Home Blog Page 2036

Wizards shake up roster with trade for Kristaps Porzingis

pacers mavericks basketball 86133 c0 0 4216

The Washington Wizards, as the saying goes, blew it up.

The Wizards roster underwent a dramatic overhaul Thursday during the NBA trade deadline as Washington acquired center Kristaps Porzingis in exchange for guard Spencer Dinwiddie and forward Davis Bertans, shipped center Montrezl Harrell to the Charlotte Hornets for guard Ish Smith and center Vernon Carey Jr. and dealt guard Aaron Holiday to the Phoenix Suns for cash. 

The trades came just days after the Wizards shut down star Bradley Beal, who underwent season-ending wrist surgery Thursday, amid a disappointing campaign in which Washington (24-29) has lost eight of nine entering Thursday’s action.  After a strong 10-3 start, the Wizards sit outside the playoffs and the league’s play-in tournament. 

It was notable  — albeit expected —that the Wizards chose not to trade Beal, who can be a free agent this summer. These deals were likely made in an attempt to strengthen the roster in order to convince Beal to stay. The Wizards can offer Beal a five-year, $241 million contract if the 28-year-old opts out of his current deal. 

Of the trade, Porzingis’ acquisition may be the most intriguing. It wasn’t that long ago when the 2015 fourth-overall pick was hailed as a “unicorn” for his 7-foot-3 size and his versatile scoring ability. But Porzingis has suffered a litany of injuries and had become an awkward fit in Dallas, where he struggled to play alongside star Luka Doncic upon Porzingis’ trade from the Knicks in 2019.

This season, Porzingis is averaging 19.2 points per game along with 7.7 rebounds and 1.7 blocks. Injuries, though, remain a problem: The 26-year-old hasn’t played since Jan. 30 with right knee soreness and had missed 22 of the Mavericks’ 55 games with other various ailments.  It was not immediately clear when Porzingis would be eligible to play, or if the Wizards would possibly look to shut him down with Beal also out. 

Still, Porzingis is signed through the 2023-24 season and holds a player option for the last year of his five-year, $158.3 million contract. And if Beal re-signs, then Porzingis would theoretically present a capable co-star alongside the three-time All-Star.  Beyond his offense, Porzingis has become a reliable rim protector on defense. 

Besides Porzingis, Thursday’s moves for the Wizards were about trying to undo the damage of past deals.

For example, by sending Dinwiddie to Dallas, the Wizards moved on from a player it had acquired and signed to a three-year, $54 million contract just six months ago. Dinwiddie was a part of the multi-player package the Wizards received for guard Russell Westbrook. Coming off an ACL tear, Dinwiddie struggled to find a rhythm in Washington  — averaging just 12.6 points per game on 37.6% shooting.

Bertans, meanwhile, had recently fallen out of the Wizards’ rotation. That, obviously, is less than ideal circumstances for a team that signed Bertans to a five-year, $80 million contract in 2018. Bertans, a 3-point specialist, failed to live up to the deal, notably shooting just 31.9% from deep during last year’s playoffs. 

As part of the Porzingis package, the Wizards also reportedly got a second-round pick from the Mavericks. ESPN first reported the trade. 

Elsewhere, the Wizards moved on from Harrell and Holiday — both of whom were also acquired in last summer’s Westbrook trade. Harrell’s contract is set to expire after the season, while Holiday can opt out of his deal.

Harrell started this season off strong, playing a major role off the bench in the Wizards’ 10-3 start. But like the Wizards as a whole, Harrell’s performance started to trail off as the year progressed — scoring 19.5 points per game in October, 14.9 in November and then 11.9 in January.

By trading Harrell to Hornets, Washington got back a young 20-year-old center in Carey and reunited with Ish Smith, the journeyman point guard who was with the Wizards for the past two seasons. Smith signed with the Hornets in August. 

The Wizards got the deals done roughly 30 minutes before Thursday’s 3 p.m. deadline. They were among the number of teams active on what turned out to be a hectic day for the league. 

Outside of Washington, the Brooklyn Nets and the Philadelphia 76ers engaged in a blockbuster trade that sent James Harden to Philadelphia in exchange for Ben Simmons. Other players were involved in the deal, though the Harden-Simmons swap headline the trade that figures to shake up the NBA’s landscape. Both Philadelphia and Brooklyn are seen as viable contenders. 

Biden calls on Democrats to pass drug negotiation, extend Obamacare subsidies

Biden 83596.jpg 9dfcf c0 250 6000

President Biden leaned on Democratic senators Thursday to extend supersized Obamacare subsidies and give struggling American families “breathing room” on prescription costs through Medicare negotiation.

He made the appeal as he toured the U.S. in a desperate bid to grease the path for a legislative agenda that derailed on Capitol Hill.

“We pay the highest prescription drug prices of any developed nations in the world. The highest of any,” Mr. Biden said at Germanna Community College in Culpeper, Virginia, about 70 miles outside Washington. “Medicare can negotiate everything except drug prices.”

He cited a leukemia drug that costs $14,000 per month in the U.S. but $6,000 in France. The mismatch is replicated with other drugs, forcing Americans to make difficult economic decisions or ration medicine, according to the president.

“That’s just wrong. It’s simply wrong,” Mr. Biden said.

Many Americans consider drug prices to be way too high, so members of both parties have floated ideas to bring down prices. However, Congress has struggled to find a solution.

Mr. Biden wants the federal government to be allowed to negotiate prices for a set number of prescription drugs and require drug companies to pay rebates if they increase costs faster than inflation. He also wants to cap out-of-pocket drug costs for seniors on Medicare at $2,000 per year and insulin at $35 per month.

“We can do that with the stroke of a pen,” Mr. Biden said.

Mr. Biden faces a problem, though. The provisions he championed are in a $1.75 trillion social welfare and climate bill that passed the House but died in the evenly divided Senate because of opposition from centrist Democratic Sens. Joe Manchin III of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona.

The bill would also extend supersized Obamacare subsidies that made private insurance on the program more affordable.

