#ubet63

Barclays PLC increased its stake in First Community Bankshares, Inc. ( NASDAQ:FCBC – Free Report ) by 219.6% during the third quarter, according to its most recent Form 13F filing with the SEC. The firm owned 29,709 shares of the bank’s stock after purchasing an additional 20,412 shares during the period. Barclays PLC’s holdings in First Community Bankshares were worth $1,282,000 as of its most recent filing with the SEC. Several other hedge funds and other institutional investors also recently made changes to their positions in the company. Assenagon Asset Management S.A. bought a new stake in First Community Bankshares during the third quarter worth $1,030,000. Northwestern Mutual Wealth Management Co. boosted its position in First Community Bankshares by 14.0% during the 2nd quarter. Northwestern Mutual Wealth Management Co. now owns 2,947 shares of the bank’s stock worth $109,000 after buying an additional 361 shares during the period. Bank of New York Mellon Corp grew its holdings in First Community Bankshares by 3.8% during the 2nd quarter. Bank of New York Mellon Corp now owns 124,760 shares of the bank’s stock worth $4,596,000 after acquiring an additional 4,623 shares during the last quarter. Creative Planning acquired a new position in First Community Bankshares in the 3rd quarter valued at approximately $367,000. Finally, Connor Clark & Lunn Investment Management Ltd. acquired a new stake in First Community Bankshares in the third quarter valued at $802,000. 34.95% of the stock is currently owned by institutional investors and hedge funds. Insider Activity In other news, CFO David D. Brown sold 2,520 shares of First Community Bankshares stock in a transaction on Tuesday, November 12th. The stock was sold at an average price of $48.00, for a total transaction of $120,960.00. Following the sale, the chief financial officer now directly owns 12,676 shares in the company, valued at $608,448. The trade was a 16.58 % decrease in their position. The transaction was disclosed in a document filed with the SEC, which is available at this hyperlink . Also, SVP Jason R. Belcher sold 6,384 shares of First Community Bankshares stock in a transaction that occurred on Friday, November 8th. The stock was sold at an average price of $46.49, for a total transaction of $296,792.16. Following the completion of the sale, the senior vice president now directly owns 15,317 shares in the company, valued at $712,087.33. This trade represents a 29.42 % decrease in their position. The disclosure for this sale can be found here . 3.67% of the stock is currently owned by company insiders. First Community Bankshares Price Performance First Community Bankshares Dividend Announcement The business also recently announced a quarterly dividend, which was paid on Friday, November 22nd. Investors of record on Friday, November 8th were paid a dividend of $0.31 per share. This represents a $1.24 annualized dividend and a yield of 2.97%. The ex-dividend date was Friday, November 8th. First Community Bankshares’s dividend payout ratio is presently 44.44%. First Community Bankshares Profile ( Free Report ) First Community Bankshares, Inc operates as the financial holding company for First Community Bank that provides various banking products and services. It offers demand deposit accounts, savings and money market accounts, certificates of deposit, and individual retirement plans; and commercial, consumer real estate, and consumer and other loans. Featured Articles Want to see what other hedge funds are holding FCBC? Visit HoldingsChannel.com to get the latest 13F filings and insider trades for First Community Bankshares, Inc. ( NASDAQ:FCBC – Free Report ). Receive News & Ratings for First Community Bankshares Daily - Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analysts' ratings for First Community Bankshares and related companies with MarketBeat.com's FREE daily email newsletter .

