Prices (Fares, Fees and Rates)

Subterms

    Latest story

    125 Shares62 Views

    Data Centers’ Hunger for Energy Could Raise All Electric Bills

    by

    Individuals and small businesses may end up bearing some of the cost of grid upgrades needed for large electricity users, a new report found.Individuals and small business have been paying more for power in recent years, and their electricity rates may climb higher still.That’s because the cost of the power plants, transmission lines and other equipment that utilities need to serve data centers, factories and other large users of electricity is likely to be spread to everybody who uses electricity, according to a new report.The report by Wood MacKenzie, an energy research firm, examined 20 large power users. In almost all of those cases, the firm found, the money that large energy users paid to electric utilities would not be enough to cover the cost of the equipment needed to serve them. The rest of the costs would be borne by other utility customers or the utility itself.The utilities “either need to socialize the cost to other ratepayers or absorb that cost — essentially, their shareholders would take the hit,” said Ben Hertz-Shargel, who is the global head of grid edge research for Wood MacKenzie.This is not a theoretical dilemma for utilities and the state officials who oversee their operations and approve or reject their rates. Electricity demand is expected to grow substantially over the next several decades as technology companies build large data centers for their artificial intelligence businesses. Electricity demand in some parts of the United States is expected to increase as much as 15 percent over just the next four years after several decades of little or no growth.The rapid increase in data centers, which use electricity to power computer servers and keep them cool, has strained many utilities. Demand is also growing because of new factories and the greater use of electric cars and electric heating and cooling.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    More stories

    • 125 Shares60 Views

      in Elections

      How Much Does It Cost to See Beyoncé? It Depends.

      by

      Some fans who paid top dollar for the star’s Cowboy Carter Tour are feeling miffed as prices drop. Other procrastinators are reaping the benefits.Tanaka Paschal, 43, was thrilled to be taking her son to Beyoncé’s final Southern California show on her Cowboy Carter Tour this month. They had missed the Renaissance World Tour two summers ago; tickets had sold out so fast, some fans ventured overseas to catch a gig.“I thought I was not going to be able to see her, so I jumped on it,” she said.Paschal bought a pair of floor seats for about $900 total, but like many others, she soon had a bit of buyers’ remorse. In the weeks that followed, she saw the price for similar seats drop by hundreds of dollars, then increase, then drop again.“It’s frustrating,” she said. “The next time, I’m going to wait until the day of.”When tickets for big summer tours by acts like Lady Gaga, the Weeknd and Kendrick Lamar and SZA go on sale, the prevailing wisdom is you have to move fast during one of the presales offered by artists and credit card companies or you’ll be shut out.Most, if not all, tickets are usually snatched up immediately, with prime seats popping up on resale platforms like StubHub or Ticketmaster’s own secondary market at inflated prices. (Fans hoping to see Taylor Swift’s Eras Tour famously didn’t even get a shot at the general on-sale: All the tickets were long gone.)Kendrick Lamar is also on a stadium tour this year, supporting his recent album, “GNX” and a big year.Graham Dickie/The New York TimesBut things have been different for Beyoncé’s tour this time supporting her Grammy album of the year-winning “Cowboy Carter”; tickets moved during the presales, but a glance at the seat maps on Ticketmaster’s pages later revealed not only a lot of pink dots indicating resale tickets, but plenty of blue dots representing available seats that had gone unpurchased, too. And those prices were notably changing.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 113 Shares50 Views

      in Elections

      California Approves 17 Percent Rate Increase for State Farm

      by

      Homeowners reeling from the wildfires in January say that State Farm’s increased rates are unfair and unfounded.State Farm will be allowed to temporarily charge an extra 17 percent for homeowners’ insurance policies in California, after the state gave the company permission, in the wake of the catastrophic fires. The insurer will be allowed to charge the higher rate at least until a hearing later this year, the state announced on Tuesday.The insurance giant already received a 20 percent rate increase last year, a move that a consumer watchdog group, as well as homeowners struggling to be paid after their homes were destroyed in January in the Los Angeles fires, criticized as unfair and unfounded.State Farm requested the emergency rate increase in February, the month after fires ripped through the Pacific Palisades and Altadena neighborhoods of Los Angeles, razing over 16,000 homes and structures. The company — which insures one out of every five homes in California or roughly 1 million homeowner customers — had requested even more: a nearly 22 percent rate increase on homeowners’ policies, citing a “dire situation.”California, like other states hit by natural disasters, has faced threats from major insurers: Raise rates, or we leave the state, said Carmen Balber, the executive director of Consumer Watchdog, which led the effort to oppose the rate increase in hearings this spring.“The commissioner has shown a tendency to roll over in the face of insurer threats to leave,” Ms. Balber said. The increase “adds insult to injury” at a time when many homeowners insured by State Farm have reported delays or attempts by State Farm to lowball claims following the fires earlier this year, she added.In a statement, Ricardo Lara, the state’s insurance commissioner, presented the rate increase as a difficult compromise for consumers. “Let me be clear: We are in a statewide insurance crisis affecting millions of Californians,” he said. “Taking this on requires tough decisions.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Just About Everything That’s Changed Since Congestion Pricing Took Effect