A record 14.5 million people selected a health plan through Obamacare for 2022, including 300,000 Virginians who saw their premiums drop an average of 26% due to the bigger subsidies, which were included in the coronavirus-relief bill Democrats muscled to passage in early 2021.

“That’s more money staying in your pocket,” Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra told the Culpeper audience.

The bigger subsidies expire at the end of the year, so Mr. Biden is scrambling to extend them through 2025 in the massive spending bill known as the Build Back Better Act, which Democrats are now considering trying to pass in pieces.

It is unclear if the health provisions can get through the Senate or if they would move before other priorities, including universal pre-kindergarten, a child tax credit for families and climate change provisions.

Some patient advocates want Democrats to prioritize drug pricing while they hold narrow majorities in Congress.

“These drug pricing reforms are not controversial for the people of America; they are the most popular element of BBB. Over 80% of Americans support them — Democrats, Republicans and independents alike,” said David Mitchell, a blood-cancer patient and founder of Patients For Affordable Drugs Now whose drugs have a list price of over $900,000 per year. “The provisions before the Senate will help restore balance to ensure patients get the innovation they need at prices they can afford. All 50 Senate Democrats support the legislation; this is Congress’ chance to deliver on years of promises. This opportunity won’t come again soon.”

The pharmaceutical industry says the Democrats’ plan looks more like extortion than negotiation because it wields excise taxes against drugmakers who refuse to negotiate lower prices. They say the bill will result in fewer drugs entering the market and there are other fixes available, such as capping out-of-pocket costs in Medicare Part D and making sure any savings from negotiations are passed to consumers instead of middlemen.

The White House is unpersuaded by the industry’s arguments. It says provisions in Mr. Biden‘s big bill are exceedingly popular.

An October poll from the Kaiser Family Foundation found eight in 10 people favor letting the federal government negotiate prices for people on Medicare, including 52% who “strongly” favor it. Among Republicans, 44% strongly favor negotiation and 32% somewhat favor it compared to 23% who oppose the idea.

A Virginia mother, Shannon Davis, spoke Thursday about difficult it was to afford insulin for her son, Joshua, who has Type 1 diabetes.

“If insulin costs were capped at $35 per month,” she said, “this would be life-changing for our family not only for our family but for the millions of families impacted by diabetes.”

Health, The New York Today

Ukraine says Russian naval drills choking off trade

Turkey Russia Ships 26818.jpg e83e0 c0 0 3702

Ukrainian officials said Russian naval drills off its Black Sea coast are disrupting trade and hurting the economy, even as Russian and Belarusian forces began 10 days of major military exercises close to Ukraine’s northern border.

Oleg Nikolenko, spokesman for the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry, complained on Twitter that the Russian naval drills have put off-limits large swaths of the Black Sea and the Sea of Azov, effectively shutting down access to Ukrainian ports in the area.

“We strongly protest Russia‘s decision to block parts of the Black Sea, the Sea of Azov and the Kerch Strait under the pretext of naval drills,” Mr. Nikolenko said in a statement released Thursday on Twitter.

“The unprecedentedly large area of exercises essentially disables international navigation in both seas, leading to economic consequences in the region and for Ukrainian ports in particular,” he added. “We are working closely with partners to ensure that such aggressive actions of Russia as part of its hybrid warfare against Ukraine receive an appropriate response.”

Ukraine’s military is holding its own readiness training exercises Thursday in units and commands across the country, officials in Kyiv announced.

The Russian naval drills and the Belarusian exercises have only heightened concerns over the Kremlin’s intentions, adding to a recent build-up of more than 100,000 Russian troops and weaponry on three sides of Ukraine in recent months.

Russian officials deny any plans to invade, but are threatening unspecified consequences if the U.S. and NATO do not agree to demands to block Ukraine’s future members in the military alliance and to pull back Western troops from along Russia‘s border.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, in sometimes pointed exchanges with visiting British Foreign Secretary Liz Truss on Thursday, again defended recent military moves, saying Russia has the right to position its troops on its own territory and that of its allies.

“The demands to remove Russian troops from Russian territory were not changing in any way in response to our arguments,” Mr. Lavrov told a joint press conference in Moscow. “At the very least, this causes regret.”

Russia recently announced a six-day naval navigation warning for the Black Sea and the adjacent Sea of Azov, saying its navy planned missile and gunnery firing exercises starting Sunday.

As with the Belarusian troops’ exercises, the Kremlin says the missile drills follow established norms and will not disrupt commercial traffic.

SoftBank’s Woes Are Mounting

01claure expenses 1 facebookJumbo

For the past decade, SoftBank and its founder, Masayoshi Son, grabbed headlines mainly for the Japanese conglomerate’s eye-popping investments, becoming a fixture in the American technology scene by spending freely on start-ups and fundamentally reshaping how such companies had been funded.

There was the world’s largest tech investment fund. The billions of dollars pumped into WeWork, the co-working giant. And Mr. Son’s splashy purchase of one of Silicon Valley’s priciest homes.

Now, the bad news is piling up.

This week, SoftBank’s planned $40 billion sale of Arm, a chip designer, to Nvidia, the Silicon Valley chip maker, fell apart because of regulatory setbacks. Shares in a handful of big tech companies that SoftBank owns stakes in, from the Chinese internet giant Alibaba to DoorDash, the food delivery service, have plunged in recent months amid a wider sell-off in high-growth tech stocks. And one of Mr. Son’s key deputies, Marcelo Claure, left the firm in January after a bitter pay dispute — the latest senior executive to depart the firm in the past year.

The slump in SoftBank’s fortunes was reflected in its latest earnings report. The firm said its quarterly earnings fell 97 percent from a year earlier, although it managed to eke out a profit of $251 million during the three months that ended on Dec. 31. SoftBank’s shares, which trade publicly in Tokyo, stayed relatively flat this week, although they are already down by more than half in the past 12 months, as investors grow increasingly wary of SoftBank’s big bets that haven’t paid off.

