profitable

The brutal collection of ‘The Hate’ confirms that the most profitable franchise of the moment is not Marvel or DC: it is Christopher Nolan

by

‘The Odyssey’ has raised figures in its first weekend that are a true record for Christopher Nolan. The most significant thing, numbers aside, is that with this achievement he not only reaffirms himself as a prominent director in the league of great authors loved by the public and critics, in the style of Spielberg, but he competes directly in the field of sequels, blockbusters, Marvel and DC adaptations (where he has already made his name) and big-budget animation. Nolan already behaves (financially, at least) like a franchise. The numbers. The Nolan’s adaptation of ‘The Odyssey’ from Homer raised $124.5 million in its three opening days in the United States. On a global scale, the figure amounts to $264.1 million, the best worldwide opening of Nolan’s entire career, ahead of the $249 million achieved by ‘The Dark Knight Rises’ in 2012. Why it happens. Beyond the quality of the production and the expectation it has raised, it must be taken into account to explain the success that the premiere was strongly supported in premium rooms. IMAX screenings contributed close to $22 million to the international collection, 15% of the total, which was added to the $29.6 million domestically, 23.8% of the entire US box office. That is to say: large formats accounted for 53% of national revenue. Of course, critics praised the film, and aggregators like Rotten Tomatoes They give him a 95%, the highest grade of Nolan’s career, and sixth of yours to exceed 90% along with Memento, Insomnia, The Dark Knight, Dunkirk and Oppenheimer. Every three years like clockwork. Since the premiere of ‘Interstellar‘ in 2014, Nolan has taken up a tireless rhythm of one film every three years: ‘Dunkirk’ in 2017, ‘Tenet‘in 2020,’Oppenheimer‘ in 2023 and now ‘The Odyssey’ in 2026. Behind this regularity is an unusual production structure in Hollywood. His wife Emma Thomas has produced all of his feature films. They founded the production company Syncopy in 2001, with which Nolan develops his projects without depending on the usual machinery of a large studio. That autonomy partly explains why it can allow these wide parentheses: it does not need to prime a universe annually to justify million-dollar budgets. Fire test. That independence was put to the test in 2021. Nolan broke up with Warner Bros. after the studio decided to release its entire 2021 catalog simultaneously in theaters and on HBO Max. Nolan said the decision made no economic sense, in a statement in which came to comment that the company had gone from having “the perfect machine” for distributing films to dismantling it itself. He moved his next project, ‘Oppenheimer,’ to Universal, the same studio now backing ‘The Odyssey.’ No rival at the moment. Shawn Robbins, director of analytics at Fandango, summarized the phenomenon with a short phrase: “Death, taxes and Christopher Nolan”, referring, in a well-known Anglo-Saxon phrase, to three totems of life that are completely inevitable. Nolan has already gone in there. Of course, the director’s career seems to be an absolute concatenation of critical and public successes that attracts even non-regulars: of the 7.5 million tickets sold in the US, 43% of those spectators go to the cinema only a few times a year. ‘The Odyssey’ has no direct competition next week. The only threat on the calendar is ‘Spider-Man: Brand New Day’, which arrives in two weeks. On the other hand, ‘The Odyssey’ has not yet been released in China, Japan or South Korea, markets that could continue pushing up a figure that already corroborates that the days of Batman are long behind us and that Nolan does not need superheroes to sweep the box office. He alone is his own franchise. In Xataka | Christopher Nolan responds to Matt Damon’s defeatism about ‘The Odyssey’: “Cinema is vital and essential, and continues to transform”

“We don’t want to reinvent space travel. What we have to do is make it profitable”

