wild casino promotions
Restoration of caretaker system to be proposedCIBC Asset Management Inc Buys New Shares in STAG Industrial, Inc. (NYSE:STAG)
The big picture: TCL, one of the world's largest television manufacturers, has produce five AI-generated short films to air on its free, ad-supported streaming service. The movies, made over a 12-week period, are part of a pilot program meant to normalize AI-created TV shows and movies. While technically impressive at times, the flicks are plagued by the same shortcomings we've seen in other modern AI-generated content. For example, most human characters in the movies exhibit vacant expressions, struggle to vocalize emotion, and move unnaturally. Speech often isn't synched properly with mouth movements. Written words and text are also problematic, usually resulting in in a jumbled mess of undecipherable characters and symbols. And that's just scratching the surface. There are some positives to consider with the current state of AI video – namely, the fact that quality is improving at an impressive rate. As 404 Media highlights , "this is the worst it will ever be" and that's at least something. They were made using a variety of well-known AI tools including Runway, ComfyUI, and Nuke. For its part, TCL didn't simply phone it in. Each film had lots of real people working on them in pre-production and post-production roles. Chris Regina, TCL's chief content officer for North America, told 404 Media that more than 50 people had a hand in creating the content. "These are stories about people, made by people, but powered by AI." Paul Johansson, who directed Sun Day – a film about a girl living on a rainy planet that wins a lottery to see the Sun for the first time, said he understands that technology is coming – fast – and they have to be prepared for it. The fact that humans had a significant role in shaping the films helps push the narrative that AI isn't going to replace real actors in Hollywood – at least, not right away. Assuming AI continues to evolve like it has in recent years, the need for human oversight could taper. The short films, averaging five to 10 minutes in length, are available to view in TCL's streaming app and have also been shared on YouTube.
Golden Ocean Group Limited ( NASDAQ:GOGL – Get Free Report )’s stock price gapped down prior to trading on Thursday . The stock had previously closed at $11.83, but opened at $11.18. Golden Ocean Group shares last traded at $11.13, with a volume of 411,485 shares traded. Analyst Ratings Changes A number of research firms recently weighed in on GOGL. Jefferies Financial Group dropped their target price on Golden Ocean Group from $15.50 to $14.50 and set a “hold” rating for the company in a research report on Wednesday, August 28th. StockNews.com downgraded Golden Ocean Group from a “buy” rating to a “hold” rating in a research report on Saturday, October 5th. Finally, Pareto Securities restated a “hold” rating and issued a $12.50 target price on shares of Golden Ocean Group in a research report on Thursday. Check Out Our Latest Analysis on Golden Ocean Group Golden Ocean Group Stock Down 0.4 % Golden Ocean Group ( NASDAQ:GOGL – Get Free Report ) last announced its quarterly earnings results on Wednesday, August 28th. The shipping company reported $0.32 EPS for the quarter, topping analysts’ consensus estimates of $0.28 by $0.04. The business had revenue of $197.35 million for the quarter, compared to analysts’ expectations of $187.74 million. Golden Ocean Group had a return on equity of 10.57% and a net margin of 22.01%. As a group, sell-side analysts forecast that Golden Ocean Group Limited will post 1.18 earnings per share for the current year. Golden Ocean Group Dividend Announcement The business also recently declared a quarterly dividend, which was paid on Friday, September 20th. Shareholders of record on Wednesday, September 11th were paid a $0.30 dividend. The ex-dividend date was Wednesday, September 11th. This represents a $1.20 dividend on an annualized basis and a yield of 10.77%. Golden Ocean Group’s dividend payout ratio (DPR) is currently 112.15%. Hedge Funds Weigh In On Golden Ocean Group A number of large investors have recently bought and sold shares of GOGL. Assenagon Asset Management S.A. increased its stake in shares of Golden Ocean Group by 1,372.9% during the second quarter. Assenagon Asset Management S.A. now owns 1,260,278 shares of the shipping company’s stock valued at $17,392,000 after buying an additional 1,174,716 shares during the period. Sei Investments Co. purchased a new position in shares of Golden Ocean Group during the first quarter valued at approximately $677,000. Empowered Funds LLC increased its stake in shares of Golden Ocean Group by 5.4% during the third quarter. Empowered Funds LLC now owns 929,764 shares of the shipping company’s stock valued at $12,440,000 after buying an additional 47,302 shares during the period. Vanguard Group Inc. increased its stake in shares of Golden Ocean Group by 273.9% during the first quarter. Vanguard Group Inc. now owns 5,190,885 shares of the shipping company’s stock valued at $67,274,000 after buying an additional 3,802,652 shares during the period. Finally, Blue Trust Inc. increased its stake in shares of Golden Ocean Group by 10,268.6% during the second quarter. Blue Trust Inc. now owns 19,493 shares of the shipping company’s stock valued at $253,000 after buying an additional 19,305 shares during the period. 