Business

JAMIE DIMON is restless. The boss of JPMorgan Chase has just returned from a long July 4th holiday weekend with his large and growing family: his wife, three daughters, a gaggle of grandchildren. He has little patience for the faff that accompanies a filmed interview—the reason that he, his many handlers, a film crew, your correspondent and The Economist’s editor-in-chief have gathered at the New York headquarters of America’s biggest bank. Mr Dimon does not want to loiter in the hallway for his “walking-in” shot; nor is he going to wait to be properly miked up and seated in his chair before launching into conversation about public policy. “So should we do this?” he urges. Doing things is the Dimon way. He is impatient, opportunistic, pragmatic: the type of person to just get on with it. He has always been this way, according to a biography by Duff McDonald. When Mr Dimon’s 12th-grade calculus teacher left, he taught himself. When Sandy Weill, a Wall Street veteran, complimented a college paper he had written about a merger Mr Weill put together, he asked him for a summer job. After business school he went to work for Mr Weill at American Express—turning down offers at Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley—because he didn’t think he would be content just moving money around. He wanted to build something. “Jamie approached everything with total fury,” Alison Falls McElvery, who was Mr Weill’s assistant, told Mr McDonald. “Nothing was an idea that merely lingered. It was always 90 miles an hour.” It is at this ferocious pace that Mr Dimon has achieved every dream he has put his mind to in the 40-odd years since. He spent more than a decade under the wing of Mr Weill, by then at the bank that would become Citigroup, which was created through endless deals he helped steer through. When their partnership blew up Mr Dimon was hired to run Bank One, then America’s fifth-largest bank. At the end of 2005, after Bank One had been bought by JPMorgan Chase, he became chief executive at the bigger lender. His insistence on maintaining healthy capital buffers helped the firm navigate the biggest financial crisis in a century relatively unscathed. It is now America’s most successful bank—and by far the most valuable in the world. Under Mr Dimon’s stewardship its shareholders have earned a handsome annual return of 10.6%—double that of most other big banks, and leagues ahead of the value destruction at Citi. [embedded content]All this does not seem to have slowed Mr Dimon down much. But it may have left his to-do list a tad short. The man who wanted to build has erected the banking equivalent of the Palace of Versailles or the Taj Mahal. Its investment bank ranks in the top three in almost all businesses it cares to compete in. Its commercial bank is the biggest in America. Because it is so large—and because banks in America with more than 10% of all deposits are barred from acquiring more (unless they rescue a failing bank, as JPMorgan did with First Republic in April)—it can grow only slowly. A literal construction project, his bank’s new headquarters on Park Avenue, which will house 14,000 employees when complete, barely scratches Mr Dimon’s building itch. So he is turning his energies to other problems. He skips over the banking mini-crisis (mostly resolved) or the potential for a recession (it could be mild, or maybe not; either way, he is more worried about Ukraine and food security in Africa). He is a “red-blooded, full-throated, free-enterprise, patriotic American”, frustrated by how slow economic growth has been over the past decade. Wanting to unleash social mobility, Mr Dimon appears genuinely animated by the cause of reducing the cost of education. He craves an open dialogue with China, which he does not think America should fear. The Chinese are not “ten feet tall”. They import oil, lack food security, are poorer and have weaker armed forces. “Maybe they have caught up in a couple of areas, but the notion that somehow America has to be that afraid of China: We don’t.” His annual letters to shareholders, once limited to thoughts on management and banking, now contain more policy ruminations than the typical American political campaign. Plenty of powerful people simply enjoy hearing themselves talk about important topics. It would be easy to accuse Mr Dimon of the same, were it not for his allergy to time-wasting, on matters as trivial as mics or profound as the bitter end of his 15-year mentorship under Mr Weill, who was unwilling to let his protégé replace him. After being fired by Mr Weill, Mr Dimon said simply, “OK”. John Reed, another Citi executive, was stunned. “Is that it?” he asked. Mr Dimon replied, “Well, yeah. You’ve obviously decided.”Mr Dimon’s interest in public policy, resolve, resources and ambition all point in one direction: political office. It is an idea he quickly shoots down. “There may be common skills…in terms of administration, management, leadership, but those are not uncommon.” Knowing how to navigate political arenas or campaign is harder. Mr Dimon thinks switching from business to politics is tricky. “I think it’s very hard to do. And in fact, if we just look at history, it’s almost impossible.” President Donald Trump was the exception, not the rule.Dimon is for ever?If not the leader of the free world, perhaps a cabinet secretary? “Maybe one day that will be in the cards,” he says. “I love my country. To me, my family comes first. But my country is right next. JPMorgan is down here,” he explains, gesturing towards the ground. The realist in him probably knows an appointment to the Treasury, the most obvious post, is unlikely. The path from Wall Street to government is not as unstrewn as it used to be. Democrats have long been suspicious of high finance, and Republicans have grown more so under the populist Mr Trump. “JPMorgan is the best contribution I can do,” Mr Dimon insists. “We have 300,000 employees. We take care of them well and we give them opportunities.” A politician couldn’t have said it better. ■ More

