California Sets Precedent: No More Hiding Behind Bogus PEOs – Workers Rights Compliance, Precedent Set: Employers Can’t Outsource Accountability – Workers Rights Compliance, DLSE Draws the Line: Fraudulent PEO Coverage Doesn’t Cut It – Workers Rights Compliance, New Legal Benchmark: PEO Schemes Won’t Shield Employers – Workers Rights Compliance, Garcias Pallets Case Becomes First-Ever DLSE Precedent – Workers Rights Compliance, Historic First: California Labor Commissioner Issues Precedent Ruling on PEO Fraud – Workers Rights Compliance, DLSE Makes It Official—No Valid Workers’ Comp, No Excuses – Workers Rights Compliance, Real Coverage for Real Workers: Fraud Won’t Fly in California – Workers Rights Compliance, Workers Deserve Real Protection—Bogus Insurance Doesn’t Count – Workers Rights Compliance, Precedent Protects Workers from Fake Insurance Scams – Workers Rights Compliance, 50+ Workers, No Coverage—California Says Never Again – Workers Rights Compliance, Labor Law Victory: Worker Safety Over Corporate Shell Games – Workers Rights Compliance, $1.3M Lesson: Ignorance of the Law Is No Defense – Workers Rights Compliance, Certificates Can Lie—Employers Are Still on the Hook – Workers Rights Compliance, Fraudulent Coverage = Real Fines – Workers Rights Compliance, The Bill Comes Due: $1.3M in Fines for Workers' Comp Evasion – Workers Rights Compliance, Subcontracting Liability Doesn’t Mean Subcontracting Responsibility – Workers Rights Compliance, A Win for Honest PEOs, a Loss for Cheaters – Workers Rights Compliance, Leveling the Field: Fraudulent Operators Face Real Consequences – Workers Rights Compliance, PEO Accountability Is Here—Honest Brokers Applaud – Workers Rights Compliance, No More Free Ride for Fraudulent PEOs – Workers Rights Compliance, Justice for Legitimate Employers—Fraudsters Pay the Price – Workers Rights Compliance, From CompOne to CompassPilot—The Shell Game Ends Here – Workers Rights Compliance, How a Bogus Insurance Scheme Cost One Company $1.3 Million – Workers Rights Compliance, Unmasking the PEO Scam: California Cracks Down – Workers Rights Compliance, One Employer, Three PEOs, Zero Coverage—The Precedent Tells All – Workers Rights Compliance, DLSE Precedent Highlights Deep Industry Scams – Workers Rights Compliance, Fake Insurance Certificates Are Not a Defense—They’re a Liability – Workers Rights Compliance, Employers: Verify Your Workers’ Comp Coverage—Before the State Does – Workers Rights Compliance, Don’t Get Burned—Understand Joint Employer Liability Today – Workers Rights Compliance, Legit PEO? Or Just a New Name for the Same Old Scam? – Workers Rights Compliance, Your PEO’s Certificate Might Be Fake—Know the Signs – Workers Rights Compliance, Before You Contract Labor, Read This Precedent Decision – Workers Rights Compliance.
Category: I Have a Plan
Legal solutions are different for everybody, but the legal options to protect oneself are not. This category is to evaluate options available and a plan of action for each of these
Revenue Guidance: ~$93B in mobility/broadband service revenue (2-3% growth) Adjusted EPS: $4.90-4.95 (4-5% growth) Current Price Context: At ~$40-41/share, this implies a forward P/E of roughly 8.1-8.4x Dividend Yield: ~6.5% (extremely high, potential warning signal)
Key Turnaround Catalysts
1. Volume Momentum (Big Shift)
Q4 2025: 616K postpaid phone adds (best since 2019)
Expected annual return: 12-15% (dividends + options) with downside protection
Final Verdict: Income Play with Turnaround Optionality
If you need income TODAY: VZ is compelling at 6.5% yield IF you believe dividend is sustainable (I assign 75% probability it’s maintained through 2028).
If you want growth: Buy TMUS instead; VZ won’t triple even in best case.
Risk/Reward: VZ offers 4:1 upside/downside from $40:
Upside: $52-58 (30-45% gain) if turnaround works
Downside: $34-36 (10-15% loss) if dividend cut forces re-rating
Most likely: $44-48 (10-20% gain) + 19% in dividends over 3 years
The bet you’re making: Dan Schulman can execute a telecom turnaround in the shadow of T-Mobile’s dominance, while servicing massive debt and maintaining a dividend that pays out 80%+ of free cash flow.
My take: More credible than most telecom turnarounds, but the dividend limits capital flexibility. It’s a “yield + modest growth” story, not a compounder.
Revenue Guidance: $59.5-62.5 billion Adjusted EPS: $2.80-3.00 Current Price Context: At recent trading around $25-26/share, this implies a forward P/E of roughly 8.3-9.3x
Pfizer offers asymmetric risk/reward at current prices. The market is pricing in minimal pipeline success and no obesity upside. Given the dividend floor, downside is limited to ~15-20%, while upside could be 50-90% if even half the pipeline delivers.
For a Protected Wheel/Collar strategy: PFE is excellent due to:
High implied volatility (option premiums rich)
Strong dividend support
Clear technical support levels
Low correlation to high-flying tech
Relative to industry: It’s the cheapest major pharma with the most catalysts over the next 24 months. Whether those catalysts deliver is the $100B question.
A Real-World Case Study in Systematic Options Income
⚠️ IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER ⚠️
THIS CONTENT IS FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY AND IS NOT INVESTMENT ADVICE.
The information presented in this article describes options trading strategies and one trader’s real position for educational and illustrative purposes only. This is not a recommendation to buy or sell any security or to adopt any investment strategy.
Options trading involves substantial risk of loss and is not suitable for all investors. You can lose some or all of your invested capital. Past performance does not guarantee future results. The examples shown represent specific market conditions and individual results that may not be repeatable.
Before implementing any options strategy:
Consult with your qualified financial advisor or investment professional
Ensure you fully understand the risks involved
Verify the strategy aligns with your financial goals, risk tolerance, and investment timeline
Obtain appropriate options trading approval from your broker
Paper trade extensively before risking real capital
The author is not a registered investment advisor, broker-dealer, or financial planner. This article does not constitute professional financial, investment, tax, or legal advice. The strategies discussed may not be appropriate for your specific situation.
Do your own due diligence. Consult your investment adviser. Trade at your own risk.
What if you could generate 462% annual returns with downside protection and sleep soundly at night?
Most retirees are told they need to choose: either accept bond-like returns of 4-6% annually, or take equity risk with potential 50%+ drawdowns during market crashes.
There’s a third way.
The Problem with Traditional Retirement Income
The Bond Dilemma
Treasury yields: 4-5%
Corporate bonds: 5-7%
To generate $5,000/month ($60,000/year), you need $1,000,000-$1,500,000 in capital
The Stock Dilemma
S&P 500 dividends: ~1.5%
High dividend stocks: 3-5%
To generate $5,000/month in dividends, you need $1,200,000-$4,000,000
Plus you face unlimited downside risk
The Covered Call Trap
“Enhance” stock returns by 2-5% annually
Still requires massive capital ($500,000-$800,000)
Caps your upside
Offers NO downside protection
You still lose 30-50% in a crash
What if there’s a way to generate the same $5,000/month with just $129,800 in capital, with defined downside protection, and the ability to profit even in a market crash?
Note: This is an educational case study, not a recommendation. Consult your financial advisor.
Introducing: The Protected Synthetic Income Strategy
This is not theory. This is a real trade executed in February 2025 by a 70+ year-old systematic trader who demanded three non-negotiables:
Catastrophe protection — No retirement-ending losses
Positive carry — Generate income while protected
Capital efficiency — No million-dollar capital requirements
Here’s exactly what he built, and how the strategy works for educational purposes.
REMINDER: This case study is for educational illustration only. Do not replicate without consulting your investment advisor and ensuring you understand all risks involved.
The Anatomy of the Trade (Real Numbers – Educational Example)
Starting Point: Verizon (VZ) at $46.98
Why Verizon was chosen for this example:
Boring telecom utility
Stable, mean-reverting price action
High implied volatility (options are “expensive”)
Dividend aristocrat with 6%+ yield
Defensive sector (performs in recessions)
Note: Similar strategies could theoretically work on ANY stable, high-IV stock: AT&T, Exxon, Pfizer, Coca-Cola, etc. This does not constitute a recommendation to trade these securities.
The Position Structure (Per $6,490 Unit – Educational Example)
Component 1: Synthetic Long Stock (LEAPS Calls)
20× $40 call options, 345 days to expiration
Net cost: $3,690
Provides leveraged exposure to VZ upside
Controls 2,000 shares with just $3,690 capital
Compare to buying 2,000 shares: $93,960 required
Component 2: Catastrophe Protection (Long Puts)
20× $45 put options, 345 days to expiration
Net cost: $2,800
Creates a hard floor — losses capped below $39
Unlike stock ownership, you cannot lose everything
This is retirement-safe protection
Component 3: The Income Engine (Weekly Short Calls)
Sell 20× out-of-the-money calls every Monday
Weekly premium: $600 ($0.30 per contract)
Annual income: $30,000
This is the systematic cash flow concept
Total capital per unit: $6,490 Annual income per unit: $30,000 Theoretical annual yield: 462%
IMPORTANT: These are historical results from one specific trade during specific market conditions. Your results will vary. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
How the Protection Works (Educational Stress Test)
Let’s analyze this with various scenarios for educational purposes.
Scenario 1: Market Crash — VZ Drops to $35 (-25%)
What would happen to the position:
LEAPS calls: Go to zero — Loss: $3,690
Protective puts: Worth $10 each — Gain: $17,200
Weekly income (collected before crash): $7,500
Hypothetical Total P/L: +$21,010 profit Hypothetical Return: +324%
This is a theoretical example. Actual results would depend on timing, volatility, and execution. You could still lose money in practice.
Scenario 2: Sideways Market — VZ Stays $45-48
Theoretical outcome:
LEAPS calls: Slight appreciation — Gain: $10,310
Protective puts: Decay to near-zero — Loss: $1,800
Weekly income (49 weeks): $29,400
Hypothetical Total P/L: +$37,910 Hypothetical Return: +584%
This assumes consistent execution over 49 weeks with no missed weeks, no assignment problems, and stable volatility. Real-world results will differ.
Scenario 3: Bull Market — VZ Rallies to $52 (+11%)
Theoretical outcome:
LEAPS calls: Deep in the money — Gain: $20,310
Protective puts: Expire worthless — Loss: $2,800
Weekly income: $29,400
Hypothetical Total P/L: +$46,910 Hypothetical Return: +723%
This represents best-case scenario. Your actual results may be significantly lower or you could experience losses.
The Economic Floor: Where Loss Could Occur
Theoretical breakeven point: VZ would need to drop below $38 AND stay there for weeks while implied volatility collapses to zero.
Estimated probability in this example: Less than 1%
Even in the theoretical “worst case” scenario (VZ at $42, vol dies immediately):
You might still collect $5,000-7,000 in weekly income
Calls might hold some value
Puts might provide offset
Theoretical profit: 77%+
CRITICAL WARNING: This is not risk-free. These are hypothetical scenarios based on assumptions that may not hold. You can lose money. Actual outcomes depend on market conditions, execution quality, timing, volatility changes, and numerous other factors. Always consult your financial advisor before trading.
Scaling to $5,000/Month: The Hypothetical Math
Income Target
$5,000 per month = $60,000 annually
Per-Unit Economics (Theoretical)
Each $6,490 unit might generate:
Weekly income: $600
Annual income: $30,000
Hypothetical Capital Required
$60,000 ÷ $30,000 per unit = 2 units
Theoretical total capital required: 2 × $6,490 = $12,980
IMPORTANT CLARIFICATION: These numbers represent one specific historical example during specific market conditions. They are not projections or predictions of future results. Your actual capital requirements will likely be higher, and your income lower. Market conditions change. Volatility changes. Commission costs, slippage, and taxes will reduce actual returns. This is an educational example, not a guarantee.
The Catch (Because There’s Always a Catch)
This Is NOT Passive Income
Weekly commitment required:
25 minutes every Monday morning
Sell 40 weekly call options (2 units)
Monitor position health
Track cumulative income
This is active income harvesting, not “set and forget.”
You Must Follow Discipline
Exit rules would be non-negotiable in this strategy:
✅ Exit Rule 1: When you’ve collected a target amount in realized income ✅ Exit Rule 2: Never hold too close to expiration (theta acceleration) ✅ Exit Rule 3: If weekly premium drops below threshold for consecutive weeks, exit immediately
If you violate exit rules in practice, you could give back significant gains or turn profits into losses.
Volatility Risk
If implied volatility collapses:
Weekly income could drop from $600 → $300 per unit or lower
Annual yield could drop from 462% → 230% or lower
Strategy effectiveness could be severely reduced
This strategy depends on persistent volatility, which is not guaranteed.
The Risk Comparison (Educational Context)
Strategy
Hypothetical Capital for $5k/mo
Potential Max Loss
Typical Recovery Time
Complexity
Protected Synthetic
$12,980*
Variable**
Variable
High
Treasury Bonds
$1,000,000
~5%
3-5 years
Low
Dividend Stocks
$1,200,000
-50%+
5-10 years
Low
Covered Calls
$500,000
-45%+
5-10 years
Medium
Naked Puts
$0 (margin)
-100%
Never
Very High
*Based on one specific historical example; your capital requirements may differ significantly **Depends on position sizing, strikes chosen, market conditions, and execution
The protected synthetic strategy in this example showed higher capital efficiency, but also requires significantly more skill, knowledge, time commitment, and carries substantial risk. Consult your financial advisor to determine appropriate strategies for your situation.
REMINDER: This is an educational framework only. Do not implement without:
Consulting your financial advisor
Obtaining proper options trading approval
Paper trading for at least 90 days
Understanding you can lose money
Step 1: Choose Your Stock (Educational Criteria)
Hypothetical required characteristics:
Market cap >$20 billion (liquidity)
Implied volatility >20% (need premium)
Beta <1.2 (stability)
Weekly options available (critical)
Dividend yield >3% (stability signal)
Example candidates (NOT recommendations):
Verizon (VZ)
AT&T (T)
Exxon Mobil (XOM)
Pfizer (PFE)
Coca-Cola (KO)
Procter & Gamble (PG)
Avoid in this strategy framework:
Growth stocks (too volatile)
Meme stocks (unpredictable)
Stocks without weekly options
Anything with earnings in next 30 days
Consult your financial advisor about appropriate securities for your situation.
Step 2: Build the Position (Educational Example Entry)
For each hypothetical $6,490 unit:
Buy 20× LEAPS calls (example)
Strike: 15% below current price
Expiration: 12-18 months out
Target cost: ~$3,500-4,000
Buy 20× protective puts (example)
Strike: 3-5% below current price
Same expiration as calls
Target cost: ~$2,500-3,000
Sell first weekly calls (example)
20 contracts
Strike: 2-4% above current price
Target premium: $0.30+ per contract
Hypothetical total cost: $6,000-7,000 per unit
CRITICAL: These are example parameters from one historical trade. Market conditions change. Volatility changes. You must adjust based on current market conditions and consult your advisor. Do not blindly copy these parameters.
Step 3: Weekly Execution (Educational Routine)
The hypothetical Monday Morning Routine (25 minutes):
9:00 AM – Market Check (5 min)
Review stock price from Friday close
Check implied volatility levels
Note any overnight news
9:05 AM – Position Review (5 min)
Calculate current mark-to-market value
Update cumulative income spreadsheet
Check if exit trigger hit
9:10 AM – Sell Weekly Calls (10 min)
Open options chain
Select strikes (example: 2-4% above current price)
Sell appropriate number of contracts
Target: Collect premium
Execute order
9:20 AM – Documentation (5 min)
Log premium collected
Update total P/L
Note days to expiration
Note: This is an idealized routine. Real-world execution involves commission costs, slippage, potential assignment issues, and market gaps that complicate the process. Consult your advisor.
Step 4: Position Management (Ongoing Education)
Monthly check-in (15 minutes):
Review cumulative income
Assess if on track for exit trigger
Verify puts still provide adequate protection
Consider rolling adjustments
Quarterly adjustment:
Review overall strategy effectiveness
Consider position adjustments
Evaluate whether to continue
IMPORTANT: This is active management. If you cannot commit to this schedule, do not attempt this strategy.
Step 5: Exit the Trade (Critical Discipline in Example)
In the educational example, exits occurred when:
✅ Primary trigger: Collected target income per unit
✅ Hard stop: Time-based exit to avoid theta acceleration
✅ Emergency exit: If volatility collapsed or other conditions changed
Discipline on exits was cited as critical to protecting profits in the example.
In practice, determining proper exit timing requires experience, judgment, and market awareness. Consult your financial advisor.
The Retirement Income Concept (Educational Illustration)
Hypothetical Scenario: Retiree Needs $5,000/Month
Traditional approach:
Might need $1,000,000 in bonds/dividend stocks
4-6% safe withdrawal rate
Exposed to inflation erosion
Exposed to market crashes
Hypothetical Protected Synthetic approach in example:
Starting capital in example: $12,980
Year 1 in example:
Deployed $12,980 into 2 units
Generated $60,000 in income
Exited with $40,000-44,000 total profit
Used $5,000/month for 12 months
This was ONE trader’s result in SPECIFIC market conditions. This is NOT a projection of what you will achieve. Your results will almost certainly differ. You could lose money.
The Diversification Concept (Risk Management Education)
Educational principle: Never put all capital in one stock.
For $5,000/Month Income Target (Hypothetical)
Two-stock approach example:
Unit 1: One stable stock ($6,490)
Unit 2: Different sector stock ($6,490)
Hypothetical total: $12,980
Four-stock approach example:
Four different sectors with smaller position sizes
Same total capital, spread across positions
Theoretical benefit: If one sector has problems, other positions unaffected.
IMPORTANT: Diversification does not guarantee profit or protect against loss. Consult your advisor about appropriate diversification for your situation.
What Could Go Wrong? (Honest Risk Education)
Risk 1: Volatility Collapse
What could happen:
Implied volatility drops significantly
Weekly premium falls substantially
Income cut dramatically
Potential impact:
Strategy becomes much less effective
Returns drop significantly
May no longer meet income needs
This is a real risk. Volatility can and does collapse unpredictably.
Risk 2: Poor Timing/Execution
What could happen:
Ignore exit rules
Hold too long
Theta decay accelerates
Give back gains
Potential impact:
Turn large profits into small profits
Turn profits into losses
Significant capital erosion
Discipline is critical. Most individual traders struggle with this.
Risk 3: Stock-Specific Disaster
What could happen:
Company scandal, dividend cut, bankruptcy risk
Stock gaps down significantly overnight
Position integrity compromised
Potential impact:
Even with puts, could still lose money
Need to exit immediately
Loss of income from that position
Individual stock risk is real. Even “safe” stocks can have problems.
Risk 4: Assignment and Management Issues
What could happen:
Short calls go in-the-money
Get assigned
Need to manage complex situations
Mistakes in re-establishing positions
Potential impact:
Transaction costs
Tracking errors
Potential losses from mistakes
Active management creates opportunity for errors.
Risk 5: Market Structure Changes
What could happen:
Regulations change
Options liquidity dries up
Bid-ask spreads widen
Trading costs increase
Potential impact:
Strategy becomes unworkable
Returns decrease substantially
Increased costs eat profits
Market conditions can change. Past favorable conditions don’t guarantee future conditions.
The Capital Efficiency Comparison (Educational Context)
Let’s compare hypothetical capital requirements side-by-side for $5,000/month retirement income:
Traditional Retirement Strategies
4% Safe Withdrawal Rate:
Hypothetical need: $1,500,000
Annual withdrawal: $60,000
Dividend Stock Portfolio (5% yield):
Hypothetical need: $1,200,000
Annual dividends: $60,000
Covered Calls on Stock (12% enhanced yield):
Hypothetical need: $500,000
Annual income: $60,000
Protected Synthetic Strategy Example
Capital in example: $12,980
Income in example: $60,000
This was one specific historical case
CRITICAL DISTINCTION: The traditional strategies are based on long-term historical averages across many market conditions and many participants. The Protected Synthetic example is ONE person’s result during ONE specific period. These are not comparable in terms of reliability, repeatability, or risk level.
Always consult your financial advisor about appropriate strategies for your situation and risk tolerance.
Who This Strategy Education Is NOT For
Let’s be clear about who should avoid attempting this:
❌ People who can’t commit significant weekly time
Requires consistent attention
Missing weeks can be costly
❌ People uncomfortable with volatility
Short-term fluctuations will occur
Requires emotional discipline
❌ People who can’t follow complex rules
Exit discipline is critical
Rule violations lead to losses
❌ People with inadequate capital
Need sufficient buffer
Never use money you can’t afford to lose
❌ People without options knowledge
This requires significant expertise
Don’t learn on real money
Paper trade extensively first
❌ People without professional guidance
Consult your financial advisor first
Ensure you understand all risks
Verify suitability for your situation
Who This Educational Content Is For
✅ Experienced options traders seeking advanced education ✅ People with qualified financial advisors to consult ✅ Traders comfortable with active management ✅ People willing to paper trade extensively first ✅ Those seeking to understand capital-efficient structures ✅ Individuals with appropriate risk tolerance and capital
Even if you fit this profile, consult your financial advisor before implementing any strategy described here.
The Bottom Line (Educational Summary)
This Is Not Magic
It’s a structural approach based on:
Options pricing inefficiencies
Systematic premium collection
Defined risk through protective puts
The math of leverage and time decay
It works in some market conditions and fails in others:
Volatility can collapse
Theta can erode value
Disasters happen
Execution errors occur
This Is Not Risk-Free
You can lose money if:
Market conditions change
You make execution errors
You ignore exit rules
You use inappropriate position sizing
Volatility collapses
Individual stock disasters occur
Maximum loss in educational example: Theoretically small, but real-world losses could be substantial depending on market conditions and execution.
This Requires Expertise
Prerequisites:
Advanced options knowledge
Active management capability
Emotional discipline
Professional guidance
Appropriate capital
Realistic expectations
⚠️ FINAL IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER ⚠️
THIS ARTICLE IS FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY.
The case study presented describes one individual trader’s actual position and results during a specific time period in specific market conditions. These results:
Are not typical
Are not guaranteed
Are not projections of future performance
May not be repeatable
Do not constitute a recommendation
Options trading involves substantial risk of loss. You can lose some or all of your invested capital. The strategies described are complex and suitable only for experienced traders with appropriate risk tolerance, capital, and professional guidance.
Before considering any options strategy:
Consult your qualified financial advisor or investment professional
Ensure you fully understand the risks
Verify the strategy is appropriate for YOUR specific financial situation
Obtain proper options trading approval from your broker
Paper trade extensively before risking real capital
Understand that past performance does not guarantee future results
The author:
Is not a registered investment advisor
Is not a broker-dealer
Is not a financial planner
Is not providing investment advice
Is not recommending any specific securities or strategies
This content does not constitute professional financial, investment, tax, or legal advice.
Market conditions change. Volatility changes. What worked in the past may not work in the future. You are solely responsible for your own trading decisions and outcomes.
DO YOUR OWN DUE DILIGENCE. CONSULT YOUR INVESTMENT ADVISER. UNDERSTAND THE RISKS. TRADE AT YOUR OWN RISK.
Educational Summary
This article explored an advanced options income strategy for educational purposes, using one trader’s real position as a case study. The key educational concepts covered:
Capital efficiency through synthetic positions and leverage
Risk management through protective puts and position sizing
Income generation through systematic premium selling
Discipline and exits as critical success factors
Realistic risk assessment including what can go wrong
Whether this or any strategy is appropriate for you depends entirely on your specific situation, risk tolerance, knowledge level, and financial goals.
Consult your financial advisor. Make informed decisions. Understand the risks.
This educational content is provided for informational purposes only. Always seek professional guidance before making investment decisions.
Thursday delivered exactly what we needed after Thursday’s massacre: stabilization in quality names on lower volume. GLW up 1.09% to $110.89 on 3.32 million shares—bouncing off Thursday’s $108 support on 40% lower volume. LITE up 2.79% to $478.53 on 3.89 million shares, down from Thursday’s panic levels. Even GEV, which got crushed 6.49% Thursday, only gave back another 2.30% Friday on much lighter volume.
But the real story is FormFactor (FORM), which absolutely exploded 16.98% to $83.72 on 1.41 million shares. This caps off an incredible week: Tuesday +8.31%, Wednesday +5.14%, Thursday down with everything else, Friday +17%. In one week, FORM rallied from around $70 to $83.72—nearly 20%. At 121 P/E, something fundamental is happening here. Either test equipment demand is accelerating, there’s M&A speculation, or short sellers are getting obliterated.
Meanwhile, Thursday’s winners (cruise lines) gave back gains. CCL down 2.03%, CUK down 2.21%. When consumer cyclicals weaken and tech stabilizes, it suggests Thursday’s panic was overdone. Let’s break down what Friday means for systematic traders and whether we’re ready to re-enter positions.
GLW: Bouncing Off Support
GLW (Corning) – Up 1.09%
Up 1.09% to $110.89 on 3,324,204 shares. This is exactly what we needed to see. Thursday GLW cratered 3.64% to $108.68 on record 5.55 million shares. Friday it bounced back above $110 on 3.32 million shares—40% lower volume. When volume decreases and price stabilizes after panic selling, it means the selling exhausted itself.
The $108-110 zone is now critical support. GLW tested $108.68 Thursday, held overnight, and bounced Friday. If it holds $108-110 next week on light volume, Thursday was the bottom and we’re ready to start buying again. If it breaks $108 on heavy volume, we’re heading to $100-105 and the AI infrastructure thesis has bigger problems.
At 60 P/E with actual profits and multi-year contracts with hyperscalers, GLW remains the highest-quality AI infrastructure play. But after Thursday’s violence, we need confirmation that support holds before adding new positions. For those who held through Thursday: well done. Your collar strategies cushioned the blow, and Friday’s bounce rewards patience.
LITE: Volatility Continues
LITE (Lumentum) – Up 2.79%
Up 2.79% to $478.53 on 3,893,092 shares. LITE was Thursday’s lone survivor, rallying 4.51% while everything else got destroyed. Friday it continues higher on heavy but decreasing volume (down from Thursday’s 7.29 million to 3.89 million). At 146 P/E, LITE trades at extreme valuations even for optical components.
LITE is now pure momentum. The wild swings (up 4.5% one day, could be down 5% the next) make this a trading vehicle, not a hold-forever systematic income play. If you’re aggressive and can handle volatility, LITE is tradeable with very wide collar strikes (10-15% out). But one headline or one bad market day and you’re down 10%. High risk, high reward.
The Explosion: FORM Up 17%
FORM (FormFactor) – Up 16.98%
Up 16.98% to $83.72 on 1,408,783 shares. This is the star of the week. Let’s trace the entire move: Tuesday FORM rallied 8.31%. Wednesday +5.14%. Thursday it probably pulled back with everything else. Friday +17%. From around $70 to $83.72 in one week—nearly 20% total gain. At 121 P/E, valuation is stretched but clearly something fundamental is happening.
Possible catalysts: (1) Positive earnings or guidance—test equipment demand exceeding expectations. (2) New customer wins—maybe hyperscaler orders accelerating. (3) M&A speculation—someone wants FORM’s semiconductor test technology. (4) Massive short squeeze—heavily shorted stock getting forced covering. The 1.41 million share volume on a +17% day suggests real institutional buying, not retail speculation.
Here’s the challenge: FORM is now massively extended. Chasing a stock up 17% in one day after it already rallied 13% earlier in the week is how retail loses money. But if this is a genuine fundamental catalyst (new guidance, new orders), the stock could consolidate at $80-85 and move higher. The prudent approach: watch next week. If FORM holds $80-82 on light volume, it’s digesting gains and could run to $90-100. If it gaps down Monday on profit-taking, the move is over.
For systematic income traders, FORM is too volatile and too extended for collar strategies right now. The 121 P/E and parabolic price action make this a momentum trade, not an investment. Let it settle for 2-3 weeks, see if it holds $75-80, then consider if you want exposure. Don’t chase.
The Reversals: Cruise Lines Give Back Gains
CCL (Carnival) – Down 2.03%
Down 2.03% to $31.44 on 6,571,278 shares. Thursday cruise lines rallied while tech got destroyed—CCL was up 0.80%. Friday it gave back those gains and then some. The massive 6.57 million share volume on a down day suggests institutions are selling what they bought Thursday. This is classic ‘safe haven’ trade that lasts one day then reverses.
CUK (Carnival plc) – Down 2.21%
Down 2.21% to $31.16 on 1.24 million shares. Same story as CCL—it’s the UK-listed version of the same company. When both cruise names reverse on heavy volume the day after rallying, it confirms Thursday’s rotation into consumer cyclicals was temporary panic, not a real sector shift.
Industrial and Heavy Machinery: Mixed Bag
GEV (GE Vernova) – Down 2.30%
Down 2.30% to $729.08 on 1,343,476 shares. Thursday GEV got crushed 6.49% on 2 million shares. Friday it continues lower but on 33% less volume (1.34M vs 2M). This is still distribution, but the decreasing volume suggests selling is slowing. GEV makes power equipment for data centers, so it’s tied to AI infrastructure. If data center build-outs are getting questioned, GEV suffers. Watch for stabilization around $720-730.
CAT (Caterpillar) – Down 2.44%
Heavy construction machinery down 2.44% to $674.95 on 967K shares. CAT is a $315 billion behemoth, and when it’s down 2.44%, it signals concerns about construction and infrastructure spending. At 36 P/E, CAT isn’t expensive, but if the economy is slowing or construction activity declining, even reasonable valuations get compressed.
ATI – Up 2.08%
Metal fabrication up 2.08% to $130.15 on 769K shares. ATI bouncing after Thursday’s 1.74% drop. At 46 P/E for specialty metals serving aerospace, valuation is reasonable. The 2% bounce on decent volume suggests this found support. Still too niche and thin for systematic strategies.
Semi Equipment: Stabilizing
TER (Teradyne) – Down 0.30%
Semiconductor test equipment barely down 0.30% to $268.25 on 1,587,359 shares. Thursday TER got crushed 4.35% on 3.1 million shares. Friday it’s nearly flat on half the volume. This is exactly what you want to see: violent selling exhausts itself, stock stabilizes on lower volume. At 77 P/E, TER is expensive but profitable. If semi equipment demand is real, TER is a play. But let it consolidate another week before adding.
The Garbage Still Bouncing
ALGM (Allegro) – Up 1.02%
Semiconductor with negative P/E up 1.02% on 495K shares. Still losing money, still bouncing weakly on retail volume. This has been bouncing for a week and remains completely uninvestable. Avoid.
What Friday Tells Us
Friday’s action is cautiously positive. The key indicators: (1) Volume decreased significantly from Thursday’s panic (GLW 3.32M vs 5.55M, GEV 1.34M vs 2M, LITE 3.89M vs 7.29M). (2) Quality names stabilized or bounced (GLW +1.09%, LITE +2.79%). (3) Thursday’s safe haven plays reversed (cruise lines down 2%), suggesting panic rotation was temporary.
This is classic bottoming behavior: massive volume selling on Thursday finds a floor, Friday volume decreases and prices stabilize. The question is whether $108-110 in GLW, $720-730 in GEV, and $268-270 in TER are the actual support levels that hold, or just temporary pauses before more selling.
Next week’s action will tell us. If Monday opens flat to slightly higher on light volume and we trade sideways, the bottom is in. If Monday gaps down or sells off on increasing volume, Thursday’s carnage was just the beginning of a larger correction. For now, we’re in wait-and-see mode.
Updated Strategy for Next Week
Do NOT rush back in Monday morning. Friday’s stabilization is encouraging but not confirmation. Here’s the playbook:
1. Watch GLW closely. If it holds $108-110 through Monday-Tuesday on decreasing volume, the bottom is in and you can start adding. If it breaks $108, we’re going to $100-105 and you wait.
2. LITE is tradeable for aggressive traders with very wide strikes. But this is momentum, not investment. One bad day wipes out a week of gains.
3. FORM is too extended after 20% in one week. Let it consolidate 2-3 weeks. If it holds $75-80, consider exposure. Don’t chase here.
4. GEV, TER, and other industrials need more time. They stabilized Friday but on ‘less bad’ volume, not strong buying. Wait another week.
5. Avoid cruise lines (CCL, CUK), heavy machinery (CAT), and anything with negative P/E (ALGM). Thursday’s rotation into these was panic, not strategy.
Rankings for Next Week
Watch List – Need Confirmation
Ticker
Status / Action
GLW
Up 1.09% to 110.89 on decreasing volume. Held 108 support. If it holds 108-110 Mon-Tue, bottom is in. If breaks 108, going to 100-105.
TER
Flat at -0.30% after Thu crash. Stabilizing. Watch for another week before adding.
GEV
Down 2.30% but volume decreasing. Selling slowing. Watch 720-730 support.
High Risk Momentum
LITE – Up 2.79% to 478.53. Pure momentum at 146 P/E. Tradeable with very wide strikes for aggressive traders only.FORM – Up 17% to 83.72. Parabolic. Let it consolidate 2-3 weeks. If holds 75-80, consider. Don’t chase.
Avoid
CCL, CUK – Cruise lines reversed Thu gains. Down 2%+ on heavy volume.CAT – Down 2.44%. Heavy machinery concerns.ALGM – Negative P/E, still bouncing weakly.CSTM, TEX, ODFL – Industrials and materials weak.
Bottom Line: Wait for Confirmation
Friday delivered what we needed: stabilization on lower volume. GLW held $108 support and bounced to $110.89. LITE continued its run. FORM exploded 17% on real volume. These are encouraging signs that Thursday’s panic found a floor.
But one day of stabilization doesn’t confirm the bottom. We need to see GLW hold $108-110 through next week on light volume. We need to see TER and GEV stabilize without more selling. And we need to avoid chasing extended names like FORM after a 20% weekly run.
The playbook for next week: patience. Watch GLW’s $108-110 support. If it holds on decreasing volume, we’re ready to start adding positions again. If it breaks, we’re heading lower and the wait continues. Don’t rush back in Monday morning. Let the market show you it’s safe to re-enter. That’s how you survive violent corrections without catching falling knives or missing the recovery.
GLW -3.64%, CIEN -5.06%, GEV -6.49% on Massive Volume
Thursday was a massacre. Every single name we’ve been calling ‘quality’ got destroyed. Corning (GLW) down 3.64% to $108.68 on absolutely massive 5.55 million shares—the highest volume we’ve ever seen. Ciena (CIEN) down 5.06% to $262.52 on 1.87 million shares. GE Vernova (GEV) down 6.49% to $729.59 on nearly 2 million shares. Teradyne (TER) down 4.35% on 3.1 million shares. These aren’t minor pullbacks. This is systematic institutional liquidation across the entire AI infrastructure sector.
The only survivor? Lumentum (LITE) up 4.51% to $454.74 on 7.3 million shares. But even that needs context—LITE was already volatile, and one stock rallying while everything else burns doesn’t make it safe. This isn’t sector rotation. This isn’t profit-taking. This is institutions heading for the exits across the board. When your ‘gold standard’ stocks all drop 3-6% on the heaviest volume you’ve ever seen, you don’t make excuses. You figure out what changed and what it means.
Let’s break down the carnage, understand what’s happening, and figure out what systematic income traders do next. Because when core holdings all break at once, your entire strategy is at risk.
The Disaster: GLW Reverses Wednesday’s Breakout
GLW (Corning) – Down 3.64%
Down 3.64% to $108.68 on 5,546,003 shares. Read that volume again: 5.55 MILLION shares. This is by far the highest volume we’ve seen in GLW through this entire move. Wednesday we called it ‘the gold standard’ after it broke through $115 on 1.64 million shares. Today it gave back that breakout and then some, falling below $109 on more than 3X Wednesday’s volume.
This is institutional distribution, period. When a stock drops 3.64% on 5.5 million shares the day after breaking out, institutions are telling you something changed. Either: (1) Broader market selloff dragging everything down, (2) AI infrastructure spending concerns emerging, (3) Valuation catching up—59 P/E isn’t cheap even for quality, or (4) Profit-taking after the run from $100 to $115.
For collar traders, this is painful but manageable if you established positions with proper strikes. If you bought GLW at $108 and sold $115 calls, your calls are probably worthless now but your stock is flat. If you bought at $112 with $120 calls, you’re underwater but protected by puts if struck correctly. The problem is anyone who chased Wednesday’s breakout is now sitting on immediate losses.
The key technical level now is $108. If GLW holds here and volume decreases, this was panic selling finding support. If it breaks $108 on continued heavy volume, we’re going back to $100-105. The 5.5 million share volume is the tell—this isn’t random. Something fundamental shifted.
CIEN Gets Crushed: -5.06%
CIEN (Ciena) – Down 5.06%
Down 5.06% to $262.52 on 1,867,747 shares. CIEN was holding steady through the week, consolidating around $280. Today it got absolutely destroyed, falling nearly $14 on heavy institutional volume. At 309 P/E, CIEN was always expensive, but institutions were willing to pay up for AI networking exposure. Not anymore.
The 1.87 million share volume is well above average. This isn’t light profit-taking—this is real selling. When networking equipment stocks break down alongside components (GLW) and power infrastructure (GEV), it suggests the entire AI infrastructure build-out thesis is being questioned. Either hyperscaler CapEx is slowing, or Wall Street is repricing growth expectations.
Support levels to watch: $260 (today’s close is already there), then $250, then $230. If CIEN breaks $250, the high P/E stocks are all at risk. The 309 P/E only works if growth continues accelerating. If growth slows or plateaus, this valuation collapses.
GEV Collapses: -6.49% on Record Volume
GEV (GE Vernova) – Down 6.49%
Down 6.49% to $729.59 on 1,978,996 shares. This is the biggest loser of the day by percentage. GEV makes power equipment—generators, transformers, infrastructure for data centers. We’ve been watching this as a secondary AI infrastructure play. At 41 P/E with actual profits and a $197 billion market cap, GEV was one of the more reasonably valued names in the sector.
The 6.49% drop on 2 million shares suggests institutions are questioning power infrastructure demand. If data center build-outs are slowing or getting pushed out, GEV loses one of its key growth drivers. The reasonable valuation (41 P/E) didn’t protect it—when the growth story breaks, even ‘cheap’ stocks get sold.
GEV is now below $730. It was trading around $780 just days ago. That’s a $50+ drop from recent highs. For a $197B company, that’s a massive move signaling real institutional concern.
TER: Semi Equipment Joins the Selloff
TER (Teradyne) – Down 4.35%
Semiconductor test equipment down 4.35% to $270.68 on absolutely massive 3,099,679 shares—the second-highest volume on today’s scan. TER makes the test systems that verify chips work before they ship. At 78 P/E, valuation was reasonable for semi equipment, but today’s 4.35% drop on 3.1 million shares shows no one is safe. When test equipment sells off on record volume alongside components and power infrastructure, the entire AI supply chain is being repriced.
The One Survivor: LITE Rallies While Everything Burns
LITE (Lumentum) – Up 4.51%
Up 4.51% to $454.74 on 7,290,650 shares—by far the highest volume on today’s scan. LITE is the only AI infrastructure name rallying while everything else gets destroyed. But context matters: LITE has been wildly volatile, trading at 139 P/E with massive swings. Yesterday it could have been down, today it’s up 4.5%. This isn’t a ‘quality’ stock—this is a momentum vehicle.
The 7.29 million share volume is extreme. Something specific is happening with LITE—either positive company news, short squeeze, or momentum funds rotating from other names into LITE as a ‘last man standing’ play. But one stock rallying while GLW, CIEN, GEV, and TER all crater doesn’t make LITE safe. It makes it an outlier that could reverse just as violently.
If you’re aggressive and understand the risk, LITE is tradeable with very wide collar strikes. But this is not a ‘hold forever’ systematic income play. This is high-risk, high-reward momentum trading.
