By Jack Phillips Contributing Writer President-elect Donald Trump’s incoming national security adviser said the United States needs an “Iron Dome” amid a rash of recent drone sightings in New Jersey and New York. Top officials, including Alejandro Mayorkas, the outgoing secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, and authorities in the FBI have said the drones do not appear to pose a public safety or national security threat. They also have ruled out the drones are being operated by a foreign adversary, as suggested by several lawmakers last week. Rep. Michael Waltz, R-Florida, the incoming national security adviser to Trump, told CBS News’ “Face the Nation” on Sunday that Americans were growing frustrated with the Biden administration’s failure to clarify what information it has on the drone reports. “What the drone issue points out are kind of gaps in our agencies, gaps in our authorities between the Department of Homeland Security, local law enforcement, the Defense Department,” he said. Waltz said Trump has suggested “an Iron Dome for America,” referring to Israel’s missile defense system used to counter Hamas and Hezbollah rocket attacks. “That needs to include drones as well, not just adversarial actions like hypersonic missiles,” Waltz said. Developed with U.S. backing, Israel’s Iron Dome is a mobile air defense system designed to intercept short-range rockets and artillery shells that endanger populated areas. The spate of reported drone sightings began in New Jersey in mid-November but has spread in recent days to include Maryland, Massachusetts, Virginia, and other U.S. states. That prompted Trump to write on social media that the government should disclose all relevant information about the drones — if there is any — or shoot them down. On Sunday, Mayorkas told ABC News in a lengthy interview that the federal government is working to respond to the drones, defending the administration’s response to the aerial unmanned vehicles. “There’s no question that people are seeing drones,” Mayorkas told ABC News’ “This Week” anchor George Stephanopoulos, appearing to counter claims made by several elected officials that the drone sightings are mainly “manned aircraft.” “I want to assure the American public that we in the federal government have deployed additional resources, personnel, technology to assist the New Jersey State Police in addressing the drone sightings.” He said, however, that the federal government has limited authority in dealing with the drones, responding to a question about whether officials can just shoot the unmanned vehicles down. Also on Sunday, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul said federal officials are set to deploy high-tech systems to detect and track the drones over her state and New Jersey, about a day after a drone sighting closed down an airport in New York’s Hudson Valley. Meanwhile, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-New York, said he is putting pressure on federal officials to use technology to address a rash of drone sightings over his state and New Jersey in recent months. “If the technology exists for a drone to make it up into the sky, there certainly is the technology that can track the craft with precision and determine what the heck is going on,” Schumer, who is due to become the upper chamber’s minority leader next month, said during a news conference on Sunday. The senator added that his office is asking the DHS to “deploy special detection systems like the Robin, which use not a linear line of sight, but 360-degree technology that has a much better chance of detecting these drones” and “bring them” to New Jersey and New York. Robin refers to Robin Radar Systems, a tracking tool used for small targets such as drones. In a social media post on Monday morning, Schumer wrote he is still working on getting DHS to “deploy special drone-detection tech” across the region. Reuters contributed to this report.PRANCE Delivers Excellent Metal Ceiling and Facade Solutions to BBK Experimental School

Australian punter Matthew Hayball was visibly torn to shreds by New Orleans interim head coach Darren Rizzi in a heated moment during the Saints’ 14-11 win over the New York Giants. Watch an average of 6 games each week during the regular season, plus every game of the NFL Postseason including the Super Bowl, LIVE on ESPN with Kayo. New to Kayo? Get your first month for just $1. Limited time offer. Hayball, who won a pre-season punting battle over fellow Australian Lou Hedley, was yelled at by his coach after having one of his punts returned for a touchdown midway through the second quarter. The play was called back on a holding call but that didn’t stop a visibly upset Rizzi from confronting Hayball on the sidelines, throwing his hat to the ground and pointing at a spot on the field as Saints running back Alvin Kamara stepped in to de-escalate the situation. Hayball handled the situation well, nodding along and not once retaliating to the verbal barrage coming in his direction. While it was not initially clear why Rizzi went after Hayball, the New Orleans coach later explained that the exchange was in response to Hayball “not executing the gameplan”. “I'm a big accountability guy and that was a big part of our gameplan today and he wasn’t executing the gameplan,” Rizzi said. “His last punt was outstanding and it really helped us — actually his last two punts. His second-to-last punt in particular was really good, it pinned them back and they didn’t get any return yards. That was what we were trying to do all day. “Our first three punts weren’t good enough so I let him know that’s exactly how I felt. It probably came across a little bit more than that but me and Matt are fine.” Fortunately for Rizzi the Saints ended up escaping with the win against a lowly Giants team that struggled to get anything going on offence early, with quarterback Drew Lock failing to complete his first eight passes of the game. New Orleans had already jumped ahead 7-0 at that point after second-year running back Kendre Miller punched it in following chunk gains for Juwan Johnson and Marquez Valdes-Scantling earlier in the drive. In what was an otherwise relatively dour affair, the Giants had a chance to send the game to overtime but Graham Gano’s 35-yard field goal attempt was tipped and missed. The Saints lost quarterback Derek Carr late in the game for a hand injury and Rizzi did not have an update on his condition. RESULTS SHAKE UP TOP OF THE DRAFT ORDER Speaking of the Giants, they are one of two teams along with the Las Vegas Raiders who are expected to be picking a potential future franchise quarterback in next year’s draft. And while they were already well positioned to do just that, Jacksonville’s 10-6 win over the Tennessee Titans has re-set the top of the draft order. Both the Raiders and Giants are now 2-11, with Las Vegas going down 28-13 to Tampa Bay on Monday. The Raiders, who now have the first overall pick, also are now without their top two quarterbacks after Aidan O’Connell (knee) was carted off. He will seemingly join Gardner Minshew (collarbone) on the sidelines, while the Giants are also expected to take a quarterback high in the draft after parting ways with Daniel Jones. Shadeur Sanders and Cam Ward are the two top quarterback prospects in next year’s class, although there are big questions over both. And the Giants in particular need to make sure they pick the right guy, because frustration is clearly building. ‘FIX THIS DUMPSTER FIRE’: SAD SIGHT FOR GIANTS The Giants fell to 2-11 with a loss to the Saints and are on pace for one of the worst seasons in the history of a franchise that is “celebrating’’ its 100th season. The last time a banner flew overhead with such negative feedback from disgruntled fans was back in 1978 when in the third quarter of a game against the Cardinals at Giants Stadium, a plane flew a banner that read, “15 YEARS OF LOUSY FOOTBALL ... WE’VE HAD ENOUGH.’’ Giants ownership took that message to heart, wholesale changes were enacted, with George Young’s hiring as the general manager the main impetus for the turnaround of the franchise. It remains to be seen what happens with this year’s team. Giants co-owner John Mara insisted back when his team was 2-5 that there would be no changes in-season with general manager Joe Schoen and head coach Brian Daboll and that he did not anticipate making changes with them for 2025. The Giants are currently on an eight-game losing streak and if they lose out the rest of the way and finish 2-15, it will be difficult for Mara to keep his word. — New York Post NEW YORK NIGHTMARE OFFICIAL AS JETS OFFICIALLY OUT OF PLAYOFFS Another miserable loss in another miserable Jets season. This week, the Jets blew an eight-point, fourth-quarter lead and lost 32-26 in overtime to the Dolphins. There was not much suspense left but this loss officially eliminates the Jets from playoff contention and drops them to 3-10 this year. While fans may rejoice about draft pick positioning, this one will sting the Jets players and coaches. They played their best game of the year for three quarters and then saw the game slip away in the fourth quarter, only to regain the lead, only to see the Dolphins tie the game in the final minute and win it in overtime. The Jets took a 26-23 lead with 52 seconds left in the game on a 42-yard field goal from Anders Carlson. But Malik Washington then returned Carlson’s kickoff 45 yards to the Miami 46-yard line. The Dolphins gained 20 yards on six plays and Jason Sanders kicked a 52-yard field goal to tie the game at 26-26 with seven seconds left in regulation. The Dolphins won the coin toss to start overtime and went 70 yards on eight plays. Tua Tagovailoa hit tight end Jonnu Smith for a 10-yard touchdown to end the game. This was the Jets’ fourth loss in a row and ninth in 10 games. This is their