lifetime

‘I spent two years saving for holiday of a lifetime – but staff wouldn’t let us on the plane’

Victoria Vigors’ holiday of a lifetime was left in tatters at the airport

A family’s dream holiday costing £6,500 was left in tatters after they were turned away at the boarding gate. Victoria Vigors, 41, arrived at Gatwick Airport ready for their all-inclusive two-week break to Hurghada, Egypt.

Victoria, who was with children Riley, 15, and Roxie, nine, checked in online for their easyJet flight. But problems emerged when staff scanned their boarding passes at the gate and noticed Roxie’s passport didn’t meet Egypt’s entry requirements for remaining validity.

“My stomach dropped, and I felt like I’d been kicked in the stomach,” Victoria, from Kent, told creatorzine.com.

“The kids crumpled and I burst into tears. I begged the staff but there was nothing they could do. We had to be escorted back to get our luggage off the flight. It was so embarrassing.

“The kids were devastated, Roxie kept saying it was her fault and we were so disappointed. It was a really bad day.”

Victoria had saved up for two years for the trip, which she described as the “holiday of a lifetime”. The 41-year-old said it would have been their first two-week trip abroad together, and their first time staying at an all-inclusive resort.

Roxie’s passport expires on January 4, 2027. However, Victoria said she hadn’t realised that could still prevent travel. UK government foreign travel advice states British passport holders must have at least six months’ validity remaining from the date they arrive in Egypt.

Because Roxie’s passport did not meet that threshold, Victoria said the airline refused to let them board. She said she hadn’t known the rules and believed everything was in order.

“I wasn’t aware of the rules. I was given her passport the day before we flew by her dad. In my head, it was six months anyway, so I didn’t think there’d be an issue. For people like me who don’t always travel and it’s the first time with my children, I wasn’t to know.

“I would have thought when I put her passport details in to check in that would tell me it wasn’t valid. That would be a simple system to install so save this agony and heartbreak. It’s crazy.”

Victoria said the family is now trying to secure an emergency passport in the hope they can still get away for at least the final days of the trip, after being told they can’t get a refund.

“I’d been saving up for two years. We were incredibly excited as we’d never had a two-week holiday abroad together or been to a resort like this. It was going to be the holiday of a lifetime.”

Source link

World Cup 2026: Chance to face Lionel Messi once in a lifetime – Nico O’Reilly

England left-back Nico O’Reilly is relishing the “once-in-a-lifetime opportunity” to face Lionel Messi in Wednesday’s World Cup semi-final against Argentina.

Thomas Tuchel’s secured a place in the final four with a draining 2-1 win against Norway in the Miami heat on Saturday, and now face a match in Atlanta against the defending world champions, who saw off Switzerland 3-1.

It will be the first time Messi has faced England, and at 39, it could be the last. Manchester City defender O’Reilly has never faced him at club level either.

“I can’t wait,” O’Reilly, who will probably have to defend against Messi one-on-one if he starts at left-back, told BBC Radio 5 Live.

“It’s a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. He’s coming towards the end of his career. For me personally, he’s the best player to ever touch a football pitch. And yeah, I can’t wait for the challenge.”

Messi began the tournament with a hat-trick in a 3-0 win against Algeria as he became the all-time leading goalscorer in World Cup history, equalling Miroslav Klose’s record of 16, which had stood since 2014.

The Argentina captain has since scored five more to take that record – his total of eight goals putting him joint-first with France’s Kylian Mbappe in the Golden Boot race, and taking his career World Cup tally to 21.

While the eight-time Ballon d’Or winner is Argentina’s main threat, England goalkeeper Jordan Pickford warned against ignoring the other talents in Lionel Scaloni’s side.

“He has scored so many goals and contributed to so many over his career. It’s great to finally come up against him after so long, and watching him as a kid,” Pickford told media at England’s training base in Kansas on Monday.

“We all know how good Messi is but we also know how good Argentina are. We can’t solely rely on [stopping] Messi. We’ve got to focus on their other strengths and the weaknesses we can take advantage of.”

