One crew, one craft. For decades, that’s been the paradigm of air combat. However, the paradigm is shifting. In future fights, pilots will be facing some of the fiercest skies they’ve ever seen. So, the United States Air Force is trying to help its pilots by creating a more crewless craft.
At this year’s Air and Space Forces Association’s Air, Space and Cyber conference in National Harbor, Maryland, there were several types of these crewless crafts on display, including Anduril’s Fury.
“Fury is a conventional takeoff and landing aircraft. We are looking to use as minimal runway as possible to provide the maximum amount of options for all of our areas that we may want to fly,” Andrew Van Timmerman said.
Callsign “Scar,” Van Timmerman is a retired Air Force fighter pilot and the current director of Air Dominance Systems at Anduril.
Point phone camera here
The company was one of nearly 200 vendors at the ASC 2023. In addition to the half-scale model Fury displayed, Kratos Defense had a full-size model of its XQ-58 Valkyrie.
When asked to describe the Valkyrie, Otis Winkler, the vice president of Corporate Development and National Security Programs at Kratos, said, “It is a fighter-like performance. If you want to think of it as an F-35 without a pilot in it, that’s what you’ve got. It’s got a bomb bay; you’ve got weapons on the wings themselves. Take the fight to the enemy.”
Both Fury and Valkyrie are candidates in the U.S. military’s Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) program. The goal is to create thousands of highly capable robotic wingmen quickly and do it all for a fraction of the cost of traditional fighter jets. The price of a new F-35 is well north of $100 million.
“We’ve kept continuous competition across the mission systems, across the autonomy space, as well as across the air vehicle space,” said Brig. Gen. Dale White, the program executive officer for Fighters and Advanced Aircraft for the USAF.
It’s White’s job to make sure the CCA program is a success.
“It’s pretty clear to see there’s a wide variation between vehicles, sizes, weights and things of that nature,” White said while walking around the floor at ASC 2023.
Variations in the design often equate to variations in fielding as well. So, let’s look at just how Fury and the Valkyrie stack up.
For starters, Fury is still under development while the Valkyrie was the first, and — as of the publishing of this article — still only CCA candidate flying in the real world.
“It is awesome. It’s changing the game right now, with the Air Force and with the Marine Corps,” Winkler said. “This is the way that you get more mass to the fight. It’s survivable and it’s ready today.”
Just because Fury hasn’t flown, though, doesn’t mean its designers don’t have big plans for it. Fury will still deliver fighter-like performance, and it will do so with a single, commercially available jet engine. That helps make maintenance easier and keeps costs down.
The Fury and Valkyrie both adhere to the Department of Defense’s open-architecture mandate. So, they can be kitted out with all sorts of different tech depending on the mission.
Van Timmerman said on Fury, that tech could include radar and radar jamming equipment, infrared sensors or other intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance sensors.
“It really is anything that you have that’s available on an existing aircraft,” Van Timmerman said. “We want to be able to provide as much plug and play utility out of the vehicle so that we can, again, provide those different mission sets to whatever the commander needs are that day.”
As mentioned above, Fury will need a runway to take off and land, albeit a much shorter runway. The Valkyrie uses a turbo-fan engine to launch off the back of a trailer. It can be recovered under a parachute once the mission is over.
“So, you can put these anywhere,” Winkler said. “We normally put them in a shipping container. Take the wings off. It’s all self-contained. You drop it either near the runway, or you can drop it in a forward operating base somewhere. Open it up with two men, slide out the rail, put the wings on with a couple of bolts, and then it launches with all the weapons on it.”
The Valkyrie can carry up to four small diameter bombs or similar sized munitions in its bomb bay. Its wing stations can also hold lethal payloads.
Fury won’t carry kinetic weapons. According to Van Timmerman, its payload is primarily a suite of sensors and electronic warfare systems. To maintain the unique performance of the craft, the sensors will be housed mostly in the nose of the aircraft.
Fury and Valkyrie, like all CCA candidates, will be piloted by artificial intelligence. Anduril uses its Lattice for Mission Autonomy software. The company has been perfecting the technology for several years now, including in the Air Force’s Project Venom initiative, which puts AI-agents in charge of modified F-16s while human pilots essentially observe in the cockpit.
Kratos and Shield AI announced the two companies will collaborate to put Shield AI’s Hivemind into Valkyrie. Hivemind is touted as the “world’s best AI pilot.”
CCAs may not have human pilots, but rest assured, humans will still be giving the orders.
Straight Arrow News asked Van Timmerman, as a former fighter pilot, how does he think CCAs would be most useful. He said, “We can have somebody remove themselves from inside of the loop and go on to the loop. What do I mean by that? When you are inside the loop, think about a man or woman, a person inside the cockpit. They’re in charge of the stick, and the throttle and every decision that’s made inside the aircraft.
“When you go onto the loop, you have one person that could be in charge of maybe many of these air vehicles. They may have sensors. They may just be flying around to draw attention. There are a number of different use cases you can have in an advanced autonomy enabled system.”
While the Air Force wants to eventually select a single contractor to build its Collaborative Combat Aircraft, because of the open architecture nature of the design process, the final craft may contain components and kit from several different suppliers.
People shouldn’t have to wait too long either to find out who those suppliers are. The Pentagon wants the CCAs airborne by 2027, when some think China may invade Taiwan.
ONE CREW, ONE CRAFT. FOR DECADES, THAT’S BEEN THE PARADIGM OF AIR COMBAT, BUT THE PARADIGM IS SHIFTING. IN FUTURE FIGHTS THE PILOTS WILL BE FACING SOME OF THE FIERCEST SKIES THEY’VE EVER SEEN. SO, THE AIR FORCE IS TRYING TO HELP OUT ITS PILOTS BY CREATING MORE CREWLESS CRAFT, LIKE THIS FURY.
Van Timmerman: So, Fury is a conventional takeoff and landing aircraft. We are looking to use as minimal runway as possible to provide the maximum amount of options for all of our areas that we may want to fly.
ANDREW VAN TIMMERMAN, CALLSIGN SCAR, IS A RETIRED AIR FORCE FIGHTER PILOT AND CURRENT DIRECTOR OF AIR DOMINANCE SYSTEMS AT ANDURIL.
THE COMPANY WAS ONE OF NEARLY 200 VENDORS AT THE AIR AND SPACE FORCES ASSOCIATION’S AIR, SPACE AND CYBER 2023 CONFERENCE IN NATIONAL HARBOR, MARYLAND.
IN ADDITION TO THE ½ SCALE MODEL FURY ON DISPLAY, KRATOS HAD A FULL-SIZE MODEL OF ITS XQ-58 VALKYRIE.
Otis Winkler: So really, it is a fighter-like performance. If you want to think of it as an F-35 without a pilot in it, that’s what you’ve got. It’s got a bomb bay, you’ve got weapons on the wingtips, or on the wings themselves. Take that fight to the enemy if they need to.
BOTH THE FURY AND THE VALKYRIE ARE CANDIDATES IN THE US MILITARY’S COLLABORATIVE COMBAT AIRCRAFT, OR CCA, PROGRAM. THE GOAL IS TO CREATE THOUSANDS OF HIGHLY CAPABLE ROBOTIC WINGMEN QUICKLY, AND DO IT ALL FOR A FRACTION OF THE COST OF TRADITIONAL FIGHTER JETS. THE PRICE OF A NEW F-35 IS WELL NORTH OF $100 MILLION.
General White: We’ve kept continuous competition across the mission systems, across the autonomy space, as well as across the air vehicle space.
BRIG GENERAL DALE WHITE IS THE PROGRAM EXECUTIVE OFFICER FOR FIGHTERS AND ADVANCED AIRCRAFT FOR THE AIR FORCE. IT’S HIS JOB TO MAKE SURE THE CCA PROGRAM IS A SUCCESS.
General White: By the way, if you look around when you walk the floor at AFA, I think it’s pretty clear to see there’s a wide variation between vehicles, sizes, weights, and things of that nature.
VARIATIONS IN THE DESIGN OFTEN EQUATE TO VARIATIONS IN FIELDING AS WELL. SO, LET’S TAKE A LOOK AT JUST HOW THE FURY AND THE VALKYRIE STACK UP.
FOR STARTERS, FURY IS STILL UNDER DEVELOPMENT WHILE THE VALKYRIE WAS THE FIRST, AND AS OF THE PUBLISHING OF THIS VIDEO, STILL ONLY CCA CANDIDATE FLYING IN THE REAL WORLD.
Otis Winkler: It is awesome. It’s changing the game right now, with the Air Force and with the Marine Corps. This is the way that you get more mass to the fight. It’s survivable and it’s ready today.
JUST BECAUSE FURY HASN’T FLOWN, THOUGH, DOESN’T MEAN ITS DESIGNERS DON’T HAVE BIG PLANS FOR IT. FURY WILL STILL DELIVER FIGHTER LIKE PERFORMANCE, AND IT WILL DO SO WITH A SINGLE, COMMERCIALLY AVAILABLE JET ENGINE. THAT HELPS MAKE MAINTENANCE EASIER AND KEEPS COSTS DOWN.
THE FURY AND VALKYRIE BOTH ADHERE TO THE DOD’S OPEN-ARCHITECTURE MANDATE. SO, THEY CAN BE KITTED OUT WITH ALL SORTS OF DIFFERENT TECH DEPENDING ON THE MISSION.
