Business – Page 1766 – NewzIntel.com

MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Congratulations to Washington in Bloom volunteers!

Source: City of Sunderland

Washington Village in Bloom volunteers are celebrating after the village was named the overall winner in the Village category at the Britain in Bloom Awards 2024.

The village won Northumbria in Bloom earlier this year and was then chosen to go into the national competition, before being announced as the overall winner during the awards ceremony in Manchester this week.

This year, the volunteers also won the Exceptional Public Engagement Award for their work with the community. The Washington Village in Bloom volunteers work year-round alongside Sunderland City Council, local businesses, volunteers completing Duke of Edinburgh awards and extra volunteers from Barclay’s Bank on the floral displays and colourful flower beds that impressed the visiting judges.

In August this year, Washington in Bloom volunteers welcomed the Britain in Bloom judges as it celebrated Washington’s 60^thanniversary and the competition’s 60^th anniversary with a 1960’s ‘Flower Power’ themed celebration.

Joan Atkinson, Chair of Washington in Bloom, also won the Community Champion Award for her continued hard work on the village while she was undergoing chemotherapy and radiotherapy for breast cancer. She said: “You can’t enter the best village category – you have to be nominated by Northumbria in Bloom, so even being invited to the competition is a fantastic achievement for Washington Village. We are completely self-funded and rely on donations and the hard work and dedication of the Washington in Bloom volunteers.

“The volunteers deserve all the credit for the award. Whether its planting or removing leaves they are out working on the village every week in every season and their hard work has really paid off.”

Councillor Beth Jones, Washington Central ward councillor and Sunderland City Council’s Cabinet Member for Communities, Culture and Tourism, said: “I’d like to say a big congratulations to Joan on her award win and well done to the team of Washington in Bloom volunteers who have all worked hard towards Washington Village’s national award.

“The village looks absolutely stunning and it’s down to the hard work of all the brilliant volunteers and the collaborative efforts of council staff, local businesses, volunteers, local schools and residents. Everyone has done a fantastic job, and I’m delighted to see it recognised with this well-deserved award.”

MIL OSI United Kingdom –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI: Equinor ASA: Notifiable trading

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

A close associate of a primary insider in Equinor ASA (OSE: EQNR, NYSE: EQNR) has purchased shares in Equinor ASA:

Tocaba AS, a close associate of board member Tone Hegland Bachke, has on 25 October 2024 purchased 2000 shares in Equinor ASA at a price of NOK 276.76 per share.

Details of the purchase of shares are set forth in the attached notification.

This is information that Equinor ASA is obliged to make public pursuant to Article 19 of the EU Market Abuse Regulation and subject to the disclosure requirements pursuant to Section 5-12 of the Norwegian Securities Trading Act.

Attachment

Notice of trade – Tocaba AS

The MIL Network –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI: First Hawaiian, Inc. Reports Third Quarter 2024 Financial Results and Declares Dividend

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

HONOLULU, Oct. 25, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — First Hawaiian, Inc. (NASDAQ:FHB), (“First Hawaiian” or the “Company”) today reported financial results for its quarter ended September 30, 2024.

“I’m happy to report that we had a very good third quarter,” said Bob Harrison, Chairman, President, and CEO. “Net interest income and noninterest income increased over the prior quarter, expenses were well controlled and credit quality remained excellent. I’m also pleased to report that during the third quarter, Moody’s reviewed and reaffirmed all of First Hawaiian Bank’s long-term credit and deposit ratings.”

On October 23, 2024, the Company’s Board of Directors declared a quarterly cash dividend of $0.26 per share. The dividend will be payable on November 29, 2024, to stockholders of record at the close of business on November 18, 2024.

Third Quarter 2024 Highlights:

Net income of $61.5 million, or $0.48 per diluted share
Total loans and leases decreased $118.5 million versus the prior quarter
Total deposits decreased $91.1 million versus the prior quarter
Net interest margin increased 3 basis points to 2.95%
Recorded a $7.4 million provision for credit losses
Board of Directors declared a quarterly dividend of $0.26 per share

Balance Sheet

Total assets were $23.8 billion as of September 30, 2024, a decrease of $211.5 million, or 0.9%, from $24.0 billion as of June 30, 2024.

Gross loans and leases were $14.2 billion as of September 30, 2024, a decrease of $118.5 million, or 0.8%, from $14.4 billion as of June 30, 2024.

Total deposits were $20.2 billion as of September 30, 2024, a decrease of $91.1 million, or 0.4%, from $20.3 billion as of June 30, 2024.

Net Interest Income

Net interest income for the third quarter of 2024 was $156.7 million, an increase of $3.9 million, or 2.5%, compared to $152.9 million for the prior quarter.

The net interest margin was 2.95% in the third quarter of 2024, an increase of 3 basis points compared to 2.92% in the prior quarter.

Provision Expense

During the quarter ended September 30, 2024, we recorded a $7.4 million provision for credit losses. In the quarter ended June 30, 2024, we recorded a $1.8 million provision for credit losses.

Noninterest Income

Noninterest income was $53.3 million in the third quarter of 2024, an increase of $1.5 million compared to noninterest income of $51.8 million in the prior quarter.

Noninterest Expense

Noninterest expense was $126.1 million in the third quarter of 2024, an increase of $4.1 million compared to noninterest expense of $122.1 million in the prior quarter.

The efficiency ratio was 59.8% and 59.2% for the quarters ended September 30, 2024 and June 30, 2024, respectively.

Taxes

The effective tax rate was 19.6% and 23.3% for the quarters ended September 30, 2024 and June 30, 2024, respectively.

Asset Quality

The allowance for credit losses was $163.7 million, or 1.15% of total loans and leases, as of September 30, 2024, compared to $160.5 million, or 1.12% of total loans and leases, as of June 30, 2024. The reserve for unfunded commitments was $33.7 million as of September 30, 2024 compared to $33.4 million as of June 30, 2024. Net charge-offs were $3.9 million, or 0.11% of average loans and leases on an annualized basis, for the quarter ended September 30, 2024, compared to net charge-offs of $2.5 million, or 0.07% of average loans and leases on an annualized basis, for the quarter ended June 30, 2024. Total non-performing assets were $17.8 million, or 0.13% of total loans and leases and other real estate owned, as of September 30, 2024, compared to $18.0 million, or 0.13% of total loans and leases and other real estate owned, as of June 30, 2024.

Capital

Total stockholders’ equity increased $97.7 million in the third quarter, and stood at $2.6 billion on September 30, 2024 and June 30, 2024.

The tier 1 leverage, common equity tier 1 and total capital ratios were 9.14%, 13.03% and 14.25%, respectively, on September 30, 2024, compared with 9.03%, 12.73% and 13.92%, respectively, on June 30, 2024.

The Company did not repurchase any shares in the third quarter.

First Hawaiian, Inc.

First Hawaiian, Inc. (NASDAQ:FHB) is a bank holding company headquartered in Honolulu, Hawaii. Its principal subsidiary, First Hawaiian Bank, founded in 1858 under the name Bishop & Company, is Hawaii’s oldest and largest financial institution with branch locations throughout Hawaii, Guam and Saipan. The company offers a comprehensive suite of banking services to consumer and commercial customers including deposit products, loans, wealth management, insurance, trust, retirement planning, credit card and merchant processing services. Customers may also access their accounts through ATMs, online and mobile banking channels. For more information about First Hawaiian, Inc., visit the Company’s website, www.fhb.com.

Conference Call Information

First Hawaiian will host a conference call to discuss the Company’s results today at 1:00 p.m. Eastern Time, 7:00 a.m. Hawaii Time.

To access the call by phone, participants will need to click on the following registration link: https://register.vevent.com/register/BIec8273f35cc340bcb13d27eae17d127b, register for the conference call, and then you will receive the dial-in number and a personalized PIN code. To avoid delays, we encourage participants to dial into the conference call fifteen minutes ahead of the scheduled start time.

A live webcast of the conference call, including a slide presentation, will be available at the following link: www.fhb.com/earnings. The archive of the webcast will be available at the same location.

Forward-Looking Statements
This press release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These forward-looking statements reflect our current views with respect to, among other things, future events and our financial performance. These statements are often, but not always, made through the use of words or phrases such as “may”, “might”, “should”, “could”, “predict”, “potential”, “believe”, “expect”, “continue”, “will”, “anticipate”, “seek”, “estimate”, “intend”, “plan”, “projection”, “would”, “annualized” and “outlook”, or the negative version of those words or other comparable words or phrases of a future or forward-looking nature. These forward-looking statements are not historical facts, and are based on current expectations, estimates and projections about our industry, management’s beliefs and certain assumptions made by management, many of which, by their nature, are inherently uncertain and beyond our control. Accordingly, we caution you that any such forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and are subject to risks, assumptions, estimates and uncertainties that are difficult to predict. Although we believe that the expectations reflected in these forward-looking statements are reasonable as of the date made, there can be no assurance that actual results will not prove to be materially different from the results expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements. A number of important factors could cause actual results or performance to differ materially from the forward-looking statements, including (without limitation) the risks and uncertainties associated with the domestic and global economic environment and capital market conditions and other risk factors. For a discussion of some of these risks and important factors that could affect our future results and financial condition, see our U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) filings, including, but not limited to, our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2023 and our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarters ended March 31, 2024 and June 30, 2024.

Use of Non-GAAP Financial Measures
Return on average tangible assets, return on average tangible stockholders’ equity, tangible book value per share and tangible stockholders’ equity to tangible assets are non-GAAP financial measures. We believe that these measurements are useful for investors, regulators, management and others to evaluate financial performance and capital adequacy relative to other financial institutions. Although these non-GAAP financial measures are frequently used by stakeholders in the evaluation of a company, they have limitations as analytical tools and should not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for analysis of our results or financial condition as reported under GAAP. Investors should consider our performance and capital adequacy as reported under GAAP and all other relevant information when assessing our performance and capital adequacy.

Table 14 at the end of this document provides a reconciliation of these non-GAAP financial measures with their most directly comparable GAAP measures.


Financial Highlights	Table 1
	For the Three Months Ended									For the Nine Months Ended
	September 30,			June 30,			September 30,			September 30,
(dollars in thousands, except per share data)	2024			2024			2023			2024			2023
Operating Results:
Net interest income	$	156,707		$	152,851		$	157,148		$	463,985		$	484,334
Provision for credit losses		7,400			1,800			7,500			15,500			21,300
Noninterest income		53,288			51,768			46,097			156,427			142,468
Noninterest expense		126,147			122,086			119,383			377,046			358,831
Net income		61,492			61,921			58,221			177,633			187,481
Basic earnings per share		0.48			0.48			0.46			1.39			1.47
Diluted earnings per share		0.48			0.48			0.46			1.38			1.47
Dividends declared per share		0.26			0.26			0.26			0.78			0.78
Dividend payout ratio		54.17	%		54.17	%		56.52	%		56.52	%		53.06	%
Performance Ratios⁽¹⁾:
Net interest margin		2.95	%		2.92	%		2.86	%		2.93	%		2.96	%
Efficiency ratio		59.77	%		59.22	%		58.31	%		60.38	%		56.86	%
Return on average total assets		1.02	%		1.04	%		0.93	%		0.99	%		1.01	%
Return on average tangible assets (non-GAAP)⁽²⁾		1.06	%		1.08	%		0.97	%		1.03	%		1.06	%
Return on average total stockholders’ equity		9.45	%		9.91	%		9.76	%		9.37	%		10.72	%
Return on average tangible stockholders’ equity (non-GAAP)⁽²⁾		15.35	%		16.42	%		16.84	%		15.43	%		18.68	%
Average Balances:
Average loans and leases	$	14,304,806		$	14,358,049		$	14,349,402		$	14,325,065		$	14,238,309
Average earning assets		21,328,882			21,247,707			22,060,480			21,352,739			22,040,704
Average assets		24,046,696			23,958,913			24,727,893			24,064,208			24,699,826
Average deposits		20,367,805			20,308,028			21,212,102			20,415,746			21,245,055
Average stockholders’ equity		2,588,806			2,512,471			2,367,422			2,532,911			2,337,292
Market Value Per Share:
Closing		23.15			20.76			18.05			23.15			18.05
High		26.18			22.68			22.59			26.18			28.28
Low		20.28			19.48			17.41			19.48			15.08


	As of			As of			As of			As of
	September 30,			June 30,			December 31,			September 30,
(dollars in thousands, except per share data)	2024			2024			2023			2023
Balance Sheet Data:
Loans and leases	$	14,241,370		$	14,359,899		$	14,353,497		$	14,332,335
Total assets		23,780,285			23,991,791			24,926,474			24,912,524
Total deposits		20,227,702			20,318,832			21,332,657			21,511,489
Short-term borrowings		250,000			500,000			500,000			500,000
Total stockholders’ equity		2,648,034			2,550,312			2,486,066			2,351,009

Per Share of Common Stock:
Book value	$	20.71		$	19.94		$	19.48		$	18.42
Tangible book value (non-GAAP)⁽²⁾		12.92			12.16			11.68			10.62

Asset Quality Ratios:
Non-accrual loans and leases / total loans and leases		0.13	%		0.13	%		0.13	%		0.10	%
Allowance for credit losses for loans and leases / total loans and leases		1.15	%		1.12	%		1.09	%		1.08	%

Capital Ratios:
Common Equity Tier 1 Capital Ratio		13.03	%		12.73	%		12.39	%		12.21	%
Tier 1 Capital Ratio		13.03	%		12.73	%		12.39	%		12.21	%
Total Capital Ratio		14.25	%		13.92	%		13.57	%		13.38	%
Tier 1 Leverage Ratio		9.14	%		9.03	%		8.64	%		8.45	%
Total stockholders’ equity to total assets		11.14	%		10.63	%		9.97	%		9.44	%
Tangible stockholders’ equity to tangible assets (non-GAAP)⁽²⁾		7.25	%		6.76	%		6.23	%		5.67	%

Non-Financial Data:
Number of branches		48			48			50			50
Number of ATMs		273			272			275			294
Number of Full-Time Equivalent Employees		2,022			2,032			2,089			2,087

⁽¹⁾Except for the efficiency ratio, amounts are annualized for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2024 and 2023 and three months ended June 30, 2024.

⁽²⁾Return on average tangible assets, return on average tangible stockholders’ equity, tangible book value per share and tangible stockholders’ equity to tangible assets are non-GAAP financial measures. We compute our return on average tangible assets as the ratio of net income to average tangible assets, which is calculated by subtracting (and thereby effectively excluding) amounts related to the effect of goodwill from our average total assets. We compute our return on average tangible stockholders’ equity as the ratio of net income to average tangible stockholders’ equity, which is calculated by subtracting (and thereby effectively excluding) amounts related to the effect of goodwill from our average total stockholders’ equity. We compute our tangible book value per share as the ratio of tangible stockholders’ equity to outstanding shares. Tangible stockholders’ equity is calculated by subtracting (and thereby effectively excluding) amounts related to the effect of goodwill from our total stockholders’ equity. We compute our tangible stockholders’ equity to tangible assets as the ratio of tangible stockholders’ equity to tangible assets, each of which we calculate by subtracting (and thereby effectively excluding) the value of our goodwill. For a reconciliation to the most directly comparable GAAP financial measure, see Table 14, GAAP to Non-GAAP Reconciliation.


Consolidated Statements of Income	Table 2
	For the Three Months Ended						For the Nine Months Ended
	September 30,		June 30,		September 30,		September 30,
(dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)	2024		2024		2023		2024		2023
Interest income
Loans and lease financing	$	205,682	$	202,068	$	194,098	$	607,594	$	551,777
Available-for-sale investment securities		12,850		14,143		18,426		41,539		55,208
Held-to-maturity investment securities		16,937		17,575		18,271		52,305		55,510
Other		14,527		11,148		9,004		38,444		20,054
Total interest income		249,996		244,934		239,799		739,882		682,549
Interest expense
Deposits		87,500		85,609		74,651		257,252		176,006
Short-term and long-term borrowings		5,397		5,953		6,838		17,303		20,057
Other		392		521		1,162		1,342		2,152
Total interest expense		93,289		92,083		82,651		275,897		198,215
Net interest income		156,707		152,851		157,148		463,985		484,334
Provision for credit losses		7,400		1,800		7,500		15,500		21,300
Net interest income after provision for credit losses		149,307		151,051		149,648		448,485		463,034
Noninterest income
Service charges on deposit accounts		7,783		7,793		7,524		23,122		22,001
Credit and debit card fees		17,533		15,861		15,748		49,567		47,507
Other service charges and fees		11,790		11,036		9,546		32,730		27,764
Trust and investment services income		9,077		9,426		9,742		28,857		28,804
Bank-owned life insurance		4,502		3,360		1,872		12,148		10,263
Other		2,603		4,292		1,665		10,003		6,129
Total noninterest income		53,288		51,768		46,097		156,427		142,468
Noninterest expense
Salaries and employee benefits		59,563		57,737		55,937		176,562		169,873
Contracted services and professional fees		14,634		16,067		16,393		46,440		50,204
Occupancy		6,945		7,377		6,711		21,263		22,047
Equipment		13,078		13,196		11,826		39,687		32,562
Regulatory assessment and fees		3,412		3,814		4,149		15,346		11,661
Advertising and marketing		1,813		1,765		2,289		6,190		6,174
Card rewards program		8,678		8,719		8,358		25,905		24,124
Other		18,024		13,411		13,720		45,653		42,186
Total noninterest expense		126,147		122,086		119,383		377,046		358,831
Income before provision for income taxes		76,448		80,733		76,362		227,866		246,671
Provision for income taxes		14,956		18,812		18,141		50,233		59,190
Net income	$	61,492	$	61,921	$	58,221	$	177,633	$	187,481
Basic earnings per share	$	0.48	$	0.48	$	0.46	$	1.39	$	1.47
Diluted earnings per share	$	0.48	$	0.48	$	0.46	$	1.38	$	1.47
Basic weighted-average outstanding shares		127,886,167		127,867,853		127,609,860		127,820,737		127,552,255
Diluted weighted-average outstanding shares		128,504,035		128,262,594		127,936,440		128,362,433		127,897,829


Consolidated Balance Sheets	Table 3
	September 30,			June 30,			December 31,			September 30,
(dollars in thousands, except share amount)	2024			2024			2023			2023
Assets
Cash and due from banks	$	252,209		$	290,501		$	185,015		$	246,028
Interest-bearing deposits in other banks		820,603			824,258			1,554,882			967,400
Investment securities:
Available-for-sale, at fair value (amortized cost: $2,290,781 as of September 30, 2024, $2,379,004 as of June 30, 2024, $2,558,675 as of December 31, 2023 and $3,172,031 as of September 30, 2023)		2,055,959			2,067,956			2,255,336			2,722,704
Held-to-maturity, at amortized cost (fair value: $3,475,143 as of September 30, 2024, $3,401,006 as of June 30, 2024, $3,574,856 as of December 31, 2023 and $3,433,029 as of September 30, 2023)		3,853,697			3,917,175			4,041,449			4,104,114
Loans held for sale		—			2,820			190			—
Loans and leases		14,241,370			14,359,899			14,353,497			14,332,335
Less: allowance for credit losses		163,700			160,517			156,533			154,795
Net loans and leases		14,077,670			14,199,382			14,196,964			14,177,540

Premises and equipment, net		287,036			283,762			281,461			277,805
Accrued interest receivable		81,875			82,512			84,417			84,327
Bank-owned life insurance		490,135			486,261			479,907			477,698
Goodwill		995,492			995,492			995,492			995,492
Mortgage servicing rights		5,236			5,395			5,699			5,855
Other assets		860,373			836,277			845,662			853,561
Total assets	$	23,780,285		$	23,991,791		$	24,926,474		$	24,912,524
Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity
Deposits:
Interest-bearing	$	13,427,674		$	13,461,365		$	13,749,095		$	13,612,493
Noninterest-bearing		6,800,028			6,857,467			7,583,562			7,898,996
Total deposits		20,227,702			20,318,832			21,332,657			21,511,489
Short-term borrowings		250,000			500,000			500,000			500,000
Retirement benefits payable		100,448			101,304			103,285			99,685
Other liabilities		554,101			521,343			504,466			450,341
Total liabilities		21,132,251			21,441,479			22,440,408			22,561,515

Stockholders’ equity
Common stock ($0.01 par value; authorized 300,000,000 shares; issued/outstanding: 141,735,601 / 127,886,167 shares as of September 30, 2024, issued/outstanding: 141,728,446 / 127,879,012 shares as of June 30, 2024, issued/outstanding: 141,340,539 / 127,618,761 shares as of December 31, 2023 and issued/outstanding: 141,330,663 / 127,609,934 shares as of September 30, 2023)		1,417			1,417			1,413			1,413
Additional paid-in capital		2,558,158			2,554,795			2,548,250			2,545,659
Retained earnings		915,062			887,176			837,859			823,895
Accumulated other comprehensive loss, net		(452,658	)		(519,132	)		(530,210	)		(648,731	)
Treasury stock (13,849,434 shares as of September 30, 2024, 13,849,434 shares as of June 30, 2024, 13,721,778 shares as of December 31, 2023 and 13,720,729 shares as of September 30, 2023)		(373,945	)		(373,944	)		(371,246	)		(371,227	)
Total stockholders’ equity		2,648,034			2,550,312			2,486,066			2,351,009
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity	$	23,780,285		$	23,991,791		$	24,926,474		$	24,912,524


Average Balances and Interest Rates																	Table 4
	Three Months Ended						Three Months Ended						Three Months Ended
	September 30, 2024						June 30, 2024						September 30, 2023
	Average		Income/		Yield/		Average		Income/		Yield/		Average		Income/		Yield/
(dollars in millions)	Balance		Expense		Rate		Balance		Expense		Rate		Balance		Expense		Rate
Earning Assets
Interest-Bearing Deposits in Other Banks	$	1,020.4	$	13.9	5.40	%	$	773.4	$	10.5	5.45	%	$	608.6	$	8.2	5.36	%
Available-for-Sale Investment Securities
Taxable		2,062.6		12.8	2.48			2,100.7		14.1	2.69			2,834.6		18.4	2.59
Non-Taxable		1.5		—	5.06			1.5		—	5.76			2.3		—	5.48
Held-to-Maturity Investment Securities
Taxable		3,288.2		13.8	1.67			3,358.2		14.4	1.71			3,544.1		15.0	1.70
Non-Taxable		602.3		3.7	2.46			602.9		4.0	2.64			604.3		4.1	2.66
Total Investment Securities		5,954.6		30.3	2.03			6,063.3		32.5	2.15			6,985.3		37.5	2.14
Loans Held for Sale		2.2		—	5.64			1.0		—	6.58			0.4		—	6.63
Loans and Leases⁽¹⁾
Commercial and industrial		2,165.3		38.0	6.98			2,201.6		38.1	6.96			2,123.5		35.7	6.66
Commercial real estate		4,278.3		71.6	6.67			4,305.6		71.5	6.68			4,381.8		71.4	6.47
Construction		1,040.7		20.3	7.74			984.8		18.5	7.57			873.7		15.5	7.05
Residential:
Residential mortgage		4,204.5		40.4	3.84			4,229.4		40.1	3.80			4,316.3		40.1	3.72
Home equity line		1,158.5		13.2	4.52			1,164.2		12.6	4.35			1,154.0		10.1	3.45
Consumer		1,035.3		18.7	7.19			1,054.1		17.7	6.74			1,172.8		18.3	6.19
Lease financing		422.2		4.0	3.72			418.3		4.3	4.09			327.3		3.7	4.48
Total Loans and Leases		14,304.8		206.2	5.74			14,358.0		202.8	5.67			14,349.4		194.8	5.39
Other Earning Assets		46.9		0.7	5.83			52.0		0.7	5.25			116.8		0.8	2.64
Total Earning Assets⁽²⁾		21,328.9		251.1	4.69			21,247.7		246.5	4.66			22,060.5		241.3	4.35
Cash and Due from Banks		242.3						240.4						276.0
Other Assets		2,475.5						2,470.8						2,391.4
Total Assets	$	24,046.7					$	23,958.9					$	24,727.9

Interest-Bearing Liabilities
Interest-Bearing Deposits
Savings	$	5,963.1	$	23.6	1.57	%	$	6,000.4	$	23.4	1.57	%	$	5,982.5	$	19.2	1.27	%
Money Market		4,179.5		31.9	3.04			4,076.7		30.6	3.02			3,907.2		24.7	2.51
Time		3,327.3		32.0	3.83			3,284.3		31.6	3.87			3,362.7		30.8	3.63
Total Interest-Bearing Deposits		13,469.9		87.5	2.58			13,361.4		85.6	2.58			13,252.4		74.7	2.23
Other Short-Term Borrowings		451.1		5.4	4.76			500.0		6.0	4.79			113.1		1.5	5.17
Long-Term Borrowings		—		—	—			—		—	—			440.2		5.3	4.83
Other Interest-Bearing Liabilities		22.4		0.4	6.97			38.2		0.5	5.48			89.1		1.2	5.17
Total Interest-Bearing Liabilities		13,943.4		93.3	2.66			13,899.6		92.1	2.66			13,894.8		82.7	2.36
Net Interest Income			$	157.8					$	154.4					$	158.6
Interest Rate Spread⁽³⁾					2.03	%					2.00	%					1.99	%
Net Interest Margin⁽⁴⁾					2.95	%					2.92	%					2.86	%
Noninterest-Bearing Demand Deposits		6,897.9						6,946.6						7,959.7
Other Liabilities		616.6						600.2						506.0
Stockholders’ Equity		2,588.8						2,512.5						2,367.4
Total Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity	$	24,046.7					$	23,958.9					$	24,727.9

⁽¹⁾Non-performing loans and leases are included in the respective average loan and lease balances. Income, if any, on such loans and leases is recognized on a cash basis.

