The request came as TikTok and the Biden administration filed opposing briefs to the court, in which the company argued the court should strike down a law that could ban the platform by January 19 while the government emphasised its position that the statute is needed to eliminate a national security risk. “President Trump takes no position on the underlying merits of this dispute. Instead, he respectfully requests that the court consider staying the Act’s deadline for divestment of January 19 2025, while it considers the merits of this case,” said Mr Trump’s amicus brief, which supported neither party in the case. The filings come ahead of oral arguments scheduled for January 10 on whether the law, which requires TikTok to divest from its China-based parent company or face a ban, unlawfully restricts speech in violation of the First Amendment. Earlier this month, a panel of three federal judges on the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit unanimously upheld the statute, leading TikTok to appeal to the Supreme Court. The brief from Mr Trump said he opposes banning TikTok at this junction and “seeks the ability to resolve the issues at hand through political means once he takes office”.Russia uses Bitcoin for international payments – Reuters
South Korean lawmakers impeach second president in two weeks5 top tech gifts for the holidays
Stock market today: Dow drops over 300 points amid a tech stock rout
NoneThe is a first-of-its-kind tournament that, in FIFA’s dreams, is precisely what its name suggests. It’s a 32-team extravaganza modeled after soccer’s actual , with one key difference: top professional clubs, such as Real Madrid — rather than national teams, such as Spain — are the contestants. It is scheduled to begin June 15, 2025, in the United States. And when it does, , it will be “innovative, inclusive, groundbreaking and truly global.” It represents a novel concept in sports, where the vast majority of pro teams compete exclusively within national or continental borders; the Club World Cup, on the other hand, will feature multinational pro teams — soccer’s equivalent of the New York Knicks or Kansas City Chiefs — from Europe, the Americas, Africa, Asia and Oceania. It is, in theory, a true world championship. But it’s . Its launch has been dogged by organizational missteps, financial battles, player workload concerns and resistance from the European soccer establishment. The resistance has been so fierce that, until recently, some insiders questioned whether the 2025 tournament would even happen at all. Now, though, puzzle pieces are squirming into place. have been chosen. A has been signed. The at 1 p.m. ET, is near. The Club World Cup is happening. And the following is an attempt to explain it, beginning with the basics, then the complexities. The Club World Cup opens June 15, 2025, at Hard Rock Stadium in Miami Gardens, Florida. It concludes July 13 with the in East Rutherford, New Jersey. The full schedule — dates, locations, matchups, kickoff times — should be released soon after Thursday’s draw. The 12 U.S. venues set to host games are: • Mercedes-Benz Stadium in Atlanta • Bank of America Stadium in Charlotte, North Carolina • TQL Stadium in Cincinnati • The Rose Bowl in Pasadena, California • Hard Rock Stadium in Miami Gardens, Florida • GEODIS Park in Nashville • MetLife Stadium in East Rutherford, New Jersey • Camping World Stadium in Orlando, Florida • Inter&Co Stadium in Orlando, Florida • Lincoln Financial Field in Philadelphia • Lumen Field in Seattle • Audi Field in Washington Which stadium are you looking forward to visiting? 🏟️ — FIFA Club World Cup (@FIFACWC) Most are on or near the U.S. east coast because of its proximity to Europe, which will send 12 teams, and which boasts coveted media markets. East-coast games will minimize travel (for teams and fans) and inconvenient time differences (for TV viewers). FIFA also made this decision in coordination with CONCACAF, soccer’s North and Central American governing body, which will stage its continental championship, the Gold Cup, simultaneously and . The 32 clubs set to participate are ... Manchester City (England), Chelsea (England), Real Madrid (Spain), Atlético Madrid (Spain), Bayern Munich (Germany), Borussia Dortmund (Germany), Juventus (Italy), Inter Milan (Italy), PSG (France), Benfica (Portugal), Porto (Portugal), RB Salzburg (Austria) Inter Miami (U.S.), Seattle Sounders (U.S.), Monterrey (Mexico), Pachuca (Mexico), León (Mexico) Flamengo (Brazil), Palmeiras (Brazil), Fluminense (Brazil), Botafogo (Brazil), River Plate (Argentina), Boca Juniors (Argentina) Al Hilal (Saudi Arabia), Ulsan (South Korea), Urawa Reds (Japan), Al Ain (UAE) Al Ahly (Egypt), Wydad (Morocco), Espérance (Tunisia), Mamelodi Sundowns (South Africa) Auckland City (New Zealand) In 2023, the Club World Cup’s 32 berths to Europe (12), South America (6), CONCACAF (4), Africa (4), Asia (4), Oceania (1) and the host nation (1). To earn those berths, there were — one simple, one complicated. The simple path was via continental championships. Every club that won the UEFA Champions League, the Copa Libertadores, the CONCACAF Champions Cup, or the Asian and African equivalents between 2021 and 2024 qualified automatically. Beyond those champions, slots were filled by a , but with a caveat: only the top two clubs from any given country could qualify via rankings. So, even though Liverpool ranked eighth in Europe, the Reds missed out because Man City and Chelsea won the Champions League in 2023 and 2021. Barcelona, meanwhile, ranked two spots behind Atlético Madrid — because Barca underperformed in the Champions League over the last four seasons. Salzburg ranked 18th, but snuck in because others from Spain, Italy and Germany also ran up against the two-per-country cap. In South America, four different Brazilian clubs swept the Libertadores titles. Argentine giants Boca and River claimed the two additional seats at the table. In Africa, Al Ahly won three of four Champions League titles, so Espérance and Mamelodi Sundowns joined them and Wydad in the field. In CONCACAF, things were straightforward, with four distinct winners ... except for the “host nation slot.” FIFA never said how a team could claim that slot — until October when FIFA president Gianni Infantino appeared in South Florida, unannounced on the final day of the MLS regular season, to . It’s Thursday at 1 p.m. ET. You can watch a live stream on , or . (As of Wednesday morning, there were no plans to broadcast it on cable or over-the-air TV in the U.S.) Much like a , but with . The 32 teams have been , in part based on rankings, in part based on geography: Manchester City (Europe), Real Madrid (Europe), Bayern Munich (Europe), PSG (Europe), Flamengo (South America), Palmeiras (South America), River Plate (South America), Fluminense (South America) Chelsea, Borussia Dortmund, Inter Milan, Porto, Atlético Madrid, Benfica, Juventus, RB Salzburg (all Europe) Al Hilal (Asia), Ulsan (Asia), Al Ahly (Africa), Wydad (Africa), Monterrey (CONCACAF), León (CONCACAF), Boca Juniors (South America), Botafogo (South America) Urawa Reds (Asia), Al Ain (Asia), Espérance (Africa), Mamelodi Sundowns (Africa), Pachuca (CONCACAF), Seattle Sounders (CONCACAF), Auckland City (Oceania), Inter Miami (CONCACAF) The pots are set for the draw! 🔐 — FIFA Club World Cup (@FIFACWC) The draw begins with Pot 1. The first team picked goes into Group A, Position 1; the next team picked goes into Group B, Position 1; and so on. After all eight groups are filled with a Pot 1 team, a similar procedure empties Pot 2, then Pot 3, and finally Pot 4 — but subject to the following “ ”: Man City and Real Madrid, as the top two teams, must go to groups whose winners will stay on opposite sides of the knockout bracket. (One side is Group A, C, E and G; the other is B, D, F and H.) Bayern Munich and PSG, as seeds Nos. 3 and 4, will also be sent to opposite sides. And they’ll be placed to ensure that none of the four European superpowers could meet before the semifinals if they all win their groups. (The same exact principles apply to Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4 from South America.) The top four teams from Pot 2 — Chelsea, Dortmund, Inter and Porto — must be placed in groups with a South American team from Pot 1. The rest of Pot 2 — Atléti, Benfica, Juve and Salzburg — will be paired with a fellow European club from Pot 1. Teams from the same country can’t be in the same group — meaning Atlético Madrid can’t draw Real Madrid. Beyond the four pairings of European teams, no two clubs from the same continent can be grouped together. Inter Miami will get Position 4 in Group A, and Seattle will get Position 4 in Group B, so that they can play the opening games of the tournament (against teams from Pot 3). The Club World Cup will run just like past men’s World Cups, with the 32 teams divided into eight groups of four. The