NEW YORK (AP) — For nearly three years, JPMorgan Chase has picking up the legal tab of Charlie Javice and Olivier Amar, the two convicted fraudsters who sold their financial aid startup Frank to the bank.
But the two have racked up an astronomical, nine-figure legal bill that far exceeds any reasonable amount the two may have needed for their defense, the bank said in a court filing late Friday. Chase shouldn’t have to pay and its agreement as part of the startup purchase to shoulder the costs should end, the bank argued.
According to the filing, Javice’s team of lawyers across five law firms have billed JPMorgan approximately $60.1 million in legal fees and expenses, while Amar’s lawyers have billed the bank roughly $55.2 million in fees.
In total, the bank alleges Javice and Amar’s lawyers have racked up legal fees of $115 million, with one law firm receiving $35.6 million in reimbursements alone. In comparison, Elizabeth Holmes, who was convicted of defrauding investors in the Theranos case, reportedly ended up with a legal bill of roughly $30 million.
The bank would be “irreparably injured” if the court does not put an end to “abusive billing,” the bank said. Javice and her lawyers have treated the process “like a blank check,” Chase said.
Javice, 33, was convicted in March of duping the banking giant when it bought her company, called Frank, in the summer of 2021. She made false records that made it seem like Frank had over 4 million customers when it had fewer than 300,000. Amar was convicted of the same charges.
Early in the case, a Delaware court ruled that the bank was required to advance Javice and Amar for any legal fees, which was part of the bank’s agreement when Frank was acquired in 2021.
Part of Javice’s legal team is Alex Spiro of Quinn Emanuel, who is also the lawyer who has previously represented Elon Musk. Spiro did not immediately respond to an email request for comment.
A law firm representing Amar did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
“The legal fees sought by Charlie Javice and Olivier Amar are patently excessive and egregious. We look forward to sharing details of this abuse with the court in coming weeks,” said Pablo Rodriguez, a spokesman for the bank
Vanguard Personalized Indexing Management LLC trimmed its position in Rithm Capital Corp. (NYSE:RITM – Free Report) by 15.3% in the 2nd quarter, according to its most recent 13F filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The firm owned 68,100 shares of the real estate investment trust’s stock after selling 12,346 shares during the quarter. Vanguard Personalized Indexing Management LLC’s holdings in Rithm Capital were worth $769,000 at the end of the most recent reporting period.
Other hedge funds have also made changes to their positions in the company. SouthState Corp purchased a new stake in shares of Rithm Capital in the 1st quarter worth $25,000. Fourth Dimension Wealth LLC lifted its stake in shares of Rithm Capital by 50.0% during the 1st quarter. Fourth Dimension Wealth LLC now owns 3,000 shares of the real estate investment trust’s stock worth $34,000 after purchasing an additional 1,000 shares during the last quarter. Ameritas Advisory Services LLC purchased a new stake in shares of Rithm Capital during the 2nd quarter worth $43,000. SVB Wealth LLC purchased a new stake in shares of Rithm Capital during the 1st quarter worth $57,000. Finally, GAMMA Investing LLC lifted its stake in shares of Rithm Capital by 19.1% during the 2nd quarter. GAMMA Investing LLC now owns 5,528 shares of the real estate investment trust’s stock worth $62,000 after purchasing an additional 887 shares during the last quarter. 44.92% of the stock is currently owned by hedge funds and other institutional investors.
Rithm Capital Stock Up 0.9%
Shares of RITM stock opened at $10.93 on Tuesday. The stock’s 50-day simple moving average is $11.86 and its 200-day simple moving average is $11.49. The company has a debt-to-equity ratio of 1.63, a quick ratio of 0.40 and a current ratio of 0.40. The firm has a market capitalization of $5.79 billion, a PE ratio of 8.40 and a beta of 1.31. Rithm Capital Corp. has a fifty-two week low of $9.13 and a fifty-two week high of $12.74.
Rithm Capital (NYSE:RITM – Get Free Report) last announced its quarterly earnings data on Monday, July 28th. The real estate investment trust reported $0.54 earnings per share for the quarter, beating analysts’ consensus estimates of $0.51 by $0.03. The business had revenue of $1.22 billion for the quarter, compared to analyst estimates of $1.18 billion. Rithm Capital had a return on equity of 18.89% and a net margin of 16.72%. Equities analysts expect that Rithm Capital Corp. will post 1.93 earnings per share for the current year.
Rithm Capital Dividend Announcement
The business also recently declared a quarterly dividend, which will be paid on Friday, October 31st. Investors of record on Wednesday, October 1st will be given a dividend of $0.25 per share. This represents a $1.00 annualized dividend and a yield of 9.2%. The ex-dividend date is Wednesday, October 1st. Rithm Capital’s dividend payout ratio (DPR) is currently 76.92%.