General Motors is positioning two new crossovers from Chevrolet and Buick as its answer to affordability issues left by discontinued, cheaper sedans.
GM’s new 2024 Buick Envista and redesigned 2024 Chevrolet Trax crossovers start at $23,495 and $20,400, respectively.
Executives from Buick and Chevrolet say they expect the vehicles to be among their bestsellers as production ramps up at plants in South Korea.

2024 Buick Envista

DETROIT – General Motors is positioning two new crossovers from Chevrolet and Buick as its answer to affordability issues left by discontinued, cheaper sedans.
Affordability has increasingly become a concern among investors and consumers. Cox Automotive reports the average price paid for a new vehicle this year has ballooned to upward of $48,600. That’s up about $5,200 from two years ago and up $11,700 from five years ago. The higher prices have pushed roughly 10% of traditional new car buyers out of the market, according to Cox.

GM, like its crosstown rivals, has largely discontinued traditional sedans in favor of popular, larger crossover vehicles. The problem is those smaller vehicles were among the cheapest in the industry and have yet to be replaced by anything close in size and price.
While nondomestic automakers such as Toyota Motor and Hyundai Motor continue to offer sedans, the prices have steadily increased and those options have been in low availability in recent years due to supply chain problems.
“Automakers have made a choice to focus, especially during the chip crisis, to focus on bigger more expensive, more profitable vehicles,” said Michelle Krebs, executive analyst at Cox Automotive. “But there clearly is demand for less-expensive vehicles.”
GM’s new 2024 Buick Envista and redesigned 2024 Chevrolet Trax crossovers start at $22,400 and $20,400, respectively. That makes them competitively priced with sedans from other automakers.
The Trax and Envista are sedan-like in silhouette and style but roomier on the interior like the company’s current smaller crossovers.

2024 Chevrolet Trax (left) and 2024 Buick Envista
Michael Wayland / CNBC

Executives from Buick and Chevrolet say they expect the vehicles to be among their bestsellers as production ramps up and the crossovers are imported from factories in South Korea.
“If every vehicle you sell is $60,000, you’re really limiting the ability to attract new buyers to the brand. A vehicle like the Envista is strategically important … this just opens an entirely new audience for us,” Sam Russell, marketing director of Buick, told CNBC.
The Envista is expected to be among the top-selling vehicles for Buick, according to Russell, who described some of the potential customers as “segment orphans” amid the dearth of sedans.
Chevrolet, which cut all of its sedans except the Malibu, expects the Trax – a familiar name for the brand, but an all-new car – to be its third best-selling vehicle. That would put the Trax behind the Silverado full-size pickup and Equinox compact crossover but ahead of the Chevy Tahoe that posted sales of more than 105,000 units last year.
“We’re super bullish on the car, no doubt, but I’m really bullish on this notion of that Chevrolet hasn’t lost our mind,” Steve Majoros, head of Chevy marketing, said of cutting its least expensive vehicles. “These are the vehicles that Americans want, and Chevrolet hasn’t forgotten about that.”

