Why reporters at Voice of America are worried it may turn into 'Voice of Trump'

(CNN)The chief executive of the agency that oversees Voice of America and his team must stop investigating and interfering with the journalists employed there, a federal judge ruled Friday.

In a 76-page ruling, US District Judge Beryl Howell found that Michael Pack, CEO of the US Agency for Global Media, and his team violated the First Amendment rights of its journalists. She also found that Pack and his team showed an “extensive pattern of penalizing those USAGM and network employees whom defendants regard as insufficiently supportive of President Trump.”
Howell’s ruling bars Pack and others from continuing any actions that would curb VOA’s editorial independence, including taking personnel actions against journalists or editors, attempting to influence content by communicating with individual journalists or editors, and investigating “purported breaches of journalistic ethics.”

    Watchdogs open probes into alleged misconduct and retaliation at US Agency for Global Media
    The ruling is in response to a lawsuit filed by five senior executives at USAGM whom Pack had fired or suspended in August. The senior executives alleged that Pack and other top employees’ sought to interfere with their work because it didn’t align with the political interests of the President. They asked for a preliminary injunction to stop the interference.
    “Defendants’ extensive pattern of penalizing those USAGM and network employees whom defendants regard as insufficiently supportive of President Trump has resulted in the termination, discipline, and investigation of multiple employees and journalists,” the judge wrote in her ruling.

    Shawn Powers, USAGM’s chief strategy officer and a plaintiff in the case, said that “Judge Howell’s injunction against Mr. Pack affirms a central tenet of USAGM’s mission: that the protection and exportation of First Amendment rights and values directly support America’s national interests.”
    CNN has reached out to USAGM for comments from the defendants.
    Acting VOA Director Elez Biberaj told CNN in a statement that editorial independence free of political interference are what make the VOA “America’s voice.”
    “A steady 83% of VOA’s audience finds our journalism trustworthy,” Biberaj said. “There are few, if any, media organizations that can claim such trust. I am proud of our journalists who continue to uphold VOA’s traditions of providing our audience with accurate, objective and comprehensive reporting.”
    In her ruling, Judge Howell described Pack and his co-defendants as “individuals with no discernible journalism or broadcasting experience.” She added that Pack has tried to interfere in the agency’s newsrooms “in violation of their eighty-year practice, enshrined in law, of journalistic autonomy.”
    US global media agency seeks to kick out international journalists
    The VOA is one of multiple US government-funded broadcast outlets that brings news to people across the world. It was created in 1942 to combat Nazi propaganda, according to its website.
    In July, a bipartisan group of senators pledged to review USAGM’s funding over concerns over Pack’s mass firings. In October, the State Department’s inspector general and the US Office of Special Counsel opened inquiries into alleged misconduct and retaliation after six senior USAGM officials filed a complaint alleging that Pack engaged in abuse of authority and gross mismanagement, according to Mark Zaid, the lawyer representing the whistleblowers.

      Shortly after Pack took the helm of the agency in June, VOA’s top officials resigned en masse. Later that month, Pack fired the heads of four organizations overseen by the agency, in what was called the “Wednesday night massacre.”
      Before joining the agency, Pack was best known for making documentary films with a conservative bent and is an ally of former White House strategist Steve Bannon. He was president of the conservative Claremont Institute from 2015 to 2017.
      Source: Read Full Article


      Why tech stocks are soaring after Election Day

      Mark Zandi is chief economist of Moody’s Analytics. The opinions expressed in this commentary are his own.

      The election has yet to be decided and we may not know who won for days or even weeks. But, as of this writing, it seems investors are pricing in a Joe Biden presidency and a split Congress, where Republicans continue to control the Senate and Democrats the House.

      Stock prices are up big on the election news, and long-term interest rates are down big. The reaction in financial markets to the election is telling us a lot about what investors think it all means for the economy.

        Most immediately, investors appear to be betting that the election results will be settled in the next few days at most and that worries about vote counts being seriously contested and ultimately dragged all the way to the Supreme Court weeks from now are misplaced. The race is close, but not close enough to credibly argue that cheating changed the outcome.
        Stock investors also appear cheered by the prospects for a split government that will make big changes to economic policy more difficult. Getting any major legislation into law won’t be easy. Remember President Obama’s second term? It seemed as if he was constantly doing political battle with a Republican Senate. As a result, not much economic policy of consequence got done.
        That’s good news to shareholders who are wary of Biden’s proposal to increase taxes on corporations, which would mean businesses will have less cash to pay dividends and make share repurchases. Investors may also be doing some handwringing over Biden’s desire to increase the federal minimum wage, another campaign proposal that likely won’t happen if he comes into office with a Republican-led Senate.

