#will generate higher revenues. In 2018 | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

phoenixyfriend · 1 year ago

Text

Ko-fi prompt from Becky:

I actually would love to hear where ticket/concession/merch money for concerts go. If someone has already asked about that, can you do something similar for a sports game of your choice?

Already got a request for concerts, but I can do the sports game!

So, let's go with... baseball. I've been to professional baseball games ('twas the Ducks), even if it's been a Very Long Time, so that's the one I have some perspective on. Who is in control of the money any given game (as in, who owns the stadium and the home team) varies by place and sport, so let's use the Mets and Citi Field as our example when we need a specific.

Mostly, this is because I'm in New York and so it's down to either them or the Yankees, and between the two... the Mets, through a wholly owned subsidiary, Queens Ballpark Company, are the ones that actually own their ballpark, which makes a few things easier and includes a Fun Fact about the naming. It also means that I can treat the team and the stadium as one singular entity instead of waffling over who gets to be the Main Character of this simulation. It's not exactly uncommon for teams to own their own stadiums, but it's not most of them.

(The Mets, btw, are owned in large part by a hedge fund manager. Like, 95% of the team stock is owned by this one guy. Why can't more sports be like the Packers and just belong to the city.)

In this case, I will be referring to the Forbes article on Citi Field's revenue for 2022 as a guide or framework, as they have an actual image of the financial report; they don't do much explaining of the actual data, though, so my part will be explaining the less-obvious things and doing some maths. A few other articles will also be cited as they come in useful.

I'll also note that the Mets are a very expensive team operating at a loss, but they still work for our purposes.

MONEY COMING IN:

Tickets, most obviously

To quote the wiki article on Major League Baseball:

"MLB is the second-wealthiest professional sport league by revenue after the National Football League (NFL). [...] MLB has the highest total season attendance of any sports league in the world; in 2018, it drew more than 69.6 million spectators."

I didn't know that until I started researching for this post, but it makes sense. After all, baseball is "the American pastime." The Forbes article cites average attendance of 33,000 per home game. The stadium seat about 41,900, so we're looking at roughly 79% attendance. This is fine, because attendance is not the only stream of revenue.

Advertising

If you have seen a professional sports game in the past however many years, you have seen that, depending on the type of court, they are plastered in advertising. Let's take a look at Citi Field:

(Image Source: MLB website)

The Forbes article states that the stadium makes about $48.5 million per year from advertising. About $28.5 million of that comes from the various 'temporary' and long-term ads, the Nikon and Geico and Toyota and Coca Cola, etc.

$20 million of it comes from one company. I'm going to quote Wikipedia again:

The naming rights were purchased by Citigroup, a New York financial services company, for $20 million annually.

This is not uncommon! ESPN has an article about it, and some standout examples are Bank of America Stadium, Coors Field, Delta Center, FedEx Field and FedEx Forum, General Motors Place, Gillette Stadium, Heinz Field, and the list just goes on. I'm not even sure if the list is up to date, because I'm seeing even more articles elsewhere with higher figures.

Concessions

The financial report that Forbes cites has $22mill in concessions. This is not entirely surprising. Going by this page, we're looking at... 84 home games in that 2022 season. Let's assume that 33,000 average cited earlier. That's 2,772,000 attendees over the course of the season. So, what, a little under $10 per attendance tick? Entirely plausible. A hot dog plus a soda is $15, so... that tracks.

Parking

Apparently parking is, collectively, about $13mill annually. That's... genuinely a little concerning to me, for uh. Reasons. Also parking is $40.

(A lot of people go to games via train, if anyone's interested.)

Luxury Suite Premiums

I had to google this one, but uh. Turns out those fancy private box seats are even fancier and more private than I thought, bringing in over $10 mill a year.

Other Revenue - Stadium, undefined

"Other Revenue" and "post season revenue" are not given any further information, but they're about $16.5 mill so. They're definitely doing their part? Wish we had more information.

One guess is that there are events in the vein of the Citi Field Spring Carnival that contribute to the revenue through either fees to the stadium (if this is a carnival that rents the parking lot) or concessions and tickets (if the stadium rents a carnival).

Other Revenue - to the team that is not direct operating income of the stadium itself

Not counting the "other revenue" section of the financial statement, the Forbes article tells us that:

National broadcasting deals with Fox, ESPN and TBS that pay over $60 million a year to every MLB team, as well as the local cable fee the Mets get from SNY, which is over $80 million a year.

That's another $140mill in addition to the $244mill that the financial report cites.

Merchandise - not direct stadium revenue.

Get your Mets hats here! And your jerseys! And your logo bats! And your commemorative plushies! And--

MONEY GOING OUT

Operations

This one's easy: you have to pay wages to your employees, from the players themselves to the food sellers to janitorial to security to field maintenance, etc. Also, you have to pay for utilities (those billboards and floodlights aren't cheap), product to sell (frozen hot dogs), supplementary materials for products you sell (plastic cups, paper for the ticket machines, bags for garbage cans, and so on), and repairs/maintenance for the stands themselves (can't imagine they get through a season with all 41,900 seats intact).

Player salaries (and a few others, like the coach) aren't actually included in stadium revenue, but since the stadium is owned by the team, we're bundling them together for the sake of this case.

Payment in Lieu of Taxes

So this is an interesting one, and while the Forbes article does touch on it, there's a bit more detail to the story.

Citi Field was built in 2009, and the process cost $850 million. Of that, $615 was public subsidies. A lot of this was municipal bonds, which the Mets have to pay back with interest for the lifetime of the park; those municipal bond repayments are an offset, and in return for paying tens of millions in municipal bond repayments each year (the 2022 report shows about $43.5 mill), Citi Field does not have to pay property taxes.

Wikipedia only cites property taxes, but the financial report doesn't include any other taxes, so I'll assume the only other taxes they're on the hook for are sales and payroll, which aren't displayed in the financial report.

Parking

Right, so, parking as a bundle is about $7.5 mill in expenses, which means that parking alone has a marginal profit of about 42.3%, given the earlier figure of $13mill in parking revenue. I'm not finding any solid information on where that money goes, but it seems very like that New York City's taxes on land use for parking is not included in the property tax exemption we discussed above, and that most of the $7.5 mill is in that regard.

Post Season Expenses

I'll be honest, they don't define this $1.8 mill, but given what is and isn't included in the other sections, I'm going to hazard a guess that this may be about upgrades (more than maintenance) or replacement of physical billboards that are also not included as regular maintenance but require a lot of manpower to get up and set if complicated enough.

General and Administrative

This is the other possible allocation of the utilities and related payments. This is also where back of house activities like accountants, lawyer fees, payroll clerks, facilities managers, and so on are bundled in. It's about $5.5 mill.

Publicity and Promotions

This one's easy, it's just marketing that doesn't fall into General Mets Things and is rather for home games specifically.

Depreciation and Amortization

Bit trickier, but you know how a car loses value the second you drive it off the lot? That is depreciation. You paid $20,000 for a car, but two years later it's worth $16,000; on a financial report, you put that down as a $4,000 loss to depreciation. Amortization is similar, in that it lowers values of various assets in relation to time and relative value to what it was when new.

Interest Expenses

Expenses related directly to interest rates tend to get their own line separate from regular debt repayments. This isn't really relevant beyond 'loans are more expensive than when you first get them.'

Travel and League Expenses

Since this is a traveling team, being professionals, and a Major League Baseball Team in particular, money has to be spent on the plane rides, team bus, and of course, the league fees. I wanted to end that a bit more pithy, but it turns out it's not easy to find league fees for the MLB.

(A new team joining would have to pay about $2.2 billion, according to one article, while previous new additions were a couple hundred mill, so... 100 mill? Maybe?)

Hope that answers your question!

#economics #capitalism #phoenix talks #ko fi #ko fi prompts #research #baseball #the mets #citi field #sports #business #financial reports

48 notes · View notes

mariacallous · 1 day ago

Text

It is hard to keep track of all the tariffs that U.S. President Donald Trump is announcing or enacting these days. On top of the 10 percent tariffs that he imposed on China on Feb. 4, Washington has announced across-the-board steel and aluminum tariffs effective March 12 and plans to discuss reciprocal tariffs on all countries on April 2. On the same day, a 25 percent tariff on Canada and Mexico could come into effect, in addition to a tariff specifically targeting U.S. car imports. Yesterday, to round things off, Trump said that he will “very soon” announce a 25 percent tariff on imports from the European Union.

