investor

BUENOS AIRES, Oct. 30 (UPI) — The Incentive Regime for Large Investments, or RIGI, is one of the main pillars of Argentine President Javier Milei’s economic plan. A recent report from the Rosario Board of Trade said projected investments under the program total $33.9 billion over a period of five to 10 years.

Of that amount, 46.5%, or $15.7 billion).already has been approved across eight projects. The most recent addition is one by Canada’s McEwen Copper, which plans to invest $2.7 billion in the Los Azules copper mine.

The remaining 53.5% is still under review, with only one project valued at $273 million rejected so far. It is the “Mariana” project by China’s Ganfeng Lithium, which began to produce lithium chloride in Salta earlier this year.

“Energy and mining are the leading sectors among RIGI applications. Together they account for 98.3% of the total so far, with 64.8% in mining and 33.5% in energy. Rounding out the total are investments in port infrastructure and steelmaking, each representing about 0.9% of all applications,” the report said.

The RIGI aims to provide stable conditions and a viable tax framework so that both foreign and Argentine investments can develop in a more favorable environment.

“Argentina is a country that has repeatedly failed to honor its commitments,” said Gonzalo Brest, tax and legal partner at KPMG Argentina. That’s why the measure seeks to address a longstanding problem in the country related to the lack of investor confidence, he said.

The RIGI’s benefits operate on two levels. One is exchange-rate, tax and customs stability for 30 years The state cannot alter the regime granted under RIGI during that period.

“That provides a degree of certainty that’s necessary for long-term investment,” Brest said.

In addition, significant tax reductions are available.

“That doesn’t mean they won’t pay taxes, but they’ll pay them at a much more reasonable level,” Brest said.

“RIGI addresses two of Argentina’s longstanding problems. One is the lack of investor confidence, and the other is a heavy tax burden. Now those conditions are reduced and maintained for 30 years,” he said.

Brest noted that the approved projects represent major investments, as each exceeds $200 million, (the minimum amount required to qualify.

“Most of the approved projects are in sectors that are strategic for the country,” he said.

“RIGI is a framework that covers many sectors of the economy, but the projects submitted so far focus mainly on three: energy, mining and oil and gas,” he added.

The BCR report said that of the $11.3 billion invested in energy projects, $6.9 billion corresponds to a natural gas liquefaction project by Southern Energy, which is owned by Pan American Energy and Golar LNG. The project involves Norwegian and Argentine capital.

Another venture, the Vaca Muerta Oleoducto Sur project, unites the country’s leading energy companies with an investment of $2.5 billion.

Together, the two projects account for 83% of RIGI energy investments.

Santiago Liaudat, a researcher at the National University of La Plata, said the purpose of the program is largely to draw outside investors and spur sales overseas.

“The goal is to create the argument that RIGI will generate favorable conditions for foreign investment, job creation and export growth. It is argued that Argentina’s legal uncertainty, instability and excessive regulation are the reasons foreign investment does not come to the country,” he said.

Liaudat said some of those arguments are valid and justify a special incentive regime, but he wasn’t so sure about creating jobs.

“But there is no guarantee that RIGI will generate local jobs. In fact, it does not specify anywhere that investment must be accompanied by job creation,” he said.

He also argued that the initiative does not include any incentives for investment to create demand for capital or intermediate goods within the country.

“It could be an investment that simply imports everything it needs for its production process. As a result, it creates unfair competition for Argentina’s industrial sector,” he said.

“These actors, who are part of RIGI, could import technology, capital goods and intermediate goods without paying taxes. This regime would have the unintended effect of harming Argentina’s productive network. Far from promoting job creation, it could affect local employment,” he said.

“Large capital, all large foreign capital — since there are few companies in Argentina capable of investing more than $1 billion — will enjoy exceptional investment conditions at the expense of Argentine capital that cannot benefit from those same advantages,” he said.

Standing behind a lectern emblazoned with the words “Cutting Utility Bills,” Gov. Gavin Newsom signed into law last month a package of energy bills that he said “reduces the burden on ratepayers.”

Tucked into one of those bills: a paragraph that could allow Southern California Edison to shift billions of dollars of Eaton fire damage costs to its customers.

Among other things, the bill allows Edison to start charging customers for any Eaton fire costs exceeding the state’s $21-billion wildfire fund.

“I was shocked to see that,” said April Maurath Sommer, executive director of the Wild Tree Foundation, which tracks state government actions on utility-sparked fires. “It’s effectively a bailout.”

Other amendments in the 231-page bill known as SB 254 helped not just Edison, but all three of the state’s biggest for-profit utilities, further limiting the costs that they and their shareholders would face if the companies’ equipment ignited a catastrophic wildfire.

Previous legislation championed by Newsom, a 2019 bill known as AB 1054, already had sharply limited the utilities’ liabilities for wildfires they cause.

Staff in the governor’s office declined a request for an interview. In a statement, Daniel Villasenor, a spokesman for Newsom, called SB 254 “smart public policy, not a giveaway.”

Newsom’s staff noted that the state Public Utilities Commission would later review Eaton fire costs, determining if they were “just and reasonable.” If some costs billed to customers were rejected in that review, Edison shareholders would have to reimburse them for those amounts, the governor’s office said.

According to the legislation, that review of costs isn’t required until all Eaton claims are settled, leaving the possibility that customers would have to cover even costs found to be unreasonable for years.

“That will be expensive news to a lot of people,” said Michael Boccadoro, executive director of the Agricultural Energy Consumers Assn. “It is unfortunately what happens when major policies are done in the final hours of the Legislature with little transparency.”