        Bond investors have pushed down long-term interest rates, signaling that they believe economic growth will be slower because of the split government, at least compared with a Democratic sweep, which investors were initially expecting, according to polling before the election.
        They would be right. A President Biden and split Congress will likely agree to another fiscal rescue package on the other side of the presidential inauguration early next year, but it will be on the smaller side. Prior to the election, lawmakers were coalescing around a $2 trillion fiscal package, but that never came to fruition. Senate Republicans balked at the cost and at helping out hard-pressed state and local governments. These same Republicans will push back even more on a President Biden, resulting in a package about half the size, with little for state and local governments.
        Even more consequential for future growth are dashed prospects for additional fiscal support to jumpstart the economy once the pandemic is over. A Blue Wave would have held good odds for support, including many of Biden’s proposals for more investment in infrastructure, housing and education, and spending on health care, child and elder care. This would have been a boon to growth, but none of it is happening with a split government.
        There are things a President Biden will do without Congress via executive orders. President Trump used executive orders aggressively to ramp up his tariff wars with China and other big trading partners, severely restrict foreign immigration, both legal and undocumented, and significantly scale back regulations, especially on the fossil fuel and utility industries.
        Given Trump’s muscular use of executive orders, Biden should feel empowered to do the same — to flip Trump’s orders on their head. He would likely end Trump’s tariffs on our allies. Meanwhile, he could continue to confront China — like Trump, he feels China doesn’t trade fairly — but he likely wouldn’t do so with higher tariffs. Instead, he would likely work through the World Trade Organization and team up with other nations to put collective pressure on the Chinese to change their behavior. Biden has also talked about re-negotiating the Trans-Pacific Partnership — the free trade deal originally between the United States and other Pacific Rim nations that excludes China, because it doesn’t abide by the rules — but re-engagement would ultimately require legislation.
        Hoping for a lucky break in the pandemic could cost the US economy dearly
        On immigration, Biden has said he would quickly reset things to where they were pre-Trump. More than one million foreign immigrants came to the United States between 2015 and 2016. That number was cut nearly in half between 2018 and 2019. It won’t take long for a Biden administration to restore legal immigration through executive orders and implementation of immigration law.
        Given Biden’s strongly held views on the threats posed by climate change, he is sure to quickly re-engage on the Paris Climate Agreement and resurrect strict regulations on the fossil fuel industry as well through executive orders. New drilling, and fracking, on federal lands he has said would largely end, and there would be a recommitment to fuel economy standards for vehicles.

          Biden will also dramatically shift the federal government’s response to the pandemic. He has rightly made the point that as long as the virus is raging, the economy will struggle. He will not leave it to states and localities and the patchwork response that has failed to contain the virus. This will likely mean more consistent mask-wearing and social-distancing rules across the country. While this may result in more business disruptions in the near term, it will ultimately result in a stronger economy as infections, hospitalizations and deaths abate.
          The election has been painful to watch, but it will soon be behind us. While few of us will be entirely happy with the outcome, simply having a clear political path forward will go a long way to shoring up frayed psyches and the struggling economy. At least, investors appear to be thinking this way.
          Source: Read Full Article

          World News

          Why Apple’s Earnings Report May Not Even Matter

          The week of October 30 will mark the week where the earnings floodgates are shown to be wide open as the busiest week. Investors were taught for decades that earnings are what drive stock prices, but in 2020 this is the last week before a very divided election comes into play and eyes are on election results, stimulus packages, and so on.

          Apple Inc. (NASDAQ: AAPL) is the largest company in the world with a current market capitalization pushing $2 trillion. It has also been the best performing Dow stock with a gain of about 56% year to date.

          While earnings can always act as a catalyst, this particular earnings report may be dependent upon many aspects that are not fully within the company’s direct control.

          When Apple reports, the investing community often looks beyond the headline earnings and revenues. For this particular quarter, investors are going to be looking for additional clues about iPhone and peripheral pre-orders and expected phone deliveries for the widely awaited iPhone 12 launch. The new 5G capabilities, at least for some users in larger cellular markets, are expected to bring that iPhone supercycle that has been romanticized about for years.

