logo
G-III Apparel Pulls Certain FY Outlooks on Tariffs

G-III Apparel Pulls Certain FY Outlooks on Tariffs

G-III Apparel GIII -2.57%decrease; red down pointing triangle backed its full-year sales outlook, but the company pulled all other guidance for the year due to uncertainty around tariffs and macroeconomic conditions.
The company behind fashion brands DKNY, Calvin Klein and Tommy Hilfiger said Friday that current tariffs are expected to result in costs of about $135.0 million this year, largely concentrated in the latter half.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump order seeks to boost U.S. drone industry
Trump order seeks to boost U.S. drone industry

Yahoo

time19 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump order seeks to boost U.S. drone industry

June 7 (UPI) -- President Donald Trump is taking aim at drone technology from two directions -- boost the U.S. industry and crack down on malicious activity. Trump on Friday signed executive orders on efforts to spur U.S. production relevant to drone technology, increase U.S. drone security and regulation efforts, and an unleated one to promote design and eventual use of commercial supersonic aircraft. "Unmanned aircraft systems, otherwise known as drones, offer the potential to enhance public safety as well as cement America's leadership in global innovation," an executive order titled Restoring American Airspace Sovereignty read. "But criminals, terrorists, and hostile foreign actors have intensified their weaponization of these technologies, creating new and serious threats to our homeland. Another order, titled Unleashing American Drone Dominance, declares that "building a strong and secure domestic drone sector is vital to reducing reliance on foreign sources, strengthening critical supply chains and ensuring that the benefits of this technology are delivered to the American people." There are more than a million registered drones in the United States, according to the FAA with more than 400,000 commercial drones and more than 350,000 for recreational use. In a press release, the Commercial Drone Alliance said it has "believed that innovation and security are two sides of the same coin. Outdated regulations have long impeded technological innovation and hindered transparency in our airspace." Lisa Ellman, chief executive of the Commercial Drone Alliance, also lauded the executive orders for aiming at both innovation and security simultaneously. "We fully support the long-overdue steps taken by the Trump administration in these Executive Orders -- establishing a framework to scale safe and secure drone operations while enhancing drone security and airspace transparency -- to modernize our domestic drone policy and assure American aviation leadership into the next century of flight," she said in the release. Drone dangers Trump has warned that drones have been used to smuggle drugs across borders, and could threaten large public gatherings, such as the 2026 World Cup and the 2028 Summer Olympics, both in the United States. "It is the policy of the United States to ensure control over our national airspace and to protect the public, critical infrastructure, mass gathering events, and military and sensitive government installations and operations from threats posed by the careless or unlawful use of UAS," the security related order reads. Chinese-made drones from companies like DJI or Autel are not outright banned, but the Federal Acquisition Security Council has been called on to "publish a Covered Foreign Entity List ... identifying companies that pose supply chain risks." In 2022, the U.S. Treasury added DJI and seven other companies to its Chinese Military-Industrial Complex list, which indicates some level of national security concern. The includes a ban on U.S.-based companies exporting technology to them. The majority of drones are estimated to be built in China, The New York Times reported. The Justice Department and FAA were told to enforce civil and criminal penalties for drone operators who violate laws or airspace restrictions. There will be grants for state and local law enforcement to access drone-detection and tracking equipment. The Federal Aviation Administration requires all drones weighing more than 0.55 of a pound to be registered, in addition to restricting how high they can be flown without authorization. The Justice Department and FAA were told to more robustly enforce civil and criminal penalties for drone operators who violate laws or airspace restrictions. Grant programs are planned for state and local law enforcement to access drone-detection and tracking equipment., the order also indicates Drone industry growth In his first term, Trump sought to increase the use of drones and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick has been directed to promote exports of U.S.-made drones, in addition to federal agencies being ordered to prioritize purchases of them. "The United States must accelerate the safe commercialization of drone technologies and fully integrate UAS into the National Airspace System," the order reads. "The time has come to accelerate testing and to enable routine drone operations, scale up domestic production, and expand the export of trusted, American-manufactured drone technologies to global markets." The order directs the FAA to allow commercial users and public safety officials not to fly drones beyond their range of sight, meaning that a user must be able to see the drone they are operating. "Building a strong and secure domestic drone sector is vital to reducing reliance on foreign sources, strengthening critical supply chains, and ensuring that the benefits of this technology are delivered to the American people," the order says. Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy was directed to initiate artificial intelligence tools to assist in and expedite the review of a UAS waiver application, and the Transportation Department was told to develop an Electric Vertical Takeoff and Landing Pilot Program to accelerate the deployment of safe and lawful eVTOL operations in the United States. Supersonic flight An additional executive order titled "Leading the World in Supersonic Flight" seeks to promise planes that travel at supersonic speeds, which are greater than the speed of sound at approximately 768 mph at sea level, or Mach 1. "The United States stands at the threshold of a bold new chapter in aerospace innovation," the order reads. "For more than 50 years, outdated and overly restrictive regulations have grounded the promise of supersonic flight over land, stifling American ingenuity, weakening our global competitiveness, and ceding leadership to foreign adversaries." The order noted that "advances in aerospace engineering, materials science, and noise reduction now make supersonic flight not just possible, but safe, sustainable, and commercially viable." The order repeals regulations prohibiting cross-country supersonic flights, which for decades have precluded nonmilitary air travel over land at faster-than-sound speeds. The Concorde was manufactured from 1965 to 1979, but are no longer flown by airlines, however, Boom Supersonic and NASA are currently developing new supersonic passenger jets.