Damages for the Eaton fire have been estimated to be as high as $45 billion — which could greatly exceed the $21-billion fund.

Homes in Altadena lay in ruins after the Eaton fire.

(Robert Gauthier / Los Angeles Times)

Sheri Scott, an actuary at Milliman, told state officials in July that insured losses alone range from $13.7 billion to $22.8 billion. That estimate doesn’t include payments to families who were uninsured or underinsured, or compensation for pain and suffering.

The bill allows Edison to issue bonds secured by new payments from its electric customers for Eaton fire costs that can’t be covered by the $21-billion fund.

Kathleen Dunleavy, an Edison spokeswoman, said the company supported the bill’s language because the bonds secured by customer payments provide a lower cost of borrowing than if the company used traditional financing. “Every dollar counts for our customers,” Dunleavy said.

“There are a lot of variables here,” Dunleavy added. “The investigation is ongoing and there is not an estimate of the total cost of the Eaton fire.”

Newsom’s office noted that under the amendments the utilities won’t get to earn a profit on $6 billion of wildfire prevention expenditures. Customers will still have to pay for the costs, but they won’t be charged extra for shareholders’ profit.

Since early this year, Edison, Pacific Gas & Electric and San Diego Gas & Electric had been lobbying Newsom and state legislative leaders, urging them to bolster the $21-billion fund because of concerns it could be exhausted by the Eaton fire’s extraordinary cost.

Videos captured the Jan. 7 inferno igniting under a century-old transmission line that Edison had not used for 50 years. The wildfire swept through Altadena, destroying 9,400 homes and other structures and killing at least 19 people.

Edison now faces hundreds of lawsuits filed by victims. The suits accuse Edison of negligence, claiming it failed to safely maintain its equipment and left in place the unused transmission line, which lawyers say Edison knew posed a fire risk.

“We’ll respond to the allegations in the litigation,” Dunleavy said, adding that the company inspects and maintains idle lines in the same way as its energized lines.

Even though the government’s investigation into the cause has not been released, Edison announced in July that it was starting a program to directly pay victims for damages.

The company has also begun settling with insurance companies that paid out claims for properties they insured in Altadena that were destroyed or damaged.

Limiting Edison’s liability for Eaton fire

The utility is expecting to be reimbursed for most or all of the settlements and the costs of the fire by the $21-billion wildfire fund that Newsom and lawmakers created through the 2019 legislation, according to a July update Edison gave to its investors.

The first $1 billion of damages is covered by an insurance policy paid by its customers.

After state officials warned that the Eaton fire could deplete the state fund, Newsom said in July he was working on a plan to create an additional fund of $18 billion.

Two days before the Legislature was scheduled to recess for the year, three lawmakers added complex language to SB 254 to create what Newsom called the new $18-billion wildfire “continuation account.” Before the bill was amended, consumer groups had been supporting it because it aimed to save electric customers money.

The late amendments required the Legislature to extend its session by a day to meet a state constitutional rule that says proposed legislation must be public for 72 hours before a final vote.

“It’s impossible to believe that legislators could have understood all of this in 72 hours,” Maurath Sommer said. She noted that Newsom’s 2019 law, AB 1054, was introduced and quickly passed in a similar manner. “And it is clear now how poorly that effort fared in achieving the claimed objective of protecting public safety.”

Boccadoro said he believed the amendments were added to a bill favored by consumer groups to give it “some political cover.”

Assemblymember Cottie Petrie-Norris (D-Irvine), one of bill’s authors, said she believed utilities needed protection from wildfire liabilities because of a legal doctrine in California known as inverse condemnation, which makes them responsible for damages even if they weren’t negligent in starting it.

“This is the best possible deal for ratepayers as we navigate the truly devastating impacts of the climate crisis,” Petrie-Norris said of the legislation. The other two authors — state Sens. Josh Becker (D-Menlo Park) and Aisha Wahab (D-Hayward) — did not respond to requests for interviews.

After the bill passed, both Edison and PG&E praised its provisions in presentations for investors.

Edison called the bill “a key action” that demonstrated lawmakers’ support of its “financial stability.”

The amendments added to the protections that utilities gained in 2019 through Newsom’s AB 1054. At that time, PG&E was in bankruptcy proceedings. It had filed for protection after its transmission line was found to have ignited the 2018 Camp fire, which killed 85 people and destroyed most of the town of Paradise.

PG&E explained in a September presentation that before Newsom and lawmakers changed the law in 2019, utilities that wanted to pass fire damage costs to customers “bore the burden of proving” that their conduct related to the blaze was reasonable and prudent.

Newsom’s 2019 law changed that standard, PG&E said, so that the utility’s conduct was automatically deemed reasonable if state regulators had granted the company what the law called a safety certificate.

Since 2019, the state has regularly issued the companies these certificates — even when regulators find maintenance and safety problems.

Edison received a safety certificate less than a month before the Eaton fire, even though it had thousands of open work orders, including some on the transmission lines in the canyon where the fire started.

To get a certificate, the utilities must submit a plan to state regulators for preventing their equipment from sparking fires. They also must tie executive pay to the company’s safety performance, with bonuses expected to take a hit when more fires are sparked or people are killed.

Even though Edison failed at key safety measures last year, The Times found that cash bonuses for four of its top five executives rose. The company said that was because of their performance on responsibilities beyond safety.

With a safety certificate in hand, Edison told investors in July that the maximum it would pay for the Eaton fire under the law’s limit was $3.9 billion, a fraction of the expected costs. The utility said the wildfire fund would reimburse it for all the costs, unless an outside party can raise “serious doubt” that it had not acted reasonably before the fire.