top two in each group will advance to the Round of 16. From there, single-elimination games will decide a champion. For roughly two decades, FIFA ran another tournament also called the Club World Cup. That, though, was a shorter seven-team tournament played annually in the winter, and contested by only the most recent champion of each continent (plus one club from the host country). That tournament has now morphed into the “FIFA Intercontinental Cup.” The 32-team quadrennial summer tournament that will launch in 2025, and that you’re reading about now, is distinct, and unconnected to the seven-team annual version — other than the “Club World Cup” name. The European giants, . Their betting odds and relative standing could change between December and June, but for now the favorites are Manchester City (+320), Real Madrid (+360), Bayern Munich (+600), Chelsea (+700), Inter Milan (+950) and PSG (+1000). That’s the million-dollar question of the Club World Cup. With intercontinental club competitions so scarce, not a soul knows for sure how clubs from Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, MLS, East Asia, North Africa and elsewhere will measure up to the likes of Bayern, PSG and Porto. The assumption — based on rosters and salaries — is that the European teams are superior. But betting markets are somewhat skeptical, and suggest the gap might be thinner than Westerners realize. , Palmeiras is +1900 to win the title — same as Dortmund and Juve. Al Hilal and Flamengo are +2500 — same as Porto and Benfica. There are grounded in analytics that attempt to rank clubs across borders and seas. Most lead to a middle-ground conclusion: the Man Cities, Real Madrids and Bayerns of the world stand confidently atop the sport, but not all European teams do. Upsets will be possible. , which include over 13,000 clubs, rate the 32 Club World Cup contestants as follows: Inter Milan (2, 98.9) Manchester City (3, 98.4) Real Madrid (5, 97.4) Bayern Munich (8, 95.7) PSG (9, 95.7) Chelsea (12, 94.5) Juventus (13, 94.2) Atlético Madrid (14, 93.6) Borussia Dortmund (20, 92.4) Benfica (21, 92.4) Porto (26, 91.3) Al Hilal (30, 90.7) Botafogo (55, 87.9) Palmeiras (58, 87.4) Flamengo (68, 86.4) River Plate (99, 84.8) Al Ahly (106, 84.5) Inter Miami (113, 84.2) Seattle Sounders (143, 83.2) Monterrey (144, 83.2) RB Salzburg (150, 83.0) Boca Juniors (160, 82.5) Fluminense (166, 82.5) Mamelodi Sundowns (220, 80.8) Espérance (324, 78.8) Ulsan (361, 78.4) Pachuca (375, 78.2) Urawa Reds (389, 77.9) León (400, 77.8) Wydad (565, 75.8) Al Ain (678, 74.7) Auckland City (4082, 59.0) Probably. In fact, FIFA’s published state that all participating clubs must “field their strongest team throughout the competition.” But there are questions around how “strongest team” would be defined, and how that rule would be enforced. And there is context. A select few of the biggest clubs, such as Real Madrid, don’t seem all that enthusiastic about participating. They will have to be incentivized to come and try to win. How? With tens of millions of dollars in prize money and appearance fees. Sort of — to the extent that all of modern sport is about money. The Club World Cup is FIFA’s attempt to monetize soccer’s biggest clubs and players — which double as the sport’s most marketable brands. Currently, the vast majority of club soccer games, and therefore revenues — from broadcast rights, sponsorships and more — are controlled by domestic leagues, such as the English Premier League; and by continental confederations, namely UEFA, which runs the hugely profitable Champions League. FIFA, meanwhile, makes billions off the World Cup, a quadrennial showpiece for national teams. But because the Champions League is an annual bonanza, UEFA’s revenues are far greater. Those revenues trickle down to European clubs and national soccer federations, which use the money to recruit or produce players — and consolidate their supremacy. So, FIFA created the Club World Cup, which, for the first time, could allow the global governing body to profit off those same clubs — and share some small percentage of the spoils with 200-plus national soccer federations around the world, rather than solely the European ones. FIFA argues that this would be a . Critics argue it's a “cash grab”; part of a personal battle between Infantino and UEFA president Aleksander Čeferin; and a ploy to reinforce Infantino’s political power — because the presidents of the 200-plus national soccer