⁽²⁾Interest income includes taxable-equivalent basis adjustments of $1.1 million, $1.5 million and $1.5 million for the three months ended September 30, 2024, June 30, 2024 and September 30, 2023, respectively.

⁽³⁾Interest rate spread is the difference between the average yield on earning assets and the average rate paid on interest-bearing liabilities, on a fully taxable-equivalent basis.

⁽⁴⁾Net interest margin is net interest income annualized for the three months ended September 30, 2024, June 30, 2024 and September 30, 2023, on a fully taxable-equivalent basis, divided by average total earning assets.


Average Balances and Interest Rates											Table 5
	Nine Months Ended						Nine Months Ended
	September 30, 2024						September 30, 2023
	Average		Income/		Yield/		Average		Income/		Yield/
(dollars in millions)	Balance		Expense		Rate		Balance		Expense		Rate
Earning Assets
Interest-Bearing Deposits in Other Banks	$	884.6	$	35.9	5.43	%	$	493.6	$	18.8	5.10	%
Available-for-Sale Investment Securities
Taxable		2,124.4		41.5	2.61			2,964.0		54.8	2.47
Non-Taxable		1.6		0.1	5.49			13.0		0.5	5.57
Held-to-Maturity Investment Securities
Taxable		3,354.0		42.7	1.70			3,615.0		46.0	1.70
Non-Taxable		602.9		11.7	2.58			608.9		11.9	2.62
Total Investment Securities		6,082.9		96.0	2.10			7,200.9		113.2	2.10
Loans Held for Sale		1.3		0.1	6.11			0.3		—	6.11
Loans and Leases⁽¹⁾
Commercial and industrial		2,177.2		113.3	6.95			2,193.8		104.3	6.35
Commercial real estate		4,302.4		213.4	6.62			4,224.7		194.6	6.16
Construction		983.6		56.2	7.63			874.0		45.4	6.95
Residential:
Residential mortgage		4,232.6		122.5	3.86			4,312.4		117.6	3.64
Home equity line		1,164.9		37.8	4.34			1,116.4		27.9	3.35
Consumer		1,057.6		54.4	6.87			1,194.1		53.2	5.95
Lease financing		406.8		11.9	3.90			322.9		10.5	4.34
Total Loans and Leases		14,325.1		609.5	5.68			14,238.3		553.5	5.19
Other Earning Assets		58.8		2.5	5.69			107.6		1.3	1.53
Total Earning Assets⁽²⁾		21,352.7		744.0	4.65			22,040.7		686.8	4.16
Cash and Due from Banks		242.4						273.3
Other Assets		2,469.1						2,385.8
Total Assets	$	24,064.2					$	24,699.8

Interest-Bearing Liabilities
Interest-Bearing Deposits
Savings	$	6,007.6	$	70.5	1.57	%	$	6,144.1	$	49.1	1.07	%
Money Market		4,067.5		91.3	3.00			3,857.0		58.6	2.03
Time		3,312.3		95.5	3.85			2,921.8		68.3	3.12
Total Interest-Bearing Deposits		13,387.4		257.3	2.57			12,922.9		176.0	1.82
Federal Funds Purchased		—		—	—			23.0		0.8	4.45
Other Short-Term Borrowings		483.6		17.3	4.78			176.5		6.8	5.15
Long-Term Borrowings		—		—	—			349.8		12.5	4.78
Other Interest-Bearing Liabilities		31.1		1.3	5.75			62.1		2.1	4.63
Total Interest-Bearing Liabilities		13,902.1		275.9	2.65			13,534.3		198.2	1.96
Net Interest Income			$	468.1					$	488.6
Interest Rate Spread⁽³⁾					2.00	%					2.20	%
Net Interest Margin⁽⁴⁾					2.93	%					2.96	%
Noninterest-Bearing Demand Deposits		7,028.4						8,322.2
Other Liabilities		600.8						506.0
Stockholders’ Equity		2,532.9						2,337.3
Total Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity	$	24,064.2					$	24,699.8

⁽¹⁾Non-performing loans and leases are included in the respective average loan and lease balances. Income, if any, on such loans and leases is recognized on a cash basis.

⁽²⁾Interest income includes taxable-equivalent basis adjustments of $4.1 million and $4.2 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2024 and 2023, respectively.

⁽³⁾Interest rate spread is the difference between the average yield on earning assets and the average rate paid on interest-bearing liabilities, on a fully taxable-equivalent basis.

⁽⁴⁾Net interest margin is net interest income annualized for the nine months ended September 30, 2024 and 2023, on a fully taxable-equivalent basis, divided by average total earning assets.

Analysis of Change in Net Interest Income

Table 6

Three Months Ended September 30, 2024

Compared to June 30, 2024

(dollars in millions)

Volume

Rate

Total ⁽¹⁾

Change in Interest Income:

Interest-Bearing Deposits in Other Banks

$

3.5

$

(0.1

)

$

3.4

Available-for-Sale Investment Securities

Taxable

(0.2

)

(1.1

)

(1.3

)

Held-to-Maturity Investment Securities

Taxable

(0.3

)

(0.3

)

(0.6

)

Non-Taxable

—

(0.3

)

(0.3

)

Total Investment Securities

(0.5

)

(1.7

)

(2.2

)

Loans and Leases

Commercial and industrial

(0.3

)

0.2

(0.1

)

Commercial real estate

—

0.1

Construction

1.3

0.5

1.8

Residential:

Residential mortgage

(0.2

)

0.5

0.3

Home equity line

—

0.6

Consumer

(0.3

)

1.3

1.0

Lease financing

—

(0.3

)

(0.3

)

Total Loans and Leases

0.5

2.9

3.4

Other Earning Assets

(0.1

)

0.1

—

Total Change in Interest Income

3.4

1.2

4.6

Change in Interest Expense:

Interest-Bearing Deposits

Savings

—

0.2

Money Market

1.0

0.3

1.3

Time

0.6

(0.2

)

0.4

Total Interest-Bearing Deposits

1.6

0.3

1.9

Other Short-Term Borrowings

(0.5

)

(0.1

)

(0.6

)

Other Interest-Bearing Liabilities

(0.2

)

0.1

(0.1

)

Total Change in Interest Expense

0.9

0.3

1.2

Change in Net Interest Income

$

2.5

$

0.9

$

3.4

⁽¹⁾The change in interest income and expense not solely due to changes in volume or rate has been allocated on a pro-rata basis to the volume and rate columns.

Analysis of Change in Net Interest Income

Table 7

Three Months Ended September 30, 2024

Compared to September 30, 2023

(dollars in millions)

Volume

Rate

Total ⁽¹⁾

Change in Interest Income:

Interest-Bearing Deposits in Other Banks

$

5.6

$

0.1

$

5.7

Available-for-Sale Investment Securities

Taxable

(4.8

)

(0.8

)

(5.6

)

Held-to-Maturity Investment Securities

Taxable

(1.0

)

(0.2

)

(1.2

)

Non-Taxable

—

(0.4

)

(0.4

)

Total Investment Securities

(5.8

)

(1.4

)

(7.2

)

Loans and Leases

Commercial and industrial

0.7

1.6

2.3

Commercial real estate

(1.8

)

2.0

0.2

Construction

3.2

1.6

4.8

Residential:

Residential mortgage

(1.0

)

1.3

0.3

Home equity line

—

3.1

Consumer

(2.3

)

2.7

0.4

Lease financing

0.9

(0.6

)

0.3

Total Loans and Leases

(0.3

)

11.7

11.4

Other Earning Assets

(0.7

)

0.6

(0.1

)

Total Change in Interest Income

(1.2

)

11.0

9.8

Change in Interest Expense:

Interest-Bearing Deposits

Savings

(0.1

)

4.5

4.4

Money Market

1.8

5.4

7.2

Time

(0.3

)

1.5

1.2

Total Interest-Bearing Deposits

1.4

11.4

12.8

Other Short-Term Borrowings

4.0

(0.1

)

3.9

Long-Term Borrowings

(2.6

)

(2.7

)

(5.3

)

Other Interest-Bearing Liabilities

(1.1

)

0.3

(0.8

)

Total Change in Interest Expense

1.7

8.9

10.6

Change in Net Interest Income

$

(2.9

)

$

2.1

$

(0.8

)

⁽¹⁾The change in interest income and expense not solely due to changes in volume or rate has been allocated on a pro-rata basis to the volume and rate columns.

Analysis of Change in Net Interest Income

Table 8

Nine Months Ended September 30, 2024

Compared to September 30, 2023

(dollars in millions)

Volume

Rate

Total ⁽¹⁾

Change in Interest Income:

Interest-Bearing Deposits in Other Banks

$

15.8

$

1.3

$

17.1

Available-for-Sale Investment Securities

Taxable

(16.3

)

3.0

(13.3

)

Non-Taxable

(0.4

)

—

(0.4

)

Held-to-Maturity Investment Securities

Taxable

(3.3

)

—

(3.3

)

Non-Taxable

(0.1

)

(0.1

)

(0.2

)

Total Investment Securities

(20.1

)

2.9

(17.2

)

Loans Held for Sale

0.1

—

0.1

Loans and Leases

Commercial and industrial

(0.8

)

9.8

9.0

Commercial real estate

3.7

15.1

18.8

Construction

6.1

4.7

10.8

Residential:

Residential mortgage

(2.2

)

7.1

4.9

Home equity line

1.3

8.6

9.9

Consumer

(6.5

)

7.7

1.2

Lease financing

2.5

(1.1

)

1.4

Total Loans and Leases

4.1

51.9

56.0

Other Earning Assets

(0.8

)

2.0

1.2

Total Change in Interest Income

(0.9

)

58.1

57.2

Change in Interest Expense:

Interest-Bearing Deposits

Savings

(1.1

)

22.5

21.4

Money Market

3.4

29.3

32.7

Time

9.9

17.3

27.2

Total Interest-Bearing Deposits

12.2

69.1

81.3

Federal Funds Purchased

(0.4

)

(0.4

)

(0.8

)

Other Short-Term Borrowings

11.0

(0.5

)

10.5

Long-Term Borrowings

(6.3

)

(6.2

)

(12.5

)

Other Interest-Bearing Liabilities

(1.2

)

0.4

(0.8

)

Total Change in Interest Expense

15.3

62.4

77.7

Change in Net Interest Income

$

(16.2

)

$

(4.3

)

$

(20.5

)

⁽¹⁾The change in interest income and expense not solely due to changes in volume or rate has been allocated on a pro-rata basis to the volume and rate columns.


Loans and Leases								Table 9
	September 30,		June 30,		December 31,		September 30,
(dollars in thousands)	2024		2024		2023		2023
Commercial and industrial	$	2,110,077	$	2,208,690	$	2,165,349	$	2,101,442
Commercial real estate		4,265,289		4,305,017		4,340,243		4,387,751
Construction		1,056,249		1,017,649		900,292		885,112
Residential:
Residential mortgage		4,187,060		4,216,416		4,283,315		4,303,924
Home equity line		1,159,823		1,159,833		1,174,588		1,167,388
Total residential		5,346,883		5,376,249		5,457,903		5,471,312
Consumer		1,030,044		1,027,104		1,109,901		1,154,203
Lease financing		432,828		425,190		379,809		332,515
Total loans and leases	$	14,241,370	$	14,359,899	$	14,353,497	$	14,332,335


Deposits								Table 10
	September 30,		June 30,		December 31,		September 30,
(dollars in thousands)	2024		2024		2023		2023
Demand	$	6,800,028	$	6,857,467	$	7,583,562	$	7,898,996
Savings		5,896,029		6,055,051		6,445,084		6,028,308
Money Market		4,129,381		4,111,609		3,847,853		3,923,054
Time		3,402,264		3,294,705		3,456,158		3,661,131
Total Deposits	$	20,227,702	$	20,318,832	$	21,332,657	$	21,511,489


Non-Performing Assets and Accruing Loans and Leases Past Due 90 Days or More								Table 11
	September 30,		June 30,		December 31,		September 30,
(dollars in thousands)	2024		2024		2023		2023
Non-Performing Assets
Non-Accrual Loans and Leases
Commercial Loans:
Commercial and industrial	$	934	$	1,084	$	970	$	988
Commercial real estate		152		3,085		2,953		—
Construction		—		447		—		—
Total Commercial Loans		1,086		4,616		3,923		988
Residential Loans:
Residential mortgage		9,103		7,273		7,620		7,435
Home equity line		7,645		6,124		7,052		6,200
Total Residential Loans		16,748		13,397		14,672		13,635
Total Non-Accrual Loans and Leases		17,834		18,013		18,595		14,623
Total Non-Performing Assets	$	17,834	$	18,013	$	18,595	$	14,623

Accruing Loans and Leases Past Due 90 Days or More
Commercial Loans:
Commercial and industrial	$	529	$	110	$	494	$	289
Commercial real estate		568		—		300		170
Total Commercial Loans		1,097		110		794		459
Residential mortgage		931		1,820		—		1,430
Consumer		2,515		1,835		2,702		1,681
Total Accruing Loans and Leases Past Due 90 Days or More	$	4,543	$	3,765	$	3,496	$	3,570

Total Loans and Leases	$	14,241,370	$	14,359,899	$	14,353,497	$	14,332,335


Allowance for Credit Losses and Reserve for Unfunded Commitments																		Table 12
	For the Three Months Ended												For the Nine Months Ended
	September 30,				June 30,				September 30,				September 30,				September 30,
(dollars in thousands)	2024				2024				2023				2024				2023
Balance at Beginning of Period	$	193,930			$	194,649			$	184,780			$	192,138			$	177,735
Loans and Leases Charged-Off
Commercial Loans:
Commercial and industrial		(1,178	)			(677	)			(784	)			(2,764	)			(2,572	)
Commercial real estate		(400	)			—				—				(400	)			—
Total Commercial Loans		(1,578	)			(677	)			(784	)			(3,164	)			(2,572	)
Residential Loans:
Residential mortgage		—				—				—				—				(122	)
Home equity line		—				—				—				—				(272	)
Total Residential Loans		—				—				—				—				(394	)
Consumer		(4,192	)			(4,182	)			(3,665	)			(13,228	)			(12,963	)
Total Loans and Leases Charged-Off		(5,770	)			(4,859	)			(4,449	)			(16,392	)			(15,929	)
Recoveries on Loans and Leases Previously Charged-Off
Commercial and industrial		160				250				2,637				621				3,175
Residential Loans:
Residential mortgage		31				28				53				89				110
Home equity line		86				112				303				242				539
Total Residential Loans		117				140				356				331				649
Consumer		1,560				1,950				1,746				5,199				5,640
Total Recoveries on Loans and Leases Previously Charged-Off		1,837				2,340				4,739				6,151				9,464
Net Loans and Leases (Charged-Off) Recovered		(3,933	)			(2,519	)			290				(10,241	)			(6,465	)
Provision for Credit Losses		7,400				1,800				7,500				15,500				21,300
Balance at End of Period	$	197,397			$	193,930			$	192,570			$	197,397			$	192,570
Components:
Allowance for Credit Losses	$	163,700			$	160,517			$	154,795			$	163,700			$	154,795
Reserve for Unfunded Commitments		33,697				33,413				37,775				33,697				37,775
Total Allowance for Credit Losses and Reserve for Unfunded Commitments	$	197,397			$	193,930			$	192,570			$	197,397			$	192,570
Average Loans and Leases Outstanding	$	14,304,806			$	14,358,049			$	14,349,402			$	14,325,065			$	14,238,309
Ratio of Net Loans and Leases Charged-Off (Recovered) to Average Loans and Leases Outstanding⁽¹⁾		0.11		%		0.07		%		(0.01	)	%		0.10		%		0.06		%
Ratio of Allowance for Credit Losses for Loans and Leases to Loans and Leases Outstanding		1.15		%		1.12		%		1.08		%		1.15		%		1.08		%
Ratio of Allowance for Credit Losses for Loans and Leases to Non-accrual Loans and Leases		9.18x				8.91x				10.59x				9.18x				10.59x

⁽¹⁾Annualized for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2024 and 2023 and three months ended June 30, 2024.

Loans and Leases by Year of Origination and Credit Quality Indicator

Table 13

Revolving

Loans

Converted

Term Loans

Revolving

to Term

Amortized Cost Basis by Origination Year

Loans

Amortized

(dollars in thousands)

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

Prior

Cost Basis

Total

Commercial Lending

Commercial and Industrial

Risk rating:

Pass

$

100,174

$

82,175

$

191,861

$

256,997

$

20,866

$

266,720

$

1,026,457

$

13,396

$

1,958,646

Special Mention

303

1

7,327

48

398

1,371

18,239

—

27,687

Substandard

—

8,251

219

358

2,033

32,296

—

43,157

Other ⁽¹⁾

10,797

10,542

7,779

3,074

1,052

1,723

45,620

—

80,587

Total Commercial and Industrial

111,274

92,718

215,218

260,338

22,674

271,847

1,122,612

13,396

2,110,077

Current period gross charge-offs

—

578

333

89

221

1,543

—

2,764

Commercial Real Estate

Risk rating:

Pass

118,884

347,480

810,746

649,133

325,887

1,774,529

87,188

7,760

4,121,607

Special Mention

3,587

2,261

7,537

41,384

3,306

11,973

7,815

—

77,863

Substandard

—

54,984

1,003

—

9,548

149

—

65,684

Other ⁽¹⁾

—

135

—

135

Total Commercial Real Estate

122,471

349,741

873,267

691,520

329,193

1,796,185

95,152

7,760

4,265,289

Current period gross charge-offs

—

400

—

400

Construction

Risk rating:

Pass

61,677

246,176

361,974

241,212

58,820

46,344

4,484

—

1,020,687

Special Mention

—

164

—

164

Other ⁽¹⁾

4,970

9,468

12,022

3,575

1,199

3,463

701

—

35,398

Total Construction

66,647

255,644

373,996

244,787

60,019

49,971

5,185

—

1,056,249

Current period gross charge-offs

—

Lease Financing

Risk rating:

Pass

126,380

105,523

66,764

15,483

23,133

89,254

—

426,537

Special Mention

—

42

100

300

5

—

447

Substandard

4,899

602

343

—

5,844

Total Lease Financing

131,279

106,167

67,207

15,783

23,138

89,254

—

432,828

Current period gross charge-offs

—

Total Commercial Lending

$

431,671

$

804,270

$

1,529,688

$

1,212,428

$

435,024

$

2,207,257

$

1,222,949

$

21,156

$

7,864,443

Current period gross charge-offs

$

—

$

578

$

333

$

89

$

221

$

1,943

$

—

$

—

$

3,164

Revolving

Loans

Converted

Term Loans

Revolving

to Term

Amortized Cost Basis by Origination Year

Loans

(continued)

Amortized

(dollars in thousands)

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

Prior

Cost Basis

Total

Residential Lending

Residential Mortgage

FICO:

740 and greater

$

113,307

$

206,224

$

504,141

$

956,983

$

503,160

$

1,129,857

$

—

$

—

$

3,413,672

680 – 739

11,614

28,638

65,128

109,018

66,719

157,263

—

438,380

620 – 679

1,519

1,792

22,921

19,854

11,651

37,979

—

95,716

550 – 619

—

896

3,703

6,707

2,269

15,751

—

29,326

Less than 550

—

286

2,380

3,818

2,959

5,569

—

15,012

No Score ⁽³⁾

543

7,117

16,923

10,512

5,553

52,526

—

93,174

Other ⁽²⁾

8,148

12,786

16,721

14,776

11,222

30,022

8,105

—

101,780

Total Residential Mortgage

135,131

257,739

631,917

1,121,668

603,533

1,428,967

8,105

—

4,187,060

Current period gross charge-offs

—

Home Equity Line

FICO:

740 and greater

—

930,909

1,730

932,639

680 – 739

—

167,097

1,137

168,234

620 – 679

—

36,540

985

37,525

550 – 619

—

14,514

581

15,095

Less than 550

—

4,477

571

5,048

No Score ⁽³⁾

—

1,282

—

1,282

Total Home Equity Line

—

1,154,819

5,004

1,159,823

Current period gross charge-offs

—

Total Residential Lending

$

135,131

$

257,739

$

631,917

$

1,121,668

$

603,533

$

1,428,967

$

1,162,924

$

5,004

$

5,346,883

Current period gross charge-offs

$

—

$

—

$

—

$

—

$

—

$

—

$

—

$

—

$

—

Consumer Lending

FICO:

740 and greater

71,777

71,423

94,710

51,952

18,512

10,435

121,278

128

440,215

680 – 739

51,651

51,667

49,864

23,959

9,995

7,497

77,278

525

272,436

620 – 679

21,223

20,604

21,700

12,515

5,155

5,577

35,665

851

123,290

550 – 619

4,116

7,348

9,802

5,983

2,862

3,862

12,674

825

47,472

Less than 550

1,071

3,266

6,247

3,999

1,783

2,492

4,836

525

24,219

No Score ⁽³⁾

2,291

117

47

—

7

8

42,658

205

45,333

Other ⁽²⁾

—

296

911

101

981

74,790

—

77,079

Total Consumer Lending

$

152,129

$

154,425

$

182,666

$

99,319

$

38,415

$

30,852

$

369,179

$

3,059

$

1,030,044

Current period gross charge-offs

$

385

$

1,403

$

2,107

$

1,085

$

518

$

2,234

$

4,952

$

544

$

13,228

Total Loans and Leases

$

718,931

$

1,216,434

$

2,344,271

$

2,433,415

$

1,076,972

$

3,667,076

$

2,755,052

$

29,219

$

14,241,370

Current period gross charge-offs

$

385

$

1,981

$

2,440

$

1,174

$

739

$

4,177

$

4,952

$

544

$

16,392

⁽¹⁾Other credit quality indicators used for monitoring purposes are primarily FICO scores. The majority of the loans in this population were originated to borrowers with a prime FICO score. As of September 30, 2024, the majority of the loans in this population were current.

⁽²⁾Other credit quality indicators used for monitoring purposes are primarily internal risk ratings. The majority of the loans in this population were graded with a “Pass” rating. As of September 30, 2024, the majority of the loans in this population were current.

⁽³⁾No FICO scores are primarily related to loans and leases extended to non-residents. Loans and leases of this nature are primarily secured by collateral and/or are closely monitored for performance.


