jogando fortune rabbit

The Buffaloes suffered a 3-1 loss against No. 9 Arizona State in the penultimate home game of the season. Subscribe to continue reading this article. Already subscribed? To login in, click here.CIBC Asset Management Inc bought a new stake in shares of Plexus Corp. ( NASDAQ:PLXS – Free Report ) during the 3rd quarter, according to its most recent disclosure with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The institutional investor bought 1,853 shares of the technology company’s stock, valued at approximately $253,000. A number of other institutional investors also recently bought and sold shares of the stock. UniSuper Management Pty Ltd purchased a new stake in Plexus in the first quarter valued at approximately $515,000. Vanguard Group Inc. grew its stake in Plexus by 2.2% in the 1st quarter. Vanguard Group Inc. now owns 3,515,866 shares of the technology company’s stock valued at $333,374,000 after acquiring an additional 74,988 shares during the period. Comerica Bank grew its position in shares of Plexus by 22.5% in the first quarter. Comerica Bank now owns 81,817 shares of the technology company’s stock valued at $7,758,000 after purchasing an additional 15,046 shares during the period. Harbor Capital Advisors Inc. boosted its stake in Plexus by 269.9% during the 2nd quarter. Harbor Capital Advisors Inc. now owns 7,268 shares of the technology company’s stock worth $750,000 after purchasing an additional 5,303 shares during the last quarter. Finally, Janus Henderson Group PLC grew its stake in Plexus by 68.4% during the 1st quarter. Janus Henderson Group PLC now owns 66,261 shares of the technology company’s stock valued at $6,281,000 after acquiring an additional 26,904 shares in the last quarter. 94.45% of the stock is currently owned by institutional investors and hedge funds. Plexus Stock Up 1.5 % Shares of NASDAQ:PLXS opened at $162.01 on Friday. Plexus Corp. has a fifty-two week low of $90.18 and a fifty-two week high of $169.41. The firm’s 50-day simple moving average is $142.29 and its 200-day simple moving average is $123.67. The company has a market cap of $4.39 billion, a price-to-earnings ratio of 40.14 and a beta of 0.87. The company has a quick ratio of 0.71, a current ratio of 1.51 and a debt-to-equity ratio of 0.07. Insider Buying and Selling at Plexus In other Plexus news, Director Karen Marie Rapp sold 500 shares of Plexus stock in a transaction on Friday, August 30th. The shares were sold at an average price of $128.02, for a total value of $64,010.00. Following the transaction, the director now owns 9,586 shares in the company, valued at $1,227,199.72. This trade represents a 4.96 % decrease in their position. The sale was disclosed in a document filed with the Securities & Exchange Commission, which is available through this link . Also, CAO Angelo Michael Ninivaggi, Jr. sold 3,113 shares of the company’s stock in a transaction dated Tuesday, October 29th. The stock was sold at an average price of $144.19, for a total value of $448,863.47. Following the sale, the chief accounting officer now owns 35,323 shares of the company’s stock, valued at $5,093,223.37. This represents a 8.10 % decrease in their ownership of the stock. The disclosure for this sale can be found here . Insiders have sold 34,091 shares of company stock valued at $5,334,885 over the last quarter. Corporate insiders own 2.39% of the company’s stock. Wall Street Analysts Forecast Growth A number of equities research analysts recently issued reports on the stock. StockNews.com raised shares of Plexus from a “hold” rating to a “buy” rating in a report on Monday, November 18th. Needham & Company LLC upped their target price on shares of Plexus from $144.00 to $162.00 and gave the stock a “buy” rating in a research note on Friday, October 25th. KeyCorp initiated coverage on shares of Plexus in a research note on Tuesday, October 22nd. They set a “sector weight” rating on the stock. Finally, Benchmark upped their price objective on Plexus from $150.00 to $165.00 and gave the stock a “buy” rating in a research report on Monday, October 28th. Three investment analysts have rated the stock with a hold rating and three have issued a buy rating to the stock. According to MarketBeat, the stock presently has an average rating of “Moderate Buy” and an average price target of $133.50. Read Our Latest Research Report on PLXS Plexus Company Profile ( Free Report ) Plexus Corp. provides electronic manufacturing services in the United States and internationally. It offers design, develop, supply chain, new product introduction, and manufacturing solutions, as well as sustaining services to companies in the healthcare/life sciences, industrial/commercial, aerospace/defense, and communications market sectors. See Also Want to see what other hedge funds are holding PLXS? Visit HoldingsChannel.com to get the latest 13F filings and insider trades for Plexus Corp. ( NASDAQ:PLXS – Free Report ). Receive News & Ratings for Plexus Daily - Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analysts' ratings for Plexus and related companies with MarketBeat.com's FREE daily email newsletter .

Taylor’s University launches country’s first Philosophy, Politics and Economics degree IN A world shaped by rapid advancements and complex challenges, the ability to connect ideas across various disciplines offers fresh perspectives, combining knowledge and skills from diverse fields to solve real-world problems innovatively. Multidisciplinary learning not only fosters creativity and encourages holistic thinking, but also equips individuals with the adaptability to tackle complex issues from multiple angles and thrive in an ever-changing landscape. To this end, Taylor’s University has broken new ground with the introduction of the Bachelor in Philosophy, Politics and Economics (Honours) degree (PPE) – lauded to be the first multidisciplinary programme of its kind in Malaysia. This innovative three-year programme is designed to cultivate a new generation of leaders, thinkers and innovators, equipped to address complex global dynamics and industry challenges. Multidisciplinary programme for the future Taylor’s University has consistently been committed to educational innovation, and the Bachelor in Philosophy, Politics and Economics (Honours) degree reinforces its role in shaping the future of higher education. The institution’s PPE programme addresses the growing demand for graduates who can think critically, analyse issues from multiple perspectives and make impactful decisions. By integrating these three interconnected disciplines, students gain a comprehensive understanding of how societies function and how they can shape the future. This will prepare them to manage global uncertainties, geopolitical tensions, economic challenges and ethical complexities across public and private sectors. The Taylor’s University Industry Advisory Panel (IAP) is led by its pro-vice-chancellor (external engagement) and former MP Professor Dr Ong Kian Ming. Global and regional relevance While the programme mirrors the structure and rigour of multidisciplinary degrees offered by world-renowned institutions, it incorporates unique Malaysian and Asian elements. This blend ensures that students gain a well-rounded education, equipping them with analytical, creative and adaptive skills that are highly valued by employers. They will explore global themes while engaging deeply with regional issues, making their education both globally relevant and locally impactful. By incorporating unique Malaysian elements, the programme positions graduates for diverse career paths in consulting, finance, think tanks, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), public service, academia and more. Graduates will be well-positioned to navigate the complexities of industries worldwide, with a curriculum designed to bridge theoretical knowledge and real-world application. Industry insights A key highlight of the university’s PPE programme is its strong industry ties, featuring a prominent Industry Advisory Panel (IAP) led by Taylor’s University pro-vice-chancellor (external engagement) and former Member of Parliament (MP) Professor Dr Ong Kian Ming. The panel includes other distinguished figures such as Keluar Sekejap podcast co-host, former Minister and Umno youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin, former MP and political secretary to the Finance Minister Tony Pua, The Edge Media Group executive chairman Tan Sri Tong Kooi Ong and University of Nottingham Malaysia associate professor of practice and Institute for Democracy and Economic Affairs former chief executive officer Dr Tricia Yeoh. This diverse panel will provide students with invaluable insights and real-world perspectives through guest lectures, interactive sessions and industry-driven curriculum enhancements, ensuring that the programme remains dynamic and relevant to the evolving demands of the public and private sectors. Yeoh emphasised the programme’s potential to produce graduates who are not only skilled but passionate about making a positive social impact. “I hope the PPE programme will produce graduates who are highly astute, skilful, curious, critical and analytical of the world around them. “I expect that after graduating, PPE graduates would be active in their respective communities and countries, playing a crucial role in innovating new solutions to the world’s most pressing problems, which their previous generations were unable to resolve,” she said. Another panel member, Allen Ng, echoed Yeoh’s sentiments, highlighting the importance of graduates who are in tune with societal challenges. “I hope the PPE programme can grow into a space where students develop a nuanced understanding of regional and global issues. “These individuals should possess the rare ability to connect the dots between regional and global trends with local impacts, armed with a toolkit of political savvy, philosophical depth and economic acumen,” said Ng. Taylor’s University’s Bachelor in Philosophy, Politics and Economics (Honours) degree is said to be the first multidisciplinary programme of its kind in Malaysia. Innovative pedagogy The PPE programme even integrates cutting-edge teaching methodologies to prepare students for the challenges of the 21st-century workplace. Tools such as AI chatbot and quantitative analysis software are incorporated into the curriculum to enhance students’ analytical