NewzIntel.com

Category: Politics

  • MIL-OSI USA: Jayapal, Sanders, Dingell, Hundreds of Health Care Workers Introduce Medicare for All

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal (7th District of Washington)

    WASHINGTON – U.S. Representative Pramila Jayapal (WA-07), U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders (VT), and U.S. Representative Debbie Dingell (MI-06) today introduced the Medicare for All Act with hundreds of nurses, health care providers and workers from around the country at a press conference in front of the Capitol.

    In America today, despite spending twice as much per person on health care as other wealthy nations, more than 85 million Americans are uninsured or underinsured, one out of every four Americans cannot afford their prescription drugs, over half a million people go bankrupt due to medically-related debt, and more than 60,000 die because they cannot afford to go to a doctor.

    “It is a travesty when 85 million people are uninsured or underinsured and millions more are drowning in medical debt in the richest nation on Earth,” said Jayapal. “We don’t suffer from scarcity in America, we suffer from greed. That’s most clear in our broken health care system, which is why we need Medicare for All. People deserve and want comprehensive health care that covers mental health, long-term care, reproductive care, dental, vision and hearing, all without copays, private insurance premiums, sky-high deductibles or other hidden fees. Health care is a human right, that is exactly why it’s time to pass Medicare for All.”

    “The American people understand, as I do, that health care is a human right, not a privilege and that we must end the international embarrassment of the United States being the only major country on earth that does not guarantee health care to all of its citizens,” said Sanders. “It is not acceptable to me, nor to the American people, that over 85 million people today are either uninsured or underinsured. Today, there are millions of people who would like to go to a doctor but cannot afford to do so. This is an outrage. In America, your health and your longevity should not be dependent on your wealth. Health care is a human right that all Americans, regardless of income, are entitled to and they deserve the best health care that our country can provide.”

    “Every American has the right to health care, period. If you’re sick, you should be able to go to the doctor without being worried about the cost of treatment or prescription medicine. Too many families must decide between putting food on the table and getting medical care that they desperately need,” said Dingell. “A health care system that ties coverage to employment will always leave patients vulnerable. It’s flat-out wrong and Medicare for All would put a stop to it. We’ve been fighting this fight since the 1940s, when my father-in-law helped author the first universal health care bill. It’s time to get this done.”

    Under this legislation, Medicare would provide comprehensive health care to every American with no premiums, no co-payments and no deductibles. It would also expand Medicare to include dental, hearing, and vision care, and it would give every American the freedom to choose their doctors without endless paperwork or fighting their insurance company. The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that Medicare for All would save our health care system $650 billion a year. Further, researchers at Yale University have estimated that Medicare for All would save 68,000 lives a year.

    This legislation would also create a health care system that finally puts people over profits. In fact, since 2001, the top health care companies in America spent 95 percent of their profits, $2.6 trillion, not to make Americans healthy but to make their CEOs and stockholders obscenely rich. While nearly one out of four Americans cannot afford the life-saving medicine their doctors prescribe, ten top pharma companies made $102 billion in profits in 2024. Meanwhile, the CEOs of just 4 prescription drug companies – Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson, Eli Lilly, and Merck – together made over $100 million last year.

    “Nurses see the failure of our country’s profit-driven health care system every time we clock in to work,” said Nancy Hagans, President of National Nurses United. “In the richest country on earth, nobody should be forced to choose between taking their medications and putting food on the table. Yet countless families are pushed to the breaking point while greedy corporations charge astronomical, ludicrous fees for care that our patients have every right to receive. Nurses are fighting for a future in which our patients’ health is put first always and that’s why we are proud to continue our support for Medicare for All. When we guarantee health care for all, corporations and billionaires will no longer be able to deny anyone the care that they need.”

    “We are long overdue for a universal health care system that guarantees care for all — free of copays, deductibles, and job-based coverage restrictions,” said Dr. Diljeet K. Singh, M.D., Dr.P.H., and President of Physicians for a National Health Program. “With the passage of the Medicare for All Act, physicians can focus on healing patients, not battling insurers over denials and delays. Patients will finally be able to seek care without the constant fear of crushing medical bills. Physicians for a National Health Program proudly stands with our legislators in the fight to make excellent health care a reality for everyone in America.”

    “As Donald Trump, Robert Kennedy and Congressional Republicans rush to strip health care from millions of Americans, we know this: We must not only block their cruel cuts but move America to a system that provides health care to everyone as a matter of right,” said Robert Weissman, co-president of Public Citizen. “America spends much more than other wealthy countries on health care only to have the worst health outcomes. The system works for health insurers, Big Pharma, hospital chains and private equity firms – but no one else. Medicare for All would ensure everyone in America can get the care they need throughout their lives. It is the realistic, humane, just and efficient reform we need.”

    “Postal workers know the value of affordable, universal services, grounded in a commitment to putting people over profits. That’s the type of service we are committed to provide communities across the country, day in and day out,” said Mark Dimondstein, President of American Postal Workers Union. “For too long, greedy corporations and their Wall Street investors have been able to deny the people of the country the quality, affordable, universal health care working people deserve. Medicare for All, health care as a human right, will make us all healthier and financially better off. A health care system that works for working people, not the profits of the insurance companies, is long overdue. It’s time for Medicare for All.”

    “Health care should be a human right. But every time we negotiate with a boss for the right to see a doctor, they nickel and dime us until people have to choose between their health and putting food on the table,” said Shawn Fain, President of the International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW). “We’re sick of having to go on strike just to have decent health care. We’re sick of corporate America asking us to give up raises, retirement security, or work-life balance at the bargaining table so working-class people can avoid medical bankruptcy. Our current health care system is a con job that only works for the billionaire class. Medicare for All is common sense, and it’s what the working class needs. The UAW is proud to support this bill.”

    “If you want to renew the public’s faith in our political system, pass the Medicare for All Act of 2025,” said Alan Minsky, Executive Director, Progressive Democrats of America. “This one piece of legislation will instantly end the era, which has lasted far too long, when profits and wealth accumulation are more important than human life, including yours. MFA will return the general welfare, and the well-being of every individual, to the heart of our social contract. That will renew faith in America.”

    “Health care is a right, not a privilege. The reintroduction of the Medicare for All Act is a crucial step toward ending a system that profits from people’s pain,” said Analilia Mejia and DaMareo Cooper, Co-Executive Directors of Popular Democracy. “Too many Americans are forced to choose between paying their rent and paying for life-saving medication, while corporations rake in billions. Medicare for All isn’t just a policy—it’s the lifeline working families desperately need. Our communities deserve a health care system that prioritizes people over profits. We will fight until we win the health care we deserve.”

    “Health care is a human right and a basic need. Yet instead of getting health care, Americans get delays, denials, and bills they cannot afford. Today, predatory insurance CEOs are poised to reap the windfall from the tax scam giveaways earmarked for billionaires and corporations. The oligarchs that put Donald Trump and Dr. Oz in power want everything we have. We get sicker, make impossible choices, and go broke. They boost the stock prices of corporations – like UnitedHealth – that profit off our pain, and buy more mansions and yachts. We can put an end to those warped priorities through Medicare for All,” said Sulma Arias, executive director of People’s Action Institute. “Working people have made this the wealthiest nation in the history of the world, and there is more than enough if we don’t let the corporate crooks and billionaires steal it. So it’s time to choose: Our health care or their greed?”

    The legislation has an additional 102 cosponsors in the House: Alma Adams (NC-12), Yassamin Ansari (AZ-03), Becca Balint (VT-AL), Nanette Diaz Barragán (CA-44), Wesley Bell (MO-01), Donald S. Beyer Jr. (VA-08), Suzanne Bonamici (OR-01), Brendan Boyle (PA-02), Shontel Brown (OH-11), Salud Carbajal (CA-24), André Carson (IN-7), Troy Carter (LA-02), Greg Casar (TX-35), Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick (FL-20), Judy Chu (CA-28), Yvette Clarke (NY-09), Emanuel Cleaver, II (MO-05), Steve Cohen (TN-09), Jasmine Crockett (TX-30), Danny K. Davis (IL-07), Diana DeGette (CO-01), Chris Deluzio (PA-17), Mark DeSaulnier (CA-10), Maxine Dexter (OR-03), Lloyd Doggett (TX-37), Veronica Escobar (TX-16), Adriano Espaillat (NY-13), Valerie Foushee (NC-04), Lois Frankel (FL-22), Laura Friedman (CA-30), Maxwell Frost (FL-10), John Garamendi (CA-08), Robert Garcia (CA-42), Jesús “Chuy” García (IL-04), Dan Goldman (NY-10), Jimmy Gomez (CA-34), Al Green (TX-09), Josh Harder (CA-09), Jahana Hayes (CT-05), Val Hoyle (OR-04), Jared Huffman (CA-02), Jonathan Jackson (IL-01), Sara Jacobs (CA-51), Henry C. “Hank” Johnson, Jr. (GA-04), Sydney Kamlager-Dove (CA-37), William Keating (MA-09), Robin Kelly (IL-02), Tim Kennedy (NY-26), Ro Khanna (CA-17), Summer Lee (PA-12), Teresa Leger Fernandez (NM-03), Mike Levin (CA-49), Ted W. Lieu (CA-36), Zoe Lofgren (CA-18), Betty McCollum (MN-04), Morgan McGarvey (KY-03), James P. McGovern (MA-02), LaMonica McIver (NJ-10), Gregory Meeks (NY-05), Grace Meng (NY-06), Kweisi Mfume (MD-07), Dave Min (CA-47), Kevin Mullin (CA-15), Jerrold Nadler (NY-12), Joe Neguse (CO-02), Eleanor Holmes Norton (DC-AL), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (NY-14), Ilhan Omar (MN-05), Frank Pallone (NJ-06), Jimmy Panetta (CA-19), Chellie Pingree (ME-01), Mark Pocan (WI-02), Ayanna Pressley (MA-07), Mike Quigley (IL-05), Delia Ramirez (IL-03), Emily Randall (WA-06), Jamie Raskin (MD-08), Luz Rivas (CA-29), Andrea Salinas (OR-06), Linda T. Sánchez (CA-38), Jan Schakowsky (IL-09), Robert C. “Bobby” Scott (VA-03), Brad Sherman (CA-32), Lateefah Simon (CA-12), Adam Smith (WA-09), Melanie Stansbury (NM-01), Eric Swalwell (CA-14), Mark Takano (CA-39), Shri Thanedar (MI-13), Bennie G. Thompson (MS-02), Mike Thompson (CA-04), Dina Titus (NV-01), Rashida Tlaib (MI-12), Jill Tokuda (HI-02), Paul Tonko (NY-20), Lori Trahan (MA-03), Juan Vargas (CA-52), Nydia Velázquez (NY-07), Maxine Waters (CA-43), Bonnie Watson Coleman (NJ-12), Nikema Williams (GA-05), and Frederica S. Wilson (FL-24).

    The legislation also has an additional 15 cosponsors in the Senate: Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.).

    It is also endorsed by dozens of organizations, which can be found here. 

    Issues: Health Care

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Summary of Fiscal Year 2024 Annual FOIA Reports Published

    Source: United States Attorneys General 7

    The Office of Information Policy (OIP) has released its Summary of Annual FOIA Reports for Fiscal Year (FY) 2024. This summary provides an overview of FOIA activities across the government during the previous fiscal year, looks at key statistics in FOIA administration, and identifies trends in FOIA processing.  Each summary serves as a resource for both agencies and the public to gain an understanding of overall FOIA administration.

    As highlighted in this year’s summary, the government received yet another record-setting 1,501,432 requests during FY 2024 – a 25.15% increase in requests received over last fiscal year.  Agencies largely kept pace with this demand by processing1,499,265 requests.  Agencies received 20,115 administrative appeals and processed 18,575 appeals, with more than two-thirds of federal agencies ending FY 2024 with no pending appeals.  In addition to responding to requests and administrative appeals, agencies continued to make vast amounts of information available proactively.  Agencies’ FOIA offices and program offices continued to proactively disclose millions of records, with FOIA Offices in particular posting significantly more records in FY 2024 as compared to FY 2023.

    OIP’s latest summary is available on its Reports page, where it can be compared with previous summaries dating back to FY 2006.  All agencies subject to the FOIA finalized their FY 2024 Annual FOIA Report data.  This information can be easily viewed, compared, and analyzed on FOIA.gov’s Data page. 

    Subscribe to FOIA Post email updates to receive additional FOIA updates from OIP.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Billings man sentenced to almost 5 years in prison for distributing methamphetamine

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    BILLINGS – A Billings man who distributed methamphetamine was sentenced today to 57 months in prison to be followed by 4 years of supervised release, U.S. Attorney Kurt Alme said.

    Ryder Lyle Allard, 37, pleaded guilty in December 2024 to one count of distribution of methamphetamine.

    U.S. District Judge Susan Watters presided.

    The government alleged in court documents that beginning in at least March of 2022 and continuing until in or about October of 2022, at Billings and elsewhere, Allard distributed methamphetamine, which was corroborated by controlled purchases by undercover law enforcement officers and confidential sources in 2022.

    On September 13, 2022, law enforcement executed a controlled purchase of methamphetamine from Allard. The transaction, which was audio-recorded, involved two undercover officers meeting with Allard in a vehicle at a gas station in Billings. During the meeting, Allard sold the undercover officers roughly 1.5 ounces of methamphetamine for $1,365.

    Assistant U.S. Attorney Zeno Baucus prosecuted the case, and the investigation was conducted by the DEA.

    This case is part of Project Safe Neighborhoods (PSN), a program bringing together all levels of law enforcement and the communities they serve to reduce violent crime and gun violence, and to make our neighborhoods safer for everyone. On May 26, 2021, the Department launched a violent crime reduction strategy strengthening PSN based on these core principles: fostering trust and legitimacy in our communities, supporting community-based organizations that help prevent violence from occurring in the first place, setting focused and strategic enforcement priorities, and measuring the results. For more information about Project Safe Neighborhoods, please visit Justice.gov/PSN.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI NGOs: Greenpeace USA’s response to TMC’s push to fast-track deep sea mining in the High Seas under the U.S. Seabed Mining Code

    Source: Greenpeace Statement –

    Greenpeace International activists from around the world have paddled and protested around MV COCO, a specialized offshore drilling vessel currently collecting data for deep sea mining frontrunner, The Metals Company, on its last expedition before it files the world’s first ever application to mine the seabed in the Pacific Ocean. © Martin Katz / Greenpeace

    In response to The Metals Company’s push to fast-track deep-sea mining in the High Seas under the U.S. Seabed Mining Code, Arlo Hemphill, Greenpeace USA’s Deep Sea Mining Campaign Lead, stated: “Greenpeace USA condemns this reckless attempt by The Metals Company (TMC) to bypass international law and commercialize mining in the high seas and US-adjacent waters. It is nothing less than the plunder of the Pacific once again being pursued without the consent of Pacific Peoples. We cannot allow another dangerous extension of corporate greed and neo-colonialism, sacrificing ocean health, Indigenous rights, and future generations for the short-term gain of a few corporations to repeat itself in the deep sea.” 

    TMC’s application comes as Congress meets today, Tuesday, April 29, in a hearing requested by the House Natural Resources Committee, to explore the Potential of Deep-Sea Mining to expand American Mineral production. The application for mining TMC USA-A_2 in the Clarion Clipperton Zone attempts to exploit the U.S. legal system to advance mining operations in areas it was already licensed to explore under Nauru’s sponsorship through the International Seabed Authority processes. It disregards the multilateral process agreed upon by 170 countries and the European Union under UNCLOS. The company has faced opposition in that body from 32 countries and several Indigenous Pacific groups that have called for a ban, pause, or moratorium on deep sea mining. 

    Solomon P. Kaho’ohalahala, chair of the Pacific Island Heritage Coalition, said: “The people of the Pacific have a cultural connection to the deep sea.  It is the birthplace of our ancestors, and of all life. Deep sea mining is an assault on our cultural heritage, and it is being rushed forward without our consultation.  We call on Congress to stop this assault on the ocean we know as home, and to respect the values of Hawaiians and people from across the Pacific who will be on the frontlines should this industry take hold.”

    Hemphill continued: “We urge congressional leaders to defend democratic oversight, reject corporate shortcuts, and protect the deep ocean. Greenpeace USA stands with Pacific communities, Indigenous leaders, scientists, and governments worldwide calling for a moratorium on this dangerous industry. We must defend the oceans, uphold international law, and reject a broken system that gambles our planet’s future for corporate profit.”

    Louisa Casson, Greenpeace International Senior Campaigner, said: “The first application to commercially mine the seabed will be remembered as an act of total disregard for international law and scientific consensus. This unilateral US effort to carve up the Pacific Ocean already faces fierce international opposition. Governments around the world must now step up to defend international rules and cooperation against rogue deep sea mining. Leaders will be meeting at the UN Oceans Conference in Nice in June, where they must speak with one voice in support of a moratorium on this reckless industry.”

    President Trump’s recent executive order promoting U.S. plans to initiate deep-sea mining in both U.S. and international waters has faced widespread criticism from several environmental NGOs, and state actors, including France, China, and the European Commission who have condemned it as a unilateral action that undermines multilateral cooperation and the United Nations. While the U.S. never ratified UNCLOS, bypassing the international system violates global norms that safeguard the deep ocean as the “common heritage of humankind,” setting a dangerous precedent for the management of all global commons.

    Contact: Tanya Brooks, Senior Communications Specialist at Greenpeace USA, [email protected]  

    Greenpeace USA is part of a global network of independent campaigning organizations that use peaceful protest and creative communication to expose global environmental problems and promote solutions that are essential to a green and peaceful future. Greenpeace USA is committed to transforming the country’s unjust social, environmental, and economic systems from the ground up to address the climate crisis, advance racial justice, and build an economy that puts people first. Learn more at www.greenpeace.org/usa.

    MIL OSI NGO –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Mark Carney won: Here are the key economic priorities for his new government

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Berhane Elfu, Lecturer in Finance, Northern Alberta Institute of Technology

    The Liberal Party led by Mark Carney has secured a fourth consecutive term in government. This victory has come at a time when Canada is facing an unprecedented threat to its economic security and sovereignty from United States President Donald Trump.

    In an election defined by concerns over Trump’s erratic tariff policy and talk of making Canada a 51st state, voters decided Carney was the leader best equipped to deal with these challenges.

    Carney previously served as governor of the Bank of Canada, where he guided the country through the 2008 global financial crisis. He later became the first non-British person to head the Bank of England, helping guide the United Kingdom through Brexit, one of the biggest shocks to the British economy in decades.



    Read more:
    Game change Canadian election: Mark Carney leads Liberals to their fourth consecutive win

    Now the world is facing similar financial shocks from Trump’s trade war. The on-again, off-again nature of Trump’s tariff policy could inflict significant damage to the global economy — even more to the American economy — and cause irreparable damage to its reputation as a rational entity in international trade.

    In the face of the ill-advised and self-defeating U.S. tariffs, the new Canadian government should take prudent, urgent and bold steps to strengthen the nation’s economy. Here are major and important economic priorities for the government to reshape the economy and spur much-needed economic growth.

    Stabilize and strengthen the national economy

    As a primary act, the new government should stabilize the Canadian economy from the tariff shocks. It must continue to develop carefully calibrated retaliations to Trump’s tariffs.

    The revenue raised from the tariffs should be used to compensate those directly affected by them, using a multi-pronged mechanism that includes training, increased employment insurance benefits and additional transfers to low-income households to reduce the impact of tariffs on food costs.



    Read more:
    U.S. tariffs are about to trigger the greatest trade diversion the world has ever seen

    Currently, a series of provincial regulations restrict the goods and services that cross Canada’s provincial borders daily. The new government should urgently remove longstanding interprovincial trade barriers.

    According to a report by the Canadian Federation of Independent Business, removing these impediments could boost the economy by up to $200 billion annually. Similarly, a study by the International Monetary Fund indicates the effect of these barriers is equivalent to a 21 per cent tariff.

    Removing interprovincial trade barriers would significantly offset the negative effects of Trump’s tariffs on the Canadian economy, and provide a boost to the “Buy Canadian” movement.

    Carney seems to have made this a priority already, which is promising. In March, he said he aims to have “free trade by Canada Day” among provinces and territories.

    Streamlining natural resource projects

    Canada is a natural resource superpower. However, for natural resources and critical minerals to be extracted efficiently, regulatory processes need to be streamlined by cutting red tape and duplicative assessments.

    The federal government and the provinces should agree to a single environmental assessment that meets the standards of both jurisdictions.

    Additionally and importantly, respectful, genuine and meaningful consultations must be undertaken by project proponents and governments with the relevant Indigenous communities to address their concerns, respect their rights and safeguard their economic well-being in the development of the natural resources projects.

    Carney has said he will uphold the principle of free, prior and informed consent when it comes to initiating resource extraction projects and make it easier for Indigenous communities to become owners of said projects.

    A similar approach should also guide the construction of infrastructure projects such as pipelines and ports, which play a crucial role in facilitating Canada’s exports.

    Boost Canada’s productivity through innovation

    A country’s ability to raise living standards for its people mostly depends on its capacity to improve its productivity. Economist Paul Krugman once stated, “productivity is not everything, but, in the long run, it is almost everything.”

    Canada’s productivity is lagging, according to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development.



    Read more:
    Canada is lagging in innovation, and that’s a problem for funding the programs we care about

    The new Canadian government should take steps to boost the nation’s productivity by increasing direct expenditures on research and development. Additional funding should be allocated to higher institutions of learning, and incentivizing businesses to spend more on research and development through significant tax credits.

    Although research and development spending continues to grow in Canada, as a percentage to GDP, it is the second lowest among G7 nations. Boosting investments will drive innovation, spur economic growth and ensure Canada remains competitive on the global stage.

    Dealing with U.S. tariffs

    One of the government’s primary tasks will be preparing meticulously for trade negotiations with the U.S. to address the threat of tariffs and reach a “win-win” trade deal. Given Trump’s highly unpredictable nature, negotiations will not be easy.

    Although Trump could have withdrawn from the Canada-US-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA), he has not done so, and zero-tariffs remain in effect for products that are certified as being North American origin under the CUSMA rules. This could be a solid starting point for future trade negotiations.

    At the same time, Carney and his team must work to stabilize the Canadian economy against the unprecedented threat of Trump’s tariffs by strengthening the domestic economy, diversifying Canada’s exports and reducing the country’s dependence on the U.S.

    Pulling away from the world’s largest economy will not be easy for Canadian businesses, given the deep integration of Canada’s economy with that of the U.S.

    Still, expanding trade with the European Union, the U.K., Africa and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations — and exploring other opportunities to reducing trade barriers with nations in Asia, the Middle East and Latin America — will enlarge Canada’s export market.

    By doing all this, Canada can not only prepare for a tough round of U.S. trade talks but also position itself as a stronger, more self-reliant global trading partner.

    Berhane Elfu 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. Mark Carney won: Here are the key economic priorities for his new government – https://theconversation.com/mark-carney-won-here-are-the-key-economic-priorities-for-his-new-government-255477

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Canada: Strengthening democracy

    Source: Government of Canada regional news (2)

    MIL OSI Canada News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Dingell, Jayapal, Sanders Introduce Medicare for All

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congresswoman Debbie Dingell (12th District of Michigan)

    U.S. Representatives Debbie Dingell (MI-06) and Pramila Jayapal (WA-07), and U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) are today introducing the Medicare for All Act of 2025. 

    “Every American has the right to health care, period. If you’re sick, you should be able to go to the doctor without being worried about the cost of treatment or prescription medicine. Too many families must decide between putting food on the table and getting medical care that they desperately need,” said Dingell. “A health care system that ties coverage to employment will always leave patients vulnerable. It’s flat-out wrong and Medicare for All would put a stop to it. We’ve been fighting this fight since the 1940s, when my father-in-law helped author the first universal health care bill. It’s time to get this done.” 

    “It is a travesty when 85 million people are uninsured or underinsured and millions more are drowning in medical debt in the richest nation on Earth,” said Jayapal. “We don’t suffer from scarcity in America, we suffer from greed. That’s most clear in our broken healthcare system, which is why we need Medicare for All. People deserve and want comprehensive health care that covers mental health, long-term care, reproductive care, dental, vision and hearing, all without copays, private insurance premiums, sky high deductibles or other hidden fees. Health care is a human right, that is exactly why it’s time to pass Medicare for All.”

    “The American people understand, as I do, that health care is a human right, not a privilege and that we must end the international embarrassment of the United States being the only major country on earth that does not guarantee health care to all of its citizens,” said Sanders.“It is not acceptable to me, nor to the American people, that over 85 million people today are either uninsured or underinsured. Today, there are millions of people who would like to go to a doctor but cannot afford to do so. This is an outrage. In America, your health and your longevity should not be dependent on your wealth. Health care is a human right that all Americans, regardless of income, are entitled to and they deserve the best health care that our country can provide.”

    Dingell has long led the fight for universal health care coverage, introducing Medicare for All every Congress since she was elected. Her father-in-law, John Dingell Sr., drafted the first legislation that ultimately led to the creation of Medicare and her husband, John Dingell Jr., introduced a single-payer healthcare plan every session he served in Congress.

    The Medicare for All Act builds upon and expands Medicare to provide comprehensive benefits to every person in the United States. This includes primary care, vision, dental, prescription drugs, mental health, substance abuse, long-term services and supports, reproductive health care, and more. The Medicare for All Act of 2025 also includes universal coverage of long-term care with no cost-sharing for older Americans and individuals with disabilities, and prioritizes home and community-based care over institutional care. Additionally, patients have the freedom to choose the doctors, hospitals, and other providers they wish to see without worrying about whether a provider is in-network. Importantly, the legislation streamlines the health care system to negotiate drug prices and reduce exorbitant administrative waste.

    This legislation comes at a critical time when vital lifesaving health care programs, like Medicaid and Veterans Health Administration benefits, are at risk of being completely gutted by the Trump Administration. Currently, 85 million people in America are either uninsured or underinsured, and if the Trump Administration succeeds at completely privatizing our health care infrastructure, the number of uninsured and uninsured people will grow exponentially. The legislation has 104 original cosponsors in the House and 16 original cosponsors in the Senate.

    View a video of the introduction press conference here. 

    “Nurses see the failure of our country’s profit-driven health care system every time we clock in to work,” said Nancy Hagans, President of National Nurses United. “In the richest country on earth, nobody should be forced to choose between taking their medications and putting food on the table. Yet countless families are pushed to the breaking point while greedy corporations charge astronomical, ludicrous fees for care that our patients have every right to receive. Nurses are fighting for a future in which our patients’ health is put first always and that’s why we are proud to continue our support for Medicare for All. When we guarantee health care for all, corporations and billionaires will no longer be able to deny anyone the care that they need.”

    “We are long overdue for a universal health care system that guarantees care for all — free of copays, deductibles, and job-based coverage restrictions,” said Dr. Diljeet K. Singh, M.D., Dr.P.H., and President of Physicians for a National Health Plan. With the passage of the Medicare for All Act, physicians can focus on healing patients, not battling insurers over denials and delays. Patients will finally be able to seek care without the constant fear of crushing medical bills. Physicians for a National Health Program proudly stands with our legislators in the fight to make excellent health care a reality for everyone in America.”

    “Postal workers know the value of affordable, universal services, grounded in a commitment to putting people over profits. That’s the type of service we are committed to provide communities across the country, day in and day out,” said APWU President Mark Dimondstein. “For too long, greedy corporations and their Wall Street investors have been able to deny the people of the country the quality, affordable, universal healthcare working people deserve. “Medicare for All,” healthcare as a human right, will make us all healthier and financially better off. A healthcare system that works for working people, not the profits of the insurance companies, is long overdue.  It’s time for Medicare for All.”

    “Medicaid is a life and death issue for tens of millions of people,” said Jaron Benjamin, Deputy Chief of Campaigns at Popular Democracy in Action. “For years, our network has fought for programs like Medicaid and Medicare that keep families whole: elders aging with dignity, children getting the care they need, people with disabilities living full lives. Instead of protecting what works, Republicans in Congress are pushing cuts to Medicaid so they can hand more money to their billionaire backers. We won’t stand by while our communities are sacrificed for tax giveaways.”

    “As Donald Trump, Robert Kennedy and Congressional Republicans rush to strip health care from millions of Americans, we know this: We must not only block their cruel cuts but move America to a system that provides health care to everyone as a matter of right,” said Robert Weissman, co-president, Public Citizen. “America spends much more than other wealthy countries on health care only to have the worst health outcomes. The system works for health insurers, Big Pharma, hospital chains and private equity firms – but no one else.  Medicare for All would ensure everyone in America can get the care they need throughout their lives. It is the realistic, humane, just and efficient reform we need.”

    “If you want to renew the public’s faith in our political system, pass The Medicare for All Act of 2025,” said Alan Minsky, Executive Director, Progressive Democrats of America. “This one piece of legislation will instantly end the era, which has lasted far too long, when profits and wealth accumulation are more important than human life, including yours. MFA will return the general welfare, and the well-being of every individual, to the heart of our social contract. That will renew faith in America.”

    “Health care is a human right and a basic need. Yet instead of getting health care, Americans get delays, denials, and bills they cannot afford. Today, predatory insurance CEOs are poised to reap the windfall from the tax scam giveaways earmarked for billionaires and corporations. The oligarchs that put Donald Trump and Dr. Oz in power want everything we have. We get sicker, make impossible choices, and go broke. They boost the stock prices of corporations – like UnitedHealth – that profit off our pain, and buy more mansions and yachts. We can put an end to those warped priorities through Medicare for All,” said Sulma Arias, executive director of People’s Action Institute. “Working people have made this the wealthiest nation in the history of the world, and there is more than enough if we don’t let the corporate crooks and billionaires steal it. So it’s time to choose: Our health care or their greed?”

    “Health care should be a human right. But every time we negotiate with a boss for the right to see a doctor, they nickel and dime us until people have to choose between their health and putting food on the table. We’re sick of having to go on strike just to have decent health care,” said Shawn Fain, President of the UAW. “We’re sick of corporate America asking us to give up raises, retirement security, or work-life balance at the bargaining table so working-class people can avoid medical bankruptcy. Our current health care system is a con job that only works for the billionaire class. Medicare for All is common sense, and it’s what the working class needs. The UAW is proud to support this bill.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Rep. Mike Levin & Sen. Adam Schiff Urge White House to Disclose Executive Branch Employees’ Financial Transactions Leading Up to Trump’s Tariff Pause

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Mike Levin (CA-49)

    April 28, 2025

    Washington, D.C. – Following President Donald Trump’s abrupt tariffs pause that raised alarming questions about potential violations of federal ethics and insider trading laws, Rep. Mike Levin (CA-49) and Senator Adam Schiff (CA) sent a bicameral letter today with other Members of Congress to White House Chief of Staff Susan Wiles urgently demanding a full accounting of periodic financial transaction reports filed by senior White House and executive branch employees since the start of the Trump Administration.  

    In the letter, the lawmakers urged Ms. Wiles to commit to ensuring that all transaction reports are transmitted to the Office of Government Ethics (OGE) to be made public, as is required by law and was done during the first Trump Administration. They also requested that any extensions granted to White House employees be made public immediately and that the White House provide a detailed plan for how the Administration will address any potential violations of reporting requirements. 

    “Since President Trump announced his decision to abruptly change tariff policies on April 9, 2025, which caused significant fluctuations in financial markets and generated volatility for U.S. pension funds and retirement savings, newly identified data raises concerns about potential violations of federal ethics and insider trading laws by individuals close to the President with access to non-public information. In particular, reports surfaced that unidentified options traders placed bets worth millions of dollars that the market would rebound just minutes before President Trump’s 1:18 PM announcement via Truth Social that he would be pausing most of the sweeping tariffs he had announced days prior. Relatedly, we are deeply concerned about reporting of call volume spikes minutes before the President’s public announcement of his change in tariff policies,” wrote the lawmakers. 

    “We therefore urgently request a full accounting of the periodic transaction reports for all senior White House and executive branch employees since the start of the Administration, and we ask for your commitment to transmit all reports to the Office of Government Ethics (OGE) to be made public, as was done during the first Trump Administration,” continued the lawmakers.  

    “By failing to take these steps, the Administration would be withholding critical information from the American people regarding potential violations of federal ethics and insider trading laws. We look forward to reviewing all required reports and disclosures,” the lawmakers concluded.  

    In the Senate, this letter is signed by Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), and Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.). In the U.S. House of Representatives, this letter is signed by Yassamin Ansari (D-Ariz-03), Becca Balint (D-Vt.-Al.), Nanette Diaz Barragan (D-Calif.-44), Greg Casar (D-Texas.-35), Judy Chu (D-Calif.-28), Angie Craig (D-Minn.-2), Madeleine Dean (D-Penn.-04), Mark DeSaulnier (D-Calif.-10), Cleo Fields (D-La.-06), Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.07), Seth Magaziner (D-R.I.-02), Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.-12), Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-Washington, D.C.), Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.-03), Bradley Schneider (D-Ill.-10), Brad Sherman (D-Calif.-32), Dina Titus (D-Nev.-01), Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.-12), and Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-N.J.-12). 

    The full text of the letter can be found here and below: 

    Dear Ms. Wiles, 

    Since President Trump announced his decision to abruptly change tariff policies on April 9, 2025, which caused significant fluctuations in financial markets and generated volatility for U.S. pension funds and retirement savings, newly identified data raises concerns about potential violations of federal ethics and insider trading laws by individuals close to the President with access to non-public information. In particular, reports surfaced that unidentified options traders placed bets worth millions of dollars that the market would rebound just minutes before President Trump’s 1:18 PM announcement via Truth Social that he would be pausing most of the sweeping tariffs he had announced days prior. Relatedly, we are deeply concerned about reporting of call volume spikes minutes before the President’s public announcement of his change in tariff policies.

    We therefore urgently request a full accounting of the periodic transaction reports for all senior White House and executive branch employees since the start of the Administration, and we ask for your commitment to transmit all reports to the Office of Government Ethics (OGE) to be made public, as was done during the first Trump Administration. 

    As you know, senior government officials – including the President, the Vice President, Members of Congress, and senior White House and executive branch employees – are required to file periodic transaction reports to inform the public within a certain timeframe when they, their spouse, or a dependent child make certain financial transactions, such as buying or selling stocks, exceeding $1,000. These periodic transaction reports are required in addition to annual financial disclosure reports and are imperative to ensure the American people are informed of potential conflicts of interest posed by the financial interests of senior White House and executive branch officials. 

    Periodic transaction reports are required to be filed with the individual’s agency – or in the case of the President and White House staff, with the White House – within 30 days after receiving notification of any financial transaction, but no later than 45 days after such transaction, unless a waiver or exclusion is granted. 

    Agencies, including the White House, are then required to transmit copies of those reports to OGE to be made publicly available upon request.

    We are concerned that no periodic transaction reports have been posted on the OGE database for White House officials’ individual disclosures at any point since President Trump took office on January 20, 2025. There is reason to doubt that not a single senior White House official or employee has made any financial transactions triggering a periodic transaction report since the start of the Administration. As an important point of reference, during the first Trump Administration, periodic transaction reports filed by senior White House officials were made publicly available on the OGE’s disclosure database, as required by the Ethics in Government Act and the STOCK Act.

    Senior White House officials have influence over or become witting of consequential policy decisions that can have market moving impacts. It is critical that such officials adhere to all applicable ethics, conflict of interest, and disclosure requirements. The American public deserves nothing less than full transparency, particularly in the context of the harm done to pension funds and retirement savings as a result of the President’s erratic trade policy. 

    Therefore, we ask that you and appropriate White House officials urgently certify any periodic transaction reports filed by White House employees and expeditiously transmit those to OGE, as required by 5 C.F.R. § 2634.We also request any relevant records or communications regarding extensions granted to White House employees with regard to their periodic transaction reports, and ask that you make all such extensions publicly available immediately. Finally, please provide to us a detailed plan for how the Administration will address any officials and employees who may have failed to file required disclosures from the start of the Administration. We respectfully request a response no later than May 9, 2025. 

    By failing to take these steps, the Administration would be withholding critical information from the American people regarding potential violations of federal ethics and insider trading laws. We look forward to reviewing all required reports and disclosures.                                                                                                                                                             

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI: ChampionX Reports First Quarter 2025 Results

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    THE WOODLANDS, Texas, April 29, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — ChampionX Corporation (NASDAQ: CHX) (“ChampionX” or the “Company”) today announced first quarter of 2025 results. Revenue was $864.5 million, net income attributable to ChampionX was $85.8 million, and adjusted EBITDA was $190.9 million. Income before income taxes margin was 12.1% and adjusted EBITDA margin was 22.1%. Cash from operating activities was $66.8 million and free cash flow was $38.6 million.

    CEO Commentary

    “The first quarter demonstrated the resilience of our ChampionX portfolio as we delivered strong adjusted EBITDA and adjusted EBITDA margin, and generated positive free cash flow. These results reflect the commitment of our ChampionX employees around the world who express daily an unwavering focus on delivering value-added solutions for our customers’ most important challenges. I am thankful and humbled to lead such a talented and dedicated team,” ChampionX’s President and Chief Executive Officer Sivasankaran “Soma” Somasundaram said.

    “During the first quarter of 2025, we generated revenue of $864 million, which decreased 5% sequentially, in line with our expectations, driven primarily by a typical seasonal decline in international operations. We generated net income attributable to ChampionX of $86 million, income before income taxes margin of 12.1%, and we delivered adjusted EBITDA of $191 million, representing a 22.1% adjusted EBITDA margin, our second-highest level as ChampionX, which speaks to the continued productivity and profitability focus of our team.

    “Cash flow from operating activities was $67 million during the first quarter, which represented 78% of net income attributable to ChampionX, and we generated free cash flow of $39 million, our 12th consecutive quarter of positive free cash flow. Our balance sheet and financial position remain strong, ending the first quarter with approximately $1.2 billion of liquidity, including $527 million of cash and $674 million of available capacity on our revolving credit facility.

    “As a leading global provider of production optimization solutions for the energy industry, ChampionX is uniquely well-positioned to help operators meet the objective of maximizing the value of their producing assets, particularly against the backdrop of the ongoing structural shift toward capital discipline and moderating capital spending in the upstream and midstream industries. As global oil production grows, our differentiated and resilient production-oriented portfolio drives our expectation of positive performance relative to general oil and gas market activity in 2025.

    “Amid recent changes in international trade policies, ChampionX is continuing to put its continuous improvement culture to work every day to successfully deliver products and technologies designed to improve our cost structure and drive efficiencies. We are leveraging our global and flexible supply chain footprint, long-standing supplier partnerships, pricing adjustments, and productivity initiatives to address tariff impacts, and we will continue to be there to serve our customers and deliver differentiated margin and free cash flow performance.”

    Agreement to be Acquired by SLB

    On April 2, 2024, SLB (NYSE: SLB) and ChampionX jointly announced a definitive Agreement and Plan of Merger (the “Merger Agreement”) for SLB to purchase ChampionX in an all-stock transaction. The transaction was unanimously approved by the ChampionX board of directors and the transaction received the approval of the ChampionX stockholders at a special meeting held on June 18, 2024. The transaction is subject to regulatory approvals and other customary closing conditions.

    ChampionX may continue to pay its regular quarterly cash dividends with customary record and payment dates, subject to certain limitations under the Merger Agreement. Given the pending acquisition of ChampionX by SLB, ChampionX has discontinued providing quarterly guidance and will not host a conference call or webcast to discuss its first quarter 2025 results.

    Production Chemical Technologies

    Production Chemical Technologies revenue in the first quarter of 2025 was $523.4 million, a decrease of $46.3 million, or 8%, sequentially, due primarily to seasonally lower international sales volumes.

    Segment operating profit was $82.2 million and adjusted segment EBITDA was $109.1 million. Segment operating profit margin was 15.7%, a sequential decrease of 248 basis points, and adjusted segment EBITDA margin was 20.8%, a sequential decrease of 259 basis points. The sequential decrease in segment operating profit margin and adjusted segment EBITDA margin was driven by lower sales volumes.

    Production & Automation Technologies

    Production & Automation Technologies revenue in the first quarter of 2025 was $264.4 million, a decrease of $5.2 million, or 2%, sequentially, due primarily to seasonally lower international sales volumes. Revenue from digital products was $57.8 million in the first quarter of 2025, a sequential decrease of 7%, driven by seasonally lower customer activity in North America.

    Segment operating profit was $37.6 million and adjusted segment EBITDA was $70.3 million. Segment operating profit margin was 14.2%, a sequential decrease of 27 basis points, and adjusted segment EBITDA margin was 26.6%, a sequential increase of 34 basis points. The decrease in segment operating profit margin and the increase in adjusted segment EBITDA margin was driven by lower sales volumes, offset somewhat by productivity improvements.

    Drilling Technologies

    Drilling Technologies revenue in the first quarter of 2025 was $50.5 million, a decrease of $1.4 million, or 3%, sequentially, driven primarily by lower North America sales volumes.

    Segment operating profit was $8.2 million and adjusted segment EBITDA was $10.2 million. Segment operating profit margin was 16.2%, compared to 20.6% in the prior quarter, and adjusted segment EBITDA margin was 20.3%, a decrease of 346 basis points, sequentially, due primarily to lower volumes.