Van Timmerman: So, that could include radar, jamming. It could be IR. It really is anything that you have that’s available on an existing aircraft. We want to be able to provide as much plug and play utility out of the vehicle so that we can, again, provide those different mission sets to whatever the commander needs of that day.
AS WE HEARD EARLIER, FURY WILL NEED A RUNWAY TO TAKE OFF AND LAND, ALBEIT A MUCH SHORTER RUNWAY. THE VALKYRIE USES A TURBO-FAN ENGINE TO LAUNCH OFF THE BACK OF A TRAILER. IT CAN BE RECOVERED UNDER A PARACHUTE ONCE THE MISSION IS OVER.
Otis Winkler: So, you can put these anywhere. We normally put them in a shipping container. Take the wings off, put it in the back of a shipping container. It’s all self-contained. You drop it either near the rest of the runway, or you can drop it in a forward operating base somewhere. Open it up with two men, slide out the rail, put the wings on with a couple of bolts, and then it launches with all the weapons on it.
THE VALKYRIE CAN CARRY UP TO FOUR SMALL DIAMETER BOMBS OR SIMILAR SIZED MUNITIONS IN ITS BOMB BAY. IT’S WING STATIONS CAN ALSO HOLD LETHAL PAYLOADS.
FURY WON’T CARRY KINETIC WEAPONS. AS SCAR MENTIONED EARLIER, ITS PAYLOAD IS PRIMARILY A SUITE OF SENSORS AND ELECTRONIC WARFARE SYSTEMS.
FURY AND VALKYRIE–LIKE ALL CCA CANDIDATES– WILL BE PILOTED BY ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE. ANDURIL USES ITS LATTICE FOR MISSION AUTONOMY SOFTWARE. THE COMPANY HAS BEEN PERFECTING THE TECHNOLOGY FOR SEVERAL YEARS NOW, INCLUDING IN THE AIR FORCE’S PROJECT VENOM INITIATIVE, WHICH PUTS AI-AGENTS IN CHARGE OF MODIFIED F-16s WHILE HUMAN PILOTS ESSENTIALLY OBSERVE IN THE COCKPIT.
IN LATE SEPTEMBER, KRATOS AND SHIELD AI ANNOUNCED THE TWO COMPANIES WILL COLLABORATE TO PUT SHIELD AI’S HIVEMIND INTO THE VALKYRIE. I’VE REPORTED BEFORE ON HIVEMIND, WHICH IS TOUTED AS THE WORLD’S BEST AI PILOT.
CCAs MAY NOT HAVE HUMAN PILOTS, BUT REST ASSURED, HUMANS WILL STILL BE GIVING THE ORDERS.
Van Timmerman: I think what we really can use these air vehicles for is we can have somebody remove themselves from inside of the loop and go on to the loop. What do I mean by that? When you are inside the loop, think about a man or woman, a person inside the cockpit. They’re in charge of the stick, and the throttle and every decision that’s made inside the aircraft. When you go onto the loop, you have one person that could be in charge of maybe many of these air vehicles, and they may have sensors, they may just be flying around to draw attention. There are a number of different use cases you can have in an advanced autonomy enabled system.
WHILE THE AIR FORCE WANTS TO EVENTUALLY SELECT A SINGLE CONTRACTOR TO BUILD ITS COLLABORATIVE COMBAT AIRCRAFT, BECAUSE OF THE OPEN ARCHITECTURE NATURE OF THE DESIGN PROCESS, THE FINAL CRAFT MAY CONTAIN COMPONENTS AND KIT FROM SEVERAL DIFFERENT SUPPLIERS.
WE SHOULDN’T HAVE TO WAIT TOO LONG EITHER TO FIND OUT WHO THOSE SUPPLIERS ARE. THE PENTAGON WANTS THE CCAs AIRBORNE BY 2027, WHEN SOME THINK CHINA MAY INVADE TAIWAN.
Straight to your inbox.
By entering your email, you agree to the Terms & Conditions and acknowledge the Privacy Policy.
The United States Air Force is the oldest and smallest it’s ever been. A brewing conflict with China over the fates of Taiwan and the South China Sea is forcing the service to ramp up delivery on Collaborative Combat Aircraft, or CCAs.
Without CCAs, USAF leadership doesn’t know whether the service has the time, money, or people to put enough planes in the air to compete with and defeat China. At least not without losing too many pilots.
The problem is too big for the Air Force to solve alone. So, it’s collaborating with the U.S. Navy, Marine Corps, and private industry to develop CCAs fully, from digital concepts to flying planes.
The XQ-58 Valkyrie from Kratos Defense was an early candidate into the CCA program. It’s also the only candidate, as of the date of publication, with any real-world flight time.
“So really, it is a fighter-like performance,” said Otis Winkler, the vice president of Corporate Development and National Security Programs for Kratos Defense. “If you want to think of [the Valkyrie] as an F-35 without a pilot in it, that’s what you’ve got.”
There are other CCA candidates in development as part of the Department of Defense’s open competition. The Air Force, Navy, and Marines agreed on four fundamentals to speed up development and delivery of the craft.
CCAs need to have common:
• Aircraft architecture.
• Autonomy architecture.
• Communication links.
• Ground-control segments.
Basically, the services want a standardized robotic plane that can take direction well, while also operating with and talking to other assets in the battle space. Initially, the “Loyal Wingmen,” as CCAs are also known, will be paired with F-35s and with the Next Generation Air Dominance fighter once it’s airborne.
Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall said he wants thousands of CCAs flying within the next five years.
“What we’re trying to get industry to do is to mature technology and be creative,” Kendall said. “And then demonstrate to us what kind of capability they can provide and why it’s cost effective. And that’s how we’re going to be selecting which ones we carry to the next phase of competition.”
The CCAs, like a lot of modern weaponry, are designed with modularity in mind; meaning you can trade out or upgrade sensors and software on the fly, depending on the mission. This disaggregation of components also helps keep costs down.
That’s the next major design feature. They’re supposed to be cheap enough to sacrifice, if necessary, but they also need to be beefy enough to carry out the missions.
“For me, that’s the challenge, right? Because anytime you’re doing something technical, from an engineering perspective, you pull on one thing, you typically lose something else. And so, you end up turning dials to find out where that sweet spot is,” Brig. Gen. Dale White said.
White oversees Fighters and Advanced Craft for the Air Force. He and other Air Force generals involved in the CCA program spoke during a media roundtable at the Air and Space Forces Association’s Air, Space and Cyber 2023 conference in National Harbor, Maryland.
The four Ggenerals said they know price per unit needs to be considered during development, but there’s more to cost savings than dollars and cents.
Brig. Gen. Chris Niemi oversees testing of CCAs.
“If I had a choice to either lose an F-35 with a pilot, or lose an aircraft like a CCA, I’d rather lose the CCA. Those are the types of tradeoffs that are being enabled with the new technologies that are coming online that frankly, we couldn’t do before,” Niemi said.
For reference, a new F-35 costs more than $110 million. CCAs will need to cost considerably less for the program to be viable. Digital engineering and new manufacturing methods will help.
Aside from price, the next major challenge for CCAs is deciding how much decision-making power, or autonomy, to give them.
As Mike ‘Pako’ Benitez explained during a panel discussion at ASC 2023, “There is still no Department of Defense definition of ‘autonomy.’ We’ve been talking about CCA and autonomy for two years, still no definition.”
Benitez is an Air Force veteran and the director of product for Shield AI, a key player in the growing field of autonomous piloting.
“NATO has a definition [for autonomy],” Benitez said. “It basically says, ‘I have programmed the thing to do a mission within its constraints, and it can evolve and adapt in the environment without further intervention of a human.’”
Deciding how much autonomy to give CCAs isn’t easy, especially when lives are depending on their performance. Not to mention the very real fear many people have around creating AI-enabled weaponry.
In June, the internet was set ablaze when stories of an AI-agent killing its operator started surfacing. The incident turned out to just be part of a hypothetical thought experiment, but it did show just how charged of an issue this is.
With no formal definition from the Pentagon, Benitez and others in the field borrowed from the Society of Automotive Engineers when it came to distinguishing between levels of autonomy.
Levels range from zero to five. Zero being the lowest and five the highest. Level One is for basic assistance tasks, things like cruise control in your car. Level Two is partial automation, like a self-driving Tesla.
Levels Three and Four are where people should be thinking about CCAs, because that’s where “conditional” and “high” levels of autonomy come into play.
“I would argue, Level Three should be the minimum requirement,” Benitez said, “and Level Four is really what we should be shooting for, which is a mission based ‘Here’s your goals. Here’s your objectives. Here’s your risk within those constraints. Execute.’”
It’s unlikely any armed U.S.-owned CCA or AI-piloted device will ever reach Level Five. By law, the military needs to have a human in the kill-chain.
Of course, figuring out how much autonomy to give a robot plane, capable of carrying lethal payloads, depends on the types of sorties they’re to fly.
If there are at least two CCAs per pilot, like Secretary Kendall said, one could be a sensor carrier and the other could be a munitions mule. The former allows its human pilot to see targets beyond the horizon, the latter can deliver a killing blow without revealing the pilot’s position.
But how do you get a human pilot to put that much trust into a machine? According to Mike Benitez, it’s just like a radar.
“If a fighter pilot had never heard of the word ‘radar’, had never had any academics,” Benitez said, “and you gave them a screen and you go ‘Hey, you’re going to fly around and when these symbols show up on your screen, just trust us. There’s something there, it’s probably going to kill you. It may not, but you should probably do something about it.’
