American coastal insurance COO sells $117,800 in stock
Chief Operating Officer of American Coastal Insurance Sells $117,800 Worth of Stock
Trump is allowing Putin to emerge victorious in the Russia-Ukraine conflict
Russian and Ukrainian delegations met in Istanbul for the second time in a month on June 2 to explore the possibility of a ceasefire. The talks lasted just over an hour and, once again, produced no meaningful progress. As with the May 16 negotiations, both sides claimed they had laid the groundwork for prisoner exchanges. But despite Ukraine’s offer to hold another meeting before the end of June, a deep and unbridgeable divide remains between Kyiv and Moscow.
More meetings are unlikely to change that. Russia continues to demand Kyiv’s capitulation to the full list of conditions President Vladimir Putin set at the war’s outset: Ukrainian neutrality, a government reshaped to suit Moscow’s interests, and the surrender of the Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhia and Kherson regions. Between the two rounds of talks, Putin even raised the stakes, adding a demand for a “buffer zone” in northern Ukraine.
Kyiv, meanwhile, remains resolute. It refuses to cede any territory and maintains that a full ceasefire along all fronts is a non-negotiable precondition for serious negotiations.
Still, both sides appear prepared to continue the diplomatic charade.
That’s because these talks are not truly about achieving peace or securing a lasting bilateral agreement. Neither side is genuinely negotiating with the other. Instead, both are using the forum to send messages to the United States – and to Donald Trump, in particular.
This dynamic persists despite Trump’s recent efforts to distance himself from the war he once claimed he could end within 24 hours of returning to the White House. That shift in rhetoric has been echoed by key figures in his administration. Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who just six months ago represented opposite ends of the Republican spectrum on Ukraine – with Vance nearly endorsing surrender to Putin, and Rubio among the Senate’s most vocal Ukraine hawks – have both signalled that Trump’s White House is no longer interested in mediating the conflict. Reflecting that disengagement, there was no high-level prenegotiation meeting between US and Ukrainian officials in Turkiye ahead of the latest talks, unlike those held in May.
Yet despite Rubio’s apparent reversal – likely intended to align with Trump – Ukraine still enjoys broad support in the US Senate, including from senior Republicans. A bipartisan bill aimed at codifying existing sanctions on Russia and imposing new ones – thereby limiting Trump’s power to roll them back – has garnered 81 Senate co-sponsors. The bill’s authors, Senators Lindsey Graham (R–South Carolina) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Connecticut), recently travelled to Kyiv to reaffirm their backing. Graham has suggested the bill could move forward in the coming weeks.
Still, Ukraine knows the bill stands little chance in the House of Representatives without Trump’s blessing. Despite Trump’s enduring animosity towards Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Kyiv has recently adopted a more deferential posture, particularly after their disastrous February meeting in Washington. The Ukrainian government quickly signed and ratified the so-called “minerals deal” that Trump demanded last month. A subsequent meeting between the two leaders – held on the sidelines of Pope Francis’s funeral – was notably more productive.
So far, Kyiv’s strategy of appeasement has yielded little change in Trump’s approach. While Trump has occasionally hinted at taking a tougher stance on Putin – usually in response to particularly egregious Russian attacks on Ukrainian civilians – he consistently deflects when asked for specifics. For months, he has promised to reveal his plan for Ukraine “in about two weeks,” a vague assurance that remains unfulfilled. A new sanctions package reportedly prepared by his own team over a month ago still sits untouched.
Hoping that mounting battlefield violence or bipartisan pressure from the US Senate might force Trump to act, Kyiv presses on with negotiations. Just one day before the Istanbul talks, Russia launched a record-setting overnight assault on Ukraine, firing more than 430 missiles and drones. Ukraine responded forcefully: on June 1, it conducted a large-scale drone strike deep inside Russia, destroying dozens of military aircraft, including airborne command platforms and nuclear-capable bombers.
Yet these high-profile losses have done little to shift Putin’s strategy. He continues to use the negotiation process as a smokescreen, providing Trump with political cover for his inaction. Meanwhile, Russian forces are advancing, making incremental gains in northern Ukraine’s Sumy region – where they hope to establish a “buffer zone” – and pushing forward on the southwestern Donetsk front.