Wall Street Analysts Forecast Growth
RITM has been the subject of a number of analyst reports. Royal Bank Of Canada upped their price objective on Rithm Capital from $13.00 to $14.00 and gave the stock an “outperform” rating in a research note on Friday, August 1st. UBS Group upped their price objective on Rithm Capital from $14.00 to $16.00 and gave the stock a “buy” rating in a research note on Wednesday, September 3rd. Wedbush restated an “outperform” rating and set a $14.00 price objective on shares of Rithm Capital in a research note on Wednesday, August 6th. Keefe, Bruyette & Woods upped their price objective on Rithm Capital from $13.50 to $14.00 and gave the stock an “outperform” rating in a research note on Tuesday, July 29th. Finally, Weiss Ratings restated a “buy (b)” rating on shares of Rithm Capital in a research note on Wednesday, October 8th. One analyst has rated the stock with a Strong Buy rating and nine have assigned a Buy rating to the stock. According to MarketBeat.com, Rithm Capital presently has an average rating of “Buy” and an average price target of $14.25.
Rithm Capital Corp. operates as an asset manager focused on real estate, credit, and financial services. It operates through Origination and Servicing, Investment Portfolio, Mortgage Loans Receivable, and Asset Management segments. Its investment portfolio primarily comprises of mortgage servicing rights (MSR), and MSR financing receivables, title, appraisal and property preservation, excess MSRs, and services advance investments; real estate securities, call rights, SFR properties, and residential mortgage loans; consumer and business purpose loans; and asset management related investments.
Receive News & Ratings for Rithm Capital Daily – Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analysts’ ratings for Rithm Capital and related companies with MarketBeat.com’s FREE daily email newsletter.
Open enrollment — the annual window when employees can adjust their benefits — may deliver sticker shock this year. Workers are likely to pay between 6% to 7% more for their 2026 employer-sponsored health insurance, more than double the current rate of inflation, according to a new analysis from consultant Mercer.
That means employees could pay about $2,400 next year for single coverage in an employer-provided preferred provider organization, or PPO, the most common type of medical plan, Mercer said. Families would likely face paycheck deductions of $8,900 a year for their coverage, according to the group, whose projections are based on a survey of more than 1,700 employers.
More working-age Americans receive health insurance through their employers than any other source, with about 60% — or 164.7 million people — covered by their workplaces, according to KFF.
Companies, which typically pick up the bulk of their employees’ health insurance costs, are likely to spend more than $18,000 on average to insure each worker in 2026, Mercer told CBS News. Workers typically shoulder between 16% to 25% of the total, depending on whether they are receiving single or family coverage, according to KFF’s 2024 employer health benefits survey.
The findings come as American households continue to feel squeezed by rising prices, with inflation inching higher this year on everything from groceries to housing. The jump in health insurance costs are partly due to an aging workforce that’s tapping more medical services, as well as increased demand for costly treatments such as the GLP-1 drugs used for weight loss, Mercer Chief Actuary Sunit Patel said.
Employees “might also see an increase in the cost-sharing provisions in the design as well — higher co-pays, higher deductibles — so it’s getting hit on both ends,” Beth Umland, director of research for health and benefits at Mercer, told CBS News.
Employees who receive their health insurance through their employers will soon learn their new costs when open enrollment begins, which typically runs for several weeks in the fall but varies by company.
Health care prices aren’t likely to ease soon, Patel added, pointing to higher provider wages, inflation in medical goods, and an older workforce, as ongoing pressures. “We think costs are pretty sticky right now,” he said.
Financial squeeze
Americans pay double what residents in other developed nations pay for health care, even though outcomes in the U.S. are worse than those in other countries, the Peter G. Peterson Foundation noted in an August analysis.
In addition to an aging workforce and inflation, the complexity of the U.S. health care system is also driving those costs higher, noted Peterson. On top of that, growing consolidation amongst health insurers has made the market less competitive, resulting in higher costs, the U.S. Government Accountability Office said in a December report.
Higher health care costs could add to the financial squeeze felt by many families, who are already coping with higher grocery, utility and housing prices, noted Lindsay Owens, executive director of the Groundwork Collaborative, a liberal-leaning economic think tank.
A KFF poll in July found that 4 in 10 insured adults under 65 years old worry about affording their monthly health insurance.
“You can’t really go without health care, so something else will have to give,” Owens said. That could mean cutting “a family vacation, a family trip to a soccer game, or putting groceries on the credit card so you can clear the health care premiums.”
The Consumer Price Index, a basket of goods and services typically purchased by Americans, likely rose 3.1% on an annual basis in September, an uptick from August’s 2.9% annual rate, according to economists polled by FactSet. The September inflation data will be released on Oct. 24.
Mutual of America Capital Management LLC boosted its position in Stifel Financial Corporation (NYSE:SF – Free Report) by 0.2% in the 2nd quarter, according to the company in its most recent Form 13F filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The institutional investor owned 91,761 shares of the financial services provider’s stock after buying an additional 162 shares during the quarter. Mutual of America Capital Management LLC’s holdings in Stifel Financial were worth $9,523,000 as of its most recent filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).