Mr. Son, who is also SoftBank’s chief executive, acknowledged the firm’s troubles, especially its technology stock holdings. “The storm has not ended; the storm has gotten stronger,” he said in an earnings presentation. Still, he remained upbeat on the firm’s prospects, saying its latest investments put SoftBank at the center of the artificial intelligence “revolution.”

SoftBank’s performance also reflects the firm’s transformation in recent years from an operator of companies, mostly in telecommunications, to an investor in so-called disruptive technology companies, said Pierre Ferragu, an analyst at New Street Research.

Founded in 1981, SoftBank has been one of the biggest backers of start-ups in the United States and globally. After riding the 1990s dot-com boom and bust, Mr. Son largely retreated from American shores until the 2010s.

One of the first signs of his re-emergence came in 2012 when he purchased an estate in Woodside, Calif., for $117 million — one of Silicon Valley’s most expensive homes. He then bought a majority stake in the mobile carrier Sprint in 2013 for roughly $22 billion, installing Mr. Claure as chief executive the next year. Sprint later merged with T-Mobile.

By 2017, Mr. Son had raised $100 billion for the Vision Fund, billed as the largest technology fund ever. With nearly half the money coming from Saudi Arabia, it was SoftBank’s vehicle for large investments in high-growth tech companies such as Uber, DoorDash and WeWork.

Many of those investments are struggling in the public markets now because investors are selling tech stocks, concerned about interest rates rising soon. When rates go up, they put future growth in doubt, and tech companies, which are all about fast growth, are the first to get hit.

Coupang, South Korea’s answer to Amazon, is down nearly 40 percent. Didi, China’s ride-hailing company, has fallen even further, down roughly 70 percent — partly because of that country’s crackdown on its tech giants. SoftBank owns stakes in both companies, which trade on U.S. exchanges, although Didi plans to move its listing to Hong Kong. While SoftBank invested far below the initial public offering price of DoorDash, the delivery company — one of the best-performing stocks in 2021 — is now trading around its I.P.O. price.

The share price of SoftBank’s biggest holding, Alibaba, has dropped about 60 percent from its October 2020 high. SoftBank put more than $10 billion into WeWork, which went public last year and is now trading at less than $6 billion. And after the Arm deal with Nvidia collapsed, SoftBank plans to take the chip design company public instead.

“Even if they’re going through this pain at the moment, they’re still actually in the black,” Mr. Ferragu said of the firm’s latest results.

SoftBank has seen its share of internal turmoil, too. In recent months, at least four senior investors have left or announced plans to leave.

Last month, SoftBank also lost Mr. Claure, one of its highest-profile executives, after an acrimonious compensation battle. Mr. Claure, once a key deputy and close confidant of Mr. Son’s, had argued that his boss promised to pay him $2 billion over several years for his current and future work.

The two men were so close that Mr. Claure once prepared a slide for an investor presentation containing an image from the 1988 movie “Twins,” starring Arnold Schwarzenegger and Danny DeVito — except that the faces of Mr. Claure, who is about 6-foot-6, and Mr. Son, who is roughly a foot shorter, were superimposed on the images of the two actors, two people who viewed the presentation said.

Mr. Claure was also a big spender, often traveling by private jet and known to regularly rack up annual corporate expenses in the high seven figures, said three people familiar with his spending. One of the reasons he flew on private jets when he was executive chairman of WeWork was that SoftBank’s security team determined he was at high risk, one of the people said.

Over the past several years, he and his family have moved between Tokyo, Miami and New York — sometimes at SoftBank’s behest — with SoftBank footing many of those bills. Although that kind of spending raised eyebrows in Japan’s more conservative corporate culture, Mr. Son remained mostly tolerant.

In 2020, one of Mr. Claure’s longtime deputies complained of an abusive workplace. She left with a roughly $30 million payout from SoftBank, said three people with knowledge of the amount. Mr. Son continued to support Mr. Claure.

It wasn’t the first time SoftBank paid a big sum of money to wrap up a problem. In 2019, it announced a plan to pay Adam Neumann, a co-founder and the chief executive of WeWork, $180 million to give up voting control of the company, which was on the verge of bankruptcy. Mr. Claure negotiated that settlement directly with Mr. Neumann.

But Mr. Son refused to budge when Mr. Claure pushed for $2 billion in compensation. Mr. Claure told people that he and Mr. Son had signed a contract for his future compensation, three people briefed on the conversations said. The two men had been negotiating for months, with outside lawyers present. The teams exchanged heated words in an online mediation session in late December, two people briefed on the negotiations said. After that episode, there was little chance that Mr. Claure could stay on at SoftBank. The discussions turned to his departure.

His ultimate exit package included between $30 million and $40 million in severance, according to two people briefed on the arrangement. He will retain his stake in potential profits of SoftBank’s Latin America Fund, which he oversaw; the profits were recently estimated by SoftBank to be worth $300 million to $400 million.

In an investor presentation this week, Mr. Son thanked Mr. Claure for addressing challenges at Sprint and WeWork, but said that since SoftBank’s business model was evolving, it made sense to part ways with Mr. Claure.

Still, a hint of the acrimony was evident in late December when Mr. Claure said in a Twitter post: “People don’t leave their jobs or their companies. They leave their bosses. Treat the people who work for you right.”

Uber Says It’s Bouncing Back From Pandemic In Earnings Report

merlin 174443136 02fdb90e 4edb 48bc 98f8 ab70f1ad589b facebookJumbo

Uber said on Wednesday that growing revenue and returning passengers sent a strong signal that its business was bouncing back in the final three months of 2021 from the slowdown caused by the pandemic.

The quarter also provided another indication of how Uber’s fortunes rise and fall with its investments in other companies.

Uber’s revenue grew to $5.8 billion, an 83 percent increase from a year earlier, exceeding analyst expectations. The company also marked its second profitable quarter as a public company, earning $892 million largely from its investments in Grab, the Southeast Asian ride-hailing company that went public in December, and Aurora, the autonomous vehicle start-up.