The winner of the semi-final will face either France or Spain – who play each other on Tuesday (20:00 BST) – in the World Cup final at the New York New Jersey Stadium on Sunday, 19 July (20:00 BST).

Source link

What the ‘once in a lifetime’ federal housing bill means for California

The largest single piece of federal housing legislation to come out of Congress in at least a generation is is now law.

It happened in the middle of night early Saturday, without fanfare — or even President Trump’s signature — and it might be a while before many Californians notice its effects.

That’s because the bill, though politically monumental — both chambers approved it overwhelmingly — doesn’t do one big thing. Instead, it does a lot of little things. Individually, none of the bill’s 56 regulatory tweaks, pilot programs and low-cost loans and grants are likely to move the needle on the nation’s housing affordability woes, nor on California’s specifically.

Supporters hope that collectively, they just might.

Even the law’s path to enactment had an under-the-radar quality to it. The White House abruptly canceled a planned signing ceremony late last month, with Trump vowing not to sign the bill until Congress first passed his restrictive national voter ID proposal. That bill has stalled out in the Senate.

Still, Trump did not veto the housing package, so it automatically became law Saturday just after midnight, as per the Constitution.

For all that, supporters say this is still a big deal: a major, bipartisan piece of legislation aimed at boosting housing construction from a hyperpartisan legislative body that doesn’t typically touch the topic.

“We don’t often gather to celebrate federal housing legislation,” Stephen Russell, president of the San Diego Housing Federation, said at a news conference Thursday. “I think the last time Congress passed anything of this magnitude, many of you were not even alive. … It is almost a once-in-a-lifetime event.”

That’s thanks in part to a growing caucus of lawmakers aligned with the “Yes In My Backyard” movement that helped push the bill into law. Many hail from California, a state that has had more experience than most contending with wildly unaffordable housing. But the cause of making housing more affordable, and attributing high housing costs to a lack of sufficient supply, has become a national and bipartisan concern. Case in point: The bill originated as a joint proposal by Sens. Tim Scott (R-S.C.), an ardent conservative, and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), among the most liberal members of the Senate.

While the constituent parts of the bill are relatively narrow and none is specifically focused on California, experts highlight a few provisions that could leave a notable imprint on the state.

Build now (or else)

For high-cost cities that don’t build much housing, as in much of urban California, the federal bill includes a novel carrot and stick.

This portion of the bill would change the Community Development Block Grant, one of the largest sources of federal funding for affordable housing and local economic development. Pricey cities — defined through a variety of data benchmarks like median prices and vacancy rates — with a track record of under-building that continue to see below-average housing construction will have their grant funds cut by 10%. The savings will go to their municipal counterparts that build at a faster clip.

That’s likely to have “real implications for cities like Los Angeles and San Francisco that have traditionally lagged behind” in adding housing supply, said David Garcia, the deputy director of policy at UC Berkeley’s Terner Center for Housing Innovation.

The city of Los Angeles received $48.4 million in its last award from the block grant program in 2024, according to U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development data. San Francisco received $18.9 million.

Those numbers aren’t enough to make or break the budget of either city.

“I think this will be a small nudge,” said Laura Foote, executive director of YIMBY Action, in an email. “Which taken across the country could still have a good impact! Little nudges add up.”

More dramatic than the number of dollars involved may be the precedent the policy sets. Even in California, where the state government has aggressively incentivized cities to plan for more housing development and penalized those that don’t, lawmakers have never punished municipalities for failing to actually grow — an outcome that may not always be under a city government’s control.

Such an idea would have been “inconceivable in previous congresses,” Garcia said.

Despite that, the provision hasn’t engendered much public opposition from local government groups yet. In an online summary, Michael Wallace, a lobbyist with the National League of Cities, applauded the overall housing bill as an example of the federal government “choosing partnership with local governments over preemptions.” He singled out other provisions of the bill that provide expanded flexibility for Community Development Block Grant spending, new incentive programs for adding supply, and new supports for local urban planning.

