Latest news with #FrameworkAgreement
USA Today
6 days ago
- Business
- USA Today
Lynch: Prepare for posturing on anniversary of Framework Agreement that already achieved its goal
Lynch: Prepare for posturing on anniversary of Framework Agreement that already achieved its goal Friday marks two years since the announcement of the Framework Agreement between the PGA Tour and Saudi Arabia's Public Investment Fund, and all one can say about the passage of time is that it has proven the truth of John Irving's elegiac observation about how 'the people who once mattered the most to us wind up in parentheses.' The two men who conceived the accord (Ed Herlihy and Jimmy Dunne) have thrown their last fists in this scuffle, having exited the Tour's Policy Board. One of its three signatories (Keith Pelley) has departed the DP World Tour, while another (Jay Monahan) has had his authority as Tour commissioner hog-tied by players and investors. Only the PIF governor, Yasir Al-Rumayyan, remains as he was on June 6, 2023, right down to the libertine spending for chaste returns. The Framework Agreement predicted a definitive deal between the parties by the end of '23, but those privy to the process say none is imminent, Al-Rumayyan having been radio silent for three months. Which means apologists and propagandists will maintain their industrious output of the past 720-odd days, mitigating or touting every twist in the narrative. This promises to be a week in which both the Tour and PIF (by way of its LIV proxies) insist that the clock ticking over into a third year is much worse for the other side. In truth, it's not good for either. A year ago, even loyalists were tempted to short the Tour's stock. LIV was still spending and had poached Jon Rahm; broadcast ratings were sinking; sponsors were antsy at best, and leaving in some cases; tournaments were unhappily adjusting to a scheduling caste system and weakened fields; the investors of Strategic Sports Group were demanding efficiencies in a corporate structure unaccustomed to accountability; players were complaining because, well, because there was oxygen available. The organization appeared highly incentivized to reach a deal with the Saudis. Today, the Tour has regained some swagger. LIV's biggest signing since Rahm was a YouTube influencer; TV ratings have improved; multiple sponsors have re-upped; tournaments have mostly stabilized, though there remain too many events with fields so diluted that one almost expects Brandel Chamblee to get a start; the GloHo survived its (first) round of budget cuts; players are still … It's an organization with little incentive to cut a deal, other than wanting cash and the return of a handful of players, most of whom will be free agents anyway by the time a new structure would be implemented. What the PGA Tour lacks — other than fan-friendly information transparency on everything from equipment testing to drug testing to disciplinary matters — is clarity on its future. Which is breeding a damaging perception that its product is incomplete, that it is searching for a missing puzzle piece it doesn't actually need. That clarity won't come until the Tour's board delivers a definitive 'No sir!' to Yasir. And LIV? It isn't judged by the same commercial standards as its rival. Television ratings are negligible, but no one cares; sponsors are scarce, but everyone gets a discount at Freddy's Frozen Custard; budgets are for actual businesses, not hostage-taking enterprises; player dissent is contractually forbidden, so they applaud themselves with the forced enthusiasm of the North Korean politburo when Comrade Un is scanning the room. As June 6 nears, LIV will need its online incels to manufacture a sentiment that it must still be taken seriously, despite all evidence to the contrary. Scott O'Neil will soon reach six months as LIV's CEO and will be keen to show that his shop is open for business, ready for a fresh round of recruiting and commercially stable (an audacious claim when your regulatory filings show that you've flushed north of $5 billion, but the Great White Pilot Fish can carry the can for that). Perhaps new partnerships will materialize — maybe a broadening of the deal that put Salesforce logos on some LIV players at the PGA Championship, or a financial institution eager to expand its interests in the Kingdom, or a company that counts PIF as a valued investor. Marriages of convenience that — like LIV's broadcast arrangement with Fox Sports — are less a vote of confidence in the product than a means to pursuing some greater prize. While the key parties posture around June 6, there'll be earnest hand-wringing in some quarters about the urgency to deliver on the Framework Agreement, which ignores the fact that its promise has already been realized. That accord was only ever intended to end the expensive and reputationally hazardous litigation. It succeeded in that. The two years since have merely been a squabble over who gets to write the epilogue.
