NewzIntel.com

Category: Politics

  • MIL-OSI USA: Governor Polis Signs Construction Defects Law, Ending Years of Gridlock to Build Housing People Can Afford

    Source: US State of Colorado

    DENVER/AURORA – Today, Governor Polis continued the 2025 bill signing tour, signing new laws to lower costs, and build a Colorado for all. 

    The Governor signed a landmark housing bill, HB25-1272 – Construction Defects & Middle Market Housing, sponsored by Representatives Bird and Boesenecker, Senate President Coleman and Senator Roberts, which addresses construction defects challenges and breaks down barriers that prevented more condos from being built in Colorado. Condos are a historically more affordable option for Coloradans to purchase, and this new law builds on Governor Polis’s efforts to reduce housing costs for Coloradans and help more Coloradans build wealth through home ownership. Read the Governor’s signing statement. 

    “This new law will lead to thousands of new condos being built across our state.. By breaking down the barriers that prevented new condos from being built, we are unlocking new, more accessible housing for Coloradans to buy as a starter home. I thank the bill sponsors for their work on this legislation and look forward to seeing the positive impact on Coloradans,” said Governor Jared Polis. 

    Governor Polis called for reforming construction liability in his State of the State Address this past January. Governor Polis also signed SB25-001 – Colorado Voting Rights Act, sponsored by Senator Gonzales and Representatives Bacon and Joseph, to further secure Colorado’s already gold-standard elections system. Colorado is a model for the nation when it comes to voting and elections, and this new law enshrines the state’s systems to ensure that Coloradans can continue to make their voices heard conveniently and securely. 

    “Colorado has set a high bar for elections and we are proud of our efforts to ensure that every Coloradan can vote easily and securely to make their voices heard. This legislation strengthens election integrity for Colorado and I appreciate the sponsors for their work on this bill,” said Governor Jared Polis. 

    Governor Polis also signed the following bills in signing ceremonies: 

    • HB25-1225 – Freedom From Intimidation In Elections Act, sponsored by Representatives Woodrow and Velasco, and Senators Hinrichsen and Daugherty.
    • HB25-1315 – Vacancies in the General Assembly, sponsored by Representatives Sirota and Pugliese, and Senators Weissman and Kirkmeyer.
    • SB25-050 – Racial Classifications on Government Forms, sponsored by Senator Jodeh and Representative Zokaie.
    • SB25-196 – Insurance Coverage Preventive Health-Care Services, sponsored by Senators Jodeh and Mullica, and Representatives Lieder and Jackson. 

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Guatemalan Man Who Unlawfully Resided in the United States Charged with Fraudulently Sponsoring Unaccompanied Alien Children

    Source: United States Attorneys General

    A Guatemalan national was charged in a criminal complaint filed in the District of New Jersey for allegedly submitting sponsorship applications with false statements to the U.S. government to gain custody of two unaccompanied alien children (UACs) after they entered the United States illegally.

    “The prior administration’s border policies created chaos and allowed bad actors to prey upon the most vulnerable among us,” said Attorney General Pamela Bondi. “This Department of Justice will always seek strong legal penalties to protect children from those who would do them harm.”

    “This prosecution is an example of my office’s dedication to keeping children safe,” said U.S. Attorney Alina Habba for the District New Jersey. “We will continue to bring to justice those who take advantage of our country’s Unaccompanied Alien Children program and threaten the safety of our community. There will be zero toleration for those who prey on the vulnerable.”

    “This was a clear attempt from an individual unlawfully in the United States seeking to undermine our laws and target children, and the FBI will not tolerate it,” said FBI Director Kash Patel. “We remain laser-focused on ensuring people who come into the United States intending to wreak havoc and intentionally violate our rule of law will face serious consequences.”

    According to the criminal complaint, Luciano Tinuar Quino, also known as Luciano Tinuar Guino, 57, who unlawfully entered the United States in 2016 and previously resided in the area of Orange, New Jersey, submitted multiple applications to the Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) under penalties of perjury to sponsor and obtain custody of two UACs.

    As alleged in the complaint, after a 15-year-old Guatemalan male (UAC-1) illegally entered the United States in April 2022, Tinuar Quino submitted to sponsor this UAC that falsely: (1) claimed to be his father; (2) claimed his own name was “A.S.T.” as listed on a Guatemala national identification card he submitted; and (3) provided his date of birth. To prove his relationship with UAC-1, Tinuar Quino submitted a photoshopped image, which he asserted was a photo of himself with UAC-1’s mother.  As a result, the boy was transported from Texas to New Jersey to live with Tinuar Quino.

    Tinuar Quino allegedly submitted to ORR to falsely demonstrate his identity as A.S.T. and falsely claim he was UAC-1’s father.(2)

    Tinuar Quino allegedly submitted to ORR to falsely demonstrate a father-son relationship with UAC-1 and to assert that the clearly photoshopped woman was UAC-1’s mother.

    Tinuar Quino is also charged with submitting false information in an attempt to obtain custody of another UAC. Specifically, the complaint charges that in June 2022, Tinuar Quino submitted an application to sponsor a 17-year-old Guatemalan male (UAC-2) who had entered the United States illegally. As alleged, Tinuar Quino falsely: (1) claimed to be UAC-2’s father; (2) stated that his name was “J.R.M.” as listed on a Guatemala national identification card he submitted; and (3) provided his date of birth. ORR did not approve this application.   

    Tinuar Quino allegedly submitted to ORR to falsely demonstrate his identity as J.R.M. and falsely claim he was UAC-2’s father (2)

    “Attempting to exploit the sponsorship system to gain custody of unaccompanied alien children puts those minors at serious risk,” said U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Acting Director Todd Lyons. “ICE works alongside our law enforcement partners to prevent trafficking and exploitation by individuals falsely claiming to be family. ICE remains firmly committed to detecting deception, upholding the integrity of the immigration process, and, above all, protecting these at-risk children.”

    “Protecting children means holding individuals accountable when they use deception to exploit our systems,” said ORR Acting Director Angie M. Salazar. “ORR acted swiftly to identify the fraud and share with our law enforcement counterparts who located the children and ensured justice was served.”

    Tinuar Quino is charged with two counts of making a false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement. If convicted, he faces a maximum penalty of five years in prison on each count. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.

    These charges are the result of the coordinated efforts of Joint Task Force Alpha (JTFA). JTFA, a partnership with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), has been elevated and expanded by the Attorney General with a mandate to target cartels and other transnational criminal organizations to eliminate human smuggling and trafficking networks operating in Mexico, Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Panama, and Colombia that impact public safety and the security of our borders. JTFA currently comprises detailees from U.S. Attorneys’ Offices along the southwest border. Dedicated support is provided by numerous components of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, led by the Human Rights and Special Prosecutions Section (HRSP) and supported by the Money Laundering and Asset Recovery Section, the Office of Enforcement Operations, and the Office of International Affairs, among others. JTFA also relies on substantial law enforcement investment from DHS, FBI, DEA, and other partners. To date, JTFA’s work has resulted in more than 365 domestic and international arrests of leaders, organizers, and significant facilitators of alien smuggling; more than 334 U.S. convictions; more than 281 significant jail sentences imposed; and forfeitures of substantial assets.

    The FBI and ICE HSI Newark field offices are jointly investigating with assistance from the FBI’s Legal Attaché team in Guatemala. Additionally, HSI’s Center for Countering Human Trafficking in Washington, D.C., and ORR have provided valuable assistance.

    Senior Trial Attorney Christian Levesque of HRSP, JTFA Trial Attorney Spencer M. Perry of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section, and Assistant U.S. Attorney Rebecca Sussman of the District of New Jersey are prosecuting the case, with assistance from HRSP Analyst/Latin America Specialist Joanna Crandall.

    This case is part of Operation Take Back America, a nationwide initiative that marshals the full resources of the Department of Justice to repel the invasion of illegal immigration, achieve the total elimination of cartels and other transnational criminal organizations, and protect our communities from the perpetrators of violent crime. Operation Take Back America streamlines efforts and resources from the Department’s Project Safe Neighborhoods.

    A complaint is merely an allegation. All defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Head of the Criminal Division, Matthew R. Galeotti Delivers Remarks at SIFMA’s Anti-Money Laundering and Financial Crimes Conference

    Source: United States Attorneys General

    Thank you, Bernard, for that kind introduction. And thank you to SIFMA for having me here at your annual AML and Financial Crimes Conference.

    Over the last several months, the Department has made clear that its mission is to protect hard-working Americans from the most serious threats.  In the Criminal Division, we are working relentlessly to eliminate cartels and transnational criminal organizations (TCOs), dismantle human smuggling operations, curb the flow of fentanyl and other dangerous drugs, and neutralize child predators and violent criminals, including by securing significant charges and prison sentences against the worst criminal actors. 

    White-collar crime also poses a significant threat to U.S. interests.  Unchecked fraud in U.S. markets and government programs robs hardworking Americans and harms the public fisc.  The deadly activities of cartels and TCOs are enabled by international money laundering organizations and other financial facilitators.  Illicit financial and logistical networks undermine our national security by facilitating sanctions evasion by hostile nation-states and terror regimes.

    Today, I’m here to discuss the role the Criminal Division plays in combating these crimes.

    The Criminal Division has always been a leader in white-collar enforcement and in the development of corporate enforcement policy.  Our work prevents the distortion of markets through unfair external forces based on fraud and deceit. 

    But recently, those efforts have come at too high a cost for businesses and American enterprise. Companies need clear guidance and certainty on the concrete benefits that each company, their shareholders, boards, and customers can earn through self-reporting, owning up to criminal conduct, remediating, and cooperating with the Department. Too often, businesses have been subject to unchecked and long-running investigations that can be costly—both to the Department and to the subjects and targets of its investigations—and can unduly interfere with day-to-day business operations. These costs and uncertainty have deterred companies from working with the Department and diverted the Department’s resources from tackling the most significant threats facing our country.

    In short, if companies continue to assume that the Department will be quick and heavy-handed with the stick, and stingy with the carrot, the system will continue to generate lengthy drawn-out investigations that are ultimately detrimental to companies and the Department.  This approach has deterred companies from cooperating and allowing the Department to more readily target the most culpable actors.   

    And so the Criminal Division is turning a new page on white-collar and corporate enforcement.

    We start from first principles: recognizing that law-abiding companies are key to a prosperous America.  As stated in the America First Investment Policy, “Economic security is national security.”  Through hard work and innovation, we can build a stronger economy that benefits Americans from Main Street to the C-suite.  We have created the safest and most secure financial system in the world, ensured an even playing field where—no matter your background—you can compete in our marketplace, and rooted out those who would prey on the vulnerable through scams and schemes.

    Most corporations and financial institutions want to play by the rules and provide value for their shareholders and their customers.  And that is what we want them to remain focused on. Excessive enforcement and unfocused corporate investigations stymie innovation, limits prosperity, and reduces efficiency.

    So that ends today.  Current Department leadership recognizes the critical role that American companies play—not just in growing our economy, but also in the fight against the most serious criminal actors.  Many of you, particularly those of you in an AML compliance role, are on the front lines defending your companies against criminal actors.  You work every day to implement systems to keep your companies, your customers, and your shareholders safe.  You follow the guidance from your regulators.  And you can provide critical information to ensure that the Department can prosecute the worst offenders, the individual fraudsters, those that shadow bank for hostile nation-states, cartel enablers, and other financial facilitators of transnational crime.  We are here to prosecute criminals, not law-abiding businesses.

    To that end, I am announcing the Criminal Division’s white-collar enforcement plan.  This plan will focus the Criminal Division’s efforts on the most egregious white-collar crime to make our nation safer and more prosperous, vindicate victims’ rights, maximize the use of the Department’s resources, and provide fairness and transparency to individuals and companies alike. As part of this plan, I am revising three of the key corporate enforcement policies of the Criminal Division to reflect these priorities.

    So, let me take a few minutes and walk you through the changes I am implementing at the Criminal Division under the new Administration.

    Effective white-collar prosecution requires focus, fairness and efficiency—three principles that will guide the work of Criminal Division prosecutors going forward.

    The Criminal Division is laser-focused on the most urgent threats to our country, our citizens, and our economy. I have instructed all of our prosecutors to focus their white-collar prosecution efforts on the key threats to America.

    Fraud perpetrated against Americans as individuals, as taxpayers, and as recipients of government services are core to this focus.  Millions of Americans are victimized by fraudsters every day, some losing their hard-earned life savings.  These schemes harm the public and weaken the integrity of our markets.

    Similarly, dishonest actors seek to take advantage of our government and enrich themselves through waste, fraud, and abuse.  Those that defraud Medicare, our defense infrastructure, and other public benefit programs and government agencies, steal not only from the government but divert much-needed support from the most vulnerable Americans.

    Criminals also seek to exploit our financial system, which is the safest in the world.  Just as Americans seek the security that the system provides, dangerous cartels, hostile nation states, and terrorists seek to exploit that system to further their heinous crimes and threaten our economy and our national security.

    You are the first line of defense against these schemes—companies and particularly financial institutions with well-functioning compliance programs have a unique role to play in this fight.

    We are here to work with you.  Our goal is practicality.  Root out criminal conduct in the most cost-effective ways. But make no mistake, the Criminal Division will hold accountable those that choose a different path, those that enable criminals. It is incumbent upon us as representatives of the American people to do so.   

    Today, the Criminal Division is releasing revised corporate enforcement policies that emphasize the role of and benefits for law-abiding companies and companies that are ready to acknowledge and learn from their mistakes.  Specifically, we are making clearer the benefits for companies that self- report. Companies that are ready to take responsibility should not be overburdened by enforcement.  The revised policies are aimed at incentivizing you to come forward, come clean, reform, and cooperate with the government in efficient investigations and prosecutions of the most culpable actors.

    Let me take a minute to outline the changes you’ll see in our policies.

    We have revised the Criminal Division’s Corporate Enforcement and Voluntary Self-Disclosure Policy, or CEP.  The CEP is the Criminal Division’s primary guide to corporate enforcement and voluntary self-disclosure.  But it had gotten unwieldy and hard to navigate.  We want to be as transparent as we can to companies and their counsel about what to expect under our policies.  Therefore, under my direction, the Fraud Section and the Money Laundering and Asset Recovery Section have revised the CEP to simplify the policy and clarify the outcomes that companies can expect.

    What is the primary message I want you to take back to your companies about the new CEP?  Self-disclosure is key to receiving the most generous benefits the Criminal Division can offer. Why?  Because coming forward and coming clean lets the Department devote its resources to investigating and prosecuting individual wrongdoers and the most egregious criminal schemes.  Companies can avoid what we have all seen in the past: burdensome, years-long investigations that inevitably end in a resolution process in which the company feels it must accept the fate the Department has ultimately decided.

    Under the new CEP—with an easy-to-follow flow chart—companies that voluntarily self-disclose and meet other criteria will receive a declination, not just a presumption of a declination.  More precisely, those companies that meet our core requirements—voluntarily self-disclose to the Criminal Division, fully cooperate, timely and appropriately remediate, and have no aggravating circumstances—will not be required to enter into a criminal resolution.  This is a clear path to declination.

    For companies that are willing to meet all the voluntary self-disclosure, cooperation, and remediation requirements but may have concerns about coming forward because they have aggravating circumstances, the revised policy makes clear that you may still be eligible for a CEP declination based on weighing the severity of those aggravating circumstances and the company’s cooperation and remediation.

    And the changes aim to also provide enhanced clarity and benefits for companies who in good faith self-disclose either not quickly enough or after—unbeknownst to them—the Department has already become aware of the misconduct.  The CEP revisions put an end to the guessing game companies previously faced under these circumstances.

    Now, the CEP makes clear that those companies are still eligible to receive significant benefits—an NPA with a term of fewer than three years, 75% reduction of the criminal fine, and no monitor.

    As I said before—the key here is self-disclosure. Where a company does not self-disclose, it will not receive these benefits.  But, consistent with the high-level principles I’ve discussed, in those circumstances, Criminal Division prosecutors still have discretion to recommend a resolution of any form, with a three-year term, monitor and up to 50% reduction in the fine.

    I am also announcing revisions to our monitor selection policy.

    As with unchecked enforcement, unrestrained monitors can be a burden on businesses that are frequently making self-directed improvements and investing significant amounts in their own compliance programs to solve problems internally and proactively. Without appropriate oversight from the Criminal Division, monitors can create an adversarial relationship with the companies they monitor, impose significant expense, stray from their core mission, and unduly interfere with business.  At times, the money companies spend on their monitor could be better spent investing in their compliance programs or, if they haven’t already, making victims whole.

    In short, the value monitors add is often outweighed by the costs they impose, so you can expect to see fewer of them going forward. For pre-existing monitorships, the Criminal Division is reviewing each one in an effort to narrow their scope or, where appropriate, terminate a monitorship altogether, based on a totality of the circumstances review. 

    In limited circumstances, however, a narrowly-tailored monitorship that is right-sized to the conduct it seeks to remedy, can be an effective resource to provide independent oversight and review to companies that are struggling to implement effective compliance programs on their own.

    I have asked the experts in the Criminal Division to revise the Division’s policy on selection of monitors, consistent with these principles and concerns.  Our new policy clarifies the factors prosecutors must consider to impose a monitor and to narrowly scope and tailor the monitor’s mandate when a monitor is imposed.

    Let me walk you through some of the key changes. The top line value criterion is that the benefits of the monitor should outweigh its costs, both monetary costs, as well as burdens on the business’ operations.  A monitor’s costs must be proportionate to the severity of the underlying conduct, the profits of the company, and the company’s present size and risk profile.  Therefore, factors prosecutors will consider are:

    First, the nature and seriousness of the conduct and the risk that it will happen again.  In analyzing the nature and seriousness of the conduct, the Department will focus chiefly on harms to Americans and American business.

    Second, the availability of other effective independent government oversight—i.e., regulator oversight.

    Third, the efficacy of the company’s compliance program and culture of compliance at the time of resolution.

    Fourth, the maturity of the company’s controls and ability of the company to test and update its compliance program.

    And when a monitor is imposed, that monitor must understand that she or he serves the public by ensuring the company will not reoffend and has an appropriate compliance program. 

    The goal of the Department, the monitor, and the company should be aligned—to bring the company back into good standing and to prevent future misconduct.  In keeping with this public service, the Criminal Division will ensure that costs are proportionate with the underlying criminal conduct, the company’s profits, and the company’s size and risk profile. We will do that by requiring a fee cap, approving budgets for all workplans, and requiring biannual tripartite meetings between the Department, the monitor, and the company.

    And finally, we have made changes to our corporate whistleblower program to reflect our focus on the worst actors and most egregious crimes.

    To do this, I asked MLARS and Fraud to review the corporate whistleblower awards pilot program and recommend additional areas of focus reflecting the Administration’s priorities.

    Today, we have added the following priority areas for tips: procurement and federal program fraud; trade, tariff, and customs fraud; violations of federal immigration law; and violations involving sanctions, material support of foreign terrorist organizations, or those that facilitate cartels and TCOs, including money laundering, narcotics, and Controlled Substances Act violations.

    As with every other area in our program, these tips must result in forfeiture to be eligible for an award.

    What does all this mean for you, the compliance professional and particularly those of you in anti-money laundering and financial crime departments?  We want to hear from you and we want your companies to hear from you.  Now is the time to report, remediate, and strengthen compliance to ensure American prosperity.

    Never before have the benefits of self-reporting and cooperating been so clear.  And you are the eyes and the ears of your companies.  You have the opportunity to see something, report something, and make sure your company can work with the Department to root out individual misconduct and receive all the benefits we have to offer.

    Thank you, again, for having me today.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI USA: SCHUMER – WITH WESTERN NY RELIGIOUS LEADERS & FOOD BANKS – SOUNDS ALARM THAT UNDER GOP PLAN TO CUT SNAP – AMERICA’S LARGEST ANTI-HUNGER PROGRAM – THOUSANDS OF KIDS, SENIORS, & FAMILIES COULD GO…

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for New York Charles E Schumer
    Already 8,000 Cases Of Food For FeedMore WNY Have Already Been Canceled Due To Trump’s Cruel USDA Cuts – Now GOP Wants To Steal Up To $230 Billion From SNAP To Fund Trump’s Tax Breaks For Corporations & Billionaires
    Schumer, With Church Leaders & Advocates, Say This Double Whammy Could Hurtle Families To A Hunger Crisis, Impacting 208,000+ In WNY, Millions Nationwide; Demands GOP Block Cruel Cut To SNAP And Protect Anti-Hunger Programs
    Schumer: No Child Should Go To Bed Hungry. This Is Not A Partisan Issue; This Is A Moral Issue
    As Congressional Republicans look to advance the largest potential cut to the anti-hunger program SNAP in American history this week, U.S. Senator Chuck Schumer stood with Western NY religious leaders, food banks, & farmers to issue a stark warning and demand action against the devastating proposed $230 billion SNAP cut to fund Trump’s tax cuts for corporations & billionaires, that would leave thousands of seniors, families and children hungry. The senator joined with church leaders and hunger advocates to say how this is a moral issue that we should all unite to stop, and Schumer called on the administration to reverse its hunger program cuts and for the NY House Republicans to stand against stealing from SNAP, which over 208,000 in Western NY rely on for food.
    “No child should ever go to bed hungry. But Trump’s slashing of anti-hunger programs at the USDA has already cancelled 8,000 cases of food for FeedMore Western NY.  Now, House Republicans are trying to rush through the budget process and make the largest cut to SNAP in history. With food insecurity on the rise, this is a double whammy that could hurtle families to a hunger crisis,” said Senator Schumer. “Stealing from SNAP to pay for Trump’s tax breaks for corporations & billionaires is as backwards as it gets, and will result in thousands of kids, seniors, and families going hungry. It is not a partisan issue, it is a moral issue. That is why I am here to show what these cuts mean for the nuns, priests, and food banks on the frontlines of fighting against hunger. Together we are demanding a stop to this all-out assault on our federal anti-hunger programs and to protect SNAP for our children, veterans, seniors, and families.”
    “We need to recognize that food insecurity is not just a problem for someone else—it’s our problem. Catholic Charities of Buffalo, alongside FeedMore WNY and others, is committed to addressing it. But we cannot do it alone and we are grateful for the efforts of Senator Schumer and those of his colleagues who truly understand this problem,” said Deacon Steve Schumer, president and CEO of Catholic Charities of Buffalo.
    Schumer added, “It only takes a few NY House Republicans to join us to stop this cruel cut to SNAP. We need NY Republicans to show us which side they are on with their actions. For feeding corporate & billionaires’ greed or for feeding hungry families here in Western NY. We need them to join us in demanding the USDA reverse all of Trump’s cuts to our farmers, food banks, and anti-hunger programs and keep their hands off SNAP to fund Trump’s tax breaks.”
    Schumer explained how Trump’s USDA has already cruelly canceled $1 billion in food assistance, hurting Western New York’s FeedMore WNY, and if these SNAP cuts move forward it would be a double whammy, hurtling us to a hunger crisis. The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) is a lifeline for nearly 3 million NY seniors, veterans and families who rely on the critical funding to purchase groceries. Schumer said that we should be investing more not less in anti-hunger programs, but under the Republican proposal, the average family would be reduced to just $5.00 per day per person. A breakdown of SNAP recipients in Western NY from the Center for American Progress can be found below:

    County

    SNAP Recipients

    % of County on SNAP

    Cattaraugus

    10,959

    14.4%

    Chautauqua

    23,926

    19.1%

    Erie

    147,427

    15.5%

    Niagara

    26,650

    12.7%

    TOTAL

    208,962

     
    Schumer explained the Republican proposal to cut up to $230 billion from SNAP would inevitably mean costs of feeding families shift to states, who simply do not have the capacity to absorb this massive increase in expenses, risking families going hungry. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, mandating New York State to cover even a modest share of SNAP benefits would shift astronomical costs to the state with even just 5% increasing New York State’s costs by nearly $3.5 billion from FY2026 to FY2034. The senator said it is impossible to cut this much from federal SNAP funding without ripping food away from hungry children, seniors, veterans, people with disabilities, and more.
    These agonizing decisions would be amplified even further at the local level, with non-profits, many of whom have already had their funding cut, unable to fill in the gap. Counties could even be forced to shoulder the burden of increased costs in SNAP, using more local dollars to provide coverage because less federal funding will be coming in.
    According to New York’s Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance, in New York’s 26th Congressional District – which represents parts of Erie and Niagara counties – nearly 77,000 households receive an estimated $337 million in annual benefits. 35% of SNAP recipients are children, 14% are elderly, and 10% are people with disabilities. In New York’s 23rd Congressional District over 51,000 households receive an estimated $200 million in annual benefits. 31% of SNAP recipients are children, 17% are elderly, and 12% are people with disabilities.
    Schumer said, “SNAP is a lifeline that helps uplift everyone, from the NY farms who get direct assistance from the program to Western NY families’ kitchen tables. NY Republicans are tying themselves in knots to try to justify these SNAP cuts, but the math shows you cannot make the massive cuts the House’s tax bill proposes without risking the food security for thousands of families. I’m all for reducing any waste or fraud to make the program more efficient, but rushing to pass these massive damaging cuts with no plan while they slash our food banks is a recipe for disaster.”
    The proposed SNAP cuts would be a blow to Western NY food banks which have already been hit hard by Trump’s funding freezes and canceled payments. Earlier this year, the USDA canceled $1 billion in food assistance for organizations to purchase locally grown food. USDA programs provide food banks, schools, and other organizations with federal support to purchase local food products from NY farms.
    FeedMore WNY is facing a projected $3.5M loss in food for 2025, as 12 critical orders of protein, dairy, and produce scheduled for delivery between May and August have already been canceled, resulting in the loss of over 8,000 cases of food, including thousands of dozens of eggs. In 2024, TEFAP CCC purchases accounted for 13% of all food distributed by FeedMore WNY. This loss comes as hunger continues to surge across the region, with FeedMore experiencing a 46% increase in demand since 2021, serving tens of thousands of children, seniors, and working families each year.
    Schumer said these proposed cuts will limit food banks’ ability to keep shelves stocked as more people have been forced to rely on food banks to feed their families. Food bank workers and religious leaders across Upstate New York are concerned about the impact of potential cuts to SNAP on the people they serve, and farmers are worried there will be nowhere to sell their food if SNAP funding levels drop.
    “No matter which way you slice it, this Congressional Republican plan will screw Western New York families, food banks and farmers from farm to table. We need everyone to stand up to these cuts that would take away food from our neighbors in need,” added Schumer.
     “Deeply embedded in many religious traditions is the call to care for the vulnerable, forgotten, and poor in our midst. Offering them as we do, not just charity, but also justice that upholds their dignity and worth as human beings. And what is more basic in providing human dignity and worth for people, than providing them with the food they need? For 16 years I have pastored in WNY, and during that time I have witnessed over and over again the injustices that exist around our food system.  I have seen people who depend on programs like SNAP for their survival, especially the elderly and the children in my congregation, torn down and made to feel like they are unworthy because they cannot afford to eat. We cannot let the people we call our neighbors, our family, and our friends, go hungry in order to save those who already have more than what they need. That is why I am proud to stand with Senator Schumer, and other leaders in our community, to demand justice. To demand that our leaders uphold the dignity of all people, instead of choosing to take the food off their plates,” said Pastor Rebecca Mentzer, Prince of Peace Lutheran Church.
    “As the director of Primera’s Food Pantry, I see firsthand how many of our neighbors have to make impossible choices—between paying bills or putting food on the table,” said Pastor Cesar Galarza, Community Church Jehovah Jireh. “In recent months, we have seen a 50% increase in individuals who come to our pantry because they can no longer afford groceries. We are grateful to Senator Schumer for being here today and hearing about the nutritional insecurity that many people in our community face, and we urge more lawmakers to follow his lead. Our communities are struggling—not in theory, but in real life—and they need meaningful support to access the basic nutrition every person deserves.”
    “We hope for a day when we do not need millions of dollars in funding because the need in the community is lower – but that day is not today. Food insecurity remains a massive and growing problem across the country, including Western New York. Last year alone, more than 165,700 individuals relied on FeedMore WNY for food assistance, which was a 46 percent increase in just three years’ time. The federal government plays a critical role in alleviating food insecurity, and we appreciate the work Senator Chuck Schumer is doing to fight for this mission critical funding. In 2024, FeedMore WNY received more than $14.9 million in federal funding to purchase food for our food bank distribution network, offer community outreach with SNAP assistance, and provide prepared meals for our community dining sites and home-delivered meal clients. It is imperative that the federal government continue to fund and support food assistance programs including SNAP, TEFAP and Meals on Wheels. Any reduction or elimination of these vital funds would has a devastating effect on the charitable food assistance network and further exacerbate the already massive problem of hunger in WNY and throughout the nation,” said Collin Bishop, Chief Communications Officer FeedMore WNY.
    Proposed rollbacks to the country’s most widely utilized nutrition assistance program would strain budgets for Western NY families. Schumer said decimating funding for SNAP right as costs at grocery stores across the country are skyrocketing will hit the Western NY hard. According to the New York State Community Action Association, more than 14% of people in Erie County live in poverty, including more than 20% of children. According to No Kid Hungry, over half of New Yorkers reported going into debt in the past year due to rising food costs, with over 60% of families with children.
    SNAP not only supplements families’ food budgets, it has also generated great economic benefits for New York State and NY-26 specifically. According to the National Grocers Association, grocery stores across New York State sold over $2.1 billion in groceries to people using SNAP benefits, including $146.1 million in NY-26. This created more than 18,500 New York jobs in the grocery industry, including 1,288 in NY-26, and generated more than $820.8 million in grocery industry wages, including $356.9 million in NY-26.
    Schumer has been a strong advocate for addressing food insecurity in Western New York. Schumer last year secured $3 million for FeedMore WNY to build a new, 197,700-square-foot facility in the fiscal year (FY) 2024 spending bill. The senator secured $2 million to expand FeedMore WNY’s facility in the omnibus end-of-year spending package for FY2023. Additionally, in November 2023, Schumer announced over $40 million for food organizations across the state through the USDA funded New York Food for New York Families program with Governor Hochul, including $2 million for FeedMore and millions more for other Western NY food organizations and school districts.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Senator Murray Statement on House Republicans’ Bill to Defund Planned Parenthood, Slash Medicaid and Kick 13.7 Million Americans Off Their Health Care

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Washington State Patty Murray

    Former HELP Chair Murray has successfully beaten back Republican efforts to defund Planned Parenthood going back decades

    Washington, D.C. — Today, U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), a senior member and former Chair of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee, released the following statement on House Republicans’ actions to undermine access to quality health coverage, including through provisions to “defund” Planned Parenthood and make deep cuts to Medicaid in their reconciliation bill that would result in at least 13.7 million people losing health insurance by 2034, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. Republicans are aiming to enact their legislation via the budget reconciliation process, which only requires a simple majority to pass each chamber of Congress.

    “Defunding Planned Parenthood means ripping away millions of people’s ability to get cancer screenings, birth control, and lifesaving reproductive health care. Despite what Republicans try to claim, women cannot just ‘go somewhere else’ if Planned Parenthood shuts down—Planned Parenthood provides care to more than 2 million people every single year and for many people, those centers are their only source of health care. Defunding Planned Parenthood is defunding basic health care.

    “Americans have made clear time and again that they do not want politicians interfering in their health care—but Republicans are so hell-bent on ripping away reproductive freedom at any cost that they are refusing to listen to their own constituents. House Republicans’ attack on Planned Parenthood is part of their catastrophic proposal to pass the largest Medicaid cut in history, kick nearly 14 million Americans off their health insurance, and raise health care premiums on millions of Americans—all to create room in the budget to pass more tax cuts for billionaires.

    “Republicans tried and failed to defund Planned Parenthood in their last reconciliation bill and you can be sure that Democrats will be fighting with everything we’ve got to stop Republicans from ripping away access to care through Planned Parenthood this time around.”

    Senator Murray is a longtime leader in the fight to protect and expand access to reproductive health care and abortion rights and is widely credited with holding the line against any budget deal that would cut funding for Planned Parenthood in 2011 and leading the fight to uphold President Obama’s policy requiring insurers to cover birth control as part of the Affordable Care Act. Murray has led Congressional efforts to fight back after the Supreme Court’s disastrous decision overturning Roe v. Wade, introducing more than a dozen pieces of legislation to protect reproductive rights from further attacks, protect providers, and help ensure women get the care they need; Murray has led efforts to push for passage of these bills on the floor multiple times. Last year, on the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, Murray led her colleagues in hosting a “State of Abortion Rights” briefing with women who have suffered firsthand from Republican abortion bans, and last June, she chaired a HELP Committee hearing titled “The Assault on Women’s Freedoms: How Abortion Bans Have Created a Health Care Nightmare Across America.” Murray helped lead efforts to force Republicans on the record on votes to protect access to contraception and access to IVF (twice), and led her colleagues in raising the alarm about the threat a second Trump administration poses to reproductive rights and abortion access in every state, as outlined in Project 2025.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: SBA Offers Disaster Assistance to Oklahoma Small Businesses, Nonprofits and Residents Affected by Spring Storms

    Source: United States Small Business Administration

    SACRAMENTO, Calif. – The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) announced the availability of low interest federal disaster loans to Oklahoma small businesses, nonprofits and residents to offset physical and economic losses from severe storms and flooding beginning April 19. The SBA issued a disaster declaration in response to a request SBA received from Gov. Kevin Stitt on May 9.

    The disaster declaration covers the Oklahoma counties of Caddo, Comanche, Cotton, Grady, Kiowa, Stephens and Tillman.

    Businesses and nonprofits are eligible to apply for business physical disaster loans and may borrow up to $2 million to repair or replace disaster-damaged or destroyed real estate, machinery and equipment, inventory, and other business assets.

    Homeowners and renters are eligible to apply for home and personal property loans and may borrow up to $100,000 to replace or repair personal property, such as clothing, furniture, cars, and appliances. Homeowners may apply for up to $500,000 to replace or repair their primary residence.

    Applicants may be eligible for a loan increase of up to 20% of their physical damages, as verified by the SBA, for mitigation purposes. Eligible mitigation improvements include insulating pipes, walls and attics, weather stripping doors and windows, and installing storm windows to help protect property and occupants from future disasters.

    SBA’s Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) program is available to eligible small businesses, small agricultural cooperatives, nurseries and private nonprofit (PNP)organizations impacted by financial losses directly related to this disaster. The SBA is unable to provide disaster loans to agricultural producers, farmers, or ranchers, except for aquaculture enterprises.

    EIDLs are for working capital needs caused by the disaster and are available even if the business or PNP did not suffer any physical damage. They may be used to pay fixed debts, payroll, accounts payable, and other bills not paid due to the disaster.

    Interest rates are as low as 4% for businesses, 3.62% for nonprofits, and 2.75% for homeowners and renters with terms up to 30 years. Interest does not begin to accrue, and payments are not due until 12 months from the date of the first loan disbursement. The SBA sets loan amounts and terms based on each applicant’s financial condition.

    Beginning May 13, SBA customer service representatives will be on hand at a Disaster Loan Outreach Center (DLOC) to answer questions about SBA’s disaster loan program, explain the application process and help individuals complete their applications. Walk-ins are accepted, but you can schedule an in-person appointment in advance at appointment.sba.gov.

    “When disasters strike, SBA’s Disaster Loan Outreach Centers play a vital role in helping small businesses and their communities recover,” said Chris Stallings, associate administrator of the Office of Disaster Recovery and Resilience at the SBA. “At these centers, SBA specialists assist business owners and residents with disaster loan applications and provide information on the full range of recovery programs available.”

    The DLOC hours of operations are listed below.

    COMANCHE COUNTY
    Disaster Loan Outreach Center
    Patterson Community Center
    Library Room
    4 NE Arlington Dr.
    Lawton, OK  73507

    Opens at 12 p.m. Tuesday, May 13

    Mondays – Fridays, 9:00 a.m. – 5:30 p.m.

    To apply online, visit sba.gov/disaster. Applicants may also call SBA’s Customer Service Center at (800) 659-2955 or email disastercustomerservice@sba.gov for more information on SBA disaster assistance. For people who are deaf, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability, please dial 7-1-1 to access telecommunications relay services.

    The deadline to return physical damage applications is July 11. The deadline to return economic injury applications is Feb. 12, 2026.

    ###

    About the U.S. Small Business Administration

    The U.S. Small Business Administration helps power the American dream of business ownership. As the only go-to resource and voice for small businesses backed by the strength of the federal government, the SBA empowers entrepreneurs and small business owners with the resources and support they need to start, grow, expand their businesses, or recover from a declared disaster. It delivers services through an extensive network of SBA field offices and partnerships with public and private organizations. To learn more, visit www.sba.gov.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson urges Court to reject overreach by federal workforce against Trump orderRead More

    Source: US State of South Carolina

    (COLUMBIA, S.C.) – South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson joined a coalition of attorneys general urging a federal court to reject a lawsuit that would dramatically impede on the President’s ability to oversee and manage the Executive Branch. 

    The case, filed by the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), seeks a court order that would halt federal workforce reforms across more than 20 agencies. The states argue that the request is an extreme overreach that would undermine the President’s constitutional authority to manage the Executive Branch. 

    “This isn’t about real, urgent harm; this is about politics,” said Attorney General Wilson. “We cannot allow speculation or policy disagreements to tie the hands of the President, who was given a mandate by the American people to fix decades of federal inefficiency and mismanagement. This case protects the President’s ability to lead the federal government with efficiency. The Constitution prescribes that responsibility to the President; not the courts, and not outside interest groups.” 

    The amicus brief argues that AFGE is unlikely to succeed because the Constitution clearly places federal personnel management within the President’s Article II powers. The brief also points to existing federal laws, including the Civil Service Reform Act, which already provides a clear process for addressing employment disputes, one that does not involve federal district courts.  

    The attorneys general also argue that the plaintiffs haven’t shown the kind of serious and immediate harm that justifies emergency court intervention. They also emphasize that the alleged harm still tilts in favor of allowing the Trump administration to continue its work, and blocking reforms now would not only interfere with the President’s constitutional role but could also undermine public confidence in a government that’s already viewed by many as bloated and inefficient. 

    In addition to South Carolina, attorneys general from the following states joined the brief: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Tennessee, West Virginia, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, and Texas. 

    You can read the brief here. 

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Francis Creek Man Indicted on Federal Crimes Against Minors

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    Richard G. Frohling, Acting United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, announced that on May 12, 2025, a federal indictment was unsealed alleging that Michael J. Kornely (age: 75) of Francis Creek, Wisconsin, transported two separate minor victims across state lines with the “intent to engage in criminal sexual activity,” in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 2423(a), in the years 2005 and 2006.

    Kornely is further alleged to have used a computer to attempt to “persuade, induce, and entice” a minor to engage in unlawful sexual activity contrary to Title 18, United States Code, Section 2422(b). That crime is alleged to have occurred in March of 2024.   

    If convicted of any of the three charges alleged in the indictment, Kornely faces a mandatory 10 years’ imprisonment and up to a lifetime of incarceration. He may also be fined up to $250,000 and would be required to register as a sexual offender under state and federal law.

    This case was investigated by the Manitowoc County Sheriff’s Office and the Federal Bureau of Investigation with the assistance of the Two Rivers Police Department. It will be prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Daniel R. Humble and Timothy W. Funnell.

    This case was brought as part of Project Safe Childhood, a nationwide initiative to combat the growing epidemic of child sexual exploitation and abuse launched in May 2006, by the U.S. Department of Justice. Led by U.S. Attorneys’ Offices and the Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section (CEOS), Project Safe Childhood marshals federal, state and local resources to better locate, apprehend and prosecute individuals who exploit children via the Internet, as well as to identify and rescue victims. For more information about Project Safe Childhood, please visit www.projectsafechildhood.gov.

    An indictment is only a charge and is not evidence of guilt.  The defendant is presumed innocent and is entitled to a fair trial at which the government must prove him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.     

    # # #

    For Additional Information Contact:

    Public Information Officer

    Kenneth.Gales@usdoj.gov

    414-297-1700

    Follow us on Twitter

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Miami-Dade Transit Supervisor, Wife, and Metrorail Contractor Plead Guilty to Bribery

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    MIAMI – Miami-Dade Transit Track and Guideway Supervisor Dale Robinson, his wife Marcia Robinson, and Jessie Bledsoe, a contractor doing work for Miami-Dade Transit, pled guilty in related cases to Federal charges.  Dale Robinson pled guilty to soliciting a bribe from Bledsoe in connection with the issuance of Metrorail repair and maintenance contracts. Marcia Robinson pled guilty to misprision of a felony for helping her husband cover up the bribery. Jessie Bledsoe pled guilty to paying a bribe to Dale Robinson in connection with his contracts with Miami-Dade Transit.  Dale Robinson and Marcia Robinson entered their guilty pleas before U.S. Magistrate Judge Ellen F. D’Angelo and they were accepted by U.S. District Judge K. Michael Moore, while Bledsoe entered his guilty plea in Miami last week before U.S. District Judge Beth Bloom.

    According to the facts admitted at the change of plea hearings, Dale Robinson was the acting General Superintendent and lead Rail Structure and Track Supervisor in the Track and Guideway unit of Miami-Dade Transit. His responsibilities included making recommendations about contractors to be chosen to do Metrorail track maintenance and repair work for the transit unit and overseeing the work done by those contractors, including Bledsoe.  Bledsoe was the co-owner and operator of JB Railroad Contracting, Inc. (JB Railroad), a North Dakota-based company that did railroad track and rail replacement, repair, and maintenance work throughout the United States, including on the Metrorail system.   

    In or around January 2021, while JB Railroad was working on a previously obtained contract for the removal and replacement of Metrorail track fasteners and was in the process of seeking an additional contract to do welding work on the Metrorail system for Miami-Dade Transit, Dale Robinson requested a large bribe from Bledsoe. Bledsoe agreed to pay Robinson that bribe, which was intended to influence Robinson’s selection of the contractor for the upcoming welding project. Bledsoe also agreed to concealing the payment by making it to a company specified by Dale Robinson.

    After this, in late January 2021, Dale Robinson directed his wife, Marcia Robinson, who lived in Maryland, to create a company named Tailored Railroads & Consulting LLC and to open a company checking account on which she would serve as the sole signatory.  Marcia Robinson did this, filing the company paperwork in the State of Maryland.  Dale Robinson then provided the information about Tailored Railroads to Bledsoe so that Bledsoe could disguise the payments intended for Dale Robinson’s personal benefit by making them via checks from JB Railroad to Tailored Railroads.

    After the bribe had been solicited by Dale Robinson, and after Tailored Railroads was created and the checking account opened by Marcia Robinson, during the period of February 2021 through February 2022, Dale Robinson directed Marcia Robinson to send a total of four invoices from Tailored Railroads to JB Railroad.  When Marcia Robinson sent each of these invoices, she knew that Tailored Railroads had not provided goods or services of any type to JB Railroad.

    Bledsoe then caused JB Railroad to issue checks to Tailored Railroads to pay these invoices, even though Tailored Railroads provided no goods or services to JB Railroad, because these actually were the payments of the bribe solicited by Dale Robinson.  A total of four checks were issued from JB Railroad to Tailored Railroads during the period of February 2021 through March 2022 to pay these four invoices.  These four checks totaled approximately $75,956, the amount that Bledsoe ultimately provided to Tailored Railroads for the personal benefit of Dale Robinson in response to Dale Robinson’s bribe solicitation.

    While not knowing all the details of her husband’s illegal bribery agreement with Bledsoe, when the four checks were issued to Tailored Railroads, Marcia Robinson knew that the funds were being paid by Bledsoe for Dale Robinson’s personal benefit in connection with Dale Robinson’s recommendation of JB Railroad for work to be performed for Miami-Dade Transit. Despite this, she did not inform authorities of her husband’s crime, and her actions all helped to conceal his criminal activity.  In addition, beyond issuing these four invoices and receiving the four payments from JB Railroad, Tailored Railroads engaged in no other activity of any type, and it eventually was administratively dissolved by the State of Maryland.

    Dale Robinson and Marcia Robinson are scheduled for sentencing on July 10, 2025, at 2:00 p.m. before U.S. District Judge K. Michael Moore in Miami.  Dale Robinson faces a possible maximum sentence of up to 10 years in prison and Marcia Robinson faces a possible maximum sentence of up to three years in prison.

    Jessie Bledsoe is scheduled for sentencing on August 1, 2025, at 10:30 a.m. before U.S. District Judge Beth Bloom in Miami.  Bledsoe faces a possible maximum sentence of up to 10 years in prison

    U.S. Attorney Hayden P. O’Byrne for the Southern District of Florida, acting Special Agent in Charge Brett Skiles of FBI Miami, and Inspector General Felix Jimenez of the Miami-Dade County Office of Inspector General (MDC-OIG) announced the guilty pleas.

    Assistant U.S. Attorney Edward N. Stamm is prosecuting both cases and Assistant U.S. Attorney Marx Calderon is handling the forfeiture matters on both cases.    

    Related court documents and information may be found on the website of the District Court for the Southern District of Florida at www.flsd.uscourts.gov or at http://pacer.flsd.uscourts.gov, under case number 25-cr-20168.

    ###

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Fall River Woman Sentenced for Stealing Nearly $90,000 in Social Security Benefits Intended for Her Child

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    BOSTON – A Fall River woman was sentenced today in federal court in Boston for stealing her child’s Social Security benefits over a period of six years.    

    Nancy Taylor, 45, was sentenced by U.S. District Court Chief Judge F. Dennis Saylor IV to 10 months in prison, to be followed by three years of supervised release. Taylor was also ordered to pay $86,994 in restitution. In February 2025, Taylor pleaded guilty to one count of theft of government money. Taylor was indicted by a federal grand jury in April 2024.

    From May 2016 through May 2022, Taylor embezzled approximately $86,994 in Social Security benefits that were intended for her minor child. In August 2014, when Taylor applied to receive benefits on behalf of her child as a representative payee, the Social Security Administration (SSA) informed her of her obligation to notify SSA if her child left her custody.  However, Taylor did not notify SSA when she lost custody of her child in May 2016. Instead, Taylor called SSA in October 2021 to update contact information for the child so that she could continue receiving her child’s benefits. Further, in June 2022, Taylor visited an SSA field office to reactivate her receipt of her child’s benefits and provided two fraudulent forms claiming that her child still lived with her and that she spent all the Social Security benefits she received for her child’s care. In reality, Taylor used the vast majority of the stolen funds to pay her own bills.

