These are the 37 banks that are funding and supporting DAPL.

Women’s March is calling for people to cancel their accounts and credit lines with these creditors in opposition to their support of harming, oppressing, and stealing from Native Americans.


Wells Fargo

Citibank (CitiGroup)

JPMorgan Chase

PNC Bank

Goldman Sachs

Morgan Stanley


Bank of America

Deutsche Bank

BNP Paribas


The Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ

Mizuho Bank

TD Securities

Credit Agricole

Intesa SanPaolo

ING Bank



BBVA Securities

DNB Capital

ICBC London

SMBC Nikko Securities

Societe Generale

Royal Bank of Scotland
ABN Amro Capital

Bank of Nova Scotia (Scotiabank)

Citizens Bank

Comerica Bank

U.S. Bank


Compass Bank

Credit Suisse

DNB Capital/ASA

Sumitomo Mitsui Bank

Royal Bank of Canada

Opinion | Is It Time to Break Up Google?
Let’s face it: The biggest tech companies are monopolies.
By Jonathan Taplin

In just 10 years, the world’s five largest companies by market capitalization have all changed, save for one: Microsoft. Exxon Mobil, General Electric, Citigroup and Shell Oil are out and Apple, Alphabet (the parent company of Google), Amazon and Facebook have taken their place. 

They’re all tech companies, and each dominates its corner of the industry: Google has an 88 percent market share in search advertising, Facebook (and its subsidiaries Instagram, WhatsApp and Messenger) owns 77 percent of mobile social traffic and Amazon has a 74 percent share in the e-book market. in classic economic terms, all three are monopolies.

We have been transported back to the early 20th century, when arguments about the “curse of bigness” were advanced by President Woodrow Wilson’s counselor, Louis Brandeis, before Wilson appointed him to the Supreme Court. Brandeis wanted to eliminate monopolies, because (in the words of his biographer Melvin Urofsky) “in a democratic society the existence of large centers of private power is dangerous to the continuing vitality of a free people.” We need to look no further than the conduct of the largest banks in the 2008 financial crisis or the role Facebook and Google play in the “fake news” business to know that Brandeis was right.

While Brandeis generally opposed regulation - which he worried inevitably led to the corruption of the regulator - and instead advocated breaking up “bigness,” he made an exception for “natural” monopolies, like telephone water, and power companies and railroads, where it made sense to have one or a few companies in control of an industry.

Could it be that these companies - and Google in particular - have become natural monopolies by supplying an entire market’s demand for a service, at a price lower than that what would be offered by two competing firms? And if so, is it time to regulate them like public utilities?

Consider a historical analogy: the early days of telecommunications.

In 1895 a photograph of the business district of a large city might have shown 20 phone wires attached to most buildings. Each wire was owned by a different company, and none of them worked with the others. Without network effects, the networks themselves were almost useless.

The solution was for a single company American Telephone and Telegraph, to consolidate the industry by buying up all the small operators and creating a single network - a natural monopoly. the government permitted it, but then regulated this monopoly through the Federal Communications Commission.

AT&T (also known as the bell System) had its rates regulated and was required to spend a fixed percentage of its profits on research and development. In 1925 AT&T set up Bell Labs as a separate subsidiary with the mandate to develop the next generation of communications technology, but also to do basic research in physics and other sciences. Over the next 50 years, the basics of the digital age - the transistor, the microchip, the solar cell, the microwave, the laser, cellular telephony - al came out of Bell Labs along with eight Nobel Prizes.

In a 1956 consent degree in which the Justice Department allowed AT&T to maintain its phone monopoly, the government extracted a huge concession: all future patents were licensed (to any American company) royalty-free, and all future patents were to be licensed for a small fee. These licenses led to the creation of Texas Instruments, Motorola, Fairchild Semiconductor and many other start-ups.

True, the internet never had the same problems of interoperability. And Google’s route to dominance is different from the Bell System’s. Nevertheless, it still has all of the characteristics of a public utility.

(Continue Reading)

anonymous asked:

I've been having a lot of discussions with my white family regarding world politics, racism, etc. and somehow whenever the conversation moves to antisemitism and issues jewish people face, my father always brings up how "the jews control the media and all the money". I'm wondering if you know what factual information I could bring up to debunk that terrible idea, because it's so vile and random that all I can think to say is "Fuck you, no", but that never really helps.

