SFA business students win honors at international conference
NACOGDOCHES, Texas (KETK) – In March, Stephen F. Austin State University students won several awards at the Society for Advancement of Management International Business Conference in Tallahassee, Fla.
City of Lone Star issues mandatory curfew, bus route changes
These students competed in categories such as business pitch, extemporaneous speech and case competition. The chapter won first place for Campus Chapter Performance in the large division.
The undergraduate team included SAM chapter president Josselyn Acosta, management senior from Nacogdoches; Jaret Acosta, Josselyn's brother, senior management major from Diboll, Issac Velasco, first-year banking major from Chireno and executive vice president and management senior from Nacogdoches; Leo Carreon.
The graduate team included Lydia Sattler, business graduate student from Morgan Hill, Calif., and Zala Ule, business graduate student from Koper, Slovenia.
Kilgore College renames dance studio to honor Rangerettes' first choreographer
Additionally, Josselyn received the National Outstanding Student Award. Harden also received the Outstanding Advisor Award. Jaret and Sattler each earned the Outstanding Regional Student Award.
'Hard work and dedication always pay off, but it is the bridges we build within our organization that truly lift us higher,' Josselyn said. 'A heartfelt thank you to all our SAM members for this incredible achievement, which shines a bright light on our chapter.'
SFA's associate professor of management and marketing and faculty staff advisor Dr. Gina Harden comments on the achievements these students earned through their hark work.
'This honor is a testament to the dedication and engagement of our SAM members in recruiting new student members and keeping them active throughout the year,' Harden said.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Wire
7 hours ago
- Business Wire
Harden Announces Strategic Sale of the 3 rd Phase of Méga Centre Notre-Dame, Accelerating Laval Redevelopment and Community Growth
VAUDREUIL-DORION, Québec--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Harden announces the strategic sale of a 27-acre portion of Méga Centre Notre-Dame in Laval to Rosefellow, a leading Montreal-based industrial real estate developer for a purchase price of $75M This transaction marks a key milestone in the site's transformation, supporting broader redevelopment efforts and reinforcing a long-term commitment to enhancing Laval's economic and commercial vitality. Harden co-owns the property with RioCan in a 50% partnership which is dedicated to the site's evolution and its strategic importance to the region. As part of a shared vision to unlock the full potential of this highly visible and accessible site along Highway 13, the Harden-RioCan partnership is reinvesting in the retail component of the property following the sale. The portion sold to Rosefellow was a less productive area of the site. This strategic disposition enables targeted reinvestment into the retail core of Méga Centre Notre-Dame, accelerating its transformation into a productive, dynamic destination for residents, workers, and visitors alike. 'We are proud to continue our role in strengthening Laval's retail and commercial environment,' said Tyler Harden, Co-Chief Executive Officer, Harden. 'This sale supports a broader redevelopment vision that brings new energy and economic growth to the area. With new retailers like Sephora already open, Krispy Kreme on the way, and major expansions by iconic brands such as Winners/HomeSense, Gap, Banana Republic, La Vie En Rose, Dollarama and Poulet Rouge, Méga Centre Notre-Dame is entering a new chapter that reflects our dedication to creating lasting value for residents and businesses alike.' This transformation includes the expansion of Winners/HomeSense into one of the largest stores of its kind in Quebec, with a footprint of approximately 70,000 square feet, and a significant expansion by Dollarama. These enhancements, coupled with the arrival of high-profile brands like Sephora, reinforce the centre's appeal and solidify its role as a commercial anchor in Laval. 'This transaction highlights the strength of our retail portfolio and our ability to strategically unlock value from well-located assets,' said Jonathan Gitlin, President and CEO, RioCan Real Estate Investment Trust. 'By monetizing a less productive portion of the site at an 80% premium to IFRS value and reinvesting in its high-performing core, we have strengthened the long-term viability of Méga Centre Notre-Dame and delivered meaningful value for our unitholders." Rosefellow's planned $200 million redevelopment will introduce three state-of-the-art industrial buildings, meeting the growing regional demand for high-performance logistics and light industrial space. This development will complement the centre's retail operations, creating a mixed-use hub that draws value from both sectors while serving the evolving needs of the community. A dynamic tenant reconfiguration is already underway, with established retailers like GAP, Banana Republic, La Vie En Rose, Carter's OshKosh, Dormez-Vous, Dollarama, Sushi Shop, Thai Express, Service Canada, and SQDC relocating within the site to optimize layout and enhance the shopping experience. This reimagining also makes room for innovative new concepts, including