New Envista and Trax

The Envista and Trax feature a number of standard safety and convenience features, above what GM has historically offered on entry-level vehicles. Both vehicles are powered by a 1.2-liter turbocharged inline three-cylinder engine, producing 137 horsepower and 162 pound-feet of torque.

2024 Buick Envista 

The new Trax and Envista are sibling vehicles as they share the same platform and have similar interiors and silhouettes. The vehicles are differentiated through front and rear design tweaks as well as controls in the vehicles.
“The entry vehicle is evolving from the typical sedan and hatchback with frumpy styling to compelling alternatives. GM reimagined the roles of the latest Trax and Envista and resulted in expressive options for entry-level buyers,” said Paul Waatti, manager of industry insights for AutoPacific. “They should both revive GM’s sales at the lower end of the portfolio and start to backfill some of those entry-level models that have been broomed away.”
Both vehicles are priced under more traditional, smaller crossovers for both brands: the Chevy Trailblazer and Buick Encore GX. Those vehicles sit more upright and have more of a compact look compared with the longer and arguably more spacious Trax and Envista. However, the Trailblazer and Encore GX do not offer all-wheel drive.

2024 Chevrolet Trax (right) and 2024 Buick Envista
Michael Wayland / CNBC

Executives for both Chevrolet and Buick said they believe the new vehicles will attract a significant number of new buyers to the brands, assisting in growing sales and market share for GM.  
“The Encore GX is what we call our loyalty play. The role it has to play is build off the success of the first generation,” Buick’s Russell said. “The Envista, the vision is this is our conquest champion.”
GM’s U.S. sales through the first half of this year were up more than 18% to roughly 1.3 million vehicles sold, as the auto industry’s supply chain problems stabilize. More

Charter Communications said Monday it is changing up its cable TV offering and will allow customers to opt into a cheaper, sports-lite tier without regional sports networks.
The move comes as sports TV networks, particularly regional sports channels, contend with cord-cutting and streaming options. Diamond Sports Group, the largest portfolio of these networks, recently sought bankruptcy protection.
The packages will launch on a market-by-market basis in the third quarter.

In this photo illustration, the Charter Communications logo is displayed on a smartphone screen.
Rafael Henrique | SOPA Images | Lightrocket | Getty Images

A change-up is coming to Charter Communications’ cable TV packages — particularly for sports networks.
The cable and broadband company said Monday that it plans to start offering a new, two-tier cable package system that will allow customers to select a cheaper, sports-lite TV option without regional sports channels.

The pivotal move comes as the industry has been contending with more people opting to cut cable in favor of streaming services. That’s weighed heavily on sports channels and has hit regional sports networks, which have which have long provided lucrative fees to leagues and teams, especially hard.
Diamond Sports Group, the owner of the largest regional sports networks portfolio, filed for bankruptcy protection earlier this year. Other networks have been launching direct-to-consumer streaming options that come at price points that won’t upend the longtime lucrative pay-TV model. But they’re often considered expensive for consumers and could turn off potential streaming customers.
Charter, which owns two regional sports networks of its own, is looking to change the formula. Beginning in the third quarter, the company said its Spectrum-branded cable TV business will be relaunched as two new services.
Spectrum Select Plus will include the provider’s full slate of sports programming and regional sports networks, while Spectrum Select Signature will exclude certain sports programming for a reduced rate.
The two options will launch on a market-by-market basis throughout the majority of Charter’s U.S. footprint.