Other large investors have also recently made changes to their positions in the company. Kraft Davis & Associates LLC bought a new stake in shares of Stifel Financial in the 2nd quarter worth approximately $244,000. Moran Wealth Management LLC raised its position in Stifel Financial by 1.0% in the 2nd quarter. Moran Wealth Management LLC now owns 109,344 shares of the financial services provider’s stock worth $11,348,000 after purchasing an additional 1,135 shares during the period. Sequoia Financial Advisors LLC bought a new stake in Stifel Financial in the second quarter worth $606,000. Allspring Global Investments Holdings LLC boosted its position in Stifel Financial by 10.6% during the second quarter. Allspring Global Investments Holdings LLC now owns 93,351 shares of the financial services provider’s stock valued at $9,826,000 after buying an additional 8,951 shares during the period. Finally, Vanguard Personalized Indexing Management LLC grew its stake in shares of Stifel Financial by 5.5% during the second quarter. Vanguard Personalized Indexing Management LLC now owns 16,066 shares of the financial services provider’s stock valued at $1,668,000 after buying an additional 842 shares during the last quarter. 82.01% of the stock is owned by hedge funds and other institutional investors.
Analysts Set New Price Targets
Several research analysts have recently commented on SF shares. Wall Street Zen upgraded Stifel Financial from a “sell” rating to a “hold” rating in a report on Sunday, August 3rd. Wells Fargo & Company raised their price target on Stifel Financial from $102.00 to $125.00 and gave the stock an “overweight” rating in a research report on Friday, July 11th. Stifel Nicolaus set a $131.00 price objective on Stifel Financial in a research report on Wednesday, October 8th. Cowen raised Stifel Financial from a “hold” rating to a “buy” rating in a research note on Wednesday, October 8th. Finally, Citigroup reaffirmed an “outperform” rating on shares of Stifel Financial in a research note on Thursday, October 9th. Six investment analysts have rated the stock with a Buy rating and six have given a Hold rating to the stock. Based on data from MarketBeat, the stock currently has an average rating of “Moderate Buy” and a consensus target price of $122.60.
SF opened at $110.26 on Monday. Stifel Financial Corporation has a one year low of $73.27 and a one year high of $120.64. The company has a debt-to-equity ratio of 0.28, a current ratio of 0.82 and a quick ratio of 0.77. The business has a 50 day simple moving average of $113.23 and a two-hundred day simple moving average of $102.97. The firm has a market capitalization of $11.27 billion, a price-to-earnings ratio of 21.37 and a beta of 1.13.
Stifel Financial (NYSE:SF – Get Free Report) last posted its earnings results on Wednesday, July 30th. The financial services provider reported $1.71 earnings per share (EPS) for the quarter, beating the consensus estimate of $1.65 by $0.06. The firm had revenue of $1.28 billion for the quarter, compared to analysts’ expectations of $1.25 billion. Stifel Financial had a return on equity of 13.93% and a net margin of 11.90%.The business’s revenue was up 5.4% compared to the same quarter last year. During the same period in the previous year, the firm earned $1.60 earnings per share. Analysts predict that Stifel Financial Corporation will post 8.26 EPS for the current year.
Stifel Financial Announces Dividend
The business also recently disclosed a quarterly dividend, which was paid on Tuesday, September 16th. Shareholders of record on Tuesday, September 2nd were issued a $0.46 dividend. The ex-dividend date was Tuesday, September 2nd. This represents a $1.84 annualized dividend and a yield of 1.7%. Stifel Financial’s dividend payout ratio is 35.66%.
Stifel Financial Corp., a financial services and bank holding company, provides retail and institutional wealth management, and investment banking services to individual investors, corporations, municipalities, and institutions in the United States and internationally. It operates in three segments: Global Wealth Management, Institutional Group, and Other.
See Also
Want to see what other hedge funds are holding SF?Visit HoldingsChannel.com to get the latest 13F filings and insider trades for Stifel Financial Corporation (NYSE:SF – Free Report).
Receive News & Ratings for Stifel Financial Daily – Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analysts’ ratings for Stifel Financial and related companies with MarketBeat.com’s FREE daily email newsletter.
The next phase of tokenization won’t be won by speed, but by coordination, turning isolated pilots into a unified market. Unsplash+
Gone are the days when tokenization was a niche concept. It’s now a capital markets reality measured in billions, and the question has shifted from adoption to architecture. Can the industry coordinate fast enough to turn a rush of isolated pilots into a single, compounding market? Today, the answer is no, the coordination gap continues to drain value through duplicated integrations, stranded liquidity and regulatory drag.
The inefficiencies tokenization promised to fix
A decade of experimentation left a maze of base layers (L1s), layer-2s and token standards that often cannot speak the same language. An equity token minted on one chain rarely settles natively against collateral on another. Liquidity splinters, market makers must maintain multiple inventories, and the same asset is wrapped three different ways. This functions like walled courtyards, far from a unified market.