GAAP to Non-GAAP Reconciliation	Table 14
	For the Three Months Ended									For the Nine Months Ended
	September 30,			June 30,			September 30,			September 30,
(dollars in thousands)	2024			2024			2023			2024			2023
Income Statement Data:
Net income	$	61,492		$	61,921		$	58,221		$	177,633		$	187,481

Average total stockholders’ equity	$	2,588,806		$	2,512,471		$	2,367,422		$	2,532,911		$	2,337,292
Less: average goodwill		995,492			995,492			995,492			995,492			995,492
Average tangible stockholders’ equity	$	1,593,314		$	1,516,979		$	1,371,930		$	1,537,419		$	1,341,800

Average total assets	$	24,046,696		$	23,958,913		$	24,727,893		$	24,064,208		$	24,699,826
Less: average goodwill		995,492			995,492			995,492			995,492			995,492
Average tangible assets	$	23,051,204		$	22,963,421		$	23,732,401		$	23,068,716		$	23,704,334

Return on average total stockholders’ equity⁽¹⁾		9.45	%		9.91	%		9.76	%		9.37	%		10.72	%
Return on average tangible stockholders’ equity (non-GAAP)⁽¹⁾		15.35	%		16.42	%		16.84	%		15.43	%		18.68	%

Return on average total assets⁽¹⁾		1.02	%		1.04	%		0.93	%		0.99	%		1.01	%
Return on average tangible assets (non-GAAP)⁽¹⁾		1.06	%		1.08	%		0.97	%		1.03	%		1.06	%



	As of			As of			As of			As of
	September 30,			June 30,			December 31,			September 30,
(dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)	2024			2024			2023			2023
Balance Sheet Data:
Total stockholders’ equity	$	2,648,034		$	2,550,312		$	2,486,066		$	2,351,009
Less: goodwill		995,492			995,492			995,492			995,492
Tangible stockholders’ equity	$	1,652,542		$	1,554,820		$	1,490,574		$	1,355,517

Total assets	$	23,780,285		$	23,991,791		$	24,926,474		$	24,912,524
Less: goodwill		995,492			995,492			995,492			995,492
Tangible assets	$	22,784,793		$	22,996,299		$	23,930,982		$	23,917,032

Shares outstanding		127,886,167			127,879,012			127,618,761			127,609,934

Total stockholders’ equity to total assets		11.14	%		10.63	%		9.97	%		9.44	%
Tangible stockholders’ equity to tangible assets (non-GAAP)		7.25	%		6.76	%		6.23	%		5.67	%

Book value per share	$	20.71		$	19.94		$	19.48		$	18.42
Tangible book value per share (non-GAAP)	$	12.92		$	12.16		$	11.68		$	10.62

⁽¹⁾Annualized for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2024 and 2023 and three months ended June 30, 2024.

The MIL Network –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI: LIS Technologies Inc. Chief Executive Officer Christo Liebenberg Presented at the University of Tennessee Nuclear Engineering Colloquium on October 23, 2024

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

Oak Ridge, Tennessee, Oct. 25, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — LIS Technologies Inc. (“LIST” or “the Company”), a proprietary developer of advanced laser technology and the only USA-origin and patented laser uranium enrichment company, today announced that Christo Liebenberg, Chief Executive Officer of LIS Technologies Inc. presented at the University of Tennessee’s Nuclear Engineering Colloquium, hosted by the Nuclear Engineering Department.

“We were delighted to welcome our neighbor Mr. Liebenberg to the Nuclear Engineering Department and the University of Tennessee,” said Ashley Nelkin, Academic Specialist & Events of the University of Tennessee Department of Nuclear Engineering. “This Colloquium provides our students and faculty with a rare opportunity to engage with a leading figure in laser isotope separation and gain first-hand insights into this innovative technology.”

Figure 1 – LIS Technologies Inc. Chief Executive Officer Christo Liebenberg will present at the University of Tennessee’s Nuclear Energy Colloquium on October 23, 2024.

The Colloquium included a 45-minute presentation by Mr. Liebenberg, focusing on a comparison of 1st, 2nd, and 3rd generation enrichment technologies, with a particular emphasis on the similarities and differences among various laser enrichment methods. The discussion also covered the fundamentals and requirements of laser enrichment, highlighting 16μm and 5μm MLIS systems. Additionally, key features and benefits of the CRISLA process will be showcased. A 15-minute Q&A session will follow the presentation.

“The University of Tennessee’s Nuclear Engineering Department fosters some of the brightest talent in the country,” said Christo Liebenberg, CEO of LIS Technologies Inc. “It was an honor to lead this seminar and help inspire the next generation of nuclear engineers to push the boundaries of innovation. This event also provides a valuable opportunity to teach about the capabilities of our laser isotope separation technology and better understand its potential. This was an engaging and rewarding seminar.”

About LIS Technologies Inc.

LIS Technologies Inc. (LIST) is a USA based, proprietary developer of a patented advanced laser technology, making use of infrared wavelengths to selectively excite the molecules of desired isotopes to separate them from other isotopes. The Laser Isotope Separation Technology (L.I.S.T) has a huge range of applications, including being the only USA-origin (and patented) laser uranium enrichment company, and several major advantages over traditional methods such as gas diffusion, centrifuges, and prior art laser enrichment. The LIST proprietary laser-based process is more energy-efficient and has the potential to be deployed with highly competitive capital and operational costs. L.I.S.T is optimized for LEU (Low Enriched Uranium) for existing civilian nuclear power plants, High-Assay LEU (HALEU) for the next generation of Small Modular Reactors (SMR) and Microreactors, the production of stable isotopes for medical and scientific research, and applications in quantum computing manufacturing for semiconductor technologies. The Company employs a world class nuclear technical team working alongside leading nuclear entrepreneurs and industry professionals, possessing strong relationships with government and private nuclear industries.

For more information please visit: LaserIsTech.com

For further information, please contact:

Email: info@laseristech.com

Telephone: 800-388-5492

Follow us on Twitter

Follow us on LinkedIn

Forward Looking Statements

This news release contains “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. In this context, forward-looking statements mean statements related to future events, which may impact our expected future business and financial performance, and often contain words such as “expects”, “anticipates”, “intends”, “plans”, “believes”, “will”, “should”, “could”, “would” or “may” and other words of similar meaning. These forward-looking statements are based on information available to us as of the date of this news release and represent management’s current views and assumptions. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance, events or results and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors, which may be beyond our control. For LIS Technologies Inc., particular risks and uncertainties that could cause our actual future results to differ materially from those expressed in our forward-looking statements include but are not limited to the following which are, and will be, exacerbated by any worsening of global business and economic environment: (i) risks related to the development of new or advanced technology, including difficulties with design and testing, cost overruns, development of competitive technology, loss of key individuals and uncertainty of success of patent filing, (ii) our ability to obtain contracts and funding to be able to continue operations and (iii) risks related to uncertainty regarding our ability to commercially deploy a competitive laser enrichment technology, (iv) risks related to the impact of government regulation and policies including by the DOE and the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission; and other risks and uncertainties discussed in this and our other filings with the SEC. Only after successful completion of our Phase 2 Pilot Plant demonstration will LIS Technologies be able to make realistic economic predictions for a Commercial Facility. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which apply only as of the date of this news release. These factors may not constitute all factors that could cause actual results to differ from those discussed in any forward-looking statement. Accordingly, forward-looking statements should not be relied upon as a predictor of actual results. We do not undertake to update our forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances that may arise after the date of this news release, except as required by law.

Attachment

The MIL Network –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI: Oxford Lane Capital Corp. Schedules Second Fiscal Quarter Earnings Release and Conference Call for November 1, 2024

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

GREENWICH, Conn., Oct. 25, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Oxford Lane Capital Corp. (Nasdaq: OXLC) (NasdaqGS: OXLCP) (NasdaqGS: OXLCL) (NasdaqGS: OXLCO) (NasdaqGS: OXLCZ) (NasdaqGS: OXLCN) (NasdaqGS: OXLCI) announced today that it will hold a conference call to discuss its second fiscal quarter earnings on Friday, November 1, 2024 at 9:00 AM ET. The toll-free dial-in number is 1-833-470-1428, access code number 436588. There will be a recorded replay of the call available for 30 days after the call. If you are interested in hearing the recording, please dial 1-866-813-9403. The replay pass-code number is 813197.

About Oxford Lane Capital Corp.

Oxford Lane Capital Corp. is a publicly-traded registered closed-end management investment company principally investing in debt and equity tranches of collateralized loan obligation (“CLO”) vehicles. CLO investments may also include warehouse facilities, which are financing structures intended to aggregate loans that may be used to form the basis of a CLO vehicle.

Contact:
Bruce Rubin
203-983-5280

The MIL Network –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI Economics: Inaugural ESG Forum Wraps Up in Abidjan with Stakeholders Uniting around Vision for an Africa ESG Hub

Source: African Development Bank Group

(From left) Olumide Lala, Executive Director, Climate Transition Limited with Natenin Coulibaly, General Manager Corporate Services, MTN; Armande Laetitia Ohouo-Lath, Director of Sustainable Development, SIFCA; Rachael Antwi, Group Sustainability and Environmental Risk, ECOBANK and Azeez Alayande, ESG Manager, ENGIE Nigeria during a session on Challenges and Opportunities in ESG Reporting in Africa at the Africa ESG Forum

Two days of intensive discussions on building a sustainable finance ecosystem for Africa ended in Abidjan on Tuesday with stakeholders from government and the private sector expressing strong support for an Africa-focused Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) Data Hub.

The inaugural Africa ESG Forum, held at the Sofitel Hotel in Abidjan, Côte d’Ivoire, was organised by the African Development Bank, the Multilateral Cooperation Centre for Development Finance, and Making Finance Work for Africa. It featured discussions on ESG reporting challenges and investor expectations, and concluded with the inaugural meeting of the ESG working group.

Representatives of various participating institutions shared their ESG implementation experiences. Moubarak Moukaila of the West African Development Bank highlighted the Bank’s progress in sustainable project development. “We created, at the beginning of this year, a unit that supports project development. We have developed, within six months, three projects with GEM and two projects with Green Climate Fund.”

Ahlem Kefi, Impact & Sustainability Officer at AfricInvest, outlined the firm’s comprehensive approach to sustainability assessments. “We start looking at the ESG risks and the ESG data from the first screening phase,” she said. “We don’t call this ESG due diligence, we call it impact and sustainability due diligence.”

Mostafa Hawas of the Egyptian Stock Exchange offered practical insights into implementing ESG reporting requirements. He outlined how they began with “a very, very simple survey” distributed to listed companies, and emphasized the importance of gradual implementation to build awareness, before introducing more detailed requirements.

Kuhle Sojola, ESG Engagement Specialist at Sanlam Investments, addressed the critical issue of greenwashing – the misleading use of advertising and marketing to falsely portray an organization’s products, goals, or policies as being environmentally friendly – in corporate reporting. “We use engagement as a tool to mitigate or reduce the risk of greenwashing,” she said, adding that, when a company’s reported metrics differ significantly from those of their peer group, “that is usually an indication that there could be a level of greenwashing there.”

Participants at the Forum envisioned the proposed African ESG Hub as a unifying vehicle for sustainability issues in Africa, enhancing awareness among local entities and international investors. In preparation for its establishment, they acknowledged that with 80 percent of African companies being SMEs, engaging the sector would be critical in advancing ESG reporting and sustainable finance across the continent. In addition, they outlined plans for the proposed Hub, including ensuring that it provides a credible platform for training and technical assistance, and for sharing best practices and case studies.

MIL OSI Economics –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI: AI-Powered Firm HIVE PT Launches Global Talent Hunt with Competitive Challenges

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

Photo by HIVE PT

CASCAIS, Portugal, Oct. 25, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — HIVE PT, a global leader in proprietary trading, offers innovative trading challenges that attract top-tier talent worldwide. With the launch of its flagship trading programs, the HIVE Challenge and Queen Bee Challenge, HIVE PT is transforming how traders access capital and develop their skills.

The company’s approach to proprietary trading combines advanced technology with a deep commitment to education, allowing traders to showcase their skills in a risk-free environment. Successful participants in these challenges gain access to capital ranging from $10,000 to $200,000, with the opportunity to earn up to an 80/20 profit split—making HIVE PT’s programs some of the most attractive in the industry.

Creating Opportunities for Top Trading Talent

HIVE PT’s proprietary trading model is built on the belief that talent should be rewarded and developed. Offering traders a chance to demonstrate their abilities without risking personal funds has attracted an international pool of talent. The firm’s flexible trading conditions, which include no time limits for completing challenges, have further enhanced its appeal.

Traders from North America, Europe, and Asia have already taken advantage of the platform, with plans to expand into South America and the Middle East by 2025.

“We’ve seen a tremendous response to our trading challenges, not just because of the profit potential, but because we’ve created a system that truly nurtures traders,” said Goni Shimi, CEO of HIVE PT. “Our platform is designed to reduce the stress associated with traditional trading evaluations, giving traders the time and space to succeed.”

Market Trends and Projections

Valued at over $150 billion, the global proprietary trading sector is expected to grow at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 8.4% through 2030. This surge is driven by developments in algorithmic trading, artificial intelligence, and real-time data analytics—all areas where HIVE PT excels. Leveraging these technologies allows HIVE PT to enhance its own trading strategies and provides its traders with the right tools to stay competitive in the market.

“What makes HIVE PT different is our integration of AI and machine learning to support traders,” says Goni Shimi. “Our platform doesn’t just give them the ability to trade—it helps them become better traders through data-driven insights and real-time performance tracking.”

A Community-Driven Approach

In addition to offering advanced trading tools and challenges, HIVE PT has made significant strides in creating a supportive community for traders. The firm’s online academy provides comprehensive educational resources, including courses, videos, and market analysis, helping traders at all levels improve their strategies. This commitment to education is a cornerstone of HIVE PT’s mission to foster a global network of successfully funded traders.

As part of its medium-term goals, HIVE PT is focused on building a solid community of traders who can share insights and learn from one another. The company has also introduced a mentorship program, which pairs experienced traders with newcomers to the field, ensuring that traders have the guidance they need to master the complexities of financial markets.

“Our goal is to create a platform where traders succeed financially and grow intellectually. We want to be known not just as a trading firm but as a place where traders come to learn, share, and thrive,” Goni Shimi says.

The company is set to expand its global reach and influence. As proprietary trading continues to change, HIVE PT’s emphasis on transparency, education, and ethical trading practices will ensure its lasting impact on financial markets.

“Our mission is simple: to provide traders with the resources and support they need to succeed. As the markets change, so will we, always staying ahead of the game,” Goni Shimi concludes.

Visit HIVE PT’s website to learn more about its proprietary trading programs and educational resources.

About HIVE PT

HIVE PT is a proprietary trading firm that provides trading opportunities for skilled traders in various financial markets, including stocks, forex, and commodities. Focusing on education, transparency, and ethical trading practices, the company offers traders access to significant capital through its premium programs.

Contact Information

Contact Person: Goni Shimi, CEO
Company: HIVE PT
Email: support@HIVE-pt.com
Website: https://HIVE-pt.com/

Socials

Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiveproptrading/
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-gafpqu6nF4TH7gkLYDXIQ
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/hive-pt/
Trustpilot: https://www.trustpilot.com/review/hive-pt.com
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=61560087040874
Twitter: https://x.com/Hiveproptrading
TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@hiveproptrading?lang=en
Discord: https://discord.gg/YAH8tYBGGn
WhatsApp: https://wa.me/351912881182

A photo accompanying this announcement is available at https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/ba866118-9111-4b49-bce0-f328fc7e3dce

The MIL Network –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI Video: Start the Weekend with a…

Source: US Army (video statements)

About the U.S. Army:

The Army Mission – our purpose – remains constant: To deploy, fight and win our nation’s wars by providing ready, prompt & sustained land dominance by Army forces across the full spectrum of conflict as part of the joint force.

Interested in joining the U.S. Army?
Visit: spr.ly/6001igl5L

Connect with the U.S. Army online:
Web: https://www.army.mil
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/USarmy/
X: https://www.twitter.com/USArmy
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/usarmy/
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/us-army
#USArmy #Soldiers #Military #Shorts #BANG

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROP7I-OB03Q

MIL OSI Video –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI Video: 80th Anniversary at Leyte Landing | U.S. Army

Source: US Army (video statements)

Maj. Gen. Matthew McFarlane, deputy commanding general of I Corps, gives a speech during the 80th anniversary of the Leyte Landing celebration in Palo, Leyte, Philippines, on Oct. 20, 2024. The event commemorated the historic Leyte Landing on Oct. 20, 1944, which liberated the Philippines during World War II.

About the U.S. Army:

The Army Mission – our purpose – remains constant: To deploy, fight and win our nation’s wars by providing ready, prompt & sustained land dominance by Army forces across the full spectrum of conflict as part of the joint force.

Interested in joining the U.S. Army?
Visit: spr.ly/6001igl5L

Connect with the U.S. Army online:
Web: https://www.army.mil
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/USarmy/
X: https://www.twitter.com/USArmy
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/usarmy/
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/us-army
#USArmy #Soldiers #Military #80thAnniversary #LeyteLanding

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mAl5EY7jfcM

MIL OSI Video –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI USA: Buyer Beware: Off-brand Ozempic, Zepbound and Other Weight Loss Products Carry Undisclosed Risks

Source: US State of Connecticut

In just a few years, brand-name injectable drugs such as Ozempic, Wegovy, Mounjaro and Zepbound have rocketed to fame as billion-dollar annual sellers for weight loss as well as to control blood sugar levels and reduce the risk of heart disease.

But the price of these injections is steep: They cost about US$800-$1,000 per month, and if used for weight loss alone, they are not covered by most insurance policies. Both drugs mimic the naturally occurring hormone GLP-1 to help regulate blood sugar and reduce cravings. They can be taken only with a prescription.

The Food and Drug Administration announced an official shortage of the active ingredients in these drugs in 2022, but on Oct. 2, 2024, the agency announced that the shortage has been resolved for the medicine tirzepatide, the active ingredient in Mounjaro and Zepbound.

Despite the soaring demand and limited supply of these drugs, there are no generic versions available. This is because the patents for semaglutide – the active ingredient in Ozempic and Wegovy, which is still in shortage – and tirzepatide don’t expire until 2033 and 2036, respectively.

As a result, nonbrand alternatives that can be purchased with or without a prescription are flooding the market. Yet these products come with real risks to consumers.

I am a pharmacist who studies weaknesses in federal oversight of prescription and over-the-counter drugs and dietary supplements in the U.S. My research group recently has investigated loopholes that are allowing alternative weight loss products to enter the market.

High demand is driving GLP-1 wannabes

The dietary supplement market has sought to cash in on the GLP-1 demand with pills, teas, extracts and all manner of other products that claim to produce similar effects as the brand names at a much lower price.

Products containing the herb berberine offer only a few pounds of weight loss, while many dietary supplement weight loss products contain stimulants such as sibutramine and laxatives such as phenolphthalein, which increase the risk of heart attacks, strokes and cancer.

The role of compounding pharmacies

Unlike the dietary supplements that are masquerading as GLP-1 weight loss products, compounding pharmacies can create custom versions of products that contain the same active ingredients as the real thing for patients who cannot use either brand or generic products for some reason.

These pharmacies can also produce alternative versions of brand-name drugs when official drug shortages exist.

Since the demand for GLP-1 medications has far outpaced the supply, compounding pharmacies are legally producing a variety of different semaglutide and tirzepatide products.

These products may come in versions that differ from the brand-name companies, such as vials of powder that must be dissolved in liquid, or as tablets or nasal sprays.

Just like the brand-name drugs, you must have a valid prescription to receive them. The prices range from $250-$400 a month – still a steep price for many consumers.

Compounding pharmacies must adhere to the FDA’s sterility and quality production methods, but these rules are not as rigorous for compounding pharmacies as those for commercial manufacturers of generic drugs.

In addition, the products compounding pharmacies create do not have to be tested in humans for safety or effectiveness like brand-name products do.

Proper dosing can also be challenging with compounded forms of the drugs.

Companies that work the system

For people who cannot afford a compounding pharmacy product, or cannot get a valid prescription for semaglutide or tirzepatide, opportunistic companies are stepping in to fill the void. These include “peptide companies,” manufacturers that create non-FDA approved knockoff versions of the drugs.

From November 2023 to March 2024, my team carried out a study to assess which of these peptide companies are selling semaglutide or tirzepatide products. We scoured the internet looking for these peptide companies and collected information about what they were selling and their sales practices.

We found that peptide sellers use a loophole to sell these drugs. On their websites, the companies state that their drugs are for “research purposes only” or “not for human consumption,” but they do nothing to verify that the buyers are researchers or that the product is going to a research facility.

By reading the comments sections of the company websites and the targeted ads on social media, it becomes clear that both buyers and sellers understand the charade. Unlike compounding pharmacies, these peptide sellers do not provide the supplies you need to dissolve and inject the drug, provide no instructions, and will usually not answer questions.

Peptide sellers, since they allegedly are not selling to consumers, do not require a valid prescription and will sell consumers whatever quantity of drug they wish to purchase. Even if a person has an eating disorder such as anorexia nervosa, the companies will happily sell them a semaglutide or tirzepatide product without a prescription. The average prices of these peptide products range from $181-$203 per month.

Skirting regulations

Peptide sellers do not have to adhere to the rules or regulations that drug manufacturers or compounding pharmacies do. Many companies state that their products are 99% pure, but an independent investigation of three companies’ products from August 2023 to March 2024 found that the purity of the products were far less than promised.

One product contained endotoxin – a toxic substance produced by bacteria – suggesting that it was contaminated with microbes. In addition, the products’ promised dosages were off by up 29% to 39%. Poor purity can cause patients to experience fever, chills, nausea, skin irritation, infections and low blood pressure.

In this study, some companies never even shipped the drug, telling the buyers they needed to pay an additional fee to have the product clear customs.

If a consumer is harmed by a poor-quality product, it would be difficult to sue the seller, since the products specifically say they are “not for human consumption.” Ultimately, consumers are being led to spend money on products that may never arrive, could cause an infection, might not have the correct dose, and contain no instructions on how to safely use or store the product.

Will prices for brand-name products come down?

To combat these alternative sellers, pharmaceutical company Eli Lilly began offering an alternative version of its brand-name Zepbound product for weight loss in September 2024.

Instead of its traditional injection pen products that cost more than $1,000 for a month’s supply, this product comes in vials that patients draw up and inject themselves. For patients who take 5 milligrams of Zepbound each week, the vial products would cost them $549 a month if patients buy it through the company’s online pharmacy and can show that they do not have insurance coverage for the drug.

After a grilling on Capitol Hill in September 2024, pharmaceutical company Novo Nordisk came under intense pressure to offer patients without prescription coverage a lower-priced product for its brand-name Wegovy as well.

In the next few years, additional brand-name GLP-1 agonist drugs will likely make it to market. As of October 2024, a handful of these products are in late-phase clinical trials, with active ingredients such as retatrutide, survodutide and ecnoglutide, and more than 18 other drug candidates are in earlier stages of development.

When new pharmaceutical companies enter this market, they will have to offer patients lower prices than Eli Lilly and Novo Nordisk in order to gain market share. This is the most likely medium-term solution to drive down the costs of GLP-1 drugs and eliminate the drug shortages in the marketplace.

Originally published in The Conversation.

MIL OSI USA News –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI USA: Governor Murphy Announces Planned Innovation Center Based in Newark

Source: US State of New Jersey

TRENTON – Governor Phil Murphy today announced that the New Jersey Economic Development Authority (NJEDA) and the New Jersey Innovation Institute (NJII), a corporation of the New Jersey Institute of Technology (NJIT), have launched the NJII Venture Studio, the state’s latest Strategic Innovation Center (SIC). The NJII Venture Studio will focus on accelerating and commercializing intellectual property with a focus on high technology and information technology developed by NJIT, NJII and NJIT’s corporate partners, as well as other academic institutions who contribute to the advancement of the industry. This will be the seventh SIC in New Jersey announced under the Murphy Administration.

“Since I took office, my administration has been laser focused on positioning New Jersey as a national leader in innovation and technology development,” said Governor Phil Murphy. “The NJII Venture Studio, our seventh Strategic Innovation Center, will provide aspiring entrepreneurs with access to cutting-edge technology and the chance to collaborate with industry experts. This exciting initiative reinforces New Jersey’s reputation as a hub for innovation and research and the tremendous expertise within our state’s research universities.”

NJII, a non-profit subsidiary corporation established by NJIT in 2014, will operate and manage the Studio. The NJEDA and NJII have entered into a non-binding term sheet to establish the creation, funding, and management of the Venture Studio with an opportunity to make equity investments into participating companies. The Studio, which will be located in the Paul Profeta Center for Innovation and Entrepreneurship in Newark, will seek to launch two to three start-ups a year over a four-year period.

The Venture Studio will provide emerging companies with necessary business training, operating services, physical space, and management guidance to transform their research into commercially viable products and services. Pending approval by its Board, the NJEDA intends to invest $5.8 million into the project on a 1:1 basis with NJII, with program funding for the Venture Studio totaling $11.6 million.

