Business

Help Wanted

Automation is expected to reduce certain jobs in the coming years.
But as companies adopt robots on manufacturing floors, in kitchens and on delivery routes, workers have a growing opportunity to join the ranks in helping to build and implement the technology.
The sectors most likely to adopt robotics are electronics, energy tech and utilities and consumer goods, according to a 2023 report from the World Economic Forum.

There’s no denying automation will eliminate certain jobs in the coming years.
But as companies adopt robots on manufacturing floors, in kitchens and on delivery routes, workers have a growing opportunity to join the ranks in helping to build and implement the technology.

Both humanoid and nonhumanoid robots are set to reduce employment in the years to come, as nearly equal amounts of companies say they’re expecting growth, worker displacement or a neutral effect due to the technology, according to the World Economic Forum’s Future of Jobs Report for 2023 forecast. The sectors most likely to adopt robotics are electronics, energy tech and utilities and consumer goods, according to the study.
The effects may differ depending on the industry.
For example, the WEF study found 60% of companies operating in the production of consumer goods and the oil and gas industry project jobs will be lost due to automation. On the other hand, 60% of companies operating in information and technology services expect jobs to be created due to robots in the next five years.

Robots in the lab at the Rosenstiel Campus in Miami.
Jose A. Iglesias | Tribune News Service | Getty Images

Robotics company Zipline is among the companies looking for employees, as it aims to add at least 100 workers. The San Francisco, California-based startup designs, builds and operates autonomous delivery drones, working with clients that range from more than 4,000 hospitals to the government of Rwanda and major brands such as Walmart, GNC, Toyota and Sweetgreen. Roles are open in positions from electrical and mechanical engineering to coding and security.
“Even in a world where a lot of startups are doing layoffs or sort of playing defense, this market is big enough and exciting enough that the plan is really being very aggressive over the coming couple years,” Zipline CEO Keller Rinaudo Cliffton said. 

The current delivery ecosystem is slow, expensive and not good for the environment, Rinaudo Cliffton said. The opportunity to make it over with automation has benefits for customers, workers and the planet.
“Technology is sometimes changing the nature of jobs, but typically, it’s just dramatically increasing the productivity of any given person,” Rinaudo Cliffton said. “Before, we were using a human to do one delivery at a time driving a car one at a time to go and make deliveries. Now, we’re training that human to maintain and manage a fleet of robots. So that human can now do 50 deliveries in an hour rather than five, and that enables us to pay that human a lot more. These are jobs that people actually really want.”
The use of automation at companies large and small has two advantages, the Association for Advancing Automation argues. It reduces challenges for workers in taking away monotonous or dangerous tasks in their day-to-day roles and it keeps companies competitive and speedy in the production process. It can also help to solve an ongoing labor shortage.
“From a worker standpoint, it’s another tool — a tool to help you become more effective in the job you’re currently doing, to make you better eligible to get the job for the future, which are often better, safer and higher-paying jobs,” said Jeff Burnstein, the president of the group known as A3, which has 1,200 member companies all across the globe. 
Businesses have to strike a delicate balance between using automation to make employees’ lives easier without replacing them entirely. Unions and labor rights advocates have often fought the adoption of robotics, worrying that it could replace some human functions entirely.
Burnstein points to China’s large-scale adoption of robotics as evidence that automation has become more important for companies to maintain an edge in business. 
“China is the largest user of robots in the world by far. That tells you that this tool is so important that even countries that have an abundance of labor and low-cost labor still need to automate in order to stay globally competitive,” he said. 

Avocados sliced, cored and peeled by the Autocado robot created by Chipotle and Vebu Labs.
Source: Chipotle Mexican Grill

Automation has also started to take hold in food service as companies try to make restaurants more productive.
Vebu Labs, based in El Segundo, California, is working with Chipotle on a robot that helps prep avocados for its guacamole, dubbed the Autocado. The burrito chain has also been testing out a chip-making robot from Miso Robotics, Chippy, as it aims to free up workers to focus on other tasks in the kitchen and make their labor more effective.
Vebu wants to bring on over 40 workers in the U.S. in roles from engineering to accounting to fabrication.
“The demand for our services is through the roof because the problem is so acute — the problem of labor in restaurants is so acute,” Vebu CEO Buck Jordan said. “It’s not a problem that is going to go away anytime soon. It’s not a transitory thing. It’s not caused by Covid. This is caused by a lack of workers in the workforce.”
While robots and automation may be solving labor pains for certain sectors, there’s a shortage of workers for the suppliers of the technology. A3’s Burnstein said the workforce needs more training on how to use and build robots.
“As a country, we often have a mindset that the only way to get a great job is to go to college, get a four-year degree, get a Master’s, get a Ph.D. — [that’s] not true,” he said. “There are companies hiring people right out of high school because of this labor shortage that they have in terms of technical skills. We have to address this as a country because otherwise, companies who want to adopt automation are challenged with the ability to do it because they don’t have anybody on staff that knows how to operate the machine.”
— CNBC’s Kasey O’Brien contributed to this report. More