Ultimately, Ukraine’s ability to strike deep inside Russian territory, including potentially vulnerable targets like oil infrastructure, may have more bearing on the war’s trajectory than any outcome from the Istanbul talks. Yet neither military escalation nor stalled diplomacy seems likely to bring a swift end to the conflict.
Trump says he abhors the civilian toll of this war, even if he stops short of blaming Putin for starting it. But it is Trump’s lack of strategy – his hesitation, his mixed signals, his refusal to lead – that is prolonging the conflict, escalating its brutality and compounding its risks for global stability.
Trump’s advisers may call it “peace through strength,” but what we are witnessing is paralysis through posturing. Russia’s delegation in Istanbul was never a step towards resolution – it was a diplomatic decoy, shielding a brutal military advance. If Trump refuses to back a serious escalation in pressure on Moscow – through expanded sanctions and renewed military aid to Kyiv – he won’t just fail to end the war. He will become complicit in prolonging it. The choice before him is clear: lead with resolve, or let history record that under his watch, weakness spoke louder than peace.
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.
Fire on Ship in North Pacific Forces 22 Crew Members to Abandon Ship and Await Rescue
The crew of a cargo ship carrying 3,000 vehicles to Mexico, including 800 electric vehicles, abandoned ship after they could not control a fire aboard the vessel in waters off Alaska’s Aleutian island chain.
A large plume of smoke was initially seen at the ship’s stern coming from the deck loaded with electric vehicles Tuesday, according to U.S. Coast Guard photos and a Wednesday statement from the ship’s management company, London-based Zodiac Maritime.
There were no reported injuries among the 22 crew members of the Morning Midas.
Crew members abandoned ship, were evacuated onto a lifeboat and rescued by the crew of a nearby merchant vessel called the Cosco Hellas in the North Pacific, roughly 300 miles (490 kilometers) southwest of Adak Island. Adak is about 1,200 miles (1,930 kilometers) west of Anchorage, the state’s largest city.
The crew initiated emergency firefighting procedures with the ship’s onboard fire suppression system. But they were unable bring the flames under control.
“The relevant authorities have been notified, and we are working closely with emergency responders with a tug being deployed to support salvage and firefighting operations,” Zodiac Maritime said in a statement. “Our priorities are to ensure the continued safety of the crew and protect the marine environment.”
The U.S. Coast Guard said it sent aircrews to Adak and a ship to the area. The status of the fire onboard the ship was unknown as of Wednesday afternoon, but smoke was still emanating from it, according to the Coast Guard.
Rear Admiral Megan Dean, commander of the Coast Guard’s Seventeenth District, said in a statement that as the search and rescue part of the response concluded, the Coast Guard was working with Zodiac Maritime to determine how to recover the ship and what will be done with it.
“We are grateful for the selfless actions of the three nearby vessels who assisted in the response and the crew of motor vessel Cosco Hellas, who helped save 22 lives,” Dean said.
The 600-foot (183-meter) Morning Midas, a car and truck carrier, was built in 2006 and sails under a Liberian flag.
The cars left Yantai, China, on May 26, according to the industry site marinetraffic.com. They were being shipped to Lazaro Cardenas, a major Pacific port in Mexico.
Earlier this month, a Dutch safety board called for improving emergency response on North Sea shipping routes after a deadly 2023 fire on a freighter that was carrying 3,000 automobiles, including nearly 500 electric vehicles, from Germany to Singapore.
That fire killed one person, injured others and burned out of control for a week, and the ship was eventually towed to a port in the northern Netherlands for salvage.
The accident increased the focus on safety issues on the open sea and on containers that fall off the massive freighters, which have increased in size dramatically in recent decades. More than 80% of international trade by volume now arrives by sea, and the largest container vessels are longer than three football fields.
This story was originally featured on Fortune.com
Search for Madeleine McCann in Portugal continues into third day
Midlands correspondent

Searches for Madeleine McCann resumed on Thursday near to where the three-year-old disappeared from Praia da Luz, Portugal 18 years ago.
German and Portuguese investigators have until Friday to look for evidence relating to her disappearance but there has been no obvious sign of any major discovery so far.
Officers are scouring a 21 sq km (8.1 sq miles) site between where she went missing and where the German investigators’ prime suspect, Christian Brückner, had been staying at the time.
