Author

admin

Browsing

The debate over expanding the NCAA men’s basketball tournament isn’t really a debate. 

It’s just a math equation. 

While the consensus in college sports is that expansion from 68 teams to 72 or 76 is inevitable – largely because the commissioners of the SEC and Big Ten want it – NCAA senior vice president of basketball Dan Gavitt has gone on a media tour recently insisting that the issue is far from settled. 

‘I couldn’t predict as I sit here today what the outcome is going to be,’ Gavitt told CBS Sports last week. 

There’s a good – and simple – reason for that. 

Expanding the NCAA Tournament is going to be expensive. Unless you can guarantee that schools and conferences won’t lose money by expanding, what’s the point? 

And that’s where the math comes in. 

Let’s say the tournament expands to 76. That means four additional games, likely played on Tuesday and Wednesday before the quote-unquote ‘real tournament’ starts on Thursday. 

Keep in mind: We already have two play-in games on Tuesday and Wednesday, broadcast on TruTV. So essentially, expanding the tournament means that you’ll have four games instead of two on each of those days. 

There’s only one question that matters here: What’s that worth to the television networks? 

According to the NCAA, last year’s four play-in games drew ‘a total of 6.2 million viewers,’ which is pretty good for a normal college basketball audience and especially on TruTV, the relatively obscure channel where Turner Sports has parked those games. Still, it’s well short of the 8.53 million average for the Thursday and Friday first-round games.

What that means is the general public – the folks who don’t really watch much college basketball but enter their bracket in the office pool and pump up the ratings for March Madness – still considers Thursday the real start of the tournament. Which it is. 

What CBS and Turner need to assess is whether fans and viewers will change their habits and migrate to the Tuesday/Wednesday games or whether they’ll continue to treat them like play-ins. In some ways, it’s a test of the NCAA Tournament as a cultural institution. That Thursday start is so ingrained in American life – almost like an unofficial national holiday – that unmooring it might not be so easy. 

Yes, you can put competitive matchups with big brands on Tuesday and Wednesday, but that also means six straight full days of college basketball programming. Is it overkill? Will the audience be there to support CBS and Turner paying many millions more for those four extra games? 

And make no mistake: It’s going to cost a lot of money to make expansion worth the NCAA’s while. 

Let’s get into some simple math. Every team that makes the NCAA Tournament earns a so-called ‘unit’ of revenue for its conference and then earns subsequent units for each round it advances. Those units are worth about $2 million apiece. 

If you add eight teams to the field, you need to generate $16 million right there, not to mention the millions in extra costs for facilities, travel, food, staff and so forth that you inherit by adding more games and more teams. 

If that endeavor doesn’t add to the bottom line, it cuts into the revenue pie that everyone else is splitting. It’s hard to imagine broad support for an expansion plan that decreases the average value of a unit. Especially right now, when power conference athletic departments are scrounging for any new revenue to fill the $20-million-plus hole in their budgets brought by the House vs. NCAA settlement. 

That’s really the entire discussion. 

All the conventional arguments against expansion are valid. They’re also kind of irrelevant. 

Yeah, the bubble is already weak enough and it’s silly to reward more mediocrity. Yeah, the more the bracket expands, the more confusing it is for your office pool. Yeah, most of the extra spots are probably going to power conference teams with very ugly résumés. 

None of that matters anymore. If you can figure out how much CBS and Turner are willing to pay for those extra games, you can figure out whether the tournament is going to expand. 

You can safely assume that’s why a significant expansion to 96 teams, which has been floated in the past, is now pretty much off the table. The math just doesn’t math. 

But going to 72 or 76 is a different calculation. It’s doable – if the TV partners are on board. 

‘The committees are giving it more consideration than at any time in my 10-plus years at the NCAA,’ Gavitt told Field of 68. ‘At the end of the day, there’s no intended outcome here. One outcome is no expansion at all and if there is a recommendation to expand, it would likely be modest in nature.’

The big expansion talk started in 2022 when the SEC got a disappointing six bids and Greg Sankey started to rattle the saber about automatic qualifiers from small conferences taking away opportunities from power conference teams, especially as his league and the Big Ten expand.

But as we’ve seen this season, that isn’t really true. As of today, the SEC and Big Ten are poised to combine for more than 20 and perhaps as many as 25 teams in this year’s field. They don’t really need to engineer more spots for themselves. 

Everyone involved needs to be careful. Adding eight teams wouldn’t ruin the tournament, but it would change it. If you want people to watch those Tuesday-Wednesday games, you can’t give them a bunch of Grambling State-Montana State playing for the right to be the 16 seed. 