Tokenization promised faster settlement and broader access. Instead, firms are building parallel silos that import back-office frictions into a new substrate. Regulators see the duplication and hesitate. Investors face basis risk across wrappers. Issuers pay twice for audits and integration. Growth continues, but at a discount to what the technology could deliver.
The architecture of a unified market
There is no question that assets have to work across chains. Interoperability belongs in the design from day one. Encouragingly, both incumbent rails and emerging protocols are experimenting with exactly this mandate. SWIFT, for example, has shown that its messaging network can coordinate transfers of tokenized value across multiple public and private chains, reducing one of the biggest frictions to institutional scale. Regulators are more likely to bless systems that reuse the controls they already know.
At the infrastructure level, new interoperability protocols are tackling the same challenge with different architectures. Chainlink’s Cross-Chain Interoperability Protocol (CCIP) provides secure cross-chain messaging and programmable token transfers, allowing liquidity and compliance logic to move seamlessly across networks. Wormhole enables verifiable actions through a decentralized guardian network that validates cross-chain messages, while LayerZero connects applications across chains through an omnichain messaging framework built on lightweight nodes and configurable trust models. Each approach addresses the same problem: making tokenized value portable and composable without sacrificing security or regulatory confidence.
Let demand determine where liquidity pools, independent of initial consortium deployments. Cross-chain liquidity pools and smart order routing can direct flow to the best venue while maintaining a unified positions record for risk. The market should set measurable targets: cross-chain fill rates above 99 percent, sub-minute finality between domains, and reconciliation without manual breaks.
Second, standardize both the asset and the identity. A uniform, open token standard for regulated assets should include only the essentials—transfer controls, role-based permissions and lawful enforcement hooks, while remaining compatible with the most common blockchain formats, known as ERC-20, ERC-721, and ERC-1155. Emerging frameworks such as ERC-3643 and ERC-7943 are early efforts to codify compliance and interoperability for real-world assets, but they must remain modular, neutral, and open to extension so issuers can evolve without breaking composability.
Pair standardized assets with portable identity. Verifiable credentials and on-chain attestations should travel with the investor, ensuring that KYC and eligibility checks do not restart at every venue. This is the foundation of scalable compliance: identity and permissioning that move with the holder, not the platform.
Finally, synchronize regulation inside the asset itself. Regulators expect familiar outcomes—eligibility checks, sanctions screening, audit trails—but with improved transparency and observability. The EU’s DLT Pilot Regime demonstrates how harmonized infrastructure can evolve within existing securities law, enabling innovation under MiFID II supervision while preserving market integrity.
Bake these controls directly into the token. Rule sets can define who may hold or transfer an instrument, under which jurisdictions, and when forced transfers are lawful. That approach shortens compliance cycles and leverages shared messaging standards with minimal token primitives that any venue can implement. Singapore’s Project Guardian reflects this vision, with banks and asset managers testing regulated tokenization on open infrastructure under supervisory oversight.
Where the power plays are now
The rise of tokenized cash equivalents shows the appetite: assets in tokenized Treasury products have surged as institutions seek intraday settlement and programmatic collateral. Institutional players are no longer debating if tokenization happens; they are competing over where it settles and how it moves. Custodians want to be the universal safekeeping layer. Market infrastructures want to be the neutral hub for cross-chain messaging. Asset managers want to turn tokenized funds into the default cash leg for crypto-native activity. Each move is rational; only coordination scales them.
Consider the signal from mainstream finance. Citi estimates tokenized digital securities could reach four to five trillion dollars by 2030. Boston Consulting Group projects that as much as 18.9 trillion dollars of illiquid assets could be tokenized by 2033. Treat these numbers as a map of where capital intends to go if the rails align. Projects that keep assets stuck on single chains will miss those flows. The regulatory posture is shifting in the same direction. Central banks and industry groups are testing how to move tokenized value across networks using existing messaging standards. These are coordination bets that matter more than headline grabs. They reward open designs that keep compliance portable.
The scoreboard that matters: portability and trust
The next phase of tokenization is a race to make assets both portable and trusted across chains. Portability lowers the cost of capital by exposing issuances to broader liquidity and deeper collateral markets. Trust reduces legal friction, accelerates launches and opens institutional balance sheets to programmable finance. Together, they create network effects that a single-chain strategy cannot replicate, expressed in tighter spreads, lower collateral haircuts and faster listings. A critical enabler of this evolution is the emergence of atomic settlement, allowing cross-chain transactions to execute in full or not at all. Early implementations of atomic swaps already demonstrate how synchronized settlement can eliminate counterparty risk and reduce dependence on intermediaries for finality. As interoperability frameworks like Chainlink CCIP, Wormhole and LayerZero mature, they will bring these mechanisms into regulated environments, turning fragmented liquidity into a unified market fabric where assets and collateral move seamlessly across ecosystems without breaking compliance or auditability.
For decision-makers, the path forward requires prioritizing infrastructure over isolated issuance. The focus must shift toward interoperable rails, open token standards and portable identity frameworks built on verifiable credentials. Success will be measured by new targets: cross-chain settlement rates, shared liquidity depth, atomic swap efficiency and reduced time-to-compliance.