“Governor Murphy is dedicated to expanding New Jersey’s innovation economy by investing in various industries and equipping entrepreneurs with the necessary resources to grow and scale their businesses,” said NJEDA Chief Executive Officer Tim Sullivan. “Powered by the NJEDA’s Strategic Innovation Center program, the NJII Venture Studio will foster the development of new technologies, good-paying jobs, and long-term, sustainable economic growth throughout the state.”

NJII intends to partner with NJIT, other New Jersey higher education institutions, and NJII and NJIT’s corporate partners to offer university students hands-on experience and training.

Since its founding, NJII has spun out two for-profit companies, Healthcare Innovative Solutions (HCIS) and BioCentriq, with hopes to replicate and expand its capacity to spin out startups.

“We are excited to embark on this partnership with the NJEDA to further build the state’s Innovation Economy,” said Michael Johnson, Ph.D., President of NJII. “We see the NJII Venture Studio as a powerful tool that will bridge the gap between translational research and commercialization, resulting in innovative companies and world-changing technologies.”

Serving as the SIC’s anchor academic partner, NJIT will provide access to university resources and intellectual property to assist with the launch and development of participating companies.

“The creation of the NJII Venture Studio aligns perfectly with NJIT’s 2030 strategic plan, which calls for the university to expand on its role as a nexus of innovation—a physical and intellectual focal point for ideas, actions and people that brings together researchers, learners, entrepreneurs and partners from government, industry and the community to pursue innovation,” said Dr. Teik C. Lim, President of NJIT.

“With this next Strategic Innovation Center, New Jersey continues to unlock unparalleled opportunities to grow cutting-edge industries and cultivate emerging talent right here in the Garden State,” said New Jersey Secretary of Higher Education Brian K. Bridges. “Combined with the expertise and resources of the state’s world-class institutions, like NJIT, we are well-positioned to lead innovation and meet the workforce demands of tomorrow’s economy.”

“I commend Governor Murphy and the New Jersey Economic Development Authority for their continued focus on innovation and economic growth with the launch of the Venture Studio in Newark. This new Strategic Innovation Center is a vital step in positioning New Jersey as a national leader in emerging technologies and entrepreneurship,” said Senator Paul Sarlo, Chair of the Senate Budget Committee. “As an alumnus of the New Jersey Institute of Technology, I know firsthand the innovative spirit possessed by the university’s students and faculty. I am thrilled that this center will not only help jumpstart the careers of young entrepreneurs, but also give NJIT students the opportunity to gain hands-on experience in the process of starting a company.”

“The NJII Venture Studio will offer fresh and exciting opportunities for students and entrepreneurs in Newark and beyond,” said NJEDA Chief Economic Transformation Officer Kathleen Coviello. “The Studio’s prime location and proximity to the state’s key players in the innovation sector will open doors for entrepreneurs to advance their research, testing, and development of diverse technologies.”

SICs are facilities that support research and development, innovation, and entrepreneurship through mentorship, networking opportunities, hands-on training, business support services, and education opportunities. SICs can be accelerators, incubators, or research centers. Having a physical location where entrepreneurs can collaborate will help support new, diverse innovators and help drive long-term economic growth.

MIL OSI USA News –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI: Dave to Report Third Quarter 2024 Results on November 12, 2024 at 5:00 p.m. ET

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

LOS ANGELES, Oct. 25, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Dave Inc. (“Dave” or the “Company”) (Nasdaq: DAVE), one of the nation’s leading neobanks, will host a conference call on Tuesday, November 12, 2024, at 5:00 p.m. Eastern time to discuss its financial results for the third quarter ended September 30, 2024. The Company’s results will be reported in a press release prior to the call.

Dave management will host the conference call, followed by a question-and-answer period. The conference call details are as follows:

Date: Tuesday, November 12, 2024
Time: 5:00 p.m. Eastern time
Dial-in registration link: here
Live webcast registration link: here

The conference call will also be available for replay in the Events section of the Company’s website, along with the transcript, at https://investors.dave.com.

If you have any difficulty registering for or connecting to the conference call, please contact Elevate IR at DAVE@elevate-ir.com.

About Dave

Dave (Nasdaq: DAVE) is a leading U.S. neobank and fintech pioneer serving millions of everyday Americans. Dave uses disruptive technologies to provide best-in-class banking services at a fraction of the price of incumbents. Dave partners with Evolve Bank & Trust, a FDIC member. For more information about the company, visit: www.dave.com. For investor information and updates, visit: investors.dave.com and follow @davebanking on X.

Investor Relations Contact

Sean Mansouri, CFA
Elevate IR
DAVE@elevate-ir.com

Media Contact

Dan Ury
press@dave.com

The MIL Network –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI: GCM Grosvenor to Announce Third Quarter 2024 Financial Results and Host Investor Conference Call on November 8, 2024

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

CHICAGO, Oct. 25, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — GCM Grosvenor (Nasdaq: GCMG), a global alternative asset management solutions provider, announced today that it will release its results for the third quarter 2024 on Friday, November 8, 2024.

Management will host a webcast and conference call on Friday, November 8, 2024, at 10:00 a.m. ET to discuss the results and provide a business update. The conference call will be available via public webcast through the Public Shareholders section of GCM Grosvenor’s website at www.gcmgrosvenor.com/public-shareholders and a replay will be available on the website soon after the call’s completion for at least seven (7) days.

To register for the call, visit www.gcmgrosvenor.com/public-shareholders.

About GCM Grosvenor

GCM Grosvenor (Nasdaq: GCMG) is a global alternative asset management solutions provider with approximately $79 billion in assets under management across private equity, infrastructure, real estate, credit, and absolute return investment strategies. The firm has specialized in alternatives for more than 50 years and is dedicated to delivering value for clients by leveraging its cross-asset class and flexible investment platform.

GCM Grosvenor’s experienced team of approximately 540 professionals serves a global client base of institutional and individual investors. The firm is headquartered in Chicago, with offices in New York, Toronto, London, Frankfurt, Tokyo, Hong Kong, Seoul and Sydney. For more information, visit: gcmgrosvenor.com.

Source: GCM Grosvenor

Public Shareholders Contact
Stacie Selinger
sselinger@gcmlp.com
312-506-6583

Media Contact
Tom Johnson and Abigail Ruck
H/Advisors Abernathy
tom.johnson@h-advisors.global / abigail.ruck@h-advisors.global
212-371-5999

The MIL Network –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI: Ethical Web AI announces our new Chief Executive Officer – Manfred Ebensberger, with a shareholder update

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

NEW YORK, Oct. 25, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Bubblr Inc., d/b/a Ethical Web AI (OTC: BBLR) – a frontrunner in ethical technology determined to revolutionize the digital domain, has announced its new CEO, Manfred Ebensberger.

Before joining Bubblr, Mr. Ebensberger held senior roles in European investment firms, serving as Managing Director and Asset Manager for Ultra-High-Net-Worth Individuals (UHNWIs). He also served as CEO of a luxury Italian fashion brand in New York. Earlier in his career, Mr. Ebensberger was managing director for several US investment companies and an assistant professor at the University of Innsbruck, Austria. Manfred holds a degree from the University of Innsbruck, Austria, from the University of Venice, Italy and completed a certificate in General Business Studies at UCLA. He is a seasoned professional committed to the vision and direction of the company.

Steve Morris, CTO and founder of Ethical Web AI remarked, “I am delighted to welcome Manfred as our CEO. Manfred is a highly experienced executive who has a proven track record as the CEO of a publicly listed company, which he led to a very successful buy-out. We have been speaking to Manfred for quite some time, and both parties are in agreement that Manfred is the perfect CEO at this critical point in the company’s development.”

“Our biggest challenge has been our ability to describe succinctly what our platform does and why it is so revolutionary. Now that the platform is demonstrable, this makes our many years of work understandable, applicable and ultimately profitable. Manfred will lead us into the next stage of our revenue-positive corporate development. It has taken years in the making, but we are finally at a point where we have a product that will change the way we all use and utilize the internet.”

“Our last press release in August 2024 made clear the massive significance of finally delivering our ethical Web Search (EWS) platform to the point where it is demonstrable. It has taken many years of development to build the EWS platform, and it is the technical manifestation of our US Patent 10977387, which has been independently valued at $4.7bn. Manfred’s role is to oversee the next stage of Ethical Web AI’s development to realize its true potential and value as the world’s most innovative technology company. Our current plans are extremely ambitious, and we are confident that Manfred is the CEO we need to deliver them. They include the following key objectives:”

Raising substantial new investment capital

Within the next six months, we plan to raise significant new investment capital. This capital is required to transform the company from a technology development company to a fast-growing, revenue-driven business. There are many conversations currently underway with a number of important investors that we expect to be concluded in the next few months.

Significantly increase revenue from AI Seek.

Our generative AI product, AI Seek, is capable of generating significant revenues and is very profitable. We intend to sign a distribution and marketing contract in the next few weeks that will deliver very significant new revenues before the end of the year.

We already consider AI Seek to be demonstrably superior to Chat GPT in many ways. In particular, AI Seek is unique in that it is totally anonymous for consumers to use. This unique aspect of AI Seek allows us to develop a version of AI Seek that can be safely used by children under direct parental control. A “child-safe” generative AI application will obviously be hugely popular.

Oversee the rollout of the EWS platform to our first pilot projects.

We are currently negotiating with a number of potential community licensees to pilot our EWS platform. There are three candidates, and all three are very keen to be the first early adopter. Again, we will be signing our first deal in the next few weeks, and we will make announcements as they happen. The pilot project(s) will provide the necessary learnings required to automate the onboarding of new licensees to the platform entirely. Once we have fully automated the onboarding process, we will begin the global adoption of the product using the tried and tested open-source SaaS model.

Organic uplist to Nasdaq in 2025

We have a strategic plan to organically uplist Nasdaq in 2025. In order to qualify for Nasdaq, we need revenues and adequate cash reserves in the bank. The cash reserves will be secured primarily through further external investment capital. Both the revenues and the capital raise are eminently achievable.

The Nasdaq uplist provides a number of significant benefits for the company and its shareholders. We are certain that we have the most significant and valuable technology that the world has ever witnessed. However, hardly anyone has ever heard of the company. The Nasdaq uplist delivers much more visibility of the company and its products. It provides a platform to showcase our company to both the investment community and retail users.

Pursue our expected exit plan through acquisition.

The founder and CTO, Steve Morris, has always maintained that the most likely final exit strategy would be that it would be acquired (or its critical assets acquired) by a global technology business to ensure its global adoption. Ethical Web AI is more like a startup pharmaceutical company that has developed a world-beating drug. Such a company knows it will be acquired by one of the global pharma giants. However, acquisition opportunities were not expected to arise before we were uplisted to Nasdaq. In recent developments, a major technology company has expressed interest in communicating with the company regarding potential future alliances.

It is clear that our new CEO, Manfred Ebensberger, has a lot to do in the next few months, but he has the complete suite of expertise, knowledge and full support of everyone in the company to help him deliver. We expect to issue many more press releases in the coming weeks.

About Ethical Web AI:
Ethical Web AI is an ethical technology company that is championing an anonymous, safe, and fair new internet. We are producing unique intellectual property and technology that is made defensible by our valuable utility software patents.

Visit the new AI Seek website at: https://www.aiseek.ai.

If you are an AI Seek user, make sure to add desktop integration by going to the page https://desktop.aiseek.ai/

For more information about our Company and products, please visit our website at https://www.ethicalweb.ai.

Media Contact:
Steve Morris
Bubblr, Inc.
(646) 814 7184

Safe Harbor Statement
This press release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. These forward-looking statements are based on the current plans and expectations of management and are subject to a number of uncertainties and risks that could significantly affect the Company’s current plans and expectations, as well as future results of operations and financial condition. The Company reserves the right to update or alter its forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

The MIL Network –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI: Pacific Financial Corp Earns $2.6 Million, or $0.25 per Diluted Share for Third Quarter 2024; Tangible Book Value Per Share Up 6.6% During Quarter; Board of Directors Declares Quarterly Cash Dividend of $0.14 per Share

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

ABERDEEN, Wash., Oct. 25, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Pacific Financial Corporation (OTCQX: PFLC), (“Pacific Financial”) or the (“Company”), the holding company for Bank of the Pacific (the “Bank”), reported net income of $2.6 million, or $0.25 per diluted share for the third quarter of 2024, compared to $2.1 million, or $0.21 per diluted share for the second quarter of 2024, and $3.6 million, or $0.35 per diluted share for the third quarter of 2023. All results are unaudited.

Pacific Financials’ third quarter 2024 operating results reflected the following changes from the second quarter of 2024: (1) higher net interest income as the rise in loan and investment yields outpaced the rise in deposit and borrowing costs; (2) a negative provision for credit losses due to lower provision for unfunded loans; (3) lower non-interest income due to smaller gains on the sale of loans and investment securities; (4) slightly lower non-interest expenses; (5) a small decrease in total gross loans of 0.6% offset by an increase in the purchase of investment securities with the balance of investment securities increasing $18.1 million, or 6.5% during the third quarter; (6) an increase in total deposits of 2.6% to $1.0 billion at September 30, 2024, and (7) a $6.2 million increase in shareholder equity, or 5.4%. Tangible book value per share increased 6.6% during the quarter to $10.47.

The board of directors of Pacific Financial declared a quarterly cash dividend of $0.14 per share on October 23, 2024. The dividend will be payable on November 22, 2024 to shareholders of record on November 8, 2024. Additionally, the Board of Directors has authorized an additional $2.6 million toward future repurchases, or approximately 2.0% of total shares outstanding. The current stock repurchase program expires in November 2024.

“Our core operations continue to remain strong,” said Denise Portmann, President and Chief Executive Officer. “Our focused efforts on deposit retention, combined with the efforts of our new commercial loan and deposit teams, resulted in increased business relationships during the third quarter. Additionally, we added to our investment securities portfolio to increase yields. During the fourth quarter, we will be closing our mortgage banking division which we anticipate will improve the efficiency of our operation and improve earnings. However, the fourth quarter will reflect some one-time charges related to severance, contract and lease terminations.”

Third Quarter 2024 Financial Highlights:

Return on average assets (“ROAA”) was 0.90%, compared to 0.76% for the second quarter 2024, and 1.21% for the third quarter 2023.
Return on average equity (“ROAE”) was 8.77%, compared to 7.47% from the preceding quarter, and 13.16% from the third quarter a year earlier.
Net interest income was $11.2 million, compared to $10.8 million for the second quarter of 2024, and $12.3 million for the third quarter of 2023.
Net interest margin (“NIM”) increased to 4.19%, compared to 4.15% from the preceding quarter, and 4.37% for the third quarter a year ago. The increase in the net interest margin in the most recent quarter was due to increased yields on interest-earning assets outpacing the increased cost of interest-bearing liabilities.
Provision for credit losses was a benefit of $66,000 for the third quarter ended September 30, 2024 compared to a provision of $304,000 for the preceding quarter and $244,000 in the third quarter a year ago. The benefit largely reflected lower provisions for unfunded loans relative to prior periods.
Gross loans balances held in portfolio decreased by $4.4 million, or less than 1% to $699.6 million at September 30, 2024, compared to $704.0 million at June 30, 2024, and increased by $27.6 million, or 4%, from $672.0 million at September 30, 2023.
Total deposits increased $25.8 million to $1.01 billion, compared to $985.6 million at June 30, 2024, and decreased from $1.05 billion at September 30, 2023. Core deposits represented 87% of total deposits, with non-interest bearing deposits representing 38% of total deposits at September 30, 2024.
Coverage of short-term funds available to uninsured and uncollateralized deposits was 229% at September 30, 2024 and June 30, 2024. Uninsured or uncollateralized deposits were 25% of total deposits at September 30, 2024, and 24% at June 30, 2024.
Asset quality remains solid with nonperforming assets to total assets at 0.10%, compared to 0.12% three months earlier, and 0.10% at September 30, 2023. Accruing loans past due 30 or more days represent only 0.03% of total loans at September 30, 2024.
Tangible book value per share increased 6.6% during the quarter to $10.47 per share at September 30, 2024 from $9.82 per share at June 30, 2024. The increase was largely the result of a decline in interest rates and its impact on the fair market value of securities.
Pacific Financial and Bank of the Pacific continued to exceed regulatory well-capitalized requirements. At September 30, 2024 Pacific Financial’s estimated leverage ratio was 11.6% and its estimated total risk-based capital ratio was 17.9%.

Balance Sheet Review

Total assets increased 3% to $1.16 billion at September 30, 2024, compared to $1.12 billion at June 30, and decreased 2% from $1.18 billion at September 30, 2023.

Liquidity metrics continued to remain strong with total liquidity, both on and off balance sheet sources, at $576.8 million as of September 30, 2024. The Bank has established collateralized credit lines with borrowing capacity from the Federal Home Loan Bank of Des Moines (FHLB) and from the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, as well as $60.0 million in unsecured borrowing lines from various correspondent banks. There was no balance outstanding on any of these facilities at quarter-end.

The following table summarizes the Bank’s available liquidity:

LIQUIDITY (unaudited)	Period Ended						Change from									% of Deposits
($ in 000s)	Period Ended						Change from									% of Deposits

		Sep 30,		Jun 30,		Sep 30,		Jun 30, 2024				Sep 30, 2023				Sep 30,		Jun 30,		Sep 30,
		2024		2024		2023		$	%			$		%		2024		2024		2023
Short-term Funding
Cash and cash equivalents	$	85,430	$	63,183	$	147,970	$	22,247	35	%	$	(62,540	)	-42	%	8	%	6	%	14	%
Unencumbered AFS Securities		154,565		139,581		123,842		14,984	11	%		30,723		25	%	15	%	14	%	12	%
Secured lines of Credit (FHLB, FRB)		336,771		332,674		318,557		4,097	1	%		18,214		6	%	33	%	34	%	30	%
Short-term Funding	$	576,766	$	535,438	$	590,369	$	41,328	8	%	$	(13,603	)	-2	%	56	%	54	%	56	%

Investment securities: The investment securities portfolio increased 6% to $296.8 million, compared to $278.7 million at June 30, 2024 and increased 3% compared to the like period a year ago. The increase from the prior quarter was primarily due to the purchase of collateralized mortgage obligations and mortgage backed securities. U.S. Treasury bonds, and securities issued by the U.S. Government sponsored agencies accounted for 85% of the investment portfolio as of September 30, 2024, June 30, 2024, and September 30, 2023. Within that total, collateralized mortgage obligations accounted for 48% of the investment portfolio at September 30, 2024, compared to 45% the previous quarter.

The average adjusted duration to reset of the investment securities portfolio was 4.2 years at September 30, 2024. Net unrealized losses on the investments classified as available for sale declined $7.2 million to $14.8 million ($11.5 million after-tax) at September 30, 2024, or 5% of AFS portfolio.

Gross loans balances excluding loans held for sale decreased $4.4 million, or 1%, to $699.6 million at September 30, 2024, compared to $704.0 million at June 30, 2024. During the third quarter, loan pipelines and originations slowed from prior levels as borrowers continued to adjust to higher interest rates and economic uncertainty. Due primarily to loan amortization the loan portfolio reflected slight declines in most categories except multi-family lending which increased $2.8 million. Year-over-year loan growth was 4%, or $27.6 million, with the largest increases in residential 1-4 family and multi-family loans which increased $14.8 million and $11.7 million, respectively. Loans classified as commercial real estate for regulatory concentration purposes totaled $261.3 million at September 30, 2024, or 185% of total risk based capital.

The Company continues to manage concentration limits that establish maximum exposure levels by certain industry segments, loan product types, geography and single borrower limits. In addition, the loan portfolio continues to be well-diversified and is collateralized with assets predominantly within the Company’s Western Washington and Oregon markets.

Credit quality: Non-performing assets were minimal and remained at $1.1 million, or 0.10% of total assets at September 30, 2024, compared to $1.2 million, or 0.10% at September 30, 2023. The Company has zero other real estate owned as of September 30, 2024 and accruing loans past due more than 30 days represent only 0.04% of total loans.

Allowance for credit losses (“ACL”) for loans was $8.9 million, or 1.27% of gross loans at September 30, 2024, compared to $8.9 million or 1.26% of loans at June 30, 2024 and $8.3 million or 1.24% at September 30, 2023.

A negative provision for credit losses of $66,000 was recorded in the current quarter, reflecting less allowance requirements for unfunded loans. This compares to a provision for credit losses of $304,000 in the second quarter of 2024 and $244,000 for the third quarter of 2023. Net charge-offs for the current quarter remained minimal and reflected a net recovery of $11,000, compared to a net charge-off of $56,000 for the preceding quarter and $125,000 for the third quarter one year ago.

Total deposits increased to $1.01 billion at September 30, 2024, compared to $985.6 million at June 30, 2024 and decreased from $1.05 billion at September 30, 2023. The bank has focused efforts to retain customer relationships resulting in a $22.1 million increase in business deposits.

Non-interest-bearing account balances, composed of commercial banking relationships, are the largest component of the deposit portfolio at 38% at September 30, 2024 and June 30, 2024. Money market deposits currently represent the second largest component of the deposit base and increased $11.5 million from the linked quarter and $12.8 million from the same quarter a year ago and represent 19%, 18%, and 17%, of total deposits, at September 30, 2024, June 30, 2024, and September 30, 2023, respectively. Interest-bearing demand deposits are the third largest component of the deposit base representing 18% of total deposits at September 30, 2024. Pacific Financial continues to benefit from a strong core deposit base, with core deposits representing 87% of total deposits at quarter end.

Shareholder’s equity increased $6.2 million, or 5% to $121.1 million at September 30, 2024, compared to $114.9 million at June 30, 2024, and increased $14.5 million, or 14% compared to $106.6 million at September 30, 2023. The increase in shareholders’ equity during the current quarter was due to quarterly net income, a decrease in unrealized losses on available-for-sale securities and dividends paid to shareholders. Net unrealized losses (after-tax) on available-for-sale securities were $11.5 million at September 30, 2024 compared to $17.1 million at June 30, 2024, and $23.1 million at September 30, 2023. This decrease in net unrealized losses reflects lower longer-term market interest rates at the end of the quarter.

Book value per common share was $11.78 at September 30, 2024, compared to $11.12 at June 20, 2024, and $10.22 at September 30, 2023. The Company’s tangible common equity ratio was 9.4% at September 30, 2024 and 9.1% at June 30, 2024, compared to 8.0% at September 30, 2023. Regulatory capital ratios of both the Company and the Bank continue to exceed the well-capitalized regulatory thresholds, with the Company’s leverage ratio at 11.6% and total risk-based capital ratio at 17.9% as of September 30, 2024. These regulatory capital ratios are estimates, pending completion and filing of regulatory reports.

The current stock repurchase program expires in November 2024. The Board of Directors has authorized an additional $2.6 million toward future repurchases, or approximately 2.0% of total shares outstanding.

Income Statement Review

Net interest income increased $438,000 to $11.2 million for the third quarter of 2024, compared to $10.8 million for the second quarter of 2024, and decreased $1.1 million compared to $12.3 million for the third quarter a year ago. The change in the current quarter compared to the preceding quarter reflects higher yields on a larger investment portfolio and an increase in loan yields due primarily to repricing of loans. Increasing deposit costs offset some of the benefit from higher yielding investments and loans. For the current quarter compared to the like period a year ago, funding costs have outpaced the rising yields on investments and loans.

The Bank’s net interest margin continued to remain strong at 4.19% for the quarter ended September 30, 2024 compared to 4.15% the preceding quarter. For the third quarter ended September 30, 2023, the net interest margin was 4.37% reflecting lower funding costs relative to more recent periods.

Yields on total interest earning assets increased 14 basis points to 5.29% for the third quarter of 2024 compared to 5.15% for the prior quarter and 5.06% in the like quarter a year ago. Average loan yields increased to 5.99% during the current quarter, compared to 5.80% for the preceding quarter and 5.71% for the third quarter 2023.

The Bank’s total cost of funds increased to 1.15% for the current quarter, compared to 1.05% for the preceding quarter, and 0.72% for the third quarter 2023. The increase in the costs of deposits was due to retention efforts and competitive pricing of deposit products. The percentage of non-interest bearing deposits remained high at 38% for the current quarter.

Noninterest income decreased to $1.7 million for the current quarter, compared to $2.0 million for the linked quarter and increased from $1.6 million a year earlier. The decrease compared to the linked quarter was primarily due to decreased mortgage banking loan production and no gains on the sale of investment securities.