Booking Holdings Inc. stock rises Friday, outperforms market

A federal appeals court panel on Friday unanimously upheld a law that could lead to a ban on TikTok in a few short months, handing a resounding defeat to the popular social media platform as it fights for its survival in the U.S. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit denied TikTok's petition to overturn the law — which requires TikTok to break ties with its China-based parent company ByteDance or be banned by mid-January — and rebuffed the company's challenge of the statute, which it argued had ran afoul of the First Amendment. “The First Amendment exists to protect free speech in the United States,” said the court's opinion, which was written by Judge Douglas Ginsburg. “Here the Government acted solely to protect that freedom from a foreign adversary nation and to limit that adversary’s ability to gather data on people in the United States.” TikTok and ByteDance — another plaintiff in the lawsuit — are expected to appeal to the Supreme Court, though its unclear whether the court will take up the case. “The Supreme Court has an established historical record of protecting Americans’ right to free speech, and we expect they will do just that on this important constitutional issue," TikTok spokesperson Michael Hughes said in a statement. “Unfortunately, the TikTok ban was conceived and pushed through based upon inaccurate, flawed and hypothetical information, resulting in outright censorship of the American people,” Hughes said. Unless stopped, he argued the statute “will silence the voices of over 170 million Americans here in the US and around the world on January 19th, 2025.” Though the case is squarely in the court system, its also possible the two companies might be thrown some sort of a lifeline by President-elect Donald Trump, who tried to ban TikTok during his first term but said during the presidential campaign that he is now against such action. The law, signed by President Joe Biden in April, was the culmination of a years-long saga in Washington over the short-form video-sharing app, which the government sees as a national security threat due to its connections to China. The U.S. has said it’s concerned about TikTok collecting vast swaths of user data, including sensitive information on viewing habits, that could fall into the hands of the Chinese government through coercion. Officials have also warned the proprietary algorithm that fuels what users see on the app is vulnerable to manipulation by Chinese authorities, who can use it to shape content on the platform in a way that’s difficult to detect — a concern mirrored by the European Union on Friday as it scrutinizes the video-sharing app’s role in the Romanian elections. TikTok, which sued the government over the law in May, has long denied it could be used by Beijing to spy on or manipulate Americans. Its attorneys have accurately pointed out that the U.S. hasn’t provided evidence to show that the company handed over user data to the Chinese government, or manipulated content for Beijing’s benefit in the U.S. They have also argued the law is predicated on future risks, which the Department of Justice has emphasized pointing in part to unspecified action it claims the two companies have taken in the past due to demands from the Chinese government. Friday’s ruling came after the appeals court panel, composed of two Republican and one Democrat appointed judges, heard oral arguments in September. In the hearing, which lasted more than two hours, the panel appeared to grapple with how TikTok’s foreign ownership affects its rights under the Constitution and how far the government could go to curtail potential influence from abroad on a foreign-owned platform. On Friday, all three of them denied TikTok’s petition. In the court's ruling, Ginsburg, a Republican appointee, rejected TikTok's main legal arguments against the law, including that the statute was an unlawful bill of attainder or a taking of property in violation of the Fifth Amendment. He also said the law did not violate the First Amendment because the government is not looking to "suppress content or require a certain mix of content” on TikTok. “Content on the platform could in principle remain unchanged after divestiture, and people in the United States would remain free to read and share as much PRC propaganda (or any other content) as they desire on TikTok or any other platform of their choosing,” Ginsburg wrote, using the abbreviation for the People’s Republic of China. Judge Sri Srinivasan, the chief judge on the court, issued a concurring opinion. TikTok’s lawsuit was consolidated with a second legal challenge brought by several content creators - for which the company is covering legal costs - as well as a third one filed on behalf of conservative creators who work with a nonprofit called BASED Politics Inc. Other organizations, including the Knight First Amendment Institute, had also filed amicus briefs supporting TikTok. “This is a deeply misguided ruling that reads important First Amendment precedents too narrowly and gives the government sweeping power to restrict Americans’ access to information, ideas, and media from abroad,” said Jameel Jaffer, the executive director of the organization. “We hope that the appeals court’s ruling won’t be the last word.” Meanwhile, on Capitol Hill, lawmakers who had pushed for the legislation celebrated the court's ruling. "I am optimistic that President Trump will facilitate an American takeover of TikTok to allow its continued use in the United States and I look forward to welcoming the app in America under new ownership,” said Republican Rep. John Moolenaar of Michigan, chairman of the House Select Committee on China. Democratic Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, who co-authored the law, said “it's time for ByteDance to accept” the law. To assuage concerns about the company’s owners, TikTok says it has invested more than $2 billion to bolster protections around U.S. user data. The company has also argued the government’s broader concerns could have been resolved in a draft agreement it provided the Biden administration more than two years ago during talks between the two sides. It has blamed the government for walking away from further negotiations on the agreement, which the Justice Department argues is insufficient. Attorneys for the two companies have claimed it’s impossible to divest the platform commercially and technologically. They also say any sale of TikTok without the coveted algorithm - the platform’s secret sauce that Chinese authorities would likely block under any divesture plan - would turn the U.S. version of TikTok into an island disconnected from other global content. Still, some investors, including Trump’s former Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and billionaire Frank McCourt, have expressed interest in purchasing the platform. Both men said earlier this year that they were launching a consortium to purchase TikTok’s U.S. business. This week, a spokesperson for McCourt’s Project Liberty initiative, which aims to protect online privacy, said unnamed participants in their bid have made informal commitments of more than $20 billion in capital.In a dramatic election outcome, the Eknath Shinde-led Shiv Sena decisively defeated its rival faction, spearheaded by Uddhav Thackeray, across 36 constituencies in Maharashtra. Shinde's Sena secured 57 out of the 81 seats contested, reaffirming its dominance since the split initiated in June 2022. The political landscape shifted when Shinde, aligning with the BJP, took on a gamble that ultimately paid off. The Election Commission's endorsement of Shinde, including the retention of the coveted 'bow-and-arrow' symbol, fortified his leadership position. Many incumbent MLAs stayed loyal to Shinde, actively contributing to his success. In contrast, Uddhav Thackeray's Shiv Sena (UBT) managed only 20 seats despite fielding 95 candidates. The BJP-led Mahayuti coalition maintained its grip over Maharashtra, collectively winning an impressive 230 out of 288 total assembly seats, further marginalizing the Congress-led opposition. (With inputs from agencies.)