Business leaders and academic administrators anticipate that the end of affirmative action at colleges will result in a less diverse applicant pool from which to recruit new workers.
That presents new challenges for companies’ own diversity, equity and inclusion efforts and could have a negative effect on how the U.S. fares on the global stage.
The Supreme Court affirmative action ruling could create legal uncertainty for businesses that promote diversity in their recruitment practices.

Affirmative action supporters and counterprotesters shout at each other outside the U.S. Supreme Court building in Washington, D.C., June 29, 2023.
Kent Nishimura | Los Angeles Times | Getty Images

Even before the Supreme Court’s ruling on affirmative action policies in college admissions, the nation’s top business leaders expressed concern over how the decision could affect their own diversity goals and hiring practices. 
Major companies, including Apple, General Electric, Google, Salesforce and Starbucks, argued “racial and ethnic diversity enhance business performance” and filed a brief in support of Harvard University and the University of North Carolina, the two schools at the center of the case, reaffirming the importance of student-body diversity on college campuses.  

The businesses said they “depend on universities to recruit, admit, and train highly qualified, racially and ethnically diverse students to become the employees and business leaders of the future.”  
Now that the Supreme Court has struck down race-conscious admissions, employers could face challenges in how they find diverse talent. While the ruling is focused on university admissions and does not mandate changes by employers, experts say it is still likely to affect hiring and retention practices. On top of that, the ruling could create legal uncertainty for businesses that promote diversity in their recruitment practices.
And while it’s unclear what formal legal implications, if any, the ruling could eventually have for corporate practices, some Republican officials have argued the basis for the decision could apply to employers’ diversity hiring efforts.
A group of 13 Republican attorneys general suggested in the wake of the ruling that companies’ diversity, equity and inclusion, or DEI, programs could be considered unlawful discrimination. Several Democratic AGs later pushed back on that interpretation, saying it was wrong.
The court’s decision “will likely hamper the efforts of colleges and universities to enroll diverse student bodies, and I think unfortunately, narrow the pipeline that employers have relied on in the past to identify candidates for a diverse and inclusive workforce,” said Jocelyn Samuels, vice chair of the bipartisan Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

How does it affect business?

In the wake of the ruling, many fear universities could become less reliable sources from which to recruit diverse talent.
“It will shrink the diverse talent pool for hiring, advancement and leadership, and it could set a precedent for challenges to workplace diversity initiatives,” according to Lorraine Hariton, president and CEO of global nonprofit firm Catalyst.
“That will be the first and immediate consequence,” said Donald Harris, associate dean and equity, diversity and inclusion liaison at Temple University School of Law.
Real-world examples already back up that prediction.
After the University of California eliminated affirmative action in 1996, the share of underrepresented groups fell 12% in the years that followed. When the University of Michigan banned race-conscious admissions, Black undergraduate enrollment at the school dropped nearly by half from 2006 to 2021, according to the Urban Institute. 
“Employers are not going to be able to recruit the same diverse employees if they rely on the same methods,” said Stacy Hawkins, a vice dean of law at Rutgers University.
Companies can still find ways to fulfill DEI commitments, according to Kim Waller, senior client partner at recruiting firm Korn Ferry’s organizational strategy and DEI practices arm.
Businesses can emphasize training and promoting internal talent for more senior roles, she said, rather than turning to more traditional hiring pools such as universities, since current employees already know the culture and the organization. Some companies are looking at investing in internship programs, she added.
However, Waller noted that demographic changes could bring a shift to the makeup of colleges, as more than half of the U.S. population under age 16 is nonwhite or Hispanic, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.
“When you think about the demographics shift … there’s a talent pool that’s going to be educated,” Waller said. “The only question is where.” 

There will undoubtedly be lawsuits attacking private firms’ efforts with diversity.

