jili 5566

jili 5566 Spotlight on Qualcomm: Analyzing the Surge in Options Activity

Brainiac Babies Announces Free Childcare Opportunities for Families in NeedPre-arrest bails of IK’s sisters extended

After Trump's Project 2025 denials, he is tapping its authors and influencers for key rolesRohtak : Former MLA Umed Singh from Meham of the district has authored “Kisan Andolan 2020-21: Adamya Sangharsh va Swabhiman ki Gaurav Gatha”, capturing the essence of the farmers’ protest from Nov 26, 2020, to Dec 12, 2021. Described as one of the longest mass movements in history, it highlighted Gandhian non-violence, Bhagat Singh’s spirit of sacrifice, and Ambedkar’s ideals of equality. Born in Rohtak’s Samain village, the author in the book narrates how collective leadership and nationwide solidarity turned the movement into a historic struggle for justice . Sat Singh We also published the following articles recently FIR filed against ex-MLA Pappu Kalani for threatening BJP MLA in Ulhasnagar Former MLA Pappu Kalani and 20 others were accused of threatening BJP MLA Kumar Ailani in Ulhasnagar during the recent assembly elections. Ailani filed a complaint alleging Kalani made a threatening gesture resembling a revolver with his finger. Kalani's son, Omie, denies the allegations, claiming video evidence contradicts Ailani's account and accuses him of misusing his power. Woman, kin of ex-MLA trade charges of rape, kidnap In Sonbhadra district, a woman accused Mangalam Chero, son of former MLA Hariram Chero, of rape, alleging he filmed an obscene video and threatened her. Conversely, Mangalam's brother filed a kidnapping case against the woman, claiming she and her family assaulted and threatened Mangalam. Police are investigating both claims. NCP (SP) suspends ex-MLA Timande, APMC chief Kothari The Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) took swift action against internal dissent by suspending former MLA Raju Timande and APMC chairman Sudhir Kothari. Their offense? Rebelling against the official NCP candidate, Atul Wandile, in the Hinganghat assembly constituency. Timande defied party orders by running as an independent, while Kothari fueled the rebellion. Stay updated with the latest news on Times of India . Don't miss daily games like Crossword , Sudoku , and Mini Crossword .

HELP THEM DRIVE LIKE A SACRAMENTO KING: GIVE THE GIFT OF A REVIVER RPLATE®Chance of direct attack by Russia ‘remote’, says UK armed forces chiefSTUART, Fla. , Dec. 20, 2024 /PRNewswire/ -- Health In Tech, Inc., an Insurtech platform company backed by third-party AI technology, today announced the pricing of its initial public offering of 2,300,000 shares of its Class A common stock, at a public offering price of $4.00 per share. In addition, Health In Tech has granted the underwriter a 30-day option to purchase up to an additional 345,000 shares of its Class A common stock at the initial public offering price, less underwriting discounts and commissions. The shares are expected to begin trading on the Nasdaq Capital Market on December 23, 2024 , under the ticker symbol "HIT". The offering is expected to close on December 24, 2024 , subject to customary closing conditions. American Trust Investment Services, Inc. is acting as the sole book-running manager of this offering. Health In Tech intends to use the net proceeds from the offering towards system enhancements, the expansion of service offerings, expansion of sales and distribution channels, talent development and retention, working capital and other general corporate purpose. A registration statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-281853) relating to the shares was filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and became effective on December 19, 2024 . This offering was made only by means of a prospectus, forming part of the effective registration statement. A copy of the prospectus relating to the offering can be obtained when available, by contacting American Trust Investment Services, Inc., 230 W. Monroe Street , Suite 300, Chicago, IL 60606, or via E-Mail at ECM@amtruinvest.com . This press release shall not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy any securities, nor shall there be any sale of any securities in any state or jurisdiction in which such offer, solicitation or sale would be unlawful prior to registration or qualification under the securities laws of any such state or jurisdiction. About Health In Tech Health in Tech, Inc. ("HIT") is an Insurtech platform company backed by third-party AI technology. We offer a dynamic marketplace designed to create customized healthcare plan solutions while streamlining processes through vertical integration, process simplification, and automation. By eliminating friction and complexities, HIT enhances value propositions for employers and optimizes underwriting, sales, and service workflows for Managing General Underwriters (MGUs), insurance carriers, licensed brokers, and Third-Party Administrators (TPAs). Learn more at healthintech.com . Forward-Looking Statements Regarding Health In Tech Certain statements in this press release are forward-looking statements for purposes of the safe harbor provisions under the U.S. Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements may include estimates or expectations about Health In Tech's possible or assumed operational results, financial condition, business strategies and plans, market opportunities, competitive position, industry environment, and potential growth opportunities. In some cases, forward-looking statements can be identified by terms such as "may," "will," "should," "design," "target," "aim," "hope," "expect," "could," "intend," "plan," "anticipate," "estimate," "believe," "continue," "predict," "project," "potential," "goal," or other words that convey the uncertainty of future events or outcomes. These statements relate to future events or to Health In Tech's future financial performance, and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause Health In Tech's actual results, levels of activity, performance, or achievements to be different from any future results, levels of activity, performance or achievements expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements. You should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements because they involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which are, in some cases, beyond Health In Tech's control and which could, and likely will, affect actual results, levels of activity, performance or achievements. Any forward-looking statement reflects Health In Tech's current views with respect to future events and is subject to these and other risks, uncertainties and assumptions relating to Health In Tech's operations, results of operations, growth strategy and liquidity. Investor Contact Investor Relations: ir@healthintech.com View original content to download multimedia: https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/health-in-tech-inc-announces-pricing-of-initial-public-offering-302337631.html SOURCE Health In Tech

Warzone devs restrict fan-favorite handgun yet again

"The Council of Autism Service Providers" And "ABA Centers" Partner to Ring Closing Bell at the New York Stock ExchangeApple made waves when it announced that its AirPods Pro 2 , when combined with iOS 18.1, could fulfill the role of OTC hearing aids . Given that OTC hearing aids can often run as much as $1,500, it seemed too good to be true that the same hearing benefits could be had for just $249 or less. Better yet, given the popularity of Apple’s wireless earbuds , there’s an excellent chance that those who could benefit already own them (if you live in a country where Apple’s hearing aid feature has been approved ). So how good are the AirPods Pro 2 as OTC hearing aids? To find out, I looked at two key performance criteria: the accuracy of Apple’s software-driven hearing test, and their ability to provide speech enhancement. Testing the test Typically, prescription hearing aids are provided by a licensed audiologist. Before you get them, the audiologist will test your hearing using professionally calibrated instruments in a sound-proof booth. The results, known as an audiogram, are used to customize the hearing aids for you. At-home OTC hearing aids perform a similar test via software, and rely on the user to find a suitably quiet location. Related: How to take the AirPods Pro 2 hearing test My maternal grandfather struggled with hearing after he turned 60, and my father has moderate hearing loss in one ear. With that kind of family history, I get my hearing professionally checked annually to monitor my own health. Here’s how Apple’s audiogram of my hearing (December 2024) compares to my most recent audiologist exam (October 2024). While the Apple audiogram slightly overestimated my high-frequency loss (possibly because my test environment wasn’t quiet enough), it accurately measured my sensitivity across other frequencies, including the slight differences between my left and right ears. I shared the Apple result with my audiologist, and she agreed that it looked fairly accurate, exceeding her expectations for an at-home test. In the lab In an ideal world, we’d evaluate the AirPods Pro 2’s speech enhancement using both qualitative results (gathered from people’s real-world assessments) and quantitative results (lab-based testing). Unfortunately, I wasn’t able to gather qualitative data, but I did get in touch with HearAdvisor , an independent hearing aid testing company. HearAdvisor has lab-tested a variety of OTC and prescription hearing aid models, including the AirPods Pro 2, and maintains a published list of the best products. For OTC products, the testing methodology evaluates devices based on five major criteria using the initial settings created by the software-based hearing test. When possible, those settings are professionally tuned and the tests are repeated to see if there’s a difference in the results. The AirPods Pro 2 received a B grade , placing them in the second tier of HearAdvisor’s rankings. While that doesn’t seem especially noteworthy, the tests revealed a substantial difference between the initial and tuned results. “Speech in quiet” and “speech in noise” — arguably the most important criteria for any hearing aids — both increased by more than double (111% and 225%, respectively) after being tuned. This suggests that while Apple’s audiogram generation may be accurate, the company’s tuning undercuts the potential of the AirPods Pro 2 to deliver the best hearing enhancement. Why would Apple do this, when presumably it has access to the same (or better) assessment technology as HearAdvisor? “They may do this because new hearing aid users often prefer less-than-prescribed gain (probably to preserve naturalness, at the cost of intelligibility),” HearAdvisor scientific adviser Andrew Sabin told me. Curiously, the current king of the OTC hearing aid hill according to HearAdvisor’s tests is Sony’s CRE-E10 , with an A grade, and a perfect 5/5 overall score for both their initial and tuned results. Still, the CRE-E10 sell for between $898 and $1,199 (260%-480% more than the AirPods Pro 2) and yet they don’t deliver similarly large increases in performance. The CRE-E10 proved 18.4% better than the AirPods Pro 2 in speech in quiet, and 73% better in speech in noise. Arguably, this makes the AirPods Pro 2 an excellent value, and a great way to experiment with hearing enhancement if you’re on the fence. Even if you end up turning the feature off, you’re still getting a very good set of wireless noise-canceling earbuds for music and phone calls.