The 48-year-old is serving a prison sentence in Germany for an unrelated rape case, however could be released as early as September.
Three-year-old Madeleine McCann vanished from an apartment in the Algarve while on holiday with her family in May 2007.
Her disappearance is one of the highest-profile missing person cases in the world.
Madeleine’s case was initially handled by the Portuguese authorities with the aid of the Metropolitan Police.
However German police took the lead in 2020 when they identified Brückner as a suspect.
He is known to have spent time in the same part of Portugal between 2000 and 2017.
German police suspect him of murder. British police continue to treat the case as a missing persons investigation.
Brückner has repeatedly denied any involvement and no charges have been brought against him relating to Madeleine’s disappearance.
A European warrant has been approved by Portuguese prosecutors to allow German teams to conduct the latest searches on private land.
Diggers and specialist equipment were brought in to help scour scrubland and abandoned buildings on Wednesday.
Searches were last carried near the Barragem do Arade reservoir in 2023 as Brückner had photographs and videos of himself in the area.
On the night Madeleine disappeared, her parents had been at dinner with friends at a restaurant a short walk away while their three-year-old daughter and her younger twin siblings were asleep in the ground-floor apartment.
Last month, Kate and Gerry McCann marked the 18th year anniversary of her disappearance, saying their “determination to leave no stone unturned is unwavering”.
However they would not comment during the “active police investigation”, staff at the Find Madeleine Campaign said.

Get our flagship newsletter with all the headlines you need to start the day. Sign up here.
Sharon Osbourne’s Music Industry Tips: Managing Ozzy and More
MBW’s World’s Greatest Managers series profiles the best artist managers in the global business. Sharon Osbourne is a star in her own right, but for more than four decades, she has also managed her husband, and true rock revolutionary, Ozzy. Here she discusses that relationship, their success, and Black Sabbath going out on a high in July. This interview originally appeared in the Q1 issue of Music Business UK, printed in March. World’s Greatest Managers is supported by Centtrip, a specialist in intelligent treasury, payments and foreign exchange – created with the music industry and its needs in mind.

Let’s take this opportunity to settle one of the biggest debates in music.
Black Sabbath were the first heavy metal band. They are, thematically and sonically, pioneers. Very few acts scheduled to headline a stadium in 2025 can claim to have defined a genre of music and paved the way for over a dozen other musicians on the same line-up.
In July, Black Sabbath’s original four members return to their hometown of Birmingham, the birthplace of heavy metal, to play their final concert at Villa Park with support from giants of the metal world: Slayer, Metallica, Pantera, Lamb Of God, Mastodon and more.
According to the concert’s musical director Tom Morello, the final reunion of Ozzy Osbourne, Tony Iommi, Geezer Butler and Bill Ward, will be “the greatest heavy metal show ever”.
For Sharon Osbourne, Ozzy’s wife and manager of more than four decades, the planning of Back To The Beginning – as the charity event has been dubbed – is “very bittersweet”.
“It’s been our lives together for 45 years,” she says of hers and Ozzy’s storied careers in music. “It’s great, but it’s sad at the same time,” she adds of her feelings about the final show. “But it’s definitely time to say goodnight. It’s time for Ozzy to do whatever he wants and not have to plan anything or be anywhere at any particular time.”
After guiding heavy music’s original provocateur to solo megastardom, Sharon Osbourne built an empire across music management, festivals (Ozzfest between 1996–2018) and television (The Osbournes, The Sharon Osbourne Show etc). She’s also a best-selling author and was a judge on multiple series of hit talent shows America’s Got Talent and the UK’s The X Factor.
Osbourne was, in her own words, “born into the industry”.
She witnessed the birth of the rock‘n’roll business in London in the 1960s as the daughter of infamous music executive Don Arden – who worked with stars from Gene Vincent to Jerry Lee Lewis, and later Electric Light Orchestra, Black Sabbath and more.
“I just saw something in Ozzy. I saw that spark that he had. It was electric.”
“I watched my father go from an artist himself, to an agent, to a manager to running his own record label [Jet Records]. I worked for him for several years,” Osbourne says.