Donald Harris
associate dean and equity, diversity and inclusion liaison at Temple University School of Law

Business leaders also fear that restrictions on college admissions will ultimately have a negative effect on how the U.S. fares on the global stage.
Ahmad Thomas, CEO of the Silicon Valley Leadership Group, a business association that was part of the amicus brief in support of upholding affirmative action, said the Supreme Court’s decision “undermines business competitiveness at a time of significant economic volatility and broader societal discord.” 
Thomas worries that the prospect of less diverse higher education institutions will be a competitive disadvantage to the U.S., because he says strong diversity and inclusion efforts drive business outcomes. He fears it will have a chilling effect on high school students from marginalized backgrounds who might have considered applying for science, technology, engineering and mathematics, or STEM, programs, but now feel they may receive less consideration from top schools.  
“I think it is incumbent upon our educational institutions to continue to find ways to holistically evaluate applicants,” Thomas said. “Because if we are not able to continue to uplift and drive equitable outcomes in our classrooms, our pool of diverse STEM talent, it’s not going to be trending in the direction it needs to and that is a significant concern for me.” 
And despite recent strides in diversity, many minorities are still underrepresented, particularly at the top of organizations.
For example, board directorships filled by Black candidates increased more than 90% from January 2019 to January 2023, reaching 2,190 seats. That represents just 8.3% of board positions, according to data from ISS Corporate Solutions, a corporate governance advisory firm, which studied 3,000 companies.

Potential recruitment changes

To deal with the prospect of a less diverse talent pipeline from elite universities, businesses may need to get more creative about how they recruit new workers to maintain their diversity hiring initiatives.
“We’ve been urging companies to change their recruitment efforts for years,” said Alvin Tillery, a political science professor and director of Northwestern’s Center for the Study of Diversity and Democracy.  
Hiring managers should ramp up recruitment efforts at historically Black colleges and universities, or HBCUs, and other minority-serving institutions, as well as large state universities, he said. 
“The pathway to CEO is not necessarily an elite university,” Tillery said. 
Other approaches may include partnerships between businesses and universities that help develop students from diverse backgrounds.
“I think companies would be wise to identify those institutions that do a good job and partner with them,” said Carey Thompson, Gettysburg College’s vice president for enrollment and educational services. “I see that as a plus in a self-interested sort of way, but I also think it’s good for higher education.” 
Adam Kovacevich, founder and CEO of center-left tech industry coalition Chamber of Progress, predicted that companies may have to consider looking at a wider swath of colleges and other career prep paths that they might not have focused on before. 
“It may prompt many companies to reassess their biases about which schools they recruit from,” said Kovacevich, whose group counts Apple, Google and Meta among its partners. “Recruiting from universities that have had affirmative action admissions policies has been kind of almost a shortcut for companies.” 
Thomas, of the Silicon Valley Leadership Group, suggested that the development of a diverse talent pipeline might include investing earlier on in children’s education in disadvantaged communities, at the grade school or high school level, or creating partnerships with HBCUs and community colleges with paths to the workforce. 
But he also made clear he doesn’t consider the need for new approaches to be a silver lining. 
“I think this is an opportunity where the ability of government to drive positive impact is limited. So in the sense that our private sector has an opportunity to do the right thing and set a direction and course for society, that responsibility we take extremely seriously,” Thomas said. “But in no way do I believe that’s a silver lining — that it’s incumbent upon the private sector to do the right thing here.”  

‘Boom or bust’

Despite decades of pushing for equality, both women and racial minorities still fall far short in terms of representation and pay compared with their white male colleagues, according to the Economic Policy Institute.
Increasing diversity in workplaces became a bigger corporate priority for many companies following the murder of George Floyd in May 2020.
At the time, the nation’s largest corporations in the Russell 1000 announced far-reaching initiatives to promote more diversity, equity and inclusion within their ranks, pledging more than $50 billion to these advancement programs. 
However, during the last year there has been a “step back” in terms of diversity hiring, said Reyhan Ayas, a senior economist at Revelio Labs, a workforce data and analytics firm. “There’s a big difference between having DEI officers and having diverse hires,” she said, adding that it will likely take several years to know the full impact on hiring of the Supreme Court admissions ruling.
“This work is cyclical,” said Northwestern’s Tillery. “It’s boom or bust, and we are heading to a period in our culture where if you don’t do this work, it’s permanent bust.” 

In no way do I believe that’s a silver lining — that it’s incumbent upon the private sector to do the right thing here.

Ahmad Thomas
CEO, Silicon Valley Leadership Group

In statements following the ruling, companies including Amazon, Airbnb, Google, Microsoft and Salesforce reaffirmed their commitments to diversity and inclusion in their workforces. 
Both Kovacevich and Thomas said businesses still have a strong incentive to increase diversity in their ranks — noting it’s both the right thing to do and good for business.
“At this point, companies are not going to turn back on their commitment to diverse hiring pools, diverse candidate pools, and their belief that generally having a diverse workforce is a good thing and it helps them be more in tune with a diverse customer base,” said Kovacevich.
“There’s a business imperative here to transform Silicon Valley companies and to, I believe, catalyze change across the entire business landscape of our nation,” said Thomas. “There’s an opportunity that our companies are taking very seriously to be that beacon, not just from a business competitive standpoint, but, I also believe, from a moral imperative standpoint.” 
Some businesses, however, could find their hiring practices suddenly under new scrutiny. 
Although the equal protection clause embodied in Title VI of the Civil Rights Act doesn’t apply to private employers, “there will undoubtedly be lawsuits attacking private firms’ efforts with diversity,” said Temple’s Harris.
“This case is just the beginning,” Harris said. “If you are an employer highlighting your diversity efforts, are you putting a target on your back?”    More