          While Apple is the biggest company in the world and now has a defensive stock status in the age of COVID-19, this back-to-school year has been very mixed and there are certainly some expectations that orders were waiting for big iPhone launch. Apple has already seen euphoric trading after most recent stock split, and Apple is already considered to be a stock to own forever regardless of the quarterly noise.

          One interesting aspect about this earnings report is that Apple’s boosts are now becoming incremental even under COVID-19. The fiscal year 2020 revenues are expected to be up 5.1% this year and up 13.2% more next year. For the quarter, the earnings per share consensus is $0.71 and $64.16 billion. That would be down from $0.76 EPS a year ago and sales growth of just 0.2% from a year ago.

          A fresh report from Wedbush Securities has called for the might Apple to sell 350 million new iPhones over this upgrade supercycle. Daniel Ives of Wedbush has a very aggressive $150 price target.

          While Apple is set to report earnings on Thursday, Wall Street analysts have been eager to big up the price targets and to talk up expectations for the coming supercycle. Not all analysts have been universally positive, but the positive views are more common than negative views.

          On October 26. Atlantic Equities was shown to have resumed coverage with an Overweight rating and a $150 price target.

          On October 22, Piper Sandler reiterated its Overweight rating and raised its target to $135 from $130.

          On October 14, Credit Suisse reiterated its Neutral rating but still raised its target to $106 from (5.

          On October 14, Morgan Stanley reiterated its Overweight rating and raised its target to $136 from $130.

          On October 12, RBC Capital Markets reiterated its Outperform rating and raised its target to $132 from $111.

          On September 22, Raymond James reiterated its Outperform rating and raised its target to $120 from $110.

          On September 21, Citigroup reiterated its Buy rating and raised its target to $125 from $112.50.

          One analyst which was more cautious in the last month was David Vogt at UBS. In a call from September 23, he cut Apple’s stock to Neutral from Buy, but the price target still was raised to $115 from $106.

          Apple shares were last seen trading down about 1% at $113.90 on Monday. Its 52-week range on a split-adjusted basis is $53.13 to $137.98. Refinitiv currently has a $121.43 consensus analyst price target.

          Source: Read Full Article


          Why Wells Fargo’s Stock Could Rise Over 50%

          If there is one large bank that needs some help on its reputation and on recapturing some serious losses felt by investors, Wells Fargo & Company (NYSE: WFC) fits the bill over all others. Its stock is down a more than 50% year-to-date with its share price at close to $23.00. Wall Street is still very cautious regarding Wells Fargo, but one independent research firm seems more than 50% upside to its price target.

          Wells Fargo was reiterated with a Buy rating and with a $35 price target at Argus. This independent research firm does not have investment banking and it issues its reports without the interest of generating commissions and transactions.

          The only two other firms we have seen issue such aggressive price targets since the start of summer are Deutsche Bank ($34) and Robert W. Baird ($35). Most of the other analyst price targets are still handily under $30 and the Refinitiv sell-side consensus analyst price target is closer to $29.75.

          This aggressive price target is on the heels of Wells Fargo’s disappointment after earnings. The money center bank generated earnings of $0.42 per share, down handily from the $1.07 per share a year earlier and below the consensus estimate of $0.45 per share. Wells Fargo’s revenue was down 14% to $18.9 billion.

          According to Argus, Wells Fargo’s lending revenues were hurt by net interest margin contraction. It saw lower interest rates that it could charge on its loans and it saw a modest drop in average loans. The independent research firm noted that Wells Fargo remains a work in progress as it looks to overcome the Federal Reserve’s asset cap. The firm also sees Wells Fargo’s new CEO planning substantial cost reductions in 2021.

          What was interesting about the price target remaining at $35.00 is that Argus did lower its 2020 earnings estimate to $0.12 per share from $0.15 per share. It further lowered the 2021 forecast to $2.26 per share from $2.67 per share. That cut was based on the economic recovery taking longer to play out.

          The Argus report from Stephen Biggar said:

          We expect near-term revenues to be hurt by lower lending volumes and narrower margins following the Fed’s emergency rate cuts; however, we believe that high loss provisions have abated following provisions of more than $13 billion in the first half of the year.

