#will generate higher revenues. In 2018 | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

zvaigzdelasas · 1 year

Text

“How did we lose to China in Indonesia!?”

This is the question being worriedly debated in government offices and executive suites throughout Japan. [...]

Japan’s project plan called for a five year construction period, including a full one year trial operation period. If construction were to start in 2018 the line would be ready to take passengers in 2023. Total cost would be some Rupiah 64 trillion (JPY 534.6 billion, or $4.5 billion). The Japanese government operating through JICA (the Japanese International Cooperation Agency) would finance 75% of the cost with a 0.1% long term yen loan (terms and conditions in conformity with international convention for concessionary financing). The remaining 25% would have to be raised by the Indonesian government and private enterprises. Importantly, Japan’s concessionary loan would--in accordance with international conventions for official government lending--require an Indonesian government guarantee. Then, in October 2014, as the Japanese agencies and companies prepared for the project, something happened in Indonesia: the swearing in as president of Joko Widoko. Campaigning for office Joko had called for greater infrastructure investment, and it was taken for granted that he was a supporter of the Java high speed rail project. However, Joko had campaigned as a “man of the people” whose priority would be improving welfare for Indonesia’s common and rural people over the more affluent people in the big cities.[...]

on March 26, Joko visited Beijing and met Chinese president Xi Jinping. Xi publicly announced support for the Indonesian high speed project and the two governments signed a memorandum specifying China’s interest in the Jakarta-Bandung line. Well before the Joko-Xi meeting China had entered competition for the project. China’s proposal was for a total project cost of Rupiah 74 trillion (JPY 618.2 billion, $5.2 billion). The cost was higher than Japan’s, but China committed to financing the entire amount at an interest rate of 2%. Moreover, the project would be completed in three years--meaning taking passengers in 2018 [lol]. [...]

That China was awarded the project and Japan rejected seems to owe mainly to China’s willingness to accept the financial risk of the project (i.e., to forego an Indonesian government guarantee and also, thereby, possibly to finesse international ODA norms) and of Japan’s inability or unwillingness to do so. The Toyo Keizei piece makes the point that such projects’ risks are not small. Taiwan is an example. Taiwan’s high-speed rail line enjoys relatively heavy business passenger traffic, which allows relatively expensive ticket prices. But the high prices seem to have discouraged non-business passengers, such that ridership numbers have fallen short of forecasts and revenues have proven insufficient to cover debt service requirements. Compared with Taiwan, Indonesia is a very poor country. Given that business traffic will be relatively limited, ticket prices will have to be set low to be affordable for average citizens (and to avoid political backlash). Generating sufficient cash flow for debt service looks like a formidable challenge. That China is willing to take the risk speaks volumes about how China views infrastructure aid in the Asian region. According to press reports China sweetened its offer in other ways as well, including committing to establish a joint venture with Indonesian firms to produce rolling stock for high-speed rail, electric rail, light rail systems, not only for Indonesia, but also for export to other Asian countries; to transfer related technology [!!]; and also to renovate and rebuild train stations.

2015

75 notes · View notes

phoenixyfriend · 1 year

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

chosetherose · 1 year

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

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

mariacallous · 2 years

Text

After BP’s big results announcement today, it’s clear that major questions remain about Rishi Sunak’s windfall tax. The oil giant registered profits of $8.2bn (£7.1bn) over the past three months, almost triple the profit it made for the same period last year. While BP reports it expects to pay about £700m in windfall tax on its North Sea operations this year, it also plans to spend more than three times that much on a $2.5bn (£2.17bn) share buyback programme, handing surplus cash back to its shareholders instead of using it for renewable investment or lowering prices.

Sunak introduced the tax when he was chancellor, promising to redistribute the extraordinary profits of oil and gas companies to households and businesses in the form of cost of living support. Thanks to extremely generous loopholes – which provide tax breaks in return for investments, such as drilling oil in the North Sea – the energy profits levy looks set to miss out on vital revenues. Shell has made more than $30bn (£26bn) in net income since the start of the year, and still hasn’t paid a single penny in additional tax from the levy in the UK.

As prime minister, Sunak is once again looking at ways to raise tax revenues for the government. Rather than return to the public service cuts of the austerity era, he may turn his focus back to the behaviour of the companies he first targeted in May.

Companies producing oil and gas have been making eye-watering profits this year while average energy bills have doubled since last October, even with the government’s energy price cap holding down costs. This is no coincidence: their windfall profits are the result of sharp increases in the wholesale price of energy and represent direct cash transfers from the pockets of households and businesses.

But instead of channelling all of their profits into productive investments, energy companies have transferred most of their extra cash straight to shareholders in the form of dividends and “buybacks”. Dividends are the primary means of paying shareholders when the company makes a profit, while buybacks reward shareholders by inflating the value of a company’s stock. Share buybacks were illegal in the UK until 1981 because they were considered by many to be a form of market manipulation.

Despite aiming to invest billions in the UK’s “energy system” by 2030, Shell and BPhave transferred more than $28.6bn to shareholders through buybacks this year. The prediction by BP’s chief executive last year that rising oil prices would turn the company into a “cash machine” for its investors was proven right again this morning when it announced the latest round of buybacks. As IPPR and Common Wealth recently showed, in the first half of this year BP spent 10 times as much on transferring cash to shareholders through buybacks as it invested into renewable energy. Shell spent seven times as much on buying back its own shares as it invested into renewables in the same period.

Oil and gas giants are among the most extreme examples of this practice, but they aren’t anomalies. Cash transfers to shareholders have increased across the UK economy since the pandemic ended. Shareholder payouts, which slumped to record lows during Covid, are now 30% higher than they were pre-pandemic. Buybacks have rebounded 20-fold since their lowest point during the pandemic and are now twice as high as their previous peak in 2018.

Astonishingly, shareholders pay less tax on the wealth they earn from owning stocks than working people do on their wages and salaries. Dividends and buybacks are taxed at consistently lower rates than income tax, allowing asset owners to accumulate wealth while paying less tax than workers.