The company plans to close its mortgage banking division by the end of 2024 which is expected to reduce non-interest income offset by a reduction of personnel and overhead expenses associated with the operation. The elimination of the mortgage banking division is expected to improve the efficiency of the company after severance and contract termination expenses are realized in the fourth quarter of 2024.

Fee and service charge income remained consistent in the third quarter of 2024 at $1.2 million compared to the previous quarter and the third quarter of 2023.

Noninterest expenses decreased to $9.7 million for the third quarter of 2024 compared to $9.8 million for the prior quarter and increased from $9.1 million for the third quarter of 2023. Within the total of noninterest expenses for the current quarter compared to the prior quarter, the largest category of salaries and employee benefits remained at $6.3 million. Similarly, data processing and occupancy expenses remained consistent to the prior quarter.

The company’s efficiency ratio decreased to 75.48% for the third quarter of 2024, compared to 77.34% in the preceding quarter and increased from 65.78% in the same quarter a year ago. The increase in the efficiency ratio relative to the previous year primarily relates to the decreased net interest margin and higher overhead expenses related to the hiring, building and marketing of new commercial loan and deposit teams.

Income tax expense: Federal and Oregon state income tax expenses totaled $633,000 for the current quarter, and $454,000 for the preceding quarter, resulting in effective tax rates of 19.6% and 17.6%, respectively. These income tax expenses reflect the benefits of tax exempt income and credits on tax-exempt loans and investments, affordable housing tax credit financing, and investments in bank owned life insurance.

FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS (unaudited)	Quarter Ended									Change From											Nine Months Ended					Change
FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS (unaudited)	Quarter Ended									Change From											Nine Months Ended					Change
(In 000s, except per share data)
		Sep 30,			Jun 30,			Sep 30,			Jun 30, 2024					Sep 30, 2023					Sep 30,			Sep 30,
		2024			2024			2023			$		%			$		%			2024			2023			$		%
Earnings Ratios & Data
Net Income	$	2,594		$	2,126		$	3,645		$	468		22	%	$	(1,051	)	-29	%	$	7,370		$	11,663		$	(4,293	)	-37	%
Return on average assets		0.90	%		0.76	%		1.21	%		0.14	%				-0.31	%				0.87	%		1.28	%		-0.41	%
Return on average equity		8.77	%		7.47	%		13.16	%		1.30	%				-4.39	%				8.52	%		14.34	%		-5.82	%
Efficiency ratio ⁽¹⁾		75.48	%		77.34	%		65.78	%		-1.86	%				9.70	%				75.67	%		64.64	%		11.03	%
Net-interest margin %⁽²⁾		4.19	%		4.15	%		4.37	%		0.04	%				-0.18	%				4.24	%		4.40	%		-0.16	%

Share Ratios & Data
Basic earnings per share	$	0.25		$	0.21		$	0.35		$	0.04		19	%	$	(0.10	)	-29	%	$	0.71		$	1.12		$	(0.41	)
Diluted earning per share	$	0.25		$	0.21		$	0.35		$	0.04		19	%	$	(0.10	)	-29	%	$	0.71		$	1.12		$	(0.41	)
Book value per share⁽³⁾	$	11.78		$	11.12		$	10.22		$	0.66		6	%	$	1.56		15	%
Tangible book value per share⁽⁴⁾	$	10.47		$	9.82		$	8.93		$	0.65		7	%	$	1.54		17	%
Common shares outstanding		10,283			10,336			10,427			(53	)	-1	%		(144	)	-1	%
PFLC stock price	$	11.65		$	9.76		$	10.00		$	1.89		19	%	$	1.65		17	%
Dividends paid per share	$	0.14		$	0.14		$	0.13		$	–		0	%	$	0.01		8	%	$	0.42		$	0.39		$	0.03		8	%

Balance Sheet Data
Assets	$	1,158,410		$	1,124,295		$	1,181,975		$	34,115		3	%	$	(23,565	)	-2	%
Portfolio Loans	$	699,603		$	703,977		$	671,969		$	(4,374	)	-1	%	$	27,634		4	%
Deposits	$	1,011,473		$	985,627		$	1,051,256		$	25,846		3	%	$	(39,783	)	-4	%
Investments	$	296,792		$	278,728		$	289,152		$	18,064		6	%	$	7,640		3	%
Shareholders equity	$	121,087		$	114,923		$	106,601		$	6,164		5	%	$	14,486		14	%

Liquidity Ratios
Short-term funding to uninsured
and uncollateralized deposits		229	%		229	%		254	%		0	%				-25	%
Uninsured and uncollateralized
deposits to total deposits		25	%		24	%		22	%		1	%				3	%
Portfolio loans to deposits ratio		69	%		71	%		63	%		-2	%				6	%

Asset Quality Ratios
Non-performing assets to assets		0.10	%		0.12	%		0.10	%		-0.02	%				0.00	%
Non-accrual loans to portfolio loans		0.16	%		0.19	%		0.18	%		-0.03	%				-0.02	%
Loan losses to avg portfolio loans		-0.01	%		0.03	%		0.07	%		-0.04	%				-0.08	%				0.01	%		0.04	%		-0.03	%
ACL to portfolio loans		1.27	%		1.26	%		1.24	%		0.01	%				0.03	%

Capital Ratios (PFC)
Total risk-based capital ratio		17.9	%		17.6	%		17.6	%		0.3	%				0.3	%
Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio		16.7	%		16.4	%		16.5	%		0.3	%				0.2	%
Common equity tier 1 ratio		15.0	%		14.8	%		14.8	%		0.2	%				0.2	%
Leverage ratio		11.6	%		11.7	%		10.7	%		-0.1	%				0.9	%
Tangible common equity ratio		9.4	%		9.1	%		8.0	%		0.3	%				1.4	%

⁽¹⁾ Non-interest expense divided by net interest income plus noninterest income.
⁽²⁾ Tax-exempt income has been adjusted to a tax equivalent basis at a rate of 21%.
⁽³⁾ Book value per share is calculated as the total common shareholders’ equity divided by the period ending number of common stock shares outstanding.
⁽⁴⁾ Tangible book value per share is calculated as the total common shareholders’ equity less total intangible assets and liabilities, divided by the period ending number of common stock shares outstanding.

INCOME STATEMENT (unaudited)	Quarter Ended									Change From											Nine Months Ended					Change
INCOME STATEMENT (unaudited)	Quarter Ended									Change From											Nine Months Ended					Change
($ in 000s)
		Sep 30,			Jun 30,			Sep 30,			Jun 30, 2024					Sep 30, 2023					Sep 30,			Sep 30,
		2024			2024			2023			$		%			$		%			2024			2023			$		%
Interest Income
Loan interest & fee income	$	10,520		$	10,109		$	9,549		$	411		4	%	$	971		10	%	$	30,853		$	27,166		$	3,687		14	%
Interest bearing cash income		1,108			847			2,322			261		31	%		(1,214	)	-52	%		2,890			7,669			(4,779	)	-62	%
Investment income		2,503			2,410			2,371			93		4	%		132		6	%		7,388			6,832			556		8	%
Interest Income		14,131			13,366			14,242			765		6	%		(111	)	-1	%		41,131			41,667			(536	)	-1	%

Interest Expense
Deposits interest expense		2,684			2,358			1,716			326		14	%		968		56	%		7,033			3,437			3,596		105	%
Other borrowings interest expense		243			242			246			1		0	%		(3	)	-1	%		727			682			45		7	%
Interest Expense		2,927			2,600			1,962			327		13	%		965		49	%		7,760			4,119			3,641		88	%
Net Interest Income		11,204			10,766			12,280			438		4	%		(1,076	)	-9	%		33,371			37,548			(4,177	)	-11	%
Provision (benefit) for credit losses		(66	)		304			244			(370	)	-122	%		(310	)	-127	%		271			409			(138	)	-34	%
Net Interest Income after provision		11,270			10,462			12,036			808		8	%		(766	)	-6	%		33,100			37,139			(4,039	)	-11	%

Non-Interest Income
Fees and service charges		1,225			1,198			1,248			27		2	%		(23	)	-2	%		3,523			3,695			(172	)	-5	%
Gain on sale of investments, net		–			121			–			(121	)	-100	%		–		-100	%		121			(154	)		275		-179	%
Gain on sale of loans, net		267			445			170			(178	)	-40	%		97		57	%		865			540			325		60	%
Income on bank-owned insurance		188			182			174			6		3	%		14		8	%		550			509			41		8	%
Other non-interest income		7			17			18			(10	)	-59	%		(11	)	-61	%		34			53			(19	)	-36	%
Non-Interest Income		1,687			1,963			1,610			(276	)	-14	%		77		5	%		5,093			4,643			450		10	%

Non-Interest Expense
Salaries and employee benefits		6,341			6,321			5,560			20		0	%		781		14	%		18,656			17,006			1,650		10	%
Occupancy		601			564			501			37		7	%		100		20	%		1,806			1,536			270		18	%
Furniture, Fixtures & Equipment		286			267			252			19		7	%		34		13	%		837			808			29		4	%
Marketing & donations		201			176			160			25		14	%		41		26	%		531			380			151		40	%
Professional services		233			327			301			(94	)	-29	%		(68	)	-23	%		897			941			(44	)	-5	%
Data Processing & IT		1,185			1,165			1,161			20		2	%		24		2	%		3,541			3,490			51		1	%
Other		883			1,025			1,207			(142	)	-14	%		(324	)	-27	%		2,839			3,174			(335	)	-11	%
Non-Interest Expense		9,730			9,845			9,142			(115	)	-1	%		588		6	%		29,107			27,335			1,772		6	%
Income before income taxes		3,227			2,580			4,504			647		25	%		(1,277	)	-28	%		9,086			14,447			(5,361	)	-37	%
Provision for income taxes		633			454			859			179		39	%		(226	)	-26	%		1,716			2,784			(1,068	)	-38	%
Net Income	$	2,594		$	2,126		$	3,645		$	468		22	%		(1,051	)	-29	%	$	7,370		$	11,663		$	(4,293	)	-37	%

Effective tax rate		19.6	%		17.6	%		19.1	%		2.0	%				0.5	%				18.9	%		19.3	%		-0.4	%

BALANCE SHEET (unaudited)	Period Ended									Change from										% of Total
($ in 000s)	Period Ended									Change from										% of Total

		Sep 30,			Jun 30,			Sep 30,			Jun 30, 2024					Sep 30, 2023				Sep 30,		Jun 30,		Sep 30,
		2024			2024			2023			$		%			$		%		2024		2024		2023
Assets
Cash on hand and in banks	$	20,621		$	17,362		$	12,052		$	3,259		19	%	$	8,569		71	%	2	%	2	%	2	%
Interest bearing deposits		80,522			58,586			146,886			21,936		37	%		(66,364	)	-45	%	7	%	5	%	12	%
Investment securities		296,792			278,728			289,152			18,064		6	%		7,640		3	%	26	%	25	%	24	%
Loans held-for-sale		140			4,051			637			(3,911	)	-97	%		(497	)	-78	%	0	%	0	%	0	%
Portfolio Loans, net of deferred fees		698,974			703,322			671,134			(4,348	)	-1	%		27,840		4	%	60	%	63	%	57	%
Allowance for credit losses		(8,897	)		(8,859	)		(8,347	)		(38	)	0	%		(550	)	7	%	-1	%	-1	%	-1	%
Net loans		690,077			694,463			662,787			(4,386	)	-1	%		27,290		4	%	60	%	62	%	56	%
Premises & equipment		17,124			15,571			13,756			1,553		10	%		3,368		24	%	2	%	2	%	2	%
Goodwill & Other Intangibles		13,435			13,435			13,435			–		0	%		–		0	%	1	%	1	%	1	%
Bank-owned life Insurance		28,084			27,860			27,321			224		1	%		763		3	%	2	%	2	%	2	%
Other assets		11,615			14,239			15,949			(2,624	)	-18	%		(4,334	)	-27	%	1	%	1	%	1	%
Total Assets	$	1,158,410		$	1,124,295		$	1,181,975		$	34,115		3	%	$	(23,565	)	-2	%	100	%	100	%	100	%

Liabilities & Shareholders’ Equity
Deposits	$	1,011,473		$	985,627		$	1,051,256		$	25,846		3	%	$	(39,783	)	-4	%	87	%	88	%	89	%
Borrowings		13,403		$	13,403		$	13,403			–		0	%		–		0	%	1	%	1	%	1	%
Other liabilities		12,447		$	10,342		$	10,715			2,105		20	%		1,732		16	%	1	%	1	%	1	%
Shareholders’ equity		121,087		$	114,923		$	106,601			6,164		5	%		14,486		14	%	11	%	10	%	9	%
Liabilities & Shareholders’ Equity	$	1,158,410		$	1,124,295		$	1,181,975		$	34,115		3	%	$	(23,565	)	-2	%	100	%	100	%	100	%

INVESTMENT COMPOSITION & CONCENTRATIONS (unaudited)	Period Ended									Change from										% of Total
INVESTMENT COMPOSITION & CONCENTRATIONS (unaudited)	Period Ended									Change from										% of Total
($ in 000s)
		Sep 30,			Jun 30,			Sep 30,			Jun 30, 2024					Sep 30, 2023				Sep 30,		Jun 30,		Sep 30,
		2024			2024			2023			$		%			$		%		2024		2024		2023
Investment Securities
Collateralized mortgage obligations	$	141,842		$	125,937		$	126,376		$	15,905		13	%	$	15,466		12	%	48	%	45	%	45	%
Mortgage backed securities		41,264			37,159			38,322			4,105		11	%		2,942		8	%	14	%	13	%	13	%
U.S. Government and agency securities		68,961			72,504			82,292			(3,543	)	-5	%		(13,331	)	-16	%	23	%	27	%	27	%
Municipal securities		44,725			43,128			42,162			1,597		4	%		2,563		6	%	15	%	15	%	15	%
Investment Securities	$	296,792		$	278,728		$	289,152		$	18,064		6	%	$	7,640		3	%	100	%	100	%	100	%

Held to maturity securities	$	42,301		$	43,244		$	56,469		$	(943	)	-2	%	$	(14,168	)	-25	%	14	%	16	%	20	%
Available for sale securities	$	254,491		$	235,484		$	232,683		$	19,007		8	%	$	21,808		9	%	86	%	84	%	80	%

Government & Agency securities	$	252,039		$	235,570		$	246,956		$	16,469		7	%	$	5,083		2	%	85	%	85	%	85	%
AAA, AA, A rated securities	$	44,084		$	42,471		$	41,025		$	1,613		4	%	$	3,059		7	%	15	%	15	%	14	%
Non-rated securities	$	669		$	687		$	1,171		$	(18	)	-3	%	$	(502	)	-43	%	0	%	0	%	0	%

AFS Unrealized Gain (Loss)	$	(14,804	)	$	(21,978	)	$	(29,783	)	$	7,174		-33	%	$	14,979		-50	%	-5	%	-8	%	-10	%

PORTFOLIO LOAN COMPOSITION & CONCENTRATIONS (unaudited)	Period Ended									Change from										% of Total
PORTFOLIO LOAN COMPOSITION & CONCENTRATIONS (unaudited)	Period Ended									Change from										% of Total
($ in 000s)
		Sep 30,			Jun 30,			Sep 30,			Jun 30, 2024					Sep 30, 2023				Sep 30,		Jun 30,		Sep 30,
		2024			2024			2023			$		%			$		%		2024		2024		2023
Portfolio Loans
Commercial & agriculture	$	73,002		$	74,952		$	73,232		$	(1,950	)	-3	%	$	(230	)	0	%	10	%	11	%	11	%
Real estate:
Construction and development		46,569			47,856			42,584			(1,287	)	-3	%		3,985		9	%	7	%	7	%	6	%
Residential 1-4 family		105,298			105,807			90,449			(509	)	0	%		14,849		16	%	15	%	14	%	14	%
Multi-family		60,773			58,003			49,092			2,770		5	%		11,681		24	%	9	%	8	%	7	%
CRE — owner occupied		167,086			169,491			164,057			(2,405	)	-1	%		3,029		2	%	24	%	24	%	25	%
CRE — non owner occupied		157,347			157,591			154,993			(244	)	0	%		2,354		2	%	22	%	22	%	23	%
Farmland		26,553			27,195			27,641			(642	)	-2	%		(1,088	)	-4	%	4	%	4	%	4	%
Consumer		62,975			63,082			69,921			(107	)	0	%		(6,946	)	-10	%	9	%	10	%	10	%
Portfolio Loans		699,603			703,977			671,969			(4,374	)	-1	%		27,634		4	%	100	%	100	%	100	%
Less: ACL		(8,897	)		(8,859	)		(8,347	)
Less: deferred fees		(629	)		(655	)		(835	)
Net loans	$	690,077		$	694,463		$	662,787

Regulatory Commercial Real Estate	$	261,292		$	260,068		$	244,277		$	1,224		0	%	$	17,015		7	%	37	%	37	%	36	%
Total Risk Based Capital⁽¹⁾	$	140,971		$	140,176		$	137,473		$	795		1	%	$	3,498		3	%
CRE to Risk Based Capital⁽¹⁾		185	%		186	%		178	%				-1	%				7	%

CRE–MULTI-FAMILY & NON OWNER OCCUPIED COMPOSITION (unaudited)	Period Ended						Change from										% of Total
	Period Ended						Change from										% of Total
($ in 000s)
		Sep 30,		Jun 30,		Sep 30,		Jun 30, 2024					Sep 30, 2023				Sep 30,		Jun 30,		Sep 30,
		2024		2024		2023		$		%			$		%		2024		2024		2023
Collateral Composition⁽²⁾
Multifamily	$	63,099	$	63,243	$	54,677	$	(144	)	0	%	$	8,422		15	%	27	%	27	%	26	%
Retail		37,685		36,074		28,657		1,611		4	%		9,028		32	%	16	%	16	%	13	%
Hospitality		30,844		30,248		32,190		596		2	%		(1,346	)	-4	%	13	%	13	%	15	%
Mini Storage		25,758		23,619		20,977		2,139		9	%		4,781		23	%	11	%	11	%	10	%
Office		22,921		23,266		27,075		(345	)	-1	%		(4,154	)	-15	%	10	%	10	%	13	%
Mixed Use		22,708		23,520		22,457		(812	)	-3	%		251		1	%	10	%	10	%	11	%
Industrial		13,912		13,691		10,898		221		2	%		3,014		28	%	6	%	6	%	5	%
Warehouse		7,582		7,631		6,204		(49	)	-1	%		1,378		22	%	3	%	3	%	3	%
Special Purpose		6,968		7,014		7,146		(46	)	-1	%		(178	)	-2	%	3	%	3	%	3	%
Other		3,174		3,213		3,380		(39	)	-1	%		(206	)	-6	%	1	%	1	%	1	%
Total	$	234,651	$	231,519	$	213,661	$	3,132		1	%	$	20,990		10	%	100	%	100	%	100	%

⁽¹⁾ Bank of the Pacific
⁽²⁾ Includes loans in process of construction

CREDIT QUALITY (unaudited)	Period Ended									Change from
CREDIT QUALITY (unaudited)	Period Ended									Change from
($ in 000s)		Sep 30,			Jun 30,			Sep 30,			Jun 30, 2024					Jun 30, 2024
		2024			2024			2023			$		%			$		%
Risk Rating Distribution
Pass	$	691,199		$	694,272		$	664,327		$	(3,073	)	0	%		26,872		4	%
Special Mention		4,789			4,731			1,626			58		1	%		3,163		195	%
Substandard		3,615			4,974			6,016			(1,359	)	-27	%		(2,401	)	-40	%
Portfolio Loans	$	699,603		$	703,977		$	671,969		$	(4,374	)	-1	%	$	27,634		4	%

Nonperforming Assets
Nonaccruing loans		1,138			1,370			1,219		$	(232	)	-17	%		(81	)	-7	%
Other real estate owned		–			–			–			–		0	%		–		0	%
Nonperforming Assets	$	1,138		$	1,370		$	1,219		$	(232	)	-17	%		(81	)	-7	%

Credit Metrics
Classified loans¹ to portfolio loans		0.52	%		0.71	%		0.90	%		-0.19	%				-0.38	%
ACL to classified loans¹		246.11	%		178.11	%		132.68	%		68.00	%				113.43	%
Loans past due 30+ days to portfolio loans²		0.03	%		0.04	%		0.25	%		-0.01	%				-0.22	%
Nonperforming assets to total assets		0.10	%		0.12	%		0.10	%		-0.02	%				0.00	%
Nonaccruing loans to portfolio loans		0.16	%		0.19	%		0.18	%		-0.03	%				-0.02	%

⁽¹⁾ Classified loans include loans rated substandard or worse and are defined as loans having a well-defined weakness or weaknesses related to the borrower’s financial capacity or to pledged collateral that may jeopardize the repayment of the debt. They are characterized by the possibility that the Bank may sustain some loss if the deficiencies giving rise to the substandard classification are not corrected.
⁽²⁾ Excludes non-accrual loans

DEPOSIT COMPOSITION & CONCENTRATIONS (unaudited)	Period Ended						Change from										% of Total
DEPOSIT COMPOSITION & CONCENTRATIONS (unaudited)	Period Ended						Change from										% of Total
($ in 000s)
		Sep 30,		Jun 30,		Sep 30,		Jun 30, 2024					Sep 30, 2023				Sep 30,		Jun 30,		Sep 30,
		2024		2024		2023		$		%			$		%		2024		2024		2023
Deposits
Interest-bearing demand	$	183,337	$	179,278	$	208,091	$	4,059		2	%	$	(24,754	)	-12	%	18	%	19	%	20	%
Money market		192,185		180,727		179,367		11,458		6	%		12,818		7	%	19	%	18	%	17	%
Savings		117,131		121,851		138,981		(4,720	)	-4	%		(21,850	)	-16	%	12	%	12	%	13	%
Time deposits (CDs)		133,995		125,560		92,720		8,435		7	%		41,275		45	%	13	%	13	%	9	%
Total interest-bearing deposits		626,648		607,416		619,159		19,232		3	%		7,489		1	%	62	%	62	%	59	%
Non-interest bearing demand		384,825		378,211		432,097		6,614		2	%		(47,272	)	-11	%	38	%	38	%	41	%
Total deposits	$	1,011,473	$	985,627	$	1,051,256	$	25,846		3	%	$	(39,783	)	-4	%	100	%	100	%	100	%

Insured Deposits	$	636,725	$	632,923	$	666,308	$	3,802		1	%	$	(414,008	)	-62	%	63	%	64	%	63	%
Collateralized Deposits		122,448		118,966		152,960		3,482		3	%		(30,512	)	-20	%	12	%	12	%	15	%
Uninsured Deposits		252,300		233,738		231,988		18,562		8	%		404,737		174	%	25	%	24	%	22	%
Total Deposits	$	1,011,473	$	985,627	$	1,051,256	$	25,846		3	%	$	(39,783	)	-4	%	100	%	100	%	100	%

Consumer Deposits	$	458,097	$	458,249	$	466,877	$	(152	)	0	%	$	(8,780	)	-2	%	45	%	47	%	44	%
Business Deposits		420,845		398,719		429,443		22,126		6	%		(8,598	)	-2	%	42	%	40	%	41	%
Public Deposits		132,531		128,659		154,936		3,872		3	%		(22,405	)	-14	%	13	%	13	%	15	%
Total Deposits	$	1,011,473	$	985,627	$	1,051,256	$	25,846		3	%	$	(39,783	)	-4	%	100	%	100	%	100	%

NET INTEREST MARGIN (unaudited)	Quarter Ended									Change From											Nine Months Ended					Change
NET INTEREST MARGIN (unaudited)	Quarter Ended									Change From											Nine Months Ended					Change
($ in 000s)
		Sep 30,			Jun 30,			Sep 30,			Jun 30, 2024					Sep 30, 2023					Sep 30,			Sep 30,
		2024			2024			2023			$		%			$		%			2024			2023			$		%