Customers who pick the option with certain sports programming will receive direct-to-consumer streaming apps for the local sports networks in their area for free. Charter will also be able to market and sell these regional sports networks app to its broadband-only customers. Major networks like ESPN and FS1 will still be available on Spectrum Select Signature.
“This new model paves the way for a more flexible approach to the outdated packaging model for sports, and it puts the focus where it should be, on the customer,” said Tom Montemagno, Charter’s executive vice president of programming acquisition, in a news release.
The company noted that, historically, sports networks’ agreements require distributors to pay for the rights to the content and make their programming available to a large majority of subscribers — typically more than 80%. That’s the case even if many of those customers never turn on the channel.
Pay-TV bills usually break down the cost of regional sports network fees. National sports networks, such as Disney’s ESPN, are known to be some of the most expensive for pay-TV distributors such as Charter and DirecTV to carry.
Charter noted that the new two-tier system still gives sports fans what they want while giving non-sports viewers a more affordable option. The company also said the model supports the sports networks that are pursuing streaming options.
As both a distributor and owner, Charter is exposed to the issues sports networks are facing. The company inherited two regional sports networks — Spectrum SportsNet and SportsNet LA, which air Dodges and Lakers games — when it acquired Time Warner Cable in 2016. Charter is also planning to launch a streaming alternative for those channels.
In addition, Charter and DirecTV on Monday announced a new distribution agreement for those regional sports networks.
As part of the deal, Charter agreed to a “significantly lower penetration threshold,” which will allow DirecTV to “better target their subscribers who want Lakers and Dodgers programming.” It will also allow DirecTV to provide cheaper and more flexible options for customers who are uninterested in sports.
Spectrum Networks executive Dan Finnerty said in a news release earlier Monday that while viewing habits are shifting, regular season sports programming is still popular.
“That said, given these customers represent a relatively small percentage of the overall video subscriber base, and recognizing the marked increase in direct-to-consumer choices, the model for RSNs needs to evolve to reflect the realities of the current marketplace,” said Finnerty, the senior vice president and general manager of Spectrum Networks. “With this agreement, we are taking a step to shift the business model so that customers have more control.”
Correction: This story was updated to reflect that Charter’s Spectrum Select Signature tier will still offer some sports networks. More

Spacecraft engine manufacturer and small rocket builder Astra plans to conduct a reverse stock split at a 1 to 15 ratio.
Astra also seeks to raise up to $65 million through an “at the market” offering of common stock.
The company previously outlined a reverse split as part of its plan to avoid delisting by the Nasdaq exchange.

Astra CEO Chris Kemp speaks inside the company’s headquarters during its Spacetech Day, May 12, 2022.
Brady Kenniston / Astra

Spacecraft engine manufacturer and small rocket builder Astra plans to conduct a reverse stock split at a 1 to 15 ratio, the company disclosed in a securities filing Monday.
Astra also seeks to raise up to $65 million through an “at the market” offering of common stock, the filing said.

Shares of Astra were little changed in after-hours trading from their close at 40 cents a share. The company went public in July 2021 via a SPAC deal, at a near $2 billion valuation, before the stock began to tumble after launch failures and development setbacks.

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

Astra’s filing said the reverse stock split is expected to take place on or before October 2, after its board approved the plan July 6. The company previously outlined a reverse split as part of its plan to avoid delisting by the Nasdaq exchange.
A reverse split does not affect the fundamentals of a company, as it is not dilutive to the stock and does not change the company’s valuation, but it would lift the stock price by combining shares. A reverse split can be seen as a sign a company is in distress and is trying to “artificially” boost its stock price, or it can be viewed as a way for a viable company with a beaten up stock to continue operations on a public exchange. Functionally, a reverse split, often done as a 1 for 10, would mean a $3 stock, for example, would become $30 a share. More

Novavax’s stock price jumped after the embattled biotech company said Canada has agreed to pay $350 million for forfeiting Covid vaccine doses that were previously scheduled for delivery. 
The settlement is part of an amended coronavirus shot purchase agreement between Maryland-based Novavax and the Canadian government.
The announcement is another sign of hope for investors after the Maryland-based company raised doubts about its ability to stay in business earlier this year. 