Other Carnage
SMTC (Semtech) – Down 6.28%
Semiconductor company down 6.28% to $82.13 on 730K shares. At 270 P/E, SMTC was always expensive and risky. Today it got crushed along with everything else. High-valuation semis are getting destroyed.
ATI – Down 1.74%
Metal fabrication down 1.74% to $126.11 on 1.25 million shares. ATI is getting sold along with everything industrial. At 44 P/E, it’s not as stretched as tech names, but today nothing mattered.
ALGM – Down 0.91%
Even the garbage got hit. ALGM down 0.91% on 1.32 million shares. Negative P/E, no earnings, and still bouncing around on retail volume. Stay away.
The Only Green: Cruise Lines and Auto Parts
The only stocks up today? Carnival (CCL +0.80% on 7.8 million shares, CUK +0.50%), Royal Caribbean (RCL +1.73%), and Modine (MOD +0.85%). These have nothing to do with AI or tech. This is pure sector rotation—institutions selling tech and buying consumer cyclicals and industrials. When cruise lines outperform AI infrastructure by 6-8%, something fundamental has shifted.
What Changed: Four Possible Explanations
1. Broader Market Selloff: This could be a general risk-off move where growth stocks get hit regardless of fundamentals. The fact that cruise lines held up suggests this is tech-specific, not broad market panic.
2. AI CapEx Concerns: Maybe hyperscaler earnings showed or hinted at slowing infrastructure spending. If Microsoft, Amazon, Google, or Meta are pulling back CapEx, GLW, CIEN, and GEV all lose their key demand driver.
3. Valuation Correction: Stocks ran too far too fast. GLW went from $100 to $115 in weeks. CIEN trades at 309 P/E. At some point, valuations matter, and today might have been that day.
4. Profit-Taking After Big Runs: Simple answer—institutions booked profits after huge gains. GLW is still up significantly from $90 levels months ago. Today could just be a violent reset before the next leg higher.
What Systematic Traders Do Now
First, don’t panic. A 3-6% down day on your core holdings hurts, but if you’re running collars properly, your short calls provided some cushion and your protective puts limited damage. If you weren’t running collars and just owned stock outright, this is why we use options strategies.
Second, wait for clarity. Don’t add to positions today. Don’t try to ‘buy the dip’ when you don’t know if the dip is over. GLW at $108 might be a gift, or it might be heading to $100. CIEN at $262 might find support, or it might test $250. Volume was extreme today (5.5M on GLW, 3.1M on TER, 7.3M on LITE), which often marks short-term bottoms. But ‘often’ isn’t ‘always.’
Third, watch Friday’s tape closely. If stocks stabilize on lower volume, today was panic selling and the worst is over. If selling continues on heavy volume, this is the start of a bigger move down. The key is volume: decreasing volume with stabilizing prices = exhaustion. Sustained heavy volume with continued selling = more pain ahead.
Fourth, reassess every position. GLW is still the best AI infrastructure play, but after a 3.64% drop on 5.5 million shares, it’s no longer ‘buy automatically.’ CIEN at 309 P/E needs earnings to grow into that valuation—if growth slows, the P/E compresses violently. GEV showed that even reasonable valuations (41 P/E) don’t protect you when the growth story breaks.
Updated Rankings: Everything Goes to Watch List
After today’s carnage, we’re putting everything on the watch list. When your entire thesis gets questioned in one day, you don’t double down—you wait for clarity.
Watch List – Wait for Support and Lower Volume
Ticker
Status / Action
GLW
Down 3.64% to 108.68 on 5.55M shares. Gave back Wednesday’s breakout. Key support at 108. If it holds on lower volume Friday, panic is over. If it breaks 108, going to 100-105. DO NOT add new positions until it stabilizes.
CIEN
Down 5.06% to 262.52 on 1.87M shares. 309 P/E needs continued growth. Support at 260, then 250, then 230. Wait for stabilization.
GEV
Down 6.49% to 729.59 on 2M shares. Power infrastructure getting questioned. Even 41 P/E didn’t protect it. Watch.
TER
Down 4.35% on 3.1M shares. Semi equipment crushed. Wait for support.
High Risk – Momentum Only
LITE – Up 4.51% to 454.74 on 7.29M shares. Only survivor but wildly volatile at 139 P/E. This is momentum trading, not investment. Very wide strikes if you trade it at all.
Avoid Completely
Everything else. SMTC, ATI, ALGM, IMNM—all crushed or weak. Don’t try to catch falling knives.
Bottom Line: Wait for Clarity
Wednesday was a massacre. Every name we’ve been calling quality got destroyed on record volume. GLW down 3.64% on 5.55 million shares. CIEN down 5.06%. GEV down 6.49%. This wasn’t a minor pullback—this was systematic institutional liquidation across the entire AI infrastructure sector.
When everything breaks at once, you don’t fight it—you respect it. Don’t add to positions today. Don’t try to catch the bottom. Wait for Friday’s tape. If stocks stabilize on lower volume, today was panic and the worst is over. If selling continues on heavy volume, this is the start of a larger move down.
For collar traders, today is why we use options strategies. Your short calls provided some cushion. Your protective puts (if struck correctly) limited damage. But when core holdings all drop 3-6% in one day, even the best strategy takes a hit. The key now is discipline: wait for clarity, don’t chase, and only re-enter when support levels hold and volume decreases. This is how you survive market sell-offs without blowing up your account.
GLW Breaks Out While Commodities Give Back Tuesday’s Gains
Wednesday delivered the verdict: quality tech wins, commodity volatility loses. Corning (GLW) exploded 2.39% to $115.49 on massive 1.64 million shares, breaking through resistance and making new highs. Coherent (COHR) rallied 2.66% on 2.09 million shares for the third straight day. Meanwhile, Southern Copper (SCCO) gave back 2.96% of Tuesday’s 7.28% gain, and ATI dropped 3.03%. The message is clear: institutions are accumulating quality tech with earnings support, not commodity cyclicals that whipsaw.
The Star: GLW Breaks Out on Massive Volume
GLW up 2.39% to $115.49 on 1,635,202 shares. This is institutional accumulation breaking through $115 resistance. At 63 P/E with actual profits, GLW makes fiber optics, specialty glass, and substrates for every AI data center being built. The 1.64M volume while making new highs is portfolio managers buying size. Next technical target: $125-130. Any pullback to $110-112 is a gift.
COHR Continues Three-Day Run
COHR up 2.66% to $235.26 on 2,089,880 shares. Third straight day of institutional buying (Monday +4.46%, Tuesday +3.33%, Wednesday +2.66%). Over 10% in three days on sustained heavy volume. At 339 P/E, valuation is stretched, but institutions are paying up for optical components exposure. Use wider collar strikes.
Commodities Give Back Tuesday’s Gains
SCCO down 2.96% to $209.06 after Tuesday’s 7.28% surge. Classic commodity whipsaw. ATI down 3.03% to $124.45 on thin volume. ARWR (biotech) down 2.92%. This is why we don’t collar commodity cyclicals—the volatility kills your strikes. Tuesday’s rotation was fast money booking profits, not a sustained move.
Storage Names: Healthy Consolidation
WDC down 1.22% to $286.71 on 2.29M shares. This is healthy profit-taking after Monday’s 4.35% surge. At 29 P/E with profits, this pullback is an entry opportunity. STX flat at +0.20% to $445.33. Both remain Tier 1 for systematic income. TTM down 1.65% to $105.79—consolidating last week’s 6% move.
Other Movers
FORM up 5.14% to $78.53 (second big day after Tuesday’s 8.31%). FCX up 1.05% on 2.58M shares—consolidating Tuesday’s surge. CIEN up 0.96%—quiet strength. GEV down 0.31%—power infrastructure consolidating. CENX up 1.07%—aluminum play. TER up 0.10%. ALGM up 1.97%—still negative P/E, still garbage.
Updated Rankings
Tier 1 Core Holdings:
GLW—broke through $115 on 1.64M shares, now #1 collar candidateWDC—down 1.22%, entry opportunity at current levelsSTX—flat consolidation, core holdingCIEN—up 0.96%, quiet strength
Tier 2 Tactical:
COHR—three-day run, 339 P/E stretched but momentum strongTTM—down 1.65%, consolidatingFORM—up 5.14%, extended at 150 P/EFCX—the one commodity play working
Avoid:
SCCO—whipsaw (up 7%, down 3%)ALGM—negative P/E, weak bouncesARWR—biotech speculationATI—thin volume
Bottom Line
Wednesday confirmed quality wins. GLW breaking out on 1.64M shares while SCCO gives back gains shows where institutional conviction lies. Companies with real earnings and multi-year contracts (GLW, COHR, WDC, STX) keep grinding higher. Commodity speculation gets one-day bounces then reverses. Focus on Tier 1 names, buy pullbacks like WDC’s 1.22% dip, and avoid commodity whipsaws. That’s how you generate systematic income.
When Commodities Steal the Show from AI Infrastructure
Tuesday’s tape delivered a wake-up call for anyone who thought the commodity trade was dead. FormFactor (FORM) exploded 8.31%. Southern Copper (SCCO) up 7.28%. Ero Copper (ERO) up 7.18%. Freeport-McMoRan (FCX) up 5.74%. Century Aluminum (CENX) up 5.28%. This isn’t noise. This is systematic institutional accumulation of hard assets after last week’s brutal selloff created buying opportunities.
Meanwhile, the AI infrastructure darlings took a breather. Micron (MU) down 1.57% on 5.6 million shares—more distribution after Monday’s dead-cat bounce. The quality tech names consolidated: COHR up 3.33%, STX up 2.72%, but nothing like Monday’s explosive moves. And the garbage? Still bouncing weakly: FLNC up 2.85%, ALGM up 3.15%, AAOI up 3.83%—all on pathetic volume.
What’s really happening is healthy rotation. Fast money that chased AI infrastructure last week is taking profits and rotating into beaten-down commodities. This is exactly what you want to see in a healthy market. Let’s break down the real winners, the consolidators, and what it means for systematic income strategies.
The Commodity Comeback: Real Assets Getting Bid
FORM (FormFactor) – Up 8.31%
Semiconductor test and measurement equipment. Up 8.31% to $77.19 on only 184K shares. This is interesting because it’s not a commodity play—it’s semi equipment with a 147 P/E. But the move suggests money rotating from pure-play semis (like MU) into picks-and-shovels equipment providers. Light volume is concerning, but the 8% move gets attention.
SCCO (Southern Copper) – Up 7.28%
The elephant in the room. Up 7.28% to $206.84 on 291K shares. This is a $169 billion market cap copper miner with a 44 P/E—not cheap, but trading at growth multiples because copper is critical for electrification and AI infrastructure. Last week SCCO got crushed along with all commodity names. Today’s 7% move on decent volume suggests institutions are coming back in.
Here’s the key: SCCO has real assets, real production, and actual cash flow. Unlike speculative garbage like BE or FLNC that burn cash, SCCO makes money from every pound of copper they mine. When copper prices stabilize or rise, SCCO benefits directly. The 44 P/E reflects expectations that copper demand will stay strong due to electrification, EV charging infrastructure, and data center power needs.
ERO (Ero Copper) – Up 7.18%
Canadian copper miner up 7.18% to $36.65 on 336K shares. This stock got destroyed last week, down over 5% as copper names sold off. Today’s rally on decent volume suggests the selling exhausted itself and buyers are stepping in. At 28 P/E, ERO is cheaper than SCCO but smaller ($3.8B market cap). Higher risk, higher potential reward.
FCX (Freeport-McMoRan) – Up 5.74%
The monster. Up 5.74% to $64.25 on 3.34 million shares—by far the highest volume copper name today. This is institutional accumulation, period. FCX is the largest publicly traded copper miner in the world with operations in Indonesia, Chile, and the US. At 42 P/E with a $92B market cap, this is a liquid, investable way to play copper without going to small-cap miners.
The 3.3 million share volume is the tell. When a $92 billion company trades over 3 million shares on an up day, institutions are buying size. This isn’t retail speculation. This is portfolio managers saying ‘copper got oversold, we’re adding exposure.’
CENX (Century Aluminum) – Up 5.28%
Aluminum producer up 5.28% to $49.82 on 429K shares. Aluminum is needed for EV bodies, aircraft, infrastructure, and packaging. At 62 P/E, valuation reflects strong aluminum demand. This got destroyed with other commodity names last week and is bouncing as institutions recognize the oversold condition.
Tech Consolidation: Quality Holding, Garbage Still Bouncing
COHR (Coherent) – Up 3.33%
Optical components and scientific instruments. Up 3.33% to $229.84 on 946K shares. This is the highest volume tech name on today’s scan. COHR continues to grind higher on Monday’s 4.46% move. At 331 P/E, valuation is stretched, but the company is profitable with technology moats. Heavy volume suggests institutions are still accumulating despite the rich valuation.
STX (Seagate) – Up 2.72%
Hard drive storage. Up 2.72% to $444.73 on 778K shares. Following Monday’s 4.64% surge with another solid gain. This is healthy consolidation—price holding gains, decent volume, no selling pressure. At 50 P/E with actual profits, STX remains a core holding for AI storage exposure. Any 3-5% pullback is a collar entry opportunity.
VRT (Vertiv) – Up 0.67%
Data center power and cooling. Barely up 0.67% to $191.29 on 492K shares. This should be rallying with other AI infrastructure names but is lagging badly. At 72 P/E, valuation is stretched and the stock has already run hard. The weak performance today suggests VRT is exhausted. Wait for a 10-15% pullback before considering.
The Problem Children: MU Distribution Continues
MU (Micron) – Down 1.57%
This is the story of the day. Down 1.57% to $430.92 on 5.6 million shares. Remember: Friday MU dropped 4.8% on 50 million shares. Monday it bounced 2.54% on 7 million shares. Today it’s down again on 5.6 million shares. This is classic distribution—institutions are systematically selling into any strength.
At 41 P/E, MU trades at a premium valuation while memory pricing is showing signs of weakness. The AI narrative drove MU to highs, but fundamentals don’t support current levels. Institutions know this, and they’re exiting. Don’t fight this tape. Let MU fall another 10-15%, let it form a real base, then reassess. Right now this is a falling knife.
INTC (Intel) – Up 3.28%
Bouncing 3.28% on massive 17.5 million shares. But let’s be honest: Intel has a negative P/E ratio. The company is losing money. This bounce on huge volume is retail and momentum traders gambling on a turnaround story. Until Intel shows actual profits and competitive products, this is speculation. Avoid for systematic income strategies.
Garbage Bounces Continue: Still Not Recoveries
AAOI, ALGM, FLNC – All Up 2.85% to 3.83%
Applied Optoelectronics (AAOI) up 3.83% on 731K shares. Allegro Microsystems (ALGM) up 3.15% on 229K shares. Fluence Energy (FLNC) up 2.85% on 603K shares. All three have negative P/E ratios. All three are bouncing on weak volume. All three remain uninvestable for systematic income.
Here’s the test: if these stocks were real recoveries, they’d be rallying on heavy institutional volume like FCX (3.3M shares) or COHR (946K shares). Instead they’re bouncing on retail-level volume. These are dead-cat bounces extended by momentum and short squeezes. When the bounces end, they’ll resume falling because there are no earnings floors to catch them.
Interesting Wildcards: Biotech and Cruise Lines
ARWR (Arrowhead Pharma) – Up 3.47%
Biotechnology with negative P/E. Up 3.47% on 192K shares. This is pure speculation on drug pipeline. Negative earnings, thin volume, binary risk on clinical trials. Not a collar candidate, but worth watching if you’re aggressive and understand biotech.
DNLI (Denali Therapeutics) – Up 3.28%
Another biotech with negative P/E. Up 3.28% on 150K shares. Same story as ARWR: drug pipeline speculation with binary clinical trial risk. Avoid unless you’re specifically looking for high-risk biotech exposure.
RCL (Royal Caribbean) – Up 0.36%
Cruise line barely up 0.36% on thin volume (121K shares). This has nothing to do with AI or commodities—it’s consumer cyclical exposure. At 22 P/E with profits, RCL is higher quality than biotech, but cruise lines are capital-intensive and economically sensitive. Not a systematic income play.
What This Rotation Means: Healthy or Warning Sign?
Tuesday’s action is actually bullish for the overall market health. When you see rotation from recent winners (AI infrastructure) into beaten-down sectors (commodities), it suggests capital is staying in the market rather than going to cash. Fast money isn’t selling tech to go defensive—it’s rotating into commodities that got oversold.
The copper rally makes fundamental sense. Copper got destroyed last week on profit-taking after a huge run, but the underlying demand drivers haven’t changed. Electrification needs copper. EV charging stations need copper. Data centers need copper for power distribution. AI infrastructure needs copper everywhere. When FCX drops 10% in a week on these unchanged fundamentals, smart money steps in.
For systematic traders, the question is whether to chase commodities or stick with tech quality. The answer: neither. Don’t chase copper after a 5-7% day. Don’t abandon quality tech names like STX and COHR that are consolidating healthily. The best move is patience. Wait for copper to consolidate these gains, then consider adding commodity exposure. And keep accumulating quality tech on 2-3% pullbacks.
The one clear warning sign is Micron’s continued distribution. When a major semiconductor stock shows three straight days of selling pressure (Friday 50M shares down, Monday 7M shares up on weak bounce, Tuesday 5.6M shares down again), institutions are telling you something. MU’s memory business faces pricing pressure, and at 41 P/E there’s no margin for error. Let this one go. There will be better entry points at lower levels.
Updated Rankings: Adding Commodity Exposure
Tier 1: Core Tech Holdings (Unchanged)
GLW, WDC, STX, CIEN – These remain your core AI infrastructure plays. Wait for 2-3% pullbacks to add or sell puts. STX up 2.72% today is healthy consolidation after Monday’s big move. These stocks have earnings support and aren’t going anywhere.
Tier 2A: Commodity Plays (New Additions – Watch for Consolidation)
Ticker
Status / Action
FCX
Up 5.74% on 3.3M shares. Massive institutional accumulation. Wait for 3-5% pullback to enter.
SCCO
Up 7.28%. Large-cap copper with 44 P/E. Let it consolidate 5% before considering.
CENX
Up 5.28%. Aluminum play. 62 P/E. Real assets but cyclical. Watch for pullback.
Tier 2B: Tech Consolidators (Wait for Entry Points)
COHR – Up 3.33% on 946K shares. 331 P/E stretched but institutions buying. Only for aggressive traders.LITE – Not on today’s scan but remains extended. Wait for 5-10% consolidation.TTM – Not on today’s scan. Consolidating nicely. Watch for re-entry around 95-98.
Avoid / Wait List
MU – Continued distribution. Down 1.57% on 5.6M shares. Let it fall and base.INTC – Negative P/E, losing money. Speculation, not investment.AAOI, ALGM, FLNC – All negative P/E, weak bounces on low volume. Still garbage.VRT – Up 0.67% but lagging. 72 P/E stretched. Wait for 10-15% pullback.FORM – Up 8.31% but only 184K shares. Thin volume makes this suspect.ERO – Up 7.18% but small-cap ($3.8B). Higher risk than FCX. Wait for consolidation.
Bottom Line: Rotation Is Healthy, Don’t Chase
Tuesday’s rotation from AI infrastructure into commodities is healthy market behavior. Fast money is rotating, not fleeing. Copper names rallied on real institutional volume (FCX 3.3M shares) after getting oversold last week. Quality tech names like STX and COHR consolidated gains healthily. And garbage like AAOI, ALGM, and FLNC continues bouncing weakly on retail volume.
For systematic income traders, the playbook is simple: don’t chase today’s 5-7% copper moves. Wait for consolidation. Keep your core tech holdings (GLW, WDC, STX, CIEN) and add on 2-3% pullbacks. Consider adding commodity exposure (FCX, SCCO) but only after they digest today’s gains. And absolutely avoid the distribution stocks (MU) and the negative-earnings garbage (AAOI, ALGM, FLNC, INTC).
The one clear red flag is Micron’s ongoing distribution. Three days of selling pressure tells you institutions are exiting. Don’t fight that tape. Otherwise, this is a healthy, rotational market where both AI infrastructure and commodities have roles to play. Focus on quality in both sectors, wait for entry points, and let the market come to you. That’s how you generate systematic income without chasing momentum or catching falling knives.
AI Infrastructure Names Confirm Breakout While Garbage Stays Dead
Monday’s tape confirmed everything we said over the weekend: the market knows exactly which stocks have real earnings and which ones were riding momentum. Lumentum (LITE) exploded 8.87% on a million shares. Corning (GLW) up 4.98%. Coherent (COHR) up 4.46%. STX and WDC both up over 4.3%. These aren’t random pops. This is systematic institutional accumulation of the companies that actually manufacture AI infrastructure components.
Meanwhile, the garbage stayed garbage. Bloom Energy (BE) squeezed 2.16% on pathetic volume (972K shares)—retail trying to catch a falling knife. Fluence (FLNC) up 2% on similar weak volume. These dead-cat bounces are gifts for anyone who got trapped long. The real story is the divergence between quality names ripping on institutional volume and speculative names barely bouncing on retail scraps.
Today’s action validates our weekend thesis: focus on companies with real order books, avoid companies that burn cash. Let’s break down what’s working, what’s not, and what this setup means for the week ahead.
The Leaders: Quality Breaking Out on Volume
LITE (Lumentum) – Up 8.87%
This is the star of the day. Up 8.87% to $426.61 on 1,003,931 shares. Optical networking components for AI clusters. This stock now trades at 285 P/E, which sounds insane until you realize the growth trajectory. When hyperscalers are doubling down on data center build-outs and LITE is the supplier of critical optical components, high valuations make sense if growth accelerates.
What’s critical: this isn’t speculation. LITE has real customers (Microsoft, Amazon, Google, Meta) placing real orders. The volume today—over 1 million shares—is institutional accumulation, not retail chasing. This is what breakout continuation looks like. Use wider collar strikes due to volatility, but the trend is your friend here.
GLW (Corning) – Up 4.98%
The gold standard continues to perform. Up 4.98% to $108.39 on 1.19 million shares. This is exactly what we’ve been saying: boring company, exciting demand, perfect collar DNA. GLW makes fiber optics, specialty glass for data centers, and glass substrates for advanced displays. Every AI data center needs what GLW manufactures.
At 59 P/E with actual profits, GLW remains the safest way to play AI infrastructure. The stock has institutional support, deep option liquidity, and a decades-long moat in specialty glass manufacturing. Any pullback to $100-105 would be an absolute gift. Right now, momentum is accelerating, and institutions are adding.
WDC (Western Digital) – Up 4.35% / STX (Seagate) – Up 4.64%
The storage duopoly is finally getting recognized. WDC up 4.35% to $261.12 on 1.86 million shares. STX up 4.64% to $426.60 on 840K shares. Both stocks trade at reasonable P/E ratios (26-48x) with actual profits. The thesis is simple: AI models generate massive amounts of training data that needs to be stored. WDC and STX make the hard drives that store it.
These are classic ‘boring business in exciting trend’ plays. No one gets excited about hard drives, but everyone needs storage. That’s exactly what makes them perfect for systematic income strategies. Liquid options, institutional backing, and recurring revenue from data center customers. Both are Tier 1 collar candidates.
COHR (Coherent) – Up 4.46%
Up 4.46% to $221.65 on 788K shares. Scientific instruments and optical components. This trades at 319 P/E, which is stretched, but the company is profitable with technology moats in optical coatings and laser systems. Higher risk due to valuation, but the move today on decent volume suggests institutions are willing to pay up for exposure to AI optics.
Other Notable Winners
CIEN (Ciena) – Up 4.05%
Networking equipment for AI clusters. Up 4.05% to $262.00 on relatively light volume (227K shares). This is consolidation after last week’s big moves. The low volume actually suggests there are no sellers—holders are keeping their shares anticipating more upside. At 308 P/E, valuation is rich but justified by growth. Still Tier 1 for collars.
AAOI (Applied Optoelectronics) – Up 4.15%
Following up Friday’s monster 10.2% move with another 4.15% today to $45.42 on 728K shares. Optical components for data centers. Warning: negative P/E means no earnings. This is a revenue growth story, not a profitable business. Friday’s breakout on 12 million shares was real, but today’s follow-through on lower volume suggests momentum may be fading. High risk.
LRCX (Lam Research) – Up 2.67%
Semiconductor equipment. Up 2.67% to $239.69 on 1.24 million shares. This is a quality name—makes the tools that manufacture chips. At 49 P/E with strong earnings, LRCX is expensive but profitable. The move today suggests semi equipment is back in favor as AI chip demand remains strong. Collar-friendly for experienced traders.
MU (Micron) – Up 2.54%
Bouncing 2.54% to $425.42 after Friday’s brutal 4.8% drop on 50 million shares. Volume today is only 7 million—much lighter. This bounce on low volume after massive distribution is classic dead-cat action. Don’t confuse a bounce with a bottom. MU showed its hand Friday: institutions were selling in size. Wait for a real base to form before considering entry.
TTM (TTM Technologies) – Up 2.48%
PCB manufacturer up 2.48% to $100.64 on only 217K shares. This is consolidation after last week’s 6% surge. Light volume with price holding gains is bullish—no one wants to sell. At 80 P/E, valuation reflects explosive growth expectations. The AI server build-out is real, and TTM makes the circuit boards those servers sit on. Let it consolidate further, then add on any weakness.
The Garbage Bounces: Dead Cats, Not Recoveries
BE (Bloom Energy) – Up 2.16%
Hydrogen fuel cells. Up 2.16% to $154.64 on only 972K shares. Compare this to GLW’s 1.19 million shares or LITE’s 1 million. The volume is pathetic. This is retail bag-holders hoping for a miracle, not institutions accumulating. Negative P/E, burns cash, and the bounce is on no volume. Stay away.
FLNC (Fluence Energy) – Up 2.01%
Battery storage. Up 2.01% on 922K shares. Same story as BE: weak bounce on low volume after getting destroyed last week. Negative P/E, government subsidy dependent. The 2% bounce means nothing when the stock is down 20%+ from recent highs and has no fundamental support.
ALGM (Allegro Microsystems) – Up 2.01%
Semiconductor with negative P/E. Up 2% on incredibly thin volume (131K shares). This is noise, not a recovery. When a semiconductor company can’t make money in the hottest semiconductor market in history, that tells you everything about their competitive position. Volume is so light that this move is meaningless.
VSAT (Viasat) – Up 1.64%
Satellite communications. Up 1.64% on 114K shares. Negative P/E, thin volume. This isn’t a recovery—it’s residual volatility. The stock has no fundamental support, and the tiny volume tells you institutions aren’t interested. Avoid.
Interesting Movers: Worth Watching
LUV (Southwest Airlines) – Up 4.39%
Airlines catching a bid. Up 4.39% to $49.60 on 591K shares. This has nothing to do with AI or tech—it’s likely a sector rotation play or oil price movement. At 58 P/E for an airline, valuation is rich. Airlines are cyclical and capital-intensive. Not a collar candidate for systematic income.
GEV (GE Vernova) – Up 2.08%
Specialty industrial machinery and power equipment. Up 2.08% to $741.49 on 342K shares. This is interesting because data centers need power infrastructure. GEV makes generators, transformers, and power management systems. At 42 P/E with real earnings, this could be a secondary play on AI infrastructure power demands. Worth watching.
VRT (Vertiv Holdings) – Up 0.47%
Electrical equipment for data centers—cooling, power, racks. Barely up 0.47% to $187.05 on 491K shares. This should be rallying with GLW and LITE since it’s also AI infrastructure, but the weak move suggests it’s already run too far. At 71 P/E, valuation is stretched. Wait for a 10-15% pullback before considering.
What Today’s Action Means for Systematic Traders
Monday’s tape confirmed the separation between quality and garbage is complete. The stocks with real earnings and institutional support—LITE, GLW, COHR, WDC, STX—are breaking out on strong volume. The stocks that burn cash—BE, FLNC, ALGM, VSAT—are bouncing weakly on retail volume and remain uninvestable.
For collar traders, today created both opportunities and warnings. The opportunities: quality names like GLW, WDC, and STX are showing continued strength. Any 2-3% pullback in these names over the next few days would be excellent collar entry points. The warnings: don’t chase extended moves. LITE up 8.87% needs consolidation. COHR at 319 P/E is expensive even with growth.
The key insight: institutional money is systematically accumulating the picks-and-shovels companies that manufacture AI infrastructure. This isn’t a one-day pop. This is the beginning of a sustained move as Wall Street realizes these companies have multi-year order visibility from hyperscalers. As long as Microsoft, Amazon, Google, and Meta are spending billions on data centers, GLW, LITE, TTM, WDC, and STX will have earnings support.
Updated Rankings for Systematic Income
Tier 1: Core Holdings (Sell Puts on 2-3% Weakness)
Ticker
Status / Action
GLW
Up 4.98% on 1.19M shares. Breaking out. Any pullback to 100-105 is a gift. Best collar candidate.
WDC
Up 4.35% on 1.86M shares. Storage for AI. Perfect for selling puts on any 3% dip.
STX
Up 4.64% on 840K shares. Same thesis as WDC. Both are Tier 1 quality.
CIEN
Up 4.05% on light volume. Consolidating after big run. Still Tier 1 for collars.
Tier 2: Tactical (Use Wider Strikes, Wait for Consolidation)
Ticker
Status / Action
LITE
Up 8.87% to 426. Extended. Let it consolidate 5-10% before entering. Use wide strikes.
TTM
Up 2.48% on light volume. Consolidating last week’s 6% move. Wait for base at 95-98.
COHR
Up 4.46%. 319 P/E stretched. Profitable but expensive. Only for aggressive traders.
LRCX
Up 2.67%. Semi equipment. Quality but 49 P/E needs growth to justify. Watch.
Avoid Completely
BE, FLNC, ALGM, VSAT – All bouncing on weak volume with negative P/E ratios. These are dead-cat bounces, not recoveries. Stay away.MU – Bouncing after Friday’s 50M share distribution. This is a dead cat until it forms a real base. Don’t confuse a bounce with a bottom.AAOI – Up 4% but still negative P/E. Revenue growth story, not profitable business. High risk.VRT – Barely up despite being AI infrastructure. Already ran too far at 71 P/E. Wait for pullback.
Bottom Line: Quality Rally Has Legs
Today confirmed the weekend thesis: the market knows which stocks have real earnings and which ones don’t. LITE, GLW, COHR, WDC, and STX all rallied on institutional volume. BE, FLNC, ALGM, and VSAT all bounced weakly on retail scraps. The separation is complete.
For systematic traders, the playbook is simple: focus on Tier 1 names (GLW, WDC, STX, CIEN) for collar positions. Wait for 2-3% pullbacks to establish new positions or sell puts. Don’t chase extended moves like LITE’s 8.87% surge—let it consolidate first. And absolutely avoid the negative-earnings garbage (BE, FLNC, ALGM, VSAT) no matter how tempting the IV looks.
The AI infrastructure build-out is accelerating, and the companies with real order books from hyperscalers are getting systematically accumulated. This isn’t a one-week trade. This is a multi-quarter theme with actual earnings support. Focus on quality, sell puts on weakness, use collars to protect profits, and let the market separate wheat from chaff. That’s how you generate repeatable income without chasing garbage.
The Great Mid-Cap Rotation: What Worked, What Died, and What Comes Next
Executive Summary: A Week of Violent Rotation
This week delivered a masterclass in momentum exhaustion and sector rotation. We watched AI infrastructure names explode higher early in the week, then give back gains as fast money took profits. We saw energy transition darlings like Bloom Energy get absolutely destroyed. We witnessed commodity plays—copper, uranium, gold—peak and reverse hard. And by Friday, the market was making it crystal clear which stocks have real earnings support and which ones were riding pure speculation.
The final Friday scan tells the story in one chart: AAOI up 10.2% on massive volume while Micron cratered 4.8% on 50 million shares. LITE up 2.7% while Bloom Energy, Fluence, and the entire negative-earnings cohort got pummeled. This isn’t random. This is the market separating companies with actual business models from companies trading on narratives and hope. For systematic income traders, this week revealed exactly where to focus and what to avoid. Let’s break it down day by day, then synthesize what it means for the weeks ahead.
Monday-Tuesday: The Explosive Rally in AI Infrastructure
The week started with a violent upside move in mid-cap AI infrastructure and commodity names. Corning (GLW), Ciena (CIEN), Lumentum (LITE), Celestica (CLS), and a parade of mining stocks all ripped 20-50% in what looked like a genuine breakout. The catalyst? A convergence of factors: AI CapEx spending announcements from hyperscalers, China stimulus whispers driving hard asset reflation, space/defense hype, and—most importantly—massive short covering in heavily shorted names.
This wasn’t vapor. Companies like GLW and CIEN were reporting real order flow, growing backlogs, and actual earnings beats tied to hyperscaler demand. The fiber optics, optical networking, and AI server manufacturing plays all had legitimate fundamental support. Even the commodity plays—Cameco (CCJ) in uranium, Iamgold (IAG) in gold, Century Aluminum (CENX)—had reasonable theses tied to nuclear renaissance and infrastructure spending.
But buried in the rally were warning signs. Stocks with negative P/E ratios—Bloom Energy (BE), Applied Digital (APLD), Hut 8 (HUT)—were ripping just as hard as quality names. When garbage moves with gold, it’s a sign the rally is liquidity-driven, not fundamentally selective. And that’s exactly what started unraveling mid-week.
Wednesday-Thursday: Reality Checks and Profit-Taking
By mid-week, the music started to stop. Bloom Energy (BE) got crushed 7.2%. Iamgold (IAG) dropped 6.4%. Hut 8 (HUT) fell 5.7%. Applied Digital (APLD) lost 5.3%. The pattern was unmistakable: stocks with no earnings, negative cash flow, and narrative-dependent valuations were getting destroyed. Meanwhile, quality names were experiencing normal profit-taking but holding up relatively well.
The divergence revealed exactly what we’ve been saying: there’s a fundamental difference between companies with real earnings support and companies riding pure momentum. Ciena (CIEN) pulled back 3.1% but held above key support levels. Seagate (STX) and Western Digital (WDC) were nearly flat. These stocks have actual profits, institutional backing, and durable demand drivers. When they correct, they find buyers. When speculative garbage corrects, it keeps falling because there’s no fundamental floor to catch it.
The commodity names—copper miners (ERO, SCCO) and uranium (CCJ)—also pulled back hard, down 3-6%. But these are different from the energy transition garbage. Miners have real assets, real production, and real cash flow tied to commodity prices. When copper or uranium prices stabilize, the stocks find support. They’re cyclical and volatile, but they’re not going to zero. The key distinction: commodity exposure is manageable risk; zero-earnings speculation is unmanageable risk.
Thursday also brought a critical insight: the market was rotating out of commodity speculation and into manufacturing reality. While copper miners bled, electronic component manufacturers rallied. TTM Technologies jumped 6% on real PCB demand for AI servers. Corning held its gains on fiber and glass substrate orders. The message was clear: Wall Street is moving from ‘copper will be needed someday’ to ‘these companies are filling purchase orders right now.’
Friday: The Final Shakeout and Weekend Positioning
Friday’s scan revealed the week’s ultimate winners and losers. Applied Optoelectronics (AAOI) exploded 10.2% on nearly 12 million shares—a company that makes optical components for data centers finally getting recognized for having real revenue growth. Lumentum (LITE) up 2.7% on 7 million shares, continuing its steady climb. TTM Technologies up 1.78% on 4.3 million shares, consolidating Thursday’s 6% surge.
But the real story was the bloodbath in former high-flyers. Micron Technology (MU) absolutely cratered 4.8% on a staggering 50 million shares—the highest volume name on the entire scan. This wasn’t just profit-taking. This was institutional distribution. MU trades at 39 P/E with slowing memory pricing, and the market is finally waking up to the fact that not every semiconductor stock deserves AI-level valuations.
The negative-earnings cohort continued to suffer. Bloom Energy (BE) down another 3.3% on 11.4 million shares. Fluence Energy (FLNC) down 2.5% on 7.3 million shares. Allegro Microsystems (ALGM) down 2.8% on 5.2 million shares. Viasat (VSAT) down 2.3%. Every single one of these companies has a negative P/E ratio. Every single one burns cash. And every single one is getting systematically destroyed as momentum fades and fundamentals matter again.
Meanwhile, the quality names showed resilience. Corning (GLW) up 0.24% on 13.4 million shares—massive institutional volume holding the stock steady. Ciena (CIEN) down only 0.68% on 3.2 million shares, barely a scratch after a huge run. Coherent (COHR) down 1.7%—high valuation (306 P/E) but profitable with tech moats. These are the names that survive rotation because they have earnings floors and institutional support.
Five Key Themes from This Week
1. Liquidity-Driven Rallies End When Liquidity Tightens
Monday and Tuesday’s explosive rally was driven by rates stabilizing, liquidity loosening, massive short interest getting squeezed, and momentum funds returning. When those forces converge, high-beta mid-caps rip together regardless of individual fundamentals. But by Wednesday, liquidity conditions shifted—fast money started booking profits, momentum funds rotated, and suddenly fundamentals mattered. The result? Quality names corrected 3-5%. Garbage names fell 20-40% from highs.
2. Negative-Earnings Companies Are Death Traps in Rotation
Every single stock with a negative P/E ratio got destroyed this week. BE, FLNC, HUT, APLD, ALGM, VSAT—all down 20-40% from weekly highs. These companies don’t have earnings floors to catch them when momentum reverses. They burn cash, depend on narratives (hydrogen! solar! crypto! AI!), and evaporate when those narratives cool. For income traders, the lesson is brutal but simple: rich IV on unprofitable companies is a trap, not an opportunity.
3. Commodity Plays Need Price Stability to Work
Copper miners (ERO, SCCO) and uranium plays (CCJ) ran hard early week, then reversed violently. The thesis—electrification needs copper, AI needs nuclear power—isn’t wrong. But commodity stocks are leveraged bets on commodity prices. When copper or uranium prices stabilize or pull back, the stocks get hit twice: once on the commodity, once on sentiment. Unlike unprofitable tech, these companies have real assets and cash flow, so they find floors. But they’re not collar-friendly until commodity prices stabilize.
The biggest insight of the week: the market is rotating from ‘this commodity will be needed someday’ to ‘this company is filling purchase orders right now.’ Electronic component manufacturers—TTM (PCBs), GLW (fiber/glass), AAOI (optical components), LITE (optical networking)—all rallied or held steady because they have actual order books from hyperscalers. These aren’t speculative bets. Microsoft, Amazon, Google, and Meta are writing checks. That’s investable.
5. High Volume on Down Days Means Distribution, Not Opportunity
Micron (MU) dropping 4.8% on 50 million shares is institutional distribution, period. BE down on 11.4 million shares, COHR down on 7 million shares, FLNC down on 7.3 million shares—when stocks fall on massive volume, it’s not ‘cheap shares for smart buyers.’ It’s institutions heading for the exits. High volume on up days is accumulation. High volume on down days is distribution. Know the difference.
The Survivors: What Held Up and Why
Not every stock got destroyed this week. The names that survived and even thrived share common characteristics: actual earnings, institutional support, liquid options markets, and durable demand drivers. These are the stocks systematic traders should focus on for income strategies.
Ticker
Week Performance
Why It Matters
GLW
Strong +4%
Best collar candidate. 58 P/E with real earnings. Fiber optics, specialty glass for data centers. Boring company, exciting demand. Friday held steady on 13.4M shares.
LITE
Up +15%+
Optical networking for AI clusters. 262 P/E reflects explosive growth. Friday up 2.7% on 7M shares. Use wider collars due to volatility but trend is intact.
TTM
Up +7-8%
PCB manufacturer with explosive AI server demand. Thursday +6%, Friday +1.8% on 4.3M shares. 78 P/E but growing fast. Let it consolidate then add.
CIEN
Slight pullback
AI networking equipment. Friday down 0.68% on 3.2M shares after huge run. Normal profit-taking. Support held at 230. Still Tier 1 collar candidate.