The SB 254 amendments also clarified key language in the 2019 law — clarifications that Edison told investors in September were “constructive for potential Eaton fire losses.”

That language allows utilities that cause repeated major wildfires within a period of three years to reduce what they must pay back to the fund for a second fire if they are found to have acted imprudently.

“This certainly does not seem to encourage utilities to stop causing fires,” Maurath Sommer said of the provision.

Edison’s Dunleavy dismissed concern about the provision. “Safety remains our top priority,” she said.

Campaign contributions to Newsom

The three utilities have long been generous political donors to both Democrats and Republicans in California, including to Newsom and current legislative leaders in Sacramento.

Edison, for example, gave $100,000 to Newsom’s campaign last year to pass the mental health initiative known as Proposition 1.

This summer Edison gave $190,000 to the state Democratic Party, which is helping Newsom campaign for Proposition 50, which would redraw congressional districts.

Newsom’s staff didn’t respond to questions about the contributions.

Dunleavy said that the company’s political donations are not charged to customers. She said Edison gives contributions to politicians who share its commitment to “safely serve our customers.”

Newsom said in 2019 that the bill capping utilities’ fire liabilities would “move our state toward a safer, affordable and reliable energy future.”

He and lawmakers said the law would make the public safer by requiring the utilities to do more to prevent fires, including aggressive tree trimming and the installation of more insulated wires.

Even though the utilities have raised electric rates to charge customers for billions of dollars of fire prevention work, their electrical equipment continues to spark blazes.

According to Cal Fire statistics, if the Eaton fire is confirmed to have been ignited by Edison’s transmission line, at least seven of the state’s 20 most destructive wildfires would have been caused by the three utilities’ power lines. Two of those utility-sparked fires happened after the 2019 law passed.

Edison’s lines ignited 178 fires last year — 45% more compared with 2019. The company attributed last year’s increase to weather conditions that created more dry vegetation.

The governor’s staff said they disagreed with claims that the legislation reduced utilities’ accountability. They pointed to a measure in the 2019 law that requires a utility to reimburse the wildfire fund for all damages from a fire if its actions are found to constitute “conscious or willful disregard of the rights and safety of others.”

Advocates for utility customers have repeatedly said they believe that standard is too high to keep California utilities from causing more fires.

“Instances of utility mismanagement could easily fall short of the ‘conscious or willful disregard’ standard yet nonetheless cause a series of catastrophic wildfire events,” wrote the commission’s Public Advocates Office in a filing soon after the 2019 law passed.

The electric carmaker had unveiled chief Elon Musk’s proposed $1 trillion compensation plan in September.

Tesla’s proposed $1 trillion pay package for CEO Elon Musk has come under renewed scrutiny after proxy adviser Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS) urged investors to vote against what could be the largest compensation plan ever awarded to a company chief.

ISS’s comments on Friday marks the second consecutive year that it has urged shareholders to reject a compensation plan for Musk.

Proxy advisers often sway major institutional investors, including the passive funds that hold large stakes in Tesla.

The ISS recommendation adds pressure on Tesla’s board before a closely watched November 6 shareholder meeting and renews scrutiny of Musk’s compensation after a Delaware court earlier voided his $56bn pay package.

Musk’s record Tesla pay plan could still hand him tens of billions of dollars even if he falls short of most of its ambitious targets, however, thanks to a structure that rewards partial achievement and soaring share prices.

Last month, Tesla’s board proposed a $1 trillion compensation plan for Musk in what it described as the largest corporate pay package in history, setting ambitious performance targets and aiming to address his push for greater control over the company.

ISS said that while the board’s goal was to retain Musk because of his “track record and vision”, the 2025 pay package “locks in extraordinarily high pay opportunities over the next ten years” and “reduces the board’s ability to meaningfully adjust future pay levels.”

Tesla’s shares rose after the compensation plan was unveiled last month, as investors believe the pay package would incentivise Musk to focus on the company’s strategy.

“Many people come to Tesla to specifically work with Elon, so we recognise that retaining and incentivising him will, in the long run, help us retain and recruit better talent,” Director Kathleen Wilson-Thompson said in a video posted to Tesla’s X handle on Friday.

Unlike the 2018 pay deal, Musk will be allowed to vote using his shares this time, giving him about 13.5 percent of Tesla’s voting power, according to a securities filing last month. That stake alone could be enough to secure approval.

The proxy adviser cited the “astronomical” size of the proposed grant, design features that could deliver very high payouts for partial goal achievement and potential dilution for existing investors.

Tesla did not immediately respond to a request for comment from the Reuters news agency.

ISS valued the stock-based award at $104bn, higher than Tesla’s own estimate of $87.8bn.

The grant would vest only if Tesla reaches market capitalisation milestones up to $8.5 trillion and operational targets, including delivery of 20 million vehicles, one million robotaxis and $400bn in adjusted core earnings.

The proxy adviser’s guidance on Musk’s pay was part of a wider set of voting recommendations issued on Friday.

As of 3:45pm in New York (19:45 GMT), Tesla’s stock was up 2.4 percent.

HONOLULU — Lawyers for a Hawaii real estate investor and broker who sued Shohei Ohtani and his agent denied any improper use of the Dodgers star’s likeness for a development project and alleged the agent was trying to deflect blame for cost overruns at the player’s home.

Ohtani and Nez Balelo of CAA Baseball were sued Aug. 8 in Hawaii Circuit Court for the First Circuit by developer Kevin J. Hayes Sr., real estate broker Tomoko Matsumoto, West Point Investment Corp. and Hapuna Estates Property Owners. They accused Ohtani and Balelo of “abuse of power” that allegedly resulted in tortious interference and unjust enrichment impacting a $240 million luxury housing development on the Big Island’s coveted Hapuna Coast.