Nikos Pekiaridis | Nurphoto | Getty Images

Stock chart icon

Novavax shares jump on news of a settlement payment from the Canadian government.

It’s unclear how many doses of Novavax’s jab – its only commercially available product after 35 years – went unused. Under the amended agreement, Novavax will also provide Canada with fewer doses of its vaccine on a revised delivery schedule. 
However, Canada can terminate the contract if Novavax fails to receive regulatory approval for vaccine production at the Canadian government’s biomanufacturing facility by Dec. 31, 2024, according to the agreement.
The announcement is another sign of hope for investors after the cash-strapped company raised doubts about its ability to stay in business earlier this year. 

CNBC Health & Science

Read CNBC’s latest health coverage:

In May, Novavax adopted a more positive outlook and announced a sweeping cost-cutting plan alongside its first-quarter earnings report. The company said it expects 2023 revenue of between $1.4 billion and $1.6 billion.

Novavax’s stock price jumped around 30% on that news. The company’s stock price is down 4% since the start of the year after after shedding more than 90% of its value in 2022.
Novavax still faces a number of challenges ahead, including competing with Pfizer and Moderna in the commercial Covid vaccine market and a pending $700 million arbitration over a canceled vaccine purchase agreement. More

REMOTE WORK has a target on its back. Banking CEOs, like Jamie Dimon of JPMorgan Chase, are intent on making working from home a relic of the pandemic. Staff at America’s biggest lender and other Wall Street stalwarts like Goldman Sachs are finding that five-day weeks are back for good. Big tech companies are also cracking the whip. Google’s return-to-work mandate threatens to track attendance and factor it in performance reviews for rebellious employees. Meta and Lyft want staff back at their desks, demanding at least three days of the week in the office by the end of the summer. With bosses clamping down on the practice, the pandemic-era days of mutual agreement on the desirability of remote work seem to be over. Fresh data from a global survey shows just how far this consensus has broken down. Across the world, plans for remote working by employers fall short of what workers want, according to WFH Research, a group that includes Stanford University and the Ifo Institute, a German think-tank, which has tracked the sentiment of full-time workers with at least a secondary education in 34 countries. Corporate bosses fear that fully remote work dents productivity, a worry reinforced by a slew of recent research. One study of data-entry workers in India found those toiling from home to be 18% less productive than their office-frequenting peers; another found that employees at a big Asian IT firm were 19% less productive at home than they had been in the office. Communication records of nearly 62,000 employees at Microsoft showed that professional networks within the company ossified and became more isolated as remote work took hold. Yet all the pressure from above has done little to dent employees’ appetite for remote working. Workers want to be able to work more days from the comfort of their living rooms than they currently do, according to WFH Research. On average, workers across the world want two days at home, a full day more than they get. In English-speaking countries, which already have the highest levels of home-working, there is an appetite for more. And the trend is spreading to places where remote work has been less common (see chart 1). Japanese and South Korean employees, some of the most office-bound anywhere, want more than a quarter of the week to themselves. Europeans and Latin American crave a third and half, respectively.Continued desire for more remote work is not surprising. The time saved not having to battle public transport or congested roads allows for a better work-life balance. On average, 72 minutes each day is saved when working remotely, which adds up to two weeks over a year, according to a working paper* by Nicholas Bloom of Stanford, who helps run WFH Research, and colleagues. Employees also report that they feel most engaged when working remotely, according to a poll last year by Gallup. On average globally, workers value all these benefits to the tune of an 8% rise in their salaries, suggesting that some would take a pay cut to keep their privileges.Until recently, as firms tried to lure workers during the post-pandemic hiring bonanza, employees’ demands and employers’ plans seemed to be converging in America, the best-studied market. This convergence is tailing off (see chart 2). At the same time, the pandemic has entrenched work-from-home patterns. At the moment, a third of workers surveyed by WFH Research have a hybrid or fully remote arrangement. Those practices will not be easy to unwind.It is no coincidence that the crackdown on remote work is happening as the labour market begins to cool. Deepening job cuts across Wall Street and Silicon Valley have handed power back to businesses. However, even in tech and finance some employees are standing their ground. In May nearly 2,000 employees at Amazon staged walkouts over the e-empire’s return-to-work policies. Other companies are quietly adapting with the times, perhaps recognising that a more flexible approach is inevitable. HSBC, a British bank, is planning to relocate from its 45-storey tower in Canary Wharf to smaller digs in the City of London. Deloitte and KPMG, two professional-services giants, plan to reduce their office footprint in favour of more remote work. The gap between the two sides of the work-from-home battle may yet narrow. The question is whether the bosses or the bossed will yield the most. ■*“Working from Home Around the Globe: 2023 Report”, by C.G. Aksoy, J.M. Barrero, N. Bloom, S.J. Davis, M. Dolls, P. Zarate More