Trump’s fixation on tariffs is odd, since such duties make up just about 2 percent of U.S. federal revenues, in line with the average in other high-income economies. Average tariffs also move in a similar range, with the U.S. trade-weighted rate of 2.2 percent not much different from Japan’s 1.9 percent and the EU’s 2.7 percent.

Seen from Europe, Trump’s obsession with tariffs looks alarming. On paper, four of the five proposed measures— the blanket tariff on imports from the EU, the steel and aluminum tariffs, the reciprocal ones, the measures targeting cars—could hit the bloc hard. In turn, over the past weeks, EU officials have been at pains to outline that that tariffs are “bad for business, worse for consumers” and “harmful to the global trading system.”

From that perspective, it may seem a little strange that the mainstream assumption appears to be that the EU should retaliate with the same poison and raise tariffs on the United States. This stance makes little sense. Europe has little to gain—and possibly a lot to lose—from responding to Trump’s tariffs.

Economists like to disagree, but they typically see eye to eye on at least one thing: In developed economies, tariffs—a tax that domestic firms and consumers pay on imports—are more often than not a poor idea.

Trump’s tariffs do not tick any of these boxes: They are across-the-board, random measures that appear to come and go depending on the presidential mood. In turn, it may not come as a surprise that the tariffs that Trump imposed in 2018 resulted in an estimated net welfare loss of $7.2 billion in the United States, even after accounting for increased tariff revenues and the gains to some domestic producers benefiting from protection.

This data illustrate an inconvenient truth for tariff fans: Even if some industries benefit a little from the new tariffs (for instance, U.S. steel producers), a wide array of downstream manufacturers face higher costs because of them, which weighs on employment, investment, and exports. In such a scenario, the only option for Washington to mitigate the inflationary impact of tariffs would be to subsidize costlier U.S. production.

This is not going to happen. Even at high rates, Trump’s tariffs will not generate enough money for the U.S. government to splurge—let alone replace income taxes, like Trump fantasized during his election campaign last year.

The issues with tariffs do not end there. Firms typically pass on higher costs to consumers, who eventually shoulder most of the tariff burden. The figures are far from a rounding error: The Peterson Institute for International Economics calculated that if enacted, the proposed tariffs on Mexico and Canada (on top of the 10 percent tariff already imposed on China) could cost a typical U.S. household at least $1,200 per year.

Retaliatory tariffs on the United States would be just as bad an idea for Europe. If the EU goes down that road, European manufacturers would face higher input costs at a time when many sectors already struggle amid high energy prices and growing Chinese competition. (German carmakers come to mind as a particularly good example of firms that would be most affected.)

And just like U.S. tariffs will hurt American households, EU tariffs would also act as a tax on European consumers, fueling inflation at a time when the cost of living is already their top concern, according to a survey conducted by the European Parliament last year. By contrast, estimates suggest that avoiding retaliation to U.S. tariffs would result in minimal hit to EU GDP, a reduction of just 0.1 percent. (This modeling assumes a U.S. tariff rate of 60 percent on China and a rate of 10 percent on other economies).

Beyond economics, it is not hard to see how Europeans could end up in bitter political fights over the shape of retaliatory tariffs. Many EU economies have deep trade ties to the United States in one way or another. Some of them (such as Austria, Finland, Germany, Ireland, Italy, and Portugal) ship more than 20 percent of their extra-EU exports to the United States, suggesting that their willingness to risk triggering an unpredictable transatlantic trade war could be low.

And many EU economies (including Belgium, France, Ireland, Lithuania, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands) rely on the United States as a top source of imports, meaning that EU tariffs would fuel domestic inflation. Add the fact that yet other member states, such as Sweden, want any prospective retaliation to conform to World Trade Organization rules, which is virtually impossible. Arriving at an EU-wide consensus on how to respond to Trump will clearly be hard.

The issues with EU coordination would not end there, for at least two reasons. First, Trump’s insistence on treating EU countries on a case-by-case basis means that EU governments face a prisoner’s dilemma. Game theory suggests that going it alone and trying to cut bilateral deals with Trump, instead of collaborating with EU neighbors, could leave them better off. Some member states, such as Hungary, appear keen to cozy up to Trump anyway, making it unlikely that they would be on board with anything more than a symbolic EU tariff. Second, the risk of fragmentation is also high when it comes to the European Commission’s package of carrots that are supposed to convince Trump to spare the EU from tariffs; proposals include pledges to buy more U.S. weapons (a nonstarter for France) and get tougher on China (good luck with that in Germany).

This begs the question of how, if not with tariffs, Europeans should respond to Trump’s actions. Looking in the mirror and addressing the EU’s own trade weaknesses would be a good start. Intra-EU trade costs and barriers are so high that on average, they are equivalent to a tariff of 44 percent on shipments of goods (excluding agriculture) and 110 percent for services exchanges across EU member states—far more than any tariff Trump will ever impose on the bloc.

Such barriers include poor border infrastructure, the lack of regulatory harmonization, and the coexistence of many national procurement regimes. Europe’s willingness to impose de facto tariffs on itself comes with serious consequences: Trade across EU member states is less than half the level of trade among U.S. states.

And in the area of trade, completing the European Union’s “Single Market” is not the only item that should be at the top of the bloc’s to-do list. Inking trade agreements with developing economies, starting with the Mercosur bloc, also comes to mind at a time when EU firms worry that tariffs will weigh on their exports to the United States.

If doing nothing in retaliation is not an option for political reasons, then EU leaders could do worse than looking at China for tips on smart retaliation. Following the imposition of Trump’s 10 percent tariff on all U.S. imports of Chinese goods, Beijing’s response has been remarkably muted. China enacted a 15 percent tariff on imports of U.S. liquefied natural gas and coking coal, in addition to a 10 percent tariff on crude oil. Altogether, these cover only $13.9 billion of annual imports from the United States, or just 0.5 percent of China’s total imports.

In doing so, Beijing has adopted a sensible strategy of imposing surgical retaliatory tariffs that will support its long-stated goal of boosting energy security. This is exactly what Europeans should do: use Trump 2.0 as an opportunity to turbocharge the adoption of policies that they need to implement anyway in order to boost their economic prospects.

All things considered, Europeans may be better off being the adults in the room and letting Trump hurt the U.S. economy if he so wishes. Retaliatory tariffs enacted by the EU would not only fail to solve the issue (no, Trump will not back down), but they would also create a slew of new problems for Europeans.

By contrast, avoiding retaliation means that the economic costs of tariffs would be borne mostly by American businesses and households. At a time when all the talk in Europe is about narrowing the growing gap between the EU and U.S. economies, this would not be an entirely bad thing.

5 notes · View notes

chosetherose · 2 years ago

Text

Taylor Swift’s epic “Eras Tour” is on track to become the biggest in concert history, with the potential to gross over $1 billion.

That milestone would break the record for global concert tours currently held by Elton John and could up the ante for an era of even higher ticket prices, show grosses and concert-industry revenues.

“What we’re seeing on this particular Taylor tour is almost like a once-in-a-lifetime phenomenon,” said Jarred Arfa, executive vice president and head of global music at Independent Artist Group, who represents Billy Joel, Metallica and other acts. “It’s pretty astonishing.”

Over the past week, Swift announced dozens of new international dates that will take her to South America, Asia, Australia and Europe. Besides her original 52 U.S. dates, which end in August, she’ll be playing 54 shows overseas, bringing her to 106 gigs by the last show in London next summer. More dates could be added.

Music executives have been speculating for months about how much Swift’s tour has been making. Swift, in an unusual move for the industry, is not reporting her nightly grosses after the shows to Billboard Boxscore, which tracks such data, but instead planning to report them later, according to Dave Brooks, Billboard’s senior director of live music and touring. This has fueled questions about how much the pop superstar is making and how such towering grosses may reset expectations for other major artists.

Swift’s outsize success comes amid a booming market for arena and stadium shows from superstars like Beyoncé and Madonna. For blockbuster tours, per-show concert grosses “are higher than they’ve ever been,” Brooks said.

These performers are charging higher prices for general-admission tickets, aisle seats and VIP packages—partly to offset a large jump in their costs—even as some smaller shows in clubs and amphitheaters and music festivals struggle.

Arena and stadium concertgoers, despite grumbling about prices, continue to cough up for shows. That’s boosting industry revenues, which increasingly are concentrated in concerts by the world’s biggest artists, Brooks said. In Swift’s case, the biggest concern isn’t prices—it’s getting tickets in the first place.

The Wall Street Journal analyzed Swift’s Eras Tour based on conversations with high-ranking concert executives, examining how much revenue Swift’s shows are generating in ticket sales versus how much money she’s actually taking home in profit.