These payouts overwhelmingly benefit the wealthiest members of society. Recent analysis by Common Wealth shows that the top 1% of households overwhelmingly dominate the direct ownership of UK shares. This means that while households struggle with the cost of living crisis, profits are being channelled into the hands of wealthy asset-owners. This situation is unjustifiable. Taxes on shareholder payouts should be raised to ensure that companies are not channelling profits to their investors at a time of national economic crisis.

The Biden administration recently introduced a small tax on share buybacks to fund renewable energy projects and reduce the US government’s deficit. Analysis by IPPR and Common Wealth shows that if the UK government followed suit, it could raise £225m a year. Alternatively, a “windfall” tax on share buybacks could raise up to £11bn in a year, more than half coming from the buybacks of Shell and BP alone. A higher tax would also encourage companies to reinvest their profits into the economy and in the process boost growth, innovation and job creation.

At the same time, the government could close the loopholes that allow shareholders to pay less tax than workers. Bringing taxes on dividends in line with income tax levels would raise £6bn a year.

Targeting the imbalance between growing shareholder payouts and falling household income would allow the government to continue supporting households and businesses without returning to austerity. It’s vital that we prioritise these progressive revenue-raisers over the failed spending cuts of the past.

9 notes · View notes

researchrealmblog · 2 days

Text

Middle East and Africa (MEA) To Observe Explosive Growth of Compressor Market During 2020-2030

Valued at $39.9 billion in 2019, the global compressor market is predicted to generate $48.5 billion revenue in 2030. Furthermore, as per the forecast of P&S Intelligence, a market research firm, the market would advance at a CAGR of 3.1% from 2020 to 2030. The prominent factors driving the progress of the market are the increasing number of food processing companies in several countries, thriving automotive industry, and the growing preference for screw compressors over piston compressors in industries.

Compressors are extensively used in the automotive industry in various applications such as car painting, tire inflation, engine construction, and air conditioning systems. As a result, the boom of the automotive industry, especially in the Asia-Pacific (APAC) region, on account of the growing disposable income of people, rapid technological advancements, and ballooning requirement for electric cars, is causing a sharp surge in the sales of compressors. As per reports, over 2.1 million electric cars were sold globally in 2019.

Electric cars accounted for 2.6% of the total number of cars sold across the world in 2019 and registered as much as 40% Y-o-Y (year-on-year) growth in sales from 2018. Besides this, the surging sales of heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems is also propelling the growth of the compressor market. The sales of these systems are being driven by the increasing construction of commercial and residential buildings and the rapid development of various energy-efficient systems.

Apart from being heavily used in the automotive industry and HVAC systems, compressors are also being extensively used in gas pipelines for maintaining the required pressure and flow. As a result, the growth of the gas pipeline network in various geographical regions, because of the rising requirement for natural gas in domestic settings, soaring population, and increasing industrialization and urbanization, is positively impacting the sales of compressors across the globe.

For example, in 2017, Gazprom developed 121 gas pipelines over an area of 1,148 miles in as many as 32 constituent entities of the Russian Federation. Furthermore, GAIL (India) Limited announced in 2018 that it intends to construct 3,418 miles of new gas pipelines over the next three years. This construction of new pipelines would help the company expand its gas pipeline network. With the expansion of so many pipelines, the demand for compressors would shoot-up in the coming years.

Depending on portability, the compressor market is bifurcated into stationary and portable compressors. Between these, the stationary bifurcation recorded higher revenue growth in the market during 2014—2019. Moreover, this bifurcation would dominate the market in the future years, on account of the rising popularity of stationary compressors across the world. Stationary compressors have greater storage capacities and are more powerful than the portable variants. As a result, they are more widely preferred over portable compressors in various industries.

Globally, the compressor market is predicted to exhibit the fastest growth in the Middle East and Africa (MEA) region in the upcoming years, mainly because of the soaring investments being made in the development of manufacturing facilities and the ballooning production of processed foods in the region. In addition to this, the increasing manufacturing of automobiles in the regional countries such as Egypt, Algeria, Tunisia, and Morocco is further boosting the growth of the market in this region.

Thus, it can be said with full conviction that the market would boom all over the world in the future years, primarily due to the rapid growth of the automotive and oil and gas industries and the extensive usage of compressors in various applications in these industries.

Source: P&S Intelligence

#Compressor Market Share #Compressor Market Size #Compressor Market Growth #Compressor Market Applications #Compressor Market Trends

1 note · View note

ivanmkt100kirara · 3 days

Text

Post #4 - SWOT Analysis

Strength: For the targeted demographic it aims for, which was designed for primarily young men despite the cute endearing looks, it has a unique sort of feel towards it. You don't expect a magazine that is devoted to cute girl stuff to be aimed at a higher audience, but because of the more relaxing and entertaining motive of what is offered, the strength of the band is having a unique position in terms of Japanese magazines, and other work in general. The relatively cheap price and constant release schedule also allows for much needed customer excellence to be present regularly. In a 2007 interview with chief Hiroyuki Kobayashi, it was mentioned that the aforementioned demographic expanded to include younger teenagers, mentioning more universal appeal as a key strength.

Weakness: That being said, given that the magazine and brand is dedicated to just cute girl stuff, an obvious weakness would be that if someone is not interested in those things, the magazine will not appeal to them. It’s a very specific reach. Not everyone is going to be interested in what the world of Manga Time Kirara is going to offer, and some may only like fractions of it, but not the whole package. Someone may enjoy just the series featured in the MAX magazine, and another could only be interested in Carat’s offerings. Of course, any revenue is good for Kirara and subsequently Houbunsha, but if you were in their shoes, I imagine you would want to aim for your average consumer to like all your magazines.