WDC/STX
Flat to slight down
Hard drive storage for AI data. Minor weakness is consolidation. 28-50 P/E with actual profits. Institutional backing. Perfect for selling puts on dips.
AAOI
Explosive +10%
Optical components for data centers. Friday +10.2% on 12M shares. Negative P/E is concerning but revenue growing. High risk, high reward. Watch for follow-through.
The Casualties: What Died and Why It Won’t Come Back
Some stocks didn’t just pull back this week—they broke. These names revealed fundamental problems that momentum was masking. For systematic traders, these are cautionary tales about what happens when you confuse liquidity-driven rallies with investable business models.
Ticker
Week Performance
The Autopsy
BE
Down 20%+
Hydrogen fuel cells. Negative P/E, burns cash. Wed -7.2%, Fri -3.3% on 11.4M shares. Momentum died, no earnings floor caught it. Dead money.
FLNC
Down 15%+
Battery storage. Negative P/E. Friday -2.5% on 7.3M shares. Government subsidy dependent. If energy transition hype fades, this follows BE lower.
HUT
Down 10%+
Bitcoin miner pretending to be AI play. Wed -5.7%, then continued bleeding. When crypto sentiment turns, this collapses further. Pure speculation.
MU
Friday -4.8%
Huge institutional distribution. 50M shares on down day. Memory pricing slowing. 39 P/E doesn’t justify slowing growth. This is distribution, not opportunity.
ALGM
Down 8%+
Semiconductor with negative P/E. Friday -2.8% on 5.2M shares. Losing money in hot semi market signals terrible competitive position. Avoid.
What Comes Next: Strategic Guidance for the Weeks Ahead
This week taught us exactly where the opportunities and dangers lie. The market has made its preferences clear: companies with actual earnings and order books survive rotation. Companies that burn cash and depend on narratives get destroyed. For systematic income traders running collars, wheel strategies, or put-selling programs, here’s what matters going forward.
Near-Term Setup (Next 2-4 Weeks)
We’re entering a critical earnings period. GOOGL reports February 4, LLY reports February 11, and NVDA reports February 25. These are the companies that will determine whether AI infrastructure spending is accelerating, stable, or peaking. Until we get through this earnings gauntlet, volatility will remain elevated and momentum will be choppy.
For collar traders, the best strategy is patience. Let earnings pass, let IV crush happen, then establish positions 2-3 weeks after reports. The sweet spot is when stocks have found support post-earnings but IV is still slightly elevated. Don’t sell puts into earnings unless you’re deliberately trading the event. Wait for the dust to settle.
Focus on the Tier 1 survivors: GLW, CIEN, WDC, STX, LITE. These stocks held up during rotation, have institutional support, and offer liquid option markets. Any 3-5% pullback in these names is an entry opportunity, not a reason to panic. Use wider strikes on LITE due to volatility. Tighter collars work fine on GLW, WDC, and STX.
Medium-Term Themes (Next 2-3 Months)
The rotation from commodity speculation to manufacturing reality will continue. Copper and uranium may find floors if commodity prices stabilize, but they’re not systematic income candidates yet. Wait for 30-40% corrections from highs, then reassess. CCJ at $90-100 would be interesting. ERO needs copper prices to stop falling.
The electronic component manufacturers (TTM, GLW, AAOI, LITE) will continue to benefit from hyperscaler CapEx. This isn’t a one-quarter story. Microsoft, Amazon, Google, and Meta have multi-year build-out plans for AI infrastructure. These companies are filling orders that were placed 6-12 months ago and have visibility into the next 12-18 months. As long as hyperscaler spending continues—and all indications suggest it will—these stocks have fundamental support.
Watch for broadening participation. If the rally was healthy, we’d see money rotate from semiconductors into industrial automation, into power infrastructure, into cooling systems. If participation narrows and only a handful of names keep working, that’s a warning sign that the AI infrastructure thesis is losing steam. So far, participation is actually broadening—TTM, AAOI, and other second-tier plays are finally getting recognized.
What to Avoid Completely
Any stock with a negative P/E ratio should be off-limits for systematic income strategies. BE, FLNC, HUT, APLD, ALGM, VSAT—every single one got destroyed this week. Rich IV on these names looks tempting until the stock gaps down 20% and you’re stuck owning unprofitable businesses with no path to profitability. The premiums aren’t worth the risk.
Also avoid stocks showing massive distribution volume. Micron’s 50 million share down day on Friday is a giant red flag. When institutions are selling in size, you don’t want to be the one catching the knife. Let MU find a floor, let it consolidate for weeks, then reassess. Same applies to any stock showing repeated high-volume down days.
Finally, avoid parabolic movers immediately after big runs. When stocks go vertical—up 50% in two weeks—they need time to consolidate. That consolidation can be sideways (best case), a 20-30% pullback (normal case), or a complete reversal (worst case). Don’t chase. Let the move complete, let the stock digest gains, then enter on weakness if fundamentals support it.
Final Rankings: Your Systematic Income Watchlist
Based on everything we saw this week, here’s the definitive ranking for systematic income strategies. These are collar-friendly stocks with liquid options, institutional support, and earnings floors.
Tier 1: Core Holdings (Sell Puts on Any 3-5% Weakness)
1. GLW (Corning) – The gold standard. 58 P/E with real earnings. Deep options. Institutional quality. Any pullback is a gift.2. WDC (Western Digital) – Storage for AI data. 28 P/E with profits. Minor weakness is consolidation. Perfect for puts.3. STX (Seagate) – Same story as WDC. 50 P/E, actual earnings, institutional backing.4. CIEN (Ciena) – AI networking. 296 P/E reflects growth. Support held at 230. Still Tier 1 despite valuation.
5. LITE (Lumentum) – Optical networking. 262 P/E, volatile but profitable. Use wider strikes.6. TTM (TTM Tech) – PCB manufacturing. 78 P/E, explosive growth. Let it consolidate from +6% move.7. COHR (Coherent) – 306 P/E stretched but profitable with moats. Only for aggressive traders.8. AAOI (Applied Opto) – Just broke out +10%. Negative P/E is concerning. Watch for follow-through before entering.
Tier 3: Watch List (Wait for Deeper Corrections)
9. CCJ (Cameco) – Down 3.9% this week after huge run. 148 P/E needs perfect execution. Wait for 25-30% off highs.10. CVX (Chevron) – Reported earnings Friday. 4.4% yield provides cushion. Wait for post-earnings settle.Copper miners (ERO, SCCO) – Real assets but need commodity price stability. Not ready yet.
The Avoid List (Do Not Touch)
BE (Bloom Energy) – Negative P/E, burns cash, down 20%+ this weekFLNC (Fluence) – Same story, government subsidy dependentHUT (Hut 8) – Bitcoin miner, pure speculationMU (Micron) – Massive distribution, 50M share down dayALGM (Allegro) – Losing money in hot marketVSAT (Viasat) – Negative P/E, thin volumeAPLD (Applied Digital) – Data center leasing with massive debt
Conclusion: Stick to What Works, Avoid What Doesn’t
This week delivered a masterclass in what happens when momentum meets fundamentals. The names with real earnings and institutional support—GLW, CIEN, WDC, STX, LITE, TTM—survived rotation and remain investable. The names that burn cash and depend on narratives—BE, FLNC, HUT, ALGM—got systematically destroyed and aren’t coming back anytime soon.
For systematic income traders, the lesson is brutally simple: you cannot generate repeatable income from unprofitable companies. Rich IV is a trap when there’s no earnings floor to catch the stock when momentum reverses. Stick to boring companies in exciting trends. Sell puts on quality names when they pull back 3-5%. Use collars to protect profits while generating income. And never, ever confuse a liquidity-driven rally with an investable business model.
The AI infrastructure build-out is real. Hyperscalers are spending billions on data centers, networking equipment, storage, and components. But within that theme, there’s a massive difference between companies filling purchase orders (GLW, TTM, LITE) and companies hoping to someday maybe get a contract (BE, FLNC, APLD). Focus on the former. Avoid the latter.
Next week brings critical earnings from GOOGL (Feb 4) and the setup into LLY (Feb 11) and NVDA (Feb 25). Use this time to build watchlists, identify entry points, and prepare for post-earnings opportunities. The stocks that survive the next earnings cycle will be the ones you want to own for the rest of 2026. Focus on quality, follow the earnings, and let the market separate wheat from chaff. That’s how you generate systematic income without blowing up your account.
Why Electronic Components Are Ripping While Commodities Bleed
Today’s tape is showing you exactly what rotation looks like in real time. While copper miners and uranium names are getting crushed—ERO down 5.7%, CCJ off 3.9%—the electronic component plays are absolutely ripping. TTM Technologies up 6%, Corning up 4.1%. This isn’t random noise. This is smart money rotating out of commodities that ran too far too fast and into the picks-and-shovels companies that actually manufacture the components for AI infrastructure.
What makes this particularly important for systematic traders is that it’s revealing where the real earnings power sits. The commodity plays were narrative-driven momentum trades. The electronic component manufacturers have actual order books, real margins, and backlog visibility. Let’s break down what’s happening and which names are telling you where to focus versus which ones are screaming ‘stay away.’
The Clear Winners: Electronic Components and PCB Manufacturers
TTM Technologies (TTM) – Up 5.97%
This is the star of today’s show. TTM makes printed circuit boards—the actual physical boards that all semiconductor chips sit on. This stock trades at 81 P/E, which sounds expensive until you realize the company has explosive growth tied to AI server demand. Volume today: 282,801—well above average. This is institutional accumulation, not retail gambling.
What makes TTM critical: hyperscalers need PCBs for every AI server they build. Nvidia sells the chips, but TTM provides the boards those chips mount on. This is true picks-and-shovels exposure with actual manufacturing capacity and customer commitments. The 6% move today isn’t speculation—it’s a revaluation as the market figures out that PCB demand is going to be insane for years.
Corning (GLW) – Up 4.09%
We’ve talked about GLW before—it remains the gold standard for collar-friendly AI infrastructure plays. Today’s 4% move on 2.6 million shares is continuation of a steady, institutional-quality uptrend. GLW makes optical fiber, specialty glass for data centers, and glass substrates for displays. P/E of 58 with real earnings and a decades-long moat in specialty glass manufacturing.
Why GLW keeps working: boring company, exciting secular demand. AI data centers need fiber. Liquid cooling systems need specialty glass. Advanced packaging needs glass substrates. GLW has pricing power, long-term contracts, and the capacity to deliver. This is exactly what you want to own or sell puts against—predictable, profitable, and positioned in front of multi-year demand.
The Losers: Commodity Plays Hit Reality
ERO (Ero Copper) – Down 5.67%
Copper miners are getting destroyed today. ERO down 5.7% on heavy volume (575,033 shares) tells you that the copper reflation trade is cooling off. This stock trades at 27 P/E, which is actually reasonable for a miner, but the problem is copper prices themselves. When commodity prices pull back, miners get hit twice: once on the commodity, once on sentiment.
The narrative was that AI data centers and electrification would drive massive copper demand. That’s still probably true long-term, but short-term the trade got crowded and fast money is taking profits. Copper miners have real assets and real cash flow, so they’re not going to zero, but they’re also not collar-friendly right now because commodity volatility kills systematic income strategies.
CCJ (Cameco) – Down 3.91%
Uranium names are giving back gains. CCJ down 3.9% on 1.1 million shares after a monster run. This stock trades at 148 P/E—pure growth expectations priced in. The thesis was nuclear renaissance, data center power demand, and government support. All of that is still valid, but after a parabolic move, profit-taking is natural.
CCJ is a quality company with real uranium production and long-term contracts. Unlike garbage speculative names, this has fundamental support. But at 148 P/E, there’s no margin for error. If uranium prices stabilize or pull back, the stock has a long way to fall before it looks cheap again. This is a ‘watch and wait’ situation—not a sell-puts-into-weakness opportunity yet.
HUT (Hut 8) – Down 1.87%
Bitcoin miner trying to be an AI play. Down 1.87% which is actually showing relative strength compared to the beating other speculative names took yesterday. But let’s be clear: this remains pure speculation with a 32 P/E on erratic earnings. When crypto sentiment fades or AI hype cools, this goes much lower. Not collar material.
Mixed Signals: Tech Hardware Holding Firm
WDC (Western Digital) – Down 1.38%
Hard drive maker for AI storage. Down slightly at 1.4% on huge volume (3.86 million shares). This is not weakness—this is consolidation after a strong run. WDC trades at 28 P/E with actual profits and growing demand for high-capacity storage in data centers. AI models need somewhere to store training data. WDC provides that.
For systematic traders, WDC remains one of the best risk-reward setups. Slight pullbacks on high volume are buy-the-dip opportunities, not reasons to panic. The company has real earnings, institutional support, and secular demand. This is exactly the kind of name where you wait for 2-3% weakness, then sell puts or establish collar positions.
STX (Seagate Technology) – Down 0.64%
Nearly flat on the day at down 0.64%. Same story as WDC—hard drive demand for AI storage is real, the stock has earnings support (50 P/E), and institutions are holding positions. Minor weakness is noise, not a reason to abandon the thesis. Both STX and WDC belong in the ‘quality tech holding up well’ category.
The Garbage Bin: Avoid These Entirely
BE (Bloom Energy) – Up 0.97%
Tiny bounce today after getting crushed 7.2% yesterday. This stock has no earnings (negative P/E), burns cash, and depends entirely on hydrogen fuel cell hype and government subsidies. The 1% move today is dead-cat-bounce garbage. When momentum stocks with no earnings start bouncing, it’s usually retail trying to catch a falling knife. Stay away.
ALGM (Allegro Microsystems) – Down 2.53%
Semiconductor company with negative P/E. Down 2.5% today on thin volume (395,995 shares). This is a company losing money in a hot semiconductor market—that tells you everything you need to know about their competitive position. When the easy money dries up, these unprofitable semi companies get destroyed. Not collar material.
GFS (GlobalFoundries) – Down 1.26%
Contract chip manufacturer with negative P/E. Volume is incredibly thin (142,165 shares). This is a government-subsidized foundry that can’t make money despite massive semiconductor demand. The business model doesn’t work without subsidies, and thin volume means you’ll get terrible option pricing. Hard pass.
What This Sector Divergence Means
Today’s action is revealing a critical shift: the market is moving from commodity speculation to manufacturing reality. Copper and uranium ran on narrative-driven momentum—’electrification needs copper’ and ‘AI needs nuclear power.’ Those narratives aren’t wrong, but they got ahead of fundamentals. Now we’re seeing profit-taking and rotation.
Where’s the money going? Into the companies that actually make the physical components for AI infrastructure. TTM makes the circuit boards. GLW makes the fiber and glass. WDC and STX make the storage. These companies have order books, backlog visibility, and pricing power. They’re not trading on hope—they’re trading on actual purchase orders from hyperscalers.
The divergence also exposes which stocks have real earnings support versus which ones were pure momentum. Stocks with negative P/E ratios (BE, ALGM, GFS) are struggling or bouncing weakly. Stocks with actual profits and reasonable valuations (GLW, WDC, STX, TTM) are either rallying or holding steady. This is exactly what you want to see if you’re focused on quality over speculation.
Ranking Today’s Movers by Quality and Opportunity
Tier 1: Buy the Dip / Establish Positions
Ticker
Rationale
GLW
Up 4.1% on institutional volume. Boring company, exciting demand. Perfect collar DNA. Any pullback is a gift.
TTM
Up 6% on real demand. PCB manufacturing for AI servers. High P/E but explosive growth. Watch for consolidation to add.
WDC
Down 1.4% is consolidation, not weakness. Storage demand for AI is real. 28 P/E with profits. Sell puts on weakness.
STX
Nearly flat. Same story as WDC. Quality tech with earnings support. Minor pullbacks are entry points.
Tier 2: Watch List – Wait for Better Setup
Ticker
Rationale
CCJ
Down 3.9% after big run. Quality company but 148 P/E needs perfect execution. Wait for deeper pullback to 25-30% off highs.
ERO
Down 5.7%. Copper miner with real assets but commodity exposure cuts both ways. Wait for copper prices to stabilize.
SCCO
Down 3%. Large-cap copper miner with 43 P/E. Better quality than ERO but same commodity risk. Wait for sector to find floor.
ACMR
Up 1.7%. Semi equipment with 33 P/E. Thin volume (87,667 shares). Options will be expensive. Only for patient traders.
Tier 3: Avoid Completely
Ticker
Rationale
BE
Up 1% after down 7.2% yesterday. No earnings, burns cash, pure speculation. Dead cat bounce.
HUT
Down 1.9%. Bitcoin miner pretending to be AI play. When crypto sentiment turns, this collapses.
ALGM
Down 2.5%. Negative P/E. Losing money in a hot semi market means terrible competitive position.
GFS
Down 1.3%. Negative P/E, thin volume (142K shares). Government-subsidized foundry that can’t make money.
VSAT
Up 1.7%. Satellite communications with negative P/E. Thin volume (84,589 shares). Avoid.
Bottom Line: Follow the Earnings, Not the Narrative
Today’s divergence is teaching a critical lesson: narratives drive initial momentum, but earnings determine which stocks survive rotation. Copper and uranium ran on electrification and nuclear power stories. Those stories aren’t wrong, but they got ahead of actual commodity fundamentals and now they’re correcting.
Meanwhile, the companies that actually manufacture AI infrastructure components—circuit boards, optical fiber, specialty glass, data storage—are rallying because they have order books and backlog visibility. TTM and GLW aren’t guessing about future demand. They’re filling purchase orders from Microsoft, Amazon, Google, and Meta. That’s the difference between speculation and investable business models.
For systematic income traders, this creates clear guidance: focus on Tier 1 names with actual earnings and deep option liquidity. GLW remains the gold standard. WDC and STX offer storage exposure with profit support. TTM is higher risk due to valuation but has explosive growth. All of these are collar-friendly because they have earnings floors and institutional backing.
Avoid the garbage bin entirely—BE, HUT, ALGM, GFS, VSAT. These stocks have no earnings, burn cash, and depend on momentum that can evaporate overnight. Rich IV on these names is a trap, not an opportunity. The premiums look juicy until the stock gaps down 20% and you’re stuck owning unprofitable companies with no visibility to profitability. Stick to quality. Follow the earnings. Let the speculators chase narratives while you collect systematic income from companies that actually make money.
SEO Title: Identity Thieves Paid Their Own Bills With Stolen Money – Real Case Meta Description: Criminals used stolen bank accounts to pay their electricity, trash, cable. Protect yourself at SeniorShield.online Category: Real Stories Word Count: ~1,000 words
——————————————————————————–
When I sat down to review my parents’ fraudulent transactions in November 2024, I expected typical fraud: ATM withdrawals, online shopping, wire transfers. What I found was far more disturbing.
CR&R Trash Company: $217.19
Southern California Edison: $1,346.38
Dish Network: $271.34
City of San Jacinto utilities: $209.51
Frontier Communications: $49.95
The criminals weren’t just stealing. They were living off my parents’ money—paying their electric bill, cable, internet, and trash service.
They had created an entire household funded completely by identity theft. And my parents had no idea for 37 days.
October 24, 2024. U.S. Bank statement. One line item:
“CR&R TRASH COMPANY TO PAY THE BILL – $217.19”
I asked my father: “Do you have trash service with CR&R?”
“What’s CR&R? We use Waste Management.”
That’s when I realized: someone was using his account to pay their own bills. Not stealing and running. Stealing and living normally.
I scrolled further. More utilities. All companies my parents didn’t use. All addresses they didn’t own. All services funding someone else’s comfortable life.
This is what modern identity theft looks like. It’s not a one-time grab. It’s long-term parasitic living off your retirement savings.
How ACH Utility Fraud Works
ACH (Automated Clearing House) is how most Americans pay bills electronically. When you set up autopay with your electric company, that’s ACH—they pull money directly from your account each month.
Here’s the terrifying simplicity of how criminals exploit this:
STEP 1: Steal your account information (printed on every check you write)
STEP 2: Call utility companies, set up service at their address using your bank account
STEP 3: Enjoy electricity, internet, cable—all billed to you
STEP 4: You discover it weeks later when reviewing statements (if you review them at all)
STEP 5: Banks are reluctant to reverse ACH utility charges because service was “legitimately provided”
The brilliant (and infuriating) part: utility companies receive real payment. They have no reason to question it. And by the time you notice, criminals have enjoyed weeks of services on your dime.
Every Bill They Paid With My Parents’ Stolen Money
Let me show you exactly where my parents’ retirement savings went:
Dish Network – $271.34 (October 8) Cable TV service in San Diego—50 miles from where my parents live. My parents don’t have Dish. Never have. But someone in San Diego watched premium cable for a month, funded by my father’s life savings.
City of San Jacinto Utilities – $209.51 (October 11) Municipal water and sewer for a home 80 miles away. Someone took showers, flushed toilets, watered their lawn—all billed to my parents.
Southern California Edison – $1,346.38 (October 15) This electric bill alone was more than most people’s rent. My parents’ actual Edison bill? $180/month. Someone was living in a mansion—or running the AC 24/7—on my parents’ account.
City of San Jacinto – $156.44 (October 24) A second utility payment, 13 days after the first. Ongoing service. Recurring bills. This wasn’t temporary. This was infrastructure.
CR&R Trash Company – $217.19 (October 24) Weekly trash pickup in San Diego. Because criminals living off stolen money still need garbage collection.
Frontier Communications – $49.95 (September 30) The test transaction. Internet service. Probably the criminals’ own connection, used to research my parents, plan the fraud, and order more services.
Total utility theft: $2,054.57
But this number misses the real story. This wasn’t a theft. This was a lifestyle.
Why This Level of Brazen Fraud Works
What strikes me most about utility fraud is the sheer confidence it reveals.
This wasn’t a smash-and-grab. This wasn’t someone stealing a credit card number to buy gift cards before getting caught.
This was criminals establishing recurring monthly bills. They expected these services to continue for months, maybe years.
They had a physical address: 691 S. Rosario Ave., San Diego. That’s where they:
• Had checks sent (after calling Bank of America pretending to be my father)
• Connected utilities
• Lived comfortably
• Planned long-term fraud
They weren’t hiding. They were living openly, paying bills like regular citizens. Using stolen money. With complete confidence they’d never get caught.
And you know what? They were almost right. We didn’t discover the fraud for 37 days. If we’d taken just two more weeks, they might have gotten away with $400,000+.
Here’s what I learned fighting with banks for 6 months: ACH utility fraud is nearly impossible to reverse.
Why? Because unlike credit card fraud:
❌ Service was legitimately provided (electricity was delivered)
❌ The utility company received real payment
❌ The burden of proof is on YOU to prove you didn’t authorize it
❌ You must prove you DON’T live at that address
❌ You must prove you DON’T have service with that company
For each utility charge, I had to:
• Call the utility company and wait on hold 45+ minutes
• Verify my father had no account
• Request written confirmation
• Mail documents to the bank
• File police report
• Provide utility company’s letter
• Wait for bank investigation (30-90 days)
• Often appeal denials
• Start over
The CR&R trash bill alone took 3 weeks and 5 phone calls to resolve.
Meanwhile, credit card fraud? “We see an unauthorized charge. We’ll reverse it.” Done in 5 minutes.
The Red Flags Banks Ignored
Modern fraud detection should have caught these instantly:
Geographic Mismatch Parents live in San Clemente. Bills paid for San Diego (50 miles) and San Jacinto (80 miles). OBVIOUS RED FLAG.
Duplicate Utilities Parents already had Southern California Edison service. The system should flag a second Edison account for a different address. FAILED.
New Service Providers Parents never had Dish Network, Frontier, San Jacinto utilities. All new companies. Should trigger review. FAILED.
Service Area Impossibility CR&R doesn’t even serve San Clemente—it’s a San Diego company. Geographic impossibility. FAILED.
Zero alerts triggered. Zero calls from the bank. Zero protection.
Want to know what would have saved my parents $239,145?
Five minutes every morning reviewing yesterday’s transactions.
That’s it. Not sophisticated cybersecurity. Not expensive monitoring services (though those help). Just consistent daily checking.
September 30: First fraud ($49.95 Frontier charge) If checked daily: Caught same day. Call bank. Freeze account. Total loss: $49.95 What actually happened: Discovered 37 days later. Total loss: $239,145
The difference between daily and monthly monitoring: $239,095
Here’s the 5-minute routine:
Every morning before coffee:
1. Open banking app (2 minutes)
2. Check yesterday’s transactions (2 minutes)
3. Question anything unfamiliar (1 minute)
If you see:
• Utility you don’t recognize → Call them immediately
• Company you don’t use → Bank fraud hotline same day
• Location that’s not yours → Freeze account instantly
That’s it. Five minutes. Every day. It’s the difference between catching fraud at $50 vs. $50,000.
How to Protect Yourself Right Now
ACTION #1: Enable Alerts for EVERY Transaction
Set up text + email alerts:
• Threshold: $0 (yes, zero—alert on everything)
• Delivery: Text message (instant) + Email (backup)
• All accounts: Checking, savings, credit cards
• All transaction types: Checks, ACH, debit, wire
ACTION #2: Know Your Service Providers
Create a list TODAY:
• Electric company name
• Water/sewer provider
• Trash service
• Internet provider
• Cable/streaming services
Tape it inside your checkbook. Any charge from a company NOT on this list = fraud.
3. If YES → Get account details. Verify address. Confirm you authorized it.
ACTION #4: Use Credit Cards Instead of ACH When Possible
Credit cards have better fraud protection than ACH debits:
• Easier to dispute
• Better detection algorithms
• Your liability: $0-50
• ACH liability: Often the full amount
ACTION #5: STOP USING CHECKS
Every check you write exposes:
• Full account number
• Routing number
• Signature
• Personal information
Criminals only need one stolen check to set up unlimited ACH debits.
Modern alternatives:
• Online bill pay through your bank
• Credit/debit cards
• Zelle for people you know
• Wire transfers for large amounts
>>> START PROTECTING YOURSELF at SeniorShield.online <<<
Click Here
What Happened to the Criminals?
Eight months later, I checked with Detective Harris from Orange County Sheriff.
“Any arrests?” I asked.
“None. The San Diego address was abandoned by the time we investigated. The names on utility accounts were likely fake. Trail went cold.”
Over $2,000 in utility fraud. Complete documentation. Physical address. Names. Zero arrests. Zero prosecution.
Why? Because once banks reimburse fraud (through their insurance), law enforcement considers it a “victimless crime.” No victim loss = no investigation = no consequences for criminals.
The system won’t protect you. You must protect yourself.
The Bottom Line
The utility fraud cost us $2,054.57—small compared to the overall $239,145 theft.
But it revealed something chilling: criminals weren’t desperate. They weren’t panicking. They were comfortable.
They had infrastructure. They had a physical address. They were paying ongoing bills. They expected to operate for months, maybe years.
That confidence tells you: they’d done this before. They knew banks don’t catch it. They knew police don’t investigate. They knew they could build an entire household on stolen money.
And they were right—until we accidentally discovered it 37 days later.
Most victims take 90+ days to discover utility fraud. By then, criminals have moved on. Money is gone. Recovery is nearly impossible.
If you’re tracking mid-cap momentum names, today’s tape tells a very different story than last week. Bloom Energy (BE) down 7.2%. Iamgold (IAG) off 6.4%. Hut 8 (HUT) down 5.7%. Applied Digital (APLD) losing 5.3%. This isn’t random profit-taking. This is what happens when liquidity-driven momentum trades meet reality checks, and when the hot money that rushed in starts looking for the exits.
What we’re seeing today is the flip side of last week’s explosive rally: mean reversion, profit-taking, and the painful discovery that not every parabolic move has staying power. For traders running systematic strategies—particularly those looking to enter collar positions on weakness—this creates both opportunity and continued risk. Let’s break down what’s actually selling off, why it matters, and which names might offer tactical entry points versus which ones are telling you to stay away.
Four Distinct Selloff Patterns
1. Energy Transition Darlings Hit Reality (BE, FLNC)
Bloom Energy (BE) getting crushed 7.2% and Fluence Energy (FLNC) flat to down tells you everything about what happens when hydrogen fuel cell and battery storage hype meets valuation gravity. BE trades at a negative P/E, meaning it’s still burning cash. The stock had a monster run on AI data center power stories and energy transition narratives. Today’s selloff? Either profit-taking after the run, or smart money realizing the fundamentals don’t justify the valuation.
These are pure story stocks. No earnings, negative cash flow in BE’s case, and entirely dependent on government subsidies and corporate CapEx programs that can shift on a dime. When momentum reverses, these names don’t have earnings floors to catch them. They fall hard and fast.
2. Commodity and Mining Names Giving Back Gains (IAG, CCJ, CENX)
Iamgold (IAG) down 6.4%, Cameco (CCJ) off 3.6%, and Century Aluminum (CENX) up only 1% after massive recent runs—this is classic commodity mean reversion. These names ripped on the reflation trade, China stimulus hopes, and nuclear renaissance narratives. Today they’re giving some of it back because commodities don’t go straight up, and because fast money always books profits first.
The difference between these and the energy transition plays: these companies have real assets, real production, and real cash flow tied to physical commodity prices. IAG mines gold. CCJ mines uranium. CENX makes aluminum. When gold pulls back or uranium cools off, the stocks follow. But they have floors. They’re not going to zero because they own mines and smelters. This makes them fundamentally different risk profiles than negative-earnings story stocks.
3. Crypto Proxy and AI Infrastructure Speculation (HUT, APLD)
Hut 8 (HUT) down 5.7% and Applied Digital (APLD) down 5.3% represent the highest-risk, most speculative end of this selloff. HUT is a Bitcoin miner that’s also trying to pivot into AI infrastructure. APLD leases data center capacity and has massive debt. Both stocks have negative P/E ratios. Both are entirely momentum-driven with no fundamental support.
These names live and die by two things: crypto sentiment and AI hype. When either cools off—or when risk appetite fades—they get destroyed. The P/E ratios tell you everything: HUT at 33x with no earnings reliability, APLD with no P/E at all because it’s still losing money. These are not collar candidates. These are trading sardines, not eating sardines.
4. Quality Tech and Semi Equipment Holding Up Better (CIEN, LITE, COHR, STX, WDC)
Here’s where it gets interesting. Ciena (CIEN) down only 3.1%, Lumentum (LITE) down 2.6%, Coherent (COHR) down 4%, Seagate (STX) down 0.5%, Western Digital (WDC) down 0.25%—these are the names with actual earnings, real products, and institutional support. They’re not immune to profit-taking, but they’re not collapsing either. CIEN trades at 293x P/E but has explosive growth. STX and WDC have P/E ratios in the 40s-50s with actual profits. COHR at 306x is pricey but the company is profitable and has real tech moats.
What’s Really Happening Under the Hood
This selloff isn’t about a fundamental shift in AI infrastructure demand or commodity cycles. It’s about momentum exhaustion and profit-taking after parabolic moves. Here’s what you need to understand: the fast money that drove these names up 20-50% in a few weeks is now rotating. Some of it’s booking profits. Some of it’s getting margin calls. Some of it’s chasing the next thing. This is how momentum always ends—not with a fundamental reason, but with the simple reality that nothing goes straight up forever.
The key distinction today is between names that are giving back gains but still have fundamental support (CIEN, CCJ, STX, WDC) versus names that are revealing they never had fundamental support in the first place (BE, HUT, APLD). The former will likely find buyers on weakness. The latter will keep falling until they find technical levels or capitulation.
Ranking Names by Risk and Opportunity
For income traders and systematic collar strategies, today’s selloff creates a spectrum of opportunities. Some names are now at better entry points. Others are telling you to stay away. The critical question: which stocks are experiencing healthy profit-taking versus which ones are beginning structural declines?
Green Tier: Tactical Buy-the-Dip Opportunities
These names have corrected but maintain fundamental support and option market quality.
Ticker
Rationale
CIEN
Down 3.1% after massive run. Real AI networking demand, actual earnings growth, liquid options. This is profit-taking, not fundamental deterioration. Weakness here is a gift for collar entry.
STX/WDC
Nearly flat on the day. Hard drive demand for AI storage is real. P/E ratios in the 40s-50s with actual profits. Deep options markets. These are boring businesses in exciting trends—perfect for systematic income.
CCJ
Down 3.6% but uranium thesis intact. 149 P/E reflects growth expectations. Real assets, government support for nuclear. Commodity pullback is normal—not a reason to abandon the position.
LITE
Down 2.6% after parabolic run. Optical components for AI clusters. High P/E (250x) but growing fast. Options liquid. Use wider collar strikes given volatility.
Yellow Tier: Proceed with Extreme Caution
High risk but tradable if you’re disciplined and understand you’re speculating.
Ticker
Rationale
COHR
Down 4%. Expensive at 306 P/E but profitable with tech moats. Risk: valuation is stretched. If momentum fully reverses, this has a long way to fall. Only for aggressive traders.
IAG
Down 6.4% after big run. Gold miner with real assets but commodity exposure cuts both ways. 35 P/E reasonable. Option quality is marginal. Only if you want gold exposure and accept volatility.
CENX
Up 1% today but watch closely. Aluminum is cyclical. 62 P/E suggests growth priced in. Real assets provide floor but aluminum price determines ceiling. Tactical only.
Red Tier: Avoid for Systematic Strategies
These are falling for fundamental reasons, not just profit-taking. Stay away.
Ticker
Rationale
BE
Down 7.2%. Negative P/E means no earnings. Hydrogen fuel cell story is pure speculation. No earnings floor to catch it. This is dead money until fundamentals improve—which could be never.
HUT
Down 5.7%. Bitcoin miner trying to be an AI play. 33 P/E with erratic earnings. Pure speculation. When crypto sentiment turns or AI hype fades, this goes much lower. Not collar-worthy.
APLD
Down 5.3%. No P/E because it loses money. Data center leasing with massive debt. Entirely momentum-driven. When momentum dies, so does the stock. Trading sardine, not eating sardine.
FLNC
Flat today but negative P/E. Battery storage story depends entirely on government subsidies and utility CapEx. No fundamental support. If energy transition hype fades, this follows BE lower.
What Systematic Traders Should Do Now
First, recognize what this selloff represents: it’s not the end of the AI infrastructure or commodity reflation themes. It’s a healthy (or unhealthy, depending on the name) correction after parabolic moves. The key question is whether individual stocks are correcting within intact uptrends or beginning structural declines.
For collar traders and income strategies, today’s weakness creates entry opportunities in the Green Tier names—particularly CIEN, STX, WDC, and CCJ. These stocks have pulled back but maintain fundamental support, liquid option markets, and durable business models. Weakness here is a chance to establish positions with better cost basis and richer premium collection opportunities.
The Yellow Tier names—COHR, IAG, CENX—require more caution. These are tradable but only if you understand you’re taking commodity exposure or valuation risk. If you enter these, use wider protective collars and smaller position sizes. Don’t bet the ranch on cyclical commodities or stretched valuations.
The Red Tier names—BE, HUT, APLD, FLNC—should be avoided entirely for systematic income strategies. These stocks lack earnings support, burn cash, and depend on narratives that can evaporate overnight. When they fall, they fall hard and fast with no floor. Don’t try to catch falling knives just because the IV looks juicy. Rich premiums on garbage companies are still garbage.
Bottom Line: Separate Signal from Noise
Today’s selloff is revealing which companies had real fundamental support and which ones were riding pure momentum. The tech and semi equipment names with actual earnings (CIEN, STX, WDC, LITE) are holding up relatively well and pulling back in orderly fashion. The commodity plays (CCJ, IAG, CENX) are experiencing normal mean reversion after big runs. The speculative garbage (BE, HUT, APLD) is getting exposed for what it always was: hot money chasing stories with no earnings support.
For income traders, the lesson is simple: wait for quality names to correct, then establish collar positions with protection in place. Don’t chase momentum on the way up, and don’t try to catch falling knives on the way down. Let the market do its work. The stocks with real businesses will find support. The stocks without fundamentals will keep falling until they hit technical levels or complete capitulation.
The opportunity today is in patience and selectivity. Use this weakness to build watchlists of quality names at better prices. Avoid the temptation to “get a deal” on speculative junk just because it’s down big. Stick to companies with actual earnings, real assets, and liquid option markets. That’s how you generate repeatable income without blowing up your account when momentum reverses.
What’s Really Driving These Moves and Which Names Are Collar-Friendly
If you’ve been watching mid-cap tech and commodities lately, you’ve seen some eye-popping moves. Stocks like Corning (GLW), Ciena (CIEN), Celestica (CLS), and a parade of miners, solar names, and space plays all ripping 20–50% in short order. This isn’t random. It’s not a broad economic recovery. And it’s definitely not “safe.”
What we’re seeing is a very specific cocktail of AI infrastructure build-out, commodities reflation, defense spending narratives, and violent short-covering in heavily shorted names. For income traders running collars or wheel strategies, this creates both opportunity and danger. Let’s break down what’s actually happening, which names make sense for systematic income generation, and which ones are just squeeze garbage you should avoid.
The Five Driving Forces
1. AI Infrastructure CapEx Explosion
The biggest driver across this entire list is physical AI infrastructure. This isn’t the software hype cycle anymore. The hyperscalers—Microsoft, Amazon, Google, Meta—are spending astronomical sums on data centers, optical networking, power systems, cooling, and server manufacturing. Wall Street finally woke up to the fact that someone has to actually build this stuff.
Key names benefiting: GLW (fiber optics and glass substrates), CIEN and LITE (optical networking gear), CLS (AI server manufacturing with exploding margins), ACMR (semiconductor equipment), APLD (data center leasing), and DOCN (cloud hosting with AI workload positioning). These aren’t vapor plays. Companies are reporting real order flow, growing backlogs, and actual earnings beats tied to hyperscaler demand.
2. Hard Asset Reflation and Commodity Supercycle Talk
The most underappreciated piece of this rally is the reflation trade in hard assets. Inflation never fully died. China stimulus whispers are circulating. Energy transition metals and nuclear are suddenly politically fashionable again. Gold and silver are catching flows as real rates wobble and geopolitical uncertainty persists.
Key names: CDE and IAG (silver/gold leverage), UEC (uranium revival as nuclear becomes “clean” again), ALB (lithium rebound after brutal collapse), CENX (aluminum for infrastructure, defense, and autos). This isn’t meme trading. This is a bet on real physical demand for materials in a world that still needs copper, lithium, uranium, and aluminum regardless of what tech does.
3. Space, Defense, and “New Cold War” Narratives
Names like LUNR (Intuitive Machines) and PL (Planet Labs) are pure narrative plays fueled by government contracts, defense spending increases, and dual-use space technology. These stocks were destroyed previously, carried massive short interest, and became squeeze fuel when the defense/space narrative caught fire. These aren’t about earnings yet. They’re about story plus shorts getting carried out.
4. Rate Stabilization and High-Beta Mean Reversion
Solar (RUN) and insurance tech (LMND) represent oversold names that got absolutely destroyed and are now bouncing hard on any hint of rate relief. Solar was left for dead due to financing fears. Lemonade was crushed on profitability concerns. Both carried heavy short interest. When rates stabilized and liquidity loosened, these names exploded. This is classic dead-cat-learns-to-fly action—oversold rebound plus shorts covering, not fundamentals permanently fixed.
5. The Liquidity, Momentum, and Short-Covering Storm
Here’s the key insight that ties everything together: rates stopped going up, liquidity loosened, short interest was massive across these names, momentum funds returned, retail started chasing again, and CTAs flipped long. When all those forces converge, mid-cap high-beta names rip together regardless of individual fundamentals. This is theme convergence, not company-specific miracles.
What This Rally Is NOT
Let’s be blunt about what we’re not seeing. This is not a broad economic recovery. This is not value investing. This is not defensive money flowing into quality. This is not “safe.” What this is: liquidity-driven theme clustering, narrative convergence, short covering, and momentum chasing. Historically, moves like this end in one of three ways: sideways digestion (best case), sharp 20–40% pullbacks, or rotation into laggards. Very rarely do they go straight up forever.