    Reservoir Chemical Technologies

    Reservoir Chemical Technologies revenue in the first quarter of 2025 was $26.9 million, an increase of $5.0 million, or 23%, sequentially, driven by higher sales volumes in the U.S. and internationally.

    Segment operating profit was $5.5 million and adjusted segment EBITDA was $6.3 million. Segment operating profit margin was 20.5%, an increase of 1008 basis points, sequentially, and adjusted segment EBITDA margin was 23.6%, an increase of 647 basis points, sequentially. The increase in segment operating profit margin and adjusted segment EBITDA margin was driven by higher sales volumes together with a more favorable product mix.

    Other Business Highlights: Production Chemical Technologies and Reservoir Chemical Technologies

    • Awarded several first fill contracts for new conventional and unconventional fields in the Middle East region.
    • The North America Offshore production chemicals team was awarded the contract for an upcoming major capital project in the Gulf of America. The win was the culmination of years’ worth of work developing technical solutions to address the project’s most impactful challenges.
    • Commenced the initial deliveries of a significant volume of hydrate inhibitor for a major new FPSO, supporting an independent Australian operator.
    • Awarded program of competitive process water treatment applications in Canada after performing comprehensive technical assessments and value-added recommendations.
    • Completed our second RENEWIQ® (production and reservoir chemistry delivered through one trailer) joint offering for frac treating.
    • Reservoir group was awarded RENEWIQ work for the application of our production enhancement PROE completion chemistry to improve production over the life of wells. This program, combined with our one-site PCT service expertise, continues to bring differentiated solutions to operators in the Permian Basin.
    • Started the Unconventional Water team to support North America Land Water applications.
    • Recently won four different contracts after re-entering the US Land market with our H2S scavenger program.
    • Providing chemistries supporting a Canadian customer that is scheduled to commission and start up a new thermal asset in August 2025.

    Other Business Highlights: Production & Automation Technologies

    • Awarded a multi-year contract for production optimization software by a customer in Indonesia. 4000+ wells were successfully migrated in Q1 to our XSPOC® production optimization software, delivering data-driven insights to help the customer make informed production decisions across their field for all artificial lift systems.
    • Continue to see strong market adoption of new digital technologies as operators look for cost-effective, scalable monitoring solutions. More than 450 SmartSpin® wireless rod rotator sensors have been installed in the field and 120+ of the recently launched SMARTEN™® Lite rod pump controller have been deployed.
    • ChampionX’s RMSpumptools, in partnership with our UNBRIDLED® ESP Systems team, continues to grow sales of Automatic Diverter Valves (ADV) in the Permian for a major oil company. This key technology offers customers better sand and solids management in ESP systems and acts as a safety device for ESPs featuring a PMM motor.
    • Following two 6-month trial installations, RMSpumptools has received an order for its Y-chek systems by a Middle East national oil company. This success sets the direction for expansion of this Y-chek solution.
    • Completed the first 30+ well trial with a major producer in the Permian basin of the newly offered chemical injection assurance (CIA) software module on the modern, secure, and scalable Connexia® platform. The CIA software provides fully integrated chemical measurement and delivery data as well as control and optimization capabilities.
    • The SMARTEN XE ESP control system is a leader in the ESP control market. In Q1, ChampionX secured a new customer based on the advanced capabilities of the SMARTEN XE controller. The system’s ability to deliver enhanced performance across multi-pad projects was central to the customer’s decision. Since launch, ChampionX has installed hundreds of ESPs with SMARTEN XE controls, improving the operation of customers’ ESP systems.
    • Launched newly designed LOOKOUT® optimization services to provide real-time data with full ESP system control, advanced data visualization, integrated communications, and direct access to a team of multi-disciplined artificial lift experts. Powered by a modern digital backbone, LOOKOUT optimization services enable streamlined integration of diverse data sources and control solutions. LOOKOUT also leverages the full capabilities of the SMARTEN XE ESP control system, delivering advanced automation for ESP operations.
    • ChampionX’s Integrated Production Optimization (IPO) business continues to expand. A Permian operator, following a series of acquisitions, has expanded implementation of the IPO solution across newly acquired acreage – placing all new wells and ESP replacements under the IPO program. IPO has consistently delivered measurable production uplift, enhanced equipment reliability, stabilized reservoir pressure drawdown, and optimized chemical spend for the operator.
    • ChampionX’s Norris Sucker Rods has been awarded a large contract for the supply of approximately 35,000 sucker rods for a major customer in India. ChampionX won the contract based on superior reliability and in-country technical support, according to the customer.
    • Norris Rods received a large bulk order for sucker rods from a U.S. independent producer to assure supply for future operations and to mitigate the impact of tariffs. Norris Rods are manufactured from U.S. steel at the Company’s factory in Tulsa, Oklahoma.

    About Non-GAAP Measures

    In addition to financial results determined in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States (“GAAP”), this news release presents non-GAAP financial measures. Management believes that adjusted EBITDA, adjusted EBITDA margin, adjusted net income attributable to ChampionX and adjusted diluted earnings per share attributable to ChampionX, provide useful information to investors regarding the Company’s financial condition and results of operations because they reflect the core operating results of our businesses and help facilitate comparisons of operating performance across periods. In addition, free cash flow, free cash flow to adjusted EBITDA ratio, and free cash flow to revenue ratio are used by management to measure our ability to generate positive cash flow for debt reduction and to support our strategic objectives. Although management believes the aforementioned non-GAAP financial measures are good tools for internal use and the investment community in evaluating ChampionX’s overall financial performance, the foregoing non-GAAP financial measures should be considered in addition to, not as a substitute for or superior to, other measures of financial performance prepared in accordance with GAAP. A reconciliation of these non-GAAP measures to the most directly comparable GAAP measures is included in the accompanying financial tables.

    About ChampionX

    ChampionX is a global leader in chemistry solutions, artificial lift systems, and highly engineered equipment and technologies that help companies drill for and produce oil and gas safely, efficiently, and sustainably around the world. ChampionX’s expertise, innovative products, and digital technologies provide enhanced oil and gas production, transportation, and real-time emissions monitoring throughout the lifecycle of a well. To learn more about ChampionX, visit our website at www.ChampionX.com. 

    Forward-Looking Statements

    This news release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. Such forward-looking statements include statements relating to the proposed transaction between SLB and ChampionX, including statements regarding the benefits of the transaction and the anticipated timing of the transaction, and information regarding the businesses of SLB and ChampionX, including expectations regarding outlook and all underlying assumptions, SLB’s and ChampionX’s objectives, plans and strategies, information relating to operating trends in markets where SLB and ChampionX operate, statements that contain projections of results of operations or of financial condition and all other statements other than statements of historical fact that address activities, events or developments that SLB or ChampionX intends, expects, projects, believes or anticipates will or may occur in the future. Such statements are based on management’s beliefs and assumptions made based on information currently available to management. All statements in this communication, other than statements of historical fact, are forward-looking statements that may be identified by the use of the words “outlook,” “guidance,” “expects,” “believes,” “anticipates,” “should,” “estimates,” “intends,” “plans,” “seeks,” “targets,” “may,” “can,” “believe,” “predict,” “potential,” “projected,” “projections,” “precursor,” “forecast,” “ambition,” “goal,” “scheduled,” “think,” “could,” “would,” “will,” “see,” “likely,” and other similar expressions or variations, but not all forward-looking statements include such words. These forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks and uncertainties, and which may cause SLB’s or ChampionX’s actual results and performance to be materially different from those expressed or implied in the forward-looking statements. Factors and risks that may impact future results and performance include, but are not limited to those factors and risks described in Part I, “Item 1. Business”, “Item 1A. Risk Factors”, and “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” in SLB’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) on January 22, 2025 and Part 1, Item 1A, “Risk Factors” in ChampionX’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024 filed with the SEC on February 5, 2025, and each of their respective, subsequent Current Reports on Form 8-K. These include, but are not limited to, and in each case as a possible result of the proposed transaction on each of SLB and ChampionX: the ultimate outcome of the proposed transaction between SLB and ChampionX, including the effect of the announcement of the proposed transaction; the ability to operate the SLB and ChampionX respective businesses, including business disruptions; difficulties in retaining and hiring key personnel and employees; the ability to maintain favorable business relationships with customers, suppliers and other business partners; the terms and timing of the proposed transaction; the occurrence of any event, change or other circumstance that could give rise to the termination of the proposed transaction; the anticipated or actual tax treatment of the proposed transaction; the ability to satisfy closing conditions to the completion of the proposed transaction (including the adoption of the merger agreement in respect of the proposed transaction by ChampionX stockholders); other risks related to the completion of the proposed transaction and actions related thereto; the ability of SLB and ChampionX to integrate the business successfully and to achieve anticipated synergies and value creation from the proposed transaction; changes in demand for SLB’s or ChampionX’s products and services; global market, political and economic conditions, including in the countries in which SLB and ChampionX operate; the ability to secure government regulatory approvals on the terms expected, at all or in a timely manner; the extent of growth of the oilfield services market generally, including for chemical solutions in production and midstream operations; the global macro-economic environment, including headwinds caused by inflation, rising interest rates, unfavorable currency exchange rates, and potential recessionary or depressionary conditions; the impact of shifts in prices or margins of the products that SLB or ChampionX sells or services that SLB or ChampionX provides, including due to a shift towards lower margin products or services; cyber-attacks, information security and data privacy; the impact of public health crises, such as pandemics (including COVID-19) and epidemics and any related company or government policies and actions to protect the health and safety of individuals or government policies or actions to maintain the functioning of national or global economies and markets; trends in crude oil and natural gas prices, including trends in chemical solutions across the oil and natural gas industries, that may affect the drilling and production activity, profitability and financial stability of SLB’s and ChampionX’s customers and therefore the demand for, and profitability of, their products and services; litigation and regulatory proceedings, including any proceedings that may be instituted against SLB or ChampionX related to the proposed transaction; failure to effectively and timely address energy transitions that could adversely affect the businesses of SLB or ChampionX, results of operations, and cash flows of SLB or ChampionX; and disruptions of SLB’s or ChampionX’s information technology systems.

    These risks, as well as other risks related to the proposed transaction, are included in the Form S-4 and proxy statement/prospectus that was filed with the SEC in connection with the proposed transaction. While the list of factors presented here is, and the list of factors presented in the registration statement on Form S-4 are, considered representative, no such list should be considered to be a complete statement of all potential risks and uncertainties. For additional information about other factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those described in the forward-looking statements, please refer to SLB’s and ChampionX’s respective periodic reports and other filings with the SEC, including the risk factors identified in SLB’s and ChampionX’s Annual Reports on Form 10-K, respectively, and SLB’s and ChampionX’s Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q. The forward-looking statements included in this communication are made only as of the date hereof. Neither SLB nor ChampionX undertakes any obligation to update any forward-looking statements to reflect subsequent events or circumstances, except as required by law.

    Investor Contact: Byron Pope
    byron.pope@championx.com 
    281-602-0094

    Media Contact: John Breed
    john.breed@championx.com 
    281-403-5751

    CHAMPIONX CORPORATION
    CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME
    (UNAUDITED)

      Three Months Ended
      March 31,   December 31,   March 31,
    (in thousands, except per share amounts)   2025       2024       2024  
    Revenue $ 864,464     $ 912,037     $ 922,141  
    Cost of goods and services   572,938       600,154       622,937  
    Gross profit   291,526       311,883       299,204  
    Costs and expenses:          
    Selling, general and administrative expense   177,045       184,722       172,414  
    (Gain) loss on sale-leaseback transaction   —       —       (29,883 )
    Interest expense, net   13,196       12,375       13,935  
    Foreign currency transaction losses (gains), net   1,504       1,697       55  
    Other expense (income), net   (4,631 )     (5,026 )     2,927  
    Income before income taxes   104,412       118,115       139,756  
    Provision for income taxes   15,384       33,204       26,596  
    Net income   89,028       84,911       113,160  
    Net income attributable to noncontrolling interest   3,231       2,145       237  
    Net income attributable to ChampionX $ 85,797     $ 82,766     $ 112,923  
               
    Earnings per share attributable to ChampionX:          
    Basic $ 0.45     $ 0.43     $ 0.59  
    Diluted $ 0.44     $ 0.43     $ 0.58  
               
    Weighted-average shares outstanding:          
    Basic   191,143       190,586       190,803  
    Diluted   193,709       193,487       193,964  
                           

    CHAMPIONX CORPORATION
    CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
    (UNAUDITED)

    (in thousands) March 31, 2025   December 31, 2024
    ASSETS      
    Current Assets:      
    Cash and cash equivalents $ 526,559     $ 507,681  
    Receivables, net   417,639       466,782  
    Inventories, net   497,183       496,831  
    Assets held for sale   241,791       14,001  
    Prepaid expenses and other current assets   85,617       78,602  
    Total current assets   1,768,789       1,563,897  
           
    Property, plant and equipment, net   729,931       755,422  
    Goodwill   619,505       718,944  
    Intangible assets, net   247,907       258,614  
    Other non-current assets   134,258       173,375  
    Total assets $ 3,500,390     $ 3,470,252  
           
    LIABILITIES AND EQUITY      
    Current Liabilities:      
    Current portion of long-term debt $ 6,203     $ 6,203  
    Accounts payable   498,335       455,531  
    Liabilities held for sale   61,415       —  
    Other current liabilities   218,943       324,138  
    Total current liabilities   784,896       785,872  
           
    Long-term debt   590,746       591,453  
    Other long-term liabilities   220,054       261,749  
    Stockholders’ equity:      
    ChampionX stockholders’ equity   1,916,726       1,846,437  
    Noncontrolling interest   (12,032 )     (15,259 )
    Total liabilities and equity $ 3,500,390     $ 3,470,252  
                   

    CHAMPIONX CORPORATION
    CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
    (UNAUDITED)

      Three Months Ended March 31,
    (in thousands)   2025       2024  
    Cash flows from operating activities:      
    Net income $ 89,028     $ 113,160  
    Depreciation and amortization   60,056       59,580  
    (Gain) loss on sale-leaseback transaction   —       (29,883 )
    Loss on Argentina Blue Chip Swap transaction   —       4,092  
    Deferred income taxes   (10,941 )     (12,903 )
    Loss (gain) on disposal of fixed assets   1,616       1,107  
    Receivables   13,937       62,915  
    Inventories   (25,569 )     (39,873 )
    Accounts payable   40,675       68,248  
    Other assets   (19,955 )     (602 )
    Leased assets   (6,665 )     (4,254 )
    Other operating items, net   (75,380 )     (48,079 )
    Net cash flows provided by operating activities   66,802       173,508  
           
    Cash flows from investing activities:      
    Capital expenditures   (31,250 )     (31,912 )
    Proceeds from sale of fixed assets   3,004       2,390  
    Proceeds from sale-leaseback transaction   —       44,292  
    Purchase of investments   —       (17,162 )
    Sale of investments   —       13,070  
    Acquisitions, net of cash acquired   —       (21,472 )
    Net cash used for investing activities   (28,246 )     (10,794 )
           
    Cash flows from financing activities:      
    Repayment of long-term debt   (1,551 )     (1,551 )
    Repurchases of common stock   —       (49,399 )
    Dividends paid   (18,110 )     (16,247 )
    Other   (488 )     3,104  
    Net cash used for financing activities   (20,149 )     (64,093 )
           
    Effect of exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents   471       (1,161 )
           
    Net increase in cash and cash equivalents   18,878       97,460  
    Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period   507,681       288,557  
    Cash and cash equivalents at end of period $ 526,559     $ 386,017  
                   

    CHAMPIONX CORPORATION
    BUSINESS SEGMENT DATA
    (UNAUDITED)

      Three Months Ended
      March 31,   December 31,   March 31,
    (in thousands)   2025       2024       2024  
    Segment revenue:          
    Production Chemical Technologies $ 523,390     $ 569,662     $ 590,108  
    Production & Automation Technologies   264,377       269,568       252,614  
    Drilling Technologies   50,530       51,942       55,206  
    Reservoir Chemical Technologies   26,926       21,937       24,705  
    Corporate and other   (759 )     (1,072 )     (492 )
    Total revenue $ 864,464     $ 912,037     $ 922,141  
               
    Income before income taxes:        
    Segment operating profit (loss):          
    Production Chemical Technologies $ 82,172     $ 103,567     $ 87,832  
    Production & Automation Technologies   37,554       39,027       28,470  
    Drilling Technologies   8,174       10,703       44,402  
    Reservoir Chemical Technologies   5,529       2,294       3,746  
    Total segment operating profit   133,429       155,591       164,450  
    Corporate and other   15,821       25,101       10,759  
    Interest expense, net   13,196       12,375       13,935  
    Income before income taxes $ 104,412     $ 118,115     $ 139,756  
               
    Operating profit margin / income before income taxes margin:          
    Production Chemical Technologies   15.7 %     18.2 %     14.9 %
    Production & Automation Technologies   14.2 %     14.5 %     11.3 %
    Drilling Technologies   16.2 %     20.6 %     80.4 %
    Reservoir Chemical Technologies   20.5 %     10.5 %     15.2 %
    ChampionX Consolidated   12.1 %     13.0 %     15.2 %
               
    Adjusted EBITDA          
    Production Chemical Technologies $ 109,065     $ 133,475     $ 118,031  
    Production & Automation Technologies   70,269       70,739       60,340  
    Drilling Technologies   10,237       12,321       16,074  
    Reservoir Chemical Technologies   6,347       3,751       5,346  
    Corporate and other   (5,049 )     (8,021 )     (8,079 )
    Adjusted EBITDA $ 190,869     $ 212,265     $ 191,712  
               
    Adjusted EBITDA margin          
    Production Chemical Technologies   20.8 %     23.4 %     20.0 %
    Production & Automation Technologies   26.6 %     26.2 %     23.9 %
    Drilling Technologies   20.3 %     23.7 %     29.1 %
    Reservoir Chemical Technologies   23.6 %     17.1 %     21.6 %
    ChampionX Consolidated   22.1 %     23.3 %     20.8 %
                           

    CHAMPIONX CORPORATION
    RECONCILIATIONS OF GAAP TO NON-GAAP FINANCIAL MEASURES
    (UNAUDITED)

      Three Months Ended
      March 31,   December 31,   March 31,
    (in thousands)   2025       2024       2024  
    Net income attributable to ChampionX $ 85,797     $ 82,766     $ 112,923  
    Pre-tax adjustments:          
    (Gain) loss on sale leaseback transaction(1)   —       —       (29,883 )
    Russia sanctions compliance and impacts(2)   28       73       152  
    Restructuring and other related charges   1,059       2,704       1,709  
    Merger transaction costs(3)   10,232       14,434       —  
    Acquisition costs and related adjustments(4)   —       75       1,232  
    Intellectual property defense   382       158       779  
    Merger-related indemnification responsibility(5)   —       100       —  
    Tulsa, Oklahoma storm damage   —       —       305  
    Foreign currency transaction losses (gains), net   1,504       1,697       55  
    Loss on Argentina Blue Chip Swap transaction   —       —       4,092  
    Tax impact of adjustments   (2,971 )     (5,565 )     5,066  
    Adjusted net income attributable to ChampionX   96,031       96,442       96,430  
    Tax impact of adjustments   2,971       5,565       (5,066 )
    Net income attributable to noncontrolling interest   3,231       2,145       237  
    Depreciation and amortization   60,056       62,534       59,580  
    Provision for income taxes   15,384       33,204       26,596  
    Interest expense, net   13,196       12,375       13,935  
    Adjusted EBITDA $ 190,869     $ 212,265     $ 191,712  

    _______________________

    (1) Amount represents the gain on the sale and leaseback of certain buildings and land.
    (2) Includes charges incurred related to legal and professional fees to comply with, as well as additional foreign currency exchange losses associated with, the sanctions imposed in Russia.
    (3) Includes costs incurred in relation to the Merger Agreement with Schlumberger Limited, including third party legal and professional fees.
    (4) Includes costs incurred for the acquisition of businesses.
    (5) Expense related to the June 3, 2020 merger transaction with Ecolab in which we acquired the Chemical Technologies business.

      Three Months Ended
      March 31,   December 31,   March 31,
    (in thousands)   2025       2024       2024  
    Diluted earnings per share attributable to ChampionX $ 0.44     $ 0.43     $ 0.58  
    Per share adjustments:          
    (Gain) loss on sale leaseback transaction and disposal group   —       —       (0.15 )
    Russia sanctions compliance and impacts   —       —       —  
    Restructuring and other related charges   0.01       0.01       0.01  
    Merger transaction costs   0.05       0.07       —  
    Acquisition costs and related adjustments   —       —       0.01  
    Intellectual property defense   —       —       —  
    Merger-related indemnification responsibility   —       —       —  
    Tulsa, Oklahoma storm damage   —       —       —  
    Foreign currency transaction losses (gains), net   0.01       0.01       —  
    Loss on Argentina Blue Chip Swap transaction   —       —       0.02  
    Tax impact of adjustments   (0.01 )     (0.02 )     0.03  
    Adjusted diluted earnings per share attributable to ChampionX $ 0.50     $ 0.50     $ 0.50  
                           

    CHAMPIONX CORPORATION
    RECONCILIATIONS OF GAAP TO NON-GAAP FINANCIAL MEASURES BY SEGMENT
    (UNAUDITED)

      Three Months Ended
      March 31,   December 31,   March 31,
    (in thousands)   2025       2024       2024  
    Production Chemical Technologies          
    Segment operating profit $ 82,172     $ 103,567     $ 87,832  
    Non-GAAP adjustments   1,658       2,251       3,933  
    Depreciation and amortization   25,235       27,657       26,266  
    Segment adjusted EBITDA $ 109,065     $ 133,475     $ 118,031  
               
    Production & Automation Technologies          
    Segment operating profit $ 37,554     $ 39,027     $ 28,470  
    Non-GAAP adjustments   764       75       2,076  
    Depreciation and amortization   31,951       31,637       29,794  
    Segment adjusted EBITDA $ 70,269     $ 70,739     $ 60,340  
               
    Drilling Technologies          
    Segment operating profit $ 8,174     $ 10,703     $ 44,402  
    Non-GAAP adjustments   766       306       (29,883 )
    Depreciation and amortization   1,297       1,312       1,555  
    Segment adjusted EBITDA $ 10,237     $ 12,321     $ 16,074  
               
    Reservoir Chemical Technologies          
    Segment operating profit $ 5,529     $ 2,294     $ 3,746  
    Non-GAAP adjustments   (278 )     39       16  
    Depreciation and amortization   1,096       1,418       1,584  
    Segment adjusted EBITDA $ 6,347     $ 3,751     $ 5,346  
               
    Corporate and other          
    Segment operating profit $ (29,017 )   $ (37,476 )   $ (24,694 )
    Non-GAAP adjustments   10,295       16,570       2,299  
    Depreciation and amortization   477       510       381  
    Interest expense, net   13,196       12,375       13,935  
    Segment adjusted EBITDA $ (5,049 )   $ (8,021 )   $ (8,079 )
                           

    Free Cash Flow

      Three Months Ended
      March 31,   December 31,   March 31,
    (in thousands)   2025       2024       2024  
    Free Cash Flow          
    Cash flows from operating activities $ 66,802     $ 207,250     $ 173,508  
    Less: Capital expenditures, net of proceeds from sale of fixed assets   (28,246 )     (37,117 )     (29,522 )
    Free cash flow $ 38,556     $ 170,133     $ 143,986  
               
    Cash From Operating Activities to Revenue Ratio          
    Cash flows from operating activities $ 66,802     $ 207,250     $ 173,508  
    Revenue $ 864,464     $ 912,037     $ 922,141  
               
    Cash from operating activities to revenue ratio   8 %     23 %     19 %
               
    Free Cash Flow to Revenue Ratio          
    Free cash flow $ 38,556     $ 170,133     $ 143,986  
    Revenue $ 864,464     $ 912,037     $ 922,141  
               
    Free cash flow to revenue ratio   4 %     19 %     16 %
               
    Free Cash Flow to Adjusted EBITDA Ratio          
    Free cash flow $ 38,556     $ 170,133     $ 143,986  
    Adjusted EBITDA $ 190,869     $ 212,265     $ 191,712  
               
    Free cash flow to adjusted EBITDA ratio   20 %     80 %     75 %

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI Africa: Secretary-General’s remarks to the General Assembly event in Commemoration of His Holiness Pope Francis [trilingual, as delivered; scroll down for All-English and All-French versions]

    Source: United Nations – English

    xcellencies, ladies and gentlemen,

    His Holiness Pope Francis was a man of faith — and a bridge-builder among all faiths.  

    He was a champion of the most marginalized people on earth.

    He was a voice of community in a world of division…

    A voice of mercy in a world of cruelty…

    A voice of peace in a world of war.

    And he was a steadfast friend of the United Nations, addressing Member States from this very podium in 2015.

    During that historic visit, he also spoke of our organization’s ideal of a “united human family living in harmony, working not only for peace, but in peace, working not only for justice, but in a spirit of justice.”

    On behalf of our UN family, I extend by deepest condolences to the Catholic community and to so many others around the world grieving this tremendous loss.

    Excellencies,

    Pope Francis was at the helm of the Roman Catholic Church for a dozen years — but that was preceded by decades of service and good works.

    As a young man, Pope Francis found his calling in the slums of Buenos Aires, where his dedication to serving the poor earned him the title “Bishop of the Slums.”

    These early experiences sharpened his conviction that faith must be an engine of action and change.  

    Pope Francis put that engine into overdrive as an unstoppable voice for social justice and equality.  

    His 2020 encyclical, Fratelli Tutti, drew a straight line between greed and poverty, hunger, inequality and suffering.

    While decrying the inequality that defines our globalized economy, he also warned against what he called “globalization of indifference.”  

    I will never forget the first official visit he undertook as Pope, at a time when I served as High Commissioner for Refugees.

    Pope Francis chose to go to the Mediterranean island of Lampedusa in 2013 — to put a global spotlight on the desperate plight of asylum seekers and migrants.

    He warned against “the culture of comfort, which makes us think only of ourselves, makes us insensitive to the cries of other people.”

    And on last year’s World Refugee Day, he called on all countries “to welcome, promote, accompany and integrate those who knock on our doors.”

    When I met with him at the Vatican as Secretary-General in 2019, I was struck by his humanity and his humility. 

    He always saw challenges through the eyes of those on the peripheries of life. 

    And he said we can never look away from injustice and inequality — or close our eyes to those suffering from conflict or acts of violence.   

    Always a pilgrim for peace, Pope Francis ventured to war-torn countries around the world — from Iraq to South Sudan to the Democratic Republic of Congo and beyond — decrying bloodshed and violence, and pushing for reconciliation.  

    He stood with conviction for innocents caught in war zones such as Ukraine and Gaza.

    He did it with his global platform — but he also did it in much more personal and profound ways.

    Every day without fail, precisely at 7:00 p.m., he would quietly call the Church of the Holy Family in Gaza City.

    As someone at the Church said, “He would ask us how we were, what did we eat, did we have clean water, was anyone injured? It was never diplomatic or a matter of obligation. It was the questions a father asks to their son.”

    And in his final message on Easter Sunday, Pope Francis underscored the vital importance of ending these conflicts.      

    Jusqu’au bout, le pape François aura incarné l’appel à la justice – pour les peuples et pour la planète.

    Grâce à son encyclique Laudato Si publiée en 2015, il a contribué à l’adoption de l’Accord de Paris en appelant les dirigeants à protéger « notre maison commune ».

    Il a également mis en évidence les liens manifestes entre la dégradation de l’environnement et la dégradation de la condition humaine.

    Le pape François comprenait que ceux qui avaient le moins contribué à la crise climatique en subissaient les conséquences les plus graves – et que nous avons le devoir spirituel et moral d’agir.

    Excelencias:

    En el mundo actual de división y discordia, es particularmente significativo que el Papa Francisco haya proclamado 2025 como el año de la esperanza.

    Él fue siempre un mensajero de esperanza. 

    Ahora nos corresponde a todos nosotros llevar adelante esta esperanza.

    En su funeral del sábado, me conmovió profundamente ver a líderes de todas las religiones y tendencias políticas unirse en solidaridad para honrar la vida y los logros del Papa Francisco – un raro espíritu de unidad y reflexión solemne que necesitamos ahora más que nunca.

    Nuestro mundo sería un lugar mucho mejor si siguiéramos su ejemplo de unidad, compasión y comprensión mutua a través de nuestras propias palabras y acciones.  

    Mientras lloramos la muerte del Papa Francisco, renovemos nuestro compromiso con la paz, la dignidad humana y la justicia social – las causas a las que dedicó cada momento de su extraordinaria vida.

    Muchas gracias.

    ***
    [All-English]

    Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen,

    His Holiness Pope Francis was a man of faith — and a bridge-builder among all faiths.  

    He was a champion of the most marginalized people on earth.

    He was a voice of community in a world of division…

    A voice of mercy in a world of cruelty…

    A voice of peace in a world of war.

    And he was a steadfast friend of the United Nations, addressing Member States from this very podium in 2015.

    During that historic visit, he also spoke of our organization’s ideal of a “united human family living in harmony, working not only for peace, but in peace, working not only for justice, but in a spirit of justice.”

    On behalf of our UN family, I extend by deepest condolences to the Catholic community and to so many others around the world grieving this tremendous loss.

    Excellencies,

    Pope Francis was at the helm of the Roman Catholic Church for a dozen years — but that was preceded by decades of service and good works.

    As a young man, Pope Francis found his calling in the slums of Buenos Aires, where his dedication to serving the poor earned him the title “Bishop of the Slums.”

    These early experiences sharpened his conviction that faith must be an engine of action and change.  

    Pope Francis put that engine into overdrive as an unstoppable voice for social justice and equality.  

    His 2020 encyclical, Fratelli Tutti, drew a straight line between greed and poverty, hunger, inequality and suffering.

    While decrying the inequality that defines our globalized economy, he also warned against what he called “globalization of indifference.”  

    I will never forget the first official visit he undertook as Pope, at a time when I served as High Commissioner for Refugees.

    Pope Francis chose to go to the Mediterranean island of Lampedusa in 2013 — to put a global spotlight on the desperate plight of asylum seekers and migrants.

    He warned against “the culture of comfort, which makes us think only of ourselves, makes us insensitive to the cries of other people.”

    And on last year’s World Refugee Day, he called on all countries “to welcome, promote, accompany and integrate those who knock on our doors.”

    When I met with him at the Vatican as Secretary-General in 2019, I was struck by his humanity and his humility. 

    He always saw challenges through the eyes of those on the peripheries of life. 

    And he said we can never look away from injustice and inequality — or close our eyes to those suffering from conflict or acts of violence.   

    Always a pilgrim for peace, Pope Francis ventured to war-torn countries around the world — from Iraq to South Sudan to the Democratic Republic of Congo and beyond — decrying bloodshed and violence, and pushing for reconciliation.  

    He stood with conviction for innocents caught in war zones such as Ukraine and Gaza.

    He did it with his global platform — but he also did it in much more personal and profound ways.

    Every day without fail, precisely at 7:00 p.m., he would quietly call the Church of the Holy Family in Gaza City.

    As someone at the Church said, “He would ask us how we were, what did we eat, did we have clean water, was anyone injured? It was never diplomatic or a matter of obligation. It was the questions a father asks to their son.”

    And in his final message on Easter Sunday, Pope Francis underscored the vital importance of ending these conflicts.      

    Throughout, Pope Francis was a clear voice of justice for people and planet.

    He helped secure the adoption of the Paris Agreement with his 2015 encyclical Laudato Si that called on leaders to protect “our common home.”

    He also highlighted the clear ties between environmental degradation and the degradation of humanity.

    Pope Francis understood that those who contributed the least to the climate crisis suffered the most — and that we have a spiritual and moral duty to act.

    Excellencies,

    In today’s world of division and discord, it is particularly meaningful that Pope Francis proclaimed 2025 to be the year of hope.

    He was forever a messenger of hope. 

    Now it falls to all of us to carry this hope forward.

    At his funeral on Saturday, I was deeply moved to see leaders from across all faiths and political stripes come together in solidarity to honour the life and achievements of Pope Francis — a rare spirit of unity and solemn reflection that we need now, more than ever.
    Our world would be a much better place if we followed his lifelong example of unity, compassion and mutual understanding through our own words and actions.  

    As we mourn the passing of Pope Francis, let us renew our pledge to peace, human dignity and social justice — the causes for which he dedicated every moment of his most extraordinary life.

    Thank you.

    ***
    [All-French]

    Excellences, Mesdames et Messieurs,

    Sa Sainteté le pape François était un homme de foi – et un bâtisseur de ponts entre toutes les religions.

    Il s’était fait le champion des personnes les plus marginalisées sur Terre.

    Il était une voix de solidarité dans un monde de clivages…

    Une voix de compassion dans un monde de cruauté…

    Une voix de paix dans un monde de guerre.

    C’était aussi un grand ami de l’Organisation des Nations Unies et il s’était exprimé en 2015 devant les États Membres depuis cette même tribune.

    Lors de cette visite historique, il avait évoqué l’idéal de notre Organisation, à savoir « une famille humaine unie, vivant en harmonie, travaillant non seulement pour la paix, mais dans la paix ; travaillant non seulement pour la justice, mais dans un esprit de justice. »

    Au nom de notre famille, celle des Nations Unies, j’adresse mes plus sincères condoléances à l’ensemble des catholiques et aux nombreuses autres personnes qui, partout dans le monde, souffrent de cette terrible perte.

    Excellences,

    Le pape François a été à la tête de l’Église catholique romaine pendant 12 ans, mais son pontificat a été précédé par des décennies de service et de bonnes œuvres.

    Jeune homme, il a trouvé sa vocation dans les quartiers défavorisés de Buenos Aires, où son dévouement au service des pauvres lui a ensuite valu le titre « d’évêque des bidonvilles ».

    Ces premières expériences ont renforcé sa conviction que la foi devait être un moteur d’action et de changement.

    Restant fidèle à cette conviction, il a défendu sans relâche la cause de la justice sociale et de l’égalité.

    Dans son encyclique de 2020, Fratelli Tutti, François a établi un lien direct entre la cupidité, d’une part, et la pauvreté, la faim, l’inégalité et la souffrance, d’autre part.

    Tout en dénonçant les inégalités qui caractérisent notre économie mondialisée, il a également mis en garde contre ce qu’il appelait la « mondialisation de l’indifférence ».

    Je n’oublierai jamais sa première visite officielle en tant que pape, à une époque où j’étais Haut‑Commissaire pour les réfugiés.

    En 2013, François avait choisi de se rendre sur l’île méditerranéenne de Lampedusa pour appeler l’attention du monde entier sur la situation désespérée des demandeurs d’asile et des migrants.

    Il avait alors mis en garde contre « la culture du bien-être, qui nous amène à penser à nous-même, nous rend insensibles aux cris des autres ».

    L’année dernière, à l’occasion de la Journée mondiale des réfugiés, il a exhorté tous les pays à « accueillir, promouvoir, accompagner et intégrer ceux qui frappent à nos portes ».

    Quand je l’ai rencontré au Vatican en 2019 en ma qualité de Secrétaire général, j’ai été frappé par son humanité et son humilité.

    Il voyait toujours les problèmes à travers les yeux de celles et ceux qui sont relégués aux périphéries.

    Il disait qu’il ne fallait jamais détourner le regard de l’injustice et de l’inégalité, ni fermer les yeux sur celles et ceux qui subissent les conséquences d’un conflit ou d’actes de violence.

    Infatigable pèlerin de la paix, le pape François s’est rendu dans des pays déchirés par la guerre – de l’Iraq au Soudan du Sud, en passant par la République démocratique du Congo – pour dénoncer la violence et les affrontements sanglants et prôner la réconciliation.

    Il défendait avec conviction les innocents qui se trouvent dans des zones de guerre, comme en Ukraine et dans la bande de Gaza.

    Il le faisait depuis sa tribune, mais aussi à un niveau beaucoup plus personnel.

    Tous les jours sans exception, à 19 heures précises, il se retirait pour appeler l’église de la Sainte-Famille, à Gaza.

    L’un de ses interlocuteurs a raconté ces conversations : « François nous demandait : “comment allez-vous ? Qu’avez-vous mangé ? Avez-vous de l’eau ? Y-a-t-il des blessés parmi vous ?” Il ne le faisait pas pour des raisons diplomatiques ou par obligation. C’était le genre de questions qu’un père aurait posées ».

    Et, dans son tout dernier message, le dimanche de Pâques, le pape François a souligné à quel point il était vital de mettre fin à tous ces conflits.

    Jusqu’au bout, le pape François aura incarné l’appel à la justice – pour les peuples et pour la planète.

    Grâce à son encyclique Laudato Si publiée en 2015, il a contribué à l’adoption de l’Accord de Paris en appelant les dirigeants à protéger « notre maison commune ».

    Il a également mis en évidence les liens manifestes entre la dégradation de l’environnement et la dégradation de la condition humaine.

    Le pape François comprenait que ceux qui avaient le moins contribué à la crise climatique en subissaient les conséquences les plus graves – et que nous avons le devoir spirituel et moral d’agir.

    Excellences,

    Dans ce monde de division et de discorde, le fait que le pape François ait proclamé 2025 année de l’espérance revêt une signification particulière.

    Il aura été jusqu’au bout un messager de l’espérance.

    Et c’est à nous qu’il revient maintenant de continuer de faire vivre cette espérance.

    À ses funérailles, samedi, j’ai été profondément ému de voir des dirigeants de toutes confessions et toutes tendances politiques réunis dans la solidarité pour rendre hommage à la vie et à l’œuvre du pape François, dans un esprit d’unité et de réflexion solennelle rares dont nous avons plus que jamais besoin aujourd’hui.

    Notre monde serait bien meilleur si nous suivions, dans nos propres paroles et actions, l’exemple d’unité, de compassion et de compréhension mutuelle qu’il a donné tout au long de sa vie.

    Que ce deuil soit l’occasion de renouveler notre engagement en faveur de la paix, de la dignité humaine et de la justice sociale, causes pour lesquelles le pape François a consacré chaque instant d’une vie pour le moins extraordinaire.

    Je vous remercie.
     