capabilities. Additionally, students engage in policy podcasts, public forums and interactive case studies that hone their ability to communicate effectively and think critically. The programme encourages students to explore creative solutions to complex issues, fostering an innovative and pragmatic mindset.The forward-thinking curriculum promotes creative and critical thinking with a foundation in theory, offering customisation options to address Asian contexts and align with the standards of world-renowned institutions. Pathway to future leadership The PPE programme at Taylor’s University is more than just a degree – it’s a gateway to future leadership. By blending philosophy, politics and economics, it equips students with the critical thinking and problem-solving skills needed to navigate complex global challenges.As the institution continues to innovate in education, this programme stands as a testament to its commitment to nurturing the next generation of leaders ready to shape a better future. For details on the institution’s Bachelor in Philosophy, Politics and Economics (Honours) programme, visit https://university.taylors.edu.my , or join Taylor’s Open Day on Dec 7-8, and 14-15.KNOXVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — Nico Iamaleava threw for 209 yards and four touchdowns to lead No. 10 Tennessee to a 56-0 victory over UTEP on Saturday. The Volunteers (9-2) overcame a sluggish start to roll up the impressive win. Both teams were scoreless in the first quarter, but Tennessee found its rhythm. Grad student receiver Bru McCoy, who hadn't caught a touchdown pass this season, had two. Peyton Lewis also ran for two scores. Tennessee's defensive line, which had no sacks in last week's loss to Georgia, had three against the Miners. UTEP (2-9) struggled with two missed field goals and three turnovers. Tennessee's offense came alive with 28 points in the second quarter. In the final four drives of the quarter, Iamaleava completed 11 of 12 passes for 146 yards and touchdowns to Squirrel White, Ethan Davis and McCoy. UTEP was the dominant team in the first quarter. Tennessee managed just 37 offensive yards and, thanks to an interception near the end zone and a missed field goal by the Miners, both teams were scoreless after 15 minutes. POLL IMPLICATIONS Tennessee’s convincing victory, coupled with losses by Mississippi and Indiana, should put the Volunteers in a good position when the next College Football Playoff poll is released. The Vols were ranked No. 11 going into this week’s games. THE TAKEAWAY UTEP: The Miners will head into a very winnable game against New Mexico State having won two of their last five games. First-year coach Scotty Walden will try to build on that success in the offseason to help enhance his roster. Tennessee: Even a lopsided win won’t carry much weight where it means the most — in the College Football Playoff rankings. The Vols will have to rely on a convincing win against Vanderbilt next week, a team that has shown a lot of improvement this season, to help their standing for those coveted spots. UP NEXT UTEP: The Miners will finish their season at New Mexico State Saturday. Tennessee: The Vols will finish their regular season at Vanderbilt next Saturday. Get poll alerts and updates on the AP Top 25 throughout the season. Sign up here . AP college football: https://apnews.com/hub/ap-top-25-college-football-poll and https://apnews.com/hub/college-football

First treatment in 50 years for serious asthma attacks is ‘game-changer’Advertising Industry To Hit $1 Trillion, Dominated By The New 'Big 5'

Ruling on Monday after an emergency hearing at Belfast High Court, judge Mr Justice McAlinden rejected loyalist activist Jamie Bryson’s application for leave for a full judicial review hearing against Northern Ireland Secretary Hilary Benn. The judge said Mr Bryson, who represented himself as a personal litigant, had “very ably argued” his case with “perseverance and cogency”, and had raised some issues of law that caused him “some concern”. However, he found against him on the three grounds of challenge against Mr Benn. Mr Bryson had initially asked the court to grant interim relief in his challenge to prevent Tuesday’s democratic consent motion being heard in the Assembly, pending the hearing of a full judicial review. However, he abandoned that element of his leave application during proceedings on Monday, after the judge made clear he would be “very reluctant” to do anything that would be “trespassing into the realms” of a democratically elected Assembly. Mr Bryson had challenged Mr Benn’s move to initiate the democratic consent process that is required under the UK and EU’s Windsor Framework deal to extend the trading arrangements that apply to Northern Ireland. The previously stated voting intentions of the main parties suggest that Stormont MLAs will vote to continue the measures for another four years when they convene to debate the motion on Tuesday. After the ruling, Mr Bryson told the court he intended to appeal to the Court of Appeal. Any hearing was not expected to come later on Monday. In applying for leave, the activist’s argument was founded on three key grounds. The first was the assertion that Mr Benn failed to make sufficient efforts to ensure Stormont’s leaders undertook a public consultation exercise in Northern Ireland before the consent vote. The second was that the Secretary of State allegedly failed to demonstrate he had paid special regard to protecting Northern Ireland’s place in the UK customs territory in triggering the vote. The third ground centred on law changes introduced by the previous UK government earlier this year, as part of its Safeguarding the Union deal to restore powersharing at Stormont. He claimed that if the amendments achieved their purpose, namely, to safeguard Northern Ireland’s place within the United Kingdom, then it would be unlawful to renew and extend post-Brexit trading arrangements that have created economic barriers between the region and the rest of the UK. In 2023, the UK Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the trading arrangements for Northern Ireland are lawful. The appellants in the case argued that legislation passed at Westminster to give effect to the Brexit Withdrawal Agreement conflicted with the 1800 Acts of Union that formed the United Kingdom, particularly article six of that statute guaranteeing unfettered trade within the UK. The Supreme Court found that while article six of the Acts of Union has been “modified” by the arrangements, that was done with the express will of a sovereign parliament, and so therefore was lawful. Mr Bryson contended that amendments made to the Withdrawal Agreement earlier this year, as part of the Safeguarding the Union measures proposed by the Government to convince the DUP to return to powersharing, purport to reassert and reinforce Northern Ireland’s constitutional status in light of the Supreme Court judgment. He told the court that it was “quite clear” there was “inconsistency” between the different legal provisions. “That inconsistency has to be resolved – there is an arguable case,” he told the judge. However, Dr Tony McGleenan KC, representing the Government, described Mr Bryson’s argument as “hopeless” and “not even arguable”. He said all three limbs of the case had “no prospect of success and serve no utility”. He added: “This is a political argument masquerading as a point of constitutional law and the court should see that for what it is.” After rising to consider the arguments, Justice McAlinden delivered his ruling shortly after 7pm. The judge dismissed the application on the first ground around the lack consultation, noting that such an exercise was not a “mandatory” obligation on Mr Benn. On the second ground, he said there were “very clear” indications that the Secretary of State had paid special regard to the customs territory issues. On the final ground, Justice McAlinden found there was no inconsistency with the recent legislative amendments and the position stated in the Supreme Court judgment. “I don’t think any such inconsistency exists,” he said. He said the amendments were simply a “restatement” of the position as set out by the Supreme Court judgment, and only served to confirm that replacing the Northern Ireland Protocol with the Windsor Framework had not changed the constitutional fact that Article Six of the Acts of Union had been lawfully “modified” by post-Brexit trading arrangements. “It does no more than that,” he said. The framework, and its predecessor the NI Protocol, require checks and customs paperwork on goods moving from Great Britain into Northern Ireland. Under the arrangements, which were designed to ensure no hardening of the Irish land border post-Brexit, Northern Ireland continues to follow many EU trade and customs rules. This has proved highly controversial, with unionists arguing the system threatens Northern Ireland’s place in the United Kingdom. Advocates of the arrangements say they help insulate the region from negative economic consequences of Brexit. A dispute over the so-called Irish Sea border led to the collapse of the Northern Ireland Assembly in 2022, when the DUP withdrew then-first minister Paul Givan from the coalition executive. The impasse lasted two years and ended in January when the Government published its Safeguarding the Union measures. Under the terms of the framework, a Stormont vote must be held on articles five to 10 of the Windsor Framework, which underpin the EU trade laws in force in Northern Ireland, before they expire. The vote must take place before December 17. Based on the numbers in the Assembly, MLAs are expected to back the continuation of the measures for another four years, even though unionists are likely to oppose the move. DUP leader Gavin Robinson has already made clear his party will be voting against continuing the operation of the Windsor Framework. Unlike other votes on contentious issues at Stormont, the motion does not require cross-community support to pass. If it is voted through with a simple majority, the arrangements are extended for four years. In that event, the Government is obliged to hold an independent review of how the framework is working. If it wins cross-community support, which is a majority of unionists and a majority of nationalists, then it is extended for eight years. The chances of it securing such cross-community backing are highly unlikely.