federations sharing the spoils double as FIFA’s electorate. UEFA and the top European leagues, meanwhile, have and Infantino’s plan, because they want to keep all Real Madrid- or Manchester City-related revenue to themselves. The players and their unions are. FIFPRO Europe, a branch of the global players’ union, has called the Club World Cup a “tipping point” in the broader context of soccer’s ever-congested calendar. They’ve against FIFA, which “unilaterally set” the calendar, with space carved out for the Club World Cup. They that, especially with the new tournament extending seasons by a month, players’ bodies and brains are becoming overworked and overwhelmed. The leagues, on the other hand, say they’re concerned about workload; but really, they want to protect their market share. They already organize dozens of games per club every year; the Club World Cup will merely add a few games for a small handful of teams once every four years. The leagues want to preserve their primacy on the calendar. Their problem is that FIFA controls both the Club World Cup and the calendar. So they, too, have and attacked “FIFA’s conflict of interest.” They’ve argued to the European Commission that FIFA is abusing its position as both a commercially minded organizer and regulator of soccer. Their case, which many experts believe has merit, could muddy the future of this new tournament. The vast majority of the 32 do — and hundreds of others worldwide would love to. (Mainstream European media have largely ignored non-European perspectives.) A noisy minority, however, want to they’re well compensated. Real Madrid coach Carlo Ancelotti explained the dynamic in this past June — albeit with words he later walked back: "One single Real Madrid game is worth €20 million, and FIFA wants to give us that amount for the entire competition. ... Just like us, other clubs will refuse the invitation." Real Madrid and the rest of the clubs have since said they’re committed to the tournament. But behind the scenes, sources have told Yahoo Sports, they’re demanding hefty sums of cash. The last month that some want “significant eight-figure [appearance] fees in addition to prize money.” The question, then, for FIFA, has been: Where’s that money coming from? FIFA, anticipating immense interest in the Club World Cup, initially budgeted billions of dollars in revenue. But broadcasters and sponsors — the two main sources of potential income — were lukewarm. Negotiations with Apple collapsed. At the start of December, no television partners had been announced; and sponsors had only just begun to appear. FIFA, by all accounts, will fall short of its target, leading — and how much it will be able to pay the participating clubs. Part of the answer came Wednesday, when FIFA announced that DAZN, a struggling sports streaming platform, would broadcast all 63 Club World Cup games to viewers around the world for free. But the finances of that deal — and of the Club World Cup more broadly — remain murky. How much DAZN is paying for the tournament, , and whether the rights will be sublicensed to major TV networks in some countries is all unclear. Two people familiar with the deal told Yahoo Sports that, in its entirety, it’s worth around $1 billion. But in their press releases, FIFA and DAZN called the 2025 Club World Cup broadcast rights “the start of a broader partnership.” It’s unclear what portion of the roughly $1 billion is for the Club World Cup, and what portion might be for other rights that are part of a more extensive package. (Spokesmen for FIFA and DAZN both declined to comment on the speculation about potential Saudi involvement.) For now, in the U.S., the answer is no — DAZN, a platform that very few U.S. sports fans use, will be the exclusive broadcaster, and the only place to watch games. FIFA, though, mentioned in its news release “the possibility of sublicensing to local free-to-air linear broadcast networks.” This means that, for example, Fox could pay FIFA and/or DAZN to broadcast some of all of the 63 games. If there is no such sublicensing, the DAZN deal will be disastrous for the visibility of the tournament in the U.S. Nope. , you can “ ” in tickets, but FIFA has not said when or how you’ll be able to buy them. It could be. In many ways, it should be. But with budgets reportedly slashed, and planning far behind schedule, most insiders expect the 2025 edition to be a mixed bag of vibrancy, mishaps, full stadiums and duds. Even a mixed bag, though — in the absence of boycotts or legal interventions — should be enough to get the Club World Cup off the ground, and in position for success in 2029 and beyond.BB’s legacy of courage, vision of freedom guiding light for nation: Zardari
