Italy's Dynamic Family Firms Are Breaking the ‘Succession' Mold
Come to Milan, as I recently did, and you cannot help but notice that Italian capitalism remains what it has always been: a family affair. (Granted, I was there to attend a conference on the future of capitalism.) The great Milan-based fashion houses of Giorgio Armani, Dolce & Gabbana, and Prada are all family companies. The Ferraris that roar through the city's streets, the Bezzera machines that make such excellent coffee, the Ferrero chocolates that finish off a meal are all produced by family companies. Family giants such as Ferrari sit atop a vast network of suppliers, almost all of them family companies, that dominate the Lombardy region. Giant public companies and chain stores belong to the alien world of Anglo-Saxon capitalism. Even in the most economically advanced region of Italy, the family is king.
Yet anyone who has watched 'Succession' knows that family companies are subject to unique and often fatal problems, notably dysfunctional children and family feuds. Most languages have a phrase for the three-generation curse of family companies: 'clogs to clogs in three generations,' in English, for instance. In Italy the popular phrase is 'from stables to stars to stables.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Times
43 minutes ago
- New York Times
Can Matheus Cunha and Liam Delap signings boost Chelsea, Manchester United's top four odds?
For more stories like this, click here to follow The Athletic's sports betting section and have them added to your feed. Legendary American basketball coach John Wooden once said, 'Never mistake activity for achievement.' Wooden spent his time coaching players who dribbled with their hands instead of their feet in the 1970s. That means it's unlikely his famous quote was directed at the transfer strategies of Manchester United and Chelsea. Advertisement In acquiring Matheus Cunha and Liam Delap, each club appears to be doing something. Whether early transfer window activity indicates edging closer to securing silverware or a place in the top four next year is another story. At the very least, it represents hope around the Blues' 2/1 and their Manchester counterparts' 5/1 top four odds. Delap and Cunha also share another similarity; their numbers don't tell the whole story of their value to each club. Let's dive deeper into the metrics. Let's not beat around the bush: Ipswich Town were objectively bad this past season. The Tractor Boys' minus-1.01 expected goal (xG) differential per 90 minutes ranked 17th in the league — nearly triple the difference of Wolves in 16th. When attackers like Delap play substantial minutes for a side this dreadful, it raises questions whether their statistics accurately reflect their abilities. At 22 years old, Delap is just about to enter his prime. Considering that context, however, his underlying numbers are, well, not great: Chelsea's incumbent striker, Nicolas Jackson, has his weaknesses, particularly around his finishing, but there's no denying his surface numbers supercede Delap. Jackson's 0.50 non-penalty xG per 90 mark is nearly double Delap's 0.27. While some forwards could make up for that gap with their contributions to build-up play or chance-creation in the final third, the former Tractor Boy doesn't do either of those things. The only thing Delap does better than Jackson is dribble past opposing defenders. For Delap's inclusion to make a significant shift in Chelsea's prospects, his underwhelming numbers have to be a by-product of Ipswich's shortcomings. The Tractor Boys only averaged 40 per cent possession during the 2024-25 season. Kieran McKenna's side also were last in touches and passes into the penalty area. Projecting what this signing means for the South Londoners means trying to determine whether Delap's numbers were underwhelming due to his own poor performance or because his team simply never had possession of the ball. Advertisement Even if the answer lies somewhere in the middle, it's hard to project Delap as the type of player that adds a ton of value to Chelsea's 22/1 title odds. The Blues' top four odds might be a different story. If Delap can prove to be an effective rotation player, then the 2/1 odds for the team to qualify for the Champions League next season seem like the better bet. Delap's numbers call into question his actual level of impact, but it's quite clear the kind of player Cunha is. The 26-year-old is a good, not great, winger whose market value rose thanks to a season buoyed by a fiery finishing streak. The Brazilian scored 15 goals off just 8.6 xG — a conversion rate that even Lionel Messi would be envious of. If the predictive strength of xG has taught us anything, it's that Cunha is headed toward a serious regression next season. Thankfully for United, he does bring a decent dose of playmaking. Cunha ranks in the 80th percentile of all attacking midfielders in expected assists and led Wolves in shot-creating actions last season. Yet even with that all-around production, there's no denying that his signing is simply a signing for the sake of change given the presence of Marcus Rashford and Alejandro Garnacho. Rashford almost exactly matches Cunha's production, while the 20-year-old Garnacho offers far more promise. Despite being six years his junior, the young Argentine matched Cunha's non-penalty xG of 0.30 this past season. The problem for United is that Garnacho and Rashford have had a series of run-ins with recent managers. Erik ten Hag and Ruben Amorim sought to find alternatives, and now the latter seems poised to push both players out of the club. At 8/15 odds to head to Barcelona, Rashford seems destined to leave Old Trafford. Garnacho's most likely destination is also outside of Manchester as Napoli (6/4) are currently the club favoured to secure his services. Advertisement As great as data is, it can't really measure the impact of someone like Cunha slotting into a starting XI match after match without high-profile spats with his manager. Professionalism and locker room cohesion may not matter as much as actually putting the ball in the back of the net, but those intangibles do matter. That said, United finished 12th in non-penalty xG differential last season. This was not an unlucky side needing some stability, it is a side in need of players who move the needle (Bruno Fernandes staying should also help). Cunha is a solid player and perhaps a better fit with Amorim, but those intangible factors aren't enough to make United's 5/1 top four odds any more enticing than they already are. Betting/Odds links in this article are provided by partners of The Athletic. Restrictions may apply. The Athletic maintains full editorial independence. Partners have no control over or input into the reporting or editing process and do not review stories before publication. (Photo of Matheus Cunha: David Rogers / Getty Images)
Forbes
43 minutes ago
- Forbes
Why Do We Care How Much We Spend On Medicaid?
