Submitted by QTR’s Fringe Finance

Cracker Barrel is learning the same lesson Bud Light did: fat, bearded, gun toting middle Americans not only dislike change — especially the “woke” kind — but will also turn on you for taking a staple brand they love and pile-driving it into the ground.

Today Cracker Barrel’s stock cratered more than 10% after the company unveiled a rebrand that scrapped its iconic barrel-and-man logo in favor of a sterile, text-only “woker” design minus the old white guy and the…well, cracker barrel.

The move, pushed by CEO Julie Felss Masino, has triggered furious backlash from customers, conservatives, and investors alike, with many calling it the chain’s “Bud Light moment. And me, just calling it grossly f**king incompetent.

I mean, honestly. How do you become goddamn CEO of Cracker Barrel without understanding that this is your demographic? If you asked me to find me a woke Democrat in this crowd, I couldn’t. If you asked me to find someone who does their own plumbing or shot a deer before 6AM the day this photo was taken, I could simply point to anyone — including the women.

How does the company’s CEO just not walk into one of their own restaurants and open their eyes? How does she not understand that nobody has ever said, “Let’s pull off at Exit 49 for a plate of woke minimalism.”

People go for biscuits the size of baseball mitts, kitschy décor that hasn’t changed since Nixon, and that faint smell of maple syrup soaked into the walls. Instead, the CEO has singlehandedly torched decades of brand identity with a text-only logo that looks like it was spit out by a bored intern with Microsoft Word.

The backlash has been ferocious. Meanwhile, CEO Julie Felss Masino is insisting the feedback has been “overwhelmingly positive,” which is corporate-speak for “I muted my notifications yesterday morning and set my e-mail to my ‘out of office’ reply”.

This is the executive leading a $700 million “modernization” push to swap cozy country stores for sterile farmhouse chic. In other words, the woman who thought you could make Cracker Barrel better by making it look less like Cracker Barrel.

Masino’s vision is essentially to strip away the hokey charm and replace it with something she clearly believes will appeal to “younger, more diverse diners.” The menu is being tinkered with too—lighter options, healthier twists, a nod to “evolving tastes.”

But here’s the obvious question: did she learn nothing from Bud Light? After watching the number-one beer in America self-immolate by alienating its core base, Masino still thought bulldozing nostalgia in favor of bland “relevance” was a stroke of genius?

That’s not bold leadership—that’s corporate malpractice.

Forget about not having a case study back at Harvard Business School to remember. Bud Light walked this exact plank literally just 2 years ago when it decided to suddenly pivot into a progressive rebrand via Dylan Mulvaney.

🔥 50% OFF FOR LIFE: Using this coupon entitles you to 50% off an annual subscription to Fringe Finance for life: Get 50% off forever

The fallout was brutal: sales cratered, Modelo swooped in as the new king of American beer, and over a year later Bud Light is still limping like a horse that should have been put down. Ex-Anheuser-Busch execs admit it hasn’t recovered at all. And here’s the kicker—once you lose that loyal customer, they don’t come back. People who think salisbury steak is gourmet eating will switch to Modelo or, in Cracker Barrel’s case, literally any other highway diner, and they’ll never think twice about it.

The stock immediately plunging more than 10% should be all the impetus the board of directors needs to show Julie Felss Masino the door immediately and try and save its brand. How can anyone with a straight face defend this gamble after the smoking ruins of Bud Light and even Jaguar’s own branding fiascos showed what happens when you gut your brand’s entire identity to chase “relevance”?

This isn’t bold leadership, it’s gross incompetence. In one trading session she managed to vaporize over $100 million in shareholder value. One day. So the $700 million renovation now has costed $800 million. If wiping out nine figures in value with a single rebrand isn’t grounds for termination, what exactly is?

QTR’s Disclaimer: Please read my full legal disclaimer on my About page here. This post represents my opinions only. In addition, please understand I am an idiot and often get things wrong and lose money. I may own or transact in any names mentioned in this piece at any time without warning. Contributor posts and aggregated posts have been hand selected by me, have not been fact checked and are the opinions of their authors. They are either submitted to QTR by their author, reprinted under a Creative Commons license with my best effort to uphold what the license asks, or with the permission of the author.