Mondou's next-generation store and a refreshed Second Cup café, adding renewed energy and tenant mix to the centre. Harden, in partnership with RioCan, continues to actively manage and enhance the remaining portions of Méga Centre Notre-Dame. A portion of these improvements is already complete, reflecting the partners' ongoing commitment to improve the site's layout, aesthetics, and visitor experience. This sustained effort underscores their dedication to shaping vibrant, welcoming spaces that support the community and long-term commercial vitality. About Harden Established in 1985, Harden is a second generation, family-owned real estate company whose primary focus is owning and operating commercial, residential, and industrial properties in many communities throughout the provinces of Quebec and Ontario. Vertically integrated, Harden specializes in all facets of the real estate development process, including, development, construction, leasing, and asset management. To learn more about Harden, please visit
Yahoo
12 hours ago
- Yahoo
Understanding valuation: What investors often miss
Listen and subscribe to Stocks In Translation on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you find your favorite podcast. The stock market is nearing record highs as consumer sentiment hits new lows— raising a key question: what are investors seeing in the economy that the public isn't? In this episode of Stocks in Translation, editor Sam Ro joins Markets and Data Editor Jared Blikre and Producer Sydnee Fried to discuss stock market fundamentals with a focus on corporate valuations. Ro breaks down valuation metrics amid market uncertainty, and how investors should view hard and soft data to best shape their portfolios. Twice a week, Stocks In Translation cuts through the market mayhem, noisy numbers and hyperbole to give you the information you need to make the right trade for your portfolio. You can find more episodes here, or watch on your favorite streaming service. This post was written by Lauren Pokedoff Welcome to Stocks and Translation, Yahoo Finance's video podcast that cuts through the market mayhem, the noisy numbers, and the hyperbole to give you the information you need to make the right trade for your portfolio. I'm Jared Blicker, your host, and with me is the People's Voice, Sidney Freed, who's here to ask the people's questions, the people's spirit moves first, please like, subscribe, and comment on stocks and translation on Spotify, Apple Music, Amazon, or YouTube, and today we are welcoming back Samro, the editor of which has been recognized with the best in Business Award by the Society for Advancing Business editing and former Yahoo Financing managing editor, he now brings that award-winning perspective to our show today. Great to see you, Sam. And today we're gonna be talking about fundamentals because Sid's all about fun, aren't you? And our word of the day is valuation. There are lots of ways to measure it, and by many of them, the S&P 500 is still riding high despite that tariff uncertainty. We dig into it. And theThis episode is brought to you by the number 96 billion. That's how much Apple Services business made last year in sales up 10x from a decade ago. No longer just a device maker, how Apple and its mega cap peers have evolved since their early days. So Sam, let's just start out briefly telling us, uh, your big picture view on what you're seeing. It's been a roller coaster ride this year and especially over the last couple of months. Yeah, I mean, I think I'm seeing the same thing everyone else is seeing. The stock market has recovered basically almost all of its losses, and it's probably like 1 or 2% points from its all-time high all this new uncertainty that's been introduced in the last 2 or 3 months. So, yeah, at a high level, I think that's, that's, that's the whole story. Um, it seems like the obvious story when you're talking about you're on Yahoo Finance, you're talking about stocks, but it's like, it seems like uh uh notable, um, considering all the uncertainty. Yeah, if you're just watching the headline news every night, not necessarily finance, you wouldn't suspect that we are literally 1 or 2% points away from those all-time highs. Sam, you are a master of the fundamentals and you have a CFA title. I want to get to our word of the day, which is that is, so there are, well, let me get the definition here. There we go. It is the market's price tag on a company usually stated as a multiple of its profits, sales or cash flow. So price to earnings is one way, but another style is enterprise value. We could also use market cap, um, and that's based on the stock price and also the outstanding shares, but we want to stick with fundamentals today, so just give us your overview of how you think about valuation. Yeah, I mean, you know, I think it's sort of the building blocks of how we think about value in the stock market. I think that, you know, that's kind of a tautology, but, you know, being able to relate the price of an asset to what you get out of paying that price. Um, and so I think it's a really important topic today, um, as it relates to where the stock market is, because, uh,You know, in addition to just, you know, thinking about valuations and price earnings multiples and stuff, just with whatever the market prices and whatever earnings are projected to be, you know, there's obviously a