      by

      <!–> [–><!–> –><!–> [–><!–> –><!–> [–><!–>Almost immediately after the tolls went into effect Jan. 5 — charging most vehicles $9 to enter Manhattan from 60th Street south to the Battery — they began to alter traffic patterns, commuter behavior, transit service, even the sound of gridlock and the on-time arrival of school buses.–><!–> –><!–> [!–> […] More

    • 150 Shares111 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Plan Would Tie Some Drug Prices to What Peer Nations Pay

      by

      The president announced an executive order aimed at lowering U.S. drug costs, revisiting an idea that was blocked in court during his first term.President Trump will sign an executive order on Monday aimed at lowering some drug prices in the United States by aligning them with what other wealthy countries pay, he said on Truth Social on Sunday evening.The proposal he described, which alone cannot shift federal policy, is what he calls a “most favored nation” pricing model. Mr. Trump did not provide details about which type of insurance the plan would apply to or how many drugs it would target, but he indicated that the United States should pay the lowest price among its peer countries.“Our Country will finally be treated fairly, and our citizens Healthcare Costs will be reduced by numbers never even thought of before,” he wrote in his social media post.Any such plan will most likely be subject to challenges in court, and it is not clear whether it will pass legal muster, especially without action by Congress.In his first term, Mr. Trump tried unsuccessfully to enact a version of this idea for Medicare, the health insurance program that covers 68 million Americans who are over 65 or have disabilities. That plan would have applied only to 50 drugs, administered at clinics and hospitals, that are paid for by Medicare. A federal court blocked it, ruling that the administration had skipped steps in the policymaking process.The pharmaceutical industry bitterly opposes the idea, which would almost certainly cut into its profits, and has been lobbying against it as discussions of the policy have regained steam in Washington in recent weeks. Companies have warned that such a policy would lead them to spend less on research, depriving patients of new medicines.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 150 Shares117 Views

      in Elections

      Why Patients Are Being Forced to Switch to a 2nd-Choice Obesity Drug

      by

      CVS Caremark decided to stop offering Zepbound in favor of Wegovy for weight loss. It’s the latest example of limits imposed by insurance that disrupt treatments for patients.Tens of thousands of Americans will soon be forced by their health insurance to switch from one popular obesity drug to another that produces less weight loss.It is the latest example of the consequences of secret deals between drugmakers and middlemen, known as pharmacy benefit managers, that are hired by employers to oversee prescription coverage for Americans. Employers pay lower drug prices but their workers are blocked from getting competing treatments, a type of insurance denial that has grown much more common in the past decade.One of the largest benefit managers, CVS Health’s Caremark, made the decision to exclude Zepbound in spite of research that found that it resulted in more weight loss than Wegovy, which will continue to be covered.Those research findings, first announced in December, were confirmed in an article published on Sunday in The New England Journal of Medicine. The study involved a large clinical trial comparing the drugs that was funded by Eli Lilly, the maker of Zepbound. Earlier research not financed by Eli Lilly reached similar conclusions.Ellen Davis, 63, of Huntington, Mass., is one of the patients affected by Caremark’s decision. “It feels like the rug is getting pulled out from under my feet,” she said.After taking Zepbound for a year, she has lost 85 pounds and her health has improved, she said. She retired after working for 34 years at Verizon, which hired Caremark for her drug coverage.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 113 Shares107 Views

      in Elections

      Oil Prices Slide Further on Plans to Increase Supply

      by

      U.S. oil prices fell to around $56 a barrel after the OPEC Plus cartel said it would bring more oil to market.Oil prices resumed their downward slide after the OPEC Plus cartel of oil producers said over the weekend that it would pump more oil, despite concerns that President Trump’s trade war will curb demand.The U.S. benchmark oil price fell to around $56 a barrel, from $58 on Friday. For many companies, the steady decline means it will not be profitable to drill wells in the United States despite Mr. Trump’s calls for increased production.Prices were last around this level in early April, just before Mr. Trump said he would pause reciprocal tariffs on most countries for 90 days. That announcement led to rallies in both the stock market and the oil market, though oil prices have since waned.That is partly because OPEC Plus is raising output at the same time that economists are warning that higher tariffs on most American trading partners will slow global economic growth and potentially cause a recession in the United States.The eight countries that make up the OPEC Plus cartel said on Saturday that they would further ramp up production in June.Lower commodity prices are causing some companies to pull back. There are about 9 percent fewer rigs drilling wells in the Permian Basin, the top U.S. oil field, than there were this time last year, when oil was trading near $80 a barrel, according to Baker Hughes.On Friday, Exxon Mobil and Chevron, the two largest U.S. oil and gas companies, reported their lowest first-quarter earnings in years. Those financial results reflect the market before Mr. Trump further escalated tariffs on China in early April.“It is clear that this uncertainty is weighing on economic forecasts, causing significant volatility and raising the prospects of slower growth,” Darren Woods, Exxon’s chief executive, told analysts. More