Opportunities: In part to the sponsorship and events that Manga Time Kirara does for the magazine, another benefit is their events to celebrate their characters and franchise. Starting in autumn 2018, Manga Time Kirara has held exhibitions honoring their work, as well as engaging with their audience by providing the chance to explore and getting to know the magazine at heart, which take place almost yearly, or at least every other year. Just last month, Manga Time Kirara Exhibition FINAl, their latest event, took place in honor of the 20th anniversary of the magazine. Lasting for a week in Tokyo, the event served as an exhibition of both Kirara’s history and their legacy, including displaying their past magazines for attendees to see and discussing the impact left behind across the decades. It felt like not just a celebration of the magazine, but also for those who have stuck around throughout the years, showing a great respect between the company and the audience. These exhibitions allow an opportunity for engagement that makes the bond between sides stronger. It makes the brand feel lively.

Threat: In terms of other competition, there really isn't anything out there to combat against it. There are a few other magazines that have tried to do a similar thing, including Comic Cune, which began in 2015, but none have reached the impact and love that Kirara has in Japan. They are the lead in their target market, and it’ll likely be that way for a while. In contrast to other brands or companies or even magazines, the threat is comparably minimal. Most would probably like their threats to be that way, and that's about it for threats.

Sources:

Plachina (8, June 2007) Moe 4 Frames, Good Kanji? Manga Time Kirara Editorial Department Interview. Plachina. Retrieved October 2nd, 2024 https://web.archive.org/web/20100704140425/http://www.p-tina.net/interview/80

Yahoo Japan (20, September 2024) Writing Down 100 Works Such as "K-On!" "Manga Time Kirara Exhibition FINAL" Opens on the 21st. Yahoo Japan. Retrieved October 2nd, 2024 https://news.yahoo.co.jp/articles/d2bd60ffb7228cc743e1022a912cbe1429ffa9e0

0 notes

docvuai · 11 days

Text

Document Automation and the Future of Non-QM Loans with IDP solutions

As margins thin out, lenders are faced with the task of reconfiguring their existing cost structures while looking for alternate revenue streams. The non-QM market is emerging as a lucrative and practical solution for many. COVID-19 halted the boom of non-QM due to the liquidity constraint, however, it regained its market share and finished 2021 with 25 billion worth of originations and is anticipated to double in 2022.

What is a Non-QM Loan?

A loan which has any one of the criteria below will be considered non-QM:

Debt-to-Income greater than 43%

Blemish on FICO credit due to unforeseen circumstances

Self-employed for less than two years

Low income on tax returns

A non-qualified mortgage doesn’t conform to the consumer protection provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act.

For example, if you have a DTI of more than 43% or have erratic income and don’t meet the income verification requirements set out in the Dodd-Frank Act or by most lenders, you are not eligible for a qualified mortgage and may be offered a non-qualified mortgage instead.

How Do Lenders Verify Income for Non-QM Loans?

Non-QM loans don’t adhere to the standards required for QM loans, but that doesn’t mean they are low-quality loans. A study conducted in 2018 shows that the differences in credit score and loan-to-value ratio between non-QM borrowers and QM borrowers are minimal. However, non-QM borrows on average do have a higher DTI ratio.

Non-QM loans provide flexibility for lenders to offer mortgages to people not eligible for QM loans. Nevertheless, lenders still need to substantiate the documents provided, including income sources. They may also want to verify assets or any other information that assures them the borrower will be able to repay the loan. Non-QM loans are not insured, guaranteed, or backed by FHA, VA, Fannie Mae, or Freddie Mac.

The Evolution of the Mortgage Market

The non-QM market shows promise for the future due to the below factors:

Stricter Regulations

Regulatory bodies, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac have made stricter restrictions to reduce possible risks by limiting the percentage of qualified loans offered. This has resulted in a smaller government box, isolating a large section of borrowers who do not conform with the GSE. Moreover, with bank lending restrictions also becoming stricter, this aided non-QM loans to become a more accommodative alternative for loan seekers.

2. Evolving Borrower Profile

There has been a radical change in employment profiles across the country triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic. Entrepreneurship is on the up with a significant percentage of salaried individuals starting their own business due to loss of jobs.

According to statistics, the growth of start-up businesses in the country has risen by 24% from 2019 to 2020. A Forbes report published in 2019 estimated that nearly 30% of Americans are self-employed. This opens the non-QM market to a large number of individuals who become natural candidates for non-QM loans as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac primarily favor the salaried class.

3. Soaring Home Prices

Home prices over the past few years have seen a gradual rise. The mortgage market is generally shifting away from refinances, which made up over 50% of the market in the last 12 months, to a purchase driven market. The demand for large-sized loans has increased – mostly in the form of Non-QM, as the GSE guidelines around investment properties have been disqualifying most candidates for agency loans.

Key Challenges Faced by Lenders in the Non-QM Space

While interest in the market is on the rise, there are challenges for Non-QM loans. Despite the growing interest, the sector does face some basic functional challenges that lenders are required to overcome. The key ones are detailed below-

Managing Error-Prone Manual Processes

Manual processing of Non-QM can lead to errors, longer timelines and higher costs. Non-QM products do tend to be a bit diverse. This makes the requirement of proper technology to streamline tasks and improve efficiency levels across the organization quite a pressing one. Though there are many generic automation solutions available in the market, Non-QM loans require specialized solutions to get the domain intelligence into the system.

2. Mitigating Risks of Frauds

Mortgage fraud has been rising steadily in the last decade. Due to a relaxation in DTI ratio and other criteria, it becomes critical for Non-QM providers to have a robust risk and fraud mitigation mechanism.

3. Dealing with the Changing Cost Structures

When looking at the total number of mortgage units over the last 10 years, the market has fluctuated up or down by up to 50% each year. It’s clear that mortgage is an industry that is subject to high fluctuations. Due to this ambiguity, increasing fixed costs by investing in additional capacity can be a risk.