None“Gladiator II” asks the question: Are you not moderately entertained for roughly 60% of this sequel? Truly, this is a movie dependent on managed expectations and a forgiving attitude toward its tendency to overserve. More of a thrash-and-burn schlock epic than the comparatively restrained 2000 “Gladiator,” also directed by Ridley Scott, the new one recycles a fair bit of the old one’s narrative cries for freedom while tossing in some digital sharks for the flooded Colosseum and a bout of deadly sea-battle theatrics. They really did flood the Colosseum in those days, though no historical evidence suggests shark deployment, real or digital. On the other hand (checks notes), “Gladiator II” is fiction. Screenwriter David Scarpa picks things up 16 years after “Gladiator,” which gave us the noble death of the noble warrior Maximus, shortly after slaying the ignoble emperor and returning Rome to the control of the Senate. Our new hero, Lucius (Paul Mescal), has fled Rome for Numidia, on the North African coast. The time is 200 A.D., and for the corrupt, party-time twins running the empire (Joseph Quinn and Fred Hechinger), that means invasion time. Pedro Pascal takes the role of Acacius, the deeply conflicted general, sick of war and tired of taking orders from a pair of depraved ferrets. The new film winds around the old one this way: Acacius is married to Lucilla (Connie Nielsen, in a welcome return), daughter of the now-deceased emperor Aurelius and the love of the late Maximus’s life. Enslaved and dragged to Rome to gladiate, the widower Lucius vows revenge on the general whose armies killed his wife. But there are things this angry young phenom must learn, about his ancestry and his destiny. It’s the movie’s worst-kept secret, but there’s a reason he keeps seeing footage of Russell Crowe from the first movie in his fever dreams. Battle follows battle, on the field, in the arena, in the nearest river, wherever, and usually with endless splurches of computer-generated blood. “Gladiator II” essentially bumper-cars its way through the mayhem, pausing for long periods of expository scheming about overthrowing the current regime. The prince of all fixers, a wily operative with interests in both managing gladiators and stocking munitions, goes by the name Macrinus. He’s played by Denzel Washington, who at one point makes a full meal out of pronouncing the word “politics” like it’s a poisoned fig. Also, if you want a masterclass in letting your robes do a lot of your acting for you, watch what Washington does here. He’s more fun than the movie but you can’t have everything. The movie tries everything, all right, and twice. Ridley Scott marshals the chaotic action sequences well enough, though he’s undercut by frenetic cutting rhythms, with that now-familiar, slightly sped-up visual acceleration in frequent use. (Claire Simpson and Sam Restivo are the editors.) Mescal acquits himself well in his first big-budget commercial walloper of an assignment, confined though he is to a narrower range of seething resentments than Crowe’s in the first film. I left thinking about two things: the word “politics” as savored/spit out by Washington, and the innate paradox of how Scott, whose best work over the decades has been wonderful, delivers spectacle. The director and his lavishly talented design team built all the rough-hewn sets with actual tangible materials the massive budget allowed. They took care to find the right locations in Morocco and Malta. Yet when combined in post-production with scads of medium-grade digital effects work in crowd scenes and the like, never mind the sharks, the movie’s a somewhat frustrating amalgam. With an uneven script on top of it, the visual texture of “Gladiator II” grows increasingly less enveloping and atmospherically persuasive, not more. But I hung there, for some of the acting, for some of the callbacks, and for the many individual moments, or single shots, that could only have come from Ridley Scott. And in the end, yes, you too may be moderately entertained. “Gladiator II” — 2.5 stars (out of 4) MPA rating: R (for strong bloody violence) Running time: 2:28 How to watch: Premieres in theaters Nov. 21. Michael Phillips is a Tribune critic.