Chassis change

Manufactured housing units are often colloquially referred to as mobile homes, but they don’t tend to move around much. Built on assembly lines and shipped to where they’re needed, these naturally affordable houses — the likes of which lawmakers across California and the United States claim we need in droves — are often placed upon permanent foundations where a fewer than 1 in 10 ever move again.

Even so, the federal building code applied to manufactured housing includes a costly, vestigial reference to its mobile origins: a permanent chassis.

A giant steel frame with removable axles and wheels, the chassis ostensibly exists to make it easier to pick up and move a manufactured house by truck. In practice, it serves as a 10- to 12-inch-thick floor beneath the floor. Because it cannot be removed upon delivery, it just serves as “dead space and wasted money,” said Jess Maxcy, president of the California Manufactured Housing Institute, the industry’s trade group. Aside from adding thousands of dollars in added costs per unit, it also makes it harder for manufactured units to be stacked into double story homes or multifamily apartment buildings.

The federal housing bill removes the permanent chassis requirement, something that manufacturers and some housing policy experts have been pushing for since the mid-1980s.

“That relatively minor change will expand access to one of the most affordable forms of home ownership available,” Rep. Scott Peters (D-San Diego) said at the Thursday news conference.
Maxcy said he doesn’t expect the end of the chassis requirement to trigger an overnight building boom in the manufactured home industry. But especially in California, where, due to the high price of land, new single-family homes are more likely to be built stacked on small lots, the regulatory change “provides more opportunities and helps us reduce the price.”

Recovering after disaster

In the months after a natural disaster, long after emergency federal dollars have come and gone, Congress has provided communities with long-term rebuilding grants through the Community Development Block Grant—Disaster Recovery program. Over the last three decades, the program has spent more than $100 billion on the long-term work of recovery, like home construction, infrastructure repair and rental and relocation assistance. That money tends to be reserved for low-income people and communities “who are not going to bounce back without the funds,” said Marion McFadden, who used to run the program under the Biden administration and now works at the disaster preparation and recovery consulting company IEM.

Unfortunately for California, the program only kind of exists. Since the mid-1990s, it’s been stood up and funded on an ad hoc basis, one appropriation bill at a time. That presents a challenge for communities planning in the middle of post-disaster planning. It also means the rules that govern the program — when the money goes out, to whom, under what conditions and for what purposes — are redrafted with each political administration. That’s had the effect of slowing things down considerably. No program funding has gone to Los Angeles in the wake of the 2025 fire storms, according to the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Congress has yet to appropriate any.

The new housing bill would officially write the program into law for at least three years.

“It creates the ability for HUD to have money on hand before a disaster and then make a decision within 15 days about whether they’re going to provide funding,” McFadden said.

What the housing bill doesn’t do: provide fresh funding. Disaster-prone communities will need to wait for Congress to take that up later.

A ‘bottleneck’ removed

For the last two decades, public housing authorities in Los Angeles and the Bay Area have been turning to the federal Rental Assistance Demonstration program to help repair and upgrade their aging stock of increasingly dilapidated public housing. The program works by switching up funding sources in a way that gives locals more flexibility to borrow money and attract private investment dollars.

Until the new law took effect this weekend, the federal government was only authorized to permit 455,000 of these conversions. The law raises the cap by an additional 100,000.

“This has been a bottleneck in California for years and that bottleneck just got removed,” said Russell with the San Diego Housing Federation.
Not all affordable housing advocates are cheering the development. The National Low Income Housing Coalition has consistently opposed expansion of the program on the grounds that the change in funding source could weaken existing tenant protections. It’s unclear whether and to what extent that might be true. A study from last year found no evidence that conversions under the program lead to more evictions.

Wall Street out of suburbia

If you’ve heard only one thing about this housing bill, it’s that it bans “large institutional investors” from buying up more single family homes.

Caveats apply in the final version of the law. The bill defines “large” as any of a number of business structures with control over more than 350 single-family homes. It doesn’t apply retrospectively, so current investors with portfolios brimming with houses need not divest. Exemptions exist for new construction, renovations and senior housing. In California specifically, where corporations and other major investors do not play a significant role in the housing market, the effect is likely to be muted.

