investment

One of the many big geopolitical stories in the world today is the changing tariff regime in the United States. Key trading partner China is retaliating in a way that only China can, by limiting access to rare-earth metals, which are vital in the technology sector.

And that has led to a huge boon for MP Materials (MP -10.99%), which produces rare-earth metals in the United States. Does this make MP Materials a smart buy?

Image source: Getty Images.

What’s going on in the tariff world?

The new administration in Washington D.C. is raising tariffs on foreign countries that export products to the U.S. market. Given that U.S. consumers represent a valuable customer group, the tariffs are a very big deal. Impacted countries are attempting to negotiate and/or retaliate in an effort to limit the impact that tariff changes will have on their economies. China is one of the largest exporters to the United States and negotiations have been tense.

China’s wild card is the fact that it is the world’s largest producer of rare earth metals. These metals are used in electronics, including in highly sensitive high-tech gear that might be used for defense purposes. In the face of U.S. tariffs, China has been more than willing to limit access to rare-earth metals. And that is potentially a large problem for the United States.

This is where MP Materials comes in, since it is a U.S.-based supplier of rare earth metals. It didn’t just appear overnight, the company went public a few years ago. The whole idea of the business is to produce rare earth metals from within a politically and economically stable country, giving technology-driven customers what might be seen as a more reliable supply option for these vital materials. In hindsight, MP Materials’ timing could hardly have been any better.

There have been big investments in MP Materials

The importance of MP Materials is highlighted by two big events. First, on July 10, the U.S. government made a $400 million investment in the business, which included convertible securities. Second, and just five days later, Apple announced a $500 million partnership with MP Materials around rare-earth metals.

Not surprisingly, MP Materials’ stock price rose dramatically on the news. That, in turn, allowed MP Materials to sell $650 million worth of stock at attractive prices for the company. Demand for the shares was so high that the sale was upsized from $500 million, showing that investor appetite for MP Materials’ story is large. And why not? The story is quite compelling.

There’s just one problem. MP Materials is still building out its business. It likely has ample cash to do that today, but there is still material execution risk. If building the business, which has both mining and processing aspects to it, doesn’t go smoothly, investors could quickly turn negative on the stock. Similarly, if tariff tensions ease, the excitement around MP Materials could also wane. Notably, the bottom of the company’s income statement is in the red.

MP data by YCharts

The fact that MP Materials is losing money as it makes the large capital investments needed to build out its business is hardly surprising. The problem is that investors are likely buying the short-term rare earth metals story, not the upstart business story. The second story, which is fundamental to the business right now, could require years to play out. And yet MP Materials’ stock price has risen more than 140% since July 9, the day before the government investment was announced.

Thinking long term will be key

At this point, it looks like a lot of good news has been priced into MP Materials’ stock. That has diminished the opportunity here for investors, even though the opportunity for the business looks very attractive. If you buy MP Materials today, it would be a smart move to think long term because in the short term, any negative news could lead to a swift drawdown in what has become a story stock.

That said, conservative investors will probably want to watch from the sidelines for a little bit to see how well MP Materials executes on its investment plans. The company has plenty of cash to work with at this point, but it still needs to make good use of that money for the quick stock price advance to make financial sense for investors.

If you want to invest in the stock market with little time and effort, a good strategy can be to simply “buy” the S&P 500 (^GSPC -0.50%). This benchmark index includes 500 of the biggest U.S. companies, and it’s a popular choice for many investors.

While you cannot invest in the S&P 500 directly, index funds that track its performance are widely available. Below, I’ll look at what kind of returns the index has historically averaged and how it has performed recently to build out a forecast of what a $20,000 investment in the S&P 500 might be worth after 20 years.

Image source: Getty Images.

The S&P 500 boasts a 10% annual return, but can that continue?

If you look at nearly a century of historical data, the S&P 500 has enjoyed an annualized growth rate of about 10% (including dividends). For 2025, it’s up 14% as of this writing, and that’s with the index already coming off strong years when its total return was more than 25% in both 2023 and 2024. The index has effectively been punching well above its weight for a while, which is why some analysts and investors worry the market may be in a bubble, and a slowdown may be coming.

For that reason, it’s important to brace for lower, more modest gains in the future. New investors may have become accustomed to these elevated returns, but the reality is there have been no shortage of years when the index’s returns have been in the single digits or even negative.

The good news is that regardless of what happens in any single year, over the long term, the S&P 500 is likely to rise in value. That’s why tracking it with an exchange-traded fund (ETF) such as the SPDR S&P 500 ETF (SPY -0.49%) can be a winning strategy.

What could a $20,000 investment in the S&P 500 be worth in the future?

I’m not going to try to predict the exact rate of return the S&P 500 will deliver over the next two decades. But I can show you what a $20,000 investment in the SPDR ETF may be worth at various points over the next 20 years based on a range of growth rates.

Data source: Clculations by author.

Even at 8%, the value of your position can more than quadruple after 20 years to about $93,000. And you shouldn’t expect 11% or 12% annualized returns going forward, especially given the S&P 500’s hot streak in recent years. However, I included those bullish growth rates to illustrate how significant the gap in the final investment value can be, even when the difference is only a few percentage points.

This highlights why it’s important to go with a low-cost fund such as the SPDR S&P 500 ETF, where the expense ratio is only 0.09%. It’s crucial to keep those fees as low as possible so you can maximize your returns.

Intel (INTC -2.59%) just had one of its best days in years, with its stock price surging after Nvidia (NVDA 3.70%) revealed it would take a $5 billion stake in the chipmaker and partner on new products. The stock price is now up about 50% on the year.

While the market loved the deal, it is worth taking a closer look at what this deal really means for Intel and whether this is a true turning point or just a short-term jolt.

Image source: Getty Images.

Why Nvidia is partnering with Intel

The collaboration between Nvidia and Intel appears largely aimed at rival Advanced Micro Devices (AMD 1.73%). AMD’s central processing units (CPUs) have been steadily taking share from Intel in both the data center and computer segments. Meanwhile, the company has started to fuse its graphics processing units (GPUs) and CPUs together, which is a direct challenge to Nvidia. However, thus far, most of its success in this area has been in gaming and computers and not in artificial intelligence (AI).

Nonetheless, Nvidia does not appear content to just dominate the massive data center market, and with this collaboration, it will look to address the laptop market as well. It also looks to stave off any advantages that AMD may gain in the data center market with a combined GPU/CPU chip, especially as the market moves more toward inference.

As such, the companies will look to combine Intel CPUs with Nvidia GPUs connected by NVLink, giving laptop buyers an integrated option that is much more powerful. Intel will also build custom x86 CPUs for Nvidia’s rack-scale servers, making Nvidia a major customer for its chips. That is a big win for Intel, given how much share it has lost to AMD in the data center over the past five years. For Nvidia, this is about making sure AMD doesn’t gain too much ground with its own combined CPU/GPU solutions.

While the $5 billion investment is a drop in the bucket for Nvidia, it does matter for Intel. Intel has been burning through cash trying to scale its foundry business and build new fabs in the U.S. and Europe. Its foundry operating losses were $3.2 billion last quarter, worse than a year ago.

The Nvidia capital injection, along with $9 billion from the U.S. government and $2 billion from SoftBank, gives Intel a $16 billion war chest to keep investing without wrecking its balance sheet. It also signals to the market that Nvidia sees Intel as too important to fail. The company may be a competitor in some markets, but Nvidia apparently wants a strong CPU partner to keep AMD from getting too much leverage in the CPU market.