This is not a recommendation to buy or sell any stocks or securities, just my opinions. I often lose money on positions I trade/invest in. I may add any name mentioned in this article and sell any name mentioned in this piece at any time, without further warning. None of this is a solicitation to buy or sell securities. I may or may not own names I write about and are watching. Sometimes I’m bullish without owning things, sometimes I’m bearish and do own things. Just assume my positions could be exactly the opposite of what you think they are just in case. If I’m long I could quickly be short and vice versa. I won’t update my positions. All positions can change immediately as soon as I publish this, with or without notice and at any point I can be long, short or neutral on any position. You are on your own. Do not make decisions based on my blog. I exist on the fringe. If you see numbers and calculations of any sort, assume they are wrong and double check them. I failed Algebra in 8th grade and topped off my high school math accolades by getting a D- in remedial Calculus my senior year, before becoming an English major in college so I could bullshit my way through things easier.

The publisher does not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of the information provided in this page. These are not the opinions of any of my employers, partners, or associates. I did my best to be honest about my disclosures but can’t guarantee I am right; I write these posts after a couple beers sometimes. I edit after my posts are published because I’m impatient and lazy, so if you see a typo, check back in a half hour. Also, I just straight up get sh*t wrong a lot. I mention it twice because it’s that important.

Update: President Trump just told reporters in Washington DC that he’ll fire Cook if she doesn’t resign. 

Developing…

*  *  *

Days after Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) Director Bill Pulte wrote a letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi claiming Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook “falsified bank documents and property records to acquire more favorable loan terms” by claiming two homes as her primary residence, Pulte dropped new evidence on Friday suggesting that Cook lied again on a government form. 

“We have obtained a document Lisa Cook submitted to the U.S. Government while serving as Federal Reserve Governor. In it, on February 28, 2023, she represents to the U.S. Government that the Atlanta Property is her PERSONAL RESIDENCE,” Pulte wrote on X. “However, Lisa Cook, as a then-sitting Fed Governor and six months earlier, on September 1, 2022, appears to have listed that same property for RENT.”

We have obtained a document Lisa Cook submitted to the U.S. Government while serving as Federal Reserve Governor. In it, on February 28, 2023, she represents to the U.S. Government that the Atlanta Property is her PERSONAL RESIDENCE.

However, Lisa Cook, as a then-sitting Fed… pic.twitter.com/clclhtag9O

— Pulte (@pulte) August 22, 2025

Here are the ‘receipts’ spread out for your perusal: 

Recall that Cook listed the Atlanta Condo has her “Primary Residence” at the same time she was claiming a property in Michigan as her primary residence. 

Last week Pulte wrote a letter to Bondi and DOJ official Ed Martin suggesting that Cook may have committed a criminal offense. The letter alleges that Cook “falsified bank documents and property records to acquire more favorable loan terms, potentially committing mortgage fraud under the criminal statute.”

Bloomberg reports that Pulte said Cook took a mortgage on a property in Ann Arbor, Michigan, signing a mortgage agreement that stipulated she would use the property as her primary residence for at least a year.

Two weeks later, according to the letter, she took another mortgage on a Georgia property and also declared it would be her primary residence.

Pulte also called on Bondi to look into whether Cook misrepresented her circumstances by later listing the Georgia property for rental.

The letter prompted President Trump to respond, demanding “Cook must resign, now!!” 

Cook responded to the accusations; 

“I have no intention of being bullied to step down from my position because of some questions raised in a tweet,” Cook said in a statement.

“I do intend to take any questions about my financial history seriously as a member of the Federal Reserve and so I am gathering the accurate information to answer any legitimate questions and provide the facts.”

Write anything you or your attorneys want Miss Cook, you’ve been caught based on mortgage documents, not a tweet. It’s black and white. We go after people who commit mortgage fraud, and you signed the mortgage documents, no one else. And you did it within 14 days of each other. https://t.co/LIRK89Zaf8

— Pulte (@pulte) August 20, 2025

Of note, she was nominated to the Fed by President Joe Biden and took office in 2022, becoming the first Black woman to serve on the Fed’s board of governors.

She was later nominated by Biden for a full term, which expires in 2038.