Tokenization is crossing from curiosity to critical infrastructure. The market already punishes fragmentation, thin liquidity, duplicated cost and preventable risk, even as architectures mature. The institutions that align early around interoperability, standardized assets and portable identity will own the compounding benefits of a unified market, while others remain confined to isolated silos.
Coordination is not an afterthought; it is the multiplier that turns pilots into markets. Whether the coming trillions in tokenized value flow through harmonized rails or fracture across closed venues will define the next decade of capital markets. Those who architect for coordination will capture the scale; those who do not will fund it for others.
From nonprofits to credit unions, organizations across the country are stepping up to help military families and federal workers as the government shutdown continues. Many are reporting an alarming surge in demand.Since the shutdown, military spouse Alicia Blevins has faced a mountain of stress. Her family’s savings are depleted, stress-related health issues are emerging, and her job search has been put on hold 16 days into the shutdown. “It’s the stress that’s really gotten to us,” Blevins said. “Right now, I’ve got my resume out to every customer service job, entry level or not. I’ve got it out everywhere.”The desperation is being felt at nonprofits like the Military Family Advisory Network (MFAN). This week, the organization launched its emergency grocery support program in response to the shutdown, noting that more than 6,000 verified military families applied for its 1,600 grocery packages in the first 24 hours alone.”This moment really puts families at a very fragile place,” MFAN’s Chief Advancement Officer Kara Pappas said. “The need has so quickly eclipsed the demand that we need support from Americans.”Financial institutions are also escalating aid to military members and federal workers who qualify. The Navy Federal Credit Union, for example, is offering 0% interest loans through its paycheck assistance program.The USAA is offering the same and reports that it’s issued nearly $270 million in loans to more than 71,000 of its members so far.The Federal Employee Education and Assistance Fund (FEEA) is giving those eligible up to $150 in micro-grants to support federal employees impacted by the shutdown.Patrick Malone, Director at the Key Executive Leadership Program at American University, emphasizes prioritizing mental health during the shutdown. Malone advises those impacted to reach out and tap into resources immediately and scheduling time for self-care.Watch the latest coverage on the federal government shutdown:
WASHINGTON —
From nonprofits to credit unions, organizations across the country are stepping up to help military families and federal workers as the government shutdown continues. Many are reporting an alarming surge in demand.
Since the shutdown, military spouse Alicia Blevins has faced a mountain of stress. Her family’s savings are depleted, stress-related health issues are emerging, and her job search has been put on hold 16 days into the shutdown.
“It’s the stress that’s really gotten to us,” Blevins said. “Right now, I’ve got my resume out to every customer service job, entry level or not. I’ve got it out everywhere.”
The desperation is being felt at nonprofits like the Military Family Advisory Network (MFAN). This week, the organization launched its emergency grocery support program in response to the shutdown, noting that more than 6,000 verified military families applied for its 1,600 grocery packages in the first 24 hours alone.
“This moment really puts families at a very fragile place,” MFAN’s Chief Advancement Officer Kara Pappas said. “The need has so quickly eclipsed the demand that we need support from Americans.”
Financial institutions are also escalating aid to military members and federal workers who qualify.
The Navy Federal Credit Union, for example, is offering 0% interest loans through its paycheck assistance program.
The USAA is offering the same and reports that it’s issued nearly $270 million in loans to more than 71,000 of its members so far.
The Federal Employee Education and Assistance Fund (FEEA) is giving those eligible up to $150 in micro-grants to support federal employees impacted by the shutdown.
Patrick Malone, Director at the Key Executive Leadership Program at American University, emphasizes prioritizing mental health during the shutdown. Malone advises those impacted to reach out and tap into resources immediately and scheduling time for self-care.
Watch the latest coverage on the federal government shutdown:
United Airlines CEO Scott Kirby said his company is doubling down on brand loyalty. Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
United Airlines, which has increasingly tapped into premium offerings and brand-loyalty programs, expects surging revenue in these areas to deliver a strong finish to 2025—so long as the ongoing government shutdown doesn’t dampen travel demand.
During United’s third-quarter earnings call today (Oct. 16), CEO Scott Kirby told analysts that the airline’s cancellation rates and on-time performance have remained steady so far. “There hasn’t really been a measurable impact in the first couple of weeks of October. [But] the longer this drags on, obviously the risks will grow on both of those points, so I hope our politicians will figure out how to get in a room, compromise and get something done,” he said.
The shutdown, now in its third week, is disrupting flights nationwide due to staffing shortages at the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The shutdown has placed added strain on air traffic controllers, many of whom are expected to work with reduced or no pay until the government reopens.
Kirby said most controllers continue to show up for duty, but warned that a prolonged shutdown would eventually take a toll. “Every day that goes by, the risk to the U.S. economy grows. I hope we will avoid an unforced error here,” he said.