None
State championship reign for Santa Margarita girls golf ends with runner-up finish to Torrey Pines‘Gladiator II’ review: Are you not moderately entertained?The NBA got the Christmas gift it was hoping for on Wednesday. In , the league said it posted its most-watched Christmas day slate in five years with an average of 5.25 million viewers across its five games on ABC, ESPN, ESPN2, Disney+ and ESPN+. That reportedly adds up to a viewership increase of 84% against last year's Christmas. The biggest game of the day was predictably the one between the Los Angeles Lakers and Golden State Warriors, or LeBron James and Stephen Curry. That game saw an average 7.76 million viewers with a peak of 8.32 million, the most-watched game in that same five-year span and a 499% increase from last year's window (which was between the Philadelphia 76ers and Miami Heat. The game was a fun one, with the Lakers blowing a double-digit lead in the final minutes, capped off by game-tying Curry 3-pointer with eight seconds left, then winning on an Austin Reaves layup. The NBA will gladly take all of those numbers, considering it is currently fighting to defend at least part of its hold on Christmas from the most powerful league in the world. The NFL has been attempting to replicate its success with Thanksgiving for a few years now by instituting a slate of games on Christmas, no matter what inconvenient day of the week the holiday falls upon. This year, that day was Wednesday, requiring the league to have four of its teams play on Saturday the previous week to give them at least four day's rest. It still added up to three games in 11 days and , though . This year was also unusual because it was the first time the NFL handed the slate off to Netflix, having already found success ( ) by giving "Thursday Night Football" to a streamer at Amazon. The NFL has so far reported success with its 2024 Christmas viewership, though in Netflix's usual way without the hard numbers you see with Nielsen ratings. Instead of , the league : more than 200 countries watched at least part of its Kansas City Chiefs-Pittsburgh Steelers game that Chiefs-Steelers game was already Netflix's second-most popular "Live" title to date nearly one third of Netflix's global concurrents were watching Chiefs-Steelers Netflix topped the peak concurrent viewers of any Christmas in the past four years For reference, last year's NFL Christmas, which was on a Monday, , trouncing the NBA's 2.85 million that year. When LeBron James proclaimed " " after Wednesday's Lakers game, he was voicing what many in the NBA hope to achieve or preserve. They can at least say this year was a step back in the right direction after some bleak outcomes over the past few years.
