Podcast appearances and mentions of Apollo Global Management

P.M. Edition for Aug. 31. The second quarter was a good one for S&P 500 companies. Per-share earnings soared 53% and many companies have raised their guidance. WSJ reporter Theo Francis explains what's propelling those gains. Plus, the Federal Trade Commission sues Amazon for allegedly manipulating prices for ads on its site—and making billions from merchants. And the Supreme Court allows President Trump to keep building his White House ballroom. Pierre Bienaimé hosts. Sign up for the WSJ's free What's News newsletter. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

In der heutigen Folge sprechen die Finanzjournalisten Nando Sommerfeldt und Holger Zschäpitz über Broadcoms Schuldenplan, Georgs geniale Gas-Idee und die historischen Auswüchse am Anleihemarkt. Außerdem geht es um Walmart, Advance Auto Parts, AutoZone, O'Reilly Automotive, Home Depot, Lowe's, TJX Companies, Coty, JD Sports Fashion, Adidas, Puma, Fresenius, Fresenius Medical Care, Sartorius, UBS, Tonies, Korea Gas Corporation, Vontobel, Alibaba, Deere, Broadcom, Apollo Global Management, Blackstone, Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, Nvidia, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, TSMC, Meta Platforms, Samsung Electronics, ASML, SK Hynix, Deutsche Börse, Moderna, BioNTech, Eli Lilly, Novo Nordisk, Mini Future Long auf den TTF-Gaspreis von Vontobel, (WKN: VY80G4), Vanguard FTSE Global All-Cap ETF thesaurierend (WKN: A42B1M), Vanguard FTSE Global All-Cap ETF ausschüttend (WKN: A42B1N), Vanguard FTSE Global Small-Cap ETF thesaurierend (WKN: A42B1P), Vanguard FTSE Global Small-Cap ETF ausschüttend (WKN: A42B1Q), Vanguard FTSE All-World ex-U.S. UCITS ETF thesaurierend (WKN: A42B1R), Vanguard FTSE All-World ex-U.S. ETF ausschüttend (WKN: A42B1S), SPDR MSCI ACWI IMI ETF (WKN: A1JJTD), Vanguard ESG Global All Cap ETF thesaurierend (WKN: A2QL8U), Vanguard FTSE All-World ETF thesaurierend (WKN: A2PKXG), Vanguard FTSE All-World ETF ausschüttend (WKN: A1JX52). Am 2. Oktober findet unser „Alles auf Aktien“-Summit in Berlin statt. Mit dem Code „AAAFRIENDS“ sparst du 50 Prozent auf dein Ticket – aber nur unter folgendem Link: https://veranstaltung.businessinsider.de/event/financesummit26/summary?rp=c6dc55d6-6f4f-4fb4-b75f-3f3501d84859 Wir freuen uns an Feedback über aaa@welt.de. Holt euch jetzt den exklusiven NordVPN-Deal inkl. 4 Bonusmonaten mit dem Code Allesaufaktien oder unter https://nordvpn.com/allesaufaktien Noch mehr "Alles auf Aktien" findet Ihr bei WELTplus und Apple Podcasts – inklusive aller Artikel der Hosts. Hier bei WELT: https://www.welt.de/podcasts/alles-auf-aktien/plus247399208/Boersen-Podcast-AAA-Bonus-Folgen-Jede-Woche-noch-mehr-Antworten-auf-Eure-Boersen-Fragen.html. Hier könnt ihr den AAA-Newsletter abonnieren: https://www.welt.de/newsletter/article232797673/Alles-auf-Aktien-Der-taegliche-Boersen-Newsletter-fuer-WELTplus-Abonnenten.html Und – ganz neu: AAA gibt es jetzt auch auf Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/alles_auf_aktien/ Disclaimer: Die im Podcast besprochenen Aktien und Fonds stellen keine spezifischen Kauf- oder Anlage-Empfehlungen dar. Die Moderatoren und der Verlag haften nicht für etwaige Verluste, die aufgrund der Umsetzung der Gedanken oder Ideen entstehen. Hörtipps: Für alle, die noch mehr wissen wollen: Holger Zschäpitz können Sie jede Woche im Finanz- und Wirtschaftspodcast "Deffner&Zschäpitz" hören. +++ Werbung +++ Du möchtest mehr über unsere Werbepartner erfahren? Hier findest du alle Infos & Rabatte! https://linktr.ee/alles_auf_aktien Anzeige: Eight Sleep: Der Pod 5 reguliert die Temperatur im Bett automatisch, trackt Schlaf- und Gesundheitswerte ohne Wearable und kann so zu besserem Schlaf beitragen. Mit dem Code ALLESAUFAKTIEN erhaltet ihr auf https://www.eightsleep.com/allesaufaktien bis zu 350 Euro Rabatt. Impressum: https://www.welt.de/services/article7893735/Impressum.html Datenschutz: https://www.welt.de/services/article157550705/Datenschutzerklaerung-WELT-DIGITAL.html

Leon Black's relationship with Jeffrey Epstein exposed just how deeply the worlds of high finance, elite philanthropy, and blue-chip art could overlap without much meaningful scrutiny. Black, the billionaire cofounder of Apollo Global Management and one of the most powerful private collectors in the world, paid Epstein roughly $170 million over six years for financial and tax-related services, even though Epstein had already pleaded guilty in 2008 to offenses involving a minor and was a registered sex offender throughout much of their professional relationship. The newly released material showed that Epstein's role went well beyond giving Black occasional financial advice. Epstein became deeply involved in the machinery surrounding Black's enormous art collection, meticulously cataloguing works that were ultimately used as collateral for hundreds of millions of dollars in borrowing. Black's collection, once appraised by Christie's at roughly $2.7 billion, included extraordinary trophies such as Edvard Munch's The Scream, multiple works by Raphael, and a Picasso sculpture purchased for $125 million. Yet Black continued to portray his relationship with Epstein largely as a matter of financial expertise, insisting he had not understood the true extent of Epstein's criminality and describing himself as someone who had been misled. That explanation became much harder to swallow alongside Black's own acknowledgment that he knew about Epstein's 2008 conviction but did not regard it as sufficiently serious to stop doing business with him.The story was also an indictment of an art world that has repeatedly demonstrated an extraordinary capacity to overlook almost anything when enormous wealth, prestigious collections, and major donations are involved. Black did not merely purchase paintings; his money bought him extraordinary institutional standing, culminating in his chairmanship of the Museum of Modern Art, while his masterpieces circulated through museums that benefited from his patronage and prestige. Even after the Epstein relationship became impossible to ignore, Black remained on MoMA's board and continued appearing at major art fairs, museum dinners, galleries, sporting events, and elite cultural gatherings. That resilience illustrated one of the uglier realities of the contemporary art ecosystem: museums and cultural institutions frequently present themselves as moral authorities while remaining financially dependent upon billionaires whose money grants them astonishing insulation from ordinary reputational consequences. Black eventually surrendered leadership positions at Apollo and MoMA, but he was hardly exiled from the cultural establishment. The art world absorbed the scandal, issued the requisite expressions of concern, and largely moved forward with one of its most valuable collectors still inside the tent. In that sense, the Black-Epstein story was about much more than one billionaire's extraordinarily questionable judgment. It demonstrated how an industry built around opaque ownership, private transactions, tax strategy, asset-backed borrowing, billionaire philanthropy, and social exclusivity could provide the perfect environment for uncomfortable questions to remain unanswered as long as the person writing the checks remained important enough.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:The Strange Tale of Leon Black and Jeffrey Epstein | Vanity Fair

Leon Black's relationship with Jeffrey Epstein exposed just how deeply the worlds of high finance, elite philanthropy, and blue-chip art could overlap without much meaningful scrutiny. Black, the billionaire cofounder of Apollo Global Management and one of the most powerful private collectors in the world, paid Epstein roughly $170 million over six years for financial and tax-related services, even though Epstein had already pleaded guilty in 2008 to offenses involving a minor and was a registered sex offender throughout much of their professional relationship. The newly released material showed that Epstein's role went well beyond giving Black occasional financial advice. Epstein became deeply involved in the machinery surrounding Black's enormous art collection, meticulously cataloguing works that were ultimately used as collateral for hundreds of millions of dollars in borrowing. Black's collection, once appraised by Christie's at roughly $2.7 billion, included extraordinary trophies such as Edvard Munch's The Scream, multiple works by Raphael, and a Picasso sculpture purchased for $125 million. Yet Black continued to portray his relationship with Epstein largely as a matter of financial expertise, insisting he had not understood the true extent of Epstein's criminality and describing himself as someone who had been misled. That explanation became much harder to swallow alongside Black's own acknowledgment that he knew about Epstein's 2008 conviction but did not regard it as sufficiently serious to stop doing business with him.The story was also an indictment of an art world that has repeatedly demonstrated an extraordinary capacity to overlook almost anything when enormous wealth, prestigious collections, and major donations are involved. Black did not merely purchase paintings; his money bought him extraordinary institutional standing, culminating in his chairmanship of the Museum of Modern Art, while his masterpieces circulated through museums that benefited from his patronage and prestige. Even after the Epstein relationship became impossible to ignore, Black remained on MoMA's board and continued appearing at major art fairs, museum dinners, galleries, sporting events, and elite cultural gatherings. That resilience illustrated one of the uglier realities of the contemporary art ecosystem: museums and cultural institutions frequently present themselves as moral authorities while remaining financially dependent upon billionaires whose money grants them astonishing insulation from ordinary reputational consequences. Black eventually surrendered leadership positions at Apollo and MoMA, but he was hardly exiled from the cultural establishment. The art world absorbed the scandal, issued the requisite expressions of concern, and largely moved forward with one of its most valuable collectors still inside the tent. In that sense, the Black-Epstein story was about much more than one billionaire's extraordinarily questionable judgment. It demonstrated how an industry built around opaque ownership, private transactions, tax strategy, asset-backed borrowing, billionaire philanthropy, and social exclusivity could provide the perfect environment for uncomfortable questions to remain unanswered as long as the person writing the checks remained important enough.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:The Strange Tale of Leon Black and Jeffrey Epstein | Vanity Fair

Bobby and Alex discuss some distinctly Tipping Pitches news at the top of this week's show, including a news story in The City Reporter about Diamond Baseball Holdings stealing tips from Brooklyn Cyclones concessions workers and Apollo Global Management investing nearly $3 billion in the Yankees. Then, they're joined by CNN's Hannah Keyser and Jon Becker of FanGraphs to have a wide-ranging discussions of the state of the MLBPA-MLB CBA negotiations. For a longer discussion of the Yankees' private equity investment, head over to Patreon and start a 7-day free trial of the Alex Rodriguez VIP Club.Links:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Join the Tipping Pitches Patreon ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Tipping Pitches merchandise ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Call the Tipping Pitches voicemail: 785-422-5881Tipping Pitches features original music from Steve Sladkowski of PUP.

Falta un día para el dato de inflación en EEUU de julio, que puede ser fundamental para anticipar la hoja de ruta de la FED de cara a la reunión de septiembre. Sin olvidarnos de las tensiones que llegan de Oriente Medio.. así, los futuros de Wall Street anticipan signo mixto este martes, tras las caídas de ayer lunes motivadas por las alzas del petróleo. A los índices les cuesta cada vez más mantener el optimismo sobre la reapertura de Ormuz mientras las negociaciones entre EEUU e Irán avanzan más despacio de lo esperado o sencillamente no avanzan. En el plano empreasarial, es protagonista Nvidia y el nuevo paquete de financiación de 500.000 millones de dólares procedente de grandes fondos de inversión como Apollo Global Management, Blackstone y BlackRock, entre otros. El análisis con Georgina Sierra, directora de análisis y activos financieros de Diverinvest.

