Sharing Knowledge in Smallcaps

[BottomBounce]

$NIO es8 https://nio.com/es8

[BullNBear52]

Posts Misrepresent Unfreezing of $16 Billion in Iranian Funds
By Saranac Hale Spencer

Posted on May 10, 2024
Quick Take
A recent deal involving a prisoner swap and the extension of a Trump-era waiver have freed $16 billion in previously frozen Iranian funds. Social media posts distort the sources of the money to falsely claim “Joe Biden gave 16 billion to Iran.” The Iranian money has been unfrozen with restrictions that it be used for humanitarian purposes.

Full Story
Two separate agreements in the fall allowed Iran to access up to $16 billion of its previously frozen assets, including a reported $10 billion as the result of an extension of a Trump-era waiver that allows Iran to access funds for humanitarian purposes.

Posts on social media have misrepresented those agreements, claiming, “Joe Biden gave 16 billion to Iran.” One early version of the claim, which spread widely on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter, showed a picture of President Joe Biden with this text: “Anyone remember when this guy handed $16,000,000,000 to Iran last year?” It came from an account that describes itself as “Conservative populist.” When the post went viral, the account added a marketing link to a survivalist goods company.

“This use of the word ‘gave’ is certainly intended to mislead,” Heather Williams, a senior policy researcher at RAND who specializes in Middle East regional issues, told us in an email. “[P]eople often try to portray this issue in a way that gives the impression that America is giving funds to Iran.”

The agreements don’t provide any U.S. money to Iran, as the posts suggest. Rather, they allow Iran to access its own assets that had been frozen in foreign banks due to earlier sanctions. The money can only be used for humanitarian purposes.

It’s also not clear how much of the $16 billion – which is held in accounts in Qatar and Oman – has been spent. As of December, U.S. officials said no Iranian money held in Qatar had been spent, but there were two transactions from the funds in Oman. The amounts of the transactions have not been disclosed.

Williams said she isn’t as familiar with the details of the money held in Oman. But as for Qatar, “There is no clear evidence Iran has used any of this money,” she said — although there are still questions about how Qatar plans to enforce the restrictions on the money, and Iran has claimed to have access to the money.

Here’s the deal with each of the two agreements.

$6 Billion in Foreign Banks
In September, the U.S. and Iran exchanged prisoners in a deal that also included the unfreezing of $6 billion in Iranian assets.

Five Americans were released from Iranian jails and returned to the U.S., and five Iranians who had either been charged or convicted in the U.S. received clemency. The other part of the deal freed up $6 billion in previously frozen Iranian assets.

As we’ve explained before, none of it was U.S. money. It was Iranian money that had been held in South Korean banks.

The money was from South Korea’s purchases of Iranian energy products. It was held in the bank accounts after then-President Donald Trump announced the withdrawal of the U.S. from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, better known as the Iran nuclear deal, in May 2018. Months later, the administration reinstated sanctions on Iran that were lifted after Iran agreed to the nuclear deal, which was negotiated by the U.S., China, France, Germany, Russia, the United Kingdom and the European Union. Those sanctions included a partial ban on oil exports, and the next year, the Trump administration made it a total ban. The sanctions were also aimed at stopping “transactions by foreign financial institutions with the Central Bank of Iran.”

In October 2019, the Trump administration made the money in those accounts available to Iran for limited humanitarian purposes, although the banks didn’t use that accommodation much due to the increased reporting it required.

As the Washington Institute for Near East Policy explained, “participants and observers complained that the ‘enhanced due diligence’ requirements were too much of a burden.”

So, even though there were mechanisms to disperse Iranian assets, “the South Koreans weren’t interested,” Patrick Clawson, director of research at the Washington Institute, told us last year. “From the beginning, South Korean banks were reluctant to use it because they feared the U.S. could change its mind and come back and fine them.”

The prisoner swap deal in September moved that money from South Korea to Qatar, although it is available only for humanitarian purposes. John Kirby, spokesman for the National Security Council, said in October that Iran hadn’t accessed any of the money.