The PGA Tour is defending its proposed deal with LIV Golf ahead of Tuesday’s Senate hearing.
“That future for the PGA Tour is significantly brighter thanks to this agreement,” Chief Operating Officer Ron Price said in an op-ed Monday.
Price and another PGA Tour official will testify Tuesday during a hearing called by Sens. Richard Blumenthal and Ron Johnson, chairman and ranking member of the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, respectively, regarding the merger between the PGA Tour and Public Investment Fund’s LIV Golf.
The hearing comes shortly after former AT&T chief Randall Stephenson resigned from the PGA Tour’s policy board, citing “serious concerns.”

A PGA TOUR logo is seen after play was suspended due to severe storms during the third round of THE PLAYERS Championship held at THE PLAYERS Stadium course at TPC Sawgrass on May 14, 2011 in Ponte Vedra Beach, Florida.
Streeter Lecka | Getty Images

The PGA Tour has begun its public defense of its deal with Saudi-backed LIV Golf ahead of a key Senate hearing slated for this week.
The tour’s chief operating officer, Ron Price, who is set to testify Tuesday, released an op-ed in The Athletic on Monday defending the deal and explaining why it was the best outcome for the future of golf. He also argued the agreement should not be considered a merger.

“Given the well-chronicled legal disputes that have existed between the PGA Tour and PIF, we understand the fair and valid questions raised by PGA Tour members, Tour partners, media, fans and now Congress,” Price said in the op-ed.
The piece comes days after a shake-up at the PGA Tour’s policy board that added another wrinkle to what could be a rocky road toward approval of the deal.
Former AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson on Saturday resigned from the PGA Tour’s policy board, which he served on since 2012. Stephenson stepped down as lawmakers appeared likely to start a broad probe into the merger between the PGA Tour and LIV, beginning with Tuesday’s Senate hearing.
Sen. Richard Blumenthal and Sen. Ron Johnson, the chairman and ranking member of the Senate Homeland Security Committee’s Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, respectively, called the meeting on Tuesday. The senators requested officials from the tour and Saudi Public Investment Fund to appear before the panel.
While the senators requested testimony from PGA Tour Commissioner Jay Monahan, Price and policy board independent director Jimmy Dunne will instead appear, the tour said in a statement last week. Monahan has been on a leave of absence due to an unspecified medical situation, but recently announced he will return to his role on July 17.

Jay Monahan, PGA TOUR Commissioner, speaks during the trophy ceremony during the final round of THE PLAYERS Championship on THE PLAYERS Stadium Course at TPC Sawgrass on March 12, 2023 in Ponte Vedra Beach, Florida.
Richard Heathcote | Getty Images Sport | Getty Images

“We look forward to appearing before the Senate Subcommittee to answer their questions about the framework agreement that keeps the PGA TOUR as the leader of professional golf’s future and benefits our players, our fans, and our sport,” a PGA Tour representative said in a recent statement.
The tour did not comment beyond Price’s op-ed on Monday.
The senators had said in an earlier letter that the subcommittee would examine the proposed deal and the Saudi fund’s “investment in golf in the United States, the risks associated with a foreign government’s investment in American cultural institutions, and the implications of this planned agreement on professional golf in the United States going forward.”
It is unknown whether representatives for the Saudi Arabia Public Investment Fund will testify. Representatives for PIF have not responded to multiple requests for comment.