In der heutigen Folge sprechen die Finanzjournalisten Lea Oetjen und Philipp Vetter über den 500-Milliarden-Dollar-Plan von Nvidia, den GameStop-Rückzieher und die finanzielle Intel-Renaissance nach 55 Jahren. Außerdem geht es um Apollo Global Management, Blackstone, Goldman Sachs, KKR, Microsoft, Berkshire Hathaway, MarineMax, Varex Imaging, Teledyne Technologies, Apple, Jefferies, eBay, Boeing, Archer Aviation, Qiagen, Deutsche Bank, Deutsche Telekom, Stabilus, Covestro, Thyssenkrupp, BP, Lanxess, BASF, Natco Pharma, Novo Nordisk, Aspen Pharmacare, Sun Pharmaceutical, CSPC Pharmaceutical, AstraZeneca, Dr. Reddy's, FactSet. Am 2. Oktober findet unser „Alles auf Aktien“-Summit in Berlin statt. Mit dem Code „AAAFRIENDS“ sparst du 50 Prozent auf dein Ticket – aber nur unter folgendem Link. Wir freuen uns an Feedback über aaa@welt.de. Noch mehr "Alles auf Aktien" findet Ihr bei WELTplus und Apple Podcasts – inklusive aller Artikel der Hosts. Hier bei WELT: https://www.welt.de/podcasts/alles-auf-aktien/plus247399208/Boersen-Podcast-AAA-Bonus-Folgen-Jede-Woche-noch-mehr-Antworten-auf-Eure-Boersen-Fragen.html. Hier könnt ihr den AAA-Newsletter abonnieren: https://www.welt.de/newsletter/article232797673/Alles-auf-Aktien-Der-taegliche-Boersen-Newsletter-fuer-WELTplus-Abonnenten.html Und – ganz neu: AAA gibt es jetzt auch auf Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/alles_auf_aktien/ Disclaimer: Die im Podcast besprochenen Aktien und Fonds stellen keine spezifischen Kauf- oder Anlage-Empfehlungen dar. Die Moderatoren und der Verlag haften nicht für etwaige Verluste, die aufgrund der Umsetzung der Gedanken oder Ideen entstehen. Hörtipps: Für alle, die noch mehr wissen wollen: Holger Zschäpitz können Sie jede Woche im Finanz- und Wirtschaftspodcast "Deffner&Zschäpitz" hören. +++ Werbung +++ Du möchtest mehr über unsere Werbepartner erfahren? Hier findest du alle Infos & Rabatte! https://linktr.ee/alles_auf_aktien Impressum: https://www.welt.de/services/article7893735/Impressum.html Datenschutz: https://www.welt.de/services/article157550705/Datenschutzerklaerung-WELT-DIGITAL.html

Your morning briefing. All the news you need to start your day.On today's podcast: (1) Another wave of intense heat is set to sweep across an already parched Europe this week, raising wildfire risks, threatening crops and drying watersheds feeding the region’s critically low rivers.(2) British shoppers retreated during the July heat wave, prioritizing small treats and cutting back elsewhere as the recent consumer boost showed signs of fading.(3) US President Donald Trump made sweeping new demands on Iran after Tehran reiterated requests for reparations as part of talks to wind down the conflict, dimming hopes of a quick deal that would reopen the Strait of Hormuz.(4) An Iranian assassination threat against President Donald Trump prompted an extraordinary operation last month in which he flew secretly from Turkey on an alternate military aircraft while the White House said he was aboard Air Force One, The Washington Post has learned.(5) US investment giants including Apollo Global Management, Blackstone, BlackRock. and Brookfield Asset Management are partnering with Nvidia to source $500 billion in financing for artificial intelligence infrastructure. Podcast Conversation: UK Wildfires Are Here to Stay. We Have to Adapt: Lara WilliamsSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Falta un día para el dato de inflación en EEUU de julio, que puede ser fundamental para anticipar la hoja de ruta de la FED de cara a la reunión de septiembre. Sin olvidarnos de las tensiones que llegan de Oriente Medio.. así, los futuros de Wall Street anticipan signo mixto este martes, tras las caídas de ayer lunes motivadas por las alzas del petróleo. A los índices les cuesta cada vez más mantener el optimismo sobre la reapertura de Ormuz mientras las negociaciones entre EEUU e Irán avanzan más despacio de lo esperado o sencillamente no avanzan. En el plano empreasarial, es protagonista Nvidia y el nuevo paquete de financiación de 500.000 millones de dólares procedente de grandes fondos de inversión como Apollo Global Management, Blackstone y BlackRock, entre otros. El análisis con Georgina Sierra, directora de análisis y activos financieros de Diverinvest.

On this week's Defense & Aerospace Report Business Roundtable, sponsored by Bell, Dr. “Rocket” Ron Epstein of Bank of America Securities, Sash Tusa of Agency Partners, and Richard Aboulafia of the AeroDynamic advisory consultancy join host Vago Muradian to discuss an up week on Wall Street and rising energy prices in the wake of wider conflict in the Middle East; higher Treasury yields in the wake of Federal Reserve Chairman Kevin Warsh's communication stumble on explaining Fed's decision to keep interest rates steady; President Trump call to suspend further Iran strikes pending a quick deal to end the war; despite an uncertain budget future, the Pentagon awarded Lockheed Martin a $58 billion contract for PAC 3 missiles that will also flow to companies like RTX and General Dynamics and HII $76.6 billion in contracts for nine Virginia-class attack subs and four Columbia-class ballistic missile subs; Washington and Tokyo worked together to prop up the yen, with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent asking the New York Federal Reserve Bank to sell euros to buy yen; Britain's Burnham government will release its budget on Oct. 28 that will include a $32 billion buffer as British bond yields near their post-2008 high after Washington and Jerusalem started their war on Iran; EasyJet says it's got a 5.7 billion pound or $7.7 billion offer from Apollo Global Management; and Airbus, AerCap, Boeing, Bombardier, General Dynamics, Hexcel, HII, Leonardo and Leonardo DRS, Melrose, Safran, and Textron report earnings.

Týždenné spravodajstvo z finančných trhov.O spoločnosť easyJet sa rozbieha súboj dvoch amerických investičných gigantov, keď Apollo Global Management prekonalo pôvodnú ponuku Castlelake a zvýšilo hodnotu aerolínie na približne 5,7 miliardy libier. Pre akcionárov ide o pozitívny vývoj, no konečný výsledok bude závisieť od regulačného schválenia, záväznosti ponúk a budúcej stratégie jedného z najväčších európskych nízkonákladových dopravcov. Téme sa vo svojom týždňovom komentári z finančných trhov podrobnejšie venuje Adam Záhorský...IAD TALKS, týždenník, IAD Investments,správ. spol., a.s., Malý trh 2/A, 811 08 Bratislava, IČO: 17 330 254, dátum vydania: 20.07.2026, 35/2026, EV 139/23/EPP..*UPOZORNENIE. Tento materiál je marketingovým oznámením. Kompletné znenie upozornenia nájdete na stránke www.iad.sk/marketingoveoznamenia

Frank Bisignano serves as Commissioner of the Social Security Administration & CEO of the IRS, and now he's being tapped to lead the expansion of Trump Accounts. In an extended interview, the Commissioner discusses stock donations to Trump Accounts and the tech transformation within the IRS.  Netflix shares are down over 40% for the past 12 months, but MoffettNathanson analyst Robert Fishman says the stock is a buy ahead of its earnings report. Plus, after a victory over England, Argentina will face off with Spain in the World Cup Final, the New York Yankees are reportedly in talks with Apollo Global Management to raise more money, and global energy markets are digesting the latest action in Iran.    Frank Bisignano - 10:49 Robert Fishman - 25:32   In this episode: Joe Kernen, @JoeSquawk Becky Quick, @BeckyQuick Andrew Ross Sorkin, @andrewrsorkin Katie Kramer, @Kramer_Katie Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Analysis focuses on the New York Yankees' potential $3 billion deal with Apollo Global Management and their roster requirements for a World Series run. They also put an intern named Becker through a rigorous trivia challenge covering sports, music, and movies. Conversations also touch on cruise ship experiences, smoking meats for football season, and the upcoming Sylvester Stallone biopic. 01:20 - Zac Brown Band Musings 05:55 - Cruise Safety And Plans 11:31 - Smoking Meat For Football 16:12 - Yankees Trade Deadline Outlook 21:30 - Yankees Huge Financial Deal 28:05 - August Vacation Schedule Debate 36:06 - Intern Becker Knowledge Test 42:55 - Pop Culture Knowledge Challenge

Faith in Leon Black was badly shaken once the scale of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein became public, because Black was not a distant acquaintance or a casual social contact — he had paid Epstein enormous sums after Epstein's 2008 conviction while remaining the dominant figure at Apollo Global Management. Investors, board members, employees, and clients were suddenly forced to ask how the head of one of the world's most powerful private-equity firms could have maintained such a lucrative relationship with Epstein and still claim he had no real idea who Epstein was. Apollo commissioned an outside review that found no evidence Black had been involved in Epstein's crimes or that Epstein had done business with Apollo, but the review still confirmed enough damaging facts to make Black's position unstable. The issue was no longer just reputational embarrassment; it became a question of judgment, governance, disclosure, and whether Black could still lead a major financial institution while carrying Epstein's shadow into every room.That loss of confidence helped turn Apollo's boardroom into a battleground. Black's planned transition out of the CEO role was supposed to look orderly, but the Epstein revelations intensified old rivalries inside the firm, especially between Black, Josh Harris, and Marc Rowan. Harris reportedly saw the crisis as an opening to gain influence or control, while Rowan ultimately emerged as the successor with enough board support to take over. Black, meanwhile, accused Harris of trying to exploit the Epstein scandal to push him out, while Harris denied wrongdoing and the courts later dismissed Black's racketeering claims. In the end, Epstein's relationship with Black did not just damage one billionaire's reputation; it fractured trust at Apollo, exposed power struggles among its founders, accelerated Black's exit, blocked Harris from taking command, and cleared the way for Rowan to become the face of Apollo's post-Epstein reset.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Jeffrey Epstein's relationship with Leon Black detonated inside Apollo Global Management because Black was not just any executive — he was Apollo's co-founder, chairman, and public face. Once it became clear that Black had paid Epstein enormous sums after Epstein's 2008 conviction, Apollo had a reputational crisis on its hands. The firm launched an independent review through its board's conflicts committee, which examined Black's relationship with Epstein and whether Apollo itself had business ties to Epstein. The review said it found no evidence that Black was involved in Epstein's criminal conduct and said Apollo had not retained Epstein, but it also confirmed that Black paid Epstein huge fees for personal tax and estate-planning advice. That confirmation was damaging enough that Black announced he would step down as Apollo CEO, and he later left the chairman role as well.The shockwave did not stop with Black's exit. Apollo had to reassure investors, clients, and partners that Epstein's relationship was with Black personally and not with the firm, while also overhauling governance and moving leadership to Marc Rowan. Years later, the issue is still haunting Apollo, with the firm again telling clients in 2026 that no one at Apollo other than Black had a business or personal relationship with Epstein, while shareholder litigation has accused Apollo and its leaders of misleading investors about the depth of Epstein-related ties. Black's Epstein relationship turned into a long-tail corporate contamination problem: it damaged Apollo's brand, forced a leadership transition, triggered legal and investor scrutiny, and left the company repeatedly trying to prove that Epstein's shadow stopped at Leon Black and did not extend into Apollo itself.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Faith in Leon Black was badly shaken once the scale of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein became public, because Black was not a distant acquaintance or a casual social contact — he had paid Epstein enormous sums after Epstein's 2008 conviction while remaining the dominant figure at Apollo Global Management. Investors, board members, employees, and clients were suddenly forced to ask how the head of one of the world's most powerful private-equity firms could have maintained such a lucrative relationship with Epstein and still claim he had no real idea who Epstein was. Apollo commissioned an outside review that found no evidence Black had been involved in Epstein's crimes or that Epstein had done business with Apollo, but the review still confirmed enough damaging facts to make Black's position unstable. The issue was no longer just reputational embarrassment; it became a question of judgment, governance, disclosure, and whether Black could still lead a major financial institution while carrying Epstein's shadow into every room.That loss of confidence helped turn Apollo's boardroom into a battleground. Black's planned transition out of the CEO role was supposed to look orderly, but the Epstein revelations intensified old rivalries inside the firm, especially between Black, Josh Harris, and Marc Rowan. Harris reportedly saw the crisis as an opening to gain influence or control, while Rowan ultimately emerged as the successor with enough board support to take over. Black, meanwhile, accused Harris of trying to exploit the Epstein scandal to push him out, while Harris denied wrongdoing and the courts later dismissed Black's racketeering claims. In the end, Epstein's relationship with Black did not just damage one billionaire's reputation; it fractured trust at Apollo, exposed power struggles among its founders, accelerated Black's exit, blocked Harris from taking command, and cleared the way for Rowan to become the face of Apollo's post-Epstein reset.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Leon Black's relationship with Jeffrey Epstein became impossible for Apollo Global Management to contain once reporting revealed that Black had paid Epstein staggering sums after Epstein's 2008 conviction. Black insisted the payments were for legitimate tax, estate, and financial-planning work, and an Apollo-commissioned review said it found no evidence that Black participated in Epstein's crimes or that Epstein did business with Apollo. But the review still confirmed the central problem: Apollo's billionaire co-founder and chief executive had maintained a massive financial relationship with Epstein long after Epstein was known publicly as a convicted sex offender. That alone shook investor confidence, damaged Apollo's reputation, and raised serious questions about Black's judgment.Black initially announced that he would step down as Apollo's CEO while remaining chairman, presenting the move as part of a leadership transition. But the pressure did not stop there. The Epstein revelations had turned Black from Apollo's greatest asset into a liability, creating reputational risk for the firm, tension inside the boardroom, and concern among clients and shareholders. Within months, Black gave up the chairman role as well, leaving Apollo's leadership and clearing the way for Marc Rowan to take over. In the end, Black was not forced out because Apollo proved he committed Epstein's crimes; he stepped down because his personal ties to Epstein became too damaging for one of the world's most powerful investment firms to keep defending.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Jeffrey Epstein's relationship with Leon Black detonated inside Apollo Global Management because Black was not just any executive — he was Apollo's co-founder, chairman, and public face. Once it became clear that Black had paid Epstein enormous sums after Epstein's 2008 conviction, Apollo had a reputational crisis on its hands. The firm launched an independent review through its board's conflicts committee, which examined Black's relationship with Epstein and whether Apollo itself had business ties to Epstein. The review said it found no evidence that Black was involved in Epstein's criminal conduct and said Apollo had not retained Epstein, but it also confirmed that Black paid Epstein huge fees for personal tax and estate-planning advice. That confirmation was damaging enough that Black announced he would step down as Apollo CEO, and he later left the chairman role as well.The shockwave did not stop with Black's exit. Apollo had to reassure investors, clients, and partners that Epstein's relationship was with Black personally and not with the firm, while also overhauling governance and moving leadership to Marc Rowan. Years later, the issue is still haunting Apollo, with the firm again telling clients in 2026 that no one at Apollo other than Black had a business or personal relationship with Epstein, while shareholder litigation has accused Apollo and its leaders of misleading investors about the depth of Epstein-related ties. Black's Epstein relationship turned into a long-tail corporate contamination problem: it damaged Apollo's brand, forced a leadership transition, triggered legal and investor scrutiny, and left the company repeatedly trying to prove that Epstein's shadow stopped at Leon Black and did not extend into Apollo itself.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Listen in for a live recording of CAIA's Capital Decanted Podcast that was hosted in New York City—where the conversation goes beyond surface-level takes to explore the deeper forces shaping capital allocation. Hosted by CAIA's John Bowman and Aaron Filbeck, the podcast brings together leading voices in asset management to challenge perspectives and unpack today's most important industry shifts.Guests:Taylor Robinson, Partner, Lexington PartnersKim Lew, President and CEO, Columbia Investment Management CompanyElizabeth Burton, Chief Strategist, Fortress Investment GroupReed Rayman, Partner, Apollo Global Management