Uber lost $968 million during the same period a year earlier and reported a loss of $2.4 billion in the third quarter of 2021 caused by its investment in Didi, the Chinese ride-hailing company.

Its investments in other ride-hailing companies would probably continue to cause fluctuation in its profits and losses, Uber said in its earnings report. Uber’s chief executive, Dara Khosrowshahi, said at a December analyst event that the company would hang on to some of its strategic investments but would eventually look to sell its stake in Didi.

Uber’s loss from operations for the quarter was $550 million, a 37 percent improvement from a year earlier.

Uber said it was attracting a growing number of users by relying on its food delivery business, Uber Eats, to bring in business during spikes in coronavirus cases, when its ride-hailing business declined. Uber reported 118 million users during the fourth quarter, a 27 percent increase from a year earlier.

“Our results demonstrate just how far we’ve come since the beginning of the pandemic,” Mr. Khosrowshahi said in a statement. “While the Omicron variant began to impact our business in late December, mobility is already starting to bounce back.”

Uber’s stock price was up about 5 percent in after-hours trading on Wednesday.

The growth in users sets Uber apart from its primary rival in the United States, Lyft. In an earnings report on Tuesday, Lyft said it had 18.7 million users during the fourth quarter, a 49 percent increase from a year earlier but a slight decrease from the third quarter. The modest decline in users showed that the winter wave of Omicron might have presented more challenges to Lyft’s business.

Still, Lyft said that its revenue had grown by 70 percent, to $969.9 million, and that its losses had improved to $258.6 million, a 43 percent change from a year earlier.

Analysts said Uber’s and Lyft’s businesses would most likely continue to fluctuate as travel was affected by the pandemic.

“It’s going to ebb and flow,” said Tom White, a senior research analyst with the financial firm D.A. Davidson. While Lyft’s business was tied to coronavirus conditions in North America, Uber could experience other issues because it operates around the world, he added.

Twitter’s Mixed Fourth-Quarter Earnings Show Challenges Ahead

10economy briefing twitter facebookJumbo

Last year, Twitter executives set ambitious goals for their company, with hopes of attracting more than 100 million new users and doubling revenue by 2023. The last three months of 2021, however, showed the challenges the company must overcome before it can hit its objectives.

Twitter said on Thursday that its revenue grew more slowly than analysts had expected in the last quarter of 2021, and the company predicted that it would report a loss in the current quarter. But it added new users, potentially easing concerns that it was having a hard time drawing interest in an increasingly diverse market for social media.

Twitter reported revenue of $1.56 billion in the final three months of 2021, a 22 percent increase from a year earlier but lower than analyst expectations. Twitter said it had earned $176 million in income, a 34 percent decline from a year earlier. The company said it had 217 million daily active users who see ads, a 13 percent increase.

Twitter also announced that its board had authorized a $4 billion buyback of its stock. The company plans to repurchase $2 billion of its shares on what it described as an accelerated timeline, with the remaining $2 billion to be purchased over time. The plan follows a $2 billion buyback that was authorized in 2020, although $819 million of that program remained unspent.

“It represents confidence in our strategy and execution,” Ned Segal, Twitter’s chief financial officer, said of the share repurchasing plan. “We are putting our money where our mouth is.”

Twitter has said it plans to grow rapidly over the next two years, reaching 315 million daily active users and $7.5 billion in annual revenue by the end of 2023.

The company added one million daily active users in the United States in the fourth quarter, and five million users internationally. Its total revenue in 2021 was $5.08 billion, a 37 percent increase from the previous year.

Twitter’s stock price swung wildly last week when Facebook’s parent company, Meta, said privacy changes introduced by Apple had dampened its advertising business. Investors viewed Meta’s earnings report as a bellwether for the social media industry, but Twitter said Apple’s privacy changes had a minimal impact on its advertising business.

“Our strong 2021 performance positions us to improve execution and deliver on our 2023 goals,” Parag Agrawal, Twitter’s new chief executive, said in a statement. “We are more focused and better organized to deliver improved personalization and selection for our audience, partners and advertisers.”

The Life (and House) That Street Racing Built

00wheels streetrace1 facebookJumbo

Long after sundown one day 44 years ago, 21-year-old Kevin Lawrence stepped out of his ’68 Chevelle onto a sparsely traveled road just beyond Chicago’s suburban sprawl. After hushed negotiations with another young man, he settled into his car and ignited an engine that barked powerfully before settling into a bass-beat idle. He switched on the headlights, illuminating 50 feet of road. I jabbed at the shutter of a beat-up camera, clicking off frames as my flash defied the darkness.

Mr. Lawrence — a fishing hat atop his head — was intently focused on the road ahead. To his right was a Camaro with huge rear racing slicks. A few dozen young people were gathered on the roadside; among them was his wife and racing partner, Pam Pappas Lawrence.

A raised hand fell, and both cars screamed off into the darkness, accelerating to 120 miles an hour in 12 seconds just as flashing police lights rushed in from behind. The spectators jumped into their cars and followed the racers. I did likewise. A few stragglers were pulled over and subsequently released after insisting they didn’t know the offenders.

Earlier that night, dozens of teenagers and 20-somethings had gathered at Duke’s Drive-In in Bridgeview, just outside Chicago, to show off their hopped-up cars and perhaps earn some cash in contests of acceleration on the street. On that August 1977 evening, the crowd was large, with outrageous machinery occupying every available space and spilling onto Harlem Avenue. The group had heard that an aspiring journalist would be on hand, documenting the drive-in’s reputation as a hotbed of illegal street racing for “Hi-Performance CARS,” a long-gone magazine that targeted the outlaw fringes of the hot-rod hobby.

Cars were an obsession for many at that place and time. Social media and the internet weren’t even on the horizon. The athletes stayed busy with sports, but for many others there were cars. Teenagers of all stripes spent their free time under the hood, busting knuckles to make their car drivable. Once it could move under its own power, they would work harder still to make it faster. And hopefully the fastest.