Boxing Day shopper footfall was down 7.9% from last year across all UK retail destinations up until 5pm, MRI Software’s OnLocation Footfall Index found. However, this year’s data had been compared with an unusual spike in footfall as 2023 was the first “proper Christmas” period without Covid-19 pandemic restrictions, an analyst at the retail technology company said. It found £4.6 billion will be spent overall on the festive sales. Before the pandemic the number of Boxing Day shoppers on the streets had been declining year on year. The last uplift recorded by MRI was in 2015. Jenni Matthews, marketing and insights director at MRI Software, told the PA news agency: “We’ve got to bear in mind that (last year) was our first proper Christmas without any (Covid-19) restrictions or limitations. “Figures have come out that things have stabilised, we’re almost back to what we saw pre-pandemic.” There were year-on-year declines in footfall anywhere between 5% and 12% before Covid-19 restrictions, she said. MRI found 12% fewer people were out shopping on Boxing Day in 2019 than in 2018, and there were 3% fewer in 2018 than in 2017, Ms Matthews added. She said: “It’s the shift to online shopping, it’s the convenience, you’ve got the family days that take place on Christmas Day and Boxing Day.” People are also increasingly stocking-up before Christmas, Ms Matthews said, and MRI found an 18% increase in footfall at all UK retail destinations on Christmas Eve this year compared with 2023. Ms Matthews said: “We see the shops are full of people all the way up to Christmas Eve, so they’ve probably got a couple of good days of food, goodies, everything that they need, and they don’t really need to go out again until later on in that week. “We did see that big boost on Christmas Eve. It looks like shoppers may have concentrated much of their spending in that pre-Christmas rush.” Many online sales kicked off between December 23 and the night of Christmas Day and “a lot of people would have grabbed those bargains from the comfort of their own home”, she said. She added: “I feel like it’s becoming more and more common that people are grabbing the bargains pre-Christmas.” Footfall is expected to rise on December 27 as people emerge from family visits and shops re-open, including Next, Marks and Spencer and John Lewis that all shut for Boxing Day. It will also be payday for some as it is the last Friday of the month. A study by Barclays Consumer Spend had forecast that shoppers would spend £236 each on average in the Boxing Day sales this year, but that the majority of purchases would be made online. Nearly half of respondents said the cost-of-living crisis will affect their post-Christmas shopping but the forecast average spend is still £50 more per person than it was before the pandemic, with some of that figure because of inflation, Barclays said. Amid the financial pressures, many people are planning to buy practical, perishable and essential items such as food and kitchenware. A total of 65% of shoppers are expecting to spend the majority of their sales budget online. Last year, Barclays found 63.9% of Boxing Day retail purchases were made online. However, a quarter of respondents aim to spend mostly in store – an 11% rise compared with last year. Karen Johnson, head of retail at Barclays, said: “Despite the ongoing cost-of-living pressures, it is encouraging to hear that consumers will be actively participating in the post-Christmas sales. “This year, we’re likely to see a shift towards practicality and sustainability, with more shoppers looking to bag bargains on kitchen appliances and second-hand goods.” Consumers choose in-store shopping largely because they enjoy the social aspect and touching items before they buy, Barclays said, adding that high streets and shopping centres are the most popular destinations.5 top tech gifts for the holidays
NEW YORK (AP) — U.S. stock indexes reached more records after tech companies talked up how much artificial intelligence is boosting their results. The S&P 500 climbed 0.6% Wednesday to add to what looks to be one of its best years of the millennium. The Dow Jones Industrial Average gained 0.7%, while the Nasdaq composite added 1.3% to its own record. Salesforce pulled the market higher after highlighting its artificial-intelligence offering for customers. Marvell Technology jumped even more after saying it’s seeing strong demand from AI. Treasury yields eased, while bitcoin climbed after President-elect Donald Trump nominated a crypto advocate to head the Securities and Exchange Commission. THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. AP’s earlier story follows below. NEW YORK (AP) — U.S. stock indexes are rising toward more records Wednesday after tech companies talked up how much of a boost they're getting from artificial intelligence . The S&P 500 climbed 0.5% to add to what looks to be one of its best years of the millennium. It’s on track to set an all-time high for the 56th time this year after coming off 10 gains in the last 11 days . The Dow Jones Industrial Average