Is Intel’s stock a buy?

Despite the stock’s huge jump, there are still plenty of risks with the Intel story. Intel’s core PC business remains soft, with client computing revenue down 3% year over year last quarter. Its data center and AI segment revenue grew just 4%, which was far behind the booming numbers from Nvidia and even AMD.

And while the company says its product roadmaps remain on track, its recent history is not good, with the company often missing deadlines or even scrapping products. In addition, Nvidia said that it is not giving up on the CPUs it has been developing with Arm Holdings.

Intel’s money-losing foundry business is also an issue, and it does not sound like Nvidia is riding to the rescue with regard to this part of its business. Nvidia has made clear that it is not moving away from Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing as its primary manufacturing partner. Intel doesn’t have the expertise or scale of TSMC, so Nvidia is still very reliant on the foundry leader.

While the partnership with Nvidia is a positive, it doesn’t solve all of Intel’s problems. It still needs to prove it can execute and that all the money it’s pouring into its foundry business will pay off. Gaining Nvidia as a foundry customer likely would have been a bigger deal, but that was not the case.

Meanwhile, after the jump in its stock price this year, the stock is no longer in the bargain bin. As such, I wouldn’t chase the rally.

Broadcom (AVGO -0.06%) and Oracle (ORCL 1.72%) have been two of the best-performing mega-cap growth stocks in 2025. As of this writing, Broadcom is up 19% since reporting earnings on Sept. 4, and Oracle soared 36% on Sept. 10 in response to its own blowout earnings and guidance.

Broadcom is getting closer to reaching a $2 trillion in market cap, and Oracle is knocking on the door of $1 trillion. Yet, you won’t find either of these stocks in the “Magnificent Seven,” which only includes Nvidia (NVDA -0.20%), Microsoft (MSFT 0.73%), Apple (AAPL 2.98%), Amazon (AMZN 1.04%), Alphabet (GOOG 0.69%) (GOOGL 0.65%), Meta Platforms (META -1.32%), and Tesla (TSLA 1.48%).

The “Ten Titans” corrects that error by adding Broadcom, Oracle, and Netflix (NFLX 1.38%) to the group. Combined, these 10 growth stocks now make up 39.1% of the S&P 500 (^GSPC 0.28%).

Here’s how the Ten Titans have disrupted the stock market in just a few years and why their dominance in the S&P 500 can still impact your investment portfolio, even if you don’t own any of the Ten Titans outright.

Image source: Getty Images.

A lot has changed in less than three years

The S&P 500 is up a staggering 70% since the start of 2023, and a big reason for that is artificial intelligence (AI). Specifically, a few major companies are profiting from AI through semiconductors and associated networking hardware, software infrastructure, cloud computing, automation, and efficiency improvements.

The Ten Titans encapsulate this theme. The group is now double the market cap of China’s entire stock market and is largely responsible for moving the S&P 500 in recent years.

At the end of 2022, the Ten Titans made up 23.3% of the S&P 500. But since then, many of the Titans have increased in value several-fold, with Nvidia and Broadcom leading the pack.

Data by YCharts.

The Ten Titans’ combination of size and rapid gains has redefined the structure of the S&P 500. Here’s a look at each company’s weight in the S&P 500 as of this writing.

Data source: Slickcharts.

Oracle’s surge on Sept. 10 briefly pole-vaulted it to become the tenth-largest company by market cap. At that time, the nine largest names in the S&P 500 were all tech companies — a far cry from the days when the most valuable U.S. companies were from the oil and gas, consumer staples, financials, and industrial sectors.

The Ten Titans’ influence is growing

Even if you don’t own any of the Ten Titans stocks, their rise may still have ripple effects for your financial portfolio.

The biggest impact would be if you own index funds or exchange-traded funds (ETFs) with exposure to these holdings. Market-cap weighted passive funds that follow a growth theme or the general market will likely have sizable positions in the Ten Titans. And S&P 500 funds that mirror the index, like the Vanguard S&P 500 ETF, SPDR S&P 500 ETF, the iShares Core S&P 500 ETF will all have around 39% of their holdings in the Titans.

The sheer size of the Ten Titans means that the S&P 500 is no longer a balanced index, at least for now. Rather, it’s more of a growth index, similar to how the Nasdaq Composite is typically viewed.

The S&P 500 may contain hundreds of holdings, but its performance is now based on just a couple dozen companies. Investors looking for mid-cap or even large-cap stocks should venture outside the index because the S&P 500 offers little exposure to non-mega-cap names.

Navigating a Ten Titans-dominated market

The rise of the Ten Titans has benefited their shareholders, S&P 500 index fund investors, and folks with exposure to these stocks through ETFs. However, because they are so big, they will likely make the S&P 500 more volatile going forward.

Investors can offset the Ten Titans concentration by investing in value and dividend stocks that no longer make up a large percentage of the S&P 500. On the other hand, if you’re looking for a low-cost and straightforward way to get exposure to top growth stocks, the S&P 500 may be one of the simplest ways to do so.

The White House denies any involvement with the deal despite Nvidia’s CEO meeting US President Donald Trump only a day before.

Nvidia says it will invest $5bn into Intel, throwing its heft behind the struggling US chip company, but has stopped short of giving Intel a crucial manufacturing deal.

Nvidia, which is based in Santa Clara, California, announced the investment on Thursday.

The pact, which also includes a plan for Intel and Nvidia to jointly develop personal computer and data centre chips, represents a potential risk to Taiwan’s TSMC. TSMC currently manufactures Nvidia’s flagship processors, a business that the world’s most valuable company could one day extend to Intel. AMD, which competes with Intel for supplying chips to data centres, also stands to lose because of Nvidia’s backing of Intel.

Nvidia, whose must-have chips are powering a global artificial intelligence boom, said in a statement it will pay $23.28 per share for Intel common stock, a price slightly below the $24.90 at which Intel shares closed on Wednesday.

However, that is higher than the $20.47 price per share that the United States government paid for a 10 percent stake it took in Intel last month, an extraordinary development.

The White House has denied any involvement in the deal, which comes only a day after US President Donald Trump met Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang on Wednesday.

New opening

Nvidia’s latest investment will make it one of Intel’s largest shareholders, likely owning 4 percent or more of the company after new shares are issued to complete the deal.

Nvidia’s support represents a new opening for Intel after years of turnaround efforts at the famed US manufacturer failed to pay off.

Intel – once the chip industry’s flagbearer that claimed to put the “silicon” in Silicon Valley – appointed a new CEO, Lip-Bu Tan, in March. Tan has promised to make Intel’s operation lean and build factory capacity only when there’s demand to match it.

Crucially, the deal will not involve Intel’s contract manufacturing business, known as a “foundry” in the chip industry, making chips for Nvidia. Most analysts believe that for Intel’s foundry to survive, it would need to eventually win a large customer such as Nvidia, Apple, Qualcomm or Broadcom.

But the deal adds to a growing reserve of capital that Intel has accumulated weeks after it announced a $2bn investment from Softbank and received $5.7bn from the US government.

David Zinsner, Intel’s chief financial officer, told investors at a Deutsche Bank conference last month that the company was in a “good cash position” and would not require much more capital until it saw significant demand for 14A, a next-generation manufacturing process that it expects to invest heavily in building.