OK. Let’s look at this:

Five Largest Banks in the USA according to wikipedia:

1. JP Morgan Chase: CEO Jamie Dimon - Not Jewish
2. Bank of America: CEO Brian Moynihan - Not Jewish
3. Welles Fargo: CEO Timothy J. Sloan - Not Jewish
4. Citigroup: CEO Michael Corbat - Not Jewish
5. Goldman Sachs: CEO Lloyd Blankfein - Jewish

OK. So one of five. Overrepresented, but Jewish control? Hardly.

Let’s look at some of the biggest news organizations.

1. Fox News: Part of NewsCorp which is run by Rupert Murdoch who isn’t Jewish
2. CNN: Part of Turner Broadcasting, which is owned by Time Warner which is run by Jeff Bewkes who isn’t Jewish
3. MSNBC: Part of NBC Universal which is owned by Comcast which is run by Brian Roberts who is Jewish
4. BBC: Owned by the British Government
5. Al Jazeera: Owned by Qataris who aren’t Jewish
6. RT: Owned by Russia
7. New York Times: Owned by the Sulzberger Family who are Jewish

The point here is that while there are Jews in significant roles in the media and banking and that we may even be over-represented, there is no such thing as Jewish control of those industries. Most Jews don’t work in the media or banking. Also, despite rumors to the contrary, we don’t hold weekly Elders of Zion meetings where we connect to the Hebrew Hive Mind and plot how to control the universe. 

Instead, consider this fact:

There are approximately 6 million Jews in the USA. There are 1.5 million Presbyterians. There has never been a Jewish president. There have been 8 Presbyterian Presidents including Donald Trump.

So clearly, there must be a Presbyterian conspiracy to rule the US through the Presidency. 

Does that sound absurd? That’s because it is. Every Presbyterian I know personally opposed Trump. Do they deserve to be hated because their fellow Presbyterians are over-represented in the US Presidency?

Do you get my point? 

If you are looking to confirm that Jews run the media and banking, you will find evidence to prove that. Instead of pulling together a list of Jews in the media and banking, try pulling together a list of non-Jews. I guarantee it will be much longer.

This is called confirmation bias: where people ignore information that disproves their case, no matter how much of it there might be, and instead choose to focus on data that proves their case, no matter how spurious. I do not understate when I say that confirmation bias, especially in this era of Fake News and “alternative facts,” is a profound threat to everyone in the world. 

Antisemites are particularly fond of playing “spot the Jew” in every industry they don’t like. They don’t put a lot of effort into counting all the Jewish doctors, teachers, non-profit workers, scientists, etc. etc. etc. who make enormous strides to make the world a better place. A Jew ended the polio epidemic. A Jew discovered dark matter. A Jew wrote the inscription on the Statue of Liberty.

Tell your family to start looking for Jews in fields that have made positive contributions to humanity. They’ll find we’re quite over-represented there, too. They might want to start with Jewish winners of the Nobel Prize. 

When I was in college, I won an award for “Excellence in Ancient Greek,” an award, I believe, was given out of pity/awe because I logged the most hours of any student being privately tutored outside of class in an attempt to retain some small amount of that dead language.

All recipients of language awards that year got to attend a dinner with the president of the college (I missed it because my brother was graduating the same weekend and I had to go to North Carolina to sweat outside in the Sun for 4 hours while a bunch of names were read off a list. This is the dumbest part of college and it forced me to miss my big free meal! I’m still mad.)

That summer, I lived in Williamsburg in an apartment with no air conditioning. My professor emailed me asking where he could send my award. I rolled my eyes and sent the address. A few days later, I got my little fancy-lettered certificate that I’d failed to receive at the big dinner. I also found in the envelope a gift certificate to Barnes & Noble for $500.

“Holy shit.” I said out loud to no one.

I assume Bard College expected me to save the card until the fall, and use it at the bookstore on campus for textbooks. But I’m no sucker. I knew from my time working at a Barnes & Noble in Cleveland that Starbucks gift cards don’t work at the Starbucks within B&N because it’s technically owned by the bookstore. But the Barnes & Noble gift cards do. So, essentially, I possessed $500 of free Starbucks.

I spent whole days writing or meeting friends at the Union Square Barnes & Noble. I learned employees will ask you to move from the cafe from time to time (if you sit there for 5 hours) but they’ll never ask you to leave the aisles as long as you don’t fall asleep. I also learned accidentally that, although they guard the doors at the store so you don’t steal anything, no one notices if you read a few books, then when you’re done, throw them in the garbage (I still feel guilty about doing this once but, man, what a thrill. In retrospect, I should I told someone I did it but I was too scared). I saw author talk after author talk, and even had an awkward moment with John Updike before he died. I got stoned and read the first page of as many books as I could in a day. Mostly, I remember the air conditioning. Whew. I’d have paid them just to let me sit there.