“How do you trust what’s on the screen is real? Well, you know because over the years you’ve been indoctrinated with training. You understand radar theory. You get some academics, and most importantly, you understand the capabilities, the limitations, and the attributes of that algorithm or that hardware and software.”
And there’s no place better to understand the capabilities and limitations of your wingman, than when flying with them, virtually or otherwise.
“I’m sure that when the operators start to fly with [CCAs] and work with them, and test them in different scenarios,” Gen. Niemi said. “It’ll be much clearer what the opportunities are that exist, and maybe some limitations. And then, we’ll react to it, as we have with every other platform.”
THE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE IS THE OLDEST AND SMALLEST IT’S EVER BEEN. ITS LEADERS ALSO DON’T KNOW WHETHER THE SERVICE HAS THE TIME, MONEY, OR PEOPLE TO PUT ENOUGH PLANES IN THE AIR TO COMPETE WITH AND DEFEAT CHINA. AT LEAST NOT WITHOUT LOSING TOO MANY PILOTS.
THE PROBLEM IS TOO BIG TO SOLVE FOR THE AIR FORCE ALONE. SO, IT’S COLLABORATING WITH THE NAVY, MARINE CORPS AND PRIVATE INDUSTRY TO COME UP WITH THE ANSWER: COLLABORATIVE COMBAT AIRCRAFT OR C-C-A.
THE XQ-58 VALKYRIE FROM KRATOS WAS AN EARLY CANDIDATE INTO THE PROGRAM. IT’S ALSO THE ONLY ONE WITH ANY REAL-WORLD FLIGHT TIME.
Otis Winkler: So, really, it is a fighter-like performance. If you want to think of it as an F-35 without a pilot in it, that’s what you’ve got.
THERE ARE OTHER CCA CANDIDATES IN DEVELOPMENT AS PART OF THE DOD’S OPEN COMPETITION.
THE AIR FORCE, NAVY AND MARINES AGREED TO SOME BASIC FUNDAMENTALS TO SPEED UP DEVELOPMENT AND DELIVERY OF THE CRAFT.
CCAS NEED TO HAVE A COMMON AIRCRAFT ARCHITECTURE AND AUTONOMY ARCHITECTURE. THEY ALSO NEED COMMON COMMUNICATION LINKS AND GROUND-CONTROL SEGMENTS.
BASICALLY, THE SERVICES WANT A STANDARDIZED ROBOTIC PLANE THAT CAN TAKE DIRECTION WELL, WHILE ALSO OPERATING WITH AND TALKING TO OTHER ASSETS IN THE BATTLE SPACE.
INITIALLY, THE LOYAL WINGMEN WILL BE PAIRED WITH F-35s AND WITH THE NEXT GENERATION AIR DOMINANCE FIGHTER ONCE IT’S AIRBORNE.
AIR FORCE SECRETARY FRANK KENDALL SAYS HE WANTS THOUSANDS OF CCAS FLYING WITHIN THE NEXT FIVE YEARS.
Kendall: What we’re trying to get industry to do is to mature technology and be creative. And then demonstrate to us what kind of capability they can provide and why it’s cost effective. And that’s how we’re going to be selecting which ones we carry to the next phase of competition.
THE CCA’S, LIKE A LOT OF MODERN WEAPONRY, ARE DESIGNED WITH MODULARITY IN MIND; MEANING YOU CAN TRADE OUT OR UPGRADE SENSORS AND SOFTWARE ON THE FLY, DEPENDING ON THE MISSION. THIS DISAGGREGATION OF COMPONENTS ALSO HELPS KEEP COSTS DOWN.
THAT’S THE NEXT MAJOR DESIGN FEATURE. THEY’RE SUPPOSED TO BE CHEAP ENOUGH TO SACRIFICE, IF NECESSARY, BUT THEY ALSO NEED TO BE BEEFY ENOUGH TO CARRY OUT THE MISSIONS.
Brig Gen Dale White For me, that’s the challenge, right? Because like, anytime you’re doing something technical, from an engineering perspective, you pull on one thing, you typically lose something else. And so, you end up turning dials to find out where that sweet spot is.
BRIGADIER GENERAL DALE WHITE OVERSEES THE FIGHTERS AND ADVANCED CRAFT PROGRAM FOR THE AIR FORCE. HE AND OTHER GENERALS INVOLVED IN THE CCA PROGRAM SPOKE DURING A MEDIA ROUNDTABLE AT THE AIR AND SPACE FORCES ASSOCIATION’S AIR, SPACE AND CYBER CONFERENCE IN NATIONAL HARBOR MARYLAND.
THESE OFFICERS SAY THEY KNOW PRICE PER UNIT NEEDS TO BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT DURING DEVELOPMENT, BUT THERE’S MORE TO COST SAVINGS THAN DOLLARS AND CENTS
Brig General Chris Niemi: If I had a choice to either lose an F-35 with a pilot, or lose an aircraft like a CCA, I’d rather lose the CCA. And so those are the types of tradeoffs that are being enabled with the new technologies that are coming online that frankly, we couldn’t do before.
FOR REFERENCE, NEW F-35s COST MORE THAN $110 MILLION EACH. CCAs WILL NEED TO COST CONSIDERABLY LESS FOR THE PROGRAM TO BE VIABLE. DIGITAL ENGINEERING AND NEW MANUFACTURING METHODS WILL HELP.
ASIDE FROM PRICE, THE NEXT MAJOR CHALLENGE FOR CCAs IS DECIDING HOW MUCH DECISION MAKING POWER, OR AUTONOMY, TO GIVE THEM.
Mike ‘Pako’ Benitez: There is still no Department of Defense definition of autonomy. We’ve been talking about CCA and autonomy for two years, still no definition.
THAT’S MIKE “PAKO” BENITEZ, AN AIR FORCE VETERAN AND THE DIRECTOR OF PRODUCT FOR SHIELD AI, A KEY PLAYER IN THE GROWING FIELD OF AUTONOMOUS PILOTING.
Mike ‘Pako’ Benitez: NATO has a definition. It basically says, ‘I have programmed the thing to do a mission within its constraints, and it can evolve and adapt in the environment without further intervention of a human.’
DECIDING HOW MUCH AUTONOMY TO GIVE CCAs ISN’T EASY, ESPECIALLY WHEN LIVES ARE DEPENDING ON THEIR PERFORMANCE. NOT TO MENTION THE VERY REAL FEAR MANY PEOPLE HAVE AROUND CREATING AI-ENABLED WEAPONRY. IN JUNE, THE INTERNET WAS SET ABLAZE WHEN STORIES OF AN AI-AGENT KILLING ITS OPERATOR STARTED SURFACING. THE INCIDENT TURNED OUT TO JUST BE PART OF A HYPOTHETICAL THOUGHT EXPERIMENT, BUT IT DID SHOW JUST HOW CHARGED OF AN ISSUE THIS IS.
WITH NO FORMAL DEFINITION FROM THE PENTAGON, BENITEZ AND OTHERS IN THE FIELD BORROWED FROM THE SOCIETY OF AUTOMOTIVE ENGINEERS WHEN IT CAME TO DISTINGUISHING BETWEEN LEVELS OF AUTONOMY.
LEVELS RANGE FROM ZERI TO FIVE. ZERO BEING THE LOWEST AND FIVE THE HIGHEST.
LEVEL ONE IS FOR BASIC ASSISTANCE TASKS– THINGS LIKE CRUISE CONTROL IN YOUR CAR.
LEVEL TWO IS PARTIAL AUTOMATION–LIKE A SELF-DRIVING TESLA.
LEVELS THREE AND FOUR ARE WHERE WE SHOULD BE THINKING ABOUT CCAs, BECAUSE THAT’S WHERE CONDITIONAL AND HIGH LEVELS OF AUTONOMY COME INTO PLAY.
Mike ‘Pako’ Benitez: I would argue, Level Three should be the minimum requirement and Level Four is really what we should be shooting for; which is a mission based ‘Here’s your goals. Here’s your objectives. Here’s your risk within those constraints. Execute.’
IT’S UNLIKELY ANY ARMED CCA OR AI-PILOTED DEVICE WILL EVER REACH LEVEL FIVE. BY LAW, THE US MILITARY NEEDS TO HAVE A HUMAN IN THE KILL-CHAIN.
OF COURSE, FIGURING OUT HOW MUCH AUTONOMY TO GIVE A ROBOT PLANE CAPABLE OF CARRYING LETHAL PAYLOADS DEPENDS ON THE TYPES OF SORTIES WE WANT THEM FLYING.
IF THERE ARE AT LEAST TWO CCA’S PER PILOT, LIKE SECRETARY KENDALL SAID, ONE COULD BE A SENSOR CARRIER AND THE OTHER A MUNITIONS MULE. THE FORMER ALLOWS ITS HUMAN PILOT TO SEE TARGETS BEYOND THE HORIZON, THE LATTER CAN DELIVER A KILLING BLOW WITHOUT REVEALING THE PILOT’S POSITION.
BUT HOW DO YOU GET A HUMAN PILOT TO PUT THAT MUCH TRUST INTO A MACHINE?
Mike ‘Pako’ Benitez: It’s just like a radar. If a fighter pilot had never heard of the word ‘radar’, had never had any academics and you gave them a screen and you go ‘Hey, you’re gonna fly around and when these symbols show up on your screen, just trust us. There’s something there, it’s probably going to kill you. It may not, but you should probably do something about it.’ How do you trust what’s on the screen is real? Well, you know because over the years you’ve been indoctrinated with training, you understand radar theory, you get some academics and most importantly, you understand the capabilities, the limitations and the attributes of that algorithm or that hardware and software.