TGM MOURNS DEATH OF CO-FOUNDER AND MANAGING PRINCIPAL STEVEN C. MACY

Heavy travel day starts with brief grounding of all American Airlines flights

FGBI stock hits 52-week high at $13.38 amid robust growth

Meta Platforms Inc. stock underperforms Monday when compared to competitorsThe Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, a private research laboratory, is located on Long Island, New York, where I live. Its outrageous history is detailed in a forthcoming book , “Long Island and the Legacy of Eugenics: Station of Intolerance.” The book, by Mark A. Torres, an attorney as well as an author, will be released by The History Press on January 21st. Torres also wrote the 2021 book “Long Island Migrant Labor Camps: Dust for Blood,” an examination of the plight of migrant farmworkers on Long Island, published, too, by The History Press. Torres is general counsel of Teamsters Local 810, a union that covers Long Island, and as an attorney has long specialized in labor and employment law in federal and state courts. He is also a professor at Hofstra University. As an author, he excels at in-depth research. Earlier this year the Association of Public Historians of New York awarded Torres its Joseph F. Meany Award (named for former New York State Historian Joseph F. Meany, Jr.) for his book on migrant farmworker camps on Long Island. Most Long Island residents know little about the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory although it is off a major highway on Long Island, Route 25A, on 110 acres, and currently employs more than a thousand people. I’ve received an advance copy of Torres’ book. It begins with an “Author’s Note” in which Torres explains: “True to my roots as an author of Long Island history, I have always strived to present topics from the oft-neglected local perspective. Thus, this book is not intended to merely serve as a broad retelling of the history of eugenics. Instead, it focuses on investigating the local origins, characters and stratagems employed by the Eugenics Record Office in Cold Spring Harbor which, for nearly three decades, served as the global headquarters of the eugenics movement.” He relates how his investigative “journey led me to study the archival records at numerous facilities, including the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory and Archives...the Rockefeller Archive in Sleepy Hollow, New York; the American Philosophical Institute in Philadelphia; Truman State University in Kirksville, Missouri; and the National Museum of Health and Medicine in Silver Springs, Maryland...” “The information I amassed from these meticulously preserved archives provided sharp insight into the origins, inspiration and machinations of the American eugenics movement, while never losing focus on the fact that it all emanated from a small hamlet on Long Island.” “Through it all, I came to understand how eugenics became such an accepted and normalized part of society in the United States and throughout the world during the twentieth century,” writes Torres. He goes on how the book includes “the downfall of the Eugenics Record Office” (part of the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory between 1910 and 1939) “and the ultimate discrediting of eugenics as a scientific field. The final section also explores the enduring and cruel legacy of eugenics.” “The quest to perfect our species was not a new one,” Torres writes. “However, the problem with such aspirations: Who decides the standards of perfection? And, more importantly, what is to be done with those who fall below the arbitrarily created standards.” Then the book starts with the 1946 trial in Nuremberg, Germany: United States of America v. Karl Brandt, et al. Brandt, who was “the personal physician of Adolph Hitler,” and other doctors were put on trial in the aftermath of World War II for crimes against humanity, he relates, in connection with the Nazi “euthanasia program.” “Brandt and six others were convicted, sentenced to death and executed. Astonishingly, the information that Brandt and his cohorts so desperately relied on for their defense was not derived from Nazi propaganda,” says Torres. “Instead, their sources came directly from a report published in 1914 by the Eugenics Record Office in Cold Spring Harbor, New York.” “What connection,” asks Torres, “did an administrative office four thousand miles away in a small town on Long Island have with the Nazi regime that plotted and carried out the systematic torture and murder of millions of human beings based on race and disability?” “The connection was eugenics: the pseudoscience that dominated much of the twentieth century and was premised on the racist, classist and misguided belief that mental, physical and behavioral traits of human beings were all inheritable and must be eliminated to save the human race.” “Although it was promoted as cutting-edge science, eugenics was a social philosophy that aimed to develop a master race of human beings with the purest blood and the most desirable hereditary traits,” the book continues. A “component” of eugenics was “’negative eugenics’ which aimed to discourage or outright prevent the reproduction of people who were declared genetically unfit. Negative genetics was driven by the premise that society would dramatically improve if the millions of Americans who were deemed mentally, physically or morally undesirable were ‘eliminated from the human stock’ by means of segregation, sterilization and even euthanasia. This included the ‘feebleminded,’ paupers, criminals, epileptics, the insane, the deformed, the congenitally weak, the blind and the deaf. While human heredity would not begin to be understood by scientists until the 1960s, the social prejudice and practice of eugenics dominated scientific objectivity for more than half a century.” “The legacy of eugenics is undeniably cruel and enduring,” writes Torres. “In the United States alone, more than sixty thousand forced sterilizations were carried out in more than half the states....A multitude of people throughout the country were classified as undesirable and confined to psychiatric centers during their childbearing years. A bevy of marriage restriction and eugenic sterilization laws were enacted for the purpose of preventing the procreation of the unfit. Eugenically driven immigration laws barring the entry of immigrants from many countries into the United States endured for years. Globally, eugenics thrived in countries like Argentina, Canada, China, Japan and Norway, and Nazi Germany used it to commit unimaginable atrocities. In some ways, the ideals of eugenics persist today.” “Despite its global appeal,” Torres goes on, “eugenics was truly made in America, and the epicenter of the movement was not found in some laboratory or government facility. Instead, the science was developed at the Eugenics Record Office...in Cold Spring Harbor, Long Island.” Before the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory became “the global center of the eugenics movement,” eugenics had roots in England, relates Torres. He notes how in 1851 in England, Herbert Spencer penned a book “Social Statics” that “first publicized the phrase survival of the fittest.” And “less than a decade later, Charles Darwin popularized the phrase survival of the fittest in his seminal work “The Origin of the Species.” Yet another Englishman, Francis Galton, a cousin of Darwin, then authored a book “Hereditary Genus” in which he “suggested that the breeding of the best people would evolve mankind into a super species...” “The founding fathers of eugenics in England,” writes Torres, “had formulated the theoretical concepts of human hereditary research. It was only a matter of time before it caught on in the United States, and of the many individuals and groups who helped establish eugenics from theory to practice, none was more influential than an American biologist Charles Davenport who was directly responsible for the establishment and operation of the Eugenics Record Office, which for more than three decades would serve as the eugenics capital of the world.” From the Eugenics Record Office, part of the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, “Davenport also led the movement that would ultimately springboard eugenics into a global phenomenon.” “In 1902, the Carnegie Institute of Washington was founded, and Davenport immediately began to lobby the group to invest in the establishment of a center for genetics at Cold Spring Harbor,” Torres continues. And “the forces were beginning to align for the formation of the American eugenics movement, and Charles Davenport would be at the center of it all.” Davenport “developed a plan to collect hereditary information from a multitude of families in order to prove that evolution worked in human beings the way it worked in animals and plants.” In the end, eugenics was thoroughly discredited, as Torres relates in the last chapter of his book, titled “A Reckoning.” “The rise of eugenics was not a random phenomenon,” the chapter begins. “Eugenics presented as a cutting-edge science driven by utopian ideals for the betterment of humanity. It was buoyed by a continuous flow of financial support from wealthy and progressive-minded donors and fully embraced by the leading thinkers of the time before settling into the very fabric of the United States and societies throughout the world. Ultimately, eugenics was discredited as a science and exposed as nothing more than a social philosophy used as a slogan for intolerance, racism, bigotry and classism. It was essentially a means for the wealthy to assert their dominance over the poor, which has been an unfortunate and recurring theme throughout all of human history.” “It took many years for the scientific and corporate communities to accept responsibility for their part in eugenics,” says Torres. Indeed, it was only in 2020 that the president of the Carnegie Institution for Science “issued a formal apology for the group’s support for eugenics.” The statement: “There is no excuse, then or now, for our institution’s previous willingness to empower researchers who sought to pervert scientific inquiry to justify their own racist and ableist prejudices. Our support of eugenics made us complicit in driving decades of brutal and unconscionable actions by the governments in the United States and around the world.” Only in 2023 did the American Society of Human Genetics issue a statement declaring that it “seeks to reckon with, and sincerely