Delta Air Lines CEO Ed Bastian raised similar concerns last week, cautioning that “cracks will soon emerge” if the shutdown isn’t resolved “beyond another 10 days or so.”
United and Delta pivot to premium offerings
United and Delta—the nation’s two largest airlines by market capitalization—are better positioned than most to weather potential turbulence. Both carriers have surged ahead of rivals by doubling down on premium seats and cultivating customer loyalty.
Between July and September, United reported $15.2 billion in revenue, up 2.6 percent year-over-year but slightly below analyst expectations. Net income came in at $949 million, a modest 1 percent decline. A bright spot is the premium cabins, where revenue rose 6 percent, while loyalty program revenue jumped 9 percent from a year ago. The company expects that loyalty-driven momentum will help it post record-high operating revenue in the final quarter of 2025.
To sustain that growth, United plans to invest more than $1 billion next year in enhancing its customer experience. The upgrades include adding more seatback screens and extra legroom, increasing food spending by 25 percent and equipping its entire fleet with SpaceX’s Starlink wifi by 2027.
Delta has already benefited from a pivot to luxury. The airline reported better-than-expected quarterly revenue and profit earlier this month and expects its premium cabins to surpass economy-class sales for the first time next year.
Kirby said United’s success reflects a long-term bet on a fundamental shift in traveler behavior. For decades, he noted, airlines were viewed as interchangeable commodities mainly chosen on price and schedule. But as most carriers now offer comparable routes and fares, loyalty and brand differentiation have become the new battleground.
“What we’ve proven, and continue to prove in the last few years, is that it is possible to transform into a brand-loyal airline,” he said.
To be clear, it’s unlikely that MrBeast Financial would incorporate the same type of reality-show-on-steroids gimmickerythat has made the MrBeast YouTube channel a hit. Indeed, we know very little about what the personal finance app would look like, period—or whether it will even happen.
But a trademark application for MrBeast Financial that, according to data from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, was filed on October 13 under Beast Holdings—an umbrella companyowned by the eponymous YouTuber—indicates that the name could be used for a mobile app that might do anything from banking services to short-term cash advances to crypto trading.
An Inc.com Featured Presentation
Also on that list are investment banking and management services; microfinance lending; insurance; financial advice; financial planning; and financial education. The trademark application makes additional reference to issuing credit and debit cards, as well as the “provision and financial administration of a debit card savings program.”
It’s not clear whether any eventual app would offer all of those services or just a subset of them. A spokesperson for Donaldson declined to comment, and the legal team cited in the trademark application did not respond to a request for details.
In addition to the trademark application, which is public, Business Insider reported in March that it had reviewed a pitch deck indicating that Donaldson had plans to get into financial services. The proposed service was at the time called a slightly different name—“Beast Financial”—but included a similar bevy of services, including student loans, insurance, credit cards, banking services, and financial literacy support.
The pitch deck indicated that MrBeast’s team had “engaged with leading fintech companies to white label their products,” Business Insider reported, “while avoiding regulatory, credit risk, and capital requirements.”
A parallel pitch had to do with creating a new platform for web content creators.
Financial services are a tightly regulated industry, especially compared to the wild west that is online content creation. But legal complexities aside, it wouldn’t be an entirely out-of-left-field move by Donaldson, whose videos tend to be built around eye-popping cash prizes (an exemplary title: “Survive 100 Days in Prison, Win $500,000”) and who’s already stretched his brand across various other verticals, including Feastables chocolate bars, Lunchly packaged meals, and the MrBeast Burger fast food concept.
Business Insider reported last month that the YouTube titan is also thinking about launching a mobile-phone service, seemingly in the same vein as the Ryan Reynolds-backed Mint Mobile—although a source close to the company said that there’s no specific timeline for the telecom project, and that it isn’t a top priority.
“I’d love for Cup of Jo to talk about financial literacy, alongside makeup recs,” commented a reader named Sarah. “The choices we make to maintain society’s beauty standards are keeping us distracted from our long-term financial well-being. Hot Girl Hamster Wheel, anyone?”
A bunch of other readers agreed, including another Sarah: “Preach! Money has historically been an emotional trigger for me, and my defense mechanism is to completely ignore it. Not great!”
So, as we kick off a new finance column — with the goal of feeling empowered and excited, not stressed or shamed — I’d love to know: What money-related questions do you have? For example: What common money mistakes do people make? Where are people putting their savings? What credit cards are good (or bad)? What are five things we should all be doing? How do we handle money when it comes to our parents, kids, friends, and partners? We’re excited to tackle any and all questions with trusted experts and share our financial hopes and dreams with each other. Please tell us what you’d like to discuss! xoxo
Jamie Dimon warned that there could be more to come after the bankruptcies of Tricolor and First Brands. Photo: Noam Galai/Getty Images
Last month’s collapses of Tricolor and First Brands, a subprime auto lender and auto-parts supplier, respectively, sent alarm bells ringing across Wall Street about the health of the consumer credit market. Those concerns deepened today (Oct. 14) as JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon warned during the bank’s quarterly earnings call that “everyone should be forewarned” by the recent bankruptcies.