TikTok Faces Crucial US Supreme Court Ruling Over National Security ConcernsRich countries boost COP29 climate finance offer as developing nations seethePistons take to social media following 117-114 win to seal Lakers sweep

TORONTO , Dec. 20, 2024 /CNW/ - TD Asset Management Inc. ("TDAM") today announced the final annual 2024 reinvested distributions for certain TD Exchange-Traded Funds listed below (the "TD ETFs"). These annual reinvested distributions generally represent realized capital gains within the TD ETFs. Cash distributions for December 2024 will be distributed and reported separately. Unitholders of record as of December 31, 2024 will receive a notional distribution at year-end representing realized capital gains within the TD ETFs for the 2024 tax year. A notional distribution is when the units from a reinvested distribution are immediately consolidated with the units held prior to the distribution and the number of units held after the distribution is identical to the number of units held before the distribution. The actual taxable amounts of reinvested and cash distributions for 2024, including the tax characteristics of the distributions, will be reported to brokers via CDS Clearing and Depository Services within the first 60 days of 2025. Details of the per-unit reinvested distribution are as follows: Fund Name Fund Ticker Final Annual Reinvested Distribution ($) TD Balanced ETF Portfolio TBAL 0.11446 TD Target 2025 Investment Grade Bond ETF TBCE - TD Target 2026 Investment Grade Bond ETF TBCF - TD Target 2027 Investment Grade Bond ETF TBCG 0.00508 TD Canadian Bank Dividend Index ETF TBNK - TD Target 2025 U.S. Investment Grade Bond ETF TBUE.U 0.02146 TD Target 2026 U.S. Investment Grade Bond ETF TBUF.U 0.08291 TD Canadian Long Term Federal Bond ETF TCLB - TD Q Canadian Low Volatility ETF TCLV - TD Conservative ETF Portfolio TCON - TD Select Short Term Corporate Bond Ladder ETF TCSB - TD Cash Management ETF TCSH - TD Canadian Aggregate Bond Index ETF TDB - TD Global Healthcare Leaders Index ETF TDOC 0.22558 TD Global Healthcare Leaders Index ETF - USD Units TDOC.U 0.12710 TD Global Technology Leaders Index ETF TEC - TD Global Technology Leaders Index ETF - USD Units TEC.U - TD Global Technology Innovators Index ETF TECI - TD Global Technology Leaders CAD Hedged Index ETF TECX - TD Active Global Enhanced Dividend ETF TGED 1.56612 TD Active Global Enhanced Dividend ETF - USD Units TGED.U 0.81125 TD Active Global Income ETF TGFI - TD Active Global Equity Growth ETF TGGR - TD Active Global Real Estate Equity ETF TGRE - TD Growth ETF Portfolio TGRO 0.22168 TD International Equity CAD Hedged Index ETF THE 0.07475 TD U.S. Equity CAD Hedged Index ETF THU - TD Q International Equity Low Volatility ETF TILV 0.12800 TD Active Global Infrastructure Equity ETF TINF - TD International Equity Index ETF TPE - TD Active Preferred Share ETF TPRF - TD U.S. Equity Index ETF TPU 0.29623 TD U.S. Equity Index ETF - USD Units TPU.U 0.14759 TD Q Canadian Dividend ETF TQCD 0.52526 TD Q Global Dividend ETF TQGD 0.81940 TD Q U.S. Small-Mid Cap Equity ETF TQSM 0.59600 TD Canadian Equity Index ETF TTP 0.16014 TD Active U.S. Enhanced Dividend ETF TUED 2.80680 TD Active U.S. Enhanced Dividend ETF - USD Units TUED.U 1.32429 TD Active U.S. Enhanced Dividend CAD Hedged ETF TUEX 1.88954 TD Active U.S. High Yield Bond ETF TUHY - TD U.S. Long Term Treasury Bond ETF TULB - TD Q U.S. Low Volatility ETF TULV - TD Select U.S. Short Term Corporate Bond Ladder ETF TUSB - TD Select U.S. Short Term Corporate Bond Ladder ETF – USD Units TUSB.U - For more information regarding the TD ETFs, visit TDAssetManagement.com. Commissions, management fees and expenses all may be associated with investments in exchange-traded funds (ETFs). Please read the prospectus and ETF Facts before investing. ETFs are not guaranteed, their values change frequently and past performance may not be repeated. ETF units are bought and sold at market price on a stock exchange and brokerage commissions will reduce returns. TD Canadian Bank Dividend Index ETF, TD Canadian Aggregate Bond Index ETF, TD Canadian Equity Index ETF, TD U.S. Equity Index ETF, TD U.S. Equity CAD Hedged Index ETF, TD International Equity Index ETF, TD International Equity CAD Hedged Index ETF, TD Global Healthcare Leaders Index ETF, TD Global Technology Leaders Index ETF, TD Global Technology Leaders CAD Hedged Index ETF and TD Global Technology Innovators Index ETF (the "TD ETFs") are not sponsored, promoted, sold or supported in any other manner by Solactive AG nor does Solactive AG offer any express or implicit guarantee or assurance either with regard to the results of using the Indices (as defined below) and/or any trade mark(s) associated with the Indices or the price of the Indices at any time or in any other respect. The Solactive Canadian Bank Dividend Index (CA NTR), Solactive Canadian Select Universe Bond Index, Solactive Canada Broad Market Index (CA NTR), Solactive US Large Cap CAD