Published 4:48 pm Saturday, November 23, 2024 By Data Skrive Sunday’s game between the McNeese Cowboys (3-2) and Longwood Lancers (6-0) squaring off at Virgin Islands Sport & Fitness Center has a projected final score of 75-67 (based on our computer prediction) in favor of McNeese, who is listed as the favorite by our model. The game will start at 5:30 PM ET on November 24. According to our computer prediction, McNeese projects to cover the 6.5-point spread in its matchup versus Longwood. The over/under is listed at 139.5, and the two teams are projected to hit the over. Catch tons of live college basketball , plus original programming, with ESPN+ or the Disney Bundle. Place your bets on any men’s college basketball matchup at BetMGM. Sign up today using our link. McNeese has gone 2-2-0 against the spread, while Longwood’s ATS record this season is 3-2-0. The Cowboys have hit the over in three games, while Lancers games have gone over one time. The two teams score 154.7 points per game, 15.2 more points than this matchup’s total. Bet on this or any men’s college basketball matchup at BetMGM. Rep your favorite players with officially licensed gear. Head to Fanatics to find jerseys, shirts, hats, and much more. Not all offers available in all states, please visit BetMGM for the latest promotions for your area. Must be 21+ to gamble, please wager responsibly. If you or someone you know has a gambling problem, contact 1-800-GAMBLER .TD with :04 left lifts No. 24 Illinois to 8th win

TALLAHASSEE — An appeals court Thursday upheld a circuit judge’s ruling that rejected five candidates for municipal offices in the Palm Beach County city of Riviera Beach because they used debit cards — instead of checks — to pay qualifying fees. A three-judge panel of the 4th District Court of Appeal issued a one-paragraph opinion that provided little explanation. But in a Dec. 12 ruling that blocked the five candidates, Palm Beach County Circuit Judge Reid P. Scott cited a state law that requires qualifying fees to be paid with a “properly executed check drawn upon the candidate’s campaign account.” Scott wrote that the law “does not make an exception for the use of a debit card to pay the qualifying fee. The court finds that the plain language of the statute is clear and unambiguous.” Thursday’s appeals-court opinion shared by Judges Robert Gross, Spencer Levine and Jeffrey Kuntz cited a precedent in another election-qualifying case that said the law must be enforced “as written.” The rulings blocked mayoral candidates Kendrick Wyly and Kendra Wester and city council candidates Joseph J. Bedford, Sr., Madelene Irving-Mills and Douglas Lawson from running in March municipal elections. After a November qualifying period, other candidates challenged a decision by the city clerk that Wyly, Wester, Bedford, Irving-Mills and Lawson had properly qualified to appear on the ballot. Orlando’s top federal prosecutor touts surge in cases amid uncertain future The qualifying fee for the mayor race was $1,212, while the qualifying fee for the council races was $1,140, according to a brief filed in the appeals court by Mark Herron, an attorney for the five blocked candidates. In appealing Scott’s decision, Herron focused, in part, on another state law that allows political candidates to use debit cards to pay campaign expenses. Under that law, he wrote, debit cards are considered bank checks for such expenses. He wrote that the two laws — about paying qualifying fees and campaign expenses — need to be construed together. “Thus, payment of a candidate’s qualifying fees by a debit card linked to the candidate’s campaign account is authorized by Florida law,” Herron wrote. But attorney Dedrick Straghn, who represents the other candidates, filed a brief that drew a distinction between the two laws. That brief contended that campaign “expenditures and qualifying fees are not interchangeable.” “The Florida Election Code contains no explicit language allowing the use of debit cards as payment for qualifying fees,” Straghn wrote. “If this (appeals) court were to construe the Election Code allowing payment of the qualifying fee with debit cards in the absence of specific language, it would literally be legislating by reinserting the language. This is beyond the court’s power. Moreover, allowing such payments would undermine the statutory framework intended to ensure transparency, traceability, and immediate fund verification.” Straghn represents Mayor Ronnie Felder, Councilman Tradrick McCoy and council candidate Fercella Panier.