The Hindu
25-05-2025
- Business
- The Hindu
Frontier of progress: On the potential of the northeast
That unity in diversity is India's strength might sound clichéd, but it is as true as ever. Prime Minister Narendra Modi, while speaking at the Rising North East Investors Summit 2025 last week, cited the diversity of India's northeastern region to underscore the vast diversity of the country. The northeast is rich in its cultural diversity and natural resources, and its location, topography and complex histories make it a unique space. But its numerous linguistic, tribal and cultural affinities can be a source of conflict within the Indian state. At times, these conflicts can be violent as the one in Manipur, which erupted on May 3, 2023, and is still simmering between the Kuki and Meiti communities. The Modi government and State governments in the region have sought to turn the region into an attractive destination for investors and tourists. The Sela Tunnel in Arunachal Pradesh, the Bhupen Hazarika bridge in Assam, the construction of 11,000 kilometres of highways, extensive new rail lines, more airports, the development of waterways on the Brahmaputra and Barak rivers, the expansion of mobile telephony, and a 1,600-km-long Northeast Gas Grid are examples of the new dynamism of the region. The Modi government has built on the initiatives of its predecessor United Progressive Alliance governments. Mr. Modi has also sought to settle many a conflict in the region in the last decade. The Framework Agreement with the NSCN (Isak-Muivah) in August 2015, although nebulous now, the Bodo Peace Accord and the Bru refugee settlement (both in January 2020), and the rollback of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act from a larger part of the region have been some of the steps signalling the Centre's intent. The change in perception about the northeast and its green cover has led to a surge in tourism and attracted investments, headlined by the Tata Group's ₹27,000-crore semiconductor plant coming up in Assam. But the challenges remain. Apart from Manipur, there is the perception in Nagaland that the Centre has lost interest in the peace process. Inter-State border disputes also continue to haunt the region, although Assam has partially resolved its issues with Arunachal Pradesh and Meghalaya. The investments have increased the demand for power and the focus on hydroelectric projects, most in Arunachal Pradesh, has triggered local protests fearing displacement and environmental damage in a region that is prone to natural disasters. Increased rhetoric by the Bharatiya Janata Party about immigrants from Bangladesh and Myanmar has heightened social tensions. If India has to meaningfully pursue its Act East policy, by integrating the northeast more closely with the east Asian economies, then its policies within the borders and toward the neighbouring countries should be in alignment.
USA Today
25-05-2025
- Business
- USA Today
PGA Tour can dictate what reunification looks like and it doesn't have to include everyone
PGA Tour can dictate what reunification looks like and it doesn't have to include everyone The most tediously unshakable assumption about the division in men's professional golf is that responsibility for resolving it falls to those who didn't create it, while those who did just keep dealing from a seemingly inexhaustible deck of victim cards. The Framework Agreement was announced 719 days ago and the expectation ever since has been that the PGA Tour must engineer the reunification of a game it didn't fracture, and that its members must make concessions to facilitate the return of guys who split to LIV of their own accord. Count Scottie Scheffler among those finally pushing back publicly against that ersatz sentiment. A few days ago, he was asked about the state of negotiations, in which he isn't involved. "If you wanna figure out what's going to happen to the game of golf, go to the other tour and ask those guys," he replied. "We had a tour where we all played together, and the guys that left, it's their responsibility I think to bring the tours back together. So go see where they're playing this week and ask them.' Scheffler's comment generously grants LIV players agency they don't actually enjoy. Having sold their services, they are hostages of Yasir Al-Rumayyan, the chief of Saudi Arabia's Public Investment Fund. What they want is irrelevant and what Al-Rumayyan wants is unclear since he hasn't engaged with the Tour since a fractious meeting at the White House on February 20. And that's why the Tour should forget about any onus to build bridges and focus exclusively on what will help its business. There are three potential fields to be plowed in any reunification effort—one verdant, one barren, one finite. They are, respectively, pocketbook, product and players. Golf executives have spent years deliberating how to share in Saudi riches without upending the entire structure of the sport. A PIF-PGA Tour deal would be driven by money, regardless of any grandiloquent waffle about unity and a shared future. But the Tour doesn't need their conditional investment—it hasn't yet spent a dime of the $1.5 billion infusion it obtained 16 months ago from Strategic Sports Group. Nor does it need any component of the LIV product. There's no market of scale for team golf to exploit, no broadcast audience to co-opt, no revenue to redirect, no sponsors to covet (unless Jay Monahan has an undisclosed craving for Freddy's Frozen Custard). There's