Average Interest Bearing Balances
Portfolio loans	$	697,904		$	699,404		$	665,300		$	(1,500	)	0	%	$	32,604		5	%	$	695,418		$	653,619		$	41,799		6	%
Loans held for sale	$	1,276		$	1,593		$	497		$	(317	)	-20	%	$	779		157	%	$	1,155		$	601		$	554		92	%
Investment securities	$	285,947		$	283,637		$	284,041		$	2,310		1	%	$	1,906		1	%	$	287,315		$	285,538		$	1,777		1	%
Interest-bearing cash	$	81,755		$	62,494		$	172,119		$	19,261		31	%	$	(90,364	)	-53	%	$	71,080		$	206,259		$	(135,179	)	-66	%
Total interest-earning assets	$	1,066,882		$	1,047,128		$	1,121,957		$	19,754		2	%	$	(55,075	)	-5	%	$	1,054,968		$	1,146,017		$	(91,049	)	-8	%
Non-interest bearing deposits	$	383,332		$	387,740		$	441,782		$	(4,408	)	-1	%	$	(58,450	)	-13	%	$	388,672		$	457,750		$	(69,078	)	-15	%
Interest-bearing deposits	$	615,388		$	596,121		$	619,183		$	19,267		3	%	$	(3,795	)	-1	%	$	600,694		$	628,978		$	(28,284	)	-4	%
Total Deposits	$	998,720		$	983,861		$	1,060,965		$	14,859		2	%	$	(62,245	)	-6	%	$	989,366		$	1,086,728		$	(97,362	)	-9	%
Borrowings	$	13,403		$	13,404		$	13,403		$	(1	)	0	%	$	–		0	%	$	13,403		$	13,401		$	2		0	%
Total interest-bearing liabilities	$	628,791		$	609,525		$	632,586		$	19,266		3	%	$	(3,795	)	-1	%	$	614,097		$	642,379		$	(28,282	)	-4	%

Yield / Cost $⁽¹⁾
Portfolio loans	$	10,509		$	10,092		$	9,570		$	417		4	%	$	939		10	%	$	30,834		$	27,208		$	3,626		13	%
Loans held for sale	$	22		$	28		$	8		$	(6	)	-21	%	$	14		175	%	$	55		$	28		$	27		96	%
Investment securities	$	2,535		$	2,442		$	2,405		$	93		4	%	$	130		5	%	$	7,485		$	6,954		$	531		8	%
Interest-bearing cash	$	1,108		$	847		$	2,322		$	261		31	%	$	(1,214	)	-52	%	$	2,890		$	7,669		$	(4,779	)	-62	%
Total interest-earning assets	$	14,174		$	13,410		$	14,306		$	764		6	%	$	(132	)	-1	%	$	41,265		$	41,859		$	(594	)	-1	%
Interest-bearing deposits	$	2,684		$	2,358		$	1,716		$	326		14	%	$	968		56	%	$	7,033		$	3,437		$	3,596		105	%
Borrowings	$	243		$	242		$	246		$	1		0	%	$	(3	)	-1	%	$	727		$	682		$	45		7	%
Total interest-bearing liabilities	$	2,927		$	2,600		$	1,962		$	327		13	%	$	965		49	%	$	7,760		$	4,119		$	3,641		88	%
Net interest income	$	11,247		$	10,810		$	12,344		$	437		4	%		(1,097	)	-9	%	$	33,505		$	37,740		$	(4,235	)	-11	%

Yield / Cost %⁽¹⁾
Yield on portfolio loans		5.99	%		5.80	%		5.71	%		0.19	%				0.28	%				5.92	%		5.57	%		0.35	%
Yield on investment securities		3.53	%		3.46	%		3.36	%		0.07	%				0.17	%				3.48	%		3.26	%		0.22	%
Yield on interest-bearing cash		5.39	%		5.46	%		5.35	%		-0.07	%				0.04	%				5.43	%		4.97	%		0.46	%
Cost of interest-bearing deposits		1.74	%		1.59	%		1.10	%		0.15	%				0.64	%				1.56	%		0.73	%		0.83	%
Cost of borrowings		7.21	%		7.26	%		7.28	%		-0.05	%				-0.07	%				7.25	%		6.80	%		0.45	%
Cost of deposits and borrowings		1.15	%		1.05	%		0.72	%		0.10	%				0.43	%				1.03	%		0.50	%		0.53	%

Yield on interest-earning assets		5.29	%		5.15	%		5.06	%		0.14	%				0.23	%				5.22	%		4.88	%		0.34	%
Cost of interest-bearing liabilities		1.85	%		1.72	%		1.23	%		0.13	%				0.62	%				1.69	%		0.86	%		0.83	%
Net interest spread		3.44	%		3.43	%		3.83	%		0.01	%				-0.39	%				3.53	%		4.02	%		-0.49	%
Net interest margin		4.19	%		4.15	%		4.37	%		0.04	%				-0.18	%				4.24	%		4.40	%		-0.16	%

⁽¹⁾ Tax-exempt income has been adjusted to a tax equivalent basis at a rate of 21%.

ALLOWANCE FOR CREDIT LOSSES (ACL) (unaudited)	Quarter Ended									Change From											Nine Months Ended					Change
ALLOWANCE FOR CREDIT LOSSES (ACL) (unaudited)	Quarter Ended									Change From											Nine Months Ended					Change
($ in 000s)
		Sep 30,			Jun 30,			Sep 30,			Jun 30, 2024					Sep 30, 2023					Sep 30,			Sep 30,
		2024			2024			2023			$		%			$		%			2024			2023			$		%
Allowance for Credit Losses
Beginning of period balance	$	8,859		$	8,580		$	8,223		$	279		3	%	$	636		8	%	$	8,530		$	8,236		$	294		4	%
Impact of CECL Adoption (ASC 326)		–			–			–			–		-100	%		–		-100	%		–			(157	)		157		-100	%
Charge-offs		(5	)		(57	)		(126	)		52		-91	%		121		-96	%		(97	)		(259	)		162		-63	%
Recoveries		16			1			1			15		1500	%		15		1500	%		19			55			(36	)	-65	%
Net (charge-off) recovery		11			(56	)		(125	)		67		-120	%		136		-109	%		(78	)		(204	)		126		-62	%
Provision (benefit)		27			335			249			(308	)	-92	%		(222	)	-89	%		445			472			(27	)	-6	%
End of period balance	$	8,897		$	8,859		$	8,347		$	38		0	%	$	550		7	%	$	8,897		$	8,347		$	550		7	%

Net charge-off (recovery) to
average portfolio loans		-0.01	%		0.03	%		0.07	%		-0.04	%				-0.08	%				0.01	%		0.04	%		-0.03	%
ACL to portfolio loans		1.27	%		1.26	%		1.24	%		0.01	%				0.03	%				1.27	%		1.24	%		0.03	%

Allowance for unfunded loans
Beginning of period balance	$	617		$	648		$	754		$	(31	)	-5	%	$	(137	)	-18	%	$	698		$	203		$	495		244	%
Impact of CECL Adoption (ASC 326)		–			–			–			–		-100	%		–		-100	%		–			609			(609	)	-100	%
Provision (benefit)		(93	)		(31	)		(5	)		(62	)	200	%		(88	)	1760	%		(174	)		(63	)		(111	)	176	%
End of period balance	$	524		$	617		$	749		$	(93	)	-15	%	$	(225	)	-30	%	$	524		$	749		$	(225	)	-30	%

ABOUT PACIFIC FINANCIAL CORPORATION

Pacific Financial Corporation of Aberdeen, Washington, is the bank holding company for Bank of the Pacific, a state chartered and federally insured commercial bank. Bank of the Pacific offers banking products and services to small-to-medium sized businesses and professionals in western Washington and Oregon. At September 30, 2024, the Company had total assets of $1.16 billion and operated fifteen branches in the communities of Grays Harbor, Pacific, Thurston, Whatcom, Skagit, Clark and Wahkiakum counties in the State of Washington, and three branches in the communities of Clatsop and Clackamas counties in Oregon. The Company also operated loan production offices in the communities of Burlington, Washington and Salem, Oregon. Visit the Company’s website at www.bankofthepacific.com. Member FDIC.

Cautions Concerning Forward-Looking Statements
This press release contains statements that constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and other laws, including all statements in this release that are not historical facts or that relate to future plans or events or projected results of Pacific Financial Corporation and its wholly-owned subsidiary, Bank of the Pacific. Such statements are based on information available at the time of communication and are based on current beliefs and expectations of the Company’s management and are subject to risks and uncertainties, many of which are beyond our control, which could cause actual events or results to differ materially from those projected, anticipated or implied, and could negatively impact the Company’s operating and stock price performance. These risks and uncertainties include various risks associated with growing the Bank and expanding the services it provides, development of new business lines and markets, competition in the marketplace, general economic conditions, changes in interest rates, extensive and evolving regulation of the banking industry, and many other risks. Any forward-looking statements in this communication are based on information at the time the statement is made. We undertake no obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statement. Readers of this release are cautioned not to put undue reliance on forward-looking statements.

CONTACTS:
DENISE PORTMANN, PRESIDENT & CEO
CARLA TUCKER, EVP & CFO
360.533.8873

The MIL Network –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI: Bitget Wallet Powers Nearly 50% of Catizen Airdrop

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

VICTORIA, Seychelles, Oct. 25, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Bitget Wallet, the leading non-custodial Web3 wallet, facilitated nearly 50% of claims for the Catizen’s CATI token airdrop, according to onchain data. This positions Bitget Wallet as the most popular choice for users claiming the Catizen airdrop, underscoring its dominance in accessing the latest Web3 opportunities.

Catizen is an innovative game within the TON and Mantle ecosystems, seamlessly blending gaming with crypto rewards in a play-for-airdrop format. Its integration with Telegram’s mini-app ecosystem has made it highly accessible, creating a dynamic hub for Web 3.0 traffic and quickly attracting players eager to explore the next generation of blockchain gaming. The CATI airdrop claim period, which ran from September 19 to October 24, nearly 50% of all claims were made through Bitget Wallet, underscoring its popularity among users.

Bitget Wallet partnered with Catizen to enhance its airdrop experience by providing full gas fee subsidies, enabling users to claim CATI tokens on-chain at no cost. The initiative also included a prize pool of 50,000 CATI tokens for users completing designated tasks. Furthermore, Bitget Wallet integrated Catizen’s Game Center by adding a dedicated section within its DApp platform for easy access. This collaboration enriches the Catizen community and solidifies Bitget Wallet’s role within the expanding TON ecosystem.

Alvin Kan, COO of Bitget Wallet, stated, “Our partnership with Catizen is a step for making blockchain gaming more accessible. By facilitating seamless access to the Catizen game and its token airdrop, we are removing barriers to participation and empowering users to explore new opportunities, ultimately fostering a vibrant blockchain gaming community and Web3 ecosystem.“

About Bitget Wallet

Bitget Wallet is the home of Web3, where endless possibilities come together in one wallet. Uniting over 40 million users, this non-custodial wallet brings everything onchain in one place—asset management, quick swaps, rewards, staking, trading tools, live market data, a DApp browser, and an NFT marketplace. With wallet options like mnemonic, MPC, AA, and a Telegram bot, Bitget Wallet serves everyone from beginners to advanced traders. Supporting 100+ blockchains, 20,000+ DApps and 500,000+ tokens, it connects to hundreds of DEXs and cross-chain bridges for seamless multi-chain trading, and offers a $300 million protection fund to keep your digital assets safe.

Experience Bitget Wallet Lite to start your Web3 journey.

About Catizen

Catizen is a revolutionary gaming bot on Telegram that seamlessly integrates the messaging app Telegram with multiple blockchains, including TON and Mantle Network. It redefines Web 3.0 experiences by enabling -mobile payments with both crypto currencies and fiat currencies. By tapping into Telegram’s vast user base, Catizen aims to create a Web 3.0 traffic hub on an unprecedented scale.

Additionally, Catizen is evolving into a Mini-app Center, integrating features from launchpool platforms, such as early access to new projects, token-based activities, transaction capabilities, along with short videos and e-commerce functionalities. This innovative approach will attract and engage users through gamification and strategic Play-to-Airdrop initiatives, transforming how users access and engage with the Web 3.0 ecosystem.

For more information, visit: X | Official Website | Telegram | Telegram Chat | Bot

A photo accompanying this announcement is available at https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/ce6b68b3-c33e-45b6-bd97-85090f45a5c4

The MIL Network –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI Global: In her first budget, the chancellor faces a minefield of risks

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Steve Schifferes, Honorary Research Fellow, City Political Economy Research Centre, City St George’s, University of London

Ahead of the new government’s first budget on October 30, chancellor Rachel Reeves has revealed her determination to change borrowing rules that will allow her to boost investment spending.

The overriding goal of the government is to promote economic growth, after more than a decade of stagnation in living standards. In the long run, boosting growth will produce more money for the government to improve public services. But while Reeves has given a strong steer as to how she will fund the public investment needed to grow the economy in the long term, she will also have to find money for urgent improvements to struggling public services like the NHS, a key election pledge.

There are three ways that the government can raise the funds it needs to boost investment and improve key public services. It can raise taxes, increase borrowing, or make cuts to spending. Given the scale of the challenge faced by the chancellor, all three are likely.

The government had made a rod for its own back with two of its key election pledges: not to raise the main taxes (income tax, national insurance, and VAT) on “working people”, while sticking to a set of fiscal rules that set strict limits on government borrowing. These pledges were designed to appeal to voters hit by the cost of living, while demonstrating to financial markets that Labour would be cautious with public money. Government borrowing reached nearly £80 billion in last six months, the third highest sum on record.

With the so-called financial “black hole” now estimated at £40 billion, not the £22 billion announced in July, the Treasury will need major tax rises that go well beyond the modest proposals from the election campaign. Although Labour may make some limited increases in other taxes on wealth, such as capital gains tax, this alone will not close the revenue gap.

The most likely candidate to bridge the gap is an increase in employer national insurance (NI) contributions, for example by making employers pay NI on their pension contributions. This could raise more than £15 billion per year. Reeves and prime minister Keir Starmer argue that this would not breach their manifesto commitments – but it will be politically controversial. Observers, including the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) and the Institute for Fiscal Studies, argue that such taxes are eventually felt by workers through either lower wages or staff cuts.

Further spending cuts are also on the cards. In July the chancellor announced a series of cuts, cancelling planned spending on the reform of social care, withdrawing the winter fuel payment to most pensioners, and ordering departments to make efficiency savings to help fund pay awards.

Other than for the NHS, Reeves is expected to squeeze spending in “unprotected” departments (prisons and local government, for example). On welfare spending, the Treasury has the rising bill for disability and incapacity benefits in its sights.

But even these decisions leave the government with a major funding dilemma. How will it pay for capital spending, everything from new hospitals and schools to roads, bridges and other infrastructure? All are key to boosting long-term growth.

While one of Reeves’ fiscal rules aims to ensure that day-to-day spending must be balanced by tax receipts (leading to the need for tax increases), borrowing for long-term public investment is not part of that calculation. But any increased borrowing for investment appears to be sharply curtailed by another fiscal rule, which says that total government debt (including that incurred by borrowing to invest) as a percentage of GDP must be falling within five years.

New government, new rules?

Despite Labour’s embrace of both these tight fiscal rules during the election campaign, the chancellor has now confirmed that she wants to modify this debt rule to allow herself to borrow more.

She plans to change how overall government debt is measured, effectively redefining it by including more government assets to set against the amount being borrowed. The likely new measure, known as “public sector net financial assets”, would include assets like funded local government pension schemes and student loans income, as well as government-owned companies like Great British Energy.

This could give the chancellor up to £50 billion in extra borrowing power for public investment. Her argument is that borrowing to build infrastructure gives the government a tangible asset that will pay for itself in the long term by boosting growth and tax receipts.

None of the choices facing Rachel Reeves will be easy.

The government’s spending watchdog, the OBR, agrees that in the long term, well-planned public sector investment could benefit the economy, although it says it would take a long time to materialise. Many observers, including the former head of the civil service, Gus O’Donnell, and Mark Carney, the former governor of the Bank of England, strongly support increased public investment as a way to boost lagging productivity.

But there are risks in this strategy if it unsettles financial markets. Total government debt on the current measure now stands at £2.6 trillion, nearly the same size as the whole UK economy. It is costing the Treasury around £74 billion a year in interest payments, almost the size of the education budget.

If the bond markets (which buy government debt) take fright, they could force up the cost of borrowing further, which could raise interest rates on mortgages and other consumer borrowing. And news of the chancellor’s plan to change to the fiscal rule did cause bond yields to rise slightly. This suggests if government debt rises too rapidly, even within the new rules, this could have a destabilising effect. So the chancellor will have to judge carefully how much of the extra headroom she should use.

Like all Labour chancellors, Reeves faces the task of keeping both voters and the financial markets happy at the same time. Her strategy could end up alienating rather than pleasing both sides.

Given the scale of Labour’s ambitions, balanced against her limited resources, she may have little choice but to take such a bold approach. But her path between alienating business and disillusioning the public is a narrow one. And the longer it takes for her strategy to bear fruit in terms of a better standard of living and improved public services, the more difficult things will become politically.

Steve Schifferes does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. In her first budget, the chancellor faces a minefield of risks – https://theconversation.com/in-her-first-budget-the-chancellor-faces-a-minefield-of-risks-241939

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Budget will invest in foundations of future growth

Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

Chancellor Rachel Reeves is in Washington D.C. for her first IMF Annual Meetings, where she will say that the Budget is about investing in future growth.

Chancellor Rachel Reeves at the IMF Annual Meetings in Washington D.C.

Reeves will set out how public investment will drive innovation in science and technology, the transition to clean energy, and upgraded infrastructure.
Chancellor to represent British interests in G7, G20 and IMF discussions on the global economy, international financial system and ongoing support for Ukraine.

Rachel Reeves will tell her global counterparts that the Government’s first Budget will “invest in the foundations of future growth,” as she attends her first annual meetings of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in Washington D.C as Chancellor.

The Chancellor will pledge that the Budget next week will be “built on the rock of economic stability” to fix the foundations and deliver change. She will set out how public investment will help fuel mission-led government, from boosting investment in science and technology, transitioning to clean energy and upgrading infrastructure.

The Chancellor will attend G7, G20 and IMF meetings to represent Britain’s interests on issues including the global economy, the international financial system and ongoing support for Ukraine. This follows the UK’s announcement of its £2.26bn contribution to the G7’s Extraordinary Revenue Acceleration (ERA) Loans for Ukraine scheme, backed by the profits from sanctioned Russian sovereign assets. She will also hold a series of bilateral meetings with her international counterparts.

Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves said:

A Britain built on the rock of economic stability is a Britain that is a strong and credible international partner. I’ll be in Washington to tell the world that our upcoming Budget will be a reset for our economy as we invest in the foundations of future growth.

It’s from this solid base that we will be able to best represent British interests and show leadership on the major issues like the conflicts in the Middle East and Ukraine.

At the Annual Meetings, Chancellor Reeves will support proposals to expand financing for development, needed for countries to meet the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals and tackle unsustainable debt. She will also press for all G20 countries to meet G20 best practice on debt transparency and move swiftly to implement support for countries facing pressing liquidity problems. The Chancellor will welcome the agreement of a new G20 roadmap to scale up financing to developing countries through Multilateral Development Banks.

It is the 80th anniversary year of the founding of the IMF and the World Bank, established at a conference in Bretton Woods, New Hampshire in 1944 to promote international cooperation on economic and monetary policies. At this years’ gathering the Chancellor will also call for change to the global financial system to deliver a fairer deal for vulnerable countries.

The IMF released its latest survey of the global economy on Tuesday, in which the UK’s growth forecast was upgraded to 1.1% in 2024. Whilst this is welcome, the Chancellor will make clear to her counterparts that there will be more long-term decisions required to reinforce stability and deliver on the promise of change at her first Budget on 30 October.

The Chancellor’s trip to Washington D.C. follows the International Investment Summit earlier this month, at which it was announced that nearly 38,000 jobs are set to be created across the UK thanks to a total of £63 billion in investment commitments from businesses around the world. The vote of confidence in the UK is a clear sign Britain is open for business and ready to drive sustainable growth across the country.

Published 25 October 2024

MIL OSI United Kingdom –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI Global: Horror movies are as much a mainstay of Halloween as trick or treat − but why are they so bloody?

Source: The Conversation – USA – By James Francis, Jr., Instructional Associate Professor, Texas A&M University

Horror movies are plentiful in 2024, and plenty bloody. The year has seen the release of films awash in blood, such as “Immaculate,” “The First Omen” and “The Strangers.” With Halloween on the way, bloody offerings are streaming, in theaters and running in marathons on cable.

Watch them, and you’ll likely notice that as the decades pass, the directors, writers and studio executives of these films seem to produce more and more on-screen blood, violence and gore. But why?

As a professor of horror studies, I explore the depths of the genre with my students – and for us to understand the evolution of blood in horror cinema, we first consider how films reflect their times.

Alfred Hitchcock and Michael Powell created proto-slashers with “Psycho” and “Peeping Tom,” respectively. Both films were released in 1960 about four months apart, both feature serial killers, and both operate on a “tell, don’t show” visual aesthetic. Rather than show the blood to the audience, the films provide narrative cues to only suggest the blood.

Janet Leigh’s shower scene in ‘Psycho’ is one of the most memorable moments in movie history.
Bettmann via Getty Images

Guts, gore and so much more

In “Psycho,” Marion Crane, played by Janet Leigh, is stabbed to death in the famous shower scene. But the quick-cut editing gives only the illusion of her nude body being slashed as a small amount of blood washes down the drain in black-and-white tones. By not shooting “Psycho” in color, and avoiding the image of bright red blood in the bathtub – Hitchcock’s choice – the film doesn’t seem as violent.

By the late 1960s, the restrictive Hays Code, which prohibited overt on-screen violence and the use of fake blood, was replaced by the less stringent Motion Picture Association of America film ratings system. Filmmakers could latch onto new freedoms to express fear, anxiety and dread in more visceral depictions. One way to do that – more blood.

In “Night of the Living Dead,” George A. Romero’s 1968 seminal zombie flick, the walking dead consume the flesh of the living. Even though the movie is in black and white, the monochromatic presentation does not dull the display of the undead gobbling guts and licking up blood.

The film’s release came six months after the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr., and a clear connection between Romero’s film and the Civil Rights Movement then taking place is apparent. The movie’s heightened gore correlates to the movement’s all-too-bloody violent struggle, as Ben, played by Duane Jones, the sole person of color among the living, hides from the ghouls in an abandoned farmhouse with a group of six white people.

Ben works to keep the group safe but faces ongoing pushback from the white male characters. At the end of the film, a group of vigilantes, believing Ben is a zombie, guns him down before tossing his body into a fire.

The symbolism as a reflection of the times is hard to miss. Romero and John Russo, who co-wrote the screenplay, didn’t initially intend to make a statement on civil rights; but later, during postproduction, Romero realized the assassination of King turned his movie into a “Black film.”

Bloody metaphors

Then came the 1970s, when blood was sprayed all over the screen. But Tobe Hooper’s “The Texas Chain Saw Massacre” (1974), William Friedkin’s “The Exorcist” (1974) and Ridley Scott’s “Alien” (1979) have something else in common: They feature women protagonists who survive the unthinkable.

Once again, blood is a common denominator. Sally’s body is covered in it after escaping Leatherface; Regan’s body, along with the blood, spews green vomit; and Ripley sees an alien burst out of a crew member’s chest. But the films weren’t just gory – they were metaphors for the uphill battle for women’s rights in the 1970s.

The original “Halloween” (1978) also fits here, but with a twist. The character of Laurie Strode, perhaps an early prototype of women protagonists in horror films, connects back to a “tell, don’t show” sensibility while simultaneously embracing changing times. While the first kill shows Michael Myers stabbing his older sister, the audience views the death from the partially veiled perspective of Myers behind his Halloween mask. You see little until her body hits the floor to reveal the blood.

‘Halloween’ was a huge hit and has thus far spawned six direct sequels, one offshoot, a two-part remake and one reboot trilogy over 46 years.
Universal History Archive via Getty Images

Nightmares and reality

In the 1980s, the slasher subgenre dominated horror – and the bloodier, the better: These movies focus on the number of kills and the creative ways the victims are dispatched.

Each sequel in these horror franchises needed to up the kills, if for no other reason than to outdo its predecessors and competitors. Audiences began rooting for villains like Myers, Jason Voorhees and Freddy Krueger, all of whom had their own theme music, and in Freddy’s case, trademark one-liners. Many of the villains had more character development than their victims, who seemed interchangeable and little more than fodder for the slasher machine.