Update (1000ET): Well, Powell surprised many with a notably dovish tilt:

• *POWELL: SITUATION SUGGESTS DOWNSIDE RISKS TO EMPLOYMENT RISING

• *POWELL: SHIFTING BALANCE OF RISKS MAY WARRANT ADJUSTING POLICY

Powell recognizes that the employment picture is significantly worse…

Here’s the key paragraph:

Putting the pieces together, what are the implications for monetary policy?

In the near term, risks to inflation are tilted to the upside, and risks to employment to the downside—a challenging situation. When our goals are in tension like this, our framework calls for us to balance both sides of our dual mandate.

Our policy rate is now 100 basis points closer to neutral than it was a year ago, and the stability of the unemployment rate and other labor market measures allows us to proceed carefully as we consider changes to our policy stance.

Nonetheless, with policy in restrictive territory, the baseline outlook and the shifting balance of risks may warrant adjusting our policy stance.

This sent stocks, gold, and bond (prices) higher…

Small Caps are leading the charge (up 3%)…

And the dollar notably lower…

And rate-cut odds spiked…

The rest of the statement is just Powell undoing FAIT policy from the 2020 Jackson Hole speech.

Full speech below:

*  *  *

The big day has finally arrived as Fed Chair Powell delivers what will be his last speech from the wilds of Wyoming.

The big question here is whether he will specifically set up a September rate cut. At his last press conference, on July 30, Powell declined to tip his hand on whether he expected to move in September.

At that July press conference, Powell highlighted that several economic reports were due before the September meeting.

“We’ll be taking that information into consideration and all the other information we get as we make our decision at the September meeting,” he said back then.

What have the reports shown?

Most memorably, that the job market looks much weaker than it did on July 30.

Major data revisions showed the average three-month payroll gain went from 150,000 before the July employment report to just 35,000.

Amid much speculation of what he will offer up to the market gods amid the summer doldrums, Goldman Sachs expects Powell to modify his statement from the July FOMC press conference that the FOMC is “well positioned” to wait for more information.

Instead, he might note that the FOMC is well positioned to address risks to both sides of its mandate but emphasize that downside risks to the labor market have grown following the July employment report, while reiterating that tariffs are likely to have only a one-time effect on the price level.

We expect the FOMC to partially reverse some of the changes it made in 2020, as it has foreshadowed in the minutes to its recent meetings.

Specifically, we expect the FOMC to return to saying that it will respond to “deviations” from maximum employment in both directions rather than just to “shortfalls” or to at least water down the shortfalls language and to return to flexible inflation targeting (rather than flexible average inflation targeting) as its main strategy while retaining the option to use a make-up strategy at the zero lower bound.

Bottom line, Goldman does not expect Powell to decisively signal a September cut, but the speech should make it clear to markets that he is likely to support one.

We suspect that most FOMC participants who have expressed mixed feelings about cutting in September will be willing to support a cut if Powell pushes for one, but that he will think it more reasonable to make that case to them closer to the meeting with more data in hand

Additionally, Academy Securities, Peter Tchir expects Powell to push back on the “labor market is weak” narrative (which Tchir continues to believe is true and why the Fed should be cutting in September).

Economists seem to be honing in on a “replacement rate” level of hiring, in the 50k to 80k range.

That seems low and if discussed, will likely agitate the President as numbers less than 100k as the level of hiring required to keep the unemployment rate stable, just don’t seem that exciting.

Even if the Fed plans to cut, they would like it to be a bit of a surprise (keeping the probability of a rate cut at the next meeting closer to 50 than 100 likely suits them best).

If Powell is able to convince markets jobs are comfortable but inflation isn’t, look for bond yields to go higher, dragging stocks down with them.

Some of this already has been priced in, so the move should be “normal” in size, rather than some outlier.

Recent news on the AI/Data Center side seems to have slowed the excitement for investing in those sectors a little this week.

The market’s reaction to Powell’s has been varied over the years…

Watch the full speech live here (due to start at 1000ET):

Meanwhile, here’s a Bingo Card to play along (via Bloomberg)

By Bas van Geffen, senior macro strategist at Rabobank

Picking Sides

Yesterday, the EU and the US finally released a joint statement on trade. The statement further decreases trade uncertainty, as both sides were still locked into talks over some of the details. In the end, the EU did make several regulatory concessions to the US. However, European legislation on e.g. digital services was less of a blocking issue than some had feared.