literally nothing that should entice the Tour to jettison its current model or commercial partners to make space. Which leaves players as the only thing LIV owns that the Tour does want. Just not all of 'em. Most of the 50-odd guys on LIV used to compete on the PGA Tour. How many of them are missed? Jilted loyalists might insist on none, but that's untrue. A handful are clearly missed, though the reasons why vary. Take Patrick Reed. Every entertainment product could use a villain who needs a slab of bacon strapped to his face to get a dog to lick him. Or Sergio Garcia, since it's always useful to have a reminder that age and maturity are mutually exclusive. Only a few players left a real void because they competed at a high standard and had obvious commercial value. Should the Tour be presented with an opportunity to welcome them back—whether via a deal, a defection, the demise of LIV or a contract expiration—it should do so. That needn't mean the Tour alienating its loyal members (beyond the unavoidable) since the only guys it would want back could be argued to have status that didn't expire during their LIV sojourn. Jon Rahm, Bryson DeChambeau, Brooks Koepka and Cameron Smith have all won major championships since 2022. The only other unquestionable status belongs to Dustin Johnson and Phil Mickelson, lifetime members with more than 20 wins. Beyond that, it's a grey area. For example, being top 50 or top 25 on the career money list is good for a one-time season pass; Garcia and Reed were deleted from that list when they split but would still rank 14th and 30th, respectively. The rest of the LIV roster are discards for the PGA Tour but not without utility for the DP World Tour, which likely sees value in Messrs. Hatton, Kaymer, McDowell, Stenson, Westwood and Poulter. Perhaps too for the Aussie contingent. But if any of them want status in the States, go earn it back. Johnson's LIV servitude expires this year, but he seems happily checked out from career ambition. DeChambeau and Koepka can walk away in '26 if they wish. Only Rahm has a lengthy term ahead as Al-Rumayyan's asset. LIV told its stars that any contract renewals won't repeat the huge upfront payments that first lured them to the Saudi teat, so the earnings gap between the circuits has narrowed significantly, at least for those who are competitively relevant. If all that the PGA Tour wants by way of reunification is the return of the few men who matter, then it can simply wait until they're contractually free and do what Scottie suggested, go ask 'em.
Yahoo
19-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Subsea7 awarded contract offshore Norway
Luxembourg – 19 May 2025 - Subsea 7 S.A. (Oslo Børs: SUBC, ADR: SUBCY) today announced the award of a contract by the operator ConocoPhillips Skandinavia AS (ConocoPhillips) for a front-end engineering and design (FEED) study for the Previously Produced Fields (PPF) development project, offshore Norway. The project is granted under a new Framework Agreement between ConocoPhillips and Subsea7. The FEED study will finalise the technical definition of the proposed subsea development. Work will commence immediately in our office in Norway. If the development project passes final investment decision and is approved by the authorities, the operator can exercise an option to a large1 award of the subsea structures, umbilicals, risers and flowlines (SURF) scope under the Framework Agreement to Subsea7. Offshore installation activities associated with this contract would be scheduled for 2026 to 2029. The Previously Produced Fields are located in the Greater Ekofisk Area, approximately 290 kilometres southwest of Stavanger, Norway. The PPF development will be connected to the existing Ekofisk Complex. Erik Femsteinevik, Vice President for Subsea 7 Norway said: 'We are delighted to have signed a Framework Agreement with ConocoPhillips and have been awarded this initial FEED contract. The study will enable Subsea7 to engage early in the field development process, optimising design solutions and contributing to the final investment decision. We look forward to working closely with ConocoPhillips to unlock further value in the Greater Ekofisk Area'. Subsea7 defines a large contract as being between $300 million and $500 million. *******************************************************************************Subsea7 is a global leader in the delivery of offshore projects and services for the evolving energy industry, creating sustainable value by being the industry's partner and employer of choice in delivering the efficient offshore solutions the world is listed on the Oslo Børs (SUBC), ISIN LU0075646355, LEI 222100AIF0CBCY80AH62. ******************************************************************************* Contact for investment community enquiries:Katherine TonksInvestor Relations DirectorTel +44 20 8210 5568ir@ Contact for media enquiries:Jan Roger MoksnesCommunications ManagerTel +47 Forward-Looking Statements: This document may contain 'forward-looking statements' (within the meaning of the safe harbour provisions of the U.S. Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995). These statements relate to our current expectations, beliefs, intentions, assumptions or strategies regarding the future and are subject to known and unknown risks that could cause actual results, performance or events to differ materially from those expressed or implied in these statements. Forward-looking statements may be identified by the use of words such as 'anticipate', 'believe', 'estimate', 'expect', 'future', 'goal', 'intend', 'likely' 'may', 'plan', 'project', 'seek', 'should', 'strategy' 'will', and similar expressions. The principal risks which could affect future operations of the Group are described in the 'Risk Management' section of the Group's Annual Report and Consolidated Financial Statements. Factors that may cause actual and future results and trends to differ materially from our forward-looking statements include (but are not limited to): (i) our ability to deliver fixed price projects in accordance with client expectations and within the parameters of our bids, and to avoid cost overruns; (ii) our ability to collect receivables, negotiate variation orders and collect the related revenue; (iii) our ability to recover costs on significant projects; (iv) capital expenditure by oil and gas companies, which is affected by fluctuations in the price of, and demand for, crude oil and natural gas; (v) unanticipated delays or cancellation of projects included in our backlog; (vi) competition and price fluctuations in the markets and businesses in which we operate; (vii) the loss of, or deterioration in our relationship with, any significant clients; (viii) the outcome of legal proceedings or governmental inquiries; (ix) uncertainties inherent in operating internationally, including economic, political and social instability, boycotts or embargoes, labour unrest, changes in foreign governmental regulations, corruption and currency fluctuations; (x) the effects of a pandemic or epidemic or a natural disaster; (xi) liability to third parties for the failure of our joint venture partners to fulfil their obligations; (xii) changes in, or our failure to comply with, applicable laws and regulations (including regulatory measures addressing climate change); (xiii) operating hazards, including spills, environmental damage, personal or property damage and business interruptions caused by adverse weather; (xiv) equipment or mechanical failures, which could increase costs, impair revenue and result in penalties for failure to meet project completion requirements; (xv) the timely delivery of vessels on order and the timely completion of ship conversion programmes; (xvi) our ability to keep pace with technological changes and the impact of potential information technology, cyber security or data security breaches; (xvii) global availability at scale and commercially viability of suitable alternative vessel fuels; and (xviii) the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting. Many of these factors are beyond our ability to control or predict. Given these uncertainties, you should not place undue reliance on the forward-looking statements. Each forward-looking statement speaks only as of the date of this document. We undertake no obligation to update publicly or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or information is considered to be inside information pursuant to the EU Market Abuse Regulation and is subject to the disclosure requirements pursuant to Section 5-12 the Norwegian Securities Trading Act. This stock exchange release was published by Katherine Tonks, Investor Relations, Subsea7, on 19 May 2025 at 15:30 CET. Attachment SUBC PPFError in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Time of India
16-05-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
NSCN-IM chairman asks Nagas to stand by historic Framework Agreement
Dimapur: NSCN (IM) chairman Q Tuccu on Friday urged the Nagas to take the pledge once again to stand by the Framework Agreement it signed with the Govt of India on Aug 3, 2015, affirming that the pact was based on the historic declaration of Naga independence and Naga plebiscite. Delivering his speech at the 75th Naga Plebiscite Day celebration at the National Socialist Council of Nagalim (NSCN) headquarters at Camp Hebron, Tuccu said the historic Framework Agreement was signed cognizant of the unique history of the Nagas, which reveals the truth of the Naga declaration of independence and the Naga plebiscite, reaffirming the sovereign right of the Nagas to be an independent nation. "There's no going back to betray ourselves like falling off the cliff as devilishly planned by the Govt of India. Too many times the Govt of India has played with the Naga issue in the name of agreement after agreement," he said. Tuccu said enough harm has been done to kill the rights of the Nagas by creating many groups to counterweight the NSCN, the only authentic group that has firmly spearheaded the Naga political movement after the 'infamous Shillong Accord'. He said: "We are no novice to the divisive politics planted by the Indian agency." Tuccu accused the Govt of India of scheming a policy to destroy the Framework Agreement by placing it at the level of the Agreed Position of Nov 17, 2017. He said former interlocutor RN Ravi, representing the Govt of India, drafted the Agreed Position and made the working committee of the Naga National Political Groups (NNPGs) sign it. According to him, the NNPGS compromised the historical and political rights of the Nagas and agreed to accept the Indian Constitution-based Naga political solution. "Anything that is deceitfully planned against the sanctity of the Framework Agreement is not acceptable to the NSCN," Tuccu said. He reaffirmed that the Naga political solution and the Framework Agreement of Aug 3, 2015, cannot stay apart. Tuccu said any attempt to seek solution diluting the Framework Agreement is unacceptable.