I owe a lot more to Community Bookstore and other indie bookstores, but I owe the Union Square Barnes & Noble and Bard College for keeping me sane during the summer of 2007. I never dreamed I’d be signing a book there or at the store in Cleveland where I first learned the joys of bookselling, but here we are.

I want to thank Marni at the Citigroup Barnes & Noble for being excited about this book and the last. I signed some copies there too. She’s worked at that store since it opened! Also, I was happy to see a fellow Bard alum Senia working at Union Square (she took this photo).


1. Drink apple cider vinegar. I’m serious: Every night I drink a glass of water with a splash of this in it (weird, but make sure it has “The Mother” in it — that’s what makes it work) and it’s made my skin better, my digestion better, and overall improved my life. Also, you can use it as a toner!

2. Clean your room for no “good reason.” Sometimes, when no boy’s coming over to smoosh, your room or apartment is too small to have parties, or you’ve been really busy, your living space suddenly becomes the Cave of Forgotten Dreams and No Toilet Paper. Yes, you might be single — but you should still pick up your dirty underwear occasionally, for Pete’s sake. Just do it for me.

3. Use protection. Every time. Just do it, or else you’ll end up sending your best friend panicky iPhone pictures of your vagina and asking her if she “sees anything.” (P.S. Not that this happened to me or anything. P.P.S. It was nothing.)

4. Read one classic novel a month. And not a modern classic. I’m talking Henry James/Edith Wharton/Jane Austen. I know it’s way harder than whipping out that In Touch you stole from the doctor’s office, but just think of it as flossing your brain.

5. Acquire the ability to go out to restaurants alone. You’re a grown-ass woman, and you don’t need someone else to give you permission to eat something besides sad ramen while huddled in your bed watching Top Chef.

6. If you’re waiting for a dude to change, stop waiting. He won’t.

7. On the flip: Don’t go out with a guy just because you’re afraid you won’t be able to do better or you feel like you “should” only because he is interested in you. Life is too short to sit at a bar listening to a guy you give 0.00 craps about talk about his job at Citigroup.

8. Stick with one kind of drink every time you drink. All-beer, all-cocktails (preferably with the same liquor), or all-wine will severely lessen your awful hangover the following day. But if you do wake up with one, drink one or two full-fat Mexican Cokes. This is weird, but it works, I swear to god. Why? I don’t know. I’m not a woman of science.

9. Stop with the through-the-pants jobs. Nobody besides your cousin Eric’s bar mitzvah attendees and maybe Amish guys on Rumspringa wants them.

10. Don’t worry about the future. Dear lord, stop worrying. If there’s one major thing I could tell myself at 21, it would be to calm the hell down. Everything will be fine. And if it’s not, you’ll always have apple cider vinegar.

—  Anna Breslaw
Stocks are shrugging off a troubling trend

(REUTERS/Mike Blake )

  • The S&P 500 is on pace for another record close, even with a US economic surprise index at its lowest level in a year.
  • Investors are choosing to focus on earnings growth for US corporations, which is at its best in six years.
  • Morgan Stanley has optimistic forecasts for coming GDP data, citing better consumer-spending conditions.

If stock investors are worried about economic data that has recently missed expectations, they certainly aren’t showing it.

While the S&P 500 is on pace to close at another record high, Citigroup’s US Economic Surprise Index sits at its lowest level in a year. The gauge has been in negative territory since the start of May, indicating that data has recently been coming in below forecasts.

(Business Insider / Andy Kiersz, data from Bloomberg / Citigroup)

The equity market’s willingness to overlook economic hiccups may seem out of character, but not if you consider earnings growth. Historically the biggest contributor to share-price appreciation, profit expansion has returned to the S&P 500 with a fury not seen in six years.

Companies in the index are on pace to see 14% profit expansion for the period, the most since the third quarter of 2011, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. It marks the third straight quarter of earnings growth for the S&P 500 after five consecutive periods of contraction.

Another potential explanation is that investors are optimistic about where economic data goes from here. While gross domestic product missed estimates in the first quarter, growing at the slowest pace since 2014, there are signs of an imminent recovery.