apologizes for, its involvement in and silence of the misuse of human genetics to justify and contribute to injustice in all forms,” he continues. Torres closes his book by stating: “In the nearly three decades of its operation, the Eugenics Record Office served as the ultimate vessel to fortify and amplify the pseudoscience called eugenics and transformed it into a global phenomenon. Everything that emanated from this facility served to dominate the poor, the weak and the sick, who were deemed the defectives of society and subject them to mass levels of institutionalization, sterilization, immigration restrictions and even euthanasia. Later, in the hands of the Nazi regime, eugenics was openly used as a scientific excuse to torture and murder a multitude of innocent human beings.” “The Eugenics Record Office and those who directly operated, controlled and funded it are fully deserving of the blame for the entire eugenics movement and the dire atrocities committed under the banner of this false science,” he says. “While we must continue to honor the seemingly countless victims, we must also provide public discourse and educational programs on the subject, for if we fail to do so, we may be in danger of repeating this dark history.” Between the start and end of his book, Torres documents the horrors committed in the name of eugenics—and how an institution on Long Island was the base for it. He names the names—prominent names—including those in government and business in the U.S. who pushed eugenics. “All movements require the support and participation of people with strong public influence” and “there were few greater endorsements than that of president of the United States of America. In fact,” he notes, “every president” of the U.S. from Theodore Roosevelt to Herbert Hoover “was a member of a eugenics organization, publicly endorsed eugenic laws, or signed eugenic legislation without voicing opposition.” As for Roosevelt, whose ”summer White House” at Sagamore Hill was a “mere six miles from the ERO facility in Cold Spring Harbor,” Roosevelt wrote a letter to Davenport asserting: “Someday we will realize that the prime duty of the good citizen of the right type [is] to leave his blood behind him in the world; that that we have no business to perpetuate citizens of the wrong type.” He tells of John Harvey Kellogg, a doctor who with his brother founded the Kellogg company that developed corn flakes becoming a “staunch ally of Charles Davenport and a full-fledged eugenicist....In 1914, he organized the First Race Betterment Foundation Conference in Battle Creek, Michigan, with the stated purpose of establishing the foundations for the creation of a super race.” On its website, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory in a section labeled its “History” has an essay on a “historical perspective on genetics” headlined: “Good genes, bad science.” It begins relating how in the early 1900s “the bogus concept of hereditary criminality and a made-up disease known as feeblemindedness became part of some scientists’ so-called studies of genetics. Ideas such as these were the core of the American eugenics movement....in which science got mixed up with racial dogma. Among the results was the destruction of thousands of people’s ability to pass on their ‘defective’ genes through forced sterilization programs.” “Many of Hitler’s beliefs were directly inspired by the eugenics books he read while he was in prison,” writes Torres. (Hitler was jailed for leading in 1923 the Beer Hall Putsch, an attempted coup in Munich involving members of his Nazi Party. Convicted of treason, he was sentenced to five years in jail and served nine months.) Hitler “admired,” Torres continues, “the policies of the American eugenics program, including the efforts that led to the passage of strict immigration laws in the United States.” In 1933, he “seized power,” and “eugenics presented Hitler with a...globally accepted science to support his sinister plans. In July 1933, Germany enacted the ‘Law for the Prevention of Defective Progeny,’ the first eugenic sterilization law in the country....The law also established approximately two hundred genetic courts and managed anyone suspected of having a genetic defect to be reported to the authorities.” A publication put out by the Eugenics Record Office, Eugenical News, featured the law “proudly.” Soon, “German eugenicists began to formulate definitions of Jewishness. Hitler insisted that Jews of all degrees to be identified, including those with at least one drop of Jewish blood.” The “methodology was fully inspired by the family pedigree system created at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory more than two decades before,” writes Torres. With the mass sending of Jews and others to death camps, Hitler “directed...doctors at different concentration camps to conduct a wide range of eugenics-based research.” “Over time, the world began to learn of the Nazis’ atrocities,” writes Torres. “In 1936, the Rockefeller Foundation finally became reluctant to fund any further eugenics-based programs, and nearly all funding ended when the fighting erupted in 1939. Unfortunately, Nazi eugenics programs had already benefited from the foundation’s funding, and the fully developed program continued throughout the war.” The book includes a chapter on the impact of eugenic advocates on U.S. immigration law, titled “’Scientific Racism’ and the Anti-Immigration Movement.” Torres writes about how Harry Laughlin, superintendent of the Eugenics Record Office from its inception to closure, sent a report to the U.S. Congress in 1922 labeling certain immigrants “human waste.” Writes Torres: “Page after page, the report was rife with racial and ethnic slurs and detailed statistics regarding feeblemindedness, insanity, crime, various forms of illness and deformity and ‘all types of social inadequacy.’” Laughlin testified before Congress in 1922 asserting: “These degeneracies and hereditary handicaps are inherent in the blood.” Before Congress again, in 1924, “elaborate charts” were displayed by Laughlin “promoting the link between the so-called inferior races and immoral conduct.” “As a direct result of Laughlin’s tireless efforts, which were driven by his eugenic ideals coupled with lawmakers’ growing racial animus against immigrants, the House and Senate passed the Immigration Act of 1924,” writes Torres. “The law imposed even stricter quotas on immigrants from all non-Nordic nations. For example, the quota on immigration from Italy was dramatically reduced from forty-two thousand per year to just four thousand.” In the U.S., laws were passed to mandate sterilization based on the claims of eugenics. Torres focuses on a 1927 U.S. Supreme Court 8-to-1 decision upholding a “request by the State of Virginia to forcefully sterilize nineteen-year-old Carrie Buck based on a eugenics diagnosis.” She was determined to be “feebleminded.” The ruling, written by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. “has never been reversed,” writes Torres. “It is an enduring legacy left by the Eugenics Record Office and a direct byproduct of the ERO’s work. In the wake of the decision, the number of sterilizations across the country began to grow exponentially.” The Eugenics Record Office activities also included research close to home, “in local communities on Long Island and throughout New York State.” It got involved with psychiatric institutions on Long Island including Kings Park Psychiatric Center, Central Islip State Hospital and Pilgrim State Hospital in Brentwood. The book includes how “Native American reservations on Long Island were targeted” by Davenport and his followers including what is now the Shinnecock Indian Nation and the Unkechaug Reservation, both on Long Island. He tells of how Dr. John Strong, the author of numerous books on Native Americans and long a professor of history at Southampton College on Long Island, said “the eugenically biased data derived from these studies was used by the [U.S.] Bureau of Indian Affairs...to the detriment of the Native American population.” Torres in an interview emphasized how eugenics “was not a fringe movement. It was the rage of the age. It was widely embraced.” Torres writes of how eugenics was embraced by academia in the U.S. “During much of the early to mid-twentieth century, eugenics was taught....at the most prestigious academic institutions in the country, including Harvard, Johns Hopkins, Princeton and Yale.” He cites a 1916 ERO report stating that 254 colleges taught courses about eugenics. He writes: “At Boston University, eugenics was taught to students at the School of Theology.” New York University, Columbia and Barnard “each offered a eugenics-based course....Other New York colleges that taught eugenics” that are listed include Adelphi, Cornell, Colgate, Farmingdale, Fordham, Syracuse University and Vassar. Also, he notes, “eugenics was a regularly offered course in the biology department at San Francisco State University from 1916 to 1951.” The year 1951 was decades after the Eugenics Records Office at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory was shut down. In recent years, what eugenics is about has continued as an issue. In 2007, Dr. James Watson, chancellor of the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory and a Nobel Prize winner, was relieved of his post after saying in an interview with the London Times that that there was an intelligence gap between Blacks and whites and this accounted for many of problems in Africa. In 2019, the laboratory stripped Watson of titles he still held including chancellor emeritus after he appeared on a PBS documentary “American Masters: Decoding Watson,” and, asked if he changed his views, said: “No. Not at all....there’s a difference on the average between Blacks and whites on I.Q tests. I would say the difference is....genetic.” Last month, Laura Helmuth, editor-in-chief of Scientific American, resigned after complaints about comments she made including, online, that “Trump’s racist rants are straight-up eugenics.” An article in the magazine in October scored Donald Trump’s statements about immigrants, its headline “Trump’s Racist Rants against Immigrants Hide under the Language of Eugenics.” Helmuth from 2016 to 2018 was president of the National Association of Science Writers. And this month, New York magazine featured an article headlined: “A Rift in the Family, My in-laws gave me a book by a eugenicist. Our relationship is over.”