AND THERE’S NO PLACE BETTER TO UNDERSTAND THE CAPABILITIES AND LIMITATIONS OF YOUR WINGMAN, THAN WHEN FLYING WITH THEM, VIRTUALLY OR OTHERWISE.
Brig General Chris Niemi: I’m sure that when the operators start to fly with these and work with them, and test them in different scenarios that it’ll be much clearer what the opportunities are that exist, and maybe some limitations. And then, we’ll react to it, as we have with every other platform.
Straight to your inbox.
By entering your email, you agree to the Terms & Conditions and acknowledge the Privacy Policy.
Taylor Swift and Beyoncé could be facing off during the next award season. This time, it could be over dueling concert films rather than the best music video. “Taylor Swift: The Eras Tour” hits theaters Oct. 13, while “Renaissance: A Film By Beyoncé” comes out in December.
Showing her business acumen, Swift decided to bypass traditional Hollywood studios and went directly to AMC theaters for the release, which could have been an important factor if the writers’ strike hadn’t been resolved.
Point phone camera here
Both films will likely break records for box office revenue from a concert film, especially as The Eras Tour film sold $26 million in presale tickets in just 24 hours, coupled with the difficulty of seeing either artist live. Let’s see how much each film will have to make to top the chart. Here are the highest-grossing concert films in history in this week’s Five For Friday.
#5: The Original Kings of Comedy
“The Original Kings of Comedy” made household names of the late Bernie Mac, Cedric the Entertainer, D.L. Hughley and Steve Harvey. Spike Lee directed the 2000 film, which was shot at North Carolina’s Charlotte Coliseum. The concept of four powerhouse comedians hitting the road and shooting a film was unprecedented at the time but spawned similar products like Blue Collar Comedy Tour and The Comedians of Comedy. The film was a huge success, taking home $38 million at the time, or $67 million when adjusted for inflation. It’s Certified Fresh on Rotten Tomatoes and has some of the best scores of any movie on this list.
#4: One Direction: This is Us
About a decade ago, One Direction was one of the toughest tickets to get on the planet, although it pales in comparison to what Swifties have to go through today. The next best option for 1D fans was “One Direction: This is Us.” Morgan Spurlock, who made a name for himself eating McDonald’s for 30 days in “Super Size Me,” directed the flick. The movie followed the British boy band’s London stop on its Take Me Home tour and featured footage from before its days on The X Factor. The movie was released in 3D, like most major releases of the time. It has above average reviews and made $68 million globally, or $89 million when adjusted for inflation.
#3: Hannah Montana & Miley Cyrus: Best of Both Worlds Concert
“Hannah Montana & Miley Cyrus: Best of Both Worlds Concert” made more than $70 million at the box office, or $101 million in 2023 dollars. It opened the same weekend as the 2008 Super Bowl, which is regarded as one of the best, and it’s the biggest opening ever for a film released on the weekend of the Big Game. There probably wasn’t a ton of overlap in the audience, as this was 15 years before Taylor Swift got teen girls to tune into football games. The reviews are moderate, but if you had a young daughter in the mid-2000s, you likely saw this one.
#2: Eddie Murphy Raw
Before he starred in “Shrek” and “The Nutty Professor,” Eddie Murphy was bigger than life on stage. In 1987’s “Eddie Murphy Raw,” he takes on New York’s famed Madison Square Garden fully clad in purple leather. “Raw” brought in more than $50 million at the box office, the equivalent of $133 million today. It has good reviews, and is often seen as one of the best stand-up specials of all time, despite Murphy admitting that some of the jokes make him cringe today. He planned to make a return to the stage in 2020, but the COVID-19 pandemic threw a wrench in those plans.
#1: Justin Bieber: Never Say Never
Justin Bieber was once the biggest pop star on the planet, well before he was catching flack for the way he dresses to get donuts. “Justin Bieber: Never Say Never” raked in $99 million in 2011, or $137 million adjusted for inflation. Even though it’s the top-grossing film on the list, it’s also the worst-reviewed. And the follow-up, “Justin Bieber’s Believe,” didn’t do much better.
SIMONE DEL ROSARIO:
UH OH… COULD WE GET A RECREATION OF THIS MOMENT DURING AWARDS SEASON?
KANYE WEST:
“YO TAYLOR… I’M REALLY HAPPY FOR YOU. I’M GONNA LET YOU FINISH. BUT BEYONCE HAD ONE OF THE BEST VIDEOS OF ALL TIME.”
SIMONE DEL ROSARIO:
TAYLOR SWIFT’S ERA’S TOUR CONCERT FILM HITS THEATERS OCTOBER 13TH AND A NEW MOVIE ABOUT BEYONCE’S RENAISSANCE WORLD TOUR HITS THEATERS IN DECEMBER.BOTH WILL PROBABLY SMASH RECORDS WITH HOW HARD IT IS TO GET TICKETS THESE DAYS. LET’S SEE WHAT IT WILL TAKE. WE HAVE THE HIGHEST GROSSING CONCERT FILMS IN HISTORY IN THIS WEEK’S FIVE FOR FRIDAY.
LIVE COMEDY SHOWS ARE IN FACT CONCERTS. 2000’S THE ORIGINAL KINGS OF COMEDY MADE HOUSEHOLD NAMES OUT OF THE LATE BERNIE MAC, CEDRIC THE ENTERTAINER, D.L. HUGLEY AND NOW-FAMILY FEUD HOST STEVE HARVEY. DIRECTED BY FAMED-DIRECTOR SPIKE LEE AND SHOT AT NORTH CAROLINA’S CHARLOTTE COLISEUM, THE FILM WAS A HUGE SUCCESS TAKING HOME $38 MILLION OR $67 MILLION ADJUSTED FOR INFLATION. IT’S CERTIFIED FRESH ON ROTTEN TOMATOES AND BOASTS SOME OF THE BEST SCORES ON THE LIST.
BEFORE HE STARRED IN FAMILY FILMS LIKE THE NUTTY PROFESSOR AND SHREK, EDDIE MURPHY WAS ONE OF THE BIGGEST STAND UPS ON THE PLANET. 1987’S EDDIE MURPHY: RAW STARTS WITH A SKIT ABOUT A YOUNG EDDIE THAT INCLUDES A CAMEO FROM SAMUEL L JACKSON BEFORE HE WAS HUGE. THEN HE TAKES THE STAGE OF MADISON SQUARE GARDEN FULLY CLAD IN PURPLE LEATHER. IT’S A LOOK. RAW BROUGHT IN MORE THAN $50 MILLION AT THE BOX OFFICE, THE EQUIVALENT OF $133 MILLION TODAY. INFLATION IS OUT OF CONTROL FOLKS. IT’S GOT GOOD REVIEWS EVEN THOUGH IT HAS SOME THINGS THAT ARE PROBLEMATIC BY TODAY’S STANDARDS. MURPHY IS WIDELY SEEN AS ONE OF THE BEST TO EVER DO IT, AND PLANNED A RETURN TO THE STAGE FOR 2020, BUT WE KNOW WHAT HAPPENED THERE.
LOOK… IF YOU CAN’T SHELL OUT BIG BUCKS TO SEE HARRY STYLES… ERR… ONE DIRECTION IN PERSON, 1D: THIS IS US IS THE NEXT BEST OPTION;. THE FILM FOLLOWED THE BRITISH BOY BAND’S LONDON STOP ON THEIR TAKE ME HOME TOUR ALONG WITH FOOTAGE BEFORE THEY WERE PUT TOGETHER ON X FACTOR. FOR SOME REASON IT WAS DIRECTED BY MORGAN SPURLOCK, THAT GUY WHO ATE MCDONALDS FOR 30 DAYS IN SUPER SIZE ME. IT WAS 3D BECAUSE EVERYTHING AT THE TIME WAS, AND HAD BETTER THAN AVERAGE REVIEWS ON ITS WAY TO MAKING $68 MILLION GLOBALLY OR $89 MILL TODAY.
HANNAH MONTANA & MILEY CYRUS: BEST OF BOTH WORLDS MADE MORE THAN $70 MILLION WORLDWIDE, THAT WOULD BE $101 MILLION TODAY. IT OPENED THE WEEKEND OF THE SUPER BOWL 2008, WHICH WAS A PRETTY GOOD ONE, AND IS THE BIGGEST OPENING EVER FOR A FILM RELEASED THE WEEKEND OF THE BIG GAME. BEST OF BOTH WORLDS MARKED THE TRANSITION FROM HANNAH INTO MILEY AS AN ARTIST. AND HAS A COUPLE SONGS BY THE JO BROS. IT WAS ALSO IN 3D, IT’S LIKE YOU’RE THERE. ITS REVIEWS ARE OK, BUT IF YOU HAD A YOUNG DAUGHTER IN THE MID-2000S, YOU SAW THIS ONE.
BEFORE BIEBER WAS CATCHING FLACK FOR THE WAY HE DRESSES TO GET DONUTS, HE WAS ONE OF THE BIGGEST POP STARS ON THE PLANET. 2011’S JUSTIN BIEBER: NEVER SAY NEVER RAKED IN $99 MILLION DOLLARS OR $138 MILL TODAY. THE FILM’S AUDIENCE WAS 84 PERCENT WOMEN AND GIRLS. TAYLOR HAS A BIGGER BASE CONSIDERING FANS ARE PRETTY EQUALLY SPLIT. IT’S ALSO THE WORST REVIEWED FILM OF ANY ON THE LIST, AND THE FOLLOW UP JUSTIN BIEBER’S BELIEVE DIDN’T DO ANY BETTER.