Will the Eras Tour become the first to gross $1 billion in revenue?

The music industry keeps track of superstar concert tours via gross concert-ticket revenue figures that artists provide. It’s these figures that are used every year to rank successful tours. (Artists don’t include their costs, profits and deal making.)

Elton John currently holds the record for the highest-grossing global tour, with his ongoing “Farewell Yellow Brick Road Tour,” which has run from 2018 to 2023. So far, the tour, which ends in July, has raked in over $887 million. John surpassed prior record-holder Ed Sheeran’s “Divide Tour,” which ran between 2017 and 2019 and brought in $776 million.

Back in December, Billboard estimated that Swift’s 52-date U.S. leg would gross about $590 million; the average ticket price for the U.S. leg is $215, Billboard said.

Now that Swift is performing 106 shows worldwide, she could cross the record-breaking $1 billion line. But it’s not a done deal. Top tickets in the U.S. tend to cost 20% to 30% more than in the rest of the world, which makes the U.S. a more lucrative market than Europe or Asia. Swift’s 54 international shows aren’t worth as much as her American ones, though in some cases the venues overseas are larger in size, allowing for more concertgoers and revenue.

Asked how much the Eras Tour might end up grossing, Arfa, of Independent Artist Group, says Swift may very well reach $1 billion.

Others aren’t so sure, with some estimates putting her around $700 million to $900 million. That would still eclipse Swift’s previous “Reputation Stadium Tour” in 2018, which grossed about $345 million across 53 shows. Her average ticket price back then was $119, according to Pollstar.

A spokeswoman for Swift did not respond to requests for comment.

Executives generally expect Swift’s current tour to exceed Beyoncé’s, even if the pop-R&B superstar delivers eye-popping numbers of her own. That’s what happened the last time the two artists toured as solo artists: Back in 2016, Beyoncé’s “Formation World Tour” grossed $256 million.

So how much actual profit is Swift making?

Just because a tour grosses $1 billion doesn’t mean the artist is making $1 billion. It’s more complicated than that.

Superstars like Swift aren’t paid per show; they’re paid for the full tour. Still, it’s easier to get a picture of Swift’s earnings by thinking in terms of per-show grosses and profits.

For her U.S. shows, Swift set ticket prices ranging from roughly $50 for cheap seats to nearly $900 for VIP packages. Swift didn’t engage in “dynamic pricing,” which allows ticket prices to float upward (or downward) based on demand. Since her shows tend to sell out, the number of tickets sold each night depends on the size of the stadium. Such venues often host roughly 50,000 to 60,000 concertgoers, but can sometimes hit 80,000 or higher.

According to a person familiar with the matter, Swift grossed approximately $40 million via concert tickets over a recent weekend of shows. This $40 million figure would break down to more than $13 million per concert over three shows.

That generally tracks with concert executives’ estimates for Swift’s average per-show gross, which they put at $10 million, though shows could range from $6 million to $13 million or so.

But revenues are one thing, profits are another.

How much does the tour cost?

The expense of running the concert includes renting out stadiums, along with production, labor and transportation costs. The Eras Tour, in particular, is one of the most technically ambitious in recent history, with its various segments showcasing different albums of Swift’s career accompanied by unique backdrops and costumes.

Other payouts go to Swift’s concert promoters around the world, including Messina Touring Group, which is affiliated with AEG Presents, the No. 2 concert promoter globally after Live Nation. Promoters often get a 10% cut, Billboard’s Brooks said. But Swift is an unusually big superstar, which means she may be more able to secure highly favorable deals, executives said. Also, unlike most stars, Swift is not working with a booking agency in the U.S.—just Messina Touring Group—which eliminates a major cost.

Some executives expect Swift is taking home 40% to 60% of the estimated $10 million average per-show gross, while others think this take-home figure is probably 50% or lower.

To boil it all down, let’s imagine what all of this looks like in practice: First, the hosting stadium takes a cut, lopping off $2 million to $3 million from the $10 million gross. From there, Swift pays her staging costs and the promoter’s cut, which together could remove 50% of the remaining $7 million to $8 million. That gives her about $3.5 million to $4 million in profit per night.

That figure, multiplied by roughly 100 shows, takes you to $350 million to $400 million in profit for the entire 2023-2024 tour.

Accounting for various unknowns, a broader estimate would put Swift’s profits from selling tickets to the Eras Tour in the neighborhood of $300 million to $500 million.

What about her merchandise sales?

Concert executives said the Eras Tour is likely grossing another $2 million-plus a night through merchandise—all the $75 hoodies, $55 long-sleeve shirts and $45 short-sleeve shirts that fans are eating up. Fans, they say, are likely spending about $50 to $75 a person, after accounting for those who don’t buy anything. Even among the ranks of superstars, Swift’s merchandise is highly prized by her fans, known as Swifties, allowing her to gross more on everything from T-shirts to portable phone chargers. Some other superstars, especially non-veteran acts, might earn $25 a person or less.

During the weekend of shows where Swift grossed approximately $40 million via tickets, she also generated approximately $10 million via merch in total, according to the person familiar with the matter. That means about $3 million in merchandise revenue per night.

But Swift also has to pay a merchandise company. Of the $2 million-plus in average per-night merch revenue, Swift could be left with around 70%, after various payouts, concert executives said. That amounts to about $1.4 million in merchandise profit per night. If Swift’s merch sold like that over 100 shows, it would bring an additional $140 million on top of the $300 million to $500 million from tickets.

The upshot: Swift is looking at possibly over $500 million in profit across tickets and merchandise from the Eras Tour between the U.S. and overseas.

But there are even more income streams than that.

Even then, the Eras Tour doesn’t stop generating income.

There’s the cash from Swift’s partnership with the credit-card company Capital One, which is the U.S. presenting sponsor of the tour.

Swift’s alliance with Capital One, which goes back to 2019, is typical for superstars of her stature, for whom such deals typically involve hefty paydays. Swift, for her part, has appeared in Capital One commercials.

Last November, Capital One cardholders got early access to Swift’s tickets via a presale. At Swift’s shows on this tour, light-up wristbands were given away to fans; the bands were branded with Capital One’s logo.

Then there’s the merch on Swift’s website, which many fans likely bought before and after attending shows—especially if they wanted to avoid long lines at the venue.

Finally, there’s the tour-related income from increased interest in Swift’s music.

Swift is selling thousands of albums every week, often vinyl records and CDs. At the same time, she’s experiencing a spike in online streams as the Eras Tour rolls across the U.S. In the week ending June 15, Swift had six different albums in the top 25 of the Billboard 200 chart, according to Luminate, driven partly by the jump in streaming activity.

Executives said the tour has caused a Beatles-like mania. Some Swift fans who haven’t been able to get tickets have listened to shows from stadium parking lots. Others who got in have reported “post-concert amnesia,” where you’re so overjoyed you don’t remember a show afterward.

Such fans are likely among those helping fuel the streaming spike. That intensified listening, in turn, creates another waterfall of profits for Swift.

“She’s just capturing this moment of popularity so perfectly,” Arfa said.

#get it get it

18 notes · View notes

nickgerlich · 1 year ago

Text

Charged Up

One of the most frustrating things that happens to consumers, especially when it comes to tech products, is to find out that something you own is now obsolete. It happens all the time, but one company—Apple—has been notorious for doing it. Worse yet, the obsolescence affects one of the most mundane aspects of the product, yet also one of the most critical: the charger cord.

It was eleven years ago that Apple introduced the Lightning connector for its iPhones, leaving the much clunkier 30-pin connector to fade away. While it was a net improvement, it meant that all of our household and car chargers were done. They also did a similar move with charger cords for their MacBook line of laptops. And don’t get me started about when they eliminated the headphone jack back on iPhone 7 in 2016. It was clearly a move to bolster sales of their wireless AirPods.

Now they have done it again. At their big media announcement earlier this week, Apple announced iPhone 15 among other products, but also had to tell us that—here we go again—the phone’s charger cord would now be USB-C. It’s just that this time, Apple is not trying to pull another fast one, because they have been forced to change.

While it is convenient to think that the US rules the world and we set the standards, we are quickly waking up to the fact that the EU—European Union—has significant clout. The General Data Protection Regulation that was passed in 2018 ensures that European users have much higher expectations of data privacy online, and while they can opt-in to cookies, they are not the de facto setting. We can thank the GDPR for all those annoying questions we face on many websites today asking us if we would like some cookies.