The joint statement confirms that 15% is the base tariff, which will also apply to European pharmaceuticals and semiconductors from September 1. As we noted before, that’s a significant increase from the current 0% rate. Having said that, this coming into effect little over a week from now also reduces any lingering risk that these two sectors would temporarily be subject to much higher Section 232 tariffs that Trump is still due to announce.

The auto industry will have to wait a little longer: the US will cut the tariff on European cars only after the EU “formally introduces the necessary legislative proposal to enact the tariff reductions” on US industrial goods and certain food and agri exports – and extends the 2020 ‘lobster deal’ that expired July 31.

The statement also keeps the door open to quota for steel and aluminium exports, to safeguard US and EU supply chains. More importantly, Washington and Brussels will coordinate actions to “ring fence” their domestic steel and aluminium markets from overcapacity. That’s a thinly veiled way of not saying China?

If you need more proof of that, the two sides have also agreed to strengthen their cooperation related to export restrictions on critical minerals and similar resources by third countries, to address non-market policies of third parties, and to cooperate on inbound investment reviews as well as duty evasion.

Add to this the European commitment to align with US technologies and the purchase of US defense equipment, and the EU clearly has joined the US camp.

Although the joint statement further reduces trade uncertainty, we still expect foreign demand for European goods to be more muted in the coming quarters. Nonetheless, the European purchasing managers’ indices were better than expected. And the positive surprise in the August survey was entirely led by European manufacturing. It is somewhat remarkable that the manufacturing sector, which should be hardest hit by tariffs and trade uncertainty, has steadily improved since the start of the year.

Frontrunning of Trump’s tariffs may have helped European exports in the first half of the year, but the flipside of that frontloading should be weaker export performance in the coming period. In fact, the August survey suggests that the improvement was entirely home-grown. European manufacturers reported an increase in new orders for the first time in 14 months – despite a fall in new export orders.

Day ahead

Today’s key event is the Fed’s annual conference in Jackson Hole. Several central bankers have travelled to Wyoming, including ECB President Lagarde, the Bank of England’s Bailey and Governor Ueda from the Bank of Japan. But the key speaker is Fed Chair Powell.

Powell has so far maintained that more data is needed before the policy rate can be lowered further. And the minutes from the last FOMC meeting revealed this week that a majority of policymakers are still waiting for more clarity on the potential inflationary impact of Trump’s tariffs.

There is still no convincing evidence that consumer prices are being affected by the higher tariffs, but since the July policy meeting, the producer price index has shown the first signs of upward price pressures. It remains unclear to what extent this will be passed on to consumers, and how persistent these price pressures will be. But, since that meeting, it has also become evident that the labor market has been significantly weaker in recent months than previously thought.

So, the Fed is caught between inflation risks and concerns about the labor market. Driven by the weak jobs report, markets are pricing a 70% chance that the Fed will lower rates in September. Several FOMC members have recently hinted at this as well. But what does Powell think? If he still insists that more data is needed, the market may revise the probability of a rate cut.

But will Powell be very outspoken today? The Fed Chair is not only torn between the two objectives of its dual mandate; the Trump administration continues to chip away at the independence of the central bank.

In addition to Trump’s verbal attacks on the Fed chair, the president is also trying to undermine Powell’s position from within the FOMC. Trump already has a some allies within the Fed. Bowman and Waller dissented in July, and he has nominated Miran, one of his confidants, to (temporarily) join the FOMC starting in September.

But Miran’s seat is the only one Trump can fill with certainty in the coming years, since Powell can technically stay on as a regular member of the FOMC after his term as chair ends. And that’s not enough for Trump to tighten its grip on the central bank.

So, Trump and his allies have now launched an attack on Lisa Cook. The Department of Justice indicated it plans to investigate her over alleged fraud. A DoJ official “encouraged” Powell to immediately remove Cook from the central bank’s board “before it is too late!” – but Powell does not have the authority to do so.

The ECB releases its estimate of Q2 negotiated wages. The Bundesbank reported a strong rebound in German wages. That should lift the eurozone average, which in turn should further reduce the prospect of additional monetary easing.