At the same time, do two struggling name brands like Texas and Villanova playing for a 13 seed move the needle much either? Both of those schools are likely to miss the tournament this year. If it expands by eight, they’d both likely be in. 

If you’re an executive at CBS or Turner, how much is that game really worth and how quickly can you get America to start watching the tournament on Tuesday?

Smart people are undoubtedly working on those answers right now. They’re the ones who will ultimately decide whether expansion happens or not.  

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

Vasyl Myroshnychenko, Ukraine’s ambassador to Australia, is appealing to Australian miners to invest in Ukraine’s resource sector amid heightening tensions between the US and Ukraine

The request comes as Ukraine seeks ways to fund its three year defense against Russia’s invasion, an effort that became more dire this week as US President Donald Trump paused all aid to the country on Monday (March 3).

The US head of state made the decision after negotiations between the two countries broke down on February 28 while Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy was visiting the White House to pen a deal regarding mineral rights for US security.

During the televised meeting between Trump, US Vice President JD Vance and Zelenskyy, a heated exchange ensued, turning the formal conversation into finger pointing and a series of accusations.

Ukraine welcomes Australian mining investment

According to the Nightly, Myroshnychenko said Russia is looking to break the bond between the US and Europe.

“If Russia achieves what they want, that would be a world of chaos … where might is right, where the stronger one will have the power and in this world, Australia has no chance of surviving,’ he said.

“There is a moral argument in terms of security, democracy and helping Ukraine, helping the underdog who’s been bullied; it’s all valid but I think we have to talk about money,” Myroshnychenko continued.

He opened the invitation to non-mining companies as well, noting, “This is an opportunity for Australian companies, for mining companies, to come and invest in Ukraine together with American companies.”

Australia’s support of Ukraine

Australia and Ukraine have a long history of cooperation and allyship.

The country supplied uranium to Ukraine in 2016 via an agreement where Ukraine joined other countries in a pact with Australia, ensuring that uranium obtained from Australia is designated strictly for peaceful uses.

A Nuclear Cooperation Agreement with Ukraine was announced in 2017 by Julie Bishop, then the country’s foreign affairs minister, enabling Australia to export uranium to Ukraine and enhance cooperation between the countries on activities such as nuclear safeguards, security, safety and science.

During Ukraine’s defense against Russia, Australia has assisted Ukraine by offering cash and resource support.

In 2022, the Australian mining sector and the federal government joined hands in offering donations.

Australian Resources & Investment notes said that Whitehaven Coal (ASX:WHC,OTC Pink:WHITF) produced 70,000 tonnes of thermal coal to be donated to Ukraine to support its energy security.

Major miners BHP (ASX:BHP,NYSE:BHP,LSE:BHP), Newmont (TSX:NGT,NYSE:NEM) and Anglo American (LSE:AAL,OTCQX:AAUKF), each donated US$5 million at the time for humanitarian relief.

Last October, the Australian government gifted 49 M1A1 Abrams tanks to Ukraine to assist in its fight against Russia’s invasion. This donation was valued approximately AU$245 million.

On the third anniversary of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, an announcement by Senator Penny Wong said Australia’s military assistance to Ukraine during that time amounts to over AU$1.3 billion.

In total, the support is valued at over AU$1.5 billion.

“Australia has now imposed a total of more than 1,400 sanctions in response to Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine,” Wong said. “Working with Ukraine and our partners, Australia supports a just and lasting peace for Ukraine.”

Australia seeking rare earths independence

While Myroshnychenko invited broad investment in Ukraine’s resource sector, rare earths may be of special interest to Aussie miners as the country makes moves toward rare earths supply independence.

These include strategies from both the government and mining companies such as Lynas Rare Earths (ASX:LYC,OTC Pink:LYSCF), a leading producer of rare earth materials outside of China.

Lynas owns the recently opened Kalgoorlie rare earths processing facility in Western Australia, the country’s first rare earths processing facility and the largest facility outside China.

On February 12, the Australian government passed the Critical Minerals Production Tax Incentive, which will provide a refundable tax credit on 10 percent of eligible costs associated with the production of critical minerals and rare earths.

Federal Resources Minister Madeleine King said the incentives are valued at AU$7 billion over the decade.

“The passing of this legislation is a historic moment for the resources industry and a big deal for resource states like Western Australia and Queensland,” she explained. “By processing more of these minerals here in Australia we will create jobs and diversify global supply chains.”