Under the deal announced Thursday, Intel is planning to design custom data-centre central processors that Nvidia will package with its AI chips, known as GPUs. A proprietary Nvidia technology will let the Intel and Nvidia chips communicate at higher speeds than before.

Those speedy links are a key differentiator in the AI market because many chips must be strung together to act as one to chew through massive amounts of data.

At present, Nvidia’s best-selling AI servers with those speedy links are only available using Nvidia’s own chips, but the deal would now put Intel on equal footing, giving it a chance to make money off each Nvidia server.

On Wall Street, Nvidia’s stock is trending upwards. As of 12pm in New York (16:00 GMT), it is up more than 3.4 percent from the market open. Intel stock is surging up more than 29 percent for the day.

The S&P 500 closed Sept. 12 up 12% year to date, 62% over the last three years, and 97% over the last five years. Mega-cap growth-focused companies are largely responsible for driving the index to new heights.

The “Ten Titans,” which includes Nvidia, Microsoft, Apple, Amazon, Alphabet, Meta Platforms, Broadcom, Tesla, Oracle, and Netflix, now makes up over 39% of the S&P 500. And the technology sector alone makes up 34% of the index.

Here’s how the S&P 500 being dependent on the performance of a single sector impacts the broader market and your financial portfolio — and is a low-cost and straightforward way to bet on the continued dominance of tech stocks.

Image source: Getty Images.

Tech is even more dominant than it appears

The S&P 500 has a high concentration in the tech sector, namely because of just a handful of stocks. Nvidia, Microsoft, and Apple collectively account for approximately 20% of the S&P 500. Throw in Broadcom and Oracle, and that number jumps to close to 24%. So, nearly a quarter of the index is in just five tech stocks.

However, there are many leading tech-focused companies that aren’t in the tech sector. Amazon, which owns the largest cloud computing company by market share — Amazon Web Services — is in the consumer discretionary sector, along with Tesla, which is being valued more for its activities outside of electric vehicles, such as robotics, automation, and artificial intelligence (AI).

Alphabet and Meta Platforms are often thought of as big tech companies, but they are in the communications sector, along with Netflix.

The tech sector, plus these five companies, makes up 48.7% of the S&P 500. So, as big as the tech sector is, purely based on the companies that are classified as tech stocks, the real reach of tech-focused companies is far larger.

Let the S&P 500 work for you

The S&P 500’s concentration in the tech sector has expanded its valuation and made it more of a growth-focused index. This can pay off with outsized gains if tech keeps outperforming, but it can also lead to more volatility.

During the worst of the tariff-induced stock market sell-off in April, the Nasdaq Composite fell 24.3% and the S&P 500 also got crushed, falling as much as 18.9%. So while the S&P 500 used to be led by consumer staples, industrial, and energy companies, it has now become like a lighter version of the Nasdaq.

Any investor with exposure to index funds or market-cap-based exchange-traded funds (ETFs) will be impacted by this change. An S&P 500 index fund may seem diversified at first glance, with over 500 industry-leading companies. But the reality is that the S&P 500 is really betting big on just a handful of companies. This presents a dilemma for risk-averse investors, but an opportunity for risk-tolerant investors.

Risk-averse investors can reduce their dependence on mega-cap tech companies by mixing in value and dividend stocks or value-focused ETFs. Many low-cost ETFs have virtually the same expense ratio as an S&P 500 index fund, meaning there’s next to no added cost for picking an ETF that better suits your investment objectives.

However, some investors may feel that it’s best not to fight the market’s momentum, and if anything, lean into it. The Ten Titans are massive, but they are also extremely well-run companies with high-margin businesses and multi-decade runways for future growth. So some folks may cheer the fact that these companies have gotten so large and are dominating the S&P 500.

In that case, buying an S&P 500 index fund may be more interesting. Or even a sector-based fund like the Vanguard Information Technology ETF, which has a staggering 53.2% invested in Nvidia, Microsoft, Apple, Broadcom, and Oracle.

Navigating a tech-driven market

As an individual investor, you don’t have to measure your own performance against an index like the S&P 500. Rather, it’s best to invest in a way that suits your risk tolerance and puts you on a path to achieving your investment goals.

Regardless of your investment time horizon, I think it’s important for all investors to be aware of the current state of the S&P 500 and what’s moving the index. Knowing that so much of the index is invested in tech-focused companies explains why the S&P 500 has such a low dividend yield and a higher-than-historical valuation.

Put another way, the U.S. stock market is being increasingly valued for where its top companies could be years from now rather than where they are today. And that puts a lot of pressure on leading growth stocks to deliver on earnings and capitalize on trends like artificial intelligence and cloud computing.

Sept. 18 (UPI) — Shares of Intel rose 33% Thursday after NVIDIA announced a $5 billion investment in the company to make data center and PC chips.

NVIDIA is investing its stake at a price of $23.28 a share, a press release said. Intel shares jumped 33% to around $33 a share in premarket trading, CNBC reported.

The collaboration deal says that Intel will build custom NVIDIA CPUs for data centers that the company will integrate into its AI infrastructure platforms and sell.

For PCs, Intel will build and sell x86 system-on-chips that integrate NVIDIA RTX GPU chiplets. These new x86 RTX SOCs will power a wide range of PCs, a press release said.

NVIDIA will invest $5 billion in Intel’s common stock at a purchase price of $23.28 per share, which will need regulatory approval.

“At the heart of this reinvention is NVIDIA’s CUDA architecture,” NVIDIA founder and CEO Jensen Huang said in a statement. “This historic collaboration tightly couples NVIDIA’s AI and accelerated computing stack with Intel’s CPUs and the vast x86 ecosystem – a fusion of two world-class platforms. Together, we will expand our ecosystems and lay the foundation for the next era of computing.”

Intel, which has struggled recently, last month got a boost from a 10% investment from the federal government. Earlier this year, its shares hit the lowest in more than 10 years.

“Intel’s x86 architecture has been foundational to modern computing for decades, and we are innovating across our portfolio to enable the workloads of the future,” Lip-Bu Tan, CEO of Intel, said in a statement. “Intel’s leading data center and client computing platforms, combined with our process technology, manufacturing and advanced packaging capabilities, will complement NVIDIA’s AI and accelerated computing leadership to enable new breakthroughs for the industry.”

Huang and Tan will hold a press conference about the deal at 1 p.m. EDT Thursday.

There’s one very big reason some income-focused investors might want to buy mortgage real estate investment trust (mREIT) AGNC Investment (AGNC 0.79%). That would be its astonishingly high 14% dividend yield. But a yield that high is highly unusual, given that the S&P 500 index (^GSPC -0.10%) yields only 1.2%, and the average REIT yields only 3.8%. If you’re looking for an investment that will set you up for a lifetime of reliable dividends, you’ll need to tread with caution here.

AGNC Investment is a decent mREIT

A double-digit dividend yield isn’t particularly abnormal in the mortgage niche of the broader REIT sector. For the most part, AGNC Investment is a fairly well-run mREIT. Notably, the stock’s total return since its initial public offering (IPO) is very compelling, as the chart below highlights. In fact, the total return is very close to that of the S&P 500 index. However, the return doesn’t track along with the S&P 500, so AGNC Investment looks like an attractive diversification tool.

AGNC Total Return Price data by YCharts.