The EU is at it again, with charger cords the next item to come in their cross hairs. Starting next year, all devices sold in Europe must have a common connector. USB-C was chosen as the standard. In both cases—the GDPR and charger cord—American firms have decided to go with the flow, and not fight it. Rather than have two websites, one for the EU and the one for everywhere else, they opted for one. As for Apple, it had no choice but to yield, if it wants to sell phones there.

Of course, this once again puts consumers in a bad place, because we still have legacy products that require the Lightning cord. At my office, both my keyboard and mouse are charged by—you guessed it—the Lightning cord. And my two Apple MagSafe external batteries also require that connector. Even when I upgrade my phone from 12 to 15, I will still have to keep some of these old cords around, while also changing out my home and vehicle charger cords.

Lovely. I will be using two systems at the same time. I see a tangled mess of cables in my future.

It can be argued that Apple should never have stuck with proprietary connectors in the first place, that it wasn’t being a good corporate citizen. But there is a monetary explanation. On Wednesday’s Morning Brew Daily podcast, they reported that Apple makes $5 billion a year either selling its own cords, or licensing their manufacture to third-party companies. That is a significant revenue stream that is now gone.

I am also perplexed that Apple had already adopted the USB-C standard on its own for MacBooks and iPads. It’s enough to make me pull out my hair. Well, if I had enough to pull.

Yes, I am an Apple fan boy. I made the switch in 2005, and have not looked back. While I do not own an Apple Watch or AirPods, I have phone, laptop, office iMac, and tablet, and I love the eco-system. Everything plays well together, which makes it a powerful bundle not replicated elsewhere. I’m good with paying the so-called “Apple tax” to own these products.

Sometimes, though, I admit to the frustration you get when you feel like someone is just yanking you around. This time Apple is getting yanked around. It lost the battle in Europe, and had to concede the world. I’m happy, because there really never was a good reason to have unique connectors other than extra revenue. In fact, this is something that has been going on for years in tech products, from cords to batteries. I can show you a bunch of incompatible camera batteries within both the Sony and Canon lines.

It’s just that Apple is the one getting the black eye for it now. It’s going to be a wobbly transition period for a while until we wear out all of our older products that still use Lightning, but we’ll get there one day.

And we can then add those old charger cords to that box everyone has in their home. Heck, mine still has Cat-4, RS-232, RCA, and land-line phone cables in it. Just in case, you know.

Dr “Of One A Cord” Gerlich

Audio Blog

#marketing #Apple #USB-C

2 notes · View notes

global-research-report · 1 day ago

Text

Sustainability Trends in the Pleated Filters Market: Growth and Future Outlook

The global pleated filters market size is expected to reach USD 16.95 billion by 2030, expanding at a CAGR of 3.9% from 2023 to 2030, according to a new report by Grand View Research, Inc. Increasing demand for air filtration across the manufacturing industries is anticipated to propel the pleated filters market growth over the forecast period.

The factors such as growing environmental concerns and stringent regulatory framework have resulted in companies investing heavily in air filtration techniques and processes. In addition, the strict regulations and policies that govern the water treatment for both domestic and industrial waste-water is expected to promote the demand for pleated filters.

Buyers are expected to have low to medium bargaining power on account of use of pleated filters across a number of end-user industries. In addition, superior performance of the pleated filters is expected to attract the buyers towards the use of the product in comparison to the conventionally used filtration systems which is expected to benefit growth

Key players are notably investing in research and development activities and continuously launching new products and services in the market to enhance customer lifetime value, thereby leading to market growth. In addition, the companies are also involved in the development of new sustainable products and solutions offering improved efficiency and better value to the customers.

Pleated Filters Report Highlights

Air filters accounted for a market share of 50.6% in 2022, owing to higher durability coupled with the wider surface area for filtration, thereby prompting its use in HVAC systems

The industrial application segment is anticipated to witness a significant growth over the forecast period, owing to the rapid industrialization in the developing economies such as China, India, and Brazil

The market for pleated filters in Asia Pacific is projected to grow at a CAGR of 4.9% from 2023 to 2030, due to the growing demand across the well developed electronic and chemical & petrochemicals industries

Key participants are taking efforts to increase market penetration & presence and offer expanded product offerings in the market segments.

Pleated Filters Market Segmentation

Grand View Research has segmented the global pleated filters market based on product, application, and region:

Pleated Filters Product Outlook (Revenue, USD Million, 2018 - 2030)

Air Filters

Food & Beverage Filters

Oil Filters

Other Filters

Pleated Filters Application Outlook (Revenue, USD Million, 2018 - 2030)

Industrial

Paints & Coatings

Chemicals & Petrochemicals

Electronics

Oil & Gas

Power Generation

Food & Beverage

Others

Pleated Filters Regional Outlook (Revenue, USD Million, 2018 - 2030)

North America

Canada

Mexico

Europe

Germany

France

Italy

Spain

Asia Pacific

China

India

Japan

South Korea

Thailand

Australia

Central & South America

Brazil

Middle East & Africa

Saudi Arabia

Key Players in Pleated Filters Market

Donaldson Company, Inc.

SUEZ

Honeywell International Inc.

Siemens

Freudenberg Filtration Technologies GmbH & Co. KG

PARKER HANNIFIN CORP

Order a free sample PDF of the Pleated Filters Market Intelligence Study, published by Grand View Research.

0 notes

industrynewsupdates · 9 days ago

Text

A Deep Dive into the Circuit Protection Market: Insights and Analysis

The global circuit protection market size is expected to reach USD 72,677.3 million by 2030 registering a CAGR of 5.9 from 2023 to 2030 according to a new study by Grand View Research, Inc. The primary drivers of the global market growth include expanding energy infrastructure development activities, the necessity of revamping the power transmission and distribution network, and a focus on creating new energy connectivity. Additionally, in order to protect the machinery from the probability of power fluctuation and short circuits, there is an increasing demand for advanced circuit protection equipment throughout industry verticals, including electronics, communications, and automotive. The growth of the global market is anticipated to be positively impacted by the above-mentioned factors in the upcoming years.

Rapid urbanization in developing nations and substantial government and private sector investment in renewable energy generation projects are the main drivers influencing the market's expansion. Likewise, the market is anticipated to grow as a result of the global automotive industry's surging sales, strict government restrictions, and consumer concern about passenger safety and security.

The demand for circuit-breakers is expected to rise as a result of factors like continued industrialization in developing nations, the expanding worldwide market for electric vehicles, and the proliferation of digitally connected gadgets. The rising temperature is also proliferating demand for air conditioners, which is projected to drive up demand for fuse and current protection components, thus aiding the growth of the global market.

The market was negatively affected as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. In early 2020, the government enforced lockdown limitations resulting in suspended production. The lockdown restrictions disrupted the supply chain by delaying the product supply. However, as the government has eased workplace restrictions enabling assembly plants to resume operation the market is expected to recover. Similarly, the recovering automobile industry will foster market growth.

Gather more insights about the market drivers, restrains and growth of the Circuit Protection Market

Circuit Protection Market Report Highlights

• In 2022, the circuit breaker segment accounted for more than 21.77% of the global market. This growth in energy infrastructure projects can be related to the demand for higher-quality fuses to protect electrical equipment. In addition, the target segment is anticipated to grow as urbanization and the demand for reliable energy sources both rise

• Over the course of the forecast period, Asia Pacific is expected to increase at a 7.0% CAGR. This development is ascribed to an increase in energy consumption from industries including power generation, transportation, and telecommunication

• The main stakeholders' attention is on expanding the company through partnerships and acquisitions. For instance, in July 2022 the Irish-American power management giant Eaton Corporation announced that it would buy a 50% stake in Jiangsu Huineng Electric Co. Ltd

Circuit Protection Market Segmentation

Grand View Research has segmented the circuit protection market report based on product, application, channel, and region:

Circuit Protection Product Outlook (Revenue, USD Million, 2018 - 2030)

• Circuit Breaker

o Low Current

o High Current

• Fuse

o Fast Acting

o Slow Blow

• HD Pro

o High Power Inline/Bulkhead GFCI

o High Power Inline/Bulkhead ELCI

o High Power Inline/Bulkhead EGFPD

• Inrush Current Limiter

• Mobile Power Protection

o Automatic Transfer Switch

o Battery Control Center

o Inverter

o Load Center

o Others

• Overvoltage Protection

o Crowbar Devices

o ESD Protector

o Gas Discharge Tubes (GDT)

o Metal Oxide Varistors (MOV)

o Surge Protection Device (SPD)

o Others

• PTC Devices

o Ceramic

o Polymeric

• GFCI

o Adapters

o In-line Cord Sets

o Quad Boxes

o Panel Mount

o Right Angle Cord Sets

o User Attachable

o Others

Circuit Protection Application Outlook (Revenue, USD Million, 2018 - 2030)

• Agriculture

• Automotive

• Commercial & Residential Building

• Household Appliances

• HVAC

• Power Generation

• Recreational Vehicle (RV)

• Telecom

• Others

Circuit Protection Channel Outlook (Revenue, USD Million, 2018 - 2030)

• OEM

• Retail

• Wholesale

Circuit Protection Regional Outlook (Revenue, USD Million, 2018 - 2030)

• North America

o U.S.

o Canada

o Mexico

• Europe

o U.K.

o Germany

o Rest of Europe

• Asia Pacific

o China

o India

o Japan

o Rest of Asia Pacific

• South America

• Middle East & Africa

List of Key Players in the Circuit Protection Market

• ABB Ltd.