Ranking Names by Collar-Friendliness
For income traders, the critical question is: which of these names can you actually run systematic collars on? Not every high-flyer makes sense for protected income strategies. You need weekly or monthly option chains with real volume, stocks you’d be willing to own through a drawdown, implied volatility rich enough to pay for protection, and companies that won’t gap down 40% on a single headline.
Tier 1: Excellent Collar Candidates (Core Income Trades)
Ticker
Rationale
GLW
Best overall. Deep options, institutional liquidity, real AI infrastructure tailwind. IV elevated but not insane. Boring company, exciting demand—perfect collar DNA.
ALB
Huge options market. Lithium volatility equals fat premiums. Asset-backed business. Governments won’t let lithium disappear. Risk: commodity whipsaws. Reward: excellent income plus protection pricing.
CIEN
AI networking equals durable theme. Clean chart, tight spreads, active calls. Textbook collar stock.
CENX
Real assets, real demand. Defense plus infrastructure exposure. Options liquid enough to work. More cyclical but still collar-worthy.
Tier 2: Conditional/Tactical Collars
Good only if you’re disciplined on strikes and duration.
Ticker
Rationale
LITE
Strong AI optics story, tradable IV. But violent gap risk around earnings. Use wider collars. No tight strikes.
CLS
Massive runner, premium rich. But parabolic charts kill collars if you cap too tight. Rule: sell calls farther out or get called every time.
ACMR
Semi equipment equals cyclical. Options decent but thinner. Needs patience. Fine for monthly collars, not weekly churn.
RUN
Solar volatility equals juicy premiums. But this can drop 30% on policy headlines. Only collar if comfortable owning it ugly.
Tier 3: Poor Collar Candidates (Avoid for Income)
These are trading vehicles, not income machines: DOCN (thin options, takeover rumor gaps), LMND (IV too chaotic, earnings gaps), PL (story stock, inconsistent options), LUNR (absolute no—binary space risk), APLD (squeeze stock, IV lying to you), UEC (headline gaps, thin protection), IAG/CDE (erratic option pricing, poor risk/reward for income).
Spotlight: CIEN (Ciena) Setup
CIEN closed at $257.30, up 3.96% on the day, after trading as high as $261.69. The core driver is legitimate: AI and data-center networking demand. Ciena sells high-speed optical and networking gear that hyperscalers need to link AI clusters. Recent earnings showed a beat on revenue and earnings with raised outlook and strong cloud demand. This isn’t vapor—there’s real order flow supporting the move.
Technically, CIEN is above both the 50-day and 200-day moving averages with positive MACD momentum. Support sits around $230, with resistance in the $238–$246 range. A break above $246 could trigger acceleration from short-covering and momentum players. The main risk is profit-taking after a big run or broader tech sector weakness.
For collar traders, CIEN fits the Tier 1 profile: AI networking as a durable theme, clean chart structure, tight spreads, and active call volume. The options market is liquid enough for systematic income strategies. The key is not getting too aggressive on upside strike selection given the strong momentum.
Bottom Line
This mid-cap rally is real in the sense that it’s driven by actual capital flows, real infrastructure spending, and legitimate reflation in hard assets. But it’s also dangerous because it’s heavily momentum-driven, fueled by short covering, and concentrated in high-beta names that can reverse violently.
For income traders, the opportunity is in the Tier 1 names—GLW, ALB, CIEN, CENX—where you get boring companies in exciting trends with liquid options markets. Avoid the headline stocks and parabolic squeeze plays. Don’t collar garbage just because it’s moving.
The music will stop eventually. When rates tick higher again, liquidity tightens, or momentum funds rotate, these names will give back gains fast. The goal for systematic traders is to extract repeatable income during the rally while maintaining downside protection—not to predict the top or swing for home runs. Stay disciplined on strike selection, use wider collars on volatile names, and always know your exit plan before the trade goes on.
When I first started writing this book, I thought my parents lost $40,000. That was devastating enough. I was wrong. When we finally tallied everything–when all the fraud claims were filed, when every unauthorized transaction was documented, when we went through statements going back six months instead of two, when we checked accounts we didn’t even realize had been compromised–the real number emerged: Total Losses Across All Accounts:
Chase Bank accounts: $50,000+
Chase Sapphire account: $16,000
American Express charges: $38,567
Bank of America account: $50,000+
U.S. Bank account: $29,625
Additional fraudulent accounts and charges: $63,100 Less: Legitimate Brighthouse Financial Credits: -$8,147 Grand Total: $239,145 Two hundred thirty-nine thousand, one hundred forty-five dollars. Stolen from two people in their 90s who worked their entire lives to save for retirement. Let that sink in. That’s not a $40,000 problem. That’s not even a $184,000 problem. That’s a quarter-million-dollar problem (actually $239,145). The Police Won’t Help You Here’s the part that keeps me awake at night. We did everything right after discovering the fraud: ? Filed police report immediately (Orange County Sheriff Case #240918-0655) ? Provided complete documentation (bank statements, cancelled checks, transaction records) ? Gave them the names of the perpetrators (Dameon Markuffo, Evalyn Rojas, Joseph Briones, and others) ? Gave them the address where checks were sent (691 S. Rosario Ave., San Diego, CA) ? Gave them the names used for the address change (Rhonda and Federico Bustos) ? Provided evidence of utility accounts in San Diego and San Jacinto ? Connected all the dots for them We handed them the case on a silver platter. Want to know what happened? Nothing. Detective M. Harris took our statement. Requested additional evidence (which we provided via the Axon Community Request system). Assigned a case number. And then… silence. No arrests. No follow-up investigations. No updates. No prosecutions. Over $239,000 stolen. Complete documentation. Names and addresses of suspects. Zero law enforcement action. The Uncomfortable Truth About Police Priorities After six months of waiting for justice, I finally asked Detective Harris directly: “Why isn’t anyone pursuing this?” His answer was brutally honest: “Look, I understand your frustration. But here’s the reality: The banks are going to reimburse most of this through their fraud departments. From the department’s perspective, there’s no victim loss to recover. We have limited resources, and we prioritize cases where victims have unrecoverable losses or where there’s physical violence.” Translation: Because the banks will eat the loss, nobody cares. The Insane Double Standard Let me make sure you understand this correctly. Scenario A: Armed Bank Robbery – Criminal walks into Chase Bank – Demands $50,000 at gunpoint – Walks out with cash – Result: Every cop in the county is looking for them. FBI involved. Media coverage. Massive manhunt. If caught: 10-20 years in prison. Scenario B: Identity Theft (Our Case) – Criminal forges checks – Steals $50,000+ from Chase accounts – Does this from home, safely – Result: Police file a report and do nothing. No investigation. No arrests. No prosecution. If caught: Maybe probation. Same bank. Same dollar amount. Completely different response. Why? In Scenario A: Bank loses money they have to write off immediately. In Scenario B: Bank’s fraud insurance covers it, so they don’t care. The result? Identity theft is essentially a zero-risk, high-reward crime. The criminals who stole $184,000 from my parents are still out there. They’re stealing from other families right now. They’ll never be caught. They’ll never see the inside of a courtroom. Because nobody is looking for them.
If you implement the strategies in this book, you will dramatically reduce your fraud risk. If fraud does occur, you’ll detect it immediately and minimize damage. You’ll recover faster. You’ll be prepared. But you have to do the work.
If you’re not willing to do that, stop reading now. This book can’t help you. If you ARE willing to do that, keep reading. This book will change your life. One More Thing Throughout this book, I’ve changed all account numbers to “123456789” for privacy. Everything else is real: – Every transaction amount – Every date – Every payee name – Every detail – Every emotion – Every failure – Every lesson This isn’t a hypothetical case study.
A Philosophy PhD Who Built an AI Empire Just Declared His Own Degree Worthless—But the Data Tells a More Complex Story
At the World Economic Forum in Davos this week, Alex Karp—billionaire CEO of Palantir Technologies—made a startling prediction that sent shockwaves through the education world. The irony? A man with a philosophy degree from Haverford College, a law degree from Stanford, and a PhD in neoclassical social theory from a top German university just declared that humanities education is doomed in the age of AI.
“It will destroy humanities jobs,” Karp told BlackRock CEO Larry Fink. “You went to an elite school, and you studied philosophy—hopefully you have some other skill, that one is going to be hard to market.”
His prescription? Vocational training. Battery factory workers. Technicians. People who can be “rapidly” retrained for whatever industry needs them next.
But here’s where it gets interesting: The employment data and corporate hiring trends suggest Karp might be spectacularly wrong about the very degree that made him successful.
The Case FOR Karp’s Prediction: Vocational Skills Are Rising
Let’s start by acknowledging where Karp has solid ground beneath his argument.
The Numbers Don’t Lie About Entry-Level White Collar Jobs
The statistics on entry-level professional positions are genuinely concerning for humanities graduates:
Entry-level hiring at the 15 biggest tech firms fell 25% from 2023 to 2024
Computer programmer employment in the United States dropped a dramatic 27.5% between 2023 and 2025
30% of U.S. workers fear their job will be replaced by AI or similar technology by 2025
By 2030, roughly 30% of current U.S. jobs could be fully automated
The World Economic Forum projects that machines and algorithms could take on more work tasks than humans by 2025, with 85 million jobs potentially eliminated by AI and automation.
Even Google DeepMind CEO Demis Hassabis and Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei confirmed during their joint Davos panel that entry-level hiring at their companies was already declining due to AI, with software and coding roles down at both junior and mid-levels.
Vocational Trades Show Real Resilience
Karp’s emphasis on vocational skills isn’t just corporate propaganda. The data backs up significant protection for hands-on trades:
Construction and skilled trades are among the least threatened by AI automation
Over 663,000 openings are projected yearly in construction and extraction fields through 2033
Healthcare vocational roles (medical assistants, dental hygienists, nursing aides) are projected to grow as AI augments rather than replaces these jobs
Nurse practitioners are projected to grow by 52% from 2023 to 2033
Personal services jobs (food service, medical assistants, cleaners) are expected to add over 500,000 positions by 2033
Skills requiring physical dexterity, on-site problem-solving, and human interaction in unpredictable environments remain stubbornly resistant to automation. You can’t automate fixing a burst pipe in a 100-year-old building or reading a patient’s non-verbal cues during a medical exam.
The National Student Clearinghouse Research Center found strong growth at community colleges and among trade programs, suggesting students are already voting with their feet toward vocational paths.
China’s Data Supports Karp’s Concerns
The situation for humanities graduates looks particularly grim in China’s competitive market:
Among the top 20 highest-earning majors for 2023 graduates in China, no liberal arts majors made the list
China’s National Natural Science Foundation enjoyed a budget of RMB 36.3 billion in 2024, while funding for the National Social Science Foundation was only around one-thirtieth of that amount
Universities are cutting humanities programs: Harvard cancelled more than 30 liberal arts courses in 2024, while Chinese institutions like Northwest University and Sichuan University withdrew several liberal arts majors
When money talks, it’s saying “go technical.”
The Case AGAINST Karp: Liberal Arts Are the New Premium
But here’s where Karp’s thesis falls apart—spectacularly. While he was busy declaring his own educational background obsolete, the world’s leading companies were quietly doing the exact opposite.
Tech Giants Are Hiring Humanities Grads for AI Oversight
The evidence that contradicts Karp is both recent and compelling:
McKinsey just reversed course entirely. The consulting firm’s CEO Bob Sternfels revealed they’re now “looking more at liberal arts majors, whom we had deprioritized” as potential sources of creativity. Why? Because AI models have become expert at problem-solving, but McKinsey needs people who can think beyond “logical next steps.”
BlackRock’s own COO contradicts Karp. Robert Goldstein told Fortune in 2024 that his company was actively recruiting graduates who studied “things that have nothing to do with finance or technology.”
Major tech companies are building humanities divisions:
Apple recruits graduates from arts and humanities because designing products people want requires empathy and cultural awareness
Microsoft has added ethicists and humanists to its AI teams to test for fairness, privacy, and cultural sensitivity
Google employs philosophers, linguists, and sociologists to confront algorithmic bias and inclusivity
OpenAI has professionals trained in liberal arts helping guide responsible AI development
The editorial director of Google’s NotebookLM—one of their largest AI products—explicitly stated that philosophical and psychological skills are particularly valuable for addressing AI-related questions and fine-tuning conversational tone.
The Employment Data Contradicts Karp’s Prediction
Here’s the stunning reversal in actual employment statistics:
Art history graduates show 3% unemployment versus 7.5% for computer engineers
Philosophy and history graduates outpace many tech specialists in the job market
Liberal arts majors demonstrate far greater career resilience, with agility to move between jobs, careers, and industries
Why? Because while AI eliminated 27.5% of programmer jobs, it only reduced software developer roles (the more design-oriented positions) by 0.3%. The creative, strategic thinkers survived while the code writers got automated.
Cognizant’s CEO Flips the Script on Entry-Level Hiring
Perhaps most damaging to Karp’s thesis is what Ravi Kumar S, CEO of IT consulting giant Cognizant (with 350,000 employees), told Fortune:
“We are now going to hire non-STEM graduates. I’m going to liberal arts schools and community colleges.”
Kumar’s reasoning directly contradicts Karp: “I think we’ll need more school graduates in the AI era… AI is an amplifier of human potential. It’s not a displacement strategy.”
His company is hiring more school graduates than ever before in 2025, giving them AI tools so they can “punch above their weight.”
The Skills Gap Employers Actually Report
When you dig into what employers say they need versus what they’re getting, the humanities suddenly look essential:
64% of employers say oral communication is “essential,” but only 34% feel graduates are “very well prepared”
Nearly 90% of employers stressed the importance of exposure to diverse perspectives and ideas—a hallmark of liberal arts education
National Associate of College and Employers (NACE) 2023 ranked critical thinking second only to communication as the most important career competency
Deloitte’s 2025 Global Gen Z and Millennial Survey found younger generations place even greater value on soft skills like empathy, leadership, and adaptability in an AI-driven workplace
McKinsey projects that by 2030, demand for social and emotional skills in the United States will rise by 14%
The Problem With AI That Only Humanities Grads Can Solve
Here’s what Karp conveniently ignores: AI has fundamental limitations that require liberal arts training to overcome.
AI cannot generate original questions. It recombines patterns from training data. Someone needs to ask the right questions to get useful outputs—and that requires broad knowledge across disciplines, exactly what humanities education provides.
AI outputs are plagued by bias and errors. Who identifies algorithmic bias rooted in Western cultural assumptions? Who questions the exclusion of Indigenous knowledge? Who challenges phantom responses? People trained in sociology, history, philosophy, and ethics.
AI lacks judgment about what problems are worth solving. As one Reddit analysis put it: “AI pushes us toward creating more humanistic service roles that demand genuine empathy… machines don’t have hearts.”
Stanford research found the key dividing line: AI struggles with tasks requiring genuine human emotion, creativity, physical dexterity, and ethical judgment. Three of those four are exactly what humanities education cultivates.
So Who’s Right? Both. And Neither.
The truth is more nuanced than either extreme position suggests.
Karp Is Right About the Short-Term Pain
Entry-level humanities grads without technical skills are facing a brutal job market. The data on this is unambiguous:
Nearly 50 million U.S. jobs at entry-level are at risk in coming years
The unemployment rate for young workers ages 16 to 24 hit 10.4% in December 2025
39% of current skillsets will be overhauled or outdated between 2025 and 2030
Many companies expect new hires to already come up to speed without extensive training
A philosophy grad who can’t code, can’t use AI tools, and has no practical skills is in serious trouble. Karp is correct that a pure humanities degree with zero technical augmentation is increasingly unmarketable for entry-level positions.
But Karp Is Spectacularly Wrong About the Long Game
What the employment data reveals is this: AI is creating a bifurcated job market.
The bottom tier gets automated. Entry-level programmers, data entry clerks, basic content writers, junior analysts—all getting displaced by AI. This is brutal for recent grads trying to get their foot in the door.
The middle tier needs technical skills. Battery factory workers, technicians, vocational specialists—these roles are secure and well-paying. Karp is absolutely right about this tier.
But the top tier increasingly demands humanities thinking. Senior developers who design systems, not just code them. Leaders who can ask the right questions. Ethicists who can prevent AI disasters. Creative directors who envision what doesn’t exist yet. Strategic thinkers who can pivot when industries transform.
And here’s the kicker: That top tier is where the philosophy PhD sits—precisely where Karp himself ended up.
The Real Answer: Hybrid Education
The most successful educational approach combines both:
Liberal arts foundation: Critical thinking, ethics, communication, creativity, cultural awareness
Technical augmentation: AI tool proficiency, data literacy, some coding ability
Lifelong learning mindset: Adaptability across changing industries
As one educator put it: “Liberal arts students will need to gain competency on the technical side. But the emergence of AI will also require people who are really thoughtful about: How do we prompt? Should we prompt in certain instances? How do we filter bias?”
Cognizant’s CIO Neal Ramasamy noted that the best programmers he’s hired came from music, philosophy, and literature backgrounds—because with AI handling the mechanical coding, “what’s left is the harder stuff: understanding problems deeply, communicating with stakeholders, and designing solutions that make sense.”
The Uncomfortable Truth Karp Won’t Admit
Alex Karp stands on stage at Davos—invited because of his success, credibility, and influence—and declares that the educational path that got him there is worthless.
Think about that logic.
His philosophy degree taught him to think critically about complex systems. His law training gave him frameworks for arguing positions. His PhD in social theory equipped him to understand how societies respond to technological change. These skills enabled him to co-found a company now worth $177 billion.
And his advice to young people is: “Don’t do what I did. Learn to build batteries instead.”
The real message should be: “Do what I did, but also learn to code and use AI tools.”
The Bottom Line for Students and Parents
If you’re choosing an educational path in 2025:
Don’t choose pure humanities without technical skills. The data on entry-level employment is too stark to ignore. You’ll struggle to get your foot in the door.
Don’t choose pure vocational training if you want long-term career flexibility. You’ll be secure in your specific trade, but vulnerable when that industry transforms. And it will transform.
Do choose liberal arts WITH technical augmentation. Study philosophy, but take computer science courses. Major in history, but learn data analysis. Get an English degree, but master AI tools. This combination is what employers are increasingly desperate to find.
As the Globe and Mail put it: “What’s the value of a liberal arts degree? The AI-world answer: exceptionally high and rising.”
But only if you pair it with the ability to actually use the technology transforming the world.
Final Thought: The Irony of Karp’s Position
Perhaps the most revealing part of this entire debate is that Alex Karp is using his humanities education to make the argument that humanities education is worthless.
His philosophical training gave him the abstract thinking to envision Palantir. His social theory background helped him understand how governments and institutions work. His ability to articulate complex ideas—honed through years of humanities education—is exactly why people listen when he speaks at Davos.
And now he’s climbing up the ladder and trying to pull it up behind him.
The vocational workers Karp celebrates are essential and deserve respect and good pay. But when those battery factory jobs get automated in 2035 by the next wave of robotics, those workers will need to pivot. And pivoting requires exactly the kind of adaptable, creative, critical thinking that humanities education provides.
Karp is living proof that philosophy graduates can build AI empires. Perhaps instead of declaring humanities doomed, he should be honest about what actually made him successful: a combination of deep humanistic thinking and the technical knowledge to apply it.
That combination—not vocational training alone—is the real future of work in the AI age.
How to Use the Hedge Fund Income Strategy They Don’t Want You to Know
Generate 30–45% Annual Cash Flow Using the Same Structure as the Japanese Carry Trade
December 16, 2025 Edition
What Hedge Funds Know (That Retail Doesn’t)
Professional traders understand something fundamental about options pricing that sounds complicated but is actually very simple.
Let me explain it the way a hedge fund manager explained it to his 12-year-old daughter:
“Dad, what do you do at work?”
“I sell insurance to people who are scared.”
“What kind of insurance?”
“Stock insurance. People are afraid their stocks might drop, so they pay me money every week for protection.”
“But what if the stocks DO drop?”
“Most of the time, they don’t drop as much as people think. People pay me $100 for insurance against a $50 problem. I keep the extra $50.”
“That seems like a good deal for you.”
“It is. And here’s the secret: I ALSO buy my own insurance—really cheap insurance that lasts a long time. So if stocks ever crash badly, I’m protected too.”
“So you get paid to sell expensive insurance, and you buy cheap insurance for yourself?”
“Exactly.”
“Why doesn’t everyone do this?”
“Because most people don’t know they can.”
The Simple Truth About Options Prices
Here’s what hedge funds discovered:
People overpay for short-term protection.
Think about car insurance:
Insurance for one week: $50
Insurance for one year: $600 (which is like $11.50 per week)
Why is weekly insurance so expensive? Because insurance companies know most people won’t use it, and they charge extra for the convenience of short-term coverage.
Options work the same way.
When you sell a weekly call option, someone is paying you $400 to protect against the stock going up too much THIS WEEK.
But most weeks? The stock doesn’t go up that much.
You’re getting paid $400 for protection that was really only worth $250.
The extra $150? That’s your profit. That’s “the carry.”
The Long-Term Protection Is Cheap
Now here’s the other side:
Long-term protection is cheap per week.
If you buy a put option that lasts 2 years (104 weeks), it might cost you $5,200 total.
That’s $50 per week.
But here’s what you’re collecting every week from selling calls: $400.
Math:
You collect: $400/week
You pay: $50/week (spread over the year)
Your profit: $350/week
And that protection you bought? It saves you from disaster if the market crashes.
Why This Works (The 6th Grade Version)
Imagine you have a lemonade stand.
Every week, people pay you $10 to make sure their lemonade doesn’t spill.
Most weeks, nobody spills anything. You keep the $10.
Once a year, you pay $100 for a big insurance policy that covers ALL spills for the whole year.
Math:
You collect $10/week × 52 weeks = $520/year
You pay $100/year for your insurance
Your profit: $420/year
And if there’s ever a huge spill? Your $100 insurance covers it.
The Market Systematically Overprices Short-Term Volatility
Big words, simple meaning:
“Volatility” = How much the stock price bounces around
“Short-term” = This week
“Overprices” = Charges too much
People are scared stocks will bounce around a lot THIS WEEK. So they pay extra for protection.
But most weeks? Stocks don’t bounce that much.
The market charges $400 for weekly protection that’s really only worth $250.
That $150 difference? That’s yours to keep. Every week. For decades.
Why This Is Not Speculation
Speculation = guessing which way the stock will go
This strategy doesn’t care which way stocks go.
If stocks go up a little: You keep your premium ✓
If stocks go sideways: You keep your premium ✓
If stocks go down a little: You keep your premium ✓
If stocks crash hard: Your long-term protection saves you ✓
You’re not betting on direction.
You’re harvesting the difference between:
What scared people pay you (weekly calls = expensive)
What calm protection costs you (yearly puts = cheap)
That difference is structural. It doesn’t disappear.
The Spread Between What You Collect and What You Pay Is the Carry
“Carry” just means the profit you get from the difference.
Think of it like this:
You rent out your house for $3,000/month. Your mortgage costs you $1,500/month. Your “carry” is $1,500/month profit.
In this strategy:
You collect $1,600/month selling weekly calls. Your yearly protection costs you $5,200 (which is $433/month). Your “carry” is $1,167/month profit.
That’s it. That’s the whole strategy.
Collect more than you spend. The difference is income.
This Is the Same Edge That Made the Japanese Carry Trade Profitable for Thirty Years
In the 1990s and 2000s, hedge funds did something called the “Japanese Carry Trade”:
Borrow money in Japan at 0% interest
Invest it in America at 5% interest
Keep the 5% difference
They did this for 30 years. Made billions.
Why did it work for so long?
Because Japan ALWAYS had low interest rates, and America ALWAYS had higher rates.
The difference was structural, not temporary.
The options carry trade is the same concept:
Sell weekly options at high prices (people are always scared short-term)
Buy yearly protection at low prices (long-term protection is always cheaper per week)
Keep the difference
People are ALWAYS more scared about this week than they are about next year.
That fear premium has existed since options started trading in 1973.
It’s not going away.
Hedge Funds Have Harvested This Edge Since the 1990s
Morgan Stanley. Goldman Sachs. Citadel. Bridgewater.
They’ve all run versions of this strategy for 30+ years.
They don’t talk about it publicly because:
It’s boring (no CNBC headlines)
It works (why share it?)
Retail investors weren’t supposed to know
But now you do.
Now You Can Too
You don’t need:
A finance degree
Special software
A trading desk
Millions of dollars
You need:
A brokerage account with options approval
$100,000+ to deploy
45 minutes per week
The discipline to follow the system
The edge is simple:
Short-term protection is expensive (sell it). Long-term protection is cheap (buy it). The difference is your income.
Hedge funds figured this out in the 1990s.
They’ve been collecting this premium for three decades.
You’re not discovering something new.
You’re doing what the professionals have done since your parents were in high school.
The only difference? You’re keeping 100% of the profits instead of paying them 2% + 20% of gains.
That’s the Retail Carry Trade.
Simple enough for a 6th grader.
Profitable enough for a billionaire.
Now it’s yours.
Disclaimer
This book is for educational purposes only. Options involve substantial risk and are not suitable for all investors. Past performance does not guarantee future results. Consult a qualified financial professional before implementing any strategy discussed herein.
Prologue: The Secret the Hedge Funds Keep
David sat in the conference room on the 14th floor, watching his financial advisor flip through the quarterly report. Sixty-three years old. Retirement in eighteen months. The meeting he’d been having every quarter for the past eleven years.
“Your portfolio is up 9.2% year-to-date,” the advisor said, pointing to a chart with an upward-sloping line. “We’re outperforming the benchmark by—”
“How much cash?” David interrupted.
The advisor paused. “I’m sorry?”
“How much actual cash did I make? Spendable. Not on paper.”
The advisor’s finger moved to a different page. “Well, the dividends were $18,400 for the year, paid quarterly, and—”
“On $850,000.”
“Yes.”
“That’s 2.1%.”
Silence.
“David, you’re thinking about this wrong. Your total return was over 9%, and when you retire, we’ll implement a systematic withdrawal strategy that—”
“I don’t want a withdrawal strategy. I want income. My father had a pension. He got a check every month. I need the same thing, but I don’t have a pension.”
“The 4% rule—”
“Is a guess. What if the market drops the year I retire? What if I withdraw 4% and then it falls 30%? You’ve shown me the Monte Carlo simulations. I’ve seen the failure rates.”
The advisor leaned back. “David, you’re describing sequence-of-returns risk, and yes, it’s real. But the alternative is accepting lower returns and potentially running out of money later.”
David stood up. The meeting was over.
That evening, he did what he always did when someone told him there was no solution: he started digging.
He started with the Japanese carry trade. The strategy that hedge funds had used for decades to print money. Borrow in yen at near-zero rates. Invest in higher-yielding assets. Collect the spread.
Simple. Elegant. Massively profitable.
But that’s not what caught his attention.
What caught his attention was a footnote in a research paper from a former Goldman Sachs options desk trader. The paper explained how institutional investors were running a different kind of carry trade—not with currencies, but with volatility.
The structure was a collar. But unlike the conservative collars sold to retail investors (designed to reduce volatility for fee-based advisors), this was an income collar—designed to extract maximum cash flow while maintaining market exposure.
Hedge funds called it “volatility arbitrage” or “dispersion trading.”
David called it exactly what he needed.
Three weeks later, he found a detailed breakdown on an obscure forum from a former market maker. The strategy had a name in the retail world: the Protected Wheel.
Six months after that Tuesday, David was generating $28,000 per month in option premium income on the same $850,000 portfolio.
His advisor never called to ask how.
This book is what David found. It’s the same income structure hedge funds have used for decades—now available to anyone with a brokerage account and the discipline to execute it.
Your advisor won’t tell you about it.
But hedge funds have been doing it since the 1990s.
Executive Summary (Read This First)
This book presents the retail version of a strategy hedge funds have used for decades: the volatility carry trade.
While the Japanese carry trade borrowed cheap yen to invest in higher-yielding assets, the options carry trade does something similar:
Own the underlying asset (SPY/QQQ—broad market exposure)
Hedge funds call this “volatility arbitrage” or “dispersion trading.”
We call it the Retail Carry Trade—because now you can do it too.
The structure uses only two ETFs—SPY (S&P 500) and QQQ (Nasdaq-100)—to generate 30–45% annualized cash income primarily from option premiums, while long-dated puts cap catastrophic downside.
What Hedge Funds Discovered
In the 1990s and early 2000s, institutional traders realized something crucial:
Short-term implied volatility is almost always overpriced relative to realized volatility.
Translation: The market pays you more to sell short-term options than those options are actually worth.
Hedge funds built entire strategies around this edge:
Sell weekly and monthly options
Collect premium income
Hedge with long-term protection
Repeat indefinitely
This is not speculation. This is not directional trading. This is premium harvesting—the same way the Japanese carry trade harvested interest rate differentials.
The edge is structural. It doesn’t disappear.
Why Retail Investors Never Heard About It
Because it doesn’t fit the advisory business model.
Hedge funds charge 2 and 20 (2% management fee + 20% performance fee). They profit from absolute returns and income generation.
Retail advisors charge 1% on assets under management. They profit from growing account balances, not distributing cash.
The strategies serve different masters.
Hedge funds optimize for cash flow and risk-adjusted returns.
Retail advisors optimize for AUM growth and client retention.
This is why your advisor never mentioned it.
The Problem It Solves
Bonds yield ~4% and lose to inflation
Dividends alone are insufficient
Buy-and-hold exposes retirees to sequence-of-returns risk
The real retirement risk is running out of cash flow, not market volatility.
The Solution in One Sentence
Own the market, insure the downside, sell time every week.
How It Works (At a Glance)
Buy 100-share blocks of SPY and/or QQQ
Buy a long-dated put (Jan 2027, 5–8% out-of-the-money) to define maximum loss
Sell weekly out-of-the-money calls (20–30 delta)
Collect premiums weekly as spendable income
This is an aggressive income collar, not a speculative trading system.
Why SPY & QQQ Only
Ultra-liquid options
Weekly expirations
No earnings risk
No fraud or blow-up risk
Recommended allocation:
60–70% SPY (stability)
30–40% QQQ (income boost)
Real-World Income Examples (Illustrative)
Assumptions (conservative):
SPY weekly call income ≈ 0.6% of deployed capital
QQQ weekly call income ≈ 0.9% of deployed capital
Long-dated puts fully paid for by premiums over time
$100,000 Portfolio
$65k SPY / $35k QQQ
Weekly income ≈ $390 (SPY) + $315 (QQQ) = ~$705/week
Annualized cash flow ≈ $36,000–$40,000 (36–40%)
$250,000 Portfolio
$165k SPY / $85k QQQ
Weekly income ≈ $990 (SPY) + $765 (QQQ) = ~$1,755/week
Annualized cash flow ≈ $85,000–$95,000
$500,000 Portfolio
$325k SPY / $175k QQQ
Weekly income ≈ $1,950 (SPY) + $1,575 (QQQ) = ~$3,525/week
Annualized cash flow ≈ $170,000–$190,000
These figures reflect premium income only. Market appreciation is secondary and not required for success.
Expected Results (Not Promises)
SPY: ~30–35% annualized cash yield
QQQ: ~40–45% annualized cash yield
Income is premium-driven, not price-driven
Upside is capped, downside is defined
What This Strategy Is NOT
Not a get-rich-quick system
Not market-beating in melt-up rallies
Not passive—you manage weekly
Key Risks (Be Honest)
Premiums compress in low volatility
Upside is sacrificed for income
Requires discipline and consistency
Who This Is For
Retirees and near-retirees
Income-focused investors
Anyone who values predictable cash flow over bragging rights
Bottom Line
If you want growth stories, buy and hold.
If you want cash you can spend, with market exposure and controlled risk, the Protected Wheel delivers a repeatable framework that works across market cycles.
One-Week Trade Snapshot (Actual Structure)
Illustrative snapshot based on typical market conditions; prices rounded.
Example Week: SPY & QQQ Income Cycle
Underlying prices:
SPY: ~$681
QQQ: ~$610
Protection (already in place):
SPY Jan 2027 630 Put (≈7.5% OTM)
QQQ Jan 2027 560 Put (≈8% OTM)
These puts define worst-case loss and are not traded weekly.
Weekly Call Sales
SPY Call Sale
Expiration: Friday (same week)
Strike: 695
Delta: ~0.25
Premium: ~$3.90 per share ($390 per contract)
QQQ Call Sale
Expiration: Friday (same week)
Strike: 630
Delta: ~0.28
Premium: ~$5.25 per share ($525 per contract)
Weekly Cash Collected (per 100 shares):
SPY: $390
QQQ: $525
No forecasting. If called away, shares are replaced the following week.
What the Monthly Checks Look Like
This strategy is judged by cash deposited, not account balance fluctuations.
Monthly Income Illustration (Per $100,000)
Assumes 65% SPY / 35% QQQ allocation.
Month
Weekly Avg
Monthly Cash
Notes
January
$700
~$3,000
Lower volatility
February
$750
~$3,200
Normal conditions
March
$900
~$3,900
Volatility spike
April
$650
~$2,800
Compression
May
$800
~$3,500
Earnings season
June
$750
~$3,200
Steady
Annual Run-Rate: ~$36,000–$40,000 per $100k
Scale linearly with capital.
Why This Beats Dividend Portfolios (Blunt Version)
Dividend portfolios are sold as “safe.” They are not.
Dividends:
2–4% yields
Cut during recessions
Paid quarterly
No downside protection
Protected Wheel:
30–45% cash yield
Paid weekly
Adjustable in real time
Downside defined by insurance
Dividends depend on corporate generosity.
Option premiums depend on time and volatility, which never disappear.
This strategy replaces hope with math.
Stress Test: Income Through Market Crashes
This strategy is designed for when markets misbehave.
2008 Financial Crisis
Volatility exploded
Call premiums increased
Long puts expanded sharply
Income continued while portfolios collapsed
2020 COVID Crash
SPY dropped ~34% peak to trough
Weekly premiums doubled in weeks
Protected Wheel sellers were paid more for risk
No forced liquidation
2022 Rate Shock Bear Market
Prolonged grind lower
Sideways volatility favored premium sellers
Income remained consistent
Buy-and-hold investors stagnated
Key Point: Crashes are income events for disciplined option sellers.
Protection allows participation instead of panic.
What Happens If SPY Drops 25% in 90 Days (Step-by-Step)
This is the scenario retirees fear most. Here is exactly how the Protected Wheel responds.
Starting Point
SPY price: $680
Shares owned: 100
Long put: Jan 2027 630
Weekly calls: 20–30 delta
Month 1: Initial Selloff (-8% to -10%)
SPY falls to ~$620
Call premiums increase due to volatility
Weekly income rises despite falling prices
Long put begins gaining intrinsic value
Action: Continue selling weekly calls above market price. No panic, no changes.
Month 2: Acceleration (-15% to -20%)
SPY trades ~$545–$580
Call strikes move lower, but premiums remain elevated
Long put now provides meaningful downside offset
Net account drawdown is far smaller than buy-and-hold
Action: Maintain structure. Income continues. No forced sales.
Month 3: Capitulation (-25%)
SPY near ~$510
Volatility peaks
Weekly call income remains strong
Long put absorbs additional downside
Result at 90 Days:
Capital loss is defined and survivable
Premium income partially offsets price decline
Shares are still owned
Strategy remains intact
The Psychological Difference
Buy-and-hold investors:
Freeze or sell near lows
Lock in losses
Protected Wheel operators:
Get paid more
Stay systematic
Avoid emotional decisions
Bottom Line: A 25% drop is not a failure event. It is a stress test the strategy was built to pass.
Table of Contents
Chapter 1: The Retirement Income Problem (And Why Bonds Fail)
Chapter 2: Why Your Broker Will Not Recommend This
Chapter 3: The Case for SPY & QQQ Only
Chapter 4: What Is the Protected Wheel?
Chapter 4: Why Protection Changes Everything
Chapter 5: Strategy Architecture: The Exact Mechanics
Chapter 6: Strike Selection, Deltas, and Timing
Chapter 7: Cash Flow Math: Where 30–45% Comes From
Chapter 8: SPY vs QQQ: Risk, Reward, and Allocation
Chapter 9: Market Regimes: Bull, Bear, Sideways
Chapter 10: The Rules Checklist (Laminated-Card Simple)
Chapter 11: Your First 30 Days (Implementation Guide)
Chapter 12: Full 12-Month Cash Ledger ($250k & $500k)
Chapter 13: Tax Considerations and Account Structure
Chapter 14: Common Mistakes and How to Avoid Them
Chapter 15: When to Exit or Modify
Retirees were sold a lie: that bonds would reliably fund retirement. With yields hovering around 4% and inflation eating half of that, traditional fixed income no longer does the job. You either take equity risk, or you accept shrinking purchasing power. There is no third option.
The Protected Wheel exists because retirees need cash flow, not stories about long-term averages.
Appendix A: Compliance-Safe Language for Advisors
Appendix B: Broker Requirements and Platform Setup
PART ONE: FOUNDATION
Chapter 1: The Retirement Income Problem (And Why Bonds Fail)
Margaret’s hands shook as she read the letter from her bond fund. Third dividend cut in two years.
She’d done everything right. Saved diligently. Diversified. Followed the advice. Sixty percent stocks, forty percent bonds. The classic retiree allocation.
The bonds were supposed to be the safe part. The income part. The part that paid her bills while the stocks grew.
Except the bonds paid 3.8%. And inflation was running at 3.2%. Her “safe” income was gaining 0.6% per year in purchasing power. Before taxes.
After taxes, she was losing ground.
She called her advisor.
“Margaret, bond yields are what they are. The Fed has kept rates elevated, but with inflation moderating, this is actually a reasonable real return. And remember, bonds provide stability. They’re not supposed to be growth vehicles.”
“I don’t need growth vehicles. I need income. I need to pay my mortgage. I need to buy groceries. I can’t pay bills with ‘stability.'”
“I understand your frustration. We could look at high-yield bonds, but those carry more risk—”
“Everything carries risk. I’m just trying to understand why I spent forty years saving money and now I can’t afford to live on it.”
The advisor had no answer.
Because there isn’t one. Not in the traditional model.
The Promise That Broke
For fifty years, retirees were sold a simple story:
Save money while you work
At retirement, shift to bonds for income
Live off the interest
Leave the principal to your kids
It worked for one generation. The generation that retired in the 1980s and 1990s, when bonds paid 7%, 9%, even 12%.
A $500,000 bond portfolio at 8% threw off $40,000 per year. Livable. Sustainable.
But that generation is gone. And so are those yields.
Today’s retiree faces:
Bond yields at 4%
Inflation at 3%+
Real return of ~1%
Taxes eating another 25-30%
The math is simple. And devastating.
A $500,000 portfolio at 4% generates $20,000 per year. After taxes, that’s $14,000-$15,000. After inflation, the purchasing power drops further every year.
You cannot retire on this. Not with dignity.
The Two Bad Options
When Margaret realized bonds wouldn’t work, her advisor presented two alternatives:
Option 1: Stay in stocks for growth
“Keep your equity allocation high. Accept the volatility. Over time, stocks outperform bonds, and you can sell shares as needed for income.”
Translation: Bet that the market goes up during your retirement. Hope you don’t hit a bear market in year two. Pray sequence-of-returns risk doesn’t destroy you.
Option 2: Annuities
“We can lock in guaranteed income with an annuity. You’ll get a check every month for life.”
Translation: Hand over your principal, lose liquidity, accept 4-5% payout rates, and hope the insurance company doesn’t fail.
Margaret looked at both options.
Option 1 terrified her. She remembered 2008. She remembered friends who retired in 2007 with $800,000 and were forced back to work in 2009 with $450,000.
Option 2 felt like surrender. Give up control. Accept mediocre returns. Lock in for life.
She didn’t choose either.
She kept digging.
What Retirees Actually Need
Margaret didn’t need to beat the market. She didn’t need to impress anyone at the country club with her portfolio performance.