In Part 1, Jim Voss, CEO of Tenneco, took on a company in need of a turnaround. In Part 2, he hands you the playbook behind it.This is the Tenneco Way. Not a poster on a wall. Not a slide deck someone presents once a month. It's the operating system running a 100-year-old company with more than 60,000 people across 28 countries. And as Jim puts it, it is the company's sustainable competitive advantage.Jim sees culture as the most powerful advantage a leader can build. It's the thing that drives every result you actually care about, because people drive results, and culture shapes people.From there, it builds. Simplify, kill the bureaucracy and the silos, and go hunt for friction instead of waiting for it to find you. Organizational velocity, the differentiator Jim believes will separate the winners from everyone else. Tenacious execution, because strategy gets eaten alive without it. Accountability and ownership without a shred of micromanagement. And win, treated as a mindset, not an outcome.Then Jim gets practical. How do you roll core values out to 60,000 people in 28 countries without peanut-buttering it across the wall? The Tenneco mindset and the power of humility. Why did he grow his own talent through Tenneco University and the P3 standards that went from impossible to gold? This is not the legacy playbook. This is a transformation that actually happened, told by the leader who lived it.Themes Discussed in this EpisodeWhy culture is an operating system, not a soft HR initiativeThe six gears of the Tenneco WayRadical candor and building a company where bad news travels fastRedefining failure: we never fail, we win or we learnOrganizational velocity as the next great competitive differentiatorAccountability and ownership without micromanagementThe Tenneco mindset and the power of humilityP3 standards and the pride that drives performance

US equity futures are under pressure, Asian markets are sharply lower, while European equities are also weaker. Markets are being driven by continued weakness in large-cap technology stocks and elevated volatility following the hawkish Fed stance. While progress in US-Iran talks has weighed on oil prices and provided some support to the macro backdrop, it has done little to offset risk-off sentiment tied to tech sector declines. Positioning dynamics, upcoming inflation data, and key earnings events are reinforcing a cautious tone, with geopolitical developments and rate expectations remaining central to near-term market direction.Companies Mentioned: Qualcomm, Eli Lilly, Apollo Global Management

Brad Karp, the longtime chairman of the elite Wall Street law firm Paul, Weiss, was forced to step down in early 2026 after newly released Justice Department files exposed a series of previously undisclosed interactions with Jeffrey Epstein. The documents showed that Karp had a personal relationship with Epstein that went beyond incidental contact, including attending private dinners at Epstein's residence and exchanging emails that reflected a notably friendly tone. In one instance, Karp thanked Epstein for an evening he described as “once in a lifetime,” and in another, he asked Epstein to help his son secure a role in a Woody Allen film. While Karp and his firm maintained that neither he nor Paul, Weiss ever represented Epstein professionally, the optics of those interactions—particularly given Epstein's 2008 conviction—triggered intense scrutiny.The fallout was swift and reputationally severe. Karp resigned not only from his role as chairman of Paul, Weiss after nearly two decades but also from external positions, including a college board seat, as the controversy widened. Additional disclosures suggested that his interactions with Epstein intersected with his professional orbit, particularly through his representation of Apollo Global Management and its co-founder Leon Black, a key Epstein associate. Emails also indicated that Karp at times engaged with Epstein on legal and strategic matters involving high-profile individuals, further blurring the line between personal and professional contact. Even though Karp expressed regret and framed the relationship as limited, the broader reaction reflected a growing intolerance for any post-conviction association with Epstein, especially among powerful institutional figures whose judgment is expected to be beyond reproach.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:https://www.ft.com/content/064e81a5-5e1b-4364-a581-9062868a3735?syn-25a6b1a6=1Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Episode Overview:In this episode of The World According to Boyar, Jonathan Boyar speaks with Lina Tetelbaum, a corporate partner at Wachtell Lipton, one of the world's most influential corporate law firms, where she heads the firm's shareholder engagement and activism defense practice.Lina takes us inside the world of shareholder activism — how activists choose targets, the small universe of ideas they typically push, how companies and boards respond, and why so many activist campaigns ultimately end in settlements rather than full proxy fights.We discuss the tension between the changes activists typically call for and long-term business strategy, the role of index funds and proxy advisors, how activists build positions, what really happens behind the scenes in settlement negotiations, and why even controlled companies are not completely immune from activist pressure.Lina also shares her perspective on Wachtell Lipton's history in takeover defense and activism, from the era of the poison pill to today's more complex battles between boards, activists, institutional investors, and other stakeholders.Topics discussed include: shareholder activism, proxy fights, activist settlements, board governance, index funds, ISS and Glass Lewis, activist nominees, controlled companies, capital allocation, M&A, and long-term value creation.To receive more of Boyar's research, interviews, and thoughts on investing, subscribe to our Substack at boyarresearch.substack.comAbout Lina Tetelbaum:Elina (Lina) Tetelbaum is a Corporate Partner and Head of Shareholder Engagement and Activism Defense at Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz.  Lina regularly counsels on proxy fights, takeover defense, corporate governance, crisis management and mergers and acquisitions. Lina has been named a Dealmaker of the Year by The American Lawyer, one of The Deal's Top Women in Dealmaking, a Power Player in Shareholder Activism by Financier Worldwide, a Leading Partner in Shareholder Activism by Legal500, a Law360 Rising Star for M&A, and one of the 500 Leading Dealmakers in America by Lawdragon, among other honors.Lina has advised companies in numerous industries navigating activist situations across an array of established and new activists, including Phillips 66 in its response to three years of activism from Elliott Management and first-ever contested vote by Elliott in the United States, United States Steel Corporation in its successful defense against a proxy contest by Ancora, The J.M. Smucker Co. in its response to activism by Elliott Management, Hexcel Corporation in response to activism by Vision One, Macy's, Inc. in its response to activism and unsolicited takeover proposals, Match Group in its response to activism by Elliott Management and later Anson Funds, and numerous REITs in their response to activism by Land & Buildings.  Lina has extensive expertise advising companies in response to unsolicited takeover offers, including National Instruments in its $8.2 billion acquisition by Emerson following its unsolicited offer, and Kansas City Southern in its unsolicited transaction with Canadian National Railway and $31 billion acquisition by Canadian Pacific Railway. Lina has also advised public and private companies in a wide range of industries in mergers and acquisitions, including The Free Press in its acquisition by Paramount, Allergan in its $83 billion acquisition by AbbVie, PDC Energy in its $7.6 billion acquisition by Chevron and successful proxy fight defense against Kimmeridge, Barnes Group in its $3.6 billion acquisition by Apollo Global Management, and Masonite International in its $3.9 billion sale to Owens Corning. Lina is the President of the Stuyvesant High School Alumni Association, an Advisory Board Member of the Harvard Law School Program on Corporate Governance, the John L. Weinberg Center for Corporate Governance at the University of Delaware, and the Yale Law School Center for the Study of Corporate law. She frequently lectures, presents and publishes on corporate governance and M&A at law schools and corporate governance conferences around the world. Lina received an A.B. magna cum laude in Economics from Harvard University and completed a J.D. from Yale Law School, where she served as editor-in-chief of the Yale Journal on Regulation and editor of the Yale Law Journal. After law school, Lina served as a law clerk to the Chief Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Unlocking Investment Opportunities Since 1975At the Boyar Value Group, we've dedicated nearly five decades to the pursuit of value on behalf of our clients. Founded in 1975, our firm has earned a reputation as a trusted source for uncovering undervalued opportunities in the stock market.To find out more about the Boyar Value Group, please visit www.boyarvaluegroup.com

How do you take a 100-plus-year-old automotive company with 158 manufacturing sites, operations in 28 countries, more than 60,000 employees, and over 30 brands and transform it into a top-performing company?That's the question at the heart of Tenneco's remarkable turnaround story.In less than three years, under the leadership of CEO Jim Voss and his team, Tenneco doubled its EBITDA margins, becoming a leader within its peer group. But before the performance came the hard part: confronting a deeply entrenched command-and-control culture and reimagining how leadership works inside a legacy automotive company.In Part 1 of this two-part series, Jim shares his unconventional path to the automotive industry, his private equity background with Apollo, what he discovered when he arrived at Tenneco in 2022, and why culture became the foundation of the company's transformation.This is a conversation about leadership, trust, organizational velocity, and the courage required to challenge decades of legacy thinking.Themes Discussed in this EpisodeWhy Tenneco's turnaround began with culture.What Jim found when he walked into Tenneco in 2022Breaking away from command-and-control leadershipWhy organizational velocity is now a competitive advantageThe challenge of transforming legacy automotive organizationsHow leaders create cultures that drive executionHigh care and high accountability as a leadership modelWhy manufacturing plants should sit at the top of the organizational pyramid