A federal judge has ordered the dismantling of major components of “Alligator Alcatraz,” the detention center for illegal immigrants recently built in the Florida Everglades. Judge Kathleen M. Williams of the Federal District Court in Miami also ruled that no new detainees may be brought to the facility, and current detainees must be relocated within 60 days.  

At its heart, the Thursday-night ruling has nothing to do with the management of illegal immigrants. The lawsuit that led to the decision was filed the Center for Biological Diversity, the Miccosukee Tribe and Friends of the Everglades, with the three organizations accusing federal agencies and Miami-Dade County of violating the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Specifically, Williams sided with the plaintiffs in concluding that the building of Alligator Alcatraz proceeded without the environmental review required by NEPA. 

“[Defendants] consulted with no stakeholders or experts and did not evaluation of the environmental risks,” wrote the 68-year-old Williams, who was appointed by President Obama in 2011. “There weren’t ‘deficiencies’ in the agency’s process. There was no process.” Williams pointed to “a myriad of risks” to the Everglades environment, including wastewater discharge and rain runoff.  

Florida’s Division of Emergency Management appealed the ruling almost immediately after it was released. Florida and the Trump administration had argued there was no environmental impact to consider, because there was already an airstrip on the site before they turned it into Alligator Alcatraz. The judge, however, said the transformation of the site was on a scale that dramatically changed the environmental implications. The new lighting, for example, reduced the Florida panther’s habitat by 2,000 acres. “The project creates irreparable harm in the form of habitat loss and increased mortality to endangered species in the area,” wrote Williams.

In a statement issued after the ruling, Paul Schwiep, who represented Friends of the Everglades and Center for Biological Diversity, offered his own depiction of the project:

“The state and federal government paved over 20 acres of open land, built a parking lot for 1,200 cars and 3,000 detainees, placed miles of fencing and high-intensity lighting on site and moved thousands of detainees and contractors onto land in the heart of the Big Cypress National Preserve, all in flagrant violation of environmental law.”

Williams said Florida and the federal government “offered little to no evidence” as to why the facility had to be built in the Everglades. “[It’s] apparent …that in their haste to construct the detention camp, the state did not consider alternative locations.” Florida had argued that the facility is purely a state enterprise, exempting it from NEPA’s environmental-review provisions. Williams, however, said the facility falls under NEPA because it operates with federal funding and direction” 

Though it’s a preliminary injunction as the case is further litigated, Williams set a 60-day deadline for Florida and the feds to remove current detainees and to start dismantling critical features of the facility, including fencing, lighting and power generators. A temporary restraining order issued on Aug 7 had already prohibited additional construction, including filling, paving and installation of new lighting and other infrastructure.  

Alligator Alcatraz is the first state-run facility that houses people detained by the federal government. Several other Republican-led states have moved toward creating their own versions, complete with similarly creative nicknames. Earlier this month, Indiana announced it had made an agreement with the Department of Homeland Security to add 1,000 beds for illegal immigrants at the Miami Correctional Facility in Bunker Hill — calling it the “Speedway Slammer.” On Tuesday, Nebraska announced plans for a “Cornhusker Clink.” 

“This ruling affirms what we argued in court — that the government can’t just build something in the middle of the Everglades and the Big Cypress preserve with no environmental review, and no public input,” said Tania Galloni, managing attorney for the Florida office of Earthjustice. Ahead of the ruling, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis sounded pessimistic about his prospects: “It’s pretty clear we’re in front of a judge who is not going to give us a fair shake on this.”

I know I married the right man when he drove me 3.5 hours to get a picture in front of Alligator Alcatraz!! 🐊🐊🐊🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🔥🔥🔥 pic.twitter.com/8q4S0vhY28

— Smow (@2_smow) August 21, 2025

Nvidia has instructed key suppliers, Arizona-based Amkor Technology and South Korea’s Samsung Electronics, to suspend China-specific H20 AI chip production, according to The Information, citing unidentified sources. The directive comes after Beijing has pressured local companies to avoid using the H-20s for security concerns. 