Federal judge approves $2.8B settlement, paving way for US colleges to pay athletes millions
Federal judge approves $2.8B settlement, paving way for US colleges to pay athletes millions

CNN

time39 minutes ago

  • CNN

Federal judge approves $2.8B settlement, paving way for US colleges to pay athletes millions

Source: AP A federal judge signed off on arguably the biggest change in the history of college sports Friday, clearing the way for schools to begin paying their athletes millions of dollars as soon as next month as the multibillion-dollar industry shreds the last vestiges of the amateur model that defined it for more than a century. Nearly five years after Arizona State swimmer Grant House sued the NCAA and its five biggest conferences to lift restrictions on revenue sharing, U.S. Judge Claudia Wilken approved the final proposal that had been hung up on roster limits, just one of many changes ahead amid concerns that thousands of walk-on athletes will lose their chance to play college sports. The sweeping terms of the so-called House settlement include approval for each school to share up to $20.5 million with athletes over the next year and $2.7 billion that will be paid over the next decade to thousands of former players who were barred from that revenue for years. The agreement brings a seismic shift to hundreds of schools that were forced to reckon with the reality that their players are the ones producing the billions in TV and other revenue, mostly through football and basketball, that keep this machine humming. The scope of the changes — some have already begun — is difficult to overstate. The professionalization of college athletics will be seen in the high-stakes and expensive recruitment of stars on their way to the NFL and NBA, and they will be felt by athletes whose schools have decided to pare their programs. The agreement will resonate in nearly every one of the NCAA's 1,100 member schools boasting nearly 500,000 athletes. 'Approving the agreement reached by the NCAA, the defendant conferences and student-athletes in the settlement opens a pathway to begin stabilizing college sports,' NCAA President Charlie Baker said. Wilken's ruling comes 11 years after she dealt the first significant blow to the NCAA ideal of amateurism when she ruled in favor of former UCLA basketball player Ed O'Bannon and others who were seeking a way to earn money from the use of their name, image and likeness (NIL) — a term that is now as common in college sports as 'March Madness' or 'Roll Tide.' It was just four years ago that the NCAA cleared the way for NIL money to start flowing, but the changes coming are even bigger. Wilken granted preliminary approval to the settlement last October. That sent colleges scurrying to determine not only how they were going to afford the payments, but how to regulate an industry that also allows players to cut deals with third parties so long as they are deemed compliant by a newly formed enforcement group that will be run by auditors at Deloitte. The agreement takes a big chunk of oversight away from the NCAA and puts it in the hands of the four biggest conferences. The ACC, Big Ten, Big 12 and SEC hold most of the power and decision-making heft, especially when it comes to the College Football Playoff, which is the most significant financial driver in the industry and is not under the NCAA umbrella like the March Madness tournaments are. The deal looked ready to go since last fall, but Wilken put a halt to it after listening to a number of players who had lost their spots because of newly imposed roster limits being placed on teams. The limits were part of a trade-off that allowed the schools to offer scholarships to everyone on the roster, instead of only a fraction, as has been the case for decades. Schools started cutting walk-ons in anticipation of the deal being approved. Wilken asked for a solution and, after weeks, the parties decided to let anyone cut from a roster — now termed a 'Designated Student-Athlete' — return to their old school or play for a new one without counting against the new limit. Wilken ultimately agreed, going point-by-point through the objectors' arguments to explain why they didn't hold up. 'The modifications provide Designated Student-Athletes with what they had prior to the roster limits provisions being implemented, which was the opportunity to be on a roster at the discretion of a Division I school,' Wilken wrote. Her decision, however, took nearly a month to write, leaving the schools and conferences in limbo — unsure if the plans they'd been making for months, really years, would go into play. 'It remains to be seen how this will impact the future of inter-collegiate athletics — but as we continue to evolve, Carolina remains committed to providing outstanding experiences and broad-based programming to student-athletes,' North Carolina athletic director Bubba Cunningham said. The list of winners and losers is long and, in some cases, hard to tease out. A rough guide of winners would include football and basketball stars at the biggest schools, which will devote much of their bankroll to signing and retaining them. For instance, Michigan quarterback Bryce Underwood's NIL deal is reportedly worth between $10.5 million and $12 million. Losers will be the walk-ons and partial scholarship athletes whose spots are gone. One of the adjustments made at Wilken's behest was to give those athletes a chance to return to the schools that cut them in anticipation of the deal going through. Also in limbo are Olympic sports many of those athletes play and that serve as the main pipeline for a U.S. team that has won the most medals at every Olympics since the downfall of the Soviet Union. All this is a price worth paying, according to the attorneys who crafted the settlement and argue they delivered exactly what they were asked for: an attempt to put more money in the pockets of the players whose sweat and toil keep people watching from the start of football season through March Madness and the College World Series in June. What the settlement does not solve is the threat of further litigation. Though this deal brings some uniformity to the rules, states still have separate laws regarding how NIL can be doled out, which could lead to legal challenges. NCAA President Charlie Baker has been consistent in pushing for federal legislation that would put college sports under one rulebook and, if he has his way, provide some form of antitrust protection to prevent the new model from being disrupted again. See Full Web Article