ninth straight loss in Miami. — New York Post AUSSIE MAILATA SAYS EAGLES WERE ‘S***TY’ WITH NERVY WIN Elsewhere, star Eagles receiver DeVonta Smith said Philadelphia’s offence is “not on the same page” after the Super Bowl contenders escaped with a 22-16 win over the Carolina Panthers. The Panthers have been much-improved since second-year quarterback Bryce Young’s return after being benched earlier in the year following a few rough weeks to start the season. That continued on Monday and in fact a few key drops from rookie receiver Xavier Legette, including a particularly costly one on Carolina’s final drive of the game, meant Young played even better than his final stat line of 19/34 for 191 yards, one touchdown and an interception. Young did particularly well navigating pressure, often connecting with reliable veteran receiver Adam Thielen, who had nine receptions for 102 yards. Running back Chuba Hubbard, meanwhile, had a big day on the ground with 26 carries for 92 yards and a score while rookie Jonathon Brooks, who had only recently returned from a torn ACL, went down again with a non-contact injury in worrying signs. Elsewhere, Smith and A.J. Brown only combined for 80 receiving yards as Philadelphia did what it needed to do, riding Saquon Barkley and the rushing game instead as the superstar running back picked up 124 yards on 20 carries. With it, Barkley passed LeSean McCoy’s single-season rushing mark of 1607 yards set in 2013. Australian left tackle Jordan Mailata said Barkley’s record-setting game was the bright spot in what was otherwise a disappointing game that left the team feeling “s***ty”. “It was good. It wasn’t like someone died. I’m just critical,” Mailata later said of the mood in the locker room. “The mood was good. You’ve just got to remember this is the NFL, they compete too. They’ve been on a tear the last four weeks this team. We did not take them for granted.” FINAL SCORES — WEEK 14 Lions 34 Packers 31 Steelers 27 Browns 14 Giants 11 Saints 14 Dolphins 32 Jets 26 (OT) Titans 6 Jaguars 10 Vikings 42 Falcons 21 Eagles 22 Panthers 16 Buccaneers 28 Raiders 13Desemba olyo ethimbo lyomatyapulo kaantu oyendji, ashike kependa lyomopolitika Martin Lukato, omwedhi nguno ogwo gwemanguluko lye papolitika.OmuDesemba 1960 sho a valelwa momukunda ... If you are an active subscriber and the article is not showing, please log out and back in. Free access to articles from 12:00.Mystery drone sightings continue in New Jersey and across the US. Here's what we know

Company's first ultra-low power AI module will be commercially available for wearables and various other battery-powered on-device AI applications starting Q1 2025 SANTA CLARA, Calif. , Dec. 16, 2024 /PRNewswire/ -- Ambient Scientific, The AI Processor Company, announced today its first coin cell battery powered AI module, named the Sparsh-board, targeted for a variety of on-device AI applications such as human activity recognition, voice control, acoustic event detection and more capable of running on a coin cell battery for months of always-on AI operation. Equipped with motion sensors, a digital microphone, BLE module and several other components, the Sparsh module is an extremely powerful and versatile module to enable rapid prototyping of a vast array of battery-powered AI applications. "While traditional MCUs force an undesirable tradeoff between AI performance and power consumption, our ultra-low power AI processor GPX10 ushers a paradigm shift with our groundbreaking analog in-memory computing technology," said GP Singh, Founder and CEO of Ambient Scientific. Product makers can now enable highly accurate and diverse AI applications without compromising on AI performance, battery life, form factor, flexibility and more. Ambient Scientific's exhaustive software stack makes the development of AI applications easier than ever before with support for industry standard AI frameworks such as Tensorflow and keras and a continuously evolving homegrown compiler, capable of supporting essentially all the major types of neural networks. With various sample AI applications and algorithms included, developers can get begin developing AI applications within minutes of downloading our AmbiSense SDK . Current applications being worked on cut across industries, including predictive maintenance, AI-enabled medical devices, wearables, voice controlled toys and more. With increasing demand from product makers, enthusiasts, students and researchers alike, Ambient Scientific plans to launch several reference designs for battery-powered AI applications and similar form factor modules to enable rapid prototyping and fulfill its mission to make AI computing efficient, accessible and affordable for all. Meet Ambient Scientific at CES 2025 Ambient Scientific is excited to unveil its Sparsh AI module at CES 2025 with live demostrations of AI applications running on coin cell batteries such as Fall Detection, voice recognition and more. To explore potential synergies, attendees can schedule meetings CES 2025 with Ambient Scientific at. To learn more about Ambient Scientific, visit our booth at CES 2025 or download our press kit . About Ambient Scientific Ambient Scientific is a fabless semiconductor company pioneering AI hardware and software design to create next-generation low-power processors for edge and on-device AI applications. With a team comprised of Ex-Sun Microsystems, Intel, Broadcom and Google professionals, Ambient Scientific is committed to bringing the power of AI to all, through cutting edge hardware and software products. To learn more about its products, visit www.ambientscientific.ai and follow Ambient Scientific on LinkedIn . Click here for more details about our booth at: https://ces25.mapyourshow.com/8_0/exhibitor/exhibitor-details.cfm?exhid=0013A00001egpuFQAQ . SOURCE Ambient Scientific, Inc.

Apple Cash: How to use it to send and receive moneyAston Villa denied last-gasp winner in Juventus stalemateHOUSTON--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Dec 5, 2024-- Hewlett Packard Enterprise (NYSE: HPE) today announced financial results for the fourth quarter ended October 31, 2024. This press release features multimedia. View the full release here: “HPE delivered an exceptional fourth quarter with record quarterly revenue, capping off a strong FY 2024. We exceeded our full-year commitments for revenue, EPS, and free cash flow,” said Antonio Neri, president and CEO of Hewlett Packard Enterprise. “Our differentiated portfolio across hybrid cloud, AI, and networking, which will be further enhanced with the pending Juniper Networks acquisition, positions us well to capitalize on the market opportunity, accelerating value for our shareholders.” “Our exceptional revenue, profitability, and higher-than-expected free cash flow this fiscal year reflect disciplined execution and improving customer demand across our portfolio,” said Marie Myers, executive vice president and CFO of Hewlett Packard Enterprise. “We are pleased to have exceeded our commitments and look forward to the opportunities ahead in fiscal year 2025.” The HPE Board of Directors declared a regular cash dividend of $0.13 per share on the company’s common stock, payable on January 16, 2025, to stockholders of record as of the close of business on December 20, 2024. HPE estimates revenue to grow by mid-teens percent when compared to revenue for the prior-year period. HPE estimates GAAP diluted net EPS to be in the range of $0.31 to $0.36 and non-GAAP diluted net EPS (1) to be in the range of $0.47 to $0.52. Fiscal 2025 first quarter non-GAAP diluted net EPS excludes net after-tax adjustments of $0.16 per diluted share primarily related to stock-based compensation, acquisition, disposition and other related charges and amortization of intangible assets. HPE’s pending acquisition of Juniper Networks, Inc. has received approval from key jurisdictions including the European Union, United Kingdom, India, South Korea, and Australia, among others. HPE and Juniper Networks are cooperatively engaged with the U.S. Department of Justice as the agency continues to review the transaction into the new calendar year. HPE and Juniper expect that the transaction will close in the early part of 2025 — within the previously stated timeframe. 1 A description of HPE’s use of non-GAAP financial information is provided below under “Use of non-GAAP financial information and key performance metrics.” 2 Annualized Revenue Run-Rate (“ARR”) is a financial metric used to assess the growth of the Consumption Services offerings. ARR represents the annualized revenue of all net HPE GreenLake cloud services revenue, related financial services revenue (which includes rental income from operating leases and interest income from finance leases), and software-as-a-Service, software consumption revenue, and other as-a-Service offerings, recognized during a quarter and multiplied by four. We use ARR as a performance metric. ARR should be viewed independently of net revenue and is not intended to be combined with it. 3 Free cash flow represents cash flow from operations, less net capital expenditures (investments in property, plant & equipment (“PP&E”) and software assets less proceeds from the sale of PP&E), and adjusted for the effect of exchange rate fluctuations on cash, cash equivalents, and restricted cash.