If you’re looking for a total return type of investment, however, AGNC Investment could be attractive for your portfolio. There’s just one small problem. Total return requires the reinvestment of dividends. That makes sense, given the nature of the mortgage-backed securities that AGNC Investment buys.

When you make a mortgage payment, part of the payment goes to the principal and part goes to the interest. That doesn’t change just because AGNC Investment owns mortgages that have been pooled into bond-like securities. Thus, every time AGNC Investment collects a payment on a security it owns, part is interest and part is principal. The huge dividends the mREIT pays are, similarly, made up partly of interest and partly of principal. That principal is effectively a return of investor capital.

Image source: Getty Images.

AGNC Investment’s big dividend problem

The issue for dividend investors is that AGNC Investment’s dividend hasn’t been stable over time. In the table below, the blue line is dividends, and it has been highly volatile. After the IPO, the dividend rose sharply. Then it started to fall, and it’s been heading lower for roughly a decade, as have the shares. Paying out principal, or returning capital to investors, means that the value of the portfolio inherently shrinks over time. That means that there’s less capital to earn interest.

AGNC data by YCharts.

If you spend the dividends AGNC Investment pays you, you are, effectively, spending some of your own capital. To be fair, AGNC Investment has paid out more in dividends than it has lost in value since its IPO. So dividend investors have made out OK with this arrangement. But you still can’t buy AGNC Investment and expect a reliable dividend to support your spending needs in retirement. That’s just not on the table here, and the company’s dividend history proves it. To be fair, the company itself highlights that its ultimate goal is total return, not dividend income.

AGNC is an acquired taste

AGNC Investment is not an easy REIT to wrap your head around. It’s not a bad investment, but it is highly complicated to understand. More specifically for dividend investors, the dividend is not, and probably never will be, reliable.

Most dividend investors are looking for a stock that pays a dividend that’s sustainable, if not growing, over time. If that’s what you want, this 14% yield is very likely to let you down, no matter how attractive it looks relative to other high-yield dividend stock options you have.

Latin American consumer conglomerate MercadoLibre (MELI 0.10%) has drawn considerable interest from investors. The company spearheaded Latin American e-commerce and pioneered the fintech industry in the region through its business segment, Mercado Pago.

Moreover, investors may be curious to know how it fits with Warren Buffett‘s investment philosophy, even though Berkshire Hathaway does not hold any MercadoLibre shares. Still, comparing MercadoLibre to Buffett’s philosophy could help investors better understand this investment and determine whether it is suitable for them.

Image source: Getty Images.

Inconsistencies with Warren Buffett’s philosophy

On the surface, it is not immediately apparent how well MercadoLibre’s stock and business align with Buffett’s philosophy. Buffett has tended to avoid companies in countries with unstable political environments. Berkshire sold Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing (TSMC) due to Taiwan’s precarious political position, so the same sentiment could discourage him from investing in MercadoLibre.

That does not always mean Berkshire avoids companies operating in the developing world. Buffett has invested in several Chinese companies and also showed interest in Latin American fintech a few years ago. For a time, it owned shares in Brazilian fintech stocks StoneCo and Nu Holdings, parent of the world’s largest digital bank outside of Asia.

However, it has since sold both companies without an explanation. That could mean Buffett feels increasingly uncomfortable with these markets.

That discomfort is likely to discourage Buffett and his team from paying a premium for such stocks. Unfortunately for Berkshire, MercadoLibre trades at a 58 P/E ratio, meaning it may have to pay more than a fair price to take advantage of this opportunity.

Why MercadoLibre may fit Buffett’s investing approach

However, most of the inconsistencies are countered by Berkshire’s ownership of one company: Amazon. Amazon is MercadoLibre’s counterpart in the developed world. It is also a company that Buffett said he was “an idiot” for not seeing its potential earlier. Until recently, Amazon had an elevated P/E ratio, so it is possible he set his valuation concerns aside when his company purchased shares in 2019.

That is critical, since MercadoLibre seems to see some of the same valuation trends as Amazon when it was a smaller company. Additionally, Buffett likes industry leaders. That fits the description of Berkshire’s three largest positions, Apple, Bank of America, and American Express, all of which are among the top companies in their respective fields.

More importantly, Buffett likes to see long-term competitive advantages in stable industries, and MercadoLibre mostly fits that description. As mentioned, the company pioneered e-commerce in Latin America. Furthermore, it leads its region in fintech and has developed a shipping and fulfillment network that gives it a competitive edge.

Indeed, investors tend not to associate Latin America with stability. Nonetheless, from building a logistics operation to developing Mercado Pago to sell online in a cash-based society, MercadoLibre has successfully turned regional challenges into advantages.

Is MercadoLibre stock a Buffett-worthy investment?

MercadoLibre stock is a worthy investment, but Warren Buffett more than likely does not see it that way. Indeed, MercadoLibre’s leadership in e-commerce and fintech in Latin America is likely to bolster the stock, even at a 58 P/E ratio. Since it possesses the unique talent of turning regional adversity into a revenue source within fast-growing industries, the stock is likely to continue its upward trend in the longer term.

Still, Buffett ultimately has shown little tolerance for political instability. His past positions in StoneCo and Nu Holdings showed some open-mindedness, but the fact that Berkshire sold these positions without any apparent justification is telling. His sale of TSMC seems to confirm these feelings.

Ultimately, given its history and resilience, long-term investors are likely to outperform the market with MercadoLibre stock. Just don’t expect Buffett to follow that lead.

SEOUL, Sept. 11 (UPI) — South Korean President Lee Jae Myung said Thursday that last week’s “perplexing” immigration raid at a Hyundai electric battery plant in Georgia, which led to the detention of more than 300 South Korean workers, could prevent firms from making future investments in the United States.

“Companies will have to worry about whether establishing a local factory in the United States will be subject to all sorts of disadvantages or difficulties,” Lee said at a press conference in Seoul marking his 100th day in office.

“That could have a significant impact on future direct investment,” he said.

Multiple agencies led by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement arrested 475 people, most of whom are South Korean nationals, at a Hyundai-LG Energy Solutions battery plant near Savannah, Ga., last Thursday.

ICE and Homeland Security Investigations officials said those who were detained are not authorized to work in the United States. The raid was the largest single-site operation so far under U.S. President Donald Trump‘s mass deportation agenda.

The roundup, which came less than two weeks after Lee met with Trump in the White House, has sparked widespread public shock and anger in South Korea. In July, Seoul and Washington reached a trade deal to lower Trump’s threatened tariffs from 25% to 15%, while South Korea pledged to invest $350 billion in the United States.

“The situation is extremely perplexing,” Lee said, noting that South Korean firms regularly send skilled workers for short stays to help establish overseas factories.

“These are not long-term workers,” he said. “When setting up facilities and equipment, you need skilled technicians. You need to install the machinery and the U.S. doesn’t have the workforce locally.”

Lee added that Seoul is currently negotiating with Washington to address the visa situation through potential waivers, additional quotas or new visa categories for Korean workers.

“If the United States sees a practical need, I think the issue will be resolved,” he said. “Under the current circumstances, Korean companies will be very hesitant to make direct investments in the United States.”

Some 316 South Korean nationals and 14 foreigners will return to Seoul on a charter plane departing at 1 a.m. local time on Friday, Lee said.