Index (CA NTR), Solactive US Large Cap Hedged to CAD Index (CA NTR), Solactive GBS Developed Markets ex North America Large & Mid Cap CAD Index (CA NTR), Solactive GBS Developed Markets ex North America Large & Mid Cap Hedged to CAD Index (CA NTR), Solactive Global Healthcare Leaders Index (CA NTR), Solactive Global Technology Leaders Index (CA NTR), Solactive Global Technology Leaders Hedged to CAD Index (CA NTR) and Solactive Global Technology Innovators Index (CA NTR)) (the "Indices") are calculated and published by Solactive AG. Solactive AG uses its best efforts to ensure that the Indices are calculated correctly. Irrespective of its obligations towards the Issuer, Solactive AG has no obligation to point out errors in the Indices to third parties including but not limited to investors and/or financial intermediaries of the TD ETFs. Neither publication of the Index by Solactive AG nor the licensing of the Indices or any trade mark(s) associated with the Indices for the purpose of use in connection with the TD ETFs constitutes a recommendation by Solactive AG to invest capital in said TD ETFs nor does it in any way represent an assurance or opinion of Solactive AG with regard to any investment in the TD ETFs. TD ETFs are managed by TD Asset Management Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of The Toronto-Dominion Bank. TD Bank Group means The Toronto-Dominion Bank and its affiliates, who provide deposit, investment, loan, securities, trust, insurance and other products or services. ®The TD logo and other TD trademarks are the property of The Toronto-Dominion Bank or its subsidiaries. About TD Asset Management Inc. TD Asset Management Inc. ("TDAM"), a member of TD Bank Group, is a North American investment management firm. TDAM offers investment solutions to corporations, pension funds, endowments, foundations and individual investors. Additionally, TDAM manages assets on behalf of almost 2 million retail investors and offers a broadly diversified suite of investment solutions including mutual funds, professionally managed portfolios and corporate class funds. Asset management businesses at TD manage $479 billion in assets. Aggregate statistics are as of September 30, 2024 for TDAM and Epoch Investment Partners, Inc. TDAM operates in Canada and Epoch Investment Partners, Inc. operates in the United States . Both entities are affiliates and are wholly-owned subsidiaries of The Toronto-Dominion Bank. SOURCE TD Asset Management Inc. View original content: http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/December2024/20/c6368.html © 2024 Benzinga.com. Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved.The is a first-of-its-kind tournament that, in FIFA’s dreams, is precisely what its name suggests. It’s a 32-team extravaganza modeled after soccer’s actual , with one key difference: top professional clubs, such as Real Madrid — rather than national teams, such as Spain — are the contestants. It is scheduled to begin June 15, 2025, in the United States. And when it does, , it will be “innovative, inclusive, groundbreaking and truly global.” It represents a novel concept in sports, where the vast majority of pro teams compete exclusively within national or continental borders; the Club World Cup, on the other hand, will feature multinational pro teams — soccer’s equivalent of the New York Knicks or Kansas City Chiefs — from Europe, the Americas, Africa, Asia and Oceania. It is, in theory, a true world championship. But it’s . Its launch has been dogged by organizational missteps, financial battles, player workload concerns and resistance from the European soccer establishment. The resistance has been so fierce that, until recently, some insiders questioned whether the 2025 tournament would even happen at all. Now, though, puzzle pieces are squirming into place. have been chosen. A has been signed. The at 1 p.m. ET, is near. The Club World Cup is happening. And the following is an attempt to explain it, beginning with the basics, then the complexities. The Club World Cup opens June 15, 2025, at Hard Rock Stadium in Miami Gardens, Florida. It concludes July 13 with the in East Rutherford, New Jersey. The full schedule — dates, locations, matchups, kickoff times — should be released soon after Thursday’s draw. The 12 U.S. venues set to host games are: • Mercedes-Benz Stadium in Atlanta • Bank of America Stadium in Charlotte, North Carolina • TQL Stadium in Cincinnati • The Rose Bowl in Pasadena, California • Hard Rock Stadium in Miami Gardens, Florida • GEODIS Park in Nashville • MetLife Stadium in East Rutherford, New Jersey • Camping World Stadium in Orlando, Florida • Inter&Co Stadium in Orlando, Florida • Lincoln Financial Field in Philadelphia • Lumen Field in Seattle • Audi Field in Washington Which stadium are you looking forward to visiting? 