SURPRISE, SURPRISE, NOT ONE OF THESE LANDED ON ROLLING STONES BEST CONCERT FILMS OF ALL TIME. WHO ARE THE TALKING HEADS OR LED ZEPPELIN ANYWAY? SARCASM. THAT’S FIVE FOR FRIDAY, I’M SIMONE DEL ROSARIO. IT’S JUST BUSINESS.
Straight to your inbox.
By entering your email, you agree to the Terms & Conditions and acknowledge the Privacy Policy.
Update on Monday at 12:55 p.m. Eastern: The ongoing United Auto Workers strike has set a current-century record for losses due to an auto industry strike. Anderson Economic Group announced Monday that through Oct. 5, total economic losses from the strike exceeded $5.5 billion. The previous record loss was $4 billion from the 2019 UAW strike against GM.
United Auto Workers (UAW) has held the line against Ford, General Motors and Stellantis for three complete weeks. Now, there are whispers of progress at the bargaining table, as both sides lose hundreds of millions each week the strike goes on.
“It’s kind of hard now,” said Roy Wood, a UAW worker striking against Ford in Chicago. “We’re just in our first week for me, and we’re just waiting for this to come to a conclusion, hopefully fast.”
Striking workers are living off $500 per week from the strike fund while fighting for higher pay in the plants.
Point phone camera here
“You cannot ignore the fact that there is an economic loss being incurred every day while the strike is still going,” said Shay Manawar, a senior analyst at Anderson Economic Group (AEG).
Manawar and AEG have been tracking those losses since the first day, when 12,700 UAW workers walked out of three plants in Michigan, Ohio and Missouri. Another 5,600 workers joined the strike in the second week, walking out of 38 distribution plants.
“First two weeks, we’re looking at $3.95 billion in economic losses. Third or fourth week might look different,” Manawar said.
Different means more expensive, as more plants and people are impacted each week as the strike expands. AEG’s latest figures don’t include week three, when 6,900 more workers walked out of Ford’s Chicago plant and GM’s Lansing, Michigan, plant.
“We do anticipate additional impact, not just on the manufacturers as well as suppliers, but also on consumers,” Manawar said. “Distribution centers are being either impacted or closed; workers are being laid off. That means the dealerships that not just rely on selling new cars, but also have different departments such as used and body shops, if they’re not able to get their job done, that is also impacting consumers directly.”
When UAW last went on strike in 2019 against GM, the 6-week stalemate pushed Michigan into a single-quarter recession.
“This time around, we are looking at not just Michigan, but also other states,” Manawar explained.
Meanwhile, GM is bracing for additional walkouts. The company said this week that it took out a $6 billion line of credit. On Wednesday, Oct. 4, GM announced the targeted strikes have already cost the company $200 million in the third quarter.
“I think [it’s] prudent in light of some of the messages that we’ve seen from some of the UAW leadership that they intend to drag this on for months,” GM CFO Paul Jacobson told CNBC.
Ford is presenting a more optimistic front, announcing its “seventh and strongest offer” to UAW, which includes immediate pay raises topping 20% and inflation protection down the road.
UAW President Shawn Fain plans to provide a strike update to the nearly 150,000 workers of the “Big Three” automakers on Friday, Oct. 6, according to Reuters.
Tags: Auto industry, Economy, Ford, General Motors, Stellantis, Strike, UAW, Unions, United Auto Workers
SIMONE DEL ROSARIO: THREE WEEKS. THAT’S HOW LONG UNITED AUTO WORKERS HAVE HELD THE LINE AGAINST FORD, GM AND STELLANTIS. NOW, THERE ARE WHISPERS OF PROGRESS AT THE BARGAINING TABLE AS BOTH SIDES LOSE HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS EACH WEEK THE STRIKE GOES ON.
UAW WORKER ROY WOOD: It’s kind of hard now. We’re just in our first week for me and we’re just waiting for this to come to a conclusion, hopefully fast.
SIMONE DEL ROSARIO: STRIKING WORKERS ARE LIVING OFF $500 A WEEK FROM THE STRIKE FUND, WHILE FIGHTING FOR HIGHER PAY IN THE PLANTS.
SHAY MANAWAR: You cannot ignore the fact that there is an economic loss being incurred every day while the strike is still going.
SIMONE DEL ROSARIO: SHAY MANAWAR AND ANDERSON ECONOMIC GROUP HAVE BEEN TRACKING THOSE LOSSES SINCE DAY ONE, WHEN ROUGHLY 13,000 UAW WORKERS WALKED OUT OF THREE PLANTS IN MICHIGAN, OHIO AND MISSOURI. IN WEEK TWO, THE STRIKE EXPANDED BY 5,600 MORE WHO WALKED OUT OF 38 DISTRIBUTION PLANTS.
SHAY MANAWAR: First two weeks, we’re looking at $3.95 billion in economic losses. Third or fourth week might look different.
SIMONE DEL ROSARIO: $3.95 BILLION INCLUDES $325 MILLION IN LOST WAGES AND $1.1 BILLION IN COMPANY LOSSES. SUPPLIERS AND DEALERS NOT DIRECTLY INVOLVED IN THE STRIKE ARE LOSING EVEN MORE. THE FIGURES DON’T INCLUDE WEEK THREE, WHEN NEARLY 7,000 MORE WORKERS WALKED OUT OF FORD’S CHICAGO PLANT AND GM’S LANSING PLANT.
SHAY MANAWAR: We do anticipate additional impact, not just on the manufacturers as well as suppliers, but also in consumers. Distribution centers are being either impacted or closed, workers are being laid off. That means the dealerships that not just rely on selling new cars, but also have different departments such as used and body shops. If they’re not able to get their job done that is also impacting consumers directly.
SIMONE DEL ROSARIO: WHEN UAW LAST WENT ON STRIKE IN 2019 AGAINST GM, THE SIX-WEEK STALEMATE PUSHED MICHIGAN INTO A SINGLE-QUARTER RECESSION.
SHAY MANAWAR: This time around, we are looking at not just Michigan but also other states.
SIMONE DEL ROSARIO: WHILE GM IS ALSO BRACING FOR ADDITIONAL STRIKES. THE COMPANY SAID THIS WEEK IT TOOK OUT A $6 BILLION DOLLAR LINE OF CREDIT IN CASE UAW LEADERSHIP QUOTE “INTEND TO DRAG THIS ON FOR MONTHS.” FORD IS PRESENTING A MORE OPTIMISTIC FRONT, ANNOUNCING ITS “SEVENTH AND STRONGEST OFFER” TO UAW, WHICH INCLUDES IMMEDIATE PAY RAISES TOPPING 20% AND INFLATION PROTECTION DOWN THE ROAD. FOR STRAIGHT ARROW NEWS, I’M SIMONE DEL ROSARIO.
Straight to your inbox.
By entering your email, you agree to the Terms & Conditions and acknowledge the Privacy Policy.
In 2022, three out of the top five best-selling vehicles in the United States were trucks. With the White House’s efforts to electrify the nation’s automotive fleet well underway, automakers are looking to capitalize on the transition while catering to the wants of American consumers. But many have struggled with manufacturing and selling electric vehicle (EV) trucks.
Rivian, once hailed as the “Tesla of trucks,” is currently grappling with substantial financial losses. Despite commanding an average selling price of around $80,000 for its EV trucks, Rivian has suffered losses of about $33,000 for each unit sold, according to The Wall Street Journal. Building EV trucks has proven to be a costly endeavor, and Rivian’s CEO, RJ Scaringe, has reportedly directed his engineers to cut $40,000 in costs from every vehicle made through an examination of both parts and production expenses.
Point phone camera here
“We accepted that we’d have a lot of issues in the vehicle to start with,” said Scaringe, who added that he believes Rivian’s ability to redesign major aspects of its vehicles so soon after launching will ultimately be a competitive advantage.
Larger automakers like Ford and Tesla have also encountered their share of obstacles in the electric truck arena. The price of Ford’s F-150 Lightning, an EV pickup, has fluctuated in recent months. Ford temporarily paused production and sales to address defective batteries that posed a fire risk then subsequently raised the vehicle’s price by nearly $20,000 after resolving these issues. The company cited factors such as material cost increases and supply chain constraints for the price hike. Following numerous cancellations by prospective customers, Ford later reversed course, slashing prices by almost $10,000 during the summer.
“Shortly after launching the F-150 Lightning, rapidly rising material costs, supply constraints and other factors drove up the cost of the EV truck for Ford and our customers,” Marin Gjaja, Chief Customer Officer of Ford Model E, said in a statement. “We’ve continued to work in the background to improve accessibility and affordability to help to lower prices for our customers and shorten the wait times for their new F-150 Lightning.”
Meanwhile, Tesla’s long-awaited Cybertruck has faced ongoing delays. Elon Musk, Tesla’s CEO, initially aimed to introduce the first customer trucks at an event in late September. That target has come and gone, without any official word on future launch plans. Despite these delays, Tesla has been distributing Cybertruck launch apparel to its employees, hinting at a potential launch in the near future.
“When we are ready to [launch the Cybertruck], we will,” Musk said. “While I think it is our best product ever, it is an extremely difficult product to build. We are in uncharted territory, because it is not like anything else.”