The 1990s had bigger-budgeted, more innovative films, such as Wes Craven’s “New Nightmare” (1994) and “Scream” (1996). Here the attacks are more personal; the stabbings are close-up. CGI, or computer-generated imagery, used in abundance in the “Nightmare” series, allowed for more creative and bloody kills.

Scarier times mean bloodier movies

Since 9/11, horror films have existed in a place where there’s no apparent motive other than violence and bloodshed. In “The Strangers” (2008), the villains tie up, torment and savagely maim their victims. In the 2009 remake of “The Last House on the Left,” it’s the villains who meet a bloody end. Contemporary horror understands how senseless killings on screen are effective, because the removal of emotion from the violence parallels real-world incidents.

‘Ghostface’ is the villain in the popular ‘Scream’ series.
James Gourley/Getty Images Entertainment via Getty Images

By the late 2010s, horror films link to the #MeToo and Time’s Up movements, most notably in the “Halloween” reboot trilogy, as Laurie Strode once again confronts Michael Myers and the trauma he inflicted 40 years prior.

The kills in the new “Halloween” trilogy are extremely bloody and violent. They also mirror the sexual and societal exploitation of women and their bodies. Ultimately, the series allows the protagonist, and the traumatized town of Haddonfield, to acknowledge the evil, confront it and try to finally put an end to it, once and for all.

The evolution in the horror genre’s presentation of blood and gore doesn’t necessarily make for scarier movies, but they often point to the scarier times in which we live. Earlier horror films, comparatively tamer and with less blood, were often box-office successes. But today’s audiences probably appreciate them more for their artistic merits than the fear they induce.

The preferences of horror audiences change over time, much like the ebb and flow of the blood depicted in these movies. The original “Halloween” has hardly a drop; the recent reboots are over the top – but still nowhere close to the mayhem depicted in the just-released “Terrifier 3.”

What the future holds is anyone’s guess. But check out the world around you, and you’ll certainly get a bloody good hint of what’s to come.

James Francis, Jr. does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Horror movies are as much a mainstay of Halloween as trick or treat − but why are they so bloody? – https://theconversation.com/horror-movies-are-as-much-a-mainstay-of-halloween-as-trick-or-treat-but-why-are-they-so-bloody-241214

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI Global: Florida’s new condo laws recognize the total price of living on the beach

Source: The Conversation – USA – By Bill Hughes, Research Director, Kelley A. Bergstrom Real Estate Center, University of Florida

Repairing high-rise condos like this one in Miami Beach can cost millions. Jeffrey Greenberg/Universal Images Group via Getty Images

Nearly a million Florida condo owners face an important deadline at the end of the year. That’s when a law passed in 2022 requires most Florida condo associations to submit inspection reports for their buildings and to collect money from owners to pay for any needed repairs.

Condo owners are reporting that new condominium rules are driving up fees and inducing outrageous assessments.

The media has picked up on the outrage. News articles about condo owners “facing financial turmoil as a result of new building safety regulations” and how “bills are crippling homeowners” lead readers to believe that Florida lawmakers have imposed an egregious tax on the elderly and those on fixed incomes.

This is misleading at best.

As the research director at the University of Florida’s Bergstrom Real Estate Center, I suggest it is important to set emotions aside and see what these laws attempt to accomplish.

Safety inspections

The 2022 state condo law, known as SB-4D, and its 2023 follow-up, SB-154, establish three primary requirements: licensed inspections, reporting and disclosures, and reserve funds.

Importantly, these laws are not tax legislation that directly increases housing costs on condo owners.

But by requiring more inspections, transparency and funding to cover repairs, many owners will face costs much greater than the amounts paid in the past. These new expenses simply reflect more of the true cost of living in a condo near the ocean.

Under the laws, all buildings occupied before 1992 must complete a milestone inspection by Dec. 31, 2024. This is an examination of the building’s structural integrity by an architect or engineer.

The requirement also applies to buildings at least 25 years old that are within 3 miles of the coast.

If the milestone inspection finds a potential structural problem, testing is required to determine if structural repairs are needed. If they are, owners must fund these repairs without an option to waive by vote.

If no damage is identified, then the association must report and post the results, and that concludes the requirement.

Prior to SB-4D, milestone inspections were not required outside of Miami-Dade and Broward counties. Now, they are required statewide and must be reported to local authorities, all unit owners and the public for buyer information.

Adequate savings for repairs

The new regulations also require building associations to budget and collect sufficient reserves to cover the cost of maintaining and replacing parts of their buildings subject to regular wear and tear, such as roofs, elevators and balconies.

History suggests that most homeowners associations struggle to adequately save for repairs and maintenance to keep their properties safe and in top condition.

“Florida has … more associations that are considered weak [in terms of funded reserves] than any other state,” Will Simons, the head of Florida and Southeast Operations at Association Reserves, which conducts reserve studies for condo and community associations, told a colleague as part of a research article.

The Champlain Towers South condominium that collapsed in the Miami suburb of Surfside in June 2021, killing 98 people, is just one example. Simons’ company completed a reserve study of the condo just months prior to the collapse and found its association was significantly underfunded.

The association held approximately US$706,000 in reserves as of January 2021. Association Reserves recommended the association stockpile nearly $10.3 million to account for necessary repairs. That means the Surfside condo’s homeowners association had just 6.9% of the money it needed on hand.

True costs of living by the ocean

More than 16,000 condominium associations representing over 900,000 of Florida’s 1.5 million condominium units are currently affected by the new laws because these units are already more than 30 years old.

Properties that have been sufficiently maintained and hold adequate reserves for future structural repairs will face nothing but an increased disclosure of inspection reports and continued reserve funding.

Many residents, especially retired seniors, are struggling to adapt to the funding requirement. In response, Gov. Ron DeSantis is indicating some form of relief for owners facing financial hardship over these regulations.

Frustration is understandable, as current residents are asked to simultaneously fund 30 years of past deterioration and also set aside savings for the next 30 years. However, policymakers are simply setting guidelines that condo owners should have established for themselves. Properties that face significant financial shocks from SB-4D are, by definition, undermaintained or underfunded.

It is important to separate the intent of these laws from possible overreaction or fraud from condo associations, which is an existing concern. House Bill 1021, signed into law in June 2024, focuses on association governance to manage oversight of this type.

Oceanside concrete structures, roofs, windows and elevators have limited lifespans. These items need to be repaired or replaced to protect residents’ safety. The new regulations are making the true condo costs transparent to unit owners and buyers.

Bill Hughes is affiliated with National Council of Real Estate Investment Fiduciaries (NCREIF), Pension Real Estate Association (PREA), Counselors of Real Estate (CRE), and CFA Institute.

– ref. Florida’s new condo laws recognize the total price of living on the beach – https://theconversation.com/floridas-new-condo-laws-recognize-the-total-price-of-living-on-the-beach-239163

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI Global: Student-athletes find more power in the changing legal landscape of college sports

Source: The Conversation – USA – By Joshua Lens, Associate Professor of Instruction of Sport & Recreation Management, University of Iowa

Money disputes abound between players and universities. Aksonov/E+ via Getty Images

Ever since the NCAA permitted college athletes to get paid by companies that use their names, images and likenesses, athletes have tested the limits of their increasing power.

One of the latest examples is Matthew Sluka, the starting quarterback for UNLV’s first three games of the 2024 season. After helping lead UNLV to three wins and potential contention for a prestigious College Football Playoff bid, Sluka announced on Sept. 24, 2024, he would sit out the rest of the season. His decision is the result of a dispute over compensation for use of his name, image and likeness, commonly referred to as NIL.

While the decision sent shock waves through college athletics, it also shines light on the changing balance of power that favors athletes over their coaches and universities.

As a former lawyer and college athletics compliance administrator – and also as a current university faculty member who has authored several law review articles on legal issues related to NIL – I suggest that Sluka’s situation exemplifies how collegiate athletes can use recent NCAA rules changes to improve their financial situation in the NIL era of college athletics.

Promises and denials

Sluka’s NIL agent claims a UNLV assistant coach failed to fulfill a promise he made Sluka during the recruiting process. That promise, according to Sluka’s agent, was that Sluka would receive US$100,000 of NIL compensation from an NIL collective should he attend UNLV. NIL collectives are generally formed to pool individuals’ and businesses’ funds to provide NIL opportunities and compensation for athletes.

Any such promise by a UNLV assistant coach would violate current NCAA policy. That’s because NCAA policy prohibits coaches from making NIL compensation offers contingent on whether a student enrolls. NIL collectives, on the other hand, may negotiate with athletes during the recruiting process as the result of a U.S. District Court ruling. That ruling prohibits the NCAA from penalizing collectives that negotiate NIL compensation with athletes during the recruiting process.

In a forthcoming BYU Law Review article, however, I suggest that a university whose star athlete transfers because another school’s collective recruited the athlete possesses a viable legal claim against the collective. That claim would be for inducing the athlete to transfer and violate their athletics scholarship agreement.

UNLV denies Sluka’s version of events. The university asserts that Sluka’s representative demanded more compensation from UNLV and its NIL collective in order for Sluka to continue playing. UNLV says it then refused, as such a “pay-for-play” agreement violates NCAA policy, which states that athletes may not accept NIL compensation based on “play” or on-field results.

Perceptions and ‘pay-to-play’

In Sluka’s case, further complicating things is the issue of whether Sluka’s NIL representative is properly registered with the state as an agent, as required by Nevada law. The state may be interested in pursuing enforcement, given the Nevada secretary of state’s relationship with UNLV’s NIL collective. More specifically, Nevada Secretary of State Francisco V. Aguilar co-founded Blueprint Sports, which operates the collective.

NCAA rules allow a football player to retain a year of eligibility if they play in four or fewer games in a season. Sluka exercised this ability by leaving his team. There is little that UNLV can do about it beyond taking away Sluka’s athletic scholarship for leaving the team.

Universities, however, must be increasingly sensitive to providing the necessary procedures, such as hearings and appeal opportunities, before disciplining athletes in the NIL era. As I explain in a forthcoming SMU Law Review article, a recent U.S. District Court decision involving then-University of Illinois men’s basketball player Terrence Shannon Jr. precluded the university from enforcing its suspension of Shannon without providing appropriate processes, lest he lose out on NIL compensation, which the court classified as a constitutionally protected interest.

Issues of fairness linger in the era of NIL deals for college athletes.
David Madison via Getty Images

A slew of lawsuits

Before it granted college athletes the ability to get paid through NIL deals, the NCAA faced long-standing criticism that its policies were unfair to athletes. The argument was that athletes benefited relatively little compared with the NCAA, conferences and universities, even though it was the athletes who provided the product. Along those lines, former college football stars Terrelle Pryor, Reggie Bush and Denard Robinson all recently filed separate lawsuits against the NCAA over denied NIL compensation opportunities.

Some college football luminaries are now questioning whether the pendulum of power has swung too far in favor of athletes in the NIL era. Examples include former Alabama head coach Nick Saban and former Ohio State quarterback and longtime ESPN commentator Kirk Herbstreit. Saban has openly wondered whether the current college football model is sustainable. Herbstreit has lamented “the players having all the control” without any accountability to their coaches and universities.

High-profile college football players, such as quarterbacks Kelly Bryant and D’Eriq King and receiver Gary Bryant Jr., previously exploited NCAA rules permitting them to play in four games and then transfer to another university without sacrificing a season of competition eligibility.

At least publicly, their decisions were due to on-field considerations such as playing time. Sluka’s decision to forgo playing the rest of the season and transfer was different. It is the first time – but likely not the last – a college athlete has publicly based their decision to leave their team mid-season on an NIL dispute.

Sluka’s departure from UNLV makes clear that collegiate athletes’ power to move freely between universities in pursuit of their best financial situation has greatly increased. Meanwhile, their coaches’ and universities’ power to keep them on the team and participating has significantly decreased.

While my full-time employment is as a faculty member at the University of Iowa, I provide consulting services on a contractual basis on the side for universities and athletics conferences. However, I have never performed consulting services for UNLV or any of the individuals mentioned in this piece and do not believe my consulting conflicts in any way with publishing this piece.

– ref. Student-athletes find more power in the changing legal landscape of college sports – https://theconversation.com/student-athletes-find-more-power-in-the-changing-legal-landscape-of-college-sports-240433

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI Global: Debates about Columbus’ Spanish Jewish ancestry are not new − the claim was once a bid for social acceptance

Source: The Conversation – USA – By Devin Naar, Associate Professor of History and Jewish Studies and Chair of the Sephardic Studies Program, University of Washington

‘Landing of Columbus,’ by John Vanderlyn. Architect of the Capitol via Wikimedia Commons

In connection to Columbus Day and Indigenous Peoples Day, media from the BBC and Fox to Reuters and Haaretz reported on new DNA evidence about the holiday’s original namesake. According to research revealed in a recent Spanish documentary, Christopher Columbus was not Italian, as widely assumed, but Sephardic: of Spanish Jewish lineage.

About 1 in 5 people in Spain and Portugal today may indeed be of “converso” origin: descendants of Jews or Muslims who converted to Catholicism, often under threat of death or expulsion. Regardless of whether Columbus was genealogically Jewish, though, there is scant evidence that he considered himself to be Jewish in any meaningful way. After all, he wrote approvingly of the Spanish king and queen’s decision to expel Jews from Spain in 1492.

The claim that Columbus may have been of Spanish Jewish descent is by no means certain; the “new” research has not yet been published in any academic journals. What’s more, it’s far from new.

The debate over the origins of the New World’s “discoverer” stretch back more than a century, to a time when Columbus was more routinely hailed as a hero – whereas today, he is remembered as the man who initiated European settler colonialism in the Americas and the genocide of Indigenous peoples. For decades, some Spanish and American Jewish activists claimed that Columbus was a Sephardic Jew.

One of their own

At the turn of the 20th century, new immigrant groups in the U.S. were seeking acceptance as part of dominant white American society. Spaniards, Jews, Italians and Greeks seized claims that Columbus was one of their own, hoping to combat prejudice that they faced. By linking themselves to the progenitor of white “civilization” in the Americas, they sought to secure their own position on the white side of the color line, with the privileges and protections that status bestowed.

A poster for the Italian-American Exposition of 1892 in Genoa, Italy – often thought to be Columbus’ birthplace.
Twice25 via Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA

U.S. President Benjamin Harrison instituted Columbus Day in 1892, initially as a one-time holiday. The event was meant to celebrate Italian American contributions to society – partly as an apology, following the lynching of 11 Italian immigrants in New Orleans. Decades later, in 1934, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt rendered Columbus Day a federal holiday, even as the U.S. government continued to impose a quota on Italian immigration.

Early claims about Columbus or members of his entourage being Sephardic Jews also emerged in 1892 – the 400th anniversary of the conquerer’s arrival. Oscar Straus, a Jewish American diplomat, commissioned Meyer Kayserling, a rabbi and scholar, to research Jews’ role in the age of conquest. While Kayserling’s book did not say Columbus himself was of Jewish origin, it claimed that many people connected to his voyages were, including an interpreter named Luis de Torres and funder Luis de Santagel. Straus hoped that highlighting Jewish contributions to American society would curtail rising antisemitism in the United States.

Spanish strategy

In contrast, Spanish claims about Columbus as a Sephardic Jew sought to elevate Spain’s own international image. After its 1898 defeat in the Spanish-American War, Spain lost its possessions in the Western Hemisphere and ceased to be a major European colonial power. A cohort of Spanish writers and artists, known loosely as the Generation of ’98, produced an outpouring of cultural creativity grappling with Spain’s new position.

Some politicians and intellectuals drew on economic and cultural arguments to court descendants of Jews expelled from Spain in 1492, whom they viewed as having preserved the Spanish language, and thus providing a new source of influence in the Mediterranean region. Ultimately, the Spanish government issued a decree in 1924 that rendered these descendants eligible for citizenship – an offer it renewed from 2015-2021.

Raquel Venitura and Moise Cohen were wed in Madrid in 1930, the first Hebrew marriage ceremony in Spain since the Inquisition.
Bettmann via Getty Images

Spanish intellectuals became the first to claim that Columbus was a Sephardic Jew, hoping to further elevate Spain’s status, in the wake of the losses of 1898, as the trailblazer of European civilization in the Americas. By World War I, scholar Celso Garcia de la Riega published a theory that not only some of Columbus’ crew had Spanish Jewish origins, but Columbus himself. Nobel Prize nominee Salvador de Madariaga endorsed the theory of Columbus’ Jewish origins in his 1940 book on Don Cristobal Colón.

Crucial moment

The rise of Nazism heightened discussion among American Jews about Columbus and brought Sephardic Jews themselves into the debate – hoping that a connection to the explorer would temper rising antisemitism.

Sephardic Jews also hoped that if Columbus were recognized as one of their own, Ashkenazi Jews, the dominant Jewish group in the United States, would be more likely to treat them with respect. Sephardic Jews coming from the Ottoman Empire – one of the primary places their ancestors sought refuge after Spain – were often maligned as “uncivilized” and “uncultured” due to their associations with the Muslim world.

As Spanish and Portuguese Jews were the first practicing Jews to come to the Americas, Sephardic Jews arriving from the Ottoman Empire at the turn of the 20th century hoped to hitch their story to the grandeur of the country’s first Jewish communities.

In 1933, American Jewish writer Maurice David purported to offer Spanish archival evidence to demonstrate Columbus’ Spanish Jewish bona fides. While David was not Sephardic himself, the Sephardic Jewish community in New York advertised his book’s “sensational” claims in La Vara, a newspaper written in Ladino, the main Sephardic language, also called Judeo-Spanish.

Sephardic men in Seattle, around 1918.
University of Washington via Wikimedia Commons

The most prominent Sephardic exponent of the theory was the former editor of La Amerika, the first Ladino newspaper published in the U.S. During the Second World War, Moise Gadol published a booklet in English called “Christopher Columbus was a Spanish-Jew.”

Gadol sought to elevate the status of his own community of Jews from the Ottoman Empire. By demonstrating links to Columbus, he hoped that all Sephardic Jews – not only those early Spanish and Portuguese Jews who came to the Americas during the colonial period – would be associated with Europe rather than the “Orient,” and with being “white” rather than “brown.”

Gadol also sought to exert pressure on the American public and government to loosen the quotas preventing Jews fleeing Nazi persecution from entering the United States. Two years before, in 1939, the government had rejected all 900 passengers aboard the SS St. Louis, who were forced to return to Europe – an infamous manifestation of the policy.

Gadol’s dubious claims about Columbus, however, did not produce the desired results. Sephardic Jews continued to be marginalized within the broader American Jewish community. Meanwhile, immigration quotas based on nationality – in effect until 1965 – continued to prevent Jewish refugees from finding safe haven in the U.S.

Then … and now

A century ago, embracing Columbus – and the sweeping colonization he represents – was a way for marginalized immigrant groups to claim a sense of belonging as part of the dominant white caste in American society.

Today, it provokes uncomfortable questions. especially claims about Columbus as a Jew. Fixating on his ancestry reinforces the racial blood logic of the Spanish Inquisition, according to which a person was considered Jewish or Muslim based on descent alone – to say nothing of the racial logic of Nazi Germany or the Jim Crow South.

What’s more, the emphasis on Columbus’ personal genealogy distracts from the actual geopolitical forces at play, such as empire building and resource extraction, that propelled Europe’s conquest and mass violence.

As discussions about antisemitism intensify in the U.S. and across the world, perhaps the idea that Columbus was “Jewish” – a conquistador who initiated the destruction of Indigenous peoples – only aggravates the problem.

Devin Naar does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Debates about Columbus’ Spanish Jewish ancestry are not new − the claim was once a bid for social acceptance – https://theconversation.com/debates-about-columbus-spanish-jewish-ancestry-are-not-new-the-claim-was-once-a-bid-for-social-acceptance-242003

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI Global: Doctors are preoccupied with threats of criminal charges in states with abortion bans, putting patients’ lives at risk

Source: The Conversation – USA – By Sophie Bjork-James, Assistant Professor of Anthropology, Vanderbilt University

The study took place in Tennessee, a state that has had a near-total ban on abortions since 2022. Anchiy/E+ via Getty Images

Abortion bans are intended to reduce elective abortions, but they are also affecting the way physicians practice medicine.

That is the key finding from our recently published article in the journal Social Science & Medicine.

Medical providers practicing in states that implemented abortion bans in the wake of the 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Supreme Court decision are forced to balance the needs of their pregnant patients against the risk that the providers could be prosecuted for treating these patients. This dilemma has serious and far-reaching consequences.

We interviewed 22 medical providers working in reproductive health care across Tennessee in the six months following the implementation of the state’s total abortion ban in 2022.

Providers spoke with our team about the need to protect themselves from criminal liability and told us that they were increasingly hesitant to provide care that their patients needed.

Why it matters

A 2024 ProPublica investigation found that at least two women have died in Georgia as a result of being denied medical care stemming from the implementation of these abortion bans. Nearly all of our interviewees spoke about their fear that these kinds of deaths would happen.

Providers told us that patients often believe that these bans include exceptions when the health of the pregnant person is at risk, but that is not always true in practice.

In states with abortion bans, providers grapple with ensuring the health and autonomy of their patients while facing the looming threat of medical malpractice lawsuits and criminal liability.

The Tennessee abortion ban allows for an “exception for situations where the abortion is necessary to prevent the death of a pregnant woman or prevent serious risk of substantial and irreversible impairment of major bodily function.”

The problem is that such cases are rarely clear-cut. And the stakes for health care providers are very high. In certain states, including Tennessee, if they are found to have provided an abortion in a case where the mother’s life or health was not imminently at risk, they can face felony charges, which could include multiple years in prison.

In interviews, providers described many cases where terminating a pregnancy is medically necessary for the pregnant person. Take cases of preterm premature membrane rupture, a condition where a pregnant person’s water breaks before 37 weeks of pregnancy. Serious complications can follow a premature membrane rupture, particularly in cases that do not result in the beginning of labor.

The standard treatment for this condition is to induce labor in an effort to prevent such potential medical complications. However, if it is early on in a pregnancy and the fetus would likely not survive outside the womb, this treatment is now discouraged, as the law does not sufficiently clarify what interventions are allowed to protect the pregnant person.

In many cases, the physical harm the pregnant person is experiencing correlates with the level of legal protection a medical provider receives.

Although doctors are trained to follow best practices around health care treatment, fear of malpractice accusations leads to the widely documented practice of defensive medicine, cases where providers either over-administer testing or avoid risks in an effort to prevent malpractice lawsuits.

Abortion bans make this dynamic far worse because they often involve the threat of criminal prosecution, which is not covered by malpractice insurance. This exposes providers to a new form of risk, one that is shaping how providers interact with patients and provide care.

Our team calls this new form of defensive medicine “hesitant medicine.” Providers are forced to prioritize their own criminal legal protection over the well-being of their patients, so they hesitate to provide treatment that patients need. Hesitancy is exacerbated by bans that are ambiguous about when a provider can intervene during a pregnancy complication.

What’s next

It will take years before researchers have data showing the full picture of how abortion bans are affecting women’s reproductive health. However, our interviews show that these bans are already shaping how providers are treating pregnant people.

A majority of our interviewees had considered moving to a state without an abortion ban to practice medicine with far less stress around the threat of criminal prosecution, a trend that is already occurring. Over time, this exodus of providers could exacerbate the problem of health care deserts in the United States.

To mitigate some of this harm, more effort is needed from medical associations, employers and legislatures to clarify or revise the Tennessee “Human Life Protection Act” in a way that better protects women’s health.

Sophie Bjork-James receives funding from the National Science Foundation.

Anna-Grace Lilly and Isabelle Perry Newman do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Doctors are preoccupied with threats of criminal charges in states with abortion bans, putting patients’ lives at risk – https://theconversation.com/doctors-are-preoccupied-with-threats-of-criminal-charges-in-states-with-abortion-bans-putting-patients-lives-at-risk-240524

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI Global: Foreign countries are helping autocracies repress exiled dissidents in return for economic gain

Source: The Conversation – USA – By Rebecca Cordell, Assistant Professor of Political Science, University of Pittsburgh

Governments, even democratic ones, are willing to aid autocracies in silencing exiled dissidents if the host nation thinks it’s in its economic interest.

That is what we found when looking into cases of transnational repression – the act of governments reaching across their national border to repress diasporas and exiles – from 2014 to 2020.

Since 2014, international watchdog Freedom House recorded 1,034 cases of governments reaching across borders to illegally deport, abduct, intimidate or assassinate their citizens.