🏟️ — FIFA Club World Cup (@FIFACWC) Most are on or near the U.S. east coast because of its proximity to Europe, which will send 12 teams, and which boasts coveted media markets. East-coast games will minimize travel (for teams and fans) and inconvenient time differences (for TV viewers). FIFA also made this decision in coordination with CONCACAF, soccer’s North and Central American governing body, which will stage its continental championship, the Gold Cup, simultaneously and . The 32 clubs set to participate are ... Manchester City (England), Chelsea (England), Real Madrid (Spain), Atlético Madrid (Spain), Bayern Munich (Germany), Borussia Dortmund (Germany), Juventus (Italy), Inter Milan (Italy), PSG (France), Benfica (Portugal), Porto (Portugal), RB Salzburg (Austria) Inter Miami (U.S.), Seattle Sounders (U.S.), Monterrey (Mexico), Pachuca (Mexico), León (Mexico) Flamengo (Brazil), Palmeiras (Brazil), Fluminense (Brazil), Botafogo (Brazil), River Plate (Argentina), Boca Juniors (Argentina) Al Hilal (Saudi Arabia), Ulsan (South Korea), Urawa Reds (Japan), Al Ain (UAE) Al Ahly (Egypt), Wydad (Morocco), Espérance (Tunisia), Mamelodi Sundowns (South Africa) Auckland City (New Zealand) In 2023, the Club World Cup’s 32 berths to Europe (12), South America (6), CONCACAF (4), Africa (4), Asia (4), Oceania (1) and the host nation (1). To earn those berths, there were — one simple, one complicated. The simple path was via continental championships. Every club that won the UEFA Champions League, the Copa Libertadores, the CONCACAF Champions Cup, or the Asian and African equivalents between 2021 and 2024 qualified automatically. Beyond those champions, slots were filled by a , but with a caveat: only the top two clubs from any given country could qualify via rankings. So, even though Liverpool ranked eighth in Europe, the Reds missed out because Man City and Chelsea won the Champions League in 2023 and 2021. Barcelona, meanwhile, ranked two spots behind Atlético Madrid — because Barca underperformed in the Champions League over the last four seasons. Salzburg ranked 18th, but snuck in because others from Spain, Italy and Germany also ran up against the two-per-country cap. In South America, four different Brazilian clubs swept the Libertadores titles. Argentine giants Boca and River claimed the two additional seats at the table. In Africa, Al Ahly won three of four Champions League titles, so Espérance and Mamelodi Sundowns joined them and Wydad in the field. In CONCACAF, things were straightforward, with four distinct winners ... except for the “host nation slot.” FIFA never said how a team could claim that slot — until October when FIFA president Gianni Infantino appeared in South Florida, unannounced on the final day of the MLS regular season, to . It’s Thursday at 1 p.m. ET. You can watch a live stream on , or . (As of Wednesday morning, there were no plans to broadcast it on cable or over-the-air TV in the U.S.) Much like a , but with . The 32 teams have been , in part based on rankings, in part based on geography: Manchester City (Europe), Real Madrid (Europe), Bayern Munich (Europe), PSG (Europe), Flamengo (South America), Palmeiras (South America), River Plate (South America), Fluminense (South America) Chelsea, Borussia Dortmund, Inter Milan, Porto, Atlético Madrid, Benfica, Juventus, RB Salzburg (all Europe) Al Hilal (Asia), Ulsan (Asia), Al Ahly (Africa), Wydad (Africa), Monterrey (CONCACAF), León (CONCACAF), Boca Juniors (South America), Botafogo (South America) Urawa Reds (Asia), Al Ain (Asia), Espérance (Africa), Mamelodi Sundowns (Africa), Pachuca (CONCACAF), Seattle Sounders (CONCACAF), Auckland City (Oceania), Inter Miami (CONCACAF) The pots are set for the draw! 🔐 — FIFA Club World Cup (@FIFACWC) The draw begins with Pot 1. The first team picked goes into Group A, Position 1; the next team picked goes into Group B, Position 1; and so on. After all eight groups are filled with a Pot 1 team, a similar procedure empties Pot 2, then Pot 3, and finally Pot 4 — but subject to the following “ ”: Man City and Real Madrid, as the top two teams, must go to groups whose winners will stay on opposite sides of the knockout bracket. (One side is Group A, C, E and G; the other is B, D, F and H.) Bayern Munich and PSG, as seeds Nos. 3 and 4, will also be sent to opposite sides. And they’ll be placed to ensure that none of the four European superpowers could meet before the semifinals if they all win their groups. (The same exact principles apply to Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4 from South America.) The top four teams from Pot 2 — Chelsea, Dortmund, Inter and Porto — must be placed in groups with a South American team from Pot 1. The rest of Pot 2 — Atléti, Benfica, Juve and Salzburg — will be paired with a fellow European club from Pot 1. Teams from the same country can’t be in the same group — meaning Atlético Madrid can’t draw Real Madrid. Beyond the four pairings of European teams, no two clubs from the same continent can be grouped together. Inter Miami will get Position 4 in Group A, and Seattle will get Position 4 in Group