    • 125 Shares175 Views

      in Elections

      They Help Companies Set Prices. Tariffs Are Making It Trickier.

      by

      Pricing strategists are navigating the possibility that input costs, the economy and consumer behavior may all shift drastically.As companies scramble to respond to President Trump’s ever-changing tariff policies, some of the pressure has fallen directly on a tiny corner of the consulting world.Known as pricing strategy, it uses tools like customer research, historical data, economic modeling and competitive analysis to recommend not only what price tag to put on items but how to structure prices to maximize revenue and profit.Often a pricing strategist’s work involves simulating how different pricing strategies and prices could affect sales. But brand rules and psychology can also come into play. It’s part art, part science.And lately, it’s been trickier.Nobody knows how Trump’s tariff policies will change, how those tariffs will affect the overall economy or how consumers will adjust their spending as a result — all of which can be key metrics when determining pricing.“It’s some of the highest levels of uncertainty that I’ve seen over my 25-year career,” Robert Haslehurst, who leads the global pricing practice at L.E.K. Consulting, told DealBook. Only the first weeks of Covid lockdowns and the start of the 2007-8 financial crisis came close.Times like these can be a “golden opportunity,” said William Humsi, a partner at the consumer strategy firm Simon-Kucher who mostly works with B2B companies. A brand that imports less from countries with high tariffs than its competitors may be able to defend its market share by keeping prices lower, or use other players’ need to raise prices as cover for its own price increases, known as “taking price” in industry parlance.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 175 Shares183 Views

      in Elections

      GM Cuts Profit Forecast by 20% and Says Auto Tariffs Will Cost It Billions

      by

      General Motors now expects to earn a lot less than it did before President Trump imposed 25% tariffs on imported cars and auto parts.General Motors cut its profit forecast for 2025 on Thursday by more than 20 percent and said that the Trump administration’s tariffs would increase its costs by $4 billion to $5 billion this year.In a conference call with analysts, G.M. executives said the company now expects to make $8.2 billion to $10.1 billion this year, down from a previous forecast of $11.2 billion to $12.5 billion.“G.M.’s business is fundamentally strong as we adapt to the new trade policy environment,” the company’s chief executive, Mary T. Barra, said.In April, President Trump imposed tariffs of 25 percent on imported vehicles and will begin imposing the same duty on imported auto parts on Saturday. On Tuesday the president modified how the tariffs are applied to give automakers some relief, including partial reimbursement for tariffs on imported parts for two years.Ms. Barra said G.M. hopes to offset about 30 percent of the impact of the tariffs by increasing production in U.S. plants, cutting costs, and working with suppliers to raise their domestic production of parts and components.G.M. had previously said it was increasing pickup truck production at a plant near Fort Wayne, Ind., which will reduce the number of vehicles it imports from Canada and Mexico. Ms. Barra said output at the Fort Wayne factory would increase by about 50,000 trucks this year.She also said G.M. now plans to make more battery modules in its U.S. plants to raise the portion of domestic content in its electric vehicles.About $2 billion in tariff-related cost increases will come from vehicles that are made in Canada, Mexico and South Korea and sold in the United States.Analysts have predicted that the tariffs will add thousands of dollars to the cost of new cars and trucks, and some or all of that would be passed on to consumers. In the call, G.M.’s chief financial officer, Paul Jacobson, said the company now expects new vehicle prices to rise 0.5 percent to 1 percent this year, he added. Previously, the company had forecast that pricing would fall by 1 percent to 1.5 percent.Other automakers are also planning to produce more vehicles in the United States. Mercedes-Benz said Thursday that it would build a new vehicle at an Alabama factory as part of what the German carmaker called a “deepening commitment” to manufacturing in the United States.While the company did not mention tariffs, Mercedes and other carmakers have been at pains in recent weeks to emphasize how many cars they already build in the United States and their plans to make more. Mercedes did not provide details about the car, except to say that it would be a new design tailored to the U.S. market and begin production in 2027.The company’s factory near Tuscaloosa, Ala., primarily assembles luxury sport utility vehicles, including electric models, for sale in the United States and export to other markets.Jack Ewing More