​ Hewlett Packard Enterprise (NYSE: HPE) is the global edge-to-cloud company that helps organizations accelerate outcomes by unlocking value from all of their data, everywhere. Built on decades of reimagining the future and innovating to advance the way people live and work, HPE delivers unique, open and intelligent technology solutions as a service. With offerings spanning Cloud Services, Server, Intelligent Edge, Software, and Hybrid Cloud, HPE provides a consistent experience across all clouds and edges, helping customers develop new business models, engage in new ways, and increase operational performance. For more information, visit: . To supplement Hewlett Packard Enterprise’s condensed consolidated financial statement information presented on a generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) basis, Hewlett Packard Enterprise provides financial measures, including revenue on a constant currency basis (including at the business segment level), non-GAAP gross profit, non-GAAP gross profit margin, non-GAAP operating profit (non-GAAP earnings from operations), non-GAAP operating profit margin (non-GAAP earnings from operations as a percentage of net revenue), non-GAAP income tax rate, non-GAAP net earnings, non-GAAP diluted net earnings per share and free cash flow (“FCF”). Hewlett Packard Enterprise also provides forecasts of revenue growth on a constant currency basis, non-GAAP diluted net earnings per share, non-GAAP operating profit growth, and FCF. Reconciliations of each of these non-GAAP financial measures to their most directly comparable GAAP measures for this quarter and prior periods are included in the tables below or elsewhere in the materials accompanying this news release. In addition an explanation of the ways in which Hewlett Packard Enterprise’s management uses these non-GAAP measures to evaluate its business, the substance behind Hewlett Packard Enterprise’s decision to use these non-GAAP measures, the material limitations associated with the use of these non-GAAP measures, the manner in which Hewlett Packard Enterprise’s management compensates for those limitations, and the substantive reasons why Hewlett Packard Enterprise’s management believes that these non-GAAP measures provide supplemental useful information to investors is included further below. This additional non-GAAP financial information is not meant to be considered in isolation or as a substitute for revenue, gross profit, gross profit margin, operating profit (earnings from operations), operating profit margin (earnings from operations as a percentage of net revenue), net earnings, diluted net earnings per share, and cash flow from operations prepared in accordance with GAAP. In addition to the supplemental non-GAAP financial information, Hewlett Packard Enterprise also presents annualized revenue run-rate (“ARR”) as performance metric. ARR is a financial metric used to assess the growth of the Consumption Services offerings. ARR represents the annualized revenue of all net HPE GreenLake cloud services revenue, related financial services revenue (which includes rental income for operating leases and interest income from finance leases), and software-as-a-service (“SaaS”), software consumption revenue, and other as-a-service offerings, recognized during a quarter and multiplied by four. ARR should be viewed independently of net revenue and deferred revenue and are not intended to be combined with any of these items. This press release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Such statements involve risks, uncertainties, and assumptions. If the risks or uncertainties ever materialize or the assumptions prove incorrect, the results of Hewlett Packard Enterprise and its consolidated subsidiaries (“Hewlett Packard Enterprise”) may differ materially from those expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements and assumptions. The words “believe”, “expect”, “anticipate”, "guide", “optimistic”, “intend”, “aim”, “will”, "estimates", “may”, “could”, “should” and similar expressions are intended to identify such forward-looking statements. All statements other than statements of historical fact are statements that could be deemed forward-looking statements, including but not limited to any projections, estimations, or expectations of addressable markets and their sizes, revenue (including annualized revenue run rate), margins, expenses (including stock-based compensation expenses), investments, effective tax rates, interest rates, the impact of tax law changes and related guidance and regulations, net earnings, net earnings per share, cash flows, liquidity and capital resources, inventory, order backlog, share repurchases, currency exchange rates, repayments of debts (including our asset-backed debt securities), or other financial items; recent amendments to accounting guidance and any related potential impacts on our financial reporting; any projections or estimations of future orders, including as-a-service orders; any statements of the plans, strategies, and objectives of management for future operations, as well as the execution and consummation of corporate transactions or contemplated acquisitions (including our proposed acquisition of Juniper Networks, Inc.) and dispositions (including disposition of our H3C shares and the receipt of proceeds therefrom), research and development expenditures, and any resulting benefit, cost savings, charges, or revenue or profitability improvements; any statements concerning the expected development, performance, market share or competitive performance relating to products or services; any statements concerning technological and market trends, the pace of technological innovation, and adoption of new technologies, including artificial intelligence-related and other products and services offered by Hewlett Packard Enterprise; any statements regarding current or future macroeconomic trends or events and the impact of those trends and events on Hewlett Packard Enterprise and our financial performance and our actions to mitigate such impacts to our business; any statements regarding future regulatory trends and the resulting legal and reputational exposure, including but not limited to those relating to environmental, social, and governance, cybersecurity, data privacy, and artificial intelligence issues, among others; any statements regarding pending investigations, claims, or disputes; any statements of expectation or belief, including those relating to future guidance and the financial performance of Hewlett Packard Enterprise; and any statements of assumptions underlying any of the foregoing. Risks, uncertainties, and assumptions include the need to address the many challenges facing Hewlett Packard Enterprise’s businesses; the competitive pressures faced by Hewlett Packard Enterprise’s businesses; risks associated with executing Hewlett Packard Enterprise’s strategy; the impact of macroeconomic and geopolitical trends and events, including but not limited to heightened global trade restrictions, the use and development of artificial intelligence, the inflationary environment (though easing), the ongoing conflicts between Russia and Ukraine and in the Middle East, and the relationship between China and the U.S.; the need to effectively manage third-party suppliers and distribute Hewlett Packard Enterprise’s products and services; the protection of Hewlett Packard Enterprise’s intellectual property assets, including intellectual property licensed from third parties and intellectual property shared with its former parent; risks associated with Hewlett Packard Enterprise’s international operations (including from public health crises, such as pandemics or epidemics, and geopolitical events, such as those mentioned above); the development and transition of new products and services and the enhancement of existing products and services to meet customer needs and respond to emerging technological trends; the execution of Hewlett Packard Enterprise's transformation and mix shift of its portfolio of offerings, the execution and performance of contracts by Hewlett Packard Enterprise and its suppliers, customers, clients, and partners, including any impact thereon resulting from macroeconomic or geopolitical events such as those mentioned above; the prospect of a shutdown of the U.S. federal government; the hiring and retention of key employees; the execution, consummation, integration, and other risks associated with business combination, disposition, and investment transactions, including but not limited to the risks associated with the disposition of H3C shares and the receipt of proceeds therefrom and completion of our proposed acquisition of Juniper Networks, Inc. and our ability to integrate and implement our plans, forecasts, and other expectations with respect to the consolidated business; the impact of changes to privacy, cybersecurity, environmental, global trade, and other governmental regulations; changes in our product, lease, intellectual property, or real estate portfolio; the payment or non-payment of a dividend for any period; the efficacy of using non-GAAP, rather than GAAP, financial measures in business projections and planning; the judgments required in connection with determining revenue recognition; impact of company policies and related compliance; utility of segment realignments; allowances for recovery of receivables and warranty obligations; provisions for, and resolution of pending investigations, claims, and disputes; the impacts of tax law changes and related guidance or regulations; and other risks that are described in Hewlett Packard Enterprise’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2023, subsequent Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K, and in other filings made by Hewlett Packard Enterprise from time to time with the Securities and Exchange Commission. As in prior periods, the financial information set forth in this press release, including tax-related items, reflects estimates based on information available at this time. While Hewlett Packard Enterprise believes these estimates to be reasonable, these amounts could differ materially from reported amounts in the filings made by Hewlett Packard Enterprise from time to time with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Hewlett Packard Enterprise assumes no obligation and does not intend to update these