Defending the deal

Last month, the PGA Tour and PIF’s LIV Golf, as well as Europe’s DP World Tour, agreed to merge. While specific terms and the valuation of the deal have not been announced, an early framework of the proposed transaction shows it would create a for-profit subsidiary of the PGA Tour, and the new entity would manage commercial assets for all the tours. The PGA Tour would manage competitions.
The proposed deal came as a shock to the sports world — including the tour’s own players — following months of tensions between the PGA Tour and LIV Golf, which led to both entities filing antitrust claims against each other. All litigation between the two has been squashed as part of the proposed deal.
Price, in Monday’s op-ed, acknowledged the deal was a surprise after two years of “unprecedented conflict.”
Negotiations are still ongoing and the framework ends litigation between the two entities. Price contended that due to the confidential nature of the deal, “much of the initial reaction has been negative, colored by misinformation or misunderstanding.”
“That’s something we take full ownership of and deeply regret. Moving forward, we firmly believe that the more the facts are discussed and understood, the further our constituents can support a potential definitive agreement — if reached — and look forward to the positive and lasting impact on all levels of our game,” Price said in Monday’s op-ed.
The two entities had been embroiled in antitrust lawsuits since last year. LIV had sued the tour, alleging anti-competitive practices for banning its players, while the tour countersued, claiming LIV was stifling competition.
Price defended the framework agreement so far as a favorable outcome not only for the tour, but also for professional golf as a whole. He said the agreement “provides clear, explicit and permanent safeguards that ensure the PGA Tour will lead the decisions that shape our future, and that we’ll have control over our operations, strategy and continuity of our mission.”
He added if the sides reach an agreement, it will allow further investment in players, events, venues, communities and technology. The PIF has said it would invest billions of dollars into the new entity.
Price also contended the deal “is not a merger.” He wrote that the tour would remain intact, and that the newly formed subsidiary will include PIF as a noncontrolling, minority investor, as it is in “many other American businesses.” The majority of the board that leads the PGA Tour Enterprises will be appointed by the tour and run by Monahan.
Following the announcement, top player Rory McIlroy — who repeatedly slammed LIV Golf during the years of acrimony — expressed agitation about the proposed deal being referred to as a merger.