lot of complex topics and uh subtleties that go into making those calculations, right? And I think, um, you know, especially when we're talking about valuations today, and how they are, you know, relatively high, are high relative to history, know, it raises a lot of questions as to, you know, how we actually should be thinking about evaluations when uncertainty is so high, because usually, you would think when you have a lot of uncertainty, you should get a discount, right? If the fixes up, stocks are down, but that's not what we're seeing, that's not what we're saying. Um, and so it's a question of, you know, does this actually make any sense? Um, but, you know, of course, if you actually look into the history of this stuff, it rarely ever makes you know, we talk about how stuff like PE ratios are above long term averages, but how much time has the PE ratio actually, you know, traded within range of the average, right? So it's, it's almost as if, you know, we can have these discussions about how the market should trade based off of evaluation. I know that I've said that 1000 times, but it's the word of the day. So I think it works. Um, but, you know, when you actually look at the market history, history actually tells us the market doesn't trade at averages almost ever. Now we'll get to that, but. Well, what, what is an attractive valuation? Is there a specific range that a company wants to be? Well, I mean, I think for a company, they don't care about the evaluation, they, they just want to see the stock price go up. So they'll always say that whatever the valuation is at a given point, um, maybe it's probably fair, but the price could go higher. That that's what a manager or an owner of a business is going to tell and then you'll have sort of, you know, the purest, you know, academics who look at the history and will tell you that, you know, the PE ratio of the stock market should be closer to 15 or 16. Um, and as you extend out the historical measurement period, you're looking at, that number tends to go lower. Um, but the reality is, uh, we haven't traded at 15 for very long over the last couple of years, and if that kept you out of the market, you've missed out on a whole lot of gains. So let's talk about the irrationality here of the whole situation. Valuations might be a little bit, uh, I don't know if the right word is irrational, but let's just go with that. And that comes from stock prices being elevated and how would, how do we use this information to make money? In other words, you know, I come from the school of technical analysis mainly, and I know fundamentals have longer term value in investment portfolios, but even in the short term, how do you, how would you use this information from the short term to the long term? Yeah, well, I think, I think part of the problem is when we think about valuations, we spend too much time obsessing over the price, right? You know, again, when we're talking about stuff like the price earnings ratio, there's two components here. There's the price on the earnings. So maybe there is something we should be thinking about when it comes to earnings. AndYou know, the other historical trend there is that earnings tend to trend higher. And when you look at analysts forecasts for earnings in not just this year, but 2026 and 2027 and 2028, further down the road, it's a line going up to the maybe that helps us understand why valuations are above average, because, you know, maybe it's elevated now, but, you know, in a year or two from now, we're talking about a higher denominator, a higher earnings figure, which if prices went sideways, you know, valuations would just shrink, because that's just how the math would so maybe that's what investors are doing. They're actually looking further into the future. And instead of thinking of it as paying a high premium for this year's earnings, they, they might be thinking that they're getting a reasonable price for the next 5 or 6 years' worth of earnings. How valuation when deciding whether you're investing in a stock and does it need to be paired with other things to kind of make that decision. Um, you know, it's tricky. You know, I think it depends on everybody's sort of view on risk and the risk appetite and especially their time know,Stuff like PE ratios, you know, tend not to send a very strong signal as to where prices are gonna go in the very short term period. But, you know, studies also show that they have a decent, they do a decent job of of forecasting what longer term returns are, like, what are your average returns over 10 years, and, um, you know, the higher the the lower the returns tend to be over time. Still positive. I mean, that's another thing that, you know, people forget, even at, you know, 20 times earnings, which is considered a might have lower returns over the next 10 years, but those returns are still positive. I wanna ask you about some of the themes that you've explored in your newsletter, the ticker, and, uh, great, great writing, by the way, and great syn synopsis and organization, the way you lay it out makes me want to read more and it's, it's all right there in a, in a compact email online, and you're talking about that we've talked a lot about the hard versus the soft economic data and I know that's something that we've been tracking and you've been writing about. So tell us about some of the surprises there