“I learned everything I knew from my father. I watched him make terrible mistakes, and I learned a lot of good things and also things that you just don’t do in the industry. I was like an apprentice. I learned it all from him, good and bad, because I definitely have my father’s temper, but I don’t take other people’s money!”
The first artist Sharon managed on her own was guitar player Gary Moore, but would later go on to manage Ozzy’s solo career by herself after his split from Black Sabbath in 1979. “I started with Gary, and I was doing day-to-day management for ELO at the time,” she explains.
“And I just saw something in Ozzy. I saw that spark that he had. It was electric. Ozzy would walk into a room, and everybody would look at him. In two minutes, he had everybody laughing on the floor. He was a very charismatic young man. I just believed in it.”
That belief manifested into significant success. Ozzy’s first solo album Blizzard Of Ozz (1980), featuring the classically trained late great Randy Rhoads on guitar and co-songwriting duties, has sold over six million copies worldwide, hit No.21 on the US album chart and included iconic tracks like Crazy Train and Mr. Crowley.
“It just exploded,” Sharon recalls of Ozzy’s transition from Sabbath frontman to solo star in 1980. “As soon as Crazy Train came out on the radio, it was just instant. Ozzy was blessed.”
Ozzy has since sold over 100 million albums worldwide across his work with Black Sabbath and his 13 solo studio albums. His most recent LP, the Andrew Watt-produced Patient Number 9 (Epic), hit No.3 on the US album chart and won the Grammy for Best Rock Album in 2023. He also won Best Metal Performance that year for Degradation Rules (feat. Tony Iommi).
Asked about the legacy she hopes to leave in the music business as she prepares for Ozzy’s last ever live performance, Osbourne responds: “I’m not important. Managers are on the coat-tails of their artists. It’s about what Sabbath leaves, and what Ozzy leaves. That’s the important thing.”
But first, Osbourne takes MBW back to the beginning of Ozzy’s solo career and weighs in on the modern music industry, superfans, big-money catalog deals and more…
How did the idea come together for Back To The Beginning?
Since Ozzy’s illness, which has been six years, he’s said his one regret is that he never got the chance to say goodbye to his fans and everybody that he’s ever worked with.
And then it was like, ‘Ok, how do we do this without Ozzy just performing for two-and-a-half hours?’, because Ozzy can’t perform for two-and-a-half hours anymore.
So then I thought of having all the bands he’s ever had relationships with perform and maybe do Sabbath songs and Ozzy songs. I started to ask really close friends, and they were like, ‘Sure, yeah.’
It became a celebration of the music. All the generations are going to be there that Sabbath and Ozzy have passed the torch down to. The only place that we could do it would have been Aston, because that’s where Ozzy was born and grew up, which is right where the Villa ground is.
There are two bands that we would have loved to have been there, but they couldn’t because they’re working that day. And that was Judas Priest, a local band, and Angus [Young] from AC/DC, because he’s always been a huge supporter of Ozzy’s.
Going back to your early career as a manager after Ozzy left Black Sabbath and you took over managing his solo career, what was your strategy for developing him as an artist?
Do you know what it was? Blind ignorance. It was like, ‘We’re gonna make it,’ And that’s it. We did whatever we had to do. In the beginning, when we were booking Ozzy in America, the album hadn’t even come out yet. Promoters were booking him without the success of his first album.
We were talking to people in the fall, and he would be planning to tour the [following] summer. It was a long wait for these promoters, and most of them were shitting because they [were] blindly booking him.
It was fun to see it all happen. I mean, so many dates went up on sale and just sold instantly. And all of the promises that you make to a promoter, ‘Don’t worry, we’ll promote the show. We’ll do every bit of promotion to help you sell out.’ And then it just exploded. It was very organic.
Blizzard Of Ozz obviously became a huge success. You’ve written about how the sound was more commercially accessible than some of the heavier Sabbath music. Apart from the songwriting and musicianship, how much of the lore around Ozzy’s stage persona at that time played into the success of his career in those early days? And how challenging was it as his manager to handle the business side of it all?
Oh, yeah. Well, it just went from, ‘Ozzy’s the wild man’, to ‘Ozzy’s insane and kills animals’ and all of that shit. And you know all the stories: Ozzy’s cut his finger; no, he bit the head off a bat!
And so it just kind of spread. It had a life of its own. It just got bigger and more exaggerated; anything he did at that time in the industry.