by

Although AI gurus, former prime ministers of Italy and the United Kingdom and CEOs of giant companies are passing through the Vivatech stages, the figure that has attracted the most attention is Jeff Bezos. The main theater of the event was packed as has not happened with any other speaker. Even Yann LeCun, the so-called ‘godfather of AI‘, he had to speak to some empty seats. On that stage, alongside Bezos were David Limp, CEO of Blue Origin, and Mike Massiminoformer NASA astronaut and the one who asked the questions. The first was obvious: the feeling behind the explosion of the brand new New Glenn rocket of Bezos. The answer was not so obvious, with the tycoon pointing out that the team ‘celebrated’ it in a rather curious way. And the conversation soon focused on the main point of the talk: build the roads to go to space. Because Blue Origin is in the same race as SpaceXbut also in the same competition as Chinathe race to find a way to reduce launch costs so much that it is viable to constantly put things into orbit. And, apart from infinite money, you only need one thing that Rajoy already said at the time, finding a way to make more of those machines that make the machines that make rockets. And this is where Prometheus, Bezos’s new AI company, has to do. so much controversy is awakening. The Moon as a space gas station “People underestimate (whatever)” was a phrase that was repeated up to three times during the talk. Because Bezos and Limp came to Paris to make it clear that what they are doing is very difficult, but that it is a great leap for humanity. After talking about the New Glenn explosion, Massimino said “everyone wants to go to the Moon”, and there Bezos expanded because the phrase touches on one of the three key points of Blue Origin’s objective in space exploration (and the rest of the countries and companies that are on the same path). “We will go to Mars and do other things, but the Moon is the first step, the first base“he commented. There are several reasons. The first, according to the businessman, is that “it is close and we can go in three and a half days and also return in three and a half days. We do not have to wait for it to align with the Earth as happens with Mars. And the reason why we would want to go (and to stay, no less) is because, although he did not say it explicitly, it was printed in the message: the Moon is a space gas station. We have already said on several occasions that our satellite has a lot of resources that we can use, and the most recent missions have focused, in part, on collecting and studying samples of lunar soil to see what can be done with that material called regolith. “Now that we are going to go to the Moon to stay, not just to visit it, we need to build fuel with materials that are on the Moon. With electrolysis we can create liquid hydrogen and that is the goal: to create fuel from raw materials on the Moon“, commented Bezos. Because that is the first step to, from there, launch missions further away, such as to Mars. The reason is that it is ‘cheaper’ to launch rockets from the Moon than from the Earth due to gravity. The rocket does not need as much fuel to take off or as much force, so it is much easier and costs are greatly reduced. The problem is that loading the tanks with liquid hydrogen to go to Mars has the disadvantage that it is a fuel that takes up a lot of space and it is not feasible to leave so loaded from Earth. “If we want to explore space and make colonies on Mars, the Moon is the first step” That’s where the Moon comes into play again. Because that’s what this is all about: “We don’t want to reinvent space travel. These trips were surpassed 60 years ago. What we want to do is make them profitable. That’s what Blue Origin is focusing on.” Extracting the materials also comes into play. “The Moon’s gravity is much lower, so you can extract those materials using 28 times less energy per kilo than you would need on Earth.” What keeps a billionaire who wants to play with rockets up at night But we must not lose sight of something: this is a business, and Bezos points out that there are many players who want to go to space, but not all of them can make rockets. And there are companies like yours or Musk’s. “Neoconstellations of satellites, resources on the Moon and in low orbit – solar panels, space data centers -, missions on the Moon to stay… there is a lot of demand. I think people greatly underestimate the demand for space travel,” he said. Beyond the Moon and that Martian objective, he is right in pointing out that low orbit is looking like an electric station during Easter. United States and China are launching military and communication satellites, but Europe does not want to be left behind and Russia, India and Japan are in the same competition. The law of “who comes first, gets the spot” prevails here, and everyone wants to get there first. “We are in the golden age to achieve the objective. It already happened years ago with the US getting ahead of the Soviets. Now it is going to happen again” The point is that, as Bezos comments, “if the launches are very expensive, the satellites must have a very long life and remain behind technologically, but if we make upload is cheaperwe can speed up times. Limp went on to say that reusable rockets are the way to create these mega satellite constellations, but beyond the problem of fuel, … Read more

Someone has created the website “is AI profitable anymore?” to answer the question of our time in real time