Hayes and Matsumoto had been dropped from the development deal by Kingsbarn Realty Capital, the joint venture’s majority owner.

The amended complaint filed Tuesday added Creative Artists Agency and CAA Sports as defendants.

“Balelo and CAA sought to deflect blame by scapegoating Hayes for the cost overruns on Otani’s home — overruns caused entirely by defendants’ own decisions,” the complaint said.

“The allegations as we clarified them make very clear that there was never a breach of the endorsement agreement, the video that was posted on the website promoting specifically this project was sent to Balelo and CAA and another adviser to Ohtani, Mark Daulton, and they were aware of it and never objected to it,” said Josh Schiller, a lawyer for Hayes and the suing entities.

In a motion to dismiss filed Sept. 14, attorneys for Ohtani and Balelo said “plaintiffs exploited Ohtani’s name and photograph to drum up traffic to a website that marketed plaintiffs’ own side project development.”

“This is a desperate attempt to avoid dismissal of a frivolous complaint and, as we previously said, to distract from plaintiffs’ myriad of failures and their blatant misappropriation of Shohei Ohtani’s rights,” Laura Smolowe, a lawyer for Ohtani and Balelo, said in a statement. “Nez Balelo has always prioritized Mr. Ohtani’s best interests, including protecting his name, image, and likeness from unauthorized use.”

Lawyers for Hayes and the plaintiffs claimed they kept Balelo and CAA informed.

“Before the website went live, Hayes submitted a link to the entire site — including its promotional aspects — by email to Balelo and Terry Prince, the director of legal and business Affairs at CAA Sports LLC,” the amended complaint said. “It remained online with no material changes for 14 months before Balelo suddenly objected and threatened litigation — weaponizing the issue in order to create pretext for yet another set of demands and concessions.”

“The sudden demand that Kingsbarn terminate plaintiffs was instead a retaliatory measure against Hayes for resisting the constant and improper demands of Balelo and (Ohtani),” the complaint added. “Defendants further calculated that, with plaintiffs removed, they could more easily extract financial concessions from the project and enrich themselves at plaintiffs’ expense.”

If you don’t know much about Intuitive Surgical (ISRG 1.71%), you might want to remedy that. It’s a very impressive growth stock. Its past performance is likely to wow you, and its future looks very promising.

Over the past decade, Intuitive Surgical stock has grown in value at an average annual rate of 23%. Over the past three years, that growth rate ramped up to nearly 30%! If you had invested $10,000 in Intuitive a decade ago, your stake would be worth roughly $80,610 today. The S&P 500 index, in contrast, averaged 13.6% in that period, turning $10,000 into $33,720 — a still-quite-solid performance.

Image source: Gertty Images.

Intuitive Surgical is a leader in robotic surgery equipment. It has more than 9,900 of its million-dollar-plus da Vinci robotic surgery systems installed in 72 countries. Together, the systems have been used to perform more than 16 million procedures.

Its business model is delightful, too, as it derives 84% of its revenue not from the costly systems themselves but from rather dependable recurring sales of servicing, supplies, and accessories for the machines. Once a hospital has committed to a da Vinci machine, it can’t go elsewhere for servicing and supplies.

And as our world’s population ages, there’s likely to be more demand for the kinds of procedures that Intuitive Surgical’s machines facilitate, such as colorectal surgery, cardiac surgery, hernia surgery, and more. Intuitive’s Ion systems also facilitate lung procedures.

According to some metrics, Intuitive’s stock is not a bargain right now; for example, its forward-looking price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio was recently 51, which is on the steep side. But that’s still well below the stock’s five-year average of 56. That’s because the stock has pulled back recently, presenting a tempting buying opportunity for interested long-term investors.

Uber Technologies (UBER 1.05%) is a monster success story in the mobile age. The company, which was founded in 2009, has become a dominant platform that has a presence in more than 70 countries across the globe. Uber is so highly regarded that the company name is used interchangeably as a verb, a standing not many businesses achieve.

This transportation-as-a-service stock has been a huge winner. Just in the past three years, shares have rocketed 213% higher (as of Sept. 5). Besides this momentum, here’s one reason every investor should know about Uber.

Image source: Getty Images.

Uber’s most impressive trait

Uber benefits from a powerful network effect. This favorable setup supports its competitive position. Its mobility segment connects riders with drivers. As the number of riders increases, drivers find the platform much more valuable, as they can generate more income from a bigger customer base.

On the other hand, more riders will come on board as well because the experience will improve with greater driver supply. Riders might see better pricing and lower wait times.

The same situation applies to the delivery segment. Only this time, a larger number of restaurants is introduced on the supply side.

Only getting better

There are key indicators that reveal the strength of the network effect. For instance, Uber’s user base continues to grow at an impressive pace. The company had 180 million monthly active platform consumers (MAPCs) (as of June 30), up 15% year over year. What’s more, the average number of trips per MAPC was 18.2 in Q2, up from 17.7 in the same period of 2024, showcasing impressive levels of engagement.

In recent years, Uber’s revenue and operating income have soared. The business is finding remarkable success, which has supported the stock’s rise. Credit goes to the network effect, a competitive advantage that investors should understand about Uber.

Published on
08/08/2025 – 14:08 GMT+2

ADVERTISEMENT

Binance is partnering with Spain’s Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria (BBVA) to allow crypto customers to store their funds with the bank instead of keeping them directly on the crypto exchange, according to reporting by the Financial Times.