The measure “takes a hyper-salient issue for lots of people across the country and does a pretty modest intervention to address it,” said Chad Maisel, a fellow at the liberal-leaning Center for American Progress and a former housing policy advisor to President Biden.

Even so, the provision has plenty of bipartisan appeal. Earlier this year, Trump called for an even stricter crackdown on so-called corporate landlords. Gov. Gavin Newsom followed suit the same week.

The anti-investor language was considerably watered down from earlier this year, when a related provision threatened to undermine “build-to-rent” projects: well-financed subdevelopments of single-family homes reserved for renters. That prompted a revolt by many developers and YIMBY activists who had otherwise enthusiastically supported the bill, who argued that such communities are one of the fastest growing sources of the U.S. housing stock and provide some of the few opportunities for renters to live in suburban-style, family-sized housing.

After the build-to-rent provision was left on the cutting room floor of Congress, state Sen. Aisha Wahab, a Fremont Democrat who is now running for Congress, introduced a bill that picked it back up again. SB 880 would have banned the bundled sale of multiple single-family homes, striking at the heart of the build-to-rent business model. That bill died in the Assembly Judiciary committee in late June.

Christopher writes for CalMatters.



Source link

How Culver City-based Scopely built ‘Monopoly Go!’ into a mobile games juggernaut

Passing “Go” has become especially lucrative for mobile game publisher Scopely.

The Culver City-based Scopely launched “Monopoly Go!” in 2023, betting fans of the classic board game would flock to a mobile version aimed at casual gamers.

By 2025, “Monopoly Go!” had accrued $6 billion in lifetime in-app purchase revenue, becoming the fastest free mobile game to do so, according to app analytics firm Sensor Tower.

This summer, the app is expected to reach $8 billion in lifetime revenue, the company says, solidifying “Monopoly Go!” as Scopely’s biggest game and far surpassing the company’s popular “Pokémon Go.” The company declined to disclose its total profits.

Scopely Co-Chief Executive Javier Ferreira.

Scopely Co-Chief Executive Javier Ferreira.

As overall downloads in the mobile game market have stagnated and in-app purchases and retention become the main drivers of growth, Scopely has hit on an age-old Hollywood strategy — using known franchises and intellectual property to bring out fans.

“These are incredibly durable and long-lasting games that have really passionate communities and fandom around them,” said Javier Ferreira, co-chief executive of Scopely. “We’re in the business of building people’s favorite thing, and that’s a difficult thing to do. The power of [intellectual property] is that, in some cases, that is already their favorite thing.”

The company’s journey toward “Monopoly Go!” began in 2014, when Scopely formed a partnership with Rhode Island-based toymaker Hasbro. Its first collaboration was a Yahtzee mobile dice game that ultimately drew millions of players worldwide (though it was especially popular in the U.S.) and generated more than $1 billion in lifetime revenue.

After that, Scopely approached Hasbro about taking on the “crown jewel” of its board game empire — Monopoly.

Monopoly’s massive global popularity was an obvious draw. But adapting an hours-long real estate transaction game for a casual, mobile audience proved challenging.

Development of what would become “Monopoly Go!” ultimately took seven years, two of which were spent trying to make movement around the board more fun. In that time, the company scrapped two versions of the game; one deemed too competitive, and one that was too complex, Ferreira said.

Developers wanted to capture the “roller coaster feel” of the board game’s highs and lows, while also having simple rules and ensuring a strong social element, he said.

“We couldn’t just copy,” Ferreira said. “We had to reinvent it and re-imagine it, and that’s a complicated, creative endeavor.”

Today, “Monopoly Go!” brings in more than $2 billion in annual revenue and has been downloaded across the globe more than 300 million times.

Now with “Pokémon Go,” which the company owns after acquiring maker Niantic’s game business last year, “Scopely has gone from a successful publisher to one of the defining companies in mobile gaming,” Randy Nelson, head of insights at Appfigures, a mobile app analytics firm.

“The company cracked the code on licensed games years ago,” he wrote in an email. “Its biggest hits work because they’re great games first and recognizable brands second.”