Securities Disclosure: I, Gabrielle de la Cruz, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

The global biofuels market was valued at US$64.06 billion in 2024 and is anticipated to reach US$106.02 billion in 2034. Despite previous dips, the outlook for the biofuels industry and US biofuel stocks is positive.

The driving forces behind rising demand for biofuels include the goal of reducing the carbon footprint of transport industries, as well as factors such as a growing need for alternatives to foreign oil and enhanced cost-competitiveness and efficiency of biofuel production technology.

The US is the largest biofuels-producing country in the world by far.

‘Capacity at U.S. producers of renewable diesel and other biofuels totaled 4.3 billion gal/y in January 2024, 1.3 billion gallons more per year than in 2023. Fuel ethanol—primarily produced from corn kernel starch and blended with gasoline—accounts for most of U.S. biofuels production capacity,’ states the US Energy Information Administration.

Not surprisingly, the corn field state of Iowa is by far the leader in biofuels production in the nation, followed by agricultural powerhouses Nebraska and Illinois.

For investors interested in the biofuel industry, here are the 6 top US biofuels stocks by market cap. All figures are from TradingView’s stock screener and were current as of market close on March 5, 2025. Read on to learn more about these biofuels companies and their operations.

1. REX American Resources (NYSE:REX)

Company Profile

Market cap: US$644.36 million

REX American Resources has interests in six ethanol production facilities that together have the capacity to produce 730 million gallons of ethanol. The company is the majority owner of two of these facilities, One Earth Energy in Illinois and NuGen Energy in South Dakota, which combine for capacity of 300 million gallons. It is also a minority owner of holding company Big River Resources, which has four production plants across Iowa, Illinois and Wisconsin.

REX is advancing its expansion campaign at its ethanol production facility at the One Earth Energy facility, which will increase annual ethanol production capacity from 150 million gallons to 175 million gallons. The company expects to complete the expansion in mid-2025. REX is also planning to obtain permits to further expand the facility to an annual production capacity of 200 million gallons.

2. Montauk Renewables (NASDAQ:MNTK)

Company Profile

Market cap: US$444.44 million

Montauk Renewables is a US renewable energy company specializing in the recovery and conversion of biogas derived from landfill methane into renewable natural gas (RNG) or electrical power for the electrical grid. The company has 14 operating projects and ongoing development projects located in California, Idaho, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, South Carolina and Texas.

For its fiscal year 2024, Montauk’s RNG revenues are expected to come in at between US$175 million and US$185 million, while its renewable electricity revenues are expected to be between US$17 million and US$18 million. Its full year results will be available in mid-March.

3. OPAL Fuels (NASDAQ:OPAL)

Company Profile

Market cap: US$407.88 million

OPAL Fuels is another renewable energy company that specializes in capturing and converting biogas into RNG. The company’s fully integrated vertical waste-to-energy model takes biogas from landfills and dairies to create fuel for use in heavy- and medium-duty trucking fleets, as well as renewable power for sale to utilities.

In late February 2025, the company announced a series of 50/50 joint venture partnerships to develop four new landfill RNG production projects. OPAL’s share represents 1.5 million MMBtu of aggregate annual design capacity.

4. Gevo (NASDAQ:GEVO)

Company Profile

Market cap: US$316.02 million

Gevo is a renewable chemicals and next-generation biofuels company with headquarters in Colorado. Gevo produces isobutanol, ethanol and high-value animal feed at its fermentation plant in Minnesota. Over in Texas, it operates a biorefinery that converts alcohols into products ranging from renewable jet fuel to octane and even ingredients for plastics.

Gevo owns and operates one of the largest dairy-based RNG facilities in the United States and operates an ethanol plant with an adjacent carbon capture and sequestration facility.

In February 2025, Gevo announced a partnership with French energy company Axens “to accelerate development and commercialization of sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) using the ethanol-to-jet (ETJ) pathway.” Gevo is currently developing the world’s first ethanol-to-jet SAF commercial production facility, Net-Zero 1, which will be located in South Dakota.

5. FutureFuel (NYSE:FF)

Company Profile

Market cap: US$186.87 million

FutureFuel is a developer and producer of diversified chemical products, specialty organic chemicals, premium biodiesel and other biofuels, such as ethanol and biomass solids. FutureFuel launched its biofuels product platform in 2005 and now has a biodiesel production capacity of 60 million gallons per year.

FutureFuels announced a quarterly dividend program for 2025 that will distribute cash dividends of US$0.06 per share, with the first payment of the year on March 18.