The move is aimed at rebuilding trust with investors after Binance was hit with a record fine from US regulators nearly two years ago.

Binance is the world’s largest cryptocurrency exchange by trading volume, and it handles billions of dollars in trades each day across hundreds of cryptocurrencies.

What does this mean for crypto?

BBVA, as a bank, will act as an “independent custodian” or a separate and trusted third party and ensure a greater level of safety when it comes to customers’ funds or assets that are traded through Binance.

As the second largest bank in Spain and praised for its innovation and sustainability, BBVA will act as a security guarantee, giving traders a reduced risk while encouraging them to invest in the high-returns crypto exchange.

By storing them with BBVA, if Binance runs into trouble, like being hacked, declaring bankruptcy or facing regulatory action, the funds would still be safe with BBVA.

Banks are much more closely regulated than crypto exchanges, so BBVA’s obligation to follow compliance rules should lead to more interest in crypto overall.

Essentially, the move is akin to putting your valuables in a safe or a secure bank, instead of being displayed in a storefront as they’re being bought and sold.

Binance trying to clean up its reputation

Binance, the world’s largest crypto exchange, got slammed in 2023 with a record $4.3 billion (€3.69bn) fine after US regulators accused it of not keeping checks on its trading floor.

US officials said Binance allowed shady funds to flow through its exchange and allegedly permitted laundered money to be used, helping its big clients dodge the rules.

Founder Changpeng ‘CZ’ Zhao stepped down and served four months in prison for failing to stop money laundering.

Now, with regulators watching its every move, Binance is trying to clean up its act and by partnering with Spain’s BBVA, hopes to prove it can play by the rules.

James Arthur McDonald Jr., an investor and financial analyst who frequently appeared on CNBC, was sentenced to five years in prison for defrauding investors in a multimillion-dollar scheme, the United States Attorney’s Office said on Monday.

McDonald, 53, a former San Gabriel Valley resident, was the CEO and chief investment officer of two Los Angeles-based companies: Hercules Investments LLC and Index Strategy Advisors Inc.

In late 2020, McDonald adopted a “risky short position” betting against the U.S. economy following the presidential election, with the idea that the combination of the COVID-19 pandemic and the election would trigger a major sell-off in the stock market, according to the Justice Department. However, when the expected market drop did not happen, Hercules’ clients lost between $30 million and $40 million.

McDonald “solicited millions of dollars’ worth of funds from investors” for the purposes of raising capital for Hercules at the start of 2021 after clients complained to the firm’s employees about their losses. However, in doing so, McDonald “misrepresented how the funds would be used” and failed to disclose the firm’s massive losses.

According to the Justice Department, McDonald obtained $675,000 from “one victim group” and then misappropriated most of the money including spending $174,610 at a Porsche dealership and transferring an additional $109,512 to the landlord of a home he was renting in Arcadia.

McDonald also defrauded clients at Index Strategy Advisors, his other firm, said the Justice Department, using less than half of $3.6 million he raised for trading purposes on personal and other expenditures.

McDonald commingled clients’ funds with his personal bank account and used the money to buy luxury cars, pay his rent, make credit card payments, pay off Hercules operating expenses and “to make Ponzi-like payments” to Index Strategy clients — including paying some of those clients using funds from other clients.

Prosecutors claimed that McDonald caused his victims more than $3 million in losses.

“To his victims, [McDonald] seemed to embody the American Dream,” prosecutors argued in a sentencing memorandum. “But looks can be deceiving, and as [McDonald’s] victims learned, their trust had been betrayed.”

In November 2021, McDonald failed to appear before the Securities and Exchange Commission to testify about the allegations he had defrauded investors, and remained a fugitive until last June when he was found at a residence in Port Orchard, Wash.

At the time of his arrest, law enforcement found a fake Washington, D.C., driver’s license with his photograph and the name “Brian Thomas.”

In April 2024, a U.S. District judge found McDonald and Hercules liable for violating federal securities law and ordered them to pay millions in disgorgement and civil penalties.

McDonald pleaded guilty to one count of securities fraud in February.

He will be ordered to pay restitution in this case before a United States district judge at a later date.

A proposed international league described as the F1 of basketball gained attention over the weekend when Misko Raznatovic, the agent for Denver Nuggets star Nikola Jokic, posted a photo on Instagram of him meeting in shorts and bare feet with LeBron James and the Lakers star’s business partner Maverick Carter on a yacht off the coast of the French Riviera.

Raznatovic accompanied the photo with an intriguing comment: “The summer of 2025 is the perfect time to make big plans for the fall of 2026! @kingjames @mavcarter

The post triggered speculation that perhaps James and Jokic could team up on either the Lakers or Nuggets, but more likely it suggests James has more than a peripheral interest in the new league.

Front Office Sports reported in January that Carter was advising a group of investors trying to raise $5 billion to jump-start the league but that James wasn’t involved. That may have changed.

So what’s the league about?

Early discussions are of a touring model with six men’s and six women’s teams playing in eight cities, none of which is likely to be in the United States. Investors include the Singapore government, SC Holdings, the Saudi Arabian Public Investment Fund, a Macau casino operator, UBS, Skype founder Geoff Prentice and former Facebook executive Grady Burnett, according to the Financial Times. Reports have linked VC firm Quiet Capital, tech investor Byron Deeter and Hong Kong-based Galaxy Entertainment to the effort.

Investors are leaning toward not allowing players in the league unless they cut ties with the NBA, making the model somewhat like LIV Golf — the professional circuit funded by (PIF). A better comparison in terms of format and scale might be Formula 1 Racing, which holds 24 races a year across five continents.