The pivotal role of specialized document automation technology in overcoming functional challenges

Specialized solutions can help to overcome functional challenges faced in disbursing Non-Qualified Mortgages. Document automation involves using advanced technology such as AI to simplify the lengthy tasks pertaining to disbursing a typical non-QM loan – right from onboarding, processing, underwriting, pricing, packaging, and closing in a cost-effective way.

DocVu.AI – the most innovative AI/ML solution for BFSI* is designed to be workflow-driven and follows the same set of rules that is adhered to when tasks are manually executed. With the use of intelligent algorithms, the solution significantly increases the pace of execution and reduces the probability of costly human errors.

As a result, Non-QM Mortgage lenders gain increased freedom to take on additional workload due to the automation introduced at several points without worrying about capacity constraints. This empowers the lenders to place their undivided focus on core areas for sustainable growth.

*As per IBS Intelligence 2021 ratings

0 notes

umadeochake · 11 days

Text

Global Bottled Water Packaging Market Size: Regional Outlook and Analysis 2024-2036

The recent market research analysis of “Bottled Water Packaging Market: Global Demand Analysis & Opportunity Outlook 2036” by Research Nester delivers an in-depth competitors analysis and a detailed overview of the global bottled water packaging market in terms of market segmentation by water type, material type, and by region over the forecast period, i.e., 2023-2033.

Further, for the in-depth analysis, the report encompasses the industry growth indicators, restraints, supply and demand risk, along with detailed discussion on current and future market trends that are associated with the growth of the global bottled water packaging market. These analyses help organizations identify a continuous flow of growth opportunities to succeed in an unpredictable future. Additionally, the growth opportunities exposed by the market is poised to gain significant momentum in the next few years.

Request Free Sample Copy of this Report @ https://www.researchnester.com/sample-request-4502

Bottled water packaging market to find numerous growth opportunities on the back of growing sales and consumption of bottled water, finds Research Nester

The global bottled water packaging market is estimated to grow majorly on account of the higher trend of tourism boosting the demand for bottled water. In 2022, the number of international arrivals was anticipated to be about 450 million. Additionally, it is estimated that around 80 billion water bottles are produced across the globe annually. Moreover, the increasing consumption of bottled water is further projected to fuel the market growth over the forecast period. it was observed that the bottled water volume reached approximately 55 liters per person in 2022.

The global bottled water packaging market is segmented on the basis of bottle water type into carbonated, still, flavored, and functional bottle water. The diabetes segment is to garner the highest revenue by the end of 2033 by growing at a significant CAGR over the forecast period. The growth of the market can be accounted to higher demand for sparkling water worldwide. As of 2018, the sparkling water sales reached approximately USD 350 million and further estimated to hit around USD 500 million in 2022.

Request for customization@

https://www.researchnester.com/customized-reports-4502

By region, the North America bottled water packaging market is to generate the highest revenue by the end of 2033. This growth is anticipated by rising prevalence of diseases caused by consuming contaminated water such as, diarrhea, hepatitis A and others. For instance, in 2019, around 16 thousand new cases of hepatitis A were observed solely in the South Korea.

The research is global in nature and covers detailed analysis on the bottled water packaging market in North America (U.S., Canada), Europe (U.K., Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Hungary, Belgium, Netherlands & Luxembourg, NORDIC [Finland, Sweden, Norway, Denmark], Poland, Turkey, Russia, Rest of Europe), Latin America (Brazil, Mexico, Argentina, Rest of Latin America), Asia-Pacific (China, India, Japan, South Korea, Indonesia, Singapore, Malaysia, Australia, New Zealand, Rest of Asia-Pacific), Middle East and Africa (Israel, GCC [Saudi Arabia, UAE, Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, Oman], North Africa, South Africa, Rest of Middle East and Africa). In addition, analysis comprising of global bottled water packaging market size, Y-O-Y growth & opportunity analysis, market players’ competitive study, investment opportunities, demand for future outlook etc. has also been covered and displayed in the research report.

This report also provides the existing competitive scenario of some of the key players of the global bottled water packaging market which includes company profiling of Amcor Limited, Berry Global Inc., Aqua Amore Limited, Plastipak Holdings, Ins., Graham Packaging Company, Silgan Holdings Inc., RPC Group Ltd, Alpha Group, Greiner Packaging GmbH, CKS Packaging, Inc., and others. The profiling enfolds key information of the companies which encompasses business overview, products and services, key financials and recent news and developments. On the whole, the report depicts detailed overview of the global bottled water packaging market that will help industry consultants, equipment manufacturers, existing players searching for expansion opportunities, new players searching possibilities and other stakeholders to align their market centric strategies according to the ongoing and expected trends in the future.

Access our detailed report @

https://www.researchnester.com/reports/bottled-water-packaging-market/4502

About Research Nester-

Research Nester is a leading service provider for strategic market research and consulting. We aim to provide unbiased, unparalleled market insights and industry analysis to help industries, conglomerates and executives to take wise decisions for their future marketing strategy, expansion and investment etc. We believe every business can expand to its new horizon, provided a right guidance at a right time is available through strategic minds. Our out of box thinking helps our clients to take wise decision in order to avoid future uncertainties.

Contact for more Info:

AJ Daniel

Email: [email protected]

U.S. Phone: +1 646 586 9123

U.K. Phone: +44 203 608 5919

#Bottled Water Packaging

0 notes

tamanna31 · 17 days

Text

Nanocellulose 2023 Industry – Challenges, Drivers, Outlook, Segmentation - Analysis to 2030

Nanocellulose Industry Overview

The global nanocellulose market size was valued at USD 351.5 million in 2022 and is projected to grow at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 20.1% from 2023 to 2030.

The growth is attributable to the rise in demand for various applications and the shifting trend for using bio-based goods are the factors responsible to drive demand for product. Due to its various qualities, such as increased paper machine efficiency, better filler content, lighter base mass, and higher freeness, nanocellulose is suitable for the producing a wide range of products. The paper industry uses nanocellulose as a prominent sustainable nanomaterial additive owing to its high strength, strong oxygen barrier performance, low density, mechanical qualities, and biocompatibility among the available bio-based resources. Additionally, the construction of materials, aqueous coating, and others are some of the major uses of nanocellulose composite materials.