6. Verde Clean Fuels (NASDAQ:VGAS)

Company Profile

Market cap: US$118.58 million

Verde Clean Fuels is a renewable gasoline technology company with projects under development in North America. The company converts biomass feedstocks such as agricultural byproducts into renewable, low-carbon gasoline compatible with standard car engines and refueling stations.

In the past two years, Cottonmouth Ventures LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Diamondback Energy (NASDAQ:FANG), has made US$70 million in investments into Verde Clean Fuels, indirectly making the multibillion dollar Texas-based oil and gas company the second largest shareholder of Verde. The most recent came in January 2025.

The two companies are collaborating on developing and constructing natural-gas-to-gasoline plants that will use Verde’s technology to convert natural gas from Diamondback’s Permian Basin operations.

FAQs for biofuel stocks

What is biofuel?

Biofuel is a type of renewable energy derived from living material known as biomass. Biomass includes algae, as well as plant and animal waste, and examples of biofuels are ethanol, biodiesel, green diesel and biogas. Biofuels can be solid, liquid or gaseous.

How are biofuels produced?

Depending on the type of biomass being used, biofuels can be produced in a variety ways.

The typical processes include chemical reactions, dry milling, fermentation and heat to break down starches, sugars and other molecules. The resulting products are then refined to produce the end-product fuel.

What is ethanol made of?

Ethanol can be produced from corn, as is common in the US. In Brazil, ethanol is produced from sugarcane.

Securities Disclosure: I, Melissa Pistilli, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

Those interested in the lithium sector and investing in lithium stocks are often curious about which countries are the top producers of the battery metal, but they may not stop to consider the top lithium reserves by country.

Major lithium-producing countries are, of course, home to a large number of lithium companies. Many of the world’s top lithium producers also hold significant reserves, and their reserves can give an idea of how much room those countries have to grow. At the same time, nations with high reserves may become more significant lithium players in the future.

Looking forward, lithium demand is expected to continue increasing. That’s because, together with metals such as cobalt, lithium is a key raw material in the lithium-ion batteries used to power electric vehicles, and it is also essential for the energy storage sector.

On that note, here’s an overview of lithium reserves by country, with a focus on the four countries that host the world’s largest lithium deposits. Total worldwide lithium reserves stand at 30,000,000 metric tons as of 2024. Data is based on the most recent information from the US Geological Survey. Reserves data refers to contained lithium content.

1. Chile

Lithium reserves: 9.3 million metric tons

Chile holds the largest lithium reserves in the world at 9.3 million metric tons. The country reportedly hosts most of the world’s “economically extractable” lithium reserves, and its Salar de Atacama region houses approximately 33 percent of the world’s lithium reserve base.

Chile was the second biggest producer of lithium in 2024 at 44,000 metric tons (MT). SQM (NYSE:SQM) and Albemarle (NYSE:ALB) are the key lithium producers in Chile, with operations in the Salar de Atacama.

In late April 2023, Chilean President Gabriel Boric announced plans to partially nationalize the country’s lithium industry in a bid to bolster the economy and protect the environment. “This is the best chance we have at transitioning to a sustainable and developed economy,” he said at the time.

Chile’s state-owned mining company Codelco has negotiated for much larger stakes in both SQM and Albemarle’s lithium assets in the country, and will have controlling interests in all operations in that salar going forward.

According to the Baker Institute, Chile’s strict legal framework surrounding mining concessions has hamstrung the lithium powerhouse from gaining a bigger share of the global lithium market comparable with this mineral largess.

In early 2025, Chile received seven bids for lithium operation contracts across six salt flats, with a key contender beign a consortium of Eramet (EPA:ERA), Chilean miner Quiborax and state-owned Codelco. The government will announce winners in March 2025, while a second bidding phase has been extended to boost participation.

2. Australia

Lithium reserves: 7 million metric tons

Australia’s lithium reserves stand at 7 million metric tons, the majority of which are found in Western Australia. Unlike those found in Chile and Argentina, Australia’s lithium reserves are in the form of hard-rock spodumene deposits.

Although it is second to Chile in reserves, Australia was the largest lithium-producing country in the world in 2024, with many operational lithium mines in the country.

The country is home to the Greenbushes lithium mine, which is operated by Talison Lithium, a joint venture comprised of lithium producers Tianqi Lithium (OTC Pink:TQLCF,SZSE:002466), Australian miner IGO (ASX:IGO,OTC Pink:IPGDF) and Albemarle. Greenbushes has been producing lithium since 1985.