Raznatovic’s involvement would be key. His Belgrade, Serbia, agency BeoBasket has a partnership with Excel Sports Management and represents dozens of top European players, including Clippers center Ivica Zubac.

The EuroLeague is currently recognized as the world’s second-best basketball circuit, but can’t come close to paying players NBA-level salaries.

If Raznatovic’s social media post is an indication, the new league could launch as soon as the fall of 2026. Until then, fans wanting an alternative to the NBA can check out Ice Cube’s tour-based Big3 basketball league, which makes its single stop in Los Angeles on Aug. 9.

The LA Riot, coached by Nick Young and starring Dwight Howard and Jordan Crawford, will play the Boston Ball Hogs at the Intuit Dome at 1 p.m. PDT.

Venture capital investments in the Greater Los Angeles region more than doubled to $5.8 billion in the second quarter, compared to a year ago, as investors poured money into the area’s defense tech and aerospace companies amid escalating geopolitical tensions.

Costa Mesa-based defense tech company Anduril received the most venture capital in the region last quarter, raising a $2.5-billion funding round, according to research firm CB Insights.

The company, co-founded by entrepreneur Palmer Luckey, said it would use the money to invest in scaling up its production, hiring, taking big swings on products and capabilities and other efforts such as its mergers and acquisitions strategy.

Anduril, which manufactures autonomous weapons systems, was recently awarded a $99.6-million contract to build a next generation command and control prototype for the U.S. Army that it says will help modernize communications on the battlefield. Anduril employs more than 6,000 people and has a valuation of $30.5 billion.

Venture capital firm Founders Fund led the recent round with a $1-billion investment, marking the firm’s largest check to date, said Founders Fund partner and Anduril executive chairman Trae Stephens in a Bloomberg TV interview in June.

The company’s recent fundraising round is an example of strong investor interest in defense tech and aerospace, which venture firms believe is ripe for disruption, with startups taking market share from incumbents such as Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman.

Globally, venture capital investments in defense tech is on the rise. Already, the funding in this category has outpaced last year, according to CB Insights. For the first half of 2025, investors allocated $11.1 billion in venture capital to defense tech companies, compared to $8.2 billion in the full year of 2024, CB Insights said.

Investors are eager to jump on an area of growth that has a lot of support from the government, as the U.S. enters a period in which defense and the geopolitical arena is at the forefront, analysts said. The world is being rocked by multiple international conflicts, including Russia’s ongoing war on Ukraine and Israel’s battle against Hamas in Gaza.

“We’re entering an administration, a regulatory period, and a broader geopolitical arena where defense is at the forefront of everyone’s minds,” said Jason Saltzman, head of insights at CB Insights. “We’re starting to see a lot of support from the government in particular, with an increasing number of investors hopping on the defense tech train.”

Southern California, long an aerospace and defense tech hub, is benefiting from the investor interest, with the area’s companies representing nine of the top 30 private businesses globally in defense tech that have received the most venture capital financing, according to CB Insights.

Local companies said they were attracted to Southern California because of its strong talent pool, with nearby universities like Caltech and USC Viterbi School of Engineering.

Going back to World War II and the Cold War period, key defense contractors like Northrop Grumman and Hughes were built in the South Bay area, making the region a crucial locale for the defense and aerospace industries, said Professor Dan Wadhwani, director of the Lloyd Greif Center for Entrepreneurial Studies at the USC Marshall School of Business. As startups build new technologies, they will need to integrate them with other existing systems, he added.

“The proximity to key players within the defense industry makes L.A. a prime place for capitalizing on the growing trends towards defense spending,” he said.

Last quarter, defense tech and aerospace companies represented the top four businesses receiving venture capital, according to CB Insights. Anduril led the way, followed by Redondo Beach-based Impulse Space, which raised $300 million, Hawthorne-based Chaos Industries that had a $275-million funding round and L.A.-based spacecraft manufacturer Apex, which raised $200 million in the second quarter, CB Insights said.

Chaos Industries makes radars that provide warning and tracking against unmanned aerial systems, missiles and aircraft. The company, which has more than 100 employees, raised a total of $490 million since it was founded in 2022. The funding will go toward hiring and increasing the company’s manufacturing capabilities, said Chief Strategy Officer Will Hurd.

Hurd said he remembers when he worked at an investment bank in 2021 and most investors did not want to fund companies where the government was their client because there was a fear or lack of understanding of how that process worked. Now, that’s changed and evolved, with a wave of defense tech and aerospace companies, including Chaos Industries.

“Now the adversaries have gotten more sophisticated, and we have to match that,” Hurd said.

Impulse Space, which makes space vehicles, said there has been surging customer demand. The company said it has more than 30 signed government and commercial contracts worth nearly $200 million in value and the additional venture capital funding will go toward hiring, scaling production and accelerating its research and development.

“We’ve proven that we can build fast and fly successfully,” said CEO and founder Tom Mueller in a statement. “Now, the market is demanding more.”

With Cleveland Guardians closer Emmanuel Clase under investigation for baseball betting, fans that bet a combined $315,000 on him could be at risk of losing some or all of that investment.

Clase is the star attraction at Finlete, a San Diego company that offers fans the chance to invest in an athlete in exchange for a share of his future earnings.

The future earnings of Clase, 27, a three-time All-Star, could be influenced by Monday’s announcement that Major League Baseball had placed him on paid leave as part of what the league called a “sports betting investigation.” The sport in question is baseball, according to an official familiar with the probe but unauthorized to discuss it publicly.