maybe. Yeah, you know, uh, sentiment as as measured by uh the soft data measures, uh, has been very poor. Um, people are really bummed out about things. Um, businesses are, you know, feel really uncertain about the business outlook, and consumers are talking about how, uh, they, they feel like it's harder to find a job, or that they think they're, you know, jobs are at risk and they think that the economy is think inflation is very high, etc. etc. They don't know the S&P 500% points of, yeah, you know, if you survey many people, they'll they'll still tell you that, you know, maybe we're at the lows of the year, um, but that's just sentiment and that's perception, um, but the hard data continues to reflect, um, something that's actually a little bit more positive, um, and that's, you know, despiteHow unhappy people say they are. They're still going shopping, they're still going to restaurants, they're still going to the movies, they're still planning their vacation, but reluctantly, begrudgingly, you know, whatever you wanna call it, but um that's what's happening and and so maybe like from uhYou know, societal sentiment, policy standpoint, um, you know, these sentiment figures, uh, you know, carry some weight, um, you know, cause like,Uh, there's different ways to measure, you know, value in your lives or happiness and all this kind of stuff. Um, but from an investor standpoint, um, things tend to gravitate toward back toward those fundamentals, and those fundamentals are driven by what people actually do, and what businesses actually do. And for now, at least, businessare actually still investing in their businesses and consumers are still going shopping. Is theresomething wrong then though with the way we measure soft data if it's not lining up with the hard data? Are they all wrong? I don't know, maybe I don't know if it's wrong. It just tells us a little bit more that that we do detach, um, you know, our feelings from what reality are, or maybe it's maybe it is actually the case that we're just unhappier than we used to be, um, you know, with structural change and unhappiness, a whole other area we can go down and and you know, maybe it's a uh we rely so as investors and policymakers or, or, you know, people who think about the economy, maybe it is a problem that uh we we rely too much on the hard, hard metrics, maybe that's the problem. Um, I'm not gonna I'm not, you know, I don't think we're gonna solve those problems today, but at least from an investor's perspective, and and that's why I write for, right? Um, when you're thinking strictly about trying to get a return on your capital or your you sort of have to live with this reality that, you know, you're investing in an environment where people might be unhappy, but you try to shut that stuff out, because over the last, not just, you know, a couple of months, but like the last couple of years, we've learned that that soft sentiment data can detach from the hard data, whichYou know, at least in recent history, um, has held up. Now that could flip, of course, you know, who knows, cause people, you know, uh, don't always do what they say, and, you know, maybe there's a period where everyone's happy and the economy tanks, you know, who knows. But for now, um, you know, if we have to pick between two sets of data, you have to rely on the hard data. And that's what Powell is following. So we need to take a short break here, but coming up we're gonna be talking about mega cap business pivots and a who wore better featuring tasty frozen treats. Stay episode is brought to you by the number $96 billion. That's how much Apple services business, including the App Store, iCloud, TV plus and music, made in sales last year, up 10x from a decade ago, and it's a far cry from the company known years ago, mostly for selling devices like the iPhone and and the laptops and even further cry from the OG Apple computer that was in jobs built and sold in the 1970s. And all of this leads to an interesting topic you brought up to us, which is most of these mega cap names have pivoted and sometimes strongly and sometimes multiple times over the years from their original businesses. Yeah. Yeah, I think it's an incredibly fascinating and incredibly important to, to be told and explore, especially from an investor's perspective, right? Um, you know, we were just talking a minute ago about valuations, you know, high PE ratios and, you know, paying a premium for some company, butIf we were having a conversation about valuations, you know, 25 years ago, when Apple was only making, you know, desktop computers, how many computers can they sell before, you know, you hit a ceiling? And so if you're only thinking about um investing in a company that only makes computers, then yeah, uh it might not make sense to pay a premium onOn, on, on the, the stock that you're buying. But if you can be a little bit more imaginative, and if you understand that this is a company that understands change and changes, tweaks its business model as the world changes and as, you know, it reaches a saturation point, then you can begin to imagine a path where a company can continue to grow earnings like Apple has and turn into a multi-trillion dollar company. Iwas gonna say it seems like a good sign to me as an investor, if you're actively seeing a company can change withTechnology and with the times versus someone who