B, so that they can play the opening games of the tournament (against teams from Pot 3). The Club World Cup will run just like past men’s World Cups, with the 32 teams divided into eight groups of four. The top two in each group will advance to the Round of 16. From there, single-elimination games will decide a champion. For roughly two decades, FIFA ran another tournament also called the Club World Cup. That, though, was a shorter seven-team tournament played annually in the winter, and contested by only the most recent champion of each continent (plus one club from the host country). That tournament has now morphed into the “FIFA Intercontinental Cup.” The 32-team quadrennial summer tournament that will launch in 2025, and that you’re reading about now, is distinct, and unconnected to the seven-team annual version — other than the “Club World Cup” name. The European giants, . Their betting odds and relative standing could change between December and June, but for now the favorites are Manchester City (+320), Real Madrid (+360), Bayern Munich (+600), Chelsea (+700), Inter Milan (+950) and PSG (+1000). That’s the million-dollar question of the Club World Cup. With intercontinental club competitions so scarce, not a soul knows for sure how clubs from Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, MLS, East Asia, North Africa and elsewhere will measure up to the likes of Bayern, PSG and Porto. The assumption — based on rosters and salaries — is that the European teams are superior. But betting markets are somewhat skeptical, and suggest the gap might be thinner than Westerners realize. , Palmeiras is +1900 to win the title — same as Dortmund and Juve. Al Hilal and Flamengo are +2500 — same as Porto and Benfica. There are grounded in analytics that attempt to rank clubs across borders and seas. Most lead to a middle-ground conclusion: the Man Cities, Real Madrids and Bayerns of the world stand confidently atop the sport, but not all European teams do. Upsets will be possible. , which include over 13,000 clubs, rate the 32 Club World Cup contestants as follows: Inter Milan (2, 98.9) Manchester City (3, 98.4) Real Madrid (5, 97.4) Bayern Munich (8, 95.7) PSG (9, 95.7) Chelsea (12, 94.5) Juventus (13, 94.2) Atlético Madrid (14, 93.6) Borussia Dortmund (20, 92.4) Benfica (21, 92.4) Porto (26, 91.3) Al Hilal (30, 90.7) Botafogo (55, 87.9) Palmeiras (58, 87.4) Flamengo (68, 86.4) River Plate (99, 84.8) Al Ahly (106, 84.5) Inter Miami (113, 84.2) Seattle Sounders (143, 83.2) Monterrey (144, 83.2) RB Salzburg (150, 83.0) Boca Juniors (160, 82.5) Fluminense (166, 82.5) Mamelodi Sundowns (220, 80.8) Espérance (324, 78.8) Ulsan (361, 78.4) Pachuca (375, 78.2) Urawa Reds (389, 77.9) León (400, 77.8) Wydad (565, 75.8) Al Ain (678, 74.7) Auckland City (4082, 59.0) Probably. In fact, FIFA’s published state that all participating clubs must “field their strongest team throughout the competition.” But there are questions around how “strongest team” would be defined, and how that rule would be enforced. And there is context. A select few of the biggest clubs, such as Real Madrid, don’t seem all that enthusiastic about participating. They will have to be incentivized to come and try to win. How? With tens of millions of dollars in prize money and appearance fees. Sort of — to the extent that all of modern sport is about money. The Club World Cup is FIFA’s attempt to monetize soccer’s biggest clubs and players — which double as the sport’s most marketable brands. Currently, the vast majority of club soccer games, and therefore revenues — from broadcast rights, sponsorships and more — are controlled by domestic leagues, such as the English Premier League; and by continental confederations, namely UEFA, which runs the hugely profitable Champions League. FIFA, meanwhile, makes billions off the World Cup, a quadrennial showpiece for national teams. But because the Champions League is an annual bonanza, UEFA’s revenues are far greater. Those revenues trickle down to European clubs and national soccer federations, which use the money to recruit or produce players — and consolidate their supremacy. So, FIFA created the Club World Cup, which, for the first time, could allow the global governing body to profit off those same clubs — and share some small percentage of the spoils with 200-plus national soccer federations around the world, rather than solely the European ones. FIFA argues that this would be a . Critics argue it's a “cash grab”; part of a personal battle between Infantino and UEFA president Aleksander Čeferin; and a ploy to reinforce Infantino’s political power — because the presidents of the 200-plus national soccer federations sharing the spoils double as FIFA’s electorate. UEFA and the top European leagues, meanwhile, have and Infantino’s plan, because they want to keep all Real Madrid- or Manchester City-related revenue to themselves. The players and their unions are. FIFPRO Europe, a branch of the global players’ union, has called the Club World Cup a “tipping point” in the broader context of soccer’s ever-congested calendar. They’ve against FIFA, which “unilaterally set” the calendar, with space carved out for the Club World Cup. They that, especially with the new tournament extending seasons by a month, players’ bodies and brains are becoming overworked and overwhelmed. The leagues, on the other hand, say they’re concerned about workload; but really, they want to protect their market share. They already organize dozens of games per club every year; the Club World Cup will merely add a few games for a small handful of teams once every four years. The leagues want to preserve their primacy on the calendar. Their problem is that FIFA controls both the Club World Cup and the calendar. So they, too, have and attacked “FIFA’s conflict of interest.” They’ve argued to the European Commission that FIFA is abusing its position as both a commercially minded organizer and regulator of soccer. Their case, which many experts believe has merit, could muddy the future of this new tournament. The vast majority of the 32 do — and hundreds of others worldwide would love to. (Mainstream European media have largely ignored non-European perspectives.) A noisy minority, however, want to they’re well compensated. Real Madrid coach Carlo Ancelotti explained the dynamic in this past June — albeit with words he later walked back: "One single Real Madrid game is worth €20 million, and FIFA wants to give us that amount for the entire competition. ... Just like us, other clubs will refuse the invitation." Real Madrid and the rest of the clubs have since said they’re committed to the tournament. But behind the scenes, sources have told Yahoo Sports, they’re demanding hefty sums of cash. The last month that some want “significant eight-figure [appearance] fees in addition to prize money.” The question, then, for FIFA, has been: Where’s that money coming from? FIFA, anticipating immense interest in the Club World Cup, initially budgeted billions of dollars in revenue. But broadcasters and sponsors — the two main sources of potential income — were lukewarm. Negotiations with Apple collapsed. At the start of December, no television partners had been announced; and sponsors had only just begun to appear. FIFA, by all accounts, will fall short of its target, leading — and how much it will be able to pay the participating clubs. Part of the answer came Wednesday, when FIFA announced that DAZN, a struggling sports streaming platform, would broadcast all 63 Club World Cup games to viewers around the world for free. But the finances of that deal — and of the Club World Cup more broadly — remain murky. How much DAZN is paying for the tournament, , and whether the rights will be sublicensed to major TV networks in some countries is all unclear. Two people familiar with the deal told Yahoo Sports that, in its entirety, it’s worth around $1 billion. But in their press releases, FIFA and DAZN called the 2025 Club World Cup broadcast rights “the start of a broader partnership.” It’s unclear what portion of the roughly $1 billion is for the Club World Cup, and what portion might be for other rights that are part of a more extensive package. (Spokesmen for FIFA and DAZN both declined to comment on the speculation about potential Saudi involvement.) For now, in the U.S., the answer is no — DAZN, a platform that very few U.S. sports fans use, will be the exclusive broadcaster, and the only place to watch games. FIFA, though, mentioned in its news release “the possibility of sublicensing to local free-to-air linear broadcast networks.” This means that, for example, Fox could pay FIFA and/or DAZN to broadcast some of all of the 63 games. If there is no such sublicensing, the DAZN deal will be disastrous for the visibility of the tournament in the U.S. Nope. , you can “ ” in tickets, but FIFA has not said when or how you’ll be able to buy them. It could be. In many ways, it should be. But with budgets reportedly slashed, and planning far behind schedule, most insiders expect the 2025 edition to be a mixed bag of vibrancy, mishaps, full stadiums and duds. Even a mixed bag, though — in the absence of boycotts or legal interventions — should be enough to get the Club World Cup off the ground, and in position for success in 2029 and beyond.The Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Ola Olukoyede , has praised President Bola Tinubu for his courageous and inspirational leadership. Speaking in his Christmas message to Nigerians, the EFCC boss asserted that the President’s strong political will is the direct outcome of the achievements of the EFCC in the last one and a half years. Speaking further, he stressed that the light, joy, hope, truth, and liberty that Christ brought to the world are significant drives towards zero tolerance for corruption and reform-minded pursuits. He expressed hope for a greater and better Nigeria shorn of economic and financial crimes and