It’s a sentiment shared by Morgan Stanley, which has a particularly rosy outlook for GDP. It attributes the first-quarter miss to an inventory slowdown — one that’s likely to turn into a positive for the second quarter, equity strategists led by Michael J. Wilson wrote in a client note Monday.

Companies will also get a boost from job growth, US average hourly earnings growth and “healthy” consumer balance sheets — elements that should get shoppers to put more money to work — according to the strategists.

“US consumer spending can continue as a positive contributor to GDP growth at a relatively constant pace through the balance of 2017,” they said.

While US stocks may sit near a record, it would be a mistake to assume that everyone is a raging bull. More than anything at this point, the market is complacent — a dynamic that has manifested itself in muted price swings.

The CBOE Volatility Index, or VIX, a barometer of investor nervousness, sits close to its lowest level on record. The so-called fear gauge slipped earlier this month to its lowest level since February 2007.

NOW WATCH: Yale history professor: Trump’s path to tyranny is unfolding

More From Business Insider
Grandes bancos planean trasladar 9.000 empleos de Reino Unido por el Brexit

Por Anjuli Davies y Andrew MacAskill
LONDRES (Reuters) - Los principales bancos mundiales en Londres planean trasladar alrededor de 9.000 puestos de trabajo al continente en los próximos dos años, según fuentes y comunicados públicos, a medida que el éxodo de empleos financieros empieza a tomar forma.
La semana pasada, Standard Chartered y JPMorgan fueron los últimos bancos mundiales en detallar sus operaciones europeas después del Brexit. Se encuentran entre un número creciente de entidades que siguen adelante con planes para trasladar operaciones fuera de Londres.
El consejero delegado de Goldman Sachs, Lloyd Blankfein, dijo en una entrevista el viernes que el crecimiento de Londres como centro financiero podría “estancarse” como consecuencia de la conmoción causada por el Brexit.
Trece importantes bancos, entre ellos Goldman Sachs, UBS y Citigroup, han dado indicaciones de cómo aumentarían sus operaciones en Europa para garantizarse el acceso al mercado único de la Unión Europea cuando Reino Unido abandone el bloque.
Las negociaciones con las autoridades financieras en Europa llevan en marcha varios meses, pero los bancos están concretando cada vez más los planes para trasladar personal y operaciones.
    "Vamos a toda velocidad. Estamos en plena marcha con nuestra planificación de contingencia", dijo el jefe de banca de inversión de un banco global de Londres. “No hay esperas”.
Aunque los traslados representarían alrededor del 2 por ciento de los empleos financieros de Londres, los ingresos fiscales de Reino Unido podrían verse afectados si pierden a ricos contribuyentes que trabajan en servicios financieros.
    El Instituto de Estudios Fiscales - un ‘think tank’ centrado en cuestiones presupuestarias - dijo en un informe el jueves que el resto de la población tendría que pagar más si los que más ganan se van.
El número exacto de puestos de trabajo dependerá del acuerdo que el gobierno británico cierre con la UE. Algunos políticos dicen que los banqueros han exagerado la amenaza a la economía del Brexit.
    Se desconocen los planes de grandes bancos como Credit Suisse y Bank of America y de muchos bancos más pequeños.
Fráncfort y Dublín están emergiendo como las principales ciudades ganadoras de los planes de reubicación. Seis de los 13 bancos prefieren abrir una nueva oficina o trasladar la mayor parte de sus operaciones a Fráncfort. Tres de los bancos exploran crecer en Dublín.
Las estimaciones de posibles pérdidas de puestos de trabajo relacionados con las finanzas por el Brexit ocupan una amplia horquilla de 4.000 a 232.000, según informes diferentes de Oliver Wyman y Ernst & Young.
    Los bancos están actuando con cautela, poniendo en marcha planes de contingencia en dos etapas, para evitar perder a un personal de Londres nervioso mientras deciden cuántos empleos tendrán que trasladar.
    Esto sugiere que las cifras podrían aumentar potencialmente dependiendo del acuerdo que finalmente se negocia entre la UE y Reino Unido.
Esta primera fase afecta a pequeños números para asegurarse de que las licencias, tecnología y las infraestructuras necesarias están en orden, mientras que la siguiente dependerá de la estrategia a más largo plazo de los negocios europeos de un banco.
    El Banco de Inglaterra ha dado a las compañías financieras hasta el 14 de julio para establecer sus planes.
    Un ejecutivo en un importante banco británico dijo que obligar a las empresas a elaborar un plan hacía que fuera más probable que saliera adelante.
    "Es una consecuencia no deseada, pero cuanto más preparación se hace, más probable es que se ejecuten esos planes", dijo el ejecutivo.