A sharp decline in lithium prices has led some of the country’s lithium companies to curtail or outright halt their lithium operations and development projects until market conditions improve.

While Western Australia dominates lithium exploration, new research highlights untapped potential in Queensland, New South Wales and Victoria. Published in ‘Earth System Science Data,’ the 2023 study — led by University of Sydney researchers with Geoscience Australia — maps regions with high lithium density, signaling broader opportunities for the growing battery metal market.

“We’ve developed the first map of lithium in Australian soils which identifies areas with elevated concentrations,” said Professor Budiman Minasny. “The map agrees with existing mines and highlights areas that can be potential future lithium sources.”

3. Argentina

Lithium reserves: 4 million metric tons

Argentina ranks third in terms of global lithium reserves at 4 million metric tons. It’s worth noting that Argentina, Chile and Bolivia comprise the “Lithium Triangle,” which hosts more than half of the world’s lithium reserves. The country is also the fourth largest lithium producer in the world, and last year it put out 18,000 MT of the metal.

In May 2022, the Argentine government committed to investing up to US$4.2 billion in its lithium industry over the next three years with the goal of increasing lithium output.

More recently, in April 2024, the government greenlit Argosy Minerals’ (ASX:AGY,OTC Pink:ARYMF) expansion of its operations at the Rincon salar to raise annual lithium carbonate production from 2,000 MT to 12,000 MT.

Argentina hosts around 50 advanced lithium mining projects, reports Fastmarkets. “Argentina’s lithium production remains cost-competitive even in a low-price environment,” said Ignacio Celorrio, executive VP of legal and government affairs at Lithium Argentina.

In late 2024 mining major Rio Tinto (ASX:RIO,NYSE:RIO,LSE:RIO) announced plans to invest US$2.5 billion to expand lithium extraction at its operations on Argentina’s Rincon salar, increasing capacity from 3,000 to 60,000 MT, with full capacity reached following a three-year ramp up period beginning in 2028.

4. China

Lithium reserves: 3 million metric tons

China holds lithium reserves of 3 million metric tons. The country has a mix of deposit types; lithium brines make up the majority of its reserves, but it has spodumene and lepidolite hard-rock reserves as well.

Last year it produced 41,000 MT of the mineral, a 5,300 MT increase from the previous year. While it does have significant production and is working to increase it, the Asian nation currently still imports most of the lithium it needs for its battery cells from Australia.

China’s lithium usage is high due to its electronics manufacturing and electric vehicle industries. It also produces the majority of the world’s lithium-ion batteries and hosts most of the world’s lithium-processing facilities.

In October 2024, the US State Department accused China of flooding the market with lithium to create a low price environment to kill off ex-China competition.

“They engage in predatory pricing… (they) lower the price until competition disappears. That is what is happening,” stated Jose W. Fernandez, the US Under Secretary of State for Economic Growth, Energy and the Environment.

In early 2025, Chinese media reported that the country has significantly bolstered its lithium ore reserves, claiming national deposits now account for 16.5 percent of global resources, up from 6 percent.

The surge is attributed in part to the discovery of a 2,800 kilometer lithium belt in the western regions, with proven reserves exceeding 6.5 million tons of lithium ore and potential resources surpassing 30 million tons. Additionally, advancements in extracting lithium from salt lakes and mica have further expanded China’s reserves.

Other lithium reserves by country

While Chile, Australia, Argentina and China are home to the world’s highest lithium reserves, other countries also hold significant amounts of the metal. Here’s a quick look at these other nations:

  • United States — 1,800,000 MT
  • Canada — 1,200,000 MT
  • Brazil — 390,000 MT
  • Zimbabwe — 480,000 MT
  • Portugal — 60,000 MT

As the lithium industry continues to grow, production has followed, and many of these countries with high reserves are becoming significant producers as well.

FAQs for lithium reserves

Where in the world are the best lithium reserves?

Chile has the largest lithium reserves, and the three countries that make up the Lithium Triangle — Argentina, Bolivia and Chile — together account for a large portion of the world’s lithium reserves.

What are the biggest lithium reserves in Europe?

Portugal has the biggest lithium reserves in Europe, coming in at 60,000 metric tons. The Southern European country produced 380 MT of lithium in 2024, the same as the previous year.

Securities Disclosure: I, Georgia Williams, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

Rare pieces of memorabilia from two of the National Basketball Association’s biggest icons are hitting the auction block and are expected to sell for a combined $20 million.