Plus: Chip maker Broadcom is working with the private equity companies Apollo Global Management and Blackstone to launch a 35-billion-dollar AI financing platform. And a U.S. military drone boat has rescued two crew members of an American Apache helicopter that crashed near the Strait of Hormuz. Anthony Bansie hosts. Sign up for WSJ's free What's News newsletter. An artificial-intelligence tool assisted in the making of this episode by creating summaries that were based on Wall Street Journal reporting and reviewed and adapted by an editor. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Apollo Global Management President Jim Zelter discusses what massive IPOs like SpaceX could mean for future companies looking to go public, the conflict in the Middle East, investment-grade debt sales and more with hosts Jonathan Ferro and Lisa Abramowicz.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The build-out for artificial intelligence will be inflationary in the early going, preventing new Federal Reserve Chair Kevin Warsh from cutting interest rates as quickly as he has suggested should be possible, according to Torsten Slok, chief economist at Apollo Global Management. He discusses this and more with Jonathan Ferro and Lisa Abramowicz. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In der heutigen Folge sprechen die Finanzjournalisten Daniel Eckert und Holger Zschäpitz über den Milliardenkauf von Berkshire, den Profiteur eines Mega-KI-Projekts in Frankreich und was sonst noch wichtig wird in dieser Woche. Außerdem geht es um Taylor Morrison, D.R. Horton, Lennar, PulteGroup, SoftBank, Schneider Electric, BioNTech, Microsoft, Nvidia, Intel, AMD, Hochtief, Zalando, Porsche Automobil Holding, iShares Core MSCI World ETF (WKN: A0RPWH), Sony Financial Group, JD Sports, Barratt Redrow, Auto Trader, Entain, Pinterest, DraftKings, The Trade Desk, Zillow, LEG Immobilien, PLS (ehemals Pilbara Minerals), Var Energi, Equinox Gold, TechnipFMC, Medline, Circle Internet Group, Alphabet, Apple, Amazon, Tesla, Micron, UBS, Apollo Global Management, EQT, Partners Group, Partners Group Private Markets Evergreen (ISIN: LU2716887091). Wir freuen uns an Feedback über aaa@welt.de. Noch mehr "Alles auf Aktien" findet Ihr bei WELTplus und Apple Podcasts – inklusive aller Artikel der Hosts. Hier bei WELT: https://www.welt.de/podcasts/alles-auf-aktien/plus247399208/Boersen-Podcast-AAA-Bonus-Folgen-Jede-Woche-noch-mehr-Antworten-auf-Eure-Boersen-Fragen.html. Hier könnt ihr den AAA-Newsletter abonnieren: https://www.welt.de/newsletter/article232797673/Alles-auf-Aktien-Der-taegliche-Boersen-Newsletter-fuer-WELTplus-Abonnenten.html Und - ganz neu: AAA gibt es jetzt auch auf Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/alles_auf_aktien/ Disclaimer: Die im Podcast besprochenen Aktien und Fonds stellen keine spezifischen Kauf- oder Anlage-Empfehlungen dar. Die Moderatoren und der Verlag haften nicht für etwaige Verluste, die aufgrund der Umsetzung der Gedanken oder Ideen entstehen. Hörtipps: Für alle, die noch mehr wissen wollen: Holger Zschäpitz können Sie jede Woche im Finanz- und Wirtschaftspodcast "Deffner&Zschäpitz" hören. +++ Werbung +++ Du möchtest mehr über unsere Werbepartner erfahren? Hier findest du alle Infos & Rabatte! https://linktr.ee/alles_auf_aktien Anzeige: Diese Folge enthält Werbung für Smartbroker+. Depot eröffnen, 30 € ETF als Bonus sichern und aus tausenden ETFs wählen. Smartbroker+ macht Investieren einfach. Alle Informationen gibt es unter: https://get.smartbrokerplus.de/triple-aaa-podcast2/ Impressum: https://www.welt.de/services/article7893735/Impressum.html Datenschutz: https://www.welt.de/services/article157550705/Datenschutzerklaerung-WELT-DIGITAL.html

In 1990, Marc Rowan walked out of Drexel with his belongings in a cardboard box. Within a year, Apollo was managing $6 billion. David Haber speaks with Marc Rowan, Cofounder, CEO, and Chair of Apollo Global Management, about building Apollo into one of the world's largest alternative asset managers and how private capital is reshaping the global economy. The conversation covers the rise of private credit, and why Rowan believes private markets are becoming increasingly central to financing the real economy. They also discuss AI, data centers, robotics, and the growing intersection between venture-backed technology companies and large-scale private financing. Along the way, they reflect on leadership, institutional culture, and why enduring organizations must adapt rather than protect the status quo.   Resources: Follow David Haber on X: https://x.com/dhaber Learn more about Apollo Global Management: https://www.apollo.com Stay Updated:Find a16z on YouTube: YouTubeFind a16z on XFind a16z on LinkedInListen to the a16z Show on SpotifyListen to the a16z Show on Apple PodcastsFollow our host: https://twitter.com/eriktorenberg Please note that the content here is for informational purposes only; should NOT be taken as legal, business, tax, or investment advice or be used to evaluate any investment or security; and is not directed at any investors or potential investors in any a16z fund. a16z and its affiliates may maintain investments in the companies discussed. For more details please see a16z.com/disclosures. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

A new lawsuit filed in Manhattan Supreme Court accuses billionaire investor Leon Black — co-founder of Apollo Global Management — of conspiring with the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and former law firm chairman Brad Karp to target, intimidate, and “silence and destroy” women who accused Black of sexual abuse. According to the suit by Wigdor LLP, internal emails from the recent Department of Justice release show Epstein and Karp discussing tactics to retaliate against Russian model Guzel Ganieva, including strategies to have her arrested, deported, or have her visa revoked, as well as surveilling her movements and license plates. The complaint portrays the three men as coordinating efforts to undermine and discredit accusers rather than address the allegations on their merits.The lawsuit also highlights Black's history of filing counterclaims against his accusers' legal teams, alleging malicious prosecution and defamation — all of which were dismissed — and asserts that Black misused the legal system to intimidate and suppress women seeking accountability. Black's attorney called the claims meritless, and neither Karp nor representatives for the law firm Wigdor provided comment. The filing follows previous civil actions by women alleging sexual misconduct by Black, some of which were withdrawn or dismissed, and adds new allegations that Black's legal and personal strategy included coordinated retaliation with Epstein's involvement.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Leon Black colluded with Jeffery Epstein, Brad Karp to attack accusersBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Leon Black's fall from grace at the Museum of Modern Art came in early 2021, after intense public backlash over his deep financial relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. Reports revealed that Black had paid Epstein approximately $158 million for tax and estate advisory services, long after Epstein's 2008 conviction for soliciting sex from a minor. The revelations sparked outrage across New York's art world, with artists, staff, and activists demanding his removal from MoMA's board. Protesters accused the museum of moral hypocrisy for maintaining ties with a man linked to Epstein's network, arguing that his presence tainted the institution's credibility and mission. As pressure mounted from both within and outside MoMA, calls for his resignation grew louder, and donors began quietly voicing discomfort about his continued leadership.In March 2021, facing unrelenting scrutiny, Black announced that he would step down as chairman of MoMA's board and not seek re-election when his term ended. While he technically remained on the board as a trustee, his exit from the chairmanship was viewed as a forced retreat under immense public pressure. His resignation from the top spot came shortly after he also resigned as CEO of Apollo Global Management amid the same Epstein scandal. MoMA attempted to minimize the fallout by framing his departure as voluntary, but the timing — coming amid protests and reputational damage — made clear that Black's position had become untenable. His exit marked one of the most high-profile instances of cultural institutions severing ties with financiers connected to Epstein.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

US equity futures are under pressure, Asian markets are mostly lower, and European equities are also weaker. Risk sentiment is weighed down by escalating tensions around the Strait of Hormuz, with disruptions to shipping activity and ongoing uncertainty around diplomatic progress. Reports of seizures and military activity in the region have pushed oil prices higher and raised concerns about prolonged supply disruptions. Markets are also focused on potential economic implications, with expectations for softer European activity data and rising cost pressures globally, while uncertainty around the duration of the disruption continues to cloud the outlook.Companies mentioned: lululemon athletica, Forvia, Apollo Global Management, American Airlines Group, Alaska Air