22.00% of the stock is owned by hedge funds and other institutional investors. Golden Ocean Group Company Profile ( Get Free Report ) Golden Ocean Group Limited, a shipping company, owns and operates a fleet of dry bulk vessels worldwide. The company’s dry bulk vessels comprise Newcastlemax, Capesize, and Panamax vessels operating in the spot and time charter markets. It also transports a range of bulk commodities, including ores, coal, grains, and fertilizers. Recommended Stories Receive News & Ratings for Golden Ocean Group Daily - Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analysts' ratings for Golden Ocean Group and related companies with MarketBeat.com's FREE daily email newsletter .Why I Am A Vegetarian: A Life Journey Toward Interconnectedness
In late December, Donald Trump suggested the United States should retake control of the Panama Canal in his second term. He claims Panama is imposing “ridiculous” fees on ships passing through this vital waterway connecting the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. The Panama Canal is a man-made waterway that cuts through central Panama for 51 miles, using a system of locks and reservoirs to connect the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. This route saves ships from traveling an extra 7,000 miles around South America’s Cape Horn. “The Panama Canal is considered a VITAL National Asset for the United States, due to its critical role to America’s Economy and National Security,” Trump said on Truth Social on Dec. 21. “The fees being charged by Panama are ridiculous, especially knowing the extraordinary generosity that has been bestowed to Panama by the U.S. This complete ‘rip-off’ of our Country will immediately stop,” he added. Trump repeated these claims during a speech at Turning Point USA’s AmericaFest in Arizona on Dec. 22. “If the principles, both moral and legal, of this magnanimous gesture of giving are not followed, then we will demand that the Panama Canal be returned to the United States of America in full quickly and without question,” he said. Following Trump’s comments, Google search data shows there’s been a spike in searches of people asking which country — the U.S. or Panama — has authority over the Panama Canal. THE QUESTION Does the U.S. have any authority over the Panama Canal? THE SOURCES Panama Canal Authority The Embassy of Panama U.S. Department of State’s Office of the Historian U.S. Census Bureau The Library of Congress Panamanian President José Raúl Mulino GovInfo , a service of the United States Government Publishing Office that provides free public access to official publications from all three branches of the federal government Jorge Luis Quijano, the Panama Canal administrator from 2014 to 2019, Benjamin Gedan, Ph.D. , director of the Latin America Program at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington, D.C. THE ANSWER No, the U.S. does not have any authority over the Panama Canal, but it used to. Sign up for the VERIFY Fast Facts daily Newsletter! WHAT WE FOUND The U.S. does not have any authority over the Panama Canal. The waterway, which was built by the U.S. in the early 1900s, opened in 1914 and remained under U.S. government control until treaties signed in 1977 by President Jimmy Carter set terms for its eventual transfer to Panama. The two countries jointly operated the canal until December 1999, after which Panama assumed full control. On Dec. 22, in response to Trump’s comments, Panamanian President José Raúl Mulino posted a video on X declaring that “every square meter of the canal belongs to Panama and will continue to belong” to his country. Without mentioning Trump by name, Mulino addressed the president-elect’s complaints over rising fees for ships crossing the canal, saying they are set by experts who take into account operational costs, and supply and demand factors. “The tariffs are not set on a whim,” Mulino said. He noted that Panama has expanded the canal over the years to increase ship traffic “on its own initiative,” and added that shipping fee increases help pay for improvements. “Panamanians may have different views on many issues, but when it comes to our canal, and our sovereignty, we will all unite under our Panamanian flag,” Mulino said. A little over an hour later, Trump