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

The U.S. is the largest market for nanocellulose in North America contributing a considerable amount to global revenue. People in the U.S. are concerned about their health, which has greatly aided the use of MFC (Micro fibrillated Cellulose) and CNF (Cellulose nanofibers) in the production of functional food products thus increasing the demand for nanocellulose in the country.

The food & beverage, and paper & pulp industry are majorly driving product growth in the country. Demand in the country is majorly driven by the increasing awareness and insistence on highly advanced sustainable products along with paper-based packaging in the food & beverage industries.

The pulp & paper business heavily utilizes nanocellulose as an ingredient to create light and white paper that further accelerates the market growth. Owing to its benign qualities it is used in healthcare applications such as biomedicines and personal hygiene products. Additionally, owing to its superior adsorption abilities, Nanocellulose is a suitable constituent for sanitary napkins and wound dressings. The market has been further stimulated by expanding product research activity.

Nanocellulose Market Segmentation

Grand View Research has segmented the global nanocellulose market report based on the type, application, and region:

Type Outlook (Revenue, USD Million; Volume, Kilotons; 2018 - 2030)

CNF (NFC, MFC)

Bacterial Cellulose

CNC

Application Outlook (Revenue, USD Million; Volume, Kilotons; 2018 - 2030)

Pulp & Paperboard

Composites

Pharmaceuticals & Biomedical

Electronics

Food & Beverages

Others (Textile, Paints, cosmetics, Oil & Gas, Cement)

Regional Outlook (Revenue, USD Million; Volume, Kilotons; 2018 - 2030)

North America

Canada

Mexico

Europe

Germany

Netherlands

France

Finland

Norway

Sweden

Switzerland

Spain

Asia Pacific

China

India

Japan

South Korea

Australia

Thailand

Malaysia

Singapore

Central & South America

Brazil

Colombia

Chile

Middle East & Africa

Saudi Arabia

South Africa

Israel

Iran

Browse through Grand View Research's Renewable Chemicals Industry Research Reports.

The global chondroitin sulfate market size was valued at USD 1.29 billion in 2023 and is projected to grow at a CAGR of 3.6% from 2024 to 2030.

The global pine-derived chemicals market size was estimated at USD 5.82 billion in 2023 and is projected to grow at a CAGR of 4.4% from 2024 to 2030.

Key Companies & Market Share Insights

The market is consolidated owing to the existence of a few major players in the market including Cellu Force, Fiber Lean, Kruger INC., and others. Manufacturers operating in the market engage in strategic mergers & acquisitions, geographical expansion, product developments, and innovation in order to strengthen their positions, increase profitability, and simultaneously generate innovations and advancements.

When compared to other nanotechnology high-performance materials, nanocellulose offers a lower cost and the potential to replace many products made from petrochemicals. It has exceptional qualities like biodegradability, transparency, flexibility, high mechanical strength, and barrier characteristics, among others. Growing interest in health issues and the food & beverage industries will both have a significant impact on the market share in the years to come.

Consequently, the focus on manufacture of the product has increased owing to increasing awareness about health and environmental concerns arising from harmful chemical products. The global market has witnessed several new product developments, mergers & acquisitions and joint ventures due to several industrial challenges. Some prominent players in the global nanocellulose market include:

Cellu Force

Fiber Lean

NIPPON PAPER INDUSTRIES CO., LTD.

Kruger INC

Borregaard AS

CelluComp

Melodea Ltd

Blue Goose Refineries

GranBio Technologies

Stora Enso Biomaterials

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

0 notes

adityarana1687-blog · 26 days

Text

Coronary Stents Market Size To Reach $12.10 Billion By 2030

The global coronary stents market size is expected to reach USD 12.10 billion by 2030, according to a new report by Grand View Research, Inc. The market is expected to expand at a CAGR of 3.1% from 2023 to 2030. Increasing adoption of minimally invasive surgeries and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) procedures is expected to drive the market in the coming years. For instance, according to The Korean Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, the proportion of PCI for Coronary Artery Disease (CAD) was 78% in 2016, and the country-specific PCI proportion was 96%, which was significantly higher than the global average. As a result, the unprecedented growth in CAD incidence, along with an increase in the proportion of PCIs done in these CAD patients, is expected to raise demand for an effective coronary stent technology.

Technological advancement and the launch of 2nd generation drug-eluting stents are further fueling the growth. For instance, Abbott Laboratories Laboratories' XIENCE Sierra became the first DES approved for CTO indications in the US in May 2018. Medtronic followed suit in early 2019, obtaining FDA approval for the use of its Resolute range of DES in CTO indications. In addition, many companies have recently launched newer versions of their coronary stent systems in the US, notably Boston Scientific's Synergy Megatron in January 2021 and Abbott Laboratories Laboratories' XIENCE Skypoint in June 2021.

The global COVID-19 pandemic has had a negative impact on the market for coronary stents. According to guidelines from physician societies throughout the world, procedure deferrals primarily impacted less urgent or elective procedures for eligible patients. ACC's ((American College of Cardiology) 2020 guidance, for instance, recommended postponing non-urgent procedures like CTO interventions and surveillance angiography during the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic. These guidelines have influenced physicians' treatment decisions throughout the world. Additionally, according to the European Society of Cardiology recommendations, all emergency and urgent PCI procedures (treatment of STEMI, high or intermediate risk NSTEMI, cardiogenic shock, and unstable angina) should be continued during the peak of the pandemic and in the subsequent resurgence of COVID-19, while only elective PCI procedures (CTO interventions or treatment of NYHA II symptoms) should be deferred.