Vineyard Wind sues GE Renewables to block a walkout over $300M in withheld payments and defective blades. Plus Ørsted posts a $262M quarterly loss and shakes up its board. Sign up now for Uptime Tech News, our weekly newsletter on all things wind technology. This episode is sponsored by Weather Guard Lightning Tech. Learn more about Weather Guard’s StrikeTape Wind Turbine LPS retrofit. Follow the show on YouTube, Linkedin and visit Weather Guard on the web. And subscribe to Rosemary’s “Engineering with Rosie” YouTube channel here. Have a question we can answer on the show? Email us! Uptime316 Matthew Stead: [00:00:00] The Uptime Wind Energy Podcast brought to you by Strike Tape, protecting thousands of wind turbines from lightning damage worldwide. Visit strike tape.com And now your hosts. Allen Hall: Welcome to the Uptime Wind Energy Podcast. I’m your host Allen Hall, and I’m here with Matthew Stead and Rosemary Barnes who are in Australia. Before we get too far into this episode, I would like to mention that the UK US relationship has been very tense recently, as you have seen in the, in the news articles and on television. But there was one good news piece that just happened, which is the band Oasis just got inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. So that is trying to mend those relationships, bring the UK and US back together. In at least a musical sense. So I know Rosemary was watching that closely as the votes were counted. But, [00:01:00] uh, everybody in the UK is super thrilled about it as they should be. And all us Oasis fans can’t wait for the induction ceremony. In fact, we’re planning to go to Cleveland. They’ll go watch it if we can. We shall see now onto more important information this week. Vineyard, wind and GE are not getting along. And if you have been paying attention for the last two years, you would’ve noticed that there’s been a couple of tense moments. Well, uh, that wind project is a little bit up in the air because vineyard wind has filed suit against GE renewables to stop the turbine maker from walking away after GE sent a termination notice. Over a $300 million ish, uh, disagreement in unpaid bills. At the center of this dispute are defective blades, of course, that, uh, broke off in 2024 and caused a number of problems, uh, for GE and vineyard Wind is particularly a delay in the [00:02:00] project and ge having to fix pull blades off of turbines that were already installed and I think they ended up sending those back to France. Reading the lawsuit, it seems like GE did not repair those blades. They replaced those blades because, uh, they may not have been able to repair them or maybe is the amount of time it’s gonna take to repair them. You can repair almost anything made out of. Composite. Uh, but this is a big problem because, uh, if GE does walk away and they’re talking about walking away from this project at the end of April, vineyard, wind believes that the turbines are not ready to be operated, and they don’t have a way to operate those turbines. They don’t have the knowledge or the people because the people belong to GE that need to make some of these turbines operate. Even there’s even some question about if all the turbines are operating at the required [00:03:00]handover requirements. This is unique because I don’t think I’ve ever seen a wind turbine manufacturer leave before a wind site is finished. It must have happened before, but. It does put both sides in quite a pinch. Right.  Rosemary Barnes: Can I just jump, jump back to, to something that you said, um, that you can repair almost anything when it comes to composites? I would say that that doesn’t necessarily apply if your design was insufficient in the first place. And I mean the design for manufacturing in this case, I think that the, like computer model design worked fine, but obviously it was not as easy to manufacture or as possible to manufacture. With the correct quality as what they expected. It can’t have been so simple to just, just repair. That’s, um, that’s what I want to say. Like it, it’s obvious to me that if it was possible to repair, that would’ve been much easier than what they’ve ended up with, which I think is pretty foreseeable. Or most [00:04:00] engineers would probably have foreseen that if you, you know, put blades out there that, um, don’t meet your. Standard, um, quality control acceptance criteria that, you know, the consequence of that would be that it would be more likely to fail. So yeah, I think you can repair nearly anything on a standard blade that is possible to make correctly. But if you’ve got big quality problems, then it’s not, it’s, it’s not easy and it’s possibly not possible to, you know, just get, um, just get onto that in repair.  Matthew Stead: I, I think you’re both right. Because it all comes down to economics. So I think Alan’s statement, you know, things can be repaired. It just comes back to economics, doesn’t it?  Rosemary Barnes: U usually, yes. And like for your average, like if you’ve got a wind farm and you’ve got a blade with a big, a big repair, or you know, like a big defect right on the main laminate, that’s gonna require, you know, like a huge repair, taking the blade down and keeping it down for, you know, like three months while you rebuild like 20 meters [00:05:00] of laminate. Yes, that would be technically possible, but you wouldn’t because it would be so expensive. So us usually, like in 99% of cases, that would be it. That it’s not actually impossible to repair. It’s just very hard. But, you know, in these really huge blades and, you know, um, bearing in mind that I don’t, I don’t know the specific quality problems that they face, but, you know, just from my knowledge of composites, you can say what the challenging areas would be, but you know, a really big blade is gonna have a really thick laminate and, um, composites don’t like to have really thick laminates. When they cure, it’s usually an, an exothermic reaction, puts off heat, you know, like the temperature is changing and um, it works fine for thin laminates, but when it’s really thick you can get hot spots and cold spots and maybe it’s hard to get the resin to go all the way through evenly. But you know, imagine if you’ve got a really thick laminate and there’s a chunk of it that just didn’t get any resin in it. How are you gonna repair that? Like, I wouldn’t say impossible. I’m sure if the fate of the human race depended on it, then you would, you would make it work. But it’s [00:06:00] certainly very close to impossible.  Matthew Stead: Economically, it does not make sense.  Rosemary Barnes: You would probably have to make a few inventions. Along the way to be able to make it work as well. I think,  Allen Hall: I think I should read part of, and I don’t like reading these lawsuits, but this is informative in a sense that it provides some relative background as to what Vineyard Wind is thinking in some of the contract details that are involved here. So in June 4th, 2021, this is directly from the lawsuit, uh, vineyard Wind entered into A TSA with GE renewables in which. GE Renewables agreed to design, manufacture supply, install commission, and test the wind turbine generators for the vineyard wind project at a contract price of more than $1.3 billion. There you go. On the same day as an integral part of the commercial agreement, the parties entered into an SMA, uh, by which GE renewables agreed to maintain and service that wind turbine [00:07:00]generators for the first five years. Of operations of the project and guarantee that all wind turbine generators will operate at a 97% of production availability. Uh, this guarantee is central, is a central component of the commercial viability of the Vineyard Wind Project. So I would say so, right. Uh, at present, all of the wind turbine generators on the project have been installed. However, the wind turbine generators are not yet fully operational and are. Able to reduce power at only levels well below those intended under the contracts fundamental to the project’s commitment to Massachusetts to achieve full commercial operation. The project requires repair, commissioning, and maintenance of GE renewables, 62 proprietary wind turbine generators, and their component parts work that only GE renewables knows how to perform. So it sounds like Vineyard Wind has a five-year contract that GE ISS gonna operate these [00:08:00] turbines, and if they leave in a couple of weeks, vineyard wind really doesn’t have a backup plan. They may have. Were planning on a plan five years down the road where they could operate ’em, but to operate those turbines immediately when they haven’t, at least as. Indicated here may not be fully commissioned to providing the right amount of availability. That’s a huge problem for Vineyard. Huge.  Rosemary Barnes: It’s interesting to me that they’ve decided to withhold some money that I think everyone agrees that they owe that money to ge. But then there’s a dispute because Vineyard when says that GE owes them money for some other stuff That sounds like GE disputes. Um, it’s like if you have a problem. With your landlord, they always tell you, don’t, don’t withhold rent, because then they can, you know, that’s, that’s their out of the contract. Right? So it seems weird, like it’s a relatively small amount compared to what vineyard wind is risking. So. It seems to me like, are they, is this a mistake from them? Are they giving ge an out from this contract that’s gonna be [00:09:00] really hard for them to meet? It might be that GE knows what it would cost to entirely fix the wind farm and have it producing the way that it should. But, you know, let’s say in a worst case scenario, that means remaking every single blade in the um, in the wind farm. At the, at the French factory, you know, like that could be your, your worst case scenario. GE knows that that’s gonna cost more than what they’re ever gonna pay over the five years of, um, you know, the, uh, of missing the availability guarantee. So then it is worth, for them, the cost effective thing to do is to just walk away and they’re kind of, the amount that they’ll have to pay is limited. If I’m thinking fairness, it’s so unfair that vineyard wind would be stuck with this wind farm that they can’t really get to do anything. But if I think about how I see these disputes work out in the smaller versions of them that I’ve seen, it seems like vineyard wind actually probably is the one more likely to come out with a bad outcome from the way that they’re [00:10:00] choosing to play this right. Uh, because they, they risk not being able to operate at all. And they have potentially, like, I’m not a lawyer, I don’t, I don’t know about, you know, how likely it is that the 300 million, that their withholding will be enough for GE to walk away with without having to pay anything for, um, you know, not operating, uh, correctly over the next five years. But, um, you know, it just seems like it’s not so much money compared to the billions that are at stake. To risk that they will be left unable to operate the wind farm at all. You know, it’s just, uh, I don’t know. It seems risky.  Allen Hall: Let’s start with the kickoff of what happened and what vineyard wind is alleging happened from these, their perspective on it. It does provide some insight into all the things we talked about on the podcast for the last two years. We, we saw bits and pieces of it. According to vineyard wind, uh, GE Renewable [00:11:00] claims that it is owed quote amounts due unquote for milestone payments is, is contrary in in language to the TSA, so the turbine supply agreement put simply vineyard wind owes nothing to GE renewables because the TSA turbine supply agreement allows vineyard wind to withhold amounts. The project engineer determines that GE Renewable owes vineyard wind from milestone payments otherwise due under the contract. So what they’re saying is GE owes is a bunch of money. Yes, we do owe GE renewables money, but it’s in Vineyard Wind’s favor. So why would they send GE money? Um, those set off amounts are substantial because GE renewables caused catastrophic injury to vineyard wind by installing 68 defective blades on 24. Wind turbine generators resulting in two years of delay and over a billion dollars of damages. In July, 2024, one of the GE renewable offshore blades collapsed and fell into the waters off Nantucket resuscitating a massive environmental cleanup and requiring a six month [00:12:00] construction hiatus during which GE Renewable performed a root cause analysis, concluding that 68 of the 72 GE renewable. Blades installed at the project, nearly all manufactured by GE Renewable in Gaspay Canada, and they say nearly all, not all, nearly all were also defected because they were inadequately bonded together, the original blades were so poorly made that they were beyond repair. Indeed, the federal government required GE renewable to remove all the blades and to replace all gas bay blades with others manufactured at a different facility in Sherbrook, France. So that’s really the kickoff to all of this disagreement was the quality issues from Gas Bay. Uh, vineyard Wind goes on to say that GE Renewables and, and their CEO, Scott Straza, basically admitted to, uh, a, a serious, um. Overlook or quality issue? Quality escape, something of the [00:13:00] sort, uh, in some of the statements, which I, I remember him talking about  Rosemary Barnes: allegedly, in your opinion. Allen Hall: Well, and Scott Streek did say it. In fact, here’s, here’s what Scott Streek did say. Streek, uh, acknowledged that the blade failure and said, quote, we have identified a material deviation or a manufacturing deviation. In one of our factories that through the inspection or quality assurance process we should have identified. Because of that, we’re going to use our existing data and reinspect all of the blades that we have made for offshore wind and for context in this factory in Gus Bay, Canada, where the material deviation existed. That’s a quote. What happens now,  Rosemary Barnes: obviously I’ve never worked on anything that’s, this is the biggest example of, um, a, you know, a blade quality problem, a serial issue probably that’s ever happened in the wind industry. I’ve never worked on something this big, but I have worked on probably half a dozen small, small versions that are quite similar. Um. To this, but just on a, you know, a much, much smaller scale. And I will say that it never [00:14:00] feels fair what the owner of the wind farm, like, what the outcome is, never feels fair to the owner of the wind farm. Like when you’ve got a serial defect in, um, in play it like, and everyone suffers. It costs, it’s gonna cost the, um, you know, the manufacturer a lot of money. But I think that proportionally it is. Affects the owners more in nearly every case. It’s just there are some contractual things that you don’t end up with outcomes that feel, feel fair to anybody that, um, you know, would take a casual look at it. So I don’t think that an outcome that feels fair is probably likely for, for vineyard wind. Um, and I guess it all just comes down to whether or not GE agree that they owe that 800 million or whatever the figure is. Um, or if a court finds that they owe it. Because surely the contract doesn’t say that Vineyard wins engineer at any time can just, or project manager can at any time decide [00:15:00] that, um, GE owes the money and so they don’t have to pay. That obviously wouldn’t be a very, um, nice contract for GE to sign. So there’s gotta be some more nuance to it other than. That our project manager says, you owe us money so we’re not paying. And then, you know, you have to continue. Like, I, it’s probably impossible for us to, without, um, you know, having access to all of, all of the documents and the legal degree to understand it. Probably, probably hard for us to Yeah. Come up with a, a reasonable conclusion.  Allen Hall: It does make you think, usually the progression is dispute. Whatever contractually is obligated in the beginning happens. And so if there’s someone who decides what pot of money goes where, that, that’s usually the first step. Second step is usually arbitration in the us. I’d be surprised if they haven’t gone through at least an attempt at arbitration. And then once arbitration breaks down, then you go into the courts, which is clearly where they’re at now you’re, you’re at the highest level that you can be in terms of legal proceedings to try to sort this matter out. And I’m sure both sides. Do not want to be in front of a [00:16:00] courtroom if they can avoid it. So there’s a much more to come about this. I, I think the other operators, uh, GEs this is, is this GEs only? Yeah. This is GEs only wind farm offshore in the us So this is it. But I would imagine that the other, uh, operators in offshore wind in the US or. Being very careful word through contracts and how this is proceeding.  Rosemary Barnes: That’s something else I think about this case is that it’s going to be like the GE are the ones who have more at stake in terms of reputational harm. I would’ve thought then. Um, so. Yeah, that’s obviously a consideration that they’ve, they’ve gotta have, it isn’t, regardless of where the facts are, it’s not a good look. Right. Um, to be seen, to be walking away from a wind farm. And it probably would make other people considering big expensive GE wind farms to be like, oh, you know, are we actually gonna get across the line with this? Or is there a risk that they just, you know, throw a tantrum towards the end and threaten to walk away and we have to renegotiate [00:17:00] everything. So, um, I guess that there’s a, yeah, there’s always just the perception. Is as important in a lot of ways to what the actual facts are.  Matthew Stead: The thing I find is, um, I mean this is largely a legal thing, isn’t it? You know, we, we’ve agreed that it’s, with the lawyers, it’s a largely a legal thing. The, the sort of topic that I’m interested in is, um, like the example of you buy a car, you know, you buy a Toyota, um, you expect to be able to maintain it. You expect to be able to run it and get a serviced by a Toyota, you don’t expect in the first year to take your Toyota to Ford and get them to fix it in the first year. The bigger issue is the turbine supplier agreement does not actually allow the turbine to be operated without the OEM, so no one knows. No one knows how to run it. So for me, it’s a massive industry challenge, access of data, access of how to run a turbine. If the OEM is no longer there, so I think hopefully [00:18:00] this can have rama bigger ramifications for the industry that operators and owners can actually run the assets they own.  