In its offering statement, Finlete noted that Clase’s current contract extends through 2026 and guarantees him at least $13.3 million, if the Guardians decline a 2027 buyout. The Guardians hold an option for $10 million in 2027 and another for $10 million in 2028. Clase would be eligible for free agency if the Guardians decline either option, or after the option years have been exercised.

However, if the league determines Clase had bet on any baseball game in which his team participated, he could be declared permanently ineligible. If the league determines he had bet on any other baseball games, he could be banned for one year.

On July 14, Finlete announced on Instagram that it had raised more than $315,000 from “hundreds of investors in Emmanuel Clase’s career.”

In its offering, beyond the boilerplate warning that investors should not invest money they could not afford to lose, Finlete cited injuries, illnesses and work stoppages among risks that could derail payments to investors.

Finlete also warned that players “suspended or banned” from the league “would not receive amounts under their existing player contract and may not be able to secure future playing contracts.”

In his Clase sales pitch, Finlete co-founder Rob Connolly last year told Sportico: “Mariano Rivera was the best ever. And this guy’s in that conversation. So he’s got a full career in front of him. How the hell did we land this deal? It’s incredible.”

Finlete spelled that out in its offering: If you really want to make the big bucks as investors, Clase needs to sign a lucrative extension, or hit free agency and strike gold.

“The profitability of the Clase Agreement is substantially dependent on Mr. Clase entering into additional high-value MLB player contracts,” the offering read.

On its homepage, Finlete highlights seven baseball players with which it has agreements, Clase included. The other six are in the minor leagues.

Connolly did not immediately return a message seeking comment.

Current and former Facebook leadership reached the agreement with shareholders only one day into the trial.

Mark Zuckerberg and current and former directors and officers of Meta Platforms have agreed to settle claims seeking $8bn for the damage they allegedly caused the company by allowing repeated violations of Facebook users’ privacy.

Zuckerberg and his counterparts reached the agreement on Thursday with shareholders who brought the lawsuit.

The parties did not disclose details of the settlement, and defence lawyers did not address the judge, Kathaleen McCormick of the Delaware Court of Chancery. McCormick adjourned the trial just as it was to enter its second day, and she congratulated the parties.

The plaintiffs’ lawyer, Sam Closic, said the agreement just came together quickly.

Billionaire venture capitalist Marc Andreessen, who is a defendant in the trial and a Meta director, was scheduled to testify on Thursday.

Shareholders of Meta sued Zuckerberg, Andreessen and other former company officials, including former Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg, in hopes of holding them liable for billions of dollars in fines and legal costs the company paid in recent years.

The Federal Trade Commission fined Facebook $5bn in 2019 after finding that it failed to comply with a 2012 agreement with the regulator to protect users’ data.

The shareholders wanted the 11 defendants to use their personal wealth to reimburse the company. The defendants denied the allegations, which they called “extreme claims”. Facebook changed its name to Meta in 2021. The company was not a defendant.

The company declined to comment. A lawyer for the defendants did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

“This settlement may bring relief to the parties involved, but it’s a missed opportunity for public accountability,” said Jason Kint, the head of Digital Content Next, a trade group for content providers.

Zuckerberg was expected to take the stand on Monday and Sandberg on Wednesday. The trial was scheduled to run through the end of next week.

The case was also expected to include testimony from former Facebook board members Peter Thiel, Palantir Technologies co-founder, and Reed Hastings, co-founder of Netflix.

Longstanding concerns

Meta investors alleged in the lawsuit that former and current board members completely failed to oversee the company’s compliance with the 2012 FTC agreement and claim that Zuckerberg and Sandberg knowingly ran Facebook as an illegal data harvesting operation.

The case followed revelations that data from millions of Facebook users was accessed by Cambridge Analytica, a now-defunct political consulting firm that worked for Donald Trump’s successful US presidential campaign in 2016. Those revelations led to the FTC fine, which was a record at the time.

On Wednesday, an expert witness for the plaintiffs testified about what he called “gaps and weaknesses” in Facebook’s privacy policies, but would not say if the company violated the 2012 agreement that Facebook reached with the FTC.

Jeffrey Zients, a former board member, testified on Wednesday that the company did not agree to the FTC fine to spare Zuckerberg legal liability, as shareholders allege.

On its website, the company has said it has invested billions of dollars into protecting user privacy since 2019.

The trial would have been a rare opportunity for Meta investors to see Zuckerberg answer probing questions under oath. In 2017, Zuckerberg was expected to testify at a trial involving a lawsuit by company investors opposed to his plan to issue a special class of Facebook stock that would have extended his control over that company. That case also settled before he took the stand.

“Facebook has successfully remade the ‘Cambridge Analytica’ scandal about a few bad actors rather than an unraveling of its entire business model of surveillance capitalism and the reciprocal, unbridled sharing of personal data,” Kint said. “That reckoning is now left unresolved.”

Meta stock was down 0.4 percent for the day as of 11am in New York (15:00 GMT) and 3.1 percent over the last five days.

In a high-stakes gamble, Wall Street hedge funds are offering to buy claims that insurers may have against Southern California Edison if the utility is found liable for causing the devastating Eaton fire in Altadena.

The solicitations are legal, but have alarmed California state officials — who loathe the idea of investors profiting from a disaster that claimed 18 lives and destroyed more than 9,400 homes and other structures.

“I think everyone in this room looks at a catastrophe, like what happened in Southern California, and our natural instincts are to say, ‘What can we do to help?’” Tom Welsh, the chief executive of the California Earthquake Authority, which manages the state’s wildfire fund, said at a recent public meeting. “There are other actors in the environment who look at that situation in Southern California and ask instead, “What can I do to profit?’”