    United States Attorney Leah B. Foley and Amy Connelly, Special Agent-in-Charge of the U.S. Social Security Administration, Office of the Inspector General, Office of Investigations, Boston Field Division made the announcement. Special Assistant U.S. Attorney James J. Nagelberg of the Major Crimes Unit prosecuted the case.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Booker Statement on Passing of Sharpe James

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for New Jersey Cory Booker
    Newark, N.J. – Today, U.S. Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ) issued the following statement:
    “Sharpe James was a beloved pillar of our shared community, serving the City of Newark for two decades as mayor and giving nearly four decades of his life to public service. I am deeply saddened by his passing, and I extend my most heartfelt condolences to his family, friends, and all who knew him throughout Newark.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: VIDEO: Amid Potential Army Budget Cuts, Senator Peters Presses Army Undersecretary Nominee on the Impact to Michigan’s Defense Facilities

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Michigan Gary Peters
    Published: 05.12.2025

    WASHINGTON, DC – U.S. Senator Gary Peters (MI) underscored the importance of Michigan’s defense production assets during a confirmation hearing in the Armed Services Committee for Michael A. Obadal, President Trump’s nominee to be Under Secretary of the Army. Obadal’s nomination comes as the Army has begun to implement its “Army Transformation Initiative” – an effort to reduce its top-line budget. During the hearing, Peters emphasized the significance of the work carried out at the Detroit Arsenal and the Ground Vehicle Systems Center (GVSC) in Warren, and raised concerns about the impact of potential cuts to these critical defense and economic assets. 
    “I enjoyed our conversation in my office prior to today’s hearing. As we were sitting in the office, the Army Transformation Initiative had just come out. We had an opportunity to talk about that some in the office. But I wanted to follow up because I know you needed more time to take a look at that,” said Senator Peters, a member of the Armed Services Committee and former Lieutenant Commander in the U.S. Navy Reserve. “We talked, if you recall, about the Detroit Arsenal and the Ground Vehicle Systems Center, which are really the center and the heart of the Army’s research and development acquisition and supply chain issues. So, I’m concerned about what impact this could have, and I want to reach out to you again and ask if you’ve had a chance to review it? And what sort of impact do you think it will have on the Detroit Arsenal and GVSC? And is it something we can certainly work on together?”
    In his response, Obadal acknowledged Michigan’s key role as a vehicle hub for the Army and committed to working with Peters on the issue moving forward. 

    To watch the full video of Senator Peters’ questioning, click here.
    Through his role on the Armed Services and Appropriations Committees, Peters has strongly advocated for the Detroit Arsenal and the GVSC as a hub for the development of new cutting-edge technologies that will continue to play a critical role in our national defense and help create good paying jobs in Michigan. 
    Last year, Peters secured $37 million for the construction of a manned/unmanned tactical vehicle lab in Macomb County in the annual defense bill that was signed into law. This builds on funding Peters previously secured for the planning and design of this lab. This space will allow for more efficient testing of these technologies in a System Integration Lab at the Detroit Arsenal located on Macomb County’s Defense Industrial Corridor. The work of this new center will be critical to the Army’s efforts to develop the next generation of unmanned ground vehicle technologies. In recent government funding legislation that was signed into law, Peters also secured $72 million in funding to create research and development laboratory space at the Detroit Arsenal to support its advanced tactical and combat system mission functions.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Trump Signs Ricketts’ Consumer Payment CRA into Law

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Pete Ricketts (Nebraska)
    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Over the weekend, President Donald Trump signed a congressional review act resolution introduced by U.S. Senator Pete Ricketts (R-NE) into law. The resolution nullifies a Biden-era rule governing digital payment applications from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). This CFPB rule stifled innovation and made financial transactions more difficult. Now, it will be easier for consumers to send and receive money among family and friends.
    “Following their election loss, the Biden-Harris CFPB rushed an eleventh-hour rule to attack non-bank digital consumer payment applications,” said Ricketts. “I am happy President Trump signed my resolution into law to reverse this regulation and support American consumers. These are widely popular applications among consumers. President Trump is continuing to pass common sense measures by reversing this Biden-era rule.”
    BACKGROUND 
    On November 21, 2024, the CFPB finalized a rule entitled “Defining Larger Participants of a Market for a General-Use Digital Consumer Payment Applications.” The rule was one of the Biden Administration’s many midnight rulemakings at the end of the year. Effective Jan. 9, 2025, the rule stretched CFPB’s powers to establish new supervision and examination authority. It claimed new authority over nonbank entities identified as “larger participants” in the general-use digital consumer payment applications market. These entities include payment apps, digital wallets, peer-to-peer payment apps, and other entities. “Larger participants” are entities that facilitate at least 50 million consumer payment transactions annually.
    Many payment companies are already regulated at the federal and state level. Consumers are having positive experiences in engaging with these services. Despite minimal consumer complaints about payment services—accounting for only 1% of the CFPB’s 1.3 million complaints in 2023—the CFPB chose to layer additional oversight on an already well-regulated industry.
    This one-size-fits-all solution in search of a problem expands CFPB’s authority without properly identifying a specific market it seeks to supervise. It fails to identify the risks within a specific market that pose harm to consumers that existing regulation doesn’t already mitigate. It also layers overreaching, duplicative regulation that could stifle innovation and lead to fewer services and increased costs. Further, the cost-benefit analysis supporting the rule is insufficient, unrealistic, and notably underestimates a CFPB exam to cost just $25,001.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI: 3D Systems Reports First Quarter 2025 Financial Results

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    ROCK HILL, S.C., May 12, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — 3D Systems Corporation (NYSE:DDD) announced today its financial results for the first quarter ended March 31, 2025.

    • Revenue of $95 million as growth in new hardware systems and related services was offset by a decline in materials sales driven primarily by inventory management in the dental aligner market.
    • Previously announced $50 million cost savings initiative proceeding on schedule for completion by mid-2026. Reduction in operating expenses in Q1 continues to reflect the Company’s focus on cost and efficiency.
    • Company announcing an additional cost reduction initiative estimated to deliver $20 million incremental savings in 2025 to accelerate organizational alignment in response to potential macroeconomic and tariff risks.
    • Company withdrawing full year guidance due to risk of protracted weakness in customer capex spending. Top priority on delivering profitability at current scale. Strong new product portfolio spanning all metal and polymer platforms positions company well for accelerated growth and profitability when customer capex rebounds.
    • Balance sheet significantly strengthened as April sale of Geomagic portfolio provided over $100 million post-tax increase to Company cash reserves, which totaled approximately $250 million as of April 30, 2025.
    Unaudited Three Months Ended
    (in millions, except per share data) March 31, 2025   March 31, 2024
    Revenue $ 94.5     $ 102.9  
    Gross profit $ 32.7     $ 40.9  
    Gross profit margin   34.6 %     39.8 %
    Operating expense $ 69.5     $ 80.8  
    Operating loss $ (36.8 )   $ (39.9 )
    Net loss attributable to 3D Systems Corporation $ (37.0 )   $ (16.0 )
    Diluted loss per share $ (0.28 )   $ (0.12 )
           
    Non-GAAP measures for year-over-year comparisons    
    Non-GAAP gross profit margin   35.0 %     40.1 %
    Non-GAAP operating expense $ 61.6     $ 66.3  
    Adjusted EBITDA $ (23.9 )   $ (20.1 )
    Non-GAAP diluted loss per share $ (0.21 )   $ (0.17 )
                   

    Summary Comments on Results

    Dr. Jeffrey Graves, president and CEO of 3D Systems said, “Our first quarter revenues reflect a continuation of challenging top-line pressures as many customers are delaying their capital investments in order to get greater clarity around potential tariff impacts on their manufacturing and distribution strategies. This is in addition to the ongoing geopolitical and broader macroeconomic uncertainty that we have been experiencing for some time. We believe that these factors led to a noticeable dampening of our customers’ near-term capital spending, particularly in consumer-facing and service bureau related end markets. While we were pleased to see this growth in new printer sales for the second straight quarter, the rate was clearly impacted by these capital spending delays. Encouragingly, this growth in printer sales was driven predominantly by our newest hardware systems, as our strengthened technology portfolio delivered strategic wins for all three of our metal printing platforms, and steady growth broadly in Aerospace and Defense markets. These wins bode well for the future, particularly in the high-reliability Healthcare and Industrial markets, which include Aerospace and Defense, and AI infrastructure, areas that have been an increasing focus for us for some time. These trends were true not only in our US markets, but also in Europe, Asia and the Middle East. With regard to materials sales, the decline we experienced was primarily related to short-term inventory management in the dental orthodontics market. More broadly within our Healthcare segment, we delivered impressive results in spite of the broader economy, with 17% growth in our Personalized Healthcare business, and 18% in our manufacturing operations for FDA-approved parts – both crucial elements of our growth strategy moving forward.”

    Dr. Graves continued, “While margins remained under pressure given lower volumes and less favorable mix, we are focused intently on the items within our direct control. In this respect, our cost reduction plans that we announced last quarter are gaining momentum and contributed approximately $5 million of year-over-year improvement in operating expenses in Q1. While this is the progress we had anticipated, as we continue to assess the unpredictability of the current demand environment, we are taking a more conservative view with respect to revenue expectations for the remainder of 2025 and have announced additional, incremental actions to drive profitability improvements. These latest actions will ensure that our organizational capacity is aligned to our current demand environment. These new actions will be taken in the short term and are designed to deliver $20 million of in-year savings for 2025. Our deliberate preservation of R&D investments over the last few years has yielded a significant wave of new technology introduction across the entirety of our product portfolio, including both our polymer and metal platforms. While the short-term impact on profitability from these investments has been painful, based upon the strong customer interest we have received in these new products, we believe the strength of our offerings and the groundwork we have laid through our application specialists, will be a key competitive differentiator in the market as the headwinds on customer capex spending recede and new production inroads are expanded upon. This is particularly true in metal applications, where our new systems are increasingly preferred for high-quality/high-reliability component manufacturing, for applications within the human body, and in advanced industrial systems. With many of these new products now entering the critical phase of commercialization, our focus can expand to cost reduction activities, including significant footprint consolidations, simplification and modernization of our back-office activities, and a reorganization of our workforce to better align it with current market conditions. Given the scale of our company, we believe these actions can deliver profitability and the positive cash performance needed to sustain our development efforts and serve our customers’ production needs as they expand around the world. In addition, with the closing of our Geomagic asset sale in early April, we have strengthened our balance sheet by adding over $100 million of net proceeds, ending the most recent month with approximately $250 million of cash.”

    Dr. Graves concluded, “So, in short, we have followed a very deliberate strategy for the last three years of investing to be a technology leader in both metals and polymers, and one that has full control over all design, production and sourcing operations that are essential to the quality of our products, as the market for new production applications of 3D printing now opens in earnest. While the short term headwinds driven by tariff risks and other factors are painful and require us to implement significant cost savings initiatives, in the longer-term the new opportunities for localized manufacturing within the US, Europe, India and other nations is a significant driver for long-term value creation for all of our stakeholders.”

    First Quarter 2025 Results

    Revenue for the first quarter of 2025 decreased 8% to $94.5 million compared to the same period last year. The revenue decrease primarily reflects lower materials sales, partially offset by growth in services and hardware systems.

    Healthcare Solutions revenue decreased 9% to $41.3 million compared to the prior year period.

    Industrial Solutions revenue decreased 7% to $53.2 million compared to the prior year period.

    Gross profit margin for the first quarter of 2025 was 34.6% compared to 39.8% in the same period last year. Non-GAAP gross profit margin was 35.0% compared to 40.1% in the same period last year and decreased primarily due to lower volumes and unfavorable price and mix.

    Net loss attributable to 3D Systems Corporation increased by $21.0 million to a loss of $37.0 million in the first quarter of 2025 compared to the same period in the prior year.

    Adjusted EBITDA decreased by $3.8 million to a loss of $23.9 million in the first quarter of 2025 compared to the same period last year primarily driven by lower volumes and unfavorable price and mix, partially offset by an improvement in operating expenses as result of previously announced cost reduction actions.

    2025 Outlook

    Due to the risk of protracted weakness in customer capital investment spending, the Company is withdrawing full year guidance for 2025 as it continues to focus on delivering profitability at its current scale. The Company believes with its strong new product portfolio, spanning all metal and polymer platforms, it is well-positioned for accelerated growth and profitability when customer spending on capex rebounds.

    Financial Liquidity

    At March 31, 2025, cash and cash equivalents totaled $135.0 million and decreased $36.3 million since December 31, 2024. This decrease resulted primarily from cash used in operations of $33.8 million and capital expenditures of $2.8 million. At March 31, 2025, the company had total debt, net of deferred financing costs of $212.3 million.

    Q1 2025 Conference Call and Webcast

    The company will host a conference call and simultaneous webcast to discuss these results on May 13, 2025, which may be accessed as follows:

    Date: Tuesday, May 13, 2025
    Time: 8:30 a.m. Eastern Time
    Listen via webcast: www.3dsystems.com/investor
    Participate via telephone: 201-689-8345

    A replay of the webcast will be available approximately two hours after the live presentation at www.3dsystems.com/investor.

    Forward-Looking Statements

    Certain statements made in this release that are not statements of historical or current facts are forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause the actual results, performance or achievements of the company to be materially different from historical results or from any future results or projections expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. In many cases, forward looking statements can be identified by terms such as “believes,” “belief,” “expects,” “may,” “will,” “estimates,” “intends,” “anticipates” or “plans” or the negative of these terms or other comparable terminology. Forward-looking statements are based upon management’s beliefs, assumptions and current expectations and may include comments as to the company’s beliefs and expectations as to future events and trends affecting its business and are necessarily subject to uncertainties, many of which are outside the control of the company. The factors described under the headings “Forward-Looking Statements” and “Risk Factors” in the company’s periodic filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, as well as other factors, could cause actual results to differ materially from those reflected or predicted in forward-looking statements. Although management believes that the expectations reflected in the forward-looking statements are reasonable, forward-looking statements are not, and should not be relied upon as a guarantee of future performance or results, nor will they necessarily prove to be accurate indications of the times at which such performance or results will be achieved. The forward-looking statements included are made only as the date of the statement. 3D Systems undertakes no obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements made by management or on its behalf, whether as a result of future developments, subsequent events or circumstances or otherwise, except as required by law.

    About 3D Systems

    More than 35 years ago, Chuck Hull’s curiosity and desire to improve the way products were designed and manufactured gave birth to 3D printing, 3D Systems, and the additive manufacturing industry. Since then, that same spark continues to ignite the 3D Systems team as we work side-by-side with our customers to change the way industries innovate. As a full-service solutions partner, we deliver industry-leading 3D printing technologies, materials and software to high-value markets such as medical and dental; aerospace, space and defense; transportation and motorsports; AI infrastructure; and durable goods. Each application-specific solution is powered by the expertise and passion of our employees who endeavor to achieve our shared goal of Transforming Manufacturing for a Better Future. More information on the company is available at www.3dsystems.com.

     
    3D SYSTEMS CORPORATION
    Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets
    (Unaudited)
     
    (in thousands, except par value) March 31, 2025   December 31, 2024
    ASSETS      
    Current assets:      
    Cash and cash equivalents $ 135,040     $ 171,324  
    Accounts receivable, net of reserves — $2,621 and $2,433   104,691       101,471  
    Inventories   120,045       118,530  
    Prepaid expenses and other current assets   39,172       34,329  
    Assets held for sale   2,936       3,176  
    Total current assets   401,884       428,830  
    Property and equipment, net   50,918       51,044  
    Intangible assets, net   17,874       18,020  
    Goodwill   15,102       14,879  
    Operating lease right-of-use assets   51,983       50,715  
    Finance lease right-of-use assets   8,504       8,726  
    Long-term deferred income tax assets   2,107       2,063  
    Other assets   34,983       34,569  
    Total assets $ 583,355     $ 608,846  
    LIABILITIES, REDEEMABLE NON-CONTROLLING INTEREST AND EQUITY      
    Current liabilities:      
    Current operating lease liabilities $ 11,775     $ 9,514  
    Accounts payable   39,767       41,833  
    Accrued and other liabilities   44,310       45,488  
    Customer deposits   5,750       4,712  
    Deferred revenue   32,110       27,298  
    Liabilities held for sale   10,305       10,251  
    Total current liabilities   144,017       139,096  
    Long-term debt, net of deferred financing costs   212,310       211,995  
    Long-term operating lease liabilities   51,525       52,527  
    Long-term deferred income tax liabilities   2,001       2,076  
    Other liabilities   25,829       25,001  
    Total liabilities   435,682       430,695  
    Commitments and contingencies      
    Redeemable non-controlling interest   2,034       1,958  
    Stockholders’ equity:      
    Common stock, $0.001 par value, authorized 220,000 shares; shares issued 135,361 and 135,510 as of March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024, respectively   135       136  
    Additional paid-in capital   1,596,747       1,593,366  
    Accumulated deficit   (1,399,229 )     (1,362,243 )
    Accumulated other comprehensive loss   (52,014 )     (55,066 )
    Total stockholders’ equity   145,639       176,193  
    Total liabilities, redeemable non-controlling interest and stockholders’ equity $ 583,355     $ 608,846  
                   
    3D SYSTEMS CORPORATION
    Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations
    (Unaudited)
     
      Three Months Ended
    (in thousands, except per share amounts) March 31, 2025   March 31, 2024
    Revenue:      
    Products $ 54,723     $ 64,051  
    Services   39,817       38,854  
    Total revenue   94,540       102,905  
    Cost of sales:      
    Products   37,365       39,587  
    Services   24,486       22,396  
    Total cost of sales   61,851       61,983  
    Gross profit   32,689       40,922  
    Operating expenses:      
    Selling, general and administrative   49,769       57,304  
    Research and development   19,683       23,480  
    Asset impairment charges   —       —  
    Total operating expenses   69,452       80,784  
    Loss from operations   (36,763 )     (39,862 )
    Non-operating income (loss):      
    Foreign exchange gain, net   1,139       1,909  
    Interest income   953       2,798  
    Interest expense   (581 )     (714 )
    Other (loss) income, net   (160 )     21,386  
    Total non-operating income   1,351       25,379  
    Loss before income taxes   (35,412 )     (14,483 )
    Provision for income taxes   (671 )     (1,371 )
    Loss on equity method investment, net of income taxes   (903 )     (247 )
    Net loss before redeemable non-controlling interest   (36,986 )     (16,101 )
    Less: net loss attributable to redeemable non-controlling interest   —       (100 )
    Net loss attributable to 3D Systems Corporation $ (36,986 )   $ (16,001 )
           
    Net loss per common share:      
    Basic $ (0.28 )   $ (0.12 )
    Diluted $ (0.28 )   $ (0.12 )
           
    Weighted average shares outstanding:      
    Basic   132,462       130,820  
    Diluted   132,462       130,820  
                   

    3D SYSTEMS CORPORATION
    Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
    (Unaudited)

      Three Months Ended
    (in thousands) March 31, 2025   March 31, 2024
    OPERATING ACTIVITIES      
    Net loss before redeemable non-controlling interest $ (36,986 )   $ (16,101 )
    Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash used in operating activities:      
    Depreciation and amortization   5,712       7,272  
    Accretion of debt discount   316       434  
    Stock-based compensation   4,168       8,252  
    Non-cash operating lease expense   2,371       2,728  
    Provision for inventory obsolescence   1,311       4,259  
    Provision for bad debts   325       (71 )
    Loss on the disposition of businesses, property, equipment and other assets   128       155  
    Gain on debt extinguishment   —       (21,518 )
    Provision for deferred income taxes and reserve adjustments   1,652       714  
    Loss on equity method investment, net of taxes   903       247  
    Changes in operating accounts:      
    Accounts receivable   (1,231 )     (2,391 )
    Inventories   (1,870 )     30  
    Prepaid expenses and other current assets   (4,078 )     (3,277 )
    Accounts payable   (2,799 )     (8,708 )
    Deferred revenue and customer deposits   5,745       7,854  
    Accrued and other liabilities   (4,144 )     (1,017 )
    All other operating activities   (5,309 )     (4,407 )
    Net cash used in operating activities   (33,786 )     (25,545 )
    INVESTING ACTIVITIES      
    Purchases of property and equipment   (2,795 )     (3,190 )
    Proceeds from sale of assets and businesses, net of cash sold   —       3  
    Acquisitions and other investments, net of cash acquired   (550 )     —  
    Other investing activities   (67 )     —  
    Net cash used in investing activities   (3,412 )     (3,187 )
    FINANCING ACTIVITIES      
    Repayment of borrowings/long-term debt   —       (87,150 )
    Taxes paid related to net-share settlement of equity awards   (285 )     (1,710 )
    Other financing activities   (364 )     (327 )
    Net cash used in financing activities   (649 )     (89,187 )
    Effect of exchange rate changes on cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash   1,178       (1,579 )
    Net decrease in cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash   (36,669 )     (119,498 )
    Cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash at the beginning of the year   172,883       333,111  
    Cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash at the end of the period $ 136,214     $ 213,613  
                   
    3D SYSTEMS CORPORATION
    Segment Information
    (Unaudited)
     
      Three Months Ended
    (in millions) March 31, 2025   March 31, 2024
    Revenue:      
    Healthcare Solutions $ 41.3     $ 45.4  
    Industrial Solutions $ 53.2     $ 57.5  
    Total $ 94.5     $ 102.9  
                   
    3D SYSTEMS CORPORATION
    Reconciliations of GAAP to Non-GAAP Measures
     

    Presentation of Information in this Press Release

    3D Systems reports its financial results in accordance with GAAP. Management also reviews and reports certain non-GAAP measures, including: non-GAAP gross profit, non-GAAP gross profit margin, non-GAAP diluted income (loss) per share, non-GAAP Operating expense and Adjusted EBITDA. These non-GAAP measures exclude certain items that management does not view as part of 3D Systems’ core results as they may be highly variable, may be unusual or infrequent, are difficult to predict and can distort underlying business trends and results. Management believes that the non-GAAP measures provide useful additional insight into underlying business trends and results and provide meaningful information regarding the comparison of period-over-period results. Additionally, management uses the non-GAAP measures for planning, forecasting and evaluating business and financial performance, including allocating resources and evaluating results relative to employee compensation targets. 3D Systems’ non-GAAP measures are not calculated in accordance with or as required by GAAP and may not be calculated in the same manner as similarly titled measures used by other companies. These non-GAAP measures should thus be considered as supplemental in nature and not considered in isolation or as a substitute for the related financial information prepared in accordance with GAAP.

    To calculate the non-GAAP measures, 3D Systems excludes the impact of the following items:

    • amortization of intangible assets, a non-cash expense, as 3D Systems’ intangible assets were primarily acquired in connection with business combinations;
    • costs incurred in connection with acquisitions and divestitures, such as legal, consulting and advisory fees;
    • stock-based compensation expenses, a non-cash expense;
    • charges related to restructuring and cost optimization plans, impairment charges, including goodwill, and divestiture gains or losses;
    • certain compensation expense related to the 2021 Volumetric acquisition; and
    • costs, including legal fees, related to significant or unusual litigation matters.