Rosemary Barnes: Well, there are companies that will come in and pull out your control system of your, you know, your turbine. If it, you know, if you, um, if you don’t wanna work with them anymore or if the company went bankrupt, then there are companies that will rip it out and put a new one in. It’s not, not saying that that’s like an easy, cost effective thing to do and probably not gonna get the same, um, performance as, as you originally did. But that’s what happens if you are, um, you know, your turbine manufacturer goes bankrupt and they just don’t exist to support anymore. Sometimes people have to resort to literally pulling out the whole control system and starting again. Not easy. When it’s something as big and new as this one obviously  Matthew Stead: isn’t the better answer that when you buy something, you actually buy the information to actually run it. Rosemary Barnes: I don’t fully agree [00:19:00] though, because. It’s like, um, o often what you say, oh, you know, like this would be good. Like the one common thing is people say, oh, you know, like it’s planned obsolescence. People, engineers plan design things to fail so that you’ll need to replace them. And I think that that does, that does happen again in like consumer, consumer products. Like, um, yeah, like your, your battery isn’t really designed to last for 10 years in your, your phone the same way that it is in an electric car. Um, more than 10 years in the case of an electric car. Um. But it’s not. It’s not what happens in industrial scale equipment. You are mostly worried about getting the price point right. And if you want something to last longer, if you want something that anybody can come in and fix it easily, it costs more to engineer like that and usually like a a lot more. So it’s not just people like evil engineers or evil. Um. Evil management at these, at these companies.  Allen Hall: I already get to evil engineers. Rosemary Barnes: No, people think it is. People think it’s evil. Engineers like purposely designing bad products to [00:20:00] um, make money, which I actually do think that they do with consumer products. Some of the time. Um, but when it comes to like industrial equipment, I, I don’t think that that’s the main, the main thing that planned obsolescence is not, is not a major factor here. It’s about trying to get the price point competitive to make sales. And if you want to get better engineering, you, you will, you will pay for it.  Matthew Stead: I got a call with someone today that, which is on this topic. So, you know, we, we are a sensor company and, um, we pro we provide results, okay? So if we actually provided the raw data that we measure, it actually allows people, other people to reverse engineer our products. So we don’t generally provide the raw data, so we provide the end outcome. Because it means that people can’t copy what we do. It means we can actually charge a lower price. So actually there’s a lot of logic to, you know, having, you know, [00:21:00] all these ways of engineering a product to, you know, give a better outcome to the end customer. Allen Hall: I know Rosie doesn’t like Elon Musk, but this one of the things that Elon Musk did with Tesla at least, I don’t know about the other companies that he runs, but with Tesla, they went off and. Made patents, right? So they applied for a bunch of patents and received them and then just made them open use. And the reason they did that was so somebody couldn’t jump the patent line, create a patent about some car related electric thing, and prohibit Tesla from doing. And so Tesla has always had the need to create patents that cost them, I’m sure, a, a pretty penny, just so they can avoid. Patent conflicts and lawsuits going forward. And it’s sort of the same thing, right? That the evil engineer bit, that’s the evil engineer bit I, that I don’t like is that when you get these crazy patent things happening out there that are just there to collect money and not do any of the work,  Rosemary Barnes: and some of the patents are. Absolutely crazy. Like when you do a patent search and it’s like you’re [00:22:00] reading the language and like it sounds like they’ve just patented the concept of a wheel, you know? And then you’ve gotta try and figure out like what’s actually going on. Yeah. In  Matthew Stead: our world, someone has a patent around the Doppler shift. Allen Hall: How can you have a patent on Doppler shift? That’s crazy.  Matthew Stead: It’s fundamental physical. You know, there’s a shift in frequency of a sound, um,  Allen Hall: based on speed  Matthew Stead: and yes, sound comes from a blade and there’s a doppler shift.  Allen Hall: That’s real. I, I, I guess, uh, see, that’s, that’s, that’s the craziness of that. See, you should have thought about. The idiots that were gonna do that and then write a patent about Doppler shift.  Rosemary Barnes: It’s really annoying because it’s like, you know that it’s not gonna be, I mean, a lot of them you are like 99% sure it’s not gonna be possible for them to defend that if it gets challenged. But it’s like, to what extent do we trust that, you know? Um, so you still usually end up steering around it anyway, but it, it really gets in the way of elegant engineering solutions. All these. Bizaro patents that are out there like clogging up [00:23:00] the design landscape.  Allen Hall: That happened recently. Right? Rosa? You had and I were talking about a particular patent. I thought had it existed and it did at one point exist and I. Rosie said, I don’t, I don’t see it anymore. So I did some search on it. Yeah, it got pulled off. Uh, the list of valid patents. It was a lightning related thing.  Rosemary Barnes: And you were complaining that it was so obvious that they should never have been able to patent it, but yeah, and somebody obviously said, said something at some. I don’t think patents are not the best way to protect an idea anyway. Right? Like nobody, if you, if you’ve got a new technology idea and you’re relying on a patent to protect other people from copying it, it’s not the best idea. I do work with a lot of small inventors who are like, oh, I’ve got a patent application, and they think it means something, that it doesn’t. They think, oh, you know, patent was approved. That means it works. It means it’s a good idea. It doesn’t mean any of those things for like small, outside of big companies. I, I think it’s super rare that you would get more. You would get a positive return [00:24:00] on. On filing and maintaining a patent in all the countries that, um, are relevant  Allen Hall: as wind energy professionals, staying informed is crucial, and let’s face it difficult. That’s why the Uptime podcast recommends PES Wind Magazine. PES Wind offers a diverse range of in-depth articles and expert insights that dive into the most pressing issues facing our energy future. Whether you’re an industry veteran or new to wind, PES Wind has the high quality content you need. Don’t miss out. Visit PES wind.com today. Sted posted a net loss of 1.7 billion Danish groner, roughly $262 million for the third quarter, as the cost of battling us anti win policies continues to mount the CEO. Rasmus abo, uh, says the company is about. One year into a turnaround plan, uh, that’s set to [00:25:00] run through beginning of 2028, and that the medicine is starting to work. Uh, one major strategic change. Ted will enter partnerships on new projects far earlier, and so it will never again, uh, be forced into damaging late stage divestments The company maintained its full year EBITDA and, uh, guidance of, of, of. 24 to 27 billion Danish kroner. That’s a good bit of money. And the sale of a 50% stake in the horn, C3 to Apollo Global Management for a billion dollars is already under. Well, at least in progress, but there’s a lot more behind the scenes here. Sted had an basically an investor meeting and a shareholder meeting, and, uh, they have three new board members. They let go of, if I remember correctly, three board members that were [00:26:00] employees that they just, uh, had reductions in forces that happen to affect board members, which is very odd. Very, very odd in my. Humble opinion, having watched number of boards for a long time, usually don’t remove board members in that fashion, but there does seem to be a, a, a more emphasis on the board to help, uh, the CEO of stead get through some of these tumultuous times and maybe a little bit of concern about the, the, the way the board was constructed to get or sit back into profitability sooner rather than later. This is a big deal up in Denmark. Of course, stead is the power company for Denmark. This has implications worldwide, though, uh, what stead does everybody else follows. And the one thing that, uh, that was sort of in dispute before the shareholder meeting was EOR at one point, was. At least contemplating a board seat. And then right [00:27:00] before the meeting they backed off and said, no, it’s fine. We don’t want a board seat. Maybe they had some sense of what the changes were gonna be made to the board, so they felt better about it. But orsa is not out of the rough seas at the moment. There’s a couple more years of, of growing pains and learning some lessons that they wish they didn’t have to learn. I guess that’s the way I would look at it. What implications does this have on the greater offshore wind community? Is stead taking basically a step back and, and trying to focus. Herding offshore wind, or is it just other, another companies are gonna step into that, that space that Sted may have previously occupied? Matthew Stead: I think what you’re talking about, um, Alan, is, is all logical. I mean, you know, you can’t have everything. So, um, as in you can’t, you know, getting late to a project and expect it to go well, um, spreading risk is a good thing, you know, so the whole, you know, [00:28:00] doing it fast. Doing it cheap and doing it well. Um, you, you, you can’t have all of those things at once. So actually what they’re talking about, I think is entirely logical. Um, so yeah, I think if they can lead the way that way and, and you know, I’ve come from, um, some other industries like construction and they, they spread the risk across multiple. Organizations that know what they’re doing. So the idea of joint ventures where you get the best of both worlds makes complete sense to me. Allen Hall: Do they start making different decisions on projects based upon their financial stake at the moment? A And more importantly, when they start looking for offshore wind projects, are they likely to hook up with Vestas? Because I, I think that’s where this is all going.  Matthew Stead: Pick a horse.  Allen Hall: Yeah, they’re gonna pick a horse. I, I mean, that’s the best, best way to think about it. They’re gonna pick a horse and gonna stick with them. Instead of having, uh, a lot of options and playing one against the other, I could see alignment happening, uh, versus being the [00:29:00] one offshore, of course. And or instead being a big player. There is, is that the combo that’s gonna push the industry forward? Rosemary Barnes: Yeah, maybe. I mean, I think it’s more similar to what Chinese manufacturers are doing, a lot more vertical integration. You can, um, yeah, save, save a lot of money by doing that. It is. Uh, you know, not always ideal from other points of view. And it might be nice to have a, you know, a thriving technology ecosystem of, you know, different manufacturers competing with each other and, you know, making better products. So, um, yeah, I don’t know, uh, have sit on the fence on this one for what’s good. I do feel really bad for osted though, like in terms of the, the. Shocks that they’ve had over the last couple of years. I, I don’t think most people would’ve foreseen that it would be so risky to try and expand into the US like everybody. A few years ago, everybody thought that that was the next big profitable frontier in offshore wind. And [00:30:00] I don’t think that many people would’ve foreseen things going the way that they did.  Allen Hall: Is it the result of large industrial projects take time and that in that timeframe, five, 10 years, that the world changes so much? You can’t. Accurately predict what the outcome will be and or it just got caught up in it.  Rosemary Barnes: Yeah, I think that’s actually one of the themes you guys have read, um, how big things get Done Right by Ben. Um, that’s one of the things that he mentions that the quicker that you can do the execution phase of your project, like spend plenty of time planning it, but when you’re actually committed, work super fast because the longer that you’re working, the more your chance of a, a black swan. Um, a Black Swan event be, you know, a government that turns out to, you know, want to, you know, tear up contracts and you know, do all these other unprecedented stuff. You know, if you’ve got projects that take 10 or more years to build, then there’s just like a lot more risk of something like that happening. And I think that, um, you know, like in some ways that’s just one of the inherent weaknesses of [00:31:00] wind energy in general, but offshore wind especially is that it does actually take a long time to get through all of the things that you need to do to. Um, to complete a project. And so it’s just, yeah, a lot more chance for, you know, the government will change two or three times probably in, um, you know, during a project. How many wars can start, how many, you know, pandemics. Can there be you? Like, the longer that you’re going, you might think none of those things could be predicted and that can’t, but you can predict that those sorts of big things happen. And the longer that you, um, are exposed and the more of them that you’re probably gonna face. And I think that, yeah, like something like a solar farm is much quicker to roll out. Um, battery projects are much quicker to roll out. So it’s just like that, those are benefits of those technologies compared to wind. You just have to kind of accept that that’s one of the weaknesses of this, this industry that we’re in. Allen Hall: Is it a benefit to have solar because it can deploy very quickly, or, or is it just [00:32:00] smarter to have. More wind turbines of smaller megawatt outputs because you can manufacture ’em at scale quicker, and so the economies of scale don’t really matter so much. This is an argument we’ve been making for months now, that when you start selecting a single turbine, which doesn’t have any history, and it’s a big one, and it takes a long time to produce, you are really setting up yourself to fall into that window where something can go wrong. Versus just stamping out two or three megawatt turbines and going like crazy. It just seems so much less risky.  Rosemary Barnes: I think that I definitely agree with you for onshore and then for offshore. Probably also, like I don’t think it’s necessarily go for a smaller turbine. It’s just don’t go for the brand new one. Like that’s why I don’t understand how many people are like so obsessed with this, you know, small, small amount of improvement that they get from the very biggest. Turbine, but I don’t think that they realize the amount of technical risk. And I think that it gets, it’s getting [00:33:00] more and more like the, um, technology increment is getting more and more the bigger that we go. It’s not that like, oh, we’re learning how to do this, this, well, it’s, it’s the opposite that, you know, like every, um, increment up in size as an exponentially more like larger number of problems, technical problems that have to be solved. And, um, I think that, yeah, that’s. That’s something people don’t factor in. Allen Hall: Is it the gold rush problem where the miners were trying to hit that pocket of gold and spending all their time trying to find this gold, find this gold. In the meantime, a lot of them obviously broke, and the people that made money in the gold rush or the stores that sold the pickaxes, if you, you making a pickaxes, you have a customer page, you can just sell those things in. Levi’s, be the other one, right? So they’re selling genes of pickaxes to the miners. Guess who won in that battle, right? Levi’s.  Rosemary Barnes: But what’s the analogy with win two of the pickax manufacturers,  Allen Hall: the people that make the two megawatt machines? In my opinion, that’s gonna be who the pickaxes are because you don’t have to think about it. If [00:34:00] you can talk to operators of the United States today and you say, what turbine would you like to buy over again? And they will almost all tell you, GE one point fives. Almost all of them. And you go, yeah. Oh, okay. I understand it because it’s a machine. It’s pretty simple. But it does work. And it is, it is a true warhorse turbine. And some of the vested ones are the same. Simpson Siemens turbines are very similar, right? Uh, but in today’s world, when we’re talking about 15, 20 megawatt turbines, I just think, man, you gotta be careful doing that just because of the time it takes to develop it and produce it, and. Work at all the kinks? Uh, Rosemary, I think you’re right about that.  Rosemary Barnes: I think the issue is that, um, when you’re deciding whether to develop a project or not, it really depends a lot on what the spreadsheet tells you your return is going to be. And, um, you know, a bigger turbine with, uh, you know, like larger output over its lifetime, longer lifetime. Those are all gonna give you really good. Spreadsheet numbers, but what’s not in the spreadsheet [00:35:00] is, oh, you know, you’ve actually increased your risk of having to wait two years while they replace every single blade in this, um, in this wind farm. Oh, by the way, yeah, you’re gonna be dealing with, um, you know, twice as many repairs and your, um, downtime is not gonna be 2%, it’s gonna be 3.5% or, or something. You know, those, those sorts of things, I don’t think, uh, adequately captured in the, the spreadsheets whe say when you, whether you should or shouldn’t develop a new project.  Matthew Stead: So, so the evil engineering should be making decisions, not the evil lawyers.  Allen Hall: The financial people always make the decisions, right? The insurance companies make the decisions.  Rosemary Barnes: Don’t think there’s a lot of engineering into, um, input in the, the very first stages. But I also think that if you put in the reality, like most engineers, I think are a little bit pessimistic because our job is to see what problems exist at, you know, and then solve them ideally. Um, but at least part of it, like our brains are wired to look for problems, right? That’s, um, that’s a necessary part of the job, in my opinion. But if you were, you know, like pessimistic in your assumptions in the [00:36:00] spreadsheet, you would probably the majority of the time say, don’t make this project. The return is not very good. Allen Hall: Well, that would be a smart move, right? Yeah.  Rosemary Barnes: Yeah. So I don’t actually think you probably should have too many engineers in in involved.  Matthew Stead: Yeah. But what is the CEO incentivized by is the, yeah, so it, it comes back to, you know, what, what, what drives the project And it’s not just engineering.  Allen Hall: That wraps up another episode of the Uptime Wind Energy Podcast. If today’s discussion sparked any questions or ideas, we’d love to hear from you. Reach out to us on LinkedIn and don’t forget to subscribe. So if you never miss an episode and if you found value in today’s conversation, please leave us a review. It really helps. For Rosie and Matthew, I am Allen Hall and we’ll see you next week on the Uptime Wind Energy [00:37:00] Podcast.