• Bel Fuse Inc

• Schneider Electric SE

• Mitsubishi Electric Corporation

• Eaton Corporation plc

• General Electric Company

• Siemens AG

• Rockwell Automation, Inc.

• Larsen & Toubro Limited

• NXP Semiconductors N.V.

• SCHURTER Holding AG

• Sensata Technologies Holding plc

• Texas Instruments Incorporated

Order a free sample PDF of the Circuit Protection Market Intelligence Study, published by Grand View Research.

#Circuit Protection Market #Circuit Protection Market Size #Circuit Protection Market Share #Circuit Protection Market Analysis #Circuit Protection Market Growth

0 notes

michigantopnews · 18 days ago

Text

Michigan Road Funding Battle: Whitmer’s $2.5B Plan Faces GOP Pushback

Michigan lawmakers clash over Gov. Whitmer’s proposed tax hike for Michigan road funding, as critics argue existing funds should be reallocated instead of raising taxes. Whitmer’s Proposed Tax Hike on Michigan Families Draws Criticism LANSING, Mich. – Michigan’s road funding battle is heating up as Gov. Gretchen Whitmer unveils a new $2.5 billion tax increase to tackle infrastructure repairs. The proposal, part of an expanded $86 billion state budget, faces strong opposition from Republican lawmakers, who argue that existing revenue should cover road improvements without burdening taxpayers. State Rep. Ann Bollin (R-Brighton Township), chair of the House Appropriations Committee, condemned the governor’s approach, calling it an unnecessary tax hike. She pointed to a recent $3.1 billion Republican-backed plan that prioritizes road repairs without additional taxation (Bollin, 2025). “The governor’s claim that Michigan doesn’t have enough existing revenue to fix our roads is simply false. Just last month, the House introduced a responsible, $3.1 billion plan that prioritizes road repairs using existing revenue, without raising taxes. State Spending Soars by $30 Billion Since 2018, GOP Argues Mismanagement Bollin’s argument hinges on Michigan’s sharp increase in state spending. Since 2018, the state budget has swelled by nearly $30 billion, a more than 40% increase, yet little of that has been allocated toward road maintenance. “The problem isn’t revenue, it’s priorities,” Bollin stated. “The money is there. We don’t need higher taxes to fix our roads. We need leadership that respects taxpayers, spends responsibly, and makes roads a priority” (Bollin, 2025). Republican lawmakers contend that mismanagement—not a lack of funds—is the primary issue. They argue that rather than seeking higher taxes, Michigan should reprioritize existing budget allocations to fund infrastructure projects. Whitmer Defends Her Infrastructure Plan as Essential for Michigan’s Future Gov. Whitmer, who campaigned on fixing Michigan’s roads, defended her budget proposal, insisting that additional funding is necessary to make meaningful improvements. She emphasized that Michigan’s aging roads and bridges require substantial investments to ensure safety and efficiency. “We cannot patch our way to better roads,” Whitmer said. “A sustainable, long-term solution requires dedicated funding” (Whitmer, 2025). The governor’s proposal includes higher vehicle registration fees and fuel taxes to generate revenue. She argues these measures will provide a reliable funding stream that prevents further deterioration of state highways and local roads. Business Leaders and Municipal Officials Voice Mixed Reactions The proposed tax hike has sparked mixed reactions among Michigan’s business leaders and local government officials. Some support Whitmer’s plan, noting that failing to invest in infrastructure will harm commerce and public safety. Others align with Republicans, urging the state to find funding within the existing budget. Previous Michigan Road Funding Efforts: A History of Political Gridlock Michigan has struggled for years to secure sustainable road funding. In 2015, lawmakers passed a $1.2 billion road funding package, but critics argue it fell short of addressing long-term infrastructure needs. Whitmer’s initial attempt to fund road repairs included a 45-cent-per-gallon gas tax increase, which failed due to widespread opposition. The current debate follows a familiar pattern, with Republicans pushing for reallocation of existing revenue and Democrats advocating for increased funding through new taxation. What’s Next? The Battle Over Road Funding Continues With Whitmer’s budget proposal now before the Legislature, intense negotiations are expected in the coming months. Republican leaders have vowed to fight against tax hikes, while Whitmer insists that new revenue is essential for long-term infrastructure improvements. The outcome of this battle

will determine whether Michigan residents face higher taxes or if lawmakers find a way to fund road repairs through existing means. As the debate continues, Michigan families, business owners, and local governments eagerly await a resolution. Find More Interesting Feature Stories From ThumbWind Michigan Feature Stories - Unveiling the diverse and vibrant people, captivating places, and remarkable events that come together to make the Great Lake State unique and cherished by both residents and visitors alike. Weird Political News - A sarcastic take on official news from around the U.S., exploring the absurdities that often arise in the political landscape while providing a humorous perspective on current events and highlighting the quirks of politicians and policies. Michigan News - News and events from Michigan’s Upper Thumb region worth knowing, including local stories, impactful interviews, and updates on community happenings that shape the culture and lifestyle of the area. Your Turn - Like This, or Loath It - We Want to Hear from You Please offer an insightful and thoughtful comment. We review each response. Follow us to have other feature stories fill up your email box, or check us out on ThumbWind Publications.

0 notes

digitalmore · 18 days ago

Text

#IFTTT #DigitalMore.co

0 notes

weldonwulstein · 24 days ago

Text

What Is Corporate Tax?

Corporate tax, also known as corporation tax or company income tax, is a tax levied by the federal or state government on business profits. In the United States, corporations' profits are subject to a tax rate of 21 percent.

Corporation tax is imposed on a company's taxable income, which is the revenue after all necessary expenses have been deducted. The expenses here include the cost of goods sold, research and development expenses, general and administrative expenses, depreciation, and all other operating expenses of the company. Various countries have various corporate tax rates. Some countries are known for having very low rates and are called tax havens because of this.

Corporate income and capital gains are two common types of corporate tax. Corporate income tax is usually levied on a company's net profits. The rates for corporate income tax can vary significantly from country to country. Within the United States, corporate income tax might vary from state to state. So, businesses need to be aware of the specific rates that apply to them based on where they are located. Capital gains tax applies when corporations sell assets like real estate, stocks, or other investments for a profit. This tax is usually separate from the regular corporate income tax and may be subject to different rates depending on the asset and its length of ownership.

Companies often pay less than the official tax rate due to available deductions, government incentives, and legal tax gaps. These factors reduce the actual tax rate companies pay compared to the nominal rate set before adjustments. Before 2017, the US corporate income tax rate was 35 percent, but after the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) was signed into law by former President Donald Trump in 2017 and was affected in 2018, the current federal voltage tax rate in the United States has now been pegged to a flat 21 percent rate.

One major reason for corporate tax is that it serves as a source of revenue for governments worldwide. Although corporate tax rates have been experiencing a downward turn worldwide over the last twenty years, corporate tax continues to be a key revenue source for the government, especially in developing nations. In certain nations across Africa, Asia, and the Pacific, over 25 percent of their overall tax income is derived from corporate taxes.

In addition to generating revenue for the government, corporate tax is essential for limiting wealth accumulation and promoting an equitable sharing of the tax load across both individuals and companies. Governments often use corporate tax policies to guide how businesses behave in the economy. For instance, they might offer tax breaks to companies that invest in areas like renewable energy, new technologies, or infrastructure. On the flip side, they can impose higher taxes on industries like fossil fuels to discourage activities that harm the environment or public health. These strategies not only help steer the economy in the right direction but also encourage businesses to align with broader goals like sustainability and social responsibility.

