Search This Blog

Wednesday, June 18, 2025

X Ticker Now Available As Nippon Steel Completes $14BN US Steel Deal

 And just like that, the X ticker is available for Elon Musk to purchase and take his social media company public. 

Nippon Steel completed its $14.1 billion acquisition of iconic American peer, US Steel, bringing to a close protracted negotiations which lasted for 18 months amid US political wrangling.

As the Nikkei reported, the Japanese company will acquire 100% of U.S. Steel's ordinary shares, while handing a "golden share" to the U.S. government under a National Security Agreement both companies signed with Washington. 

"Nippon Steel is excited about opening a new chapter of U. S. Steel’s storied history. Building on our investment, the transfer of our advanced technologies, and the unwavering efforts of management and the employees of both companies, Eiji Hashimoto, Nippon Steel’s CEO said in a press release, announcing the completion of the deal late Wednesday night local time.

The deal consolidates Nippon Steel's position as the world's fourth largest steel maker, and comes just a matter of days after U.S. president Donald Trump cancelled the decision by former President Joe Biden to block the Japanese company's acquisition of its American peer.

A golden share typically hands the holder a right to veto certain changes to the company. The golden share in U.S. Steel "prevents" actions like relocating the American company's headquarters from Pittsburgh, changing the name of the company, and closing plants "before certain timeframes" according to the U.S. commerce secretary Howard Lutnick.

The NSA agreement signed by the two companies also stipulates approximately $11 billion in new investments by 2028, including in a greenfield project, and commitments related to production in the U.S. and "trade matters," according to both companies.

Nippon Steel first announced the acquisition back in December 2023 but it quickly became mired in steelworker union opposition and U.S. election-year politics. President Joe Biden issued an order in January this year blocking the purchase, prompting Nippon Steel to respond with a lawsuit against the former leader.

The Japanese company sees the deal as a top priority for its medium- to long-term growth. Steel demand is expected to grow in the U.S. due to factors like the growth of electric vehicles and infrastructure renewal. That contrasts with Japan, where demand is expected to fall due to a shrinking population.

Trump's 50% tariff on all steel imports, an increase from the previous 25%, has made exporting to the U.S. harder, making the acquisition even more pertinent.

The deal will see Nippon Steel's crude production rise to 57.82 million tons from 43.64 million tons, taking the Japanese company closer to the third largest producer, Ansteel Group of China, which produced 59.55 million tons in 2024. However, analysts have raised concerns over the financial burden of the takeover, as well as the promised additional investments.

"We expect an increase in investment costs in the near term owing to funding for the U.S. Steel acquisition, additional investments post-acquisition, and investments in electric furnaces in Japan," said Yuji Matsumoto, analyst at Nomura, in a recent note. "We still think the stock looks undervalued but will lower our target price to reflect the aforementioned financial burden and weak demand in Japan," he added.

Aside from the investment costs, analysts at Jefferies raised concerns over the Japanese company's post-merger integration. "We think that Nippon Steel has a limited track record operating a business of this scope," it said in a note.

Its "success stories" of overseas ventures in the U.S. state of Alabama and in India have "been done with the help of ArcelorMittal," but its "unassisted acquisition of G/GJ Steel in Thailand almost immediately went loss-making after the deal closed," the analysts said.

https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/x-ticker-now-available-nippon-steel-completes-14bn-us-steel-deal

WTI Tumbles On Trump Iran Comments, Despite Massive Crude Inventory Draw

 Crude prices are down modestly this morning despite ongoing attacks between Iran and Israel and API reporting a major crude draw overnight as President Trump said Iran has reached out and wants to negotiate.

When asked about possible Iran strikes, Trump said: “I may do it. I may not do it. Nobody knows what I’m going to do.”

Meantime, Trump also said he told Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to “keep going.”

So geopolitical risk premia are far from over.

Additionally, Russian flows rose only very marginally in the last four weeks, limiting downward price pressures.

API

  • Crude -10.133mm  (-600k exp)

  • Cushing -800k

  • Gasoline -202k

  • Distillates +318k

DOE

  • Crude -11.47mm (-600k exp, -2.8mm Whisper) - biggest build since June 2024

  • Cushing -995k

  • Gasoline +209k

  • Distillates +514k

The offoicial data confirmed API's with a huge crude drawdown (the biggest since June 2024). We also saw a third straight week of product builds...

Source: Bloomberg

Despite the plungng rig count, US crude production remains near record highs (for now)...