We were told by our record company: one more incident in their building, one more misbehaviour, and he would be dropped. It was very funny to watch it all play out!
So that was CBS, before they became Sony?
Yeah, and the head of legal [at CBS] called me and warned me. We used to laugh because it was so funny, going into radio stations and gigs. It was just hysterical, because people take everything literally.
Then, of course, at that time, Judas Priest had the same thing going on about the lyrics, the content of the album. You know, it’s got to be [censored]. Can you imagine today if you had to [censor] an album, every album would be fucking [censored]!
Ozzy ended up having a really long association with CBS and then Epic after CBS was sold to Sony in 1988. You presumably had a good relationship with them over the years after that?
Yeah. The thing was, the heads of the companies would change, but Ozzy’s only ever been on Epic as a solo artist. Well, Sony, and the same as Sabbath, were only on Warner Bros. We don’t like chopping and changing. It’s been the same with agents and people who work with us.
It’s the same crew of people. I’m not one of those who will go and do an album here and an album there, and shop every record company.
What’s some of the best music business advice you’ve ever been given?
Oh, God, hold on to your publishing! Never let your publishing go, until you get to the stage where you think you want to bail, and then you sell it all for a fortune.
You look at where your songs could end up; you could get a couple of million each time your song is used in an advertisement.
Other people could cover your song and have a hit with a song that wasn’t a hit for you. It’s something which, now, I know a lot of artists, they go in, and they want deals, [and the] record companies want their publishing. It’s like, ‘Fuck you, no way.’
You mentioned those who choose to sell their catalogues for a fortune. What do you think about the trend of big money deals struck by legacy artists and would you ever consider that for Ozzy’s music?
Everybody’s life is different. Artists who have worked and built a great body of work, it’s like, ‘Hey, sell it. It’s your big payday. Go for it.’ And there’s some that want to say, ‘No, I want to hand it over to my children.’
It’s whatever is right for you at that time in your life. But if you had 100% of it, you can imagine what it would be worth, instead of giving it to a publisher, and you get your whatever it is, 40-50% and they still retain the rest. It’s like, ‘Fuck them’, because publishers usually just sit there and wait for it to happen.
Have there been any deals that you either regret making or regret not making during your career?
Yeah, the biggest mistake I ever did with Ozzy was that they asked him to go and read for Pirates Of The Caribbean. I said, ‘Fuck off’. Can you imagine? He would have been so perfect in it.
Ozzfest became a big challenger in the festival market in the 1990s. I’ve read you came up with the idea because you approached Lollapalooza to book Ozzy, and they said no. What happened?
Yes, that’s right. I thought it would be so much fun [to book] him [at Lollapalooza]. And they were like, ‘No, not at all. Not for us.’ It gave me the idea of, ‘Fuck it [then], we’ll do our own metal festival’, because it didn’t exist. There were no touring metal festivals. It was the beginning; all the rest [followed]. And I’m so proud of that. We did it first, and it was an opportunity for so many younger bands to play in front of a huge crowd.
Were all the bands, labels and agents on board with the idea straight away? Or did it take some convincing?
It took a little convincing for the first one. We actually started out by doing two in one week. And everybody said, ‘Come back next year. This is huge. This is fantastic.’ And it just built and built and we did it for 20 odd years. It was amazing.
How did you approach Ozzy’s touring and live deals, especially in the early years?
We had a policy that Ozzy was never going to open for anyone. If you go out with that mindset, you better know what you’re doing.
“We had a policy that Ozzy was never going to open for anyone.”
You don’t have the cushion of saying, ‘It didn’t sell out. It’s not me, it’s them, it was badly run, and the sound system was shit!’ You’ve got to know what you’re doing because it all comes down to you.
What can the wider music business learn from rock and metal when it comes to superfans?
Longevity. You look at what goes on in our industry today, and you think, I wonder if I’m going to be hearing this music in five years’ time? It’s very disposable. You look at all the artists, and you go, ‘Ok, who’s going to be like the next Diana Ross that will be still relevant when they’re in their late seventies?’
I think half of them won’t be, I really do. I don’t think they could stand the test of time. Who is going to be the next Madonna from this lot that’s out there right now? Who’s going to be the next Rolling Stones?