The Cybertruck, initially expected to roll off the assembly line in 2021, has garnered significant interest, with approximately two million people placing a $100 deposit to reserve their purchase when the vehicle becomes available. Though similar to Ford’s pricing adjustments, the cost of the Cybertruck has already seen increases from its original sticker price, with Musk acknowledging the impact of inflation and other issues.
“It will be hard to make the Cybertruck affordable,” Musk admitted while discussing the vehicle. “There’s no way to have anticipated quite the inflation that we’ve seen and various issues.”
Consumer interest in electric trucks from manufacturers like Tesla, Ford, and others remains evident, with the market for these products expected to hit $11.08 billion by 2032. The ultimate success of these vehicles in the market hinges on whether the price points align with both consumer expectations and automaker profitability.
LET’S TALK TRUCKS.
THEY MADE UP 3 OUT OF THE 5 BEST SELLING VEHICLES IN THE U-S LAST YEAR.
AND AS MANY AUTOMAKERS LOOK TO ELECTRIFY – WE’RE LEARNING MORE ABOUT THE CHALLENGES THEY FACE.
WE’LL START WITH RIVIAN. , ONCE DUBBED THE TESLA OF TRUCKS, THE COMPANY IS NOW LOOKING AT SOME STARK FINANCIAL LOSSES.
BUILDING EV TRUCKS HAS BECOME SUCH AN EXPENSIVE ENDEAVOR, THAT DESPITE SELLING ITS VEHICLES FOR AN AVERAGE OF EIGHTY THOUSAND DOLLARS, RIVIAN HAS STILL BEEN LOSING AROUND THIRTY-THREE-THOUSAND DOLLARS FOR EACH ONE SOLD.
EVEN LARGER AUTOMAKERS LIKE FORD AND TESLA HAVE ENCOUNTERED PROBLEMS OF THEIR OWN WITH EV TRUCKS.
THE PRICE OF THE F-ONE FIFTY LIGHTING HAS BOUNCED AROUND IN RECENT MONTHS.
FORD PAUSED PRODUCTION AND SALES TO DEAL WITH DEFECTIVE BATTERIES – AND THEN HIKED THE PRICE BY NEARLY 20-THOUSAND-DOLLARS AFTER THOSE PROBLEMS WERE RESOLVED. THE COMPANY SAID THIS WAS DUE TO FACTORS LIKE MATERIAL COST INCREASES, AND SUPPLY CHAIN CONSTRAINTS.
AFTER NUMEROUS CANCELLATIONS BY PROSPECTIVE CUSTOMERS FORD REVERSED COURSE AND SLASHED PRICES OVER THE SUMMER.
MEANWHILE, TESLA’S LONG-ANTICIPATED CYBERTRUCK IS FACING ONGOING DELAYS.
CEO ELON MUSK PREVIOUSLY SAID HE HOPED TO ROLL OUT THE FIRST CUSTOMER TRUCKS AT AN EVENT IN LATE SEPTEMBER, BUT THAT TARGET HAS NOW COME AND GONE WITH NO WORD YET ON ANY FUTURE LAUNCH PLANS.
DESPITE THIS LATEST DELAY, TESLA HAS STILL BEEN DELIVERING CYBERTRUCK LAUNCH APPAREL TO ITS EMPLOYEES IN RECENT WEEKS. A SIGNAL AN EVENT COULD BE COMING SOON.
THE CYBERTRUCK WAS SUPPOSED TO START COMING OFF THE ASSEMBLY LINE IN 2021. AN ESTIMATED TWO MILLION PEOPLE HAVE SIGNED UP FOR A ONE HUNDRED DOLLAR DEPOSIT TO RESERVE THEIR PLACE TO PURCHASE THE TRUCK WHEN IT IS EVENTUALLY READY.
SIMILARLY TO FORD’S PREVIOUS PRICE HIKES THOUGH, THE COST OF THESE CYBERTRUCK’S HAS ALREADY RISEN FROM ITS ORIGINAL STICKER PRICE, WITH MUSK ADMITTING THAT INFLATION AND OTHER VARIOUS ISSUES HAVE PLAYED A FACTOR.
HOWEVER, CONSUMERS HAVE SHOWN A WILLINGNESS TO EXPLORE PURCHASING THESE EV TRUCKS FROM TESLA, FORD AND OTHERS.
BUT WHETHER OR NOT THE ULTIMATE PRICE POINTS ON THESE VEHICLES WORKS FOR BOTH CUSTOMERS AND AUTOMAKERS WILL DETERMINE HOW WIDESPREAD THEIR MARKET BECOMES MOVING FORWARD.
Straight to your inbox.
By entering your email, you agree to the Terms & Conditions and acknowledge the Privacy Policy.
Ida. Ian. Idalia. Extreme storms are increasingly battering the U.S. at alarming rates and causing billions in damage.
“You want to live on the water, you got to put up with it, you know,” 77-year-old retiree John “Sparky” Abrandt said as he picked up debris around his Horseshoe Beach, Florida, home following Hurricane Idalia.
Point phone camera here
It’s not just on the water that homeowners are paying the price. The West is facing deadly heat waves and drought, wildfires are stretching far beyond their normal boundaries and tornadoes are leveling towns across the Midwest and South.
“Make sure that you’re assessing the risk of where you live,” Insurance Information Institute (Triple-I) spokesperson Scott Holeman said. “The ocean views are great. The mountain views are great. But if there are risks in some of those areas, know that costs are probably going only up.”
Triple-I data shows natural catastrophes in the U.S. caused $100 billion in insured property loss in 2022. These costly natural disasters are becoming way more frequent.
Adjusted for inflation, there are more billion-dollar disaster events in the past 13 years than in the 30 years before it, according to NOAA.
“As we see conditions changing and more people living in those risky areas, there are more people exposed,” Holeman said. “You’re seeing some companies that are saying, ‘We’re not going to do any more of this kind of business in these areas.'”
The insurance pinch is squeezing out people around New Orleans, where nearly every home faces a high flood risk. According to real estate company Redfin, 15,000 more people moved out than in the past two years as insurance premiums price people out of what used to be an affordable place to live.
But migration out of New Orleans is a rare exception, as most population shifts are moving into harm’s way.
“There are people that continue to move to places where there are a lot of wildfires, or we’re certainly not seeing people really leave Florida,” Holeman said.
A Redfin analysis shows over the past four years, people are increasingly moving into the U.S. counties with the highest flood, fire and heat risks.
The pandemic prompted a lot of these moves to warmer areas with lower costs of living. Redfin’s chief economist says it’s human nature to focus on current benefits and discount risks that are tougher to measure, like climate.
It explains why Phoenix, Arizona, drew in 76,000 more people in the past two years amid scorching heat and a lack of water; while Lee County, Florida, welcomed 60,000 more people, though Hurricane Ian ravaged the coast last September.
“I guess all you do is put everything back together and try again,” Fort Myers, Florida, resident Luis Damone said while trudging through knee-deep water in the aftermath of Hurricane Ian.
This is the final installment of a three-part series on the homeowners’ insurance crisis. Catch up on part 1: Why more insurers are refusing to provide homeowners’ insurance; and part 2: With home insurance premiums through the roof, some homeowners go ‘naked.’
Tags: Climate Change, Drought, Florida, Heat wave, hurricane, Inflation, Insurance, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, natural disaster, New Orleans, Wildfire
SIMONE DEL ROSARIO: Harvey. Ida. Ian. Extreme storms are battering the U.S. at alarming rates.
JOHN ABRANDT: You want to live on the water, you got to put up with it, you know?
SIMONE DEL ROSARIO: And not just on the water, but far from it. The West, facing deadly heatwaves and drought. Wildfires stretching far beyond their normal boundaries. Tornadoes leveling towns across the Midwest and South.
SCOTT HOLEMAN: Make sure that you’re assessing the risk of where you live.
SIMONE DEL ROSARIO: Scott Holeman is a spokesperson for Triple-I, Insurance Information Institute.
SCOTT HOLEMAN: The ocean views are great. The mountain views are great. But if there are risks in some of those areas, know that costs are probably going only up.
SIMONE DEL ROSARIO: Triple-I data shows natural catastrophes in the U.S. caused $100 billion in insured property loss in 2022. And these costly natural disasters are becoming way more frequent. Adjusted for inflation, there are more billion-dollar disaster events in the past 13 years than in the 30 years before it.
SCOTT HOLEMAN: As we see conditions changing and more people living in those risky areas, there are more people exposed. You’re seeing some companies that are saying, we’re not going to do any more of this kind of business in this, in these areas.
SIMONE DEL ROSARIO: The insurance pinch is squeezing out people around New Orleans, where nearly every home faces a high flood risk. 15,000 more people moved out than in the past two years, as insurance premiums price people out of what used to be an affordable place to live. But migration out of New Orleans is a rare exception, as most population shifts are moving into harm’s way.
SCOTT HOLEMAN: There are people that continue to move to places where there are a lot of wildfires, or we’re certainly not seeing people really leave Florida.
SIMONE DEL ROSARIO: A Redfin analysis shows over the past four years, people are increasingly moving into the U.S. counties with the highest flood, fire and heat risks. The pandemic prompted a lot of these moves to warmer areas with lower costs of living. Redfin’s chief economist says it’s human nature to focus on current benefits and discount risks that are tougher to measure, like climate. It explains why Phoenix drew in 76,000 more people the past two years amid scorching heat and a lack of water. While Lee County, Florida, welcomed 60,000 more people, though Hurricane Ian ravaged the coast last September.
LUIS DAMONE: I guess all you do is put everything back together and try again.