A range of companies are pulling back on perks as they chase higher margins.
From airport lounges to free shipping and birthday treats, consumers are seeing fewer freebies as businesses rethink how they want to inspire loyalty.
The shift has come with a change in spending habits.

Shoppers at Brickell City Centre in Miami, Florida, US, on Wednesday, June 14, 2023. 
Eva Marie Uzcategui | Bloomberg | Getty Images

It’s not your imagination: Companies are getting stingier with customer rewards.
Airlines are making it harder to earn elite status. Retailers have tightened return windows and tacked on fees. Dunkin’ and Sephora are even cracking down on birthday treats.

related investing news

2 days ago

The shift shows companies are rethinking how to attract, retain and reward customers after the Covid pandemic as consumers change their spending priorities and businesses face pressure to control costs while increasing sales.
Companies have to be careful. If they slash benefits too severely, they risk losing customers, but being too generous comes with a cost.
“It’s not a simple math exercise to say letting few people into a particular group or offering fewer people a promotion just translates to a change in sales volume,” said David Garfield, global head of industries at consulting firm AlixPartners. “It also can change the way people feel about the company and influence others.”

Raising the bar

Some of the biggest shifts in customer perks have come in the airline industry.
During the pandemic, airlines allowed frequent flyers to hold on to their elite statuses. They ended that perk as travel rebounded, and customers racked up loyalty points on co-branded credit cards. Carriers including American Airlines, Delta Air Lines and United Airlines also have raised the number of miles customers need to earn elite status as the ranks of those with the benefits swelled.

“When you have that many customers in the so-called premium tiers, it doesn’t feel that special anymore,” said Yuping Liu-Thompkins, a professor of marketing at Old Dominion University’s Strome School of Business who researches loyalty programs.

The Sky Lounge during a tour of Delta Air Lines Terminal C at LaGuardia Airport (LGA) in the Queens borough of New York, US, on Wednesday, June 1, 2022.
Stephanie Keith | Bloomberg | Getty Images

Delta has taken steps to try to reduce crowding at its popular airport lounges. It has largely barred staff when they’re flying standby and raised membership fees and entry requirements. In February, American Express Centurion Lounges started charging members $50 to bring in an adult guest and $30 for children between the ages of 2 and 17 for American Express Platinum cardholders. Previously, members could bring two guests for free. The fees are waived if a cardholder spends $75,000 on the card in a year.
Those changes come as airlines see a new trend: Many travelers are willing to pay more to sit in business class or for other roomier seats to make flying more comfortable.
United, Delta and American executives said on earnings calls last month that premium-seat revenue has increased , outpacing growth from the main cabin. Airlines are racing to add roomier seats to cater to those free-spending travelers.

Retail’s reality check

While the airline industry has turned profitable during the post-pandemic travel boom, retailers have faced a host of new challenges.
Inflation has squeezed consumer spending, said Marshal Cohen, chief retail advisor for Circana, the market researcher formerly known as IRI and The NPD Group. As shoppers buy fewer discretionary and big ticket items, companies have taken a harder look at expenses, he said. If they can’t boost sales, they can try to impress investors with better margins.
“We are now living in an environment where growth isn’t going to happen by selling more product so easily and when you sell more product, it’s easier to cover the cost of getting those sales,” he said. “Retailers and brands have had to step back and look at all of their components of their business and decide which ones are working, which ones are not.”

When travel and events were limited during lockdowns, retailers saw a windfall. Now, they are also cracking down as higher costs for essentials and increased travel possibilities force consumers to get more selective with their dollars.
At many retailers, customers must now pay a return fee if they want to ship back unwanted clothing, shoes or other items. Urban Outfitters, the company’s chain Anthropologie, Abercrombie & Fitch and J.Crew are among the businesses that charge for sending back a return. Nordstrom’s off-price chain, Nordstrom Rack, also added a $9.95 fee to ship back products earlier this year.