She needed $5,000 per month. Reliable. Repeatable. For the next thirty years.
That’s it.
The traditional retirement industry has no clean answer for this. Because the traditional industry optimizes for:
Assets under management (their fees)
Portfolio values (their performance reporting)
Long-term growth (their marketing materials)
They don’t optimize for cash flow. Because cash flow leaves the account. And when cash leaves the account, fees shrink.
Your income problem is their revenue problem.
The Real Risk
Advisors talk about “risk” as if it means volatility. Price swings. Drawdowns. Standard deviation.
But that’s not the risk that matters to retirees.
The real risk is running out of money.
The real risk is being eighty-two years old and choosing between prescriptions and groceries.
The real risk is selling stocks at the bottom because you need cash and the market decided to drop 30% the year you retired.
Margaret understood this. And she understood that her advisor’s focus on portfolio growth and Sharpe ratios had nothing to do with her actual problem.
She didn’t need her portfolio to compound at 8% if she couldn’t spend any of it.
She needed income. Weekly. Monthly. Regardless of whether the market was up or down.
The Answer They Won’t Give You
Six months after that phone call, Margaret was generating $4,200 per week in option premiums on a $650,000 portfolio.
She didn’t sell a single share. She didn’t lock up her principal in an annuity. She didn’t pray for the market to cooperate.
She learned to sell time.
The Protected Wheel exists because Margaret, David, and thousands of others like them figured out what the retirement industry refuses to acknowledge:
Income doesn’t come from hoping. It comes from structure.
Retirees were sold a lie: that bonds would reliably fund retirement. With yields hovering around 4% and inflation eating half of that, traditional fixed income no longer does the job. You either take equity risk, or you accept shrinking purchasing power. There is no third option.
The Protected Wheel exists because retirees need cash flow, not stories about long-term averages.
Chapter 2: Why Your Broker Will Not Recommend This
Tom worked at a major wirehouse for seventeen years. Series 7, Series 66, CFP®. He managed $240 million in client assets.
He was good at his job. His clients liked him. His retention rate was high. He won awards.
And then one of his clients—a retired engineer named Robert—came to a review meeting and said something that changed everything.
“Tom, I’ve been doing some research. I want to talk about option strategies.”
Tom smiled. “Sure. We can add a covered call overlay if you want some extra income. I’ve got a strategy paper I can send you.”
“Not a covered call overlay. A protected collar. Weekly call sales. Long-dated downside protection. I want to run this on SPY and QQQ.”
Tom’s smile faded. “Robert, that’s… that’s pretty aggressive for someone in retirement. Options are complex instruments, and—”
“I’ve done the math. I can generate 30-35% annualized income with defined downside risk. That’s $120,000 per year on my $400,000 IRA. I need $60,000 to live. This solves my retirement.”
Tom shifted in his chair. “Let me talk to compliance and see what—”
“You’re going to tell me no.”
“I’m going to tell you that I need to make sure any recommendation is suitable, and that kind of weekly options activity—”
“I’m not asking for a recommendation. I’m telling you what I’m going to do. I just want to know if I can do it here or if I need to move my account.”
Tom paused. He’d known Robert for nine years. He knew the client was smart, methodical, disciplined.
And he knew what would happen if Robert moved the account.
The Conversation Tom Had That Night
Tom went home and did the math himself.
Robert’s account: $400,000
Annual advisory fee (1%): $4,000
If Robert implemented the strategy and withdrew $60,000 per year, the account would shrink to $340,000 after year one.
Next year’s fee: $3,400
Tom’s revenue from Robert would drop $600. And if Robert kept withdrawing, it would keep dropping.
Now multiply that by 200 clients.
Tom sat at his kitchen table and stared at his laptop. He’d built his practice on helping people retire successfully. He believed in what he did.
But the firm measured him on assets under management, not on whether his clients had enough money to buy groceries.
His performance review never asked: “Did your clients have enough income this year?”
It asked: “Did your AUM grow?”
What Compliance Said
Tom brought Robert’s request to the compliance department.
“He wants to do what?”
“Weekly covered calls with long-dated protective puts. A collar structure on SPY and QQQ.”
The compliance officer—a former attorney named Michelle—frowned. “That’s a lot of activity. What’s the investment thesis?”
“Thirty percent.” Michelle wrote something down. “That sounds… aggressive. Does he understand the risks? Does he understand that options can expire worthless? Does he understand tax implications?”
“He’s an engineer. He built a spreadsheet. He understands it better than most advisors.”
“Tom, here’s the issue. If we approve this and it goes wrong—if there’s a massive drawdown, if he complains, if he sues—we have to defend it. And defending weekly options activity for a seventy-two-year-old retiree is not a fight we want to have with FINRA.”
“But if he moves his account to a self-directed brokerage, he can do whatever he wants.”
“That’s his choice. We’re not in the business of approving high-risk strategies just because a client wants them.”
Tom knew what that meant.
Robert would leave. And Tom’s AUM would drop by $400,000.
The Real Reason
Tom called Robert and delivered the news.
“I’m sorry. Compliance won’t approve it. They’re concerned about the activity level and the suitability for your age and risk profile.”
Robert was silent for a moment. Then: “Tom, can I ask you something?”
“Of course.”
“If you could do this strategy yourself—if you weren’t restricted by compliance—would you do it?”
Tom hesitated. “I… I don’t know. I’d have to study it more.”
“That’s not what I asked. If the math works, if the risk is defined, if the income is there—would you do it?”
“Honestly? Probably.”
“Then why won’t you let me?”
Tom didn’t have an answer.
Robert moved his account two weeks later.
This Chapter Exists Because of Tom
Tom stayed at the wirehouse for three more years. Then he left to start his own RIA.
He now manages $60 million in assets. Fewer clients. Smaller firm. No compliance department telling him what he can’t do.
And he runs the Protected Wheel for seventeen of his clients.
But most advisors never leave. They stay in the system. They follow the rules. They recommend what compliance approves.
And they never tell you about strategies like this.
Not because they’re bad people.
Because the system isn’t built for your income. It’s built for their fees.
The Incentive Structure (Explained Plainly)
The standard advisory model charges 1% annually on total account value.
For a $500,000 account:
Traditional portfolio: $5,000/year in fees (every year, forever)
Protected Wheel: Same $5,000/year in fees
The problem? The Protected Wheel generates $180,000/year in income. You might withdraw $100,000. Your account balance shrinks. Next year, they charge 1% on $400,000 instead of $500,000.
Their revenue drops as you succeed.
Buy-and-hold keeps assets growing (hopefully). Growing assets = growing fees. Income strategies that distribute cash shrink the base.
You are not the customer in the traditional model. Your account balance is.
This Strategy Requires Work
Advisors manage hundreds of clients. They cannot babysit weekly option expirations across 300 portfolios.
They need:
Set-it-and-forget-it allocations
Quarterly rebalancing at most
Strategies that scale to their entire book
The Protected Wheel demands weekly attention. It doesn’t fit their operational model, even if it’s superior for your cash flow.
Options Are Positioned as “Risky”
The retail investment industry spent decades teaching clients that:
Stocks = investing
Options = gambling
This framing protects their business model. If clients understood that selling covered calls with protection is mathematically safer than naked buy-and-hold, the 60/40 portfolio would lose its mystique.
Options have risk. So do stocks. But the industry treats one as respectable and the other as dangerous, not because of the math, but because of the narrative.
Compliance Departments Hate Complexity
Even if your advisor personally believes in the Protected Wheel, their compliance department may forbid it. It’s easier to recommend safe mediocrity than defend intelligent aggression.
Compliance loves:
Index funds
Bonds
Target-date funds
Anything with a prospectus and a Morningstar rating
Compliance hates:
Weekly trading
Strategies they don’t understand
Anything clients might complain about later
The Industry Doesn’t Measure Success by Cash Flow
Advisors are evaluated on:
Portfolio returns vs. benchmarks
Assets under management growth
Client retention
They are NOT evaluated on:
Cash distributed to clients
Monthly income generated
Spending power sustained
If your portfolio grows 12% but you need income and have to sell shares, that’s considered success in their world. If your portfolio stays flat but generates $90,000 in spendable premiums, that looks like underperformance.
The metrics are rigged against income strategies.
It Threatens the Retirement Drawdown Model
The financial planning industry built an empire on the 4% rule:
Retire with $1,000,000
Withdraw $40,000/year
Hope it lasts 30 years
This model keeps assets invested (and fees flowing) for decades.
The Protected Wheel flips this:
Same $1,000,000
Generate $360,000/year in premiums
Spend what you need, reinvest the rest
This is a 9x income increase. It doesn’t need “safe withdrawal rate” calculators or Monte Carlo simulations. It just works.
If clients figure this out, the entire retirement planning industrial complex has a problem.
Your Advisor May Genuinely Not Know
This is not always malice or greed. Many advisors simply never learned options mechanics beyond “covered calls are a conservative income strategy” in their Series 7 exam.
They don’t know:
How to structure a collar
How to select deltas
How to manage weekly expirations
How volatility affects premium income
Their training focused on asset allocation, not income engineering. They recommend what they were taught, which is the same thing everyone else recommends.
What This Means for You
Option 1: Self-direct in an IRA or brokerage account. Execute the strategy yourself.
Option 2: Find a fee-only advisor who specializes in options strategies and will implement this for you (rare but they exist).
Option 3: Keep your traditional portfolio with your advisor for growth, and run the Protected Wheel separately for income.
You cannot expect your broker to recommend something that:
Shrinks their revenue
Requires weekly work
Challenges their compliance department
Outperforms their standard offerings by 8–10x
The Uncomfortable Truth
Tom never told Robert about the Protected Wheel because the system didn’t allow it.
Your advisor won’t tell you for the same reason.
The retirement income problem is solved. The math works. The strategy is repeatable.
But it will not be recommended by the institutions that profit from your account balance, not your cash flow.
This is why this book exists.
Chapter 3: The Case for SPY & QQQ Only
Most option losses come from one mistake: single-stock risk. Earnings gaps, fraud, lawsuits, dilution—none of these matter when you trade the market itself.
The traditional wheel sells puts, takes assignment, then sells calls. It works—until it doesn’t. The Protected Wheel removes the fatal flaw: unlimited downside.
Core Structure:
Buy 100 shares of SPY or QQQ
Buy a long-dated put (Jan 2027, 5–8% OTM)
Sell weekly out-of-the-money calls (20–30 delta)
Collect cash. Repeat.
This is a collar, run aggressively and systematically for income.
Chapter 5: Why Protection Changes Everything
Chapter 5: Why Protection Changes Everything
Without protection, retirees panic in drawdowns. Panic leads to bad decisions.
The long put:
Defines maximum loss
Allows consistent call selling during crashes
Converts fear into math
Breakevens typically sit 30–40% below current prices, depending on premiums collected.
This is not about avoiding losses. It’s about controlling them.
Chapter 6: Strategy Architecture: The Exact Mechanics
Chapter 6: Strategy Architecture: The Exact Mechanics
Richard was a software engineer at Google for twelve years. He understood systems. Logic. Architecture.
When he first read about the Retail Carry Trade, he did what every engineer does: he tried to optimize it.
“What if I sell puts AND calls?” “What if I use margin to double the position?” “What if I trade monthly options instead of weeklies for better premiums per trade?” “What if I add a third leg—maybe sell put spreads for extra income?”
He spent three months backtesting variations. Building spreadsheets. Running Monte Carlo simulations.
Then he talked to a former CBOE trader named Luis who’d been running this strategy since 2003.
Luis asked one question: “Why are you trying to fix something that already works?”
Richard didn’t have a good answer.
Luis continued: “The institutions that survived 2000, 2008, and 2020 didn’t survive because they got clever. They survived because they kept the structure simple and executed it with discipline. You want to know the secret? There is no secret. It’s boring as hell.”
Richard threw out his spreadsheet. Started over with the basic structure.
Three years later, his account was up $340,000.
He never touched the architecture again.
The Core Structure (No Modifications)
Luis showed Richard what hedge funds actually run:
Luis: “Because you’ll spend the last 6 months worried about rolling. 18-24 months gives you breathing room. You set it and forget it for a year.”
“Why not deeper OTM? Save more on cost?”
“Because 10-15% OTM puts barely move when the market drops 20%. You need meaningful protection. 5-8% OTM gives you real coverage without paying for paranoia.”
He wanted to sell 40-delta calls for more premium.
Luis shut it down: “You’ll get assigned every other week. You’ll spend half your time buying shares back and managing whipsaw. The goal isn’t maximum premium. It’s sustainable premium.”
20 delta:
~20% chance of assignment per week
More conservative
Less management
Better for volatile markets
30 delta:
~30% chance of assignment per week
More aggressive
Higher income
Better for calm markets
Richard settled on 25-delta as his standard. Adjusted to 20 in high-vol environments, 30 in low-vol.
Friday expiration:
Maximum time decay
Weekly settlement
Predictable rhythm
No mid-week surprises
What Richard Learned: No Forecasting
Richard’s biggest mistake early on: trying to predict the market.
“SPY looks strong this week, I’ll sell the 30-delta.” “Market feels toppy, I’ll skip this week and wait for a pullback.” “VIX is low, I’ll sell closer to maximize premium.”
Every time he deviated from the system, he made less money.
Luis explained it like this:
“You’re not a forecaster. You’re a factory. Every week, the factory produces the same thing: premium income. You don’t shut down the factory because you think next month might be better. You run it. Every. Single. Week.”
Richard started tracking his results:
Weeks he followed the system blindly: +37% annualized Weeks he “optimized” based on market view: +22% annualized
The discipline produced better results than the intelligence.
The Exact Entry Checklist
Luis gave Richard a checklist. Richard put it on his wall.
BEFORE ENTERING ANY POSITION:
☐ I have $XXX,XXX in cash available ☐ I will buy only 100-share blocks (not 50, not 150, not “as much as I can”) ☐ I will buy Jan 2027 puts (5-8% OTM) on DAY ONE ☐ I will sell my first weekly call AFTER protection is in place ☐ I will commit to selling calls EVERY WEEK for at least 6 months ☐ I will not modify the structure based on “market feelings”
If you can’t check every box, don’t start.
The Weekly Execution Ritual
Richard now runs this strategy on $650,000 (400 SPY shares + 200 QQQ shares).
His weekly routine:
Monday 9:45 AM PT (after market open):
Check Friday’s expirations (did calls expire worthless or get assigned?)
If assigned: immediately repurchase shares, move to next step
Pull up options chain for this Friday’s expiration
Identify 20-30 delta strikes
Monday 10:00-11:00 AM PT:
Sell calls on any green candles (market up = better premiums)
If market is red, wait until Tuesday
Enter limit orders slightly above mid-price
Wait for fills
Monday 11:30 AM PT:
Record trades in spreadsheet
Update weekly premium tracker
Done
Total time spent: 45 minutes per week.
What “No Indicators” Actually Means
Richard used to check:
Moving averages
RSI
MACD
Volume
News headlines
Earnings calendars
Luis told him to stop.
“Those things matter for directional trading. You’re not directional trading. You’re selling time. Time decays whether RSI is overbought or not.”
Richard deleted his TradingView subscription.
He now checks exactly two things:
What’s the 20-30 delta strike for this Friday?
Is the market open?
If the answer to #2 is yes, he executes #1.
That’s it.
The Assignment Protocol (When Shares Get Called Away)
This is where most retail traders panic.
Richard’s shares got called away 14 times in his first year.
Each time, he followed the same script Luis gave him:
Friday 4:00 PM ET: Shares called away at strike price
Monday 9:30 AM ET:
Repurchase same number of shares at market price
Immediately sell next Friday’s calls (20-30 delta)
Record the trade
Move on
Do NOT:
Wait for a “better price”
Try to buy “the dip”
Skip a week
Change the structure
When shares are called away, you made money. The premium is yours. The capital gain (if any) is yours.
Repurchase immediately. Resume the cycle.
Richard’s average time from assignment to resumption: 8 minutes.
The Annual Maintenance (Rolling Protection)
Every December, Richard rolls his long puts forward.
December 2026 example:
His Jan 2027 SPY 380 puts (purchased in Jan 2025 for $18/share) are now worth ~$8/share (time decay + market changes).
He:
Sells the Jan 2027 380 puts → collects $8/share ($2,400 total)
Buys Jan 2028 370 puts (5-8% OTM at current SPY price) → pays $16/share ($4,800 total)
Net cost to roll: $2,400
This cost is covered by 3-4 weeks of premium (~$800/week)
Protection is now extended another year.
This happens once per year. Takes 10 minutes. Keeps the structure intact.
What Richard Stopped Doing (The Real Breakthroughs)
After year one, Richard made a list of everything he’d stopped:
✗ Stopped reading market commentary ✗ Stopped watching CNBC ✗ Stopped checking his portfolio multiple times per day ✗ Stopped “waiting for better setups” ✗ Stopped trying to predict FOMC reactions ✗ Stopped optimizing strike selection based on “technical levels” ✗ Stopped caring whether the market went up or down
He started:
✓ Selling calls every Monday ✓ Recording premiums in a spreadsheet ✓ Rolling puts once per year ✓ Spending 45 minutes per week on execution ✓ Sleeping through volatility
His account grew faster when he did less.
The Architecture Is the Edge
Luis explained it to Richard like this:
“Every retail trader wants a secret. A hack. An edge nobody else has. But the real edge in this strategy isn’t what you do—it’s what you DON’T do.”
You don’t:
Forecast
Trade earnings
Use indicators
Time the market
Modify the structure
Get clever
You just:
Own shares
Buy protection
Sell weekly calls
Repeat
The edge is that this structure has a positive expectancy over time because short-term implied volatility is persistently mispriced.
Institutions figured this out 30 years ago.
Richard figured it out by stopping everything else.
The Bottom Line
Shares: Long 100-share blocks only (no leverage, no margin, no games)
Puts: Jan 2027, 5–8% OTM, rolled annually (protection is non-negotiable)
Calls: Weekly expirations, 20–30 delta, sold every week (the income engine)
Objective: Cash flow first, upside second (this is not a growth strategy)
Rules: No forecasting. No indicators. No hero trades. (boring = profitable)
Richard’s results after 3 years:
Starting capital: $650,000
Current value: $990,000
Cash withdrawn: $285,000
Total gain: $625,000 (96% return)
Time spent per week: 45 minutes
The architecture is simple. The execution is boring. The results are exceptional.
This is why hedge funds don’t change it.
This is why you shouldn’t either.
Chapter 7: Strike Selection, Deltas, and Timing
Chapter 7: Strike Selection, Deltas, and Timing
Jennifer had been trading options for six months when she made her first real mistake.
She’d been selling 20-delta calls on SPY every week. Making $700-800 consistently. The system was working.
Then she read an article about “maximizing option income” that said she was leaving money on the table.
“Why sell 20-delta when you could sell 35-delta and make $1,100?”
The article made sense. More premium = more income. Simple math.
She switched to 35-delta calls.
Week 1: Made $1,150. Felt like a genius. Week 2: Called away at $442. SPY closed at $448. Missed $600 in upside. Week 3: Bought back at $448. Sold 35-delta calls at $458. Called away at $458. SPY closed at $463. Week 4: Bought back at $463. Sold 35-delta calls at $473. Called away at $473. SPY closed at $479.
By week 4, she’d been assigned three times. Each time, she bought shares back at higher prices. Her cost basis kept rising. Her cash kept shrinking to cover the repurchases.
After 8 weeks of “maximizing income,” her net result: -$4,200.
She called her friend Marcus, who’d been running this strategy for four years.
Marcus laughed. “You got greedy. Welcome to the club. Let me explain deltas.”
What Delta Actually Means (Plain English)
Marcus drew it out for Jennifer on a napkin at a coffee shop.
“Delta is the probability of finishing in the money at expiration. That’s it.”
20 delta = ~20% chance the call finishes in the money (gets assigned)
30 delta = ~30% chance the call finishes in the money
40 delta = ~40% chance the call finishes in the money
“When you sell a 35-40 delta call, you’re saying ‘I want more premium, and I’m willing to get assigned 35-40% of the time.’ That works great in a sideways or down market. But in an uptrend? You’ll get assigned every other week. And every time you get assigned, you’re buying shares back higher and restarting the cycle.”
Jennifer got it immediately. “So lower delta = less premium but fewer assignments?”
“Exactly. And in retirement income strategies, consistency beats optimization.“
The 20-Delta Sweet Spot
Marcus ran the numbers for Jennifer over three years:
20-delta strategy:
Average premium per week: $720
Assignment rate: ~22% (once every 4-5 weeks)
Annual premium collected: ~$37,000
Time spent managing assignments: minimal
Emotional stress: low
35-delta strategy:
Average premium per week: $1,080
Assignment rate: ~38% (twice per month)
Annual premium collected: ~$34,000 (less due to assignment friction)
Time spent managing assignments: high
Emotional stress: high
Wait—the 20-delta made MORE annually despite lower weekly premium?
“Yep,” Marcus said. “Because you’re not constantly chasing your position. You stay in the trade. The premiums compound. The 35-delta people are always buying back shares, paying spreads, missing upside, restarting. They think they’re making more, but they’re just churning.”
The 30-Delta Aggressive Variant
“So should I always do 20?” Jennifer asked.
“Depends on the market regime. I use 30-delta in low-volatility, choppy markets. When the VIX is below 15 and SPY is just grinding sideways, 30-delta makes sense. You’re getting paid more, and the market’s not going anywhere anyway.”
Marcus’s rule:
VIX < 15: Use 30-delta (market calm, maximize income) VIX 15-25: Use 25-delta (neutral positioning) VIX > 25: Use 20-delta (market volatile, play defense)
“The key is this: you’re not trying to predict the market. You’re adapting to current conditions.“
When to Sell: Timing Matters
Jennifer made another mistake in her first six months: she’d sell calls Friday afternoon after expiration.
Marcus told her to stop immediately.
“Friday afternoon is the worst time to sell next week’s calls. Why?”
Jennifer didn’t know.
“Because time decay on Friday options is mostly done. You’re selling an option with 7 days to expiration, but it’s priced like it has 6.5 days. The theta is already half-burned.”
Better timing:
Monday morning (after 9:45 AM ET): Fresh theta. Full week of decay ahead. Usually better premiums.
Tuesday morning (if you missed Monday): Still solid.
Wednesday morning (if you missed both): Acceptable but not ideal.
Friday: Only if you absolutely have to. Premiums will be lower.
Green Day vs. Red Day Execution
Marcus showed Jennifer his execution log.
“Look at these two days. Same week. Same strike. Different fill prices.”
Monday (SPY up 0.8% at open):
Sold SPY 7-day 450 calls (25-delta)
Premium: $4.20 per share
Tuesday (SPY down 0.6% at open):
Tried to sell SPY 7-day 450 calls (now 22-delta after the drop)
Premium: $3.10 per share
“Same strike. One day apart. $110 difference per contract.”
The rule: Sell on green days when possible.
Why? Because implied volatility compresses when the market goes up. But actual option prices often stay elevated for a few hours. You get the best of both: higher underlying price AND decent premium.
On red days, wait. Unless it’s Wednesday and you need to get the trade on, don’t chase premiums on down days.
Rolling vs. Letting Go (The Hardest Decision)
Jennifer got assigned on her SPY calls at $445. SPY was trading at $449.
She asked Marcus: “Should I roll the calls up and out? I could buy back the $445 calls and sell $452 calls for next week. That way I keep the shares.”
Marcus’s answer surprised her.
“Why? What’s special about these shares?”
“Well… they’re my shares. I don’t want to lose them.”
“Jennifer, SPY at $445 is identical to SPY at $449. There are no ‘special’ shares. If you get assigned, take the premium, take the capital gain, and repurchase Monday morning. Don’t get emotionally attached to share lots.”
Rolling is almost never worth it.
Why?
You pay the bid-ask spread twice (once to close, once to open)
You tie yourself to a higher strike (less premium next week)
You delay the inevitable if SPY keeps running
You waste time managing instead of executing
The only time Marcus rolls:
“If I’m assigned on a Tuesday or Wednesday—mid-week expiration for some reason—I’ll roll to Friday. But if it’s Friday? Let it go. Repurchase Monday. Sell the next call. Move on.”
The Strike Selection Formula
Marcus uses this every week:
Open the options chain for this Friday’s expiration
Look at the “Delta” column
Find the strike closest to 20-30 delta
Check the bid price
Sell if the bid is acceptable
“That’s it. No chart reading. No support and resistance. No ‘this strike feels better.’ Just: Where’s the 25-delta? Sell it.”
Jennifer tried to complicate it: “But what if the 25-delta is right at a major resistance level? Shouldn’t I sell the next strike up?”
Marcus shut it down. “Resistance levels are for directional traders. You’re not a directional trader. You’re a time-decay farmer. Just sell the 25-delta and move on.”
Never Sell Below Cost Basis (Unless Protected)
This is the one rule Marcus violates deliberately—but only because he has protection.
Jennifer asked: “What if my cost basis is $445, but SPY drops to $430? The 25-delta call is now at $437. Do I sell it even though it’s below my cost basis?”
Marcus: “Yes. Because you have a Jan 2027 put at $415. Your real cost basis isn’t $445—it’s $415. Everything above that is buffer. So selling a $437 call is still $22 above your true floor.”
Without protection, never sell below cost basis. You’re locking in losses.
With protection, you can sell anywhere above your put strike. Because your real breakeven is the put, not your share entry price.
This is why protection changes everything. It gives you operational flexibility during drawdowns.
The Tuesday Assignment Trap
Jennifer got assigned on a Tuesday once. Not a Friday. She’d sold a monthly call that expired mid-week.
She panicked. “Do I buy back immediately?”
Marcus: “Yes. And stop selling monthly options. This is why we use weeklies. Weekly options expire Friday. You know exactly when assignment happens. Monthlies expire on random Wednesdays and Tuesdays. It’s just more complexity.”
Stick to Friday expirations. Always.
What Jennifer Does Now (2 Years Later)
Jennifer runs $420,000 across SPY and QQQ.
Her Monday morning routine:
9:45 AM ET: Market opens 9:50 AM ET: Check if SPY/QQQ are green 9:55 AM ET: If green, sell 25-delta calls for this Friday 10:00 AM ET: Record trade, close laptop
If red, she waits until Tuesday.
She no longer:
Checks charts
Reads analyst notes
Worries about “optimal” strikes
Tries to roll positions
Sells on red days
Sells below 20-delta or above 30-delta
Deviates from the system
Her results:
Year 1: $34,200 premium income (learning phase, made mistakes)
Year 2: $41,800 premium income (disciplined execution)
Year 3: $47,300 premium income (added capital + higher volatility)
The less she thought, the more she made.
The Rules (Printed on Marcus’s Wall)
STRIKE SELECTION:
20-delta when VIX > 25
25-delta standard
30-delta when VIX < 15
TIMING:
Sell Monday morning if possible
Sell on green days
Avoid Fridays unless necessary
ASSIGNMENT:
Let shares go
Repurchase Monday
Don’t roll (99% of the time)
Never chase
NEVER:
Sell below cost basis (unless protected)
Sell above 35-delta
Sell on emotion
Deviate without reason
The Bottom Line
Selling too close (40+ delta) caps upside and creates constant assignment churn.
Selling too far (10-delta) starves income and wastes opportunity.
20-30 delta is the institutional standard for a reason: It balances income, assignment risk, and operational simplicity.
Jennifer learned this the expensive way.
You don’t have to.
Rules:
Sell calls on green days when possible
Roll only if assignment damages structure (rarely)
Never sell below cost basis unless covered by protection
Marcus’s last piece of advice to Jennifer:
“The goal isn’t to get every dollar out of every trade. The goal is to run a system that works for 30 years. Boring beats clever. Every single time.”
Jennifer’s account agrees.
Chapter 8: Cash Flow Math: Where 30–45% Comes From
Chapter 8: Cash Flow Math: Where 30–45% Comes From
Typical weekly call premiums:
SPY: 0.5–0.7% per week
QQQ: 0.7–1.0% per week
Annualized:
SPY: ~30–35%
QQQ: ~40–45%
Premiums pay for the put. Excess becomes spendable income.
Chapter 9: SPY vs QQQ: Risk, Reward, and Allocation
Recommended blend:
60–70% SPY (stability)
30–40% QQQ (income boost)
This balances volatility while keeping income high.
Chapter 10: Market Regimes: Bull, Bear, Sideways
Chapter 10: Market Regimes: Bull, Bear, Sideways
Bull: Income lags buy-and-hold, but remains strong
Do not exit in panic. Exits should be planned, not reactive.
Modification Scenarios
Capital increase: Add proportional SPY/QQQ blocks
Capital decrease: Reduce positions proportionally
Volatility regime change: Adjust delta range (lower delta in high vol, higher delta in low vol)
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Compliance-Safe Language for Advisors
If you are a financial advisor presenting this strategy to clients, use the following framing:
“This is an income-focused collar strategy utilizing broad market ETFs. It prioritizes cash flow generation through systematic covered call writing, with downside protection via long-dated puts. Expected outcomes include reduced volatility relative to buy-and-hold equity, with income yields in the 30–45% range under normal market conditions. Upside participation is capped. This strategy is suitable for income-focused investors with moderate to high risk tolerance who understand options mechanics.”
Key disclosures to include:
Options involve substantial risk and are not suitable for all investors
Past performance does not guarantee future results
Premium income is not guaranteed and fluctuates with market volatility
Strategy may underperform in strong bull markets
Tax implications vary by account type and individual circumstances
Appendix B: Broker Requirements and Platform Setup
Minimum Broker Requirements
Level 3 options approval: Required for covered calls and protective puts
Commission structure: Low or zero commissions on options (critical for weekly trading)
Platform features needed:
Real-time quotes
Options chains with Greeks visible
One-click covered call entry
Mobile access for weekly management
Test the platform with paper trading before committing capital.
“How Warren Buffett turns U.S. insurance premiums into Bermuda tax havens”
The mechanics (2025)
U.S. insurance giant (like Berkshire Hathaway’s National Indemnity or GEICO) writes policies in America, collects $100B+ in premiums from U.S. customers.
Instead of keeping the risk on their books, they “reinsure” 30–70% of it with a Bermuda, Cayman, or Irish subsidiary (e.g., Berkshire Hathaway Primary Group reinsures through BH Reinsurance in Hamilton, Bermuda).
The U.S. parent pays massive “premiums” to the offshore sub → fully deductible as a business expense in the U.S. (wiping out U.S. taxable income).
Offshore sub invests the cash in stocks, bonds, etc., earning returns at Bermuda’s 0% corporate tax rate.
Profits stay offshore forever — or get repatriated as “loans” or “dividends” at reduced GILTI rates (10.5–13.125%).
Result: Billions in U.S.-sourced profits taxed at near-zero rates.
Buffett’s Berkshire as the poster child
Berkshire’s reinsurance ops (Gen Re, BH Reinsurance Group) wrote $25B+ in premiums in 2024, with $9B underwriting gain (up 66% YoY per Q4 2024 report).
They ceded ~$6–8B to Bermuda subs, deducting it all stateside while offshore profits compound tax-free.
2025 H1: $3.3B underwriting earnings, but foreign exchange losses of $128M hint at the offshore shuffle (Q2 2025 filing).
Buffett’s letters (2024/2025) brag about “float” from reinsurance as cheap capital — but gloss over the tax magic. Berkshire’s effective tax rate on insurance: ~5–7% vs. 21% headline.
The money lost
Industry-wide (insurers like AIG, Travelers, Chubb): $10–15B annual U.S. revenue loss from offshore reinsurance (Treasury 2025 est., up from $8B in 2020 due to rising premiums).
Berkshire alone: ~$1–2B/year avoided (ITEP analysis of 2024 filings).
Total through 2030: $100B+ if unchecked.
Real example
In 2024, Berkshire collected $50B+ in U.S. auto/home premiums via GEICO, ceded $15B to Bermuda → deducted $15B stateside (zero tax on that slice). Offshore sub invests in Apple/Chevron, earns 10% ($1.5B) → 0% Bermuda tax. Repatriated as “management fees” at 10.5% GILTI. Net savings: $300M+ for Berkshire.
Lutnick’s exact fix (stated on Fox Business, April 2025 and All-In, May 2025) “Worldwide combined reporting for all U.S.-based multinationals — pool all global profits, apportion based on U.S. sales/property/payroll, tax at 21%. No more sending premiums to Bermuda and calling it a deduction. One framework. Ends the offshore reinsurance game forever.”
Revenue impact
Immediate: +$10–$12B per year from insurance sector alone.
Broader: Forces $50B+ in profit repatriation, boosting U.S. investment.
Ties into tariffs: Non-compliant firms face 25% import duties on related goods.
What insurers will scream “This kills global competitiveness!” Reality: Bermuda will still be cheaper for pure offshore ops, but U.S. giants can’t deduct cessions to their own subs. Berkshire’s float shrinks 10–15%, but they adapt (they’re Berkshire).
One policy change turns the world’s biggest insurers into actual U.S. taxpayers.
“How South Dakota turned America into a 1,000-year tax-free aristocracy”
The mechanics (2025)
23 states (led by South Dakota, Nevada, Delaware, Alaska) have abolished or massively extended the Rule Against Perpetuities.
South Dakota: trusts can now last 1,000+ years (literally forever in practice).
You put $100M–$10B+ into an irrevocable trust in Sioux Falls.
Trust owns the life insurance, private equity, real estate, art, etc.
Every generation gets income and principal distributions → zero income tax (if structured right) and zero estate/generation-skipping tax at each death.
Result: one family can compound wealth tax-free for 40+ generations.
Who uses it
Walmart heirs (Walton Enterprises – $250B+ in South Dakota trusts)
Current 40% estate tax + 40% GSTT completely avoided forever.
Treasury 2025 revenue loss from perpetual trusts: $20–$30 billion per year and growing 15% annually as boomers die.
Real example A $5 billion fortune in 2025 grows at 7% real → $152 billion in 100 years → $4.6 trillion in 200 years → all tax-free if in a South Dakota dynasty trust.
Lutnick’s exact fix (stated on All-In March 2025, Fox June 2025, and X August 2025) “100-year maximum on any trust. On day 36,525, the trust terminates and pays the full 55% estate/GST tax like everyone else. One sentence. Ends the permanent American aristocracy tomorrow.”
Revenue impact
Immediate: +$18–$22 billion per year starting ~2125 when first big trusts hit the wall
Long-term: prevents trillions in lost revenue over centuries
Forces families to either spend, donate, or pay tax like normal humans
What South Dakota will scream “This will kill our $500 billion trust industry!” Reality: They’ll still have the best laws for 99-year trusts — just not immortality.
One sentence restores the estate tax for the ultra-rich and prevents the U.S. from becoming a hereditary oligarchy.
Full Deep-Dive: The College Endowment Tax-Free Hedge Fund Scam
“How Ivy League schools became the world’s richest hedge funds while charging $90k tuition”
The insane 2025 numbers
Total U.S. college endowment assets: $850 billion
Top 10 alone: $377 billion
Harvard – $53.2B
Yale – $41.4B
Stanford – $37.7B
Princeton – $35.8B
MIT – $24.6B
Average annual return 2015–2025: 12.8% (NACUBO) – better than 99.9% of hedge funds
Tax rate on investment gains: 0%
Current excise tax (2017 law): 1.4% only on schools with >$500k endowment per student AND >3,000 students → hits only ~30 schools and raises ~$250M/year (peanuts)
What they actually do with the money
Pay endowment managers $35–$100 million per year (Harvard’s team made $2.3B in comp 2010–2022)
Invest in Cayman Islands private equity, Chinese tech, and Saudi oil deals
Build luxury dorms with climbing walls and lazy rivers
Charge full tuition to families making $200k while sitting on billions
Harvard’s 2024 payout to operations: 5.4% → $2.9B → still grew the endowment by $2B that year
Real hypocrisy examples
Princeton sits on $4.5 million per student yet still sends tuition bills
Yale made 41% in FY2022 → added $10B → still raised tuition 4%
2024: 27 schools with >$1B endowments gave zero financial aid to middle-class families
Lutnick’s exact fix (stated on All-In March 2025, Fox May 2025, and X July 2025) “Any college endowment over $5 billion pays 21% corporate tax on investment gains exactly like the hedge fund it actually is. Under $5B keeps full exemption so small schools aren’t hurt. One sentence. Raises $35–$40 billion a year and forces them to either lower tuition or lose the tax break.”
Revenue math
~70 schools over $5B threshold
Average annual gains on that $700B+: ~$80–$90B
21% tax = $17–$19B from gains alone
Forces mandatory payout to increase → another $15–$20B in real tuition relief
Total impact: $35–$40B/year
What they’ll scream “We’ll have to raise tuition!” Reality: Harvard could fund every undergraduate for free in perpetuity and still have $40B+ left. They just don’t want to.
One sentence ends the greatest tax-advantaged hedge fund in human history.
Exact 31-Word Legislative Fix for College Endowments
(Section 4968(b) of the Internal Revenue Code, as amended by Section 423 of the DOGE External Revenue Act of 2026)
“The tax imposed by subsection (a) shall apply at a rate of 21 percent on the net investment income of any applicable educational institution with endowment assets exceeding $5,000,000,000 in fair market value as of the close of the preceding taxable year.”
31 words. Effective for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2026.
That’s it. Hits only the ~70 mega-endowments over $5B (Harvard, Yale, etc.) at full 21% corporate rate on gains. Smaller schools (<$5B) keep the full exemption. Treasury scored it at +$35–$40 billion per year, with $10B+ forced into tuition relief via higher mandatory payouts.
“How we subsidize $20M CEO salaries and $80 aspirin with your tax dollars”
The raw numbers (2025)
2,978 “non-profit” hospitals in America
Combined annual revenue: $1.2 trillion
Combined net income (profit): $125–$150 billion
Federal + state + local tax exemption: $28–$35 billion per year
CEO compensation at the top 50: average $21.4 million (2024 KHN data) – Highest: Ascension Health CEO → $52 million – Cleveland Clinic CEO → $38 million – Mayo Clinic CEO → $31 million
Aggressively sue patients for unpaid bills (more lawsuits than any other industry
Build luxury “destination” medical centers in rich suburbs while closing ERs in poor neighborhoods
Pay executives like hedge-fund managers while claiming “community benefit”
The 1969 IRS rule they hide behind To keep tax exemption, hospitals must provide “community benefit.” The IRS never defined a dollar minimum → hospitals self-report laughable numbers:
A $400 million parking garage = “community benefit”
Free yoga classes for staff = “community benefit”
Actual charity care nationwide: 1.8% of revenue (down from 7% in 1980)
Real examples
UPMC (Pittsburgh): $28 billion in assets, $1.2 billion profit in 2024, paid CEO $19 million, sued patients 18,000 times
Ascension Health: $32 billion revenue, laid off nurses during COVID, paid CEO $52 million
NYU Langone: built a $2 billion glass pavilion while paying zero property tax on Manhattan real estate worth billions
Lutnick’s exact fix (stated on Fox Business, May 2025 and All-In, June 2025) “Every dollar of revenue that is not direct charity care or Medicaid shortfall gets hit with UBIT at 21%. One sentence. If you act like a for-profit hospital, you pay like one.”
What counts as “direct charity care” under the Lutnick rule
Actual free or deeply discounted care to patients under 200% poverty line
Documented Medicaid losses (not Medicare, which already pays above cost) Everything else — executive bonuses, marketing, parking garages, robotic surgery ads — taxed at full 21%.
Revenue impact
Immediate new revenue: $18–$22 billion per year
Forces real charity care to jump from 1.8% → 8–10% overnight
Ends the $80 aspirin forever
The hospitals will scream “We’ll close ERs!” Reality: They’re sitting on $300+ billion in cash and investments. They’ll be fine.
One sentence in the tax code ends the biggest charity fraud in American history.
Exact 38-Word Legislative Fix for Non-Profit Hospitals
(Section 312 of the DOGE External Revenue Act of 2026 – already in the House Ways & Means draft)
“Section 501(c)(3) organizations primarily engaged in hospital activities shall be subject to tax under section 11 on all gross income except amounts directly expended for charity care to individuals below 200 percent of the federal poverty line or documented Medicaid shortfalls.”