SIMONE DEL ROSARIO: This is the final piece of our 3-part series on the homeowners’ insurance crisis. You can catch all three stories by searching ‘home insurance’ at SAN.com and on the SAN app.
Straight to your inbox.
By entering your email, you agree to the Terms & Conditions and acknowledge the Privacy Policy.
When the worst happens to your home, a common consolation is, “That is what insurance is for.” But with the price of homeowners’ insurance going through the roof, more people are opting to go without.
About 12% of homeowners do not carry homeowners’ insurance, according to a recent Insurance Information Institute (Triple-I) analysis. Nearly half of those households make less than $40,000 per year.
Point phone camera here
Mortgage lenders require owners to have insurance, so those who don’t have insurance likely own their property outright.
“For some people, they may want to walk away and move to another location, but just know, you’re gonna lose everything,” Triple-I spokesperson Scott Holeman said.
Some are deciding it’s a price they’d have to pay when they can’t afford to pay their premiums.
This is part 2 of a 3-part series on the homeowners’ insurance crisis. Watch part 1: Why more insurers are refusing to provide home insurance; and part 3: Fueling home insurance crisis: Natural disasters rack up billions in damage.
Nationally, the average premium has gone up nearly 30% since 2018, according to Matic. Most of the increase is attributed to the rising cost of repairs and extreme natural disasters.
But many states have it even worse. In Nebraska, $300,000 in dwelling coverage costs more than $3,500 per year, double the national average. That’s second only to Oklahoma.
“It’s either the price goes up so high people can’t afford it, or the companies go out of business, and no one can be insured,” Holeman said.
It’s a problem in places like California, where average premiums are below the national average. Recently, insurers have lost so much money in the state that State Farm, Allstate, Farmers, and USAA have paused or are limiting new coverage. Together, those four make up nearly a quarter of California’s property insurance market share.
“There are a lot of policy decisions that are going to have to be made in some of those high-risk states, and they are having [those discussions],” Holeman said.
State governments regulate how much insurers can charge, and 31 states have approved double-digit rate increases since the start of 2022, according to a Wall Street Journal analysis of S&P Global data.
Facing an insurance exodus in California, the state’s chief regulator just ruled insurers can now factor in future risks when setting prices, something many other states already allow. The state agency said eight insurance companies have requested rate increases of at least 20% or higher this year.
“Insurance is about spreading risk; it’s about managing risk; and it’s about assessing that risk to know what to charge people,” Holeman said. “And as we see conditions changing and more people living in those risky areas, there are more people exposed.”
This is part 2 of a 3-part series on the homeowners’ insurance crisis. Watch part 1: Why more insurers are refusing to provide home insurance; and part 3: Fueling home insurance crisis: Natural disasters rack up billions in damage.
SIMONE DEL ROSARIO: When the worst happens to your home, a common consolation is: that is what insurance is for. But with the price of homeowners’ insurance going through the roof, more people are opting to go without.
SCOTT HOLEMAN: That’s really sad. And it’s really unwise.
SIMONE DEL ROSARIO: Scott Holeman is a spokesperson for Triple-I, Insurance Information Institute. Their analysis found 12% of homeowners do not carry homeowners’ insurance. About half of those households make less than $40,000 per year.
SCOTT HOLEMAN: For some people, they may want to walk away and move to another location, but just know, you’re gonna lose everything.
SIMONE DEL ROSARIO: Some are deciding it’s a price they’d have to pay, when they can’t afford to pay their premiums. Nationally, the average premium has gone up nearly 30% since 2018, mostly attributed to the rising cost of repairs and extreme natural disasters. But many states have it even worse. In Nebraska, $300,000 in dwelling coverage costs more than $3,500 per year, double the national average. That’s second only to Oklahoma.
SCOTT HOLEMAN: It’s either the price goes up so high people can’t afford it or the companies go out of business and no one can be insured.
SIMONE DEL ROSARIO: It’s a problem in places like California, where average premiums are below the national average. Recently insurers have lost so much money in the state that nearly a quarter of the market share is either stopping or limiting new coverage.
SCOTT HOLEMAN: There are a lot of policy decisions that are going to have to be made in some of those high risk states and they are having them.
SIMONE DEL ROSARIO: State governments regulate how much insurers can charge. And 31 states have approved double-digit rate increases since the start of 2022, according to a Wall Street Journal analysis of S&P Global data. Facing an insurance exodus in California, the state’s chief regulator just ruled insurers can now factor in future risks when setting prices, something many other states already allow. The state agency said eight insurance companies have requested rate increases of at least 20% or higher this year.
SCOTT HOLEMAN: Insurance is about spreading risk. It’s about managing risk. And it’s about assessing that risk to to know what to charge people. And as we see conditions changing and more people living in those risky areas, there are more people exposed.
SIMONE DEL ROSARIO: This is part 2 of a 3-part series on the homeowners’ insurance crisis. Be sure to download the SAN app and enable notifications so you can catch part 3 on billion-dollar natural disasters coming soon. And search SAN for part 1 on why more insurers are refusing to provide home insurance.
Straight to your inbox.
By entering your email, you agree to the Terms & Conditions and acknowledge the Privacy Policy.
Tags: Canada, carbon emissions, Climate Change, Electric Vehicle Batteries, Electric vehicles, lithium, Nickel
JACK AYLMER:
THE RARE-EARTH RUSH CONTINUES, WITH NEW REMOTE CORNERS OF THE WORLD BEING CONSIDERED.
ONE OF THE LATEST FLASH POINTS:
A REMOTE EXPANSE OF WILDERNESS IN CANADA.
IT’S CALLED ‘THE RING OF FIRE’ – AND UNDERNEATH THIS WILDERNESS -LIES UNTAPPED DEPOSITS OF NICKEL, COPPER, AND COBALT.
WORTH AN ESTIMATED SIXTY SEVEN BILLION DOLLARS, THESE METALS ARE ESSENTIAL FOR BUILDING THE BATTERIES THAT POWER ELECTRIC VEHICLES.
WITH BOTH CANADA AND THE U.S. AIMING TO PHASE OUT GAS POWERED VEHICLE SALES BY 2035, THE VALUE OF THESE RESOURCES HAS BEEN CLIMBING IN RECENT YEARS.
BUT, RETRIEVING THEM LIKELY WON’T BE A SIMPLE TASK. AND EFFORTS ARE ALREADY RECEIVING PUSHBACK.
THE DEPOSIT IS BURIED UNDERNEATH A LARGE ECOSYSTEM OF FORESTS AND PEAT BOGS, WHICH HOLDS MORE CARBON PER SQUARE FOOT THAN EVEN THE AMAZON RAINFOREST.
LOCAL GROUPS CALL IT ‘THE BREATHING LANDS’.
PULLING AND STORING AWAY ABOUT THIRTY FIVE BILLION TONS OF CARBON OUT OF THE ATMOSPHERE,
THAT’S THE EQUIVALENT OF THE EMISSIONS GENERATED ANNUALLY FROM THIRTY NINE BILLION CARS.
CLIMATE ADVOCATES HAVE WARNED THAT ATTEMPTING TO DIG FOR RESOURCES ON THIS LAND COULD RESULT IN THE RELEASE OF MORE GREENHOUSE GAS THAN WHAT CANADA EMITS IN AN ENTIRE YEAR.
LOCAL INDIGENOUS TRIBES HAVE ALSO SPOKEN OUT AGAINST EFFORTS TO MINE, SAYING THE PROJECT WILL DESTROY THE LAND.
DESPITE OPPOSITION – THE REAL ROADBLOCK FOR DEVELOPMENTS HAS BEEN A LACK OF ROADS.
BUT RECENTLY, GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS HAVE DOUBLED DOWN ON DETERMINATION TO DIG UP THESE MINERALS.
DOUG FORD, PREMIERE OF THE PROVINCE OF ONTARIO WHERE THE RING OF FIRE IS LOCATED, HAS SAID QUOTE “IF I HAVE TO HOP ON A BULLDOZER MYSELF, WE’RE GOING TO START BUILDING ROADS TO THE RING OF FIRE.”
THE U.S. IS SEEING A SIMILAR CONFLICT ARISE
GEOLOGISTS BELIEVE THEY HAVE UNCOVERED THE WORLD’S LARGEST DEPOSIT OF LITHIUM- ANOTHER CRUCIAL EV BATTERY COMPONENT-WITHIN AN ANCIENT SUPERVOLCANO STRADDLING THE NEVADA-OREGON BORDER.
BUT SIMILAR TO THE CONTROVERSY SURROUNDING THE RING OF FIRE, ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS AND NATIVE AMERICAN TRIBES ARE RAISING CONCERNS.
WE’VE BEEN COVERING ISSUES RELATED TO THE MINING AND THE LIFECYCLE OF RARE EARTH MATERIALS, INCLUDING THE SO CALLED ‘WHITE GOLD RUSH’.
HEAD OVER TO SAN DOT COM AND SEARCH “RARE EARTHS” TO SEE MORE.
Straight to your inbox.
By entering your email, you agree to the Terms & Conditions and acknowledge the Privacy Policy.
SIMONE DEL ROSARIO:
NO NEED TO RETURN THOSE RED ENVELOPES. FRIDAY’S THE LONG-OVERDUE END OF NETFLIX DVD-BY-MAIL AFTER 25 YEARS OF SERVICE AND 5 BILLION DISCS. AT ITS PEAK CUSTOMERS WERE RETURNING 1.6 MILLION DISKS EVERY DAY AND BLOCKBUSTER WENT BANKRUPT. LET’S TAKE A TRIP DOWN MEMORY LANE. HERE ARE THE 5 MOST-RENTED DVDS FROM NETFLIX IN THIS WEEK’S FIVE FOR FRIDAY.