Nvidia sent its communications this week on the H20 to Arizona-based Amkor Technology and South Korea’s Samsung Electronics, according to the two people. Amkor handles the advanced packaging of Nvidia’s H20 chips, a process that involves combining multiple components, while Samsung supplies high-bandwidth memory chips for the H20. -The Information

In a statement, Nvidia explained, “We constantly manage our supply chain to address market conditions,” adding that “allowing U.S. chips for beneficial commercial business use is good for everyone.”

*NVIDIA ORDERS SUSPENSION TO H20 CHIP PRODUCTION: INFORMATION

guess no chips for china

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) August 22, 2025

The suspension underscores Nvidia’s delicate balancing act in China, following President Trump’s reversal of a previous ban on the H20s and his decision to allow sales on the condition that the federal government collect 15% of revenue. However, last month, China’s Cyberspace Administration summoned Nvidia officials to address alleged “backdoor” security vulnerabilities in the H20s – claims that CEO Jensen Huang has denied, stressing the chips pose no security risks.

Related:

• China Urges Tech Giants To Avoid Nvidia H20 Chips After Trump Lifts Sales Ban

• China Probes Nvidia Over Alleged H20 AI Chip’s “Backdoor” Security Risks

Amkor, which handles advanced chip packaging, and Samsung, which supplies high-bandwidth memory in the H20 production process, received Nvidia’s order to halt production earlier this week. The Information reported that semi-finished H20s are piling up at Amkor. The future of the H20 chip in China remains unclear. 

Here’s Bloomberg Intelligence analysts Kunjan Sobhani and Oscar Hernandez Tejada’s first-take: 

Nvidia’s decision to halt H20 chip production, as reported by The Information, follows the Chinese government urging local companies to avoid using the chip and creates fresh uncertainty over when Nvidia’s China business can recover. We had previously projected H20 shipments to China would resume no earlier than the end of this year. Although a delay might temper optimistic estimates for China, robust US hyperscaler demand and Blackwell adoption should offset the impact on Nvidia this year.

Shares in Nvidia fell about 1% in premarket trading in New York following the news. Shares are still trading near record highs, up 30% year-to-date as of Thursday’s close.

Nvidia’s decision to halt H20 chip production puts its China market in question – once accounting for 26% of its revenue – but has since tumbled to just 13% amid trade wars and tech restrictions. 

Authored by Lear Zhou via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

SAN FRANCISCO—The Olympus Spa, a women-only Korean-style spa in Washington State, which was forced via legal means to allow male customers who identify as women, is seeking re-hearing in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

The case is centered on a state law that bars discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. Many of the services provided at the spa require nudity, and all the onsite staff are female. Allowing a person with male body parts to partake of the services would violate the Christian beliefs of the spa owners, they said.

A May 29 Ninth Circuit opinion by a four-judge panel had already dismissed the spa’s claims that its First Amendment rights had been violated, affirming the decision previously made in a lower court.

“The Spa may have other avenues to challenge the enforcement action. But whatever recourse it may have, that relief cannot come from the First Amendment,” the opinion states.

The re-hearing request centered instead on an “expressive association claim,” according to a petition document filed on June 24 and obtained by The Epoch Times.

“We respectfully disagree with the Court’s position that there are no First Amendment interests at stake for the Spa,” Kevin Snider, lead attorney of the Pacific Justice Institute representing the plaintiffs, said in an email to The Epoch Times. “Safeguarding the dignity of unclothed women in their intimate spaces implicates the right to association and the free exercise of religion. We are committed to pressing forward to vindicate those rights.”

In late 2020, a man complained to the Washington Human Rights Commission (HRC) that the spa was violating Washington’s Law Against Discrimination (WLAD) by refusing service to man who identified as a transgender woman.

The spa owners refused to change their admission policy, which they said was rooted in Korean tradition and Christian beliefs.

The owners, employees, and patrons of the Olympus Spa launched a lawsuit against the HRC executive director and its civil rights investigator, alleging that the state was infringing on their First Amendment rights to freedom of speech, free exercise of religion, and freedom of association.

Washington District Court Judge Barbara Jacobs Rothstein dismissed the case on June 5, 2023.

Usually public accommodations laws, like Washington State’s anti-discrimination law, must give way where such laws impermissibly burden constitutional rights, according to the Ninth Circuit opinion.