Source: Bloomberg

WTI tumbled ahead of the official data on Trump's comments on Iran seeking peace.. bounced very briefly on the huge crude draw...

Source: Bloomberg

...but the main driver for prices right now continues to be the potential for Israel-Iran war escalations. 

https://www.zerohedge.com/energy/wti-tumbles-trump-iran-comments-despite-massive-crude-inventory-draw

"Unconditional Surrender!"

 By Michael Every of Rabobank

So, no, President Trump didn’t leave the G7 to discuss a Middle-East ceasefire. From the Situation Room, he instead declared: “we” now have total control over Iranian airspace; “we” know where Supreme Leader Khamenei is bunkering down but are not going to kill him (yet); and that Iran must offer its “UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER!”

So, is the US going to enter the war despite the risk of possible attacks on its bases? Anonymous claim a false flag attack on US soil perpetrated by what’s clearly implied as Israel looms to drag it into the war: but isn’t the war part obvious(?) Khamanei tweeted from his bunker --presumably not on a new gold Trump phone-- “The Battle begins”, referring to Khaybar, Shia Islam’s conquest of a Saudi Jewish town in 628CE. The unofficial Shah of Iran, abroad, called for an uprising with unsubstantiated claims some of Iran’s military may defect to him, as parts of Tehran were evacuated, Israel hit more military facilities, and some ATM machines stopped functioning. Regime change really can’t be ruled out, it seems: but what then? And who will have control of the nuclear material scattered round the country?

France’s Macron is warning that a violent Iran regime change would trigger ‘chaos’; so would leaving a violent Iran regime in place with a nuclear programme; and so is trying to remove that programme with violence. It’s easy to be a purist and say ‘Non’ to things which one isn’t capable of doing about threats one chooses not to see. It’s not so easy to say, ‘Oui, *quelque chose* doit être fait’ (Yes, *something* must be done.) But what and how?

It's all desperately confusing and extremely worrying. Indeed, it can feel like we are watching ‘Top Gun: Maverick’ and ‘Hot Shots’ on twin screens, and ‘V for Vendetta’ and ‘The Dictator’, while humming The Scorpions’ ‘Wind of Change’. As such, some in markets are unconditionally surrendering to the appeal of ignoring this as much as possible; or of ‘maverick’ geopolitical Top Hot Takes that the USA V Iran will see asset prices heat up even further once the Big Gun enters the arena. Both are possible in the short term but overlook that this isn’t a regional but a global issue.

As Bloomberg puts it, ‘Russia Fears for Ally Iran With Few Tools to Influence Crisis’, with memes of Khamenei sitting sadly in a Moscow flat with former Syrian President Assad flowing. Russia loves the thought of higher oil prices and hates the idea of losing an ally in Iran. Even with its resources tied up with Ukraine, agreeing to allow the regime to flee to Moscow would have to be part of a larger geopolitical deal. And if you don’t know what that might mean, it might mean you’re part of it.

In geoeconomics, the Wall Street Journal says, ‘If Iran’s Oil Is Cut Off, China Will Pay the Price’ as “Chinese refineries have become hooked on cheap imports of sanctioned Iranian crude.” China also may want to have a say: what’s in it for them if Iran sees regime change and the Middle East, and its oil, ends up as a US satrapy?

Or the EU, which just released its latest proposals to wean itself off Russian gas - but not oil. However, that’s just as Qatar --whom it will have to rely on instead-- warned that LNG carriers sailing to it should wait outside the Strait of Hormuz as GPS tracking being jammed has already seen two tankers collide, and its foreign ministry noted everyone is concerned about “uncalculated targeting” of the South Pars gas field.

The EU is also spurning economic dialogue with China due to the latter’s neo-mercantilism: a planned summit in July is now off. Moreover, European Commission President Von der Leyen said at the G7, “On this point, Donald is right - there is a serious problem… [China’s] undercutting intellectual property protections, massive subsidies with the aim to dominate global manufacturing and supply chains. This is not market competition - it is distortion with intent,” and threatens “a new China shock.” So, is the EU going to line up with the US vs. China as the larger threat? If not, what?

That’s as ECB President Lagarde spoke of a “global euro moment.” No, not more countries watching their camp Song Contest --where Israel was also a story this year-- but EUR gaining ground on the USD as a global reserve asset. Yet that’s at a time when European powerlessness vis-à-vis the US could not be more amply demonstrated across multiple realpolitik dimensions from military to energy to tech to banking. (And as UK PM Starmer is reportedly going to meet NATO defence spending targets by counting rural broadband as such. “We” feel safer already.)

