Nine 'held up and recognized' for contributions at YWCA's Tribute to Women event
JOHNSTOWN, Pa. – Women's achievements and contributions to the community were celebrated at an awards ceremony Thursday.
With more than 275 people in attendance, the YWCA Greater Johnstown held its 38th annual Tribute to Women at Ace's in the Cambria City section of Johnstown.
'There are things getting done in our communities by women every day and they go unnoticed, so this is to recognize them and show them the appreciation their communities have for them,' said Diane Lopez, YWCA Greater Johnstown board president. 'This year's group of women are from all over the county, which is different than it's been in the past.
'We have multiple honorees from the northern part of the county, so the word is getting out and we're very excited about that.'
The nine honorees were Debbie Baxter, employee of Ray Oil & Gas in Portage and recipient of the Arts & Letters Award; Becky DeYulis, owner of WorkLink Staffing in Ebensburg and recipient of the Business Award; Stacey Lewis, founder of South Fork Heritage Days and South Fork Winterfest and recipient of the Community Service Volunteer Award; Angela Seidel, professor of accounting and the chair of the business administration department at St. Francis University in Loretto and recipient of the Education Award; Jessie Mullen, a Marine Corps veteran and teacher at Ferndale Area High School and recipient of the Lady Liberty Award; Ashley Flynn, executive director the Cambria County Library and recipient of the Nonprofit Award; Louann Hoffman, broker/owner of Lang Real Estate and Tax Services in Cresson and recipient of the Professions Award; Jacqueline Hockenberry, a licensed professional geologist with Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, Cambria District Mining Office and recipient of the STEM Award; and Andi Palmar, executive director of Operation BeYoutiful and recipient of the Yellow Rose Award.
'This is very humbling because there are so many women in business and sometimes you don't feel like you're worthy, but then when someone sees what you do it becomes quite an honor,' DeYulis said. 'It's so nice to see women recognized for all their contributions to the roles that they have.'
She said it's exciting to see women from all over Cambria County being recognized for their achievements.
'The YWCA is located in Johnstown, but their reach for this award is amazing,' DeYulis said. 'I love what they are doing, and I hope this continues to get more notoriety on what they do and it can enhance their programs.'
Lewis said women do so much in their communities and deserve to be celebrated.
'We work so hard and you sometimes think people don't see everything, not that you need the recognition, but it's just nice to be acknowledged,' she said. 'Women can put a lot on their plate sometimes and we try to juggle everything, so it's phenomenal that the YWCA does this for our community and spotlights women.'
Lewis said it's a thrill be included with the other honorees.
'To be acknowledged is an accomplishment and something very special,' she said. 'I'm already thinking about who I can nominate next year.'
Flynn said the award is overwhelming, and she's glad she can help draw attention to the public library system.
'I work with some really great people and to know what we're doing is being noticed at the level of all these other honorees is very impactful,' she said. 'So many of the women that are doing these incredible things are also juggling many responsibilities at home and fulfilling a lot of different roles in their lives, so to be recognized at this professional level is very important.'
Flynn said the event can inspire other women.
'It's good to know that we women are working together to make things better,' she said.
'It's fun to be a part of that.'
Seidel said she appreciates the award.
'It's a heartfelt nomination, and it's very humbling,' she said. 'So many people go unrecognized for the work that they do. They give so much time and effort and give so much of their hearts to what they do, so it's a great thing to be recognized.'
Seidel said she does what she does because she loves it.
'I'm just grateful that I have an opportunity to get up every morning and go do something that I love to do,' she said.
Mullen said receiving the award is an honor.
'Women need to be held up and recognized so that we can inspire each other to continue to do good work and can inspire the younger generation to do even better work,' she said. 'So often the people you see in the news or history books are men, so holding up women as examples in your community gives younger women an example to follow.'
She said to be the company of current and past honorees is gratifying.