“My antenna goes up when things like that happen,” Dimon told analysts. “I probably shouldn’t say this, but when you see one cockroach, there are probably more.”
Tricolor filed for bankruptcy in September amid allegations of fraud. The Dallas-based company specialized in providing auto loans to so-called “subprime” lenders with low credit scores. First Brands, a car parts manufacturer headquartered in Rochester, Mich., went bankrupt shortly afterward, with more than $2 billion in funds unaccounted for. Both companies had received financing from various Wall Street banks, sparking fears that financial institutions could increasingly be put at risk due to their exposure to non-bank lenders.
JPMorgan said it had no exposure to First Brands. But it was impacted by Tricolor’s collapse, taking a $170 million charge-off—a loss recognized when a loan won’t be repaid—stemming from the company’s bankruptcy. The hit took place during an otherwise strong quarter for JPMorgan, which beat analyst expectations on both revenue and profit for July through September. Revenue rose 9 percent year-over-year to $47 billion, while net income climbed 12 percent to $14.4 billion.
Dimon said the bank is now reviewing “all processes, all procedures, all underwriting—all everything” in light of the Tricolor collapse. “There clearly was, in my opinion, fraud involved in a bunch of these things. But that doesn’t mean we can’t improve our procedures,” he added.
Dimon, who has led JPMorgan for nearly two decades, also warned that weaknesses in the credit market could worsen if the economy deteriorates. “We’ve had a benign credit environment for so long that I think you may see credit in other places deteriorate a little bit more than people think when, in fact, there’s a downturn,” he said, adding that he is hoping for a “fairly normal credit cycle.”
Even so, the bulk of JPMorgan’s lending to non-bank financial institutions (NBFI) is not particularly risky, said Jeremy Barnum, the bank’s chief financial officer. “The vast majority of that type of lending that we do is highly secured or in some way structured or securitized,” he told analysts today. “I’m not sure that our lending to the NBFI community is an area of risk that we see as more elevated than other areas of risk.”
When you make an offer on a home, you usually put down earnest money to show the seller you’re serious. This money is held in escrow until the sale is finalized, protecting both you and the seller during the transaction.
So what happens to that money at closing? In most cases, your earnest money is applied toward your down payment or closing costs, reducing the cash you need to bring to the closing table.
Still, what happens to earnest money at closing can vary depending on the terms of your contract. In thisRedfin guide, we’ll walk through how it works, when you might get it back, and what to expect in different scenarios.
In this article:
What is earnest money?
Earnest money is a deposit you make after your offer on a home is accepted to show the seller that you’re serious about buying. Think of it as a good-faith payment that tells the seller you’re committed.
This deposit is usually between 1% and 3% of the home’s purchase price, but the amount can vary based on the local market and the agreement between you and the seller.
The earnest money is typically held in anescrow account — a neutral third party, such as atitle company or real estate brokerage, holds onto the funds until the sale is finalized. This ensures that neither the buyer nor the seller can access the money prematurely, protecting both parties during the transaction.
What happens to earnest money at closing?
In most real estate transactions, your earnest money is applied directly toward your home purchase at closing. This means it can either reduce your down payment or be credited toward closing costs like lender fees, title insurance, and other expenses.
Here’s a closer look at what typically happens to earnest money once you reach closing:
Earnest money can be applied toward your down payment
In most cases, if you’re making a down payment on your home, your earnest money is subtracted from the total down payment you owe. For example, if your down payment on your dream home in Boston is $20,000 and you’ve already put $5,000 in earnest money, you’d only need to bring $15,000 more to closing to cover the remainder of your down payment.
Earnest money can be applied to closing costs
If your down payment is already covered or you’ve paid a smaller portion upfront, the earnest money can go toward closing costs, which include fees like lender charges, title insurance, and other closing expenses. This reduces the amount of cash you need to bring to the closing table.
Potential refund of earnest money
In certain situations, such as loans with little or no down payment (like VA or USDA loans) or when seller concessions or lender credits reduce your total costs, the earnest money may exceed what you owe at closing. In these cases, the leftover portion is refunded to you.
Do you get your earnest money back at closing?
In most cases, you don’t typically get your earnest money back as a separate payment or cash refund at closing. Your earnest money is applied to your homebuying expenses, so while you’re not handed a check, that money still goes toward your home purchase.
That said, there are a few instances where receiving your earnest money back at closing is possible:
You paid more than you owe. If your earnest money exceeds what you owe at closing, the difference will be refunded.
You’re using a no-down-payment loan. VA and USDA loans don’t require a down payment. If your closing costs are less than your earnest money, you’ll get the extra back.
You received seller concessions or lender credits. These can lower your out-of-pocket costs, potentially leaving some of your earnest money unused, resulting in a refund.
Example: You put down $4,000 in earnest money for a house in Portland, OR. Thanks to seller concessions and lender credits, your final amount due at closing is just $3,000. You’ll receive the remaining $1,000 back after closing.