The flight, initially planned for Wednesday, was delayed due to U.S. officials insisting on transporting the workers in handcuffs, Lee added. He said Seoul protested and Washington reversed its stance, citing an “instruction from the White House.”

SEOUL — The immigration raid that snatched up hundreds of South Koreans last week sent a disconcerting message to companies in South Korea and elsewhere: America wants your investment, but don’t expect special treatment.

Images of employees being shackled and detained like criminals have outraged many South Koreans. The fallout is already being felt in delays to some big investment projects, auto industry executives and analysts said. Some predicted that it could also make some companies think twice about investing in the U.S. at all.

“Companies cannot afford to not be more cautious about investing in the U.S. in the future,” said Lee Ho-guen, an auto industry expert at Daeduk University, “In the long run, especially if things get worse, this could make car companies turn away from the U.S. market and more toward other places like Latin America, Europe or the Middle East.”

The raid last week, in which more than 300 South Korean nationals were detained, targeted a factory site in Ellabell, Ga,. owned by HL-GA Battery Company, a joint venture between Hyundai and South Korean battery-maker LG Energy Solutions to supply batteries for EVs. The Georgia factory is also expected to supply batteries for Kia, which is part of the Hyundai Motor Group. Kia has spent hundreds of millions of dollars on its factory in West Point, Ga.

“This situation highlights the competing policy priorities of the Trump administration and has many in Asia scratching their heads, asking, ‘Which is more important to America? Immigration raids or attracting high-quality foreign investment?” said Tami Overby, former president of the American Chamber of Commerce in Korea. “Images of hundreds of Korean workers being treated like criminals are playing all over Asia and don’t match President Trump’s vision to bring high-quality, advanced manufacturing back to America.”

A protester wears a mask of President Trump at a rally Tuesday in Seoul protesting the detention of South Korean workers in Georgia. The signs call for “immediate releases and Trump apology.”

(Ahn Young-joon / Associated Press)

South Korea is one of the U.S.’ biggest trading partners, with the two countries exchanging $242.5 billion in goods and services last year. The U.S. is the leading destination for South Korea’s overseas investments, receiving $26 billion last year, according to South Korea’s Finance Ministry.

Trump is banking on ambitious projects like the one raided in Georgia to revive American manufacturing.

Hyundai is one of the South Korean companies with the largest commitments to the U.S. It has invested around $20 billion since entering the market in the 1980s. It sold 836,802 cars in the U.S. last year.

California is one of its largest markets, with more than 70 dealerships.

Earlier this year, the company announced an additional $26 billion to build a new steel mill in Louisiana and upgrade its existing auto plants.

Hyundai’s expansion plans were part of the $150-billion pledge South Korea made last month to help convince President Trump to set tariffs on Korean products at 15% instead of the 25% he had earlier announced.

Samsung Electronics announced that it would invest $37 billion to construct a semiconductor factory in Texas. Similarly large sums are expected from South Korean shipbuilders.

Analysts and executives say the recent raid is making companies feel exposed, all the more so because U.S. officials have indicated that more crackdowns are coming.

“We’re going to do more worksite enforcement operations,” White House border advisor Tom Homan said on Sunday. “No one hires an illegal alien out of the goodness of their heart. They hire them because they can work them harder, pay them less, undercut the competition that hires U.S. citizen employees.”

Many South Korean companies have banned all work-related travel to the U.S. or are recalling personnel already there, according to local media reports. Construction work on at least 22 U.S. factory sites has reportedly been halted.

The newspaper Korea Economic Daily reported on Monday that 10 out of the 14 companies it contacted said they were considering adjusting their projects in the U.S. due to the Georgia raids.

It is a significant problem for the big planned projects, analysts say. South Korean companies involved in U.S. manufacturing projects say they need to bring their own engineering teams to get the factories up and running, but obtaining proper work visas for them is difficult and time-consuming. The option often used to get around this problem is an illegal shortcut like using the Electronic System for Travel Authorization, a non-work permit that allows tourists to stay in the country for up to 90 days.

Unlike countries such as Singapore or Mexico, South Korea doesn’t have a deal with Washington that guarantees work visas for specialized workers.

“The U.S. keeps calling for more investments into the country. But no matter how many people we end up hiring locally later, there is no way around bringing in South Korean experts to get things off the ground,” said a manager at a subcontractor for LG Energy Solution, who asked not to be named. “But now we can no longer use ESTAs like we did in the past.”

Trump pointed to the problem on Truth Social, posting that he will try to make it easier for South Korean companies to bring in the people they need, but reminding them to “please respect our Nation’s Immigration Laws.”

“Your Investments are welcome, and we encourage you to LEGALLY bring your very smart people … and we will make it quickly and legally possible for you to do so,” the post said.

Sydney Seiler, senior advisor and Korea chair at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies, said that the timing of the raids was an “irritant” but that South Korean companies would eventually adjust.

“Rectifying that is a challenge for all involved, the companies, the embassies who issue visas, etc.,” Seiler said, adding that the raids will make other companies be more careful in the future.

SACRAMENTO — Gov. Gavin Newsom used his written State of the State address Tuesday to cast California as a bulwark against a menacing Trump administration he accused of dismantling public services, flouting the rule of law and using extortion to bully businesses and universities.

The remarks came as Newsom’s national profile has grown and given him a broader political stage, even as he skipped the literal one — opting to send his speech to lawmakers in writing rather than deliver it from the Assembly rostrum, which is customary. His address painted a portrait of a state under siege by the federal government even as it grapples with the aftermath of the devastating Los Angeles County fires, spiraling housing costs and an uneven economic recovery.

While he framed Trump and his allies as the chief obstacle to progress, he leaned on familiar themes of California’s resilience, pointing to disaster response, investments in schools and clean energy and the state’s economic staying power. He said as California celebrates the 175th anniversary of statehood, “the state of the state is strong, fully committed to defending democracy, and resolved to never bend.”

“It would be a mistake to think California is cowering in the face of this onslaught,” Newsom said in the 2,300-word address accompanied by a shortened video version.

The written address marks the fifth year in a row that Newsom has diverged from the decades-old tradition of the governor delivering the annual address in person to lawmakers at the state Capitol.

His unconventional approach has drawn some criticism, particularly by Republicans who characterized it as an example of Newsom lacking respect for the institution. California’s Constitution only requires that the State of the State be submitted as a written letter to the Legislature, which was how governors up until roughly the 1960s fulfilled their duty. Starting with the late Gov. Pat Brown, the addresses were delivered in person, typically in January as a way to set the agenda for the year.

Newsom, who dislikes reading from a teleprompter due to his dyslexia, has not delivered his State of the State in the Capitol since 2020, shortly before the COVID-19 pandemic. In 2021, Newsom’s address was streamed from an empty Dodgers Stadium and, two years later, he declined to give a speech in lieu of a statewide press tour, during which he unveiled new policies.

“His ambitions are more than his ability to govern this state,” Assembly Republican leader James Gallagher of Yuba City said in a video posted on X. “And here is another symbol of that, not showing up to talk about what is actually going on in the state and how we can actually come together to get things done.”

This year’s speech arrives unusually late in the year, as lawmakers race to approve hundreds of bills ahead of Friday’s legislative deadline. It also comes at a moment when Newsom, in the final stretch of his governorship, is drawing national attention not only for his confrontations with Trump but also for a shrewd social media assault that borrows the president’s own trolling style to energize supporters and burnish his public brand.