          While management changes can be difficult transitions for investors, Wells Fargo is in good hands according to Argus. The firm noted that Charles Scharf as its new CEO brings strong talent to navigate an array of regulatory issues and to implement new risk management practices. And perhaps more important for investors, the firm sees Scharf as being able to restore confidence in the sales culture. His prior experience came from working at Visa and Bank of New York Mellon, and he was earlier a protege of JPMorgan’s Jamie Dimon. Wells Fargo more recently announced that Mike Santomassimo would become CFO following the retirement of John Shrewsberry.

          Argus also sees many changes being required to get the Federal Reserve’s asset cap removed. On top of splitting the Chairman and CEO roles, the expected changes include amending its by-laws to require an independent chairman, electing new independent directors, enhancing risk management, and more. On top of social and cybersecurity enhancements, the report sees the bank enhance risk oversight as well as new heads for overseeing governance and nominating committees.

          Thursday’s report further noted that Wells Fargo has said it would require about $10 billion in cost savings to match the efficiency of peers. One effort to help this is by continuing to divest noncore businesses with low returns or which have high capital requirements. The bank has already divested businesses related to health benefit services, insurance, global fund services and shareholder services over the past two years.

          Argus also noted that Wells Fargo has an elevated P/E ratio versus peers due to depressed earnings along with revenue and credit cost headwinds from the coronavirus. Biggar’s report said:

          Still, we expect an earnings rebound in 2021 and continue to see a strong potential catalyst for the shares in the removal of the asset cap. Our target price of $35 implies a multiple of 15-times our 2021 EPS estimate… The stock trades at 0.73-times tangible book value, well below historical levels as the company works through depressed earnings caused by low interest rates and higher loss provisions. The stocks also trades at a discounted 10-times our 2021 EPS estimate, which we believe undervalues the franchise.

          Wells Fargo’s stock was trading at $25.30 last Friday ahead of this week’s earnings report. It then fell to a low close of $22.95 on Thursday after three days of selling pressure. Wells Fargo is also under dividend restrictions.

          24/7 Wall St. would always remind its readers that investors should never use a single analyst research report as a sole basis for buying or selling a stock. That would be true for sell-side research and independent research alike.

          Source: Read Full Article


          Why the US Is Paying $486 Million to Test AstraZeneca’s COVID-19 Drug Cocktail\u00a0

          The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the U.S. Department of Defense have agreed to supply about $486 million to drugmaker AstraZeneca PLC (NYSE: AZN) to develop the company’s AZD7442 COVID-19 treatment and vaccine. The funds will help support two trials of the company’s cocktail of drugs, both as a medicine to prevent infection and a pre-emptive treatment for patients who already have been infected with COVID-19.

          AZD7442 is different from the company’s other drug, dubbed AZD1222, further trials of which were put on hold by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). A U.K. participant in the late-stage clinical trial developed an unexplained illness after receiving a dose of AZD1222. In many countries, including the United Kingdom, clinical testing was allowed to resume. The United States is not among them.

          AstraZeneca is about to commence a trial of the drug with 5,000 participants. Another 1,100 participants in a second trial will evaluate AZD7442’s efficacy as a post-exposure prophylaxis and pre-emptive treatment. The company plans additional trials of the drug with 4,000 participants to determine the cocktail’s value as a treatment for COVID-19.

          The HHS and Defense Department funding also will pay for 100,000 doses in 2020 of the single-shot AZD7442 vaccine that is expected to provide protection against COVID-19 for up to 12 months. The two agencies provided more than $25 million earlier this year to develop and begin trials of AstraZeneca’s monoclonal antibody treatments. The U.S. government also will be able to acquire an additional 1 million doses of AZD7442 in 2021 under a separate agreement.

          Last May, the U.S. government agreed to pay $1.2 billion for 300 million doses of AZD1222, but lacking an FDA emergency use authorization, none can be shipped. That’s just $4 per dose. The per-dose average for the AZD7442 cocktail is $4,860 for the first 100,000 doses. Presumably, this would decline if the drug is approved and the federal government exercises its option to acquire another 1 million doses.

          CEO Pascal Soriot commented that the U.S. government investment in AZD7442 in a medicine that “has the potential to provide immediate and long-lasting effect in both preventing and treating COVID-19 infections” focuses on “helping the most vulnerable people.”