forward-looking statements, except as required by applicable law. Net revenue $ 8,458 $ 7,710 $ 7,351 Costs and Expenses: Cost of sales (exclusive of amortization shown separately below) 5,852 5,271 4,792 Research and development 527 547 578 Selling, general and administrative 1,211 1,229 1,332 Amortization of intangible assets 69 60 72 Transformation costs 26 14 56 Disaster charges (recovery) 2 5 (4 ) Acquisition, disposition and other related charges 78 37 18 Total costs and expenses 7,765 7,163 6,844 Earnings from operations 693 547 507 Interest and other, net (1) 5 (12 ) (23 ) Gain on sale of equity interest 733 — — (Loss) earnings from equity interests (14 ) 73 65 Earnings before provision for taxes 1,417 608 549 (Provision) benefit for taxes (51 ) (96 ) 93 Net earnings attributable to HPE 1,366 512 642 Preferred stock dividends (25 ) — — Net earnings attributable to common stockholders $ 1,341 $ 512 $ 642 Net Earnings Per Share Attributable to Common Stockholders: Basic $ 1.02 $ 0.39 $ 0.50 Diluted 0.99 0.38 0.49 Cash dividends declared per share 0.13 0.13 0.12 Cash dividends accrued per preferred share $ 0.83 $ — $ — Weighted-average Shares Used to Compute Net Earnings Per Share: Basic 1,312 1,312 1,295 Diluted 1,375 1,332 1,315 Net revenue $ 30,127 $ 29,135 Costs and Expenses: Cost of sales (exclusive of amortization shown separately below) 20,249 18,896 Research and development 2,246 2,349 Selling, general and administrative 4,871 5,160 Amortization of intangible assets 267 288 Transformation costs 93 283 Disaster charges 7 1 Acquisition, disposition and other related charges 204 69 Total costs and expenses 27,937 27,046 Earnings from operations 2,190 2,089 Interest and other, net (1) (117 ) (104 ) Gain on sale of equity interest 733 — Earnings from equity interests 147 245 Earnings before provision for taxes 2,953 2,230 Provision for taxes (374 ) (205 ) Net earnings attributable to HPE 2,579 2,025 Preferred stock dividends (25 ) — Net earnings attributable to common stockholders $ 2,554 $ 2,025 Net Earnings Per Share Per Share Attributable to Common Stockholders: Basic $ 1.95 $ 1.56 Diluted 1.93 1.54 Cash dividends declared per share 0.52 0.48 Cash dividends accrued per preferred share $ 0.83 $ — Weighted-average Shares Used to Compute Net Earnings Per Share: Basic 1,309 1,299 Diluted 1,337 1,316 GAAP net revenue $ 8,458 $ 7,710 $ 7,351 GAAP cost of sales 5,852 5,271 4,792 2,606 2,439 2,559 Non-GAAP Adjustments Stock-based compensation expense 10 9 9 Disaster recovery (4 ) (7 ) (10 ) Divestiture related exit costs — 9 — $ 2,612 $ 2,450 $ 2,558 30.8 % 31.6 % 34.8 % Non-GAAP adjustments 0.1 % 0.2 % — % 30.9 % 31.8 % 34.8 % GAAP net revenue $ 30,127 $ 29,135 GAAP cost of sales 20,249 18,896 9,878 10,239 Non-GAAP Adjustments Stock-based compensation expense 49 47 Disaster recovery (43 ) (13 ) Divestiture related exit costs 9 — $ 9,893 $ 10,273 32.8 % 35.1 % Non-GAAP adjustments — % 0.2 % 32.8 % 35.3 % $ 693 $ 547 $ 507 Non-GAAP Adjustments Amortization of intangible assets 69 60 72 Transformation costs 26 14 56 Disaster recovery (17 ) (2 ) (14 ) Stock-based compensation expense 89 80 71 Divestiture related exit costs — 35 — Acquisition, disposition and other related charges 78 37 18 $ 938 $ 771 $ 710 8.2 % 7.1 % 6.9 % Non-GAAP adjustments 2.9 % 2.9 % 2.8 % 11.1 % 10.0 % 9.7 % $ 2,190 $ 2,089 Non-GAAP Adjustments Amortization of intangible assets 267 288 Transformation costs 93 283 Disaster recovery (51 ) (12 ) Stock-based compensation expense 430 428 Divestiture related exit costs 35 — Acquisition, disposition and other related charges 204 69 $ 3,168 $ 3,145 7.3 % 7.2 % Non-GAAP adjustments 3.2 % 3.6 % 10.5 % 10.8 % $ 1,366 $ 0.99 $ 512 $ 0.38 $ 642 $ 0.49 Non-GAAP Adjustments: Amortization of intangible assets 69 0.05 60 0.05 72 0.05 Transformation costs 26 0.02 14 0.01 56 0.05 Disaster recovery (17 ) (0.02 ) (2 ) — (14 ) (0.01 ) Stock-based compensation expense 89 0.06 80 0.06 71 0.05 Divestiture related exit costs — — 35 — — — Acquisition, disposition and other related charges 78 0.06 37 0.03 18 0.01 Gain on sale of equity interest (733 ) (0.53 ) — — — — Adjustments for equity interests 25 0.02 (44 ) (0.04 ) 2 — (Gain) loss on equity investments, net (34 ) (0.02 ) (14 ) (0.01 ) 40 0.03 Adjustments for taxes (89 ) (0.06 ) (21 ) (0.01 ) (203 ) (0.15 ) Other adjustments (2) 15 0.01 4 — (4 ) — 795 0.58 661 0.50 680 0.52 Preferred stock dividends (25 ) — — $ 770 $ 661 $ 680 $ 2,579 $ 1.93 $ 2,025 $ 1.54 Non-GAAP Adjustments: Amortization of intangible assets 267 0.20 288 0.22 Transformation costs 93 0.07 283 0.22 Disaster recovery (51 ) (0.04 ) (12 ) (0.01 ) Stock-based compensation expense 430 0.32 428 0.33 Divestiture related exit costs 35 0.03 — — Acquisition, disposition and other related charges 204 0.16 69 0.05 Gain on sale of equity interest (733 ) (0.55 ) — — Adjustments for equity interests (107 ) (0.08 ) 18 0.01 Loss on equity investments, net 13 0.01 40 0.03 Adjustments for taxes (95 ) (0.07 ) (255 ) (0.20 ) Other adjustments (2) 20 0.01 (52 ) (0.04 ) 2,655 1.99 2,832 2.15 Preferred stock dividends (25 ) — $ 2,630 $ 2,832 $ 2,030 $ 1,154 $ 2,843 Investment in property, plant and equipment and software assets (608 ) (543 ) (675 ) Proceeds from sale of property, plant and equipment 90 62 255 Effect of exchange rate changes on cash, cash equivalents, and restricted cash (12 ) (4 ) (102 ) $ 1,500 $ 669 $ 2,321 $ 4,341 $ 4,428 Investment in property, plant and equipment and software assets (2,367 ) (2,828 ) Proceeds from sale of property, plant and equipment 370 602 Effect of exchange rate changes on cash, cash equivalents, and restricted cash (47 ) 36 $ 2,297 $ 2,238 Current Assets: Cash and cash equivalents $ 14,846 $ 4,270 Accounts receivable, net of allowances 3,550 3,481 Financing receivables, net of allowances 3,870 3,543 Inventory 7,810 4,607 Assets held for sale 1 — Other current assets 3,380 3,047 Total current assets 33,457 18,948 Property, plant and equipment, net 5,664 5,989 Long-term financing receivables and other assets 12,616 11,377 Investments in equity interests 929 2,197 Goodwill and intangible assets 18,596 18,642 Total assets $ 71,262 $ 57,153 Current Liabilities: Notes payable and short-term borrowings $ 4,742 $ 4,868 Accounts payable 11,064 7,136 Employee compensation and benefits 1,356 1,724 Taxes on earnings 284 155 Deferred revenue 3,904 3,658 Accrued restructuring 61 180 Liabilities held for sale 32 — Other accrued liabilities 4,530 4,161 Total current liabilities 25,973 21,882 Long-term debt 13,504 7,487 Other non-current liabilities 6,905 6,546 Commitments and Contingencies Stockholders’ Equity HPE stockholders' Equity: 7.625% Series C mandatory convertible preferred stock, $0.01 par value (30 shares issued and outstanding as of October 31, 2024) — — Common stock, $0.01 par value (9,600 shares authorized; 1,297 and 1,283 shares issued and outstanding as of October 31, 2024 and October 31, 2023, respectively) 13 13 Additional paid-in capital 29,848 28,199 Accumulated deficit (2,068 ) (3,946 ) Accumulated other comprehensive loss (2,977 ) (3,084 ) Total HPE stockholders’ equity 24,816 21,182 Non-controlling interests 64 56 Total stockholders’ equity 24,880 21,238 Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity $ 71,262 $ 57,153 Cash Flows from Operating Activities: Net earnings attributable to HPE $ 2,579 $ 2,025 Adjustments to Reconcile Net Earnings Attributable to HPE to Net Cash Provided by Operating Activities: Depreciation and amortization 2,564 2,616 Stock-based compensation expense 430 428 Provision for inventory and credit losses 175 230 Restructuring charges 33 242 Deferred taxes on earnings (64 ) (67 ) Earnings from equity interests (147 ) (245 ) Gain on sale of equity interest (733 ) — Dividends received from equity investees 43 200 Other, net 149 31 Changes in Operating Assets and Liabilities, Net of Acquisitions: Accounts receivable (83 ) 577 Financing receivables (909 ) (607 ) Inventory (3,358 ) 400 Accounts payable 3,927 (1,655 ) Taxes on earnings 190 (34 ) Restructuring (164 ) (275 ) Other assets and liabilities (291 ) 562 Net cash provided by operating activities 4,341 4,428 Cash Flows from Investing Activities: Investment in property, plant and equipment and software assets (2,367 ) (2,828 ) Proceeds from sale of property, plant and equipment 370 602 Purchases of investments (16 ) (15 ) Proceeds from maturities and sales of investments 2,149 9 Financial collateral posted (1,020 ) (1,443 ) Financial collateral received 978 1,152 Payments made in connection with business acquisitions, net of cash acquired (147 ) (761 ) Net cash used in investing activities (53 ) (3,284 ) Cash Flows from Financing Activities: Short-term borrowings with original maturities less than 90 days, net (31 ) (47 ) Proceeds from debt, net of issuance costs 11,245 4,725 Payment of debt (5,475 ) (4,887 ) Cash settlement for derivative hedging debt — (7 ) Net payments related to stock-based award activities (84 ) (106 ) Proceeds from issuance of 7.625% Series C mandatory convertible preferred stock, net of issuance costs 1,462 — Repurchase of common stock (150 ) (421 ) Cash dividends paid to non-controlling interests, net of contributions (8 ) — Cash dividends paid to shareholders (676 ) (619 ) Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities 6,283 (1,362 ) Effect of exchange rate changes on cash, cash equivalents, and restricted cash (47 ) 36 Change in cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash 10,524 (182 ) Cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash at beginning of period 4,581 4,763 Cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash at end of period $ 15,105 $ 4,581 Net Revenue: Server (4) $ 4,706 $ 4,280 $ 3,574 Hybrid Cloud (4) 1,582 1,300 1,341 Intelligent Edge (4) 1,124 1,121 1,410 Financial Services 893 879 876 Corporate Investments and other (4) 262 262 263 