“But this is not such a case,” Ninth Circuit Judge Margaret McKeown wrote in the opinion. “The HRC’s action under WLAD does not impermissibly burden the Spa’s First Amendment rights to free speech, free exercise, or free association.”

The re-hearing petition document states that the Ninth Circuit opinion by the four judges omitted or overlooked the “prominence of the advancement of traditional Korean culture.”

“This position improperly constrains expressive association because that liberty interest includes ‘associat[ing] with others in pursuit of a wide variety of political, social, economic, educational, religious, and cultural ends,’” the petition states, adding emphasis to the word “cultural.”

The Ninth Circuit ordered Washington State to submit a written brief in response to the re-hearing petition on July 17, according to Snider.

“The Ninth Circuit will decide if it will re-hear the case,” Snider told The Epoch Times. “If they decide not to re-hear the case, then we will file with the Supreme Court.”

One of the defendants, Andreta Armstrong, executive director of the HRC, told The Epoch Times via an email, “I decline to comment on ongoing litigation involving the agency.”

Sun Lee, co-owner and president of the Olympus Spa, told The Epoch Times, “I believe that our case should actually go to the Supreme Court, and then it should be measured by the Constitution, our freedom of speech, and also freedom of religion.”

“I’m very worried at this point, how this society goes,” Lee said. “But I’m really hopeful that the Supreme Court or the higher court [will] make a right decision.”

Lee said he has suffered from stress in the past four years since he received a letter from the HRC. He said they have to deal with emails and phone calls related to the issue on a daily basis.

“The model and foundation of our spa is for women to relax and forget about their lives, their daily worries, and they shouldn’t be judged,” Lee said. “But this is under threat.”

He said the spa still does not admit men who identify as transgender women.

The controversy has affected the business, he said. Yearly sales, more than half of which come from traditional Korean scrubbing services, have diminished, said Lee, “not by a lot … but a certain percentage.”

“I’m really puzzled and struggling with why these simple kinds of boundaries cannot be sustained. And this is not due to hatred or prejudice; this is more like a biologically and psychologically valid response rooted in safety and dignity and privacy,” said Lee.

In-flight Wi-Fi has long been notorious for being slow, spotty, and expensive. Well, that’s until Elon Musk’s SpaceX Starlink entered the skies three years ago. The low-Earth orbit satellite service has ignited a race among airlines to install high-speed, low-latency terminals, transforming the passenger experience. Now, gaming or even logging into a Bloomberg Terminal mid-flight is possible. 

Tfue wins a Fortnite game at 40,000 feet using Starlink on Qatar Airways pic.twitter.com/Se5roYjFqe

— Dexerto (@Dexerto) May 12, 2025

Bloomberg reports a rapid adoption of Starlink among airlines, including United Airlines, Air France, Qatar Airways, Virgin Atlantic, and now Alaska Air. Sources say British Airways is also in talks to adopt the service, which delivers up to 200 Mbps download, 8 Mbps to 25 Mbps upload, and latency under 99 ms. This is a far cry from the dial-up speeds still common on most commercial jets.

According to the media outlet, Starlink’s next target is to be an early mover of high-speed internet for premium Gulf carriers such as Emirates, FlyDubai, Gulf Air, and Saudia. This would be a significant win for the company and game-changing for the massive long-haul fleets. 

Starlink faces fierce global competition from EchoStar, Viasat, SES, and Intelsat. These rivals are defending market share and revamping strategies to strike new deals as the race over the $100 billion satellite communications market accelerates ahead of the 2030s. 

The cost to install a Starlink aviation receiver on a Boeing 737 is approximately $300,000, while a 787 Dreamliner model totals around half a million per aircraft, according to documents reviewed by Bloomberg. Airlines pay upwards of $120 per seat monthly for the service, with an additional $120 for live television. 

What’s important to note is that Starlink is a first-mover in the high-speed in-flight Wi-Fi market that airlines are rapidly adopting. Competition from Amazon’s Project Kuiper is not even a discussion at the moment. 

At the moment, Starlink remains a division of SpaceX and has not filed for an IPO. No underwriters have been appointed, and there’s no confirmed timetable, despite Musk’s recent comments about a public offering “at some point in the future.” 