    Amortization of intangibles and acquisition and divestiture-related costs are excluded from non-GAAP measures as the timing and magnitude of business combination transactions are not predictable, can vary significantly from period to period and the purchase price allocated to amortizable intangible assets and the related amortization period are unique to each acquisition. Amortization of intangible assets will recur in future periods until such intangible assets have been fully amortized. While intangible assets contribute to the company’s revenue generation, the amortization of intangible assets does not directly relate to the sale of the company’s products or services. Additionally, intangible assets amortization expense typically fluctuates based on the size and timing of the company’s acquisition activity. Accordingly, the company believes excluding the amortization of intangible assets enhances the company’s and investors’ ability to compare the company’s past financial performance with its current performance and to analyze underlying business performance and trends. Although stock-based compensation is a key incentive offered to certain of our employees, the expense is non-cash in nature, and we continue to evaluate our business performance excluding stock-based compensation; therefore, it is excluded from non-GAAP measures. Stock-based compensation expenses will recur in future periods. Charges related to restructuring and cost optimization plans, impairment charges, including goodwill, divestiture gains or losses, and the costs, including legal fees, related to significant or unusual litigation matters are excluded from non-GAAP measures as the frequency and magnitude of these activities may vary widely from period to period. Additionally, impairment charges, including goodwill, are non-cash. Furthermore, the company believes the costs, including legal fees, related to significant or unusual litigation matters are not indicative of our core business’ operations. Finally, 3D Systems excludes contingent consideration recorded as compensation expense related to the 2021 Volumetric acquisition from non-GAAP measures as management evaluates financial performance excluding this expense, which is viewed by management as similar to acquisition consideration.

    The matters discussed above are tax effected, as applicable, in calculating non-GAAP diluted income (loss) per share.

    Adjusted EBITDA, defined as net income, plus income tax (provision) benefit, interest and other income (expense), net, stock-based compensation expense, amortization of intangible assets, depreciation expense, and other non-GAAP adjustments, all as described above, is used by management to evaluate performance and helps measure financial performance period-over-period.

    A reconciliation of GAAP to non-GAAP financial measures is provided in the accompanying schedules.

    Certain columns may not add due to the use of rounded numbers. Percentages presented are calculated from the underlying numbers in thousands.

    3D Systems does not provide forward-looking guidance for certain measures on a GAAP basis. The company is unable to provide a quantitative reconciliation of forward-looking non-GAAP gross profit margin, Adjusted EBITDA, and non-GAAP operating expense to the most directly comparable forward-looking GAAP measures without unreasonable effort because certain items, including litigation costs, acquisition expenses, stock-based compensation expense, intangible assets amortization expense, restructuring expenses, and goodwill impairment charges are difficult to predict and estimate. These items are inherently uncertain and depend on various factors, many of which are beyond the company’s control, and as such, any associated estimate and its impact on GAAP performance could vary materially.

    Non-GAAP Gross Profit and Gross Profit Margin (unaudited)

      Three Months Ended
    (in millions) March 31, 2025   March 31, 2024
      Gross Profit   Gross Profit Margin (1)   Gross Profit   Gross Profit Margin (1)
    Gross profit (GAAP) $ 32.7       34.6 %   $ 40.9       39.8 %
    Amortization expense   0.2       0.2 %     0.3       0.3 %
    Restructuring expense   0.2       0.2 %     —       — %
    Gross profit (Non-GAAP) $ 33.1       35.0 %   $ 41.2       40.1 %
                                   

    (1) Calculated as non-GAAP gross profit as a percentage of total revenue.

    Non-GAAP Operating Expense (unaudited)

      Three Months Ended
    (in millions) March 31, 2025   March 31, 2024
    Operating expense (GAAP) $ 69.5     $ 80.8  
    Amortization expense   (0.8 )     (2.0 )
    Stock-based compensation expense   (4.2 )     (8.2 )
    Acquisition and divestiture-related expense   (0.9 )     (0.1 )
    Legal and other expense   (1.1 )     (4.2 )
    Restructuring expense   (0.8 )     —  
    Non-GAAP operating expense $ 61.6     $ 66.3  
                   

    Net Loss Attributable to 3D Systems Corporation to Adjusted EBITDA (unaudited)

      Three Months Ended
    (in millions) March 31, 2025   March 31, 2024
    Net loss attributable to 3D Systems Corporation (GAAP) $ (37.0 )   $ (16.0 )
    Interest income, net   (0.4 )     (2.1 )
    Provision for income taxes   0.7       1.4  
    Depreciation expense   4.7       5.0  
    Amortization expense   1.0       2.3  
    EBITDA (Non-GAAP)   (31.0 )     (9.4 )
    Stock-based compensation expense   4.2       8.2  
    Acquisition and divestiture-related expense   0.9       0.1  
    Legal and other expense   1.1       4.2  
    Restructuring expense   1.0       —  
    Net loss attributable to redeemable non-controlling interest   —       (0.1 )
    Loss on equity method investment, net of tax   0.9       0.2  
    Gain on repurchase of debt   —       (21.5 )
    Other non-operating income   (1.0 )     (1.8 )
    Adjusted EBITDA (Non-GAAP) $ (23.9 )   $ (20.1 )
                   

    Diluted Loss per Share (unaudited)

      Three Months Ended
    (in dollars) March 31, 2025   March 31, 2024
    Diluted loss per share (GAAP) $ (0.28 )   $ (0.12 )
    Amortization expense   0.01       0.02  
    Stock-based compensation expense   0.03       0.06  
    Acquisition and divestiture-related expense   0.01       —  
    Legal and other expense   0.01       0.03  
    Restructuring expense   0.01       —  
    Gain on repurchase of debt   —       (0.16 )
    Loss on equity method investment and other   0.01       —  
    Non-GAAP diluted loss per share $ (0.21 )   $ (0.17 )
                   

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Cortez Masto, Blackburn Introduce Bipartisan Legislation to Improve Patient Care and Save Taxpayers Billions

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Nevada Cortez Masto
    Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senators Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.) and Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) introduced the bipartisan Radiology Outpatient Ordering Transmission (ROOT) Act to modernize Medicare’s imaging oversight process. This legislation would remove a key barrier that has delayed implementation of Medicare’s Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) program.
    “When the right imaging is used at the right time, it can lead to better health outcomes and reduce costs for patients and the health care system,” said Senator Cortez Masto. “This commonsense, bipartisan legislation supports evidence-based care and reduces unnecessary scans, saving Medicare billions of dollars while ensuring safer, more personalized care.”
    The Protecting Access to Medicare Act (PAMA) established the AUC program to ensure appropriate ordering of advancing diagnostic imaging. The AUC program was designed to guide clinicians in real-time selection of diagnostic imaging services and reduce unnecessary imaging costs. Full implementation of AUC was supposed to have happened on January 1, 2017, but CMS has been unable to fully launch the program due to challenges incorporating AUC with existing systems. Evidence shows the AUC program improves imaging decisions, reduces unnecessary utilization, and cuts costs for both Medicare and its beneficiaries. Data from CareSelect Imaging revealed $178 million in inappropriate allowed charges in 2023 could have been avoided with AUC consultation.
    The ROOT Actwould remove real-time claims reporting, the primary barrier to the implementation of the AUC program. Instead, this legislation would require providers to attest that they reviewed AUC at the point of care. CMS would conduct retrospective audits based on this data to ensure compliance and inform provider education. An additional carveout reduces administrative burden, exempting those participating in clinical trials and those in small rural practices.
    The ROOT Act could save American taxpayers billions of dollars:
    $2.2 billion reduction in federal spending from Fiscal Year (FY) 2025 – FY 2034.
    $1.6 billion in savings for Medicare beneficiaries from reduced cost-sharing over the same period.
    The full text of the legislation can be found here.
    Senator Cortez Masto has been a champion of affordable, quality health care, including mental and behavioral care. Cortez Masto has pushed pharmacy benefit managers to help lower prescription drug costs. She passed legislation to allow Medicare to negotiate lower drug prices and cap the cost of insulin at $35-a-month for Medicare recipients through the Inflation Reduction Act. To lower health care costs for all Nevadans, Cortez Masto worked to expand health care subsidies for individuals and families getting health care through the exchange. She recently introduced bipartisan legislation to provide patients with transparent and timely access to prescription medications and treatments.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI: Satellogic Secures Multi-Million Dollar Agreement with Asia Pacific Customer

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    DAVIDSON, N.C., May 12, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Satellogic Inc. (NASDAQ: SATL), a leader in high-resolution Earth observation data, announced today it has entered into a multi-million dollar agreement with an Asia Pacific customer.

    The agreement provides the customer with rapid, flexible tasking of Satellogic’s NewSat constellation, enabling prompt delivery of imagery to support a range of applications. This agreement underscores the value and reliability of Satellogic’s satellite imagery for critical applications.

    The agreement enables the customer to leverage Satellogic’s Aleph platform, a cutting-edge self-service interface that empowers customers to schedule and manage their own imagery collections. This direct access and control over a world-class high-resolution constellation allows users to realize the benefits of constellation ownership without the associated high costs.

    “With Satellogic’s Aleph platform, organizations are gaining unprecedented control over their geospatial needs,” said Mark Carmichael, VP of Imagery and Data at Satellogic. “Our self-service platform for high-resolution, on-demand imagery empowers users to drive a more proactive, responsive, and resilient posture.”

    Satellogic remains committed to delivering cutting-edge satellite solutions for customers and is proud to introduce Aleph to accelerate data delivery and meet the growing global demands.

    For more information, please visit: www.satellogic.com

    About Satellogic

    Founded in 2010 by Emiliano Kargieman and Gerardo Richarte, Satellogic (NASDAQ: SATL) is the first vertically integrated geospatial company, driving real outcomes with planetary-scale insights. Satellogic is creating and continuously enhancing the first scalable, fully automated EO platform with the ability to remap the entire planet at both high-frequency and high-resolution, providing accessible and affordable solutions for customers.

    Satellogic’s mission is to democratize access to geospatial data through its information platform of high-resolution images to help solve the world’s most pressing problems including climate change, energy supply, and food security. Using its patented Earth imaging technology, Satellogic unlocks the power of EO to deliver high-quality, planetary insights at the lowest cost in the industry.

    With more than a decade of experience in space, Satellogic has proven technology and a strong track record of delivering satellites to orbit and high-resolution data to customers at the right price point.

    To learn more, please visit: http://www.satellogic.com

    Forward-Looking Statements

    This press release contains “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the U.S. federal securities laws. The words “anticipate”, “believe”, “continue”, “could”, “estimate”, “expect”, “intends”, “may”, “might”, “plan”, “possible”, “potential”, “predict”, “project”, “should”, “would” and similar expressions may identify forward-looking statements, but the absence of these words does not mean that a statement is not forward-looking. These forward-looking statements are based on Satellogic’s current expectations and beliefs concerning future developments and their potential effects on Satellogic. Forward-looking statements are predictions, projections and other statements about future events that are based on current expectations and assumptions and, as a result, are subject to risks and uncertainties. These statements are based on various assumptions, whether or not identified in this press release. These forward-looking statements are provided for illustrative purposes only and are not intended to serve, and must not be relied on by an investor as, a guarantee, an assurance, a prediction or a definitive statement of fact or probability. Actual events and circumstances are difficult or impossible to predict and will differ from assumptions. Many actual events and circumstances are beyond the control of Satellogic. Many factors could cause actual future events to differ materially from the forward-looking statements in this press release, including but not limited to: (i) our ability to generate revenue as expected, (ii) our ability to effectively market and sell our EO services and to convert contracted revenues and our pipeline of potential contracts into actual revenues, (iii) risks related to the secured convertible notes, (iv) the potential loss of one or more of our largest customers, (v) the considerable time and expense related to our sales efforts and the length and unpredictability of our sales cycle, (vi) risks and uncertainties associated with contracts, (vii) risk related to our pricing structure, (viii) our ability to scale production of our satellites as planned, (ix) unforeseen risks, challenges and uncertainties related to our expansion into new business lines, (x) our dependence on third parties to transport and launch our satellites into space, (xi) our reliance on third-party vendors and manufacturers to build and provide certain satellite components, products, or services, (xii) our dependence on ground station and cloud-based computing infrastructure operated by third parties for value-added services, and any errors, disruption, performance problems, or failure in their or our operational infrastructure, (xiii) risk related to certain minimum service requirements in our customer contracts, (xiv) market acceptance of our EO services and our dependence upon our ability to keep pace with the latest technological advances, (xv) competition for EO services, (xvi) challenges with international operations or unexpected changes to the regulatory environment in certain markets, (xvii) unknown defects or errors in our products, (xviii) risk related to the capital-intensive nature of our business and our ability to raise adequate capital to finance our business strategies, (xix) substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern, (xx) uncertainties beyond our control related to the production, launch, commissioning, and/or operation of our satellites and related ground systems, software and analytic technologies, (xxi) the failure of the market for EO services to achieve the growth potential we expect, (xxii) risks related to our satellites and related equipment becoming impaired, (xxiii) risks related to the failure of our satellites to operate as intended, (xxiv) production and launch delays, launch failures, and damage or destruction to our satellites during launch and (xxv) the impact of natural disasters, unusual or prolonged unfavorable weather conditions, epidemic outbreaks, terrorist acts and geopolitical events (including the ongoing conflicts between Russia and Ukraine, in the Gaza Strip and the Red Sea region) on our business and satellite launch schedules. The foregoing list of factors is not exhaustive. You should carefully consider the foregoing factors and the other risks and uncertainties described in the “Risk Factors” section of Satellogic’s Annual Report on Form 10-K and other documents filed or to be filed by Satellogic from time to time with the Securities and Exchange Commission. These filings identify and address other important risks and uncertainties that could cause actual events and results to differ materially from those contained in the forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date they are made. Readers are cautioned not to put undue reliance on forward-looking statements, and Satellogic assumes no obligation and does not intend to update or revise these forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events, or otherwise. Satellogic can give no assurance that it will achieve its expectations.

    Media Contacts

    Satellogic, Inc.
    Ryan Driver, VP of Strategy & Corporate Development
    pr@satellogic.com

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI: Vital Energy Reports First-Quarter 2025 Financial and Operating Results

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    TULSA, OK, May 12, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Vital Energy, Inc. (NYSE: VTLE) (“Vital Energy” or the “Company”) today reported first-quarter 2025 financial and operating results. Supplemental slides have been posted to the Company’s website and can be found at www.vitalenergy.com. A conference call to discuss results is planned for 7:30 a.m. CT, Tuesday, May 13, 2025. A webcast will be available through the Company’s website.

    First-Quarter 2025 Highlights

    • Reduced total and Net Debt1 by $145.0 million and $133.5 million, respectively, through free cash flow, net changes in working capital, and the sale of non-core assets
    • Reported a net loss of $18.8 million, Adjusted Net Income1 of $89.5 million and cash flow from operating activities of $351.0 million
    • Generated Consolidated EBITDAX1 of $359.7 million and Adjusted Free Cash Flow1 of $64.5 million
    • Reported in-line capital investments of $252.7 million, excluding non-budgeted acquisitions and leasehold expenditures
    • Reported lease operating expense (“LOE”) of $103.5 million or $8.20 per BOE, beating guidance
    • Produced 140.2 thousand barrels of oil equivalent per day (“MBOE/d”) and oil of 64.9 thousand barrels of oil per day (“MBO/d”), within guidance

    “Our first quarter performance highlights the quality of our inventory and the ongoing success of our optimization efforts,” said Jason Pigott, President and Chief Executive Officer. “Our team is focused on generating sustainable efficiency gains and lower costs across our business and delivering on our targets for Adjusted Free Cash Flow and debt reduction.”

    “Our hedge position for the remainder of the year has reduced our near-term price risks and today we have about 90% of our expected oil production swapped at around $71 per barrel WTI,” continued Pigott. “The quality of our assets and structure of our services contracts provide tremendous flexibility in how we choose to allocate future capital. We are closely monitoring commodity prices and services costs and have multiple options to quickly adjust our plans.”

    First-Quarter 2025 Financial and Operations Summary

    Financial Results. The Company had a net loss of $18.8 million, or $(0.50) per diluted share. Results were impacted by a non-cash pre-tax impairment loss on oil and gas properties of $158.2 million. Adjusted Net Income1 was $89.5 million, or $2.37 per adjusted diluted share. Cash flows from operating activities were $351.0 million and Consolidated EBITDAX1 was $359.7 million.

    _____________________
    1Non-GAAP financial measure; please see supplemental reconciliations of GAAP to non-GAAP financial measures at the end of this release.

    The impairment was the result of the full cost ceiling limitation, driven in part by the decline in the trailing 12-month oil price calculation, and excludes the value of $145.9 million for the Company’s commodity derivative positions and only includes the 185 proved undeveloped locations in the Company’s reserve report out of approximately 925 inventory locations.

    Non-core Divestiture. On March 6, 2025, Vital Energy closed on the sale of non-core assets in Reagan County for $20.5 million, including transaction expenses. The assets comprised approximately 9,100 net acres, production of 1,300 BOE/d (12% oil) and did not include any of the Company’s inventory locations. As a result of the sale, Vital Energy’s asset retirement obligation will be reduced by $8.4 million.

    Production. Vital Energy’s total and oil production averaged 140,159 BOE/d and 64,893 BO/d, respectively, with both exceeding the midpoint of guidance. Results were driven by accelerated TIL’s on wells drilled in the southern Delaware Basin.

    Capital Investments. Total capital investments, excluding non-budgeted acquisitions and leasehold expenditures, were $253 million, within guidance, and include drilling efficiencies that pulled forward capital into the quarter.

    Investments included $218 million in drilling and completions, $21 million in infrastructure investments, $8 million in other capitalized costs and $6 million in land, exploration and data-related costs.

    Operating Expenses. LOE was 12% below guidance midpoint at $103.5 million, or $8.20 per BOE. The beat was related to actual expenses on the Point Energy assets being lower than initial estimates in both the fourth quarter of 2024 and first-quarter 2025 and lower workover activity in the period.

    General and Administrative (“G&A”) Expenses. Total G&A expenses were below guidance at $22.7 million, or $1.80 per BOE.

    Liquidity. At March 31, 2025, the Company had $735 million outstanding on its $1.5 billion senior secured credit facility and cash and cash equivalents of $29 million.

    As of May 8, 2025, through its regular semi-annual redetermination process, the Company’s lenders have set the senior secured credit facility’s borrowing base and elected commitment at $1.4 billion, a $100 million reduction from the prior amount of $1.5 billion.

    2025 Outlook

    Vital Energy remains committed to maximizing cash flow and reducing debt. Cash flows are supported by its significant hedge position, with ~90% of expected oil production for the remainder of the year swapped at an average WTI price of $70.61 per barrel.

    While the Company today reiterated its full-year 2025 outlook, it is closely monitoring commodity prices and service costs and has significant flexibility to adjust its development plans, should market conditions warrant, with no rig or completions contracts extending beyond March 2026.

    For full-year 2025, the Company expects to generate approximately $265 million of Adjusted Free Cash Flow at current oil prices of ~$59 per barrel WTI, inclusive of hedging proceeds, and to reduce Net Debt by approximately $300 million, inclusive of proceeds from the non-core asset sale in March.

    Second-Quarter 2025 Guidance

    The table below reflects the Company’s guidance for production and capital investments.

       
      2Q-25E
    Total production (MBOE/d) 133.0 – 139.0
    Oil production (MBO/d) 61.0 – 65.0
    Capital investments, excluding non-budgeted acquisitions ($ MM) $215 – $245
       
       

    The table below reflects the Company’s guidance for select revenue and expense items.

       
      2Q-25E
    Average sales price realizations (excluding derivatives):  
    Oil (% of WTI) 101%
    NGL (% of WTI) 24%
    Natural gas (% of Henry Hub) 14%
       
    Net settlements received (paid) for matured commodity derivatives ($ MM):  
    Oil $69
    NGL $3
    Natural gas $21
       
    Selected average costs & expenses:  
    Lease operating expenses ($ MM) $112 – $118
    Production and ad valorem taxes (% of oil, NGL and natural gas sales revenues) 6.60%
    Oil transportation and marketing expenses ($ MM) $10.7 – $11.7
    Gas gathering, processing and transportation expenses ($ MM) $6.7 – $7.7
    General and administrative expenses (excluding LTIP and transaction expenses, $ MM) $21.0 – $22.5
    General and administrative expenses (LTIP cash, $ MM) $0.6 – $0.7
    General and administrative expenses (LTIP non-cash, $ MM) $3.0 – $3.5
    Depletion, depreciation and amortization ($ MM) $180 – $190
       

    Conference Call Details

    Vital Energy plans to host a conference call at 7:30 a.m. CT on Tuesday, May 13, 2025, to discuss its first-quarter 2025 financial and operating results. Supplemental slides will be posted to the Company’s website. Interested parties are invited to listen to the call via the Company’s website at www.vitalenergy.com, under the tab for “Investor Relations | News & Presentations | Upcoming Events.”

    About Vital Energy

    Vital Energy, Inc. is an independent energy company with headquarters in Tulsa, Oklahoma. Vital Energy’s business strategy is focused on the acquisition, exploration and development of oil and natural gas properties in the Permian Basin of West Texas.

    Additional information about Vital Energy may be found on its website at www.vitalenergy.com.

    Forward-Looking Statements
    This press release and any oral statements made regarding the contents of this release, including in the conference call referenced herein, contain forward-looking statements as defined under Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. All statements, other than statements of historical facts, that address activities that Vital Energy assumes, plans, expects, believes, intends, projects, indicates, enables, transforms, estimates or anticipates (and other similar expressions) will, should or may occur in the future are forward-looking statements. The forward-looking statements are based on management’s current belief, based on currently available information, as to the outcome and timing of future events. Such statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve risks, assumptions and uncertainties.

    General risks relating to Vital Energy include, but are not limited to: the volatility of oil, NGL and natural gas prices, including the Company’s area of operation in the Permian Basin; changes, uncertainty and instability in domestic and global production, supply and demand for oil, NGL and natural gas, and actions by the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries members and other oil exporting nations (“OPEC+”); changes in general economic, business or industry conditions and market volatility, including as a result of slowing growth, inflationary pressures, monetary policy, tariffs, trade barriers, price and exchange controls and other regulatory requirements, including such changes that may be implemented by the United States (“U.S.”) and foreign governments; the Company’s ability to execute its strategies, including its ability to successfully identify and consummate strategic acquisitions at purchase prices that are accretive to its financial results and to successfully integrate acquired businesses, assets and properties; the Company’s ability to optimize spacing, drilling and completions techniques in order to maximize its rate of return, cash flows from operations and stockholder value; the ongoing instability and uncertainty in the U.S. and international energy, financial and consumer markets that could adversely affect the liquidity available to the Company and its customers and the demand for commodities, including oil, NGL and natural gas; competition in the oil and gas industry; the Company’s ability to discover, estimate, develop and replace oil, NGL and natural gas reserves and inventory; insufficient transportation capacity in the Permian Basin and challenges associated with such constraint, and the availability and costs of sufficient gathering, processing, storage and export capacity; a decrease in production levels which may impair the Company’s ability to meet its contractual obligations and ability to retain its leases; risks associated with the uncertainty of potential drilling locations and plans to drill in the future; the inability of significant customers to meet their obligations; revisions to the Company’s reserve estimates as a result of changes in commodity prices, decline curves and other uncertainties; the availability and costs of drilling and production equipment, supplies, labor and oil and natural gas processing and other services; ongoing war and political instability in Ukraine, Israel and the Middle East and the effects of such conflicts on the global hydrocarbon market and supply chains; risks related to the geographic concentration of the Company’s assets; the Company’s ability to hedge commercial risk, including commodity price volatility, and regulations that affect the Company’s ability to hedge such risks; the Company’s ability to continue to maintain the borrowing capacity under its Senior Secured Credit Facility or access other means of obtaining capital and liquidity, especially during periods of sustained low commodity prices; the Company’s ability to comply with restrictions contained in its debt agreements, including its Senior Secured Credit Facility and the indentures governing its senior unsecured notes, as well as debt that could be incurred in the future; the Company’s ability to generate sufficient cash to service its indebtedness, fund its capital requirements and generate future profits; drilling and operating risks, including but not limited to, risks related to hydraulic fracturing, securing sufficient electricity to produce its wells without limitation, natural disasters and other matters beyond the Company’s control; U.S. and international economic conditions and legal, tax, political and administrative developments, including the effects of energy, trade and environmental policies and existing and future laws and government regulations; the Company’s ability to comply with federal, state and local regulatory requirements; the impact of repurchases, if any, of securities from time to time; the Company’s ability to maintain the health and safety of, as well as recruit and retain, qualified personnel, including senior management or other key personnel, necessary to operate its business; evolving cybersecurity risks such as those involving unauthorized access, denial-of-service attacks, third-party service provider failures, malicious software, data privacy breaches by employees, insiders or others with authorized access, cyber or phishing attacks, ransomware, social engineering, physical breaches or other actions; and the Company’s belief that the outcome of any current legal proceedings will not materially affect its financial results and operations, and other factors, including those and other risks described in its Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024 (the “2024 Annual Report”), subsequent Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q and those set forth from time to time in other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). These documents are available through Vital Energy’s website at www.vitalenergy.com under the tab “Investor Relations” or through the SEC’s Electronic Data Gathering and Analysis Retrieval System at www.sec.gov. Any of these factors could cause Vital Energy’s actual results and plans to differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements. Therefore, Vital Energy can give no assurance that its future results will be as estimated. Any forward-looking statement speaks only as of the date on which such statement is made. Vital Energy does not intend to, and disclaims any obligation to, correct, update or revise any forward-looking statement, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by applicable law.