Moreover, recovery of the coronary stent market from the COVID-19 pandemic is anticipated to be aided by the continuous performance of urgent PCI procedures and an increase in capacity utilization for performing non-elective procedures.

The coronary stent market is driven by reimbursement coverage provided by the general public Center for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) and private payers. The coverage is availed under national coverage determination for carotid artery stenting, including products and service providers. From January 2020, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) proposed reimbursement for some angioplasty and stenting procedures performed in the ambulatory surgical centers (ASC), which is expected to boost the market revenue over the forecast period.

Request a free sample copy or view the report summary: Coronary Stents Market Report

Coronary Stents Market Report Highlights

Overall PCI procedure volumes treated with coronary stent devices will rise as the aging population and the PCI-eligible patient population grows, owing to new technologies and increased ability to treat severe lesions

The bioresorbable vascular scaffold segment is expected to be the second fastest growing segment due to its several advantages in treating coronary artery disease including temporary placement in the patient heart, ease for future treatments as it degrades over 3 years, and it dissolve completely in the patient body.

Favorable clinical trials have demonstrated that DES is better than standard BMS. As a result, in 2021, DES has dominated the market

North America dominated the coronary stents market and accounted for the largest revenue share of 32.6% in 2022 and is anticipated to witness the same trend over the foreseeable future.

The Asia Pacific market for coronary stents is expected to exhibit the fastest growth rate in terms of revenue generation. This market is driven by some additional variables of enhanced screening for CAD, economic growth, regulatory updates, and notable beneficial reimbursement in some countries such as Australia and South Korea.

Coronary Stents Market Segmentation

Grand View Research has segmented the global coronary stents market based on product, and region:

Coronary Stents Product Outlook (Revenue, USD Million, 2018 - 2030)

Bare Metal Stents (BMS)

Drug-Eluting Stents (DES)

Biodegradable

Non-Biodegradable

Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold

Coronary Stents Regional Outlook (Revenue, USD Million, 2018 - 2030)

North America

U.S.

Canada

Europe

Germany

France

Italy

Spain

Sweden

Norway

Denmark

Asia Pacific

Japan

China

India

Australia

Thailand

South Korea

Latin America

Brazil

Mexico

Argentina

Middle East and Africa

Saudi Arabia

South Africa

UAE

Kuwait

List of Key Players of Coronary Stents Market

Abbott

Medtronic

Boston Scientific Corporation

Terumo Corporation

B Braun Melsungen AG

Biotronik

Stentys SA

MicroPort Scientific Corporation

C. R. Bard, Inc.

Cook Medical

#Coronary Stents Market

0 notes

ontogen1 · 1 month

Text

It is 2024 and it isn’t whether you should have a mobile-friendly site or not, but you should know how optimized it should be for the user. There are currently 4.88 Billion smartphone users in the world today which is equivalent to 60.42% of the global population that owns a Smartphone. As per Exploding topics, More than 60% of all online traffic is from mobile devices globally. So it’s high time that you made sure your business website is working optimally on your smartphones.

How much has mobile usage risen?

The demand for an adaptable business website rises from the fact that more than 60% of web traffic will be linked to smartphones by 2024, meaning you risk losing many clients if yours is not well designed for this specific group. Any kind of business will now have to adapt to meet their users where they are currently, at their phones. Without a mobile-friendly website, business could risk loss of potential customers as well as reducing its own visibility on search engines like Google by more than half. Coming to that, let us see the importance of mobile-friendly websites in 2024.

Having SEO:

The most basic requirement of having a mobile-friendly website, or any other website in general is Search Engine Optimization. Having a design that will adhere to your fingers on a smartphone can increase your search rankings. Since 2018, surfing websites on mobile has been the standard, and since then Google has used the mobile version for indexing and ranking. Your SEO efforts will showcase results properly in a mobile-friendly website and lead to higher visibility and more traffic, be it organic or paid.

Perfect User Experience:

A user-friendly mobile site helps users to move easily, have faster download speed and better readability. Users usually expect consistency when they access the website either through a computer or mobile phone. If your website forces people to pinch and zoom in too many times during navigation, they will most likely get out due to slow incoming time. Making one’s website simpler and making it responsive across different screens sizes will make the website more accessible on mobile.

Increased Conversion Rates

Increasing your sales relies on a smooth and intuitive mobile experience. If it is easy for clients to go from one page to another or they can find the necessary information, they will easily get converted into customers just by a mere fact that they could easily access through their phone. This is noticeable in e-commerce nowadays, as most of the transactions take place over smartphones, it puts more pressure on e-commerce sites to have them functioning smoothly on different types of mobile devices. It is possible to streamline the purchase process and boost revenue through mobile optimization.

Competitive Advantage:

By having a mobile-friendly website in today’s digital marketplace, you are ahead of the competition. Due to this, businesses prioritize mobile optimization in order to reach the ever-increasing population of mobile internet users thus capturing more market share, which ultimately helps in mobile marketing. Those that fail to cater for the needs of the audience risk losing them in comparison with their competitors who might have better mobile experience. So get the upper hand and build a solid mobile friendly website to amplify your sales.

Building Brand Credibility:

Having created a website that can be effectively used from your smartphone, rest assured you’re making a big step towards showing how responsive and up-to-date your business is. It also conveys the message that you are paying attention both to the latest technological tendencies and consumer requirements, which has a favorable impact on your brand reputation. You’re building a strong credibility by staying ahead of the curve. It will also build trust towards customers who are more willing to believe and react with these organizations.