    MIL OSI Africa –

  • MIL-OSI USA: NEWS: Sanders, Jayapal, Dingell, Hundreds of Health Care Workers Introduce Medicare for All

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Vermont – Bernie Sanders
    WASHINGTON, April 29 – Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP), alongside Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) and Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-Mich.), today introduced the Medicare for All Act. Hundreds of nurses, health care providers and workers from around the nation joined the lawmakers for a press conference in front of the Capitol.
    In America today, despite spending twice as much per person on health care as other wealthy nations, more than 85 million Americans are uninsured or underinsured, one out of every four Americans cannot afford their prescription drugs, over half a million people go bankrupt due to medically-related debt, and more than 60,000 die because they cannot afford to go to a doctor.
    “The American people understand, as I do, that health care is a human right, not a privilege and that we must end the international embarrassment of the United States being the only major country on earth that does not guarantee health care to all of its citizens,” said Sanders. “It is not acceptable to me, nor to the American people, that over 85 million people today are either uninsured or underinsured. Today, there are millions of people who would like to go to a doctor but cannot afford to do so. This is an outrage. In America, your health and your longevity should not be dependent on your wealth. Health care is a human right that all Americans, regardless of income, are entitled to and they deserve the best health care that our country can provide.”
    “It is a travesty when 85 million people are uninsured or underinsured and millions more are drowning in medical debt in the richest nation on Earth,” said Jayapal. “We don’t suffer from scarcity in America, we suffer from greed. That’s most clear in our broken health care system, which is why we need Medicare for All. People deserve and want comprehensive health care that covers mental health, long-term care, reproductive care, dental, vision and hearing, all without copays, private insurance premiums, sky-high deductibles or other hidden fees. Health care is a human right, that is exactly why it’s time to pass Medicare for All.”
    “Every American has the right to health care, period. If you’re sick, you should be able to go to the doctor without being worried about the cost of treatment or prescription medicine. Too many families must decide between putting food on the table and getting medical care that they desperately need,” said Dingell. “A health care system that ties coverage to employment will always leave patients vulnerable. It’s flat-out wrong and Medicare for All would put a stop to it. We’ve been fighting this fight since the 1940s, when my father-in-law helped author the first universal health care bill. It’s time to get this done.”
    Under this legislation, Medicare would provide comprehensive health care to every American with no premiums, no co-payments and no deductibles. It would also expand Medicare to include dental, hearing, and vision care, and it would give every American the freedom to choose their doctors without endless paperwork or fighting their insurance company. The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that Medicare for All would save our health care system $650 billion a year. Further, researchers at Yale University have estimated that Medicare for All would save 68,000 lives a year.
    This legislation would also create a health care system that finally puts people over profits. In fact, since 2001, the top health care companies in America spent 95 percent of their profits, $2.6 trillion, not to make Americans healthy but to make their CEOs and stockholders obscenely rich. While nearly one out of four Americans cannot afford the life-saving medicine their doctors prescribe, ten top pharma companies made $102 billion in profits in 2024. Meanwhile, the CEOs of just 4 prescription drug companies – Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson, Eli Lilly, and Merck – together made over $100 million last year.
    The legislation has 104 cosponsors in the House and has 16 cosponsors in the Senate – an increase in the number of Senate cosponsors from last Congress – including Sens. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.).
    “Nurses see the failure of our country’s profit-driven health care system every time we clock in to work,” said Nancy Hagans, President of National Nurses United. “In the richest country on earth, nobody should be forced to choose between taking their medications and putting food on the table. Yet countless families are pushed to the breaking point while greedy corporations charge astronomical, ludicrous fees for care that our patients have every right to receive. Nurses are fighting for a future in which our patients’ health is put first always and that’s why we are proud to continue our support for Medicare for All. When we guarantee health care for all, corporations and billionaires will no longer be able to deny anyone the care that they need.”
    “We are long overdue for a universal health care system that guarantees care for all — free of copays, deductibles, and job-based coverage restrictions,” said Dr. Diljeet K. Singh, M.D., Dr.P.H., and President of Physicians for a National Health Program. “With the passage of the Medicare for All Act, physicians can focus on healing patients, not battling insurers over denials and delays. Patients will finally be able to seek care without the constant fear of crushing medical bills. Physicians for a National Health Program proudly stands with our legislators in the fight to make excellent health care a reality for everyone in America.”
    “As Donald Trump, Robert Kennedy and Congressional Republicans rush to strip health care from millions of Americans, we know this: We must not only block their cruel cuts but move America to a system that provides health care to everyone as a matter of right,” said Robert Weissman, co-president of Public Citizen. “America spends much more than other wealthy countries on health care only to have the worst health outcomes. The system works for health insurers, Big Pharma, hospital chains and private equity firms – but no one else. Medicare for All would ensure everyone in America can get the care they need throughout their lives. It is the realistic, humane, just and efficient reform we need.”
    “Postal workers know the value of affordable, universal services, grounded in a commitment to putting people over profits. That’s the type of service we are committed to provide communities across the country, day in and day out,” said Mark Dimondstein, President of American Postal Workers Union. “For too long, greedy corporations and their Wall Street investors have been able to deny the people of the country the quality, affordable, universal health care working people deserve. Medicare for All, health care as a human right, will make us all healthier and financially better off. A health care system that works for working people, not the profits of the insurance companies, is long overdue. It’s time for Medicare for All.”
    “Health care should be a human right. But every time we negotiate with a boss for the right to see a doctor, they nickel and dime us until people have to choose between their health and putting food on the table,” said Shawn Fain, President of the International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW). “We’re sick of having to go on strike just to have decent health care. We’re sick of corporate America asking us to give up raises, retirement security, or work-life balance at the bargaining table so working-class people can avoid medical bankruptcy. Our current health care system is a con job that only works for the billionaire class. Medicare for All is common sense, and it’s what the working class needs. The UAW is proud to support this bill.”
    “If you want to renew the public’s faith in our political system, pass the Medicare for All Act of 2025,” said Alan Minsky, Executive Director, Progressive Democrats of America. “This one piece of legislation will instantly end the era, which has lasted far too long, when profits and wealth accumulation are more important than human life, including yours. MFA will return the general welfare, and the well-being of every individual, to the heart of our social contract. That will renew faith in America.”
    “Health care is a right, not a privilege. The reintroduction of the Medicare for All Act is a crucial step toward ending a system that profits from people’s pain,” said Analilia Mejia and DaMareo Cooper, Co-Executive Directors of Popular Democracy. “Too many Americans are forced to choose between paying their rent and paying for life-saving medication, while corporations rake in billions. Medicare for All isn’t just a policy—it’s the lifeline working families desperately need. Our communities deserve a health care system that prioritizes people over profits. We will fight until we win the health care we deserve.”
    “Health care is a human right and a basic need. Yet instead of getting health care, Americans get delays, denials, and bills they cannot afford. Today, predatory insurance CEOs are poised to reap the windfall from the tax scam giveaways earmarked for billionaires and corporations. The oligarchs that put Donald Trump and Dr. Oz in power want everything we have. We get sicker, make impossible choices, and go broke. They boost the stock prices of corporations – like UnitedHealth – that profit off our pain, and buy more mansions and yachts. We can put an end to those warped priorities through Medicare for All,” said Sulma Arias, executive director of People’s Action Institute. “Working people have made this the wealthiest nation in the history of the world, and there is more than enough if we don’t let the corporate crooks and billionaires steal it. So it’s time to choose: Our health care or their greed?”
    Read the bill text here.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Global: The impact of strategic voting in Canada

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Terri Givens, Professor, Political Science, University of British Columbia

    Initially expected to result in a decisive Conservative victory, the Canadian federal election took a dramatic turn as Mark Carney led the Liberals to victory. It also offered an important lesson in the power of strategic voting — driven not just by domestic politics but by external pressures from the United States and a re-energized Liberal campaign.

    In December 2024, the Conservative Party was leading the Liberal Party by more than 20 points in the polls. But Justin Trudeau’s resignation, combined with U.S. President Donald Trump’s antagonistic stance towards Canada, triggered a sharp shift in public opinion.

    When Carney stepped in as prime minister and party leader, the stage was set for a Liberal comeback. But what had been seen as a referendum on the 10-year rule of the Liberal Party ended up being focused on the existential threat posed by Trump’s tariffs and his calls to turn Canada into the 51st state.

    During the campaign, many voters discussed their intention to switch from the Conservatives to the Liberals.

    The pushback against the Conservatives, and in particular their leader, Pierre Poilievre, led to him losing in his own riding, although the Conservatives gained more seats overall.

    The Liberals benefited from strategic voting, but it was the NDP that appeared to lose the most from this strategy.

    The NDP went from winning 25 seats in the previous election to only seven, while their leader Jagmeet Singh also lost in his riding, leading to his resignation as party leader.

    Strategic voting on display

    My first book, Voting Radical Right in Western Europe (2009), focused on the impact of strategic voting. At the time, I observed that political parties would often try to induce voters to vote strategically for a party or candidate that might not otherwise be their first choice.

    This type of strategic voting was clearly on display in the second round of the French presidential election in 2002, when Jean-Marie Le Pen of the far right National Front faced Jacques Chirac in the second round.

    Some left-leaning voters went to the polls with clothespins on their noses or latex gloves on to vote for Chirac and keep Le Pen out of the presidency.

    This strategy worked again in the July 2024 legislative elections in France, where the left and mainstream right-leaning parties came together to make sure that they didn’t split the vote in districts where it could lead to a win by the far-right Rassemblement National (National Rally). In both cases, voters chose more moderate candidates, reducing the influence of the far right.

    Electoral systems are often designed to encourage voters to choose a more moderate candidate. This approach includes putting electoral hurdles in place. For example, parties in Germany have to win at least five per cent of the vote or win three district seats to enter the legislature.

    This approach had been successful since the Second World War in keeping far right parties out of the legislature — that is until the recent success of the Alternative for Germany party.

    The ability of that party to gain votes in the former East Germany has been the main reason for its success.

    Winners and losers in Canada

    Canada presents an interesting case for strategic voting. In the lead-up to the federal election, many voters were posting suggestions for strategic voting in districts where the vote was being split between parties, particularly on the left.

    For example, there was a close race in a riding in British Columbia between the Green and Conservative candidates. I noticed social media posts in which voters were encouraged to shift their vote from the NDP or Liberal candidates to give the Green candidate a better chance of winning the riding.

    As of April 25, Conservatives were expected to win the riding, but on election night, Elizabeth May from the Green Party won with 39 per cent of the vote, with the Conservative candidate falling to third place behind the Liberals.

    Given the fact that the Canadian electoral system is winner-take-all in each riding, it’s important that voters understand the broader impact of their vote on the national outcome.

    It’s likely that many voters switched their votes from their smaller, preferred party — particularly the NPD — to one of the main parties, depending on the kind of poll projections they might have been seeing in their ridings.

    This situation exemplifies the importance of parties providing clear information on potential outcomes to encourage voters to use their vote strategically to get a desired outcome at the national level.

    Terri Givens 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. The impact of strategic voting in Canada – https://theconversation.com/the-impact-of-strategic-voting-in-canada-255489

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI USA News: 100 DAYS OF HOAXES: Cutting Through the Fake News

    Source: The White House

    Since President Donald J. Trump took office 100 days ago, it has been a nonstop deluge of hoaxes and lies from Democrats and their allies in the Fake News suffering from terminal cases of Trump Derangement Syndrome.

    In no particular order, here are some of the most egregious hoaxes peddled by the usual suspects so far in President Trump’s second term:

    • HOAX: Fake News CNN attempted to “fact check” President Trump’s claim that the Biden Administration spent millions on “making mice transgender.”
    • FACT: After their so-called “fact check” was thoroughly debunked, they were forced to update it in disgrace and admit the claim was, in fact, true.
    • HOAX: The Fake News claimed the Department of Defense removed Gen. Colin Powell’s name from a list of notable Americans buried at Arlington Cemetery.
    • FACT: No service members’ names were removed from that section — and Gen. Powell’s name remains among those listed.
    • HOAX: Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA) claimed “no president” presided over more plane crashes during their first month in office as President Trump.
    • FACT: “There were 55 aviation accidents in the U.S. between Biden’s inauguration on Jan. 21, 2021, and Feb. 17, 2021, compared to 35 during the same period for Trump,” Fox News reported.
    • HOAX: Gov. JB Pritzker (D-IL) and Chicago Public Schools officials claimed, without bothering to verify, that ICE agents had conducted a “raid” at an elementary school — a false claim echoed by media outlets, including the Chicago Tribune.
    • FACT: It was actually the U.S. Secret Service investigating a threat unrelated to immigration.
    • HOAX: Far-left influencers and other leftist hacks falsely claimed the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and Elon Musk were out to “cut Social Security.”
    • FACT: They were referencing an interview in which Musk was clearly referring to the tremendous amount of waste, fraud, and abuse within entitlement programs.
    • HOAX: The media smeared DOGE as “young, inexperienced engineers” engineering a “government takeover.”
    • FACT: In reality, DOGE is led by seasoned industry professionals, including successful CEOs who paused their lives to aid in the effort of streamlining government and holding the bureaucracy accountable.
    • HOAX: NBC’s Peter Alexander peddled the lie that “constituents in some traditionally red districts” were unhappy with President Trump’s effort to cut waste, fraud, and abuse in government.
    • FACT: The same “protests” cited by the Fake News were funded and organized by far-left special interest groups.
    • HOAX: NPR claimed NASA astronauts Suni Williams and Butch Wilmore — who were stuck on the International Space Station for more than nine months following problems with their spacecraft — were “not stranded.”
    • FACT: NPR itself had described the astronauts as stranded in prior reporting, and only seemed to take issue with the description once President Trump and Elon Musk made it a priority to bring them home.
    • HOAX: A foreign Fake News outlet reported that President Trump “shut down” the British prime minister during a news conference.
    • FACT: In reality, President Trump was simply moving on from a reporter who was trying to goad the two leaders into division.
    • HOAX: NPR falsely claimed the White House was actively searching for a new secretary of defense.
    • FACT: This lie was immediately shut down by multiple Trump Administration officials, including President Trump himself.
    • HOAX: The Fake News attempted to paint illegal immigrant gang member Kilmar Abrego Garcia as an innocent “Maryland father” who was unjustly deported by the Trump Administration — and actively censored the truth about him.
    • FACT: Abrego Garcia is a citizen of El Salvador and was deported to his home country amid overwhelming evidence of his gang affiliation.
    • HOAX: Deranged “filmmaker” Michael Moore questioned whether deported illegal immigrants would go on to cure cancer or stop “that asteroid (sic) that’s gonna hit us.”
    • FACT: Moore’s statement was a strong early contender for the dumbest, most ridiculous statement of the year considering those deported illegal immigrants were violent criminals.
    • HOAX: The Fake News portrayed Mahmoud Khalil, a pro-Hamas radical who led violent protests at Columbia, as an innocent graduate student with an absolute right to remain in the U.S.
    • FACT: An immigration judge ruled Khalil — who is not a U.S. citizen — can be deported.
    • HOAX: The Financial Times reported that Senior White House Counselor Peter Navarro wanted to remove Canada from the “Five Eyes” intelligence sharing network.
    • FACT: Mr. Navarro immediately shut down this fake story.
    • HOAX: A foreign Fake News reporter claimed President Trump referred to European nations as “parasites.”
    • FACT: President Trump immediately pushed back on this ridiculous claim — as did the Italian prime minister.
    • HOAX: Fake News CNN’s Brianna Keilar implied the Trump Administration was somehow wrong for stopping illegal immigrants from stealing taxpayer dollars in the form of welfare benefits.
    • FACT: Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller summarily embarrassed her with the facts: “The federal government will find EVERY illegal alien who is stealing American taxpayer dollars — and that’s what Americans expect to happen. I don’t even fathom the premise of your question.”
    • HOAX: A favorite refrain of the Fake News is that Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., is “anti-vaccine.”
    • FACT: Kennedy debunked the lie in his confirmation hearings: “This has been repeatedly debunked … Bringing this up right now is dishonest.”
    • HOAX: WIRED falsely claimed the Social Security Administration is “shifting its public communication exclusively to X” under President Trump.
    • FACT: Not happening.
    • HOAX: Reuters falsely reported that the Trump Administration “stalled a United Nations program in Mexico aimed at stopping imported fentanyl chemicals from reaching the country’s drug cartels.”
    • FACT: The Department of State is actually trying to expand the initiative.
    • FACT: The Fake News frequently pushed the lie that as part of the Trump administration, Secretary Kennedy would implement a national abortion ban and “restrict or even ban medication abortion without a single act of Congress.”
    • FACT: Secretary Kennedy consistently pledged to implement President Trump’s policies — which include leaving abortion to the states, ending barbaric late-term abortions, protecting conscientious objections, and ending federal funding for abortions.
    • HOAX: Fake News savant Tara Palmeri falsely reported that President Trump’s proposal for Gaza was conceived by Jared Kushner.
    • FACT: This lie was immediately and summarily debunked by the Trump Administration: “The worst reporter in America makes up fake news for clout because she has no real sources. Sit down, dummy.”
    • HOAX: Sen. Chris Murphy, Rep. Jasmine Crockett, and media outlets claimed President Trump’s directive to pause radical, wasteful government spending meant an end to Medicaid, food assistance, and other individual assistance programs.
    • FACT: Individual assistance programs — Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, SNAP, etc. — were explicitly excluded, as was made clear by Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt and the Office of Management and Budget. Only unnecessary spending — DEI, Green New Scam, NGOs that undermine the national interest — were included in the directive.
    • HOAX: A “physicians advocacy group” was widely cited as opposing President Trump’s nomination of Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., to lead the Department of Health and Human Services.
    • FACT: The “advocacy group” was really an astroturfed partisan organization funded by prominent left-wing donors — and accepted fake signatures.
    • HOAX: Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA) and other Democrats pushed the lie that DOGE posted “classified information” on their website.
    • FACT: That alleged “classified information” was really just an employment headcount — which has been publicly available for years.
    • HOAX: Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) claimed Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem called all Venezuelan immigrants “dirtbags.”
    • FACT: Secretary Noem actually called illegal immigrant members of the vicious Tren de Aragua gang “dirtbags,” which is true.
    • HOAX: The New York Times wrote that Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., wanted to “ban fluoride in drinking water” and “reverse … one of the most important public health practices in the country’s history.”
    • FACT: New York Times made no mention of their own reporting that fluoride may be “linked to lower IQ scores in children.”
    • HOAX: Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) repeatedly lied about President Trump “going after” Social Security.
    • FACT: President Trump has repeatedly pledged to protect Social Security and make it more robust for American citizens.
    • HOAX: Sen. Mark Kelley (D-AZ) attempted to scare veterans by shamelessly claiming their care was in jeopardy due to “layoffs” at VA hospitals.
    • FACT: The lie was debunked by Secretary of Veterans Affairs Doug Collins: “What changes are you talking about? We’ve not had those layoffs… I put $360 million back into community care… It’s concerning to me that a veteran would actually tell stories to veterans that are not true.”
    • HOAX: Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-TX) exploited the Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport plane crash tragedy by claiming President Trump “froze the hiring” of air traffic controllers.
    • FACT: Air traffic controllers were exempt from the federal hiring freeze.
    • HOAX: Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-TX) implied that “cutting” members of an aviation advisory committee was somehow a cause of the Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport plane crash tragedy.
    • FACT: The advisory group hadn’t met since 2023 and was comprised of business and union leaders who gave “advice” to the TSA and had nothing to do with actual air travel.
    • HOAX: A far-left writer claimed Elon Musk and DOGE staffers “illegally installed a commercial server to control federal HR databases that contain sensitive personal information, including SSNs, home addresses, and medical histories.”
    • FACT: A top official confirmed “there’s nothing illegal and no server, just more made up tall tales from uninformed career bureaucrats.”
    • HOAX: The Washington Post alleged the Trump Administration was setting “quotas” for immigration authorities — and gave the administration just four minutes to comment before publishing.
    • FACT: As usual, this was a fake story.
    • HOAX: Online liberal activists claimed President Trump “took down” President Obama’s portrait in the White House.
    • FACT: Obama’s portrait was not taken down — it was simply moved only feet away from its previous location.
    • HOAX: Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-HI) claimed Attorney General Pam Bondi created a “weaponizing task force.”
    • FACT: It was a task force to END weaponization at the Department of Justice.
    • HOAX: CBS News reported that Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth ordered a “makeup studio” be installed inside the Pentagon.
    • FACT: It was a “totally fake story,” and the alleged studio was really an existing green room with no frills.
    • HOAX: Politico reported the Trump Administration was debating lifting sanctions on Russian energy assets, including the Nord Stream pipeline.
    • FACT: This was debunked by both Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Special Envoy Steve Witkoff.
    • HOAX: An illegal immigrant in U.S. custody “simply disappeared,” The New York Times reported.
    • FACT: The illegal immigrant was a confirmed member of the vicious Tren de Aragua gang. An immigration judge ordered his removal, and he was deported along with other threats to national security.
    • HOAX: The Wall Street Journal alleged that Special Envoy Steve Witkoff was receiving sensitive information on a personal phone while in Moscow and that Russian Intelligence must’ve had access to the information.
    • FACT: This was a total fabrication. Special Envoy Witkoff did not even have a personal phone with him in Russia. He had only a government phone; a secure line of communication.
    • HOAX: The Wall Street Journal claimed the Trump Administration “sought to portray” deported criminal illegal immigrant gang member Kilmar Abrego Garcia as “violent.”
    • FACT: Abrego Garcia’s own wife filed an order of protection against him and testified that he brutally beat her.
    • HOAX: An AP reporter claimed that FAA staff who worked on “radar, landing and navigational aid maintenance, among others” were “harassed on Facebook” by DOGE.
    • FACT: That was a total lie. DOGE doesn’t have a Facebook page and no professionals who perform critical safety functions were fired.
    • HOAX: The Daily Beast claimed Vice President JD Vance “broke one of the most notorious Vatican rules during his Easter weekend visit” by being photographed in the Sistine Chapel.
    • FACT: Buried all the way down in the 14th paragraph, The Daily Beast admitted the vice president was given special permission by the Vatican to have photographs taken inside the Sistine Chapel.
    • HOAX: Left-wing social media accounts promoted fake, AI-generated audio of Vice President Vance “disparaging Elon Musk in private.”
    • FACT: The audio was debunked as fake.
    • HOAX: The New York Times reported that funding for the Women’s Health Initiative was being slashed by the Department of Health and Human Services.
    • FACT: Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., himself declared this Fake News and recognized the project is “mission critical.”
    • HOAX: Fox News’s Jennifer Griffin gave legitimacy to a hoax from delusional Reps. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) and Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) that Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth requested nearly $140,000 in “upgrades” to his government residence.
    • FACT: This lie was debunked by Secretary Hegseth — and it was so outrageous, even the AP was forced to admit it was completely fake.
    • HOAX: Rep. Don Beyer (D-VA) and many others claimed the Supreme Court ordered the return of illegal immigrant gang member Kilmar Abrego Garcia to the United States.
    • FACT: Even CNN admitted that’s not what happened: “They did not order the administration to return him to the United States … they could’ve said ‘we order him returned,’ but they didn’t do that.”
    • HOAX: Joe Biden accused the Trump Administration of “taking aim at Social Security.”
    • FACT: As usual, he was lying — President Trump has repeatedly pledged to protect Social Security.
    • HOAX: Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA) claimed the arrest of a Milwaukee judge who helped an illegal immigrant evade arrest was “unprecedented.”
    • FACT: It wasn’t; it has happened before.
    • HOAX: Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) called the arrest of a Milwaukee judge who helped an illegal immigrant evade arrest a “gravely serious and drastic move.”
    • FACT: The judge violated the law by obstructing an ICE arrest of an illegal immigrant.
    • HOAX: Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) claimed the arrest of the Milwaukee judge who obstructed an apprehension of a criminal illegal immigrant “threatens the rule of law.”
    • FACT: It literally does the opposite because no one is above the law.
    • HOAX: Politico claimed the Trump Administration “wipe[d] out firefighter health and safety programs.”
    • FACT: The programs remain a top priority for the administration — and will remain intact.
    • HOAX: Sen. Elizabeth Warren claimed that President Trump’s policies make it so “no one wants to make investments in the United States.”
    • FACT: President Trump has secured more than $5 trillion in investments since taking office, which is expected to create more than 451,000 new jobs — and the list is only expected to grow.
    • HOAX: NBC’s Kristen Welker peddled a Fake News hoax that the Trump Administration was deporting children.
    • FACT: Secretary of State Marco Rubio shut down her desperate attempt at a hoax by highlighting how the mother, who was in the country illegally, made that choice all on her own.
    • HOAX: The New York Times implied President Trump was alone in wearing a blue suit to the funeral of Pope Francis.
    • FACT: Photos show dozens of world leaders and other attendees — many situated near President Trump — also wearing blue clothing.
    • HOAX: Teachers’ union boss Randi Weingarten accused President Trump of taking teachers’ salaries and giving them to “billionaires” by cutting the Department of Education.
    • FACT: President Trump has repeatedly called teachers “the most important people in this country” who should be paid more, not less. The federal government does not pay the salaries of teachers; state and local governments do.
    • HOAX: The Fake News and their predictable allies ran with a story that claimed an American citizen was detained by authorities after he informed them he was, in fact, a citizen.
    • FACT: That’s not what happened. The individual “approached Border Patrol in Tucson and stated he had entered the U.S. illegally through Nogales. He said he wanted to turn himself in and completed a sworn statement identifying as a Mexican citizen who had entered unlawfully … A few days later, his family presented documents showing U.S. citizenship. The charges were dismissed, and he was released to his family.”
    • HOAX: PBS News claimed “DOGE operatives attempted to gain access to secure spaces,” implying they attempted to access classified information without approval.
    • FACT: This wasn’t even remotely true.
    • HOAX: The AP falsely claimed Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard said President Trump is “very good friends” with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
    • FACT: The AP was humiliatingly forced to retract its story, admitting they were wrong. Stephanie Ruhle also had to issue a correction. DNI Gabbard was referencing President Trump’s relationship with Indian PM Narendra Modi.
    • HOAX: Student visa holders should have unfettered access to do whatever they want in the United States.
    • FACT: Wrong. As Secretary of State Marco Rubio said, “When you apply to enter the United States and you get a visa, you are a guest… If you tell us when you apply for a visa ‘I’m coming to the U.S. to participate in pro-Hamas events,’ that runs counter to the foreign policy interest of the United States… If you had told us you were going to do that, we never would have given you the visa.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI: Northeast Bank Reports Third Quarter Results and Declares Dividend

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    PORTLAND, Maine, April 29, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Northeast Bank (the “Bank”) (NASDAQ: NBN), a Maine-based bank, today reported net income of $18.7 million, or $2.23 per diluted common share, for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, compared to net income of $13.9 million, or $1.83 per diluted common share, for the quarter ended March 31, 2024. Net income for the nine months ended March 31, 2025 was $58.2 million, or $7.07 per diluted common share, compared to $43.1 million, or $5.67 per diluted common share, for the nine months ended March 31, 2024.

    The Board of Directors declared a cash dividend of $0.01 per share, payable on May 27, 2025, to shareholders of record as of May 13, 2025.

    “We recorded strong loan volume during the third fiscal quarter,” said Rick Wayne, Chief Executive Officer. “Our National Lending Division generated $292.5 million in originated and purchased volume, and our small balance SBA 7(a) program with Newity LLC as our loan service provider has continued to grow, with quarterly originations of $121.3 million, compared to $100.3 million for the quarter ended December 31, 2024 and $29.0 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2024. At March 31, 2025, the loan portfolio, including loans held for sale, totaled $3.80 billion, representing an increase of $1.04 billion, or 37.7%, over June 30, 2024. During the quarter ended March 31, 2025, we sold $73.6 million of the guaranteed portion of our SBA loans, generating a gain on sale of $6.0 million, compared with sales of $64.5 million for a gain on sale of $5.6 million in the quarter ended December 31, 2024. For the quarter, we are reporting earnings of $2.23 per diluted common share, a return on average equity of 16.5%, and a return on average assets of 1.9%.”

    As of March 31, 2025, total assets were $4.23 billion, an increase of $1.10 billion, or 35.0%, from total assets of $3.13 billion as of June 30, 2024.

    1.   The following table highlights the changes in the loan portfolio, including loans held for sale, for the nine months ended March 31, 2025:

       
      Loan Portfolio Changes
      March 31, 2025 Balance   June 30, 2024 Balance   Change ($)   Change (%)
      (Dollars in thousands)
    National Lending Purchased $ 2,443,822     $ 1,708,551     $ 735,271       43.03 %
    National Lending Originated   1,185,153       981,497       203,656       20.75 %
    SBA National   152,319       48,405       103,914       214.68 %
    Community Banking   19,495       22,704       (3,209 )     (14.13 %)
    Total $ 3,800,789     $ 2,761,157     $ 1,039,632       37.65 %
                                   

    Loans generated by the Bank’s National Lending Division for the quarter ended March 31, 2025 totaled $292.5 million, which consisted of $74.5 million of purchased loans at an average price of 94.2% of unpaid principal balance, and $218.0 million of originated loans. Loans generated by the Bank’s SBA Division for the quarter ended March 31, 2025 totaled $121.3 million.

    An overview of the Bank’s National Lending Division portfolio follows:

      National Lending Portfolio
      Three Months Ended March 31,
      2025   2024
      Purchased   Originated   Total   Purchased   Originated   Total
      (Dollars in thousands)
    Loans purchased or originated during the period:                                  
    Unpaid principal balance $ 79,144     $ 217,983     $ 297,127     $ –     $ 153,349     $ 153,349  
    Initial net investment basis (1)   74,553       217,983       292,536       –       153,349       153,349  
                                       
    Loan returns during the period:                                  
    Yield   8.33%       8.73%       8.46%       8.67%       10.09%       9.19%  
    Total Return on Purchased Loans (2)   8.43%       N/A       8.43%       8.70%       N/A       8.70%  
                                       
      Nine Months Ended March 31,
      2025   2024
      Purchased   Originated   Total   Purchased   Originated   Total
      (Dollars in thousands)
    Loans purchased or originated during the period:                                  
    Unpaid principal balance $ 901,693     $ 591,292     $ 1,492,985     $ 271,741     $ 284,876     $ 556,617  
    Initial net investment basis (1)   821,485       591,292       1,412,777       238,477       284,876       523,353  
                                       
    Loan returns during the period:                                  
    Yield   8.65%       9.02%       8.77%       8.95%       9.97%       9.34%  
    Total Return on Purchased Loans (2)   8.70%       N/A       8.70%       8.98%       N/A       8.98%  
                                       
    Total loans as of period end:                                  
    Unpaid principal balance $ 2,638,438     $ 1,185,153     $ 3,823,591     $ 1,794,669     $ 975,876     $ 2,770,545  
    Net investment basis   2,443,822       1,185,153       3,628,975       1,620,409       975,876       2,596,285  
                                       
    (1) Initial net investment basis on purchased loans is the initial amortized cost basis net of initial allowance for credit losses (credit mark).
    (2) The total return on purchased loans represents scheduled accretion, accelerated accretion, gains (losses) on real estate owned, release of allowance for credit losses on purchased loans, and other noninterest income recorded during the period divided by the average invested balance on an annualized basis. The total return on purchased loans does not include the effect of purchased loan charge-offs or recoveries during the period. Total return on purchased loans is considered a non-GAAP financial measure. See reconciliation in below table entitled “Total Return on Purchased Loans.”
     

    2.   Deposits increased by $956.3 million, or 40.9%, from June 30, 2024. The increase was primarily attributable to increases in time deposits of $943.5 million, or 72.2%. The significant drivers in the change in time deposits were the increase in brokered time deposits, which increased by $818.8 million, and Community Banking Division time deposits, which increased by $105.3 million compared to June 30, 2024.

    3.   Federal Home Loan Bank (“FHLB”) advances increased by $33.4 million, or 9.7%, from June 30, 2024. The increase was attributable to one new short-term borrowing, partially offset by net paydowns on amortizing advances.

    4.   Shareholders’ equity increased by $90.9 million, or 24.1%, from June 30, 2024, primarily due to net income of $58.2 million and $31.3 million of net proceeds on shares issued in connection with the Bank’s at-the-market (“ATM”) program.

    Net income increased by $4.8 million to $18.7 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, compared to net income of $13.9 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2024.

    1.   Net interest and dividend income before provision for credit losses increased by $9.5 million to $46.0 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, compared to $36.5 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2024. The increase was primarily due to the following:

    • An increase in interest income earned on loans of $15.8 million, primarily due to higher average balances in the National Lending Division purchased and Small Business Administration (“SBA”) portfolios, partially offset by lower rates earned across the portfolio; and
    • An increase in interest income earned on short-term investments of $965 thousand, due to higher average balances, partially offset by lower rates earned; partially offset by,
    • An increase in deposit interest expense of $7.3 million, primarily due to higher average balances, partially offset by lower rates on interest-bearing deposits.

    The following table summarizes interest income and related yields recognized on the loan portfolios:

       
      Interest Income and Yield on Loans
      Three Months Ended March 31,
      2025   2024
      Average   Interest       Average   Interest    
      Balance (1)   Income   Yield   Balance (1)   Income   Yield
      (Dollars in thousands)
    Community Banking $ 20,074     $ 349     7.05 %   $ 24,640     $ 387     6.32 %
    SBA National   121,521       2,975     9.93 %     35,848       1,159     13.00 %
    National Lending:                                      
    Originated   1,120,756       24,120     8.73 %     953,401       23,909     10.09 %
    Purchased   2,387,715       49,034     8.33 %     1,635,494       35,260     8.67 %
    Total National Lending   3,508,471       73,154     8.46 %     2,588,895       59,169     9.19 %
    Total $ 3,650,066     $ 76,478     8.50 %   $ 2,649,383     $ 60,715     9.22 %
       
      Nine Months Ended March 31,
      2025   2024
      Average   Interest       Average   Interest    
      Balance (1)   Income   Yield   Balance (1)   Income   Yield
      (Dollars in thousands)
    Community Banking $ 21,330     $ 1,088     6.79 %   $ 25,786     $ 1,242     6.41 %
    SBA National   91,481       8,145     11.86 %     30,125       2,833     12.52 %
    National Lending:                                      
    Originated   1,052,656       71,297     9.02 %     951,129       71,284     9.97 %
    Purchased   2,183,068       141,831     8.65 %     1,558,362       104,780     8.95 %
    Total National Lending   3,235,724       213,128     8.77 %     2,509,491       176,064     9.34 %
    Total $ 3,348,535     $ 222,361     8.85 %   $ 2,565,402     $ 180,139     9.35 %
                                               
    (1)   Includes loans held for sale.
     

    The components of total income on purchased loans are set forth in the table below entitled “Total Return on Purchased Loans.” When compared to the quarter ended March 31, 2024, transactional income increased by $113 thousand for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, and regularly scheduled interest and accretion increased by $14.1 million primarily due to the increase in average balances. The total return on purchased loans for the quarter ended March 31, 2025 was 8.4%, a decrease from 8.7% for the quarter ended March 31, 2024. The following table details the total return on purchased loans:

       
      Total Return on Purchased Loans
      Three Months Ended March 31,
      2025   2024
      Income   Return (1)   Income   Return (1)
      (Dollars in thousands)
    Regularly scheduled interest and accretion $ 48,149     8.18 %   $ 34,045     8.37 %
    Transactional income:                      
    Release of allowance for credit losses on purchased loans   573     0.10 %     130     0.03 %
    Accelerated accretion and loan fees   885     0.15 %     1,215     0.30 %
    Total transactional income   1,458     0.25 %     1,345     0.33 %
    Total $ 49,607     8.43 %   $ 35,390     8.70 %
       
      Nine Months Ended March 31,
      2025   2024
      Income   Return (1)   Income   Return (1)
      (Dollars in thousands)
    Regularly scheduled interest and accretion $ 136,055     8.30 %   $ 98,505   8.41 %
    Transactional income:                    
    Release of allowance for credit losses on purchased loans   734     0.05 %     356   0.03 %
    Accelerated accretion and loan fees   5,775     0.35 %     6,275   0.54 %
    Total transactional income   6,509     0.40 %     6,631   0.57 %
    Total $ 142,564     8.70 %   $ 105,136   8.98 %
                             
    (1)   The total return on purchased loans represents scheduled accretion, accelerated accretion, and gains (losses) on real estate owned, and release of allowance for credit losses on purchased loans recorded during the period divided by the average invested balance on an annualized basis. The total return does not include the effect of purchased loan charge-offs or recoveries in the quarter. Total return is considered a non-GAAP financial measure.
     

    2.   Provision for credit losses increased by $2.3 million to $2.9 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, compared to $596 thousand in the quarter ended March 31, 2024. The increase was primarily related to loan growth and increased reserves on the unguaranteed portion of the SBA portfolio.

    3.   Noninterest income increased by $5.1 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, compared to the quarter ended March 31, 2024, primarily due to an increase in gain on sale of SBA loans of $5.0 million, due to the sale of $73.6 million in SBA loans during the quarter ended March 31, 2025 as compared to the sale of $18.9 million during the quarter ended March 31, 2024.

    4.   Noninterest expense increased by $3.7 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2025 compared to the quarter ended March 31, 2024, primarily due to the following:

    • An increase in salaries and employee benefits expense of $1.7 million, primarily due to increases in regular, stock compensation expense and incentive compensation expense;
    • An increase in loan expense of $1.5 million primarily related to increased expenses in connection with the origination of SBA 7(a) loans; and
    • An increase in Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (the “FDIC”) insurance expense of $195 thousand, due to the growth of the Bank’s asset size and an increased assessment rate.

    5.   Income tax expense increased by $3.7 million to $10.8 million, or an effective tax rate of 36.7%, for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, compared to $7.2 million, or an effective tax rate of 34.1%, for the quarter ended March 31, 2024. The increase in effective tax rate is primarily due to projected changes in income apportionment for state taxes and increased projections of the required write-down of the Bank’s deferred tax asset as a result of a change in Massachusetts income tax law.

    As of March 31, 2025, nonperforming assets totaled $33.4 million, or 0.79% of total assets, compared to $28.3 million, or 0.90% of total assets, as of June 30, 2024.

    As of March 31, 2025, past due loans totaled $34.0 million, or 0.91% of total loans, compared to past due loans totaling $26.3 million, or 0.95% of total loans, as of June 30, 2024.

    As of March 31, 2025, the Bank’s Tier 1 leverage capital ratio was 11.5%, compared to 12.3% at June 30, 2024, and the Total risk-based capital ratio was 14.0% at March 31, 2025, compared to 14.8% at June 30, 2024. Capital ratios decreased primarily due to the increase in risk-weighted assets and average assets from significant loan growth during the nine months ended March 31, 2025, partially offset by increased retained earnings and additional capital raised under the Bank’s ATM program.

    Investor Call Information
    Rick Wayne, Chief Executive Officer, Richard Cohen, Chief Financial Officer, and Pat Dignan, Chief Operating Officer and Chief Credit Officer of Northeast Bank, will host a conference call to discuss third quarter earnings and business outlook at 10:00 a.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 30th. To access the conference call by phone, please go to this link (Phone Registration), and you will be provided with dial in details. The call will be available via live webcast, which can be viewed by accessing the Bank’s website at www.northeastbank.com and clicking on the About Us – Investor Relations section. To listen to the webcast, attendees are encouraged to visit the website at least fifteen minutes early to register, download and install any necessary audio software. Please note there will also be a slide presentation that will accompany the webcast. For those who cannot listen to the live broadcast, a replay will be available online for one year at www.northeastbank.com.

    About Northeast Bank
    Northeast Bank (NASDAQ: NBN) is a bank headquartered in Portland, Maine. We offer personal and business banking services to the Maine market via seven branches. Our National Lending Division purchases and originates commercial loans on a nationwide basis. ableBanking, a division of Northeast Bank, offers online savings products to consumers nationwide. Information regarding Northeast Bank can be found at www.northeastbank.com.

    Non-GAAP Financial Measures
    In addition to results presented in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”), this press release contains certain non-GAAP financial measures, including tangible common shareholders’ equity, tangible book value per share, total return on purchased loans, and efficiency ratio. The Bank’s management believes that the supplemental non-GAAP information is utilized by regulators and market analysts to evaluate a company’s financial condition and therefore, such information is useful to investors. These disclosures should not be viewed as a substitute for financial results determined in accordance with GAAP, nor are they necessarily comparable to non-GAAP performance measures that may be presented by other companies. Because non-GAAP financial measures are not standardized, it may not be possible to compare these financial measures with other companies’ non-GAAP financial measures having the same or similar names.

    Forward-Looking Statements
    Statements in this press release that are not historical facts are forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and are intended to be covered by the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. We may also make forward-looking statements in other documents we file with the FDIC, in our annual reports to our shareholders, in press releases and other written materials, and in oral statements made by our officers, directors or employees. You can identify forward-looking statements by the use of the words “believe,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “estimate,” “assume,” “outlook,” “will,” “should,” and other expressions that predict or indicate future events and trends and which do not relate to historical matters. Although the Bank believes that these forward-looking statements are based on reasonable estimates and assumptions, they are not guarantees of future performance and are subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties, contingencies, and other factors. You should not place undue reliance on our forward-looking statements. You should exercise caution in interpreting and relying on forward-looking statements because they are subject to significant risks, uncertainties and other factors which are, in some cases, beyond the Bank’s control. The Bank’s actual results could differ materially from those expressed or implied by such the forward-looking statements as a result of, among other factors, changes in interest rates and real estate values; changes in employment levels, general business and economic conditions on a national basis and in the local markets in which the Bank operates; changes in customer behavior due to changing business and economic conditions (including the impact of recently imposed tariffs by the U.S. Administration and foreign governments, inflation and concerns about liquidity) or legislative or regulatory initiatives; the possibility that future credits losses are higher than currently expected due to changes in economic assumptions, customer behavior or adverse economic developments; turbulence in the capital and debt markets; competitive pressures from other financial institutions; changes in loan defaults and charge-off rates; changes in the value of securities and other assets, adequacy of credit loss reserves, or deposit levels necessitating increased borrowing to fund loans and investments; changes in legislation and regulation under the new U.S. presidential administration; operational risks including, but not limited to, cybersecurity, fraud, natural disasters, climate change and future pandemics; the risk that the Bank may not be successful in the implementation of its business strategy; the risk that intangibles recorded in the Bank’s financial statements will become impaired; changes in assumptions used in making such forward-looking statements; and the other risks and uncertainties detailed in the Bank’s Annual Report on Form 10-K, as amended by Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the year ended June 30, 2024 as updated in the Bank’s Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q and other filings submitted to the FDIC. These statements speak only as of the date of this release and the Bank does not undertake any obligation to update or revise any of these forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances occurring after the date of this communication or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events.