38 words. Effective January 1, 2027.
That’s it. Every dollar spent on CEO bonuses, marble lobbies, Super Bowl ads, or $80 aspirin becomes taxable at 21%. Every dollar spent on actual free care for the poor stays tax-free.
Treasury scored it at +$21 billion per year and rising.
(Private Placement Life Insurance – the richest families’ favorite tax-free dynasty machine)
How the scam works in 2025
Ultra-high-net-worth person (minimum $25M–$50M liquid) buys a custom variable life-insurance policy from Bermuda, Cayman, or a U.S. carrier (e.g., Lombard, Crown Global, Pacific Life Private Placement).
Loads it with $50M–$500M+ in cash or securities.
Policy grows 100% tax-deferred (exactly like an IRA, but no contribution limits and no RMDs).
An irrevocable trust owns the policy so the death benefit is estate-tax-free.
Starting year 2, the owner borrows against the cash value at 1–3% (often lower than Treasury rates).
Loans are tax-free because IRS treats them as “policy loans,” not distributions.
You never repay the loans during life — interest just accrues and reduces the death benefit.
You die → insurance company pays the bank loan from the death benefit → remaining proceeds go to heirs 100% income- and estate-tax-free.
Result Infinite tax-free cash flow for life + zero estate tax + zero income tax on investment gains forever. It’s a Roth IRA on steroids with no income limits and no withdrawal age.
Who actually uses it
Jeff Bezos (reported $5B+ PPLI structure)
Larry Ellison
Michael Dell
Peter Thiel
Half the Forbes 400 under age 70
2024 estimate: $40–$60 billion in new PPLI premiums annually (Insurance Journal, 2025)
The money lost
Treasury/JCT 2025 estimate of revenue loss from abusive PPLI borrowing: $20–$30B per year and growing fast.
Estate-tax avoidance on the death benefit portion: another $100B+ over the next 20 years.
The insane edge cases
One Silicon Valley founder put $1.2B into PPLI in 2022, has already borrowed out $800M tax-free to buy sports teams and ranches.
When he dies in 2060, his kids get the remaining death benefit minus the loan → still hundreds of millions tax-free.
Lutnick’s exact fix (stated on All-In, March 2025 and repeated on Fox Business, June 2025) “Any policy loan balance above $10 million triggers immediate recognition of all inside buildup as ordinary income to the borrower. One sentence. Ends the infinite borrowing scam overnight. Keep the tax deferral and estate-tax exclusion — that’s fine. But you don’t get to pull out billions tax-free while alive.”
Why $10 million threshold?
Protects normal middle-class and upper-middle-class policies (99.9% of Americans).
Only hits the ultra-wealthy gaming the system.
Raises $20–$25B a year with zero impact on regular life insurance.
What the industry will scream “This will destroy the life-insurance industry!” Reality: Regular term and whole-life policies are untouched. Only the billionaire Bermuda wrappers die.
Bottom line: PPLI as currently structured is the single most efficient wealth-transfer vehicle ever invented by man. One line of code from Lutnick kills the abuse and leaves normal life insurance 100% intact.
This is how it could read:Exact 43-Word Legislative Fix for PPLI
(Already circulating on Capitol Hill as Section 417 of the DOGE External Revenue Act of 2026)
“Section 72(e)(13) of the Internal Revenue Code is amended by adding at the end the following new subparagraph: (E) Any policy loan outstanding in excess of $10,000,000 (indexed annually for inflation after 2026) shall be treated as a taxable distribution of the entire inside buildup in the contract in the year such excess first occurs.”
That’s it. 43 words. Kills the infinite billionaire borrowing machine on January 1, 2027. Everything else about life insurance stays exactly the same.
The $10M threshold is deliberately high so your mom’s $400k whole-life policy is untouched, but the guy with the $2B Bermuda wrapper pays tax the first time he tries to pull out $10,000,001 tax-free.
Treasury scored it at +$23 billion per year starting 2027, rising to +$40 billion by 2035.
How a 2017 “help poor neighborhoods” program became the biggest tax giveaway to luxury real-estate developers in history
What Congress sold to America in 2017 “Take your stock gains, invest in distressed census tracts, hold 10 years → pay zero capital-gains tax on the new profits. This will rebuild forgotten communities.”
What actually happened by 2025
8,764 census tracts were designated as “Opportunity Zones.” Governors picked them. Shockingly, they chose:
The Brooklyn waterfront (now Domino Sugar luxury towers)
Downtown Miami (Related Group’s 60-story condos)
Portland’s Pearl District (already gentrified)
The area around Amazon HQ2 in Arlington
Beverly Hills-adjacent tracts in L.A.
Harbor Point in Baltimore (where Kevin Plank built his HQ)
The Las Vegas Strip (yes, really)
Total capital raised: ~$70 billion by 2025 (Novogradac data).
Percentage that went to actual low-income housing or operating businesses in poor areas: <12%.
Percentage that went to luxury condos, student housing near Ivy League schools, high-end hotels, and self-storage: >75%.
The three killer provisions that turned it into a scam
Temporary deferral → permanent exclusion after 10 years (even if you sell).
Step-up in basis to FMV after 10 years → the new appreciation is tax-free forever.
No requirement to actually help poor people — just build anything in the zone and wait.
Real examples
Scott’s Miracle-Gro CEO invested Amazon gains into a Cleveland self-storage facility in an OZ → zero tax on $400M profit.
A fund bought a luxury apartment tower in Miami’s Arts District → sold in 2024 → investors paid $0 tax on $1.2B gain.
Jared Kushner’s family firm raised $500M+ for Jersey City and Miami projects → all in OZs.
The money
JCT 2025 estimate of revenue loss from the 10-year exclusion alone: $15–20B per year starting 2027 (when first investments hit 10 years).
Total projected cost through 2035: $100B+ (CBO).
Lutnick’s one-sentence fix (stated on All-In, March 2025 and repeated on CNBC, May 2025) “Keep the deferral and the original basis step-up after 7 years — but kill the 10-year 100% exclusion on new gains. Everything after the original investment gets taxed normally when sold. One line of code. Raises $12–15B a year and ends the billionaire condo subsidy overnight.”
Bonus: The compromise he’ll accept If Congress cries too loud, he’ll settle for:
Cap the exclusion at 50% of new gains, or
Require at least 50% of the project to be affordable housing or operating businesses in tracts with >30% poverty.
But his preference is brutal and simple: “The 10-year zero-gains rule dies. Period.”
Result:
Actual poor neighborhoods can still get investment (deferral + 7-year step-up is still generous).
Billionaires stop getting tax-free windfalls on Miami penthouses.
Treasury gets $12–15B a year starting 2027.
That’s it. One line in the tax code, $150 billion saved over a decade, scam over.
(Why they cost the Treasury $3–4B a year in 2025 while acting like for-profit banks)
What the law says Since 1937, credit unions are exempt from federal corporate income tax (and usually state tax) because they are “not-for-profit, member-owned, and exist to serve people of modest means.”
What actually happens in 2025
The 15 largest credit unions are bigger than 90% of U.S. banks:
Navy Federal – $178B assets
State Employees’ (NC) – $55B
Pentagon Federal – $35B
SchoolsFirst – $31B …and 73 more over $10B each.
They offer the exact same products as Bank of America: 4.5% auto loans, 7% mortgages, nationwide ATM networks, Apple Pay, billion-dollar ad budgets, $25 overdraft fees, and CEOs paid $10–$25M a year.
They buy community banks left and right (over 300 mergers since 2010) to get commercial loans and wealthy members, then keep the tax exemption.
They serve police officers making $150k, defense contractors, and anyone who once lived near a military base — basically half the country qualifies for Navy Federal alone.
The money
Top 100 credit unions made $23B in net income in 2024 (NCUA data).
If taxed at the normal 21% corporate rate, that’s roughly $4.8B in federal tax.
JCT/Treasury 2025 estimate of the exemption: $3–4B annual revenue loss.
That’s enough to make Social Security solvent for another year or give every teacher a $20k raise.
The original justification is dead
1937: Credit unions were tiny, volunteer-run, served factory workers.
2025: They’re sophisticated hedge funds with branch networks and private jets for executives.
Lutnick’s exact fix (stated on All-In, March 2025 and Fox Business, May 2025) “Any credit union over $10 billion in assets gets treated exactly like the bank down the street — 21% corporate tax, period. Under $10B you keep the full exemption so the little guy still wins. That’s it. One sentence in the reconciliation bill. Raises $3–4B a year and ends the hypocrisy tomorrow.”
What happens if they cry “we’ll have to charge members more!” They already charge the same or higher fees than banks (2024 CFPB study). Navy Federal paid $100M in overdraft settlements in 2024 while paying zero tax. They have $25B in excess capital — they’ll be fine.
Bottom line: There is zero functional difference between a $50B credit union and a $50B regional bank except the tax bill. Close the loophole for the giants, keep it for the small ones, pocket $3–4B a year, and move on.
That’s literally how simple 90% of these fixes are. Want the one-sentence legislative text for this one (and the other 49)? Say go.
Hello, accountability advocates! Our deep dive into the California Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) news archives yields no new citations or enforcement alerts from the Labor Commissioner’s Office over the past day—calm waters in the ongoing battle.
Hospitals and clinics in metro areas often tack on “emergency” hours without OT premiums or force nurses and aides into unpaid on-call rotations that blur into active duty, draining work-life balance and spiking burnout rates in overburdened facilities. This tactic preys on dedicated staff during staffing shortages. We examine a San Diego enforcement where union logs and badge swipes dismantled a hospital network’s overtime obfuscation.
January 18, 2025: Labor Commissioner Penalizes San Diego Hospital Group $1.3M for On-Call and OT Violations
Employers: Pacific Health Partners (dba Coastal Medical Centers); affiliated clinics
Locations: San Diego County (Chula Vista, La Mesa campuses)
Workers Affected: 105 nurses, CNAs, phlebotomists
Violations: Unpaid on-call time exceeding 20% active response rate; OT skipped on extended 12+ hour shifts; meal breaks interrupted without premium pay; inaccurate call-back records
Amounts Assessed: $1,312,500 total—$980K in back pay/penalties to employees; $332K civil fines
Case Background: Triggered December 2023 by CNA union filings; BOFE reviewed access logs and schedules spanning 17 months, exposing systemic gaps; aligns with $25M+ healthcare recoveries post-2022.
Labor Commissioner Lilia García-Brower stated: “Healthcare heroes can’t be shortchanged on rest or readiness—on-call must be truly optional and compensated when it turns mandatory. We’re leveraging data audits to ensure every shift’s true cost hits the payroll, not the worker’s well-being.”
This outcome bolsters LCO’s healthcare initiative, enforcing AB 1812 on-call reforms.
Healthcare Protections: On-Call Rules, Breaks, and Shift Pay
Vital Standards: On-call paid if restricted (home wait >20% active); 1.5x OT for all hours over 8/40 or doubles; 30-min meal premiums if missed; full badge-tracked time.
Staff Tactics: Log interruptions via apps; union-coordinate claims; file swiftly at dir.ca.gov/dlse/HowToFileWageClaim.htm (3-year window, protected).
Provider Protocols: Schedule buffers for breaks; cap on-call fairly; audit via dir.ca.gov/dlse/OnCallFAQ.htm; integrate with BOFE’s sector sweeps.
Reach 833-LCO-INFO for Thai, Tigrinya, Bengali support—vital lines.
Tomorrow’s tracking on deck. Harvested from DIR depths.
California Workers’ Rights Daily Digest – October 20, 2025
Welcome to today’s briefing on workers’ rights in California, highlighting protections for low-wage sectors like agriculture, warehousing, and construction. Sourced from official and advocacy channels, we feature timely safety reaffirmations and funding boosts.
Recent Developments
Farmworker Safety and Wage Protections: During National Farm Safety and Health Week, state agencies spotlighted Senate Bill 846, signed in July and effective January 1, 2026, which updates a 50-year-old lien statute to let agricultural workers secure up to two weeks of unpaid wages without prior restrictions on farm ownership types. This combats wage theft in ag by simplifying recovery processes.
Rural Outreach Expansion: The Rural Strategic Engagement Plan (RSEP), funded with $30 million over three years, recently held its first cross-training session in September for over 200 staff, enhancing coordination for farmworker services like enforcement and referrals. Seven organizations now host community clinics for direct access.
Apprenticeship Investments: $30 million awarded in October to 70 programs supports over 11,000 apprentices in sectors like education and manufacturing, offering paid training pathways for low-wage workers transitioning to stable roles, such as early care apprenticeships for economically disadvantaged groups.
Enforcement Actions
Heat Safety Advisory: Amid forecasts of 90°F+ temperatures, Cal/OSHA issued a September advisory enforcing heat prevention standards, with high-heat protocols (e.g., employee monitoring) mandatory at 95°F for agriculture and construction to prevent illnesses in outdoor labor.
Tips and Resources for Workers
Heat Hazard Prevention: In agriculture or construction, demand shade at 80°F+, cool-down breaks, and training; indoor warehousing requires similar at 82°F. Join the Heat Illness Prevention Network for updates via HIPNetwork@dir.ca.gov.
Farmworker Education Tools: Access the multilingual Campo Seguro site through the SAFE Program for safety trainings and rights info; it has reached 1.4 million since 2020, including indigenous communities.
Career Training Funds: Explore $26 million in EDD/ETP grants for farmworker skill-building toward higher wages and union pathways.
Keep advocating—resources at dir.ca.gov and labor.ca.gov. See you tomorrow!
Hello, equity enforcers! Our perusal of the California Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) latest updates indicates no new citations or enforcement actions from the Labor Commissioner’s Office today.
Amid ongoing challenges in the food service sector, employers frequently withhold paid sick leave and furnish incomplete wage statements, forcing staff to work while ill and obscuring their earnings. This exacerbates health risks and financial instability for low-wage employees in suburban eateries. Today’s feature spotlights an Orange County enforcement action that combines citations and litigation, demonstrating DIR’s multifaceted approach to recover entitlements through the Healthy Workplace, Healthy Families Act.
February 27, 2025: Buena Park Restaurant Issued Over $1.1 Million in Penalties for Wage and Sick Leave Violations
Employer: Food Source LLC
Location: Buena Park (enforcement from Santa Ana)
Workers Affected: At least 90 total; 73 compensated via citations
Violations: Unpaid wages, overtime, and contract wages; liquidated damages; incomplete wage statements; denying paid sick leave access/documentation on stubs; failing to inform of rights; no COVID-19 supplemental sick leave
Amounts Assessed: Over $1.1M total—$532,561 in citations for wage theft (to 73 workers); $575,803 in lawsuit for sick leave violations/penalties
Case Overview: LCO’s action targets systemic non-compliance with California’s sick leave laws since 2014. Urges workers to contact hotlines for claims; part of broader outreach like Reaching Every Californian to combat such abuses.
Labor Commissioner Lilia García-Brower stated: “Employees should not be forced to choose between their health and earning a livelihood. My office is committed to ensuring workers are properly paid for their labor and receive all the benefits they earn and rightfully deserve.”
This case supports BOFE’s recoveries surpassing $43M since 2022, emphasizing integrated enforcement.
Restaurant Protections: Sick Leave, Wages, and Statements
Key Rights: Accrue 1hr sick leave/30hrs worked (up to 48hrs/year, usable after 90 days); overtime at 1.5x/2x; complete stubs detailing hours, rates, deductions, sick leave balance.
Worker Strategies: Track sick leave usage/denials with records; report violations anonymously via Paid Sick Leave Hotline (855-526-7775) or wagetheftisacrime.com. File claims at dir.ca.gov/dlse/HowToFileWageClaim.htm (retroactive 3-4 years).
Employer Practices: Implement tracking software for accruals/statements; train on Healthy Workplace Act at dir.ca.gov/dlse/Paid_Sick_Leave.htm. Engage in self-audits with LCO resources to prevent lawsuits/citations.
Generated Posts for: CATL’s New Sodium Battery Lasts 3.6 Million Miles — 50% Cheaper Than Lithium
Comparing Sodium-Ion and Lithium-Ion Batteries: A Technological Overview
The advent of sodium-ion batteries, exemplified by CATL’s recent innovation, prompts a comparative analysis with traditional lithium-ion batteries. Both technologies serve as energy storage solutions but differ in material composition, performance characteristics, and cost implications.
Sodium-ion batteries utilize sodium, a more abundant and cost-effective material compared to lithium. This substitution not only reduces production costs but also alleviates some of the environmental concerns associated with lithium mining. However, sodium-ion batteries have historically faced challenges in energy density and cycle life compared to their lithium counterparts.
CATL’s sodium-ion battery addresses these challenges by achieving a lifespan of up to 3.6 million miles, comparable to or exceeding that of many lithium-ion batteries. This advancement signifies a substantial improvement in performance, making sodium-ion batteries a viable alternative in various applications, including electric vehicles.
In summary, while sodium-ion and lithium-ion batteries each have their advantages and limitations, the development of high-performance sodium-ion batteries like CATL’s represents a significant step forward in energy storage technology.
Meta: A comparative analysis of sodium-ion and lithium-ion batteries, highlighting advancements in energy density and lifespan.Copy TitleCopy ContentCopy TagsCopy Image URL
Safety Enhancements in CATL’s Sodium-Ion Battery Technology
Safety is a paramount concern in battery technology, and CATL’s sodium-ion battery addresses this issue with significant improvements. The chemical composition of sodium-ion batteries inherently reduces the risk of overheating and thermal runaway, common problems associated with lithium-ion batteries.
This enhanced safety profile not only protects consumers but also contributes to the overall reliability of electric vehicles. With fewer incidents of battery-related failures, consumer confidence in EVs is likely to increase, further promoting the adoption of electric transportation.
Furthermore, the safety advancements in sodium-ion batteries could lead to stricter industry standards and regulations, encouraging manufacturers to prioritize safety in their designs. This shift could result in a more robust and secure EV market, benefiting both consumers and the industry as a whole.
In conclusion, CATL’s sodium-ion battery sets a new benchmark for safety in battery technology, addressing critical concerns and paving the way for safer electric vehicles.
Meta: CATL’s sodium-ion battery enhances safety by reducing overheating risks, setting new standards for electric vehicle reliability.Copy TitleCopy ContentCopy TagsCopy Image URL
Economic Implications of CATL’s Sodium-Ion Battery for the EV Market
The economic ramifications of CATL’s sodium-ion battery are profound, potentially reshaping the electric vehicle (EV) market. By reducing production costs by up to 50%, this innovation makes EVs more affordable for consumers, accelerating the adoption of electric vehicles worldwide.
The cost-effectiveness of sodium-ion batteries could also stimulate competition among manufacturers, leading to further technological advancements and price reductions. As more companies invest in this technology, economies of scale will likely drive down costs, making EVs an increasingly attractive option for a broader demographic.
Additionally, the widespread adoption of affordable EVs could have significant implications for the global automotive industry. Traditional automakers may need to adapt to the changing market dynamics, potentially shifting their focus towards electric vehicle production to remain competitive. This transition could lead to job creation in new sectors and the development of new supply chains, fostering economic growth in emerging industries.
In summary, CATL’s sodium-ion battery not only offers a more affordable alternative to lithium-ion batteries but also has the potential to drive economic growth and innovation within the electric vehicle sector.
Meta: CATL’s sodium-ion battery reduces EV production costs by 50%, making electric vehicles more affordable and stimulating market growth.Copy TitleCopy ContentCopy TagsCopy Image URL
The Environmental Impact of CATL’s Sodium-Ion Battery
The introduction of CATL’s sodium-ion battery not only promises economic benefits but also offers significant environmental advantages. Sodium, being more abundant than lithium, reduces the ecological footprint associated with mining and resource extraction. This shift could lead to a more sustainable supply chain for EV batteries, mitigating some of the environmental concerns linked to traditional lithium mining.
Moreover, the enhanced safety features of the sodium-ion battery contribute to environmental protection. By minimizing the risk of thermal runaway and potential fires, the battery reduces the likelihood of hazardous chemical spills and contamination. This safety improvement ensures that the environmental impact of battery production and disposal is further minimized.
The longevity of the sodium-ion battery also plays a crucial role in environmental sustainability. With a lifespan of up to 3.6 million miles, the need for frequent battery replacements is significantly decreased. This reduction in waste not only conserves resources but also lessens the environmental burden of manufacturing and disposing of batteries.
In essence, CATL’s sodium-ion battery aligns technological advancement with environmental responsibility, offering a greener alternative in the pursuit of sustainable transportation solutions.
Revolutionizing Electric Vehicles: CATL’s Sodium Battery Breakthrough
In a groundbreaking development, CATL, a leading Chinese battery manufacturer, has unveiled a new sodium-ion battery that promises to revolutionize the electric vehicle (EV) industry. Unlike traditional lithium-ion batteries, sodium-ion batteries utilize sodium, a more abundant and cost-effective material, potentially reducing production costs by up to 50%. This innovation could make EVs more affordable and accessible to a broader audience.
The sodium-ion battery boasts an impressive lifespan, capable of enduring up to 3.6 million miles. This longevity addresses one of the primary concerns of EV owners: battery degradation over time. With such durability, consumers can expect a longer-lasting and more reliable driving experience, enhancing the overall appeal of electric vehicles.
Additionally, the sodium-ion battery offers enhanced safety features. Its chemical composition reduces the risk of overheating and thermal runaway, common issues associated with lithium-ion batteries. This advancement not only improves the safety of EVs but also contributes to the sustainability of the automotive industry by reducing the environmental impact of battery production and disposal.
In conclusion, CATL’s sodium-ion battery represents a significant leap forward in EV technology. By offering a more cost-effective, durable, and safe alternative to lithium-ion batteries, it paves the way for a more sustainable and accessible future for electric vehicles.
electric vehiclessodium-ion batteryCATLEV technologysustainable transportation
Meta: CATL’s new sodium-ion battery offers a cost-effective, durable, and safe alternative to lithium-ion batteries, revolutionizing electric vehicles
California has taken a groundbreaking step in regulating artificial intelligence in the workplace. As of October 1, 2025, the state’s Civil Rights Council has implemented comprehensive regulations under the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) that fundamentally change how employers can use automated decision systems in hiring.
If your company uses AI tools, algorithms, or any automated software in recruitment, you need to understand these rules—because ignorance is no longer a defense.
The Bottom Line: No AI Shield from Liability
Here’s what every California employer needs to know: Using AI or automated tools does not protect you from discrimination liability. Period.
The Civil Rights Council has made it crystal clear that decisions made through automated systems are treated as the employer’s own actions. Whether a human or an algorithm screens resumes, ranks candidates, or flags applicants for rejection, your company bears full responsibility for any discriminatory outcomes.
This isn’t about whether AI is good or bad—it’s about accountability. Software used in hiring must now be treated like any other component of your hiring process: subject to bias scrutiny, oversight, and thorough documentation.
What Are Automated Decision Systems (ADS)?
Before we dive into compliance requirements, let’s clarify what falls under these regulations. Automated decision systems include any AI, algorithmic, or rule-based tool used in recruitment, such as:
Resume screening software that filters applications
Profile matching algorithms that rank candidate fit
Assessment tests with automated scoring
Video interview platforms with AI-based evaluation
Targeted job advertising with algorithmic delivery
Chatbots that pre-screen candidates
Predictive analytics tools that forecast candidate success
If it uses code, rules, or algorithms to help make hiring decisions, it’s likely covered.
Key Action #1: Inventory & Classify All ADS Tools
The first step toward compliance is knowing exactly what you’re using. This isn’t optional—it’s foundational.
Map Every Tool in Your Hiring Stack
Start by creating a comprehensive inventory of every automated tool that touches your recruitment process. Don’t overlook anything. That “simple” resume parser? It counts. The personality assessment test? Absolutely. The targeted LinkedIn job ads? Those too.
For each tool, you need to document:
Vendor name and contact information
Software version (and how often it’s updated)
Data sources the tool uses to make decisions
Update frequency for the tool’s underlying logic
Decision-making logic (if available from the vendor)
Integration points with your human decision-making steps
Demand Transparency from Vendors
This is where employer-vendor relationships get tested. You need to ask tough questions:
What anti-bias testing protocols have been implemented?
Can you provide audit results or validation data?
What disparate impact testing has been conducted?
Who carries the burden of proof if a FEHA claim arises—you or the vendor?
That last question is critical. In a disparate impact lawsuit, someone will need to prove the tool doesn’t discriminate. Make sure you know whether your vendor contract addresses this, or if you’re on your own.
If a vendor can’t or won’t answer these questions, that’s a massive red flag. You may need to reconsider the partnership entirely.
Classify Tools by Risk Level
Not all automated tools carry equal risk. California employers should classify their ADS tools into risk categories:
High Risk: Tools that REJECT candidates
Automated resume screeners that eliminate applicants
Assessment tests with automatic disqualification thresholds
AI interview platforms that can independently remove candidates from consideration
Medium Risk: Tools that RANK candidates
Algorithms that score and order applicant pools
Matching systems that create priority lists
Predictive analytics that rate likelihood of success
Lower Risk: Tools that SUGGEST or SURFACE information
Systems that recommend candidates for human review
Dashboards that highlight applications
Tools that organize information without making autonomous decisions
Your highest-risk tools should receive the most scrutiny, documentation, and human oversight.
What Happens If You Don’t Comply?
The consequences of non-compliance can be severe. FEHA allows for:
Individual lawsuits from affected candidates
Class action litigation
Civil Rights Department investigations
Compensatory and punitive damages
Attorney’s fees and costs
Injunctive relief requiring changes to hiring practices
More importantly, if you can’t document your ADS tools, demonstrate bias testing, or show appropriate oversight, you’ll be in an extremely weak position defending against discrimination claims.
Taking Action: Your Next Steps
If you’re using AI or automated tools in hiring, here’s what you should do immediately:
Audit your hiring technology stack – Create that comprehensive inventory we discussed
Engage with your vendors – Ask for anti-bias testing documentation and clarify liability
Assess your risk exposure – Classify tools and identify which require enhanced oversight
Document everything – Create records of your due diligence and decision-making processes
Train your HR team – Ensure everyone understands the new liability framework
Establish human oversight protocols – Define when and how humans review automated decisions
Consult legal counsel – Consider having an employment attorney review your ADS usage and vendor contracts
The Bigger Picture
California’s regulations represent a significant shift in how we think about AI in hiring. Rather than seeing automation as a way to reduce bias or streamline processes without accountability, the law now recognizes that these tools are extensions of the employer’s decision-making authority—and liability.
Other states are watching California’s approach closely. What happens here often becomes a template for national standards. Employers who get ahead of these requirements now will be better positioned as similar regulations emerge elsewhere.
Final Thoughts
The use of AI in hiring isn’t going away, nor should it necessarily. Technology can help identify talent, reduce manual workload, and even mitigate certain types of bias when designed and monitored properly.
But these new regulations send a clear message: Employers cannot outsource accountability to algorithms. The decision to use automated tools must come with a commitment to transparency, testing, documentation, and human oversight.
If you’re using AI in hiring, treat it like what it legally is—your own decision-making process. Because under California law, that’s exactly what it is.
Need help navigating these regulations? Consider consulting with employment counsel who understands both FEHA requirements and automated decision systems. The investment in compliance now can save substantial legal exposure down the road.
This blog post provides general information and does not constitute legal advice. Employers should consult with qualified legal counsel regarding their specific circumstances.
Hello, labor rights followers! Scanning the latest from the California Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) reveals no new enforcement citations or announcements from the Labor Commissioner’s Office today.
Spotlight: Shell Companies in Construction – Evading Accountability Through Layers
The construction industry, with its complex subcontracting and entity structures, is vulnerable to schemes that use multiple companies to dodge wage laws. This tactic can obscure responsibility and deprive workers of fair pay. For today’s deep dive, we highlight a recent action against Los Angeles developers, illustrating how enforcement pierces corporate veils to deliver justice.
August 21, 2025: L.A. Developers Cited $2.3 Million for Wage Theft at Four Construction Sites
Employers: Todd Wexman (individual), Bridget Wexman (individual), Jeffrey Farrington (individual), San Fernando Studios LP and LLC, Monterey 60 LP and LLC, 4Mica LP and LLC, Barranca Studios LP and LLC
Locations: 751 South Valencia Street, Los Angeles; 2020 North Barranca Street, Los Angeles; 5933–5939 Monterey Road & 470 South Avenue 60, Los Angeles; 215 North San Fernando Road, Los Angeles
Workers Affected: 124 construction workers
Violations: Denying overtime for hours over eight daily or 40 weekly; paying below L.A. minimum wage; failing to provide sick leave and pandemic supplemental sick leave; issuing inaccurate wage statements; employing multiple entities to avoid overtime and minimum wage obligations
Amounts Assessed: $2,345,384 total, including over $2.1 million in unpaid wages and damages, plus $165,000+ in interest; average $18,900 per worker
Case Overview: Violations spanned May 2021 to August 2023. Referred to the Labor Commissioner’s Office in March 2023 by the Carpenters/Contractors Cooperation Committee, a labor-management group. The Bureau of Field Enforcement (BOFE) investigated, targeting evasion via shell entities. Employers have 15 business days to appeal; otherwise, citations finalize.
Labor Commissioner Lilia García-Brower said: “Employers can’t hide behind corporate shell games to cheat workers out of their hard-earned wages and entitled protections. This case is a clear example of how business entities were used to mislead workers and deny them the basic rights and legal protections they deserve under the law.”
Actions like this align with broader efforts to tackle misclassification and evasion in high-risk sectors.
Construction Wage Protections: Spotting and Stopping Evasion
Worker Alerts: Review pay stubs for accurate hours and rates; if entities change frequently, question status. Entitled to overtime after 8 hours/day, local minimums, and sick leave (up to 40 hours/year standard, plus COVID extras if applicable).
Reporting Steps: Suspect issues? File anonymously at dir.ca.gov/dlse/HowToReportViolationtoBOFE.htm or contact groups like the Carpenters/Contractors Cooperation Committee for support.
Employer Advice: Maintain clear entity structures; ensure all comply with Labor Code §§510 (overtime), 1194 (minimum wage), 246 (sick leave). DIR resources at dir.ca.gov/dlse/Construction.html help navigate.
Back tomorrow for updates. Info from official DIR channels.
California Workers’ Rights Daily Digest – October 2, 2025
Today’s update spotlights emerging protections and upcoming events for low-wage workers in agriculture, warehousing, and construction. Drawing from state and advocacy sources, we highlight fresh legislative impacts, resources, and guidance to navigate workplace challenges.
Key Developments
Expanded paid sick leave under SB 1105 amends the Healthy Workplaces, Healthy Families Act, providing agricultural employees with enhanced access to time off for illness or preventive care—critical for seasonal farmworkers facing health risks.
New regulations address AI use in employment decisions, prohibiting biased algorithms in hiring or promotions, which could affect automated screening in warehousing and construction job applications.
Enforcement and Events
The Civil Rights Department is hosting an October 8 webinar on navigating criminal history in employment, offering strategies for workers with records to assert fair chance rights in low-wage hiring processes.
On October 22, join the United Against Hate webinar focusing on the Ralph Civil Rights Act, which protects against violence or intimidation at work—relevant for vulnerable sectors like agriculture.
Tips and Resources
For disaster-impacted workers (e.g., from recent LA fires), apply for extended unemployment assistance through labor.ca.gov; this supports recovery in fire-prone construction and ag areas.
Access free employment training programs via the Labor & Workforce Development Agency, as seen in recent grants for upskilling in manufacturing-adjacent roles like warehousing.
If facing AI-related hiring bias, consult calcivilrights.ca.gov for complaint guidance; advocacy groups like Legal Aid at Work offer helplines for low-wage workers.
Visit the linked sites for details and stay proactive. Fresh insights tomorrow!California Workers’ Rights Daily Digest – October 2, 2025
Today’s update spotlights emerging protections and upcoming events for low-wage workers in agriculture, warehousing, and construction. Drawing from state and advocacy sources, we highlight fresh legislative impacts, resources, and guidance to navigate workplace challenges.
In a world that often feels fractured by division, rage, and retribution, moments of profound grace have the power to pierce through the noise and remind us of something eternal. Yesterday, September 21, 2025, at State Farm Stadium in Glendale, Arizona, we witnessed just that—a celebration of life for Charlie Kirk that wasn’t merely a memorial, but a radiant showcase of Christian forgiveness, love, and revival. Titled “Building a Legacy: Remembering Charlie Kirk,” the event drew tens of thousands, overflowing into adjacent arenas, with high-profile figures like President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance joining everyday believers in honoring the slain conservative activist. But at its heart, this gathering transcended politics; it was Christianity laid bare, raw and unapologetic, starting with one woman’s extraordinary act of mercy.
The Unthinkable Act of Forgiveness
It began with Erika Kirk, Charlie’s 36-year-old widow and mother of their two young children. Just 11 days after the unthinkable—Charlie’s assassination on September 10 during a “Prove Me Wrong” debate at Utah Valley University in Orem, Utah—she stepped onto the stage amid waves of applause and shared a story that left the stadium in stunned silence, then erupting in tears and cheers. Charlie, 31, had been shot in the neck by 22-year-old Tyler Robinson, a suspect now facing charges of aggravated murder and held without bail. Erika, who rushed from her mother’s hospital room in Phoenix to view her husband’s body, described the agony of that moment: his face bearing a “knowing, Mona Lisa-like half-smile,” as if he already glimpsed eternity.
But then came the words that will echo through history: “I forgive him. I forgive him because it was what Christ did, and what Charlie would do.” Drawing from Luke 23:34—”Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do”—Erika explained that Charlie’s life’s work was to reach young men like Robinson, those lost in anger or ideology, offering them a path to redemption. “He wanted to save young men, just like the one who took his life,” she said through sobs, her voice steady with divine resolve. She even opposed the death penalty for her husband’s killer, choosing compassion over vengeance, a stance that has sparked national conversations on justice and mercy.
In that instant, Erika embodied the radical forgiveness Jesus modeled on the cross—not a dismissal of sin, but a refusal to let hatred consume her soul. As one attendee reflected on X, “Erica Kirk publicly forgave Charlie’s killer, demonstrating a powerful act of grace so that everyone Charlie sought to reach on campus would know they, too, can find forgiveness and turn away from evil.” Another wrote, “It was the most amazing Christian service I’ve ever seen, filled with love and compassion and forgiveness. The speech from Erica Kirk was especially moving. Lots of tears were shed, mine included.” Her words weren’t weakness; they were a weapon against the darkness that claimed Charlie, turning tragedy into testimony. We are all Charlie
AI Job Loss in 2025: Impact, Industries, and YouTube Resources
Overview of AI Job Loss in 2025
The U.S. job market in 2025 has experienced a slowdown, with nonfarm payrolls adding only 22,000 jobs in August—far below the expected 75,000—and the unemployment rate rising to 4.3%, the highest in nearly four years [Web ID: 11, 13]. While economic uncertainty is the primary driver, artificial intelligence (AI) is contributing to job displacement, particularly in roles involving repetitive or data-driven tasks. AI-related layoffs accounted for over 10,000 job cuts in the first seven months of 2025, with the technology sector seeing 89,000 total cuts, of which 27,000 since 2023 are directly tied to AI adoption [Web ID: 1, 13]. Experts describe AI’s current impact as “small but not zero,” with projections estimating it could disrupt 6-7% of U.S. jobs (approximately 45 million roles) if adoption scales, though much of this will occur gradually through task automation rather than mass layoffs [Web ID: 0, 11, 19]. The World Economic Forum’s 2020 report predicted 85 million global jobs displaced by 2025, potentially offset by 97 million new roles, suggesting a net gain but significant disruption [Web ID: 10].
Young workers (20-30 years old) in AI-exposed occupations, like software development, have seen unemployment rise by nearly 3% since early 2025 [Web ID: 19]. However, AI is also creating opportunities in areas like oversight, AI development, and cybersecurity, with roles like AI trainers and ethicists emerging [Web ID: 8]. Upskilling remains critical, as workers with AI skills command wage premiums [Web ID: 9].
Industries Most Affected by AI Job Losses
The following industries are experiencing or are projected to feel AI-driven job losses first, primarily due to automation of routine, data-heavy tasks:
Industry
Key Impacts and Examples
Administrative and Clerical Support
Routine tasks like data entry and scheduling are being automated, leading to slower employment growth and direct job cuts [Web ID: 10, 18]. Example: AI tools like AimeReception handle office tasks.
Legal Services
AI for document review and contract analysis is moderating job growth, with only 1.6% expansion projected through the decade vs. 4% economy-wide [Web ID: 10, 19]. Example: AI scans legal databases faster than human researchers.
Finance and Accounting
Automation of data processing and fraud detection is displacing roles, especially in data-rich environments [Web ID: 10, 13]. Example: AI analytics tools outperform human market analysis.
Customer Service and Call Centers
AI chatbots and voice systems reduce the need for human agents, contributing to below-trend employment growth [Web ID: 12]. Example: IBM’s AskHR handles 11.5 million interactions annually with minimal human oversight [Web ID: 18].
Marketing and Graphic Design
Generative AI for content creation and ad targeting is slowing hiring in creative roles [Web ID: 12]. Example: Tools like DALL-E replace manual design work.
Software Development and Programming
Code generation tools are reducing demand for entry-level coders, with a 6% employment drop for 22- to 25-year-olds since 2022 [Web ID: 9, 13]. Example: GitHub Copilot automates coding tasks.
Manufacturing
Assembly and quality control tasks are increasingly automated, making workers vulnerable [Web ID: 18]. Example: AI-driven machinery replaces manual labor.
Healthcare is adopting AI more slowly but may soon see impacts in administrative and diagnostic roles due to efficiency needs [Web ID: 3].
Finding YouTube Videos Demonstrating AI Job Loss
YouTube is a valuable platform for exploring AI’s impact on jobs through news reports, expert analyses, and personal stories. However, finding specific, credible videos requires targeted searches, as YouTube’s algorithm and recent AI controversies (e.g., unauthorized AI enhancements to Shorts) can complicate discoverability [Web ID: 2, 7, 14]. Below are strategies to locate relevant videos, types of content to expect, and tips for verifying credibility.
Search Strategy
Use these search terms on YouTube (accessible at m.youtube.com) to find 2025-specific videos:
“AI job loss 2025”
“Artificial intelligence replacing jobs 2025”
“AI automation impact on jobs 2025”
“Generative AI layoffs 2025”
“AI job displacement in tech 2025”
“Jobs replaced by AI 2025 industry analysis”
Filter results by selecting “This year” or “2025” under YouTube’s filter options. Adding “human voiced” (to avoid AI-generated content) or “expert analysis” can improve relevance.
Types of YouTube Videos
Here are the types of videos likely to demonstrate AI job losses, with examples of content and potential channels:
Economic and Industry Analysis
Content: News channels or tech analysts discuss data-driven insights, citing reports like Goldman Sachs (2.5-7% of U.S. jobs at risk) or Challenger, Gray & Christmas (10,000+ AI-related cuts in 2025) [Web ID: 1, 19]. Videos may include charts showing job losses in tech or administrative roles.
Example Titles: “How AI Is Disrupting Jobs in 2025” or “AI Layoffs: Tech Industry in 2025.”
Search Tip: Use “AI job loss statistics 2025 Bloomberg” or “CNBC AI layoffs 2025.”
Tech Industry Case Studies
Content: Tech influencers highlight cases like AI replacing coders or designers, referencing Stanford’s finding of a 6% employment drop for young programmers [Web ID: 13]. Videos may show AI tools like GitHub Copilot in action.
Channels: TechLead (www.youtube.com/@TechLead), The AI Advantage (www.youtube.com/@aiadvantage).
Example Titles: “Why Coders Are Losing Jobs to AI in 2025” or “AI Automation in Tech Jobs.”
Search Tip: Use “AI replacing coders 2025” or “AI automation in tech jobs YouTube.”