Other possible outcomes for your earnest money
While earnest money is usually applied to your purchase at closing, there are situations where the sale doesn’t make it that far. In these cases, your earnest money could either be refunded or forfeited, depending on what caused the deal to fall through:
1. You back out due to a contingency → you get your earnest money back
Most purchase agreements include contingencies that allow you to cancel the deal without penalty. If you back out for one of these protected reasons, you’ll get your earnest money back.
Inspection contingency: If the home inspection reveals serious issues and you decide to walk away (within the agreed timeframe), you can get your money back.
Financing contingency: If your loan falls through despite your best efforts, you can typically back out and recover your earnest money.
Appraisal contingency: If the home appraises for less than the purchase price and you can’t negotiate a lower price, you might be able to walk away with your deposit.
2. You back out for no valid reason → seller keeps earnest money
3. The seller backs out → you get your earnest money back
If the seller cancels the deal (without a reason allowed in the contract), you should get your earnest money back in full. In some cases, you may even have legal grounds to sue for damages.
4. The closing is delayed → money stays in escrow
If closing is pushed back due to title issues, financing delays, or other factors, your earnest money stays in escrow until the sale is finalized.
5. The deal falls through due to an appraisal gap → depends on your contract
If the home’s appraisal is lower than the purchase price (anappraisal gap) and you don’t have an appraisal contingency, you may have to make up the difference or lose your earnest money.
The escalating trade clash between the U.S. and China has investors on edge, fearing it could mark the beginning of the end for global cooperation as we know it. On Friday, President Donald Trump called China’s new export controls “extraordinarily aggressive” and “hostile”; he threatened a retaliatory 100% tariff. (He later sought to deescalate the situation, calming U.S. markets.)
For Kristalina Georgieva, head of the International Monetary Fund, it’s just another day in the office. Speaking at Fortune’s Most Powerful Women 2025 summit in Washington, D.C., she downplayed any fears of a trade war.
“Frankly, this thing that trade is dead is completely overstated,” Georgieva told Fortune’s Diane Brady. “Trade is like water. You put [up an] obstacle, it goes around it.”
And while Georgieva recognizes the world is becoming “foggier” and full of uncertainty, one of the biggest challenges comes from getting buy-in that cooperation is better than division: “We are in this one big boat. It is a rough sea. We better row together.”
Luckily, many countries already subscribe to this philosophy. She pointed out that following the onset of U.S. tariffs earlier this year, 188 out of the IMF’s 191 member states did not choose to retaliate. Instead, they’ve turned to regional partners for trade. Southeast Asia and the Gulf region are two examples she cited.
Even China has benefited from diversifying its trade portfolio: overall exports rose 8.3% in September—the highest total this year—thanks to strong trade growth with the European Union. Chinese shipments to the U.S. fell 27% in September, marking half a year of double-digit trade declines, according to data released by the General Administration of Customs.
But for business leaders, there’s a growing opportunity to be a grounding voice as long as they are willing to “buckle up,” Georgieva added.
“Good news for the world. The private sector is more agile, more adaptable,” she said. “Over the last years, we have seen in many countries where there was [a] big state presence in the economy—including because of IMF urging them to pull back—more private sector initiative. And in this time of strong winds, [business leaders] are an anchor of stability because you adapt, you just keep doing it.”
For female business leaders, in particular, she reiterated the need to always be thinking about worst case scenarios—and be ready to adapt to them.
“Think of the unthinkable so you’re ready when the unthinkable comes,” Georgieva said. “Because we know from COVID, we know from the war in Europe, it will come, and we women are so strong and resilient, and we can face it.”
Fortune Global Forum returns Oct. 26–27, 2025 in Riyadh. CEOs and global leaders will gather for a dynamic, invitation-only event shaping the future of business. Apply for an invitation.
Doug Lebda, the founder and CEO of LendingTree, died Sunday in an ATV accident, the online loan marketplace company announced.
“Doug was a visionary leader whose relentless drive, innovation and passion transformed the financial services landscape, touching the lives of millions of consumers,” LendingTree’s board of directors said in a statement on Monday.
Lebda founded LendingTree in 1996 in a move to simplify the process of shopping and applying for loans. The business launched in 1998 and went public in 2000, two years after it launched. The site helps users find and compare mortgages, credit cards, insurance and other financial products.
LendingTree was later acquired by internet conglomerate IAC/InterActiveCorp, before spinning off on its own again in 2008.
Scott Peyree, LendingTree’s chief operating officer and president, will take over as president and CEO. Steve Ozonian, the lead independent director on the company’s board, will serve as chairman of the board. Both leadership transitions are effective immediately, according to LendingTree.
Lebda, who previously worked as an auditor and consultant for PriceWaterhouseCoopers, in 2010 also co-founded a financial services platform for children and families called Tykoon.
“All of my ideas come from my own experiences and problems,” Lebda told the Wall Street Journal in a 2012 interview.