The investors are aiming to buy so-called subrogation claims from insurance companies. These are claims that insurers would file against Edison seeking reimbursement for the money they paid to their policyholders for fire damages if it’s determined the utility’s equipment triggered the wildfire that began Jan. 7.

For the insurers, selling the claims — even at a steep discount — allows them to get at least some reimbursement for the money they’ve paid out. For the hedge funds buying the claims, it’s a gamble that could pay big if Edison is found liable and they can cash in those claims for much more than they paid.

More than $17 billion in insurance claims for the Eaton and Palisades fires has been paid out so far, according to the California Department of Insurance.

State officials say California has a stake in the trading of fire-related subrogation claims, which was previously reported by Bloomberg, because of the potential effect on the state’s wildfire fund.

That fund, which currently has about $21 billion, would be used to cover most of the costs of damage claims should Edison be found liable for starting the Eaton blaze. While the cause is still under investigation, a leading theory is that a decommissioned transmission line in Eaton Canyon was reenergized and sparked the blaze, Edison has said.

The wildfire fund is managed by a state board called the Catastrophe Response Council. At its last meeting in May, Welsh told the board that solicitations from New York brokers and investment firms began landing in his email inbox in March.

Ronald Ryder at Oppenheimer & Co., a New York investment firm, told Welsh in an email on April 15 that his company was currently trading the subrogation claims. Ryder wrote that there had already been 10 transactions worth more than $1 billion in recovery rights for the Eaton fire as well as the Palisades fire in Pacific Palisades, where the city of Los Angeles faces potential liability.

In another email, Ryder told Welsh that investors were bidding 47 cents on the dollar for the claims related to the Eaton fire. For the Palisades fire, the bidding was 5 cents on the dollar, Ryder wrote.

Welsh warned the council that “speculative investors” might hold onto the Eaton claims and “really try to get outsized profits by demanding settlements from Edison of 75, 80, 85 cents on the dollar.”

If that were to happen, the wildfire fund could pay out “hundreds of millions, if not billions of dollars” more than if the claims were settled directly by the insurers, he said.

“That would really, very negatively impact the durability of the wildfire fund,” Welsh said.

Oppenheimer declined to comment, and Ryder didn’t respond to messages.

Under a 2019 state law, the state wildfire fund would be expected to reimburse Edison for most of the insurers’ payments to policyholders if its electrical equipment is found to have started the Eaton fire. The Palisades fire, which occurred in territory serviced by the L.A. Department of Water and Power, isn’t covered by the state fund.

California lawmakers created the wildfire fund in 2019 to protect the state’s three biggest for-profit utilities — Edison, Pacific Gas & Electric and San Diego Gas & Electric — from bankruptcy if their equipment sparks catastrophic wildfires.

The possibility of large settlements paid out by the wildfire fund has led to dozens of lawsuits against Edison, even before the cause of the fire has been determined.

If found responsible for the fire, Edison would negotiate settlements with the insurers, as well as with homeowners and others who have filed lawsuits, saying they’ve been harmed. The utility would then ask the state wildfire fund to cover those amounts.

If the insurers have sold their claims, however, the investors who bought them would reap the returns. Attorneys who handle the complex transactions would also get a cut and “generally take a very high percentage off the top,” Paul Rosenstiel, a catastrophe council member, said at last month’s meeting.

Already, Gov. Gavin Newsom and other state leaders are worried that the $21-billion wildfire fund could be depleted by damage claims from the Eaton fire.

Welsh recounted how a hedge fund had profited in 2019 by buying insurers’ subrogation claims against PG&E after its transmission line was found to have started the 2018 Camp fire that killed 85 people and destroyed much of the town of Paradise. Bloomberg reported at the time that hedge fund Baupost Group made a profit of hundreds of millions of dollars by buying the claims at 35 cents on the dollar and later getting a settlement valued at much more.

To stop hedge funds from profiting on the claims, Welsh said, the earthquake authority is now considering changing its claim administration procedures to make the settlements less lucrative for those investors.

One possible change being discussed, according to authority staff, would require a utility that ignited a wildfire to prioritize settling the claims of victims and insurers who have not sold their subrogation rights before those claims owned by hedge funds.

Angel City FC players and staff wore T-shirts and read a pregame message declaring their support for immigrants on Saturday, a day of protest against ICE raids throughout Los Angeles.

The front of the black T-shirts read: “Immigrant City Football Club.”

The back featured the phrases: “Los Angeles is for everyone” and “Los Ángeles es Para Todos.”

Angel City players lock arms while standing for the national anthem. Their shirts read “Los Angeles is for everyone.”

(Courtesy of Jen Flores / Angel City FC)

The club was the first of the city’s 11 major professional sports teams to release a statement in support of those impacted by immigration raids during the past week focused on Los Angeles County and surrounding areas.

Angel City gave out “Immigrant City Football Club” shirts to the first 10,000 fans at Saturday’s match against the North Carolina Courage.

Singer Becky G, a founding investor in Angel City, read the following statement as players walked onto the field for introductions before the game:

“At Angel City, we believe in the power of belonging. We know that Los Angeles is stronger because of its diversity and the people and the families who shape it, love it, and call it home.

Angel City FC gave away shirts to fans at BMO Stadium on Saturday, June 14, 2025, supporting immigrants.

(Courtesy of Jen Flores / Angel City FC)

“The fabric of this city is made of immigrants.

“Football does not exist without immigrants.

“This club does not exist without immigrants.

“This is our home.

“This is LA.

“This is Immigrant City.”