Total segment net revenue 8,567 7,842 7,464 Elimination of intersegment net revenue (109 ) (132 ) (113 ) Total consolidated net revenue $ 8,458 $ 7,710 $ 7,351 Earnings Before Taxes (4): Server $ 545 $ 464 $ 360 Hybrid Cloud 122 66 51 Intelligent Edge 274 251 382 Financial Services 82 79 70 Corporate Investments and other (2 ) (4 ) (16 ) Total segment earnings from operations 1,021 856 847 Unallocated corporate costs and eliminations (83 ) (85 ) (137 ) Stock-based compensation expense (89 ) (80 ) (71 ) Amortization of intangible assets (69 ) (60 ) (72 ) Transformation costs (26 ) (14 ) (56 ) Disaster recovery 17 2 14 Divestiture related exit costs — (35 ) — Acquisition, disposition and other related charges (78 ) (37 ) (18 ) Interest and other, net (1) 5 (12 ) (23 ) Gain on sale of equity interest 733 — — (Loss) earnings from equity interests (14 ) 73 65 Total pretax earnings $ 1,417 $ 608 $ 549 Net Revenue: Server (4) $ 16,205 $ 14,361 Hybrid Cloud (4) 5,386 5,493 Intelligent Edge (4) 4,532 5,379 Financial Services 3,512 3,480 Corporate Investments and other (4) 1,014 985 Total segment net revenue 30,649 29,698 Elimination of intersegment net revenue (522 ) (563 ) Total consolidated net revenue $ 30,127 $ 29,135 Earnings Before Taxes (4): Server $ 1,818 $ 1,830 Hybrid Cloud 245 232 Intelligent Edge 1,115 1,343 Financial Services 316 281 Corporate Investments and other (25 ) (77 ) Total segment earnings from operations 3,469 3,609 Unallocated corporate costs and eliminations (301 ) (464 ) Stock-based compensation expense (430 ) (428 ) Amortization of intangible assets (267 ) (288 ) Transformation costs (93 ) (283 ) Disaster recovery 51 12 Divestiture related exit costs (35 ) — Acquisition, disposition and other related charges (204 ) (69 ) Interest and other, net (1) (117 ) (104 ) Gain on sale of equity interest 733 — Earnings from equity interests 147 245 Total consolidated earnings before taxes $ 2,953 $ 2,230 Net Revenue: Server (4) $ 4,706 $ 4,280 $ 3,574 10% 32% Hybrid Cloud (4) 1,582 1,300 1,341 22 18 Intelligent Edge (4) 1,124 1,121 1,410 — (20) Financial Services 893 879 876 2 2 Corporate Investments and other (4) 262 262 263 — — Total segment net revenue 8,567 7,842 7,464 9 15 Elimination of intersegment net revenue (109 ) (132 ) (113 ) (17) (4) Total consolidated net revenue $ 8,458 $ 7,710 $ 7,351 10% 15% Net Revenue: Server (4) $ 16,205 $ 14,361 13% Hybrid Cloud (4) 5,386 5,493 (2) Intelligent Edge (4) 4,532 5,379 (16) Financial Services 3,512 3,480 1 Corporate Investments and other (4) 1,014 985 3 Total segment net revenue 30,649 29,698 3 Elimination of intersegment net revenue (522 ) (563 ) (7) Total consolidated net revenue $ 30,127 $ 29,135 3% Segment Operating Profit Margin (4): Server 11.6 % 10.8 % 10.1 % 0.8 1.5 Hybrid Cloud 7.7 % 5.1 % 3.8 % 2.6 3.9 Intelligent Edge 24.4 % 22.4 % 27.1 % 2.0 (2.7) Financial Services 9.2 % 9.0 % 8.0 % 0.2 1.2 Corporate Investments and other (0.8 %) (1.5 %) (6.1 %) 0.7 5.3 Total segment operating profit margin 11.9 % 10.9 % 11.3 % 1.0 0.6 Segment Operating Profit Margin (4): Server 11.2 % 12.7 % (1.5) Hybrid Cloud 4.5 % 4.2 % 0.3 Intelligent Edge 24.6 % 25.0 % (0.4) Financial Services 9.0 % 8.1 % 0.9 Corporate Investments and other (2.5 %) (7.8 %) 5.3 Total segment operating profit margin 11.3 % 12.2 % (0.9) Numerator: GAAP net earnings attributable to common stockholders - Basic $ 1,341 $ 512 $ 642 Plus: 7.625% Series C mandatory convertible preferred stock dividends 25 — — GAAP net earnings attributable to HPE - Diluted $ 1,366 $ 512 $ 642 Non-GAAP net earnings attributable to common stockholders - Basic $ 770 $ 661 $ 680 Plus: 7.625% Series C mandatory convertible preferred stock dividends 25 — — Non-GAAP net earnings attributable to HPE - Diluted $ 795 $ 661 $ 680 Denominator: Weighted-average shares used to compute basic net earnings per share 1,312 1,312 1,295 Dilutive effect of employee stock plans 22 20 20 Dilutive effect of 7.625% Series C mandatory convertible preferred stock 41 — — Weighted-average shares used to compute diluted net earnings per share 1,375 1,332 1,315 GAAP Net Earnings Per Share Basic $ 1.02 $ 0.39 $ 0.50 Diluted (3) $ 0.99 $ 0.38 $ 0.49 Non-GAAP Net Earnings Per Share Basic $ 0.59 $ 0.50 $ 0.53 Diluted (3) $ 0.58 $ 0.50 $ 0.52 Numerator: GAAP net earnings attributable to common stockholders - Basic $ 2,554 $ 2,025 Plus: 7.625% Series C mandatory convertible preferred stock dividends 25 — GAAP net earnings attributable to HPE - Diluted $ 2,579 $ 2,025 Non-GAAP net earnings attributable to common stockholders - Basic $ 2,630 $ 2,832 Plus: 7.625% Series C mandatory convertible preferred stock dividends 25 — Non-GAAP net earnings attributable to HPE - Diluted $ 2,655 $ 2,832 Denominator: Weighted-average shares used to compute basic net earnings per share 1,309 1,299 Dilutive effect of employee stock plans 18 17 Dilutive effect of 7.625% Series C mandatory convertible preferred stock 10 — Weighted-average shares used to compute diluted net earnings per share 1,337 1,316 GAAP Net Earnings Per Share Basic $ 1.95 $ 1.56 Diluted (3) $ 1.93 $ 1.54 Non-GAAP Net Earnings Per Share Basic $ 2.01 $ 2.18 Diluted (3) $ 1.99 $ 2.15 (1) Interest and other, net includes tax indemnification and other adjustments, cost, and interest and other, net. (2) Other adjustments includes non-service net periodic benefit cost and tax indemnification and other adjustments. (3) For purposes of calculating diluted net EPS, the preferred stock dividends are added back to the net earnings attributable to common stockholders and the diluted weighted average share calculation assumes the preferred stock was converted at issuance or as of the beginning of the reporting period. (4) As previously disclosed, effective as of the beginning of fiscal 2024, in order to align the segment financial reporting more closely with its business structure, the Company established two new reportable segments, Hybrid Cloud and Server. Hybrid Cloud includes the historical Storage segment, HPE GreenLake Flex Solutions (which provides flexible as-a-service IT infrastructure through the HPE GreenLake cloud and was previously reported under the Compute and the High Performance Computing & Artificial Intelligence ("HPC & AI") segments), Private Cloud, and Software (previously reported under the Corporate Investments and Other segment). The Server segment combines the previously separately reported Compute and HPC & AI segments, with adjustments for certain product lines that are now reported in Hybrid Cloud. Additionally, certain products and services previously reported in the financial results for the HPC & AI segment were moved to be reported in the Hybrid Cloud segment, and the Athonet business and certain components of the Communications and Media Solutions business, both previously reported in the financial results for Corporate Investments and Other, moved to be reported in the Intelligent Edge segment. As a result, the Company’s organizational structure for fiscal 2024 consisted of the following segments: (i) Server; (ii) Hybrid Cloud; (iii) Intelligent Edge; (iv) Financial Services; and (v) Corporate Investments and Other. The Company began reporting under this re-aligned segment structure beginning with the results of the first quarter of fiscal 2024. The Company has reflected these changes to its segment information retrospectively to the earliest period presented, which primarily resulted in the realignment of net revenue and operating profit for each of the segments as described above. These changes had no impact on Hewlett Packard Enterprise’s previously reported consolidated net revenue, net earnings, net earnings per share or total assets. To supplement Hewlett Packard Enterprise’s condensed consolidated financial statement information presented on a GAAP basis, Hewlett Packard Enterprise provides non-GAAP financial measures including revenue on a constant currency basis (including at the business segment level), non-GAAP gross profit, non-GAAP gross profit margin, non-GAAP operating profit (non-GAAP earnings from operations), non-GAAP operating profit margin (non-GAAP earnings from operations as a percentage of net revenue), non-GAAP income tax rate, non-GAAP net earnings, non-GAAP diluted net earnings per share, and FCF. Hewlett Packard Enterprise also provides forecasts of revenue growth on a constant currency basis, non-GAAP diluted net earnings per share, non-GAAP operating profit growth, and FCF. These non-GAAP financial measures are not computed in accordance with, or as an alternative to, GAAP in the United States. The GAAP measure most directly comparable to net revenue on a constant currency basis is net revenue. The GAAP measure most directly comparable to non-GAAP gross profit is gross profit. The GAAP measure most directly comparable to non-GAAP gross profit margin is gross profit margin. The GAAP measure most directly comparable to non-GAAP operating profit (non-GAAP earnings from operations) is earnings from operations. The GAAP measure most directly comparable to non-GAAP operating profit margin (non-GAAP earnings from operations as a percentage of net revenue) is operating profit margin (earnings from operations as a percentage of net revenue). The GAAP measure most directly comparable to non-GAAP income tax rate is income tax rate. The GAAP measure most directly comparable to non-GAAP net earnings is net earnings. The GAAP measure most directly comparable to non-GAAP diluted net earnings per share is diluted net earnings per share. The GAAP measure most directly comparable to FCF is cash flow from operations. Reconciliations of each of these non-GAAP financial measures to their most directly comparable GAAP measures for this quarter and prior periods are included in the tables above or elsewhere in the materials accompanying this news release. Hewlett Packard Enterprise believes that providing