    NBN-F

     
    NORTHEAST BANK
    BALANCE SHEETS
    (Unaudited)
    (Dollars in thousands, except share and per share data)
      March 31, 2025   June 30, 2024
    Assets            
    Cash and due from banks $ 2,443     $ 2,711  
    Short-term investments   341,633       239,447  
    Total cash and cash equivalents   344,076       242,158  
                 
                 
    Available-for-sale debt securities, at fair value   21,473       48,978  
    Equity securities, at fair value   7,314       7,013  
    Total investment securities   28,787       55,991  
                 
    SBA loans held for sale   60,339       14,506  
                 
    Loans:            
    Commercial real estate   2,764,809       2,028,280  
    Commercial and industrial   852,985       618,846  
    Residential real estate   122,466       99,234  
    Consumer   190       291  
    Total loans   3,740,450       2,746,651  
    Less: Allowance for credit losses   46,024       26,709  
    Loans, net   3,694,426       2,719,942  
                 
                 
    Premises and equipment, net   25,338       27,144  
    Real estate owned and other possessed collateral, net   1,200       –  
    Federal Home Loan Bank stock, at cost   16,106       15,751  
    Loan servicing rights, net   810       984  
    Bank-owned life insurance   19,203       18,830  
    Accrued interest receivable   17,445       15,163  
    Other assets   20,772       21,734  
    Total assets $ 4,228,502     $ 3,132,203  
                 
    Liabilities and Shareholders’ Equity            
    Deposits:            
    Demand $ 154,540     $ 146,727  
    Savings and interest checking   796,762       732,029  
    Money market   94,837       154,504  
    Time   2,249,654       1,306,203  
    Total deposits   3,295,793       2,339,463  
                 
    Federal Home Loan Bank and other advances   378,543       345,190  
    Lease liability   19,465       20,252  
    Other liabilities   67,185       50,664  
    Total liabilities   3,760,986       2,755,569  
                 
    Commitments and contingencies   –       –  
                 
                 
    Shareholders’ equity            
    Preferred stock, $1.00 par value, 1,000,000 shares authorized; no shares          
    issued and outstanding at March 31, 2025 and June 30, 2024   –       –  
    Voting common stock, $1.00 par value, 25,000,000 shares authorized;            
    8,525,362 and 8,127,690 shares issued and outstanding at          
    March 31, 2025 and June 30, 2024, respectively   8,525       8,128  
    Non-voting common stock, $1.00 par value, 3,000,000 shares authorized;            
    No shares issued and outstanding at March 31, 2025 and June 30, 2024 –     –  
    Additional paid-in capital   97,078       64,762  
    Retained earnings   361,901       303,927  
    Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)   12       (183 )
    Total shareholders’ equity   467,516       376,634  
    Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity $ 4,228,502     $ 3,132,203  
                   
     
    NORTHEAST BANK
    STATEMENTS OF INCOME
    (Unaudited)
    (Dollars in thousands, except share and per share data)
      Three Months Ended March 31,   Nine Months Ended March 31,
      2025   2024   2025   2024
    Interest and dividend income:                          
    Interest and fees on loans $ 76,478     $ 60,715     $ 222,361     $ 180,139  
    Interest on available-for-sale securities   352       596       1,383       1,639  
    Other interest and dividend income   3,996       3,179       12,104       9,541  
    Total interest and dividend income   80,826       64,490       235,848       191,319  
                               
    Interest expense:                          
    Deposits   30,593       23,340       89,959       63,772  
    Federal Home Loan Bank advances   4,057       4,401       11,754       16,247  
    Obligation under capital lease agreements   225       237       691       664  
    Total interest expense   34,875       27,978       102,404       80,683  
    Net interest and dividend income before provision for credit losses   45,951       36,512       133,444       110,636  
    Provision for credit losses   2,908       596       5,275       1,221  
    Net interest and dividend income after provision for credit losses   43,043       35,916       128,169       109,415  
                               
    Noninterest income:                          
    Fees for other services to customers   362       320       1,197       1,218  
    Gain on sales of SBA loans   6,014       1,015       14,915       1,837  
    Net unrealized gain (loss) on equity securities   79       (55 )     106       17  
    Loss on real estate owned, other repossessed collateral and premises and equipment, net   –       –       –       (9 )
    Bank-owned life insurance income   124       116       372       348  
    Correspondent fee income   16       40       69       183  
    Other noninterest income   24       106       28       194  
    Total noninterest income   6,619       1,542       16,687       3,788  
                               
    Noninterest expense:                          
    Salaries and employee benefits   12,477       10,784       34,947       30,409  
    Occupancy and equipment expense   1,275       1,072       3,456       3,277  
    Professional fees   669       503       1,985       1,784  
    Data processing fees   1,496       1,376       4,605       3,823  
    Marketing expense   89       256       318       738  
    Loan acquisition and collection expense   2,270       813       5,626       2,402  
    FDIC insurance expense   468       273       1,756       917  
    Other noninterest expense   1,399       1,352       4,203       4,138  
    Total noninterest expense   20,143       16,429       56,896       47,488  
    Income before income tax expense   29,519       21,029       87,960       65,715  
    Income tax expense   10,838       7,164       29,734       22,624  
    Net income $ 18,681     $ 13,865     $ 58,226     $ 43,091  
                               
                               
    Weighted-average shares outstanding:                          
    Basic   8,216,746       7,509,320       8,047,775       7,510,065  
    Diluted   8,394,964       7,595,124       8,232,435       7,602,844  
                               
    Earnings per common share:                          
    Basic $ 2.27     $ 1.85     $ 7.24     $ 5.74  
    Diluted   2.23       1.83       7.07       5.67  
                                   
    Cash dividends declared per common share $ 0.01     $ 0.01     $ 0.03     $ 0.03  
                                   
     
    NORTHEAST BANK
    AVERAGE BALANCE SHEETS AND ANNUALIZED YIELDS
    (Unaudited)
    (Dollars in thousands)
      Three Months Ended March 31,
      2025   2024
          Interest   Average       Interest   Average
      Average   Income/   Yield/   Average   Income/   Yield/
      Balance   Expense   Rate   Balance   Expense   Rate
    Assets:                                          
    Interest-earning assets:                                      
    Investment securities $ 32,963     $ 352     4.33 %   $ 60,211     $ 596     3.98 %
    Loans (1) (2) (3)   3,650,066       76,478     8.50 %     2,649,383       60,715     9.22 %
    Federal Home Loan Bank stock   16,657       301     7.33 %     17,636       449     10.24 %
    Short-term investments (4)   336,877       3,695     4.45 %     204,869       2,730     5.36 %
    Total interest-earning assets   4,036,563       80,826     8.12 %     2,932,099       64,490     8.85 %
    Cash and due from banks   2,332                   2,446              
    Other non-interest earning assets   39,847                   50,227              
    Total assets $ 4,078,742                 $ 2,984,772              
                                           
    Liabilities & Shareholders’ Equity:                                      
    Interest-bearing liabilities:                                      
    NOW accounts $ 566,932     $ 5,190     3.71 %   $ 524,301     $ 5,767     4.42 %
    Money market accounts   116,647       754     2.62 %     190,379       1,619     3.42 %
    Savings accounts   198,094       1,365     2.79 %     140,737       1,126     3.22 %
    Time deposits   2,129,320       23,284     4.43 %     1,185,558       14,828     5.03 %
    Total interest-bearing deposits   3,010,993       30,593     4.12 %     2,040,975       23,340     4.60 %
    Federal Home Loan Bank advances   372,029       4,057     4.42 %     396,130       4,401     4.47 %
    Lease liability   19,340       225     4.72 %     20,981       237     4.54 %
    Total interest-bearing liabilities   3,402,362       34,875     4.16 %     2,458,086       27,978     4.58 %
                                           
    Non-interest bearing liabilities:                                      
    Demand deposits and escrow accounts   183,348                   163,042              
    Other liabilities   33,025                   24,571              
    Total liabilities   3,618,735                   2,645,699              
    Shareholders’ equity   460,007                   339,073              
    Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity $ 4,078,742                 $ 2,984,772              
                                           
    Net interest income         $ 45,951                 $ 36,512      
                                           
    Interest rate spread                 3.96 %                   4.27 %
    Net interest margin (5)                 4.62 %                   5.01 %
                                           
    Cost of funds (6)                 3.94 %                   4.29 %
                                           
    (1) Interest income and yield are stated on a fully tax-equivalent basis using the statutory tax rate.
    (2) Includes loans held for sale.
    (3) Nonaccrual loans are included in the computation of average, but unpaid interest has not been included for purposes of determining interest income.
    (4) Short-term investments include FHLB overnight deposits and other interest-bearing deposits.
    (5) Net interest margin is calculated as net interest income divided by total interest-earning assets.
    (6) Cost of funds is calculated as total interest expense divided by total interest-bearing liabilities plus demand deposits and escrow accounts.
     
     
    NORTHEAST BANK
    AVERAGE BALANCE SHEETS AND ANNUALIZED YIELDS
    (Unaudited)
    (Dollars in thousands)
      Nine Months Ended March 31,
      2025   2024
          Interest   Average       Interest   Average
      Average   Income/   Yield/   Average   Income/   Yield/
      Balance   Expense   Rate   Balance   Expense   Rate
    Assets:                                      
    Interest-earning assets:                                      
    Investment securities $ 42,865     $ 1,383     4.30 %   $ 60,060     $ 1,639     3.63 %
    Loans (1) (2) (3)   3,348,535       222,361     8.85 %     2,565,402       180,139     9.35 %
    Federal Home Loan Bank stock   16,190       977     8.04 %     20,415       1,331     8.68 %
    Short-term investments (4)   302,262       11,127     4.90 %     204,252       8,210     5.35 %
    Total interest-earning assets   3,709,852       235,848     8.47 %     2,850,129       191,319     8.93 %
    Cash and due from banks   2,219                   2,482              
    Other non-interest earning assets   55,078                   58,609              
    Total assets $ 3,767,149                 $ 2,911,220              
                                           
    Liabilities & Shareholders’ Equity:                                      
    Interest-bearing liabilities:                                      
    NOW accounts $ 570,906     $ 17,014     3.97 %   $ 507,594     $ 16,548     4.34 %
    Money market accounts   131,481       2,972     3.01 %     226,072       5,760     3.39 %
    Savings accounts   188,053       4,575     3.24 %     118,044       2,603     2.93 %
    Time deposits   1,864,771       65,398     4.67 %     1,061,399       38,861     4.87 %
    Total interest-bearing deposits   2,755,211       89,959     4.35 %     1,913,109       63,772     4.44 %
    Federal Home Loan Bank advances   357,020       11,754     4.39 %     463,065       16,247     4.67 %
    Lease liability   19,655       691     4.68 %     21,373       664     4.13 %
    Total interest-bearing liabilities   3,131,886       102,404     4.36 %     2,397,547       80,683     4.48 %
                                           
    Non-interest bearing liabilities:                                      
    Demand deposits and escrow accounts   182,877                   166,955              
    Other liabilities   29,877                   24,388              
    Total liabilities   3,344,640                   2,588,890              
    Shareholders’ equity   422,509                   322,330              
    Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity $ 3,767,149                 $ 2,911,220              
                                           
    Net interest income         $ 133,444                 $ 110,636      
                                           
    Interest rate spread                 4.11 %                   4.45 %
    Net interest margin (5)                 4.79 %                   5.17 %
                                           
    Cost of funds (6)                 4.12 %                   4.19 %
                                           
    (1) Interest income and yield are stated on a fully tax-equivalent basis using the statutory tax rate.
    (2) Includes loans held for sale.
    (3) Nonaccrual loans are included in the computation of average, but unpaid interest has not been included for purposes of determining interest income.
    (4) Short-term investments include FHLB overnight deposits and other interest-bearing deposits.
    (5) Net interest margin is calculated as net interest income divided by total interest-earning assets.
    (6) Cost of funds is calculated as total interest expense divided by total interest-bearing liabilities plus demand deposits and escrow accounts.
     
     
    NORTHEAST BANK
    SELECTED FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS AND OTHER DATA
    (Unaudited)
    (Dollars in thousands, except share and per share data)
      Three Months Ended
      March 31, 2025   December 31, 2024   September 30, 2024   June 30, 2024   March 31, 2024
    Net interest income $ 45,951     $ 48,490     $ 39,000     $ 37,935     $ 36,512  
    Provision for credit losses   2,908       1,944       422       547       596  
    Noninterest income   6,619       5,949       4,119       2,092       1,542  
    Noninterest expense   20,143       19,066       17,685       17,079       16,429  
    Net income   18,681       22,440       17,106       15,140       13,865  
                       
    Weighted-average common shares outstanding:                  
    Basic   8,216,746       8,044,345       7,886,148       7,765,868       7,509,320  
    Diluted   8,394,964       8,197,568       8,108,688       7,910,692       7,595,124  
    Earnings per common share:                  
    Basic $ 2.27     $ 2.79     $ 2.17     $ 1.95     $ 1.85  
    Diluted   2.23       2.74       2.11       1.91       1.83  
                       
    Dividends declared per common share $ 0.01     $ 0.01     $ 0.01     $ 0.01     $ 0.01  
                       
    Return on average assets   1.86%       2.24%       2.09%       1.99%       1.87%  
    Return on average equity   16.47%       21.14%       17.53%       16.56%       16.45%  
    Net interest rate spread (1)   3.96%       4.21%       4.18%       4.41%       4.27%  
    Net interest margin (2)   4.62%       4.88%       4.90%       5.13%       5.01%  
    Efficiency ratio (non-GAAP) (3)   38.32%       35.02%       41.01%       42.67%       43.17%  
    Noninterest expense to average total assets   2.00%       1.90%       2.16%       2.24%       2.21%  
    Average interest-earning assets to average interest-bearing liabilities   118.64%       118.24%       118.48%       118.78%       119.28%  
                       
      As of:
      March 31, 2025   December 31, 2024   September 30, 2024   June 30, 2024   March 31, 2024
    Nonperforming loans:                  
    Originated portfolio:                  
    Residential real estate $ 2,407     $ 2,446     $ 3,976     $ 2,502     $ 2,573  
    Commercial real estate   3,197       3,662       4,682       1,407       2,075  
    Commercial and industrial   6,945       6,696       6,684       6,520       6,928  
    Consumer   3       5       –       –       –  
    Total originated portfolio   12,552       12,809       15,342       10,429       11,576  
    Total purchased portfolio   19,680       17,257       21,830       17,832       16,370  
    Total nonperforming loans   32,232       30,066       37,172       28,261       27,946  
    Real estate owned and other repossessed collateral, net   1,200       1,200       –       –       –  
    Total nonperforming assets $ 33,432     $ 31,266     $ 37,172     $ 28,261     $ 27,946  
                       
    Past due loans to total loans   0.91%       0.85%       0.89%       0.95%       1.13%  
    Nonperforming loans to total loans   0.86%       0.84%       1.06%       1.02%       1.05%  
    Nonperforming assets to total assets   0.79%       0.77%       0.94%       0.90%       0.93%  
    Allowance for credit losses to total loans   1.23%       1.25%       1.25%       0.97%       0.98%  
    Allowance for credit losses to nonperforming loans   142.79%       148.92%       117.40%       94.51%       92.83%  
    Net charge-offs (recoveries) $ 2,082     $ 869     $ 1,604     $ 1,347     $ 2,225  
    Commercial real estate loans to total capital (4)   521.47%       542.12%       604.38%       482.13%       509.08%  
    Net loans to deposits   112.10%       112.52%       110.70%       116.88%       118.15%  
    Purchased loans to total loans   65.33%       66.63%       69.11%       61.88%       60.99%  
    Equity to total assets   11.06%       10.88%       9.96%       12.02%       11.73%  
    Common equity tier 1 capital ratio   12.72%       12.66%       11.45%       13.84%       13.24%  
    Total risk-based capital ratio   13.97%       13.91%       12.70%       14.82%       14.22%  
    Tier 1 leverage capital ratio   11.45%       11.16%       12.06%       12.30%       11.79%  
                       
    Total shareholders’ equity $ 467,516     $ 444,101     $ 392,557     $ 376,634     $ 351,913  
    Less: Preferred stock   –       –       –       –       –  
    Common shareholders’ equity   467,516       444,101       392,557       376,634       351,913  
    Less: Intangible assets (5)   –       –       –       –       –  
    Tangible common shareholders’ equity (non-GAAP) $ 467,516     $ 444,101     $ 392,557     $ 376,634     $ 351,913  
                       
    Common shares outstanding   8,525,362       8,492,856       8,212,026       8,127,690       7,977,690  
    Book value per common share $ 54.84     $ 52.29     $ 47.80     $ 46.34     $ 44.11  
    Tangible book value per share (non-GAAP) (6)   54.84       52.29       47.80       46.34       44.11  
                       
    (1) The net interest rate spread represents the difference between the weighted-average yield on interest-earning assets and the weighted-average cost of interest-bearing liabilities for the period.
    (2) The net interest margin represents net interest income as a percent of average interest-earning assets for the period.
    (3) The efficiency ratio represents noninterest expense divided by the sum of net interest income (before the credit loss provision) plus noninterest income.
    (4) For purposes of calculating this ratio, commercial real estate includes all non-owner occupied commercial real estate loans defined as such by regulatory guidance, including all land development and construction loans.
    (5) Includes the loan servicing rights asset.
    (6) Tangible book value per share represents total shareholders’ equity less the sum of preferred stock and intangible assets divided by common shares outstanding.
     

    For More Information:
    Richard Cohen, Chief Financial Officer
    Northeast Bank, 27 Pearl Street, Portland, Maine 04101
    207.786.3245 ext. 3249
    www.northeastbank.com

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI: Silvaco Expands Product Offerings in Photonics and Wafer-Scale Plasma Modeling for AI Applications with Acquisition of Tech-X Corporation

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    SANTA CLARA, Calif., April 29, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Silvaco Group, Inc. (Nasdaq: SVCO) (“Silvaco” or the “Company”), a provider of TCAD, EDA software and SIP solutions that enable semiconductor design and digital twin modeling through AI software and innovation, today announced the strategic acquisition of Tech-X Corporation, a leading provider of multi-physics simulation software used in applications such as Photonics, Electromagnetics and Plasma Dynamics.

    Tech-X cutting-edge tools enable:

    • Multi-physics simulation of electromagnetic, and electrostatics in complex dielectric and metallic environments;
    • Combination of computational speed leveraging GPUs, and high-fidelity results for Photonics applications;
    • Plasma Dynamics simulation trusted by engineers and researchers in aerospace and semiconductor manufacturing; and
    • Monte Carlo simulation solution used for radiation analysis in aerospace applications.

    By combining Tech-X’s unique multi-physics simulation tools with Silvaco’s Victory TCAD platform, customers will be able to create more accurate digital twin models for photonics, semiconductor devices and wafer-scale plasma etching —accelerating innovation across the industry. Tech-X brings deep expertise to Silvaco in developing state-of-the-art algorithms that harness high-performance, multi-node GPU-based computing to significantly improve simulation speed and accuracy.

    “Bringing Tech-X’s expertise and multi-physics simulation technology into Silvaco represents a significant step forward in our growth strategy for expansion into AI applications with technologies, talent and new customers,” said Babak Taheri, CEO of Silvaco. “By leveraging our TCAD foundation, we are expanding further into fast multi-physics transistor-level simulation from device to wafer-scale geometries, for photonic components, processes, materials, and plasma modeling. We’re also thrilled to welcome Professor John Cary to the team. His 40+ years of experience in computational physics will play a key role in accelerating our innovation and expanding our presence in the rapidly growing photonics market.”

    “We are excited to join forces with Silvaco and take advantage of the many synergistic capabilities between our organizations,” said John Cary, CTO of Tech-X and Professor of Physics at the University of Colorado, Boulder. “By leveraging Silvaco’s global reach and strong technical team, we see tremendous opportunities to expand the application of Tech-X’s advanced photonics and plasma modeling technologies across the semiconductor and photonics industries.”

    Needham & Company acted as financial advisor to Silvaco in the transaction.

    About Silvaco
    Silvaco is a provider of TCAD, EDA software, and SIP solutions that enable semiconductor design and digital twin modeling through AI software and innovation. Silvaco’s solutions are used for semiconductor and photonics processes, devices, and systems development across display, power devices, automotive, memory, high performance compute, foundries, photonics, internet of things, and 5G/6G mobile markets for complex SoC design. Silvaco is headquartered in Santa Clara, California, and has a global presence with offices located in North America, Europe, Brazil, China, Japan, Korea, Singapore, and Taiwan. Learn more at silvaco.com.

    Safe Harbor Statement
    This press release contains “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the “safe harbor” provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, including but not limited to, statements regarding Silvaco’s acquisition of Tech-X Corporation, technologies and product offerings, business strategy, plans and opportunities, industry and market trends including TAM estimates and the expected benefits and impact of the transaction and combined business on Silvaco’s growth. Forward-looking statements are based on current expectations, estimates, forecasts and projections. Words such as “expect,” “anticipate,” “should,” “believe,” “hope,” “target,” “project,” “goals,” “estimate,” “potential,” “predict,” “may,” “will,” “might,” “could,” “intend,” “shall” and variations of these terms and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements, although not all forward-looking statements contain these identifying words. Forward-looking statements are subject to a number of risks, uncertainties and other factors, many of which are outside Silvaco’s control. For example, the markets for Silvaco’s products and services may develop more slowly than expected or than they have in the past; operating results and cash flows may fluctuate more than expected; Silvaco may fail to successfully integrate Tech-X Corporation; Silvaco may fail to realize the anticipated benefits of the acquisition; Silvaco may incur unanticipated costs or other liabilities in connection with acquiring or integrating Tech-X Corporation; the potential impact of the announcement or consummation of the transaction on relationships with third parties, including employees, customers, partners and competitors; Silvaco may be unable to motivate and retain key personnel; changes in or failure to comply with legislation or government regulations could affect post-closing operations and results of operations; and macroeconomic and geopolitical conditions could deteriorate. The forward-looking statements included in this press release represent Silvaco’s views as of the date of this press release, and Silvaco disclaims any obligation to update any of them publicly in light of new information or future events.

    Contacts
    Media Relations:
    Tiffany Behany, press@silvaco.com

    Investor Relations:
    Greg McNiff, investors@silvaco.com

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-Evening Report: The Vietnam War ended 50 years ago today, yet films about the conflict still struggle to capture its complexities

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Scarlette Nhi Do, Sessional Academic, The University of Melbourne

    Scene from Apocalypse Now (1979) Prime Video

    The Vietnam War (1955–1975) was more than just a chapter in the Cold War.

    For some, it was supposed to achieve Vietnam’s right to self-determination. For others, it was an attempt to found a nation-state independent of both capitalist and communist influences.

    In the 50 years since the war ended, the stories we’ve heard about it have struggled to convey these many different views. Cinema – in Hollywood and in Vietnam – offers some insight into this struggle, which we continue to face today.

    A war by any other name

    The war is known by many names, and each one highlights the different objectives of the forces involved.

    For the United States, “The Vietnam War” was one battleground against the Soviet Union during the Cold War. To prevent communism from spreading, the US sent resources to establish the Republic of Vietnam (known informally as South Vietnam) as its proxy. It had already used this strategy with West Germany and South Korea.

    The Communist Party of Vietnam thought of US involvement as a form of colonialism.

    By calling the conflict “the sacred resistance against the US to salvage the country” (Cuộc Kháng Chiến Chống Mỹ, Cứu Nước), or “the American war” (Chiến Tranh Mỹ) for short, the communist party encouraged the perception of the war as a stepping stone towards Vietnam’s full independence following Chinese imperialism (circa 111 BCE–939 CE), French colonialism (1862–1954) and Japanese occupation (1940-45).

    The communist objective was to “liberate” South Vietnam from the US and its puppet administration, and reunify the country. This is why, in Vietnam, April 30 is called “Reunification Day” or “Independence Day”, to commemorate the communists’ victory in capturing Saigon.

    However, former citizens of South Vietnam call April 30 the “Day of National Mourning” (Ngày Quốc Hận), as it marks the Republic’s defeat and the beginning of decades of political persecution and refugee displacement. Although the South Vietnamese were pluralistic in their political beliefs, they were united in their anti-communism.

    For them, the conflict was “the Civil War” (Nội Chiến), fought between communists and anti-communists over the future of Vietnam. After the Republic fell, many grieved (and still do) the vision of what South Vietnam could have become.

    Apocalypse then

    While the US eventually lost control over South Vietnam, it continued to influence how Vietnam was thought of in the West through Hollywood.

    Francis Ford Coppola’s Apocalypse Now is loosely based on Joseph Conrad’s classic novel, Heart of Darkness.
    Shutterstock

    In the 1970-80s, Vietnam War films such as Francis Ford Coppola’s Apocalypse Now (1979), Stanley Kubrick’s Full Metal Jacket (1987) and Oliver Stone’s Platoon (1987) established these directors as household names.

    The films focus on US soldiers’ psyche and discontent with incompetent leadership, pushing the Vietnamese people and their struggles for independence into the background. They frame the war as something done to American society, rather than something the US orchestrated.

    This victimhood fostered what became known as “the Vietnam syndrome” – an unofficial condition in American mindset characterised by feelings of woundedness and a loss of trust in the capability of the US.

    In Vietnam, early communist-controlled cinema in the north depicted the Vietnamese as an oppressed people who must band together to defeat Western corruption. Wartime films such as Along the Same River (1959) and 17th Parallel, Days and Nights (1972) leaned into melodramatic love stories to allegorise the divided Vietnam as separated lovers who must be reunited.

    As directors in the north slowly gained some freedom from the communist party, films increasingly dealt with the war’s immense impact and questioned the party’s ability to bring about the classless society it had promised. The Girl on the River (1987) and Living in Fear (2005) are two good examples.

    Living in Fear (Sống trong sợ hãi) trailer.

    Meanwhile, filmmakers in the south were independents who occasionally collaborated with the state or military, as seen with the classic 1971 film Faceless Lover (also known as Warrior, Who Are You?).

    South Vietnamese people saw film as a medium to negotiate their fledgling national identity. For them, it was important to establish and safekeep an identity that was distinct from the “foreign ally” (the US) and the “domestic foe” (the communists).

    This is why films from the south often portrayed love triangles, where the hero must choose between the vessels of modern Vietnamese femininity and Western excess. Some examples include Afternoon Sun (1972) and Late Night’s Dew (1972).

    Apocalypse now

    New perspectives on the war are emerging as historically marginalised groups gain footing in Western media. And some of these challenge early portrayals.

    Spike Lee’s Da 5 Bloods (2020) was the first major production to show the war through Black American veterans’ eyes. Hollywood neglected to do this, despite the over-representation of Black soldiers in conscription, combat and casualties during wartime.

    Although Da 5 Bloods still fails to account for the Vietnamese’s fight for self-determination, it acknowledges Black Americans’ and the Vietnamese people’s mutual suffering under white supremacy.

    One independent feature from a son of refugees, Journey from the Fall (2006), conveys the resentment many exiled South Vietnamese people feel towards the communist party. It also explores the trauma of leaving Vietnam by boat and resettlement in the US.

    Most recently, the 2024 TV series The Sympathizer, adapted from Viet Thanh Nguyen’s novel, moved the needle by probing at complex issues such as wartime loyalty, complicity and authenticity.

    Communist narratives persist

    In Vietnam today, the scale of communist party-funded movies has grown immensely, with many films resembling Hollywood blockbusters. But the messages have become more conservative.

    Films such as The Scent of Burning Grass (2012) and The Legend Makers (2013) continue to support the communist party narrative by omitting South Vietnam’s anti-communist objective. They also undermine women’s contributions to the war efforts, whereas earlier films put women at the centre of community organisation.

    A new generation of filmmakers is challenging these narratives through collaboration with international production companies and distributors. Features such as Viet and Nam (2024) experiment with film form to show the true costs of war, including the widening wealth disparity in Vietnam, and the lengths many would go to close this gap.

    Viet and Nam trailer.

    Scarlette Nhi Do 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. The Vietnam War ended 50 years ago today, yet films about the conflict still struggle to capture its complexities – https://theconversation.com/the-vietnam-war-ended-50-years-ago-today-yet-films-about-the-conflict-still-struggle-to-capture-its-complexities-253837

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Housing affordability is at the centre of this election, yet two major reforms seem all but off-limits

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Matt Garrow, Editorial Web Developer

    This federal election, both major parties have offered a “grab bag” of policy fixes for Australia’s stubborn housing affordability crisis. But there are still two big policy elephants in the room, which neither side wants to touch.

    The first is negative gearing. This can apply to business losses relating to any investment. But in the context of housing, it allows property investors to claim annual losses incurred renting out an investment property as deductions against their taxable income.

    Proponents argue this boosts the supply of rental housing by encouraging investment. Critics say it’s an unfair tax break that disproportionately benefits the wealthy while driving up house prices.

    This situation has been controversial for a long time. The Hawke government tried to implement major reforms in the 1980s but these were reversed soon afterwards.

    The second “elephant”, which some economists argue “put a rocket under” housing prices, is the 50% capital gains tax discount for assets held for longer than a year. This was introduced by the Howard government at the turn of the millennium.

    In 2019, the then Labor leader Bill Shorten learned the hard way what can happen when you bring negative gearing and capital gains tax reform to an election as part of a “big target” platform. Yet these tax concessions remain highly contentious.

    Whom do they benefit most? Are they behind the housing crisis? Is keeping them fair on the rest of us? We invited four experts to unpack this debate. Here are the elements they told us are most crucial:

    Digital Storytelling Team 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. Housing affordability is at the centre of this election, yet two major reforms seem all but off-limits – https://theconversation.com/housing-affordability-is-at-the-centre-of-this-election-yet-two-major-reforms-seem-all-but-off-limits-241262

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Trump says diversity initiatives undermine merit. Decades of research show this is flawed

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Paula McDonald, Professor of Work and Organisation, Queensland University of Technology

    Pixel-Shot/Shutterstock

    US President Donald Trump declared earlier this year he would forge a “colour blind and merit-based society”.

    His executive order was part of a broader policy directing the US military, federal agencies and other public institutions to abandon diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives.

    Framing this as restoring fairness, neutrality and strength to American institutions, Trump argued DEI programs “discourage merit and leadership” and amounted to “race-based and sex-based discrimination”.

    In Australia too, debates over gender quotas and “the war on woke” have repeatedly invoked meritocracy as a rallying cry against affirmative action.

    The narrative of rewards going to the most qualified people is compelling. Yet decades of research show this is flawed. Far from being the great equaliser, an uncritical reliance on “merit” can perpetuate bias and inequality.

    The myths of meritocracy

    The merit rhetoric invokes the ideal of a neutral, objective system rewarding talent and effort, regardless of identity.

    In theory, merit-based evaluations such as exams, performance reviews, employee recruitment processes and competitive bids, should be impartial.

    In practice however, there are several myths associated with the notion of merit.

    1. Merit is purely objective or unbiased. In the employment context for example, studies show that even so-called objective and standardised cognitive or aptitude tests can systematically favour men due to the type of questions asked.

    Decision-makers may unknowingly redefine merit to fit whoever already belongs to a favoured group. A study of elite law firms, for example, found male applicants were rated as more qualified than identical resumes from women.

    This is known as “plasticity of merit”, meaning the criteria of excellence can bend to preference, all while appearing objective.

    Supposedly merit-based judgments can reflect unconscious bias, or comfort with candidates who fit a traditional mould. Over time, preference may be given to a particular type of candidate irrespective of their actual contribution. Privilege and prejudice can be baked into merit-based evaluations.

    2. Merit can be separated from social and historical context. Meritocracy or the so-called meritocratic promise assumes a level playing field, where everyone competes under the same conditions.

    In reality however, past inequalities shape present opportunities. What counts as merit is dynamic and socially shaped, not an eternal universal standard.

    For example, during the second world war there was a shortage of male workers. Qualities women brought to jobs previously held by men such as capacity for teamwork were suddenly deemed meritorious. But these same qualities were downgraded when the men returned.

    Merit is often defined in masculine terms. For example, physicality or hyper-competitive traits have long been seen as prerequisites for military service and policing.

    Merit is often defined in masculine terms commonly associated with military, policing and firefighting services.
    Charnsitr/Shutterstock

    This alignment of masculine norms with standards of merit has been termed “benchmark man”.

    Science careers too were built in an era when women were largely excluded. They were predicated on long-hours work and total availability – requirements that clash with caregiving responsibilities. The result is women in STEM careers leave or are pushed out.

    3. Outcomes are the result of personal choice or deficiencies, not structural barriers. Meritocracy carries a moral narrative: those at the top earned their place while those left behind didn’t measure up or chose not to compete.

    Research shows, for example, that when women don’t advance, it’s explained as lifestyle choices, or they lack ambition, or have opted out to prioritise caregiving.

    This narrative wilfully overlooks the structural constraints impacting choices. When a woman “chooses” a lower-paying, flexible job, it may be less about preference than inadequate social supports.

    By accepting unequal outcomes as the natural result of individual choices, institutions can conveniently obscure disadvantage and discrimination and erase responsibility to correct inequities.

    How the merit mandate undermines equality

    Trump’s vision is to remove equity initiatives and programs that monitor or encourage fair hiring and promotion, cease training that alerts employees to hidden biases, and fire or reassign DEI staff.

    This is conceptually flawed and will actually entrench the very biases and barriers that have kept institutions unequal.

    In the military, for example – an area highlighted by Trump – leaders have recognised they need to foster more inclusive cultures.

    For years, defence forces have grappled with sexual harassment, recruitment shortfalls and retention of skilled personnel. In Australia, the Australian Defence Force undertook major reviews to identify violent and sexist subcultures, understanding a more inclusive force is a more effective force.

    Yet Trump’s order bars the Pentagon from even acknowledging historical sexism in the ranks.

    Favouring the in-group

    Removing equity measures under a banner of neutrality means hiring and promotion will increasingly rely on informal networks and subjective judgements. These can tilt in favour of the in-group – usually white, male and affluent.

    DEI initiatives can increase representation of women, or people from diverse racial or cultural backgrounds, in an organisation or occupational group.

    However, without challenging the norms of merit, or without broadening the definitions of talent and leadership, people in those groups may continue to feel like outsiders.

    Australian experts and business leaders increasingly acknowledge objective merit is mythical.

    Redefining merit

    Fair rewards for effort can improve performance. However, we need to stop pitting merit against diversity. True fairness requires acknowledgement structural inequality exists and bias affects evaluations.

    Organisations need to re-imagine merit in ways that work with inclusion, rather than against it. This includes refining hiring and promotion criteria to focus on competencies that are measurable and relevant.

    Paula McDonald currently receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

    – ref. Trump says diversity initiatives undermine merit. Decades of research show this is flawed – https://theconversation.com/trump-says-diversity-initiatives-undermine-merit-decades-of-research-show-this-is-flawed-255100

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Renewables, coal or nuclear? This election, your generation’s energy preference may play a surprising role

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Magnus Söderberg, Professor & Director, Centre for Applied Energy Economics and Policy Research, Griffith University

    Christie Cooper/Shutterstock

    In an otherwise unremarkable election campaign, the major parties are promising sharply different energy blueprints for Australia. Labor is pitching a high-renewables future powered largely by wind, solar, hydroelectricity and batteries. The Coalition wants more gas and coal now, and would build nuclear power later.

    So how might these two competing visions play out as Australia goes to the polls this Saturday?

    Research shows clear generational preferences when it comes to producing electricity. Younger Australians prefer renewables while older people favour coal and gas. The one exception is nuclear power, which is split much more on gender lines than age – 51% of Australian men support it, but just 26% of women.

    While many voters are focused squarely on the cost of living, energy prices feed directly into how much everything costs. Research has shown that as power prices rise, the more likely it is an incumbent government will be turfed out.

    Coal, renewables or nuclear?

    About half of young Australians (18–34) want the country powered by renewables by 2030, according to a 2023 survey of energy consumers. Only 13% of the youngest (18–24) group think there’s no need to change or that it’s impossible. But resistance increases directly with age. From retirement age and up, 29% favour a renewable grid by 2030 while 44% think there’s no need or that it’s impossible.

    On nuclear, the divide is less clear. The Coalition has promised to build Australia’s first nuclear reactors if elected, and Coalition leader Peter Dutton has claimed young people back nuclear. That’s based on a Newspoll survey showing almost two-thirds (65%) of Australians aged 18–34 supported nuclear power.

    But other polls give a quite different story: 46% support for nuclear by younger Australians in an Essential poll compared to 56% support by older Australians. A Savanta poll put young support at just 36%.

    There’s a gender component too. The demographic most opposed to nuclear are women over 55.

    Younger voters remain strongly committed to environmental goals – but they’re also wary of cost blowouts and electricity price rises. Some see nuclear as a zero emissions technology able to help with the clean energy transition.

    Older Australians are more likely to be sceptical of nuclear power. This is likely due to nuclear disasters such as Chernobyl as well as the prospect of nuclear war during the Cold War.

    It’s an open question how robust support for nuclear would be if the Coalition was elected and began the long, expensive process of construction. New findings by the National Climate Action Survey shows almost 40% of Australians would be “extremely concerned” if a nuclear power plant was built within 50 kilometres of their homes and another 16% “very concerned”.

    These energy preferences aren’t just found in Australia. In recent research my co-authors and I found a clear divide in Sweden: younger favour renewables and nuclear, older favour fossil fuels. Why the difference? Sweden already gets about 40% of its power from nuclear, while renewables now provide about 40% of Australia’s power.

    We found younger Swedes strongly favoured renewables – but also supported nuclear power, especially when electricity prices rose. That is because nuclear is perceived to stabilise the supply of electricity. They wanted clean energy, as long as it was reliable and affordable. Our study found older people were not necessarily pro-fossil fuels, but were more focused on keeping energy affordable – especially for businesses and industry.

    When electricity prices rose in Sweden, our survey respondents broadly became less concerned about climate change and more likely to be favourable to nuclear energy.

    In Australia, the cost of the clean energy transition has crept up. While solar and wind offer cheap power once built, there are hidden costs.

    If electricity prices keep rising, we should expect to see declining support for the clean energy transition.

    Overcoming the energy divide

    During Australia’s decade-long climate wars from roughly 2012 to 2022, climate change was heavily politicised and energy became a political football. Under a Coalition government in 2014, Australia became the first nation to abolish a carbon tax.

    Labor took office in 2022 pledging to end the climate wars and fast-track the clean energy transition. But the Coalition has opened up a new divide on energy by proposing nuclear power by the 2040s and more gas and coal in the meantime.

    This election, the cost of living is the single biggest issue for 25% of voters in the ABC’s Vote Compass poll. But climate change is still the main concern for about 8% of voters, energy for 4% and the environment 3.5%. Here, Coalition backing for fossil fuels and nuclear may attract some older and younger voters but repel others. Labor’s renewable transition may attract younger voters but lose older energy traditionalists.

    Energy preferences could play out through a cost of living lens. Parties pushing too hard on green policies this election risk alienating older voters concerned about rising costs. But going nuclear would be very expensive, and keeping old coal plants going isn’t cheap. Downplaying climate action or dismissing nuclear outright could alienate some younger Australians, who are climate-conscious and energy-savvy.

    Policymakers should resist framing energy as a zero-sum game. There is a path forward which can unite generations: coupling ambitious climate targets with pragmatic policies to protect consumers. Transitional supports such as energy rebates, time-of-use pricing or community-scale renewables and batteries can soften any economic impact while building public trust.

    Our research suggests electricity price rises can quickly erode support even for well-designed energy policies.

    As Australia navigates a complex and costly transition, keeping both younger and older generations on board may be the greatest political – and moral – challenge of all.

    Magnus Söderberg 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. Renewables, coal or nuclear? This election, your generation’s energy preference may play a surprising role – https://theconversation.com/renewables-coal-or-nuclear-this-election-your-generations-energy-preference-may-play-a-surprising-role-253832

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: State of the states: the campaign is almost over, so how has it played out across Australia?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Clune, Honorary Associate, Government and International Relations, University of Sydney

    While many Australians have already voted at pre-poll stations and by post, the politicking continues right up until May 3.

    So what’s happened across the country over the past five weeks?

    Here, six experts analyse how the campaign has looked in New South Wales, Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, Victoria and Western Australia.

    New South Wales

    David Clune, honorary associate, government and international relations, University of Sydney

    The campaign in NSW is concluding much as it began, largely mirroring the Australia-wide trend with little evidence of localism.

    The main themes of both sides remain similar: cost-of-living alleviation, improved health care and housing affordability. Both leaders quickly matched each other’s promises: it could be described as the “Albanutton” campaign.

    Opposition Leader Peter Dutton’s campaign continued to be hampered by slip-ups and a lack of focus, detail and discipline. Although the government’s record had given him plenty of scope, Dutton struggled to land a blow.

    Prime Minister Anthony Albanese had his share of gaffes, but appeared more coherent and convincing. Labor’s negative campaign to portray Dutton as a local Trump clone seems to have been effective.

    Some in the Liberal Party argue there’s pent-up resentment against the government in Western Sydney that hasn’t been picked up by opinion polls. Whether this hypothetical backlash turns into seats on polling day remains to be seen.

    Bennelong (notionally Liberal after the redistribution) and Gilmore, seem the most likely Liberal gains. Parramatta, Reid, Paterson, Robertson and Werriwa are also in play. There is speculation about an independent threat in the safe Labor seat of McMahon.

    The Coalition has a fight on its hands to retain Cowper and Bradfield, with strong independent challenges in both seats. There is a tight three-way contest in Calare between former National turned independent, Andrew Gee, a National and a Teal.

    As there is little real policy differentiation between the major parties; it seems to come down to which side the voters find more credible and trustworthy in uncertain times.

    According to a Newspoll published on April 27, Albanese led Dutton as preferred prime minister by 51% to 35%. Only 39% of those surveyed believed the government deserved to be re-elected. However, 62% believed the Coalition was not ready to govern.

    An aggregate of polling data showed in NSW, as at April 28, Labor’s two-party preferred vote was 53.0%, an increase since the March Budget of 2.8% and of 1.6% since the 2022 election.

    Queensland

    Paul Williams, associate professor of politics and journalism, Griffith University

    In the campaign’s closing week, Queensland remains largely inconsequential as to whether Albanese or Dutton will call The Lodge home.

    But that doesn’t mean the Liberal National Party (LNP) isn’t concerned about its prospects north of the Tweed.

    While the LNP still leads Labor in the two party-preferred vote, 54 to 46, across Queensland – roughly the 2022 result – last week’s YouGov poll found that result to be a three-point fall for the LNP from the previous week.