Welcome to Cross Examining Cyber, a podcast brought to you by Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer. In this podcast series, we speak to our business leaders about all things cyber, including the legal, governance, technical, regulatory and policy developments that impact corporates around the world. I'm really excited to announce that this is the first of our Cross-Examining Cyber Director Series. For the next six months, we will speak to some of our leading directors, including David Gonski, Anne Templeman-Jones, John Mullen, Catherine Brenner, just to name a few. Today's the first in our series, and today we cross-examine David Moffatt. David has over 40 years' experience in executive leadership positions. He's worked and lived almost everywhere, Australia, the US, Europe and Asia. He's currently the chair of Ventia Services Group, Environmental Remediation and Social Services and Apollo Global Management. David is also the chair of the American Chamber of Commerce here in Australia. David has first-hand experience dealing with a cyber incident as part of his role at Ventia. His insights are not only considered but come from direct experience. Thanks again for listening. This is Cross Examining David Moffatt, the first in our Director Series. Here we go.

The unsettling story of Leslie Wexner—the Midwestern retail billionaire who built Victoria's Secret, then gave Jeffrey Epstein extraordinary access to his money and credibility. But how much did he know? Listen to Vanessa and Justine's podcast Fallen Angel Read Gabriel Sherman's Vanity Fair article on Epstein and Wexner. Chameleon is a production of Campside Media and Audiochuck. Follow Chameleon on Instagram @chameleonpod Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

In this episode, Scott Becker highlights sharp year to date declines across major firms like Blackstone, KKR, Apollo Global Management, and Ares Management.

In this episode, Scott Becker highlights sharp year to date declines across major firms like Blackstone, KKR, Apollo Global Management, and Ares Management.

Here they come again. Every couple of decades another infestation of smiling, winking, fast-talking, corporate hucksters descends on rural America.The scammers have varied from Big Oil's notorious land men to peddlers of private prisons. But this one is the biggest, most important flimflam yet, with Silicon Valley billionaires and Wall Street speculators rushing through the countryside buying up vast tracts of land.Why? Because Amazon, Google, Meta, and dozens of other tech profiteers are converting their corporations into Artificial Intelligence robotic empires, and each AI facility is absolutely humongous, requiring airport-size swaths of land.Acreage is the least of it though, for the data centers consume Niagara Falls-levels of water. So local families, farms, factories, and businesses suddenly find their essential water supply being raided by faraway corporate water suckers.Also, local utility bills skyrocket as profiteers drain enormous amounts of electric power from the area's grid. Worse, corporate lobbyists squeeze local officials to subsidize this thievery! For example, a private equity predator named Apollo Global Management recently fleeced a New York county for $1.4 billion in “job-creation” subsidies for a sprawling data center that will – get this – employ only 125 people. Yes, that's $11 million per job – with actual workers only getting a pittance of it.You don't need a big schnoz to smell this stink. The good news is that county officials across the country are beginning to say “NO” to AI's money grab. Also, Sen. Bernie Sanders and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez have proposed a national moratorium on this corporate frenzy to impose an AI future that We the People do not want. For more information and action, go to foodandwaterwatch.org.Jim Hightower's Lowdown is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit jimhightower.substack.com/subscribe

In this episode, Scott Becker discusses Intel surging with a major buyback from Apollo Global Management.

Jim Zelter, president at Apollo Global Management, offers a defense of private credit and says investors are missing the plot on the public/private convergence. He speaks with Bloomberg's Jonathan Ferro, Lisa Abramowicz and Annmarie Hordern. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Plus: Anthropic races to contain leak of code behind Claude AI agent. Intel agrees to buy out Apollo Global Management's stake in Irish chip manufacturing plant. And President Trump raises the possibility of leaving NATO. Imani Moise hosts. Sign up for WSJ's free What's News newsletter. An artificial-intelligence tool assisted in the making of this episode by creating summaries that were based on Wall Street Journal reporting and reviewed and adapted by an editor. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Leon Black, CEO of Apollo Global Management, wrote to his investors expressing regret over his past relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, but he strongly denied wrongdoing or any inappropriate conduct. Black acknowledged that he transferred between $50 million and $75 million to Epstein as far back as 2008, and detailed that Epstein provided professional services to Black's family partnership — services such as estate planning, tax advice, and philanthropic consulting.Black insisted that all of his dealings with Epstein were in a personal capacity and that Apollo itself did not conduct business with Epstein. He said he was “completely unaware” of, and appalled by, the wrongdoing revealed in late 2018 that led to the criminal charges against Epstein. He also pledged to cooperate with ongoing investigations, including that by the U.S. Virgin Islands, while maintaining that none of the conduct was illegal.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comSource:https://www.reuters.com/article/us-people-jeffrey-epstein-apollo-global/apollo-ceo-black-says-he-regrets-ties-to-epstein-denies-any-wrongdoing-idUSKBN26X2PDThe letter:https://www.axios.com/leon-black-jeffrey-epstein-0eff63bd-6549-4c03-a93a-bb99766dcade.htmlBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Pam Bondi's appearance before Congress on Epstein-related matters drew sharp criticism for its tone and substance, with lawmakers pressing her on past decisions, her handling of the case while serving as Florida's attorney general, and her public posture since. Rather than offering clear, detailed answers, she was widely viewed as evasive and combative, leaning on narrow legal defenses and distancing language instead of addressing broader concerns about oversight failures and missed opportunities for accountability. The exchange amplified long-standing questions about whether key officials treated Epstein as an ordinary defendant or as someone afforded unusual deference. For critics, the hearing underscored a pattern: when pressed on the record, officials revert to technicalities and memory gaps, leaving major questions about prosecutorial judgment, victim notification, and investigative scope unresolved.At the same time, the involvement of figures like Jay Clayton has fueled skepticism about the integrity of the process. Clayton's prior ties to Apollo Global Management—an institution that has faced scrutiny over connections to Epstein—have been cited by critics as a glaring conflict or, at minimum, an appearance problem that undermines public confidence. Even if no direct impropriety is established, placing individuals with links to firms entangled in Epstein-related controversies into positions touching the investigation invites doubts about independence and rigor. To detractors, it looks like a familiar loop: the same circles of finance, law, and government overseeing matters that intersect with their own networks, making assurances of impartiality harder to accept and reinforcing the perception that the system is policing itself.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Brad Karp, the longtime chairman of the elite Wall Street law firm Paul, Weiss, was forced to step down in early 2026 after newly released Justice Department files exposed a series of previously undisclosed interactions with Jeffrey Epstein. The documents showed that Karp had a personal relationship with Epstein that went beyond incidental contact, including attending private dinners at Epstein's residence and exchanging emails that reflected a notably friendly tone. In one instance, Karp thanked Epstein for an evening he described as “once in a lifetime,” and in another, he asked Epstein to help his son secure a role in a Woody Allen film. While Karp and his firm maintained that neither he nor Paul, Weiss ever represented Epstein professionally, the optics of those interactions—particularly given Epstein's 2008 conviction—triggered intense scrutiny.The fallout was swift and reputationally severe. Karp resigned not only from his role as chairman of Paul, Weiss after nearly two decades but also from external positions, including a college board seat, as the controversy widened. Additional disclosures suggested that his interactions with Epstein intersected with his professional orbit, particularly through his representation of Apollo Global Management and its co-founder Leon Black, a key Epstein associate. Emails also indicated that Karp at times engaged with Epstein on legal and strategic matters involving high-profile individuals, further blurring the line between personal and professional contact. Even though Karp expressed regret and framed the relationship as limited, the broader reaction reflected a growing intolerance for any post-conviction association with Epstein, especially among powerful institutional figures whose judgment is expected to be beyond reproach.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:https://www.ft.com/content/064e81a5-5e1b-4364-a581-9062868a3735?syn-25a6b1a6=1