A pickup and returns counter at an Amazon Fresh grocery store in Schaumburg, Illinois, US, on Monday, July 24, 2023.
Christopher Dilts | Bloomberg | Getty Images

Even Amazon, the retail giant that pressured the rest of the industry to offer free shipping, has attached more strings. Starting this spring, customers must pay a $1 fee if they return a package at a UPS store, instead of at an Amazon-related store. The fee applies if the package’s delivery address is near a Whole Foods, Amazon Fresh or Kohl’s. Amazon owns Whole Foods and has a partnership with Kohl’s for receiving returns.
Yet all of those retailers allow shoppers to return items for free at a company store rather than in the mail — a move that not only can reduce shipping costs but increase the chance that a shopper may buy something else. The extra step may also make a customer think twice and decide to keep the item instead.
Some retailers have tightened return policies, too. In March, Macy’s shortened its return window from 90 days to 30 days. By making the change, the company said it can get products back on shelves more quickly when they’re still in season. The move also reduces the odds that merchandise winds up on the clearance rack.
Amit Sharma, CEO of returns technology company Narvar, said retailers have started to retrain customers on how to return items, much like grocery stores have gradually taught shoppers to employ reusable bags. He added that after the pandemic created supply chain headaches, shoppers have a clearer understanding that shipping and returns come at a price.
“To drive that online demand, free shipping and free returns were put in place, but now we all know it costs significant money,” he said.
In some cases, retailers are calling return fees “restocking fees” to refer to the extra labor involved in processing the item, said Heidi Isern, the head of Narvar’s design and research.
In other cases, retailers are offering customers more choice, she said. For example, Levi Strauss, Ann Taylor, Crocs and Brooks Brothers have a home pickup program in some cities, powered by Narvar, where customers can pay about $5 to $9 for a delivery person to retrieve a package.

Porous entry

As retailers make shoppers think twice about returns, Netflix and Costco have also cracked down. Both companies aim to make sure membership isn’t shared with people who aren’t paying, particularly as the companies chase new avenues of growth.
For Netflix, subscriber growth has stagnated as customers spend less time on the couch and more time out in the world. The streaming service responded by reining in password sharing and introducing a lower priced, ad-supported option.
Costco also noticed a trend of people using membership cards that belong to someone else. It is now checking photo IDs, even in self-checkout lanes, to verify cardholders.
For both companies, the moves could nudge freeloading customers to become paying ones — or create a sense of fairness for members.

Chasing big spenders

Airlines and retailers alike have taken a harder look at the customers they will try hardest to keep.
Simeon Siegel, a retail analyst for BMO Capital Markets, said the sudden halt in sales for discretionary retailers when the Covid pandemic hit, then the stimulus-fueled spending, gave companies a moment to rethink how they cater to shoppers — and if they’re giving away dollars for little loyalty in return.
That led some companies to take a new approach to markdowns. Certain businesses also became confident that they could tack on a fee without losing their most valuable shoppers.
“It does seem like the companies are doing this because they’re able to, not because they have to,” Siegel said. “From 2008 to 2020, consumers felt they were entitled to whatever they wanted and corporations would wait on them hand and foot and that changed during the pandemic.”
More companies from Target to Walmart and Best Buy have decided to push loyalty programs and offer the best perks only to the customers who shell out. The members can skirt delivery and return fees — or earn extra privileges.
For example, Macy’s announced this week that it would charge shoppers at its namesake store $9.99 for shipping back returns. But it will waive that fee for members of Star Rewards, its free loyalty program.
At Best Buy, shoppers only have 15 days to return most products. But if they pay a subscription for the company’s membership program, they get a longer return window of 60 days. Best Buy rolled out the three-tiered membership program in late June.
Delta earlier this year started rolling out free Wi-Fi on board for members of its SkyMiles loyalty program.
Even birthday gifts now sometimes have caveats to cater to shoppers who are bigger spenders or more frequent customers. Dunkin’ got rid of its free birthday drink last fall and instead, it gives customers triple the loyalty points for purchases during their birthday. Sephora customers not only have to be in the company’s loyalty program, but also must now spend at least $25 online if they want to get a birthday treat. (The giveaway is available in store without a minimum.)
Sephora and Dunkin’ did not respond to requests asking for the reasoning behind the changes.
Garfield of AlixPartners said perks sometimes inspire a drive-by purchase rather than lasting customer loyalty. He said some shoppers take advantage of benefits like freebies but ultimately prove unprofitable for the companies.
It’s a delicate balance.
“If the company loses the customer entirely as a result of this switch it may not be worth it,” Garfield said. “The flip side of that coin is that clever companies actually fire some of their customers deliberately.” More

Astra is cutting 25% of its workforce and restructuring to focus more on its spacecraft engine business.
It also said it raised $10.8 million in net proceeds from selling debt to investment group High Trail Capital.
The company also released preliminary second-quarter results. Astra expects it brought $1 million or less in revenue during the quarter, with a net loss between $13 million and $15 million.