responded to Mulino’s remarks on Truth Social, saying: “We’ll see about that!” He also posted a picture of a U.S. flag planted in the canal zone under the phrase, “Welcome to the United States Canal!” The Panama Canal’s history An effort to establish a canal through Panama began with the French in 1880, but financial troubles made the initiative fail after nearly nine years of little progress, according to the Embassy of Panama in the United States . Malaria, yellow fever and other tropical diseases devastated a workforce that was already struggling with especially dangerous terrain and harsh working conditions in the jungle. These conditions eventually cost more than 20,000 lives by some estimates, the U.S. Department of State’s Office of the Historian says on its website . At this time, Panama was a province of Colombia, which refused to ratify a subsequent 1901 treaty licensing U.S. interests to build the Panama Canal. President Theodore Roosevelt responded to Colombia’s refusal by dispatching U.S. warships to Panama’s Atlantic and Pacific coasts. The U.S. also pre-wrote a constitution that would be ready after Panamanian independence, which gave American forces “the right to intervene in any part of Panama, to re-establish public peace and constitutional order.” In part because Colombian troops were unable to traverse harsh jungles, Panama declared an effectively bloodless independence within hours on Nov. 3, 1903. The newly-declared Republic of Panama soon signed the Hay-Bunau-Varilla Treaty of 1903 , which provided the U.S. with a 10-mile wide strip of land for the canal, a one-time $10 million payment to Panama, and an annual annuity of $250,000. The U.S. also agreed to guarantee the independence of Panama, according to the Office of the Historian. After more than a decade of construction, the U.S. finished building the canal on Aug. 15, 1914. Almost immediately, some Panamanians began questioning the validity of U.S. control of the canal, which led to what became known in the country as the “generational struggle” to take it over. The U.S. annulled its right to intervene in Panama in the 1930s. By the 1970s, with its administrative costs sharply increasing, the U.S. government spent years negotiating with Panama to cede control of the waterway. The Carter administration worked with the government of Omar Torrijos, and the two sides eventually decided that their best chance for ratification was to submit two treaties to the U.S. Senate , the “Permanent Neutrality Treaty” and the “Panama Canal Treaty.” The first, which continues in perpetuity, gives the U.S. the right to act to ensure the canal remains open and secure. The second stated that the U.S. would turn over the canal to Panama on Dec. 31, 1999. Both were signed in 1977 and ratified the following year. “At noon on December 31, 1999, Panama took over full operation, administration and maintenance of the Canal, in compliance with the Torrijos-Carter Treaties negotiated with the United States in 1977,” said the Embassy of Panama. “The waterway is now managed by the Panama Canal Authority, an autonomous government entity.” Jorge Luis Quijano, who served as the Panama Canal’s administrator from 2014 to 2019, says the neutrality treaty does give the U.S. the right to act if the canal’s operation is threatened due to military conflict — but not to reassert control. “There’s no clause of any kind in the neutrality agreement that allows for the taking back of the canal,” Quijano told the Associated Press. “Legally, there’s no way, under normal circumstances, to recover territory that was used previously.” Benjamin Gedan, director of the Latin America Program at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington, D.C., agrees. “There’s very little wiggle room, absent a second U.S. invasion of Panama, to retake control of the Panama Canal in practical terms,” Gedan said. The Associated Press contributed to this report .Trump calls for end to 'spring forward, fall back' clock changesInfinix introduces vibrant colors for HOT 50 Series, a bold lifestyle statement for new year
'Have a Great Day': Greg Gutfeld Just DECIMATES Nate Silver for Claiming Crime is ACKSHUALLY Down in NYC