the non-GAAP financial measures stated above, in addition to the related GAAP measures provides investors with greater transparency to the information used by Hewlett Packard Enterprise’s management in its financial and operational decision making and allows investors to see Hewlett Packard Enterprise’s results “through the eyes” of management. Hewlett Packard Enterprise further believes that providing this information provides Hewlett Packard Enterprise’s investors with a supplemental view to understand the Company’s historical and prospective operating performance and to evaluate the efficacy of the methodology and information used by Hewlett Packard Enterprise’s management to evaluate and measure such performance. Disclosure of these non-GAAP financial measures also facilitates the comparisons of Hewlett Packard Enterprise’s operating performance with the performance of other companies in the same industry that supplement their GAAP results with non-GAAP financial measures that may be calculated in a similar manner. Net revenue on a constant currency basis assumes no change to the foreign exchange rate utilized in the comparable prior-year period. This measure assists investors with evaluating the Company’s past and future performance, without the impact of foreign exchange rates, as more than half of our revenue is generated outside of the U.S. Non-GAAP gross profit and non-GAAP gross profit margin are defined to exclude charges related to the stock-based compensation expense, disaster recovery, and divestiture related exit costs. Non-GAAP operating profit (non-GAAP earnings from operations) and non-GAAP operating profit margin (non-GAAP earnings from operations as a percentage of net revenue) consist of earnings from operations or earnings from operations as a percentage of net revenue excluding the items mentioned above and charges relating to the amortization of intangible assets, transformation costs, and acquisition, disposition and other related charges. Non-GAAP net earnings and non-GAAP diluted net earnings per share consist of net earnings or diluted net earnings per share excluding the charges previously stated, as well as adjustments for equity interests, gain or loss on equity investments, other adjustments, and adjustments for taxes. The Adjustments for taxes line item includes certain income tax valuation allowances and separation taxes, the impact of tax reform, structural rate adjustment, excess tax benefit from stock-based compensation, and adjustments for additional taxes or tax benefits associated with each non-GAAP item. Hewlett Packard Enterprise believes that excluding the items mentioned above from the non-GAAP financial measures provides a supplemental view to management and investors of its consolidated financial performance and presents the financial results of the business without costs that Hewlett Packard Enterprise’s management does not believe to be reflective of ongoing operating results. Exclusion of these items can have a material impact on the equivalent GAAP measure and cash flows thus limiting their use as analytical tools. These limitations are discussed below or elsewhere in the materials accompanying this news release. More specifically, Hewlett Packard Enterprise’s management excludes each of those items mentioned above for the following reasons: These non-GAAP financial measures have limitations as analytical tools, and these measures should not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for analysis of Hewlett Packard Enterprise’s results as reported under GAAP. Some of the limitations in relying on these non-GAAP financial measures are that they can have a material impact on the equivalent GAAP earnings measures and cash flows, they may be calculated differently by other companies (limiting the usefulness of those measures for comparative purposes) and may not reflect the full economic effect of the loss in value of certain assets. Hewlett Packard Enterprise compensates for these limitations on the use of non-GAAP financial measures by relying primarily on its GAAP results and using non-GAAP financial measures only as a supplement. Hewlett Packard Enterprise also provides a reconciliation of each non-GAAP financial measure to its most directly comparable GAAP financial measure for this quarter and prior periods within this news release and in other written materials that include these non-GAAP financial measures, and Hewlett Packard Enterprise encourages investors to review those reconciliations carefully. View source version on : CONTACT: Media Contact: Laura Keller Contact: Paul Glaser KEYWORD: UNITED STATES NORTH AMERICA TEXAS INDUSTRY KEYWORD: DATA MANAGEMENT TECHNOLOGY SOFTWARE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE INTERNET HARDWARE SOURCE: Hewlett Packard Enterprise Copyright Business Wire 2024. PUB: 12/05/2024 04:05 PM/DISC: 12/05/2024 04:05 PMFamily-Owned Dickey's Barbecue Pit Franchise Prioritizes Community, Quality, and Collaboration Hannah Davis, Seth Davis, Tim Davis and Sue Davis in front of the North Branch A family that barbecues together "Our family dynamic is the foundation of our success,” said Tim Davis, franchisee. "Everyone brings their strengths to the table, and together we're building something we're incredibly proud of-not just for us, but for our community.” Tim and Sue Davis purchased the North Branch location after seeing it as the perfect opportunity to combine their entrepreneurial spirit with a love for great barbecue. With a background that includes real estate franchises and other business ventures, Tim saw something unique in Dickey's. "The decision to join Dickey's wasn't just about the product-it was about the people,” said Tim. "The Dickey's corporate team provided unwavering support throughout the process, from training to daily operations. That personal touch made all the difference.” The Davis family has made their Dickey's location a testament to collaboration and teamwork. Sue Davis, a school principal, also contributes by helping with catering deliveries and providing strategic input. Together, the Davis family is creating a legacy of quality barbecue and community involvement. Like any business, the journey hasn't been without challenges. From navigating equipment repairs to managing labor costs, the Davis family has tackled each hurdle with determination and support from the Dickey's team. "You learn quickly that financial discipline and adaptability are key,” said Tim. "Dickey's provides the resources and guidance we need to overcome obstacles and continue growing.” The Dickey's system has been instrumental in helping the Davis family succeed. "Dickey's commitment to quality and tradition is what sets the brand apart,” said Tim. "From the smoking process to the customer service, everything is designed to ensure an excellent experience.” Roland Dickey, Jr. , CEO of Dickey's Capital Group , praised the family's efforts. "The Davis family embodies the spirit of Dickey's-hardworking, innovative, and community-focused,” he said. "Their ability to create a welcoming environment while staying true to our brand's values is exactly what makes our franchisees so successful.” For the Davis family, their Dickey's isn't just a restaurant-it's a gathering place for the North Branch community. They've prioritized building relationships with their neighbors and supporting local events, making Dickey's a true community hub. "We're here to serve more than just barbecue-we're here to serve people,” said Hannah Davis. "Our goal is to create memories and make every guest feel like part of the family.” Laura Rea Dickey , CEO of Dickey's Barbecue Restaurants, Inc., highlighted the family's impact. "The Davis family represents what makes Dickey's so special,” she said. "They've seamlessly blended entrepreneurial vision with the heart of a family business, creating an experience that resonates with their guests and their community.” As the Davis family continues to grow their business, they remain committed to upholding Dickey's values of quality, community, and tradition. "Our journey with Dickey's is about more than just business,” said Tim. "It's about creating a legacy for our family and a gathering place for our community. With the support of Dickey's, we're excited for what the future holds.” About Dickey's Barbecue Restaurants, Inc. Founded in 1941 by The Dickey Family, Dickey's Barbecue Restaurants, Inc. is the world's largest barbecue concept and continues as a third-generation family-run business. For over 80 years, Dickey's Barbecue Pit has served millions with its signature Legit. Texas. Barbecue.TM Slow-smoked over hickory wood-burning pits, Dickey's barbecued meats are paired with a variety of southern sides. Committed to authentic barbecue, Dickey's never takes shortcuts-because real barbecue can't be rushed. With over 866 restaurants across eight concepts in the U.S. and several countries, Dickey's Barbecue Franchise and Dickey's Restaurant Brands continues to grow under the leadership of Roland Dickey, Jr., CEO of Dickey's Capital Group, and Laura Rea Dickey, CEO of Dickey's Barbecue Pit, Inc. Dickey's has been recognized on Newsweek's 2022 "America's Favorite Restaurant Chains" list, Nation's Restaurant News 2024 top fast-casual brands for value, and USA Today's 2021 Readers' Choice Awards. The brand has also ranked in the Top 20 of Fast Casual's "Top 100 Movers and Shakers” for four of the past five years. Additional accolades include Entrepreneur's Top 500 Franchise and Hospitality Technology's Industry Heroes list. The brand has been featured by Fox News, Forbes, Franchise Times, The Wall Street Journal, and People Magazine . For more information, visit www.dickeys.com . For information about becoming a franchise partner, visit www.dickeysfranchise.com . Attachment Hannah Davis, Seth Davis, Tim Davis and Sue Davis in front of the North Branch CONTACT: Louisa Garrett Dickey's Barbecue Pit [email protected]