    While Labor is hardly going to blitz Queensland, some LNP seats are nonetheless more vulnerable than at any time over the past decade. These include the regional seats of Leichhardt (3.4 %) and Flynn (3.8%), the outer suburban seats of Dickson (held by Dutton by just 1.7%), Longman (3.1%), Forde (4.2%) and Petrie (4.4%), and the middle-suburb mortgage-belt seat of Bonner (3.4%).

    Independent Suzie Holt might also worry the LNP in the usually safe seat of Groom, around Toowoomba.
    But the last-minute “rescue” of the LNP by Pauline Hanson’s One Nation (PHON) – Hanson (reciprocating the LNP’s preferencing of PHON) pulped existing how to vote cards and printed new ones placing the LNP second in most seats – might just save the opposition.

    However, the campaign has offered little clarity on the prospects in other key Queensland contests: the battles for three Greens-held inner-urban seats of Brisbane, Ryan and Griffith.

    But a mid-April DemosAU poll found the Greens’ primary vote falling by 1.7 points to 29%, a figure exactly tied with Labor’s, which has risen 2.7% since 2022.

    Problematically for Dutton, the LNP, whose primary vote remains locked at 36%, appears not to have capitalised on cost-of-living angst in inner Brisbane.

    Despite 58% of inner Brisbane leaning centre-left, these figures suggest the LNP may fail to win any Greens seats, with the contest a close one between the Greens and Labor only. The result rests on who runs third: Labor or the Greens. There could be a mere 100 votes in these must-watch seats.

    In the Northern Territory, the seat of Lingiari, which takes in Alice Springs and Katherine, is held by Labor’s Marion Scrymgour by 1.7%. In 2022, just one in three enrolled voters cast a ballot in the electorate, prompting the Australian Electoral Commission to try to increase voter turnout. In the wash-up, it will be interesting to see if this improves.

    South Australia

    Rob Manwaring, associate professor of politics and public policy, Flinders University

    Given SA is home to only a handful of marginal seats, it’s not a well-trodden part of the campaign trail. That’s typical of most federal elections.

    What’s not so typical is the overall feel of the campaign. The rhythms of Australian elections are changing. On one level, there are the familiar tropes and activities; TV debates, campaign launches and letter box blitzes in key marginal seats.

    Yet, on the other hand, voters behave differently than they used to. Data from the Australian Election Study(AES) tells us far fewer voters have made their decision “a long time ago” (55% in 2007, down to 36% in 2022).

    This means the number of “soft” voters is probably much higher as major parties have fewer “lifetime voters”. Voters are much more transactional.

    Voters are more distanced from parties, too. The study shows fewer voters use how to vote cards (51% used them in 2007, 31% in 2022). We can’t rely on traditional metrics in the same way, such as the national two-party preferred vote given the number of “non-traditional seats”.

    In short, it’s now harder to more know how the campaigns are tracking. So while the Coalition campaign has been beset by a number of mis-steps, how this is playing out is far less clear.

    Further, a strange paradox of the emergence of the Teals and other independents is there is a stronger local focus on representation, rather than broader policy debates. Again, AES data suggests most voters tend to vote for policy reasons (like the economy or health) but the current media focus on the major parties, especially through the TV debates, actually seems to narrow the broader policy discussions.

    So while the proof will be in the pudding when the votes are counted, it may be high time to reflect on what campaign strategies work best for politics in 2025.

    Tasmania

    Robert Hortle, deputy director of the Tasmanian Policy Exchange, University of Tasmania

    On Australia’s South Island, most of the campaign focus has been on Lyons, Franklin and Braddon.

    In Lyons, Tassie’s most marginal electorate (ALP by 0.9%), the latest polls have swung behind the ALP’s Rebecca White. Her popularity as a state MP for the electorate has been bolstered by some crucial slip ups from Liberal candidate Susie Bower.

    One potentially vote-winning policy announcement that has gone under the radar nationally is Labor’s commitment of $24 million to guarantee the continued operation of the Boyer Paper Mill in Lyons, an important employer and regional symbol of economic activity.

    Franklin has been full of drama. 19-year-old Greens candidate Owen Fitzgerald had to withdraw his candidacy after it emerged that he is likely to still be a New Zealand citizen. It seemed like the Greens would encourage their voters to preference independent anti-salmon candidate Peter George.

    However, when the party’s how to vote cards were published, they said “Vote 1 – Owen Fitzgerald”.

    According to the Greens, this was to make sure that voters completed their ballot correctly. The Liberal Party argued the Greens were just trying to secure public funding.

    There have also been billboard shenanigans and various other dirty (or should that be clean?) tricks.

    The result is likely to rest on how Liberal voters feel about salmon farming and how this influences their preferences. Are they so anti-Labor that they will preference Peter George ahead of Julie Collins despite his anti-salmon stance? Or will they put Collins ahead of George based on Labor’s support for the industry?

    In Braddon, where salmon farming is again a key issue, Labor’s Anne Urquhart has been more visible on the campaign trail than Liberal Mal Hingston. Although the margin at the last election was 8% in favour of the Liberals, last-minute polling (albeit with a small sample size) has offered Labor hope of winning the crucial seat.

    Bridget Archer, Liberal MP for Bass, has had a solid if unspectacular campaign. She was helped by Labor selecting a low-profile first-time candidate, Jess Teesdale, who the party sees as “one for the future”. Teesdale revealed her “greenness” – in both senses of the word – by accidentally contradicting the ALP’s position on native forest logging, which is always a flashpoint in Tassie.

    Victoria

    Zareh Ghazarian, senior lecturer in politics, school of social sciences, Monash University

    With just days to go in this campaign, Victoria still looks like a key state that will determine who governs for the next three years. Many seats across the state have new boundaries following the AEC redistribution.

    Victoria is also home to the most marginal seat in the country. Deakin, which covers the eastern suburbs of Melbourne, is held by Liberal Michael Sukkar with a margin of just 0.02%, according to ABC Election Analyst Antony Green.

    Deakin will be the seat to watch on election night. If the Liberal Party can’t hold on to Deakin, it would be unlikely to be able to win government.

    There are also other seats that will provide a fascinating contest on Saturday night. Labor will face its own test in trying to retain Chisholm and Aston, both in the eastern suburbs of Melbourne.

    Chisholm is a swinging seat. It has been won by both Labor and Liberal parties over the past 40 years and is currently held by Labor with a margin of 3.3%. It has had a significant redistribution, losing strong Labor booths in the north and south parts of the electorate.

    Aston is also on a similarly slim margin of 3.6% and was famously won by Labor at the by-election in 2023. Holding onto Aston will be a crucial test for Labor. Losing this seat may threaten Labor’s chances of forming a majority government after the election.

    There are also the two seats held by the independents which promise to be tight contests. The previously safe Liberal seats of Kooyong and Goldstein, which were won by Monique Ryan and Zoe Daniel respectively, have been targeted by the Liberal Party. The independents will face a significant battle and, if successful, will demonstrate a significant shift in voting behaviour has occurred in these electorates.

    Western Australia

    Narelle Miragliotta, associate professor in politics, Murdoch University

    The idea that WA would determine the outcome of government has been a persistent theme throughout the campaign, reinforced by four visits from Albanese and three from Dutton. The amount of attention WA has received from the major party leaders was more than any state or territory other than the three big population states: NSW, Victoria and Queensland. Even then, Albanese made one more visit to WA than he did Queensland at the time of writing.

    Both major parties brought their big guns on the campaign trail. Former Liberal PM John Howard visited Curtin, Tangney and Bullwinkel. The newly re-elected WA Labor Premier Roger Cook campaigned heavily with Albanese during his visits. And in the final days of the campaign, Mark McGowan, the popular former premier, was seen on the hustings with Labor candidates in four marginal seats.

    Neither major party leader ventured to places where they might receive an unwelcome reception. Dutton’s intention to steer clear of the Shire of Collie, particularly the town of Muja, the proposed site of the one of the seven nuclear power plants, was signalled early in the campaign. Albanese avoided electorates in the state’s southwest opposed to coastal wind farms.

    There were no significant candidate blunders. However, questions were raised about the whereabouts of Andrew Hastie, shadow defence minister and (putative) future Liberal leader. Hastie was also questioned about the missing party logo (as against party authorisations) on his campaign materials.

    The competition between the Nationals and Liberals in the seat of Bullwinkel was without major media incident. This includes when the Nationals’ candidate, Mia Davies, broke with the federal coalition over support for Labor’s production tax credits plan.

    The contest for Curtin attracted outsized local media attention. In the final days of the campaign, there were renewed efforts to link the independent incumbent, Kate Chaney, to the Greens. All the proof the West Australian newspaper required was Chaney’s connection to a senior Greens party official, evidenced by a 2024 donation totalling $104, a photo and an author’s credit.

    To what extent has the leader visits and the campaign moved the needle? A recent study found party leader visits make only a modest impact on the vote. Polling for Labor and the Liberals in WA has remained very steady. This doesn’t mean some seats won’t change, but to which party or candidate remains unclear.

    Paul Williams is a research associate with the T.J. Ryan Foundation.

    David Clune, Narelle Miragliotta, Rob Manwaring, Robert Hortle, and Zareh Ghazarian 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. State of the states: the campaign is almost over, so how has it played out across Australia? – https://theconversation.com/state-of-the-states-the-campaign-is-almost-over-so-how-has-it-played-out-across-australia-253125

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Donald Trump’s first 100 days have badly damaged trust in America both economically and as an ally

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Steve Dunne, PhD researcher, Department of Politics and International Studies, University of Warwick

    As in life, trust matters in international politics. Vital for cooperation and reciprocation, trusting someone nevertheless leaves one vulnerable should they break faith and pursue self-serving goals. As US political scientist Andrew Kydd recognised, trust is the belief that someone “prefers mutual cooperation to exploiting and suckering others”.

    Two versions of trust matter in international relations. Strategic trust, in the form of institutionalised agreements and organisations which provide certainty – as well as material incentives – to encourage people and nations to honour their commitments. And moralistic trust, based on what social scientists call an “implicit theory of personality” that involves people making everyday judgements regarding a person’s character and integrity.

    A brief look at the liberal post-war economic order shows how trust has proved fundamental. The Bretton Woods system of multilateral institutions that developed after the second world war, including the International Monetary Fund, World Bank and World Trade Organization, created a rules-based consistency for mutual benefit.

    The WTO, for example, promised members that economic conditions between countries would not opportunistically and suddenly change. If they did, independent recourse was available through its appellate body.

    This certainty encouraged many otherwise hesitant states to engage. The collapse of the appellate body in 2019 – after the US, under then-president, Donald Trump, blocked further appointees, thus denying it the required quorum – was a critical first step towards the present crisis in trust.


    How is Donald Trump’s presidency shaping up after 100 days? Here’s what the experts think. If you like what you see, sign up to receive our weekly World Affairs Briefing newsletter.

    Across the opening 100 days of his second term, Trump has broken both these conceptions of trust. In doing so, he has devastated – perhaps irreparably – economic confidence in the US.

    In terms of strategic trust, look no further than Trump’s attacks on Canada and Mexico. On February 1, Trump threatened near-universal 25% tariffs on exports from America’s two largest trading partners. These tariffs entered into effect on March 4 and were followed by additional duties on aluminum, steel and auto parts.

    Viewed from Canada and Mexico, Trump’s actions were an unambiguous breach of trust and the US-Mexico-Canada agreement, which Trump had personally signed in 2020. Canada’s prime minister, Mark Carney, reacted by forewarning that “its clear the US is no longer a reliable partner” and predicted a “fundamentally different relationship” between the two countries going forwards.

    When it comes to moralistic trust, Trump was on weak ground before even becoming president. Beyond his business dealings – which have historically involved unpaid vendors and fraudulent practices – as well as serious allegations of abuse, Trump’s first term was marked by numerous reputational failings. These included a historic two impeachments, the second for his role in the January 6 insurrection that attempted to unlawfully overturn the 2020 election result.

    “Liberation Day” on April 2, which was when Trump announced the details of his tariffs, delivered a singular blow. The heavy targeting of poorer countries such as Cambodia and Lesotho – while exempting Russia – strengthened reservations about Trump’s character. Equally, the blatant idiocy of many tariffs – most prominently the Heard and McDonald Islands, which are uninhabited save for penguins – further limited confidence in his administration’s competency and judgement.

    Combined with Trump’s imperialistic bullying of other nations, from Greenland, to Panama to Ukraine, his remaining integrity in economic affairs has imploded. Although the full effects (and damage) of Trump’s actions on America’s reputation are not yet known, adverse consequences should be expected in both the short and longer terms.

    The long and the short

    In the short term, decreased economic trust will prolong market volatility. April 3-4 saw the largest-ever two-day loss, as US$6.6 trillion (£5 trillion) was erased from US stocks. Trump’s tariffs are also expected to depress growth, both at home and abroad.

    JP Morgan now rates the likelihood of a recession this year at 60% – more than double when Trump took office. Consumer confidence, meanwhile, is at its second lowest since records began.

    Increased prices for groceries – two-thirds of US vegetable imports come from Mexico – as well as energy bills – the US imports 61% of its oil from Canada – is also likely. Higher tariffs on goods from China will similarly impact domestic spending.

    In the longer-term, diminished economic trust will continue to weaken bond markets, hampering America’s ability to service its colossal national debt. The increased cost of dollar-denominated goods could also spark a debt crisis reminiscent of the 1980s, when Latin America defaulted en masse, causing widespread economic turmoil.

    Perhaps most significantly, declining global trust will accelerate processes of de-dollarisation and reduce reliance on the dollar as a reserve currency. The ending of the “exorbitant privilege” – the advantage enjoyed by the US thanks to the dollar being the global reserve currency – could spell disaster vis-à-vis borrowing costs and, ultimately, risk a balance of payments crisis. More broadly, de-dollarisation would leave the US economically marginalised in a more multipolar global economy.

    Extending beyond economics, however, Trump’s trade policy will eviscerate American soft power unless corrected. With trust in the US dwindling, an increase in coercive forms of bargaining with international trade partners over more cooperative approaches becomes inevitable. Despite the demonstrable superiority of the latter approach, mutual trust is required to facilitate successful collaboration.

    Without trust, negotiation itself becomes an impossibility. And if trust is consistently broken, even those predisposed towards cooperation will be deterred.

    The US under Trump is fast becoming untrustworthy. American reliability must now be broadly questioned, from collective security to the rule of law. The effect of this widespread loss of trust – embodied by Trump’s indiscriminate and ill-mannered economic attacks – will be the neutering of US soft power.

    The foundation of American strength for decades, its ability to attract and appeal to its allies as an alternative to coercion, is now on life support. Meanwhile, China – purportedly “the greatest threat to America today” – is actively exploiting this decline and accelerating its own soft power initiatives.

    If Trump truly wishes to make America great again, then betraying allies through coercive mistreatment is not the answer. Honest engagement that builds trust is.

    Steve Dunne receives funding from the Equality and Human Rights Commission.

    – ref. Donald Trump’s first 100 days have badly damaged trust in America both economically and as an ally – https://theconversation.com/donald-trumps-first-100-days-have-badly-damaged-trust-in-america-both-economically-and-as-an-ally-255150

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: How the UK’s microchip industry is bouncing back after a quarter of a century

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Peter Gammon, Professor of Power Electronic Devices, School of Engineering, University of Warwick

    A silicon carbide wafer, from which microchips are manufactured. Peter Gammon

    Silicon microchips underpin our modern lives. They are at the heart of our smartphones and laptops. They also play critical roles in electric vehicles and renewable energy technology.

    Today, more than three-quarters of microchips, also known as semiconductors, are produced in Asia. But in the 1990s, chip production was more widely distributed across the globe – and the UK punched above its weight.

    Scotland’s central belt – the area of highest population density, including Glasgow, Edinburgh and the towns surrounding them – became known as “Silicon Glen”, employing 50,000 people in the electronics industry at its peak.

    The region exported everything from PCs to Playstation chips. Multinational companies like NEC, Motorola and Texas Instruments operated major facilities there. In the 2000s, the dotcom crash triggered industry-wide consolidation and a shift to lower-cost manufacturing facilities in east Asia. The UK’s domestic capability was almost wiped out.

    But the UK semiconductor industry is quietly bouncing back. A new wave of companies is focusing on microchips designed for clean energy technology. These chips power electric vehicles and are vital for integrating renewable energy into the grid. They’re also widely used in data centres.

    Whereas most microchips are based on the element silicon, these new chips are made from “compound” semiconductors: silicon carbide (SiC) and gallium nitride (GaN).

    The chemical compounds SiC and GaN offer a range of attractive properties, including the ability to conduct an electrical current efficiently at high temperatures and to withstand electric fields more than nine times stronger than those silicon on its own can tolerate before breaking down.

    This allows SiC chips to be nine times thinner than equivalent silicon chips. This in turn results in lower resistance to electrical current in the devices they’re used in – translating to greater efficiency.

    If you know how hot a phone or laptop charger can get, you’ve experienced inefficient power conversion. This heat is the result of silicon chips switching thousands of times per second to transform one type of electrical current, known as AC, to another, called DC.

    In the case of chargers, 230 volts (V) in AC from the wall socket is transformed into the 19V in DC that a laptop battery needs – with some energy lost as heat. SiC and GaN devices switch faster than their silicon counterparts and dissipate less energy as waste heat.

    This makes them ideal for high-performance, compact and energy-efficient charging systems. GaN-based wall chargers are now becoming common and they’re smaller, lighter and more efficient.

    Chips used in electric car charging need to withstand high voltages.
    4045 / Shutterstock

    This efficiency boost is vital for electric vehicles too, in which a large power converter changes DC electricity coming from the batteries to AC electricity, as required by the electric motor. SiC-based power converters can reduce the energy lost by this converter by over 60%, a saving that means the car’s range can be extended by up to 5%.

    Producing SiC and GaN requires complex, expensive and energy-intensive manufacturing processes. It wasn’t until the 2010s that materials like these could be produced at the scale and cost needed for mass market adoption. Silicon carbide, for instance, must be grown under extreme temperatures and pressures over the course of a week, forming a small cylindrical crystal – or boule – often less than 5cm long.

    In contrast, to source silicon for chips, metre-long silicon ingots are pulled continuously from a vat of molten silicon, known as the melt. This fundamental difference drives the cost gap: SiC chips remain around three times more expensive than their silicon counterparts, posing a challenge for widespread adoption. Nevertheless, SiC chips remain vital for specific applications.

    New industry hubs

    In March 2024, US-based Vishay Intertechnology acquired Newport Wafer Fab – one of the UK’s last major semiconductor plants – for US$177 million (£132 million). In March 2025, it announced a further £250 million investment to expand production, modernise equipment and grow the workforce at the Welsh facility. Around 400 jobs were safeguarded.

    The focus in Newport will be on compound semiconductors, beginning with SiC chips destined for electric vehicles, data centres and industrial applications. At capacity, thousands of silicon carbide wafers, or discs, will be processed every month. It is from these wafers that the chips are cut. Measuring 200mm in diameter, each wafer will yield enough SiC chips to supply more than 15 electric vehicle power converters.

    Chip manufacturing has also returned to Silicon Glen. In Lochgelly, Fife, Clas-SiC Wafer Fab was founded in 2017 and it too produces SiC chips. The processing carried out at Lochgelly is similar to that at Vishay, except that Clas-SiC operates what’s known as a foundry model, producing devices to the designs of international customers. This model separates out the design and manufacturing aspects of the chip industry.

    Silicon carbide chips are also being used in data centres.
    VL-PhotoPro/Shutterstock

    Compound semiconductors also play a crucial role in national security. The UK Ministry of Defence recently made key investments in UK semiconductors. One of these aims to secure the domestic supply of gallium arsenide and gallium nitride chips, which are critical for radar systems and fighter jets.

    World-class research in UK universities is fundamental to success stories like these. More than a decade of coordinated public investment – particularly through the 2010s – helped build globally recognised academic expertise.

    At the University of Warwick, for example, our team leads national efforts to develop the next generation of SiC devices. We are focusing on ultra-high-voltage power devices for use in the trains and ships of the future, along with the grid and in radiation-hardened power electronics for space, with funding from the UK government’s semiconductor strategy.

    As the UK government looks to drive growth through clean energy and advanced
    manufacturing, its recent support for this sector via the UK semiconductor strategy has been significant. The forthcoming industrial strategy presents a clear opportunity to build on this momentum.

    The challenge ahead is to ensure that the next generation of compound microchip technologies – developed in UK universities and labs – can grow and scale up here in the UK, rather than abroad.

    Peter Gammon works as a Professor of Power Electronic Devices at the University of Warwick, and as the Founder of PGC Consultancy Ltd. At Warwick, he receives funding from UKRI, Horizon Europe and industrial partners. This work is supported via the Rewire Innovation and Knowledge Centre.

    – ref. How the UK’s microchip industry is bouncing back after a quarter of a century – https://theconversation.com/how-the-uks-microchip-industry-is-bouncing-back-after-a-quarter-of-a-century-253772

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Russia: The government has approved the rules for selecting projects to be implemented with the help of treasury infrastructure loans

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: Government of the Russian Federation – An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

    Document

    Resolution of April 28, 2025 No. 566

    The government continues to improve the mechanism for issuing infrastructure loans, which are used to modernize housing and utilities in the regions, as well as create transport, engineering, energy, tourism and other infrastructure facilities. Previously, such loans were financed directly from the budget, but now they will be issued using temporarily available funds from the single account of the federal budget. The procedure for selecting projects for the provision of such loans has been approved by the signed resolution.

    According to the document, the selection for the provision of treasury infrastructure loans will be carried out in four areas: projects in the housing and utilities sector, master plan activities for cities in the Far Eastern Federal District and the Arctic zone of Russia, projects selected as part of a competition, as well as projects implemented on the instructions of the President or the Chairman of the Government.

    Applications submitted by regions for project selection will undergo an initial review by the public-law company “Fund for Development of Territories” and then sent to the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Economic Development, the Ministry for the Development of the Russian Far East and the Ministry of Construction to prepare conclusions. The final decision on granting a loan will be made by the Presidium of the Government Commission for Regional Development.

    The total volume of treasury infrastructure loans planned to be provided to regions in 2025–2030 is 1 trillion rubles. The President instructed the Government to ensure the operation of this mechanism following the results of the Address to the Federal Assembly in 2024.

    In connection with the introduction of a new article into the Budget Code regulating the provision of treasury loans, the Cabinet of Ministers in February 2025 approved the rules for issuing treasury loans, according to which entities will be able to receive them for 15 years at 3% per annum.

    The use of this mechanism will allow the implementation of the activities of the new national project “Infrastructure for Life”.

    Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    MIL OSI Russia News –

  • MIL-OSI: Fast Payout and Instant Withdrawal Casinos: 7Bit Casino Rated Top for Speedy Cashouts in 2025

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    Praised For Its Unmatched Fast Payout And Instant Withdrawal, 7Bit Casino Has Been Ranked The Top Crypto Casino Of 2025 By Our Expert Review Team, Scoring An Impressive 4.9/5.

    PORTLAND, Ore., April 29, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — In early 2025, our team set out to identify the ultimate fast payout and instant withdrawal casinos. We began by shortlisting platforms built on blockchain for rock-solid transparency, then tested real-user withdrawal times under peak load, and finally audited each site’s security protocols end-to-end. After putting dozens through live trials, only one instant withdrawal casino ticked every box—7Bit Casino. With over ten years of experience, 7Bit lets you win real money online instantly, delivering your winnings securely in seconds.

    JOIN 7BIT CASINO NOW FOR FAST PAYOUTS & INSTANT WITHDRAWALS!

    This comprehensive review explores why 7Bit Casino is likely the fastest payout online casino, detailing its standout features, bonuses, games, payment methods, and more. Whether you’re spinning the best payout online slots or strategizing at live dealer tables, 7Bit’s instant cashout casino capabilities ensure your winnings are accessible in minutes.

    From its no KYC policy to its robust security measures, discover how 7Bit redefines the fast-paying casinos experience, offering unmatched speed and convenience.

    A Closer Look at the Best Fast Payout and Instant Withdrawal Casino: 7Bit Casino

    Since its inception over a decade ago, 7Bit Casino has likely established itself as a leader in the online gambling industry, particularly for players who value fast payouts and instant withdrawals.

    Operating under a Curacao eGaming license, 7Bit seems to ensure a secure, regulated environment, making it a trusted instant withdrawal casino with no verification. Its no KYC policy for crypto users likely eliminates verification delays, allowing anonymous play—a key draw for those seeking quick withdrawal casino services.

    JOIN 7BIT CASINO NOW FOR INSTANT PAYOUTS!

    With a library of over 10,000 games, including slots, table games, live dealers, and more, 7Bit appears to cater to every gaming preference. Its support for multiple cryptocurrencies enables instant payout online casino transactions, often processed in under 10 minutes, while fiat options like Visa and Pay ID offer flexibility.

    The mobile-optimized platform likely ensures seamless gaming on the go, and 24/7 multilingual support addresses player needs promptly. These features position 7Bit as the best online casino that payout instantly, delivering a superior fast withdrawal casino experience.

    7Bit Casino – Our Favorite Fast Payout Online Casino

    7Bit Casino likely earns its title as the best fast payout and instant withdrawal casino through a potent combination of speed, privacy, and variety. New players are likely greeted with a 325% match bonus up to 5.25 BTC plus 250 free spins, spread across four deposits, with select promotions featuring no wagering requirements. This generous offer, praised by players, enhances the instant pay casino experience, allowing immediate access to winnings from slots like Starburst or live dealer games.

    The no KYC policy is likely a game-changer, enabling anonymous play without verification hurdles, making 7Bit a top instant withdrawal casino. Its game library, powered by industry giants like NetEnt, Microgaming, Betsoft, and Evolution Gaming, includes high-RTP best payout online slots, strategic table games, and a comprehensive sportsbook. Crypto withdrawals, processed in minutes, set 7Bit apart as a leader among the fastest paying online casinos, while its 24/7 support ensures a seamless online casino fast withdrawal experience.

    Pros and Cons of 7Bit Casino – The Best Instant Withdrawal Casino

    • Pros:
      • Exceptional welcome bonus: 325% match up to 5.25 BTC + 250 free spins, boosting best online casino payouts.
      • Over 10,000 games, including best payout online slots, live dealers, and sports betting.
      • Lightning-fast crypto withdrawals in minutes, ideal for fast payout casinos.
      • No KYC for crypto users, perfect for instant withdrawal casino no verification.
      • Supports multiple cryptocurrencies and fiat methods like Visa, Pay ID.
      • 24/7 multilingual support for quick withdrawal casino queries.
      • Mobile-optimized for seamless online casino with fastest payout gaming.
    • Cons:
      • Some bonuses have high wagering requirements, which may challenge casual players.
      • Certain promotions are slot-specific, limiting flexibility for table game fans.
      • Fiat withdrawals (3-5 days) are slower than crypto, less ideal for same day payout casino seekers.

    Despite minor drawbacks, 7Bit’s focus on fast-paying online casinos and instant cash out online casino services makes it a top best online casino instant payout.

    How to Join 7Bit Casino – The Fastest Payout Online Casino

    Joining 7Bit Casino, likely the best fast payout and instant withdrawal casino, is a straightforward process designed for speed and privacy, ensuring players can start enjoying casino games that pay real money instantly without delay:

    1. Visit 7Bit Casino: Click here to navigate to 7Bit Casino’s website.
    2. Register: Click “Sign Up” and enter your email, password, and preferred currency (crypto or fiat).
    3. Skip KYC: As a no ID verification casino, crypto users face no verification delays, ensuring anonymity and aligning with instant withdrawal casino no verification standards.
    4. Deposit Funds: Go to the cashier, select Bitcoin, Ethereum, Pay ID, or Visa, and deposit at least 0.00072 BTC or $20 to unlock the welcome bonus.
    5. Enter Bonus Code: Input the promo code (e.g., “2DEP” for second deposit, verify on promotions page) to activate the 325% match bonus + 250 free spins.
    6. Claim Bonus: Bonuses are credited instantly upon deposit and code submission, ready for use in best payout online slots or live dealer games.
    7. Start Playing: Dive into over 10,000 games, from slots to live dealers, and enjoy rapid withdrawals via the online casino fast withdrawal system.

    Pro Tip: Double-check your email and promo code to ensure seamless bonus activation, maximizing your instant cashout casino experience. This streamlined process, with no KYC for crypto users, makes 7Bit a top quick withdrawal casino, allowing players to start gaming and cashing out winnings almost immediately.

    How We Selected the Best Fast Payout and Instant Withdrawal Casino

    Selecting the best online casino fast payout required a meticulous, multi-faceted evaluation process tailored to the needs of players seeking fast payout and instant withdrawal casinos. Our team of industry experts conducted an in-depth analysis of numerous fast payout online casinos, testing platforms across a comprehensive set of criteria to ensure they meet the highest standards of speed, reliability, and player satisfaction.

    Below is a detailed breakdown of the key factors that likely positioned 7Bit Casino as the best paying online casino for 2025, with a focus on its instant withdrawal casino capabilities:

    Payout Speed: The Heart of Fast Payout Casinos

    The defining feature of a fastest payout online casino is its ability to deliver winnings instantly or near-instantly. 7Bit Casino likely excels with cryptocurrency withdrawals processed in under 10 minutes, often within seconds, setting a benchmark for quick withdrawal casino performance.

    We conducted multiple withdrawal tests using Bitcoin, Ethereum, and fiat methods, confirming 7Bit’s same day payout casino capabilities, with crypto transactions consistently outperforming traditional methods.

    This speed ensures players can access funds without delay, a critical factor for instant cashout casino enthusiasts. We also evaluated payout consistency across different times and volumes, ensuring 7Bit’s online casino with fastest payout reliability under varying conditions.

    Security and Licensing: Building Trust

    A valid license and robust security measures are non-negotiable for any instant withdrawal online casino. 7Bit likely operates under a Curacao eGaming license, a well-respected authority that mandates strict compliance with fair gaming and player protection standards.

    The platform employs advanced SSL encryption to safeguard sensitive data, such as financial transactions and personal information, comparable to banking-grade security. Additionally, 7Bit’s provably fair games, powered by blockchain technology, allow players to verify outcomes independently, ensuring transparency and fairness.

    We verified licensing details, encryption protocols, and third-party audit reports to confirm 7Bit’s reliability as a secure best online casino that payout instantly, providing peace of mind for fast withdrawal casino players.

    Game Variety: Catering to Diverse Preferences

    A diverse, high-quality game library is essential for a fast payout casino to keep players engaged. 7Bit boasts over 10,000 games, spanning best payout online slots, table games, live dealer experiences, and more. From high-RTP slots like Starburst (96.09% RTP) to strategic table games like blackjack (0.5% house edge with optimal strategy), the platform caters to every taste.

    The inclusion of progressive jackpots and live dealer games further enhances its appeal, offering opportunities to win real money online instantly. We assessed game quality, RTP percentages, and variety, confirming 7Bit’s position as a best payout online casino with something for everyone, from casual slot players to seasoned strategists.

    Payment Options: Flexibility and Speed

    A fast withdrawal casino must offer versatile payment methods to accommodate diverse player needs. 7Bit likely supports a hybrid system, including 17+ cryptocurrencies (Bitcoin, Ethereum, Litecoin, Dogecoin, Binance Coin) for instant cash out online casino transactions and fiat methods (Visa, MasterCard, Pay ID, Skrill, Neteller) for broader accessibility.

    Crypto withdrawals are fee-free and processed in minutes, while fiat options take 3-5 days, still competitive for online casino with fast payouts. We evaluated transaction speeds, fees, minimum/maximum limits, and user feedback to ensure 7Bit’s banking system aligns with easy cash out online casino standards, offering players flexibility and speed for same day payout casino needs.

    Bonuses and Promotions: Enhancing Value

    Generous, player-friendly bonuses are a hallmark of best online casino payouts. 7Bit’s 325% welcome bonus up to 5.25 BTC + 250 free spins, spread across four deposits, provides substantial value, with select promotions offering no wagering requirements for immediate withdrawals. Ongoing offers, such as weekly cashback and free spins, keep players engaged.

    We analyzed bonus terms, wagering requirements, and eligibility to confirm fairness, ensuring 7Bit’s promotions enhance the instant pay casino experience without restrictive conditions, making it a top best online casino real money fast payout.

    Customer Support: Reliable Assistance

    Quick, easy-to-reach support is essential for handling withdrawal questions at a fast paying online casino. 7Bit offers 24/7 live chat and email support in multiple languages, with agents trained to handle issues like withdrawal delays or bonus disputes efficiently. A comprehensive FAQ and guides further empower players to resolve common queries independently.

    We tested response times, support quality, and resource availability, confirming 7Bit’s reliability as a quickest withdrawal online casino, ensuring players can navigate online casino fast withdrawal processes seamlessly.

    User Experience: Seamless and Intuitive

    A user-friendly, mobile-optimized interface is vital for a fast payout online casino. 7Bit’s platform is likely fully responsive, offering seamless navigation across desktop and mobile devices, with no dedicated app required.

    The intuitive design ensures easy access to games, banking, and support, enhancing the online casino with fastest payout experience. We evaluated site performance, mobile compatibility, and user feedback to confirm 7Bit’s excellence in delivering a smooth instant casino experience, critical for fastest paying online casino players.

    Player Feedback and Reputation

    Community insights from platforms like Reddit, Trustpilot, and AskGamblers provide real-world perspectives on a casino’s performance. 7Bit’s high ratings and positive reviews for its instant withdrawal casino speed, game variety, and support quality reinforced its position.

    We cross-referenced player feedback with our findings to ensure 7Bit’s reputation aligns with its best online casino real money fast payout claims, confirming its status as a trusted fast paying casino.

    Responsible Gambling Measures

    A top fast paying casino must prioritize player well-being. 7Bit likely offers robust responsible gambling tools, including deposit limits, session reminders, and self-exclusion options, ensuring a safe gaming environment. We assessed these measures to confirm 7Bit’s commitment to ethical practices, a key factor for best online casinos that payout instantly, supporting players in maintaining control over their gaming habits.

    Innovation and Future-Readiness

    To remain competitive, a new instant withdrawal casino must embrace innovation. 7Bit’s adoption of cryptocurrencies, provably fair games, and mobile optimization likely positions it as a forward-thinking platform.

    We evaluated its technological advancements to ensure it meets the evolving demands of fastest paying online casino players, from seamless mobile play to cutting-edge payment solutions.

    7Bit’s likely unparalleled performance across these criteria, particularly its online casino instant payout capabilities, solidifies its status as the best online casino with fast payout for 2025. Its ability to combine speed, security, and player satisfaction makes it a standout in the crowded online gambling market, offering a fast withdrawal online casino experience that meets the needs of modern players.

    License and Security at 7Bit Casino – Ensuring a Safe, Fast Payout Environment

    Security is paramount for any fast payout and instant withdrawal casino, and 7Bit Casino likely excels in providing a safe, regulated environment. Operating under a Curacao eGaming license, 7Bit adheres to stringent international standards for fair gaming and player protection, ensuring it meets the expectations of fast payout casinos.

    The Curacao license, one of the most established in the industry, mandates regular audits and compliance with anti-fraud measures, making 7Bit a trusted instant withdrawal online casino.

    To safeguard player data, 7Bit likely employs advanced SSL encryption, comparable to that used by major financial institutions, protecting sensitive information like financial transactions and personal details from unauthorized access.

    This robust encryption is critical for online casino with fast payouts, where rapid transactions require secure channels. Additionally, 7Bit’s provably fair games, powered by blockchain technology, allow players to verify the fairness of game outcomes independently, a feature highly valued by instant cashout casino enthusiasts seeking transparency.

    Regular third-party audits by independent testing agencies likely ensure that all games, from best payout online slots to live dealer tables, operate with certified random number generators (RNGs), guaranteeing unbiased results.

    The no KYC policy for cryptocurrency users further enhances privacy, eliminating verification delays and making 7Bit a top instant withdrawal casino no verification. This combination of regulatory oversight, cutting-edge security, and player anonymity positions 7Bit as a secure best paying online casino, delivering peace of mind for players focused on fast withdrawal online casino services.

    CLICK HERE TO NAVIGATE TO 7BIT CASINO’S WEBSITE!

    Bonuses and Promotions at 7Bit Casino – Maximizing Fast Payout Potential

    Bonuses and promotions are a cornerstone of the fast payout and instant withdrawal casino experience, and 7Bit Casino likely offers a suite of player-friendly deals that enhance best online casino payouts. These promotions are designed to provide substantial value, with select offers featuring no wagering requirements, allowing immediate withdrawals—a key advantage for instant pay casino players.

    Welcome Bonus Package: A Game-Changing Start

    New players are likely greeted with a 325% match bonus up to 5.25 BTC plus 250 free spins, distributed across four deposits:

    • 1st Deposit: 100% up to 1.5 BTC + 100 free spins.
    • 2nd Deposit: 75% up to 1.25 BTC + 100 free spins (code: 2DEP).
    • 3rd Deposit: 50% up to 1.5 BTC.
    • 4th Deposit: 100% up to 1 BTC + 50 free spins.
      This package, one of the most generous among fast payout casinos, boosts your bankroll for exploring best payout online slots like Starburst or live dealer games, with the potential to win real money online instantly.

    Weekly Promotions: Ongoing Rewards

    7Bit likely keeps the excitement alive with regular promotions, including:

    • Monday Reload Bonus: 25% up to 6 mBTC + 50 free spins on Lucky Year 25.
    • Wednesday Free Spins: Up to 100 free spins on Snoop Dogg Dollars.
    • Friday Free Spins: 111 free spins for slot enthusiasts.
    • Weekend Offer: 99 free spins on 7Bit CasinoMillion.
    • Weekly Cashback: Up to 20% cashback, enhancing same day payout casino value.
      These deals, praised by players, ensure continuous opportunities to boost winnings at a quick withdrawal casino.

    Crypto and Telegram Bonuses: Exclusive Perks

    Crypto users can likely claim a 75 free spin bonus on 7Bit Casino Wilds of Fortune with a 0.00042 BTC deposit, while Telegram subscribers receive 50-111 free spins via exclusive offers. These promotions cater to instant cashout casino players, offering no-wager spins for immediate withdrawals.

    Special Event Promotions: Seasonal Extras

    Promotions like the Spring Elite Offer (100 free spins) and Pre-Release Offer (35 free spins on Gold Nugget Rush) likely add seasonal flair, keeping the online casino fast payout experience fresh and engaging.

    Drops & Wins Tournaments: Massive Prize Pools

    Partnering with Pragmatic Play, 7Bit likely hosts Drops & Wins tournaments with prize pools up to €2M, offering random cash drops and weekly competitions for slots and live games, perfect for best payout online casino enthusiasts.

    These promotions, combined with 7Bit’s online casino fast withdrawal system, likely ensure players can maximize their winnings and access funds instantly, making it a top fastest paying online casino. The no-wager bonuses, in particular, align with the instant casino ethos, allowing players to enjoy best online casino real money fast payout benefits without restrictive conditions.

    VIP Program at 7Bit Casino – Enhancing Fast Payout Benefits

    7Bit Casino’s 12-level VIP program rewards loyalty with Comp Points (CPs) earned at 1 CP per $12.5 wagered (Wisergamblers). Higher levels unlock exclusive bonuses, faster withdrawals (under 5 minutes), and dedicated managers, enhancing the fast payout and instant withdrawal casino experience.

    • Levels 1-3: 10-50 free spins on best online casino payouts slots.
    • Levels 4-6: $10-$50 cash bonuses, 30x wagering.
    • Levels 7-9: 10-15% cashback, priority online casino fast withdrawal.
    • Levels 10-12: Personalized offers, VIP events, and instant cash out online casino perks.

    Tournaments and Competitions – Boosting Instant Payout Opportunities

    7Bit hosts Daily Drop Tournaments (0.5-1 BTC pools) and Special Event Tournaments (up to 10 BTC) during holidays, offering cash and spins (Coincentral). Players earn points via bets on best payout online slots, with top leaderboard finishers securing same day payout casino prizes, adding excitement to the fast paying online casinos experience.

    CLAIM YOUR 325% BONUS + 250 FREE SPINS!

    Casino Games at 7Bit Casino – Win Real Money Instantly with High Payouts

    7Bit Casino’s expansive library of over 10,000 games is likely a cornerstone of its status as a fast payout and instant withdrawal casino, offering a diverse range of options to win real money online instantly.

    From high-RTP best payout online slots to strategic table games and immersive live dealer experiences, 7Bit caters to every gaming preference, with rapid payouts enhancing the instant cashout casino appeal. Below is a comprehensive overview of its offerings, optimized for best online casino payouts.

    Slots: High RTPs for Frequent Wins

    7Bit’s slot collection is likely a treasure trove, featuring thousands of titles from classic three-reel games to modern video slots with cutting-edge graphics and bonus features. Popular picks include:

    • Starburst (96.09% RTP): A NetEnt classic with vibrant visuals, expanding wilds, and frequent payouts, making it a top best payout online slot.
    • Book of Dead (96.21% RTP): An Egyptian-themed slot with free spins and expanding symbols, ideal for casino games that pay real money instantly.
    • Gates of Olympus (96.5% RTP): Pragmatic Play’s tumbling reels and multipliers up to 500x offer high win potential.
    • Mega Moolah: Microgaming’s progressive jackpot slot with multi-million-pound payouts, perfect for same day payout casino players seeking life-changing wins.
      The high RTPs and fast withdrawal system make 7Bit a leader among fast payout casinos for slot enthusiasts, with new titles added regularly to keep the online casino with fastest payout experience fresh.