Abram Paley, the State Department deputy special envoy for Iran, said the same thing in December during a House Financial Services Committee hearing.

“Not a penny of this money has been spent and these funds will not go anywhere anytime soon,” Paley said, although he didn’t explain what mechanism was keeping the funds static.

After the Hamas attack on Israel on Oct. 7, Deputy Treasury Secretary Wally Adeyemo reportedly told House Democrats in a closed-door meeting in October that the U.S. and Qatar had reached an agreement to prevent Iran from accessing the $6 billion that had been unfrozen as part of the prisoner swap, according to ABC News.

The Biden administration was under pressure to act because of Iran’s support for Hamas. “The Iranian government has backed Hamas for decades, going back nearly to the group’s inception in the 1980s,” according to a Congressional Research Service report on the history of U.S. policy toward Iran.

The CRS report, which was last updated on April 22, cited the same news reports and noted that the apparent agreement was “for an unspecified period of time.”

We reached out to the State Department for more information but didn’t get a response.

At the same December House hearing, Elizabeth Rosenberg, the assistant secretary for terrorist financing and financial crimes at the Treasury Department, also confirmed that no money had left those accounts. “There have been no transfers out of this, from the $6 billion sum held in Qatari financial institutions,” she said.

$10 Billion in Energy Sales to Iraq
In 2018, after Trump pulled the U.S. out of the Iran nuclear deal and reinstated sanctions, his administration issued a waiver that allowed Iraq to continue purchasing electricity from Iran, with restrictions that Iran only use the proceeds for humanitarian purposes.

That waiver has been consistently renewed, typically in 120-day increments.

On Nov. 14, Secretary of State Antony Blinken signed another waiver, “the twenty-first such waiver across multiple administrations,” Paley, the State Department’s deputy special envoy, said at the hearing. That waiver expired in March and was, again, renewed.

News stories noted the estimated reserve of money that had built up from the sale of energy from Iran to Iraq was about $10 billion.

The decision to extend the waiver was criticized by some conservative politicians, who highlighted the $10 billion figure, including Sen. Tim Scott of South Carolina and Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina. And that number has now found its way to social media posts.

It’s unclear exactly how much has accrued from the sale of Iranian energy to Iraq, though. It’s also unclear how much has been accessed by Iran, which, as we said, can use the money only to fund humanitarian purchases.

The $10 billion figure — which has been referenced by many U.S. officials over the last several months — appears to have come up over the summer, in an Iranian media report.

When the previous waiver was renewed in July, the State Department allowed for money to be held in bank accounts outside of Iraq to prevent Iran from pressuring Iraq to give it access to the funds. That money is now largely held in Oman. As of December, there had been two transactions from those accounts, according to Rosenberg, who declined to give details about them during the House hearing.

Also in July, the Persian-language broadcaster Iran International reported that the chairman of the Iran-Iraq chamber of commerce had estimated the amount of money in the Iraqi accounts for Iran was $10 billion, which is the earliest reference we could find to that amount.

A month earlier, in June, the U.S. had reportedly approved a payment of $2.7 billion from restricted funds held for Iran in Iraq.

Neither the State Department nor the White House responded to our requests for more details.

When the waiver was reissued in November, State Department spokesman Matthew Miller explained that the money “is held in accounts that are restricted where they can only be used to pay for food, medicine, humanitarian purposes, and other non-sanctionable activities.”

Referring to Iraq, Miller said, “We’ve had a number of policies we’ve worked with to try to ensure their energy independence, but in the meantime, they continue to buy Iranian electricity. And so we have in the past, as has the Trump administration, issued waivers to allow these funds to move to restricted accounts, or as I said, that can be used for humanitarian and other non-sanctionable purposes.”

And, more recently, Kirby, the NSC spokesman, answered a reporter’s question in April about the unfreezing of Iranian assets, saying, “none of those funds — funds set up in an account, by the way, by the previous administration — goes directly to the Supreme Leader of the [Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps]. It can only be used for humanitarian purposes. And we’re watching that account very, very closely to make sure that that’s what happens.”