their product doesn't work and they kind of just flounder, right? Sure, yeah, I mean, you know, I think the most classic example of this is Netflix, right? You know, DVDs. Yeah, and DVDs was the disruption, right? Well, male DVDs, you know, was a disruption. You know, you start with videotapes, and then that goes to DVDs, which is videotapes were disrupting too. I mean, everything's just as bigdisruption. And it's like, every, at that time, this is the greatest thing that you see, and it's so hard to imagine a world where the way you consume, you know, media, for example, with Netflix, that all that stuff could change. So going from, you know, disrupting Blockbuster, and then mailing people DVDs and then deciding that, you know, we're, yeah, we're gonna scrap that we're gonna start screaming. And then in addition to that, we're going to start creating content. Um, you know, again, if you wereYou know, to rewind back to, you know, 20 years ago, when it's just DVDs, it's hard to imagine a company getting as big as where Netflix is today. I mean, you know, you see a lot of volatility there, but um that business model just keeps changing. Yeah, I mean, I remember some of the takedowns in real time saying we lost it. Uh, but I did have something prepared and this is just, this is just a mag 7, and I'll go through some of the highlights here. So we already talked about Apple. I mean, Microsoft, they're kind of, uh, they' as old as uh as Apple, and they started out in PC operating systems. Now it's the cloud is their biggest gainer. They, they're a software services company. Amazon started out in books, and now it's all about the cloud again and ads, and plus they sell everything in the universe. Alphabet, again, another cloud story, but they started out as a search engine, and now it's the search engine is a tool, but it's about selling ads and Nvidia from to AI data center GPUs and Meta is an interesting one. Facebook, then, I mean, they're still involved in social, but it's an ad company now. I think, uh, the famous line from Mr. Zuckerberg is, we sell ads, sir, you know, in front of Congress. And Tesla, well, maybe Tesla is one of the few that really hasn't changed so much. It was kind of a niche, uh, company with the electric roadster, and now they mass market EVs and I guess energy too. you know, if you ask people like Cathy Wood, you know, uh, you're not investing in a car company, you're investing in all the things that, right, exactly, or whatever, whatever a Tesla could be further down the road. But yeah, um, you know, I think another part of this too, especially with the Max 7 companies, as they evolve, um, they've alsoDeveloped a lot of arms of their business that, you know, might stand alone as $1 trillion dollar businesses or $100 billion dollar businesses. Um, you know, Microsoft also has LinkedIn and Xbox and all these other we didn't talk about gaming. Yeah, gaming and all these other things. Amazon has a movie studio and they, they stream and, you know, they're in the content business. I think they, they said something about getting into the news business at one point, even good luck. Oh and then, yeah, Facebook, Meta, they have WhatsApp and Instagram and all these different things that again could be standalone $100 billion dollar businesses. So, you know, it's it, as much as it's easy to get caught up in how these companies and, and, you know, yes, they have evolved over this time, um, but it's easy to get caught up in these $1 trillion dollar valuations that they have and say this is, you know, not justified, this doesn't make any sense. But when you realize that each of these companies are like, make up of large cap companies effectively, then it begins to makesense. And sometimes they have 100,000 employees, which is just mind boggling. Um, so is it about the founders, it is about the executive team and the workers in general, because if you're looking, and these are seven very different companies, and you can throw 8 in if we're talking about Netflix here too, but very different management styles, some of them are still founder led with voting rights secured and just a couple people or even one and others just have evolved as, you know, kind of like the modern software conglomerate that Microsoft could be characterized as. Yeah, I think it's a good question. And you know, I'd watch a 3 hour special on something like this. Well, let's let's do I mean, you know, uh, I think it probably helps some of these companies that, you know, they are founder led or largely founder led because, you know, there's one person that can make a final decision here and they move forward and plow through with those things. Um, and it's not like, you know,Uh, Mark Zuckerberg or Elon Musk or Jeff Bezos when he was running Amazon. It's not like they didn't make mistakes along the way, they always, they all have like these big grant announcements for products, and they plowed all this money into it, and they were also very quick to pull the money out of it when um they saw that the opportunity wasn't quite know, I, I don't know, um, something about, uh, these companies that succeed. I mean, you know, there's also going to be plenty of companies that are founder led that got huge, that completely collapsed on itself, and, you know, what are those stories and why didn't those those work out? That's another 3 hour show. That's another 