Sotheby’s announced on Thursday that it is putting up for auction Michael Jordan and Kobe Bryant rookie jerseys that were worn during each of their first NBA games. The auction comes as rookie memorabilia has seen a recent surge in popularity and pricing.

“The historical weight of these two jerseys is difficult to overstate. They are as rare as they come,” said Brahm Wachter, Sotheby’s head of modern collectables, in a statement.

The jerseys will be available in separate lots beginning March 21.

Sotheby’s is auctioning off rare jerseys from Michael Jordan’s and Kobe Bryant’s rookie season.

The Jordan jersey was first worn Oct. 5, 1984, in Peoria, Illinois, where he played his first game for the Chicago Bulls in front of a crowd of just 2,000 people.

Sotheby’s said jerseys from Jordan’s rookie season are “unicorns” and rarely seen on the market.

Jordan ended up averaging 28.2 points per game that rookie season, earning him Rookie of the Year honors. He went on to win six NBA championships and has cemented his name as one of the greatest basketball players of all time.

Sotheby’s expects the iconic jersey to fetch about $10 million.

A second lot is offering Bryant’s first jersey from his 1996-97 rookie reason with the Los Angeles Lakers. Sotheby’s said the rare jersey was worn during Bryant’s first preseason and regular season games.

Bryant entered the NBA at just 18 years old and went on to win five NBA championships and two Finals MVP awards. He died in a tragic helicopter crash in 2020.

Bryant’s jersey is also expected to sell in the $10 million range.

Sotheby’s says rookie memorabilia has seen a recent uptick in demand among its customers. In October 2023, Victor Wembanyama’s game-worn San Antonio Spurs jersey sold for $762,000, and in August 2022, a 1952 Topps Mickey Mantle rookie card sold for $12.6 million.

“Early rookie jerseys represent the genesis of an athlete’s career. For collectors in search of true one-of-one treasures, this is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to own iconic pieces of basketball history,” said Wachter.

This post appeared first on NBC NEWS

Macy’s delivered another quarter of mixed results on Thursday as investors wait and see how quickly CEO Tony Spring can pull off a turnaround of the business with yet another activist investor looking to take the chain private.

Across the business, which includes the Macy’s banner, Bloomingdale’s and Blue Mercury, comparable sales during the all-important holiday quarter were down 1.1%. But comparable sales across its owned and licensed businesses, plus its online marketplace, were up 0.2%, which is the highest the metric has been since the first quarter of 2022. 

Plus, the so-called First 50 locations — the stores that Macy’s is devoting more resources to as part of its turnaround plan — saw comparable sales up 0.8%, marking the fourth quarter in a row the metric has been positive.

The two bright spots in an otherwise worse-than-expected set of results suggest Macy’s turnaround is showing some signs of life — it just might not be working fast enough.

For fiscal 2025, Macy’s is expecting adjusted earnings per share of $2.05 to $2.25 and sales of between $21 billion and $21.4 billion, lower than Wall Street expectations of $2.31 per share and $21.8 billion, according to LSEG.

Macy’s shares fell slightly in early trading.

Here’s how the department store performed during its fiscal fourth quarter, compared with what Wall Street was anticipating, based on a survey of analysts by LSEG:

The company’s reported net income for the three-month period that ended Feb. 1 was $342 million, or $1.21 per share, compared with a loss of $128 million, or a loss of 47 cents per share, a year earlier. Excluding one-time items including impairments and settlement and restructuring charges, Macy’s reported earnings of $507 million, or $1.80 per share. 

Sales dropped to $7.77 billion, down about 4% from $8.12 billion a year earlier. Like other retailers, Macy’s benefited from an extra selling week in the year-ago period, which has skewed comparisons. 

For the current quarter, Macy’s is expecting adjusted earnings per share of between 12 cents and 15 cents and sales of between $4.4 billion and $4.5 billion, far below estimates of 28 cents and $4.71 billion, according to LSEG.

On a call with analysts, chief operating officer and chief financial officer Adrian Mitchell said the company is taking a “prudent” approach to guidance given the fluid nature of the turnaround plan, cautious consumer spending and uncertainties created by recent tariff increases between the U.S. and major trade partners.

“If we weren’t in the environment that were operating in, I would be even more bullish on our potential,” CEO Spring said during a call with analysts. “But I think prudency is important at this point in time.”