    This press release and any accompanying disclosures include financial measures that are not in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”), such as Adjusted Free Cash Flow, Adjusted Net Income, Net Debt and Consolidated EBITDAX. While management believes that such measures are useful for investors, they should not be used as a replacement for financial measures that are in accordance with GAAP. For a reconciliation of such non-GAAP financial measures to the nearest comparable measure in accordance with GAAP, please see the supplemental financial information at the end of this press release.

    Unless otherwise specified, references to “average sales price” refer to average sales price excluding the effects of the Company’s derivative transactions.

    All amounts, dollars and percentages presented in this press release are rounded and therefore approximate.

       
     
       
       
       
     
       
    Vital Energy, Inc.
    Selected operating data
       
     
       
       
      Three months ended March 31,
        2025       2024
      (unaudited)
    Sales volumes:      
    Oil (MBbl)   5,840       5,327
    NGL (MBbl)   3,484       2,934
    Natural gas (MMcf)   19,742       18,534
    Oil equivalent (MBOE)(1)   12,614       11,349
    Average daily oil equivalent sales volumes (BOE/d)(1)   140,159       124,719
    Average daily oil sales volumes (Bbl/d)(1)   64,893       58,534
    Average sales prices(1):      
    Oil ($/Bbl)(2) $ 72.31     $ 78.06
    NGL ($/Bbl)(2) $ 17.72     $ 16.05
    Natural gas ($/Mcf)(2) $ 1.38     $ 0.98
    Average sales price ($/BOE)(2) $ 40.54     $ 42.39
    Oil, with commodity derivatives ($/Bbl)(3) $ 75.78     $ 74.95
    NGL, with commodity derivatives ($/Bbl)(3) $ 17.09     $ 15.92
    Natural gas, with commodity derivatives ($/Mcf)(3) $ 1.52     $ 1.41
    Average sales price, with commodity derivatives ($/BOE)(3) $ 42.18     $ 41.60
    Selected average costs and expenses per BOE sold(1):      
    Lease operating expenses $ 8.20     $ 9.32
    Production and ad valorem taxes   2.63       2.70
    Oil transportation and marketing expenses   0.80       0.87
    Gas gathering, processing and transportation expenses   0.54       0.21
    General and administrative (excluding LTIP and transaction expenses)   1.56       2.11
    Total selected operating expenses $ 13.73     $ 15.21
    General and administrative (LTIP):      
    LTIP cash $ (0.02 )   $ 0.17
    LTIP non-cash $ 0.26     $ 0.28
    General and administrative (transaction expenses) $ —     $ 0.03
    Depletion, depreciation and amortization $ 15.05     $ 14.64

    ____________________

    (1) The numbers presented are calculated based on actual amounts and may not recalculate using the rounded numbers presented in the table above.
    (2) Price reflects the average of actual sales prices received when control passes to the purchaser/customer adjusted for quality, certain transportation fees, geographical differentials, marketing bonuses or deductions and other factors affecting the price received at the delivery point.
    (3) Price reflects the after-effects of the Company’s commodity derivative transactions on its average sales prices. The Company’s calculation of such after-effects includes settlements of matured commodity derivatives during the respective periods.
       
             
    Vital Energy, Inc.
    Consolidated balance sheets
             
    (in thousands, except share data)   March 31,
    2025    		   December 31,
    2024
        (unaudited)
    Assets        
    Current assets:        
    Cash and cash equivalents   $ 28,649     $ 40,179  
    Accounts receivable, net     254,343       299,698  
    Derivatives     100,497       101,474  
    Other current assets     24,757       25,205  
    Total current assets     408,246       466,556  
    Property and equipment:        
    Oil and natural gas properties, full cost method:        
    Evaluated properties     13,842,969       13,587,040  
    Unevaluated properties not being depleted     213,610       242,792  
    Less: accumulated depletion and impairment     (9,308,110 )     (8,966,200 )
    Oil and natural gas properties, net     4,748,469       4,863,632  
    Midstream and other fixed assets, net     127,815       134,265  
    Property and equipment, net     4,876,284       4,997,897  
    Derivatives     53,211       34,564  
    Operating lease right-of-use assets     99,055       104,329  
    Deferred income taxes     241,698       239,685  
    Other noncurrent assets, net     32,999       35,915  
    Total assets   $ 5,711,493     $ 5,878,946  
    Liabilities and stockholders’ equity        
    Current liabilities:        
    Accounts payable and accrued liabilities   $ 163,362     $ 185,115  
    Accrued capital expenditures     115,626       95,593  
    Undistributed revenue and royalties     193,175       187,563  
    Operating lease liabilities     59,853       73,143  
    Other current liabilities     75,636       59,725  
    Total current liabilities     607,652       601,139  
    Long-term debt, net     2,310,268       2,454,242  
    Derivatives     —       5,814  
    Asset retirement obligations     74,999       82,941  
    Operating lease liabilities     30,760       26,733  
    Other noncurrent liabilities     5,309       7,506  
    Total liabilities     3,028,988       3,178,375  
    Commitments and contingencies        
    Stockholders’ equity:        
    Preferred stock, $0.01 par value, 50,000,000 shares authorized and zero issued as of March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024     —       —  
    Common stock, $0.01 par value, 80,000,000 shares authorized, and 38,701,810 and 38,144,248 issued and outstanding as of March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024, respectively     387       381  
    Additional paid-in capital     3,824,006       3,823,241  
    Accumulated deficit     (1,141,888 )     (1,123,051 )
    Total stockholders’ equity     2,682,505       2,700,571  
    Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity   $ 5,711,493     $ 5,878,946  
                     
         
    Vital Energy, Inc.
    Consolidated statements of operations
         
        Three months ended March 31,
    (in thousands, except per share data)     2025       2024  
        (unaudited)
    Revenues:        
    Oil sales   $ 422,332     $ 415,784  
    NGL sales     61,739       47,075  
    Natural gas sales     27,338       18,245  
    Other operating revenues     771       1,235  
    Total revenues     512,180       482,339  
    Costs and expenses:        
    Lease operating expenses     103,485       105,728  
    Production and ad valorem taxes     33,225       30,614  
    Oil transportation and marketing expenses     10,120       9,833  
    Gas gathering, processing and transportation expenses     6,756       2,376  
    General and administrative     22,680       29,356  
    Depletion, depreciation and amortization     189,900       166,107  
    Impairment expense     158,241       —  
    Other operating expenses, net     1,913       1,018  
    Total costs and expenses     526,320       345,032  
    Gain (loss) on disposal of assets, net     110       130  
    Operating income (loss)     (14,030 )     137,437  
    Non-operating income (expense):        
    Gain (loss) on derivatives, net     44,171       (152,147 )
    Interest expense     (50,380 )     (43,421 )
    Gain (loss) on extinguishment of debt, net     —       (25,814 )
    Other income (expense), net     353       2,065  
    Total non-operating income (expense), net     (5,856 )     (219,317 )
    Income (loss) before income taxes     (19,886 )     (81,880 )
    Income tax benefit (expense)     1,049       15,749  
    Net income (loss)     (18,837 )     (66,131 )
    Preferred stock dividends     —       (349 )
    Net income (loss) available to common stockholders   $ (18,837 )   $ (66,480 )
    Net income (loss) per common share:        
    Basic   $ (0.50 )   $ (1.87 )
    Diluted   $ (0.50 )   $ (1.87 )
    Weighted-average common shares outstanding:        
    Basic     37,577       35,566  
    Diluted     37,577       35,566  
                     
         
    Vital Energy, Inc.
    Consolidated statements of cash flows
         
        Three months ended March 31,
    (in thousands)     2025       2024  
        (unaudited)
    Cash flows from operating activities:        
    Net income (loss)   $ (18,837 )   $ (66,131 )
    Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash provided by (used in) operating activities:        
    Share-settled equity-based compensation, net     3,604       3,501  
    Depletion, depreciation and amortization     189,900       166,107  
    Impairment expense     158,241       —  
    Mark-to-market on derivatives:        
    (Gain) loss on derivatives, net     (44,171 )     152,147  
    Settlements received (paid) for matured derivatives, net     20,687       (9,000 )
    (Gain) loss on extinguishment of debt, net     —       25,814  
    Deferred income tax (benefit) expense     (1,811 )     (16,924 )
    Other, net     9,551       5,402  
    Changes in operating assets and liabilities:        
    Accounts receivable, net     45,355       (51,475 )
    Other current assets     10       (5,646 )
    Other noncurrent assets, net     (3,634 )     (357 )
    Accounts payable and accrued liabilities     (21,754 )     (9,064 )
    Undistributed revenue and royalties     5,612       (12,865 )
    Other current liabilities     16,099       (21,347 )
    Other noncurrent liabilities     (7,867 )     (1,572 )
    Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities     350,985       158,590  
    Cash flows from investing activities:        
    Acquisitions of oil and natural gas properties, net     (1,636 )     (4,380 )
    Capital expenditures:        
    Oil and natural gas properties     (229,612 )     (195,372 )
    Midstream and other fixed assets     (1,825 )     (5,085 )
    Proceeds from dispositions of capital assets, net of selling costs     21,044       125  
    Other investing activities     (93 )     (952 )
    Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities     (212,122 )     (205,664 )
    Cash flows from financing activities:        
    Borrowings on Senior Secured Credit Facility     150,000       130,000  
    Payments on Senior Secured Credit Facility     (295,000 )     —  
    Issuance of senior unsecured notes     —       800,000  
    Extinguishment of debt     —       (453,518 )
    Stock exchanged for tax withholding     (3,923 )     (3,411 )
    Payments for debt issuance costs     —       (15,721 )
    Other, net     (1,470 )     (1,012 )
    Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities     (150,393 )     456,338  
    Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents     (11,530 )     409,264  
    Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period     40,179       14,061  
    Cash and cash equivalents, end of period   $ 28,649     $ 423,325  
                     

    Vital Energy, Inc.
    Supplemental reconciliations of GAAP to non-GAAP financial measures

    Non-GAAP financial measures

    The non-GAAP financial measures of Adjusted Free Cash Flow, Adjusted Net Income, Consolidated EBITDAX, Net Debt and Net Debt to Consolidated EBITDAX, as defined by the Company, may not be comparable to similarly titled measures used by other companies. Furthermore, these non-GAAP financial measures should not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for GAAP measures of liquidity or financial performance, but rather should be considered in conjunction with GAAP measures, such as net income or loss, operating income or loss or cash flows from operating activities.

    Adjusted Free Cash Flow

    Adjusted Free Cash Flow is a non-GAAP financial measure that the Company defines as net cash provided by (used in) operating activities (GAAP) before net changes in operating assets and liabilities and transaction expenses related to non-budgeted acquisitions, less capital investments, excluding non-budgeted acquisition costs. Management believes Adjusted Free Cash Flow is useful to management and investors in evaluating operating trends in its business that are affected by production, commodity prices, operating costs and other related factors. There are significant limitations to the use of Adjusted Free Cash Flow as a measure of performance, including the lack of comparability due to the different methods of calculating Adjusted Free Cash Flow reported by different companies.

    This release also includes certain forward-looking non-GAAP measures. Due to the forward-looking nature of such measures, no reconciliations of these non-GAAP measures to their respective most directly comparable GAAP measure are available without unreasonable efforts. This is due to the inherent difficulty of forecasting the timing or amount of various reconciling items that would impact the most directly comparable forward-looking GAAP financial measure, that have not yet occurred, are out of the Company’s control and/or cannot be reasonably predicted. Accordingly, such reconciliations are excluded from this release. Forward-looking non-GAAP financial measures provided without the most directly comparable GAAP financial measures may vary materially from the corresponding GAAP financial measures.

    The following table presents a reconciliation of net cash provided by (used in) operating activities (GAAP) to Adjusted Free Cash Flow (non-GAAP) for the periods presented:

         
        Three months ended March 31,
    (in thousands)     2025     2024  
        (unaudited)
    Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities   $ 350,985   $ 158,590  
    Less:        
    Net changes in operating assets and liabilities     33,821     (102,326 )
    General and administrative (transaction expenses)     —     (332 )
    Cash flows from operating activities before net changes in operating assets and liabilities and transaction expenses related to non-budgeted acquisitions     317,164     261,248  
    Less capital investments, excluding non-budgeted acquisition costs:        
    Oil and natural gas properties(1)     251,264     213,265  
    Midstream and other fixed assets(1)     1,407     4,635  
    Total capital investments, excluding non-budgeted acquisition costs     252,671     217,900  
    Adjusted Free Cash Flow (non-GAAP)   $ 64,493   $ 43,348  

    ____________________

    (1) Includes capitalized share-settled equity-based compensation and asset retirement costs.
       

    Adjusted Net Income

    Adjusted Net Income is a non-GAAP financial measure that the Company defines as net income or loss (GAAP) plus adjustments for mark-to-market on derivatives, premiums paid or received for commodity derivatives that matured during the period, organizational restructuring expenses, impairment expense, gains or losses on disposal of assets, income taxes, other non-recurring income and expenses and adjusted income tax expense. Management believes Adjusted Net Income helps investors in the oil and natural gas industry to measure and compare the Company’s performance to other oil and natural gas companies by excluding from the calculation items that can vary significantly from company to company depending upon accounting methods, the book value of assets and other non-operational factors.

    The following table presents a reconciliation of net income (loss) (GAAP) to Adjusted Net Income (non-GAAP) for the periods presented:

         
        Three months ended March 31,
    (in thousands, except per share data)     2025       2024  
        (unaudited)
    Net income (loss)   $ (18,837 )   $ (66,131 )
    Plus:        
    Mark-to-market on derivatives:        
    (Gain) loss on derivatives, net     (44,171 )     152,147  
    Settlements received (paid) for matured derivatives, net     20,687       (9,000 )
    Impairment expense     158,241       —  
    (Gain) loss on disposal of assets, net     (110 )     (130 )
    (Gain) loss on extinguishment of debt, net     —       25,814  
    Income tax (benefit) expense     (1,049 )     (15,749 )
    General and administrative (transaction expenses)     —       332  
    Adjusted income before adjusted income tax expense     114,761       87,283  
    Adjusted income tax expense(1)     (25,247 )     (19,202 )
    Adjusted Net Income (non-GAAP)   $ 89,514     $ 68,081  
    Net income (loss) per common share:        
    Basic   $ (0.50 )   $ (1.87 )
    Diluted   $ (0.50 )   $ (1.87 )
    Adjusted Net Income per common share:        
    Basic   $ 2.38     $ 1.91  
    Diluted   $ 2.38     $ 1.91  
    Adjusted diluted   $ 2.37     $ 1.84  
    Weighted-average common shares outstanding:        
    Basic     37,577       35,566  
    Diluted     37,577       35,566  
    Adjusted diluted     37,736       36,922  

    _____________________

    (1) Adjusted income tax expense is calculated by applying a statutory tax rate of 22% for each of the periods ended March 31, 2025 and 2024.
       

    Consolidated EBITDAX

    Consolidated EBITDAX is a non-GAAP financial measure defined in the Company’s Senior Secured Credit Facility as net income or loss (GAAP) plus adjustments for share-settled equity-based compensation, depletion, depreciation and amortization, impairment expense, organizational restructuring expenses, gains or losses on disposal of assets, mark-to-market on derivatives, accretion expense, interest expense, income taxes and other non-recurring income and expenses. Consolidated EBITDAX provides no information regarding a company’s capital structure, borrowings, interest costs, capital expenditures, working capital movement or tax position. Consolidated EBITDAX does not represent funds available for future discretionary use because it excludes funds required for debt service, capital expenditures, working capital, income taxes, franchise taxes and other commitments and obligations. However, management believes Consolidated EBITDAX is useful to an investor because this measure:

    • is used by investors in the oil and natural gas industry to measure a company’s operating performance without regard to items that can vary substantially from company to company depending upon accounting methods, the book value of assets, capital structure and the method by which assets were acquired, among other factors;
    • helps investors to more meaningfully evaluate and compare the results of the Company’s operations from period to period by removing the effect of the Company’s capital structure from the Company’s operating structure; and
    • is used by management for various purposes, including (i) as a measure of operating performance, (ii) as a measure of compliance under the Senior Secured Credit Facility, (iii) in presentations to the board of directors and (iv) as a basis for strategic planning and forecasting.

    There are significant limitations to the use of Consolidated EBITDAX as a measure of performance, including the inability to analyze the effect of certain recurring and non-recurring items that materially affect the Company’s net income or loss and the lack of comparability of results of operations to different companies due to the different methods of calculating Consolidated EBITDAX, or similarly titled measures, reported by different companies. The Company is subject to financial covenants under the Senior Secured Credit Facility, one of which establishes a maximum permitted ratio of Net Debt, as defined in the Senior Secured Credit Facility, to Consolidated EBITDAX. See Note 7 in the 2025 Annual Report, to be filed with the SEC, for additional discussion of the financial covenants under the Senior Secured Credit Facility. Additional information on Consolidated EBITDAX can be found in the Company’s Eleventh Amendment to the Senior Secured Credit Facility, as filed with the SEC on September 13, 2023.

    The following table presents a reconciliation of net income (loss) (GAAP) to Consolidated EBITDAX (non-GAAP) for the periods presented:

         
        Three months ended March 31,
    (in thousands)     2025       2024  
        (unaudited)
    Net income (loss)   $ (18,837 )   $ (66,131 )
    Plus:        
    Share-settled equity-based compensation, net     3,604       3,501  
    Depletion, depreciation and amortization     189,900       166,107  
    Impairment expense     158,241       —  
    (Gain) loss on disposal of assets, net     (110 )     (130 )
    Mark-to-market on derivatives:        
    (Gain) loss on derivatives, net     (44,171 )     152,147  
    Settlements received (paid) for matured derivatives, net     20,687       (9,000 )
    Accretion expense     1,034       1,020  
    Interest expense     50,380       43,421  
    (Gain) loss extinguishment of debt, net     —       25,814  
    Income tax (benefit) expense     (1,049 )     (15,749 )
    General and administrative (transaction expenses)     —       332  
    Consolidated EBITDAX (non-GAAP)   $ 359,679     $ 301,332  
                     

    The following table presents a reconciliation of net cash provided by (used in) operating activities (GAAP) to Consolidated EBITDAX (non-GAAP) for the periods presented:

         
        Three months ended March 31,
    (in thousands)     2025       2024  
        (unaudited)
    Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities   $ 350,985     $ 158,590  
    Plus:        
    Interest expense     50,380       43,421  
    Current income tax (benefit) expense     762       1,175  
    Net changes in operating assets and liabilities     (33,821 )     102,326  
    General and administrative (transaction expenses)     —       332  
    Other, net     (8,627 )     (4,512 )
    Consolidated EBITDAX (non-GAAP)   $ 359,679     $ 301,332  
                     

    Net Debt

    Net Debt is a non-GAAP financial measure defined in the Company’s Senior Secured Credit Facility as the face value of long-term debt plus any outstanding letters of credit, less cash and cash equivalents, where cash and cash equivalents are capped at $100 million when there are borrowings on the Senior Secured Credit Facility. Management believes Net Debt is useful to management and investors in determining the Company’s leverage position since the Company has the ability, and may decide, to use a portion of its cash and cash equivalents to reduce debt.

             
    (in thousands)   March 31,
    2025    		   December 31,
    2024
        (unaudited)
    Total senior unsecured notes   $ 1,600,578   $ 1,600,578
    Senior Secured Credit Facility     735,000     880,000
    Total long-term debt   $ 2,335,578   $ 2,480,578
    Less: cash and cash equivalents     28,649     40,179
    Net Debt (non-GAAP)   $ 2,306,929   $ 2,440,399
                 

    Net Debt to Consolidated EBITDAX

    Net Debt to Consolidated EBITDAX is a non-GAAP financial measure defined in the Company’s Senior Secured Credit Facility as Net Debt divided by Consolidated EBITDAX for the previous four quarters, which requires various treatment of asset transaction impacts. Net Debt to Consolidated EBITDAX is used by the Company’s management for various purposes, including as a measure of operating performance, in presentations to its board of directors and as a basis for strategic planning and forecasting.

    Investor Contact:
    Ron Hagood
    918.858.5504
    ir@vitalenergy.com

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Range anxiety – or charger drama? Australians are buying hybrid cars because they don’t trust public chargers

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ganna Pogrebna, Executive Director, AI and Cyber Futures Institute, Charles Sturt University

    VisualArtStudio/Shutterstock

    Range anxiety has long been seen as the main obstacle stopping drivers from going electric.

    But range isn’t the real issue. The average range of a new electric vehicle (EV) is more than 450 kilometres, and top models offer more than 700km per charge. By contrast, the average car is driven about 33km per day in Australia as of 2020.

    What’s really going on is charger anxiety – the question of whether you can find somewhere reliable to recharge when you’re away from home. Australia’s public chargers are not common enough or reliable enough to give motorists certainty they can find a place to recharge.

    This is why many drivers are hedging their bets. Rather than embracing battery-electric vehicles, many Australian drivers are opting for hybrids as well as plug-in hybrids (PHEVs), which couple a smaller battery with an internal combustion engine. Hybrids and PHEVs accounted for almost 20% of new car sales from July–September last year, compared to 6.5% for fully electric vehicles.

    Labor’s reelection could lead to better charging infrastructure. Last term, the federal government set a goal of a fast charging station every 150km along major highways, while state governments are also building more. But so far, these efforts aren’t enough to ensure Australia has reliable chargers in the right locations. Until then, cautious drivers will buy hybrids.

    Australia’s charger network has expanded, but many drivers are anxious about availability and reliability.
    Stepan Skorobogadko/Shutterstock

    Public chargers matter

    EV owners charge their cars at home an estimated 70–85% of the time. They use public chargers just 10–20% of the time and workplace charging 6–10% of the time.