Though the company’s overall game downloads have slowed, its gross revenue has largely increased every year since 2020, according to Appfigures data.

Shortly after Scopely released “Monopoly Go!,” the company was acquired by Savvy Games Group, which is owned by the Saudi Public Investment Fund, for $4.9 billion.

In a statement about the deal, Savvy Games Group Chief Executive Brian Ward touted the success of “Monopoly Go!” as “indicative of Scopely’s ongoing position at the forefront of the global games sector.”

Representatives of the Saudi investment fund are part of Savvy Game Group’s board and do sometimes give some feedback on company initiatives, though Ferreira said the company has remained “very independent.”

The proposed acquisition of gaming giant Electronic Arts by the Saudi Public Investment Fund is not expected to affect Scopely since EA largely focuses on high-budget console and computer games, he said.

As Scopely, now 3,000 employees strong, looks to the future, it has embarked on a number of entertainment partnerships with studios to add franchises such as “The Simpsons,” “Hello Kitty” and Marvel to its mobile game ecosystem.

“They give us access to these universes that millions of people love and are really invested in,” Ferreira said. “We see this as a very strategic part of our business.”

Source link

British passengers could face lifetime ban from UK airlines under new proposals

Officials are considering measures that would allow UK airlines to block disruptive passengers with a history of serious misconduct from travelling, amid a sharp rise in onboard incidents since the pandemic

Ministers are exploring proposals that could result in persistent troublemakers being banned from future flights amid growing alarm over disruptive behaviour on aircraft.

Officials are weighing up a system that would enable airlines to identify passengers with a track record of serious misconduct and potentially deny them the ability to travel. Under the plans, which are still at an early stage of consideration, details of blacklisted passengers could be shared throughout the aviation industry.

Should someone attempt to book a flight after being added to the list, the airline or tour operator could receive notification and be given the choice to block the reservation, effectively grounding that individual indefinitely.

Civil liberties campaigners have, however, raised alarm about the proposals, cautioning they could set a “dangerous precedent” through the sharing of personal data and limitations on access to transport, reports the Express.

Currently, airlines have the power to ban passengers who have displayed violent or abusive conduct while travelling with them. Yet existing restrictions only extend to the specific carrier involved in the incident, meaning offenders can frequently sidestep penalties by simply booking with a different airline.

The primary hurdle facing any new system is current data protection law, which prohibits carriers from exchanging passenger details with one another, even where criminal offences have taken place.

Who is calling for some passengers to be banned from all flights for life?

Calls for stricter measures have grown louder following a string of high-profile mid-air incidents that have gone viral online, reports the Daily Mail. These have included episodes where cabin crew faced death threats and violent clashes erupted between passengers in aircraft aisles.

Such incidents are among hundreds logged annually and have often led to expensive flight diversions that wreck holidays and travel arrangements.

There appears to be widespread public backing for harsher punishments, with recent polling indicating most Britons support restrictions on passengers who commit serious misconduct while airborne.

Ryanair boss Michael O’Leary has previously urged limits on airport alcohol sales, including curbs on early morning pints, in an effort to cut the number of disruptive passengers getting on planes.

Ministers aren’t attempting to stop travellers from having a drink before their flight. Rather, they’re hoping any future system would promote better conduct while helping to safeguard cabin crew, families and fellow passengers.

It’s understood the proposals are being worked on by the Home Office and Department for Transport but remain in the early stages and require additional consultation with the aviation sector. Any system would need to tackle existing privacy regulations, which currently stop airlines from sharing passenger data.

Ministers are expected to sit down with industry bosses later this month to thrash out the details of the plans. A government source said: “Everyone should be able to enjoy a pint at the airport, but anti-social behaviour on flights is totally unacceptable.

“It threatens the safety of passengers and crew and disrupts hard-earned holidays.

“There are already tough laws in place to deal with offences committed on flights, but we are exploring with industry how we can better address this issue, ensuring we crack down on people who persistently cause chaos. Everyone should be able to fly without fuss.”