Mr. Lawrence, now 65 and living in Palos Hills, Ill., was among the fastest at the drive-in that night. He was an automotive veteran. At 12 he had tagged along with an uncle who worked at a body shop. There, he swept the floor and went along on tows. Soon he learned to repair crumpled cars. But he was intrigued by the mechanical side of things, so his uncle taught him to rebuild engines.

They built a modified car — a Ford Starliner with a hopped-up V-8 — and it performed better than most muscle cars on occasional drag strip runs. But a day at the track was a major undertaking. After an early rise there was the 45-mile trip to the U.S. 30 drag strip in Merrillville, Ind., where there were entry fees and long hours waiting in line to make two or three runs over a 10-hour day.

After high school, Mr. Lawrence was hired by P&G Engineering, a shop owned by a local pro racer. He furthered his automotive education, as he rebuilt carburetors, performed tuneups and ran a dynamometer that measured the rear-wheel horsepower of customers’ cars.

Access to the dyno and the other resources at P&G proved invaluable as Mr. Lawrence was building a hot rod of his own — the 1968 Chevelle SS. The original 396-cubic-inch V-8 gave way to a 454-incher with dual four-barrel carbs.

With more than 500 horses on tap, it was quick. The dyno confirmed its potential, and Duke’s helped Mr. Lawrence put it to the test, often with substantial sums on the line. The drive-in provided camaraderie as well.

“The guys and gals who hung out at Duke’s watched out for each other,” Mr. Lawrence said. “We competed, but we were friends, and when unknowns showed up looking for a race, we took them on.”

After the photo of Mr. Lawrence and his street-racing Chevelle appeared in the magazine, racers from metro Chicago and beyond traveled to Duke’s to challenge him and others, who proudly wore jackets emblazoned with “Duke’s Drive In, home of thee fastest street cars.”

Mr. Lawrence competed on the street for more than 10 years — winning about 90 percent of his races and developing a reputation as a guy to beat if you wanted to make a name for yourself among Chicago’s street racing fraternity. He still worked days as a mechanic, but the race winnings helped make life better for the Lawrences’ growing family, which now included two daughters, Danielle and Nicole — both of whom would eventually see success behind the wheel of race cars.

Mr. Lawrence was pulled over numerous times while racing. “The officer usually gave me a variety of tickets,” he said. “I once decided to contest a ticket for 125 miles per hour in a 50-mile-per-hour zone. The judge called me into his chamber and said in so many words: ‘You don’t want to do this. Pay the ticket and be quiet.’ I followed his advice that day and thereafter.”

“I made enough money street racing to put together a down payment on my house,” he said. “Then I called it quits.”

“I kind of grew up,” Mr. Lawrence added. “At one time, street racing, as we practiced it on the Southwest side of suburban Chicago, was relatively safe. We raced on rural roads devoid of houses and businesses, and we closed the road to what little traffic there was. But eventually there was more development in our area, which brought in more traffic. What’s more, street racing was illegal. As my girls reached school age, I wanted them to understand that breaking the law has consequences.”

But Mr. Lawrence didn’t lose either his love of automobiles or his desire to compete, so he teamed up with his buddy Scott Fulkerson on a National Hot Rod Association Pro Stock car.

Pro Stock drag racing cars look like passenger cars, but they’re sophisticated race cars with an exactingly engineered tube chassis under the body and a highly modified drivetrain. Capable of accelerating to 200 m.p.h. in seven seconds, they have virtually nothing in common with the production cars they resemble.

Jumping from the street to Pro Stock — the most competitive class of N.H.R.A. drag racing — was a formidable challenge. In the 1990s, when Mr. Lawrence and Mr. Fulkerson leaped into the fray, the fasted and slowest cars in the fields of 16 were often separated by just a tenth of a second. And it wasn’t uncommon for as many as 40 well-financed cars to compete for those 16 spots.

Unlike its big-dollar competitors, the fledgling team operated out of the garage behind Mr. Lawrence’s house, just as he had in his street-racing days. Ms. Lawrence, who had always been her husband’s right-hand woman, pitched in, and soon their two daughters were lending a hand as well.

In 1997, Mr. Fulkerson married, and racing wasn’t part of the plan. That made finances even tougher. The competition was spending thousands a week on research and equipment. Mr. Lawrence was trying to compete on a small fraction of that.

He recalls that 36 cars vied to qualify for a 16-car field at Memphis. The 16th qualifier covered a quarter-mile in 6.803 seconds. Mr. Lawrence was No. 21 at 6.806.

Finally, in his last two years racing, he qualified his Pro Stock Chevrolet Cobalt for an event. His pit crew, now with over a dozen friends and relatives, erupted. Tears of joy were shed. He would go on to qualify again, but his tank was nearing empty.

“I tried and tried,” Mr. Lawrence said, but he was exhausted. Facing better-funded teams, he added, “I bailed and sold everything.”

But that wasn’t the end: Enter nostalgia racing — a brand of quarter-mile competition featuring facsimiles of great cars of years past, raced for a guaranteed fee at booked-in shows. Mr. Lawrence built a near-perfect reproduction of one of the most famous Pro Stock cars of all time, Warren Johnson’s Oldsmobile Cutlass. Mr. Johnson was one of the N.H.R.A.’s winningest drivers for many years. He and his wife, Arlene, contributed technical advice, team uniforms, decals and more.

In shakedown runs, the car recorded 6.8-second quarter-mile times at over 200 m.p.h. That’s virtually unheard-of for a new car and testimony to the fruits of Mr. Lawrence’s 40-plus years of racing experience and the expert help he gets from his family.

“I’ll run five or six nostalgia Pro Stock shows with the Cutlass this year, but it will be a family affair,” Mr. Lawrence said. “My daughters are busy moms, so they no longer race, but they are part of my crew and are training the next generation of Lawrence family drivers.”

At many events, Mr. Lawrence’s grandchildren, including 10-year-old Katelyn, 9-year-old Johnny and 8-year-old Sydney, will drive Lawrence-family-built junior dragsters — essentially, go-karts that look like dragsters.