So, saying only that “Joe Biden gave 16 billion to Iran” leaves the false impression that the administration has provided new, unrestricted money to Iran. That money already belonged to Iran, and its use is restricted. It’s also unclear how much of it Iran has actually accessed.

Editor’s note: FactCheck.org is one of several organizations working with Meta to debunk misinformation shared on social media. Our previous stories can be found here. Meta has no control over our editorial content.
https://www.factcheck.org/2024/05/posts-misrepresent-unfreezing-of-16-billion-in-iranian-funds/

[BullNBear52]

“I asked Fred where the funds had come from, and he responded, ‘The meeting with the General Dynamics board was a bust and I knew we needed money for Monday, so I took a plane to Las Vegas and won $27,000.’

I said, ‘You mean you took our last $5,000— how could you do that?’

So the kid asks what was wrong it was his money? I told him that's not quite the way it works. lol.

A remarkable man.

[EZ2]

Great story !!!

[BullNBear52]

Rest in Peace Fred Smith, Founder of FedEx (and Maybe the Luckiest Entrepreneur of All Time)Is it better to be lucky or good? Why not both?
EXPERT OPINION BY BILL MURPHY JR., FOUNDER OF UNDERSTANDABLY AND CONTRIBUTING EDITOR, INC. @BILLMURPHYJR

Jun 23, 2025



Fred Smith, CEO of FedEx Corp., attended an Economic Club of Washington event in Washington, D.C. in 2012. He passed away on Sunday. Photo: Getty Images

Frederick W. Smith, the founder of FedEx, has died at the age of 80. Smith was a highly successful entrepreneur. Maybe more important, he might very well have been the luckiest.

Here’s a very early story that proves the point. It comes to us courtesy of Roger Frock, who was the first general manager and chief operating officer of FedEx (then known as Federal Express), and who later wrote a book about his time at the company.

FedEx launched in Memphis on April 17, 1973. Soon afterward, the company was nearly broke according to Frock, owing much more than it had to pay for fuel to continue operations.

After a last-ditch financing effort fell through, Frock said he learned Smith had taken an unorthodox approach to handling the cash problem. As Frock wrote in Changing How the World Does Business: FedEx’s Incredible Journey to Success:

“I asked Fred where the funds had come from, and he responded, ‘The meeting with the General Dynamics board was a bust and I knew we needed money for Monday, so I took a plane to Las Vegas and won $27,000.’

I said, ‘You mean you took our last $5,000— how could you do that?’

He shrugged his shoulders and said, ‘What difference does it make? Without the funds for the fuel companies, we couldn’t have flown anyway.’

Fred’s luck held again. It was not much, but it came at a critical time and kept us in business for another week.”

Kids, don’t try this at home.

For one thing, is it legal to take company funds on a gambling trip to Las Vegas? I’ll refrain from attempting to answer that here out of respect for the recently departed.

But, I think Smith’s story provides a great context for the age-old question of whether it’s better to be lucky or good in business.

Smith was clearly both:

Good? Smith famously based the entire idea for FedEx on a term paper he wrote at Yale University in 1965. He revolutionized the industry and built FedEx into a $50 billion company by the time he stepped down as CEO in 2022.
Lucky? Even setting aside the whole “kept the company going with blackjack” story, or the Warren Buffett-esque recognition that simply being born in the United States in the 20th century was a huge advantage, Smith was wounded twice in Vietnam while serving in the Marines before coming home to start FedEx.
It also helped Smith and FedEx that the federal government deregulated the air cargo industry in 1977, opening massive opportunities for Smith’s company.

Of course, we could go down a fun rabbit hole looking at companies that really ought to credit luck — or big gambles — for their early success.

Microsoft? There are a lot of versions of the story, but most of them say Bill Gates managed to sell an operating system that Microsoft didn’t yet own to IBM, acquiring it under favorable terms, and keeping the rights to sell it to other companies.
Twitter? It started as a side project by some of the people behind the early podcasting company Odeo.
Zoom? Would we be using Zoom now if it hadn’t happened to be in the perfect position to become the default videoconferencing setup during the pandemic (at least for a while)?
Non-entrepreneurs often seem to think that entrepreneurs must have an exceptionally high tolerance for risk, but the other way to look at this is that the most successful in the game make every effort they can to reduce risk.