    This makes sense – home charging is reliable and cheap. But these figures also point to a problem: EV drivers don’t trust public chargers.

    At present, Australia has about 3,700 public chargers nationwide. Each charging station typically supports one or two EVs, often offering different charging speeds. By contrast, there are around 6,600 service stations, with the ability to fuel multiple vehicles at once.

    Other countries have much larger charger networks. The United Kingdom has more than 40,000 and Canada 16,000. China, the world leader, has almost 10 million.

    China now has 10 million EV chargers.
    Tang Yan Song/Shutterstock

    Outside major Australian cities, chargers are harder to find and are often broken or in use. Chargers are usually not staffed, meaning there’s no one watching to prevent vandalism or organise maintenance.

    EV plugs are not yet standardised. Some plugs may not be available, and using chargers isn’t always easy. By contrast, petrol cars use standard nozzles, payment is simpler and staff and CCTV presence discourages vandalism and ensures the pumps work.

    If a petrol car runs out of fuel, the problem can be solved with a lift and a jerry can. But if your EV runs flat in a rural area because you can’t find a charger, you may have to get it towed.

    This lack of reliability is more than just a logistical hurdle — it’s a psychological barrier.

    Psychological roadblocks

    A recent study found the fear of running out of charge was a major psychological barrier to buying an EV – particularly for rural and regional Australians, who drive longer distances. As long as chargers remain unreliable or located too far apart, this anxiety will persist.

    In Australia, it’s easy to find reports of broken chargers, long queues at charging stations, gaps in the rural network and personal anecdotes of EV owners struggling to find a way to charge.

    A 2023 survey found almost 70% of EV owners had come across an inoperable charger at least once over the previous six months.

    What can Australia take from overseas experience?

    Australia’s government wants to increase EV uptake. While EVs are getting cheaper, the supporting infrastructure isn’t good enough yet to make them the norm.

    Across the European Union, chargers are being installed every 60km along major highways and efforts are being made to tackle psychological barriers to uptake.

    Federal and state governments in the United States have invested heavily in filling gaps in the charger network and working with consumers to encourage more sustainable commuting.

    Plug-in hybrids are powered by batteries and an internal combustion engine.
    algre/Shutterstock

    Choosing a hybrid is rational but not ideal

    It should be no surprise more Australians are buying hybrids as a safety net, given there are plenty of service stations and not as many EV chargers. City driving can allow near-total use of the electric motor, while longer trips still require petrol.

    The choice is rational. But it’s not ideal from an environmental point of view. Traditional hybrids are still largely powered by an internal combustion engine, while PHEVs can run as electric for longer but still use their combustion engines.

    While plug-ins have lower emissions than traditional vehicles, they often fail to deliver the full emissions savings drivers and regulators might hope for. Many drivers don’t charge regularly and rely instead on petrol.

    Chargers aren’t the only factor, of course. A tax break for PHEVs boosted their popularity for several years before ending in April, while sales of Tesla EVs have fallen off a cliff due to the unpopularity of owner Elon Musk.

    What needs to change?

    The solutions are straightforward: expand the charger network, especially in regional and rural areas. Improve maintenance schedules and ensure existing chargers are reliable. Make sure data on their availability is accessible in real time so drivers can avoid anxiety and frustration. Counter EV misinformation and anecdotal biases with information campaigns.

    When EV ownership and charging in Australia is practical and low risk, the sluggish EV transition will accelerate. But until then, many drivers will keep buying hybrids as a compromise.

    Ganna Pogrebna 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. Range anxiety – or charger drama? Australians are buying hybrid cars because they don’t trust public chargers – https://theconversation.com/range-anxiety-or-charger-drama-australians-are-buying-hybrid-cars-because-they-dont-trust-public-chargers-250281

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: What did the parties say on TikTok in the election, and how? Here’s the campaign broken down in 5 charts

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hannah Oates, PhD Candidate, School of Social Sciences, Monash University

    TikTok emerged as a key battleground in an election where young voters comprised a dominant share of the electorate. All the prominent political parties used the platform – especially after tactics by Labor contributed to its electoral success in 2022.

    With 60% of Gen Z now getting their news primarily from social media, this shift reflects a welcome effort to meet young voters where they are.

    But on these platforms, visibility alone isn’t enough. What you say, and how you say it, matters just as much.

    Collecting the data

    We collected and manually analysed more than 500 TikTok posts from the official accounts of Labor, the Liberals, the Greens and One Nation during the federal election campaign period (March 28 to May 2).

    Data was collected using web-scraping software, and included captions, sounds, hashtags and engagement metrics.

    Our analysis focused on both the discursive content (what was said) and performative use of the platform (how it was said).

    We manually categorised posts by their focus, whether political, apolitical, or blending politics and entertainment (“politainment”). We also grouped them according to their primary purpose:

    • promoting the party’s own policies

    • attacking opponents

    • or shaping their public image to appeal to a TikTok audience.

    We also coded posts by topic, including key campaign issues, such as the economy, health, housing and climate.

    What we found

    Labor had the highest total number of posts, which correlated to the highest views and a fairly strong engagement rate (10.5%). Engagement rates are calculated by the total number of user interactions with a post (comments, likes, shares) relative to how many people viewed the post.

    Labor also had a relatively balanced gender reach, skewing young.

    The Liberals posted frequently, as well, with an ever so slightly lower engagement rate (10.1%) and a more male-leaning audience.

    One Nation, though with far fewer posts, still achieved notable reach.

    Despite a smaller post volume than major parties, the Greens stood out for having the highest engagement rate by far (14.4%), along with the highest share of female and young audience followers.

    Focus, tone and messaging

    Clear differences emerge in how parties used TikTok to communicate.

    The Liberals leaned heavily into politainment (75%) and attack ads (nearly 90%). They rarely promoted their own policies, with only 12% of posts being solely focused on their campaign promises.

    Their content was strongly centred around the economy (60%) and energy (26%). Three-quarters of their posts were designed to target and appeal primarily to young audiences through the inclusion of informal language, youth-focused policies and youth slang and trends.

    One Nation, in contrast, was the most overtly political (94%) and traditional in tone (88% professional language). It directed its messaging to a general audience with a strong focus on attack content (82%).

    On the whole, One Nation’s content consisted of long formal news interviews and speeches, and was not well-adapted to suit the TikTok medium.

    Labor blended politainment (58%) with substantive political messaging (42%). About 35% of the videos were promoting party policy, while 53% were attack ads. It focused most on Medicare (44%), education, and housing – all issues particularly resonant with younger people (68% of their audience).

    The Greens had the highest share of policy-focused content (60%). These posts were strongly youth-oriented (77%), and covered climate change (27%), taxes (27%), and education (23%). Their posts were the most informal, with Greens leaders often using the platform to speak directly to TikTok users in a “selfie” style.

    Follow the money

    A closer look at the policy messaging on TikTok reveals a strong focus on the economy and health. These are two of the most decisive issues for voters across generations, according to the Australian Election Study.

    Given the rising cost of living, it’s no surprise this election played out around hip-pocket concerns. Yet, it’s notable that Labor didn’t lean heavily into economic messaging on TikTok, despite cost of living being the top concern for young people.

    The Liberals, by contrast, stuck to their traditional strength, making the economy a central theme of their content.

    Did it translate to electoral victory?

    Our analysis reveals a highly coordinated Labor campaign on TikTok, backed by serious resourcing and a keen understanding of platform dynamics. From short-form videos to youth-oriented podcasts and influencer briefings, Labor went all-in.

    While it’s hard to draw a straight line from TikTok posts to ballots cast, their dominant presence online mirrored their dominant result at the polls.

    The Greens, however, present a puzzle. They’ve traditionally performed well with young voters and achieved enviable engagement rates on TikTok: about 14% during the campaign, the kind most influencers dream of.

    Their content resonated, especially when it featured positive messaging or direct, informal engagement from party leaders. They didn’t rely on minimising political issues with memes and trends.

    But they posted far less than Labor and didn’t invest as heavily in trend-based posting. That likely reflects a smaller budget rather than a flawed strategy, but the result was fewer overall views and reach.



    Read more:
    Greens’ election hubris – how the minor party lost its way and now its leader

    Ultimately, this isn’t a story about young voters being swayed by viral videos. They’re politically engaged, issue-aware, and looking for credibility.

    Labor’s full-spectrum campaign was slick, and while they also backed that style with substance, they relied heavily on trends and mass-posting, prioritising quantity over quality.

    The Greens’ more quality-focused approach connected with their audience, but led to them being out-performed and far less visible.

    Hannah Oates receives funding from the Australian Government in the form of a PhD stipend.

    Intifar Chowdhury 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. What did the parties say on TikTok in the election, and how? Here’s the campaign broken down in 5 charts – https://theconversation.com/what-did-the-parties-say-on-tiktok-in-the-election-and-how-heres-the-campaign-broken-down-in-5-charts-254793

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Trump heads to the Gulf aiming to bolster trade ties – but side talks on Tehran, Gaza could drive a wedge between US and Israel

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Asher Kaufman, Professor of History and Peace Studies, University of Notre Dame

    President Donald Trump and Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman attend the G20 Summit in Japan in 2019. Eliot Blondet/AFP via Getty Images

    President Donald Trump will sit down with the Saudi crown prince and Emirati and Qatari leaders on May 14, 2025, in what is being heavily touted as a high-stakes summit. Not invited, and watching warily, will be Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

    Like many other members of his right-wing coalition, Netanyahu appeared delighted at the election of Trump as U.S. president in November, believing that the Republican’s Middle East policies would undoubtedly favor Israeli interests and be coordinated closely with Netanyahu himself.

    But it hasn’t quite played out that way. Of course, Washington remains – certainly in official communications – Israel’s strongest global ally and chief supplier of arms. But Trump is promoting a Middle East policy that is, at times, distinctly at odds with the interests of Netanyahu and his government.

    In fact, in pushing for an Iran nuclear deal – a surprise reversal from Trump’s first administration – Trump is undermining long-held Netanyahu positions. Such is the level of alarm in Israeli right-wing circles that rumors have been circulating of Trump announcing unilateral U.S. support for a Palestinian state ahead of the Riyadh visit – something that would represent a clear departure for Washington.

    As a historian of Israel and the broader Middle East, I recognize that in key ways Trump’s agenda in Riyadh represents a continuation of the U.S. policies, notably in pursuing security relationships with Arab Gulf monarchies – something Israel has long accepted if not openly supported. But in the process, the trip could also put significant daylight between Trump and Netanyahu.

    Trump’s official agenda

    The four-day trip to the Gulf, Trump’s first policy-driven foreign visit since being elected president, is on the surface more about developing economic and security ties between the U.S. and traditional allies in the Persian Gulf.

    Trump is expected to cement trade deals worth tens of billions of dollars between the U.S. and Arab Gulf States, including unprecedented arms purchases, Gulf investments in the U.S. and even the floated Qatari gift of a palatial 747 intended for use as Air Force One.

    There is also the possibility of a security alliance between the U.S. and Saudi Arabia.

    So far, so good for Israel’s government. Prior to the Oct. 7 attacks, Israel was already in the process of forging closer ties to the Gulf states, with deals and diplomatic relations established with the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain through the Abraham Accords that the Trump administration itself facilitated in September 2020. A potential normalization of ties with Saudi Arabia was also in the offing.

    Dealing with Tehran

    But central to the agenda this week in Riyadh will be issues where Trump and Netanyahu are increasingly not on the same page. And that starts with Iran.

    While the country won’t be represented, Iran will feature heavily at Trump’s summit, as it coincides with the U.S. administration’s ongoing diplomatic talks with Tehran over its nuclear program. Those negotiations have now concluded four rounds. And despite clear challenges, American and Iranian delegations continue to project optimism about the possibility of reaching a deal.

    The approach marks a change of course for Trump, who in 2018 abandoned a similar deal to the one he is now largely looking to forge. It also suggests the U.S. is currently opposed to the idea of direct armed confrontation with Iran, against Netanayhu’s clear preference.

    Diplomacy with Tehran is also favored by Gulf states as a way of containing Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Even Saudi Arabia – Tehran’s long-term regional rival that, like Israel, opposed the Obama-era Iran nuclear diplomacy – is increasingly looking for a more cautious engagement with Iran. In April, the Saudi defense minister visited Tehran ahead of the recent U.S.-Iranian negotiations.

    Netanyahu has built his political career on the looming threat from a nuclearized Iran and the necessity to nip this threat in the bud. He unsuccessfully tried to undermine President Barack Obama’s initial efforts to reach an agreement with Iran – resulting in 2015’s Iran nuclear deal. But Netanyahu had more luck with Obama’s successor, helping convince Trump to withdraw from the agreement in 2018.

    So Trump’s about-turn on Iran talks has irked Netanyahu – not only because it happened, but because it happened so publicly. In April, the U.S. president called Netanyahu to the White House and openly embarrassed him by stating that Washington is pursuing diplomatic negotiations with Tehran.

    Split over Yemen

    A clear indication of the potential tension between the Trump administration and the Israeli government can be seen in the ongoing skirmishes involving the U.S., Israel and the Houthis in Yemen.

    After the Houthis fired a missile at the Tel Aviv airport on May 4 – leading to its closure and the cancellation of multiple international flights – Israel struck back, devastating an airport and other facilities in Yemen’s capital.

    But just a few hours after the Israeli attack, Trump announced that the U.S. would not strike the Houthis anymore, as they had “surrendered” to his demands and agreed not to block passage of U.S. ships in the Red Sea.

    It became clear that Israel was not involved in this new understanding between the U.S. and the Houthis. Trump’s statement was also notable in its timing, and could be taken as an effort to calm the region in preparation of his trip to Saudi Arabia. The fact that it might help smooth talks with Iran too – Tehran being the Houthis’ main sponsor – was likely a factor as well.

    Timing is also relevant in Israel’s latest attack on Yemeni ports. They took place on May 11 – the eve of Trump setting off for his visit to Saudi Arabia. In so doing, Netanyahu may be sending a signal not only to the Houthis but also to the U.S. and Iran. Continuing to attack the Houthis might make nuclear talks more difficult.

    Bibi’s political survival-first approach

    Critical observers of Netanyahu have long argued that he prioritizes continued war in Gaza over regional calm for the sake of holding together his far-right coalition, members of which desire full control of the Gaza Strip and de-facto annexation of the West Bank.

    Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warns of the Iran nuclear threat at the United Nations in 2012.
    Mario Tama/Getty Images

    This, many political commentators have argued, is the main reason why Netanyahu backed off from the last stage of the ceasefire agreement with Hamas in March – something which would have required the withdrawal of the Israeli army from the Gaza Strip.

    Since the collapse of the ceasefire, Israel’s army has mobilized in preparation for a renewed Gaza assault, scheduled to start after the end of Trump’s trip to the Gulf.

    With members of the Netanayhu government openly supporting the permanent occupation of the strip and declaring that bringing back the remaining Israeli hostages is no longer a top priority, it seems clear to me that deescalation is not on Netanyahu’s agenda.

    Trump himself has noted recently both the alarming state of the hostages and the grave humanitarian crisis in Gaza. Now, in addition to the release of Israeli-American hostage Edan Alexander, the U.S. is also engaged in negotiations with Hamas over ceasefire and aid – ignoring Netanyahu in the process.

    The bottom dollar

    Current U.S. policy in the region may all be serving a greater aim for Trump: to secure billions of dollars of Gulf money for the American economy and, some have said, himself. But to achieve that requires a stable Middle East, and continued war in Gaza and Iran inching closer to nuclear capabilities might disrupt that goal.

    Of course, a diplomatic agreement over Tehran’s nuclear plans is still some way off. And Trump’s foreign policy is notably prone to abrupt turns. But whether guided by a dealmaker’s instincts to pursue trade and economic deals with wealthy Gulf states, or by a genuine – and related – desire to stabilize the region, his administration is increasingly pursuing policies that go against the interests of the current Israeli government.

    Asher Kaufman 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. Trump heads to the Gulf aiming to bolster trade ties – but side talks on Tehran, Gaza could drive a wedge between US and Israel – https://theconversation.com/trump-heads-to-the-gulf-aiming-to-bolster-trade-ties-but-side-talks-on-tehran-gaza-could-drive-a-wedge-between-us-and-israel-256371

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: From Zoo Quest to Ocean: The evolution of David Attenborough’s voice for the planet

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Neil J. Gostling, Associate Professor in Evolution and Palaeobiology, University of Southampton

    Over the course of seven decades, Sir David Attenborough’s documentaries have reshaped how we see the natural world, shifting from colonial-era collecting trips to urgent calls for environmental action.

    His storytelling has inspired generations, but has only recently begun to confront the scale of the ecological crisis. To understand how far nature broadcasting has come, it helps to return to where it started.

    When Attenborough’s broadcasting career began in the 1950s, Austrian filmmakers Hans and Lotte Hass were already pushing the boundaries of what was possible by taking cameras below the sea and touring the world aboard their schooner, the Xafira.

    In one of their 1953 Galapagos films, a crewman handled a sealion pup, having crawled across the volcanic rock of Fernandina honking at sealions to attract them. A penguin and giant tortoise were brought on board Xafira. And as Lotte Hass took photographs, she’d beseech some poor creature to “not be frightened” and “look pleasant”.

    This is a world away from today’s expectations, where both research scientists and amateur naturalists are taught to observe without touching or disturbing wildlife. When the Hasses visited the Galápagos, it was still five years before the creation of the national park and the founding of the island’s conservation organisation Charles Darwin Foundation. Now, visitors must stay at least two metres from all animals – and never approach them.

    Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences. Join The Conversation for free today.

    At the same time, television was beginning to shape public perceptions of the natural world. In 1954, Attenborough was working as a young producer on Zoo Quest. By chance, he became its presenter when zoologist Jack Lester became ill.

    The programme followed zoologists collecting animals from around the world for London Zoo. Zoo Quest was filmed in exotic locations around the world and then in the studio where the animals found on the expedition were shown “up close”.

    Attenborough has since acknowledged that Zoo Quest reflected attitudes that would not be acceptable today. The series showed animals being captured from the wild and transported to London Zoo – practices which mirrored extractive, colonial-era approaches to science.

    David Attenborough’s Zoo Quest for a Dragon aired in 1956.

    Yet, Zoo Quest was also groundbreaking. The series brought viewers face-to-face with animals they might never have seen before and pioneered a visual style that made natural history television both entertaining and educational. It helped establish Attenborough’s reputation as a compelling communicator and laid the foundations for a new genre of science broadcasting – one that has evolved, like its presenter, over time.

    After a decade in production, Attenborough returned to presenting with Life on Earth (1979), a landmark series that traced the evolution of life from single-celled organisms to birds and apes. Drawing on his long-standing interest in fossils, the series combined zoology, palaeobiology and natural history to create an ambitious new template for science broadcasting.

    Life on Earth helped cement Attenborough’s reputation as a trusted communicator and became the foundation of the BBC’s “blue-chip” natural history format – big-budget, internationally produced films that put high-quality cinematic wildlife footage at the forefront of the story. The series did not simply document the natural world. It reframed it, using presenter-led storytelling and global spectacle to shape how audiences understood evolutionary processes.

    For much of his career, Attenborough has been celebrated for showcasing the beauty of the natural world. Yet, he has also faced criticism for sidestepping the environmental crises threatening it. Commentators such as the environmental journalist George Monbiot argued that his earlier documentaries, while visually stunning, often avoided addressing the human role in climate change, presenting nature as untouched and avoiding difficult truths about ecological decline.

    Building on the legacy of Life on Earth, Attenborough’s later series began to respond to these critiques. Blue Planet (2001) expanded the scope of nature storytelling, revealing the mysteries of the ocean’s most remote and uncharted ecosystems. Its 2017 sequel, Blue Planet II, introduced a more urgent tone, highlighting the scale of plastic pollution and the need for marine conservation.

    Although Blue Planet II significantly increased viewers’ environmental knowledge, it did not lead to measurable changes in plastic consumption behaviour – a reminder that awareness alone does not guarantee action. The subsequent Wild Isles (2023) continued the shift towards conservation messaging. While the main series aired in five parts, a sixth episode – Saving Our Wild Isles – was released separately and drew controversy amid claims the BBC had sidelined it for being too political. In reality, the episode delivered a clear call to action.

    Attenborough’s latest film, Ocean, continues in this more urgent register, pairing breathtaking imagery with an unflinching assessment of ocean health. After decades of gentle narration, he now speaks with sharpened clarity about the scale of the crisis and the need to act.

    A voice for action

    In recent years, Attenborough has taken on a new role – not just as a broadcaster, but as a powerful voice in environmental diplomacy. He has addressed world leaders at major summits such as the UN climate conference Cop24 and the World Economic Forum, calling for urgent action on climate change. He was also appointed ambassador for the UK government’s review on the economics of biodiversity.

    On the subject of environmemtal diplomacy, Monbiot recently wrote: “A few years ago, I was sharply critical of Sir David for downplaying the environmental crisis on his TV programmes. Most people would have reacted badly but remarkably, at 92, he took this and similar critiques on board and radically changed his approach.”

    Attenborough not only speaks. He listens. This is part of his charm and popularity. He is learning and evolving as much as his audience.

    What makes Attenborough stand out is the way he speaks. While official climate treaties often rely on technical or legal language, he communicates in emotional, accessible terms – speaking plainly about responsibility, urgency and the moral imperative to protect life on Earth. His calm authority and familiar voice make complex issues easier to grasp and harder to dismiss.

    Frequently named Britain’s most trusted public figure, Attenborough has become something of an unofficial diplomat for the planet – apolitical, measured, and often seen as a voice of reason amid populist noise. Despite his criticisms, Attenborough’s documentaries walk a careful line between fragility and resilience, using emotionally ambivalent imagery to prompt reflection. He shares his wonder with the natural world and brings people along with him

    Ocean shows our blue planet in more spectacular fashion than Lotte and Hans Hass could ever have imagined. But it is also Attenborough’s most direct reckoning with environmental collapse. With clarity and urgency, it confronts the damage wrought by industrial trawling and habitat destruction.

    After 70 years of gently guiding viewers through the natural world, Attenborough’s voice has sharpened. If he once opened our eyes to nature’s wonders, he now challenges us not to look away. As he puts it: “If we save the sea, we save our world. After a lifetime filming our planet, I’m sure that nothing is more important.”

    Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?

    Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 45,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.

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

    – ref. From Zoo Quest to Ocean: The evolution of David Attenborough’s voice for the planet – https://theconversation.com/from-zoo-quest-to-ocean-the-evolution-of-david-attenboroughs-voice-for-the-planet-251727

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: A looming workforce crisis in NZ tourism and hospitality threatens industry growth plans

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anthony Brien, Associate Professor, Department of Global Value Chains and Trade, Lincoln University, New Zealand

    Getty Images

    Last week’s big tourism conference in Rotorua saw plenty of optimism about the industry’s potential, but also warnings that airline capacity is hampering post-COVID growth.

    The focus on bringing more foreign tourists to New Zealand is understandable, given the sector accounts for 7.5% of GDP and is our second highest export earner. But there is deeper problem, too. We already struggle to serve current visitor numbers – how will we handle more?

    International tourism injected NZ$16.9 billion into the economy in the year to March 2024. Total tourism expenditure (domestic and international) hit a record $44.4 billion, up nearly 15% from the previous year.

    The government has responded with a $13.5 million global marketing boost, and business leaders are celebrating. The big question is whether we will have the workforce to match the ambition.

    Because right now, the pipeline of skilled, engaged people willing to work, grow and lead in tourism and hospitality isn’t flowing.