3 hour show. But I, I do think it's incredibly fascinating, um, to, to think about companies that, you know, are massive, that are household brand names, but then, you know, you do a little bit ofOf, uh, the review of the history and you realize that when they started they were completely differentcompanies. All right, hold that thought. It is time for our runway showdown featuring two titans of frozen treats. Stage left gelato glizin, a polished chrome cart, small batch, slow churned and priced for connoisseurs, think lean inventories, premium margins, management guarding, every basis point of profit. Stage right, we have soft serve. It is bursting from a country fair machine, light and built for speed, it wins by pumping out cones all day long, a high volume low margin strategy that keeps cash flowing even in choppy weather. Call it resilience versus throughput. So Sam, when the economic headwinds swirl and valuation stretch, which type struts with the crown here, the disciplined margin-minded gelato, or the crowd-pleasing soft serve that bets everything on scale? Uh, that's a very complicated question. Yeah, I don't know. I think it's probably a tie. Uh, I love that. Usually it's one-sided. Sure, yeah, gelato's been around for forever and Soft Serve has been around forever. Um, I think, was, as someone, as someone who, uh,Uh, preaches the, the merits of diversification and index fund investing, you know, why do you have to choose one or the other? Why can't you go with both? And, you know, if one fails, you still have the other one, and, you know, you limit your downside. Equal weighted or market cap weighted? Oh, that's a good question. I'll probably go market cap weighted. Yeah, with the soft serve, big things get bigger, right? Exactly. here's my question about diversification that I want to throw in there. you want to invest in a tech ETF, this is so random. Do you consider it diversified if you throw all your money one way and it's a tech ETF but then you pick a second tech ETF and you're like, I'm diversifying cause it's a different one. They're all invested in the same things though, right? Yeah, I mean, you know, again, it's, it depends on what you're looking for in terms of the nature of that diversification. Um, it could be like if you're buying the same indexes from two different funds, then you're not getting any additional diversification. If one's weighted differently and the other is weighted, you know, if one's weighted based off of market cap, and the other one is, you know, equal weighted or, you know, there's different cap sizes, and yeah, maybe get some more diversification at a micro level, but you're still in the same and like, you know, even if it were different industries, um, and if you have two ETFs, you're still allocated into the stock market, so, um, you know, depends on what kind of diversification are you looking for. Is it sector level? Is it market cap? Is it industry, is it the asset class, you know, maybe it should be in bonds, um, and then maybe even beyond that, like, is it just financial assets that you should be uh invested in. I'm basicallyfascinated with like how you do this, play the stock market, but through ETFs only and like,Try to pick them, like, pick, you know, you know what Imean? Sure, yeah, and, you know, I, I think uh there's a lot of literature that shows, um, you know, it depends on what you're trying to achieve when it comes to risk and return and what your time horizons are, but um theUh, the consensus in the literature says it's very hard to beat just a straight S&P 500 index fund. And on that Warren Buffett note, we are going to end things here at Stocks in Translation. Be sure to check out all our other episodes on the Yahoo Finance site and your favorite podcast platform. We'll see you next time. Error while retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Yahoo
President Trump repeals overland supersonic flight ban
WASHINGTON, D.C. (WNCT) — N.C. Senator Ted Budd, a member of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, applaud President Trump executive order to repeal the prohibition on overland supersonic flight. According to a press release, it would 'establish an interim noise-based certification standard, and repeal other regulations that hinder supersonic flight.' The executive order follows Senator Budd and Representative Troy Nehls introduction of the Supersonic Aviation Modernization (SAM) Act, which would require the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Administrator to issue regulations to legalize civil supersonic flight in the United States. President Trump's executive order directly aligns with the goals of this legislation. 'President Trump's swift leadership to unleash supersonic flight will boost America's ability to compete with China in the race for next-generation aircraft and revolutionize commercial air travel. For too long, outdated restrictions on civil supersonic flight have stifled innovation. I am grateful that President Trump has leaned in to legalize this vital technology in the United States and promote international engagement for international operations. I will continue to work with my colleagues in Washington, like my friend Rep. Nehls, to advance policies that unleash cutting-edge technologies like supersonic aviation,' said Senator Budd. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