An Astra Spacecraft Engine during testing.

Struggling space company Astra is cutting 25% of its workforce, the company announced Friday, and restructuring to focus more on its spacecraft engine business, which will delay progress on the small rocket it has been developing.
Astra is cutting about 70 employees, as well as reallocating about 50 personnel from its rocket development program over to its space products unit, which builds the company’s spacecraft engines.

“We are intensely focused on delivering on our commitments to our customers, which includes ensuring we have sufficient resources and an adequate financial runway to execute on our near-term opportunities,” Astra chairman and CEO Chris Kemp said in a statement.
The workforce reductions are expected to result in $4 million in quarterly cost savings, beginning in the fourth quarter. Astra noted that it had 278 total orders for spacecraft engines, as of four months ago, worth about $77 million in contracts. It expects to deliver on “a substantial majority” of those orders by the end of 2024.
In a separate filing Friday, Astra said it raised $10.8 million in net proceeds from selling debt to investment group High Trail Capital.
Astra stock was little changed in after-hours trading Friday from its close at 38 cents a share.

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

Last year, Astra moved away from its Rocket 3.3 vehicle earlier than expected to focus on the next version, an upgraded system called Rocket 4.0, after its final Rocket 3.3 mission failed mid-launch. While the company was targeting a first launch of Rocket 4 by the end of this year, in a securities filing, Astra noted the prioritization of the spacecraft engine business “will affect the timing of the Company’s future test launches.”

“The Company’s ability to conduct paid commercial launches in 2024 and beyond will depend on the ultimate timing and success of the initial test launches which will in turn depend on the resources that the Company is able to devote to Launch Systems development in the coming quarters,” Astra warned.
The company also released preliminary second-quarter results. Astra expects it brought $1 million or less in revenue during the quarter, with a net loss between $13 million and $15 million, and a remaining amount of cash and securities of about $26 million. The company plans to report finalized second-quarter results Aug. 14.
Last month, Astra finalized plans to conduct a reverse stock split at a 1 to 15 ratio. It’s also seeking to raise up to $65 million through an “at the market” offering of common stock through Roth Capital and ended a prior agreement with B. Riley to sell up to $100 million in common stock that the company signed a year ago.
In Friday’s filing, Astra said it hired PJT Partners as a financial advisor, with the company “focused on thoughtfully pursuing opportunities to raise additional capital.” More

Heading into the weekend, “Barbie” has tallied $916.1 million. It’s expected to hit the coveted billion-dollar benchmark before Monday.
In doing so, director Greta Gerwig will become the first solo female director to have a film cross $1 billion globally.
The bubblegum pink flick from Warner Bros. Discovery and Mattel shows that moviegoers are interested in leaving their couches for quality films and unique communal experiences.

A scene from the “Barbie” movie.
Courtesy: Warner Bros.

“Barbie” is less than $100 million away from topping $1 billion at the global box office.
Heading into the weekend, the bubblegum pink flick from Warner Bros. Discovery and Mattel has tallied $916.1 million. It’s expected to hit the coveted billion-dollar benchmark before Monday.

“Joining the billion-dollar box office club is a watershed moment for ‘Barbie’ and Greta Gerwig as the latter will become the first solo female director to achieve that feat,” said Shawn Robbins, chief analyst at BoxOffice.com.
Anna Boden, co-director of Disney’s “Captain Marvel,” was the first female director to be attached to a billion-dollar film. “Captain Marvel” reached just shy of $1.13 billion during its theatrical run in 2019, according to data from Comscore.
When “Barbie” tops this mark, it will become the first billion-dollar film to do so for the newly minted Warner Bros. Discovery, which merged in 2022.
“Ultimately, ‘Barbie’ has become a global phenomenon in ways the industry perhaps didn’t see coming as it reignites cultural discussions about femininity,” Robbins said. “It’s launched an iconic brand onto the big screen in a way that fans feel is organic and embraces the right amount of nostalgia to tell a relatable and entertaining story in the modern world.”
The success of “Barbie” comes at a time when studios have struggled to connect with moviegoing audiences. A series of adult-aimed blockbusters have underperformed in recent months, leading many in the industry to question if consumer tastes have shifted away from Hollywood.