Lastly, corporate tax also ensures fairness when it comes to taxes for businesses. The main idea behind corporate tax is to ensure that each company contributes an appropriate share in taxes, ensuring that the responsibility of paying taxes is shared equitably.

#Weldon Wulstein

0 notes

industryforecastnews · 2 months ago

Text

Specialty Chemicals Market Size, Share, Trends And Industry Report, 2030

Specialty Chemicals Market Growth & Trends

The global specialty chemicals market size is estimated at USD 914.4 billion in 2030 and is anticipated to witness a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 5.2% from 2024 to 2030. The growth is attributed to the growing demand from pharmaceuticals, flavors and fragrances, rubber processing, and electronics chemicals, among others. One of the prime growth factors is consumer-driven demand, led by categories such as personal care, food & feed additives, and pharmaceuticals, among others.

Growing trends of rubber products such as long service life tires, high- performance requirements, and others influence the demand for rubber processing chemicals used in tires and industrial products. The market is primarily driven by the increasing use of synthetic rubber products globally. Additionally, growth in medical, footwear, aerospace, construction industries that require rubber products are expected to propel the demand in the near future.

However, the market growth slumped due to European geopolitical conflict which have caused an increase in oil costs, which affected the price of producing chemicals. The market is projected to be significantly impacted by rising oil prices. From the manufacturer’s viewpoint, the impact of rising energy prices resulted in higher chemical prices and has somewhat eroded profits. The import and export of raw materials across regions, particularly in the European region, were impacted by supply interruptions, which in turn had an impact on the market as a whole.

The countries in Latin America regions are expected to witness a trend of increased consumption of food & beverage products manufactured by adding additives to enhance flavor and taste owing to the shifting consumer eating habits and favorable regulatory developments in the region. These factors have led to a strong increase in the demand and the consumption of high-end value-added products like carbonated drinks, desserts, bakery products, among others. Moreover, the presence of major manufacturer such as Cargill Incorporated, General Mills, and Kraft Foods has resulted in novel product developments and capacity expansions in the industry, thus contributing to market growth.

Request a free sample copy or view report summary: https://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/specialty-chemicals-market

Specialty Chemicals Market Report Highlights

Electronic chemical is the second fastest growing product segment with a CAGR of 5.5 % on the account of their use in advanced chemical purification technologies such as filtration, distillation, gas adsorption, and ion exchange to minimize the level of contaminants in high-purity process chemicals

Specialty pulp and paper chemicals product segment will grow significantly during forecast period. The demand is likely to increase with the growing developments, technological advancement, and M&A among the market players

The specialty chemicals landscape has been experiencing noteworthy transformation in recent times. Many integrated and large companies are expanding their portfolios to gain a foothold in the specialty chemicals marketspace

Germany specialty chemicals demand is expected to be high over the coming years owing to increasing consumption of coatings, printing inks, additives, and others in the food, automotive, and wood coating applications. Key players including BASF SE, Evonik Industries AG, and Lanxess are the largest manufacturers in the countr

With surplus feedstock and rising regional demand, prominent manufactures are witnessing lucrative investment opportunities from the Asia Pacific and Middle East region

Specialty Chemicals Market Segmentation

Grand View Research has segmented the global specialty chemicals market based on product, application, end-use, and region:

Specialty Chemicals Product Outlook (Revenue, USD Billion, 2018 - 2030)

Institutional & Industrial Cleaners

Rubber Processing Chemicals

Construction Chemicals

Food & Feed Additives

Cosmetic Chemicals

Oilfield Chemicals

Specialty Pulp & Paper Chemicals

Specialty Textile Chemicals

Water Treatment Chemicals

Electronic Chemicals

Mining Chemicals

Pharmaceutical & Nutraceutical Additives

CASE (Coatings, Adhesives, Sealants & Elastomers)

Other Products

Specialty Chemicals Application Outlook (Revenue, USD Billion, 2018 - 2030)

Institutional & Industrial Cleaners

Rubber Processing Chemicals

Construction Chemicals

Food & Feed Additives

Cosmetic Chemicals

Oilfield Chemicals

Specialty Pulp & Paper Chemicals

Specialty Textile Chemicals

Water Treatment Chemicals

Electronic Chemicals

Mining Chemicals

Pharmaceutical & Nutraceutical Additives

CASE (Coatings, Adhesives, Sealants & Elastomers)

Other Products

Specialty Chemicals Regional Outlook (Revenue, USD Billion, 2018 - 2030)

North America

Europe

Asia Pacific

Latin America

Middle East & Africa

List of Key Players in Specialty Chemicals Market

Solvay

Evonik Industries AG

Clariant AG

Akzo Nobel N.V.

DuPont

Kemira Oyj

Lanxess

Croda International Plc

Huntsman International LL

The Lubrizol Corporation

Albemarle Corporation

Browse Full Report: https://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/specialty-chemicals-market

#Specialty Chemicals Market Size #Specialty Chemicals Market Share #Specialty Chemicals Market Trends #Specialty Chemicals Market Growth

0 notes

rohitpalan · 2 months ago

Text

Virtual Event Platforms Market: Projected Growth and Future Outlook (2023-2033)

In the year 2018, the global virtual event platforms market value was estimated to be US$ 3,751.5 million which registered a CAGR of 14.6% until 2022. As per the FMI market survey report, the demand for virtual event platforms globally reached US$ 6783.2 million in 2022.

In the present year, 2023 the global virtual event platforms market size is estimated to be nearly US$ 7,888 million. It is further poised to register a 16.6% CAGR through 2033 and reach an overall valuation of US$ 36,735.8 million by its end.

The virtual event platforms market saw good growth in the pandemic era owing to lockdown restrictions that were imposed to curb the spread of coronavirus infections across multiple nations in the world.

Technological proliferation has substantially increased across the world and this trend has penetrated all industries and applications. The increasing adoption of cloud-based technologies in businesses has enabled them to deploy multiple virtual solutions to ensure smooth business operations.

However, difficulty in software integration and compatibility issues across multiple platforms are expected to constrain virtual networking platform adoption. The lack of developed internet infrastructure in multiple economies is also expected to slow down market growth on a global scale.

Key Takeaways from the Virtual Event Platforms Market Study Report

The United States is the leading region in the adoption of all types of virtual event platforms in comparison to any other country. The net worth of its present market in the United States is US$ 1,537.3 million and is expected to grow at 13.2% over the next ten years.

Presently Germany is the largest shareholder of the global virtual event platform market in Europe and would generate nearly US$ 463 million in 2023. However, the virtual event platform market in the United Kingdom is expected to witness a year-on-year growth rate of 20.3% through 2033.

Demand for virtual event platforms in China is predicted to grow at a CAGR of 15.4% during the forecast period. By the end of this forecast period, this regional market is expected to reach US$ 1,879.4 million.

Meanwhile, India is anticipated to witness a robust growth rate of 24.5% in the adoption of virtual event platforms in the country. It is further expected to overtake the United States and reach a valuation of US$ 3,027.8 million by the end of the year 2033.

Demand for virtual event platforms is anticipated to be high for SMEs over the coming years at a CAGR of 18.4%.

Event management agencies currently account for a market share of 27.1% in the global virtual event platforms market landscape. While the enterprise or corporate sector is the leading segment and contributes nearly 30% of the market revenue generated globally.

At present, the academic institutions’ segment accounts for a market share of 13.2% in the global virtual event platforms marketplace. This segment is projected to grow at a higher rate of 21.4% in the adoption of virtual event platforms over the forecast years.

Competitive Landscape for the Virtual Event Platforms Market Players

Microsoft Corporation, Cisco Systems, Zoom Video Communications, Cvent Holding Corp., Evenium Inc., SpotMe Inc., Cadence Design Systems, Inc., Hubb LLC., InEvent Inc., KitApps Inc. (Attendify), Boomset Infotainment PVT Ltd., vFairs Inc., ubivent GmbH, and Kestone Inc. among others are some of the major players in the global virtual event platforms market.

Key Segments of Virtual Event Platforms Industry Survey

Virtual Event Platforms Market by Solution:

Software

Integrated Virtual Event Platforms

Standalone Software

Services

Live Event Support

Post Event Processing Services

Event Consulting Services

Support Services

Other Services

Virtual Event Platforms Market by Enterprise Size:

Virtual Event Platforms for SMEs

Virtual Event Platforms for Large Enterprises

Virtual Event Platforms Market by End User:

Virtual Event Platforms for Enterprises or Corporates

Virtual Event Platforms for Event Management Agencies

Virtual Event Platforms for Academic Institutions

Virtual Event Platforms for Trade Show Organizers

Others

Virtual Event Platforms Market by Region:

North America Virtual Event Platforms Market

Latin America Virtual Event Platforms Market

Europe Virtual Event Platforms Market

East Asia Virtual Event Platforms Market

South Asia & Pacific Virtual Event Platforms Market

Middle East & Africa (MEA) Virtual Event Platforms Market

#Virtual Event Platforms Market

0 notes

sublimeobservationarcade · 2 months ago

Text

Why Do We Have Wars?