First treatment in 50 years for serious asthma attacks is ‘game-changer’Another Tinubu's minister started war with predecessor in his state as Fubara vs Wike's rift deepensEmail Hosting Services Market to Exhibit a Remarkable CAGR of 19.00% by 2031, Size, Share, Trends, Key Drivers, Demand, Opportunity Analysis and Competitive Outlook 12-09-2024 10:14 PM CET | Advertising, Media Consulting, Marketing Research Press release from: Data Bridge Market Research The global email hosting services market size was valued at USD 22.73 billion in 2023 and is projected to reach USD 91.40 billion by 2031, with a CAGR of 19.00% during the forecast period of 2024 to 2031. Email hosting services refer to a type of Internet hosting service that enables individuals and organizations to send, receive, and manage their email using custom domain names. These services provide the necessary infrastructure and technology to handle email communications, often including features such as spam filtering, security protocols, and storage solutions. Email hosting can be offered as a standalone service or as part of a larger suite of services, such as web hosting or cloud-based collaboration tools. Browse More About This Research Report @ https://www.databridgemarketresearch.com/reports/global-email-hosting-services-market Some of the major players operating in the Email Hosting Services market are Google LLC (U.S.), DigitalOcean, LLC. (U.S.), Hostinger (Lithuania), GoDaddy Operating Company, LLC. (U.S.), Microsoft (U.S.), OVH SAS (France), Rackspace Technology (U.S.), Fasthosts Internet Limited (U.K.), IceWarp Ltd. (U.S.), Runbox Solutions AS (Norway), Fastmail Pty Ltd (Australia), Greatmail LLC. (U.S.), A2 Hosting (U.S.), FastComet Inc. (U.S.), TMDHosting (U.S.), HostPapa, Inc. (Canada), SmarterASP.NET (U.S.), Heficed (Lithuania) Global Email Hosting Services Market Scope The market is segmented on the basis of product type, application, and deployment type. The growth amongst these segments will help you analyze meagre growth segments in the industries and provide the users with a valuable market overview and market insights to help them make strategic decisions for identifying core market applications. Product Type Webmail Hosted Email Application Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs) Large Enterprises Deployment Type Private Cloud Public Cloud Hybrid Cloud Browse Trending Reports: https://dbmrblogs02.blogspot.com/2024/11/circadian-rhythm-lighting-market-size.html https://dbmrblogs02.blogspot.com/2024/11/window-film-market-opportunities-and.html https://dbmrblogs02.blogspot.com/2024/11/spirits-market-insights-and-growth.html https://dbmrblogs02.blogspot.com/2024/11/amphotericin-b-market-trends-analysis.html About Data Bridge Market Research: An absolute way to predict what the future holds is to understand the current trend! Data Bridge Market Research presented itself as an unconventional and neoteric market research and consulting firm with an unparalleled level of resilience and integrated approaches. We are committed to uncovering the best market opportunities and nurturing effective information for your business to thrive in the marketplace. Data Bridge strives to provide appropriate solutions to complex business challenges and initiates an effortless decision-making process. Data Bridge is a set of pure wisdom and experience that was formulated and framed in 2015 in Pune. Contact Us: - Data Bridge Market Research Email: - sopan.gedam@databridgemarketresearch.com This release was published on openPR.

FORT WASHINGTON, Pa., Dec. 09, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Toll Brothers, Inc. (NYSE:TOL) (TollBrothers.com), the nation’s leading builder of luxury homes, today announced results for its fourth quarter ended October 31, 2024. FY 2024 ’s Fourth Quarter Financial Highlights (Compared to FY 2023 ’ s Fourth Quarter): Net income and earnings per share were $475.4 million and $4.63 per diluted share, compared to net income of $445.5 million and $4.11 per diluted share in FY 2023’s fourth quarter. Pre-tax income was $621.1 million, compared to $605.0 million in FY 2023’s fourth quarter. Home sales revenues were $3.26 billion, up 10% compared to FY 2023’s fourth quarter; delivered homes were 3,431, up 25%. Net signed contract value was $2.66 billion, up 32% compared to FY 2023’s fourth quarter; contracted homes were 2,658, up 30%. Backlog value was $6.47 billion at fourth quarter end, down 7% compared to FY 2023’s fourth quarter; homes in backlog were 5,996, down 9%. Home sales gross margin was 26.0%, compared to FY 2023’s fourth quarter home sales gross margin of 27.5%. Adjusted home sales gross margin, which excludes interest and inventory write-downs, was 27.9%, compared to FY 2023’s fourth quarter adjusted home sales gross margin of 29.1%. SG&A, as a percentage of home sales revenues, was 8.3%, compared to 8.2% in FY 2023’s fourth quarter. Income from operations was $611.1 million. Other income, income from unconsolidated entities, and gross margin from land sales and other was $44.5 million. The Company repurchased approximately 1.3 million shares at an average price of $150.19 per share for a total purchase price of $200.9 million. Full FY 2024 Financial Highlights (Compared to Full FY 2023 ): Net income was $1.57 billion, and earnings per share were $15.01 diluted, compared to net income of $1.37 billion and $12.36 per share diluted in FY 2023. Net income and earnings per share included $124.1 million and $1.19, respectively, related to the sale of a parcel of land to a commercial developer in our second quarter. Excluding this gain, net income and earnings per share were $1.45 billion and $13.82 per diluted share in FY 2024. Pre-tax income was $2.09 billion, compared to $1.84 billion in FY 2023. Home sales revenues were $10.56 billion, up 7% compared to FY 2023; delivered homes were 10,813, up 13%. Net signed contract value was $10.07 billion, up 27% compared to FY 2023; contracted homes were 10,231, up 27%. Home sales gross margin was 26.6%, compared to FY 2023’s home sales gross margin of 26.9%. Adjusted home sales gross margin, which excludes interest and inventory write-downs, was 28.4%, compared to FY 2023’s adjusted home sales gross margin of 28.7%. SG&A, as a percentage of home sales revenues, was 9.3%, compared to 9.2% in FY 2023. Income from operations was $2.04 billion. Other income, income from unconsolidated entities, and gross margin from land sales and other was $258.0 million. The Company repurchased approximately 4.9 million shares at an average price of $127.79 per share for a total purchase price of $627.9 million Douglas C. Yearley, Jr., chairman and chief executive officer, stated: “I am very pleased with our fourth quarter results, which cap the strongest year ever for Toll Brothers. For the full year, we generated a record $10.6 billion of home sales revenue, earned $15.01 per diluted share and grew contracts by 27% in both units and dollars. In the fourth quarter, we delivered 3,431 homes and generated $3.3 billion in home sales revenues, up 25% in units and 10% in dollars compared to last year’s fourth quarter. Our fourth quarter adjusted gross margin was 27.9%, beating guidance by 40 basis points, and our SG&A expense was 8.3% of home sales revenues, or 30 basis points better than guidance. Our strong margin performance and better than projected home sales revenues drove earnings of $4.63 per diluted share in the quarter, up 13% compared to last year. We also signed 2,658 net contracts at an average price of $1,000,000, up 30% in units and 32% in dollars compared to last year’s fourth quarter. Our performance this year and in the fourth quarter demonstrates the power of our luxury brand, the financial strength of our buyers, and the success of our strategies of increasing our spec home production and widening our geographies, price points and product lines. “Since the start of our fiscal 2025 six weeks ago we have seen strong demand, which is encouraging as we approach the beginning of the spring selling season in mid-January. We are well positioned with communities in over 60 markets across 24 states featuring the widest offering of luxury homes and serving the most affluent customers in our industry. Last year, we increased community count by 10% and are targeting a similar increase in fiscal 2025. We also owned or controlled approximately 74,700 lots at year end, providing sufficient land for further growth in fiscal 2026 and beyond. “In fiscal 2024, we generated a return on beginning equity of 23.1%, driven by our record earnings and strong cash flows that allowed us to return approximately $720 million of capital to shareholders. Our healthy balance sheet, low leverage, and ample liquidity, including significant projected cash flows from operations in fiscal 2025, should allow us to continue investing in our business while returning cash to shareholders well into the future.” Additional Information: The Company ended its FY 2024 fourth quarter with $1.30 billion in cash and cash equivalents, compared to $1.30 billion at FYE 2023 and $893.4 million at FY 2024’s third quarter end. At FY 2024 fourth quarter end, the Company also had $1.77 billion available under its $1.96 billion revolving credit facility, which is scheduled to mature in February 2028 . On