The U.S. has fewer hospital beds per person than Europe does. In evaluating the success of Obamacare in general and Medicaid expansion in particular, reporters and commentators have tended to focus on only one measure: the increase in the number of people with health insurance. At the same time, in evaluating the health consequences of the House Republican reconciliation measure, almost all the focus has been on the number of people who will lose health insurance. The implicit premise in all of this is: more health insurance means more health care and less health insurance means less health care. That has been the premise behind virtually every important piece of health care legislation going all the way back to the creation of Medicare and Medicaid in1965. Yet the premise ignores a fundamental economic principle: no matter what happens to the demand for care, there won't be a change in health care delivered unless there is a change in supply. Under Obamacare, we are certainly spending more money. The annual cost of Medicaid expansion is $130 billion and the cost of exchange subsidies is more than $60 billion. What are we getting in return for all this extra spending? Although there has been a substantial increase in the number of people with health insurance, one study finds that there has been no overall increase in health care. In fact, the nation may be getting less care. In 2023, 13 years after the passage of the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare), the number of hospital admissions per capita was 19 percent lower and the number of hospital days was18 percent lower than the year the act was passed. In the 9 years following the passage of Obamacare, doctor visits per capita declined by 18%. Further, our health care resources appear to be quite skimpy in comparison to other developed countries. Today, the United States has 2.7 doctors per 1,000 people, while the European average is 4.1. The U.S. has fewer than three hospital beds per 1,000 residents. The EU has more than five. And our country doesn't seem to be getting any healthier. Life expectancy in 2024 was lower than it was ten years earlier. As for Medicaid, numerous studies through the years have produced conflicting results on what difference the program makes for enrollee health. Yet these studies suffer from all the problems that are inherent in making inferences from population statistics. One study was different. The Oregon Health Insurance Experiment was a randomized controlled trial (RCT) that examined the medical condition of real people. Medicaid enrollees were selected by lottery and after two years the investigators compared the medical condition of those who enrolled with those who didn't. The results: enrollees had less financial stress and were less likely to be depressed, but there was no difference in their physical health. One of the Oregon investigators, MIT economist Amy Finkelstein, helps us understand those results. People without health insurance, she notes, still get about 80 percent of the health care that Medicaid enrollees get. And when they are confronted with high medical bills, they actually pay only a small portion of them. You might suppose that Medicaid enrollees are less likely to rely on hospital emergency rooms. The reverse is true. Once they enroll, Medicaid patients increase their trips to the emergency room by 40 percent. This may explain why Medicaid enrollees place a very low value on enrollment. If you were to offer to buy their Medicaid insurance coverage, it appears that the average enrollee would sell her insurance for as little as 20 cents on the dollar. Moreover, among the lottery winners who were offered enrollment in Oregon, more than half turned the offer down! By implication, these folks placed no value on the opportunity to enroll. These findings have convinced Finkelstein (certainly no right-winger) that rather than giving low-income families more Medicaid, we should give them cash instead. Here is one way to do that. Private companies managing Medicaid (or the state itself) should be able to make deposits to Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) that would cover, say, all primary care. Enrollees would be restricted to using the money for health care during an insurance year. With these funds, they would be able to pay market prices (instead of Medicaid fees) at doctor's offices, walk-in clinics and urgent care centers – allowing them to buy medical care the way they buy food with food stamps. This would allow low-income families to have the same health care opportunities that middle-income families have. At the end of the insurance period, they could withdraw any unspent funds for any purpose. If there were no taxes or penalties for non-medical withdrawals, health care and non-health care would be trading against each other on a level playing field under the tax law. People wouldn't spend a dollar on health care unless they got a dollar's worth of value. An early study by the RAND Corporation suggests that these accounts could reduce Medicaid spending by 30 percent. Excluding payments for the disabled and nursing home care, the savings would amount to almost $1 trillion over ten years. This saving would be shared by the beneficiaries and the taxpayers who fund Medicaid. This is one way to resolve the impasse in the Senate over the House reconciliation bill. HSAs for Medicaid are a way to make the program better for enrollees and cut spending at the same time.