Article content The lottery begins every morning at 11. Recommended Videos About 60 people show up regularly for the 30 beds open each night at Ark Aid Street Mission on Dundas Street. The names are drawn and the lucky 30 have a warm place to stay the night. The rest, well, who knows for sure? “We have a very imperfect system,” Sarah Campbell, executive director of Ark Aid Street Mission, said. “It has been really really brutal. How do you choose who gets the warmth?” Welcome to this year’s winter response to homelessness in London, where a lottery can mean the difference between life or death. As temperatures dropped during the weekend, it appears another person without shelter or a home died, found at the entrance to the Central library on Dundas Street. London police and outreach workers confirmed the death Monday but had few other details. That brings to 67 the number of homeless Londoners of whom outreach worker Dan Oudshoorn is aware who died in 2024. “What is it like this winter? It’s appalling, it’s awful, it’s cruel the way that people are abandoned with less supports than ever,” he said. “Past winters, we had additional warming centres. Those aren’t running. Past winters we had more extra beds. Those aren’t running.” London has 396 shelter beds that generally operate at 97 to 98 per cent capacity, a city official said. The most recent count from city hall said 335 people were living without shelter, though officials added the reality is probably higher. Each winter since 2020, city hall and organizations have worked together to add more beds to help those living outside. Last year, the winter response added 120 places for people to stay warm overnight, in shelter beds and in some places on chairs where they could sit, have a coffee and get warm. This year there are officially 90, though they come with some catches. The 60 beds at Ark Aid Mission’s Cronyn-Warner Centre are for long-term use for people gaining stability, and generally aren’t available for drop-ins. They were created last winter and funded by city council through the year, but have remained full all year, Campbell said. The 30 drop-in beds at Ark Aid’s main building Dundas Street can’t remain there past Dec. 31, thanks to a new council rule that bans resting spaces on main streets in business improvement areas. It’s been difficult to find a new place for the 30 beds, partly because landlords don’t want the gathering of people outside that a drop-in centre naturally attracts, Campbell said. “No matter how big of a space we find, there will be more people who need the space than the space will provide,” she said. In the meantime, the organization has tried to find a way to allocate fairly the limited number of beds in its Dundas Street location, Campbell said. “With first come, first serve, which is how we have done it before, people were threatening each other to get in the building first, to be on the list first. It was causing violence,” she said. Having staff decide who needed a bed most put them at risk of threats and violence, and seemed just as arbitrary, Campbell said. Now, people come in during the morning and put their name on a list. “Then, we do, like, a draw system. We have the community members themselves pull the names because we don’t want to be preferential,” she said. There’s often 60 people on the list, and after that, the phone calls come in from other agencies seeking beds, Campbell said. “We get people who have acute problems, or coming with a health issue and have to get back to the hospital tomorrow for the next step of treatment and we have to keep them warm and keep track of them so they get care,” she said. Staff will hold a bed or two back for the acute cases, or simply crowd people in when things grow even more dire, Campbell said. “We try all kinds of things to make it work,” she said. The effort will have to be more robust in January, Campbell said. In December, people on social assistance get their cheques earlier and the spirit of Christmas prompts donations to non-profits, she said. But come January, both the temperatures and attention drop, Campbell said. Ark Aid is open throughout Christmas and can accept donations from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. at 696 Dundas St. she said. “But I would suggest people also consider the long-term ways they can help. Is it sponsoring a monthly spot for people inside? Is it making a commitment to volunteer or bring in supplies regularly?” Campbell said. “But the No. 1 thing is to really listen to the policies put forward and ask, ‘Will this really help solve the problem?’ Because we need housing. What is going to have an impact so people can access affordable housing?” Everybody points fingers about the homeless crisis, Oudshoorn said. “But the fact of the matter is, if there was a political will to address this more adequately, or in a way that was, like, genuinely honouring of the sacredness of each human life, that way could be found,” he said. rrichmond@postmedia.comNavient NAVI has been analyzed by 6 analysts in the last three months, revealing a diverse range of perspectives from bullish to bearish. The table below offers a condensed view of their recent ratings, showcasing the changing sentiments over the past 30 days and comparing them to the preceding months. Bullish Somewhat Bullish Indifferent Somewhat Bearish Bearish Total Ratings 0 0 4 1 1 Last 30D 0 0 1 0 0 1M Ago 0 0 1 0 0 2M Ago 0 0 0 0 1 3M Ago 0 0 2 1 0 Insights from analysts' 12-month price targets are revealed, presenting an average target of $14.67, a