October 25, 2024, the Company paid its quarterly dividend of $0.23 per share to shareholders of record at the close of business on October 11, 2024. Stockholders’ equity at FY 2024 fourth quarter end was $7.67 billion, compared to $6.80 billion at FYE 2023. FY 2024’s fourth quarter-end book value per share was $76.87 per share, compared to $65.49 at FYE 2023. The Company ended its FY 2024’s fourth quarter with a debt-to-capital ratio of 27.0%, compared to 27.6% at FY 2024’s third quarter end and 29.6% at FYE 2023. The Company ended FY 2024’s fourth quarter with a net debt-to-capital ratio (1) of 15.3%, compared to 19.6% at FY 2024’s third quarter end, and 17.7% at FYE 2023. The Company ended FY 2024’s fourth quarter with approximately 74,700 lots owned and optioned, compared to 72,700 one quarter earlier, and 70,700 one year earlier. Approximately 45% or 34,000, of these lots were owned, of which approximately 19,400 lots, including those in backlog, were substantially improved. In the fourth quarter of FY 2024, the Company spent approximately $258.6 million on land to purchase approximately 1,910 lots. The Company ended FY 2024’s fourth quarter with 408 selling communities, compared to 404 at FY 2024’s third quarter end and 370 at FY 2023’s fourth quarter end. (1) See “Reconciliation of Non-GAAP Measures” below for more information on the calculation of the Company’s net debt-to-capital ratio. Toll Brothers will be broadcasting live via the Investor Relations section of its website, investors.TollBrothers.com, a conference call hosted by chairman and chief executive officer Douglas C. Yearley, Jr. at 8:30 a.m. (ET) Tuesday, December 10, 2024, to discuss these results and its outlook for the first quarter and FY 2025. To access the call, enter the Toll Brothers website, click on the Investor Relations page, and select “Events & Presentations.” Participants are encouraged to log on at least fifteen minutes prior to the start of the presentation to register and download any necessary software. The call can be heard live with an online replay which will follow. ABOUT TOLL BROTHERS Toll Brothers, Inc., a Fortune 500 Company, is the nation’s leading builder of luxury homes. The Company was founded 57 years ago in 1967 and became a public company in 1986. Its common stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol “TOL.” The Company serves first-time, move-up, empty-nester, active-adult, and second-home buyers, as well as urban and suburban renters. Toll Brothers builds in over 60 markets in 24 states: Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, and Washington, as well as in the District of Columbia. The Company operates its own architectural, engineering, mortgage, title, land development, insurance, smart home technology, and landscape subsidiaries. The Company also develops master-planned and golf course communities as well as operates its own lumber distribution, house component assembly, and manufacturing operations. In 2024, Toll Brothers marked 10 years in a row being named to the Fortune World’s Most Admired CompaniesTM list and the Company’s Chairman and CEO Douglas C. Yearley, Jr. was named one of 25 Top CEOs by Barron’s magazine. Toll Brothers has also been named Builder of the Year by Builder magazine and is the first two-time recipient of Builder of the Year from Professional Builder magazine. For more information visit TollBrothers.com. Toll Brothers discloses information about its business and financial performance and other matters, and provides links to its securities filings, notices of investor events, and earnings and other news releases, on the Investor Relations section of its website (investors.TollBrothers.com). From Fortune, ©2024 Fortune Media IP Limited. All rights reserved. Used under license. FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS Information presented herein for the fourth quarter ended October 31, 2024 is subject to finalization of the Company’s regulatory filings, related financial and accounting reporting procedures and external auditor procedures. This release contains or may contain forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. One can identify these statements by the fact that they do not relate to matters of a strictly historical or factual nature and generally discuss or relate to future events. These statements contain words such as “anticipate,” “estimate,” “expect,” “project,” “intend,” “plan,” “believe,” “may,” “can,” “could,” “might,” “should,” “likely,” “will,” and other words or phrases of similar meaning. Such statements may include, but are not limited to, information and statements regarding: expectations regarding inflation and interest rates; the markets in which we operate or may operate; our strategic priorities; our land acquisition, land development and capital allocation priorities; market conditions; demand for our homes; our build-to-order and spec home strategy; anticipated operating results and guidance; home deliveries; financial resources and condition; changes in revenues; changes in profitability; changes in margins; changes in accounting treatment; cost of revenues, including expected labor and material costs; selling, general, and administrative expenses; interest expense; inventory write-downs; home warranty and construction defect claims; unrecognized tax benefits; anticipated tax refunds; sales paces and prices; effects of home buyer cancellations; growth and expansion; joint ventures in which we are involved; anticipated results from our investments in unconsolidated entities; our ability to acquire or dispose of land and pursue real estate opportunities; our ability to gain approvals and open new communities; our ability to market, construct and sell homes and properties; our ability to deliver homes from backlog; our ability to secure materials and subcontractors; our ability to produce the liquidity and capital necessary to conduct normal business operations or to expand and take advantage of opportunities; and the outcome of legal proceedings, investigations, and claims. Any or all of the forward-looking statements included in this release are not guarantees of future performance and may turn out to be inaccurate. This can occur as a result of incorrect assumptions or as a consequence of known or unknown risks and uncertainties. The major risks and uncertainties – and assumptions that are made – that affect our business and may cause actual results to differ from these forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to: the effect of general economic conditions, including employment rates, housing starts, inflation rates, interest and mortgage rates, availability of financing for home mortgages and strength of the U.S. dollar; market demand for our products, which is related to the strength of the various U.S. business segments and U.S. and international economic conditions; the availability of desirable and reasonably priced land and our ability to control, purchase, hold and develop such land; access to adequate capital on acceptable terms; geographic concentration of our operations; levels of competition; the price and availability of lumber, other raw materials, home components and labor; the effect of U.S. trade policies, including the imposition of tariffs and duties on home building products and retaliatory measures taken by other countries; the effects of weather and the risk of loss from earthquakes, volcanoes, fires, floods, droughts, windstorms, hurricanes, pest infestations and other natural disasters, and the risk of delays, reduced consumer demand, unavailability of insurance, and shortages and price increases in labor or materials associated with such natural disasters; risks arising from acts of war, terrorism or outbreaks of contagious diseases, such as Covid-19; federal and state tax policies; transportation costs; the effect of land use, environment and other governmental laws and regulations; legal proceedings or disputes and the adequacy of reserves; risks relating to any unforeseen changes to or effects on liabilities, future capital expenditures, revenues, expenses, earnings, indebtedness, financial condition, losses and future prospects; the effect of potential loss of key management personnel; changes in accounting principles; risks related to unauthorized access to our computer systems, theft of our and our homebuyers’ confidential information or other forms of cyber-attack; and other factors described in “Risk Factors” included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended October 31, 2023 and in subsequent filings we make with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). Many of the factors mentioned above or in other reports or public statements made by us will be important in determining our future performance. Consequently, actual results may differ materially from those that might be anticipated from our forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date they are made. We undertake no obligation to publicly update any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events, or otherwise. For a further discussion of factors that we believe could cause actual results to differ materially from expected and historical results, see the information under the captions “Risk Factors” and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” in