Brad Karp, the longtime chairman of the elite Wall Street law firm Paul, Weiss, was forced to step down in early 2026 after newly released Justice Department files exposed a series of previously undisclosed interactions with Jeffrey Epstein. The documents showed that Karp had a personal relationship with Epstein that went beyond incidental contact, including attending private dinners at Epstein's residence and exchanging emails that reflected a notably friendly tone. In one instance, Karp thanked Epstein for an evening he described as “once in a lifetime,” and in another, he asked Epstein to help his son secure a role in a Woody Allen film. While Karp and his firm maintained that neither he nor Paul, Weiss ever represented Epstein professionally, the optics of those interactions—particularly given Epstein's 2008 conviction—triggered intense scrutiny.The fallout was swift and reputationally severe. Karp resigned not only from his role as chairman of Paul, Weiss after nearly two decades but also from external positions, including a college board seat, as the controversy widened. Additional disclosures suggested that his interactions with Epstein intersected with his professional orbit, particularly through his representation of Apollo Global Management and its co-founder Leon Black, a key Epstein associate. Emails also indicated that Karp at times engaged with Epstein on legal and strategic matters involving high-profile individuals, further blurring the line between personal and professional contact. Even though Karp expressed regret and framed the relationship as limited, the broader reaction reflected a growing intolerance for any post-conviction association with Epstein, especially among powerful institutional figures whose judgment is expected to be beyond reproach.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:https://www.ft.com/content/064e81a5-5e1b-4364-a581-9062868a3735?syn-25a6b1a6=1Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Jim Cramer and David Faber discussed stocks falling and crude oil prices rebounding — one day after President Trump's comments on Iran sparked the biggest daily gain for the major indices since early February. Another rough day for shares of alternative asset managers: Apollo Global Management and Ares Management became the latest firms to limit private credit fund withdrawals. Also in focus: OpenAI on Microsoft, sources tell David that Jefferies is not interested in selling itself, Chevron CEO Mike Wirth on Iran war impact, Nvidia's AI dominance, "Faber Report" on Nelson Peltz's Trian and General Catalyst raising their offer to acquire Janus Henderson.   Squawk on the Street Disclaimer Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

DR1In our 'Asshole is selfish' headline of the week. Billionaire Uber co-founder Travis Kalanick admits strategically moving to Texas before California wealth tax***************Kalanick was caught on camera in a heated argument with an Uber driver, who complained about falling fares and the company's treatment of drivers: "Some people don't like to take responsibility for their own sh*t"In our 'Top snarky podcast hosts plead with airline companies to stop the share buyback bullshit and pay airport workers. ‘Once again, air travel CEOs are bullshit artists'' headline of the week. Top airline CEOs plead with Congress to restore DHS funding and pay airport workers. ‘Once again, air travel is the political football'***************Between June 1, 2025, and March 16, 2026:Southwest repurchased $2.6B in 2005; $400M in 2026United $1.5B5 NEOs: $91 million in 2025Scott Kirby $34M; $97M in shares Delta focused on $4.8B debt reductionFrontline Transportation Security Officers (TSOs, Airport Screeners): 50,000$328M per monthIn our 'Pervy owner does pervy stuff and everybody is fake shocked.' headline of the week. It Was Going to Be Magic City Night at the Atlanta Hawks. Then the Outrage Poured In.***************Tony Ressler founded the private equity firm Apollo Global Management with Leon Black.An independent review revealed that Leon Black paid Jeffrey Epstein $158M for financial and tax-planning services between 2012 and 2017. These payments occurred after Epstein's 2008 conviction for soliciting an underage girl.Ressler is the brother-in-law of Leon Black (Black is married to Ressler's sister, Debra) In our 'College dropout techbro ignores actual experts, part 17 million ' headline of the week. OpenAI's own mental health experts unanimously opposed “naughty” ChatGPT launch*************** The probably might be too many women and not enough Stanford? The council consists of the following eight independent experts:David Bickham, Ph.D. – Research Director at the Digital Wellness Lab at Boston Children's Hospital and Assistant Professor at Harvard Medical SchoolMathilde Cerioli, Ph.D. – Chief Scientific Officer at everyone.AI and researcher in cognitive neuroscience and psychologyMunmun De Choudhury, Ph.D. – Professor of Interactive Computing at Georgia Tech, specializing in how technology shapes mental healthTracy Dennis-Tiwary, Ph.D. – Professor of Psychology at Hunter College and co-founder/CSO of Arcade TherapeuticsSara Johansen, M.D. – Clinical Assistant Professor at Stanford University and founder of Stanford's Digital Mental Health ClinicDavid Mohr, Ph.D. – Professor at Northwestern University and Director of the Center for Behavioral Intervention TechnologiesAndrew K. Przybylski, Ph.D. – Professor of Human Behavior and Technology at the University of OxfordRobert K. Ross, M.D. – Former President and CEO of The California Endowment and a national leader in public health.In addition to the council's pushback, Ryan Beiermeister, OpenAI's head of product policy, was reportedly fired in January 2026 after being an outspoken internal critic of the erotica rollout. OpenAI has denied her dismissal was related to her opposition, citing separate workplace allegations that Beiermeister has called "absolutely false."In our 'Petulant manchild with no regulatory or societal guardrails screws up again and bails himself out with shareholder money from a different company' headline of the week. Elon Musk admits xAI ‘wasn't built right' as only 2 co-founders remain and its biggest AI bet stalls out***************The people leaving xAI right now aren't "legacy" employees—they are the hand-picked superstars Musk himself recruited in 2023 to build his AI dream.Out of the 12 original co-founders, 10 are gone. This isn't just "trimming the fat"; it's the original architects of the company walking out the door.In early 2026, Tesla (a public company) invested $2B into xAI.Tesla shareholders are furious, arguing that Musk used their money to fund a "broken" startup, then tucked it away inside his private SpaceX empire where there is less public oversight.Total Headcount Before Buyout: Approximately 7,500 to 8,000 employees.In his first week, Musk fired roughly 50% of the staff (about 3,700 people) overnight.Shortly after, he issued his famous "extremely hardcore" memo. When hundreds of employees refused to sign it and resigned instead, the headcount plummeted further.By April 2023, Musk confirmed in a BBC interview that the workforce had been slashed by 80%, leaving only about 1,500 employees. MM1In our 'The world's most stable billionaire announces a billionaire to all other billionaires ratio of 693:1' headline of the week. Elon Musk Is Now Worth More Than Bottom 693 Billionaires CombinedIn our 'In news celebrated worldwide, older women announce a "please save us from tech bros" to asshole ratio of 64:1 Elon Musk' headline of the week. Older women set to inherit most of $54 trillion in ‘great wealth transfer' to widowed spousesIn our 'Asshole wants you to know he is still here' headline of the week. ‘I never left': Travis Kalanick launches new robotics company Atoms with manifesto"At Atoms we make gainfully employed robots — specialized robots with productive jobs that bring abundance to their owners and society at large,"In our 'Company founder announces major "stealth mode" company perk is stealthy sexual harassment' headline of the week. Travis Kalanick sees benefits of being in stealth mode for 8 years. ‘You build a culture of people that want to build and do not need to be famous'In our 'Christmas, St. Patrick, Mel Gibson, and Casper the Friendly Ghost have reportedly filed complaints with the EEOC' headline of the week. Nike and Coca-Cola cases point to the next DEI fight: who gets to claim discriminationDR2In our 'Sheryl Sandberg says "If I could have worked at Facebook things would have turned out differently."' headline of the week. Sheryl Sandberg says Silicon Valley's hypermasculine rhetoric is ‘terrible'—contributing to ‘one of the worst' corporate climates she's ever seen*************** In our 'Explosive Messages Show Live Nation Thinks Customers Are ‘Stupid'; board member Richard Grenell Demands Credit for Same Observation' headline of the week. Live Nation Directors Mocked Customers in Explosive Just-Released Messages, Saying They're “Stupid” for Allowing Themselves to Be Gouged***************"Yes, I cut the DEI bullshit." — In a leaked 2025 email Grenell justified dismantling diversity programs by labeling them "woke" initiatives that "haven't made money."appointed to the Live Nation board on May 19, 2025, but was not up for the vote at the AGM on June 12, 2025In our 'Gun manufacturers say, "Oh no, it's not the gun that kills people, it's the pesky bullets."' headline of the week. She spent 16 hours on Instagram in a day. It's up to a jury to decide if Meta is to blame*************** In our 'She responded to "O" with "K," she said "J' to "D," and she responded to "F" with a simple "U"' headline of the week. Mary Barra still responds to ‘every single letter' she gets by hand despite running $65 billion automaker General Motors***************She did not say "V" to "E"In our 'OpenAI Chairman Admits It's Painful Watching AI Replace His Coding, Less So Watching It Accelerate the Collapse of Global Democracy' headline of the week. OpenAI Chairman says it's 'hard, emotionally' to let AI write his code: 'I have a hard time not caring'*************** MM2In our 'Proposals include a reduction in the CEO pay ratio from 1800:1 to 1799:1, for my boss to stop calling me Carl when my name is Todd, having a job, and not to have to take out my nose ring I got in 1998' headline of the week. Starbucks union sent the company a proposed contract. Here's what baristas wantProtections for union baristas against discrimination, unjust firings and temporary or permanent store closures.Starting wage floor of $17 per hour, down from its prior proposal of $20 an hour but still above the company's current starting wage of $15.25 to $16 an hour in 43 states.Annual raises of 4%.A process for baristas, management and union representatives to resolve workforce grievances.A dress code endorsed by the union.Requirement for at least three workers on the floor at all times and enforceable staffing and safety protections.A mandate to offer open hours to existing employees before hiring new baristas.Resolution of hundreds of outstanding unfair labor practice charges.In our 'But Sam Altman is SORRY' headline of the week. Professors Say AI Is Destroying Their Students' Ability to ThinkIn our 'Don't be fooled, I'm actually a MAN' headline of the week. CoStar Group Appoints Nana Banerjee to Its Board of DirectorsI pulled every Trade Wire story with a director appointment - 69 in the last week, all press released, some private some public - and here's the count: 60 men added to boards, 9 women added, 1 woman leftIn our 'Building on Warren Buffet's innovative "Giving Pledge", billionaire creates the rival "Taking Pledge"' headline of the week. Peter Thiel is actively convincing billionaires to abandon The Giving Pledge — and it's workingIn our 'When asked for comment, ISS asked if Nelson Peltz was involved.' headline of the week. The Coca-Cola Company Announces Maria Elena Lagomasino Will Conclude Her Service on the Board of Directors

Sid Powell and Paul Frambot on why Apollo, Cantor, and Coinbase are quietly building their financial products on DeFi rails, and what it means for lending.  Nexo is the premier digital wealth platform. Receive interest on your crypto, borrow against it without selling, and trade a range of assets. Now available in the U.S with 30 days of exclusive privileges.  Get started at nexo.com/unchained Onchain lending used to be a crypto-native curiosity. Now Cantor Fitzgerald is extending credit facilities through it, Apollo Global Management is acquiring governance tokens, and Coinbase users are borrowing against Bitcoin to buy houses, all running on DeFi protocols operating in the background. Maple Finance CEO Sid Powell and Morpho co-founder Paul Frambot sit at the center of this shift, and they have very different reads on what it takes to make institutional adoption real.  What are the actual limits to onchain lending growth right now? Does the DeFi mullet model work for everyone, or only for specific use cases? And as DAOs across the industry stumble under the weight of public governance, what structures actually let a protocol move fast without losing trust?  This conversation gets into the mechanics, the trade-offs, and the deals that are quietly redrawing the lines between DeFi and traditional finance. Guests: ⁠Paul Frambot, Co-Founder & CEO at Morpho Labs ⁠Sid Powell, CEO & Co-Founder of Maple Finance Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In July 2023, billionaire Leon Black, co-founder of Apollo Global Management, agreed to pay roughly $62.5 million to the U.S. Virgin Islands to resolve potential claims tied to his financial dealings with Jeffrey Epstein. The USVI had been pursuing Epstein's estate and associates for enabling or benefiting from his trafficking network, and Black was facing scrutiny over large payments made to Epstein's companies for so-called “financial advice.” The settlement gave Black immunity from criminal liability in the USVI and ended the possibility of a lawsuit there, though it did not include an admission of wrongdoing. Black has consistently said the payments were legitimate professional fees and that he had no knowledge of Epstein's crimes.The deal, however, did not put all questions to rest. Around the same time, the Senate Finance Committee, led by Senator Ron Wyden, released documents showing Black paid Epstein far more than originally known—over $150 million between 2012 and 2017—sparking deeper concerns that such vast sums may have indirectly financed Epstein's operations. The revelations intensified scrutiny not only of Black's judgment but also of whether banks and institutions involved properly flagged or investigated the transactions. While the $62 million settlement resolved matters with the Virgin Islands, it left lingering doubts about the true nature of Black's relationship with Epstein and whether full accountability was ever reached.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

In this episode, Scott Becker examines how firms like Blackstone, KKR, and Apollo Global Management are under pressure from high interest rates, stalled exits, and too many funds chasing too few deals