But Newsom’s record has also drawn sharp criticism.

After nearly two terms, California continues to wrestle with entrenched homelessness, soaring housing costs and one of the nation’s highest costs of living. A budget deficit has swelled in part because the governor expanded Medi-Cal healthcare coverage to include all income-eligible undocumented immigrants. And his move to undercut Texas lawmakers who redrew legislative maps to add additional Republican seats in Congress by asking California voters to do the same to add Democrats has fueled charges that he is accelerating a national wave of partisan gerrymandering and energizing state Republicans.

“My last letter to you warned about the poisonous populism of the right and the anxiety many people were feeling about the state of this country — some of it grounded in real fear about the national economy, but much of it stoked by misinformation and bigotry,” Newsom wrote to lawmakers. “We are now nine months into a battle to protect the values we hold most dear and to preserve the economic and social foundation we built for California. We are facing a federal administration built on incompetence and malicious ignorance, one that seeks the death of independent thinking.”

Newsom said California showed the country its resilient spirit in January during the deadly wind-driven wildfires that destroyed thousands of homes and forced mass evacuations in Los Angeles County. Newsom credited emergency responders who put their lives at risk saving trapped residents.

He glossed over criticisms that pre-deployed fire engines were inadequate, evacuation alerts were delayed and elderly and disabled residents were left stranded. Instead, he focused on the “historic speed and scale” for which federal, state and local officials responded. That commitment, he said, will be there until the last residents return and local businesses recover.

“Through executive orders waiving red tape, the state paved the way for debris-removal crews to move quickly through damaged areas and streamlined permits to speed rebuilding,” Newsom wrote. “Homes are now rising.”

While California looked to the Trump administration for help, Newsom said the state has found none.

“Even as fires still burned, the newly elected President began targeting our state — testing our resolve with his relentless, unhinged California obsession,” Newsom wrote.

From fires to immigration, Newsom said Trump’s approach has been the same: Abandon California when it is in crisis and attack its liberal values. The U.S. Supreme Court cleared the way Monday for federal authorities to return to mass immigration arrests at workplaces, bus stops and other places in Los Angeles. Newsom said Trump’s decision in June to deploy the National Guard and U.S. Marines to Los Angeles to help with immigration enforcement was a “cowardly attempt to scare us into submission.”

“We are committed to protecting the men and women who make this state stronger through their hard work and entrepreneurial spirit,” Newsom wrote before pivoting to Trump’s ongoing attacks on university funding. “And when the President threatens to bankrupt UCLA — an engine of innovation and economic prosperity, a world leader in science and medicine — with his own bankrupt ideas, he will fail.”

California has led the way in building a green economy, Newsom said, pointing to more than2 million zero-emission vehicles sold in the state and 51 miles of Caltrain railroad tracks now electrified. The state’s grid has run for the equivalent of 60 full days using 100% clean electricity, he added.

“Our climate investments will create millions of new jobs and cut air pollution by more than 70%,” Newsom wrote. “In California, economic growth and environmental protection go hand in hand.”

Like past governors, he used the speech to underscore California’s outsized role in the national economy. With a gross domestic product topping $4.1 trillion, he said the state leads in startups, venture capital and space technology.

The governor closed on a note of defiance, promising to report next year — in what would be his final State of the State — that California is “brighter and more prosperous than ever before.”

India’s finance minister calls for greater collaboration in ‘cybersecurity’ and ‘defence’ between the two countries.

Israel and India have signed a bilateral investment agreement to expand mutual trade during far-right Israeli Minister of Finance Bezalel Smotrich’s trip to the South Asian country, which deepened its ties with Israel under Hindu nationalist Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

The agreement, signed in New Delhi by Smotrich and Indian Minister of Corporate Affairs Nirmala Sitharaman, aims to boost trade and investment flows between the two countries. Sitharaman stressed the need for greater collaboration in “cybersecurity, defence, innovation and high-technology”.

The deal marked “an important strategic step for our joint vision”, said Smotrich, who has been sanctioned by several Western countries for his links to illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank.

“The agreement reached today between Israel and India reflects our economic growth, innovation and mutual prosperity,” he wrote on X.

“This agreement will open new opportunities for investors in both countries, strengthen Israeli exports, and provide businesses with the certainty and tools to grow in one of the world’s largest and fastest-growing markets.”

India’s Ministry of Finance described the deal as a “historic milestone”, adding that it will foster cooperation in “fintech innovation, infrastructure development, financial regulation, and digital payment connectivity”.

Bilateral trade stood at $3.9bn in 2024, while current mutual investments are worth about $800m, according to official figures. But the bulk of the trade between the two countries is in the domain of defence and security, with New Delhi being Israel’s largest weapons buyer.

Last year, Indian firms also sold Israel rockets and explosives during Israel’s war on Gaza, an Al Jazeera investigation revealed.

The agreement comes as New Delhi moves closer to Israel, even as Israel faces growing political isolation over its genocidal war on Gaza. India was one of the first countries to reach out to Israel after the October 7, 2023, attack on Israel led by Hamas, condemning it as “an act of terror”.

Indian authorities have cracked down on pro-Palestine protests, even criminalising them in some cases, while allowing pro-Israel rallies.

India still supports the so-called two-state solution for the resolution of the Israel-Palestine conflict, but it has abstained from several United Nations resolutions that have been critical of Israeli rights violations against Palestinians.

In 2024, India also abstained from a UN General Assembly vote calling for an “immediate, unconditional and permanent” ceasefire in Gaza.

Indians make up the largest group of foreign students in Israel, while Israeli construction companies have sought permission to hire up to 100,000 Indian workers to replace Palestinians whose permits were revoked after Israel launched its brutal war on Gaza in October 2023.

India has also refused to condemn Israel’s war on Iran, and declined to support the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation’s (SCO) condemnation of Israeli attacks. But after United States President Donald Trump’s 50 percent tariffs on India, which took effect late last month, New Delhi this month signed an SCO declaration that condemned the US-Israeli bombing of Iran.

India has also moved to mend its ties with rival China, in a setback for years of US policy using New Delhi as a counterweight to Beijing.

China and India should be partners, not rivals, Chinese President Xi Jinping told Modi on the sidelines of the SCO summit in Tianjin.

LONDON — U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said Monday she doesn’t think the detention of hundreds of South Koreans in an immigration raid at a Hyundai plant in Georgia will deter investment in the United States because such tough actions mean there is no uncertainty about the Trump administration’s policies.

The detention of 475 workers, more than 300 of them South Korean, in the Sept. 4 raid has caused confusion, shock and a sense of betrayal among many in the U.S.-allied nation.

“This is a great opportunity for us to make sure that all companies are reassured that when you come to the United States, you’ll know what the rules of the game are,” Noem said at a meeting in London of ministers from the “Five Eyes” intelligence-sharing partnership focused on border security.

“We’re encouraging all companies who want to come to the United States and help our economy and employ people, that we encourage them to employ U.S. citizens and to bring people to our country that want to follow our laws and work here the right way,” she told reporters.

The detained Koreans would be deported after most were detained for ignoring removal orders, while “a few” had engaged in other criminal activity and will “face the consequences,” Noem said.

Newly appointed U.K. Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood welcomed Noem and ministers from Canada, Australia and New Zealand to the 18th-century headquarters of the Honourable Artillery Company for talks on countering unauthorized migration, child sexual abuse and the spread of opioids.