Perhaps that’s the lesson to take away here, sort of a variation on the classic Louis Pasteur quote that “chance favors the prepared mind.”

Luck can sometimes be vital to success, but it usually requires a lot of hard work and achievement to be in a position to take advantage of lucky breaks when they come along.

Smith was once asked what he hoped his legacy would be. He replied:

“I don’t think that way. I just enjoy what I’m doing. I’m very focused on the here and now. The legacy will be the success of the company and, I hope, the success of my children, of which I have a lot of.”

Rest in peace Mr. Smith. Somewhere out there today, I’ll bet a member of a new generation of entrepreneurs will be inspired by your example.

That’s a pretty good addition to any founder’s legacy.
https://www.inc.com/bill-murphy-jr/rest-in-peace-fred-smith-founder-of-fedex-and-maybe-the-luckiest-entrepreneur-of-all-time/91205142

[capgain]

Congrats to her, I'm still having to use an offshore book here in SC.

[BullNBear52]

Well my wife had all 3 winners this year in the Triple Crown. I did have the exacta in the Belmont with Soverenity and Journalism. NC still won't allow online betting though I can bet on just about everything else.

[BullNBear52]

The Berkshire boards are pretty much dead too.

[bar1080]

Have all of IHUB's horse racing boards gone dead?

Maybe the unwashed masses are finally understanding the truly awful math. The facts are out there. "I had $28 in bets and won $9.80 back." Sounds about normal.

[EZ2]

Old age is cruel !!!! 🤯.    GN .... Happy Weds. 🤣

[capgain]

Not yet, besides the usual suspects :)

[BullNBear52]

I hope you mean the Belmont?

Any sons of Secretariat running?

[EZ2]

Any Preakness favorite(s) yet ?  🍀

[capgain]

LOL, I hear ya. I had $28 in bets and won $9.80 back.

[BullNBear52]

Hey Sandman is improving with each race.

[EZ2]

Journalism 🥇

[capgain]

Sounds good to me. :)

[BullNBear52]

I'm going with the number 2 and 7.

[capgain]

Added two more smalls to win on the #7 and the #1

Looking for a good longshot too lol

[capgain]

Who do you guys like?

[capgain]

Going with the #2 for the win today and a 2 7 1 trifecta box.

GL.

[capgain]

Yes, Sir!

[capgain]

I hear ya! I had him in one bet also.

[EZ2]

Good race !   On to Preakness Hoof Fans ! 🏇

[BullNBear52]

Sandman horse name, explained: How rock band Metallica, Mariano Rivera inspired moniker for Kentucky Derby racer
Daniel Chavkin
May 3, 2025
3:20 am EDT
https://www.sportingnews.com/us/horse-racing/news/sandman-horse-name-kentucky-derby-metallica-mariano-rivera/9438900e0a723bbcdedc4c8e

Thanks to Eli for posting this.

Sandman horse name, explained
Sandman has one of the most familiar names of the horses running in this year's Kentucky Derby, as it has both a sports and music connection.

Jonathan Green, one of Sandman's owners, is a big fan of Hall-of-Fame Yankees closer Mariano Rivera, who famously used "Enter Sandman" when he entered games. Green named the horse Sandman with the hope that the horse can close races like Rivera closed games.

While the horse wasn't directly named for the hit Metallica song, that hasn't stopped the band from supporting the horse. Leading up to the race, the band provided Sandman's team with merchandise.

[BullNBear52]

My horse Sandman was one of the gray horses. I lost sight of him half way through the race since he turned brown from all the mud kicked up on him and he ended up finishing next to last. He was last seen heading for the showers. lol.

[capgain]

Nice, congrats Pete.

[BullNBear52]

My wife ended up picking the winner as well as the horse that came in second.