Indeed, while Bloomberg notes ‘Trump Is Driving Off Investors and Imperilling the Dollar’s Reign’ it’s others’ physical reigns in question due to US hard power. If markets are too blind to see that truth, “because markets”, and think somehow, they sit above that dynamic, not below it, then I’m not sure what function they play anymore – with emphasis on the word ‘play’.

The same can be said about fudging defense spending figures to please markets who think pure economic policy targets actually still matter. Go ahead: just don’t be surprised if you turn out to be more of an Iran and less of an Israel if/when push ever comes to shove.

Notably, Lagarde’s call also implies Europe must produce more financial assets and less physical stuff – as if that helps it in the present geopolitical circumstances. On cue(?), the EU is to resurrect securitisation banking practices that helped cause the 2008 global financial crisis. Then again, ‘US Plans to Ease Capital Rule Limiting Banks’ Treasury Trades’, where Bloomberg notes: “The revisions aim to bolster banks' roles as intermediaries in the market, but some experts argue that easing the leverage ratio may not encourage banks to buy more Treasuries and could make the financial system more fragile.” But if this all goes wrong, who will need whose swap lines as part of a bailout? I’m asking for a friend who may or may not be in a bunker.

True, Bloomberg also ran a story saying some exporters to the US don’t want to receive dollars: so, don’t sell to the US then, which is how the current and capital accounts link up; or get the dollars and sell them to someone else. There is no sign of an unconditional dollar surrender here really.

In politics, the US Supreme Court will also get to look at Trump tariffs at some point later this year – who doesn’t, it seems? Moreover, the White House may ban pharma firms from TV advertising, with a huge impact on both, and the FBI is alluding to attempted Chinese election interference in 2020. Not a dull moment.

But it’s the Fed today, where their usual whisperer Nick Timiraos is tweeting that they would be thinking about cutting already if not for their concern over the known unknowns of tariffs, which have not shown any real impact on CPI so far. Yet what about the unknown unknowns of geopolitics? Will the Fed today mark an unconditional surrender to that hard exogenous reality or continue to fight and die on the hill that it has nothing to do with them at all… and that they have nothing to do with it, when actually they ?

I would wager most of the money will be on the latter, who coincidentally think the same way – for now. After all it’s not until 2026 that they must face up to that ugly reality, unless we get a Shadow Fed Chair appointed earlier. Plenty of time to go risk on and ignore the world around them and their now subordinate position within it.

https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/unconditional-surrender

Aptevo Mipletamig Demonstrates Compelling Clinical Activity in Frontline AML

Aptevo Therapeutics (NASDAQ:APVO) reported promising clinical data from its Phase 1b/2 RAINIER trial evaluating mipletamig, a CD123 x CD3 bispecific antibody, combined with venetoclax and azacitidine for frontline AML patients unfit for intensive chemotherapy. The triplet therapy achieved an impressive 85% remission rate across two trials, significantly outperforming competitor studies. Notable safety outcomes include no cytokine release syndrome (CRS) in cohorts 1 and 2. Three patients with poor prognosis achieved complete remission, with one successfully proceeding to transplant. The trial's Cohort 3 is nearing full enrollment at the highest dose level. Mipletamig's unique CRIS-7 binding domain engineering strategy demonstrates potential in mitigating cytokine-related toxicity while maintaining anti-cancer activity.

Prenetics Global announces bitcoin treasury with $20M BTC purchase

 

  • Prenetics Global Limited (NASDAQ:PRE) completed a $20M Bitcoin purchase (187.42 BTC at ~$106,712/BTC).
  • Andy Cheung, ex-COO of OKEx, joins the board of directors to oversee Prenetics' Bitcoin strategy and dynamic treasury management.
  • The company’s board has approved allocating a majority of its balance sheet to Bitcoin.
  • Prenetics will integrate BTC payments into its consumer platforms (IM8 Health & CircleDNA). 
  • PRE shares up 5% on Wednesday. 
  • Source: Press release

'Bariatric surgery leads to greater weight loss than GLP-1 drugs after two years: ASMBS'

 Sleeve gastrectomy and gastric bypass were associated with about five-times more weight loss than weekly injections of GLP-1 receptor agonists semaglutide or tirzepatide, at the end of two years, according to a new head-to-head real-world study presented today at the American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS) 2025 Annual Scientific Meeting.