“Barbie” shows that moviegoers are still interested in leaving their couches for quality films and unique communal experiences. Movie theaters big and small announced record ticket sales in the month of July as pink-clad audiences packed theaters.
The movie’s financial and cultural success “was the result of a most unusual and unpredictable set of circumstances that combined a great release date, marketing campaign, a fun and irresistible movie theater experience,” said Paul Dergarabedian, senior media analyst at Comscore.
Notably, “Barbie’s” marketing was not affected by the ongoing writers and actors strikes, which have shut down Hollywood and prevented stars from promoting their film and TV projects. The film was released one week after the Screen Actors Guild – American Federation of Television and Radio Artists initiated its strike and celebrity-based marketing efforts were halted.
Box office analysts don’t expect “Barbie” ticket sales to stall after this weekend, either. The film has limited competition throughout the rest of the summer season and is expected to continue to lure moviegoers to cinemas.
“‘Barbie’ reaching the $1 billion milestone is just another bold step on its ongoing path to even greater success,” said Dergarabedian. “As the film’s popularity and cultural resonance continues to attract moviegoers around the world, so too will its box office fortunes rise to even greater heights in the coming weeks.” More

Home prices are on a tear again across much of the nation, giving back to homeowners the equity they lost last year.
Home prices in June hit record highs in 60% of U.S. markets, according to a new report from Black Knight, set to be released Monday.
Home equity levels are now back to within 3% of last year’s peaks.
Per homeowner, that amounts to roughly $200,000 in cash sitting in the house.

Home prices are on a tear again across much of the nation after falling for much of last year. That means giving back to homeowners the equity they lost.
Home prices in June hit record highs in 60% of U.S. markets, according to a new report from Black Knight, set to be released Monday. Its national home price index hit a new high in June, up 0.8% from June of last year — a stronger annual growth rate than May.

related investing news

2 days ago

Nearly every major market saw gains month to month, with the overall index gaining 0.67% from May to June.
Home prices are rising again, because there is far too little supply to meet the current demand. Higher mortgage rates have been a huge deterrent for current homeowners to list their homes for sale because they don’t want to trade up to these higher rates on another purchase.
That home price growth has made homeowners wealthier again. Home equity levels are now back to within 3% of last year’s peaks.
Total equity hit over $16 trillion with tappable equity, which is the amount most lenders will allow you to take out while still leaving 20% equity in the home, rising to $10.5 trillion, just 4% off its 2022 peak. Per homeowner, that is roughly $200,000 in cash sitting in the house, ready for the taking.
As a result, negative equity, or so-called underwater borrowers, are nearly nonexistent in today’s market. Just 344,000 homeowners currently owe more on their homes than the properties are worth.

While that number is a 70% jump from this time last year, according to Andy Walden, Black Knight’s vice president of enterprise research strategy, “everything is relative.”
“There are less than half as many underwater homeowners than there were in 2019 before the onset of the pandemic, with only 3.9% having less than 10% equity, down from 6.6% in 2019,” Walden said.
Of course, all of this virtually destroys home affordability for today’s potential buyers: Affordability stands at a 37-year low.
As a comparison, current homeowners, most of whom carry mortgages with rates between 3% and 4%, need just 21% of the median household income to make the average monthly mortgage payment — principal and interest. Prospective homebuyers today are looking at paying more than 36% of their income on that payment thanks to higher home prices and higher rates.
The average rate on the popular 30-year fixed mortgage hit 7.2% on Thursday, according to Mortgage News Daily. Just two years ago it was around 3%.
“The small relative share of income needed for existing homeowners to meet their mortgage obligations, along with the strong credit quality of today’s mortgage holders and an acute focus on loss mitigation by the industry at large, are all contributing to today’s 16-year low in seriously delinquent mortgages,” Walden said.
Correction: Just 344,000 homeowners currently owe more on their homes than the properties are worth. An earlier version misstated the number. More

Florida State University is working with JPMorgan as its investment banker to explore raising funds from equity investors, according to a person familiar with the matter.
Investor Sixth Street Partners has been part of the discussions, which are still in early days, the person said.
The discussions come as FSU has been looking for opportunities to join other conferences and exit the Atlantic Coast Conference division of the NCAA.

The Westcott Building on the campus of Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida.
Education Images | Universal Images Group | Getty Images

Florida State University has been working with JPMorgan as it explores options to bring in funding from institutional investors, according to a person familiar with the matter.
The discussions have been ongoing in recent months, and Sixth Street Partners has expressed interest as an investor, the person said.

It’s unclear if the funding would be specifically for FSU’s athletic department or other parts of the university, although the university’s president reportedly told its Board of Trustees this week that they would have to seriously consider exiting the Atlantic Coast Conference division of the NCAA if the conference’s revenue distribution model didn’t change.
The discussions with potential equity investors are not tied to FSU’s potential push to leave the conference, according to the person familiar with the matter.
Sportico earlier reported that FSU was working with JPMorgan and that Sixth Street was part of the discussions.
Both JPMorgan and Sixth Street declined to comment. Representatives for FSU and the NCAA didn’t immediately respond to CNBC’s request for comment.
It’s uncommon for public universities to take funding from institutional investors.