Those bands you were speaking about, as far as merch goes, their logos, their names, will be on T-shirts decade after decade.
Are we gonna see a Coldplay T-shirt in 50 years walking down the road like the Stones? You know that tongue and lips will go on forever. It’s like, which one of you lot today is going to be that?
But that’s what artists have to think of with their career. It’s not just now, now, now. It’s about the future. It goes so quick. Before you know where you are, you’re in another decade, and it’s like, ‘Am I still relevant? Am I doing too much?’
I think that a lot of the artists today are being badly managed, badly advised [and] doing too much. [They] don’t know when to take a break, take a breath, back off for a year, or two years.
On that note, do you think there is enough long-term artist development in the music industry, across management, labels, publishing?
There is no development currently at record labels. They take everything. Record labels developing [artists] doesn’t exist. A&R departments just go on the internet. That’s it. They’ll take your publishing, your merchandise and everything else, and all they do is press and distribute and stream you.
Most of the record companies own the streaming anyway and all of this about, ‘Oh, I’ve got a billion streams, it’s amazing.’ Well, you’re getting less than a fucking penny for a stream. It’s absolutely bastardising an artist’s music.
How does this all impact the role of the manager in terms of discovering and developing artists, and the risk that managers take?
Listen, managers in my day would support an artist so they didn’t have to support themselves, so they were able to write and hone their craft. You would literally put them in an apartment or a house, if it was a band, and you’d pay everything. You would invest your own money in an artist. That doesn’t happen today!
It’s a whole different way of breaking artists because of social media. You get a lot of managers out there wheeling and dealing, and a lot of managers out there that also [act as] agents, and lie about the fact that they don’t own the agency because it’s illegal to do that.
Artists used to have to gig. You used to learn your performance skills by constantly gigging to build your fanbase. And you don’t have to do that anymore. You can do it from your back garden. Just sit there and play to the dogs. And if you’re good, people pick up on it, and it’s instant.
The years of trailing around the world, trying to break territories. It’s just instant now, which is fantastic for the artists, but then you have to wait for the artist to develop their performance skills, because they didn’t have to tour and know how to work with an audience and all of that.
Even mic techniques, you get young kids today that don’t understand how to even work with a microphone. They just stand in front of it.
If there was one thing you could change about the music business, what would it be and why?
The word perpetuity should be taken out of the music industry. No record company should be allowed to take an artist’s work and own it for life. No publisher should be able to do that. Look at it this way, you go to a bank because you want to buy a house, so you get a mortgage. Now you finish paying that mortgage and then the bank says to you, ‘You’re never going to own your house.’
That is the thing that happens to an artist. You go to a record company, they’ll upfront you the money to make an album. If it’s a hit, you pay back the record company, and they’ve got all their money back that they gave you for making that album, and then they owned it for life. Now, how does that work? You’ve paid them back. Everybody’s made a profit, the artist, the record company, but yet you still own my work.
Have you not seen deal terms improve a lot from the 1980s to the 1990s to the 2000s to now?
Yes, of course. But you will always get kids that come along who have got the dream. They don’t care about the money, they don’t care about anything. They don’t understand the business. They just want to release their music.
They want to be a true artist. Record companies [and] publishers will always take advantage of them. Look at all these boybands that have come and gone in the past. Look at how they were all abused and taken advantage of. It can be a really tough business.
What does the future hold for the traditional record industry?
They’ve all got to stop being so arrogant and realise that it is very easy for artists to do it themselves. They’ve just got to think for their futures. Some of my best friends are still at record companies. But you look at what [some] record companies are doing today, they’re hideous.
I’ve heard certain people [at] some of the biggest record labels in the world turn around and say, ‘We have to fuck the artist before they fuck us.’
It’s such huge instant money that you can make in this industry, and it’s very cut-throat. But more power to those kids that want to go out there and do it all themselves.
Security Forces Kill Mehran Samak for Celebrating Iran’s World Cup Elimination
The Iranian national team has toed a fine line between expressing support for protesters back home and risking serious repercussions from the regime for doing so. They have been criticized for not being more vocal about the regime’s violent suppression of dissent on the world stage, the Associated Press reported. Some also called out Ezatolahi for failing to mention that Samak was killed by security forces.