German politicians criticise Elon Musk for backing AfD ahead of electionNEW DELHI (AP) — India’s former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, widely regarded as the architect of India’s economic reform program and a landmark nuclear deal with the United States, has died. He was 92. Singh was admitted to New Delhi’s All India Institute of Medical Sciences late Thursday after his health deteriorated due to a “sudden loss of consciousness at home,” the hospital said in a statement. “Resuscitative measures were started immediately at home. He was brought to the Medical Emergency” at 8:06 p.m., the hospital said, but “despite all efforts, he could not be revived and was declared dead at 9:51 p.m.” Singh was being treated for “age-related medical conditions,” the statement said. A mild-mannered technocrat, Singh became one of India’s longest-serving prime ministers for 10 years and leader of the Congress Party in the Parliament's Upper House, earning a reputation as a man of great personal integrity. He was chosen to fill the role in 2004 by Sonia Gandhi, the widow of assassinated Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi . But his sterling image was tainted by allegations of corruption against his ministers. Singh was reelected in 2009, but his second term as prime minister was clouded by financial scandals and corruption charges over the organization of the 2010 Commonwealth Games. This led to the Congress Party’s crushing defeat in the 2014 national election by the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party under the leadership of Narendra Modi . Singh adopted a low profile after relinquishing the post of prime minister. Prime Minister Modi, who succeeded Singh in 2014, called him one of India’s “most distinguished leaders” who rose from humble origins and left “a strong imprint on our economic policy over the years.” “As our Prime Minister, he made extensive efforts to improve people’s lives,” Modi said in a post on the social platform X. He called Singh’s interventions in Parliament as a lawmaker “insightful” and said “his wisdom and humility were always visible.” Rahul Gandhi, from the same party as Singh and the opposition leader in the lower house of the Indian Parliament, said Singh’s “deep understanding of economics inspired the nation” and that he “led India with immense wisdom and integrity.” “I have lost a mentor and guide. Millions of us who admired him will remember him with the utmost pride,” Gandhi wrote on X. Born on Sept. 26, 1932, in a village in the Punjab province of undivided India, Singh’s brilliant academic career took him to Cambridge University in Britain, where he earned a degree in economics in 1957. He then got his doctorate in economics from Nuffield College at Oxford University in 1962. Singh taught at Panjab University and the prestigious Delhi School of Economics before joining the Indian government in 1971 as economic advisor in the Commerce Ministry. In 1982, he became chief economic adviser to the Finance Ministry. He also served as deputy chair of the Planning Commission and governor of the Reserve Bank of India. As finance minister, Singh in 1991 instituted reforms that opened up the economy and moved India away from a socialist-patterned economy and toward a capitalist model in the face of a huge balance of payments deficit, skirting a potential economic crisis. His accolades include the 1987 Padma Vibhushan Award, India’s second-highest civilian honor; the Jawaharlal Nehru Birth Centenary Award of the Indian Science Congress in 1995; and the Asia Money Award for Finance Minister of the Year in 1993 and 1994. Singh was a member of India’s Upper House of Parliament and was leader of the opposition from 1998 to 2004 before he was named prime minister. He was the first Sikh to hold the country’s top post and made a public apology in Parliament for the 1984 Sikh Massacre in which some 3,000 Sikhs were killed after then-Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was assassinated by Sikh bodyguards. Under Singh, India adopted a Right to Information Act in 2005 to promote accountability and transparency from government officials and bureaucrats. He was also instrumental in implementing a welfare scheme that guaranteed at least 100 paid workdays for Indian rural citizens. The coalition government he headed for a decade brought together politicians and parties with differing ideologies that were rivals in the country’s various states. In a move hailed as one of his biggest achievements apart from economic reforms, Singh ended India’s nuclear isolation by signing a deal with the U.S. that gave India access to American nuclear technology. But the deal hit his government adversely, with Communist allies withdrawing support and criticism of the agreement growing within India in 2008 when it was finalized. Singh adopted a pragmatic foreign policy approach, pursuing a peace process with nuclear rival and neighbor Pakistan. But his efforts suffered a major setback after Pakistani militants carried out a massive gun and bomb attack in Mumbai in November 2008. He also tried to end the border dispute with China, brokering a deal to reopen the Nathu La pass into Tibet, which had been closed for more than 40 years. His 1965 book, “India’s Export Trends and Prospects for Self-Sustained Growth,” dealt with India’s inward-oriented trade policy. Singh is survived by his wife Gursharan Kaur and three daughters. Associated Press writer Sheikh Saaliq in New Delhi contributed to this report.