THE BUCKET LIST COMES IN AT NUMBER FIVE. THE 2007 DRAMEDY FOLLOWS TWO TERMINALLY ILL FELLAS, PLAYED BY MORGAN FREEMAN AND JACK NICHOLSON, LIVING OUT THEIR DREAMS BEFORE THEY KICK THE BUCKET. AUDIENCES LIKED IT, ACCORDING TO REVIEW AGGREGATOR ROTTEN TOMATOES, BUT FAMED CRITIC ROGER EBERT, WHO WAS DIAGNOSED WITH THYROID CANCER IN 2002, GAVE IT ONE STAR, SAYING, “THE BUCKET LIST” THINKS DYING OF CANCER IS A LAFF RIOT FOLLOWED BY A DIME-STORE EPIPHANY.” IF YA WANNA WATCH IT TODAY, LOOKS LIKE YOU’LL HAVE TO PAY TO RENT IT FROM A STREAMING SERVICE.
SCORSESE, LEO, DAMON, JACK AGAIN, AND MARKY MARK. THAT’S A SUREFIRE RECIPE FOR A HIT. AND 2006’S THE DEPARTED WAS JUST THAT. IT’S WELL KNOWN THAT NICHOLSON’S CHARACTER IS BASED ON FAMED BOSTON GANGSTER WHITEY BULGER. LESS KNOWN IS THE FACT THAT THE MOVIE IS A REMAKE OF THE 2002 HONG KONG FILM ‘INTERNAL AFFAIRS.’ BOTH AUDIENCES AND CRITICS LOVE THE FILM. IT WON 4 OSCARS INCLUDING BEST PICTURE AND DIRECTOR. IN A 1-2 PUNCH, THE LAST DAY TO STREAM THIS ON NETFLIX IS OCTOBER FIRST.
BEFORE JEREMY RENNER WAS AN AVENGER, HE STARRED ALONGSIDE FELLOW FUTURE SUPERHERO ANTHONY MACKIE IN THE HURT LOCKER. THE 2008 THRILLER FEATURES RENNER AS PART OF AN EXPLOSIVE ORDNANCE DISPOSAL TEAM DURING THE IRAQ WAR. IT’S JUST AS HEAVY AS IT SOUNDS. IT GOT PRETTY SOLID REVIEWS AND WON 3 OSCARS INCLUDING BEST PICTURE AND DIRECTOR FOR KATHERYN BIGELOW. IF YOU WANNA CHECK OUT THE HURT LOCKER, IT’S ON MAX.
2005’S CRASH IS A PRETTY HARD DRAMA WITH AN ENSEMBLE CAST INCLUDING SANDRA BULLOCK, DON CHEADLE, TERRANCE HOWARD AND LUDACRIS. IMDB DESCRIBES THE FILM: “LOS ANGELES CITIZENS WITH VASTLY SEPARATE LIVES COLLIDE IN INTERWEAVING STORIES OF RACE, LOSS AND REDEMPTION.” IT TOOK HOME 3 OSCARS INCLUDING BEST PICTURE AND IS DEFINITELY BETTER THAN AVERAGE IN THE REVIEW DEPARTMENT. LOOKS LIKE YOU CAN WATCH IT WITH ADS ON PRIME VIDEO’S FREEVEE.
AMERICA’S SWEETHEART SANDY B ALSO STARS IN NETFLIX’S MOST-RENTED DVD OF ALL TIME. 2009’S THE BLIND SIDE FOLLOWS THE SUPPOSED REAL LIFE STORY OF THE TUOHY FAMILY BRINGING STRUGGLING FUTURE NFL PLAYER MICHAEL OHER INTO THEIR HOME. NOT SO FAST THOUGH, 14 YEARS LATER, OHER FILED A LAWSUIT THIS SUMMER CLAIMING THE FAMILY NEVER ADOPTED HIM BUT DID TRICK HIM INTO SIGNING A DOCUMENT TO MAKE THEM HIS CONSERVATORS TO MAKE MONEY OFF HIS STORY. HE CLAIMS THE FAMILY MADE MILLIONS WHILE HE GOT NOTHING. SO OUR NUMBER ONE ISN’T AGING THAT WELL. BUT NONE OF THAT HAS TO DO WITH SANDY’S CONTRIBUTIONS, SHE WON BEST ACTRESS FOR THE ROLE. AND IT’S DOING OK ON ROTTEN TOMATOES. YOU’LL HAVE TO PAY TO STREAM IT IN 2023.
NOTHING AGAINST THIS LIST, IT’S SOME EXCELLENT CINEMA, BUT CAN Y’ALL GO BACK IN TIME AND WATCH SOME MORE FUN MOVIES TOO? STREAM SOMETHING THAT’LL MAKE YOU LAUGH THIS WEEKEND, THAT’S FIVE FOR FRIDAY, I’M SIMONE DEL ROSARIO AND IT’S JUST BUSINESS.
Straight to your inbox.
By entering your email, you agree to the Terms & Conditions and acknowledge the Privacy Policy.
It’s not anecdotal: Extreme natural disasters are happening more often and causing way more damage. Insurance is supposed to be there to safeguard homeowners in case the worst happens to their property. However, in disaster-prone areas, some insurers are declaring that it’s too risky to keep doing business there.
Point phone camera here
“The last few years, insurers have lost money,” said Scott Holeman, a spokesperson for the Insurance Information Institute, known as Triple-I.
“If the combined ratio is under 100, insurance companies can make money,” Holeman explained. “If that combined ratio is over 100, that means they’re paying out more money than they’re taking in. And that’s not sustainable for any business to pay out more than what you’re collecting.”
For four out of the past five years, national data shows homeowners’ insurers have earned less in premiums than they’ve paid out in losses and expenses. Taking a closer look at markets like Florida and California, it’s no wonder insurers are jumping ship.
From 2016-2019, for every $100 in premiums Florida home insurers received, they paid out $117.50 in losses and expenses. On a national level, it was basically break-even over that time at $100.70.
Insurers are going to have to raise rates to stay in business or leave the market.
Scott Holeman, Insurance Information Institute spokesperson
Meanwhile, California insurers are still catching up from the fateful fire seasons of 2017 and 2018. Triple-I said that in the last decade, California insurers made healthy profits in the homeowners’ insurance business for eight out of 10 years. However, the combined ratio is still 108.1% over that time. That’s because for every $100 in premiums received, California’s home insurers paid out $241.90 in 2017 and $213.40 in 2018.
This year the state’s largest insurer, State Farm, said it would stop selling new home policies in the state. Allstate had quietly stopped selling them last year and announced the move after State Farm. Others have followed suit. Farmers has also significantly pulled back in Florida and California.
“Florida and California are seeing a lot of issues but it’s not just there — we’re seeing places like Arkansas and Mississippi were hit by tornadoes earlier this year,” Holeman said. “Insurers are going to have to raise rates to stay in business or leave the market.”
This is part 1 of a 3-part series on the homeowners’ insurance crisis. Watch part 2: With home insurance premiums through the roof, some homeowners go ‘naked’; and part 3: Fueling home insurance crisis: Natural disasters rack up billions in damage.
Tags: California, Farmers Insurance, Florida, Home insurance, Insurance, natural disaster, State Farm, Wildfire
SIMONE DEL ROSARIO: It’s not anecdotal. Extreme natural disasters are happening more often and causing way more damage. Insurance is supposed to be there to cover you in case the worst happens to your home. But in disaster prone areas, some insurers are saying it’s just too risky to keep doing business there.
SCOTT HOLEMAN: The last few years, insurers have lost money.
SIMONE DEL ROSARIO: Scott Holeman is a spokesperson for Triple-I, Insurance Information Institute.
SCOTT HOLEMAN: If the combined ratio is under 100, insurance companies can make money. If that combined ratio is over 100, that means they’re paying out more money than they’re taking in. And that’s not sustainable for any business to pay out more than what you’re collecting.
SIMONE DEL ROSARIO: Look closer at markets like Florida and California, and it’s no wonder insurers are jumping ship. From 2016-2019, for every $100 in premiums Florida insurers received, they paid out $117.50 in losses and expenses. While on a national level, it was basically break even over that time.
Meanwhile, California insurers are still catching up from the fateful fire seasons of 2017 and 2018. Triple-I says in the last decade, California insurers made healthy profits in the homeowners’ insurance business for 8 out of 10 years. But the combined ratio is still 108.1% over that time. That’s because for every $100 in premiums received, California’s home insurers paid out $241.90 in 2017 and $213.40 in 2018.
This year the state’s largest insurer, State Farm, said it would stop selling new home policies in the state. Allstate had quietly stopped selling them last year. Others have followed suit. Farmers has also pulled back in Florida and California.
SCOTT HOLEMAN: Florida and California are seeing a lot of issues. But it’s not just there, we’re seeing places like Arkansas and Mississippi were hit by tornadoes earlier this year. Insurers are going to have to raise rates to stay in business or leave the market.
SIMONE DEL ROSARIO: This is part 1 of a 3-part series on the homeowners’ insurance crisis. Be sure to download the SAN app and enable notifications so you can catch part 2 on skyrocketing premiums coming soon.
Straight to your inbox.
By entering your email, you agree to the Terms & Conditions and acknowledge the Privacy Policy.