our most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the SEC and in subsequent reports filed with the SEC. This discussion is provided as permitted by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, and all of our forward-looking statements are expressly qualified in their entirety by the cautionary statements contained or referenced in this section. Inventory at October 31, 2024 and October 31, 2023 consisted of the following (amounts in thousands): (1) Includes the allocated land and land development costs associated with each of our model homes in operation. Toll Brothers operates in the following five geographic segments, with operations generally located in the states listed below: North: Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, New York and Pennsylvania Mid-Atlantic: Georgia, Maryland, North Carolina, Tennessee and Virginia South: Florida, South Carolina and Texas Mountain: Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Nevada and Utah Pacific: California, Oregon and Washington Note: Due to rounding, amounts may not add. Unconsolidated entities: Information related to revenues and contracts of entities in which we have an interest for the three-month and twelve-month periods ended October 31, 2024 and 2023, and for backlog at October 31, 2024 and 2023 is as follows: RECONCILIATION OF NON-GAAP MEASURES This press release contains, and Company management’s discussion of the results presented in this press release may include, information about the Company’s adjusted home sales gross margin, adjusted net income, adjusted diluted earnings per share and the Company’s net debt-to-capital ratio. These four measures are non-GAAP financial measures which are not calculated in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”). These non-GAAP financial measures should not be considered a substitute for, or superior to, the comparable GAAP financial measures, and may be different from non-GAAP measures used by other companies in the home building business. The Company’s management considers these non-GAAP financial measures as we make operating and strategic decisions and evaluate our performance, including against other home builders that may use similar non-GAAP financial measures. The Company’s management believes these non-GAAP financial measures are useful to investors in understanding our operations and leverage and may be helpful in comparing the Company to other home builders to the extent they provide similar information. Adjusted Home Sales Gross Margin The following table reconciles the Company’s home sales gross margin as a percentage of home sales revenues (calculated in accordance with GAAP) to the Company’s adjusted home sales gross margin (a non-GAAP financial measure). Adjusted home sales gross margin is calculated as (i) home sales gross margin plus interest recognized in home sales cost of revenues plus inventory write-downs recognized in home sales cost of revenues divided by (ii) home sales revenues. The Company’s management believes adjusted home sales gross margin is a useful financial measure to investors because it allows them to evaluate the performance of our home building operations without the often varying effects of capitalized interest costs and inventory impairments. The use of adjusted home sales gross margin also assists the Company’s management in assessing the profitability of our home building operations and making strategic decisions regarding community location and product mix. Forward-looking Adjusted Home Sales Gross Margin The Company has not provided projected first quarter and full FY 2025 home sales gross margin or a GAAP reconciliation for forward-looking adjusted home sales gross margin because such measure cannot be provided without unreasonable efforts on a forward-looking basis, since inventory write-downs are based on future activity and observation and therefore cannot be projected for the first quarter and full FY 2025. The variability of these charges may have a potentially unpredictable, and potentially significant, impact on our first quarter and full FY 2025 home sales gross margin. Adjusted Net Income and Diluted Earnings Per Share Reconciliation The following table reconciles the Company’s net income and earnings per share (calculated in accordance with GAAP) to the Company’s adjusted net income and diluted earnings per share (a non-GAAP financial measure). Net Debt-to-Capital Ratio The following table reconciles the Company’s ratio of debt to capital (calculated in accordance with GAAP) to the Company’s net debt-to-capital ratio (a non-GAAP financial measure). The net debt-to-capital ratio is calculated as (i) total debt minus mortgage warehouse loans minus cash and cash equivalents divided by (ii) total debt minus mortgage warehouse loans minus cash and cash equivalents plus stockholders’ equity. The Company’s management uses the net debt-to-capital ratio as an indicator of its overall leverage and believes it is a useful financial measure to investors in understanding the leverage employed in the Company’s operations. CONTACT: Gregg Ziegler (215) 478-3820 gziegler@tollbrothers.com A photo accompanying this announcement is available at https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/3a0456db-a1d7-41b3-b790-3e0a1448ad2b

‘He was the best of us’: Tributes paid following death of Tyrone GAA legend Jody GormleyAmid renewed interest in the killing of JonBenét Ramsey triggered in part by a new Netflix documentary, police in Boulder, Colo., refuted assertions this week that there is viable evidence and leads about the 1996 killing of the six-year-old girl that they are not pursuing. JonBenét Ramsey, who competed in beauty pageants, was found dead in the basement of her family's home in the college town of Boulder the day after Christmas in 1996. Her body was found several hours after her mother called 911 to say her daughter was missing and a ransom note had been left behind. The details of the crime and video footage of JonBenét competing in pageants propelled the case into one of the highest-profile mysteries in the United States. The police comments came as part of their annual update on the investigation, a month before the 28th anniversary of her killing. Police said they released it a little earlier due to the increased attention on the case, apparently referring to the three-part Netflix series Cold Case: Who Killed JonBenét Ramsey . In a video statement, Boulder Police Chief Steve Redfearn said the department welcomes news coverage and documentaries about the killing of JonBenét, who would have been 34 this year, as a way to generate possible new leads. He said the department is committed to solving the case, but needs to be careful about what it shares about the investigation to protect a possible future prosecution. "What I can tell you, though, is we have thoroughly investigated multiple people as suspects throughout the years and we continue to be open-minded about what occurred as we investigate the tips that come into detectives," he said. Cold case gets renewed attention with new doc The Netflix documentary focuses on the mistakes made by police and the "media circus" surrounding the case. In this file photo from 2000, Patsy Ramsey, left, and her husband John Ramsey produce a picture of JonBenét Ramsey during a press conference in Atlanta. The new Netflix documentary alleges that the family were victims of a problematic police force. (Stringer/Reuters) JonBenét was bludgeoned and strangled. Her death was ruled a homicide, but nobody was ever prosecuted for it. Police were widely criticized for mishandling the early investigation into her death amid speculation that her family was responsible. However, a prosecutor cleared her parents, John and Patsy Ramsey, and brother Burke in 2008 based on new DNA evidence from JonBenét's clothing that pointed to the involvement of an "unexplained third party" in her slaying. The announcement by former district attorney Mary Lacy came two years after Patsy Ramsey died of cancer. Lacy called the Ramseys "victims of this crime." John Ramsey has continued to speak out for the case to be solved. In 2022, he supported an online petition asking Colorado's governor to intervene in the investigation by putting an outside agency in charge of DNA testing in the case. In the Netflix documentary, he said he has been advocating for several items that have not been prepared for DNA testing to be tested and for other items to be retested. He said the results should be put through a genealogy database. In recent years, investigators have identified suspects in unsolved cases by comparing DNA profiles from crime scenes and to DNA testing results shared online by people researching their family trees. In 2021, police said in their annual update that DNA hadn't been ruled out to help solve the case, and in 2022 noted that some evidence could be "consumed" if DNA testing is done on it. Last year, police said they had convened a panel of outside experts to review the investigation to give recommendations and determine if updated technologies or forensic testing might produce new leads. In the latest update, Redfearn said that review had ended but that police continue to work through and evaluate a "lengthy list of recommendations" from the panel.