Why do we have wars and the mass killings and destruction they engender? Men. Power hungry men who see violence as a means to an end. An end they desire, with their cabal in power. Why do we have wars? A current example of this is the Russian invasion of Ukraine, where Mr Putin’s trying to take control, by force, of a neighbouring country. There is no valid justification for killing people, whatever the political situation. Many of us shrug our shoulders and say, well, that is how the world has always been. Perhaps, but it is not good enough and we should never stop striving to progress beyond this reversion to violence and brute force.

“The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) verified a total of 39,081 civilian casualties during Russia's invasion of Ukraine as of October 31, 2024. Of them, 26,919 people were reported to have been injured. However, OHCHR specified that the real numbers could be higher. After Russia annexed Crimea in 2014, Ukraine has seen a military conflict between the government and the Russia-supported separatist regions of Donetsk and Luhansk. OHCHR estimates that between 14,200 and 14,400 people, including civilians and military personnel, were killed in relation to that conflict from April 14, 2014, to December 31, 2021. Of them, at least 3,400 were civilians. “ (https://www.statista.com/statistics/1293492/ukraine-war-casualties/) In comparison, the IDF in Gaza has killed more than 45, 000 Palestinians in 14 months of war. – (https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/12/16/death-toll-from-israels-war-on-gaza-tops-45000)

Photo by ROMAN ODINTSOV on Pexels.com

Why Do We Buy & Sell Sex?

Why do we have prostitution and the commodification of sex in the world? Men. This is a demand driven business being serviced primarily by women under the auspices of pimps and those in the commercial sex sector. Prostitution is known as the oldest profession in existence and for much of that time has been illegal. Why has it continued? Because men want it to, whether they be punters, police, politicians, and those in power, more generally, they maintain it. Sex, when it is truly making love is a beautiful magical thing, outside of this it is empty and second rate. Selling sex is rarely a good thing. “Rod Olsen has co-owned a busy brothel, Club Pleasure in southeast Melbourne, since 2013, and used to manage it. He said the day-to-day operating of the business is much more “boring” than most people think. That’s because the sex industry in Australia is tied up in red tape, with sex service premises facing fines and closure if they don’t carefully follow a strict set of rules. “You have to jump through hoops every year to keep your license,” Mr Olsen said. “ (https://www.realcommercial.com.au/news/the-surprising-reality-of-owning-and-operating-a-brothel) “The market size, measured by revenue, of the Brothel Keeping and Sex Worker Services industry was $214.2m in 2023. The market size of the Brothel Keeping and Sex Worker Services industry increased 19.5% in 2023. The market size of the Brothel Keeping and Sex Worker Services industry in Australia has grown 4.2% per year on average between 2018 and 2023.” (https://www.ibisworld.com/au/market-size/brothel-keeping-sex-worker-services/)

Jeff Bezos by U.S. Air Force is licensed under CC-CC0 1.0

Why Do We Have The Rich & Poor?

Why do we have wealth inequality, which is becoming more extreme? Men. Men are in power everywhere you look. They are the bankers, the world leaders, the police chiefs, the business leaders and they make the rules. Sure, there are a smattering of women bosses here and there but men are, by far, in control of things. Inequality drives crime, poor health, addictions, and disenfranchises citizens from their communities. Inequality hurts children more than any other part of the demographic. If Elon Musk has a greater worth than many other nations let alone millions and millions of ordinary people – what does that tell us about the world? In the United States, they will not elect a woman president. Indeed, Donald Trump a convicted criminal has defeated women presidential candidates both times to achieve the highest office in the land. What does that infer about the most powerful country on earth? Power remains in male hands. “The differences between the average incomes of low, middle and high-income households in Australia are large. Someone in a household that falls in the highest 20% income group has more than twice the average disposable income of the middle 20% income group and six times as much as someone in the lowest 20% income group. The average income of the middle income group is almost three times that of the lowest income group. At the top end, income is even more heavily concentrated. The average income of the highest 5% income group is nearly four times the income of the middle 20% and nine times that of the lowest 20% income groups; while the average income of the highest 1% income group is almost three times that of highest 20% income group. People in the highest 20% income group receive 42% of all national income, which is more than the share of the lowest 60% combined. People in the lowest 20% receive only 6% of all household income, while the second lowest 20% receive 12%.” (https://povertyandinequality.acoss.org.au/inequality/)

Why Do We Have Domestic Violence? Why is Domestic Violence (DV) still at crisis levels in our wealthy Western societies? Men. Men commit acts of violence upon their partners and former partners well above that of women. 75% of reported incidents of DV are committed by men against women. The level of unreported acts would be, I suspect, much higher again. DV remains sticky in our communities because men are in power and they tolerate it. Most of the police forces are made up of men and have been since their beginnings. Similarly, the judicial system as a whole has been predominantly male for centuries. Men see things according to their cultural preconditioning and gender stereotypes. The lack of specific training in this area has been woefully inadequate for the longest time. Yes, there are small steps in the right direction happening but we are coming from a very low base. Getting men out of the positions of authority when dealing with DV is the only way to accelerate positive change. Why do we have wars? A war on women? “1 in 6 women have experienced physical or sexual violence by a current or former partner, while for men it is 1 in 16. 75% of victims of domestic violence reported the perpetrator as male, while 25% reported the perpetrator as female. Overall, 1 in 5 women and 1 in 20 men have experienced sexual violence.” (https://www.missionaustralia.com.au/domestic-and-family-violence-statistics#:~:text=1in6womenhave,itis1in16.&text=75ofvictimsofdomestic,reportedtheperpetratorasfemale.&text=Overall1in5women,menhaveexperiencedsexualviolence.) ©WordsForWeb

Read the full article

0 notes

global-research-report · 16 days ago

Text

Brazed Plate Heat Exchangers Market: Regional Analysis, Competitive Landscape, and Key Players

The global brazed plate heat exchangers market size is expected to reach USD 1.62 billion by 2030, registering a CAGR of 6.3% over the forecast period, according to a new report by Grand View Research, Inc. Rising product demand, particularly on account of cost-effectiveness, lower carbon footprints, and higher energy efficiency is anticipated to drive the industry. According to Centrum Institutional Research, investments in the chemical industry have increased 2.5 times in the last decade, rising to 6,100 crores in FY22. Brazed plate heat exchangers are used in the chemical manufacturing process to cool, heat, and mix chemicals.

The chemical industry’s rapid expansion is projected to be a major driver for market growth. In industrial power generation engines, lubricating oil is required to optimize performance, protect moving parts, and provide optimal operating conditions for internal components. A brazed plate heat exchanger is used for activation units and engines in power generation industrial facilities as it has oil-cooling properties. Rapid industrialization in growing economies and rising investments in commercial, industrial, and residential projects have contributed to a rise in industry growth. Furthermore, increased product demand in the food, oil & gas, and other industries due to lower operational costs will also support market growth.

Brazed plate heat exchangers are utilized in the oil & gas industry for various applications, such as selective gas component extraction, natural gas evaporation, and industrial gas consumption. Brazed plate heat exchangers are now chosen over traditional shell & tube heat exchangers due to their thermal efficiency, compactness, and quicker lead time. Providers of brazed plate heat exchangers are adopting several strategies, including acquisitions, mergers, new product developments, and geographical expansions to enhance their industry presence. For instance, in October 2021, Alfa Laval launched the AC74 to improve energy efficiency and enable the use of refrigerants with a low global warming potential.