Mahmood, who was given the interior minister job in a shakeup of Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s Cabinet on Friday, said the ministers would “agree new measures to protect our borders with our Five Eyes partners, hitting people-smugglers hard.”

The far-flung countries are close allies with some common problems but also widely differ in their approaches to migration. The Trump administration’s program of street raids, mass detentions and large-scale deportations of unauthorized migrants has drawn domestic and international criticism and a host of legal challenges.

Noem says tough measures are an inspiration to others

Noem said there had not been disagreements among the ministers in talks focused on sharing information on criminal gangs, using technology to disrupt their networks and speeding extradition arrangements.

“I don’t think that the discussion today has covered politics at all,” she said. “It is what resources do we have that we can share so we can each protect our countries better?”

Noem said that “when we put tough measures in place, the more that we can talk about that and share that is an inspiration to other countries to do the same.”

She denied a plan to expand immigration raids and deploy the National Guard in Chicago, which has met with opposition from local and state authorities, was on hold.

“Nothing’s on hold. Everything is full speed ahead,” Noem told reporters, saying “we can run as many operations every single day as we need to, to keep America safe.”

Also attending Monday’s talks were Canadian Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree, Australia’s Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke and Judith Collins, the attorney general and defense minister of New Zealand.

U.K. grapples with migrant crossings

Britain’s center-left Labor government is struggling to bring down the number of migrants crossing the English Channel in small boats, some 30,000 so far this year. It faces calls from opposition parties to leave the European Convention on Human Rights in order to take tougher action.

The government says it won’t do that, but may tweak the interpretation of the rights convention in British law. It has struck a deal with France to return some migrants who cross the channel and is working on similar agreements with other countries.

Mahmood said Monday that the U.K. could suspend issuing visas to people from countries that do not agree to take back their citizens with no right to remain in Britain, though she did not name any potential countries.

“We do expect countries to play ball, play by the rules, and if one of your citizens has no right to be in our country, you do need to take them back,” she said.

Lawless writes for the Associated Press.

You’re reading a free article with opinions that may differ
from The Motley Fool’s Premium Investing Services. Become a Motley Fool member today to
get instant access to our top analyst recommendations, in-depth research, investing resources,
and more. Learn More

At the heart of the uproar over allegations that Kawhi Leonard of the Los Angeles Clippers received millions in undisclosed payments from a tree-planting startup is a National Basketball Association rule that caps the the total annual payroll for teams.

According to a report by Pablo Torre of the Athletic, bankruptcy documents show that the tree-planting startup Aspiration Partners paid Leonard $21 million — and still owes him another $7 million — after agreeing to a $28 million contract for endorsement and marketing work at the company.

The report claims there is no evidence to show that Leonard did anything for Aspiration Partners, whose initial funding came in large part from Clippers owner Steve Ballmer. Torre alleges that the payment to Leonard was a way to skirt the NBA salary cap and pad his contract.

The Clippers have forcefully denied that they or Ballmer “circumvented the salary cap or engaged in any misconduct related to Aspiration.”

Still, the NBA said it was launching an investigation into the matter.

The salary cap is a dollar amount that limits what teams can spend on player payroll. The number is determined based on a percentage of projected income for the upcoming year. In 2024-25, the salary cap was $140.6 million.

The purpose of the cap is to ensure parity, preventing the wealthiest teams from outspending smaller markets to acquire the best players. Teams that exceed the cap must pay luxury tax penalties that grow increasingly severe. Revenues from the tax penalties are then distributed in part to smaller-market teams and in part to teams that do not exceed the salary cap.

The cap was implemented before the 1984-85 season at a mere $3.6 million. Ten years later, it was $15.9 million, and 10 years after that it had risen to $43.9 million. By the 2014-15 season it was $63.1 million.

The biggest spike came before the 2016-2017 season when it jumped to $94 million because of an influx of revenue from a new nine-year, $24 billion media rights deal with ESPN and TNT.

Salary cap rules negotiated between the NBA and the players’ union are spelled out in the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA). Proven incidents of teams circumventing the cap are few, with a violation by the Minnesota Timberwolves in 2000 serving as the most egregious.

The Timberwolves made a secret agreement with free agent and former No. 1 overall draft pick Joe Smith, signing him to a succession of below-market one-year deals in order to enable the team to go over the cap with a huge contract ahead of the 2001-2002 season.

The NBA voided his contract, fined the Timberwolves $3.5 million, and stripped them of five first-round draft picks — two of which were later returned. Also, owner Glen Taylor and general manager Kevin McHale were suspended.

Then-NBA commissioner David Stern told the Minnesota Star-Tribune at the time: “What was done here was a fraud of major proportions. There were no fewer than five undisclosed contracts tightly tucked away, in the hope that they would never see the light of day. … The magnitude of this offense was shocking.”

Current commissioner Adam Silver is just as adamant as Stern when it comes to enforcing salary cap rules, although the current CBA limits punishment.

According to Article 13 of the CBA, if the Clippers were found to have circumvented the cap, it would be a first offense punishable by a $4.5 million fine, one first-round draft pick, and voiding of Leonard’s contract. However, the Clippers don’t have a first-round pick until 2027.

Leonard, one of the Clippers stars, is extremely well compensated. He will have been paid $375,772,011 by NBA teams through the upcoming season, according to industry expert spotrac.com.

A former Aspiration finance department employee whose voice was disguised on Torre’s podcast said that when they noticed the shockingly large fee paid to Leonard, they were told that, “If I had any questions about it, essentially don’t, because it was to circumvent the salary cap, LOL. There was lots of LOL when things were shared.”

Aspiration Partners was a digital bank that promoted socially responsible spending and investments that, at one point, brought in a star-filled roster of investors that included Drake, Robert Downey Jr., and Leonardo DiCaprio. Founded in 2013, it offered investments in “conscious coalition” companies and offered carbon credits to businesses. The company was valued it at $2.3 million at one point.

But in August, the company’s co-founder, Joseph Sanberg, agreed to plead guilty to charges that he defrauded investors and lenders. Federal prosecutors accused Sanberg of causing more than $248 million in losses, calling him a “fraudster.”

Prosecutors alleged that Sanberg and another member of the company’s board, Ibrahim AlHusseini, fraudulently obtained $145 million in loans by promising shares from Sanberg’s stock in the company. AlHusseini allegedly falsified records to inflate his assets to obtain the loans, and Sanberg concealed from investigators that he was the source for revenue that was recognized by the company.

Sanberg had also recruited companies and individuals to claim they would be paying tens of thousands of dollars to have trees planted, but instead Sanberg used legal entities under his control to hide that he was making these payments, not the customers.

Aspiration, which was partially funded by Ballmer with a $50 million investment, filed for bankruptcy in March.

The company was expected to pay more than $300 million over two decades as a sponsor for the Clippers’ Intuit Dome, which opened in August 2024. But before the new arena opened, the Clippers said Aspiration was no longer a sponsor, just as the Justice Department and Commodity Futures Trading Commission began looking into allegations that Aspiration had misled customers and investors.

During Aspiration’s bankruptcy proceedings, documents emerged citing KL2 Aspire as a creditor owed $7 million, one of four yearly payments of that amount agreed upon in a 2022 contract. KL2 is a limited liability company that names Leonard — whose jersey number is 2 — as its manager.