          AstraZeneca’s share price was up about 0.8% Monday morning, at $55.15 in a 52-week range of $36.15 to $64.94. The U.K.-based firm’s price target is $59.10, and the company pays a dividend yield of 2.56%.

          ALSO READ: Top Analyst Raises Price Targets on 4 High Dividend-Paying Bank Stocks

          Get Our Free Investment Newsletter

          I have read, and agree to the Terms of Use

          Source: Read Full Article


          Varney: Why the WHO warning on coronavirus lockdowns matters for the presidential race

          Varney: We rarely hear about lockdown dangers

          FOX Business’ Stuart Varney argues Democrats haven’t acknowledged the cost of lockdowns.

          To lockdown, or not to lockdown. The World Health Organization weighs in with an opinion that has implications for us in America.

          Continue Reading Below

          The WHO's Dr. David Nabarro says, "We do not advocate lockdowns as the primary means of control of this virus."

          Why not? Because, Nabarro says, lockdowns make poor people a lot poorer.


          It’s about time that was made clear. In America, lockdowns ruined the industries which employ tens of millions of low-income people. And that’s just the economic side of it. How about the rising suicide rate, depression, domestic violence, substance abuse, premature death because you can't get regular check-ups.

          All we hear about is the danger of the virus, but we rarely hear about the horrendous problems the lockdowns bring.

          This is very relevant to the presidential election. President Trump is leading us out of lockdowns. Joe Biden is leading us toward lockdowns.


          The president appeared in front of his supporters at the White House a week after he was hospitalized. He says he is virus-free and immune. And he's back on the campaign trail today in Florida. He's broken out. No lockdowns. He's opening up.

          Joe Biden is going the other way. He's called for a national mask mandate. In plain English: Wear 'em, everybody. And he's never walked back his abdication of government authority: That is a new lockdown, if a committee of scientists tells him to. We have yet to hear the Democrats acknowledge the economic, social and medical costs of lockdowns.


          It’s ironic, isn't it, that the World Health Organization is warning that lockdowns devastate the poor. At precisely the same time that Democrats, who supposedly represent the poor, continue to urge lockdowns.

          One last point: A study by Brown University found one child in a thousand got the virus going back to school — an extremely low risk. It pales into insignificance compared to the educational and personal damage from lockdowns.


          Source: Read Full Article


          Why you should consider personal loans during the coronavirus pandemic

          Personal loans could help cover unexpected expenses with lower interest rates. (iStock)

          Millions of Americans face unprecedented personal finance concerns as the coronavirus pandemic continues to affect unemployment rates months after the first case of COVID-19 was reported in the United States.

          Continue Reading Below

          The Federal Reserve took steps in March to encourage consumer spending by lowering interest rates to near 0%. Rates have stayed low, and projections suggest that the interest rate will remain near 0% until at least 2023.

          If you’re considering a personal loan, now may be a good time to move forward so you can take advantage of low rates. Get started on the application process today.

          If you still want to do more research before taking out a personal loan, read on.

          What is a personal loan?

          Personal loans allow you to borrow funds from a lender to use for any expense. Typically, personal loans may be used for any reason, though some lenders offer specific personal loans, with specific terms, for debt consolidation.

          Personal loans differ from mortgage loans and auto loans because you receive the money into your personal bank account and can use the funds to cover a myriad of expenses, from groceries to medical bills, debt payments, vacation, or home repairs. Unlike credit cards or lines of credit, a personal loan has a fixed amount of money you can use.

          Credible can help compare personal loan companies (and, hopefully, land you some of the lowest rates for what you're looking for).


          Pros of a personal loan

          There are several benefits of taking out personal loans, including closing cash flow gaps quickly and helping borrowers pay off their debts in a low-risk way.

          Here are some reasons you should take out a personal loan:

          • Get cash quickly
          • Potential lower costs
          • Debt consolidation
          • Maximize savings

          Get cash quickly: If you need money to help cover expenses, a personal loan can be a great way to get cash quickly. If you have a healthy credit history and a good credit score, you may be able to qualify for interest rates as low as 4.99%.

          Potential lower costs: Taking out a personal loan makes the most sense if the loan costs less than other forms of credit. Many consumers opt for a personal loan as an alternative to higher interest rates on a credit card.

          Debt consolidation: If you’re struggling to pay off multiple credit cards, a personal loan could consolidate your payments into one, and you could save money with a lower interest rate.