    Without an industry-led, well-funded campaign to rebuild the perception of tourism and hospitality as credible, rewarding and sustainable career options, New Zealand has a crisis in the making.

    Who wants to work in tourism and hospo?

    Fewer New Zealanders are choosing tourism and hospitality as a career. With the number of locals studying tourism and hospitality collapsing, both sectors are increasingly dependent on foreign workers.

    Tourism education numbers for the past decade show:

    • 1,355 equivalent full-time students were enrolled in tourism-related courses in 2024, down from 3,750 in 2015 – a 63% drop

    • enrolments in bachelor’s degrees in tourism management fell from 45 in 2015 to 25 in 2024 – a 44% drop

    • postgraduate enrolments in tourism management are down 75%, with only 20 in 2024.

    The figures for hospitality education paint an even grimmer picture:

    • enrolments in hospitality courses fell from from 915 in 2015 to just 250 in 2024 – a 73% drop

    • cookery course enrolments fell from 4,125 to 1,140 – a 72% drop

    • food and beverage service training fell from 1,445 in 2015 to just 340 in 2024 – a 76% drop

    • hospitality management degree enrolments fell from 380 in 2015 to 210 in 2024 – a 45% drop.

    These figures do not include actual workplace training, but they still illustrate a clear trend.

    The looming workforce shortage

    Minister of Tourism and Hospitality Louise Upston recently said, “We need to grow tourism businesses. We need to grow the value from the tourism visitors we have.” She’s right. But without a viable workforce, none of this is possible.

    As to why more New Zealanders aren’t keen to work in the sector, Upston said, “I just don’t think the sector’s promoted it well enough.” This is despite many years of industry exhortations to “grow the domestic workforce”, “attract more young people” and “build career pathways”.

    COVID-19 certainly hurt the industry’s image as a place to work. But the challenges around neglected workforce development, career promotion and long-term planning predate the pandemic.

    Other industries and professions – including construction, agriculture and accounting – have invested heavily in scholarships, internships, mentoring and reputation building. Tourism and hospitality haven’t matched this and now risk losing young people to global demand.

    If the pattern continues, there will be a national shortage of qualified staff and competent managers, and greater reliance on short-term and migrant labour. That leads in turn to overworked staff, poorer service, and businesses forced to reduce hours or close altogether.

    Investment in the future

    In the 1970s and 80s, New Zealand had to import tourism and hospitality talent to grow the industries. Without real change, those days may return.

    Apart from what is offered by two major hotel chains, few formal internships exist. Such programmes are not simply part-time jobs, they’re investments in future talent, involving professional guidance and meaningful experience. They take effort, but they work.

    Meanwhile, degree-level programmes are already being dropped. If lower-level course enrolments continue to fall, these programmes may close too. The burden then falls on businesses to train and educate staff. But those same businesses say they can’t find enough staff today.

    This is more than a workforce problem, it’s a national economic risk. Spending millions on attracting visitors only to deliver a substandard experience is not a good use of taxpayer money.

    Without people, there is no hospitality. Without hospitality, there is no tourism. And without a sustainable tourism industry, New Zealand’s economy will suffer.

    Anthony Brien is a member of Tourism Industry Aotearoa.

    – ref. A looming workforce crisis in NZ tourism and hospitality threatens industry growth plans – https://theconversation.com/a-looming-workforce-crisis-in-nz-tourism-and-hospitality-threatens-industry-growth-plans-256212

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Total Executive photography bill comes to £81,895.25 in one year – with 1/4 spent by Executive Office alone

    Source: Traditional Unionist Voice – Northern Ireland

    Statement by TUV MLA Timothy Gaston:
    “Back in April I established that since the restoration of the Executive £60,675.40  has been spent on photographers by government departments excluding the Executive Office. Now, three months after they should have answered the question, the First Minister and deputy First Minister have finally disclosed how much public money has been spent on photographers since the Executive was restored.
    “We now know that between 3rd February 2024 and 2nd February 2025, £21,219.85 was spent by Ms O’Neill and Ms Little-Pengelly.
    “That’s more than £1,700 every month.
    “Over £440 every week.
    “On photographers.
    “In just one department.
    “It is frankly shameful. While Ms O’Neill and Ms Little-Pengelly take turns attacking the so-called lack of funding from London, their own department has been spending hundreds of pounds each week on staged photoshoots.
    “The total bill run up by the Executive on photographers in its first 12 months is an eyewatering £81,895.25. A full quarter of that bill was run up by Ms O’Neill and Ms Little-Pengelly.
    “This is an Executive that always finds money for vanity — but never for public services.
    “This answer tells you everything you need to know about Stormont:
    “A three-month delay.
    “A staggering waste of public money.
    “And the clearest proof yet that when it comes to Stormont, photographs come before performance.
    “From now on, when the public see one of the many smiling photos of the First and deputy First Ministers they will know that they paid handsomely for it.”
    The full list of questions and answers on spend on photography by the Executive is online here.

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Huizenga, McCaul Introduce Legislation to Modernize Missile Technology Export Controls

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Bill Huizenga (MI-02)

    Today, Congressman Bill Huizenga (R-MI) and House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Emeritus Michael McCaul (R-TX) announced the introduction of H.R. 3068, the Missile Technology Control Revision Act. H.R 3068 modernizes missile technology export controls by removing unnecessary regulatory barriers. This will bolster U.S. national security while ensuring our allies are equipped to address shared security threats in a timely manner.

    “The threats our nation faces have evolved over time; therefore, our approach to keeping America safe must evolve as well,” said Congressman Bill Huizenga. “We cannot allow bureaucratic red tape to hinder our national security. By modernizing the Missile Technology Control Regime to meet the security challenges of today, we can strengthen our defense capabilities and increase our cooperation with our allies, especially Australia and the United Kingdom. The Missile Technology Control Revision Act can act as a force multiplier that allows the United States and our closest allies to address the security challenges we face today and in the future.”

    “The Chinese Communist Party is working at lightning speed to advance its military apparatus — and it does not play fair,” said Chairman Emeritus Michael McCaul. “The MTCR Act empowers the United States and its allies to meet that generational challenge head-on by removing burdensome red tape that slows down the transfer of critical military technologies. I urge my colleagues to support this important bill that will strengthen crucial partnerships like the AUKUS defense pact and deter the CCP’s malign activity in the Indo-Pacific and beyond.”

    Background

    The Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) was signed in 1987 and is a non-binding political arrangement designed to curtail exports and proliferation of ballistic missiles and WMD delivery vehicles. It is comprised of 35 nations, including Russia. Unfortunately, the MTCR has no independent means to verify whether states adhere to its guidelines or a mechanism to penalize member states if they violate them.

    Specifically, H.R. 3068 removes section 38(j), the statutory requirement of the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR), from the Arms Export Control Act of 1976, thus allowing for expedited defense trade with countries the President determines to be eligible for a defense trade exemption. Additionally, this bill includes a statement of policy that the US shall no longer apply a “presumption of denial” for MTCR items to NATO, major non-NATO allies, and Five Eyes members. H.R. 3068 reflects the current security realities around the globe.

    While never its intended purpose, the MTCR has hindered the United States’ ability to transfer technologies like ballistic missiles, space launch vehicles, UAV systems, cruise missiles, and other dual-use missile-related components to our closest allies. This ultimately hampers cooperation and collaboration on advanced technologies with ally nations through partnerships like NATO, Five Eyes, and AUKUS. Given the evolving threat landscape, the guidelines of the MTCR fail to provide flexibilities needed to enhance current and future collaboration opportunities.

    H.R. 3068 is supported by the Aerospace Industries Association, which represents hundreds of American aerospace and defense companies.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: VIDEO: Huizenga Reintroduces BRAVE Burma Act to Sanction Junta, Gets Commitment from Treasury Secretary Bessent to Help the People of Burma

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Bill Huizenga (MI-02)

    Today, Congressman Bill Huizenga (R-MI) reintroduced H.R. 3190, the BRAVE Burma Act. This bill addresses the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Burma by cutting off the ruthless military junta from the revenue sources it uses to facilitate acts of genocide against the Burmese civilian population. Joining Congressman Huizenga in introducing H.R. 3190 was fellow Burma Caucus co-chair Rep. Betty McCollum (D-MN) as well as Rep. Seth Moulton (D-MA) and Rep. Ann Wagner (R-MO).

    “The United States can and must do more to protect the people of Burma and stop the genocide being committed by the military junta,” said Congressman Bill Huizenga. “This bipartisan bill moves to cut off the primary source of funding for the regime and diminish its ability to conduct horrific airstrikes on civilian populations.”

    “On behalf of the Burmese (Myanmar) community in the constituency, I would like to extend our gratitude to Congressman Huizenga for his leadership on Burma-related legislation. We view this bill as a testament to the Burma Caucus’s continued commitment and constructive engagement in matters concerning Burma. We urge the United States to take a leading role in restoring democracy in Burma through sustained and vigorous engagement. The Burmese diaspora also hopes that the Burma Caucus will work closely with Burmese advocacy groups, who often possess valuable insights into the situation on the ground.” – Dr. Than N. Oo, Co-Chair, Burma Center of Battle Creek

    [embedded content]

    Congressman Huizenga: Can I get your commitment that you are going to continue to work with my staff and us on a bipartisan basis as we try to address these issues in Burma?

    U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent: Congressman, we are happy to work with your staff on this legislation. Thank you for your leadership on this issue. I share your concern about imposing consequences on persons who threaten the peace and security of Burma. Treasury has tools to continue to take action for the people of Burma and working with you, we will continue to do so.

    Background:

    The BRAVE Burma Act requires the President to determine, on an annual basis, whether to impose stronger blocking sanctions on Myanma Oil and Gas Enterprise, Myanma Economic Bank, and foreign persons operating in the jet fuel sector of the Burmese economy.

    Additionally, BRAVE Burma Act would require the Secretary of the Treasury to limit any increase in Myanmar’s influence at the International Monetary Fund (IMF) as long as it is governed by the military junta. Not only will this prevent Myanmar from gaining in voting power, but it will also limit the junta’s ability to borrow from the IMF. Lastly, this bill appoints a Senate-approved Special Envoy for Burma at the Department of State. The goal of this position is to develop a comprehensive strategy for implementing the full range of US diplomatic capabilities to promote human rights and the restoration of a civilian government in Burma.  

    Congressman Huizenga established the first-ever Congressional Burma Caucus on February 1, 2024, to coincide with the three-year anniversary of the military coup in Burma. This caucus was created to bolster congressional support for the Burmese people in their fight for democracy and human rights against the brutal military junta. Congressman Huizenga serves as the Republican Co-Chair alongside Democrat Co-Chair Betty McCollum of Minnesota.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI: Natural Gas Services Group, Inc. Reports First Quarter 2025 Financial and Operating Results; Increases 2025 Guidance

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    Midland, Texas, May 12, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Natural Gas Services Group, Inc. (“NGS” or the “Company”) (NYSE:NGS), a leading provider of natural gas compression equipment, technology, and services to the energy industry, today announced financial results for the three months ended March 31, 2025. The Company also raised the high-end of its full-year 2025 Adjusted EBITDA guidance to $79 million, citing continued strength in its business and growing demand across its fleet.

    First Quarter 2025 Highlights

    • Rental revenue of $38.9 million for the first quarter of 2025 representing a 15% year-over-year increase and a 2% sequential increase compared to the period ended December 31, 2024.
    • Net income of $4.9 million or $0.38 per diluted share for the first quarter of 2025 compared to net income of $5.1 million or $0.41 per diluted share for the comparable period; net income up $2.0 million sequentially.
    • Leverage ratio at March 31, 2025, was 2.18x.
    • Adjusted EBITDA of $19.3 million for the first quarter of 2025, representing a 14% year-over-year increase; Adjusted EBITDA up 7% sequentially. See Non-GAAP Financial Measures – Adjusted EBITDA, below.

    Management Commentary and Outlook
    “We are pleased to report another quarter of strong execution and continued momentum across our business,” said Justin Jacobs, Chief Executive Officer. “We are taking market share, expanding our presence in key basins, and investing in our fleet, including the deployment of large-horsepower electric motor units. Our recent credit facility expansion, which also decreased our interest rate and provided more flexible covenants, further improves our ability to take advantage of organic and inorganic growth opportunities.”

    Jacobs continued, “While broader market uncertainty increased in recent weeks—driven primarily by tariff concerns, commodity price volatility, and macroeconomic factors—we are not seeing any meaningful direct impact on our operations. We will continue to monitor indirect effects closely, but we remain confident in our ability to deliver results consistent with our guidance.”

    “We increased our EBITDA outlook to reflect our first quarter outperformance relative to internal expectations and our confidence in the trajectory of the business. We remain excited about our prospects as we look to the remainder of 2025 and into 2026. Our team remains focused on disciplined capital allocation, operational excellence, and long-term value creation for our shareholders.”

    Corporate Guidance — 2025 Outlook

    The Company today provides updates to its previously announced guidance for the 2025 Fiscal Year. Based on a strong start to the year in the first quarter and its confidence for the remainder of the year, the Company today increased the high-end of its adjusted EBITDA guidance to $79 million. The Company now anticipates adjusted EBITDA for the 2025 Fiscal Year to be in the range of $74 – $79 million.

    The Company also reaffirms its outlook for 2025 growth capital expenditures of between $95 – $120 million, which are mostly  comprised of new units (essentially all of which are under contract). Once all these units are deployed, which is expected by early 2026, the Company expects its rented horsepower fleet to increase by approximately 90,000 horsepower, representing an increase of approximately 18% compared to year-end 2024. Customer deployments remain on schedule and the timing of deployments as previously noted is heavily weighted to the second half of 2025 and early 2026. Additionally, the Company anticipates 2025 maintenance expenditures of $10 – $13 million, consistent with its prior guidance and its target return on invested capital of 20% remains unchanged.

    The Company also reiterates the statement from the 2024 year end release that once all the 2025 growth capital expenditures are spent and the units are deployed, its “run rate” Adjusted EBITDA should increase at a rate (when compared to the fourth quarter of 2024) well in excess of (but less than double the rate of) the Company’s anticipated horsepower growth of 18%.

      Outlook
    NEW FY 2025 Adjusted EBITDA $74 million – $79 million
    FY 2025 Growth Capital Expenditures $95 million – $120 million
    FY 2025 Maintenance Capital Expenditures $10 million – $13 million
    Target Return on Invested Capital At least 20%

    Jacobs concluded, “We have multiple pathways to build on our industry-leading growth and drive shareholder value: fleet optimization, asset utilization (both unutilized units and non-cash assets), new rental units (both electric motor and natural gas engine), and accretive mergers and acquisitions. Given our strong balance sheet, low relative leverage, and recent increase in our borrowing capacity, we are well positioned to capitalize on opportunities for significant growth throughout the remainder of 2025.”

    2025 First Quarter Financial Results

    Revenue:  Total revenue for the three months ended March 31, 2025, increased 12% to $41.4 million from $36.9 million for the three months ended March 31, 2024. This increase was primarily due to higher rental revenues for the comparable periods. Rental revenue increased 15% to $38.9 million from $33.7 million in the first quarter of 2024 due to the addition of higher horsepower packages and pricing improvements. As of March 31, 2025, we had 492,679 rented horsepower (1,202 rented units) compared to 444,220 horsepower (1,245 rented units) as of March 31, 2024, reflecting an 11% increase in total utilized horsepower. Sequentially, total revenue increased 2% from $40.7 million primarily related to higher rental revenue for the current period.

    Gross Margins and Adjusted Gross Margins: Total gross margins, including depreciation expense increased to $15.7 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025, compared to $14.2 million for the same period in 2024 and increased on a sequential basis from $14.6 million for the three months ended December 31, 2024. Total adjusted gross margin, exclusive of depreciation expense, increased to $24.3 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025, compared to $21.1 million for the same period in 2024. On a sequential basis, total adjusted gross margin, exclusive of depreciation expense increased by $1.3 million compared to $23.0 million for the period ended December 31, 2024. For a reconciliation of Gross Margin, see Non-GAAP Financial Measures – Adjusted Gross Margin, below.

    Operating Income:  Operating income for the three months ended March 31, 2025, was $9.5 million compared to operating income of $9.3 million for the comparable 2024 period. On a sequential basis, operating income increased $3.5 million compared to $6.0 million for the period ended December 31, 2024.

    Net Income: Net income for the three months ended March 31, 2025, was $4.9 million, or $0.38 per diluted share compared to net income of $5.1 million or $0.41 per diluted share for the comparable 2024 period. On a sequential basis, net income increased $2.0 million when compared to net income of $2.9 million, or $0.23 per diluted share, in the fourth quarter of 2024. The modest year-over-year decline in net income was primarily related to an adjustment to inventory allowance, retirement of rental equipment, a gain on the sale of property and equipment, as well as an increase in depreciation and amortization. The sequential improvement in net income was primarily driven by higher rental revenue and rental gross margin.

    Cash Flows: At March 31, 2025, cash and cash equivalents were approximately $2.1 million, while working capital was $24.7 million. For the three months ended March 31, 2025, cash flows provided by operating activities were $21.3 million, while cash flows used in investing activities was $19.3 million. This compares to cash flows from operating activities of $5.6 million and cash flows used in investing activities of $10.9 million for the comparable three-month period in 2024. Cash flow used in investing activities during the first quarter 2025 included $19.3 million in capital expenditures.

    Adjusted EBITDA: Adjusted EBITDA increased 14% to $19.3 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025, from $16.9 million for the same period in 2024. The increase was primarily attributable to higher rental revenue and rental adjusted gross margin. Sequentially, Adjusted EBITDA increased 7% when compared to $18.0 million for the three months ended December 31, 2024.

    Debt:  Outstanding debt on our revolving credit facility as of March 31, 2025, was $168 million. Our leverage ratio at March 31, 2025, was 2.18x and our fixed charge coverage ratio was 2.98x. The Company is in compliance with all terms, conditions and covenants of the credit agreement.

    Selected data: The tables below show revenue by product line, gross margin and adjusted gross margin for the trailing five quarters.   Adjusted gross margin is the difference between revenue and cost of sales, exclusive of depreciation.

      Revenues
      Three months ended
      March 31, 2024 June 30, 2024 September 30, 2024 December 31, 2024 March 31, 2025
      ($ in 000)   ($ in 000)   ($ in 000)   ($ in 000)   ($ in 000)  
    Rentals $                  33,734   $                  34,926   $                  37,350   $                  38,226   $                  38,910  
    Sales                        2,503                          2,270                          1,843                             997                          1,927  
    Aftermarket services                           670                          1,295                          1,493                          1,435                             546  
    Total $                  36,907   $                  38,491   $                  40,686   $                  40,658   $                  41,383  
      Gross Margin
      Three months ended
      March 31, 2024 June 30, 2024 September 30, 2024 December 31, 2024 March 31, 2025
      ($ in 000)   ($ in 000)   ($ in 000)   ($ in 000)   ($ in 000)  
    Rentals $                  13,761                       13,211                       15,043                       14,865   $                  15,634  
    Sales                           253                             (50)                           (258)                           (531)                           (181)  
    Aftermarket services                           163                             269                             151                             296                             264  
    Total $                  14,177   $                  13,430   $                  14,936   $                  14,630   $                  15,717  
                         
      Adjusted Gross Margin (1)
      Three months ended
      March 31, 2024 June 30, 2024 September 30, 2024 December 31, 2024 March 31, 2025
      ($ in 000)   ($ in 000)   ($ in 000)   ($ in 000)   ($ in 000)  
    Rentals                     20,620                       20,698                       22,908                       23,107                       24,070  
    Sales                           323                               21                           (185)                           (449)                             (89)  
    Aftermarket services                           170                             283                             169                             321                             275  
    Total $                  21,113   $                  21,002   $                  22,892   $                  22,979   $                  24,256  
                         
        Adjusted Gross Margin %
        Three months ended
        March 31, 2024 June 30, 2024 September 30, 2024 December 31, 2024 March 31, 2025
    Rentals   61.1 %   59.3 %   61.3 %   60.4 %   61.9 %
    Sales   12.9 %   0.9 %   (10.0) %   (45.0) %   (4.6) %
    Aftermarket services   25.4 %   21.9 %   11.3  %   22.4 %   50.4 %
    Total   57.2 %   54.6 %   56.3 %   56.5 %   58.6 %
      Compression Units (at end of period):
      Three months ended
      March 31, 2024 June 30, 2024 September 30, 2024 December 31, 2024 March 31, 2025
    Horsepower Utilized 444,220   454,568   475,534   491,756   492,679
    Total Horsepower 542,256   552,599   579,699   598,840   603,391
    Horsepower Utilization 81.9 %   82.3 %   82.0 %   82.1 %   81.7 %
                       
    Units Utilized 1,245   1,242   1,229   1,208   1,202
    Total Units 1,894   1,899   1,909   1,912   1,916
    Unit Utilization 65.7 %   65.4 %   64.4 %   63.2 %   62.7 %

    (1) For a reconciliation of adjusted gross margin to its most directly comparable financial measure calculated and presented in accordance with GAAP, please read “Non-GAAP Financial Measures – Adjusted Gross Margin” below.

    Non-GAAP Financial Measure – Adjusted Gross Margin: “Adjusted Gross Margin” is defined as total revenue less costs of revenues (excluding depreciation and amortization expense). Adjusted Gross Margin is included as a supplemental disclosure because it is a primary measure used by our management as it represents the results of revenue and costs (excluding depreciation and amortization expense), which are key components of our operations. Adjusted Gross Margin differs from gross margin, in that gross margin includes depreciation and amortization expense. We believe Adjusted Gross Margin is important because it focuses on the current operating performance of our operations and excludes the impact of the prior historical costs of the assets acquired or constructed that are utilized in those operations. Depreciation and amortization expense does not accurately reflect the costs required to maintain and replenish the operational usage of our assets and therefore may not portray the costs from current operating activity. Rather, depreciation and amortization expense reflects the systematic allocation of historical property and equipment costs over their estimated useful lives.

    Adjusted Gross Margin has certain material limitations associated with its use as compared to gross margin. These limitations are primarily due to the exclusion of depreciation and amortization expense, which is material to our results of operations. Because we use capital assets, depreciation and amortization expense is a necessary element of our costs and our ability to generate revenue. In order to compensate for these limitations, management uses this non-GAAP measure as a supplemental measure to other GAAP results to provide a more complete understanding of our performance. As an indicator of our operating performance, Adjusted Gross Margin should not be considered an alternative to, or more meaningful than, gross margin as determined in accordance with GAAP. Our Adjusted Gross Margin may not be comparable to a similarly titled measure of another company because other entities may not calculate Adjusted Gross Margin in the same manner.