Aspiration was partially funded by a $50-million investment from Ballmer. It is not known whether Ballmer was aware of or played a role in facilitating the employment agreement between Aspiration and Leonard.

The Clippers issued a lengthy statement Thursday, attempting to explain why Leonard being paid by Aspiration was unrelated to his contract with the Clippers.

“There is nothing unusual or untoward about team sponsors doing endorsement deals with players on the same team,” the statement said in part. “Neither Steve nor the Clippers organization had any oversight of Kawhi’s independent endorsement agreement with Aspiration. To say otherwise is flat-out wrong.”

“The Clippers take NBA compliance extremely seriously, fully respect the league’s rules, and welcome its investigation related to Aspiration.”

In his reporting, Torre noted that Leonard’s contract with Aspiration included an unusual clause that said the company could terminate the endorsement agreement if Leonard was no longer a member of the Clippers.

Mark Cuban, part owner of the Dallas Mavericks, took to X.com to suggest that Torre’s reporting was faulty.

‘I’m on Team Ballmer,” Cuban wrote. “As much as I wish they circumvented the salary cap, First Steve isn’t that dumb. If he did try to feed KL money, knowing what was at stake for him personally, and his team, do you think he would let the company go bankrupt ? “

Torre responded by inviting Cuban on his podcast, “Pablo Torre Finds Out.”

It’s been said many times before.

In Los Angeles, for many people, the neighborhood park is their frontyard and backyard.

It’s where tables are staked out early and birthdays are celebrated.

It’s where kids learn how to swim and all ages play soccer, baseball and basketball.

It’s where neighbors gather to beat the heat, hike, catch a concert, slow down, escape the madness.

But as I said in my last column, L.A.’s roughly 500 parks and 100 rec centers, occupying 16,000 acres, are generally in bad shape and not easily accessible to many residents. In fact, in the latest annual ranking by the Trust for Public Land, they fell to 90th out of the 100 largest recreation and parks systems in the nation on the basis of access, acreage, amenities, investment and equity.

That’s shameful and inexcusable, especially for a city prepping to host World Cup soccer championships and the Olympics. But in every corner of Los Angeles, residents now have a chance to weigh in on what they like or don’t like about parks, what went wrong and what to do about it.

A months-long study, commissioned by the city and compiled by landscape design company OLIN with input from multiple urban planners, community groups and thousands of residents, was posted online Tuesday, explaining the long history of decline and laying out strategies for turning things around.

Residents have 45 days to weigh in online or at community meetings (details below). The final report will be delivered to the recreation and parks board of commissioners and then, in a perfect world, someone at City Hall will lead the way and restore pride in an essential but neglected community asset.

Among the key findings of the nearly 500-page needs-assessment study:

Fewer than half of survey respondents said there are enough parks and rec centers within walking distance of their homes.

Fewer than 40% said parks are in either excellent or good condition.

L.A. invests less per capita in parks ($92 annually) than many other large cities, including Chicago ($182), Dallas ($232), Washington, D.C. ($407) and San Francisco ($583).

The department’s maintenance and operations budget has been stagnant for years and its staff has been shrinking, with more trouble on the horizon as temporary funding sources dry up in the next few years.

Nearly two-thirds of survey respondents would support a bond, tax or levy for additional funding.

“I think it validated what we already knew,” Department of Recreation and Parks general manager Jimmy Kim said of the needs assessment study, adding that it provided a framework for making smarter use of existing resources while going after new sources of revenue. “My message to Los Angeles [is] please participate in this process.”

Kim told me last week that the current workforce is half what it once was, and basic park maintenance is like a “game of whack-a-mole.” The department’s budget has grown in the last 15 years, but lagged way behind growth of the citywide budget. In that time, it’s been hit by inflation, the citywide budget deficit and the rising cost of maintaining aging facilities (the deferred maintenance tab is greater than $2 billion).

The department is also hamstrung by a Charter-mandated, per-capita funding formula that hasn’t been tweaked since the 1930s. And because it’s a proprietary department, meaning that it raises some money through programs and concessions, it’s required to pay its own utility bills and reimburse the city for employee benefits, two expenses that swallow 40% of its budget.

“For the last century,” said Jessica Henson, of OLIN, “the same percentage of the city budget has been allocated to parks, but they’re doing a lot more today, and are on the front lines of so many critical public services like COVID response and fire response. They’re doing more with less over the last 15 years.”

In my last column, I laid out one of the easiest and quickest ways to add more park space — unlock the gates of L.A. Unified schoolyards. Ten have been opened so far, and a new agreement between the city and school district paves the way for more, although two major obstacles are funding and the need to replace blacktop with greenery.

To calculate how to make better use of existing resources, the study used an approach developed in part by UCLA’s Institute of the Environment and Sustainability. The PerSquareMile tool broke the city into tiny grids and identified two dozen park sites where improved facilities could impact the largest number of people, and three dozen sites where conversion of schools and other public spaces into parks would serve hundreds of thousands of people.

“It’s the greatest good for the greatest number of people in the most efficient way,” said Jon Christensen, of the UCLA institute.

But transforming the system will take more than that, said Guillermo Rodriguez, a member of the study’s steering committee and California state director of the Trust for Public Land, the nonprofit that ranked L.A. near the bottom of the 100 largest park systems.

“Cities have made investments across the board, and L.A. is lagging,” Rodriguez said.

The study cited several revenue-generating options, including a charter amendment to increase the percentage of funding that goes to parks, expanded nonprofit partnerships, extending Proposition K, the 1996 park improvement measure that is about to expire, and putting a new fundraising initiative on the ballot in the fall of 2026.

“In every administration since [Mayor] Tom Bradley, the park system was taken for granted,” Rodriguez said. “There’s no more tape, no more paint, no more magic tricks that they can use to fix the parks. It really requires leadership and a significant investment, and I think Angelenos are ready to step up.”

That leadership is going to have to come from Mayor Karen Bass and each member of the City Council. So if you’d like to get their attention, two public meetings are coming up:

Thursday from 6 to 8 p.m. at the Bellevue Recreation Center in Silver Lake, and Saturday from 10 a.m. to noon at the Westwood Recreation Center.

For a schedule of future virtual meetings, and to read an online copy of the needs assessment study, go to needs.parks.lacity.gov.

[email protected]

FORMER Prem stars who lost tens of millions in failed investments are demanding justice.

TV pundit Danny Murphy, 48, said he was a victim of “financial abuse” — turning to booze, drugs and gambling after losing about £5million.

2

2

He was among up to 200 players who invested with Kingsbridge Asset Management in the 1990s and 2000s.

It attracted up to £417million before failed ventures led to loss of homes and bankruptcy.

Investors were deemed to be “victims of crime” in a police investigation but are still being chased for millions in tax.

Murphy is one of 11 stars, including ex-Arsenal ace Michael Thomas, calling for more protection from tax charges.

David McKee and Kevin McMenamin, who ran Kingsbridge, denied wrongdoing on BBC’s Panorama last night.

Murphy said he feels “shame” over his involvement.

“It’s the shame, embarrassment and guilt of getting yourself in a position that you think you’re better than,” he said.

“I’ve lost four – maybe five – million, roughly.

“The financial abuse I’ve suffered has caused me monumental problems in my life.”

He added: “The financial abuse in football and the dark side of football, is something that has gone under the radar for too long.”