[capgain]

Had to add a small on Bob Bafferts horse to win...

[BullNBear52]

Volpe is way over thinking routine double plays. He needs to break it down.

Field the ball
Make the transfer
Get the out at second
Then get the out at first.

Twice in one week he has booted the play at the start.

[capgain]

I ended up with #15 to show at 15/1... #18 to win at 5/1 and a # 8/17 exacta box.

GL.

[bar1080]

Portillos was just mentioned in Omaha.

[BullNBear52]

Couple of scratches this morning.
2025 Kentucky Derby horses and odds
Odds as of 10:50 a.m. ET on Saturday, May 3, according to KentuckyDerby.com

No. 1: Citizen Bull | Odds: 13-1
No. 2: Neoequos | Odds: 40-1
No. 3: Final Gambit | Odds: 15-1
No. 4: Rodriguez | SCRATCHED
No. 5: American Promise | Odds: 12-1
No. 6: Admire Daytona | Odds: 35-1
No. 7: Luxor Cafe | Odds: 9-1
No. 8: Journalism | Odds: 7-2
No. 9: Burnham Square | Odds: 16-1
No. 10: Grande | SCRATCHED
No. 11: Flying Mohawk | Odds: 30-1
No. 12: East Avenue | Odds: 37-1
No. 13: Publisher | Odds: 30-1
No. 14: Tiztastic | Odds: 20-1
No. 15: Render Judgment | Odds: 15-1
No. 16: Coal Battle | Odds: 24-1
No. 17: Sandman | Odds: 5-1
No. 18: Sovereignty | Odds: 9-1
No. 19: Chunk of Gold | Odds: 28-1
No. 20: Owen Almighty | Odds: 39-1
No. 21:Baeza | Odds: 18-1

[BullNBear52]

As Yankee fan I am forced to go with Sandman. Which was Mariano Rivera's walk on music when he came out of the bullpen to end the game.

[capgain]

GM, EZ. Thanks for your input. I made a small wager to show on Render Judgement, just because the horse is owned by the late great Toby Keith's family, and he always wanted a horse to run in the Derby.

I'm going to do a couple more later.

Have a great day!

[EZ2]

GM boys ~~ Happy (Sloppy) Derby Day !
Track conditions and weather may impact this race..... just never know.   But, a good horse is a good horse....and usually will shine!With that being said:   Journalism
Enjoy !!! 😊 

[capgain]

Hey EZ and Pete, who do we like in the Derby?

[BullNBear52]

You ended up winning the tournament. Started converting the IRA to a Roth and decided to manage the Roth myself. Been rainy and cool here and have 3 bags of Weed and Feed to put out once the rain stops. $65 a bag but bought it before the tariff wars kicked in.

Nice picks in the Masters. But Rose won't be wearing the jacket on Sunday.

[BullNBear52]

DUK and ED are having amazing runs right now. And started the RMDs this week. I'll text you the details. It ain't 4%. lol.

[BottomBounce]

$ALYI Alternet Systems, Inc., through its subsidiaries, focuses on providing digital payments and data analytics, micro segmentation, and marketing intelligence services for the mass consumer goods, payments, financial services, and telecommunications sectors. It offers financial services software, including biometric authentication, multichannel payment solutions, electronic point of sale modernization, payment processing, and data analytics tools, as well as NFC point of sale solutions for the mobile financial industry. The company is also involved in the modernization of the electronics point of sale legacy infrastructure expanding the useful life of the electronic point of sale; and including new payment functions in the terminals, such as bill payment, electronic top-up, and native payments with digital currency at the point of sale. In addition, it provides data analytics tools and services for the telecommunications and financial services industries. Further, the company produces and sells electric motorcycles. The company holds a partnership with iQSTEL, Inc. to codevelop two-way device communication solutions specific to the EV operating environment. Alternet Systems, Inc. is headquartered in Miami, Florida.

[BullNBear52]

March Madness Time to get your picks in
https://tournament.fantasysports.yahoo.com/mens-basketball-bracket/group/61227

[EZ2]

IU got screwed !!!