    The following table shows gross margin, the most directly comparable GAAP financial measure, and reconciles it to Adjusted Gross Margin:

      Three months ended
      March 31, 2024 June 30, 2024 September 30, 2024 December 31, 2024 March 31, 2025
      (in thousands)
    Total revenue $              36,907 $              38,491 $                    40,686 $                 40,658 $              41,383
    Costs of revenue, exclusive of depreciation                (15,794)                (17,489)                     (17,794)                   (17,679)                (17,127)
    Depreciation allocable to costs of revenue                  (6,936)                  (7,572)                       (7,956)                     (8,349)                  (8,539)
    Gross margin                  14,177                  13,430                       14,936                    14,630                  15,717
    Depreciation allocable to costs of revenue                    6,936                    7,572                         7,956                       8,349                    8,539
    Adjusted Gross Margin $              21,113 $              21,002 $                    22,892 $                 22,979 $              24,256

    Non-GAAP Financial Measures – Adjusted EBITDA: “Adjusted EBITDA” is a non-GAAP financial measure that we define as net income (loss) before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization, as well as an increase in inventory allowance, impairments, retirement of rental equipment, nonrecurring restructuring charges including severance and non-cash equity-classified stock-based compensation expenses. This term, as used and defined by us, may not be comparable to similarly titled measures employed by other companies and is not a measure of performance calculated in accordance with GAAP. Adjusted EBITDA should not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for operating income, net income or loss, cash flows provided by operating, investing and financing activities, or other income or cash flow statement data prepared in accordance with GAAP. However, management believes Adjusted EBITDA is useful to an investor in evaluating our operating performance because: (i) it is widely used by investors in the energy industry to measure a company’s operating performance without regard to items excluded from the calculation of Adjusted EBITDA, which can vary substantially from company to company depending upon accounting methods and book value of assets, capital structure and the method by which assets were acquired, among other factors; (ii) it helps investors to more meaningfully evaluate and compare the results of our operations from period to period by removing the impact of our capital structure and asset base from our operating structure; (iii) it is used by our management for various purposes, including as a measure of operating performance, in presentations to our Board of Directors, and as a basis for strategic planning and forecasting.

    Adjusted EBITDA has limitations as an analytical tool, and you should not consider it in isolation, or as a substitute for analysis of our results as reported under GAAP. Some of these limitations are as follows: (i) Adjusted EBITDA does not reflect all our cash expenditures, future requirements for capital expenditures, or contractual commitments; (ii) Adjusted EBITDA does not reflect changes in, or cash requirements for, our working capital needs; (iii) Adjusted EBITDA does not reflect the cash requirements necessary to service interest or principal payments on our debt and finance leases; and (iv) although depreciation and amortization are non-cash charges, the assets being depreciated and amortized will often have to be replaced in the future, and Adjusted EBITDA does not reflect any capital expenditures for such replacements.

    The following table reconciles our net income, the most directly comparable GAAP financial measure, to Adjusted EBITDA:

      Three months ended
      March 31, 2024   June 30, 2024   September 30, 2024   December 31, 2024   March 31, 2025
      (in thousands)
    Net income $               5,098                4,250   $                     5,014   $                    2,865   $                4,854
    Interest expense                  2,935                2,932                          3,045                         3,015                     3,170
    Income tax expense (benefit)                  1,479                1,294                          1,383                             283                     1,482
    Depreciation and amortization                  7,087                7,705                          8,086                         8,469                     8,636
    Impairments                        —                      —                             136                             705                           —
    Inventory allowance                        —                      —                                —                         1,863                           61
    Retirement of rental equipment                          5                      —                                —                               23                         728
    Severance and restructuring                        —                      33                                —                               —                           —
    Stock-based compensation                      274                    242                             522                             783                         359
    Adjusted EBITDA $             16,878   $         16,456   $                  18,186   $                  18,006   $              19,290

    Conference Call Details: The Company will host a conference call to review its fourth-quarter and year-end financial results on Tuesday, May 13, 2025 at 8:30 a.m. (EST), 7:30 a.m. (CST). To join the conference call, kindly access the Investor Relations section of our website at www.ngsgi.com or dial in at (800) 550-9745 and enter conference ID 167298 at least five minutes prior to the scheduled start time. Please note that using the provided dial-in number is necessary for participation in the Q&A section of the call. A recording of the conference will be made available on our Company’s website following its conclusion. Thank you for your interest in our Company’s updates.

    About Natural Gas Services Group, Inc. (NGS): Natural Gas Services Group is a leading provider of natural gas compression equipment, technology and services to the energy industry. The Company designs, rents, sells and maintains natural gas compressors for oil and natural gas production and plant facilities, primarily using equipment from third-party fabricators and OEM suppliers along with limited in-house assembly. The Company is headquartered in Midland, Texas, with a fabrication facility located in Tulsa, Oklahoma, and service facilities located in major oil and natural gas producing basins in the U.S. Additional information can be found at www.ngsgi.com.

    Forward-Looking Statements

    Certain statements herein (and oral statements made regarding the subjects of this release) constitute “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the federal securities laws. Words such as “may,” “might,” “should,” “believe,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” “continue,” “predict,” “forecast,” “project,” “plan,” “intend” or similar expressions, or statements regarding intent, belief, or current expectations, are forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements are based upon current estimates and assumptions.

    These forward–looking statements rely on a number of assumptions concerning future events and are subject to a number of uncertainties and factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from such statements, many of which are outside the control of the Company. Forward–looking information includes, but is not limited to statements regarding: guidance or estimates related to EBITDA growth, projected capital expenditures; returns on invested capital, fundamentals of the compression industry and related oil and gas industry, valuations, compressor demand assumptions and overall industry outlook, and the ability of the Company to capitalize on any potential opportunities.
    While the Company believes that the assumptions concerning future events are reasonable, investors are cautioned that there are inherent difficulties in predicting certain important factors that could impact the future performance or results of its business. Some of these factors that could cause results to differ materially from those indicated by such forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to:

    • conditions in the oil and gas industry, including the supply and demand for oil and gas and volatility in the prices of oil and gas;
    • changes in general economic and financial conditions, inflationary pressures, the potential for economic recession in the U.S., tariffs and trade restrictions, including the imposition of new and higher tariffs on imported goods and retaliatory tariffs implemented by other countries on U.S. goods, and the potential effects on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows;
    • our reliance on major customers;
    • failure of projected organic growth due to adverse changes in the oil and gas industry, including depressed oil and gas prices, oppressive environmental regulations and competition;
    • our inability to achieve increased utilization of assets, including rental fleet utilization and monetizing other non-cash balance sheet assets;
    • failure of our customers to continue to rent equipment after expiration of the primary rental term;
    • our ability to economically develop and deploy new technologies and services, including technology to comply with health and environmental laws and regulations;
    • failure to achieve accretive financial results in connection with any acquisitions we may make;
    • fluctuations in interest rates;
    • changes in regulation or prohibition of new or current well completion techniques;
    • competition among the various providers of compression services and products;
    • changes in safety, health and environmental regulations;
    • changes in economic or political conditions in the markets in which we operate;
    • the inherent risks associated with our operations, such as equipment defects, malfunctions, natural disasters and adverse changes in customer, employee and supplier relationships;
    • our inability to comply with covenants in our debt agreements and the decreased financial flexibility associated with our debt;
    • inability to finance our future capital requirements and availability of financing;
    • capacity availability, costs and performance of our outsourced compressor fabrication providers and overall inflationary pressures;
    • impacts of world events, such as acts of terrorism and significant economic disruptions and adverse consequences resulting from possible long-term effects of potential pandemics and other public health crises; and
    • general economic conditions.

    In addition, these forward-looking statements are subject to other various risks and uncertainties, including without limitation those set forth in the Company’s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024. Thus, actual results could be materially different. The Company expressly disclaims any obligation to update or alter statements whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by law.

    Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024. Thus, actual results could be materially different. The Company expressly disclaims any obligation to update or alter statements whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by law.

    For More Information, Contact:
    Anna Delgado, Investor Relations
    (432) 262-2700
    IR@ngsgi.com
    www.ngsgi.com

     NATURAL GAS SERVICES GROUP, INC.
    CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
    (in thousands, except par value)
    (unaudited)
           
      March 31,
    2025    		   December 31, 2024
    ASSETS      
    Current Assets:      
    Cash and cash equivalents $                2,147   $                2,142
    Trade accounts receivable, net of provision for credit losses                 15,415                   15,626
    Inventory, net of allowance for obsolescence                 17,343                   18,051
    Federal income tax receivable                 11,263                   11,282
    Prepaid expenses and other                      992                     1,075
    Total current assets                 47,160                   48,176
    Long-term inventory, net of allowance for obsolescence                         —                           —
    Rental equipment, net of accumulated depreciation               424,856                 415,021
    Property and equipment, net of accumulated depreciation                 23,570                   22,989
    Other assets                   6,105                     6,342
    Total assets $           501,691   $           492,528
    LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY      
    Current Liabilities:      
    Accounts payable $             14,977   $                9,670
    Accrued liabilities                   7,468                     7,688
    Total current liabilities                 22,445                   17,358
    Long-term debt               168,000                 170,000
    Deferred income taxes                 47,323                   45,873
    Other long-term liabilities                   3,659                     4,240
    Total liabilities               241,427                 237,471
    Commitments and contingencies      
    Stockholders’ Equity:      
    Preferred stock                         —                           —
    Common stock, 30,000 shares authorized, par value $0.01; 13,784 and 13,762 shares issued, respectively                      138                        138
    Additional paid-in capital               118,768                 118,415
    Retained earnings               156,362                 151,508
    Treasury shares, at cost, 1,310 shares for each of the dates presented, respectively               (15,004)                 (15,004)
    Total stockholders’ equity               260,264                 255,057
    Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity $           501,691   $           492,528
    NATURAL GAS SERVICES GROUP, INC.
    CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
    (in thousands, except earnings per share)
    (unaudited)
       
      Three months ended
      March 31,
      2025   2024
    Revenue:      
    Rental $             38,910   $             33,734
    Sales                   1,927                     2,503
    Aftermarket services                      546                        670
    Total revenue                 41,383                   36,907
    Cost of revenue (excluding depreciation and amortization):      
    Rental                 14,840                   13,114
    Sales                   2,016                     2,180
    Aftermarket services                      271                        500
    Total cost of revenues (excluding depreciation and amortization)                 17,127                   15,794
    Selling, general and administrative expense                   5,378                     4,702
    Depreciation and amortization                   8,636                     7,087
    Inventory allowance                         61                           —
    Retirement of rental equipment                      728                             5
    Gain on sale of assets, net                       (54)                           —
    Total operating costs and expenses                 31,876                   27,588
    Operating income                   9,507                     9,319
    Other income (expense):      
    Interest expense                 (3,170)                   (2,935)
    Other income (expense)                         (1)                        193
    Total other income (expense), net                 (3,171)                   (2,742)
    Income before income taxes                   6,336                     6,577
    Provision for income taxes                 (1,482)                   (1,479)
    Net income $                4,854   $                5,098
    Earnings per share:      
    Basic                     0.39                       0.41
    Diluted                     0.38                       0.41
    Weighted average shares outstanding:      
    Basic                 12,462                   12,380
    Diluted                 12,611                   12,465
    NATURAL GAS SERVICES GROUP, INC.
    CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
    (in thousands)
    (unaudited)
      Three months ended
      March 31,
      2025   2024
    CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES:      
    Net income $             4,854   $             5,098
    Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities:      
    Depreciation and amortization                 8,636                   7,087
    Inventory allowance                      61                        —
    Retirement of rental equipment                    728                          5
    Gain on sale of assets, net                    (54)                        —
    Amortization of debt issuance costs                    212                      150
    Deferred income taxes                 1,450                   1,456
    Stock-based compensation                    359                      274
    Provision for credit losses                    208                      110
    Loss (gain) on company owned life insurance                      17                    (184)
    Changes in operating assets and liabilities:      
    Trade accounts receivables                        3                 (3,265)
    Inventory                    647                   2,650
    Prepaid expenses and prepaid income taxes                      64                      250
    Accounts payable and accrued liabilities                 4,617                 (8,380)
    Other                  (535)                      358
    NET CASH PROVIDED BY OPERATING ACTIVITIES              21,267                   5,609
    CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES:      
    Purchase of rental equipment, property and other equipment             (19,256)               (10,932)
    Purchase of company owned life insurance                      —                         (9)
    NET CASH USED IN INVESTING ACTIVITIES             (19,256)               (10,941)
    CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES:      
    Proceeds from credit facility borrowings                 6,000                   8,000
    Repayments of credit facility borrowings               (8,000)                        —
    Payments of other long-term liabilities                      —                    (175)
    Taxes paid related to net share settlement of equity awards                       (6)                        —
    NET CASH (USED IN) PROVIDED BY FINANCING ACTIVITIES               (2,006)                   7,825
    NET CHANGE IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS                        5                   2,493
    CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS AT BEGINNING OF PERIOD                 2,142                   2,746
    CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS AT END OF PERIOD $             2,147   $             5,239
    SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURE OF CASH FLOW INFORMATION:      
    Interest paid $             3,510   $             6,220
    Income taxes paid $                   16   $                   —
    NON-CASH TRANSACTIONS      
    Accrued purchases of property and equipment $                 524   $                   —
    Right of use asset acquired through an finance lease $                   —   $                 532

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Department of Homeland Security Investigates State of California for Providing Federal Benefits to Illegal Aliens

    Source: US Federal Emergency Management Agency

    Headline: Department of Homeland Security Investigates State of California for Providing Federal Benefits to Illegal Aliens

    lass=”text-align-center”>Under Secretary Noem’s leadership, DHS will not allow U

    S

    taxpayer dollars to be squandered on illegal aliens 
    LOS ANGELES – Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) Los Angeles Field Office issued a Title 8 subpoena to the State of California’s Cash Assistance Program for Immigrants (CAPI)

    This program provides benefits to aliens who are ineligible for Social Security benefits because of their immigration status

     The subpoena requests all records from the Los Angeles County Department of Public Social Services – who administers the state program – to determine if ineligible illegal aliens received Supplemental Security Income (SSI) from the Social Security Administration, between January 2021 to present

    HSI Los Angeles is subpoenaing the following records:

    Applicant’s Name and Date of Birth
    Copies of Applications
    Immigration Status
    Proof of Ineligibility for SSI from the Social Security Administration
    Affidavits in Support of the Application

    “Radical left politicians in California prioritize illegal aliens over our own citizens, including by giving illegal aliens access to cash benefits,” said Secretary Kristi Noem

    “The Trump Administration is working together to identify abuse and exploitation of public benefits and make sure those in this country illegally are not receiving federal benefits or other financial incentives to stay illegally

    If you are an illegal immigrant, you should leave now

    The gravy train is over

    While this subpoena focuses only on Los Angeles County – it is just the beginning

    ”On April 15, 2025, President Donald Trump signed the Memorandum Preventing Illegal Aliens from Obtaining Social Security Act Benefits to stop incentivizing illegal immigration and protect taxpayer dollars

    The Memorandum directs the Secretary of Homeland Security – in consultation with the Secretaries of Labor and Health and Human Services, the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, and the Attorney General – to ensure ineligible illegal aliens do not receive funds from Social Security programs and prioritize civil or criminal enforcement against states or localities for potential violations of Title IV of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA)

    Under the previous administration, more than 2 million ineligible illegal aliens received a Social Security Number in fiscal year 2024 alone

    Under President Trump’s leadership, the Department of Homeland Security will work with its federal partners to deliver on his promise to put Americans, and their tax dollars, first

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Shaheen Holds Roundtable on Dangers of Medicaid Cuts in Nashua, Accepts Energy Champion Award in Manchester

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for New Hampshire Jeanne Shaheen
    (Nashua, NH) – Today, U.S. Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) held a roundtable discussion at Greater Nashua Mental Health Center to discuss the disastrous impact that Republican-led cuts to Medicaid would have on New Hampshire. Shaheen convened local substance use disorder recovery organizations and treatment providers to hear how cutting Medicaid would hinder efforts to support Granite Staters struggling with substance use disorders. Photos from today’s events can be found here. 
    “Thousands of Granite Staters who are recovering from substance use disorders are able to get the treatment they need thanks to Medicaid – cutting the funding they count on could have serious consequences,” said Senator Shaheen. “I was grateful to hear from Granite State advocates who are on the frontlines of the fight to combat the substance use disorder crisis about how harmful cuts to Medicaid would be. We’ll keep working to make sure Republicans in Congress know just how many families would be devastated by their proposal.” 
    More than 180,000 people in New Hampshire use Medicaid for their insurance and half of those recipients are children. Under the Republican proposal, they will see significant changes to their coverage and more than 60,000 Granite Starters will be at risk of losing their coverage. This includes thousands of patients that are currently receiving treatment for substance use disorders.    
    The roundtable at Greater Nashua Mental Health Center was the latest stop on Shaheen’s “Medicaid Impact Tour”—a series of discussions across the Granite State to underscore the harm that Republican-led cuts to Medicaid would have on New Hampshire, including by raising the cost of health care and leaving thousands uninsured. The tour included stops in Berlin, Laconia, Claremont and Concord for meetings with health care providers, activists and Medicaid beneficiaries. 
    Later in the day, Shaheen was honored at New Hampshire Energy Week’s Energy Innovation and Champion Award Reception with the Elected Official Energy Champion Award for her decades of energy efficiency leadership.  
    “Throughout my career in public service—from the Governor’s office to the United States Senate—I’ve looked to energy efficiency first,” said Senator Shaheen. “This work is especially important right now as too many families feel squeezed by the high cost of living. Energy efficiency programs are an important and cost-effective way for Granite Staters to save money and have more breathing room in their household budgets.” 
    Earlier this week, Shaheen pushed back on the Trump administration’s plans to scrap the Energy Star Program, which helps Americans save on energy costs.  
    As a lead negotiator of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, Shaheen helped secure $3.5 billion in additional funding for the Weatherization Assistance Program, including $18 million for New Hampshire. Shaheen has long-championed the Weatherization Assistance Program to lower energy costs for low-income families in New Hampshire, as well as the State Energy Program, which assists states with the development of energy efficiency renewable projects. In the Fiscal Year 2024 government funding bills, Shaheen helped defend key efficiency programs at the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) from cuts, including securing $366 million for weatherization efforts and $66 million for the State Energy Program, which work to bring down energy bills for families and communities. 

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Grassley, Ernst Expose Biden-Era Bureaucrats Engaged in Potential Criminal Misconduct, Urge Corrective Action

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Iowa Chuck Grassley
    WASHINGTON – Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) are demanding the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) take immediate corrective action to hold accountable two senior ATF bureaucrats who cost taxpayers millions by illegally misclassifying administrative positions as “law enforcement.”
    Grassley and Ernst are making public previously unreleased government reports confirming ATF Senior Executive Lisa Boykin and Justice Management Division (JMD) Acting Deputy Director of Human Resources (HR) Ralph Bittelari engaged in gross and substantial waste, fraud and abuse, as well as potentially criminal false certification of government records and whistleblower retaliation.
    Despite the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) and ATF Internal Affairs Division (IAD) confirming Boykin and Bittelari’s potential criminal misconduct, the Biden administration promoted both bureaucrats. According to whistleblower disclosures, Boykin and Bittelari remain employed at the Department of Justice (DOJ).
    “The Biden administration’s ATF illegally lined employees’ pockets with tens-of-millions of taxpayer dollars. These Washington bureaucrats must answer for their misconduct, and if heads don’t roll, nothing will change,” Grassley said. “Without the continued persistence of brave whistleblowers, ATF’s illegal scheme would’ve likely continued. As always, sunshine is the best disinfectant. Attorney General Pam Bondi should take strong action to hold these Biden-era pencil pushers accountable and end the fraudulent waste at ATF.”
    “It is unacceptable that the Biden administration looked the other way while ATF bureaucrats knowingly defrauded taxpayers to pad their salaries,” Ernst said. “These desk jockeys pretending to be law enforcement officers are about to get a crash course in the law. I look forward to Attorney General Pam Bondi sending a clear message that federal employees are not above the law and stealing tax dollars is a crime.”
    Read the senators’ letter to DOJ and ATF HERE.
    Background:
    In February 2020, then-HR Division Chief Bittelari fraudulently certified an administrative ATF position as “law enforcement,” despite warnings from an ATF HR classification expert. The HR expert eventually recused themself from the process and was subsequently threatened with insubordination. Bittelari then approved the fraudulent classification.
    Bittelari, along with then-Deputy Assistant Director Boykin, additionally relocated an ATF law enforcement officer from the Phoenix field office to a misclassified administrative position at ATF headquarters, in defiance of OPM’s directives. After moving forward with the illegal relocation, Bittelari told an ATF staff member “everyone was fully aware of the potential consequences,” and attempted to hide the reassignment by submitting false payroll information.
    OPM’s audit report found that the ATF’s illegal misclassification scheme hampered the agency’s ability to carry out its law enforcement mission by relocating approximately 100 law enforcement officers from the field to administrative positions at ATF headquarters in Washington, D.C., while continuing to pay them enhanced salaries and benefits. Further, many experienced administrative employees were passed over for promotions as ATF assigned unqualified special agents to senior administrative roles.
    OPM estimates the illegal enhancement of ATF bureaucrats’ salaries and benefits cost taxpayers at least $20 million during the five-year period it reviewed. However, whistleblowers allege the scheme has been decades-long and the actual taxpayer cost is in the hundreds of millions of dollars. 
    -30-

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI: Main Street Financial Services Corp. Annual Meeting Voting Results

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    WOOSTER, Ohio, May 12, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — On May 8, 2025, Main Street Financial Services Corp. (OTCQX: MSWV) (the “Company”) held its 2025 Annual Meeting of Stockholders (the “Annual Meeting”). The inspector of elections delivered its final report of voting results for each of the matters submitted to a vote.

    Proposal 1: To elect three (3) directors to serve until the 2028 annual meeting of stockholders.

    The three nominees who received a majority of “FOR” votes are elected as directors. The final report of the inspector of elections tabulation of voting results is set forth below:

    Board of Directors Nominees:

    Nominee For Withheld Broker Non-Votes
    David L. Lehman 4,202,702 213,723 1,436,249
    Debra A. Marthey 4,235,821 180,604 1,436,249
    Lance J. Ciroli 4,234,034 182,322 1,436,249

    Proposal 2: Vote on the Approval of the 2025 Equity Incentive Plan

    According to the final report of the inspector of election tabulation voting results, stockholders approved the proposed 2025 Equity Incentive Plan. The final report of the inspector of elections tabulation of voting results is set forth below:

    For Against Abstain Broker Non-Votes
    3,927,358 418,074 70,993 1,436,249

    Proposal 3: To ratify the appointment of Forvis Mazars, LLP as the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm for the year ending December 31, 2025.

    According to the final report of the inspector of election tabulation of voting results, stockholders ratified the appointment of Forvis Mazars, LLP as independent registered public accounting firm for the year ending December 31, 2025, by the votes indicated below:

    For Against Abstain Broker Non-Votes
    5,657,798 134,842 60,034 –

    Executive Chair Mark R. Witmer commented on the results, “We are incredibly grateful for the continued support and confidence of our shareholders. This past year marked a pivotal moment in our company’s history, with the successful completion of our merger and encouraging financial results. The approval of all the proposals at this year’s annual meeting reflects our shared vision for long-term growth and stability. We remain committed to delivering value, driving growth, and strengthening the communities we serve as we move forward together.”

    Forward-Looking–Statements
    This release contains forward-looking statements (as that term is defined in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995) that reflect management’s current assumptions and estimates of future economic circumstances, industry conditions, Company performance and financial results. Actual results may differ materially from the results discussed in these forward-looking statements, because such statements are inherently subject to significant assumptions, risks and uncertainties, many of which are difficult to predict and are generally beyond the Company’s control. The forward-looking statements in this letter speak only as to the date of this release. Main Street Financial Services Corp. expressly disclaims any obligation or undertaking to release publicly any updates or revisions to such statements to reflect any change in its expectations upon which such statements are based.

    Contact Information:
    Matthew Hartzler
    SVP, Chief Financial Officer
    (330) 264-5767

    The MIL Network –