Macy’s mixed results come just over a year into Spring’s tenure as the legacy department store’s chief executive and his three-year strategy to turn the business around. While Bloomingdale’s and Blue Mercury saw another quarter of positive comparable sales, growing 4.8% and 6.2%, respectively, Macy’s namesake banner continues to be the company’s laggard with comps down 1.9%. 

To address long-standing issues at the legacy banner, Spring has implemented an aggressive store closure plan that includes shuttering 150 doors and a strategy to fix its better-performing locations. As Macy’s and other department stores have shrunk over the years, it’s faced criticism for neglecting its stores, not having enough staff and falling behind on the retail essentials that are necessary to win in any environment. 

Spring has started to address those issues by investing in 50 locations and providing better staffing, merchandising and visual presentation of the company’s varied assortment.

So far, the plan appears to be working. When Macy’s added more staffing to the shoes and handbag departments at 100 test locations, those stores outperformed shops that didn’t have those investments, Spring said Thursday.

Storewide, the first 50 locations have continued to outperform the bulk of the chain, and in February, the company added an additional 75 stores to the program, bringing the total number of “reimagined” locations to 125.

“Performance of both the first 50 and the 100 test stores illustrate that when we invest in the customer experience, we can grow sales,” said Spring. “Now we must scale these changes in order to achieve our long-term goals.”

In fiscal 2024, comparable sales across Macy’s business were still down by 0.9%, but that’s an improvement of 5.1 percentage points compared to fiscal 2023. In the fourth quarter, comparable sales at the Macy’s nameplate also saw a decline of 0.9%, up 3.8 percentage points from the prior year.

Still, investors shouldn’t expect a return to growth this year. The company is projecting comparable sales for the owned stores it’s keeping open, plus its licensed businesses and online marketplace, to be down 2% to flat in fiscal 2025 compared to the prior year.

Reimagined stores now make up 36% of the 350 Macy’s locations that the business plans to keep open after it finishes closing underperforming locations. It will take time — and capital — to extend its strategy to the bulk of the chain. Spring has given the company two more years to pull it off, but whether investors have the patience to see the strategy play out — and whether macroeconomic conditions will slow it down — remains to be seen. 

In December, activist investor Barington Capital revealed it has a position in Macy’s and wants the company to cut spending, explore selling its luxury brands and take a hard look at its real estate portfolio. It’s the fourth activist push at the department store in the last decade.

Like the activists that had come right before it, Arkhouse and Brigade, many suspect that Barington is mainly after Macy’s lucrative real estate portfolio and is more interested in juicing it for profit than doing the work necessary to revitalize the chain. Still, Macy’s must act in the interest of shareholders and if it’s not doing enough to return value quickly an activist could eventually win out.

Macy’s on Thursday announced its intent to resume share buybacks under its remaining $1.4 billion share repurchase authorization, “market conditions pending.” 

“Building on our momentum, we continue to elevate the customer experience, deliver operational excellence and make prudent capital investments,” said Mitchell. “We remain committed to generating healthy free cash flow and returning capital to shareholders through share buybacks and predictable quarterly dividends.” 

This post appeared first on NBC NEWS

Macy’s delivered another quarter of mixed results on Thursday as investors wait and see how quickly CEO Tony Spring can pull off a turnaround of the business with yet another activist investor looking to take the chain private.

Across the business, which includes the Macy’s banner, Bloomingdale’s and Blue Mercury, comparable sales during the all-important holiday quarter were down 1.1%. But comparable sales across its owned and licensed businesses, plus its online marketplace, were up 0.2%, which is the highest the metric has been since the first quarter of 2022. 

Plus, the so-called First 50 locations — the stores that Macy’s is devoting more resources to as part of its turnaround plan — saw comparable sales up 0.8%, marking the fourth quarter in a row the metric has been positive.

The two bright spots in an otherwise worse-than-expected set of results suggest Macy’s turnaround is showing some signs of life — it just might not be working fast enough.

For fiscal 2025, Macy’s is expecting adjusted earnings per share of $2.05 to $2.25 and sales of between $21 billion and $21.4 billion, lower than Wall Street expectations of $2.31 per share and $21.8 billion, according to LSEG.

Macy’s shares fell slightly in early trading.

Here’s how the department store performed during its fiscal fourth quarter, compared with what Wall Street was anticipating, based on a survey of analysts by LSEG:

The company’s reported net income for the three-month period that ended Feb. 1 was $342 million, or $1.21 per share, compared with a loss of $128 million, or a loss of 47 cents per share, a year earlier. Excluding one-time items including impairments and settlement and restructuring charges, Macy’s reported earnings of $507 million, or $1.80 per share. 