Optimize your page speed:

Your user aka potential customer will have to leave your website if it is slow and lacks information. You can optimize your website by adding images that take less space than other features because if the file type is too high, it is going to be slow for users to access. The other ways include removing any unnecessary code or whitespace that is there on HTML or Javascript as it will make users use your website smoothly. What features will make your website mobile friendly? Responsive Design: Make sure your site automatically fits all screen sizes by utilizing responsive design such that it provides the same experience for everyone using different devices. Simple to Navigate on Websites: Showcasing clear and understandable menus makes user to have a smooth experience. For example, McDonald's burger menus make it easier for users to locate information on a website without overloading it with too much data. Readable Content: Make sure that the font size is big enough for people to read without having to enlarge it. Also, ensure that the buttons and links are simple to tap so that it is less probable that the user will be annoyed. We are a leading digital marketing agency where we create website designs, develop new websites, and optimize old ones. If you are someone who's looking to optimize your website or need any help with your website, feel free to connect with us at [email protected] Subscribe to us for more such blogs.

#mobilefriendly #website #contentmarketing #marketingstrategies #seo #ontogendigital

0 notes

industrynewsupdates · 1 month

Text

Battery Recycling Market Size, Share, Growth And Analysis Report 2024-2030

The global battery recycling market size was estimated at USD 1.83 billion in 2023 and is expected to grow at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 37.6% from 2024 to 2030.

The industry is expected to grow rapidly during the forecast period owing to increasing popularity of electric vehicles (EVs) and renewable energy storage systems leading to a higher demand for batteries, and, in turn, driving the need for recycling. Governments globally are implementing regulations to promote the recycling of batteries and reduce environmental impact, which is expected to boost industry growth.

Gather more insights about the market drivers, restrains and growth of the Battery Recycling Market

The U.S. emerged as the largest market in North America in 2023. Increasing sales of EVs in the U.S. owing to the formulation of supportive federal policies, such as the Responsible Battery Recycling Act of 2022 California, and presence of leading industry players are expected to drive demand for batteries in the country over the forecast period. Responsible Battery Recycling Act of 2022 California instructs each battery retailer in the state to have a system for collection of used rechargeable batteries for recycling and reusing purposes.

The U.S. has emerged as a growing market for the recycling of li-ion batteries owing to the presence of large-scale li-ion recycling facilities in the country. For instance, Li-cycle Corp. inaugurated its new li-ion recycling facility with 120,000 square feet of warehousing space. This facility can process 10,000 tons of battery material for electric vehicles annually. The company possesses the capacity to recycle 60,000 electric vehicle batteries.

Battery Recycling Market Segmentation

Grand View Research has segmented the global battery recycling market report based on chemistry, application, and region:

Chemistry Outlook (Volume, Tons; Revenue, USD Million, 2018 - 2030)

• Lithium-ion

• Lead Acid

• Nickel

• Others

Application Outlook (Volume, Tons; Revenue, USD Million, 2018 - 2030)

• Transportation

• Consumer Electronics

• Industrial

Regional Outlook (Volume, Tons; Revenue, USD Million, 2018 - 2030)

• North America

o U.S.

o Canada

o Mexico

• Europe

o Germany

o U.K.

o France

o Italy

o Spain

o Poland

o Netherlands

• Asia Pacific

o China

o Japan

o South Korea

o Taiwan

o India

o Indonesia

o Malaysia

o Thailand

o Vietnam

o Australia

• Central & South America

o Brazil

o Argentina

o Chile

• Middle East & Africa

o UAE

o Saudi Arabia

o South Africa

Browse through Grand View Research's Power Generation & Storage Industry Research Reports.

• The global portable power station market size was estimated at USD 0.61 billion in 2023 and is estimated to grow at a CAGR of 16.7% from 2024 to 2030.

• The global generator paralleling switchgear market size was estimated at USD 1.71 billion in 2023 and expected to grow at a CAGR of 8.7% from 2024 to 2030.

Key Companies & Market Share Insights

Market is highly competitive and consolidated due to the presence of a large number of well-established players. Dominant trend in operations of these battery recycling companies includes collaborations, mergers & acquisitions, and expansions, which facilitate competition in the industry.

In November 2023, Redwood Materials announced their expansion for battery recycling in line with the increasing demand for recycling of electric vehicle batteries.

Key Battery Recycling Companies:

• Call2Recycle

• Exide Technologies

• Gravita India Ltd.

• Glencore

• Cirba Solutions

• American Battery Technology Company

• Gopher Resource

• East Penn Manufacturing Co.

• Aqua Metals

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

#Battery Recycling Market #Battery Recycling Industry #Battery Recycling Market size #Battery Recycling Market share #Battery Recycling Market analysis

0 notes

kvibestudios · 2 months

Text

"Hollywood vs Indie: A Deep Dive into Audience Differences"

Examining the Differences Between Audiences of Hollywood Blockbusters and Independent Films

Understanding the audience is crucial when analyzing the viewing patterns for Hollywood blockbusters in contrast to independent films. Each category attracts distinct demographics, preferences, and behaviors. This blog explores these contrasts, offering insights backed by comprehensive research on demographic profiles, viewer choices, and market trends.

Demographic Differences

As per a 2016 report by the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), the average age of a Hollywood moviegoer is notably younger compared to that of the indie film audience. Typically, a Hollywood film viewer is around 30 years old, while an indie filmgoer averages 45 years old. Looking closer at the age demographics, 62% of Hollywood’s audience is under 35, versus 38% for indie films. Gender also differs: Hollywood's viewership is predominantly female (52% female, 48% male), whereas indie films see a slightly more male audience (51% male, 49% female).

These demographic distinctions are vital for filmmakers targeting specific audiences. Younger viewers might favor the high-energy, visually spectacular Hollywood movies, while older, more thoughtful audiences may appreciate the narrative complexity found in indie films.

Viewer Preferences

A study by comScore reveals that indie film audiences tend to be more educated. Approximately 61% possess a college degree or higher, compared to 45% of Hollywood audiences, indicating a tendency for indie viewers to prefer intellectually engaging content. Furthermore, indie film fans are frequent moviegoers; 44% watch 10 or more movies annually, in contrast to 25% for Hollywood’s audience.