high estimate of $17.00, and a low estimate of $11.00. This upward trend is apparent, with the current average reflecting a 2.59% increase from the previous average price target of $14.30. Breaking Down Analyst Ratings: A Detailed Examination An in-depth analysis of recent analyst actions unveils how financial experts perceive Navient. The following summary outlines key analysts, their recent evaluations, and adjustments to ratings and price targets. Analyst Analyst Firm Action Taken Rating Current Price Target Prior Price Target Nathaniel Richam-Odoi B of A Securities Lowers Neutral $16.00 $17.00 Richard Shane JP Morgan Lowers Neutral $15.00 $15.50 Moshe Orenbuch TD Cowen Lowers Sell $13.00 $14.00 Terry Ma Barclays Raises Underweight $11.00 $10.00 Richard Shane JP Morgan Raises Neutral $16.00 $15.00 Nathaniel Richam-Odoi B of A Securities Announces Neutral $17.00 - Key Insights: Action Taken: In response to dynamic market conditions and company performance, analysts update their recommendations. Whether they 'Maintain', 'Raise', or 'Lower' their stance, it signifies their reaction to recent developments related to Navient. This insight gives a snapshot of analysts' perspectives on the current state of the company. Rating: Analysts unravel qualitative evaluations for stocks, ranging from 'Outperform' to 'Underperform'. These ratings offer insights into expectations for the relative performance of Navient compared to the broader market. Price Targets: Understanding forecasts, analysts offer estimates for Navient's future value. Examining the current and prior targets provides insight into analysts' changing expectations. Capture valuable insights into Navient's market standing by understanding these analyst evaluations alongside pertinent financial indicators. Stay informed and make strategic decisions with our Ratings Table. Stay up to date on Navient analyst ratings. If you are interested in following small-cap stock news and performance you can start by tracking it here . About Navient Navient Corp provides technology-enabled education finance and business processing solutions that simplify complex programs and help millions of people achieve success. It operates business in three segments: Federal Education Loans, Consumer Lending and Business Processing. Navient: A Financial Overview Market Capitalization: With restricted market capitalization, the company is positioned below industry averages. This reflects a smaller scale relative to peers. Negative Revenue Trend: Examining Navient's financials over 3 months reveals challenges. As of 30 September, 2024, the company experienced a decline of approximately -58.06% in revenue growth, reflecting a decrease in top-line earnings. As compared to competitors, the company encountered difficulties, with a growth rate lower than the average among peers in the Financials sector. Net Margin: Navient's net margin falls below industry averages, indicating challenges in achieving strong profitability. With a net margin of -1.13%, the company may face hurdles in effective cost management. Return on Equity (ROE): Navient's ROE is below industry standards, pointing towards difficulties in efficiently utilizing equity capital. With an ROE of -0.07%, the company may encounter challenges in delivering satisfactory returns for shareholders. Return on Assets (ROA): Navient's ROA is below industry standards, pointing towards difficulties in efficiently utilizing assets. With an ROA of -0.0%, the company may encounter challenges in delivering satisfactory returns from its assets. Debt Management: The company faces challenges in debt management with a debt-to-equity ratio higher than the industry average. With a ratio of 18.32 , caution is advised due to increased financial risk. Understanding the Relevance of Analyst Ratings Within the domain of banking and financial systems, analysts specialize in reporting for specific stocks or defined sectors. Their work involves attending company conference calls and meetings, researching company financial statements, and communicating with insiders to publish "analyst ratings" for stocks. Analysts typically assess and rate each stock once per quarter. Some analysts publish their predictions for metrics such as growth estimates, earnings, and revenue to provide additional guidance with their ratings. When using analyst ratings, it is important to keep in mind that stock and sector analysts are also human and are only offering their opinions to investors. Breaking: Wall Street's Next Big Mover Benzinga's #1 analyst just identified a stock poised for explosive growth. This under-the-radar company could surge 200%+ as major market shifts unfold. Click here for urgent details . This article was generated by Benzinga's automated content engine and reviewed by an editor. © 2024 Benzinga.com. Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved.