Source link

Petr Vlachovsky: Czech coach handed lifetime ban by Uefa for filming female players

The CEDB has asked the sport’s global governing body Fifa to make the ban, which prohibits Vlachovsky from taking part in any football-related activity, worldwide.

It has also ordered the Football Association of the Czech Republic to revoke Vlachovsky’s coaching licence.

Leading players’ union Fifpro reported that players of 1. FC Slovacko only learned they had been secretly filmed after the arrest.

Fifpro – the global representative organisation for professional footballers – said the players were filmed on Vlachovsky’s camera hidden in a backpack, and the youngest was aged 17.

Earlier this year, a group of the victims came forward to demand further action, with players telling Czech media publication Seznam Zpravy, external Vlachovsky’s crimes had left them afraid to sleep at night and anxious about being in public in case they were being filmed.

Vlachovsky had previously led the Czech Republic Under-19s women’s team and was once voted the best women’s coach in the country.

Source link

EasyJet urges passengers to ‘switch off’ item on board or risk lifetime ban

easyJet passengers are being warned they could face serious consequences if they don’t completely switch off certain electronic devices

Holidaymakers travelling with easyJet this summer are being warned that they could unknowingly fall foul of strict cabin rules unless they fully switch off a commonly used electronic device before stepping on board. The trouble is that many passengers only discover the rule once they’ve already reached the airport or are on the verge of boarding, where last-minute slip-ups could spell serious problems.

According to EasyJet, the warning relates to e-cigarettes and vaping devices, which must be carried in hand luggage only and are strictly forbidden from being stowed in hold baggage under any circumstances. The airline’s official policy states: “All electronic cigarettes and vaping devices must be carried in the cabin, re-charging is strictly prohibited and the device must be completely switched off.”

It also advises passengers to keep their devices on their person where they can be kept an eye on throughout the flight, reducing the risk of accidental activation. These rules are in place due to concerns over lithium-ion batteries, which are used to power vaping devices and are well known for posing a fire risk if they become damaged or overheat.

The UK Civil Aviation Authority categorises lithium batteries as a significant safety risk in aviation due to their potential for ‘thermal runaway’, producing intense heat and flames that are notoriously difficult to extinguish in confined spaces. The International Air Transport Association has highlighted a worldwide rise in lithium battery-related incidents, which has gone hand in hand with the increasing prevalence of portable electronic devices, prompting airlines across the globe to tighten their rules considerably.

EasyJet also warns that passengers must take precautions to prevent their vaping devices from being switched on accidentally during flights, including ensuring they are fully powered down before boarding. The airline stipulates that travellers may carry no more than two spare batteries in their hand luggage, and that these must be properly protected to prevent them from coming into contact with metal objects.

Under UK aviation rules, vaping devices must be kept in hand luggage at all times. Official government guidance states that e-cigarettes are strictly prohibited from hold baggage.

Industry experts point out that confusion often arises because rules can vary between airlines and destinations, which can leave passengers unknowingly packing the wrong items before they even reach airport security. Aviation safety specialists also warn that using or charging vaping devices while on board flights is strictly prohibited by all major airlines, with penalties ranging from confiscation to fines or even travel bans in severe cases.

As summer travel demand picks up, holidaymakers are being urged to check airline regulations before they set off to avoid delays, confiscations, or being refused entry at the boarding gate.

Source link

EHealth outlines 20% fixed cost reduction and targets 20% adjusted EBITDA margin by 2028 as it rolls out lifetime advisory model (NASDAQ:EHTH)

Earnings Call Insights: eHealth (EHTH) Q1 2026

Management view

  • “We’re pleased with our first quarter results, which came in ahead of expectations. driven by stronger-than-anticipated Medicare enrollment volume at favorable unit economics.” (CEO & Director Derrick Duke)
  • “From a financial

Seeking Alpha’s Disclaimer: This article was automatically generated by an AI tool based on content available on the Seeking Alpha website, and has not been curated or reviewed by humans. Due to inherent limitations in using AI-based tools, the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of such articles cannot be guaranteed. This article is intended for informational purposes only. Seeking Alpha does not take account of your objectives or your financial situation and does not offer any personalized investment advice. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank.

Source link