[BullNBear52]

I reduced the stock amount by 20% to something more manageable when I moved the 401K 2 weeks ago. I start RMDs this year which once affect us tax wise. But I need to start reducing the wife's IRA now and converting it to Roths since she still has 6 years before RMDs kick in. I'm thinking $40K a year and that will help but I should have changed her 401K to a Roth. a couple of years ago.

[EZ2]

My old Jones IR used to share that in his retirement pitches.    Not sure it's gospel for everyone..... but personally, been following the rule pretty closely.    Sadly, as you'll now see, RMD can cause some headaches.... both short / long term planning.    One regret here is I loafed too long moving to ROTH(s).   Now paying the pauper ! 

[BullNBear52]

Last week I attended a bond webinar an d they mentioned the 120 Rule.

What Is the 120-Age Investment Rule?
The 120-age investment rule states that a healthy investing approach means subtracting your age from 120 and using the result as the percentage of your investment dollars in stocks and other equity investments. Any remainder should become investments in low-risk assets, including certificates of deposit (CDs), bonds, Treasury bills and fixed annuities.

For example, if you’re 30 years old, subtracting your age from 120 gives you 90. Therefore, you would invest 90% of your retirement money in stocks and 10% into more consistent financial instruments. This rule creates a portfolio that gradually carries less risk.

On the other hand, if you’re 75, the rule’s formula gives you 45. So, you’d have 45% of your portfolio in stocks and the rest elsewhere.

https://smartasset.com/retirement/what-is-the-120-age-investment-rule

An interesting concept they mentioned in passing.

[NASDAQ2020]

ELTP Merger Acquisition or Uplisting to NASDAQ Imminent
https://elite.irpass.com/Profiles/Investor/Investor.asp?BzID=2258&from=du&ID=77912&myID=16024&L=I&Validate=4

[BullNBear52]

Recently I paid a young lawyer from down the street about $1,500 to do a new will and trust from scratch.

That is about what I paid for both the will and trust. He is an old time lawyer here in NC that is well published and highly regarded. He does seminars on wills and trusts at local businesses but the will and trust business is not his primary source of business. At his age it's more like a hobby informing people of why they should have a will, a living will and POA for financial affairs. For the living will and POA he could have done those as well and charges us; but sent us to a NFP that runs one day seminars and at the end you fill out both and they provided the Notary as well. And you and your spouse each need both and in our case our son is also named to act on our behalf.

It was my wife who nagged me about getting the will and trust set up 9 years ago.

As for your kids let them get their own wills and asset protection.

[bar1080]

You should do a proper estate plan. Mine was a very simple one I did for myself and my wife maybe 30 years ago. Recently I paid a young lawyer from down the street about $1,500 to do a new will and trust from scratch. Glad I did,

Many things had changed in our state since I went to law school. So it was a fair amount of work; I proof-read everything four or five times. Read a number of law review articles online. The lawyer provided several witnesses and a notary who came to our our house for the signing. His charge for his services was only about $1,500. The documents were about 70 pages long. Of course it was pretty simple as we have no kids to look after anymore. "

Next step, getting wills and asset protection for my kids.

[bar1080]

You should do a proper estate plan. Mine was a very simple one I did for myself and my wife maybe 30 years ago. Recently I paid a young lawyer from down the street about $1,500 to do a new will and trust from scratch. Glad I did,

Many things had changed in our state since I went to law school. So it was a fair amount of work; I proof-read everything four or five times. Read a number of law review articles online. The lawyer provided several witnesses and a notary who came to our our house for the signing. His charge for his services was only about $1,500. The documents were about 70 pages long. Of course it was pretty simple as we have no kids to look after anymore.

Next step, getting wills and asset protection for my kids.

[BullNBear52]

Yeah I was getting an envelope from Fisher every 6 months so I finally mailed back the card to get their investment books. Then I got to meet with them over a Zoom call. I really didn't care for their attitude about my not having a saying in what they were investing in where on the other hand Fidelity had spent several calls and meetings with us going over what our goals were etc.