LIV controversy

Controversy has surrounded LIV since its inception in 2022. The PIF is not publicly held and is a sovereign wealth fund controlled by bin Salman. Critics have accused the fund of “sportswashing,” or using LIV and other sports investments to improve the image of the oil-rich nation and distract from the kingdom’s history of human rights violations.
Stephenson in his resignation letter on Saturday to fellow board members pointed to one of those alleged violations.
The tour notified its members on Sunday evening of Stephenson’s departure from the policy board, according to a memo viewed by CNBC. It noted there “is no specific time frame in which a successor independent director has to be appointed.” The four remaining independent directors, in consultation with the board’s five player directors and PGA director, will work together to fill the position.
In the memo, he wrote that he had “serious concerns” about the proposed deal and whether he could objectively evaluate or support it due to the U.S. intelligence report assessing Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman ordered the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi in 2018. The memo was earlier reported by the Washington Post.
Stephenson’s concerns about accepting Saudi investment are similar to those voiced by others in the tour, along with politicians. Stephenson didn’t respond to requests for comment.
A U.S. Intelligence report from 2021 showed that the Saudi crown prince had approved an operation to capture or kill the journalist Khashoggi in 2018. It cited bin Salman’s control of decision-making in Saudi Arabia, as well as the involvement of a key advisor and members of the prince’s protective detail in the operation that killed Khashoggi, a critic of the royal family.
Lawmakers have raised doubts about the merger since the golf tours announced it. Top Senate Democrats have called out antitrust concerns and have pressed for an inquiry into the merger.
“Fans, the players, and concerned citizens have many questions about the planned agreement between the PGA Tour and LIV Golf,” Johnson said in a release last month.
While the Subcommittee on Investigations has broad jurisdiction to probe matters including corporate abuses, committee hearings are relatively rare and typically mark the early phase of a longer investigation. The hearing on the merger is the committee’s second this year.
Before scheduling the meeting, Blumenthal had announced his intention to investigate the deal in light of Saudi Arabia’s human rights abuses.
When the deal was announced, Monahan acknowledged the shock and anger it triggered among players.
LIV Golf events were met with protests, particularly from the family members of those who perished in the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Fifteen of the 19 hijackers on that day were from Saudi Arabia, and Osama bin Laden, the mastermind behind the attacks, was born in the country. U.S. officials concluded that Saudi nationals helped to fund the terrorist group al-Qaeda, although the investigations didn’t find that the Saudi officials were complicit in the attacks.
Members of the group 9/11 Families United slammed the deal. They have also called out Monahan for remarks in an interview last summer, when he said he discussed the 9/11 connections with PGA Tour players and suggested the organization stood on a higher moral ground than LIV.
“I think you’d have to be living under a rock not to know there are significant implications,” Monahan said during the interview with CBS Sports. “I would ask any player who has left or any player who would consider leaving, ‘Have you ever had to apologize for being a member of the PGA tour?'” More

Wholesale used vehicle prices last month experienced their largest decline since the beginning of the Covid-19 pandemic.
Cox Automotive reported a 4.2% decline from May to June in its Manheim Used Vehicle Value Index to 215.1.
The fall is the third consecutive monthly decline, according to Cox.

Pre-owned vehicles are seen at the Roger Beasley South dealership lot in Austin, Texas, June 7, 2023.
Brandon Bell | Getty Images

DETROIT — Wholesale used vehicle prices posted their largest decline last month since the beginning of the Covid-19 pandemic, as prices are set to stabilize during the second half of this year.
Cox Automotive reported Monday a 4.2% decline from May to June in its Manheim Used Vehicle Value Index to 215.1. It marks the third consecutive monthly decline and one of the index’s largest monthly drops on record, according to Cox.

“Buyers at auction look to have taken an early summer break, and while used retail inventory has been improving over the last several weeks, we are expecting less volatility in wholesale price movements through year-end,” Chris Frey, Cox senior manager of economic and industry insights, said in a release.
The index, which tracks vehicles sold at its U.S. wholesale dealership auctions, remains elevated from historical levels but is down 10.3% compared with June 2022.
The decline could help bring used vehicle pricing down for consumers in the months to come, as retail prices traditionally follow changes in wholesale prices.
The retail used vehicle market remains strong but was estimated to be off 6% last month compared with June 2022, according to Cox. The decline was led by rising availability of new vehicles and high interest rates, Cox senior economist Jonathan Smoke said Monday during a conference call.
“We are now at a turning point where the market returns to more balance and that balanced market is likely to deliver small but predictable changes in sales and less news about big changes in prices,” Smoke said.

Used vehicle prices have been elevated since the early days of the Covid-19 pandemic, as the global health crisis combined with supply chain issues caused production of new vehicles to sporadically idle. That led to a low supply of new vehicles and record-high prices amid resilient demand. The costs and scarcity of inventory led consumers to the used vehicle market, boosting those prices as well.
Cox expects wholesale used vehicle prices to be down roughly 1.1% at the end of this year compared with December 2022. That’s down from the company’s initial forecast of a 4.3% decline, as pricing and demand were more resilient than expected to begin the year.
“The consumer is hanging in there,” Smoke said. “We do not expect the remaining months of the year to deliver declines like we saw in the spring.”
Cox expects the used vehicle wholesale market to experience a “slow and gradual recovery” in prices to pre-pandemic levels by 2028. More