OTTAWA, Dec 16 (Reuters) - Canada's government on Monday proposed C$1.3 billion ($913.05 million) for border security after U.S. President-elect Donald Trump threatened tariffs unless Canada reduced the movement of migrants and drugs into the United States. The border funding proposal was part of the mini-budget, or fall economic statement unveiled on Monday. Trump has threatened 25% tariffs on all exports to the U.S. from Canada and Mexico. The money would go towards Public Safety Canada, the Canada Border Services Agency, the Communications Security Establishment, and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police," the statement said. The statement said the government intended to introduce legislative amendments to the Customs Act to grant Canada Border Services new authorities to inspect goods destined for export. U.S. border patrol apprehended more than 23,000 migrants near the Canada-U.S. border in the 12 months ending in October - more than double the previous year. That remains a fraction of the 1.5 million apprehended near the U.S.-Mexico border in that time period. Canadian police say they have installed more cameras and sensors over this section of the border over the last four years. Ottawa has previously promised to deploy more officers and technology targeting southbound border-crossers, though Canadian law enforcement officials acknowledge they are limited in what they can do to stop southbound migrants. Last week the province of Alberta announced a border patrol of its own, although very few migrants have crossed there. ($1 = 1.4238 Canadian dollars) Sign up here. Reporting by Promit Mukherjee; Writing by Caroline Stauffer and Anna Mehler Paperny, editing by Deepa Babington Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. , opens new tab

Josh Hubbard scored 25 points and Claudell Harris Jr. scored 21 on 6-of-9 shooting as Mississippi State escaped with a 91-84 win against Prairie View A&M on Sunday in Starkville, Miss. Prairie View A&M took a 65-64 lead with 10:38 remaining, but Hubbard and Harris Jr. each scored seven points to power the ensuing 14-1 run that put Mississippi State up for good. Hubbard punctuated the rally with a 3-pointer that made it 78-66 with 5:51 to play. The Bulldogs (8-1) stretched their lead to as many as 13 points in the closing minutes to notch their second straight win. Shawn Jones Jr. added 11 points for Mississippi State, while Michael Nwoko added 10 points and 10 rebounds. RJ Melendez also netted 10 points. The Panthers (1-8) were led by the trio of Nick Anderson (21 points) Tanahj Pettway (20) and Marcel Bryant (19). Pettway drilled 4 of 5 3-pointers and Bryant grabbed seven rebounds. Prairie View A&M got off to a hot start, opening up a 27-12 lead with 10:42 left in the first half. It was a surprising haymaker from the visitors, who entered the game winless in Division I play and faced a Bulldogs team that was ranked last week. Mississippi State eventually found its stride offensively, turning things around with a 32-17 run to tie the game at 44 entering halftime. The Bulldogs shot 50 percent from the field overall in the first half, but only made six of their 17 attempts from 3-point range (35.3 percent). Their defense remained an issue throughout the half, with the Panthers hitting 16 of their 27 shots (59.3 percent) and canning 5 of 8 3-pointers. Neither team led by more than five early in the second half until Mississippi State pulled away. The Bulldogs finished the game shooting 55.6 percent from the floor (30-of-54) and drilled 11 of 26 attempts (42.3 percent) from long range. They outrebounded Prairie View A&M 35-22 and outscored them 31-20 in bench points. The Panthers held a 34-32 advantage in points in the paint and shot 56.4 percent overall for the game, including 52.6 percent (10-of-19) on threes. --Field Level MediaRené Bennett | (TNS) Bankrate.com If you’re an iPhone user, you might not realize that you already have access to Apple Cash. It’s a digital cash card that’s built into Apple devices and can be found in the default Wallet app. (Note: You must link an eligible debit card to use this service.) The main function of Apple Cash is to make it easier for Apple device users to send money to one another, including sending money through the iMessage app. But Apple Cash is more than just a peer-to-peer (P2P) payment service — it can be used to shop online, in stores or to make in-app purchases. Apple Cash is a convenient way to transfer money between friends and family. Once it’s set up, a user can simply open the iMessage app and send money to a contact through their chat. It’s also useful for those who use Apple Pay, a separate service that allows Apple device users to make contactless payments with any linked card, including an Apple Cash card. Here are some important things to know about setting up and using Apple Cash. How Apple Cash works Apple Cash is a digital cash card that’s stored in the Wallet app of Apple devices, and it can be used for making P2P payments, as well as purchases through Apple Pay. When you receive money from another Apple Cash user, that money appears in your Apple Cash balance. The balance can then be spent or transferred to a linked bank account or debit card. Sending money to peers with Apple Cash can be done either directly from the digital Apple Cash card (in the Wallet app) or through the iMessage app. You can send or receive anywhere between $1 and $10,000 per message. The money shows up on the recipient’s Apple Cash card instantly, but it may take from one to three days for the balance to be transferred to a bank account. Instant transfers to a bank account are possible, but it comes with a 1.5% fee. There’s also an option to set up Apple Cash Family for children who are under 18 years old. This option limits the amount a child can send to $2,000 per message. Those younger than 18 also cannot add money to their Apple Cash card from a bank account; rather, their balance only grows when they receive money from another Apple Cash user. Difference between Apple Cash and Apple Pay Apple Cash is a digital card within your Wallet that allows you to spend your Apple Cash online, in stores and in apps as well send and receive money. Apple Pay, however, allows you to make purchases using any credit card or debit card you have stored in your Wallet — including Apple Cash. With Apple Pay, you add credit and debit cards to your Wallet and then have the ability to pay right with your phone (or other Apple product). How to use Apple Cash 1. Set up Apple Cash with a compatible device To set up Apple Cash, you’ll need three things: —A compatible Apple device. —Two-factor authentication enabled for your Apple ID (this can be done in Settings). —An eligible debit card to load funds onto the Apple Cash card. In the Settings app, you can turn on Apple Cash in the Wallet and Apple Pay section. Tap on the Apple Cash card icon and follow the instructions on the screen. You’ll be asked to agree to the terms and conditions, after which your device will set up Apple Cash for you. The Apple Cash card, once set up, can be found in your device’s Wallet app. If you want to set up Apple Cash Family, you’ll first need to have Family Sharing turned on, which can be done in Settings. The family organizer can add children to Apple Cash in the Family Sharing section of Settings. 2. Add money to your card You’ll need to have a debit card linked to your digital Wallet to add money to an Apple Cash card. You can add a debit card to Wallet in the same place where you set up Apple Cash — the Wallet and Apple Pay section of Settings. Once a debit card is linked to your Wallet, open Wallet and tap on the Apple Cash card. Then, tap the More button (an icon with three dots). This will open a page where you can see your Apple Cash balance, add money and transfer funds to a bank account. Tap Add Money and enter the amount you’d like to add (the minimum is $10). You’ll be asked to confirm which debit card you want to use to fund the Apple Cash balance, and then the money is added to the Apple Cash card. 3. Send a payment There are two ways to send a payment to someone using Apple Cash: directly from your Wallet or in the iMessage app. Both the sender and recipient need Apple Cash to send or receive money. From your Apple Wallet To send money from Wallet, simply tap the Apple Cash card in Wallet and then tap Send. Type in the contact name or phone number of the recipient. Enter the amount you’d like to send (between $1 and $10,000), then review the payment and confirm it with Face ID, Touch ID or a passcode. Via iMessages In iMessage, open the conversation with who you’d like to send money to, or start a new one. Tap on the app button, which appears next to the type bar, and then tap on the Apple Cash icon. You’ll be prompted to enter an amount (between $1 and $10,000). Once you’ve reviewed the amount, tap Send and confirm with Face ID, Touch ID or a passcode. The first time money is sent to someone, the recipient will need to accept the payment within seven days for it to go through. After the first instance, payments are automatically accepted. If you’re using Apple Cash to make a purchase either online or in a store, you’ll need to pay using Apple Pay. 4. Request money To request money from your iPhone, open the conversation in the Messages app. Tap the plus icon, followed by Apple Cash. Then, tap Request. Tap the send button to send your payment request. Once the request is sent, the person you sent it to can confirm or change the amount they send to you. You can also request money from your Apple watch. Open your messages app, choose a conversation, tap the plus icon and then choose Apple Cash. Once you enter the amount you are requesting, swipe left on the Send button. Tap Request. 