employees voting on the negotiated proposal,” Boeing said in a statement.

    Boeing is working to stop bleeding cash as it grapples with a safety crisis stemming from a near-catastrophic door plug blowout on one of its 737 Maxes at start the year and challenges in its other programs.
    The company earlier this month said it will report a deep loss and take charges of about $5 billion in its commercial and defense units. A ratified contract on Wednesday, when Boeing also reports full results, would be a victory for new CEO Kelly Ortberg, who took the top job in August, tasked with reshaping the company.
    On Oct. 11, he announced job cuts of 10% of Boeing’s workforce and that the company will stop making 767s when orders are fulfilled in 2027.

    Don’t miss these insights from CNBC PRO More

  • 213 Shares129 Views

    in Business

    Disney will name Bob Iger’s replacement in early 2026; James Gorman to become board chair next year

    Disney will name a successor to CEO Bob Iger in early 2026, the company said in a statement.
    Former Morgan Stanley CEO James Gorman will replace Nike Executive Chairman Mark Parker as chairman in January.
    Iger’s four direct reports — ESPN Chairman Jimmy Pitaro, Disney Experiences Chairman Josh D’Amaro, and Disney Entertainment Co-Chairmen Dana Walden and Alan Bergman — have all interviewed with the succession committee in recent weeks, sources said.

    Disney has tapped James Gorman to replace Mark Parker as the company’s next chairman, effective in January, as the media giant lays the groundwork to name a successor for CEO Bob Iger in early 2026, the company said Monday.
    Gorman joined Disney’s board less than a year ago and was named the head of the succession planning committee in August. He will continue to lead that committee after he takes over as board chairman from Nike Executive Chairman Parker.

    “The Disney board has benefited tremendously from James Gorman’s expertise and guidance, and we are lucky to have him as our next chairman – particularly as the board continues to move forward with the succession process,” Iger said in a statement. “I’m extremely grateful to Mark Parker for his many years of board service and leadership, which have been so valuable to this company and its shareholders, and to me as CEO.”
    Parker will step down after nine years on the Disney board “to focus on other areas” of his work, according to a Disney statement. That includes spending more time working on Nike-related matters, according to a person familiar with the matter. Elliott Hill took over as Nike CEO last week, replacing John Donahoe.

    Early 2026

    Disney had initially targeted 2025 to announce a successor, as CNBC reported last year. Pushing the date back to early 2026 will give the board more time to conduct due diligence on both internal and external candidates, according to people familiar with the matter, who asked not to be named because the discussions are private.
    Gorman has experience with succession planning: He oversaw the orderly transfer of power at Morgan Stanley, with Ted Pick succeeding him as CEO there at the start of this year.
    Succession hasn’t been smooth at Disney. The board fired Iger’s handpicked successor, Bob Chapek, in November 2022 after a turbulent tenure that lasted less than three years. Iger returned to the CEO job, and now, Disney shareholders are eager to see a succession plan stick.

    Iger’s four direct reports — ESPN Chairman Jimmy Pitaro, Disney Experiences Chairman Josh D’Amaro, and Disney Entertainment Co-Chairmen Dana Walden and Alan Bergman — have all interviewed with the succession committee in recent weeks, since Gorman took over in August, according to the people familiar.
    Gorman said in a CNBC interview in March, before taking over as the board’s succession chair, that Disney was running a “forward-looking, forward-leaning, incredibly disciplined process.”

    Bob Iger, CEO, The Walt Disney Company appears at the Disney Entertainment Showcase at D23: The Ultimate Disney Fan Event in Anaheim, California on August 09, 2024.
    Jesse Grant | Getty Images Entertainment | Getty Images

    Still, while putting a specific timeline on naming a successor adds a bit of clarity to the search, it also means the question of who will take over for Iger will continue to hover over the company for another year.
    Iger has pushed back his retirement five different times to continue to lead Disney as CEO. Activist investor Nelson Peltz focused on the board’s failure to name a lasting successor in his unsuccessful campaign to gain board seats earlier this year.
    Iger’s current contract as CEO runs until Dec. 31, 2026. He and the board haven’t decided if Iger will extend his board tenure past 2026, said the people familiar.

    Don’t miss these insights from CNBC PRO More