What we know so far: Trump and Musk's spectacular public blowup rocks Washington
What we know so far: Trump and Musk's spectacular public blowup rocks Washington

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

What we know so far: Trump and Musk's spectacular public blowup rocks Washington

President Trump's signature 'Big Beautiful Bill' has precipitated an epic fallout between the US president and one of his closest allies, billionaire Elon Musk. The blowup played out publicly on social media, with both men using their respective platforms, X and Truth Social, to exchange criticisms. Related: Eyes on Senate Republicans as Trump and Musk feud over tax and spend bill Here is a summary of how the rift unfolded, and what we know so far: Donald Trump kicked off the fight during an Oval Office meeting with German chancellor Friedrich Merz. Asked about Elon Musk's criticism of his 'Big, Beautiful Bill', the US president told reporters: 'Elon and I had a great relationship. I don't know if we will any more.' Trump told reporters he was 'very disappointed in Elon', telling them: 'He knew every aspect of this bill. He knew it better than almost anybody, and he never had a problem until right after he left. … He said the most beautiful things about me, and he hasn't said bad about me personally, but I'm sure that'll be next, but I'm very disappointed in Elon. I've helped Elon a lot.' Soon after Musk posted on X denying Trump's statement, beginning a flurry of posts that stepped up his feud with the president. Musk wrote: 'False, this bill was never shown to me even once and was passed in the dead of night so fast that almost no one in Congress could even read it!' He went on to claim that without him Trump would have 'lost the election' before bemoaning what he called 'such ingratitude'. The president followed up by , prompting a return threat from the SpaceX boss to decommission the Dragon spacecraft (which brought home astronauts stuck on the ISS for months), potentially throwing US space programmes into turmoil. Hours later Musk rescinded the threat. Musk also suggested Trump should be impeached and that JD Vance should replace Trump, warning that Trump's global tariffs would 'cause a recession in the second half of this year'. Musk went on to say on X the reason the had not released the files into convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein was because they implicated the president. The White House called the assertions an 'unfortunate episode'. Meanwhile, Steve Bannon, a longtime ally and Elon Musk critic, suggested there were grounds to deport the tech billionaire, who has US citizenship. Bannon told the New York Times: 'They should initiate a formal investigation of his immigration status because I am of the strong belief that he is an illegal alien, and he should be deported from the country immediately.' The spectacular blowout between Trump and Musk sent Tesla shares into free fall. They The decline in Tesla's share price on Thursday knocked about $8.73bn off Musk's total net worth, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index. The reported $152bn drop also decreased the value of the company to roughly $900bn.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store