It’s in their blood.

A New Look for ‘Ulysses’

10ulysses10 facebookJumbo

MADRID — James Joyce once said that he hoped his groundbreaking and famously challenging novel “Ulysses” would “keep the professors busy for centuries arguing over what I meant.”

Since its publication 100 years ago, nearly every line has certainly continued to puzzle his readers. There has also been debate over whether the book could be illustrated, and which artist might take it on. Now, a new edition of “Ulysses” is presenting the work under a fresh light.

Timed to commemorate the centennial of Sylvia Beach’s publication of “Ulysses” in Paris, this new edition contains over 300 images by Eduardo Arroyo, a celebrated Spanish painter and graphic artist who died of cancer in 2018. Fascinated by “Ulysses,” Arroyo said in a 1991 essay that imagining the illustrations kept him alive when he was hospitalized in the late 1980s for peritonitis, an inflammation of the abdominal lining.

This new “Ulysses” edition was published late last month in both Spanish and English, by Galaxia Gutenberg, a Spanish publisher based in Barcelona, and Other Press, an independent publisher in New York. The book’s release — more than three decades after Arroyo produced his images — was long delayed because of copyright disputes.

Arroyo had initially hoped that his drawings, watercolors and collages could be published as a new “Ulysses” in 1991, to mark the 50th anniversary of Joyce’s death. But Joyce’s estate opposed the idea of an illustrated edition. Without that approval, Arroyo initially had to limit himself to printing his images in a book based on Joyce’s work, written by the Spanish author Julían Ríos.

Arroyo was able to reignite his “Ulysses” project only a decade ago, after the novel entered the public domain and Joyce’s heirs could no longer stop him from using the original text. Stephen Joyce, the grandson and last direct descendant of the author, died in 2020.

Joan Tarrida, the publisher of Galaxia Gutenberg, said in an interview that it was unclear exactly why Stephen Joyce had opposed an illustrated edition, given that his grandfather had sought to convince two of the most famous artists of his time to produce artwork for his novel.

Joyce was turned down by Pablo Picasso — probably on the advice of his friend Gertrude Stein, who was no fan of Joyce, according to Tarrida. He did not fare much better with Henri Matisse, who was more interested in illustrating the “Odyssey” and its ancient Greek heroes than “Ulysses,” whose structure mirrors that of Homer’s epic poem.

Still, after an American judge in 1933 removed an import ban on “Ulysses,” which had been censored on grounds of obscenity, Matisse accepted a $5,000 offer from George Macy, an American publisher, to incorporate a few of his “Odyssey” etchings into an illustrated, limited and deluxe edition of “Ulysses.” In 2019, a copy of Macy’s edition was sold at auction by Christie’s for $13,750.

Meanwhile, signed copies of Beach’s 1922 edition of “Ulysses” have been among the most expensive 20th-century first-edition books sold, fetching over $400,000. The new edition retails for $75.

Right up to his death, Arroyo worked on the book’s draft with Tarrida, who had also previously published some of Arroyo’s writings. Other Press joined the project after Judith Gurewich, its publisher, accidentally came across some of Arroyo’s drawings during a visit to Tarrida’s office in 2018.

While waiting for him, “I saw all these exceptional paintings and drawings strewn across the room, and I just fell in love with them,” she said in a phone interview.

After completing his “Ulysses” images, Arroyo wrote an essay in 1991 to explain his fascination with the novel, as well as how difficult he found it to turn Joyce’s words into images, leaving him worried at one point that “Ulysses” would “finish what the peritonitis had not achieved.”

He added: “At various moments I came close to throwing in the towel, to finally free myself forever from such a sizable enterprise.”

Tarrida said that readers could treat Arroyo’s artwork as “a parallel reading” to Joyce’s words. Gurewich said that she would even recommend that first-time “Ulysses” readers admire Arroyo’s vibrant watercolors and evocative drawings and then try to link them to a specific passage in the novel, rather than start by reading the text.

“You can look at an illustration and then find on the page what Arroyo picked to illustrate,” she said. “If you’re intimidated by ‘Ulysses’ — as I am — this is a very fun way to reconstruct the book.”

Just as Joyce used an array of styles to write “Ulysses,” Arroyo deployed a range of techniques to represent the author’s characters as they meander through Dublin, from paper collage to ink and watercolor.

Some of Arroyo’s black-and-white illustrations are printed in the margins of the book’s pages, while others are double-page paintings whose vivid colors are reminiscent of the Pop Art that inspired him. He also filled his version of “Ulysses” with eclectic images of shoes and hats, bulls and bats, as well as some sexually explicit representations of scenes that drew the wrath of censors a century ago.

Megan Quigley, an assistant professor of English who teaches in the Irish Studies program at Villanova University, said that she welcomed the release of an illustrated “Ulysses.”

“I tell my students to find anything they can that will help us to understand Joyce’s master novel — literature or music mentioned, historical references, later novelists influenced by Joyce (like Sally Rooney), maps, charts, previous minds who have tussled and argued and written about Joyce in everything from scholarly articles to blogs and fanfic,” she said in an email. “Joyce’s universe is one for the obsessive reader who will find any clues to chart their way through the novel.”

She added: “I’m happy to throw my hat in to support an edition of ‘Ulysses’ with images.”

Former Senior Director of Nike joins Norwegian SmartWear company VOTWear

Former Global Senior market place director of 33 years at Nike, Frank Chase has  just set his eyes on his next venture, joining the VOTWears advisory board.
Chase helped pioneer Nike into the world’s greatest fitness brand in the 80s with revolutionaries Phil Knight and Sonny Vaccaro, and transformed the way we know the brand today. This year, according to our sources he has decided to join the advisory board of VOTWear, “The Smart Training Apparel Brand of the Year 2021″ according to the Global Healthcare & Pharma Magazine. A few years back, VOTWear won the “Invention of the year 2019” award during the Medical Congress by the Union of Practitioners for Complementary and Alternative medicine setting the company apart from other competitors in the field.