was up 252 points, or 0.6%, with an hour remaining in trading, while the Nasdaq composite was adding 1.2% to its own record. Salesforce helped pull the market higher after delivering stronger revenue for the latest quarter than analysts expected, though its profit fell just short. CEO Mark Benioff highlighted the company’s artificial-intelligence offering for customers, saying “the rise of autonomous AI agents is revolutionizing global labor, reshaping how industries operate and scale.” The stock of the company, which helps businesses manage their customers, rose 9.3%. Marvell Technology jumped even more after delivering better results than expected, up 23.2%. CEO Matt Murphy said the semiconductor supplier is seeing strong demand from AI and gave a forecast for profit in the upcoming quarter that topped analysts’ expectations. They helped offset a 9.8% drop for Foot Locker, which reported profit and revenue that fell short of analysts’ expectations. CEO Mary Dillon said the company is taking a more cautious view, and it cut its forecasts for sales and profit this year. Dillon pointed to how keen customers are for discounts and how soft demand has been outside of Thanksgiving week and other key selling periods. Retailers overall have offered mixed signals about how resilient U.S. shoppers can remain. Their spending has been one of the main reasons the U.S. economy has avoided a recession that earlier seemed inevitable because of high interest rates brought by the Federal Reserve to crush inflation. But shoppers are now contending with still-high prices and a slowing job market . This week’s highlight for Wall Street will be Friday’s jobs report from the U.S. government, which will show how many people employers hired and fired last month. A narrower report released on Wednesday morning may have offered a preview of it. The report from ADP suggested employers in the private sector increased their payrolls by less last month than economists expected. Hiring in manufacturing was the weakest since the spring, according to Nela Richardson, chief economist at ADP. The report strengthened traders’ expectations that the Fed will cut its main interest rate again when it meets in two weeks. The Fed began easing its main interest rate from a two-decade high in September, hoping to offer more support for the job market. The central bank had appeared set to continue cutting rates into next year, but the election of Donald Trump has scrambled Wall Street’s expectations somewhat. Trump’s preference for higher tariffs and other policies could lead to higher economic growth and inflation , which could alter the Fed’s plans . Fed Chair Jerome Powell said Wednesday that the central bank can afford to cut its benchmark rate cautiously because inflation has slowed significantly from its peak two years ago and the economy remains sturdy. A separate report on Wednesday said health care, finance and other businesses in the U.S. services sector are continuing to grow, but not by as much as before and not by as much as economists expected. One respondent from the construction industry told the survey from the Institute for Supply Management that the Fed’s rate cuts have not pulled down mortgage rates as much as hoped yet. Plus “the unknown effect of tariffs clouds the future.” In the bond market, the yield on the 10-year Treasury fell to 4.18% from 4.23% late Tuesday. On Wall Street, Campbell’s fell 6% for one of the S&P 500’s sharper losses despite increasing its dividend and reporting a stronger profit for the latest quarter than analysts expected. Its revenue fell short of Wall Street’s expectations, and the National Football League’s Washington Commanders hired Campbell’s CEO Mark Clouse as its team president. Campbell’s said Mick Beekhuizen, its president of meals and beverages, will become its 15th CEO following Clouse’s departure. Gains for airline stocks helped offset that drop after JetBlue Airways said it saw stronger bookings for travel in November and December following the presidential election. It said it’s also benefiting from lower fuel prices, as well as lower costs due to improved on-time performance. JetBlue jumped 8.3%, while Southwest Airlines climbed 2.8%. In stock markets abroad, South Korea’s Kospi sank 1.4% following a night full of drama in Seoul. President Yoon Suk Yeol was facing possible impeachment after he suddenly declared martial law on Tuesday night, prompting troops to surround the parliament. Yoon accused pro-North Korean forces of plotting to overthrow one of the world’s most vibrant democracies. The martial law declaration was revoked about six hours later. Samsung Electronics fell 0.9% in Seoul. The country’s financial regulator said it was prepared to deploy 10 trillion won ($7.07 billion) into a stock market stabilization fund at any time, the Yonhap news agency reported. In the crypto market , bitcoin climbed back above $97,000 after Trump said he would nominate Paul Atkins , a cryptocurrency advocate, to chair the Securities and Exchange Commission. AP Writers Matt Ott and Zimo Zhong contributed.