Blackstone Jumps on Plans for $40 Billion Infrastructure Fund

Shares of Blackstone Group LP rose to the highest in 18 months after the private equity firm laid out plans for a $40 billion infrastructure fund.

The stock jumped as much as 7.1 percent Monday to $31.99, the highest since November 2015. It traded at $31.64 as of 11:06 a.m. in New York.

Citigroup Inc. analysts led by Bill Katz upgraded their rating on the shares Monday to a “buy,” saying the infrastructure initiative could drive up Blackstone’s valuation. Other analysts, including Credit Suisse Group AG’s Craig Siegenthaler and William Blair & Co.’s Chris Shutler, said they anticipate Blackstone’s fee income to rise and become less volatile as the firm raises and begins investing the new mega-fund.

“While we have been pointing to Blackstone’s future opportunities in the infrastructure segment, we conservatively had very little economics associated with this brand new segment embedded in our estimates,” Credit Suisse analysts led by Siegenthaler wrote in a note to clients Monday.

More from EU Finalizes Brexit Position as U.K. Threatens to Quit Talks

Blackstone on Saturday said it will form a new infrastructure business with a $40 billion fund, which when leveraged could have more than $100 billion in purchasing power. Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund agreed to commit $20 billion to the pool. Blackstone and PIF are still negotiating terms of the arrangement.

Leapfrogs Others

Investor interest in infrastructure is fueling ever-bigger pools of capital, especially as the strategy gains renewed attention from U.S. President Donald Trump, who has vowed to direct more private money toward improving roads, bridges and airports. Brookfield Asset Management Inc. scored $14 billion last year for an infrastructure fund, which was topped in January by Global Infrastructure Partners, which closed on $15.8 billion.

More from Trump Dials Back Islam Critique as He Basks in Saudi Deals

“Blackstone just leapfrogged most of the infrastructure world,” Evercore ISI analyst Glenn Schorr said Monday. The fund, which New York-based Blackstone plans to structure as a permanent-capital vehicle, is a “perfect fit” because the firm will have access to long-dated money and investors with long-term liabilities can benefit, Evercore analysts led by Schorr wrote to clients.

While Blackstone hasn’t disclosed plans for fees on the fund, Credit Suisse’s Siegenthaler said he anticipates them to be similar to terms of the firm’s core-plus real estate pool, which targets stable, income-producing property that can be held for a long term. Blackstone earns 1 percent on invested capital in that fund and gets a 10 percent share of investment profits.

More from Ford Names Hackett CEO as Stock Drop Prompts Fields’s Ouster

Led by Chief Executive Officer Steve Schwarzman and President Tony James, Blackstone managed $368.2 billion across private equity, real estate, credit and hedge funds as of March 31. Schwarzman, 70, chairs Trump’s Strategic and Policy forum, a group of business leaders who advise the president on job creation and economic growth.

“This business could benefit significantly from a new infrastructure spending plan,” Siegenthaler wrote, “which has been one of President Trump’s key priorities as the president plans to address the $2 trillion infrastructure funding gap in the U.S.”

Peter Grauer, chairman of Bloomberg LP, the parent of Bloomberg News, is a non-executive director at Blackstone.

More from

Read Blackstone Jumps on Plans for $40 Billion Infrastructure Fund on

UBS has hired one of Wall Street's most senior women to oversee $600 billion

(Suni Harford.UBS)
UBS’ asset-management arm has hired Suni Harford as its head of investments.

Harford will oversee about $600 billion and about 500 investment staffers from New York, according to a press release.

Harford is replacing Dawn Fitzpatrick, who left the bank earlier this year to join George Soros’ family office as chief investment officer.

Harford joins UBS from Citigroup, where she previously worked for 24 years. She most recently was regional head of markets for North America.

Harford’s hire is significant because few women hold executive investment roles within asset-management firms. At hedge funds, for instance, it is unusual to find women at the helm.

NOW WATCH: Crocs has a new comeback plan — here’s why it could actually work

More From Business Insider

More than 6 in 10 office workers in the US eat at their desks. They chow down while making calls, sitting in meetings, and, yes, even writing the story you’re reading right now. It’s sad.