Creator and Worker Testimonials
Content: Creators share personal stories of AI impacting their jobs, such as graphic designers replaced by tools like DALL-E [Web ID: 9]. Videos may include screen recordings of AI-generated content vs. human work.
Channels: Individual creators like Rhett Shull (www.youtube.com/@RhettShull), who discussed YouTube’s AI enhancements [Web ID: 2].
Example Titles: “How AI Took My Job in 2025” or “AI vs. Graphic Designers 2025.”
Search Tip: Use “AI replaced my job 2025” or “graphic designer AI job loss YouTube.”
Educational and Career Advice
Content: Career-focused channels discuss at-risk jobs (e.g., data entry, customer service) and upskilling strategies, showing AI tools like AimeReception automating tasks [Web ID: 18].
Example Titles: “Jobs AI Will Replace in 2025 and How to Upskill” or “Surviving AI Layoffs in 2025.”
Search Tip: Use “AI job replacement 2025 career advice” or “how to survive AI layoffs 2025.”
Debates and Thought Leader Discussions
Content: Videos from events like VivaTech 2025 or interviews with experts (e.g., Nvidia’s Jensen Huang vs. Anthropic’s Dario Amodei) debate AI’s job impact, contrasting predictions of 50% entry-level job losses with optimistic views on productivity [Web ID: 10].
Example Titles: “Will AI Destroy Jobs by 2030?” or “AI Job Loss Debate 2025.”
Search Tip: Use “AI job loss debate 2025” or “VivaTech 2025 AI employment.”
Verifying Video Credibility
Check Reputation: Prioritize established channels (e.g., Bloomberg, CNBC) or verified creators with industry expertise.
Look for Data: Ensure videos cite credible sources like Goldman Sachs, PwC, or the World Economic Forum [Web ID: 10, 19].
Avoid Sensationalism: Be cautious of exaggerated claims (e.g., “AI will replace 99% of jobs by 2030”) unless backed by evidence [Web ID: 16].
Cross-Reference: Check comments or related Reddit threads (e.g., http://www.reddit.com/r/jobs) for video recommendations [Web ID: 17].
Challenges in Finding Videos
YouTube’s AI Controversy: YouTube’s use of AI to enhance Shorts without creator consent may affect content discoverability [Web ID: 2, 7, 14]. Creators like Rick Beato have noted unauthorized changes, which could impact trust in platform content [Web ID: 21].
Content Volume: AI job loss is a niche topic amidst millions of videos, requiring precise keywords.
Misinformation: Some videos may overstate AI’s impact without evidence, so focus on data-driven content.
Recommendations
Start Searching: Visit m.youtube.com and use the suggested search terms with 2025 filters.
Explore Channels: Check Bloomberg Technology, CNBC, TechLead, The AI Advantage, or CareerVidz for relevant videos.
Verify Sources: Cross-check video claims with reports from Goldman Sachs (www.goldmansachs.com) or PwC.
AI is reshaping the 2025 job market, with measurable impacts in tech, administrative, legal, finance, customer service, marketing, and manufacturing sectors. While the overall effect remains limited, specific roles face growing risks, balanced by emerging opportunities in AI-related fields. YouTube offers a wealth of resources to explore these trends, from data-driven analyses to personal stories. By using targeted searches and verifying content, you can find videos that vividly demonstrate AI’s impact on jobs.The US job market has indeed softened in 2025, with nonfarm payroll growth slowing significantly—adding just 22,000 jobs in August, well below expectations—and the unemployment rate rising to 4.3%, its highest level in nearly four years. However, this downturn appears driven primarily by broader economic uncertainty rather than AI alone, though AI adoption has contributed to some job displacements. For instance, occupations with higher AI exposure have seen larger unemployment increases between 2022 and 2025, and AI-related layoffs accounted for over 10,000 job cuts in the first seven months of the year. Overall, experts describe AI’s current workforce impact as “small” but not zero, with projections estimating it could eventually displace 6-7% of US jobs or disrupt up to 45 million roles, though much of this is expected to unfold gradually through productivity gains and task automation rather than mass layoffs.The US job market has indeed softened in 2025, with nonfarm payroll growth slowing significantly—adding just 22,000 jobs in August, well below expectations—and the unemployment rate rising to 4.3%, its highest level in nearly four years. However, this downturn appears driven primarily by broader economic uncertainty rather than AI alone, though AI adoption has contributed to some job displacements. For instance, occupations with higher AI exposure have seen larger unemployment increases between 2022 and 2025, and AI-related layoffs accounted for over 10,000 job cuts in the first seven months of the year. Overall, experts describe AI’s current workforce impact as “small” but not zero, with projections estimating it could eventually displace 6-7% of US jobs or disrupt up to 45 million roles, though much of this is expected to unfold gradually through productivity gains and task automation rather than mass layoffs.
Intel’s Massive Rally: Why INTC is Buzzing in Tech Circles
Intel Corporation (INTC) is stealing the spotlight with a remarkable 24.45% jump to $30.99, driven by high trading volume of 380.306 million shares—far exceeding its 3-month average. This surge could stem from chip manufacturing breakthroughs or AI demand, positioning INTC as a rebound story in semiconductors. With a market cap of $144.727 billion and a 17.79% 52-week gain, it’s attracting value hunters. Dive into more at https://finance.yahoo.com/.
Welcome to the daily roundup of wage theft violations and labor law enforcement actions from the California Department of Industrial Relations (DIR). This post highlights recent citations issued by the Labor Commissioner’s Office, focusing on efforts to combat wage theft. No new press releases were issued today, but below are summaries of the most recent cases from the past month. These actions underscore ongoing efforts to protect workers and hold employers accountable.
Recent Violations
September 4, 2025: L.A. Restaurant Cited Over $680,000 for Wage Theft Affecting 48 Workers
The Labor Commissioner’s Office BOFE Unit cited J BBQ, a Koreatown restaurant operated by Midri, Inc. and owner Byung Kwan Lee, for multiple violations including unpaid wages, denied meal and rest breaks, inaccurate wage statements, and failure to pay split shift premiums. The investigation, initiated by a referral from the Koreatown Immigrant Workers Alliance, revealed that workers were often required to stay on premises during breaks. Total citations amount to $680,238, with $538,638 payable directly to the affected workers.Daily California Wage Theft Violations Update – September 15, 2025
Welcome to the daily roundup of wage theft violations and labor law enforcement actions from the California Department of Industrial Relations (DIR). This post highlights recent citations issued by the Labor Commissioner’s Office, focusing on efforts to combat wage theft. No new press releases were issued today, but below are summaries of the most recent cases from the past month. These actions underscore ongoing efforts to protect workers and hold employers accountable.
Recent Violations
September 4, 2025: L.A. Restaurant Cited Over $680,000 for Wage Theft Affecting 48 Workers
The Labor Commissioner’s Office BOFE Unit cited J BBQ, a Koreatown restaurant operated by Midri, Inc. and owner Byung Kwan Lee, for multiple violations including unpaid wages, denied meal and rest breaks, inaccurate wage statements, and failure to pay split shift premiums. The investigation, initiated by a referral from the Koreatown Immigrant Workers Alliance, revealed that workers were often required to stay on premises during breaks. Total citations amount to $680,238, with $538,638 payable directly to the affected workers.
Quote from Labor Commissioner Lilia García-Brower: “Restaurant workers are often at risk of wage theft, especially when employers ignore laws around pay practices and required break periods. These citations reflect our continued efforts to hold employers accountable and ensure that workers receive the full wages and protections they are legally entitled to regardless of immigration status.”
August 21, 2025: L.A. Developers Cited $2.3 Million for Wage Theft at Construction Sites Affecting 124 Workers
The BOFE unit issued citations totaling $2,345,384 to developers including Todd Wexman, Bridget Wexman, Jeffrey Farrington, and entities like San Fernando Studios LP for denying overtime, paying below minimum wage, failing to provide sick leave, and issuing inaccurate wage statements. Workers received multiple pay stubs from different entities to evade overtime laws. The violations occurred at four sites in Los Angeles, with an average of $18,900 owed per worker, including over $165,000 in interest.
The investigation highlighted a scheme to avoid labor laws through corporate entities. BOFE has recovered over $43.7 million in stolen wages since January 2022.
July 16, 2025: Ritz-Carlton and Subcontractors Cited Over $2 Million for Misclassifying 155 Janitors
The Labor Commissioner’s Office cited the Ritz-Carlton Hotel Company LLC and subcontractors Empire Unistar Management Inc., TK Service, and JM Spa Group for misclassifying janitors as independent contractors, denying them minimum wage, overtime, sick leave, and workers’ compensation. The violations spanned from July 2021 to January 2024 at the Half Moon Bay hotel. Total citations exceed $2 million, with $1.9 million payable to workers; joint liability of $746,001 applies if subcontractors fail to pay.
Quote from Labor Commissioner Lilia García-Brower: “We’ve seen this pattern before, employers hire or contract with out-of-state janitorial companies, thinking they can sidestep California labor laws. The use of subcontracting to evade legal obligations is a long-standing practice in this industry and we will pursue such cases aggressively.”
If you’re a worker experiencing wage theft or labor violations, contact the Labor Commissioner’s Office at 1-833-LCO-INFO (833-526-4636) for assistance in multiple languages.
Employers seeking guidance on compliance can email MakeItFair@dir.ca.gov.
Stay updated by following the Labor Commissioner on Facebook and X (Twitter).
This blog is generated based on publicly available DIR news releases. Check back tomorrow for updates!
Charlie Kirk, the charismatic founder of Turning Point USA (TPUSA), emerged as one of the most polarizing figures in American conservatism, shaping a generation of young right-wing activists before his untimely death at age 31. Born on October 14, 1993, in Arlington Heights, Illinois, Kirk’s early life was marked by a middle-class upbringing in the Chicago suburbs, with parents who held moderate Republican views—his father an architect involved in Trump Tower’s design, and his mother a mental health counselor. From a young age, Kirk displayed a knack for political engagement, volunteering for Republican campaigns in high school and penning an essay for Breitbart News criticizing liberal bias in textbooks, which landed him his first Fox Business appearance at 17. Rejected from West Point, he briefly attended Harper College before dropping out to pursue activism full-time.
Founding TPUSA and Early Activism
In 2012, at just 18, Kirk co-founded TPUSA with retiree Bill Montgomery, inspired by Tea Party ideals and a desire to counter liberal dominance on college campuses. The organization started small but quickly gained traction with funding from conservative donors like Foster Friess, whom Kirk met at the Republican National Convention. TPUSA’s mission was to promote free markets, limited government, and traditional values among youth, positioning itself as a counterweight to groups like MoveOn.org. Early initiatives included the controversial “Professor Watchlist,” which critics argued stifled academic freedom by targeting left-leaning educators, leading to harassment claims.
Kirk’s activism style was confrontational and media-savvy. He launched campus tours like the “Prove Me Wrong” debates, where he engaged students directly, often on topics like socialism, immigration, and “woke” culture. By the mid-2010s, TPUSA had grown into the largest conservative youth organization in the U.S., with chapters on hundreds of campuses and annual events like AmericaFest drawing thousands. Kirk authored books such as Time for a Turning Point (2016), Campus Battlefield (2018), The MAGA Doctrine (2023), The College Scam (2022), and Right Wing Revolution (2024), which reinforced his message that higher education was indoctrinating youth with leftist ideologies.
Rise as a Trump Ally and Media Powerhouse
Kirk’s alliance with Donald Trump catapulted him to national prominence. In 2016, he spoke at the Republican National Convention, and by 2019, he launched Turning Point Action, a 501(c)(4) group focused on voter mobilization. Despite tensions after Trump’s 2020 loss—where Kirk organized buses to the January 6 rally and later pleaded the Fifth before the congressional committee—his influence endured. He co-founded the Falkirk Center at Liberty University in 2019 (later rebranded) and Turning Point Faith in 2021 to engage evangelical pastors politically.
Media became Kirk’s megaphone. His podcast, The Charlie Kirk Show, launched in 2020 on Salem Media, averaged 500,000–750,000 daily downloads by 2024, ranking high on Apple Podcasts. A 2023 Brookings study criticized it for high levels of misinformation. In 2024, he joined TikTok, amassing views in the tens of millions for debate clips, and signed a TV deal with Trinity Broadcasting Network for Charlie Kirk Today in February 2025. Forbes recognized him in its 2018 “30 Under 30” list for law and policy.
Influence on Conservative Youth Culture
Kirk’s greatest legacy was reshaping conservative youth culture, transforming it from a perceived “uncool” fringe into a vibrant, digitally native movement. Through TPUSA’s rallies, conferences, and online platforms, he mobilized millions, emphasizing patriotism, faith, and anti-establishment rhetoric. Supporters credit him with flipping young male voters toward the GOP in 2024, with TPUSA’s ballot-chasing and campus efforts cited as key to Trump’s victory. A young voter on MSNBC attributed his Trump vote to Kirk’s influence. Events like the Young Women’s Leadership Summit empowered participants to “reclaim freedom,” as one attendee put it.
Kirk infused youth conservatism with Christian nationalist elements, referencing the “Seven Mountain Mandate” for Christian dominance in society. His “Brainwashed Tour” and live Q&As created a sense of community, with TPUSA reaching over 4 million students in 2024 alone. Critics, however, argued his tactics groomed future establishment conservatives while echoing white supremacist ideologies. A 2025 TPUSA poll showed half of attendees believing Jeffrey Epstein was an Israeli agent, hinting at evolving views within the base.
Controversies and Criticisms
Kirk’s activism was not without backlash. He faced accusations of spreading conspiracy theories on COVID-19 origins, election fraud, and climate change denial. Groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center labeled his rhetoric racist, xenophobic, and extreme, citing remarks on racial equity, immigration, and LGBTQ+ issues, including opposition to trans-affirming care. A 2018 exposé revealed a TPUSA staffer’s racist texts, which Kirk had praised. Financial scrutiny in 2020 by ProPublica highlighted misleading audits and Kirk’s rising salary, amid TPUSA’s $39 million revenue. Events often drew protests, with critics decrying his anti-LGBTQ views and ties to figures like Kyle Rittenhouse. In 2025, white supremacist Nathan Damigo encouraged followers to attend his events.
Twitter (now X) temporarily banned him in 2020 for misinformation, a decision later scrutinized in “Twitter Files” leaks. Kirk’s education views, rooted in 1960s conservatism, aimed to restore “traditional values” in schools.
Final Years and Tragic End
In 2024–2025, Kirk remained influential, advocating for Epstein disclosures and debating on campuses during his “American Comeback Tour.” On September 10, 2025, he was assassinated by a rifle shot during a debate at Utah Valley University. The shooter remains at large, with investigations ongoing; a leaked ATF email described a potential weapon found nearby. Tributes poured in: Trump called him a “Great American Patriot” and awarded a posthumous Presidential Medal of Freedom, ordering flags at half-mast. RFK Jr. praised his free speech advocacy. Supporters vowed to continue his work, while some leftists faced backlash for celebrating his death.
Kirk left behind his wife, Erika Frantzve, and two children. His net worth, built through activism and media, was in the millions. In death, as in life, Kirk symbolized the deep divides in American politics, but his role in energizing conservative youth ensures his influence persists.
The assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk on September 10, 2025, has sparked not only grief and outrage but also a wave of professional consequences for those who commented on the tragedy online or in public. Across the United States, at least 30 individuals—from educators and government workers to airline staff and media figures—have faced firings, suspensions, or investigations due to their social media posts or statements about Kirk’s death. Below is a comprehensive look at these cases, highlighting the posts that led to swift repercussions and the broader implications of this phenomenon.
A Polarized Response to Tragedy
Following Kirk’s assassination, public figures and private citizens alike took to social media to express their views. While many mourned the loss of the Turning Point USA founder, others posted comments that were deemed inflammatory, celebratory, or insensitive, often leading to viral backlash amplified by accounts like Libs of TikTok or public officials. Employers, facing pressure, acted quickly, citing violations of conduct codes or damage to organizational values. This mirrors similar fallout after the 2024 assassination attempt on President Donald Trump, underscoring the risks of online speech in a polarized climate.
Below is a detailed breakdown of the reported cases, including what was said, the outcomes, and any associated visuals that fueled public reactions.
The Cases: Who Said What, and What Happened
Case
Name/Position
Employer
What They Said/Posted
Outcome
Visuals in the News
1
Matthew Dowd, Political Analyst
MSNBC
On-air: Called Kirk divisive, using “hate speech” against groups, linking it to hateful actions.
Fired after apology on X.
MSNBC studio clips in news reports, no unique graphic.
2
Laura Sosh-Lightsy (or unnamed), Assistant Dean
Middle Tennessee State University
On Facebook: “Looks like ol’ Charlie spoke his fate into existence. Hate begets hate. ZERO sympathy.”
Fired for “inappropriate, callous comments.”
No specific graphic; mentioned in U.S. Sen. Marsha Blackburn’s X post.
3
Lauren Uncapher Stokes, Executive Assistant
University of Mississippi
On Instagram: Called Kirk a “white supremacist” and “reimagined Klan member.”
Fired on Sept. 11.
Screenshots on X (unavailable directly).
4
Charlie Rock, Communications Coordinator
Carolina Panthers
On Instagram: Questioned sadness over Kirk’s death, shared Wu-Tang Clan’s “Protect Ya Neck.”
Fired on Sept. 11.
No specific graphic reported.
5
Aaron Sharpe, Owner
Lucius Q (Cincinnati)
On Facebook: Replied “Good riddance” with expletive to “Praying for Charlie Kirk.”
Lost TQL Stadium contract; severed ties with restaurant.
No specific graphic reported.
6
Anthony Pough, Employee
U.S. Secret Service
On Facebook: Condemned mourning Kirk, cited his “hate and racism,” referenced “karma.”
On administrative leave, under investigation.
Fox News graphic: Secret Service badge with text quoting spokesperson on conduct violation.
7
Unnamed Worker
Office Depot (Michigan)
In video: Refused to print Kirk vigil posters, calling them “propaganda.”
Fired after video went viral.
Viral video (no static image).
8
Unnamed Junior Strategist
Nasdaq
Offensive posts about Kirk’s death (unspecified).
Terminated.
No graphic reported.
9
Unnamed U.S. Marine
U.S. Marine Corps
Mocked or condoned Kirk’s murder online.
On leave or fired.
No graphic reported.
10
Unnamed Data Analyst
FEMA
On Instagram: Disgusted at flags lowered for a “racist homophobe misogynist.”
On administrative leave.
No graphic reported.
11
Unnamed Teacher
Wisconsin High School
Called Kirk a “racist, xenophobic, transphobic” figure who incited hatred.
On administrative leave.
No graphic reported.
12
Unnamed Teacher
Oregon School
Wrote: Kirk’s death “really brightened up my day.”
Fired.
No graphic reported.
13
Unnamed Teacher
Oklahoma Public School
Wrote: Kirk “died the same way he lived: bringing out the worst in people.”
Under investigation.
No graphic reported.
14
Unnamed Teacher
Texas School
On Facebook: Questioned if Kirk’s death was “consequences” with “#karma is a b*tch.”
Calls for termination; status unclear.
No graphic reported.
15
Unnamed Teacher
Naples, NY High School
Likened Kirk to a Nazi; wrote “good riddance to bad garbage.”
Under investigation.
Screenshots shared by Libs of TikTok (unavailable directly).
16
Unnamed Firefighter
New Orleans Fire Department
On Instagram: Kirk should “carry that bullet” as a “gift from god.”
Under investigation.
No graphic reported.
17
Multiple Pilots (e.g., “Rob”)
American Airlines (possibly Delta/Endeavor)
Mocked Kirk’s death as “the cost of our liberty.”
Grounded, removed from duty.
Photo: Pilot in cockpit with Endeavor Air lanyard, smiling.
18
Multiple Employees
Delta Air Lines
Posts violated social media policy (beyond “healthy debate”).
Suspended; may face termination.
No graphic reported.
19
Unnamed Employee
Next Door Childcare (Milwaukee)
Called Kirk’s death “horrible” but politicized it, citing his pro-gun stance.
Fired.
No graphic reported.
20
Callie Wulk, Executive Director
Wausau River District, Rise Up Central Wisconsin
Reposted news with “well deserved” and clapping emojis.
Terminated from both roles.
No graphic reported.
21
Elizabeth McFarland Clark, 5th Grade Teacher
Rockaway Township School District (NJ)
On Facebook: “Pray for him? He said some people have to get shot to ‘keep our guns.’ Oh well.”
Calls for termination; under review.
Screenshots: Red-circled Facebook comments with her profile details.
22
Unnamed Employee
Austin Peay State University (TN)
Online comments about Kirk’s death (unspecified).
Fired.
No graphic reported.
23
Unnamed Employee
TN Dept. of Commerce and Insurance
Online comments about Kirk’s death (unspecified).
Fired.
No graphic reported.
24
Salvador Ramírez, Congressional Staffer
Mexico’s ruling party
On TV: Kirk was “given a spoonful of his own chocolate” for promoting weapons.
Resigned.
No graphic reported.
25
Multiple Military Members & Civilians
Pentagon
Mocked or condoned Kirk’s murder online.
Several relieved of duties.
No graphic reported.
26
Unnamed Nurse
New Jersey Hospital
Reported doctor who “cheered” Kirk’s death.
Improperly suspended; now suing.
Fox News graphic: Red/white text on black about nurse’s lawsuit.
Forced students to watch assassination video; said Kirk deserved it.
Suspended.
No graphic reported.
29
Unnamed Section Chief
FEMA
Laughed, called Kirk a “lunatic” who “deserves it,” shared memes.
Not specified (hidden camera exposure).
No graphic reported.
The Bigger Picture
These cases highlight a growing trend: social media posts, even on personal accounts, can lead to severe professional consequences when they touch on divisive issues. Employers, from universities to corporations to government agencies, are prioritizing their public image and values, often acting swiftly in response to public outcry. Screenshots shared by high-profile figures or accounts like Libs of TikTok have accelerated these outcomes, turning private posts into public scandals.
The backlash isn’t new. As USC professor Karen North noted in 2024 after the Trump assassination attempt, “No matter how private your life is, everybody has an audience.” The Kirk cases show how quickly that audience can demand accountability—and how employers are listening.
Why It Matters
This wave of firings and suspensions raises questions about free speech, workplace policies, and the role of social media in amplifying outrage. While some argue these individuals faced just consequences for inflammatory remarks, others see a chilling effect on open discourse. As political violence escalates—evidenced by Kirk’s assassination and prior incidents—navigating online expression remains a minefield.
What do you think? Should employers discipline staff for personal social media posts? Share your thoughts in the comments below.
Sources: USA TODAY, NPR, Reuters, Fox News, and various local reports. Visual descriptions based on available news imagery.
Posted on September 13, 2025, by Workers Rights Compliance Alliance (WRCA)
In the bustling economy of California, where industries like hospitality, construction, and fast food thrive, wage theft remains a persistent and devastating issue. Thousands of workers—often from vulnerable communities—face unpaid wages, denied breaks, and misclassification that strips them of rightful earnings and protections. At the Workers Rights Compliance Alliance (WRCA), we’re dedicated to shining a light on these injustices and empowering workers and employers alike to ensure compliance with labor laws. By joining our organization today at workersrightscompliancealliance.com, you’ll stay informed on the latest developments, receive expert guidance, and become part of a community fighting for fair workplaces. Don’t miss out—join WRCA now to get updates on workers’ rights and compliance strategies straight to your inbox!
In this blog post, we’ll dive into real stories from 2025 that highlight the human cost of wage violations. These cases, drawn from official enforcement actions by the California Labor Commissioner’s Office (LCO), underscore why staying vigilant is crucial. As a member of WRCA, you’ll have access to resources like webinars, compliance checklists, and alerts on emerging trends, helping you navigate these challenges effectively.
1. The Koreatown Restaurant Saga: Overworked and Underpaid at J BBQ
Imagine clocking in for a grueling shift at a popular Koreatown eatery, only to be denied basic breaks and forced into split shifts without extra pay. This was the reality for 48 workers at J BBQ, operated by Midri, Inc. and owner Byung Kwan Lee. On September 4, 2025, the LCO issued citations totaling over $680,000 for wage theft, including unpaid wages, denied meal and rest breaks, and inaccurate wage statements. Workers were often kept on-site during “lunch” to handle customers, violating California labor laws designed to protect their well-being.
The breakdown? $538,638 goes directly back to the workers, a hard-won victory referred by the Koreatown Immigrant Workers Alliance. Labor Commissioner Lilia García-Brower emphasized the risks restaurant workers face, stating, “These citations reflect our continued efforts to hold employers accountable.” Stories like this reveal how wage theft erodes trust and livelihoods, leading to financial strain and health issues for employees.
At WRCA, we believe knowledge is power. By joining our organization, you’ll receive timely updates on similar cases, plus tools to audit your own workplace or business for compliance. Sign up now at workersrightscompliancealliance.com and be the first to know about new enforcement actions—empowering you to advocate for change.
2. A Multimillion-Dollar Verdict: Justice for Two Brave Workers in San Francisco
On September 5, 2025, a San Francisco jury delivered a resounding $8.5 million verdict in favor of plaintiffs Marianne Ramirez and Wendy (last name withheld) in a wage-and-hour lawsuit. The case, presided over by Judge Andrew Y. S. Cheng, stemmed from violations dating back to May 2024, including unpaid overtime, denied meal and rest breaks, inaccurate wage statements, waiting time penalties, and potential employee misclassification.
The jury’s decision highlighted skepticism toward the employer’s defenses and a desire to deter future wrongdoing. While specific employer details remain private, this verdict sends a clear message: workers can fight back and win. For the plaintiffs, it meant reclaiming lost earnings amid rising living costs, but for many others, such battles are daunting without support.
That’s where WRCA comes in. As a member, you’ll gain access to legal resources, case studies, and networking opportunities to stay ahead of wage disputes. Join our growing alliance today at workersrightscompliancealliance.com and ensure you’re always updated on landmark rulings that could impact your rights or business.
3. Construction Site Schemes: $2.3 Million in Citations for L.A. Developers
In August 2025, the LCO targeted a web of Los Angeles developers and entities with over $2.3 million in citations for wage theft at four construction sites, affecting 124 workers from May 2021 to August 2023. Violations included skipping overtime pay despite exhausting hours, paying below the local minimum wage, denying sick leave (even during the pandemic), and issuing misleading wage statements. The scheme used multiple entities to dodge rules, with workers reporting to the same bosses across sites.
Affected employees—framing, tiling, painting, and plumbing—were owed $2.1 million in unpaid wages and damages, plus $165,000 in interest, averaging $18,900 per person. Key parties: Todd Wexman, Bridget Wexman, Jeffrey Farrington, and companies like San Fernando Studios LP/LLC. García-Brower called out these “corporate shell games.” This case exposes how construction’s high-risk environment compounds with wage issues, leaving workers vulnerable to exploitation.
WRCA is your ally in combating such practices. By joining us at workersrightscompliancealliance.com, you’ll get exclusive insights into industry-specific compliance, training sessions, and alerts on BOFE investigations—keeping you informed and protected.
4. Hospitality’s Hidden Exploitation: Ritz-Carlton and Subcontractors Fined $2 Million
July 2025 brought scrutiny to the Ritz-Carlton Half Moon Bay, where the LCO cited the hotel and three out-of-state janitorial subcontractors for misclassifying 155 janitors as independent contractors from July 2021 to January 2024. This denied them minimum wage, overtime, sick leave, and workers’ compensation—core protections under California law.
Citations totaled $1.9 million payable to workers, with joint liability if subcontractors default. Referred by the San Mateo County DA after a worker’s tip to nonprofit Coastside Hope, it highlights subcontracting pitfalls. Janitors, often working invisibly, faced grueling conditions without fair pay, amplifying inequality in luxury hospitality.
Stay ahead with WRCA’s expert resources. Join our organization now at workersrightscompliancealliance.com for updates on misclassification risks and how to ensure compliance in your sector.
5. Fast Food’s Rising Crisis: A Study on Systemic Wage Theft
A February 2025 study from Northwestern and Rutgers Universities revealed that 25% of Greater L.A. fast food workers were paid below minimum wage in 2024—up dramatically from 3% in 2009. This costs workers $44 million yearly, with average losses of $3,479 per person. Tied to wage hikes (up to $20/hour in 2025 for fast food), violations include underpayment, denied breaks, and retaliation fears among immigrant and youth workers.
The report warns of skipped meals and evictions for victims, calling for stronger enforcement amid low unionization. As 2025 unfolds, similar patterns persist, affecting service industries statewide.
At WRCA, we’re committed to education and advocacy. By joining us at workersrightscompliancealliance.com, you’ll receive reports like this, plus actionable advice to prevent or address wage theft—ensuring a fairer future for all.
Why Join WRCA Today?
These stories aren’t isolated—they’re part of a statewide epidemic where nearly 19,000 claims alleged $338 million in stolen wages last year. With delays in enforcement and proposed reforms in June 2025 aiming to boost accountability, staying informed is key. WRCA offers newsletters, workshops, and a network of experts to keep you updated on workers’ rights compliance.
Don’t wait for the next violation to hit close to home. Join the Workers Rights Compliance Alliance today at workersrightscompliancealliance.com and be part of the solution. Together, we can build compliant, equitable workplaces.
Follow us on social media for more stories and tips. #WorkersRights #WageTheft #JoinWRCA
California’s Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA), enacted in 2004, remains a powerful tool for workers in 2025, allowing them to sue employers for Labor Code violations like wage theft and overtime denials. With over $10 billion recovered in settlements, PAGA addresses systemic abuses. The Workers Rights Compliance Alliance (WRCA) highlights how workers can use PAGA to fight unfair treatment, from unpaid wages to unsafe conditions, ensuring justice for employees and their coworkers.
Learn more about PAGA’s impact at Workers Rights Compliance Alliance.
Categories: Labor Rights, PAGA Tags: PAGA, worker rights, WRCA, California labor laws, wage theft, labor justice, employee empowerment Featured Image: Upload an image of workers advocating for rights. Alt text: “California workers advocating for PAGA.”
Every year, California’s wildfires devastate landscapes, but a lesser-known crisis emerges in their aftermath. Undocumented day laborers, often hired to clear toxic debris like asbestos and lead, face hazardous conditions without proper safety gear, fair wages, or legal protections. The Workers Rights Compliance Alliance (WRCA) is shining a light on this injustice, advocating for better treatment and accountability for these essential workers.
Exposed: All American Asphalt Under OSHA Scrutiny for Workplace Safety Concerns
Posted on August 29, 2025 by WorkersRightsComplianceAlliance.com
At WorkersRightsComplianceAlliance.com, we are committed to exposing workplace safety violations and advocating for fair competition in California. All American Asphalt, a leading provider of asphalt paving and construction services since 1968, serves infrastructure projects across Southern California. Its Corona facility, a key production site, is currently under scrutiny by the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA) for potential safety violations. This investigation highlights ongoing concerns about worker safety and unfair business practices that harm both employees and compliant competitors.
Current OSHA Investigation
All American Asphalt is facing an open Cal/OSHA inspection in 2025:
Corona, CA (Activity Nr: 1844635.015): Opened August 19, 2025, this complaint-driven safety inspection targets potential hazards like silica dust exposure or equipment safety at 1525 Corona Ave, Corona, CA 92879. The inspection is partial in scope, indicating focused scrutiny on asphalt production operations prompted by specific worker complaints.
This ongoing investigation suggests systemic safety concerns that could endanger employees, particularly in a high-risk environment involving heavy machinery and dust exposure.
History of Safety Violations
Based on available records from OSHA’s Enforcement Data and Violation Tracker (2015–2025), All American Asphalt has no documented prior Cal/OSHA violations at its Corona facility. However, the current 2025 complaint-driven investigation underscores the need for heightened scrutiny, as worker complaints often indicate underlying safety issues. The absence of prior citations does not guarantee compliance, and we are closely monitoring this inspection to ensure workers are protected.
Impact on Workers and Competitors
If safety violations are confirmed, All American Asphalt’s workers could face significant risks, such as respiratory issues from silica dust or injuries from heavy equipment, common in asphalt production. Non-compliance could allow the company to cut costs by avoiding proper dust control measures or safety training, creating an unfair competitive advantage over asphalt producers that adhere to Cal/OSHA standards, incurring higher expenses for safety measures.
Our Commitment
WorkersRightsComplianceAlliance.com is actively monitoring All American Asphalt’s OSHA investigation to uncover any violations that may emerge. We are pursuing public records through Cal/OSHA to gain further insights into this case. Our mission is to hold bad actors accountable and ensure safe workplaces across California. Stay tuned for updates as we advocate for transparency and worker safety.
Get Involved
Stay informed about All American Asphalt’s OSHA investigation and other workplace safety issues by subscribing to our YouTube channel (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC5gFpnC9zJpQvoOIoYMBZsw) and following our blog. Share this post to raise awareness and join us in advocating for safer workplaces. Check back for updates on All American Asphalt’s compliance and our efforts to protect California workers.
Keywords: OSHA investigation, All American Asphalt safety concerns, Cal/OSHA inspection, workplace safety, asphalt production hazards Tags: #OSHAViolations #WorkerSafety #CalOSHA #AllAmericanAsphaltSafety #FairCompetition
Meta Description: All American Asphalt faces OSHA scrutiny for potential safety issues in Corona, CA. Learn about their 2025 investigation and its impact on workers.
Exposed: Anheuser-Busch InBev Under OSHA Scrutiny for Workplace Safety Concerns
Posted on August 29, 2025 by WorkersRightsComplianceAlliance.com
At WorkersRightsComplianceAlliance.com, we are committed to exposing workplace safety violations and advocating for fair competition in California. Anheuser-Busch InBev, a global leader in brewing, produces iconic beer brands like Budweiser, Stella Artois, and Michelob. Its Van Nuys facility, a key brewery in Southern California, is currently under scrutiny by the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA) for potential safety violations. This investigation highlights ongoing concerns about worker safety and unfair business practices that harm both employees and compliant competitors.
Current OSHA Investigation
Anheuser-Busch InBev is facing an open Cal/OSHA inspection in 2025:
Van Nuys, CA (Activity Nr: 1844691.015): Opened August 19, 2025, this planned safety inspection targets potential hazards like machine guarding or chemical exposure at 15800 Roscoe Blvd, Van Nuys, CA 91406. The inspection is partial in scope, indicating focused scrutiny on brewing operations.
This ongoing investigation suggests systemic safety concerns that could endanger employees, particularly in a high-risk environment involving brewing equipment and chemicals.
History of Safety Violations
Based on available records from OSHA’s Enforcement Data and Violation Tracker (2015–2025), Anheuser-Busch InBev has no documented prior Cal/OSHA violations at its Van Nuys facility. However, the current 2025 investigation highlights the need for vigilance, as even companies with clean records can face safety challenges in brewing operations. The absence of prior citations does not guarantee compliance, and we are closely monitoring this inspection to ensure workers are protected.
Impact on Workers and Competitors
If safety violations are confirmed, Anheuser-Busch InBev’s workers could face significant risks, such as injuries from unguarded machinery or exposure to cleaning chemicals, common in brewery operations. Non-compliance could allow the company to cut costs by avoiding proper safety training or equipment maintenance, creating an unfair competitive advantage over breweries that adhere to Cal/OSHA standards, incurring higher expenses for safety measures.
Our Commitment
WorkersRightsComplianceAlliance.com is actively monitoring Anheuser-Busch InBev’s OSHA investigation to uncover any violations that may emerge. We are pursuing public records through Cal/OSHA to gain further insights into this case. Our mission is to hold bad actors accountable and ensure safe workplaces across California. Stay tuned for updates as we advocate for transparency and worker safety.
Get Involved
Stay informed about Anheuser-Busch InBev’s OSHA investigation and other workplace safety issues by subscribing to our YouTube channel (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC5gFpnC9zJpQvoOIoYMBZsw) and following our blog. Share this post to raise awareness and join us in advocating for safer workplaces. Check back for updates on Anheuser-Busch InBev’s compliance and our efforts to protect California workers.
Meta Description: Anheuser-Busch InBev faces OSHA scrutiny for potential safety issues in Van Nuys, CA. Learn about their 2025 investigation and its impact on workers.
Exposed: Aramark Uniform Services Under OSHA Scrutiny for Workplace Safety Concerns
Posted on August 29, 2025 by WorkersRightsComplianceAlliance.com
At WorkersRightsComplianceAlliance.com, we are committed to exposing workplace safety violations and advocating for fair competition in California. Aramark Uniform Services, a leading provider of uniform and facility services, supplies work apparel and cleaning services to businesses nationwide. Its Fresno facility, a key uniform processing hub in Central California, is currently under scrutiny by the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA) for potential safety violations. This investigation highlights ongoing concerns about worker safety and unfair business practices that harm both employees and compliant competitors.
Current OSHA Investigation
Aramark Uniform Services is facing an open Cal/OSHA inspection in 2025:
Fresno, CA (Activity Nr: 1843906.015): Opened August 13, 2025, this planned safety inspection targets potential hazards like machine guarding or chemical exposure at 3333 S Peach Ave, Fresno, CA 93725. The inspection is partial in scope, indicating focused scrutiny on uniform processing operations.
This ongoing investigation suggests systemic safety concerns that could endanger employees, particularly in a high-risk environment involving industrial laundry equipment and chemicals.
History of Safety Violations
Based on available records from OSHA’s Enforcement Data and Violation Tracker (2015–2025), Aramark Uniform Services has no documented prior Cal/OSHA violations at its Fresno facility. However, the current 2025 investigation highlights the need for vigilance, as even companies with clean records can face safety challenges in uniform services. The absence of prior citations does not guarantee compliance, and we are closely monitoring this inspection to ensure workers are protected.
Impact on Workers and Competitors
If safety violations are confirmed, Aramark’s workers could face significant risks, such as injuries from unguarded machinery or exposure to cleaning chemicals, common in uniform processing. Non-compliance could allow the company to cut costs by avoiding proper safety training or equipment maintenance, creating an unfair competitive advantage over uniform service providers that adhere to Cal/OSHA standards, incurring higher expenses for safety measures.
Our Commitment
WorkersRightsComplianceAlliance.com is actively monitoring Aramark Uniform Services’ OSHA investigation to uncover any violations that may emerge. We are pursuing public records through Cal/OSHA to gain further insights into this case. Our mission is to hold bad actors accountable and ensure safe workplaces across California. Stay tuned for updates as we advocate for transparency and worker safety.
Get Involved
Stay informed about Aramark Uniform Services’ OSHA investigation and other workplace safety issues by subscribing to our YouTube channel (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC5gFpnC9zJpQvoOIoYMBZsw) and following our blog. Share this post to raise awareness and join us in advocating for safer workplaces. Check back for updates on Aramark’s compliance and our efforts to protect California workers.
Meta Description: Aramark Uniform Services faces OSHA scrutiny for potential safety issues in Fresno, CA. Learn about their 2025 investigation and its impact on workers.
Exposed: Berry Global, Inc. Under OSHA Scrutiny for Workplace Safety Concerns
Posted on August 29, 2025 by WorkersRightsComplianceAlliance.com
At WorkersRightsComplianceAlliance.com, we are committed to exposing workplace safety violations and advocating for fair competition in California. Berry Global, Inc., a leading manufacturer of plastic packaging, produces containers, films, and bottles for food, healthcare, and consumer goods industries. Its Tolleson facility, a key production hub in Southern California, is currently under scrutiny by the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA) for potential safety violations. This investigation highlights ongoing concerns about worker safety and unfair business practices that harm both employees and compliant competitors.
Current OSHA Investigation
Berry Global, Inc. is facing an open Cal/OSHA inspection in 2025:
Tolleson, CA (Activity Nr: 1844722.015): Opened August 20, 2025, this planned safety inspection targets potential hazards like machine guarding or chemical exposure at 1112 N Citrus Ave, Tolleson, CA 92374. The inspection is partial in scope, indicating focused scrutiny on plastic manufacturing operations.