other acts of corruption. He said, “ I deeply believe in the prospects of our nation for growth and development. The Christmas season is an opportunity to activate these possibilities. The values of light, joy, hope, truth, and liberty that Christ brought to the whole world are significant pathways to integrity and zero tolerance for corruption. We can make Nigeria greater if we embrace these values.” “ Nigerians can see clearly that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu is bent on tackling corrupt practices in our midst. The strides of the EFCC could not have been possible without his active support and courage. We appreciate this at all times.” Olukoyede also lauded the Judiciary, stressing that the “professionalism, commitment, integrity and courage of our Justices and Judges are greatly building strength for the EFCC in its anti-corruption works. He charged the judiciary to continue on its path of redemption and equity. The EFCC boss also appreciated the media, civil society groups, and other critical stakeholders for their fervency and robust engagement with the commission. He assured that, with their collaboration, greater strides would be made in the coming year.

LOS ANGELES — Getting resettled during their recent homestand was precisely what the Kraken needed to stabilize after teetering toward trouble. But finding ways to generate points and claim a few wins playing elsewhere than Climate Pledge Arena will ultimately determine what this season becomes for Seattle. The first test in being better on the road was failed on Saturday when the Kraken fell 2-1 to the Los Angeles Kings at Crypto.com Arena. Beginning a stretch of five straight games to close the month against Pacific Division foes, the Kraken (10-10-1) lost their fifth straight away from home on an afternoon where good scoring chances were limited, and mistakes were amplified. Los Angeles is a difficult matchup for most teams because of its defensive system that suffocates space on the ice. The Kraken were choked in developing chances off the rush and limited to 20 shots. Whether it’s the Kings, Canucks, Golden Knights or even the Oilers, they are the teams the Kraken need to find success against if they’re going to evolve from being a team on the fringes of the playoff conversation to a team that’s firmly contending for one of the top three spots in the Pacific Division. Evolution has been a theme for Seattle of late. When Seattle was last on the road three weeks ago, the response to adversity wasn’t what coach Dan Bylsma wanted. Whether it was the performance in Toronto, Ottawa or Boston, the Kraken were not showing the resolve the head coach expected. That’s why what happened the first two games of the recent homestand were so important. In both games — against Vegas and Columbus — the Kraken fell behind 2-0 before rallying to win both times. That was overcoming adversity. So was losing captain Jordan Eberle to injury against Chicago and still grinding out a 3-1 win. So was falling behind 2-1 to the Islanders by giving up a short-handed goal in the third period, only to come back for a 3-2 victory. “We came home and had five games at home to react and I thought we were much better both reacting game-to-game and reacting in-game with the circumstances and the events that happen in the game,” Bylsma said before Saturday’s game. The circumstances of what happened against the Kings called again for a response by the Kraken — and this time it came too late. Los Angeles struck 4:19 into the second period when Alex Turcotte whipped a pass off the wall past three Seattle players and onto the stick of Adrian Kempe in the slot. It was the first clean look for the Kings since the opening moments of the game and Kempe didn’t miss, beating Joey Daccord for his 10 th goal. It was the first goal allowed by Daccord in nearly 100 minutes of ice time following his 24-save shutout of Nashville on Wednesday. Less than a minute later, Yanni Gourde was penalized for charging into Kings goalie David Rittich and 60 seconds later it was 2-0 Los Angeles when Quinton Byfield beat Daccord to the short-side on the power play. Even with a couple of power-play chances late in the second period the Kraken were unable to cut into LA’s lead and only Daccord stopping a two-on-zero breakaway for Los Angeles kept the deficit from being even larger. Seattle pushed early in the third, including a great chance for Daniel Sprong that was saved by Rittich. Sprong and Brandon Montour both had terrific chances about midway through the third, with Montour hitting the post with an open net after Rittich made the initial save. Montour finally got his goal with 1:34 left and Seattle’s net empty to pull within 2-1. That created a chaotic final 90 seconds and Jared McCann had perhaps the best chance but his slap shot was kicked out by Rittich.Nala was 8 when her father was jailed in Iraq. Her Christmas wish is to see him come homePBB seeks partner for unibank license dream