Brazed Plate Heat Exchangers Market Report Highlights

The multi-circuit segment is estimated to expand at a steady CAGR over the forecast period owing to advantages, such as a low maintenance cost, smaller footprint, and energy efficiency

The HVAC-R segment accounted for the maximum share in 2022. Due to their lower footprint, brazed plate heat exchangers have become increasingly popular among HVAC equipment manufacturers

The Europe region accounted for the maximum revenue share in 2022. Rising public and private infrastructure investments are expected to drive brazed plate heat exchanger demand in the HVAC & refrigeration industry

Asia Pacific is estimated to advance at the fastest CAGR over the forecast period owing to increased industrial construction and infrastructure activities in emerging nations, such as India, China, Vietnam, and Thailand

In February 2022, Alfa Laval launched AC540 brazed plate heat exchangers, such as ACK540, ACH540, CBP540 and ACP540, which were manufactured in San Bonifacio, Italy

Brazed Plate Heat Exchangers Market Segmentation

Grand View Research has segmented the global brazed plate heat exchangers market on the basis of product, application, and region:

Brazed Plate Heat Exchangers Product Outlook (Revenue, USD Million, 2018 - 2030)

Single-circuit

Multi-circuit

Brazed Plate Heat Exchangers Application Outlook (Revenue, USD Million, 2018 - 2030)

HVAC-R

Chemical & Petrochemical

Food & Beverage

Power Generation

Heavy Industry

Others

Brazed Plate Heat Exchangers Regional Outlook (Revenue, USD Million, 2018 - 2030)

North America

Canada

Mexico

Europe

France

Germany

Italy

Asia Pacific

China

Japan

India

Central & South America

Brazil

Middle East & Africa

Saudi Arabia

UAE

Key players in the Brazed Plate Heat Exchangers Market

Alfa Laval

Danfoss

Kelvion Holding GmbH

SWEP International AB

Xylem Inc.

API Heat Transfer

AIC

Hisaka Works, Ltd.

Charts Industries, Inc.

Order a free sample PDF of the Brazed Plate Heat Exchangers Market Intelligence Study, published by Grand View Research.

#Brazed Plate Heat Exchangers Market

0 notes

industrynewsupdates · 1 month ago

Text

How Influencer Marketing Platforms Are Changing the Digital Marketing Landscape

The global influencer marketing platform market is projected to grow significantly, with an estimated value of USD 97.55 billion by 2030, reflecting a robust compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 23.3% from 2025 to 2030, according to a new report by Grand View Research, Inc. This growth is driven by the rising demand for comprehensive solutions that help manage influencer-generated content, identify social influencers, and analyze the effectiveness of influencer marketing campaigns. Various industries, including fashion, retail, cosmetics, and e-commerce, are increasingly adopting these solutions, which is expected to fuel further market expansion.

Additionally, the market is being further bolstered by the growing popularity of virtual influencers created using Computer-Generated Imagery (CGI). Virtual influencers are equipped with data from multiple platforms and consumer forums to deliver more precise results. The fashion and lifestyle industries, in particular, present significant opportunities for virtual influencers because of their ability to stay up-to-date with rapid fashion trends and exhibit enhanced creativity.

Changes in content consumption patterns are also anticipated to contribute to the market’s growth in the coming years. For example, the rising demand for Over-The-Top (OTT) media services, and the collaboration between OTT platforms and influencers for advertising and promotion, are opening new avenues for influencer marketing platforms.

Moreover, the advent of 5G technology is expected to boost the market as well. With its ability to enhance connectivity and automate marketing processes, 5G will drive increased media consumption. This technology will also amplify the demand for digital video advertising by offering higher bandwidth, which will allow influencers to produce high-quality 4K video content, faster page load speeds, and improved click-through rates for brands.

Gather more insights about the market drivers, restrains and growth of the Influencer Marketing Platform Market

Key Insights from the Influencer Marketing Platform Market Report:

• The influencer management segment is expected to experience the fastest growth during the forecast period. This is due to the growing adoption of influencer marketing strategies by large corporations.

• Small and medium enterprises (SMEs) are projected to grow at the highest CAGR, as they increasingly turn to influencer marketing for more efficient and cost-effective promotional strategies.

• The Asia Pacific region is poised to capture a significant share of the market, growing at a CAGR of over 27% during the forecast period. This is attributed to the rise of influencer marketing startups in countries like China and India.

Browse through Grand View Research's Next Generation Technologies Industry Research Reports.

• Digital Advertising Market: The global digital advertising market size is estimated at USD 488.4 million in 2024 and is expected to grow at a CAGR of 15.4% from 2025 to 2030.

• Digital Remittance Market: The global digital remittance market size was estimated at USD 24.48 billion in 2024 and is projected to grow at a CAGR of 16.7% from 2025 to 2030.

Market Segmentation Overview:

By Application (Revenue, USD Billion, 2018–2030):

• Campaign Management

• Search & Discovery

• Analytics & Reporting

• Influencer Management

By Organization Size (Revenue, USD Billion, 2018–2030):

• Large Enterprises

• SMEs

By End-use (Revenue, USD Billion, 2018–2030):

• Food & Entertainment

• Sports & Fitness

• Travel & Holiday

• Fashion & Lifestyle

• Other Sectors

By Region (Revenue, USD Billion, 2018–2030):

• North America

o U.S.

o Canada

o Mexico

• Europe

o U.K.

o Germany

o France

• Asia Pacific

o China

o Australia

o Japan

o India

o South Korea

• Latin America

o Brazil

• Middle East & Africa

o South Africa

o Saudi Arabia

o UAE

Key Players in the Influencer Marketing Platform Market:

• Upfluence

• AspireIQ, Inc.

• Grapevine Marketing LLC

• Later Influence

• Klear (Meltwater)

• NeoReach

• Traackr, Inc.

• Webfluential

• Hypetap

• CreatorIQ

Order a free sample PDF of the Influencer Marketing Platform Market Intelligence Study, published by Grand View Research.

#Influencer Marketing Platforms Market #Influencer Marketing Trends #Influencer marketing platform market size #Global influencer marketing platform market #Influencer marketing platform market share

0 notes

marketanalysisdata · 4 months ago

Text

Permanent Magnets Market Analysis, Growth Forecast by Manufacturers, Regions and Application to 2030

In 2023, the global permanent magnets market reached a valuation of USD 22.18 billion and is projected to grow at an 8.7% compound annual growth rate (CAGR) from 2024 through 2030. This growth is largely driven by the increasing demand for renewable energy sources like wind and solar power. Permanent magnets play a critical role in enhancing the efficiency of wind turbine generators, a key application area in this sector. Specifically, rare earth magnets such as Neodymium Ferrite Boron (NdFeB) are commonly used in wind turbines due to their high reliability and reduced maintenance needs.

In the United States, the demand for permanent magnets is anticipated to grow at a faster rate than that for ferrite magnets, driven by applications in high-tech sectors like robotics, wearable technology, electric vehicles (EVs), and wind energy. Following the 2008-09 economic downturn, the U.S. automotive industry has seen steady recovery, with a growing emphasis on electric vehicles. Notably, the adoption of plug-in electric vehicles has increased, spurred by innovations from prominent manufacturers including Tesla, Chevy, Nissan, Ford, Audi, and BMW. For example, Tesla began incorporating motors with neodymium magnets in 2018.

Despite this growth, the U.S. faces a supply challenge due to a limited number of domestic manufacturers for permanent motor magnets, leading to substantial imports. In 2023, the U.S. imported around 4 million pounds of automotive parts from China, a majority of which were electric motors. The ongoing trade tensions with China have raised concerns about access to essential rare earth materials. In response, the U.S. government has launched several initiatives, including funding mining projects under the Defense Production Act, aiming to bolster the domestic supply of rare earth materials and reduce dependence on imports.

Gather more insights about the market drivers, restrains and growth of the Permanent Magnets Market

Material Segmentation Insights:

In 2023, ferrite materials dominated the permanent magnet market, capturing a revenue share of approximately 36.0%. Ferrite magnets are predominantly used in motor applications, accounting for over 65% of total ferrite magnet usage. Their application spans automotive motors (19%), appliance motors (14%), HVAC systems (12%), and various industrial and commercial motors (11%) as of 2022. Additional uses of ferrite magnets include loudspeakers, separation equipment, Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), relays & switches, and lifting devices.

The Neodymium Iron Boron (NdFeB) segment is expected to be the fastest-growing segment by volume and revenue in the forecast period. Over the last five years, NdFeB magnets have expanded into various applications, including electric and hybrid vehicle motors, wind power generators, air conditioning compressors and fans, and energy storage systems. Another important material in this market is Alnico, an alloy made from aluminum, nickel, and cobalt. Prior to the discovery of NdFeB in the 1970s, Alnico-based magnets were the strongest available. According to Magnet Applications, Inc., the average energy density (BHmax) of Alnico magnets is 7 MGOe, which is higher than ferrite magnets but significantly lower than that of NdFeB magnets.

Order a free sample PDF of the Permanent Magnets Market Intelligence Study, published by Grand View Research.

#Permanent Magnets Industry #Permanent Magnets Market Share #Permanent Magnets Market Analysis #Permanent Magnets Market Trends

0 notes