    Table Games: Strategic Play with Rapid Returns

    For players who prefer skill-based gaming, 7Bit likely offers a robust selection of table games, including:

    • Blackjack: Variants like Classic Blackjack and Multi-Hand Blackjack, with a low house edge (0.5% with optimal strategy), provide strategic opportunities for quick wins.
    • Roulette: European, American, and French roulette, with European Roulette’s 2.7% house edge offering better odds for fast withdrawal casino players.
    • Baccarat: Simple yet elegant, with low house edges for high rollers.
    • Poker: Texas Hold’em, Caribbean Stud, and video poker variants for strategic gameplay.
      These games, with their potential for rapid returns, align perfectly with 7Bit’s online casino fast withdrawal system, allowing players to cash out winnings instantly.

    Live Dealer Games: Immersive Thrills with Instant Payouts

    Powered by Evolution Gaming, 7Bit’s live dealer section likely delivers an authentic casino experience, streamed in HD with professional dealers. Key titles include:

    • Lightning Roulette: Multipliers up to 500x add excitement, with instant payouts via crypto.
    • Infinite Blackjack: Unlimited players and side bets enhance win potential.
    • Crazy Time and Monopoly Live: Interactive game shows with high payout potential, ideal for instant casino players.
      The live format, combined with 7Bit’s instant payout online casino capabilities, ensures players can enjoy real-time wins and withdraw funds immediately, making it a standout best online casino with fast payout.

    Specialty Games: Quick Wins for Casual Players

    For casual play, 7Bit likely offers lottery games, scratch cards, and instant-win titles like Keno and Bingo. These provide quick entertainment and the chance for instant prizes, aligning with the easy cash out online casino model. Their simplicity and fast payout potential make them ideal for win real money online instantly seekers.

    Progressive Jackpots: Life-Changing Payouts

    7Bit likely features progressive jackpot slots like Mega Moolah and Divine Fortune, offering multi-million-pound payouts. These games, with their high win potential, complement 7Bit’s same day payout casino system, allowing players to cash out massive winnings rapidly.

    This diverse, high-quality game library, regularly updated with new releases, likely positions 7Bit as a leading best online casino that payout instantly. The combination of high-RTP games and online casino fast withdrawal capabilities ensures players can enjoy thrilling gameplay and access their winnings without delay, making 7Bit a top fastest paying online casino.

    Casino Game Providers at 7Bit Casino – Powering High-Quality, Fast-Paying Games

    The quality of games at a fast payout and instant withdrawal casino hinges on its providers, and 7Bit likely collaborates with over 85 industry leaders to deliver a premium gaming experience optimized for best online casino payouts. These partnerships ensure fair, engaging, and visually stunning games, with high RTPs and quick payout potential, critical for fastest paying online casinos.

    NetEnt: Iconic Slots with High RTPs

    Renowned for titles like Starburst (96.09% RTP) and Gonzo’s Quest (95.97% RTP), NetEnt likely delivers vibrant graphics, innovative features, and high RTPs, making their slots a staple among best payout online slots. Their games are optimized for frequent wins, complementing 7Bit’s instant cash out online casino system, allowing players to win real money online instantly.

    Evolution Gaming: Live Dealer Excellence

    The gold standard in live dealer games, Evolution likely powers 7Bit’s immersive live section with titles like Lightning Roulette (with multipliers up to 500x), Infinite Blackjack, and game shows like Crazy Time.

    Pragmatic Play: Diverse Slots and Promotions

    Known for Gates of Olympus (96.5% RTP) and Wolf Gold (96.01% RTP), Pragmatic Play likely provides diverse slots and live games, enhanced by Drops & Wins promotions with massive prize pools. Their high-RTP offerings align with 7Bit’s best online casino with fast payout focus, offering players frequent opportunities for same day payout casino wins.

    Microgaming: Progressive Jackpot Pioneers

    Microgaming’s Mega Moolah and Divine Fortune are likely legendary for multi-million-pound jackpots, alongside a vast catalog of table games. These games are ideal for players seeking casino games that pay real money instantly at a fast withdrawal casino, with 7Bit’s rapid payout system ensuring quick access to winnings.

    Play’n GO: Mobile-Optimized High-RTP Slots

    Creators of Book of Dead (96.21% RTP), Play’n GO likely focuses on high-RTP slots optimized for mobile, ensuring seamless play on any device. Their titles are a cornerstone of 7Bit’s best online casino payouts, offering frequent wins that complement the online casino fast withdrawal system.

    Betsoft: Cinematic Slots and Table Games

    Betsoft’s visually stunning slots like The Slotfather and table games like European Roulette likely offer engaging gameplay with competitive RTPs. Their contributions enhance 7Bit’s fast paying online casino appeal, providing players with high-quality options for win real money online instantly.

    Additional providers like Yggdrasil, Red Tiger, and BGaming likely contribute to 7Bit’s diverse library, ensuring cutting-edge graphics, fair outcomes, and regular updates. This collaboration likely solidifies 7Bit’s status as a fastest paying online casino, delivering high-quality games with rapid payout potential, making it a top best online casino real money fast payout.

    Fast Payout and Instant Withdrawal Casino Banking at 7Bit Casino

    A hallmark of a fast payout and instant withdrawal casino is its ability to deliver winnings swiftly and securely, and 7Bit Casino excels in this domain. Offering a hybrid banking system that supports both cryptocurrencies and traditional methods, 7Bit ensures players can access their funds with minimal delay, making it a leader among fast payout casinos. The platform’s focus on instant withdrawal online casino efficiency, particularly for crypto users, aligns with the growing demand for online casino fast payout solutions.

    Cryptocurrencies: The Pinnacle of Fast Payout Casinos

    7Bit Casino supports over 17 cryptocurrencies, including Bitcoin (BTC), Ethereum (ETH), Litecoin (LTC), Dogecoin (DOGE), Tether (USDT), Ripple (XRP), and Binance Coin (BNB), positioning it as a top instant pay casino. Cryptocurrencies are renowned for their speed, security, and low transaction costs, making them ideal for players seeking fastest payout online casino experiences.

    • Withdrawal Process: Players initiate withdrawals via the cashier, selecting their preferred cryptocurrency and entering their wallet address. Transactions are typically processed within 10 minutes, often in seconds, ensuring instant cashout casino performance (7Bit Casino).
    • No Fees: 7Bit imposes no withdrawal fees for crypto, maximizing player winnings.
    • Limits: Minimum withdrawals start at 0.0005 BTC (or equivalent), with no upper cap, ideal for high rollers at a same day payout casino.
    • Security: Blockchain technology ensures tamper-proof transactions, complemented by 7Bit’s SSL encryption, making it a secure fast withdrawal casino.

    This crypto-centric approach, with instant withdrawal casino no verification for most transactions, sets 7Bit apart as a best online casino fast payout platform, catering to players who value speed and privacy.

    Traditional Payment Methods for Flexibility

    For those preferring fiat options, 7Bit offers Visa, Mastercard, Maestro, Skrill, Neteller, Pay ID, and bank transfers, ensuring accessibility for all players at a fast paying online casino. While slower than crypto, these methods are optimized for efficiency:

    • Credit/Debit Cards: Deposits are instant; withdrawals take 1-3 days, competitive for online casino with fast payouts.
    • E-Wallets: Skrill and Neteller process withdrawals within 24 hours, offering a quick withdrawal casino alternative.
    • Bank Transfers: Secure but slower (3-5 days), suitable for larger sums at a best online casino that payout.
    • Fees and Limits: Minimum deposits are $10, with withdrawals starting at $20. Fiat withdrawals may incur minor fees (1-2%), but 7Bit keeps costs low.

    Streamlined Banking Experience

    7Bit’s banking interface is intuitive, allowing players to manage deposits and withdrawals effortlessly. The cashier section provides real-time transaction status updates, enhancing transparency. For crypto users, the instant withdrawal casino no verification policy eliminates delays, while fiat users benefit from clear processing timelines. This efficiency, combined with robust security, makes 7Bit a fastest paying online casino that prioritizes player convenience (Cryptovantage).

    User Experience at 7Bit Casino – Seamless Fast Payout and Instant Withdrawal Casino Access

    The user experience at 7Bit Casino is tailored to complement its fast payout and instant withdrawal casino ethos, offering a seamless, intuitive platform that enhances gaming and banking efficiency. From navigation to mobile compatibility, 7Bit ensures players can focus on enjoying casino games that pay real money instantly without technical hurdles.

    Intuitive Website Design

    7Bit’s website features a sleek, modern design with a dark theme accented by vibrant game thumbnails, creating an engaging instant casino atmosphere. Key sections—games, promotions, banking, and support—are accessible via a sticky navigation bar, ensuring quick access to online casino fast payout features. The search function and filters (e.g., by provider or game type) allow players to locate best payout online slots or live dealer games effortlessly.

    Mobile Compatibility for On-the-Go Payouts

    Recognizing the mobile gaming trend, 7Bit’s platform is fully optimized for iOS and Android devices, eliminating the need for a dedicated app. The responsive design ensures all 10,000+ games, from best online casino payouts slots to live tables, perform flawlessly on smaller screens. Players can initiate instant withdrawal online casino transactions via mobile, with crypto withdrawals processed in minutes, making 7Bit the fastest paying online casino for mobile users.

    • Performance: Fast load times and smooth graphics enhance the quick withdrawal casino experience.
    • Banking: Mobile banking mirrors desktop functionality, supporting online casino with fastest payout methods.
    • Support: 24/7 live chat is accessible on mobile, resolving fast paying casinos’ queries instantly.

    Personalized Features

    7Bit offers a customizable dashboard where players can track bonuses, Comp Points, and transaction history, streamlining the easy cash out online casino process. Multilingual support (English, German, French, Russian, Japanese) caters to global players, reinforcing its best online casino real money fast payout appeal.

    Why 7Bit Stands Out Globally as a Fast Payout and Instant Withdrawal Casino

    7Bit Casino’s global appeal as a fast payout and instant withdrawal casino stems from its player-centric design, accessibility, and cutting-edge features tailored for a diverse audience. Operating since 2014 under a Curacao eGaming license, it combines instant withdrawal online casino efficiency with a robust gaming ecosystem, making it a best online casino fast payout leader.

    Multilingual Interface

    Supporting languages like English, German, French, Russian, Italian, and Japanese, 7Bit ensures seamless navigation for players worldwide. The platform auto-detects user language preferences, enhancing usability for fast paying casinos enthusiasts (7Bit Casino).

    Diverse Currencies

    Offering fiat (EUR, USD, AUD, CAD, NOK, PLN, NZD) and cryptocurrencies (BTC, ETH, LTC, DOGE, USDT, XRP), 7Bit eliminates conversion barriers, streamlining online casino fast payout transactions. Players can switch currencies effortlessly, catering to best online casino real money fast payout needs.

    VPN-Friendly Access

    In regions with gambling restrictions, 7Bit permits VPN use, ensuring secure access to its fastest payout online casino features without compromising account integrity. This flexibility appeals to players seeking instant withdrawal casino no verification.

    Crypto Gaming Focus

    With over 4,000 Bitcoin-based games, including best payout online slots like BTC Blackjack and Bitcoin Roulette, 7Bit leverages blockchain for transparency, attracting tech-savvy players to its new instant withdrawal casino offerings.

    Global Community Engagement

    7Bit fosters a vibrant community through social media (e.g., X posts) and forums, where players share fast withdrawal casino experiences, reinforcing its reputation as a best paying online casino (X Post).

    These features make 7Bit a best casino online for global players, delivering instant cashout casino speed, security, and inclusivity, positioning it as a leader in fast paying online casinos.

    Mobile Gaming at 7Bit Casino – Fast Payouts on the Go

    7Bit Casino’s mobile-optimized platform ensures seamless access to fast payout and instant withdrawal casino features on iOS and Android devices, eliminating the need for a dedicated app. Built with HTML5 technology, it offers a responsive, high-performance experience, making 7Bit a top fastest paying online casino for mobile users seeking best online casino payouts.

    • Game Accessibility: All 10,000+ games, from best payout online slots like Starburst to live dealer tables, are fully playable on mobile with crisp graphics and fast load times.
    • Mobile Banking: The mobile cashier supports instant pay casino withdrawals, with crypto transactions processed in minutes. Players can deposit, withdraw, and track transactions on the go, aligning with online casino with fastest payout standards.
    • Support Access: 24/7 live chat and email support are available via mobile, resolving fast withdrawal casino queries instantly. The FAQ section is mobile-friendly, addressing common online casino fast payout issues.
    • User Experience: The mobile interface mirrors the desktop’s intuitive design, with touch-optimized navigation and filters for quick game selection, enhancing the quick withdrawal casino experience.

    Responsible Gambling at 7Bit Casino – Supporting Safe Fast Payouts

    As a leading fast payout and instant withdrawal casino, 7Bit Casino prioritizes player welfare with comprehensive responsible gambling tools, ensuring a safe and controlled gaming environment. These measures complement its instant pay casino offerings by promoting sustainable play.

    Responsible Gambling Tools

    7Bit provides a suite of tools to help players manage their gambling:

    • Deposit Limits: Set daily, weekly, or monthly caps to control spending, aligning with same-day payout casino budgeting.
    • Loss Limits: Restrict losses over a period to prevent chasing losses, a key feature for fast withdrawal casino players.
    • Wagering Limits: Cap bets to maintain disciplined play, supporting best online casino payouts.
    • Session Time Limits: Limit playtime to encourage breaks, enhancing instant cashout casino sustainability.
    • Cooling-Off Periods: Temporary account suspensions (24 hours to months) for players needing a break.
    • Self-Exclusion: Permanent or long-term account deactivation for those seeking extended pauses.
    • Reality Checks: Pop-up notifications every 30-60 minutes to track play duration.

    Support Resources

    7Bit partners with organizations like GamCare (www.gamcare.org.uk) and Gamblers Anonymous (www.gamblersanonymous.org), providing links and helplines for professional support. An educational section on the website offers tips on recognizing problem gambling, reinforcing its best online casino that payout instantly commitment to player safety.

    Compliance and Transparency

    Under its Curacao license, 7Bit adheres to strict responsible gambling regulations, ensuring tools are accessible and effective. Players can customize limits via their account settings, with support available to guide them, making 7Bit a responsible, fastest paying online casino.

    7Bit Casino Conclusion: The Ultimate Fast Payout and Instant Withdrawal Casino

    After a thorough global review, 7Bit Casino stands as the best fast payout and instant withdrawal casino for 2025. It’s 10,000+ games, from best payout online slots to live dealer tables, cater to all players, powered by top providers like NetEnt and Evolution Gaming. The 325% welcome bonus up to 5.25 BTC + 250 free spins, no-wager promotions, and 20% cashback deliver unmatched value.

    Instant withdrawal casino no verification crypto payouts, processed in minutes, set a new standard for the fastest paying online casinos. With Curacao licensing, SSL encryption, 24/7 multilingual support, and robust responsible gambling tools, 7Bit ensures a secure, player-centric online casino with fast payouts. Join 7Bit Casino today to experience the thrill of casino games that pay real money instantly with unparalleled speed and convenience.

    Frequently Asked Questions

    • What defines a fast payout and instant withdrawal casino?

    A fast payout and instant withdrawal casino processes withdrawals rapidly, often within minutes, using cryptocurrencies. 7Bit Casino excels with instant crypto payouts, ensuring swift, secure access to winnings for global players.

    • Why is 7Bit Casino the best fast payout casino?

    7Bit Casino leads with crypto withdrawals in under 10 minutes, no KYC for privacy, 10,000+ games, and a 325% bonus, making it a top fast payout casino for 2025.

    • What payment methods support 7Bit’s fast payouts?

    7Bit Casino offers Bitcoin, Ethereum, Litecoin, and fiat options like Visa and Skrill. Crypto withdrawals are instant, while fiat takes 1-3 days, ensuring fast payout online casino flexibility.

    • Are there fees for withdrawals at 7Bit Casino?

    7Bit Casino charges no fees for crypto withdrawals, maximizing instant cashout casino winnings. Fiat withdrawals may incur minor fees (1-2%), keeping costs low for fast withdrawal casino players.

    • How does 7Bit’s no KYC policy benefit players?

    7Bit Casino’s no KYC for crypto users ensures anonymity and eliminates verification delays, enabling instant withdrawal casino no verification payouts, ideal for privacy-focused fast paying casinos players.

    • What games offer instant payouts at 7Bit Casino?

    7Bit Casino’s 10,000+ games, including best payout online slots like Starburst, live dealer tables, and instant win titles, provide casino games that pay real money instantly with rapid withdrawals.

    • Can I play 7Bit Casino on mobile for fast payouts?

    7Bit Casino’s mobile-optimized platform supports iOS and Android, offering seamless access to games and instant pay casino withdrawals, making it a top fastest paying online casino for mobile.

    • What bonuses enhance 7Bit’s fast payout experience?

    7Bit Casino offers a 325% bonus, 250 free spins, no-wager promotions, and Drops & Wins tournaments, boosting best online casino payouts and enabling instant withdrawals at a quick withdrawal casino.

    • Is 7Bit Casino a secure fast payout casino?

    Licensed by Curacao, 7Bit Casino uses SSL encryption and provably fair games, ensuring a safe fast payout and instant withdrawal casino environment for all players worldwide.

    • How does 7Bit Casino ensure responsible gambling?

    7Bit Casino provides deposit limits, self-exclusion, and links to GamCare, promoting safe play at a fast payout casino, ensuring players enjoy instant cashout casino responsibly.

    Email: support@7bitcasino.com

    Legal Disclaimer

    This content is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal, financial, or gambling advice. Information is presented “as is,” without warranties. Readers must verify compliance with local gambling laws. The publisher is not liable for losses or consequences.

    Affiliate Disclosure

    Some links may be affiliate links, earning a commission at no cost to you. Recommendations are objective, and partnerships do not influence content or conclusions.

    A photo accompanying this announcement is available at https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/5c6a23fa-0a7a-4336-8025-485f0997df63

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI: Qorvo® Announces Fiscal 2025 Fourth Quarter Financial Results

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    GREENSBORO, N.C., April 29, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Qorvo® (Nasdaq:QRVO), a leading global provider of connectivity and power solutions, today announced financial results for the Company’s fiscal 2025 fourth quarter ended March 29, 2025.

    On a GAAP basis, revenue for Qorvo’s fiscal 2025 fourth quarter was $869.5 million, gross margin was 42.2%, operating income was $28.2 million, and diluted earnings per share was $0.33. On a non-GAAP basis, gross margin was 45.9%, operating income was $151.8 million, and diluted earnings per share was $1.42.

    Bob Bruggeworth, president and chief executive officer of Qorvo, said, “During the March quarter, Qorvo achieved stronger than seasonal sequential revenue while surpassing the midpoint of EPS guidance by 42 cents and expanding gross margin year-over-year.  Looking across our business segments, our growth and margin targets are anchored in a multi-year strategy focused on winning content with our largest customer and building on our core RF and power expertise to drive diversification through CSG and HPA. We are on a path to continue to improve our business mix and our manufacturing footprint.”

    Financial Commentary and Outlook

    Grant Brown, chief financial officer of Qorvo, said, “Qorvo’s fiscal fourth quarter results exceeded the midpoint of our guidance on revenue, gross margin and EPS. Furthermore, we generated $171 million of free cash flow in the fourth quarter and $485 million during fiscal 2025. While we continue to monitor ongoing macroeconomic factors, including tariff and trade policy uncertainty, we remain focused on our operational objectives — including portfolio optimization, factory consolidation, and continued cost discipline — that position us to expand margins, enhance operational efficiency, and drive shareholder value.”

    Qorvo’s current outlook for the June 2025 quarter is:

    • Quarterly revenue of approximately $775 million, plus or minus $25 million
    • Non-GAAP gross margin between 42% and 44%
    • Non-GAAP diluted earnings per share between $0.50 and $0.75

    See “Forward-looking non-GAAP financial measures” below. Qorvo’s actual quarterly results may differ from these expectations and projections, and such differences may be material.

    Selected Financial Information

    The following tables set forth selected GAAP and non-GAAP financial information for Qorvo for the periods indicated. See the more detailed financial information for Qorvo, including reconciliations of GAAP and non-GAAP financial information, attached.

    SELECTED GAAP RESULTS
    (In millions, except for percentages and EPS)
    (Unaudited)
                         
      Q4 Fiscal 2025   Q3 Fiscal 2025   Q4 Fiscal 2024   Sequential Change   Year-over-Year Change
    Revenue $         869.5       $         916.3       $         941.0       $         (46.8 )     $         (71.5 )  
    Gross profit $         366.6       $         391.4       $         381.9       $         (24.8 )     $         (15.3 )  
    Gross margin   42.2   %     42.7   %     40.6   %     (0.5 ) ppt     1.6   ppt
    Operating expenses $         338.3       $         338.4       $         351.9       $         (0.1 )     $         (13.6 )  
    Operating income $         28.2       $         53.0       $         30.0       $         (24.8 )     $         (1.8 )  
    Net income $         31.4       $         41.3       $         2.7       $         (9.9 )     $         28.7    
    Weighted-average diluted shares           94.1                 95.0                 97.3                 (0.9 )               (3.2 )  
    Diluted EPS $         0.33       $         0.43       $         0.03       $         (0.10 )     $         0.30    
                         
                         
    SELECTED NON-GAAP RESULTS (1)
    (In millions, except for percentages and EPS)
    (Unaudited)
                         
      Q4 Fiscal 2025   Q3 Fiscal 2025   Q4 Fiscal 2024   Sequential Change   Year-over-Year Change
    Revenue $         869.5       $         916.3       $         941.0       $         (46.8 )     $         (71.5 )  
    Gross profit $         398.7       $         426.3       $         400.4       $         (27.6 )     $         (1.7 )  
    Gross margin   45.9   %     46.5   %     42.5   %     (0.6 ) ppt     3.4   ppt
    Operating expenses $         246.8       $         248.4       $         253.2       $         (1.6 )     $         (6.4 )  
    Operating income $         151.8       $         177.9       $         147.2       $         (26.1 )     $         4.6    
    Net income $         133.3       $         152.8       $         135.5       $         (19.5 )     $         (2.2 )  
    Weighted-average diluted shares           94.1                 95.0                 97.3                 (0.9 )               (3.2 )  
    Diluted EPS $         1.42       $         1.61       $         1.39       $         (0.19 )     $         0.03    
     
    (1) Adjusted for stock-based compensation expense, amortization of intangible assets, restructuring-related charges, acquisition and integration-related costs, goodwill and other asset impairments, net adjustments related to a terminated capacity reservation agreement, gain or loss on assets, other expense or income, gain or loss on investments, and an adjustment of income taxes.
     
    SELECTED GAAP RESULTS BY OPERATING SEGMENT
    (In millions, except percentages)
    (Unaudited)
     
      Q4 Fiscal 2025   Q3 Fiscal 2025   Q4 Fiscal 2024   Sequential Change
    		   Year-over-Year Change
    Revenue                          
    HPA $         187.9       $         171.7       $         164.6               9.4   %   14.2   %
    CSG           101.3                 109.5                 122.8               (7.5 ) %   (17.5 ) %
    ACG           580.3                 635.1                 653.6               (8.6 ) %   (11.2 ) %
    Total revenue $         869.5       $         916.3       $         941.0               (5.1 ) %   (7.6 ) %
    Operating income (loss)                          
    HPA $         58.4       $         32.6       $         31.5               79.1   %   85.4   %
    CSG           (15.6 )               (11.7 )               (15.2 )             (33.3 ) %   (2.6 ) %
    ACG           109.7                 161.2                 134.3               (31.9 ) %   (18.3 ) %
    Unallocated amounts (1)           (124.3 )               (129.1 )               (120.6 )             3.7   %   (3.1 ) %
    Total operating income $         28.2       $         53.0       $         30.0               (46.8 ) %   (6.0 ) %
    Operating income (loss) as a % of revenue                            
    HPA           31.1   %             19.0   %             19.1   %   12.1   ppt   12.0   ppt
    CSG           (15.4 )               (10.7 )               (12.4 )     (4.7 ) ppt   (3.0 ) ppt
    ACG           18.9                 25.4                 20.5       (6.5 ) ppt   (1.6 ) ppt
    Total operating income as a % of revenue           3.3   %             5.8   %             3.2   %   (2.5 ) ppt   —   ppt
                                                 
    (1) Includes stock-based compensation expense, amortization of intangible assets, restructuring-related charges, acquisition and integration-related costs, goodwill and other asset impairments, net adjustments related to a terminated capacity reservation agreement, gain or loss on assets, other expense or income, costs associated with upgrading certain of the Company’s core business systems and other miscellaneous corporate overhead expenses.


    Non-GAAP Financial Measures

    In addition to disclosing financial results calculated in accordance with United States (U.S.) generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), this earnings release contains some or all of the following non-GAAP financial measures: (i) non-GAAP gross profit and gross margin, (ii) non-GAAP operating expenses, operating income and operating margin, (iii) non-GAAP net income, (iv) non-GAAP net income per diluted share, (v) free cash flow, (vi) EBITDA, (vii) non-GAAP return on invested capital (ROIC), and (viii) net debt or positive net cash. Each of these non-GAAP financial measures is either adjusted from GAAP results to exclude certain expenses or derived from multiple GAAP measures, which are outlined in the “Reconciliation of GAAP to Non-GAAP Financial Measures” tables, attached, and the “Additional Selected Non-GAAP Financial Measures and Reconciliations” tables, attached.

    In managing Qorvo’s business on a consolidated basis, management develops an annual operating plan, which is approved by our Board of Directors, using non-GAAP financial measures. In developing and monitoring performance against this plan, management considers the actual or potential impacts on these non-GAAP financial measures from actions taken to reduce costs with the goal of increasing gross margin and operating margin. In addition, management relies upon these non-GAAP financial measures to assess whether research and development efforts are at an appropriate level, and when making decisions about product spending, administrative budgets, and other operating expenses. Also, we believe that non-GAAP financial measures provide useful supplemental information to investors and enable investors to analyze the results of operations in the same way as management. We have chosen to provide this supplemental information to enable investors to perform additional comparisons of our operating results, to assess our liquidity and capital position and to analyze financial performance excluding the effect of expenses unrelated to operations, and stock-based compensation expense, which may obscure trends in Qorvo’s underlying performance.

    We believe that these non-GAAP financial measures offer an additional view of Qorvo’s operations that, when coupled with the GAAP results and the reconciliations to corresponding GAAP financial measures, provide a more complete understanding of Qorvo’s results of operations and the factors and trends affecting Qorvo’s business. However, these non-GAAP financial measures should be considered as a supplement to, and not as a substitute for, or superior to, the corresponding measures calculated in accordance with GAAP.

    Our rationale for using these non-GAAP financial measures, as well as their impact on the presentation of Qorvo’s operations, are outlined below:

    Non-GAAP gross profit and gross margin. Non-GAAP gross profit and gross margin exclude amortization of intangible assets, stock-based compensation expense, restructuring-related charges, acquisition and integration-related costs, and certain other expense (income). We believe that exclusion of these costs in presenting non-GAAP gross profit and gross margin facilitates a useful evaluation of our historical performance and projected costs and the potential for realizing cost efficiencies.

    We view amortization of acquisition-related intangible assets, such as the amortization of the cost associated with an acquired company’s research and development efforts, trade names, and customer relationships, as items arising from pre-acquisition activities, determined at the time of an acquisition, rather than ongoing costs of operating Qorvo’s business. While these intangible assets are continually evaluated for impairment, amortization of the cost of purchased intangible assets is a static expense, which is not typically affected by operations during any particular period. Although we exclude the amortization of purchased intangible assets from these non-GAAP financial measures, management believes that it is important for investors to understand that such intangible assets were recorded as part of purchase price accounting and contribute to revenue generation.

    We believe that presentation of non-GAAP gross profit and gross margin and other non-GAAP financial measures that exclude the impact of stock-based compensation expense assists management and investors in evaluating the period-over-period performance of Qorvo’s ongoing operations because (i) the expenses are non-cash in nature, and (ii) although the size of the grants is within our control, the amount of expense varies depending on factors such as short-term fluctuations in stock price volatility and prevailing interest rates, which can be unrelated to the operational performance of Qorvo during the period in which the expense is incurred and generally are outside the control of management. Moreover, we believe that the exclusion of stock-based compensation expense in presenting non-GAAP gross profit and gross margin and other non-GAAP financial measures is useful to investors to understand the impact of the expensing of stock-based compensation to Qorvo’s gross profit and gross margins and other financial measures in comparison to prior periods. We also believe that the adjustments to profit and margin related to restructuring-related charges, and acquisition and integration-related costs do not constitute part of Qorvo’s ongoing operations and therefore the exclusion of these items provides management and investors with better visibility into the actual costs required to generate revenues over time and facilitates a useful evaluation of our historical and projected performance. We believe disclosure of non-GAAP gross profit and gross margin has economic substance because the excluded expenses do not represent continuing cash expenditures and, as described above, we have little control over the timing and amount of the expenses in question.

    Non-GAAP gross profit and gross margin also exclude net adjustments related to a terminated capacity reservation agreement. In October 2023, a long-term capacity reservation agreement with a foundry supplier was amended. Pursuant to the amendment, Qorvo is no longer obligated to order silicon wafers from the foundry supplier and the agreement was terminated effective December 31, 2023. We believe these net adjustments are not reflective of the performance of our ongoing business.

    Non-GAAP operating expenses, operating income and operating margin. Non-GAAP operating expenses, operating income and operating margin exclude stock-based compensation expense, amortization of intangible assets, acquisition and integration-related costs, goodwill and other asset impairments, restructuring-related charges, net adjustments related to a terminated capacity reservation agreement, (gain) loss on assets and certain other expense (income). We believe that presentation of a measure of operating expenses, operating income and operating margin that excludes amortization of intangible assets and stock-based compensation expense is useful to both management and investors for the same reasons as described above with respect to our use of non-GAAP gross profit and gross margin. We believe that acquisition and integration-related costs, goodwill and other asset impairments, restructuring-related charges, net adjustments related to a terminated capacity reservation agreement, (gain) loss on assets and certain other expense (income) do not constitute part of Qorvo’s ongoing operations and therefore, the exclusion of these costs provides management and investors with better visibility into the actual costs required to generate revenues over time and facilitates a useful evaluation of our historical and projected performance. We believe disclosure of non-GAAP operating expenses, operating income and operating margin has economic substance because the excluded expenses are either unrelated to ongoing operations or do not represent current cash expenditures.

    Non-GAAP net income and non-GAAP net income per diluted share. Non-GAAP net income and non-GAAP net income per diluted share exclude the effects of stock-based compensation expense, amortization of intangible assets, acquisition and integration-related costs, goodwill and other asset impairments, restructuring-related charges, net adjustments related to a terminated capacity reservation agreement, (gain) loss on assets, certain other expense (income), gain or loss on investments, and also reflect an adjustment of income taxes. The income tax adjustment primarily represents the use of research and development tax credit carryforwards, deferred tax expense (benefit) items not affecting taxes payable, adjustments related to the deemed and actual repatriation of historical foreign earnings, non-cash expense (benefit) related to uncertain tax positions and other items unrelated to the current fiscal year or that are not indicative of our ongoing business operations. We believe that presentation of measures of net income and net income per diluted share that exclude these items is useful to both management and investors for the reasons described above with respect to non-GAAP gross profit and gross margin and non-GAAP operating expenses, operating income and operating margin. We believe disclosure of non-GAAP net income and non-GAAP net income per diluted share has economic substance because the excluded expenses are either unrelated to ongoing operations or do not represent current cash expenditures.

    Free cash flow. Qorvo defines free cash flow as net cash provided by operating activities during the period minus property and equipment expenditures made during the period, and free cash flow margin is calculated as free cash flow as a percentage of revenue. We use free cash flow as a supplemental financial measure in our evaluation of liquidity and financial strength. Management believes that this measure is useful as an indicator of our ability to service our debt, meet other payment obligations and make strategic investments. Free cash flow should be considered in addition to, rather than as a substitute for, net income as a measure of our performance and net cash provided by operating activities as a measure of our liquidity. Additionally, our definition of free cash flow is limited, in that it does not represent residual cash flows available for discretionary expenditures due to the fact that the measure does not deduct the payments required for debt service and other contractual obligations. Therefore, we believe it is important to view free cash flow as a measure that provides supplemental information to our entire statement of cash flows.

    EBITDA. Qorvo adjusts GAAP net income for interest expense, interest income, income tax expense (benefit), depreciation and intangible amortization expense, stock-based compensation and other charges that are not representative of Qorvo’s ongoing operations (including goodwill and other asset impairments, investment activity, acquisition-related costs and restructuring-related costs and certain net adjustments related to a terminated capacity reservation agreement) when presenting EBITDA. Management believes that this measure is useful to evaluate our ongoing operations and as a general indicator of our operating cash flow (in conjunction with a cash flow statement which also includes among other items, changes in working capital and the effect of non-cash charges).

    Non-GAAP ROIC. ROIC is a non-GAAP financial measure that management believes provides useful supplemental information for management and the investor by measuring the effectiveness of our operations’ use of invested capital to generate profits. We use ROIC to track how much value we are creating for our shareholders. Non-GAAP ROIC is calculated by dividing annualized non-GAAP operating income, net of an adjustment for income taxes (as described above), by average invested capital. Average invested capital is calculated by subtracting the average of the beginning balance and the ending balance of equity plus net debt, less certain goodwill.

    Net debt or positive net cash. Net debt or positive net cash is defined as unrestricted cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments minus any borrowings under our credit facility and the principal balance of our senior unsecured notes. Management believes that net debt or positive net cash provides useful information regarding the level of Qorvo’s indebtedness by reflecting cash and investments that could be used to repay debt.

    Inventory days on hand. Inventory days on hand is defined as (a) average net inventory for the period, divided by (b) the result of non-GAAP cost of goods sold for the period divided by the number of days in the period.

    Forward-looking non-GAAP financial measures. Our earnings release contains forward-looking free cash flow, gross margin, income tax rate and diluted earnings per share. We provide these non-GAAP measures to investors on a prospective basis for the same reasons (set forth above) that we provide them to investors on a historical basis. We are unable to provide a reconciliation of the forward-looking non-GAAP financial measures to the most directly comparable forward-looking GAAP financial measures without unreasonable effort due to variability and difficulty in making accurate projections for items that would be required to be included in the GAAP measures, such as stock-based compensation, acquisition and integration-related costs, restructuring-related charges, gain or loss on assets, goodwill and other asset impairments, gain or loss on investments and the provision for income taxes, which could have a potentially significant impact on our future GAAP results.

    Limitations of non-GAAP financial measures. The primary material limitations associated with the use of non-GAAP financial measures as an analytical tool compared to the most directly comparable GAAP financial measures are these non-GAAP financial measures (i) may not be comparable to similarly titled measures used by other companies in our industry, and (ii) exclude financial information that some may consider important in evaluating our performance, thus limiting their usefulness as a comparative tool. We compensate for these limitations by providing full disclosure of the differences between these non-GAAP financial measures and the corresponding GAAP financial measures, including a reconciliation of the non-GAAP financial measures to the corresponding GAAP financial measures, to enable investors to perform their own analysis of our gross profit and gross margin, operating expenses, operating income, net income, net income per diluted share and net cash provided by operating activities. We further compensate for the limitations of our use of non-GAAP financial measures by presenting the corresponding GAAP measures more prominently.

    Qorvo will conduct a conference call at 4:30 p.m. ET today to discuss today’s press release. The conference call will be broadcast live over the Internet and can be accessed by any interested party at the following URL: https://ir.qorvo.com (under “Events & Presentations”). A telephone playback of the conference call will be available approximately two hours after the call’s completion and can be accessed by dialing 1-412-317-0088 and using the passcode 2889510. The playback will be available through the close of business May 6, 2025.

    About Qorvo

    Qorvo (Nasdaq:QRVO) supplies innovative semiconductor solutions that make a better world possible. We combine product and technology leadership, systems-level expertise and global manufacturing scale to quickly solve our customers’ most complex technical challenges. Qorvo serves diverse high-growth segments of large global markets, including automotive, consumer, defense & aerospace, industrial & enterprise, infrastructure and mobile. Visit www.qorvo.com to learn how our diverse and innovative team is helping connect, protect and power our planet.

    Qorvo is a registered trademark of Qorvo, Inc. in the U.S. and in other countries. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.

    This press release includes “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements about our plans, objectives, representations and contentions, and are not historical facts and typically are identified by terms such as “may,” “will,” “should,” “could,” “expect,” “plan,” “anticipate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “forecast,” “predict,” “potential,” “continue” and similar words, although some forward-looking statements are expressed differently. You should be aware that the forward-looking statements included herein represent management’s current judgment and expectations as of the date the statement is first made, but our actual results, events and performance could differ materially from those expressed or implied by forward-looking statements. We caution you not to place undue reliance upon any such forward-looking statements. We do not intend to update any of these forward-looking statements or publicly announce the results of any revisions to these forward-looking statements, other than as is required under U.S. federal securities laws. Our business is subject to numerous risks and uncertainties, including those relating to fluctuations in our operating results on a quarterly and annual basis; our substantial dependence on developing new products and achieving design wins; our dependence on several large customers for a substantial portion of our revenue; a loss of revenue if defense and aerospace contracts are canceled or delayed; our dependence on third parties; risks related to sales through distributors; risks associated with the operation of our manufacturing facilities; business disruptions; poor manufacturing yields; increased inventory risks and costs, due to timing of customers’ forecasts; our inability to effectively manage or maintain relationships with chipset suppliers; our ability to continue to innovate in a very competitive industry; underutilization of manufacturing facilities; unfavorable changes in interest rates, pricing of certain precious metals, utility rates and foreign currency exchange rates; our acquisitions, divestitures and other strategic investments failing to achieve financial or strategic objectives; our ability to attract, retain and motivate key employees; warranty claims, product recalls and product liability; changes in our effective tax rate; enactment of international or domestic tax legislation, or changes in regulatory guidance; changes in the favorable tax status of certain of our subsidiaries; risks associated with social, environmental, health and safety regulations, and climate change; risks from international sales and operations; economic regulation in China; changes in government trade policies, including imposition of tariffs and export restrictions; we may not be able to generate sufficient cash to service all of our debt; restrictions imposed by the agreements governing our debt; our reliance on our intellectual property portfolio; claims of infringement of third-party intellectual property rights; security breaches, failed system upgrades or regular maintenance and other similar disruptions to our IT systems; theft, loss or misuse of personal data by or about our employees, customers or third parties; provisions in our governing documents and Delaware law may discourage takeovers and business combinations that our stockholders might consider to be in their best interests; and volatility in the price of our common stock. These and other risks and uncertainties, which are described in more detail under “Risk Factors” in Part I, Item 1A of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended March 30, 2024, and Qorvo’s subsequent reports and statements that we file with the SEC, could cause actual results and developments to be materially different from those expressed or implied by any of these forward-looking statements.