5. Transfer your balance to a bank account As you start to accumulate money on the Apple Cash card, you may want to move it to a debit card or a bank account . This can be done by going to the same place where you added funds to the card, by clicking the icon with three dots next to your digital card. Enter an amount to be transferred, then tap Next. You’ll be asked whether you want to do an instant transfer (for a 1.5% fee) or a transfer in one to three business days for free. After making a selection, the screen will instruct you to set up a bank account if you don’t already have one set up. You’ll confirm the payment, and the transfer is initiated. Instant transfers can only be made to an eligible debit card, not a bank account. Money is sent within 30 minutes when you select instant transfer. Alternatives to Apple Cash —Zelle: If your bank is offers Zelle, it might be a good idea to take advantage of the P2P payment service. Zelle can be accessed directly from your bank’s mobile app, and it allows you to send instant transfers at no extra cost. —Venmo: Anyone can use Venmo, as long as they’ve downloaded the app. Unlike Apple Cash or Zelle, it’s a standalone P2P payment app. Venmo comes with a social element — users can follow each other and add fun emojis to their payments, although they can also keep their account activity private. —PayPal: This P2P payment service is a good option if you want to send money internationally. It also offers a PayPal Debit card, which, like the Apple Cash card, can be used to make purchases online or in stores. —Samsung Pay Cash: Samsung device users can use this option instead of Apple Cash. Similar to Apple Cash, it is a digital wallet that you can access from a Samsung mobile device. However, to take full advantage of Samsung Pay Cash, users will need to undergo an extra registration process to upgrade to a Full Card Account. Bottom line Apple Cash makes it easy for Apple device users to send money to each other. Users can simply tap the Apple Cash icon in their text messages to send money through iMessage. It can also be used as an extra repository for spending money and can be used for purchases anywhere Apple Pay is accepted. With that said, only Apple device users can send and receive money using Apple Cash, so those looking for a more universal payment service may want to consider other P2P payment apps . ©2024 Bankrate.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.$1,000 to invest? DroneShield and this top Australian stock could rise 50% to 80%ANN/THE STRAITS TIMES – On the south side of Austin, Texas, engineers at semiconductor maker Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) designed an artificial intelligence (AI) chip called MI300 that was released a year ago and is expected to generate more than USD5 billion in sales in its first year of release. Not far away in a north Austin high-rise, designers at Amazon developed a new and faster version of an AI chip called Trainium. They then tested the chip in creations including palm-size circuit boards and complex computers the size of two refrigerators. Those two efforts in the capital of Texas reflect a shift in the rapidly evolving market of AI chips, which are perhaps the hottest and most coveted technology of the moment. The industry has long been dominated by Nvidia, which has leveraged its AI chips to become a USD3 trillion behemoth. For years, others tried to match the company’s chips, which provide enormous computing power for AI tasks, but made little progress. Now the chips that AMD and Amazon have created – as well as customer reactions to their technology – are adding to signs that credible alternatives to Nvidia are finally emerging. For some crucial AI tasks, Nvidia’s rivals are proving they can deliver much faster speed, and at prices that are much lower, said analyst at Futurum Group Daniel Newman. “That’s what everybody has known is possible, and now we’re starting to see it materialise,” he said. The shift is being driven by an array of tech companies – from large competitors such as Amazon and AMD to smaller start-ups – that have started tailoring their chips for a particular phase of AI development that is becoming increasingly important. That process, called “inferencing”, happens after companies use chips to train AI models. It allows them to carry out tasks such as serving up answers with AI chatbots. ABOVE & BELOW: Nvidia has leveraged its artificial intelligence chips to become a USD3 trillion behemoth. PHOTO: THE STRAITS TIMES PHOTO: ENVATO “The real commercial value comes with inference, and inference is starting to gain scale,” said chief executive Cristiano Amon of Qualcomm, a mobile chipmaker that plans to use Amazon’s new chips for AI tasks. “We’re starting to see the beginning of the change.” Nvidia’s rivals have also started taking a leaf out of the company’s play book in another way. They have begun emulating Nvidia’s tactic of building complete computers – and not just the chips – so that customers can wring the maximum power and performance out of the chips for AI purposes. The increased competition was evident on December 3, when Amazon announced the availability of computing services based on its new Trainium 2 AI chips and testimonials from potential users including Apple. The company also unveiled computers containing either 16 or 64 of the chips, with ultrafast networking connections that particularly accelerate inferencing performance. Amazon is even building a kind of giant AI factory for the start-up Anthropic, which it has invested in, said chief executive of Amazon Web Services Matt Garman. That computing “cluster” will have hundreds of thousands of the new Trainium chips and will be five times as powerful as any that Anthropic has ever used, said founder and the chief compute officer Tom Brown of the start-up, which operates the Claude chatbot and is based in San Francisco. “This means customers will get more intelligence at a lower price and at faster speeds,” he said. In total, spending on computers without Nvidia chips by data centre operators, which provide the computing power needed for AI tasks, is expected to grow 49 per cent this year to USD126 billion, according to Omdia, a market research firm. Even so, the increased competition does not mean Nvidia is in danger of losing its lead. A spokesperson for the company pointed to comments made by Nvidia’s chief executive Jensen Huang, who has said his company has major advantages in AI software and inferencing capability. Huang has added that demand is torrid for the company’s new Blackwell AI chips, which he says perform many more calculations per watt of energy used, despite an increase in the power they need to operate. “Our total cost of ownership is so good that even when the competitor’s chips are free, it’s not cheap enough,” he said in a speech at Stanford University this year. The changing AI chip market has partly been propelled by well-funded start-ups such as SambaNova Systems, Groq and Cerebras Systems, which have lately claimed big speed advantages in inferencing, with lower prices and power consumption. Nvidia’s current chips can cost as much as USD15,000 each, and its Blackwell chips are expected to cost tens of thousands of dollars each. That has pushed some customers towards alternatives. Executive director Dan Stanzione of the Texas Advanced Computing Centre, a research centre, said the organisation planned to buy a Blackwell-based supercomputer next year but would most likely also use chips from SambaNova for inferencing tasks because of their lower power consumption and pricing. “That stuff is just too expensive,” he said of Nvidia’s chips. AMD said it expected to target Nvidia’s Blackwell chips with its own new AI chips arriving next year. In the company’s Austin labs, where it exhaustively tests AI chips, executives said inferencing performance was a major selling point. One customer is Meta, the owner of Facebook and Instagram, which says that it has trained a new AI model, called Llama 3.1 405B, using Nvidia chips but that it uses AMD MI300s chips for providing answers to users. Amazon, Google, Microsoft and Meta are also designing their own AI chips to speed up specific computing chores and achieve lower costs, while still building big clusters of machines powered by Nvidia’s chips. In December, Google plans to begin selling services based on a sixth generation of internally developed chips, called Trillium, which is nearly five times as fast as its predecessor. Amazon, sometimes seen as a laggard in AI, seems particularly determined to catch up. The company allocated USD75 billion this year for AI chips and other computing hardware, among other capital spending. At the company’s Austin offices – run by Annapurna Labs, a start-up that it bought in 2015 – engineers previously developed networking chips and general-purpose microprocessors for Amazon Web Services. Its early AI chips, including the first version of Trainium, did not gain much market traction. Amazon is far more optimistic about the new Trainium 2 chips, which are four times as fast as previous chips. On December 3, the company also announced plans for another chip, Trainium 3, which was set to be even more powerful. Founder and the chief technology officer Eiso Kant of Poolside, an AI start-up in San Francisco, estimated that Trainium 2 would provide a 40 per cent improvement in computing performance per dollar compared with Nvidia-based hardware. Amazon also plans to offer Trainium-based services in data centres across the world, Kant added, which helps with inferencing tasks. “The reality is, in my business, I don’t care what silicon is underneath,” he said. “What I care about is that I get the best price performance and that I can get it to the end user.”

The 30+ best live Black Friday Best Buy deals 2024: Last chance on TVs, laptops, and more