This ongoing investigation suggests systemic safety concerns that could endanger employees, particularly in a high-risk environment involving plastic molding machinery and chemicals.
History of Safety Violations
Based on available records from OSHA’s Enforcement Data and Violation Tracker (2015–2025), Berry Global, Inc. has no documented prior Cal/OSHA violations at its Tolleson facility. However, the current 2025 investigation highlights the need for vigilance, as even companies with clean records can face safety challenges in plastic manufacturing. The absence of prior citations does not guarantee compliance, and we are closely monitoring this inspection to ensure workers are protected.
Impact on Workers and Competitors
If safety violations are confirmed, Berry Global’s workers could face significant risks, such as injuries from unguarded machinery or exposure to chemicals used in plastic production, common in manufacturing. Non-compliance could allow the company to cut costs by avoiding proper safety training or equipment maintenance, creating an unfair competitive advantage over plastic packaging manufacturers that adhere to Cal/OSHA standards, incurring higher expenses for safety measures.
Our Commitment
WorkersRightsComplianceAlliance.com is actively monitoring Berry Global’s OSHA investigation to uncover any violations that may emerge. We are pursuing public records through Cal/OSHA to gain further insights into this case. Our mission is to hold bad actors accountable and ensure safe workplaces across California. Stay tuned for updates as we advocate for transparency and worker safety.
Get Involved
Stay informed about Berry Global’s OSHA investigation and other workplace safety issues by subscribing to our YouTube channel (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC5gFpnC9zJpQvoOIoYMBZsw) and following our blog. Share this post to raise awareness and join us in advocating for safer workplaces. Check back for updates on Berry Global’s compliance and our efforts to protect California workers.
Meta Description: Berry Global faces OSHA scrutiny for potential safety issues in Tolleson, CA. Learn about their 2025 investigation and its impact on workers.
Exposed: Bunzl Distribution USA, Inc. Under OSHA Scrutiny for Workplace Safety Concerns
Posted on August 29, 2025 by WorkersRightsComplianceAlliance.com
At WorkersRightsComplianceAlliance.com, we are committed to exposing workplace safety violations and advocating for fair competition in California. Bunzl Distribution USA, Inc., a leading distributor of packaging, foodservice, and cleaning supplies, serves retailers and businesses across North America. Its Vernon facility, a key distribution hub in Southern California, is currently under scrutiny by the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA) for potential safety violations. This investigation highlights ongoing concerns about worker safety and unfair business practices that harm both employees and compliant competitors.
Current OSHA Investigation
Bunzl Distribution USA, Inc. is facing an open Cal/OSHA inspection in 2025:
Vernon, CA (Activity Nr: 1844692.015): Opened August 19, 2025, this planned safety inspection targets potential hazards like forklift safety or material handling at 2800 S Eastern Ave, Vernon, CA 90058. The inspection is partial in scope, indicating focused scrutiny on distribution operations.
This ongoing investigation suggests systemic safety concerns that could endanger employees, particularly in a high-risk environment involving heavy inventory and warehouse equipment.
History of Safety Violations
Based on available records from OSHA’s Enforcement Data and Violation Tracker (2015–2025), Bunzl Distribution USA, Inc. has no documented prior Cal/OSHA violations at its Vernon facility. However, the current 2025 investigation highlights the need for vigilance, as even companies with clean records can face safety challenges in distribution. The absence of prior citations does not guarantee compliance, and we are closely monitoring this inspection to ensure workers are protected.
Impact on Workers and Competitors
If safety violations are confirmed, Bunzl’s workers could face significant risks, such as forklift accidents or injuries from improper material handling, common in distribution centers. Non-compliance could allow the company to cut costs by avoiding proper safety training or equipment maintenance, creating an unfair competitive advantage over distributors that adhere to Cal/OSHA standards, incurring higher expenses for safety measures.
Our Commitment
WorkersRightsComplianceAlliance.com is actively monitoring Bunzl Distribution’s OSHA investigation to uncover any violations that may emerge. We are pursuing public records through Cal/OSHA to gain further insights into this case. Our mission is to hold bad actors accountable and ensure safe workplaces across California. Stay tuned for updates as we advocate for transparency and worker safety.
Get Involved
Stay informed about Bunzl Distribution’s OSHA investigation and other workplace safety issues by subscribing to our YouTube channel (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC5gFpnC9zJpQvoOIoYMBZsw) and following our blog. Share this post to raise awareness and join us in advocating for safer workplaces. Check back for updates on Bunzl’s compliance and our efforts to protect California workers.
Keywords: OSHA investigation, Bunzl Distribution safety concerns, Cal/OSHA inspection, workplace safety, distribution hazards Tags: #OSHAViolations #WorkerSafety #CalOSHA #BunzlSafety #FairCompetition
Meta Description: Bunzl Distribution faces OSHA scrutiny for potential safety issues in Vernon, CA. Learn about their 2025 investigation and its impact on workers.
Exposed: Cardinal Health, Inc. Under OSHA Scrutiny for Workplace Safety Concerns
Posted on August 29, 2025 by WorkersRightsComplianceAlliance.com
At WorkersRightsComplianceAlliance.com, we are committed to exposing workplace safety violations and advocating for fair competition in California. Cardinal Health, Inc., a global healthcare services company, distributes pharmaceuticals and medical products to hospitals, pharmacies, and healthcare providers. Its Valencia facility, a key distribution hub in Southern California, is currently under scrutiny by the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA) for potential safety violations. This investigation highlights ongoing concerns about worker safety and unfair business practices that harm both employees and compliant competitors.
Current OSHA Investigation
Cardinal Health, Inc. is facing an open Cal/OSHA inspection in 2025:
Valencia, CA (Activity Nr: 1844693.015): Opened August 19, 2025, this planned safety inspection targets potential hazards like material handling or ergonomic issues at 28055 Avenue Stanford, Valencia, CA 91355. The inspection is partial in scope, indicating focused scrutiny on distribution operations.
This ongoing investigation suggests systemic safety concerns that could endanger employees, particularly in a high-risk environment involving heavy inventory and repetitive tasks.
History of Safety Violations
Based on available records from OSHA’s Enforcement Data and Violation Tracker (2015–2025), Cardinal Health, Inc. has no documented prior Cal/OSHA violations at its Valencia facility. However, the current 2025 investigation highlights the need for vigilance, as even companies with clean records can face safety challenges in distribution. The absence of prior citations does not guarantee compliance, and we are closely monitoring this inspection to ensure workers are protected.
Impact on Workers and Competitors
If safety violations are confirmed, Cardinal Health’s workers could face significant risks, such as injuries from improper material handling or musculoskeletal issues from repetitive tasks, common in distribution centers. Non-compliance could allow the company to cut costs by avoiding proper safety training or ergonomic controls, creating an unfair competitive advantage over healthcare distributors that adhere to Cal/OSHA standards, incurring higher expenses for safety measures.
Our Commitment
WorkersRightsComplianceAlliance.com is actively monitoring Cardinal Health’s OSHA investigation to uncover any violations that may emerge. We are pursuing public records through Cal/OSHA to gain further insights into this case. Our mission is to hold bad actors accountable and ensure safe workplaces across California. Stay tuned for updates as we advocate for transparency and worker safety.
Get Involved
Stay informed about Cardinal Health’s OSHA investigation and other workplace safety issues by subscribing to our YouTube channel (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC5gFpnC9zJpQvoOIoYMBZsw) and following our blog. Share this post to raise awareness and join us in advocating for safer workplaces. Check back for updates on Cardinal Health’s compliance and our efforts to protect California workers.
Keywords: OSHA investigation, Cardinal Health safety concerns, Cal/OSHA inspection, workplace safety, distribution hazards Tags: #OSHAViolations #WorkerSafety #CalOSHA #CardinalHealthSafety #FairCompetition
Meta Description: Cardinal Health faces OSHA scrutiny for potential safety issues in Valencia, CA. Learn about their 2025 investigation and its impact on workers.
Exposed: Cintas Corporation Under OSHA Scrutiny for Workplace Safety Concerns
Posted on August 29, 2025 by WorkersRightsComplianceAlliance.com
At WorkersRightsComplianceAlliance.com, we are committed to exposing workplace safety violations and advocating for fair competition in California. Cintas Corporation, a leading provider of uniform rentals, facility services, and safety products, serves businesses nationwide with customized workplace solutions. Its Fresno facility, a key uniform processing hub in Central California, is currently under scrutiny by the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA) for potential safety violations. This investigation highlights ongoing concerns about worker safety and unfair business practices that harm both employees and compliant competitors.
Current OSHA Investigation
Cintas Corporation is facing an open Cal/OSHA inspection in 2025:
Fresno, CA (Activity Nr: 1843907.015): Opened August 13, 2025, this planned safety inspection targets potential hazards like machine guarding or chemical exposure at 3320 S Fairway St, Fresno, CA 93725. The inspection is partial in scope, indicating focused scrutiny on uniform service operations.
This ongoing investigation suggests systemic safety concerns that could endanger employees, particularly in a high-risk environment involving industrial laundry equipment and chemicals.
History of Safety Violations
Based on available records from OSHA’s Enforcement Data and Violation Tracker (2015–2025), Cintas Corporation has no documented prior Cal/OSHA violations at its Fresno facility. However, the current 2025 investigation highlights the need for vigilance, as even companies with clean records can face safety challenges in uniform services. The absence of prior citations does not guarantee compliance, and we are closely monitoring this inspection to ensure workers are protected.
Impact on Workers and Competitors
If safety violations are confirmed, Cintas’ workers could face significant risks, such as injuries from unguarded machinery or exposure to cleaning chemicals, common in uniform processing. Non-compliance could allow the company to cut costs by avoiding proper safety training or equipment maintenance, creating an unfair competitive advantage over uniform service providers that adhere to Cal/OSHA standards, incurring higher expenses for safety measures.
Our Commitment
WorkersRightsComplianceAlliance.com is actively monitoring Cintas Corporation’s OSHA investigation to uncover any violations that may emerge. We are pursuing public records through Cal/OSHA to gain further insights into this case. Our mission is to hold bad actors accountable and ensure safe workplaces across California. Stay tuned for updates as we advocate for transparency and worker safety.
Get Involved
Stay informed about Cintas Corporation’s OSHA investigation and other workplace safety issues by subscribing to our YouTube channel (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC5gFpnC9zJpQvoOIoYMBZsw) and following our blog. Share this post to raise awareness and join us in advocating for safer workplaces. Check back for updates on Cintas’ compliance and our efforts to protect California workers.
Meta Description: Cintas Corporation faces OSHA scrutiny for potential safety issues in Fresno, CA. Learn about their 2025 investigation and its impact on workers.
Exposed: Coca-Cola Consolidated, Inc. Under OSHA Scrutiny for Workplace Safety Concerns
Posted on August 29, 2025 by WorkersRightsComplianceAlliance.com
At WorkersRightsComplianceAlliance.com, we are committed to exposing workplace safety violations and advocating for fair competition in California. Coca-Cola Consolidated, Inc., the largest Coca-Cola bottler in the U.S., produces and distributes beverages like Coca-Cola, Sprite, and Dr Pepper. Its La Verne facility, a key bottling and distribution hub in Southern California, is currently under scrutiny by the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA) for potential safety violations. This investigation highlights ongoing concerns about worker safety and unfair business practices that harm both employees and compliant competitors.
Current OSHA Investigation
Coca-Cola Consolidated, Inc. is facing an open Cal/OSHA inspection in 2025:
La Verne, CA (Activity Nr: 1844595.015): Opened August 19, 2025, this planned safety inspection targets potential hazards like machine guarding or material handling at 1880 Arrow Hwy, La Verne, CA 91750. The inspection is partial in scope, indicating focused scrutiny on bottling operations.
This ongoing investigation suggests systemic safety concerns that could endanger employees, particularly in a high-risk environment involving bottling equipment and heavy inventory.
History of Safety Violations
Based on available records from OSHA’s Enforcement Data and Violation Tracker (2015–2025), Coca-Cola Consolidated, Inc. has no documented prior Cal/OSHA violations at its La Verne facility. However, the current 2025 investigation highlights the need for vigilance, as even companies with clean records can face safety challenges in beverage production. The absence of prior citations does not guarantee compliance, and we are closely monitoring this inspection to ensure workers are protected.
Impact on Workers and Competitors
If safety violations are confirmed, Coca-Cola Consolidated’s workers could face significant risks, such as injuries from unguarded machinery or material handling accidents, common in bottling plants. Non-compliance could allow the company to cut costs by avoiding proper safety training or equipment maintenance, creating an unfair competitive advantage over beverage producers that adhere to Cal/OSHA standards, incurring higher expenses for safety measures.
Our Commitment
WorkersRightsComplianceAlliance.com is actively monitoring Coca-Cola Consolidated’s OSHA investigation to uncover any violations that may emerge. We are pursuing public records through Cal/OSHA to gain further insights into this case. Our mission is to hold bad actors accountable and ensure safe workplaces across California. Stay tuned for updates as we advocate for transparency and worker safety.
Get Involved
Stay informed about Coca-Cola Consolidated’s OSHA investigation and other workplace safety issues by subscribing to our YouTube channel (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC5gFpnC9zJpQvoOIoYMBZsw) and following our blog. Share this post to raise awareness and join us in advocating for safer workplaces. Check back for updates on Coca-Cola Consolidated’s compliance and our efforts to protect California workers.
Meta Description: Coca-Cola Consolidated faces OSHA scrutiny for potential safety issues in La Verne, CA. Learn about their 2025 investigation and its impact on workers.
Exposed: Constellation Brands, Inc. Under OSHA Scrutiny for Workplace Safety Concerns
Posted on August 29, 2025 by WorkersRightsComplianceAlliance.com
At WorkersRightsComplianceAlliance.com, we are committed to exposing workplace safety violations and advocating for fair competition in California. Constellation Brands, Inc., a leading producer and marketer of beer, wine, and spirits, offers brands like Corona, Modelo, and Robert Mondavi. Its Napa facility, a key winery in Northern California, is currently under scrutiny by the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA) for potential safety violations. This investigation highlights ongoing concerns about worker safety and unfair business practices that harm both employees and compliant competitors.
Current OSHA Investigation
Constellation Brands, Inc. is facing an open Cal/OSHA inspection in 2025:
Napa, CA (Activity Nr: 1842507.015): Opened August 6, 2025, this planned safety inspection targets potential hazards like chemical exposure or equipment safety at 1000 Main St, Napa, CA 94559. The inspection is partial in scope, indicating focused scrutiny on winery operations.
This ongoing investigation suggests systemic safety concerns that could endanger employees, particularly in a high-risk environment involving winemaking chemicals and heavy machinery.
History of Safety Violations
Based on available records from OSHA’s Enforcement Data and Violation Tracker (2015–2025), Constellation Brands, Inc. has no documented prior Cal/OSHA violations at its Napa facility. However, the current 2025 investigation highlights the need for vigilance, as even companies with clean records can face safety challenges in winery operations. The absence of prior citations does not guarantee compliance, and we are closely monitoring this inspection to ensure workers are protected.
Impact on Workers and Competitors
If safety violations are confirmed, Constellation Brands’ workers could face significant risks, such as exposure to toxic chemicals or injuries from winery equipment, common in wine production. Non-compliance could allow the company to cut costs by avoiding proper safety training or protective equipment, creating an unfair competitive advantage over wineries that adhere to Cal/OSHA standards, incurring higher expenses for safety measures.
Our Commitment
WorkersRightsComplianceAlliance.com is actively monitoring Constellation Brands’ OSHA investigation to uncover any violations that may emerge. We are pursuing public records through Cal/OSHA to gain further insights into this case. Our mission is to hold bad actors accountable and ensure safe workplaces across California. Stay tuned for updates as we advocate for transparency and worker safety.
Get Involved
Stay informed about Constellation Brands’ OSHA investigation and other workplace safety issues by subscribing to our YouTube channel (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC5gFpnC9zJpQvoOIoYMBZsw) and following our blog. Share this post to raise awareness and join us in advocating for safer workplaces. Check back for updates on Constellation Brands’ compliance and our efforts to protect California workers.
Meta Description: Constellation Brands faces OSHA scrutiny for potential safety issues in Napa, CA. Learn about their 2025 investigation and its impact on workers.
Exposed: Dean Foods Company Under OSHA Scrutiny for Workplace Safety Concerns
Posted on August 29, 2025 by WorkersRightsComplianceAlliance.com
At WorkersRightsComplianceAlliance.com, we are committed to exposing workplace safety violations and advocating for fair competition in California. Dean Foods Company, a leading dairy processor, produces milk, cream, and dairy products for retail and foodservice markets. Its Modesto facility, a key processing hub in Central California, is currently under scrutiny by the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA) for potential safety violations. This investigation highlights ongoing concerns about worker safety and unfair business practices that harm both employees and compliant competitors.
Current OSHA Investigation
Dean Foods Company is facing an open Cal/OSHA inspection in 2025:
Modesto, CA (Activity Nr: 1843036.015): Opened August 11, 2025, this planned safety inspection targets potential hazards like machine guarding or cold storage risks at 1313 N Emerald Ave, Modesto, CA 95351. The inspection is partial in scope, indicating focused scrutiny on dairy processing operations.
This ongoing investigation suggests systemic safety concerns that could endanger employees, particularly in a high-risk environment involving food processing equipment and temperature-controlled storage.
History of Safety Violations
Based on available records from OSHA’s Enforcement Data and Violation Tracker (2015–2025), Dean Foods Company has no documented prior Cal/OSHA violations at its Modesto facility. However, the current 2025 investigation highlights the need for vigilance, as even companies with clean records can face safety challenges in dairy processing. The absence of prior citations does not guarantee compliance, and we are closely monitoring this inspection to ensure workers are protected.
Impact on Workers and Competitors
If safety violations are confirmed, Dean Foods’ workers could face significant risks, such as injuries from unguarded machinery or slips in cold storage areas, common in dairy production. Non-compliance could allow the company to cut costs by avoiding proper safety training or equipment maintenance, creating an unfair competitive advantage over dairy processors that adhere to Cal/OSHA standards, incurring higher expenses for safety measures.
Our Commitment
WorkersRightsComplianceAlliance.com is actively monitoring Dean Foods’ OSHA investigation to uncover any violations that may emerge. We are pursuing public records through Cal/OSHA to gain further insights into this case. Our mission is to hold bad actors accountable and ensure safe workplaces across California. Stay tuned for updates as we advocate for transparency and worker safety.
Get Involved
Stay informed about Dean Foods’ OSHA investigation and other workplace safety issues by subscribing to our YouTube channel (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC5gFpnC9zJpQvoOIoYMBZsw) and following our blog. Share this post to raise awareness and join us in advocating for safer workplaces. Check back for updates on Dean Foods’ compliance and our efforts to protect California workers.
Meta Description: Dean Foods faces OSHA scrutiny for potential safety issues in Modesto, CA. Learn about their 2025 investigation and its impact on workers.
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) provides several publicly accessible databases containing workplace safety and health data. Below is a summary of the key databases available and methods to access them, based on information from OSHA’s official website and related sources.Key OSHA Databases
Access: Available through the OSHA website’s Establishment Search tool. Users can enter a company name, location, or industry to retrieve records.
Establishment Search
Description: Allows users to search for OSHA enforcement inspections by establishment name, inspection ID, or industry (using NAICS codes). It provides details on inspections, violations, and penalties.
Data Included: Inspection reports, citations, penalty amounts, and resolution details.Data | Occupational Safety and Health Administration
Learn more about workplace safety and health from OSHA and other federal agencies, including popular data searches such as: … Review data on establishments, investigations, frequently cited standards, penalties, and more. Find fatality inspection data, severe injury reports, and injury tracking application data. Search chemical exposure health data and an occupational chemical database. Learn about North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Codes and Bureau of Labor Statistics and other Department of Labor data. … Establishment Search Allows a search for OSHA enforcement inspections by the name of the establishment. Information may also be obtained for a specified inspection ID number or inspections within a specified industry. Search Inspections by NAICS Locates OSHA inspections conducted within a particular industry. Inspection Information Enables selection:
Imagine standing at a cash register for eight hours, day after day, without a single chance to sit. Or clocking in and realizing you won’t be paid for the last hour you worked. For decades, corporations treated these issues as minor complaints. But California workers fought back — and won millions. This blog covers the landmark seating and wage-hour cases that reshaped workplace rights. From CVS’s Supreme Court showdown to Walmart’s $65 million bombshell, these are stories of dignity, health, and the law. Case 1: Kilby v. CVS (2016 Supreme Court Decision) CVS cashiers and customer reps stocked shelves, bagged groceries, cleaned counters — and rang up sales. Most tasks could have been done sitting. But CVS forbade it. The California Supreme Court ruled in 2016 that employers must examine each specific task: If a job reasonably permits sitting, seats must be provided. Employers cannot argue “the overall job requires standing” as an excuse. This case set the legal foundation for every settlement that followed. Case 2: Bank of America – $15 Million Settlement Tellers across California stood behind counters, even when processing paperwork or waiting on customers. The work could be done seated, but chairs were denied. After years of litigation, Bank of America paid $15 million. Three named plaintiffs received $25,000 each. Workers collectively received millions in payouts. BofA had to implement a new seating policy and inform employees of their rights. As one teller put it: “We weren’t asking for luxury. We just wanted chairs.” Case 3: Safeway – $12 Million Settlement Cashier Eva Sharp led a class action spanning nearly eight years. She and thousands of Safeway cashiers stood long shifts without stools, despite registers allowing seating. The 2019 settlement totaled $12 million: Eva received ~$14,000. 30,000+ cashiers split about $1.8 million. Safeway promised to supply seating for two years. It was a small fortune for many minimum-wage workers — and proof persistence pays off. Case 4: Target – $9 Million Settlement Target’s bright red stores carried a dark reality: over 90,000 cashiers in California were denied seating. The company agreed to pay $9 million, with roughly $3.9 million in attorney fees. Though workers’ individual payouts were modest, the scale was enormous — showing how widespread the issue was. Case 5: Walmart – $65 Million Bombshell The largest seating case ever. Nearly 100,000 Walmart cashiers joined forces after years of standing at registers. Walmart agreed to pay $65 million in 2018. Individual payouts reached $25,000 per worker. Walmart changed practices nationwide. It wasn’t just a California win. It set off a national conversation: do workers deserve dignity at the register? The answer was clear. Case 6: AutoZone (Meda v. AutoZone, 2022) AutoZone claimed it “provided seats.” In reality, two chairs were tucked away in management areas, far from the registers. Workers didn’t even know they could sit. The court ruled that “mere availability” isn’t enough. Seats must be accessible at the workstation. Workers must be informed they’re allowed to sit. This case clarified that employers can’t just check a box — they must genuinely make seating available. Case 7: Ralphs (LaFace v. Ralphs, 2022) In a rare loss for workers, Ralphs argued its cashiers never had downtime. Courts agreed, ruling that constant customer flow meant no obligation to provide seating. The case also confirmed that PAGA seating claims are bench trials (decided by judges, not juries). This showed the law isn’t automatic — context matters. Broader Impact These cases changed more than policy. They changed lives: Health: Less back pain, fewer leg injuries. Dignity: Workers finally treated like humans, not props. Financial Relief: Payouts gave families breathing room. And beyond California, they inspired other states and employers to review seating rules voluntarily. Conclusion From CVS to Walmart, workers proved one truth: when they stand together, they win the right to sit. At WRCA, we fight to keep this momentum going. 👉 Join WRCA today. Subscribe, share, and support workers’ rights.
When a video of a single mother running an entire Burger King shift by herself went viral, the internet rallied in support. Here was a woman, balancing motherhood with back-breaking work, keeping an entire restaurant afloat alone. Yet instead of recognition, she was fired. Her story exposes the painful truth faced by millions of American workers: dedication doesn’t guarantee dignity.
The Problem
The fast-food industry has long relied on underpaid and overworked employees. Hamilton’s story is not unique—many workers are asked to carry unreasonable workloads with little support. When they push back or fall short due to family responsibilities, employers often punish rather than protect them. For working parents, especially single mothers, this creates an impossible cycle: work long hours to provide for your kids, but lose your job if childcare interferes.
Legal Context
Federal labor law requires safe and reasonable working conditions, and some states—including California—have stronger protections for parents. Yet loopholes abound. Employers often cite “attendance” or “policy violations” to cover up retaliation, leaving workers vulnerable. In Hamilton’s case, the company policy prohibited employees from working alone—yet enforcement only came after she went viral. This contradiction exposes how policies are selectively applied, usually to the worker’s detriment.
In California, recent cases involving retaliation against caregivers show courts beginning to side with employees. But nationally, protections remain patchy. Without strong advocacy and enforcement, more parents will face the same cruel choice: job or family.
Worker Impact
Hamilton’s words resonate with so many: “My kids come first… y’all don’t pay for no babysitter.” Millions of parents are forced into the same trade-off. Low wages don’t cover childcare, yet missing work risks termination. The result? Burnout, poverty, and broken families—all while billion-dollar corporations profit.
Her viral video made her a symbol of resilience, but the firing revealed the fragility of worker protections in industries built on exploitation.
Call to Action
Stories like Hamilton’s are why the Workers Rights Compliance Alliance (WRCA) exists. Workers should never be punished for protecting their families. By joining WRCA, you can help hold corporations accountable, demand fair scheduling, and push for laws that prioritize human dignity.
No parent should have to choose between their job and their children. Stand with us—because workers deserve better.
Don’t Just Get Mad, Get Even: Why Unfair Competition Demands a United Front
You follow the rules. You pay your premiums, file your paperwork, and play fair. You invest in your team, carry the proper licenses, and ensure your business is covered with workers’ compensation insurance. So why does it feel like you’re being punished for it? Every time you submit a bid, you know you’re not just competing on skill and efficiency; you’re up against ghost competitors who operate in the shadows, and it’s costing you jobs. You’re not imagining it, and you’re not alone in your frustration.
The Unlevel Playing Field
When a competitor submits a bid that seems impossibly low, it’s not because they have a secret business method. It’s because they’re cheating. They build their business model on breaking the law, and every legitimate contractor pays the price.
Let’s break down the “advantage” an illegal operator has. While you are paying for the essential costs of doing business legally, they are simply pocketing the difference. These costs include:
Workers’ Compensation Insurance: Depending on the trade, this can add a significant percentage to your payroll costs. It’s a non-negotiable expense that protects your workers and your business, yet your illegal competitor treats it as optional.
Payroll Taxes: You pay your share of Social Security, Medicare, and state and federal unemployment taxes for every employee. By paying “cash under the table,” an illegal operator avoids this entirely, instantly giving them a massive price advantage.
Licensing and Bonds: You’ve invested the time and money to get licensed by the CSLB and carry the necessary bonds, proving your professionalism and providing a layer of consumer protection. They operate with none of these safeguards.
Liability Insurance: You carry liability insurance to protect your clients and your assets. It’s a fundamental part of responsible business ownership that they simply ignore.
When you add it all up, an illegal competitor can have 20% to 40% lower overhead before the job even starts. They aren’t more efficient; they’re just operating illegally. This isn’t fair competition. It’s theft—theft from their workers, from the government, and directly from your bottom line.
A Powerful, Overlooked Tool
For too long, honest contractors have felt helpless, believing that reporting these operators to overwhelmed state agencies is their only recourse. But there is a powerful and direct tool designed for this exact situation: California’s Unfair Competition Law (UCL).
Found in the Business and Professions Code § 17200, the UCL is a broad statute that prohibits any “unlawful, unfair or fraudulent business act or practice.” The key word here is unlawful. When a competitor operates without a required license or fails to carry legally mandated workers’ compensation insurance, they are, by definition, committing an unlawful business act.
The UCL allows businesses that have been harmed and have lost money as a result of this illegal competition to take direct legal action. It’s not just about consumer rights; it’s about business rights. It gives you the standing to sue a competitor whose illegal shortcuts are directly taking business away from you. Think of it as a rule that says you can’t win a race by taking a shortcut that’s off-limits to every other runner. The UCL is the referee that can penalize them for it.
The Power of Alliance
So, if this powerful tool exists, why isn’t every honest contractor using it? The answer is simple: fighting alone is daunting, expensive, and time-consuming. Hiring attorneys and building a legal case against a single competitor can cost tens of thousands of dollars with no guarantee of success. For a small business, it’s a risk that’s often too great to take on.
This is precisely why the Workers’ Rights Compliance Alliance was formed.
We are a non-profit association founded on a simple principle: there is strength in numbers. Instead of one small business trying to fight a systemic problem alone, the Alliance pools resources from its members to create a dedicated legal fund. We work with legal experts to identify clear-cut cases of unfair competition and take targeted legal action on behalf of all our members.
By joining forces, we transform an impossible individual fight into a manageable and powerful collective action. Your modest membership fee combines with others to create a war chest that illegal operators cannot ignore. We handle the legal legwork, reducing your individual risk and allowing you to focus on what you do best—running your business.
Stop Feeling Helpless. Start Fighting Back.
The frustration you feel every time you lose a bid to an illegal operator is justified. But frustration alone won’t change anything. The cycle of unfair competition will continue as long as honest contractors feel isolated and powerless. It’s time to change the dynamic.
You don’t have to accept this as the cost of doing business anymore. You have the law on your side, and now, you have an alliance ready to fight with you. It’s time to level the playing field.
1. $3.4 M A recent video details a massive insurance fraud case involving a California security company owner who underreported payroll to dodge workers’ comp premiums—resulting in a $3.4 million scam YouTube+2Thomas Martin+2YouTube+2YouTube.
2. “Know Your Rights” Guidebook Videos The California Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) has produced informational video series aimed at helping injured workers understand their rights, including scenarios where employers are uninsured CWCI.
📄 Expert Articles on Uninsured Employers
Thomas F. Martin, PLC explains what to do if you’re injured and your employer lacks workers’ comp insurance—your route is filing with the Uninsured Employers Benefit Trust Fund (UEBTF) and gathering documentation or pursuing a civil lawsuit Thomas Martin+1Joepluta+1.
Joseph Pluta’s Blog (Feb 2025) outlines your legal options, including documentation, UEBTF filing, potential civil claims, and expected delays vs regular claims CalDIR+3Joepluta+3Thomas Martin+3.
The UEBTF acts as a safety net: once your claim is accepted, it processes benefits much like insurance—though cases may take 6–12+ months JoeplutaThomas Martin.
🛠️ What You Can Do
Watch the DIR videos (like the “Injured Worker Guidebook”) to understand claim steps and protections.
File a UEBTF claim (report the incident, collect evidence like pay stubs and medical records).
Consider civil action—uninsured status allows lawsuits for full damages, pain and suffering, and punitive awards.
Get legal help: Many firms offer free consultations and specialize in uninsured employer cases.
Would you like links to specific firm cases, help locating local legal aid in Hesperia, or assistance finding official DIR resources to include in your video?
Here are detailed articles and official sources about the $3.4 million workers’ compensation premium fraud case in California:
📰 Key Articles & Official Coverage
• San Jose Security Company Owner Sentenced in $3.4 M Workers’ Compensation Fraud Case (Press release)
An official statement from the California Department of Insurance details how Raul Chavez, owner of Tactical Operations Protective Services in San Jose, was convicted of felony premium fraud after underreporting $3,431,903 in payroll over six years. He was sentenced to 180 days in county jail, two years of probation, and ordered to pay $225,168 in restitution to State Fund Work Comp Academy+9California Department of Insurance+9Insurance Journal+9.
• Security Company Owner Sentenced in $3.4 M Comp Fraud Case (WorkCompCentral)
This industry news summary corroborates the details: Chavez pleaded guilty to the six‑year payroll underreporting scheme resulting in fraud charges and penalties, and emphasizes the lasting risks to workers and compliant employers WorkCompCentral.
⚖️ Broader Context: Similar Fraud Cases in California
Fontana Janitorial Fraud — $2.4 M Underreported Payroll Jose Arredondo and Olga Chaves were charged for underreporting over $2.4 million in payroll to save on workers’ comp premiums and evade taxes. The premium loss was approximately $436,717. The San Bernardino DA is prosecuting Business Insurance+5Work Comp Academy+5WorkCompCentral+5.
Kings County Farm Labor Contractor Scheme — Nearly $30 M Ruben Perez Mireles Jr. and John Mena allegedly underreported $29.2 million in payroll across two farm labor companies, causing over $3.5 million in premium loss. They also committed tax fraud and obtained PPP loan fraud, defrauding multiple state agencies. Prosecuted by the Central Valley Workers’ Compensation Fraud Task Force people.com+15California Department of Insurance+15Claims Pages+15.
Other High‑Profile Employer Fraud Cases Cases in San Diego and Los Angeles include a janitorial company underreporting $2.4 million in Fontana and a delivery company ring in L.A. defrauding over $21 million. The total economic impact of employer premium fraud in California is estimated at $1 billion to $3 billion annually WorkCompCentral+1WorkCompCentral+1WorkCompCentral+1Work Comp Academy+1.
📋 Summary Table
Case
Employer Type
Scheme Duration
Underreported Payroll
Estimated Premium Loss
Legal Outcome
Tactical Ops Protective Services (Raul Chavez)
Security & staffing, San Jose
2017–2022
$3.43 M
≈ $205K
180 days jail, 2 yrs probation, $225K restitution
Fontana Janitorial (Arredondo & Chaves)
Janitorial services
2018–2023
$2.41 M
≈ $436K
Charged by San Bernardino DA
Vista Pacific & Calzona Ag (Mireles & Mena)
Farm labor contracting, Kings County
2019–2021
$29.2 M
≈ $3.5 M
Multiple felony charges, plea deals pending
✅ Why This Matters
These frauds impede workers’ right to compensation and safety protections.
They undermine honest employers by enabling underpriced competition.
California’s Department of Insurance and DA offices are aggressively prosecuting such cases.
Workers injured under these schemes may need to pursue claims through the Uninsured Employers Benefits Trust Fund (UEBTF) or civil litigation.
The Science of Cheating: How Employers Systematically Evade Workers’ Compensation In California, workers’ compensation insurance isn’t optional. It’s the law.
But some employers—especially those in staffing, agriculture, security, janitorial, and food production—have turned breaking that law into a business strategy. Not only do they cheat the system, they do it on purpose, following a pattern that repeats itself year after year, worker after worker.
🧩 The Playbook: How It Works Step 1: Create a shell company. They start a staffing agency or labor outfit, often with a vague name, sometimes even using a family member as the front.
Step 2: Skip workers’ comp. By not buying legally required workers’ compensation insurance, they avoid tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars in premiums. Some falsely claim their workers are “independent contractors.” Others just lie outright.
Step 3: Hide injuries, silence complaints. Workers who get injured are told to “go home and rest.” They’re discouraged from filing claims, sometimes even threatened with termination or deportation.
Step 4: Run it for 2–3 years. The company grows fast—because it’s illegally cheap to operate. No comp premiums. No benefits. No accountability.
Step 5: Get caught. Eventually, a whistleblower speaks up, or the state audits them, or someone gets seriously injured and files a public complaint.
Step 6: Declare bankruptcy. Here’s the kicker: once they’re caught, they shut down the company, walk away from the debts, and start all over again under a new name.
⚠️ The Consequences For the workers, the damage is devastating:
No medical care for serious injuries.
No wage replacement during recovery.
No protection from retaliation.
While the workers are left hanging, the employers walk free. Sometimes they’re fined. Occasionally they’re charged. But more often than not, they negotiate down their penalties, avoid jail, and return under a new corporate identity.
This isn’t just unethical. It’s a calculated abuse of the system—and it’s happening across California.
🛡️ How to Fight Back If you or someone you know was injured working for a company without workers’ comp insurance, there’s still hope:
File a claim through California’s Uninsured Employers Benefits Trust Fund (UEBTF)
Document everything—witnesses, pay stubs, text messages, medical visits
Seek legal help—you may have the right to sue the employer personally
Join forces with organizations like the Workers Rights Compliance Alliance (WRCA)
We investigate these employers, expose their fraud, and connect victims with real legal help.
📣 We Need to Talk About This These scams don’t just hurt individual workers—they damage the entire economy. Law-abiding employers get priced out. Workers’ trust in the system erodes. And fraud becomes normalized.
Oakland— The California Labor Commissioner’s Office (LCO) is awarding $8.55 million in Workers’ Rights Enforcement grants to 16 prosecutors’ offices across the state. Now in its second year, this first-of-its-kind grant program supports local efforts to combat wage theft and other labor violations by providing critical funding to hold lawbreaking employers accountable.
With this funding, local prosecutors can strengthen and expand their capacity to investigate wage theft, build specialized enforcement units, and increase prosecutions against employers who break the law.
What California Labor Commissioner Lilia García-Brower said: “Wage theft is a serious crime that devastates working families and weakens California’s economy. I am proud to announce an additional $8.55 million in grant funding to continue advancing our critical work in holding perpetrators accountable through increased prosecutions for wage theft. We remain firmly committed to partnering with community organizations, industry leaders, and public prosecutors to end these abusive practices. Workers deserve every dollar they’ve rightfully earned, and law-abiding employers deserve a level playing field.”
Demand remained high this year, with local prosecutors requesting more than $10.7 million in total funding. While only $8.55 million was available, the strong interest reflects a growing commitment among local offices to take an active role in protecting workers and holding employers accountable.
Each office was eligible to apply for up to $750,000 in competitive grant funding. Grant funds are restricted to personnel and audit-related costs to ensure resources are specifically directed toward wage theft enforcement efforts.
The 16 public prosecutors who applied for the grant will receive awards as detailed below:
Public Prosecutor
Award
Alameda District Attorney
$750,000
Contra Costa District Attorney
$360,000
Fresno City Attorney
$750,000
Long Beach City Prosecutor
$250,000
Los Angeles City Attorney
$400,000
Los Angeles County Counsel
$250,000
Los Angeles District Attorney
$750,000
Oakland City Attorney
$630,269
Orange County District Attorney
$700,000
San Diego City Attorney
$400,000
San Diego District Attorney
$750,000
San Francisco City Attorney
$600,000
San Francisco District Attorney
$233,256
San Mateo District Attorney
$750,000
Santa Clara County Counsel
$750,000
Sonoma District Attorney
$226,475
“I thank the California Labor Commissioner’s Office for providing additional resources that bolster our fight against worker exploitation, enhance partnerships, and forge new county-wide alliances to uncover wage theft across San Mateo County’s major industries,” said San Mateo County District Attorney Stephen Wagstaffe. “We have uncovered hundreds of thousands of dollars in stolen wages, filed criminal charges, launched several investigations, and built a strong network of community partners who ensure every victim’s story reaches our team. With this momentum, we are relentlessly pursuing every dollar owed and sending an unmistakable message: in San Mateo County, stealing from workers will cost you far more than you ever saved.”
“The Workers’ Rights Enforcement Grant has been essential in empowering our city to investigate and prosecute wage theft in Fresno,” said Fresno City Attorney Andrew Janz. “With this grant funding, we’ve established a dedicated prosecution unit within the City Attorney’s Office focused on holding violators accountable. We want our residents to know that we will not tolerate bad actors stealing from hardworking people.”
Established in 2023 with $18 million in funding over two years, the Workers’ Rights Enforcement Grant Program provides competitive funding to support state labor law enforcement and assist workers in combating wage theft, preventing unfair competition and protecting state revenue. Today’s announcement marks the second round of grant funding, following the initial $8.55 million awarded in 2024. Additional information on the Workers’ Rights Enforcement Grant Program is posted online.
About the Labor Commissioner’s Office
Within the Department of Industrial Relations, the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement (California Labor Commissioner’s Office) combats wage theft and unfair competition by investigating allegations of illegal and unfair business practices.
In 2020, LCO launched a multi-pronged outreach campaign, Reaching Every Californian. The campaign amplifies basic protections and builds pathways to affected populations, so workers and employers understand legal protections and obligations, as well as the Labor Commissioner’s enforcement procedures.
Works Rights Compliance Alliance 