CNET
44 minutes ago
- CNET
Klarna Launches New BNLP Debit Card That Lets You Finance on the Fly -- but There's a Catch
CNET/Getty Images Klarna, a financial service best known for its buy now, pay later (BNLP) app, just announced it's launching a new debit card with BNPL features. "We consistently hear from consumers that they want the freedom to choose how and when to pay -- whether that's paying now with debit or spreading the cost over time," David Sandstrom, chief marketing officer at Klarna, said in the press release. This isn't the BNPL service's first foray into the cards territory. Klarna launched the Klarna Credit Card, a no-annual-fee card that works more like a charge card in 2022 and issued a US version in 2024. With its new debit card offering, users will be able to load funds onto the card and use it like a debit card, or access a Buy Now, Pay Later plan. BNPL plans are typically popular as an alternative to credit cards, but the Klarna Card seems to be combining debit, credit and payment plans into a single card. The company said in the press release that it's currently testing the product in the US with plans for a wider rollout in the US and Europe later this year. Here's what we know about it so far. How the Klarna debit card works The new product will offer a mix features similar to that of both a credit card and a debit card. You can load funds onto the Klarna Card and use it like you would a standard debit card, but you're able to select if you want to finance a purchase at the point of sale by using either Klarna's Pay in 4 or Pay Later plan. Klarna told CNET that there will be a $1 to $3 charge for using Pay in 4 which will be added to your down payment. If you're going to use BNPL, I'd recommend not opting for the Pay in 4 option with the Klarna card, since others like Afterpay, Affirm and even Klarna itself don't charge you money to initiate a BNPL installment plan that's paid off in four payments. Anyone can be approved for the Klarna Card and use it as a debit card without any credit check required. However, if you want to finance a purchase with a BNPL plan, you'll undergo a soft credit check at the time of purchase. That may cause a slowdown at the register, but we'll see. Klarna also confirmed your activity won't be reported to credit bureaus at this time. The Klarna Card will also work on Visa's Flexible Credential program, which allows you to save multiple forms of payment behind one credential, locked with your biometric. It acts like a payment hub with all of your eligible payment methods. Are Klarna's cash back rewards worth it? Once the card is fully released, it will offer a free tier and two paid tiers, according to the press release. The paid tiers -- Member and Plus -- will cost $3.49 and $7.99 monthly respectively, and will include merchant discounts and cash-back rewards. Member 2.82% APY on Klarna balance. 1% cash back when you pay in full with your Klarna balance. 2x rewards on Pay-in-4 at non-integrated partners. Plus 3.22% APY on Klarna balance. 2% cash back when you pay in full with your Klarna balance. 10x rewards on Pay-in-4 at non-integrated partners. If you're after cash-back rewards, you don't have to pay for them. Many credit cards offer cash-back rewards for free -- as long as you pay your bill in full each month -- and some debit cards like the Discover Cashback Debit card also come with rewards for no monthly fee. However, depending on the cash-back rate, the tier's fees might wipe out any value you'd get from them. It's nice that Klarna lets you earn a fairly competitive APY on your balance -- the 3.22% APY the Plus tier offers is similar to many top high-yield savings accounts right now -- but having to pay $7.99 a month for this APY is a steep price. For reference, if you deposited $250 a month into your Klarna account and didn't spend it, you'd have $3,000 at the end of the year. You'd earn approximately $44 in interest (depending on how often it's compounded), but you'd have paid nearly $96 a year for this card. How to sign up for the Klarna debit card The company is currently trialing the Klarna debit card in the US. Once it's fully available, Klarna confirmed that you'll be able to sign up to use it immediately and won't be added to a wait list.