'I didn't know some of the great work these women were doing, so I hope we can find ways to work together to make our community even better,' Mullen said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
6 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
a day ago
- Yahoo
Martin Lewis gives his verdict on Labour's winter fuel payment U-turn
Money expert Martin Lewis has given his verdict on Labour's decision to partially reverse its changes to the annual winter fuel payment for pensioners. Chancellor Rachel Reeves has confirmed that while the payment will still not be paid to all pensioners as in previous years, it will be extended to far more than last winter. Around nine million more pensioners should get the payment as a result of the change – meaning about three quarters of pensioners overall are now eligible. Announcing the change, Ms Reeves said: 'Targeting winter fuel payments was a tough decision, but the right decision because of the inheritance we had been left by the previous government. 'It is also right that we continue to means-test this payment so that it is targeted and fair, rather than restoring eligibility to everyone including the wealthiest. 'But we have now acted to expand the eligibility of the winter fuel payment so no pensioner on a lower income will miss out.' The change essentially raises the threshold for receiving the payment from £11,600, plus the need to be claiming Pension Credit, to £35,000 with no additional requirements. Reacting to the news, Mr Lewis said the change is a 'very big improvement', but highlighted a piece of key information pensioners should be aware of regarding the decision. Crucially, pensioners with an income of over £35,000 will see their winter fuel payment 'clawed back' through the tax system (unless they opt out). But this can bring some slightly complicated rules for households with more than one pensioner which it may be helpful to understand. Mr Lewis gives an example: "You've got a household that's due to get £300 with two state pensioners in. That £300 for the clawback is treated as £150 and £150. 'So if this person earns over £35,000, they lose it. If this person earns under £35,000, they keep it; they still get £150. If both of them earn over £35,000, they both lose it. And if both of them earn under £35,000, they both keep it.' This is a relatively 'good system,' The Money Saving Expert founder says, as it means only one pensioner's income won't decide whether the entire payment is kept or not. Mr Lewis also said that he is 'very grateful to the Chancellor' for the decision, adding: 'This is a very big improvement on what we already had, and it does mean there's still a means test in place.' "And many people said they don't want millionaires and billionaires to get the Winter Fuel Payment. Well, they won't get the Winter Fuel Payment, they can either opt out or have it clawed back through the tax system. 'But it means far more pensioners who were struggling with still-high energy bills will get this payment.'
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
Real Madrid interest grows but Arsenal expect contract agreement
Arsenal Confident of New Lewis-Skelly Deal Despite Real Madrid Interest Rising star earns attention There are few greater compliments in football than being tracked by Real Madrid. For Myles Lewis-Skelly, that interest comes at the end of a breakout campaign which has firmly placed him among Arsenal's most promising young talents. Advertisement The 18-year-old made 39 appearances in all competitions for Mikel Arteta's side in 2024-25, having not featured at all for the senior team the season before. His progress has been rapid, not just in minutes and matches, but in stature. A senior England debut, a goal against Albania, and now headlines linking him to Madrid. Photo IMAGO Contract concern grows Arsenal are confident Lewis-Skelly will commit to a new long-term deal, yet there is some urgency. His current contract expires in 2026, and the parallels to Bukayo Saka's previous situation are all too familiar. Financial expert Stefan Borson, speaking to Football Insider, said, 'He will obviously stay at Arsenal… We know there's no way Arsenal are going to let him leave.' Advertisement That optimism is well-placed but does not mask the reality. Lewis-Skelly's emergence has occurred in an era where top clubs like Real Madrid are increasingly adept at exploiting contractual uncertainty. Having signed Trent Alexander-Arnold from Liverpool this summer, Madrid's interest in Lewis-Skelly feels credible rather than speculative. Internal confidence and external noise Borson is convinced this will follow the path Arsenal have already navigated with Saka. 'Every year that he was running to the end of his contract, there were these sorts of noises,' he said. 'He will sign a new contract.' Photo IMAGO It is a test of Arsenal's planning as much as Lewis-Skelly's ambition. The club cannot afford to delay when the vultures of Europe are circling. This is no longer a teenager with potential, but a first-team regular playing international football. Our View – EPL Index Analysis For Arsenal supporters, this is precisely the kind of situation that once sparked anxiety. But this is no longer the Arsenal of uncertainty. This is a club that knows how to keep its crown jewels. Advertisement Myles Lewis-Skelly has been a revelation. Calm in possession, aggressive in his pressing, and intelligent beyond his years, he has slotted seamlessly into Arteta's high-demand system. That he has already made such an impact in his debut season shows both his character and quality. The links to Real Madrid are almost flattering at this stage. Of course they want him. That is what happens when you nurture excellence. But Arsenal fans should trust the process. The club have managed these renewals brilliantly in recent seasons, and there's no suggestion that will change now. Saka stayed. Martinelli stayed. Saliba stayed. Lewis-Skelly will, in all likelihood, stay too. Not just because Arsenal need him, but because he has already shown he belongs there.