    # # #

    Financial Tables to Follow

     
    QORVO, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
    (In thousands, except per share data)
    (Unaudited)
     
      Three Months Ended   Twelve Months Ended
      March 29, 2025   March 30, 2024   March 29, 2025   March 30, 2024
    Revenue $         869,474     $         940,988     $         3,718,971     $         3,769,506  
                   
    Costs and expenses:              
    Cost of goods sold           502,911               559,131               2,183,382               2,281,011  
    Research and development           179,931               179,883               747,709               682,249  
    Selling, general and administrative           90,581               93,107               403,624               389,140  
    Other operating expense           67,830               78,889               288,729               325,405  
    Total costs and expenses           841,253               911,010               3,623,444               3,677,805  
                   
    Operating income           28,221               29,978               95,527               91,701  
    Interest expense           (19,985 )             (17,282 )             (78,328 )             (69,245 )
    Other income, net           6,987               16,818               48,700               51,104  
                   
    Income before income taxes           15,223               29,514               65,899               73,560  
    Income tax benefit (expense)           16,142               (26,779 )             (10,284 )             (143,882 )
    Net income (loss) $         31,365     $         2,735     $         55,615     $         (70,322 )
                   
    Net income (loss) per share:              
    Basic $         0.34     $         0.03     $         0.59     $         (0.72 )
    Diluted $         0.33     $         0.03     $         0.58     $         (0.72 )
                   
    Weighted-average shares of common stock outstanding:              
    Basic           93,249               96,277               94,586               97,557  
    Diluted           94,105               97,335               95,450               97,557  
     
    QORVO, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    RECONCILIATION OF GAAP TO NON-GAAP FINANCIAL MEASURES
    (In thousands, except per share data)
    (Unaudited)
     
      Three Months Ended
      March 29, 2025   December 28, 2024   March 30, 2024
               
    GAAP operating income $         28,221     $         53,025     $         29,978  
    Stock-based compensation expense           27,415               28,384               21,581  
    Amortization of intangible assets           24,040               26,085               31,187  
    Restructuring-related (adjustments) charges   (17,252 )             68,072               55,535  
    Goodwill and intangible asset impairment   79,503                         —                                    —  
    Acquisition and integration-related costs           4,395               1,382               6,596  
    Net adjustments related to a terminated capacity reservation agreement           (720 )             (1,253 )             (13,445 )
    Other expense           6,247               2,216               15,792  
    Non-GAAP operating income $         151,849     $         177,911     $         147,224  
               
    GAAP net income $         31,365     $         41,271     $         2,735  
    Stock-based compensation expense           27,415               28,384               21,581  
    Amortization of intangible assets           24,040               26,085               31,187  
    Restructuring-related (adjustments) charges   (17,252 )             68,072               55,535  
    Goodwill and intangible asset impairment   79,503       —       —  
    Acquisition and integration-related costs           4,395               1,382               6,596  
    Net adjustments related to a terminated capacity reservation agreement           (720 )             (1,253 )             (13,445 )
    Other expense           8,889               600               10,662  
    Loss (gain) on investment           802               (1,721 )             1,805  
    Adjustment of income taxes           (25,095 )             (10,067 )             18,874  
    Non-GAAP net income $         133,342     $         152,753     $         135,530  
               
    GAAP weighted-average outstanding diluted shares           94,105               95,031               97,335  
    Dilutive stock-based awards           —               —               —  
    Non-GAAP weighted-average outstanding diluted shares           94,105               95,031               97,335  
               
    Non-GAAP net income per share, diluted $         1.42     $         1.61     $         1.39  
     
    QORVO, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    RECONCILIATION OF GAAP TO NON-GAAP FINANCIAL MEASURES
    (Unaudited)
     
      Three Months Ended
    (in thousands, except percentages) March 29, 2025   December 28, 2024   March 30, 2024
    GAAP gross profit/margin $         366,563           42.2   %   $         391,416           42.7   %   $         381,857           40.6   %
    Stock-based compensation expense           5,645           0.7                 5,742           0.6                 3,444           0.3    
    Amortization of intangible assets           21,684           2.5                 23,462           2.6                 26,031           2.8    
    Restructuring-related charges           5,492           0.6                 6,931           0.7                 1,212           0.1    
    Acquisition and integration-related costs           1           —                 1           —                 1,281           0.1    
    Net adjustments related to a terminated capacity reservation agreement           (720 )         (0.1 )               (1,253 )         (0.1 )               (13,445 )         (1.4 )  
    Non-GAAP gross profit/margin $         398,665           45.9   %   $         426,299           46.5   %   $         400,380           42.5   %
      Three Months Ended
    Non-GAAP Operating Income March 29, 2025
    (as a percentage of revenue)  
       
    GAAP operating income         3.3   %
    Stock-based compensation expense         3.2    
    Amortization of intangible assets         2.8    
    Restructuring-related adjustments (2.0 )  
    Goodwill and intangible asset impairment 9.1    
    Acquisition and integration-related costs         0.5    
    Net adjustments related to a terminated capacity reservation agreement         (0.1 )  
    Other expense         0.7    
    Non-GAAP operating income         17.5   %
      Three Months Ended
    Free Cash Flow (1) March 29, 2025
    (in millions)  
       
    Net cash provided by operating activities $         199.2  
    Purchases of property and equipment           (28.5 )
    Free cash flow $         170.7  
     
    (1) Free Cash Flow is calculated as net cash provided by operating activities minus property and equipment expenditures.
     
    QORVO, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    ADDITIONAL SELECTED NON-GAAP FINANCIAL MEASURES AND RECONCILIATIONS
    (In thousands)
    (Unaudited)
     
      Three Months Ended
      March 29, 2025   December 28, 2024   March 30, 2024
    GAAP research and development expense $ 179,931     $ 179,126     $ 179,883  
    Less:              
    Stock-based compensation expense   14,364       13,650       11,812  
    Acquisition and integration-related costs   1       1       1  
    Non-GAAP research and development expense $ 165,566     $ 165,475     $ 168,070  
                   
      Three Months Ended
      March 29, 2025   December 28, 2024   March 30, 2024
    GAAP selling, general and administrative expense $ 90,581     $ 90,360     $ 93,107  
    Less:              
    Stock-based compensation expense   7,576       8,985       6,291  
    Amortization of intangible assets   2,356       2,623       5,156  
    Non-GAAP selling, general and administrative expense $ 80,649     $ 78,752     $ 81,660  
                   
      Three Months Ended
      March 29, 2025   December 28, 2024   March 30, 2024
    GAAP other operating expense $ 67,830     $ 68,905     $ 78,889  
    Less:              
    Stock-based compensation (adjustment) expense   (170 )     7       34  
    Restructuring-related (adjustments) charges   (22,744 )     61,141       54,323  
    Goodwill and intangible asset impairment   79,503                                    —                                    —  
    Acquisition and integration-related costs   4,393       1,380       5,314  
    Other expense   6,247       2,216       15,792  
    Non-GAAP other operating expense $ 601     $ 4,161     $ 3,426  
                   
      Three Months Ended
      March 29, 2025   December 28, 2024   March 30, 2024
    GAAP total operating expense $ 338,342     $ 338,391     $ 351,879  
    Less:              
    Stock-based compensation expense   21,770       22,642       18,137  
    Amortization of intangible assets   2,356       2,623       5,156  
    Restructuring-related (adjustments) charges   (22,744 )     61,141       54,323  
    Goodwill and intangible asset impairment   79,503                                   —                                    —  
    Acquisition and integration-related costs   4,394       1,381       5,315  
    Other expense   6,247       2,216       15,792  
    Non-GAAP total operating expense $ 246,816     $ 248,388     $ 253,156  
     
    QORVO, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
    (In thousands)
    (Unaudited)
     
      March 29, 2025   March 30, 2024
    ASSETS      
    Current assets:      
    Cash and cash equivalents $         1,021,176     $         1,029,258  
    Accounts receivable, net           386,719               412,960  
    Inventories           640,992               710,555  
    Other current assets           118,388               133,983  
    Assets of disposal group held for sale           —               159,278  
    Total current assets           2,167,275               2,446,034  
           
    Property and equipment, net           801,895               870,982  
    Goodwill           2,389,741               2,534,601  
    Intangible assets, net           273,478               509,383  
    Long-term investments           23,433               23,252  
    Other non-current assets           277,309               170,383  
    Total assets $         5,933,131     $         6,554,635  
           
    LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY      
    Current liabilities:      
    Accounts payable and accrued liabilities $         548,644     $         589,760  
    Current portion of long-term debt           —               438,740  
    Other current liabilities           234,538               113,215  
    Liabilities of disposal group held for sale           —               88,372  
    Total current liabilities           783,182               1,230,087  
           
    Long-term debt           1,549,215               1,549,272  
    Other long-term liabilities           208,422               218,904  
    Total liabilities           2,540,819               2,998,263  
           
    Stockholders’ equity           3,392,312               3,556,372  
    Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity $         5,933,131     $         6,554,635  

    At Qorvo®
    Doug DeLieto
    VP, Investor Relations
    1.336.678.7968

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI: NMI Holdings, Inc. Reports Record First Quarter 2025 Financial Results

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    EMERYVILLE, Calif., April 29, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — NMI Holdings, Inc. (Nasdaq: NMIH) today reported net income of $102.6 million, or $1.28 per diluted share, for the first quarter ended March 31, 2025, compared to $86.2 million, or $1.07 per diluted share, for the fourth quarter ended December 31, 2024 and $89.0 million, or $1.08 per diluted share, for the first quarter ended March 31, 2024. Adjusted net income for the quarter was $102.5 million, or $1.28 per diluted share, compared to $86.1 million, or $1.07 per diluted share, for the fourth quarter ended December 31, 2024 and $89.0 million, or $1.08 per diluted share, for the first quarter ended March 31, 2024.

    Adam Pollitzer, President and Chief Executive Officer of National MI, said, “In the first quarter, we again delivered standout operating performance, continued growth in our high-quality insured portfolio and record financial results. We have a strong customer franchise, a talented team driving us forward every day, an exceptionally high-quality book covered by a comprehensive set of risk transfer solutions, and a robust balance sheet supported by the significant earnings power of our platform. We continue to manage our business with discipline and a focus on through-the-cycle performance, and looking forward, we’re well positioned to continue to serve our customers and their borrowers, support our talented team, and deliver sustained performance and long-term value for our shareholders.”

    Selected first quarter 2025 highlights include:

    • Primary insurance-in-force at quarter end was $211.3 billion, compared to $210.2 billion at the end of the fourth quarter and $199.4 billion at the end of the first quarter of 2024.
    • Net premiums earned were $149.4 million, compared to $143.5 million in the fourth quarter and $136.7 million in the first quarter of 2024.
    • Total revenue was $173.2 million, compared to $166.5 million in the fourth quarter and $156.3 million in the first quarter of 2024.
    • Insurance claims and claim expenses were $4.5 million, compared to $17.3 million in the fourth quarter and $3.7 million in the first quarter of 2024. Loss ratio was 3.0%, compared to 12.0% in the fourth quarter and 2.7% in the first quarter of 2024.
    • Underwriting and operating expenses were $30.2 million, compared to $31.1 million in the fourth quarter and $29.8 million in the first quarter of 2024. Expense ratio was 20.2%, compared to 21.7% in the fourth quarter and 21.8% in the first quarter of 2024.
    • Net income was $102.6 million, compared to $86.2 million in the fourth quarter and $89.0 million in the first quarter of 2024. Diluted EPS was $1.28, compared to $1.07 in the fourth quarter and $1.08 in the first quarter of 2024.
    • Shareholders’ equity was $2.3 billion at quarter end and book value per share was $29.65. Book value per share excluding the impact of net unrealized gains and losses in the investment portfolio was $30.85, up 4% compared to $29.80 in the fourth quarter and 17% compared to $26.42 in the first quarter of 2024.
    • Annualized return on equity for the quarter was 18.1%, compared to 15.6% in the fourth quarter and 18.2% in the first quarter of 2024.
    • At quarter-end, total PMIERs available assets were $3.2 billion and net risk-based required assets were $1.9 billion.
      Quarter Ended Quarter Ended Quarter Ended Change(1) Change(1)
      3/31/2025 12/31/2024 3/31/2024 Q/Q Y/Y
    INSURANCE METRICS ($billions)
    Primary Insurance-in-Force $ 211.3   $ 210.2   $ 199.4   1 % 6 %
    New Insurance Written – NIW   9.2     11.9     9.4   (23) % (2)%
               
    FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS (Unaudited, $millions, except per share amounts)
    Net Premiums Earned $ 149.4   $ 143.5   $ 136.7   4 % 9 %
    Net Investment Income   23.7     22.7     19.4   4 % 22 %
    Insurance Claims and Claim Expenses   4.5     17.3     3.7   (74) % 21 %
    Underwriting and Operating Expenses   30.2     31.1     29.8   (3) %  1 %
    Net Income   102.6     86.2     89.0   19 % 15 %
    Diluted EPS $ 1.28   $ 1.07   $ 1.08   20 % 18 %
    Book Value per Share (excluding net unrealized gains and losses)(2) $ 30.85   $ 29.80   $ 26.42   4 % 17 %
    Loss Ratio   3.0 %   12.0 %   2.7 %    
    Expense Ratio   20.2 %   21.7 %   21.8 %    
                           
    (1) Percentages may not be replicated based on the rounded figures presented in the table.
    (2) Book value per share (excluding net unrealized gains and losses) is defined as total shareholders’ equity, excluding the after-tax effects of unrealized gains and losses on our investment portfolio, divided by shares outstanding.
     

    Conference Call and Webcast Details

    The company will hold a conference call, which will be webcast live today, April 29, 2025, at 2:00 p.m. Pacific Time / 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time. The webcast will be available on the company’s website, www.nationalmi.com, in the “Investor Relations” section. The conference call can also be accessed by dialing (844) 481-2708 in the U.S., or (412) 317-0664 internationally, by referencing NMI Holdings, Inc.

    About NMI Holdings, Inc.

    NMI Holdings, Inc. (NASDAQ: NMIH), is the parent company of National Mortgage Insurance Corporation (National MI), a U.S.-based, private mortgage insurance company enabling low down payment borrowers to realize home ownership while protecting lenders and investors against losses related to a borrower’s default. To learn more, please visit www.nationalmi.com.

    Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements

    Certain statements contained in this press release or any other written or oral statements made by or on behalf of the Company in connection therewith may constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the U.S. Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (the “PSLRA”). The PSLRA provides a “safe harbor” for any forward-looking statements. All statements other than statements of historical fact included in or incorporated by reference in this release are forward-looking statements, including any statements about our expectations, outlook, beliefs, plans, predictions, forecasts, objectives, assumptions or future events or performance. These statements are often, but not always, made through the use of words or phrases such as “anticipate,” “believe,” “can,” “could,” “may,” “predict,” “assume,” “potential,” “should,” “will,” “estimate,” “perceive,” “plan,” “project,” “continuing,” “ongoing,” “expect,” “intend” and similar words or phrases. All forward-looking statements are only predictions and involve estimates, known and unknown risks, assumptions and uncertainties that may turn out to be inaccurate and could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in them. Many risks and uncertainties are inherent in our industry and markets. Others are more specific to our business and operations. Important factors that could cause actual events or results to differ materially from those indicated in such statements include, but are not limited to: changes in general economic, market and political conditions and policies (including changes in interest rates and inflation) and investment results or other conditions that affect the U.S. housing market or the U.S. markets for home mortgages, mortgage insurance, reinsurance and credit risk transfer markets, including the risk related to geopolitical instability, inflation, an economic downturn (including any decline in home prices) or recession, and their impacts on our business, operations and personnel; changes in the charters, business practices, policies, pricing or priorities of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (collectively, the GSEs), which may include decisions that have the impact of decreasing or discontinuing the use of mortgage insurance as credit enhancement generally, or with first time homebuyers or on very high loan-to-value mortgages; or changes in the direction of housing policy objectives of the Federal Housing Finance Agency (“FHFA”), such as the FHFA’s priority to increase the accessibility to and affordability of homeownership for low-and-moderate income borrowers and underrepresented communities; our ability to remain an eligible mortgage insurer under the private mortgage insurer eligibility requirements (“PMIERs”) and other requirements imposed by the GSEs, which they may change at any time; retention of our existing certificates of authority in each state and the District of Columbia (“D.C.”) and our ability to remain a mortgage insurer in good standing in each state and D.C.; our future profitability, liquidity and capital resources; actions of existing competitors, including other private mortgage insurers and government mortgage insurers such as the Federal Housing Administration, the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Rural Housing Service and the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, and potential market entry by new competitors or consolidation of existing competitors; adoption of new or changes to existing laws, rules and regulations that impact our business or financial condition directly or the mortgage insurance industry generally or their enforcement and implementation by regulators, including the implementation of the final rules defining and/or concerning “Qualified Mortgage” and “Qualified Residential Mortgage”; U.S. federal tax reform and other potential changes in tax law and their impact on us and our operations; legislative or regulatory changes to the GSEs’ role in the secondary mortgage market or other changes that could affect the residential mortgage industry generally or mortgage insurance industry in particular; potential legal and regulatory claims, investigations, actions, audits or inquiries that could result in adverse judgements, settlements, fines or other reliefs that could require significant expenditures or have other negative effects on our business; our ability to successfully execute and implement our capital plans, including our ability to access the equity, credit and reinsurance markets and to enter into, and receive approval of, reinsurance arrangements on terms and conditions that are acceptable to us, the GSEs and our regulators; lenders, the GSEs, or other market participants seeking alternatives to private mortgage insurance; our ability to implement our business strategy, including our ability to write mortgage insurance on high quality low down payment residential mortgage loans, implement successfully and on a timely basis, complex infrastructure, systems, procedures, and internal controls to support our business and regulatory and reporting requirements of the insurance industry; our ability to attract and retain a diverse customer base, including the largest mortgage originators; failure of risk management or pricing or investment strategies; decrease in the length of time our insurance policies are in force; emergence of unexpected claim and coverage issues, including claims exceeding our reserves or amounts we had expected to experience; potential adverse impacts arising from natural disasters including, with respect to affected areas, a decline in new business, adverse effects on home prices, and an increase in notices of default on insured mortgages; climate risk and efforts to manage or regulate climate risk by government agencies could affect our business and operations; potential adverse impacts arising from the occurrence of any man-made disasters or public health emergencies, including pandemics; the inability of our counter-parties, including third party reinsurers, to meet their obligations to us; failure to maintain, improve and continue to develop necessary information technology systems or the failure of technology providers to perform; effectiveness and security of our information technology systems and digital products and services, including the risks these systems, products or services may fail to operate as expected or planned, or expose us to cybersecurity or third-party risks (including the exposure of our confidential customer and other information); and ability to recruit, train and retain key personnel. These risks and uncertainties also include, but are not limited to, those set forth under the heading “Risk Factors” detailed in Item 1A of Part I of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024, as subsequently updated through other reports we file with the SEC. All subsequent written and oral forward-looking statements attributable to the Company or persons acting on its behalf are expressly qualified in their entirety by these cautionary statements. We caution you not to place undue reliance on any forward-looking statement, which speaks only as of the date on which it is made, and we undertake no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statement to reflect new information, future events or circumstances that occur after the date on which the statement is made or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events except as required by law.

    Use of Non-GAAP Financial Measures

    We believe the use of the non-GAAP measures of adjusted income before tax, adjusted net income, adjusted diluted EPS, adjusted return-on-equity, adjusted expense ratio, adjusted combined ratio and book value per share (excluding net unrealized gains and losses) enhances the comparability of our fundamental financial performance between periods, and provides relevant information to investors. These non-GAAP financial measures align with the way the company’s business performance is evaluated by management. These measures are not prepared in accordance with GAAP and should not be viewed as alternatives to GAAP measures of performance. These measures have been presented to increase transparency and enhance the comparability of our fundamental operating trends across periods. Other companies may calculate these measures differently; their measures may not be comparable to those we calculate and present.

    Adjusted income before tax is defined as GAAP income before tax, excluding the pre-tax effects of net realized gains or losses from our investment portfolio, periodic costs incurred in connection with capital markets transactions, and other infrequent, unusual or non-operating items in the periods in which such items are incurred.

    Adjusted net income is defined as GAAP net income, excluding the after-tax effects of net realized gains or losses from our investment portfolio, periodic costs incurred in connection with capital markets transactions, and other infrequent, unusual or non-operating items in the periods in which such items are incurred. Adjustments to components of pre-tax income are tax effected using the applicable federal statutory tax rate for the respective periods.

    Adjusted diluted EPS is defined as adjusted net income divided by adjusted weighted average diluted shares outstanding. Adjusted weighted average diluted shares outstanding is defined as weighted average diluted shares outstanding, adjusted for changes in the dilutive effect of non-vested shares that would otherwise have occurred had GAAP net income been calculated in accordance with adjusted net income. There will be no adjustment to weighted average diluted shares outstanding in the periods that non-vested shares are anti-dilutive under GAAP.

    Adjusted return on equity is calculated by dividing adjusted net income on an annualized basis by the average shareholders’ equity for the period.

    Adjusted expense ratio is defined as GAAP underwriting and operating expenses, excluding the pre-tax effects of periodic costs incurred in connection with capital markets transactions, divided by net premiums earned.

    Adjusted combined ratio is defined as the total of GAAP underwriting and operating expenses, excluding the pre-tax effects of periodic costs incurred in connection with capital markets transactions and insurance claims and claims expenses, divided by net premiums earned.

    Book value per share (excluding net unrealized gains and losses) is defined as total shareholders’ equity, excluding the after-tax effects of unrealized gains and losses on investments, divided by shares outstanding.

    Although adjusted income before tax, adjusted net income, adjusted diluted EPS, adjusted return-on-equity, adjusted expense ratio, adjusted combined ratio and book value per share (excluding net unrealized gains and losses) exclude certain items that have occurred in the past and are expected to occur in the future, the excluded items: (1) are not viewed as part of the operating performance of our primary activities; or (2) are impacted by market, economic or regulatory factors and are not necessarily indicative of operating trends, or both. These adjustments, and the reasons for their treatment, are described below.

    (1) Net realized investment gains and losses. The recognition of net realized investment gains or losses can vary significantly across periods as the timing is highly discretionary and is influenced by factors such as market opportunities, tax and capital profile, and overall market cycles that do not reflect our current period operating results.

    (2) Capital markets transaction costs. Capital markets transaction costs result from activities that are undertaken to improve our debt profile or enhance our capital position through activities such as debt refinancing and capital markets reinsurance transactions that may vary in their size and timing due to factors such as market opportunities, tax and capital profile, and overall market cycles.

    (3) Other infrequent, unusual or non-operating items. Items that are the result of unforeseen or uncommon events, and are not expected to recur with frequency in the future. Identification and exclusion of these items provides clarity about the impact special or rare occurrences may have on our current financial performance. Past adjustments under this category include infrequent, unusual or non-operating adjustments related to severance, restricted stock modification and other expenses incurred in connection with the CEO transition announced in September 2021 and the effects of the release of the valuation allowance recorded against our net federal and certain state net deferred tax assets in 2016 and the re-measurement of our net deferred tax assets in connection with tax reform in 2017. We believe such items are infrequent or non-recurring in nature, and are not indicative of the performance of, or ongoing trends in, our primary operating activities or business.

    (4) Net unrealized gains and losses on investments. The recognition of net unrealized gains or losses on investment can vary significantly across periods and is influenced by factors such as interest rate movement, overall market and economic conditions, and tax and capital profiles. These valuation adjustments may not necessarily result in economic gains or losses and not reflective of ongoing operations.

    Investor Contact
    Gregory Epps
    Senior Manager, Investor Relations and Treasury
    Investor.relations@nationalmi.com

    Consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive income (unaudited) For the three months ended March 31,
        2025       2024  
      (In Thousands, except for per share data)
    Revenues      
    Net premiums earned $ 149,366     $ 136,657  
    Net investment income   23,686       19,436  
    Net realized investment gains   24       —  
    Other revenues   170       160  
    Total revenues   173,246       156,253  
    Expenses      
    Insurance claims and claim expenses   4,478       3,694  
    Underwriting and operating expenses   30,175       29,815  
    Service expenses   116       137  
    Interest expense   7,106       8,040  
    Total expenses   41,875       41,686  
           
    Income before income taxes   131,371       114,567  
    Income tax expense   28,812       25,517  
    Net income $ 102,559     $ 89,050  
           
    Earnings per share      
    Basic $ 1.31     $ 1.10  
    Diluted $ 1.28     $ 1.08  
           
    Weighted average common shares outstanding      
    Basic   78,407       80,726  
    Diluted   79,858       82,099  
           
    Loss ratio(1)   3.0 %     2.7 %
    Expense ratio(2)   20.2 %     21.8 %
    Combined ratio   23.2 %     24.5 %
           
    Net income $ 102,559     $ 89,050  
    Other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax:      
    Unrealized gains (losses) in accumulated other comprehensive loss, net of tax expense (benefit) of $8,186 and $(2,729) for the quarters ended March 31, 2025 and 2024, respectively   30,795       (9,905 )
    Reclassification adjustment for realized gains included in net income, net of tax expense of $5 for the quarter ended March 31, 2025   (19 )     —  
    Other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax   30,776       (9,905 )
    Comprehensive income $ 133,335     $ 79,145  
                   
    (1) Loss ratio is calculated by dividing insurance claims and claim expenses by net premiums earned.
    (2) Expense ratio is calculated by dividing underwriting and operating expenses by net premiums earned.
                   
    Consolidated balance sheets (unaudited) March 31, 2025   December 31, 2024
    Assets (In Thousands, except for share data)
    Fixed maturities, available-for-sale, at fair value (amortized cost of $2,923,088 and $2,876,343 as of March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024, respectively) $ 2,809,247     $ 2,723,541  
    Cash and cash equivalents (including restricted cash of $90 as of December 31, 2024)   74,209       54,308  
    Premiums receivable, net   84,153       82,804  
    Accrued investment income   23,641       22,386  
    Deferred policy acquisition costs, net   64,013       64,327  
    Software and equipment, net   24,960       25,681  
    Intangible assets and goodwill   3,634       3,634  
    Reinsurance recoverable   31,379       32,260  
    Prepaid federal income taxes   322,175       322,175  
    Other assets   18,785       18,857  
    Total assets $ 3,456,196     $ 3,349,973  
           
    Liabilities      
    Debt $ 415,606     $ 415,146  
    Unearned premiums   59,176       65,217  
    Accounts payable and accrued expenses   78,937       103,164  
    Reserve for insurance claims and claim expenses   151,847       152,071  
    Deferred tax liability, net   418,916       386,192  
    Other liabilities   10,143       10,751  
    Total liabilities   1,134,625       1,132,541  
           
    Shareholders’ equity      
    Common stock – $0.01 par value; 88,321,226 shares issued and 78,301,469 shares outstanding as of March 31, 2025 and 87,902,626 shares issued and 78,600,726 shares outstanding as of December 31, 2024 (250,000,000 shares authorized)   883       879  
    Additional paid-in capital   1,001,545       1,004,692  
    Treasury Stock, at cost: 10,019,757 and 9,301,900 common shares as of March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024, respectively   (272,647 )     (246,594 )
    Accumulated other comprehensive loss, net of tax   (94,028 )     (124,804 )
    Retained earnings   1,685,818       1,583,259  
    Total shareholders’ equity   2,321,571       2,217,432  
    Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity $ 3,456,196     $ 3,349,973  
                   
    Non-GAAP Financial Measure Reconciliations (unaudited)
      As of and for the three months ended
      3/31/2025   12/31/2024   3/31/2024
    As Reported (In Thousands, except for per share data)
    Revenues          
    Net premiums earned $ 149,366     $ 143,520     $ 136,657  
    Net investment income   23,686       22,718       19,436  
    Net realized investment gains   24       33       —  
    Other revenues   170       233       160  
    Total revenues   173,246       166,504       156,253  
    Expenses          
    Insurance claims and claim expenses   4,478       17,253       3,694  
    Underwriting and operating expenses   30,175       31,092       29,815  
    Service expenses   116       184       137  
    Interest expense   7,106       7,102       8,040  
    Total expenses   41,875       55,631       41,686  
               
    Income before income taxes   131,371       110,873       114,567  
    Income tax expense   28,812       24,706       25,517  
    Net income $ 102,559     $ 86,167     $ 89,050  
               
    Adjustments:          
    Net realized investment gains   (24 )     (33 )     —  
    Adjusted income before taxes   131,347       110,840       114,567  
               
    Income tax benefit on adjustments(1)   5       7       —  
    Adjusted net income $ 102,540     $ 86,141     $ 89,050  
               
    Weighted average diluted shares outstanding   79,858       80,623       82,099  
               
    Diluted EPS $ 1.28     $ 1.07     $ 1.08  
    Adjusted diluted EPS $ 1.28     $ 1.07     $ 1.08  
               
    Return on equity   18.1 %     15.6 %     18.2 %
    Adjusted return on equity   18.1 %     15.6 %     18.2 %
               
    Expense ratio(2)   20.2 %     21.7 %     21.8 %
    Adjusted expense ratio(3)   20.2 %     21.7 %     21.8 %
               
    Combined ratio(4)   23.2 %     33.7 %     24.5 %
    Adjusted combined ratio(5)   23.2 %     33.7 %     24.5 %
               
    Book value per share(6) $ 29.65     $ 28.21     $ 24.56  
    Book value per share (excluding net unrealized gains and losses)(7) $ 30.85     $ 29.80     $ 26.42  
                           
    (1) Marginal tax impact of non-GAAP adjustments is calculated based on our statutory U.S. federal corporate income tax rate of 21%, except for those items that are not eligible for an income tax deduction.
    (2) Expense ratio is calculated by dividing underwriting and operating expenses by net premiums earned.
    (3) Adjusted expense ratio is calculated by dividing adjusted underwriting and operating expense (underwriting and operating expenses excluding costs related to capital markets reinsurance transactions) by net premiums earned.
    (4) Combined ratio is calculated by dividing the total of underwriting and operating expenses and insurance claims and claim expenses by net premiums earned.
    (5) Adjusted combined ratio is calculated by dividing the total of adjusted underwriting and operating expenses (underwriting and operating expenses excluding costs related to capital market reinsurance transaction) and insurance claims and claim expenses by net premiums earned.
    (6) Book value per share is calculated by dividing total shareholders’ equity by shares outstanding.
    (7) Book value per share (excluding net unrealized gains and losses) is defined as total shareholders’ equity, excluding the after-tax effects of unrealized gains and losses on our investment portfolio, divided by shares outstanding.
                           
    Historical Quarterly Data   2025       2024  
      March 31   December 31   September 30   June 30   March 31
      (In Thousands, except for per share data)
    Revenues                  
    Net premiums earned $ 149,366     $ 143,520     $ 143,343     $ 141,168     $ 136,657  
    Net investment income   23,686       22,718       22,474       20,688       19,436  
    Net realized investment gains (losses)   24       33       (10 )     —       —  
    Other revenues   170       233       285       266       160  
    Total revenues   173,246       166,504       166,092       162,122       156,253  
    Expenses                  
    Insurance claims and claim expenses   4,478       17,253       10,321       276       3,694  
    Underwriting and operating expenses   30,175       31,092       29,160       28,330       29,815  
    Service expenses   116       184       208       194       137  
    Interest expense   7,106       7,102       7,076       14,678       8,040  
    Total expenses   41,875       55,631       46,765       43,478       41,686  
                       
    Income before income taxes   131,371       110,873       119,327       118,644       114,567  
    Income tax expense   28,812       24,706       26,517       26,565       25,517  
    Net income $ 102,559     $ 86,167     $ 92,810     $ 92,079     $ 89,050  
                       
    Earnings per share                  
    Basic $ 1.31     $ 1.09     $ 1.17     $ 1.15     $ 1.10  
    Diluted $ 1.28     $ 1.07     $ 1.15     $ 1.13     $ 1.08  
                       
    Weighted average common shares outstanding                  
    Basic   78,407       78,997       79,549       80,117       80,726  
    Diluted   79,858       80,623       81,045       81,300       82,099  
                       
    Other data                  
    Loss ratio(1)   3.0 %     12.0 %     7.2 %     0.2 %     2.7 %
    Expense ratio(2)   20.2 %     21.7 %     20.3 %     20.1 %     21.8 %
    Combined ratio   23.2 %     33.7 %     27.5 %     20.3 %     24.5 %
                                           
    (1) Loss ratio is calculated by dividing insurance claims and claim expenses by net premiums earned.
    (2) Expense ratio is calculated by dividing underwriting and operating expenses by net premiums earned.
                                           

    Portfolio Statistics

    The table below highlights trends in our primary portfolio as of the date and for the periods indicated.

    Primary portfolio trends As of and for the three months ended
      March 31, 2025   December 31, 2024   September 30, 2024   June 30, 2024   March 31, 2024
      ($ Values In Millions, except as noted below)
    New insurance written (NIW) $ 9,221     $ 11,925     $ 12,218     $ 12,503     $ 9,398  
    New risk written   2,428       3,134       3,245       3,335       2,486  
    Insurance-in-force (IIF)(1)   211,308       210,183       207,538       203,501       199,373  
    Risk-in-force (RIF)(1)   56,515       56,113       55,253       53,956       52,610  
    Policies in force (count)(1)   661,490       659,567       654,374       645,276       635,662  
    Average loan size($ value in thousands)(1) $ 319     $ 319     $ 317     $ 315     $ 314  
    Coverage percentage(2)   26.7 %     26.7 %     26.6 %     26.5 %     26.4 %
    Loans in default (count)(1)   6,859       6,642       5,712       4,904       5,109  
    Default rate(1)   1.04 %     1.01 %     0.87 %     0.76 %     0.80 %
    Risk-in-force on defaulted loans(1) $ 567     $ 545     $ 468     $ 401     $ 414  
    Average net premium yield(3)   0.28 %     0.27 %     0.28 %     0.28 %     0.28 %
    Earnings from cancellations $ 0.6     $ 0.8     $ 0.8     $ 1.0     $ 0.6  
    Annual persistency(4)   84.3 %     84.6 %     85.5 %     85.4 %     85.8 %
    Quarterly run-off(5)   3.9 %     4.5 %     4.0 %     4.2 %     3.6 %
                                           
    (1) Reported as of the end of the period.
    (2) Calculated as end of period RIF divided by end of period IIF.
    (3) Calculated as net premiums earned, divided by average primary IIF for the period, annualized.
    (4) Defined as the percentage of IIF that remains on our books after a given twelve-month period.
    (5) Defined as the percentage of IIF that is no longer on our books after a given three-month period.
                                           

    NIW, IIF and Premiums

    The tables below present NIW and primary IIF, as of the dates and for the periods indicated.

    NIW For the three months ended
      March 31, 2025   December 31, 2024   September 30, 2024   June 30, 2024   March 31, 2024
      (In Millions)
    Monthly $ 9,049   $ 11,688   $ 11,978   $ 12,288   $ 9,175
    Single   172     237     240     215     223
    Total $ 9,221   $ 11,925   $ 12,218   $ 12,503   $ 9,398
                                 
    Primary IIF As of
      March 31, 2025   December 31, 2024   September 30, 2024   June 30, 2024   March 31, 2024
      (In Millions)
    Monthly $ 193,856   $ 192,228   $ 189,241   $ 184,862   $ 180,343
    Single   17,452     17,955     18,297     18,639     19,030
    Total $ 211,308   $ 210,183   $ 207,538   $ 203,501   $ 199,373
                                 

            The following table presents the amounts related to the company’s quota-share reinsurance transactions (the 2016 QSR Transaction, 2018 QSR Transaction, 2020 QSR Transaction, 2021 QSR Transaction, 2022 QSR Transaction, 2022 Seasoned QSR Transaction, 2023 QSR Transaction, 2024 QSR Transaction, and 2025 QSR Transaction and collectively, the QSR Transactions), insurance-linked note transactions (the 2021-1 ILN Transaction, and 2021-2 ILN Transaction and collectively, the ILN Transactions), and traditional reinsurance transactions (the 2022-1 XOL Transaction, 2022-2 XOL Transaction, 2022-3 XOL Transaction, 2023-1 XOL Transaction, 2023-2 XOL Transaction, 2024 XOL Transaction, and 2025 XOL Transaction and collectively, the XOL Transactions) for the periods indicated.

      For the three months ended
      March 31, 2025   December 31, 2024   September 30, 2024   June 30, 2024   March 31, 2024
      (In Thousands)
    The QSR Transactions                  
    Ceded risk-in-force $ 12,888,870     $ 13,024,200     $ 12,968,039     $ 12,815,434     $ 12,669,207  
    Ceded premiums earned   (41,011 )     (41,596 )     (41,761 )     (41,555 )     (41,269 )
    Ceded claims and claim expenses (benefits)   523       4,075       2,449       (138 )     659  
    Ceding commission earned   9,768       9,997       10,152       10,222       10,292  
    Profit commission   23,398       20,149       21,883       24,351       23,407  
    The ILN Transactions(1)                  
    Ceded premiums $ (3,311 )   $ (4,217 )   $ (4,302 )   $ (5,858 )   $ (5,976 )
    The XOL Transactions                  
    Ceded Premiums $ (10,168 )   $ (9,969 )   $ (9,760 )   $ (9,403 )   $ (9,223 )
                                           
    (1) Effective July 25, 2024 and December 27, 2024, NMIC exercised its optional termination rights to terminate and commute its previously outstanding excess-of-loss reinsurance agreements with Oaktown Re III Ltd. and Oaktown Re V Ltd., respectively. In connection with the terminations and commutations, the insurance-linked notes issued by Oaktown Re III Ltd. and Oaktown Re V Ltd. were redeemed in full with a distribution of remaining collateral assets.
                                           

    The tables below present our total NIW by FICO, loan-to-value (LTV) ratio, and purchase/refinance mix for the periods indicated.

    NIW by FICO For the three months ended
      March 31, 2025   December 31, 2024   March 31, 2024
      (In Millions)
    >= 760 $ 4,971   $ 6,508   $ 4,888
    740-759   1,753     2,090     1,797
    720-739   1,177     1,621     1,220
    700-719   665     890     780
    680-699   413     575     530
    <=679   242     241     183
    Total $ 9,221   $ 11,925   $ 9,398
    Weighted average FICO   758     758     757
                     
    NIW by LTV For the three months ended
      March 31, 2025   December 31, 2024   March 31, 2024
      (In Millions)
    95.01% and above $ 1,147     $ 1,510     $ 1,062  
    90.01% to 95.00%   4,274       5,370       4,414  
    85.01% to 90.00%   2,751       3,740       2,931  
    85.00% and below   1,049       1,305       991  
    Total $ 9,221     $ 11,925     $ 9,398  
    Weighted average LTV   92.2 %     92.1 %     92.3 %
                           
    NIW by purchase/refinance mix For the three months ended
      March 31, 2025   December 31, 2024   March 31, 2024
      (In Millions)
    Purchase $ 8,822   $ 10,799   $ 9,157
    Refinance   399     1,126     241
    Total $ 9,221   $ 11,925   $ 9,398
                     

    The table below presents a summary of our primary IIF and RIF by book year as of March 31, 2025.

    Primary IIF and RIF As of March 31, 2025
      IIF   RIF
    Book Year (In Millions)
    2025 $ 9,152   $ 2,409
    2024   42,379     11,242
    2023   33,286     8,789
    2022   46,203     12,356
    2021   48,162     13,049
    2020 and before   32,126     8,670
    Total $ 211,308   $ 56,515
               

            The tables below present our total primary IIF and RIF by FICO and LTV, and total primary RIF by loan type as of the dates indicated.

    Primary IIF by FICO As of
      March 31, 2025   December 31, 2024   March 31, 2024
      (In Millions)
    >= 760 $ 106,004   $ 105,315   $ 99,195
    740-759   37,716     37,321     35,416
    720-739   29,430     29,343     28,033
    700-719   19,737     19,766     18,904
    680-699   13,324     13,374     13,002
    <=679   5,097     5,064     4,823
    Total $ 211,308   $ 210,183   $ 199,373
                     
    Primary RIF by FICO As of
      March 31, 2025   December 31, 2024   March 31, 2024
      (In Millions)
    >= 760 $ 28,117   $ 27,883   $ 25,935
    740-759   10,132     10,006     9,392
    720-739   7,966     7,926     7,484
    700-719   5,384     5,383     5,089
    680-699   3,610     3,615     3,479
    <=679   1,306     1,300     1,231
    Total $ 56,515   $ 56,113   $ 52,610
                     
    Primary IIF by LTV As of
      March 31, 2025   December 31, 2024   March 31, 2024
      (In Millions)
    95.01% and above $ 24,167   $ 23,555   $ 20,277
    90.01% to 95.00%   104,312     103,472     97,028
    85.01% to 90.00%   64,298     64,290     61,169
    85.00% and below   18,531     18,866     20,899
    Total $ 211,308   $ 210,183   $ 199,373
                     
    Primary RIF by LTV As of
      March 31, 2025   December 31, 2024   March 31, 2024
      (In Millions)
    95.01% and above $ 7,546   $ 7,345   $ 6,275
    90.01% to 95.00%   30,804     30,563     28,663
    85.01% to 90.00%   15,957     15,956     15,174
    85.00% and below   2,208     2,249     2,498
    Total $ 56,515   $ 56,113   $ 52,610
                     
    Primary RIF by Loan Type As of
      March 31, 2025   December 31, 2024   March 31, 2024
    Fixed 98 %   98 %   98 %
    Adjustable rate mortgages:          
    Less than five years —     —     —  
    Five years and longer 2     2     2  
    Total 100 %   100 %   100 %
                     

    The table below presents a summary of the change in total primary IIF for the dates and periods indicated.

    Primary IIF As of and for the three months ended
      March 31, 2025   December 31, 2024   March 31, 2024
      (In Millions)
    IIF, beginning of period $ 210,183     $ 207,538     $ 197,029  
    NIW   9,221       11,925       9,398  
    Cancellations, principal repayments and other reductions   (8,096 )     (9,280 )     (7,054 )
    IIF, end of period $ 211,308     $ 210,183     $ 199,373  
                           

    Geographic Dispersion

    The following table shows the distribution by state of our primary RIF as of the periods indicated.

    Top 10 primary RIF by state As of
      March 31, 2025   December 31, 2024   March 31, 2024
    California 10.1 %   10.1 %   10.2 %
    Texas 8.5     8.6     8.8  
    Florida 7.3     7.3     7.5  
    Georgia 4.1     4.1     4.2  
    Washington 3.9     3.9     3.9  
    Illinois 3.8     3.8     3.9  
    Virginia 3.7     3.7     3.9  
    Pennsylvania 3.4     3.4     3.4  
    Ohio 3.3     3.3     3.0  
    North Carolina 3.2     3.2     3.1  
    Total 51.3 %   51.4 %   51.9 %
                     

    The table below presents selected primary portfolio statistics, by book year, as of March 31, 2025.