The team also faced criticism early on for meeting with and bowing to President Ebrahim Raisi before they traveled to Qatar for the World Cup. During the competition, however, the players appeared to cautiously express solidarity with protesters back home.
Ahead of its first match, team captain Ehsan Hajsafi acknowledged the oppression of Iranians back home, saying the “conditions in our country are not right.”
“We are here, but it does not mean that we should not be their voice or we must not respect them,” he said.
The teammates also stayed silent as the Iranian national anthem played at their first match against England, in what many interpreted as a show of support to protesters.
They were later threatened by the members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps and told their families would face “violence and torture” if they participated in any political protest against the government, CNN reported, citing an anonymous source.
The team joined in singing the national anthem in their other two games, against Wales and then the US.
UK fintech Wise to move primary listing to New York
Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free
Roula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.
UK fintech Wise plans to switch its primary listing to New York in an attempt to attract more investors and boost its valuation, dealing a fresh blow to the London market.
The company, which listed to great fanfare in London in 2021, said the move would increase its appeal to US investors and enhance its expansion plans in the world’s biggest economy.
Announcing the decision on Thursday, Wise said: “We believe the addition of a primary US listing would help us accelerate our mission and bring substantial strategic and capital market benefits to Wise and our owners.”
Founded in London in 2010 by Estonians Kristo Käärmann and Taavet Hinrikus, about a fifth of the company’s staff are based in the UK. Its decision to go public in London rather than New York was hailed as a rare coup for the UK market.
Wise began as a provider of money transfers that undercut banks but has recently expanded its services to include interest-yielding investment products and a debit card.
Wise said the decision to shift its primary listing to New York would be put to a shareholder vote. The company intends to retain a listing in London.
The decision by Wise is likely to fuel anxieties over the appeal of the London market, which has historically struggled to compete with Wall Street.
Construction equipment rental group Ashtead in December announced plans to move its listing to New York, saying that the US was its biggest market.
Women’s 4x200m Freestyle Relay: The Breakdown
2025 U.S. NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIPS
WOMEN’S 200 Freestyle – Final
Results:
- Claire Weinstein (SAND) – 1:54.92
- Katie Ledecky (GSC) – 1:55.26
- Torri Huske (AAC) – 1:55.71
- Anna Peplowski (ISC)/Erin Gemmell (TXLA) – 1:55.82
- –
- Bella Sims (SAND) – 1:57.18
- Simone Manuel (TXLA) – 1:57.44
- Isabel Ivey (GSC) – 1:58.05
Five women broke 1:56 tonight, as Claire Weinstein out-touched Katie Ledecky for the second time in three years. Torri Huske was out fast through 150, and managed to set a huge best time as she skipped the 1:56s entirely.
With Ariarne Titmus sitting out Worlds this season and Mollie O’Callaghan nursing a slight knee injury, they could well be the favourites to reclaim their World crown from 2022.
The top four from tonight will be guaranteed a spot, whilst fifth and sixth will need to wait to see how the team shapes up elsewhere.
So, what does all this mean for Team USA’s 4×200 free relay this summer?
The Past Is History, the Future Is a Mystery?
Last year’s Trials were only the third-fastest ever – the first one we’ve seen so far that was not the fastest. The 200 free add-ups in 2016 and 2023 were faster, although their fastest two relay times have come in 2021 and 2024.
Here was what the gaps looked like between the add-up from the top four at Nationals and the relay times swum later that summer since 2000.
We love to predict how relays will perform before a major summer meet. There are almost no other real opportunities for a top-tier long course relay team to compete, so there’s limited data to go off.
Based on the U.S. Nationals results we’ve built a rough model to predict the final time for the American 4×100 free relay this summer. To calculate this we’ve considered the National Championship results (top four), previous history of the drops from Nationals to the relay in the summer, and the raw times themselves.