Brian Finke celebrates the sadness in his deadpan series Desktop Dining. His technique perfectly captures the hunched posture, blank stare, and inevitable mess of the desktop epicurean. Wrappers litter workstations, keyboard glisten with grease, and paper plates replace dinnerware because who has time to wash that stuff? Everyone looks frantic, frazzled, and, well, sad. “This story allowed for wonderfully awkward photographs,” Finke says.

MORE. Here’s How Sad You Look When You Eat Lunch at Your Desk

FIFA Said to Fire Governance Official Amid Russian Pressure

Miguel Maduro, a Portuguese politician and corporate governance expert hired by FIFA to boost the soccer body’s image following a corruption scandal, was fired amid increasing internal pressure, according to several people familiar with the matter.

Maduro, who was hired by FIFA President Gianni Infantino at last year’s annual congress, was told of his dismissal Tuesday, hours before he was scheduled to attend this year’s meeting in Manama, Bahrain, according to the people, who asked not to be identified because they aren’t authorized to discuss the subject. Maduro’s ouster was linked to his role in blocking Russian World Cup official Vitaly Mutko from retaining his seat on FIFA’s ruling council.

More from This Is the Five-Word Message That Got a Citigroup Trader Fired

Russia won the right in 2010 to host next year’s World Cup in a disputed vote that eventually led to the downfall of long-time FIFA President Joseph “Sepp” Blatter after allegations of improprieties. Russia and Qatar, which won the rights to the 2022 event at the same meeting, denied any wrongdoing. Resulting investigations in the U.S. and Europe have brought indictments against more than 30 officials and executives from the sport, and helped cause the eventual departure of Blatter, his top deputy and FIFA’s chief finance officer.

Maduro’s committee barred Mutko because his role as Russia’s deputy prime minister conflicted with FIFA’s rules on political neutrality. Maduro was told by high-ranking FIFA officials that his decision to block Mutko from standing for re-selection to the governing council would lead to serious difficulties with Russia, the people said.

More from Trump Fires FBI Director Comey Amid Russia Meddling Inquiry

Maduro declined to comment. FIFA and Russia’s World Cup organizing committee couldn’t be immediately reached to comment. Mutko told Russia’s Tass news agency in March that the decision to remove him from the ruling council wouldn’t have an effect on the 2018 event.

Maduro’s ouster Tuesday, the same day that FIFA removed its top ethics officials, investigator Cornel Borbely and adjudicatory judge Hans-Joachim Eckert. The two men traveled to Bahrain to denounce FIFA’s decision, saying there were hundreds of pending cases and their departures effectively ended FIFA’s efforts to reform itself following the scandal that erupted in May 2015 when U.S. authorities indicted several officials on corruption charges.

More from Comey Ouster Threatens to Backfire on Troubled White House

Infantino hailed Maduro a year ago, saying the hiring proved FIFA was serious about reform. Eckert and Borbely had been hired by Infantino’s predecessor Blatter.

Other decisions taken by Maduro also led to internal opposition. Last month Sheikh Ahmad al-Sabah, for more than a decade one of the most influential figures in sports politics, quit his roles, including his seat on FIFA’s ruling council. That came a day after Maduro’s eight-person governance and review committee asked him to resubmit for checks following a former FIFA officials guilty plea in the U.S. Ahmad, who was identified as a co-conspirator in that bribery and vote-buying case, has vowed to clear his name.

Top FIFA officials warned Maduro against blocking Mutko, saying the Russians had told them that it could cause difficulties for the 2018 World Cup. With a year to go, Russian broadcasters haven’t signed a television contract for the tournament.

The fallout from the departures of FIFA’s key governance officials has overshadowed its annual meeting, where officials were expected to hear how the organization had been moving on from institutional and reputational crises and hear about plans for the enlarged 2026 World Cup, a 48-team event that a joint offer from the U.S., Mexico and Canada is strong favorite to stage.

More from

Read FIFA Said to Fire Governance Official Amid Russian Pressure on

S&P Downgrades Australian Lenders on Housing Concerns
Citigroup Credit Sector Specialist Anthony Ip discusses Australian lenders credit ratings, housing and economy. He speaks on “Bloomberg Daybreak: Australia.” (Source: Bloomberg) Read more
Amazon Could Affect Local Australian Retailers
Citigroup Retail Analyst Bryan Raymond discusses the Australian retail sector and talks about his outlook for Amazon. He speaks on “Bloomberg Daybreak: Australia.” (Source: Bloomberg) Read more