The most frequent offenders were autocratic countries such as China (213 cases), Turkey (111), Egypt (42), Tajikistan (38), Russia (32) and Uzbekistan (29).

These governments have extended their reach into over 100 foreign countries to silence critics abroad. While autocracies sometimes act alone or collaborate with nongovernment actors, the most common form of transnational repression involves the governments of countries to which targeted people have fled. This includes democracies working closely with autocratic regimes to arrest, detain and deport people who face the risk of persecution and repression in the home country.

Our analysis of Freedom House data found that cooperation in transnational repression is most common among trade partners and when foreign countries wish to maintain or improve their economic relationship with autocratic governments.

Meanwhile, autocratic countries were most successful in securing cooperation among foreign countries with a weak rule of law.

For example, Turkey has successfully secured cooperation from multiple countries with a weak rule of law, such as Lebanon, in its efforts to silence Turkish journalists and overseas citizens linked to the opposition Gülen movement. Meanwhile, China has used its economic leverage to compel foreign governments to cooperate, with Cambodia deporting 20 Uyghur asylum-seekers to China after signing 14 trade deals with the country. Similarly, Thailand forcibly returned numerous dissident journalists to China, its largest trade partner.

Our analysis looked specifically at countries hosting refugees and asylum-seekers, since having diaspora populations is necessary for transnational repression to occur. For example, we included Poland, which hosts many Russian refugees, but excluded Belize, which has none.

Using Freedom House’s database, we tracked 608 cases of direct government cooperation in transnational repression. We focused specifically on detentions, renditions without legal representation, and unlawful deportations, but we excluded cases such as assassinations where host countries weren’t directly involved.

Then, using statistical models, we analyzed IMF data on annual trade flows and World Bank assessments of a country’s rule of law.

We found strong quantitative evidence that international cooperation on transnational repression relies on a country’s economic ties to the origin country and the quality of the country’s rule of law.

Why it matters

Our findings suggest that many countries are willing to sacrifice the civil liberties of foreign dissidents for economic opportunities with authoritarian governments. Autocracies also appear to be strategically targeting vulnerable states with weak rule of law institutions, such as the police, courts or immigration authorities.

Foreign countries that are less concerned about the consequences of breaking the rule of law are easier to co-opt and coerce, especially when they’re more financially dependent on the autocratic partner.

This provides autocracies with both the opportunity to repress and the leverage to elicit cooperation in violation of the “non-refoulement” rule – which, under international law, protects migrants from being returned to a country where they are at risk of torture.

What still isn’t known

It is difficult to know the full scale of transnational repression. Data measuring transnational repression is able to capture only the “tip of the iceberg,” as Freedom House has put it.

Many instances likely go unobserved due to the secret nature of human rights violations and governmental attempts to cover up, censor and deny abuses. We also know less about what causes autocracies to carry out transnational repression through collaborations with nonstate actors – including political parties, educational and religious groups, businesses and criminal gangs – rather than governments.

More research is needed to establish what prompts autocracies to engage in different types of tactics, from nonphysical instances of transnational repression – harassment, intimidation and threats – to physical forms, such as detention, abduction and physical violence.

The decision to engage in one tactic over another may be driven by different strategic benefits and costs.

The Research Brief is a short take on interesting academic work.

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Foreign countries are helping autocracies repress exiled dissidents in return for economic gain – https://theconversation.com/foreign-countries-are-helping-autocracies-repress-exiled-dissidents-in-return-for-economic-gain-240069

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI Global: Threatening ‘the enemy within’ with force: Military ethicists explain the danger to important American traditions

Source: The Conversation – USA – By Marcus Hedahl, Professor of Philosophy, United States Naval Academy

Members of the Utah National Guard were deployed to Washington in June 2020 in response to public protests and demonstrations. AP Photo/Alex Brandon

On the campaign trail, former President Donald Trump has declared there are serious threats to the United States. First, he said, there is “the outside enemy, and then we have the enemy from within, and the enemy from within, in my opinion, is more dangerous,” as he told Fox News in an Oct. 13, 2024, interview.

He went on to say that “the bigger problem are the people from within. We have some very bad people. We have some sick people, radical left lunatics. And I think. And it should be very easily handled by, if necessary, by National Guard or, if really necessary, by the military.”

Donald Trump discusses ‘the enemy within’ the United States.

When asked on CNN about Trump’s remarks about using the military on U.S. soil, Mark Esper, one of five people who led the Defense Department during Trump’s presidency, said Americans “should take those words seriously,” most especially because Trump had already tried to do so when he was president.

As professors of military ethics, we worry that Trump’s actions while president, and his comments about his plans for a potential second term, may put the military in a tough position. The July 1, 2024, Supreme Court ruling giving the president immunity for official acts – potentially including as commander in chief of the military – would make that tough position even more difficult.

Donald Trump says armed forces should take on ‘the enemy from within’ the U.S.

Response to demonstrations

In the summer of 2020, protests, including some violent ones, arose in cities around the U.S. in the wake of the May 25 murder of George Floyd. Then-President Trump announced he was considering sending the U.S. military into the streets of several American cities. He had already deployed some National Guard members in Washington in an effort to control the demonstrations there.

At the time, the two of us considered the possibility of dissent within the military hierarchy, saying that resistance would be most effective “if it were to come from those at the top.”

Indeed, many of the highest-ranking generals, admirals and Cabinet-level advisers resisted Trump’s requests to send the military to “beat the f— out” of protesters and “crack their skulls” – or even “just shoot them.”

Though Trump reportedly wanted to bring as many as 10,000 soldiers to Washington, fewer troops were deployed in the nation’s capital. No federal military personnel were used against public demonstrations in the U.S. that summer. Some National Guard troops were called up by state governors, not federal orders.

The reasons for civilian control

For his potential second term, Trump says he wants to hire Cabinet and other government officials who will follow his orders without question, rather than people who might try to prevent his worst inclinations from being enacted.

Questions about dissent and disobedience will therefore likely fall on those at more junior levels of military service in a second Trump administration than they did in the first.

The U.S. military has long been dedicated to the principle of civilian control. To minimize the chance of the kind of military occupation they suffered during the Revolutionary War, the country’s founders wrote the Constitution requiring that the president, an elected civilian, would be the commander in chief of the military. In the wake of World War II, Congress went even further, restructuring the military and requiring that the secretary of defense be a civilian as well.

For that reason, in a time of increasing political polarization, military educational institutions are focusing even more explicitly on the oath military members take to the Constitution, rather than to a person or an office.

As the Joint Chiefs of Staff reminded the military after the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection, and just before the inauguration of Joe Biden as president, military personnel serve the nation’s interests, not those of a politician or a political party.

Nonpartisanship could become partisan

When faced with a potential order to deploy the U.S. military within the nation’s borders, however, service members may find themselves in a situation where upholding the military’s tradition of staying out of politics could itself appear partisan.

Military members have a duty to obey orders from superior officers. But as military ethicists, we recognize that the content of an order is not the only factor that determines whether it is a moral one.

The political motivation for an order may be equally important. That’s because the military’s obligation to stay out of politics is deeply intertwined with the mutual obligation of civilian officials not to use the military for partisan reasons.

If an elected official were to attempt to use the military for obviously partisan ends, the decisions of military personnel to either follow the order or resist it would open them up to accusations of partisanship – even if their actions were attempts to protect the military’s strict partisan neutrality.

At the nation’s founding, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson worried about a military that would be loyal to a particular leader rather than to a form of government. James Madison was concerned that soldiers might be used by those in power as instruments of oppression against the citizenry.

Trump has said the National Guard or the military could “easily handle” political protesters. He has recommended one “really rough, nasty” hour of police violence to curb criminal activity. He has expressed a desire for military officers to be obedient to him and not the Constitution.

It’s not clear that military members could follow those kinds of orders and remain nonpartisan. By refusing to follow orders about military deployment to U.S. cities for political ends, members of the armed forces could actually be respecting, rather than undermining, the principle of civilian control. After all, the framers always intended it to be the people’s military – not the president’s.

In 2020, military personnel clear protesters from a park in Washington.
Drew Angerer/Getty Images

Risks for military members

There is a long line of military heroes who had the moral courage not to follow immoral orders. In fact, it was a junior officer who first exposed the widespread use of torture in the global war on terror.

That particular example may be useful to consider in the weeks and months ahead, given the significant effort at the time to argue that some of those immoral orders could nonetheless be legal.

Recently, some of Trump’s former military advisers have raised concerns about the the potential use of U.S. troops in American cities. But several of his civilian advisers have already recommended being less reticent about finding legal means to deploy the military within the country. And a July 1, 2024, Supreme Court ruling gave the president criminal immunity for official acts – which almost certainly include giving orders to the military.

Regardless of who wins the 2024 presidential election, there will likely be significant protests over policy – perhaps even over the results themselves. If the military is ever called in because of those actions, military members would have to consider whether they could ethically follow the orders to do so. To be ready to answer these important questions, they have to consider them now.

We often ask our students to imagine themselves in numerous different ethical situations, both real and hypothetical. In the present circumstance, we believe one set of ethical questions could quickly become very concrete for those serving:

“Would you obey an order from a president – a particular president giving an order for a particular reason – to deploy to a U.S. city? What might it mean for the nation if you did? And what might it mean for American democracy if, in some circumstances, you were brave enough not to?”

Many Americans claim to venerate military men and women, thanking them for their service and standing to celebrate them at sporting events. They may need much more support than that from the American people, and soon.

The academic views expressed in this article are the views of the authors alone and should not be read as endorsing any candidate for office. They do not reflect the official position of the U.S. Naval Academy, the Naval Postgraduate School, the U.S. Navy, the Department of Defense or any other entity within the U.S. government; the authors are not authorized to provide any official position of these entities.

This article contains some material previously published on June 11, 2020.

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Threatening ‘the enemy within’ with force: Military ethicists explain the danger to important American traditions – https://theconversation.com/threatening-the-enemy-within-with-force-military-ethicists-explain-the-danger-to-important-american-traditions-241964

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI Australia: Report calls for regulatory reform to tackle health impacts of gambling

Source: Federation University

A new Lancet Commission report highlights the urgent need for regulatory reform to address the health impacts resulting from the rapid expansion of commercial gambling. The report reveals that gambling harms are far more substantial than previously understood, exacerbated by the increased visibility of the gambling industry through digital and online platforms.

The harms associated with gambling extend beyond financial losses and include physical and mental health problems, relationship breakdown, heightened risk of suicide and domestic violence, increased crime, and loss of employment. According to the report, an estimated 80 million adults worldwide experience gambling disorder or problematic gambling.

Dr. Angela Rintoul, Principal Research Fellow at Federation University and a member of the Lancet Commission, expressed concern over the Australian government’s failure to respond to urgent cross-party recommendations from the Murphy Inquiry.

The Murphy Inquiry ‘you win some, you lose more’ was released in June 2023, detailing 31 recommendations, with the aim of reducing and ending gambling advertising and addressing the serious risk of suicide linked to gambling and a comprehensive national strategy on online gambling harm.

Dr. Rintoul stated, “We know that gambling causes enormous harm not only to those who gamble, but their family members, friends, and colleagues. High levels of gambling contribute significantly to suicide, domestic violence and other health and wellbeing issues. Constant promotion of gambling is exposing young people to gambling advertising as never before, with devastating consequences for many.”

The Lancet Commission report emphasises that the harms of gambling are not evenly distributed, with adolescents, children, and those from disadvantaged socio-economic groups being more at risk.

The Lancet Commission report calls for effective and well-resourced regulatory controls and international leadership to urgently reduce the impact of commercial gambling on public health.

For more information about the Lancet Commission report and its recommendations, please visit www.thelancet.com/commissions/gambling

About the Lancet Commission:

The Lancet Commission is an independent international body of experts that provides evidence-based recommendations to address pressing global health challenges. The Commission brings together leading researchers, policymakers, and practitioners to develop strategies for improving public health and achieving sustainable development.

Quotes attributable to Federation University Australia Vice-Chancellor and President Professor Duncan Bentley

“At Federation University, our mission is to transform lives and enhance communities and the recommendations in the Lancet Commission Report clearly outline urgent recommendations that will help keep our communities safe.”

“Gambling advertising has catastrophic impacts on lives far beyond financial stress and it is our responsibility to protect young people who are especially vulnerable to the risks.”

Quotes attributable to Federation University Australia Pro Vice Chancellor Research and Executive Deal, Institute of Health and Wellbeing, Professor Remco Polman

“The Lancet Commission Report is timely considering the Murphy inquiry in Australia and the government must heed the report’s recommendations. I am proud that Federation University is globally at the forefront of this issue.”

“Gambling does significant harm to the individual as well as their environment. It will be key to develop effective strategies to reduce the harms of excessive gambling and protect our children from the harmful effects and the predatory strategies of gambling companies.”

MIL OSI News –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI: North American Construction Group Ltd. Announces Credit Facility Extension

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

ACHESON, Alberta, Oct. 25, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — North American Construction Group Ltd. (“NACG” or “the Company”) (TSX:NOA.TO/NYSE:NOA) today announced it has finalized an extension and amendment of its senior secured credit facility (the “Credit Facility”). The maturity date has been extended by one year to October 3, 2027. In addition to the extension, the capacity has been increased to provide greater flexibility in operating the Company’s Australian and Canadian businesses.

“We would like to take this opportunity to once again thank National Bank Financial and our syndicate partners for their ongoing support,” Jason Veenstra, Chief Financial Officer stated. “It is encouraging to have all existing members extend. This low-cost facility is the foundation of our debt financing and provides the liquidity and term needed for our business.”

The Credit Facility provides lending capacity of $525 million (from $475 million) through Canadian and Australia dollar tranches and allows for an additional $400 million of secured equipment financing from third party providers (from $350 million). The facility is comprised of a revolver with no scheduled repayments and is not governed by a borrowing base that limits available borrowings. Financial covenants are tested quarterly on a trailing four quarter basis and are generally consistent with the previous agreement except for the fixed charge ratio being replaced with an interest coverage ratio.

About NACG
NACG is one of Canada and Australia’s largest providers of heavy construction and mining services. For over 70 years, NACG has provided services to mining, resource, and infrastructure construction markets.

Jason Veenstra, CPA, CA
Chief Financial Officer
P: 780.960.7171
E: ir@nacg.ca

The information provided in this release contains forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements include statements preceded by, followed by or that include the words “expected”, “estimated” or similar expressions, including the anticipated revenues and backlog to be generated by the contract. The material factors or assumptions used to develop the above forward-looking statements and the risks and uncertainties to which such forward-looking statements are subject are highlighted in the Company’s MD&A for the year ended December 31, 2023 and quarter ending June 30, 2024. Actual results could differ materially from those contemplated by such forward-looking statements because of any number of factors and uncertainties, many of which are beyond NACG’s control. For more complete information about NACG, please read our disclosure documents filed with the SEC and the CSA. These free documents can be obtained by visiting EDGAR on the SEC website at www.sec.gov or on the CSA website at www.sedar.com.

The MIL Network –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI: AIST and QuEra Sign Memorandum of Understanding to Strengthen Collaboration Toward Commercial Use of Quantum Computers

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

BOSTON, Oct. 25, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — QuEra Computing, the leader in neutral-atom quantum computing, today announced that on September 6th, it signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST) to strengthen their collaboration towards the advancement and industrialization of quantum technology. This agreement builds on an April 2024 contract, under which QuEra will deliver a state-of-the-art quantum computer to Japan, installed on-premises alongside AIST’s NVIDIA-powered ABCI-Q supercomputer.

As part of this new collaboration, QuEra will establish and operate a cloud-based platform, providing remote access to the quantum computer for researchers, collaborators, and external users. This platform will seamlessly integrate with AIST’s high-performance computing (HPC) infrastructure, including the ABCI-Q supercomputer.

The collaboration will promote the development of a hybrid environment between ABCI-Q, a function of Global Research and Development Center for Business by Quantum-AI Technology (G-QuAT) and QuEra Computing’s neutral atom quantum computer. Additionally, the applicability of optical materials and components necessary for the hardware development of next generation neutral atom quantum computers will be tested. This effort aims not only to scale up and enhance the performance of quantum computers but also to standardize processes to strengthen future supply chains.

As the demand for the industrialization of quantum technology continues to grow, the enhanced cooperation between the two institutions is expected to lead to new technological advancements and market creation.

About QuEra
QuEra Computing is the leader in developing and productizing quantum computers using neutral atoms, widely recognized as a highly promising quantum computing modality. Based in Boston and built on pioneering research from Harvard University and MIT, QuEra operates the world’s largest publicly accessible quantum computer, available over a major public cloud and for on-premises delivery. QuEra is developing useful, scalable and fault-tolerant quantum computers to tackle classically intractable problems, becoming the partner of choice in the quantum field. Simply put, QuEra is the best way to quantum. For more information, visit us at quera.com and follow us on X or LinkedIn.

About AIST
The National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST), headquartered in Tokyo, Japan, is one of the country’s largest public research organizations. AIST dedicates itself to bridging innovative technological seeds with commercial applications, enhancing industry and societal welfare.

Media Contact
Merrill Freund
press@quera.com
+1-415-577-8637

The MIL Network –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI: Not Just 15 Seconds Faster Detection – Siterwell Unveils New Combo Smoke & CO Detector for Safer Choices

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

NEW YORK, NY, Oct. 25, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Recently, Siterwell is proud to announce the launch of its new A8612B Combo Smoke & Carbon Monoxide Detector. This alarm achieves smoke detection 15 seconds faster than the latest standard UL217 9th Edition requirements (*Based on the testing from Siterwell’s laboratory, and actual data may slightly vary under real-world conditions). This advancement is driven by Siterwell’s cutting-edge photoelectric sensor, innovative 360° smoke capturing technology, and advanced labyrinth technology, collectively enabling superior smoke detection capabilities.

Research shows that fifty years ago, it took 20 to 30 minutes for a house to be fully engulfed in flames in the event of a fire. Today, that time has been reduced to just 5 to 10 minutes due to changes in building materials and the widespread use of electrical appliances. According to the US Fire Administration, residents may have less than 2 minutes to escape once the smoke alarm sounds during a home fire. In preventing disaster and saving lives, every second counts. But what if residents had 15 seconds more?

Indeed, it is this continuous drive for innovative technology that has enabled Siterwell, since its founding in 2010, to emerge as a leader in the alarm security industry, specializing in a comprehensive range of products including smoke, carbon monoxide, gas, heat, and water level alarms, alongside fog machines for theft prevention and advanced IoT intelligent security systems. Focusing on international development, this company collaborates with leading global brands and standards laboratories to ensure superior product performance and consistency, exporting its products to around 66 countries. Drawing on the diverse experiences gained from its global operations, Siterwell continually innovates to meet the evolving safety needs of homes worldwide.

“Advancing home safety with innovative and efficient solutions is always Siterwell’s commitment. On one hand, dangers in modern homes are constantly evolving, while on the other, the ability to detect these threats quickly and accurately has always been proven essential to ensuring the safety of individuals and homes,” said Aixia, CMO of Siterwell. “The advancement of 15 second faster detection strongly reflects our commitment. By providing household members with 15 seconds more to respond before a fire breaks out, it will significantly enhance personal safety and property protection.”

“We also understand the frustrations users face with frequent false alarms, especially when triggered by everyday activities like cooking smoke that poses no real danger. That’s why we are proud to introduce our detector, equipped with advanced dual-lightwave technology that accurately differentiates between regular cooking smoke and real threats. This feature ensures users can cook with confidence without unwanted alerts.” She added.

Beyond faster smoke detection and fewer nuisance alarms, the new detector exemplifies Siterwell’s dedication to delivering genuine assurance and confidence in safety for its users in each feature:

15-Second Faster, Feel Safer

Every second counts in a fire, as the risk intensifies rapidly. With advanced Photoelectric smoke sensor, this alarm detects smoke 15 seconds faster than the UL9 standard requirements. This crucial head start can make all the difference in an emergency, significantly enhancing the safety of individuals and homes.

Reduced Nuisance Alarms from Cooking

With the advanced dual-lightwave technology, the device accurately differentiates between regular cooking smoke and actual fire smoke. Consequently, the family can enjoy a more peaceful cooking experience, free from unnecessary disturbances.

Accurate CO Level Monitoring

Frequent alarms for low, harmless CO levels can undermine users’ confidence in a CO alarm. The intelligent CO detection system in this alarm tailors its responses to varying CO levels by continuously monitoring low levels, and issuing timely alerts for high levels.

10-Year Battery, Reduced Changes

Alarms with limited battery life need frequent battery changes, increasing the cost of maintenance. In contrast, this 10-year battery alarm will offer long-lasting and worry-free protection for your home, and minimize battery waste for the environment. (*Only A8612B-4R has a built-in 10-year battery. A8612B-6AR is hardwired and comes with 2 replaceable AA batteries.)

One-Click Silence, No Disturbing

A simple press of a button silences low battery alerts for up to 10 hours. This convenient feature enables uninterrupted daily routines while still keeping safety awareness.

Soft Nightlight for Better Sleep

Given that conventional lighting can interrupt sleep due to excessive brightness, this device incorporates a specially designed light carrier. It ensures soft lighting to maintain sleep continuity and activates a potent red alert in response to danger.

Dual-Language Voice Alerts

In bilingual households, it is crucial that every member can quickly understand alerts in an emergency. The smoke detector supports English and French bilingual announcements, ensuring that individuals receive immediate and clear warnings.

With advanced smoke and carbon monoxide detection, this alarm provides unparalleled safety for modern homes. For a limited time, customers can enjoy the safety from these top-tier features at an exclusive price starting from $42.39, now available with a 20% discount. Purchases can be made directly from Siterwell official store or through Siterwell’s Amazon store. By choosing Siterwell’s latest innovations, protect your home and family with more than just dual coverage—but with a vital 15-second head start for greater security!

Social Links

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/SiterwellElectronics

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/siterwell_electronics

YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@siterwell

Media Contact

Company: SITERWELL ELECTRONICS CO., LIMITED

Contact Person: Marketing Team

Email: info@siterwellhome.com

Website: https://store.siterwellhome.com/

SOURCE: SITERWELL ELECTRONICS CO., LIMITED

The MIL Network –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI China: China supports private firms in sci-tech research pursuing quality growth

Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

CHENGDU, Oct. 25 — China will support capable private enterprises in leading national initiatives to make breakthroughs in major technologies and provide private enterprises with greater access to major national scientific research infrastructure, according to the country’s top economic planner.

The country will also support basic research in diversified fields and guide eligible private enterprises to conduct high-risk, high-reward basic research, an official with the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) said Thursday at a meeting on promoting high-quality development of the private sector held in Chengdu, Sichuan Province.

This is the latest effort by Chinese authorities to boost the private sector, which is vital to stabilizing economic growth, promoting innovation and boosting employment.

Zheng Bei, deputy head of the NDRC, called for more concrete efforts to promote the deep integration of technological and industrial innovation to further promote high-quality development in the private sector.

Zheng said China supports private companies’ active participation in implementing major national strategies and building security capacity in key areas, as well as in large-scale equipment upgrades and trade-ins of consumer goods.

China will also improve policy support and market services to promote the application and upgrading of domestically developed products, Zheng said.

Meanwhile, the country will further improve support policies for long-term capital investment in early-stage, small-scale and high-tech projects to unleash more innovation potential on the part of private enterprises, the official added.

The private economy plays an important role in China’s economic development as it contributes over 50 percent of the country’s tax revenue, more than 60 percent of gross domestic product, in excess of 70 percent of technological innovation, and creates over 80 percent of urban jobs.

Earlier this month, China’s Ministry of Justice and the NDRC published a draft of private sector promotion law to solicit public opinion.

The draft, with 77 articles in nine chapters, features equal treatment and protection of private sector businesses. If passed, it will be China’s first foundational law specifically focused on the development of the private economy.

MIL OSI China News –

January 25, 2025

Category: Business

New government, new rules?

Share this page

Updates to this page

Guts, gore and so much more

Bloody metaphors

Nightmares and reality

Scarier times mean bloodier movies

Safety inspections

Adequate savings for repairs

True costs of living by the ocean

Promises and denials

Perceptions and ‘pay-to-play’

A slew of lawsuits

One of their own

Spanish strategy

Crucial moment

Then … and now

Why it matters

What’s next

Why it matters

What still isn’t known

Response to demonstrations

The reasons for civilian control

Nonpartisanship could become partisan

Risks for military members