Because of the career choices that I made in life, the professional and personal circles that I run around in tend to be composed of those who would rather have a piece of wood as president over Donald Trump. Not a nice piece of curly maple or a beautiful spalted oak – the kind that would typically be made into toothpicks or ground down to put into low-quality parmesan to prevent it from clumping. I remember in 2016 when Trump beat Hillary Clinton to win his first term how many of those around me reacted so extremely. Some were appalled and disgusted. Most were deeply concerned and anxious about the damage Trump could do to our country. We had many discussions where I attempted to argue that the impact that Trump’s presidency would have on the average American would likely be negligible. I argued that they were being excessively apocalyptic and fearful. As predicted, life went on. Unless you insisted on waiting with bated breath to be appalled by the next outrageous thing that Trump said on Twitter or on the podium, everyday life just didn’t change much for the vast majority of people. The extent to which what happens in the capital affects us is sometimes significantly inflated by our own expectations and emotional responses. Similarly to Trump’s recent campaign, in 2016 he also ran on being tough on immigration. Despite his promises, all of the many illegals that I know continued their peacefully illegal lives undisturbed – some even visited their families in Mexico, only to once again very gracefully cha-cha their way past the best efforts of the Border Patrol. Forgive my abuse of anecdotal evidence, I can’t help myself. For what it’s worth, Obama deported many more people than Trump. On the other hand, it would be a departure from reality to claim that federal politics play no significant role in our lives. If it wasn’t for Trump, we would still have nationwide access to abortion, among other things. Those living in states with heavy restrictions on abortion can go to another state to undergo the procedure. It’s an annoyance and an unnecessary burden that no woman should have to shoulder, but it’s a temporary one. Some court decision or some act of Congress will inevitably reestablish universal access to abortion. In the meantime, even Republican states are gradually restoring abortion rights. Currently, one of the most prominent sources of outrage with respect to the next Trump administration stems from the choices that he’s making in staffing his cabinet and other positions. What sort of havoc will Robert F. Kennedy Jr. wreak as the head of the Department of Health and Human Services? Will all of our teeth fall out simultaneously after he removes the fluoride from the water? Only time will tell. Pete Hegseth to lead the Pentagon is another bold choice by our future president. He’s completely unqualified and wants to remove women from positions of combat, being the chivalrous gentleman that he is. Will his appointment have any impact at all on our lives? Related Articles Opinion Columnists | Elon Musk gets it: America’s legal immigration process need to change Opinion Columnists | Susan Shelley: The mundane reality of UFOs Opinion Columnists | Larry Wilson: On climate change, Trump is no King Canute Opinion Columnists | Blame Schwarzenegger for ‘terminating’ affordable housing in California Opinion Columnists | Every Thanksgiving, I’m thankful for free markets and private property All this is to say that it’s not unreasonable to be concerned for the future of our country when we have a president who attempted to undermine the democratic process. But this constant obsession about what is going on in government is counterproductive to our health and wellbeing. The vast majority of the time, what politicians decide to do has very little appreciable impact on us, particularly when compared to everything else that is going on in our lives. It makes it so much more perplexing that many allow their mental lives to be disproportionately consumed by the poor decisions of the government. There are countless stories out there of individuals shunning their loved ones for simply supporting one candidate or another. Many are now considering refusing to attend the same holiday gatherings as their brothers or sisters, all over silly political disagreements. This is a time to appreciate your loved ones despite whatever flaws you believe them to have, so retire the pitchfork and relax a little bit. Rafael Perez is a columnist for the Southern California News Group. He is a doctoral candidate in philosophy at the University of Rochester. You can reach him at rafaelperezocregister@gmail.com.Staten Island HS soccer: Despite rain, boys and girls’ all-star games bring out best in everyone
No. 24 Illinois stuns Rutgers on Bryant's 40-yard TD reception with 4 seconds left