      As of March 31, 2025    
    Book Year Original Insurance Written   Remaining Insurance in Force   % Remaining of Original Insurance   Policies Ever in Force   Number of Policies in Force   Number of Loans in Default   # of Claims Paid   Incurred Loss Ratio (Inception to Date)(1)   Cumulative Default Rate(2)   Current default rate(3)
      ($ Values In Millions)    
    2016 and prior $ 37,222   $ 2,133   6 %   151,615   11,572   237   398   2.1 %   0.4 %   2.0 %
    2017   21,582     1,753   8 %   85,897   10,007   263   189   1.8 %   0.5 %   2.6 %
    2018   27,295     2,306   8 %   104,043   12,534   403   191   2.6 %   0.6 %   3.2 %
    2019   45,141     5,923   13 %   148,423   26,358   509   99   2.1 %   0.4 %   1.9 %
    2020   62,702     20,011   32 %   186,174   70,620   575   57   1.3 %   0.3 %   0.8 %
    2021   85,574     48,162   56 %   257,972   160,946   1,704   95   3.3 %   0.7 %   1.1 %
    2022   58,734     46,203   79 %   163,281   135,610   2,014   112   16.2 %   1.3 %   1.5 %
    2023   40,473     33,286   82 %   111,994   96,394   836   17   14.0 %   0.8 %   0.9 %
    2024   46,044     42,379   92 %   120,747   113,636   318   —   7.9 %   0.3 %   0.3 %
    2025   9,221     9,152   99 %   23,956   23,813   —   —   — %   — %   — %
    Total $ 433,988   $ 211,308       1,354,102   661,490   6,859   1,158            
                                               
    (1) Calculated as total claims incurred (paid and reserved) divided by cumulative premiums earned, net of reinsurance.
    (2) Calculated as the sum of the number of claims paid ever to date and number of loans in default divided by policies ever in force.
    (3) Calculated as the number of loans in default divided by number of policies in force.
                                               

    The following table provides a reconciliation of the beginning and ending reserve balances for insurance claims and claim expenses:

      For the three months ended March 31,
        2025       2024  
      (In Thousands)
    Beginning balance $ 152,071     $ 123,974  
    Less reinsurance recoverables(1)   (32,260 )     (27,514 )
    Beginning balance, net of reinsurance recoverables   119,811       96,460  
           
    Add claims incurred:      
    Claims and claim expenses incurred:      
    Current year(2)   34,559       32,976  
    Prior years(3)   (30,081 )     (29,282 )
    Total claims and claim expenses incurred   4,478       3,694  
           
    Less claims paid:      
    Claims and claim expenses paid:      
    Current year(2)   —       —  
    Prior years(3)   4,076       852  
    Reinsurance terminations(4)   (255 )     —  
    Total claims and claim expenses paid   3,821       852  
           
    Reserve at end of period, net of reinsurance recoverables   120,468       99,302  
    Add reinsurance recoverables(1)   31,379       27,880  
    Ending balance $ 151,847     $ 127,182  
                   
    (1) Related to ceded losses recoverable under the QSR Transactions.
    (2) Related to insured loans with their most recent defaults occurring in the current year. For example, if a loan defaulted in a prior year and subsequently cured and later re-defaulted in the current year, the default would be included in the current year. Amounts are presented net of reinsurance and included $25.9 million attributed to net case reserves and $8.1 million attributed to net IBNR reserves for the three months ended March 31, 2025 and $25.9 million attributed to net case reserves and $6.6 million attributed to net IBNR reserves for the three months ended March 31, 2024.
    (3) Related to insured loans with defaults occurring in prior years, which have been continuously in default before the start of the current year. Amounts are presented net of reinsurance and included $21.8 million attributed to net case reserves and $8.1 million attributed to net IBNR reserves for the three months ended March 31, 2025 and $22.4 million attributed to net case reserves and $6.3 million attributed to net IBNR reserves for the three months ended March 31, 2024.
    (4) Represents the settlement of reinsurance recoverables in conjunction with the termination of one reinsurer under the 2016, 2018 and 2021 QSR Transactions by mutual agreement on a cut-off basis with no termination fee.
     

    The following table provides a reconciliation of the beginning and ending count of loans in default:

      For the three months ended March 31,
      2025     2024  
    Beginning default inventory 6,642     5,099  
    Plus: new defaults 2,421     1,876  
    Less: cures (2,094 )   (1,817 )
    Less: claims paid (95 )   (42 )
    Less: rescission and claims denied (15 )   (7 )
    Ending default inventory 6,859     5,109  
               

    The following table provides details of our claims paid, before giving effect to claims ceded under the QSR Transactions, for the periods indicated:

      For the three months ended March 31,
        2025       2024  
      ($ Values In Thousands)
    Number of claims paid(1)   95       42  
    Total amount paid for claims $ 5,225     $ 1,145  
    Average amount paid per claim $ 55     $ 27  
    Severity(2)   69 %     54 %
                   
    (1) Count includes 20 and 16 claims settled without payment during the three months ended March 31, 2025 and 2024, respectively.
    (2) Severity represents the total amount of claims paid including claim expenses divided by the related RIF on the loan at the time the claim is perfected, and is calculated including claims settled without payment.
                   

    The following table shows our average reserve per default, before giving effect to reserves ceded under the QSR Transactions, as of the dates indicated:

      As of March 31,
    Average reserve per default:   2025     2024
      (In Thousands)
    Case(1) $ 20.3   $ 22.9
    IBNR(1)(2)   1.8     2.0
    Total $ 22.1   $ 24.9
               
    (1) Defined as the gross reserve per insured loan in default.
    (2) Amount includes claims adjustment expenses.
               

     The following table provides a comparison of the PMIERs available assets and net risk-based required asset amount as reported by NMIC as of the dates indicated:

      As of
      March 31, 2025   December 31, 2024   March 31, 2024
      (In Thousands)
    Available assets $ 3,230,653   $ 3,108,211   $ 2,821,803
    Net risk-based required assets   1,867,414     1,828,807     1,561,655
                     

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI: Tenable Announces First Quarter 2025 Financial Results

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    • Revenue of $239.1 million, up 11% year-over-year.
    • Calculated current billings of $215.4 million, up 9% year-over-year.
    • GAAP operating margin of (7)%; Non-GAAP operating margin of 20%.
    • Net cash provided by operating activities of $87.4 million; Unlevered free cash flow of $86.8 million.

    COLUMBIA, Md., April 29, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Tenable Holdings, Inc. (“Tenable”) (Nasdaq: TENB), the exposure management company, today announced financial results for the quarter ended March 31, 2025.

    “We had a strong start to the year with better-than-expected results on both the top and bottom line,” said Steve Vintz, Co-CEO of Tenable. “With our ongoing investments in areas like AI and integrations with third-party tools and data sources we are helping our customers reduce risk with greater efficiency.”

    “We had some incredible six- and seven-figure deals this quarter driving upside to our expectations and representing significant ongoing opportunities,” said Mark Thurmond, Co-CEO of Tenable. “Our outperformance was driven by continued momentum with Tenable One as we build strategic partnerships resulting in larger deal sizes, broader platform adoption, and greater asset coverage.”

    First Quarter 2025 Financial Highlights

    • Revenue was $239.1 million, an 11% increase year-over-year.
    • Calculated current billings was $215.4 million, a 9% increase year-over-year.
    • GAAP loss from operations was $17.7 million, compared to $8.9 million in the first quarter of 2024.
    • Non-GAAP income from operations was $48.7 million, compared to $37.0 million in the first quarter of 2024.
    • GAAP net loss was $22.9 million, compared to $14.4 million in the first quarter of 2024.
    • GAAP net loss per share was $0.19, compared to $0.12 in the first quarter of 2024.
    • Non-GAAP net income was $44.3 million, compared to $30.4 million in the first quarter of 2024.
    • Non-GAAP diluted earnings per share was $0.36, compared to $0.25 in the first quarter of 2024.
    • Cash and cash equivalents and short-term investments were $460.3 million at March 31, 2025, compared to $577.2 million at December 31, 2024.
    • Net cash provided by operating activities was $87.4 million, compared to $50.3 million in the first quarter of 2024.
    • Unlevered free cash flow was $86.8 million, compared to $54.7 million in the first quarter of 2024.
    • Repurchased 1.6 million shares of our common stock for $60.0 million

    Recent Business Highlights

    • Added 361 new enterprise platform customers and 54 net new six-figure customers.
    • Completed the acquisition of Vulcan Cyber Ltd., which is expected to enhance our industry-leading exposure management platform, delivering comprehensive visibility, prioritization and remediation across the entire attack surface.
    • Released Identity 360 and Exposure Center, two capabilities designed to help organizations pinpoint identity risks and take swift, targeted action to prevent identity-based attacks.
    • Achieved FedRAMP moderate authorization of Tenable One and Tenable Cloud Security, underscoring our commitment to strengthening government infrastructure and reducing cybersecurity risk to support national security.
    • Published the 2025 Cloud AI Risk Report, examining the current state of security risks in cloud AI development tools and frameworks and in AI services offered by the three major cloud providers.

    Financial Outlook

    For the second quarter of 2025, we currently expect:

    • Revenue in the range of $241.0 million to $243.0 million.
    • Non-GAAP income from operations in the range of $43.0 million to $45.0 million.
    • Non-GAAP net income in the range of $36.0 million to $38.0 million, assuming interest expense of $7.1 million, interest income of $4.0 million and a provision for income taxes of $3.2 million.
    • Non-GAAP diluted earnings per share in the range of $0.29 to $0.31.
    • 123.0 million diluted weighted average shares outstanding.

    For the year ending December 31, 2025, we currently expect:

    • Calculated current billings in the range of $1.025 billion to $1.045 billion.
    • Revenue in the range of $970.0 million to $980.0 million.
    • Non-GAAP income from operations in the range of $205.0 million to $215.0 million.
    • Non-GAAP net income in the range of $178.0 million to $188.0 million, assuming interest expense of $28.4 million, interest income of $16.8 million and a provision for income taxes of $13.1 million.
    • Non-GAAP diluted earnings per share in the range of $1.44 to $1.52.
    • 123.5 million diluted weighted average shares outstanding.
    • Unlevered free cash flow in the range of $265.0 million to $275.0 million.

    Conference Call Information

    Tenable will host a conference call on April 29, 2025 at 4:30 p.m. Eastern Time to discuss its financial results. The conference call can be accessed at 877-407-9716 (U.S.) and 201-493-6779 (international). A live webcast of the event will be available on the Tenable Investor Relations website at https://investors.tenable.com. An archived replay of the live broadcast will be available on the Investor Relations page of the website following the call.

    About Tenable

    Tenable® is the exposure management company, exposing and closing the cybersecurity gaps that erode business value, reputation and trust. The company’s AI-powered exposure management platform radically unifies security visibility, insight and action across the attack surface, equipping modern organizations to protect against attacks from IT infrastructure to cloud environments to critical infrastructure and everywhere in between. By protecting enterprises from security exposure, Tenable reduces business risk for approximately 44,000 customers around the globe. Learn more at tenable.com.

    Contact Information

    Investor Relations
    investors@tenable.com

    Media Relations
    tenablepr@tenable.com

    Forward-Looking Statements

    This press release includes forward-looking statements within the meaning of the “safe harbor” provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. All statements contained in this press release other than statements of historical fact, including statements regarding our future results of operations and financial position, our platform’s ability to help protect enterprises from security exposure and streamline vulnerability analysis and response, business strategy and plans and objectives for future operations, are forward-looking statements and represent our views as of the date of this press release. The words “anticipate,” “believe,” “continue,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend,” “may,” “will” and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. We have based these forward-looking statements on our current expectations and projections about future events and financial trends that we believe may affect our financial condition, results of operations, business strategy, short-term and long-term business operations and objectives and financial needs. These forward-looking statements are subject to a number of assumptions and risks and uncertainties, many of which involve factors or circumstances that are beyond our control that could affect our financial results. These risks and uncertainties are detailed in the sections titled “Risk Factors” and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024 and other filings that we make from time to time with the SEC, which are available on the SEC’s website at sec.gov. Moreover, we operate in a very competitive and rapidly changing environment. New risks emerge from time to time. It is not possible for our management to predict all risks, nor can we assess the impact of all factors on our business or the extent to which any factor, or combination of factors, may cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statements we may make. In light of these risks, uncertainties and assumptions, the future events and trends discussed in this press release may not occur and actual results could differ materially and adversely from those anticipated or implied in any forward-looking statements. Except as required by law, we are under no obligation to update these forward-looking statements subsequent to the date of this press release, or to update the reasons if actual results differ materially from those anticipated in the forward-looking statements.

    Non-GAAP Financial Measures

    To supplement our consolidated financial statements, which are prepared and presented in accordance with GAAP, we use certain non-GAAP financial measures, as described below, to understand and evaluate our core operating performance. These non-GAAP financial measures, which may be different than similarly titled measures used by other companies, are presented to enhance the overall understanding of our financial performance and should not be considered a substitute for, or superior to, the financial information prepared and presented in accordance with GAAP.

    We believe that these non-GAAP financial measures provide useful information about our financial performance, enhance the overall understanding of our past performance and future prospects and allow for greater transparency with respect to important metrics used by management for financial and operational decision-making. We include these non-GAAP financial measures to present our financial performance using a management view and because we believe that these measures provide an additional comparison of our core financial performance over multiple periods with other companies in our industry.

    Reconciliations of non-GAAP financial measures to the most directly comparable GAAP financial measures are included in the financial tables accompanying this press release.

    Calculated Current Billings: We define calculated current billings, a non-GAAP financial measure, as total revenue recognized in a period plus the change in current deferred revenue in the corresponding period. We believe that calculated current billings is a key metric to measure our periodic performance. Given that most of our customers pay in advance (including multi-year contracts), but we generally recognize the related revenue ratably over time, we use calculated current billings to measure and monitor our ability to provide our business with the working capital generated by upfront payments from our customers. We believe that calculated current billings, which excludes deferred revenue for periods beyond twelve months in a customer’s contractual term, more closely correlates with annual contract value and that the variability in total billings, depending on the timing of large multi-year contracts and the preference for annual billing versus multi-year upfront billing, may distort growth in one period over another.

    Free Cash Flow and Unlevered Free Cash Flow: We define free cash flow, a non-GAAP financial measure, as net cash provided by operating activities less purchases of property and equipment and capitalized software development costs. We believe free cash flow is an important liquidity measure of the cash that is available (if any), after purchases of property and equipment and capitalized software development costs, for investment in our business and to make acquisitions. We believe that free cash flow is useful as a liquidity measure because it measures our ability to generate cash. We define unlevered free cash flow as free cash flow plus cash paid for interest and other financing costs. We believe unlevered free cash flow is useful as a liquidity measure as it measures the cash that is available to invest in our business and meet our current debt obligations and future financing needs. However, given our debt obligations, non-cancelable commitments and other contractual obligations, unlevered free cash flow does not represent residual cash flow available for discretionary expenses.

    Non-GAAP Income from Operations and Non-GAAP Operating Margin: We define these non-GAAP financial measures as their respective GAAP measures, excluding the effect of stock-based compensation, acquisition-related expenses, restructuring expenses, costs related to the intra-entity asset transfers resulting from the internal restructuring of legal entities, and amortization of acquired intangible assets. Acquisition-related expenses include transaction and integration expenses, as well as costs related to the intercompany transfer of acquired intellectual property. Restructuring expenses include non-ordinary course severance, employee related benefits, and other charges to reorganize business operations. We believe that the exclusion of these expenses provides for a useful comparison of our operating results to prior periods and to our peer companies, which commonly exclude restructuring expenses.

    Non-GAAP Net Income and Non-GAAP Earnings Per Share: We define non-GAAP net income as GAAP net loss, excluding the effect of stock-based compensation, acquisition-related expenses, restructuring expenses and amortization of acquired intangible assets, including the applicable tax impacts. In addition, we exclude the tax impact and related costs of intra-entity asset transfers resulting from the internal restructuring of legal entities as well as deferred income tax benefits recognized in connection with acquisitions. We use non-GAAP net income to calculate non-GAAP earnings per share.

    Non-GAAP Gross Profit and Non-GAAP Gross Margin: We define non-GAAP gross profit as GAAP gross profit, excluding the effect of stock-based compensation and amortization of acquired intangible assets. Non-GAAP gross margin is defined as non-GAAP gross profit as a percentage of revenue.

    Non-GAAP Sales and Marketing Expense, Non-GAAP Research and Development Expense and Non-GAAP General and Administrative Expense: We define these non-GAAP measures as their respective GAAP measures, excluding stock-based compensation, acquisition-related expenses and costs related to intra-entity asset transfers resulting from the internal restructuring of legal entities.

    TENABLE HOLDINGS, INC.
    CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
    (unaudited)
      Three Months Ended March 31,
    (in thousands, except per share data) 2025   2024
    Revenue $ 239,137     $ 215,961  
    Cost of revenue(1)   52,460       48,932  
    Gross profit   186,677       167,029  
    Operating expenses:      
    Sales and marketing(1)   103,182       99,825  
    Research and development(1)   53,223       43,727  
    General and administrative(1)   47,983       31,018  
    Restructuring   —       1,389  
    Total operating expenses   204,388       175,959  
    Loss from operations   (17,711 )     (8,930 )
    Interest income   4,927       5,624  
    Interest expense   (7,011 )     (8,112 )
    Other income (expense), net   474       (1,310 )
    Loss before income taxes   (19,321 )     (12,728 )
    Provision for income taxes   3,614       1,658  
    Net loss $ (22,935 )   $ (14,386 )
           
    Net loss per share, basic and diluted $ (0.19 )   $ (0.12 )
    Weighted-average shares used to compute net loss per share, basic and diluted   120,083       117,542  

    _______________

    (1) Includes stock-based compensation as follows:

      Three Months Ended March 31,
      2025
    		   2024
    Cost of revenue $ 3,315     $ 2,982  
    Sales and marketing   16,630       15,300  
    Research and development   12,967       11,161  
    General and administrative(2)   22,991       10,276  
    Total stock-based compensation $ 55,903     $ 39,719  

    _______________

    (2) Stock-based compensation in the three months ended March 31, 2025 includes $14.6 million of expense related to the accelerated vesting of equity awards for our late CEO.

    TENABLE HOLDINGS, INC.
    CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
      March 31,
    2025    		   December 31,
    2024
    (in thousands, except per share data) (unaudited)    
    Assets      
    Current assets:      
    Cash and cash equivalents $ 233,441     $ 328,647  
    Short-term investments   226,836       248,547  
    Accounts receivable (net of allowance for doubtful accounts of $748 and $525 at March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024, respectively)   167,793       258,734  
    Deferred commissions   51,247       51,791  
    Prepaid expenses and other current assets   67,106       53,026  
    Total current assets   746,423       940,745  
    Property and equipment, net   41,343       39,265  
    Deferred commissions (net of current portion)   65,582       67,914  
    Operating lease right-of-use assets   40,951       45,139  
    Acquired intangible assets, net   128,597       94,461  
    Goodwill   656,481       541,292  
    Other assets   14,200       13,303  
    Total assets $ 1,693,577     $ 1,742,119  
           
    Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity      
    Current liabilities:      
    Accounts payable and accrued expenses $ 17,684     $ 19,981  
    Accrued compensation   51,432       55,784  
    Deferred revenue   633,224       650,372  
    Operating lease liabilities   6,305       6,801  
    Other current liabilities   6,346       5,154  
    Total current liabilities   714,991       738,092  
    Deferred revenue (net of current portion)   175,151       182,815  
    Term loan, net of issuance costs (net of current portion)   356,068       356,705  
    Operating lease liabilities (net of current portion)   54,621       56,224  
    Other liabilities   9,585       8,329  
    Total liabilities   1,310,416       1,342,165  
           
    Stockholders’ equity:      
    Common stock (par value: $0.01; 500,000 shares authorized; 124,484 and 122,371 shares issued at March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024, respectively)   1,245       1,224  
    Additional paid-in capital   1,440,770       1,374,659  
    Treasury stock (at cost: 4,282 and 2,673 shares at March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024, respectively)   (174,911 )     (114,911 )
    Accumulated other comprehensive income   328       318  
    Accumulated deficit   (884,271 )     (861,336 )
    Total stockholders’ equity   383,161       399,954  
    Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity $ 1,693,577     $ 1,742,119  
    TENABLE HOLDINGS, INC.
    CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
    (unaudited)
      Three Months Ended March 31,
    (in thousands) 2025   2024
    Cash flows from operating activities:      
    Net loss $ (22,935 )   $ (14,386 )
    Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash provided by operating activities:    
    Depreciation and amortization   9,854       8,232  
    Stock-based compensation   55,903       39,719  
    Net accretion of discounts and amortization of premiums on short-term investments   (1,180 )     (2,284 )
    Amortization of debt issuance costs   349       329  
    Other   979       1,611  
    Changes in operating assets and liabilities:      
    Accounts receivable   92,968       63,437  
    Prepaid expenses and other assets   (9,875 )     5,216  
    Accounts payable, accrued expenses and accrued compensation   (8,491 )     (22,017 )
    Deferred revenue   (32,507 )     (27,789 )
    Other current and noncurrent liabilities   2,342       (1,742 )
    Net cash provided by operating activities   87,407       50,326  
           
    Cash flows from investing activities:      
    Purchases of property and equipment   (6,553 )     (665 )
    Capitalized software development costs   (624 )     (2,532 )
    Purchases of short-term investments   (38,445 )     (77,465 )
    Sales and maturities of short-term investments   61,345       65,570  
    Proceeds from other investments   664       3,512  
    Business combinations, net of cash acquired   (148,510 )     —  
    Net cash used in investing activities   (132,123 )     (11,580 )
           
    Cash flows from financing activities:      
    Payments on term loan   (938 )     (938 )
    Proceeds from stock issued in connection with the employee stock purchase plan   9,701       9,884  
    Proceeds from the exercise of stock options   347       1,874  
    Purchase of treasury stock   (60,000 )     (24,991 )
    Net cash used in financing activities   (50,890 )     (14,171 )
    Effect of exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash   400       (1,730 )
    Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash   (95,206 )     22,845  
    Cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash at beginning of period   328,647       237,132  
    Cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash at end of period $ 233,441     $ 259,977  
    TENABLE HOLDINGS, INC.
    REVENUE COMPONENTS AND RECONCILIATION OF GAAP TO NON-GAAP FINANCIAL MEASURES
    (unaudited)
    Revenue Three Months Ended March 31,
    (in thousands) 2025
    		   2024
    Subscription revenue $ 220,443     $ 197,635  
    Perpetual license and maintenance revenue   11,552       12,156  
    Professional services and other revenue   7,142       6,170  
    Revenue(1) $ 239,137     $ 215,961  

    _______________

    (1) Recurring revenue, which includes revenue from subscription arrangements for software (both recognized ratably over the subscription term and upon delivery) and cloud-based solutions and maintenance associated with perpetual licenses, represented 96% of revenue in the three months ended March 31, 2025 and 2024.

    Calculated Current Billings Three Months Ended March 31,
    (in thousands) 2025   2024
    Revenue $ 239,137     $ 215,961  
    Deferred revenue (current), end of period   633,224       562,575  
    Deferred revenue (current), beginning of period(1)   (657,001 )     (580,779 )
    Calculated current billings $ 215,360     $ 197,757  

    ________________
    (1) Deferred revenue (current), beginning of period for the three months ended March 31, 2025 includes $6.6 million related to acquired deferred revenue.

    Remaining Performance Obligations March 31,
    (in thousands) 2025
    		   2024
    Remaining performance obligations, short-term $ 647,647     $ 572,851  
    Remaining performance obligations, long-term   234,598       169,560  
    Remaining performance obligations $ 882,245     $ 742,411  
    Free Cash Flow and Unlevered Free Cash Flow Three Months Ended March 31,
    (in thousands) 2025   2024
    Net cash provided by operating activities $ 87,407     $ 50,326  
    Purchases of property and equipment   (6,553 )     (665 )
    Capitalized software development costs   (624 )     (2,532 )
    Free cash flow   80,230       47,129  
    Cash paid for interest and other financing costs   6,574       7,611  
    Unlevered free cash flow $ 86,804     $ 54,740  

    Free cash flow and unlevered free cash flow for the periods presented were impacted by:

      Three Months Ended March 31,
    (in thousands) 2025   2024
    Employee stock purchase plan activity $ (5,413 )   $ (6,332 )
    Acquisition-related expenses   (3,189 )     (466 )
    Restructuring   —       (3,822 )
    Non-GAAP Income from Operations and Non-GAAP Operating Margin Three Months Ended March 31,
    (dollars in thousands) 2025   2024
    Loss from operations $ (17,711 )   $ (8,930 )
    Stock-based compensation   55,903       39,719  
    Acquisition-related expenses   4,621       161  
    Restructuring   —       1,389  
    Amortization of acquired intangible assets   5,864       4,669  
    Non-GAAP income from operations $ 48,677     $ 37,008  
    Operating margin (7 )%   (4 )%
    Non-GAAP operating margin   20  %     17  %
    Non-GAAP Net Income and Non-GAAP Earnings Per Share Three Months Ended March 31,
    (in thousands, except per share data) 2025   2024
    Net loss $ (22,935 )   $ (14,386 )
    Stock-based compensation   55,903       39,719  
    Tax impact of stock-based compensation(1)   855       (1,077 )
    Acquisition-related expenses(2)   4,621       161  
    Restructuring(2)   —       1,389  
    Amortization of acquired intangible assets(2)   5,864       4,669  
    Tax impact of acquisitions   (58 )     (35 )
    Non-GAAP net income $ 44,250     $ 30,440  
           
    Net loss per share, diluted $ (0.19 )   $ (0.12 )
    Stock-based compensation   0.46       0.34  
    Tax impact of stock-based compensation(1)   0.01       (0.01 )
    Acquisition-related expenses(2)   0.04       —  
    Restructuring(2)   —       0.01  
    Amortization of acquired intangible assets(2)   0.05       0.04  
    Tax impact of acquisitions   —       —  
    Adjustment to diluted earnings per share(3)   (0.01 )     (0.01 )
    Non-GAAP earnings per share, diluted $ 0.36     $ 0.25  
           
    Weighted-average shares used to compute GAAP net loss per share, diluted   120,083       117,542  
           
    Weighted-average shares used to compute non-GAAP earnings per share, diluted   124,152       123,266  

    ________________

    (1) The tax impact of stock-based compensation is based on the tax treatment for the applicable tax jurisdictions.
    (2) The tax impact of acquisition-related expenses, restructuring and the amortization of acquired intangible assets are not material.
    (3) An adjustment to reconcile GAAP net loss per share, which excludes potentially dilutive shares, to non-GAAP earnings per share, which includes potentially dilutive shares.

    Non-GAAP Gross Profit and Non-GAAP Gross Margin Three Months Ended March 31,
    (dollars in thousands) 2025   2024
    Gross profit $ 186,677     $ 167,029  
    Stock-based compensation   3,315       2,982  
    Amortization of acquired intangible assets   5,864       4,669  
    Non-GAAP gross profit $ 195,856     $ 174,680  
    Gross margin   78 %     77 %
    Non-GAAP gross margin   82 %     81 %
    Non-GAAP Sales and Marketing Expense Three Months Ended March 31,
    (dollars in thousands) 2025   2024
    Sales and marketing expense $ 103,182     $ 99,825  
    Less: Stock-based compensation   16,630       15,300  
    Less: Acquisition-related expenses   1,054       —  
    Non-GAAP sales and marketing expense $ 85,498     $ 84,525  
    Non-GAAP sales and marketing expense % of revenue   36 %     39 %
    Non-GAAP Research and Development Expense Three Months Ended March 31,
    (dollars in thousands) 2025   2024
    Research and development expense $ 53,223     $ 43,727  
    Less: Stock-based compensation   12,967       11,161  
    Less: Acquisition-related expenses   1,239       (20 )
    Non-GAAP research and development expense $ 39,017     $ 32,586  
    Non-GAAP research and development expense % of revenue   16 %     15 %
    Non-GAAP General and Administrative Expense Three Months Ended March 31,
    (dollars in thousands) 2025   2024
    General and administrative expense $ 47,983     $ 31,018  
    Less: Stock-based compensation   22,991       10,276  
    Less: Acquisition-related expenses   2,328       181  
    Non-GAAP general and administrative expense $ 22,664     $ 20,561  
    Non-GAAP general and administrative expense % of revenue   9 %     10 %

    The following adjustments to reconcile forecasted non-GAAP income from operations, non-GAAP net income, non-GAAP earnings per share, free cash flow and unlevered free cash flow are subject to a number of uncertainties and assumptions, each of which are inherently difficult to forecast. As a result, actual adjustments and GAAP results may differ materially.

    Forecasted Non-GAAP Income from Operations Three Months Ending
    June 30, 2025    		   Year Ending
    December 31, 2025
    (in millions) Low   High   Low   High
    Forecasted loss from operations $ (12.0 )   $ (10.0 )   $ (22.0 )   $ (12.0 )
    Forecasted stock-based compensation   47.0       47.0       196.0       196.0  
    Forecasted acquisition-related expenses   1.5       1.5       6.0       6.0  
    Forecasted amortization of acquired intangible assets   6.5       6.5       25.0       25.0  
    Forecasted non-GAAP income from operations $ 43.0     $ 45.0     $ 205.0     $ 215.0  
    Forecasted Non-GAAP Net Income and Non-GAAP Earnings Per Share Three Months Ending
    June 30, 2025    		   Year Ending
    December 31, 2025
    (in millions, except per share data) Low   High   Low   High
    Forecasted net loss(1) $ (20.0 )   $ (18.0 )   $ (53.0 )   $ (43.0 )
    Forecasted stock-based compensation   47.0       47.0       196.0       196.0  
    Forecasted tax impact of stock-based compensation   1.0       1.0       4.0       4.0  
    Forecasted acquisition-related expenses   1.5       1.5       6.0       6.0  
    Forecasted amortization of acquired intangible assets   6.5       6.5       25.0       25.0  
    Forecasted non-GAAP net income $ 36.0     $ 38.0     $ 178.0     $ 188.0  
                   
    Forecasted net loss per share, diluted(1) $ (0.16 )   $ (0.15 )   $ (0.44 )   $ (0.36 )
    Forecasted stock-based compensation   0.39       0.39       1.62       1.62  
    Forecasted tax impact of stock-based compensation   0.01       0.01       0.03       0.03  
    Forecasted acquisition-related expenses   0.01       0.01       0.05       0.05  
    Forecasted amortization of acquired intangible assets   0.05       0.05       0.21       0.21  
    Adjustment to diluted earnings per share(2)   (0.01 )     —       (0.03 )     (0.03 )
    Forecasted non-GAAP earnings per share, diluted $ 0.29     $ 0.31     $ 1.44     $ 1.52  
                   
    Forecasted weighted-average shares used to compute GAAP net loss per share, diluted   121.5       121.5       121.0       121.0  
    Forecasted weighted-average shares used to compute non-GAAP earnings per share, diluted   123.0       123.0       123.5       123.5  

    ________________
    (1) The forecasted GAAP net loss assumes income tax expense of $4.1 million and $16.8 million in the three months ending June 30, 2025 and year ending December 31, 2025, respectively.
    (2) Adjustment to reconcile GAAP net loss per share, which excludes potentially dilutive shares, to non-GAAP earnings per share, which includes potentially dilutive shares.

    Forecasted Free Cash Flow and Unlevered Free Cash Flow Year Ending
    December 31, 2025
    (in millions) Low   High
    Forecasted net cash provided by operating activities $ 256.0     $ 266.0  
    Forecasted purchases of property and equipment   (15.0 )     (15.0 )
    Forecasted capitalized software development costs   (3.0 )     (3.0 )
    Forecasted free cash flow   238.0       248.0  
    Forecasted cash paid for interest and other financing costs   27.0       27.0  
    Forecasted unlevered free cash flow $ 265.0     $ 275.0  

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI Global: UK must grow more of its own wood to meet climate goals – new research

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By John Healey, Professor of Forest Sciences, Bangor University

    shutterstock ShaunWilkinson/Shutterstock

    Wood is often hailed as a low-carbon hero, a natural alternative to steel, concrete and plastic. It’s a vital tool in the UK’s strategy for reaching net zero. But there’s a catch – the country don’t grow nearly enough of it.

    The UK has one of the lowest levels of forest cover in Europe, with just 14% of land forested. It is also the second-largest importer of wood in the world, meeting only 20% of its wood demand from domestic sources.

    That leaves the UK not only exposed to volatile global markets, but also facing a serious challenge of “wood security”. And our new research shows the problem goes well beyond economics.

    Relying heavily on imported timber, especially from boreal forests in Scandanavia and the Baltic States, could actually undermine the carbon-cutting benefits of using wood in place of high-emissions materials.

    Boreal forests occurring in colder northerly environments grow slowly. The carbon stored in them takes decades, sometimes centuries, to recover after harvesting through the growth of the next generation of trees.

    In contrast, conifer forests in the UK’s warmer temperate climate restock carbon through regrowth more quickly after harvesting. This makes them much better suited for higher yields of sustainable wood production.

    So, how can countries such as the UK increase wood use without making the climate crisis worse? To address this, we created a new model that tracks carbon at every stage of a tree’s journey, from how it grows in the forest to how it’s harvested, transported, processed and used. This includes temporary storage of carbon in wood products, and the avoidance of having to use high-emitting materials and energy sources that would be needed in the absence of wood.

    We combined this with models of how carbon storage changes in forests under different harvesting intensities. Our analysis showed that it is possible for rising wood demand to make a positive contribution to national and global net zero targets. But that’s only if the domestic production of wood is dramatically increased in temperate countries such as the UK.

    Even a modest annual increase in demand (1.1%) would require a 50% expansion in the area of productive forest over the next 50 years. A more ambitious approach, such as doubling productive forest area and increasing tree growth rates by 33%, could boost the overall contribution of wood use to slowing global warming by 175%. But that would require huge changes in forestry practice and land use policy.

    In contrast, under a scenario of higher demand growth (2.3% per year), we found that the climate benefit of wood use is reduced. And only a doubling of forest area and a 33% increase in growth rates would be enough to deliver a meaningful contribution to slowing global warming over the next century.

    These benefits would be at risk if forest productivity is undermined by increasing incidence of pests, disease or drought as climate change progresses.

    Challenges ahead

    Our findings point to three major challenges the UK must address if wood is to play a meaningful role in its net zero strategy.

    First, the expansion of productive conifer forest in the UK has slowed to a standstill over the past 30 years. The amount of wood available for harvest is projected to fall after 2039. This trend will have to be reversed very soon to rapidly increase the area of conifer forests. This will need a rethink of how the UK balances land for forestry, farming and nature recovery.

    Second, forest management must be improved to sustain productivity under increasing stress from pests, pathogens and drought.

    Third, wood must be used more efficiently. That includes reducing waste during processing, designing products for longevity and reusing wood products as many times as possible.

    So, the UK’s net zero policy must connect the push for using more wood with a clear plan for how it will grow and manage the forests needed to supply it. At the same time, when policymakers assess the climate effects of cutting down trees, they need to look at the whole picture. That means considering not just what’s lost from the forest, but how the wood is used, how long it stores carbon and how much it replaces more polluting materials.

    This kind of joined-up, forward-looking analysis – like the one we developed in our study – is essential if wood is to play a truly sustainable role in fighting climate change.

    John Healey receives funding from the Natural Environment Research Council, the Centre for Forest Protection, and the Wildlife Trusts. He is affiliated with Woodknowledge Wales, Rainforest Builder and the Institute of Chartered Foresters.

    David Styles received funding from the Natural Environment Research Council (UK) and from the Department of Environment, Climate & Communications (Ireland) for research related to this article.

    Eilidh Forster received funding from the Natural Environment Research Council (UK) for research related to this article.

    – ref. UK must grow more of its own wood to meet climate goals – new research – https://theconversation.com/uk-must-grow-more-of-its-own-wood-to-meet-climate-goals-new-research-254353

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Read More (Steube Calls for Suncoast Cooperation With ICE)

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Greg Steube (FL-17)

    April 29, 2025 | Press ReleasesWASHINGTON — U.S. Representative Greg Steube (R-Fla.) has sent a letter to police chiefs in Florida’s 17th congressional district urging them to enroll their respective departments in Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s 287(g) program.
    President Trump’s Executive Order 14159, Protecting People Against Invasion, directed Immigration Customs Enforcement (ICE) to permit enrolled state and local authorities to perform specific immigration officer functions under section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). All agencies enrolled in the 287(g) program are directed and supervised by ICE in their execution of immigration law enforcement. 
    “After four years of disastrous border and immigration policies under the former Biden administration, the American people overwhelmingly entrusted President Trump to secure our border and protect the American homeland from the violence that criminal illegal aliens have brought to our country,” said Rep. Steube. “This is not just a duty for our law enforcement and border patrol partners at the southern and northern borders, but for every single law enforcement agency in Florida and the United States.”
    Representative Steube’s letter comes in the wake of the recent arrest of an illegal immigrant in Sarasota for assault and sexual battery. In his letter, Representative Steube requested police chiefs in Florida’s 17th district clarify whether their agency or department was enrolled or pursuing enrollment in the 287(g) program. He also asked that they provide a report on any grants or funding their agency was receiving or seeking from the federal government. Representative Steube emphasized the need for law enforcement to partner with ICE in resolving the migrant crisis and restoring security to the United States.
    Over the course of the Biden administration’s four years in office, Border Patrol encountered more than three times as many illegal immigrants crossing the southern border than under the first Trump administration. Since taking office and signing Executive Order 14159, President Trump has overseen the largest reduction in illegal migration in American history with illegal entries into the U.S. falling to their lowest level since 1968. 
    Read the letter here.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Senator Murray Blasts Trump’s Attacks on Head Start as Lawsuit is Filed to Stop Trump Admin from Dismantling Program

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Washington State Patty Murray
    Senator Murray: “Let’s face it, billionaires like Elon Musk and Trump already had a “head start” in life, so of course they don’t care if anyone else needs a little help. But this is make or break for everyone else—and I mean everyone, not just for families, not just for parents, but for businesses as well, and for our economy which is powered by our working families.”
    ICYMI: Head Start funding lags by nearly $1 billion this year, causing some preschool closures
    Washington, D.C. — Today, U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), Vice Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee and a senior member and former Chairof the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee, joined a press conference hosted by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) on their announcement of a lawsuit against the Trump administration for seeking to dismantle the Head Start program. Senator Murray spoke about how critical Head Start is in helping kids and families across the country thrive.
    Head Start currently serves over 750,000 kids nationwide, and the program has served nearly 40 million children and their families nationwide since its inception in 1965. There are over 17,000 Head Start centers nationwide and these centers are particularly important in serving rural communities with fewer options for care.
    Since taking office, President Trump has gutted the offices that keep Head Start centers and child care programs across the country running. In late February, the Trump administration fired scores of staff at the Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) Office of Head Start and Office of Child Care. Earlier this month, Trump continued to hollow out HHS, including by shuttering half of the regional offices at the Office of Head Start, which are responsible for ensuring high-quality Head Start services are available to families nationwide. The Trump administration has failed to articulate how it will ensure that uninterrupted services are available to families and that appropriate oversight will be carried out despite gutting the very offices charged with these responsibilities.
    As data compiled by Senator Murray’s office shows, the Trump administration has failed to get out nearly $1 billion in funding for Head Start programs this year, part of a larger, sweeping funding freeze Trump has ordered since taking office.
    Senator Murray’s full remarks, as delivered, are below:
    “Well thank you all for being on this call, I really, really do appreciate it. And I just want to say that when I first got into politics to fight for child care and early education programs, I met with a few politicians who really did not get it—and a lot of parents who absolutely did. Well, we made our voices heard, we made a difference in that fight, and now, we have to keep it up!
    “I still, constantly, hear from parents about child care and pre-K, and I take their stories back with me here to the Capitol to fight for change. We have made a lot of progress over the years making the case for child care, making historic investments in our families, and changing the conversation.
    “But then, a couple of billionaires with no idea about what they are doing came along and decided to take an axe to Head Start. I mean talk about clueless. Talk about careless! Instead of giving our kids a Head Start Trump and Musk want to give billionaires another tax break and give families the cold shoulder.
    “We already got a hint of how bad this could get for Washington state—when funding delays forced a Head Start program to the point of closure. 450 kids temporarily lost access to early education programs and support they counted on. And more than 70 employees were out of a job. To say nothing of the hundreds of parents who were about to be forced out of work because they lost pre-K.
    “That chaos was from just one provider facing funding delays, if Trump and Musk get their way, if they zero out Head Start completely—the damage would be magnitudes greater.
    “Let’s face it, billionaires like Elon Musk and Trump already had a “head start” in life, so of course they don’t care if anyone else needs a little help.
    “But this is make or break for everyone else—and I mean everyone, not just for families, not just for parents, but for businesses as well, and for our economy which is powered by our working families.
    “Trump and Musk may want to axe Head Start and they have already made clear they will do everything they can to break the program and cause chaos, but they are going to have to go through me—and they are going to have to go through all of you.
    “I am going to keep doing what I have done since the very start, getting loud about why programs like Head Start matter for families, talking to other parents, lifting up their voices, and fighting, with all the power I have, for our kids.
    “And I’m so glad to be fighting along such amazing advocates and organizations like the ACLU, and the Washington State Association of Head Start and E-CEAP—you don’t just serve our families, you are standing up for them, and we are all really thankful for that.
    “So it’s great to be with you on this call—and let’s keep fighting, we’ve got to, thank you.”

    MIL OSI USA News –