Genre preferences also vary significantly. Indie film audiences generally lean towards dramas and documentaries, genres that often provide substantial narratives and real-world insights. Conversely, Hollywood audiences prefer action and comedies, seeking thrilling and light-hearted entertainment. These preferences allow content creators to tailor their movies to better align with their targeted audiences.

Market Analysis

Market trends highlight the clear differences between Hollywood and indie film viewership. A BusinessWire report indicates that the global independent film market is forecasted to grow at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 6.5% from 2018 to 2023. This growth is fueled by the increasing popularity of streaming services, which provide indie films with a wider reach. On the other hand, the Hollywood box office has experienced slight revenue declines in recent years, hinting at a shift in viewing habits likely influenced by the diverse and accessible content available on streaming platforms.

Segmenting Film Audiences

Proper audience segmentation benefits filmmakers and distributors alike. The Film Festival Alliance has identified six primary audience segments for independent films:

Art House Aficionados: Educated, affluent, frequent moviegoers who favor foreign, independent, and documentary films.

Cinephiles: Deeply passionate about films, often attending multiple film festivals.

Festival Film Buffs: Regular attendees of film festivals but also enjoy mainstream movies.

Mainstream Movie Lovers: Prefer mainstream films but are open to independent films.

Indie Film Curious: Occasionally watch films and are developing an interest in indie films but require more information.

Infrequent Moviegoers: Rarely visit theaters and show limited interest in indie films.

Segmenting audiences helps filmmakers precisely target their marketing strategies, optimizing engagement and box-office success.

Viewer Preference Trends

Recent findings from Nielsen point to a growing segment of "indie-curious" viewers. These individuals show interest in independent films but may not be regulars at film festivals. They often discover indie films through streaming platforms and social media, presenting filmmakers with a strategic opportunity to market their content via these channels.

Another significant trend is the increasing demand for diverse and inclusive storytelling. Films featuring underrepresented groups are performing exceptionally well at the box office. Catering to this demand can expand the audience reach and enhance the cultural relevance of a film.

Market Analysis: Mainstream vs Indie Audiences

Although the number of mainstream Hollywood viewers surpasses that of indie films, the indie audience is growing at a faster pace. The MPAA highlights the decline in frequent moviegoers (those attending the cinema at least once a month) alongside an increase in occasional moviegoers (those attending a few times a year). This shift offers indie films a chance to attract a burgeoning segment seeking diverse and innovative content available through various digital platforms.

Actionable Insights

Understand your target audience: Use demographic data and viewer preferences to segment your audience and tailor your marketing efforts accordingly.

Leverage streaming services: With the rise in popularity of streaming platforms, consider releasing films on services like Netflix or Hulu to reach a wider audience.

Embrace diversity and inclusion: Incorporate diverse perspectives into filmmaking, as films with underrepresented groups are performing well at the box office.

Engage with your audience: Use social media and other digital platforms to connect with your audience and build a community around your film.

In conclusion, Hollywood and independent films attract different audiences with unique demographic traits, preferences, and viewing habits. Understanding and leveraging these differences can aid filmmakers and distributors in effectively targeting their marketing strategies, enhancing audience engagement, and driving box-office success.

#FilmIndustry #ViewerPreferences #IndieFilms #HollywoodMovies #AudienceAnalysis

For more in-depth insights into film production, visit https://www.kvibe.com

0 notes

crimsonpublishersminingscience · 3 months

Text

The South Asian Shipbreaking Industry and its Unsafe Mining Practices

In the last two decades, India, Bangladesh and Pakistan have been the market leaders for breaking ships[1]. Before 2000, developed countries had their own shipbreaking industries. Due to risks involved in the process and the high level of safety standards under their established laws, it became too expensive to retain the shipbreaking industry in the developed countries. By the end of 20th century, shipbreaking was gradually shifted mainly to Turkey, China, India, Bangladesh and Pakistan[2]. At present, China and Turkey have higher shipbreaking costs than South Asia and therefore Turkey and China have not been the preferred destinations for the last ten years. The reason for this is that Turkey’s labour cost is twenty-five times higher than Bangladesh and India (around $17.52 per day in Turkey compared to less than $1 in Bangladesh per day)[3]. China on the other hand has invested a large amount of capital in building dry docks for shipbreaking[1], whereas India, Bangladesh and Pakistan have low cost of labour, and they use the cheaper beaching method instead of dry dock[2]. Dry dock is expensive but causes less environmental damage as wastes can be removed safely from the ships[3]. In contrast, the beaching method of shipbreaking is cheaper in terms of establishment costs but is a major concern for a sustainable shipbreaking as it allows toxic substances to escape directly into the seawater. By using the cheaper beaching method and combined with the low cost of labour, the three South Asian countries control 90% the global shipbreaking business. In fact, the price offered to shipping companies by India, Bangladesh and Pakistan differs significantly from the price offered by Turkey and China[4]. A large container ship that weighs around 25,000 Light Displacement Tonnages (LDTs)[5] can earn a shipping company about $11.80 million from a ship purchased by India, but only $7 million from Turkey and $5.25 million from China[6]. In 2018, the three South Asian countries jointly broke 518 ships out of total 744 ships that had been broken worldwide. In terms of LDT, this amounts to 90.4% of ships that required breaking[7]. The shipbreaking industry is an economic necessity for the South Asian countries. These countries rely on the shipbreaking industry for their principal source of steel scraps and generate employment for their people. It contributes to 10-15% of overall steel production of India and Pakistan and 60% for Bangladesh[8]. The profit from breaking one ship in Pakistan is $16,600 and $921,400 in Bangladesh[1]. The high profit that is generated from the shipbreaking materials makes a significant contribution towards the government tax revenues. For example, the Bangladesh government earns about $86 million per year as tax revenue from the shipbreaking industry[2].

Read More About This Article: https://crimsonpublishers.com/amms/fulltext/AMMS.000607.php

Read More About Crimson Publishers: https://crimsonpublishers.com/

#peer review journals #crimson publishers #nanomaterial #open-pit mining #minerals

0 notes