In 2019, the Pac-12 Conference had expressed interest in selling a stake in its media rights to private equity firms, but later didn’t move forward with it.
“That effort fell apart, mainly because it was a challenge to mesh private investors with the potential media rights for public schools,” said sports media consultant Lee Berke.
“With FSU, we’re only talking about one public school, but the challenges associated with the private investment still apply,” Berke said. “The potential investors may want a relatively quick and predictable return on their investment, but it may take years for FSU to extricate itself out of its grant of rights and strike a new, substantially larger media deal with the ACC or another conference.”
While other NCAA divisions such as the Big Ten and Southeastern Conference recently signed lucrative media rights deals, the ACC has been locked into an agreement with ESPN that runs until 2036.
Media rights deals are often a major source of revenue for teams and leagues in both professional and collegiate sports.
The ACC’s revenue distribution model has recently changed in a way that rewards those who are more successful when it comes to football and basketball. FSU has been vocal in pushing for a change to this model so it would instead reward schools that generate higher TV revenue. More

The covid-19 pandemic has, thanks to Zoom, killed off many work trips. But not all of them. Some in-person meetings far afield are coming back. And so is business flying. Plenty of obvious edicts of air-travel etiquette are effortlessly acquired, along with air miles, merely by flying frequently. As a sophisticated traveller, you probably know the drill by heart. Still, air-rage incidents are up markedly compared with pre-pandemic times—by 50% in America and a whopping 200% in Britain. Some people could do with a refresher.Many rules of aeroplane decorum apply to all travel. But as a business traveller, you represent not just yourself but also your employer, whose logo you may well be sporting on your jacket or laptop bag. So hewing to them is critical. They begin to apply before you board the aircraft. Arrive at the gate early and in style—do not run for your life only to be panting embarrassingly or even worse, hold the plane and make 200 people wait for you while you are browsing gadgets at Duty Free. Queue-cutters and pushers have their own place in hell.Once on board, remember the basics. Do not keep your headphones on when spoken to, make a fuss when you are told that chicken tikka is finished or, heaven forbid, perform any personal grooming in public. Bare feet on the seat or bulkhead are a no-no. Aggressive typing on your laptop is, too. Manspreading and “galley yoga” in the flight attendants’ work area are to be avoided. Be wary of booze. Alcohol’s effects are more pronounced 30,000 feet above ground, even in a pressurised cabin, because of lower oxygen levels. If you tend to feel nauseous when cabin pressure changes during take-off and landing, avoid the vodka during the flight. Unruly, entitled passengers tend to be boozing passengers—and vice versa. You don’t want to become a TikTok sensation, and nor does your employer. Cabin crew, trained to be courteous and professional, should be matched in tone. Economy class is the trickiest. As airlines are packing more seats on planes in coach, legroom is scarce and your own meal tray is encroaching on your space. This does not excuse putting your feet up on tray tables, slamming back your seat when you recline or handing the flight attendants rubbish while they are distributing food. Overhead bins are meant to be shared. So are armrests. You have no control over who sits next to you but you have agency. If you find yourself elbow to elbow with Chatty Cathy, it is alright to say “excuse me” and slip on your noise-cancelling headphones. You should probably avoid working on anything remotely sensitive. As your company’s chief of security no doubt regularly reminds you, some people are nosy. Even those who aren’t may inadvertently sneak a peek at your spreadsheet. Take the time to think about strategy or read that management book you have been meaning to for months. Corporate dress codes may have relaxed but opt for transatlantic athleisure only if you have time to change before heading to your meeting after you land. Boarding the red-eye in pyjama bottoms is not OK. Elasticated waistbands are acceptable. Yoga pants and flip-flops are not; they clash with the spirit of work—especially if colleagues and clients might be on the same flight. And you never know whom you might run into at the luggage carousel.For those lucky enough to work for firms with fat travel budgets, business class helps attenuate these problems. You can work more freely and never need to kick the seat in front of you to let the passenger in the row ahead know they are reclining too comfortably (which, incidentally, you shouldn’t do in economy either). Even so, remember you are not alone. Do not violate other passengers’ personal space with your body, voice (just because you are a senior vice-president at Goldman Sachs does not mean others want to listen to your phone conversation while you board) or odour (splash on your hypnotic sandalwood cologne in moderation).Most of these challenges are eliminated if you fly first class. You get a personal suite, à la carte dining, vintage champagne and, on some flights, doorstep baggage pick-up, check-in and drop-off by airline employees (though even that probably doesn’t excuse flip-flops). Or so this guest Bartleby is told. When she suggested corroborating it herself for the purposes of research, her request was regrettably denied. You will have to work this part out on your own. Fasten your seatbelt, and enjoy the flight. ■ More