Researchers from NYU Langone Health and NYC Health + Hospitals discovered patients who had one of the bariatric procedures lost an average 58 pounds after two years compared to 12 pounds for patients who received a GLP-1 prescription for at least six months (24% total weight loss vs. 4.7%). Patients on continuous GLP-1 therapy for a full year lost more weight, but significantly less than bariatric surgery patients (7% total weight loss).

Clinical trials show weight loss between 15% to 21% for GLP-1s, but this study suggests that weight loss in the real world is considerably lower even for patients who have active prescriptions for an entire year. We know as many as 70% of patients may discontinue treatment within one year. GLP-1 patients may need to adjust their expectations, adhere more closely to treatment or opt for metabolic and bariatric surgery to achieve desired results."

Avery Brown, MD, lead study author, surgical resident at NYU Langone Health

The study was a retrospective comparative effectiveness study using the real-world electronic medical record data of NYU Langone Health and NYC Health + Hospitals patients with a body mass index (BMI) of at least 35 who had bariatric surgery (sleeve gastrectomy or Roux en-Y gastric bypass) or were prescribed injectable semaglutide or tirzepatide between 2018 and 2024. After adjusting for age, BMI and co-morbidities using average treatment effect weighting, researchers compared the outcomes of 51,085 GLP-1 and surgical patients. The study was supported by NYU CTSA grant KL2 TR001446 from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences at the National Institutes of Health (NIH).

"In future studies we will aim to identify what healthcare providers can do to optimize GLP-1 outcomes, identify which patients are better treated with bariatric surgery versus GLP-1s, and determine the role out-of-pocket costs play in treatment success," said study senior author and bariatric surgeon Karan R. Chhabra, MD, MSc, Assistant Professor of Surgery and Population Health, NYU Grossman School of Medicine.

About 12% of Americans say they have ever taken a GLP-1 drug, including 6% who say they are currently in treatment. A recent study found that more than half of patients with overweight or obesity (53.6%) discontinued GLP-1 therapy within one year (53.6%), a number that grows to 72.2% by two years. Meanwhile, utilization of metabolic and bariatric surgery remains exceedingly low. According to the ASMBS, more than 270,000 metabolic and bariatric procedures were performed in 2023, which represents only about 1% of those who meet eligibility requirements based on BMI.

"While both patient groups lose weight, metabolic and bariatric surgery is much more effective and durable," said ASMBS President Ann M. Rogers, MD, FACS, FASMBS, who was not involved in the study. "Those who get insufficient weight loss with GLP-1s or have challenges complying with treatment due to side effects or costs, should consider bariatric surgery as an option or even in combination."

According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the prevalence of obesity and severe obesity is 40.3% and 9.4%, respectively. Studies show the disease can weaken or impair the body's immune system and cause chronic inflammation and increase the risk of scores of other diseases and conditions including cardiovascular disease, stroke, type 2 diabetes, and certain cancers. 

Grail Positive Top-Line Results From The Galleri® PATHFINDER 2 Registrational Study

 Cancer Detection and Positive Predictive Value Substantially Higher Than the Previously Published PATHFINDER Study

GRAIL, Inc. (Nasdaq: GRAL), a healthcare company whose mission is to detect cancer early when it can be cured, today announced positive top-line performance and safety results from the pre-specified analysis of the first 25,578 participants in GRAIL's registrational PATHFINDER 2 study. PATHFINDER 2 was initiated in 2021 to evaluate the safety and performance of the Galleri® multi-cancer early detection (MCED) test when added to standard of care single cancer screening in 35,878 adults over 50 years of age with no clinical suspicion of cancer. 

In the previously published PATHFINDER study, adding Galleri to standard of care cancer screening more than doubled the overall number of cancers detected by screening. In PATHFINDER 2, adding Galleri to standard of care screening demonstrated substantially greater additional cancer detection than in PATHFINDER.

In PATHFINDER, Galleri demonstrated a positive predictive value (PPV), or likelihood that a positive Galleri test was confirmed to be cancer, of 43%; specificity of 99.5%; and 88% cancer signal origin (CSO) accuracy. Data from evaluable PATHFINDER 2 participants with 12 months of follow-up showed a substantially higher PPV than that observed in the PATHFINDER study. CSO accuracy and specificity were consistent with that observed in the PATHFINDER study.

There were no serious safety concerns reported in PATHFINDER 2.

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/grail-announces-positive-top-line-results-from-the-galleri-pathfinder-2-registrational-study-302485221.html