In a significant development for war-torn Syria, Sunni-led Islamist rebels have secured backing from Alawite elders in the former president Bashar al-Assad's hometown of Qardaha. This unexpected alliance signals a message of tolerance under Syria's new rulers. The Qardaha meeting, involving members of the Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) and the Free Syrian Army, represents a monumental shift in power dynamics. Assad had long warned that these groups posed a threat to the Alawite community. However, the elders' acquiescence suggests a newfound unity in a region scarred by years of conflict. The statement of support signed by 30 Alawite notables emphasizes Syria's cultural and religious diversity. While tensions remain amidst concerns of minority rights under HTS, the rebels' moderate stance offers a flicker of hope for a peaceful transition. (With inputs from agencies.)Hammy Lammy steps up when someone else’s country needs to be fixed - The TelegraphOldest surviving Scots cello to be played again

The number of people accessing emergency accommodation has risen at a near consistent rate in recent years, repeatedly breaking new records. The housing portfolio is held by Fianna Fail’s Darragh O’Brien. In the last of Virgin Media’s “Big Interviews” with party leaders, Mr Martin said homelessness was his party’s number one priority and the reason it sought the housing portfolio in the coalition. The official figures from the Department of Housing look at the number of people accessing emergency accommodation services over the last week of each month, and are published at 2pm on the last Friday of the following month. October’s figures are due at on polling day, November 29. The latest figures for the end of September show there were 14,760 people accessing such services, including 4,561 children – record highs for both metrics. The figures do not include people sleeping rough, those that may be couch surfing or homeless in hospitals or prisons, and those in a shelter for asylum seekers or domestic violence centres. Mr Martin said his party would not interfere with the agreed process by publishing the figures in advance of polling day. However, he accepted that there are “too many people homeless” and said homelessness is “very traumatic” for families. Speaking on Wednesday night, he said there was a need to” build more houses faster”, prevent homelessness and reduce the amount of time people rely on emergency accommodation. “The obligation is to get people out of emergency accommodation as quickly as we can, and get them a house as quickly as we can. “That is why building 40,000 social houses is progress, and we need to build 12,000 social houses a year, I think, to deal with the homelessness issue.” Asked if he was expecting the figures to be uncomfortable, he said: “We’re already uncomfortable with the homelessness figures, so next Friday isn’t going to change that to any significant degree.” Pressed on when he expected the figures to peak, Mr Martin said he did not have exact timelines and added supply needed to be increased. Asked when the figure would come down, he said: “I would like to see that within the next 12 months but I can’t give a guarantee on that. “Population is growing, and that is a factor in all of this. But we have to get up to 50,000 houses per annum.” Elsewhere, he doubled down on ruling out a Fianna Fail coalition with Sinn Fein. Mr Martin said Sinn Fein’s tax proposals would “destroy” Ireland’s enterprise economy, as he made an appeal to Irish voters before polling day on Friday. Asked how big the differences are between the two parties, he said: “They’re very substantial, fundamentally, in terms of the economic model that we have in this country.” Mr Martin said the vast majority of Fianna Fail members agreed with his position. Pressed on Fianna Fail’s past history of entering into coalition with Fine Gael in 2020 after initially ruling it out, the party leader defended that decision. He said there were a number of factors, including the argument about obligations to elect a government. He said the Fianna Fail-Fine Gael-Green coalition was able to “protect a pro-European, pro-Enterprise” model. Mr Martin said the Government was also formed in the context of a “one in 100-year” pandemic. The Fianna Fail stalwart also refused to rule out a future bid for President of Ireland, but said: “I haven’t considered it.”FrankSpeech Broadcast Network Surges in Q3 2024: Record Growth in Viewers and Platform ExpansionEmpowered Funds LLC lifted its holdings in Coinbase Global, Inc. ( NASDAQ:COIN ) by 0.8% in the 3rd quarter, Holdings Channel reports. The firm owned 5,185 shares of the cryptocurrency exchange’s stock after buying an additional 43 shares during the quarter. Empowered Funds LLC’s holdings in Coinbase Global were worth $924,000 as of its most recent SEC filing. Other institutional investors and hedge funds have also modified their holdings of the company. Global Retirement Partners LLC lifted its stake in shares of Coinbase Global by 135.1% in the 3rd quarter. Global Retirement Partners LLC now owns 2,680 shares of the cryptocurrency exchange’s stock valued at $477,000 after purchasing an additional 1,540 shares during the last quarter. CloudAlpha Capital Management Limited Hong Kong acquired a new stake in shares of Coinbase Global in the 3rd quarter valued at $29,756,000. Lindbrook Capital LLC lifted its stake in shares of Coinbase Global by 30.2% in the 3rd quarter. Lindbrook Capital LLC now owns 30,012 shares of the cryptocurrency exchange’s stock valued at $5,347,000 after purchasing an additional 6,963 shares during the last quarter. Sanctuary Advisors LLC acquired a new stake in shares of Coinbase Global in the 2nd quarter valued at $2,908,000. Finally, QRG Capital Management Inc. lifted its stake in shares of Coinbase Global by 237.5% in the 3rd quarter. QRG Capital Management Inc. now owns 32,743 shares of the cryptocurrency exchange’s stock valued at $5,834,000 after purchasing an additional 23,040 shares during the last quarter. Institutional investors and hedge funds own 68.84% of the company’s stock. Insiders Place Their Bets In other news, CEO Brian Armstrong sold 23,075 shares of the company’s stock in a transaction that occurred on Tuesday, September 3rd. The shares were sold at an average price of $173.93, for a total transaction of $4,013,434.75. Following the transaction, the chief executive officer now directly owns 526 shares in the company, valued at approximately $91,487.18. This represents a 97.77 % decrease in their ownership of the stock. The sale was disclosed in a document filed with the Securities & Exchange Commission, which is accessible through this link . Also, Director Gokul Rajaram sold 400 shares of the company’s stock in a transaction that occurred on Wednesday, October 16th. The stock was sold at an average price of $204.44, for a total transaction of $81,776.00. Following the transaction, the director now owns 7,771 shares in the company, valued at $1,588,703.24. The trade was a 4.90 % decrease in their ownership of the stock. The disclosure for this sale can be found here . Over the last ninety days, insiders have sold 194,091 shares of company stock valued at $50,033,426. 23.43% of the stock is currently owned by insiders. Analysts Set New Price Targets Read Our Latest Report on Coinbase Global Coinbase Global Stock Performance NASDAQ COIN opened at $304.64 on Friday. The stock has a market cap of $76.27 billion, a P/E ratio of 51.99 and a beta of 3.34. The company’s 50-day simple moving average is $214.20 and its 200 day simple moving average is $215.15. Coinbase Global, Inc. has a twelve month low of $107.98 and a twelve month high of $341.75. The company has a quick ratio of 1.03, a current ratio of 1.03 and a debt-to-equity ratio of 0.48. Coinbase Global ( NASDAQ:COIN – Get Free Report ) last issued its quarterly earnings data on Wednesday, October 30th. The cryptocurrency exchange reported $0.28 earnings per share for the quarter, missing the consensus estimate of $0.41 by ($0.13). The firm had revenue of $1.21 billion for the quarter, compared to the consensus estimate of $1.26 billion. Coinbase Global had a return on equity of 14.81% and a net margin of 29.76%. Coinbase Global’s quarterly revenue was up 78.8% compared to the same quarter last year. During the same period in the prior year, the company posted ($0.01) earnings per share. As a group, research analysts forecast that Coinbase Global, Inc. will post 4.27 earnings per share for the current fiscal year. Coinbase Global Profile ( Free Report ) Coinbase Global, Inc provides financial infrastructure and technology for the crypto economy in the United States and internationally. The company offers the primary financial account in the crypto economy for consumers; and a marketplace with a pool of liquidity for transacting in crypto assets for institutions. Featured Articles Want to see what other hedge funds are holding COIN? Visit HoldingsChannel.com to get the latest 13F filings and insider trades for Coinbase Global, Inc. ( NASDAQ:COIN – Free Report ). Receive News & Ratings for Coinbase Global Daily - Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analysts' ratings for Coinbase Global and related companies with MarketBeat.com's FREE daily email newsletter .

5 doctors suspended after pregnant woman's death in Rajouri