‘Swiggy Instamart ruined me...’: Delhi man’s condom order left him embarrassed at work; sparkling a privacy debate that goes viral
SAN DIEGO, Dec. 24, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Franklin Access is pleased to announce a significant legal victory in its shareholder litigation, “In re Franklin Wireless Corp. Derivative Litigation”, Case No. 21-cv-1837-BEN-MSB. On December 19th, 2024, following an 8-day jury trial, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California determined that the actions of the Franklin Wireless officers and directors during the relevant time period resulted in only nominal damage to the company. Plaintiffs sought in excess of $110 million in damages from the officers and directors of the company. After less than a single day of deliberation, the jury reached its verdict and awarded nominal damages of $0.99. Franklin’s officers and directors were represented by lawyers Stephen M. Lobbin, of the law firm SML Avvocati P.C., and Philip Tencer, of TencerSherman LLP. Resolution of this case ends a long and difficult time for the Company’s Officers and Directors, and provides certainty and clarity for the future. Management will now be free to focus on its mission to deliver innovative connectivity solutions without the distraction of litigation. For more information about Franklin Wireless, visit FranklinAccess.com. About Franklin Access Franklin Wireless (FKWL) specializes in integrated solutions, leveraging 4G LTE and 5G technologies. From mobile device management to network management solutions, the company designs innovative connectivity solutions for the digital age. Explore more at FranklinAccess.com. Safe Harbor Statement Certain statements in this press release constitute "forward-looking statements" within the meaning of the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Actual results may differ materially from those expressed or implied due to various factors. For media inquiries, please contact: marketing@franklinaccess.comTV’s Dr. Oz invested in businesses regulated by agency Trump wants him to lead
ENPH Investors Have Opportunity to Lead Enphase Energy, Inc. Securities Fraud LawsuitUnion blasts comments by Quebec minister mulling law to intervene to end strikes MONTREAL — Canada's largest union is denouncing a statement by Quebec's labour minister, who suggested he might try to bring in legislation to give the province more power to end labour disputes. Canadian Press Dec 24, 2024 12:45 PM Dec 24, 2024 12:50 PM Share by Email Share on Facebook Share on X Share on LinkedIn Print Share via Text Message Quebec Labour Minister Jean Boulet responds to the Opposition during question period at the legislature in Quebec City, Tuesday, Nov. 26, 2024. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Jacques Boissinot MONTREAL — Canada's largest union is denouncing a statement by Quebec's labour minister, who suggested he might try to bring in legislation to give the province more power to end labour disputes. The Canadian Union of Public Employees is describing Jean Boulet as "the Grinch trying to steal the right to strike." Boulet told CBC/Radio-Canada that he's mulling changing the province's labour code to allow the government to suspend a strike or lockout and impose arbitration. The legislation would be modeled on a similar law at the federal level that has been used to end strikes at Canada's ports, railways and at Canada Post. Boulet told the outlet he's also considering expanding the province's list of essential services, which could prevent workers in some sectors from striking. His office did not respond for a request for comment. CUPE says the right to strike is protected under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and attempts to undermine it will be "inevitably" struck down in court. "The right to strike is a fundamental right, a cornerstone of our democracy," CUPE Quebec President Patrick Gloutney said in a news release. "Taking advantage of the holiday season to try to weaken it shows deep disdain for those who fight every day for fair working conditions." This report by The Canadian Press was first published Dec. 24, 2024. The Canadian Press See a typo/mistake? Have a story/tip? This has been shared 0 times 0 Shares Share by Email Share on Facebook Share on X Share on LinkedIn Print Share via Text Message More National News Premiers urge Trudeau to extend deadline for charitable donations after postal strike Dec 24, 2024 12:17 PM Dismiss Trump taunts, expert says after 'churlish' social media posts about Canada Dec 24, 2024 12:02 PM Ontario First Nation challenging selection of underground nuclear waste site in court Dec 24, 2024 11:41 AM Featured Flyer
Will inflation stick around? What oil, gold and stocks are saying about prices - MarketWatch