In the 1980s, Nike changed the game – literally. Innovating sneaker and clothing technology was all Nike spent doing in the 80s, and Frank Chase was one of the cornerstones for the success. Before it was the multi-billion dollar machine that it is today, Nike was designing new models of shoes and sponsoring colleges and sports teams, trying to innovate training and sportswear however they could. Frank Chase, who has even had part in designing a few of Nike’s innovative shoes, starting by being a key salesman for larger accounts, working his way to the Western US Sales Director and eventually becoming a senior director and the US Marketplace Sales Director. Chase recently retired in 2020 and has decided to lend all his knowledge and expertise to a new and upcoming brand, VOTWear, a SmartWear brand that brought us the world’s first bfr-training wear. Allegedly, VOTWear and Chase have entered a partnership, where he will be acting heavily on the advisory board.

“It would be an honor to be a part of the Advisory board,” Chase said of his addition, made by VOTWear Co founder and executive Chairman Dr. Mehdi Ettehadulhagh.

VOTWear was created by a small Oslo-based team of 5 doctors, 4 pro-athletes, 2 medical students and 1 physiotherapist, and has grown into a multi-continental based brand in the last years while just breaking the barrier. VOTWear has innovated Blood Flow Restriction (BFR) Training by innovating textile engineered BFR-bands that are integrated directly into the upper arm of their SmartWear, as well as equivalent innovations soon rolling out for their tights. This general training technique of occlusion training has been endorsed and used by NFL and pro athletes alike for a better workout, and for an increased recovery time when injured. The HTM1 (Hypertrophy manually-adjustable 1) was their first smart wear tech invention to hit the market – and with more upcoming, VOTWear has predicted to disrupt the market. Seen in multiple sites from, ABC, GQ, Wired, The Wall Street Journal and many more, the brand’s next step after becoming the world’s first award winning and leading occlusion training smart wear is just adding more fuel to the rocketship.

When VOTWear was created by Dr. Mehdi Ettehadulhagh in 2019 with his brothers, they had a vision about what role clothing should play in our daily lives, and what working out would become, what it should be, and how that is possible. After assembling a team of pro athletes, doctors, and physiotherapists, they came up with the breakthrough product, the HTM1 Shirt. Innovation in smartwear is Dr. Ettehadulhagh’s mission and goal for VOTWear. BFR training is relatively new to the market, but is quickly being adopted in gyms around the world, and brands eyeing VOTWear are looking to compete with the revolutionary company. With Frank Chase’s experience and knowledge for incredible innovation in smartwear, by joining the VOT Team there is no telling explosive things might get in the coming months to years!

Perhaps even keep an eye out for when this private brand hits the nasdaq. You can read more about VOTWear by visiting their official website votwear.com.

COVID-19 funding spends little to fight actual virus

AP21114715478770 c0 241 5793

This is the first in a six-part series on “two years and counting” for the coronavirus.

Congress has approved about $6 trillion for the fight against COVID-19, or more than it spent to defeat Nazi Germany and imperial Japan in World War II.

Yet Uncle Sam has spent only a small fraction of that money — 15% or less, depending on who’s counting — on beating the coronavirus itself.

The $50 billion or so aimed at vaccines and therapeutics is less than Congress allocated for an Obamacare expansion, tucked into the same pandemic spending bills. Another $53 billion allocated to coronavirus testing and monitoring is dwarfed by an $81 billion bailout for private pension funds that Democrats stuck inside their massive American Rescue Plan bill last year.

“On overall levels of spending, we missed badly,” said Andrew Lautz, director of federal policy at the National Taxpayers Union. “I don’t want to suggest the federal government should have spent nothing. This was a multitrillion-dollar public health and economic problem that very likely over the course of several years required a multitrillion-dollar response. I think $5 trillion was an overshoot.”

Congress has approved six bills with significant pandemic relief funds. Mr. Lautz figures only about 15% of the money has gone toward public health measures.

The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget figures it’s less than that — about $300 billion, which works out to about 5% of the money Congress approved.

It turns out that the relief may not have been enough. As the country enters its third year of the pandemic, the White House and congressional Democrats have said they will need to come back to taxpayers for a seventh pandemic spending package.

The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget runs the COVID Money Tracker website, a one-stop shop for understanding the broad outlines of pandemic spending. It shows that even as money for unemployment benefits, assistance to small businesses and cash for state and local governments sped out the door, the public health spending lagged.

“Some of this is by design,” said Marc Goldwein, the senior vice president and senior policy director at CRFB. “Sometimes it’s spending slow because it’s supposed to spend over a period of time or because people expect it to.”

Whatever the reasons, the spending decisions Congress has made have received less attention than philosophical debates over masking and vaccine mandates. Still, they are no less central to combating COVID-19.

The effects of the spending surge last for decades. In February 2020, just as the novel coronavirus was beginning to spread across the U.S., federal public debt stood at $17.2 trillion. It’s now hovering around $23.4 trillion.

Turning on the money spout

To win World War II, Uncle Sam spent nearly $300 billion in 1940s money, according to the Congressional Research Service. Adjusting for inflation, that works out to about $5 trillion, by far the costliest war in U.S. history.

That bought 47 billion rounds of ammunition, 12 million infantry rifles, 300,000 aircraft, more than 200 submarines and plenty of other war machinery.

COVID-19 tops that.

The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget says Congress has approved $5.7 trillion, with $4.9 trillion disbursed or committed. The executive branch has made another $900 billion in administrative moves, and the Federal Reserve’s monetary response tops $7 trillion, CRFB says.

CRFB says the spending roughly breaks down to $1.4 trillion in grants and loans to businesses; $906 billion to directly support Americans through unemployment benefits, student loan delays and food assistance; $869 billion for stimulus checks; $662 billion for all health spending, which goes well beyond fighting COVID-19; $572 billion in tax changes; and $884 billion for states and localities.

That last category has proved particularly controversial, given that most states have generated strong revenue during the pandemic.