Starlink has introduced a new $5-per-month “Standby Mode,” giving customers unlimited low-speed data for calls, texts, and instant reactivation during emergencies or in dead zones, according to a new company email.

The feature appears aimed at retaining subscribers who might otherwise cancel month-to-month service and only reactivate when needed. By keeping accounts active, Standby Mode could help stabilize Starlink’s subscriber base. This is likely a move that may carry weight ahead of a potential IPO.

By Charles Kennedy of OilPrice.com

The largest Chinese and Asian refiner Sinopec reported on Thursday a 36% decline in its first-half profit on the back of lower oil prices and refining margins and weakening domestic fuel demand.

China Petroleum & Chemical Corporation, or Sinopec, as it is more commonly known, booked a profit attributable to shareholders of $3.3 billion (23.75 billion Chinese yuan) for the period January to June 2025, down by 35.9% from the same period last year.

“Dragged by various factors such as the declining international crude oil prices combined with weak chemical margins, the Company’s profitability for the first half significantly decreased year on year,” Sinopec’s chairman Hou Qijun said in a statement accompanying the first-half results.

Sinopec estimates that while China’s natural gas demand rose by 2.1% year-over-year in January to June, domestic consumption of refined petroleum products slumped by 3.6% from a year earlier, “mainly affected by alternative energy.”

China’s gasoline consumption fell by 4.6% and diesel demand decreased by 4.3%, while kerosene consumption rose by 4.2%, Sinopec said.

The domestic demand for major chemical products grew rapidly, with ethylene equivalent consumption up by 10.1% year on year, the Chinese state giant added.

Looking forward, Sinopec expects China’s domestic demand for natural gas and chemical products to increase in the second half of the year, while demand for refined oil products “will be impacted by alternative energy.”

In the refining business, the company vowed to diversify its crude oil resources, dynamically optimize the procurement scale and pace, and reduce procurement costs. That’s likely a hint that it would boost the supply of domestic and cheap foreign crude to process at refineries amid weak margins and weak domestic demand for transportation fuels.

Over the past year, consumption of the road transportation fuels – gasoline and diesel – has been trailing the levels from just two years ago, when China was emerging from nearly three years of Covid-related lockdowns. That’s not only because of the pent-up demand back in 2023. A large part of the lower gasoline and diesel demand is due to the soaring sales of electric passenger cars and trucks and LNG-fueled heavy-duty vehicles.

The Boeing 737 is often seen as a symbol of American aerospace excellence. But peel back the fuselage and you’ll discover a much more intricate story—one of international collaboration, supply chain complexity, and global interdependence.

The aircraft’s thousands of components are sourced from at least two dozen countries and multiple continents. While Boeing leads final assembly in the United States, the company relies on global partners to provide specialized parts ranging from titanium forgings in Italy to cabin seating in Japan.

This global sourcing strategy, visualized by Julie Peasley and based on data from Air Framer, demonstrates the immense complexity of modern aircraft manufacturing.

Here’s a breakdown of key parts in the Boeing 737 and their country of origin:

Why Build a Jet Like This?

Commercial aircraft contain millions of precision parts, many made from exotic alloys or advanced composites. No single country holds all that know‑how. Russia’s VSMPO‑AVISMA, for instance, remains the world’s dominant source of aerospace‑grade titanium—a metal prized for its strength‑to‑weight ratio and corrosion resistance.

By tapping specialized suppliers, Boeing keeps costs competitive, earns reciprocal market access abroad, and balances political risk by spreading production across multiple jurisdictions.

Risks of Tariffs and Protectionism

However, this level of globalization exposes manufacturers to geopolitical and economic risks. According to Reuters, aerospace firms have lobbied hard to preserve tariff-free agreements between the U.S. and EU. Even temporary tariffs in past disputes have disrupted delivery schedules and increased costs.

Analysis from Harvard Business School points to rising protectionism as a major threat to supply chain stability. As governments reevaluate trade policies, the world’s major aircraft companies may be forced to rethink their international sourcing models—a costly and complex endeavor.

Learn More on the Voronoi App 

Discover more insights about Boeing’s diversified business beyond commercial planes in this related post on Voronoi: Boeing’s Business Is Much More Than Just Commercial Planes.