          Maximize savings: If you opt for a personal loan, consider choosing a fixed interest rate to maximize your savings. You should only borrow what you can afford to repay. You can maximize the benefits of a personal loan if you take some time to do a bit of research before you apply.

          With Credible's free online tools, you can find different term lengths and rates from 4.99% APR in just 2 minutes. Checking rates won't affect your credit and there are no hidden fees.

          You can also use their personal loan calculator and to find the best personal loan rates.


          Cons of a personal loan

          Personal loans may not be the best option for your financial situation.

          Here are some things to consider before taking out a personal loan:

          • Predatory lending
          • Pre-closure charges
          • Potential debt cycle

          Predatory lending: One drawback of personal loans is that they can be more expensive. While the average personal loan interest rate sits around 9.5%, some predatory lenders charge more than 100% interest rates.

          If you have a lower credit score, be careful about applying with online lenders that offer loans to anyone. Use a reputable online tool, like Credible, to compare rates and loan terms from trusted companies.

          Pre-closure charges: When you’re applying for a personal loan, look out for pre-closure charges. Some lenders charge an additional fee if you choose to repay the balance of your loan early. Additionally, lenders may also charge a loan origination fee, reducing the amount of cash you get from your loan.

          Potential debt cycle: If you use your loan to pay off credit card debt, it’s tempting to start spending on your credit cards again. If you begin spending on your credit cards after using a personal loan to pay them off, you can get stuck into a debt cycle that’s difficult to escape.

          While personal loans may have lower interest rates, other considerations could affect your personal finances. Personal loans have a fixed monthly payment and a strict repayment schedule. You must pay off your loan in a set number of months, which could be difficult if you run short on income.

          Make sure to explore your personal loan options by visiting Credible to compare rates and lenders. Experienced lenders will also be able to outline any additional fees and monthly payments with you.

          HOW TO GET A $50,000 PERSONAL LOAN

          How do you get approved for a personal loan?

          If you want to take out a personal loan for an emergency fund or cover unexpected expenses, you need to have a healthy credit history and credit score. To secure the best rates, aim to have a score of 660 or more. Additionally, your credit utilization score should be lower than 50%.

          Your credit utilization score shows how much available credit you are using. For example, if you have a total of $10,000 available between three credit cards, and you have a combined balance of $5,000 between the three cards, your credit utilization is 50%.

          Lenders will also look at your income. If you have a low credit score, you may still qualify for a personal loan if you opt for a secured loan. A secured loan requires you to put cash or another item up as collateral. Alternatively, you could ask a family member or friend with a better credit score to cosign the loan.

          Personal loans are a helpful tool to cover expenses you don’t have the cash to cover, but they’re not ideal for every situation. Make sure to review your finances and review your lending options before moving forward.


          Source: Read Full Article

          World News

          Why Big Tech is racing to bring the internet to India (2018)

          London (CNN Business)London transport officials have refused to grant a new license to Ola over safety concerns, saying the Indian ride-hailing app is not “fit and proper to hold one.”

          Transport for London said in a statement on Sunday that unlicensed vehicles and drivers had made more than 1,000 trips on the app, and that Ola had failed to notify the regulator of the breaches when they were first identified.
          “Our duty as a regulator is to ensure passenger safety,” said Helen Chapman, the director of licensing, regulation and charging at Transport for London. “We will closely scrutinize the company to ensure passenger safety is not compromised.”

            Ola is one of several apps including Bolt, Kapten and ViaVan to challenge Uber and traditional black cabs in the lucrative urban market. It said in a statement that it would appeal the decision. The app will be allowed to continue operating in London during the appeals process.
            Uber can continue operating in London
            Marc Rozendal, the startup’s UK managing director, said that “our core principle is to work closely, collaboratively and transparently with regulators.”

            “We have been working with [Transport for London] during the review period and have sought to provide assurances and address the issues raised in an open and transparent manner,” he added.
            Ola, which is based in Bangalore and backed by Japan’s SoftBank (SFTBF), has been operating in London since February.

              Uber (UBER) has faced a lengthy battle with regulators in the city. London first refused to renew the US company’s license in 2017, citing several concerns including how it responded to serious crimes. Uber appealed that decision and was later granted permission to operate for 15 months.
              The regulator again declined to grant Uber a license in November 2019. Last week, the company received a new license for 18 months after a judge ruled it had a right to continue operating in London.
              Source: Read Full Article