The past four years look something like this:
Year | Trials Add-up | Predicted Time | Range (90% confidence band*) | Range (50% confidence band) | Actual Relay Time |
2021 | 7:45.86 | 7:43.66 | 7:42.53 – 7:44.87 | 7:43.14 – 7:44.12 | 7:40.73 |
2022 | 7:47.20 | 7:44.68 | 7:43.61 – 7:45.91 | 7:44.18- 7:45.09 | 7:41.45 |
2023 | 7:42.85 | 7:41.46 | 7:39.80 – 7:42.60 | 7:41.00 – 7:42.11 | 7:41.38 |
2024 | 7:44.51 | 7:42.67 | 7:41.36 – 7:43.87 | 7:42.15 – 7:43.20 | 7:40.86 |
*This defines the upper and lower limits of a range in which we would be 90% sure that the result would fall – if this was raced 100 times, in 90 of those we’d expect a time in this range.
First things first, the model does have some limitations. It is only intended as a ballpark figure and the 90% and 50% confidence bands are too confident, especially for the last few years where the actual drops have ranged anywhere from 0.88 seconds to 2.92 seconds.
Overall though, we’re not looking for this to give us an absolute relay time to hold ourselves to for the summer – just a range which we (or you) can debate. Without further ado, here are all the numbers from this year’s trials you need to worry about.
The Numbers
Fastest three flat-start times of the top-six:
Fastest senior international three relay splits of the top six:
Fastest flat-start add-up:
Fastest flat start + relay split add-up:
Katie Ledecky is unlikely to be at 1:53 pace, and Bella Sims was a little off her 1:55-mid best from 2022, so these are not wholly representative. However, the relays have seemed to step up big over the last Olympic quad, so potentially a Sub-7:40 is not out of the question
As a final look ahead, here are the U.S. Nationals/Trials to summer relay drops since 2000 based on location. The circles get darker as the year gets later, and any hollow circles indicate a negative drop – that is, an increase.
Vietnam Abandons Two-Child Policy in Effort to Address Declining Birthrate | Demographics Update
Vietnam’s declining birthrate is most pronounced in urban areas, while nationally, male births still outnumber female.
Vietnam has scrapped its longstanding two-child policy as it aims to reverse its declining birthrate and ease the pressure from an ageing society.
All restrictions were removed this week, and couples will be free to have as many children as they choose, according to Vietnamese media.
Minister of Health Dao Hong Lan said that a future shrinking population “threatens Vietnam’s sustainable economic and social development, as well as its national security and defence in the long term,” the Hanoi Times reported.
Between 1999 and 2022, Vietnam’s birthrate was about 2.1 children per woman, the replacement rate needed to keep the population from shrinking, but the rate has started to fall, the news outlet said.
In 2024, the country’s birthrate reached a record low of 1.91 children per woman.
Regional neighbours like Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore and Hong Kong all have declining birthrates, but their economies are more advanced than Vietnam’s.
Vietnam’s working-age population is expected to peak around 2040, according to the World Bank, and it aims to avoid the trap of “getting old before it gets rich”.
The country’s communist government introduced the two-child policy in 1988 to ensure it had adequate resources as it transitioned from a planned to a market economy. At the time, Vietnam was also still overcoming the effects of decades of war.
Vietnam’s two-child policy was most strictly enforced with members of Vietnam’s Communist Party, according to the Associated Press, but families everywhere could lose out on government subsidies and assistance if they had a third or fourth child.
As well as a declining birthrate, Vietnam is also facing significant imbalances across different regions and social groups, the Ministry of Health said.
The declining birthrate is most pronounced in urban areas such as Ho Chi Minh and the capital Hanoi, where the cost of living is highest. But there are also significant disparities in gender. Last year, Vietnam’s sex ratio at birth was 111 boys to every 100 girls.
The disparity between male and female births is most pronounced in North Vietnam’s Red River Delta and the Northern Midlands and Mountains, according to the World Bank, and lowest in the Central Highlands and Mekong River Delta.
Vietnam prohibits doctors from telling parents the sex of their children to curb sex-selective abortions, but the practice continues, with doctors communicating via coded words, according to Vietnamese media.
Left unchecked, the General Statistics Office warned there could be a “surplus of 1.5 million men aged 15-49 by 2039, rising to 2.5 million by 2059”.
In a bid to reverse this trend, the Health Ministry separately proposed tripling the fine for “foetal gender selection” to about $3,800.
Akkodis at the Paris Air Show 2025: Leading the Way in Sustainable and Digital Innovation with AI
AI and Sustainability: Akkodis showcases the future of sustainable and digital innovation at the Paris Air Show 2025