Sales dropped to $7.77 billion, down about 4% from $8.12 billion a year earlier. Like other retailers, Macy’s benefited from an extra selling week in the year-ago period, which has skewed comparisons. 

For the current quarter, Macy’s is expecting adjusted earnings per share of between 12 cents and 15 cents and sales of between $4.4 billion and $4.5 billion, far below estimates of 28 cents and $4.71 billion, according to LSEG.

On a call with analysts, chief operating officer and chief financial officer Adrian Mitchell said the company is taking a “prudent” approach to guidance given the fluid nature of the turnaround plan, cautious consumer spending and uncertainties created by recent tariff increases between the U.S. and major trade partners.

“If we weren’t in the environment that were operating in, I would be even more bullish on our potential,” CEO Spring said during a call with analysts. “But I think prudency is important at this point in time.”

Macy’s mixed results come just over a year into Spring’s tenure as the legacy department store’s chief executive and his three-year strategy to turn the business around. While Bloomingdale’s and Blue Mercury saw another quarter of positive comparable sales, growing 4.8% and 6.2%, respectively, Macy’s namesake banner continues to be the company’s laggard with comps down 1.9%. 

To address long-standing issues at the legacy banner, Spring has implemented an aggressive store closure plan that includes shuttering 150 doors and a strategy to fix its better-performing locations. As Macy’s and other department stores have shrunk over the years, it’s faced criticism for neglecting its stores, not having enough staff and falling behind on the retail essentials that are necessary to win in any environment. 

Spring has started to address those issues by investing in 50 locations and providing better staffing, merchandising and visual presentation of the company’s varied assortment.

So far, the plan appears to be working. When Macy’s added more staffing to the shoes and handbag departments at 100 test locations, those stores outperformed shops that didn’t have those investments, Spring said Thursday.

Storewide, the first 50 locations have continued to outperform the bulk of the chain, and in February, the company added an additional 75 stores to the program, bringing the total number of “reimagined” locations to 125.

“Performance of both the first 50 and the 100 test stores illustrate that when we invest in the customer experience, we can grow sales,” said Spring. “Now we must scale these changes in order to achieve our long-term goals.”

In fiscal 2024, comparable sales across Macy’s business were still down by 0.9%, but that’s an improvement of 5.1 percentage points compared to fiscal 2023. In the fourth quarter, comparable sales at the Macy’s nameplate also saw a decline of 0.9%, up 3.8 percentage points from the prior year.

Still, investors shouldn’t expect a return to growth this year. The company is projecting comparable sales for the owned stores it’s keeping open, plus its licensed businesses and online marketplace, to be down 2% to flat in fiscal 2025 compared to the prior year.

Reimagined stores now make up 36% of the 350 Macy’s locations that the business plans to keep open after it finishes closing underperforming locations. It will take time — and capital — to extend its strategy to the bulk of the chain. Spring has given the company two more years to pull it off, but whether investors have the patience to see the strategy play out — and whether macroeconomic conditions will slow it down — remains to be seen. 

In December, activist investor Barington Capital revealed it has a position in Macy’s and wants the company to cut spending, explore selling its luxury brands and take a hard look at its real estate portfolio. It’s the fourth activist push at the department store in the last decade.

Like the activists that had come right before it, Arkhouse and Brigade, many suspect that Barington is mainly after Macy’s lucrative real estate portfolio and is more interested in juicing it for profit than doing the work necessary to revitalize the chain. Still, Macy’s must act in the interest of shareholders and if it’s not doing enough to return value quickly an activist could eventually win out.

Macy’s on Thursday announced its intent to resume share buybacks under its remaining $1.4 billion share repurchase authorization, “market conditions pending.” 

“Building on our momentum, we continue to elevate the customer experience, deliver operational excellence and make prudent capital investments,” said Mitchell. “We remain committed to generating healthy free cash flow and returning capital to shareholders through share buybacks and predictable quarterly dividends.” 

This post appeared first on NBC NEWS

In this video, Dave analyzes market conditions, bearish divergences, and leadership rotation in recent weeks. He examines the S&P 500 daily chart, highlighting how this week’s selloff may confirm a bearish rotation and set downside price targets using moving averages and Fibonacci retracements. To validate a potential end to the bearish phase, he shares a key technical analysis chart. What’s your S&P 500 downside objective?

This video originally premiered on March 4, 2025. Watch on StockCharts’ dedicated David Keller page!

Previously recorded videos from Dave are available at this link.