Other estimates put total COVID-19 relief spending slightly lower than the CRFB’s numbers. The National Taxpayers Union calculates that spending and tax cuts have totaled $5.1 trillion. The Government Accountability Office said Congress has allocated $4.6 trillion, obligated about $4 trillion and spent $3.5 trillion.

Whatever the figure, it’s about to grow once President Biden submits his request for another round of money.

Lawmakers on Capitol Hill are pondering whether to attach it to the catchall spending bill they want to pass by Feb. 18.

The bigger question is whether the money would be added to what has already been allocated or whether Republicans can force Democrats to recapture COVID-19 money Congress has approved but the administration hasn’t spent.

Lawmakers also will have to figure out how much to spend on public health in the U.S., how much to spend on programs around the world and whether to attempt another round of economic stimulus.

Early in the pandemic, that question was easy.

Mr. Lautz said the first bill Congress passed, an $8 billion measure in March 2020, was about 75% for public health. The second bill, a $200 billion measure approved a couple of weeks after that, was about 80% for health.

The next four bills got into far more than health, which never topped 20% of the total spending, Mr. Lautz said.

“Congress really shifted from a primary public health focus on their COVID relief legislation to an economic relief focus,” he said.

The self-described budget wonk said he doesn’t know whether enough money went to health spending, but 15% seems the wrong balance.

It’s worth asking whether the U.S. got its money’s worth from the spending.

As of October, according to the International Monetary Fund, the world had spent a total of $10.8 trillion to grapple with the pandemic, with about $1.5 trillion going to health measures. The U.S. accounts for about half of that spending.

Measured another way, the U.S. has spent about 25% of gross domestic product on the pandemic and currently has a death rate of about 2,700 per 1 million people. South Korea has spent 6.4% of its GDP, and its death rate is 134 people per 1 million — 20 times better.

Poland, whose death rate is similar to that of the U.S., spent 6.5% of GDP on COVID-19 measures.

Vaccine makers rake in cash

Health experts now say the virus is here to stay and suggest annual vaccine boosters may be needed.

That is fueling questions about whether pandemic spending is a permanent part of the federal budget.

With more than 9 billion doses of vaccines administered globally, and more than 500 million in the U.S. alone, the manufacturers have had a windfall and believe demand is just beginning.

“Today, we are reasonably certain that SARS-CoV-2 is here to stay,” Kathrin Jansen, Pfizer’s head of vaccine research and development, said in a December call with investors.

Pfizer, which developed its vaccine, Comirnaty, in an alliance with German firm BioNTech, shipped 2.4 billion doses to more than 160 countries in 2021 and posted $36.8 billion in revenue from the vaccine last year.

Governments around the globe had secured contracts for 1.9 billion more doses in 2022 as of the end of last year, for another $32 billion in revenue, and Pfizer expects the year’s total to reach 4 billion doses.

Johnson & Johnson, with about 3.5% market share in the U.S., is projecting $2.4 billion in sales in 2021.

Other U.S. manufacturers stand to post significant profits from the vaccine in 2021 as well.

Moderna, which produces the second-leading shot in the U.S., said it shipped 807 million doses worldwide in 2021 and raked in an expected $17.5 billion in revenue.

The company has signed about $18.5 billion in advanced purchase agreements for 2022, with an additional $3.5 billion in options, according to figures presented at the J.P. Morgan Health Care Conference in January.

It’s not just the drug manufacturers getting federal cash.

The Biden administration in recent weeks announced the purchase of 500 million rapid tests to be doled out to Americans for use at home, at a cost of $4 billion.

The White House is pulling 400 million N95-style masks from the national stockpile. At nearly $6 a mask — the rate the government is paying during the pandemic — the price tag is more than $2 billion.

Competition coming

If Pfizer’s projections are correct, demand for annual revaccination shots would outpace annual flu vaccines, valued at more than $5 billion globally in 2020, well beyond 2024. That’s when COVID-19 is expected to become endemic.

Pfizer says it is well-postured for a more competitive market, especially one that will be forced to respond to evolving variants, given its messenger-RNA platform used for its COVID-19 vaccine. Moderna’s vaccine is also an mRNA-type vaccine.

The technology, which has been studied for decades but became available to the public only with the fielding of COVID-19 vaccines, allows companies to update their vaccines quicker to respond to new strains of the virus. Pfizer has said it can update its vaccine to respond to new strains within 100 days.

James Love, director of Knowledge Ecology International, a Washington-based nongovernmental organization focused on access to medical technology and trade policy, said the technology will not necessarily remain competitive.

“The question is: Can they come up with new variant vaccines as fast as new variants come up?” he said.

He said the technology undoubtedly will be important in the future but has by no means made other technologies obsolete. Legacy vaccine technologies are still in play for effective responses to the virus, he said.

These tried-and-true technologies, in many cases, are far more accessible for companies that don’t have the deep pockets needed to get the technology off the ground.

“In the booster market right now, you see people working on vaccines right now that are not messenger-RNA,” he said. “These are Big Pharma companies, and so they must think like we do: that messenger-RNA is not the only game in town.

“I think it will be more competitive than people think,” Mr. Love said.

Congress soon might have answers about the vaccine market if lawmakers include funding for future booster shots in the COVID-19 spending package.

Under contracts already in place, the U.S. has the option of buying 1.2 billion doses, according to a spokesperson for the Department of Health and Human Services.

When or where Uncle Sam’s cutoff line is, nobody knows.

“To date, [the government has] made a commitment that they’re going to be buying vaccines for people in the United States,” Mr. Goldwein said. “The question is: When, if ever, does that shift?

“This could be the type of thing that ultimately goes on the Federal Reserve’s balance sheet and they are paying for COVID vaccines for the next 200 years,” he said. “That’s one possibility. The other possibility is that, at some point, they say the public health emergency is over. But as of now, my assumption is the federal government is intending to cover Americans’ vaccine expenses for the foreseeable future.”

For more information, visit The Washington Times COVID-19 resource page.