by

There is a website called “Is AI Profitable Yet?” whose sole mission is to answer one of the most important—and most uncomfortable—questions of today’s technology industry: does artificial intelligence make money anymore? The visual response It is absolutely forceful: The short answer is a priori a big NO, but be careful, because that answer is in a certain sense misleading. The graph effectively shows how the companies that are building frontier models are burning money like there’s no tomorrowand they all spend much more than they earn. The four that appear with long red bars (expenses) and very short green bars (income) are precisely the companies that are betting almost everything on the future of AI. Amazon, Alphabet, Microsoft and Meta They have not stopped increasing their capex (capital expenditures) in recent years, and that logically means that their accounts are in the red. In fact, the announcements of these “hyperscalers” in their latest financial results have not only failed to soften that capex, but have driven it even further. The combined capex of these technology companies by 2026 is expected to amount to $725 billion, 25% of all world military spending. But the message of “everyone is losing money” is dangerous, because what all these companies are doing is investing in your future although when doing so they are running out of cash flow. There are two clear examples that can alert us. Companies are spending so much on AI infrastructure that they are running out of cash flow. It’s a dangerous bet. Source: Financial Times. The first is Amazon, which did not stop losing (investing) money for years and then became the giant it is today. The second, Uber, a company to which the same thing happened: it lost (invested) money for a decade, and although it does not have the size or success of Amazon, today it is an absolute world leader in its segment. That leaves us with a clear message: Not being profitable by investing in your future is not the same as not being clear about the economic model.. And all these companies are very clear about the economic model of AI: it is to invest today to earn (a lot) tomorrow. Nvidia is the big winner, but not the only one The great irony of AI is that for now the big business does not seem to be in AI, but in selling infrastructure to those who try to do business with it. It is the same thing that happened during the gold rush in the mid-19th century in California: Those who amassed stable fortunes were not the miners who searched for goldbut those who provided them with services and tools. There are several well-known examples: Levi Strauss saw the need of tough clothing, Samuel Brannan bought all the shovels, picks and pans he could in the area, and Henry Wells and William Fargo founded the famous postal and financial services company that allowed money and supplies to be sent safely to gold seekers. Nvidia is basically doing that: (making and) selling shovels. This has caused absolutely extraordinary growth in the stock market, and in the last three years it has become the most valuable company in the world and has not stopped breaking market capitalization records. Here it must be clarified that the estimates on that website are striking, but they do not mean that these companies are in any way bankrupt. Google/Alphabet continues to make billions of dollars every quarter, and the same goes for its rivals. All those red bars don’t mean that AI is smoke: just that we’re footing the bill for the experiment. One that could go wrong, of course, but one that could also go really, really right. The phrase that best sums up this “AI fever” is what Mark Zuckerberg said a few months ago: “We’re going to invest aggressively. Even if we lost a couple hundred billion dollars it would be a bummer, but it’s better than being left behind in the race for superintelligence.” Neither Zuckerberg nor his rivals seem upset about losing $200 billion right off the bat. They certainly do not seem to wrinkle despite the fact that at the moment there is a reality on the market: AI already works technically, but What it doesn’t do is function economically. for those who invest in frontier models. Here, however, there are a couple of notable notes. The first, the fact of Anthropic apparently expects to end the quarter making moneysomething unusual and promising. The second, that this website only shows Nvidia as the winner of this AI race, but that company is by no means the only one that has managed to make gold with this technological fever. The growth of stock market memory manufacturers is extraordinary. In just one year they have multiplied their market capitalizations by up to 11. Source: Reuters. In fact, we are seeing how a large number of technology companies have grown extraordinary in recent months thanks to the demand for hardware and components such as memories. Micron. SK Hynix and Samsung are the big beneficiaries of this situation, but they are not the only ones either. These days we have seen how PC manufacturers barely grow in income from those PCs, but they are doing it with the servers. There are more winners. There are photolithography equipment manufacturers such as ASML or Applied Materials, but also electrical, liquid cooling, networking, storage companies, and of course companies specialized in data center construction. This website answers the question in a very limited way, because the AI ​​segment is not only the one in which OpenAI, Anthropic, Microsoft, xAI or Google operate. What is happening is simply that the big business of AI is currently not where everyone thinks. AI is being very profitable. The problem is that perhaps we are looking in the wrong place. In Xataka | The problem is not spending a lot of tokens, it’s that most of them are being wasted

Snapchat invented the format that dominates the Internet. 15 years later it is still unable to make it profitable

by

Evan Spiegel this week sent a memo to your employees announcing that Snap is going to lay off about 1,000 people16% of the entire workforce, in addition to canceling 300 vacant positions that had yet to be filled. Snap thus hopes to save more than $500 million in annualized costs starting in the second half of this year, although the cut is expensive in the short term, since it will have to pay between $95 and $130 million in compensation. Nevertheless, the stock rose 7% in response to the layoffs. The markets have been asking for them for a long time. Why is it important. Snap’s is not a “normal” failure story. It’s much more interesting than that. It’s the story of a company that forever changed how we communicate online and yet has failed to build a profitable business on it. In 2025 it lost 460 million dollars, although it is true that in 2024 it lost more and in 2023 even more. He has spent his 15 years of life in that dynamic. It still hasn’t closed a single complete year on a positive note. The context. His paradox begins in 2013, when he launched Stories: photos and videos that lasted 24 hours, published before disappearing. A format that is common today but at that time groundbreaking. A format that freed people from the pressure of permanence, of the trail. In August 2016, Instagram launched exactly the same thing, with the same name, and with much bigger muscle behind it. Within two months, Instagram had 100 million Stories users. It had taken Snapchat four years to reach that number. A year later it had already surpassed Snapchat. Yes, but. The problem was not that they were copied. The problem was that Meta, TikTok and YouTube adopted the format with an advantage that Snap never had: data. Meta and Google know who we are, what we buy, what interests us. Snap knows much less. That’s why their advertising converts worse, and advertisers pay less for it. A vicious circle. The coup de grace was Transparency Tracking AppApple’s privacy policy released in 2021, which sank tracking-based advertising models. Meta also sufferedbut Meta had the scale and ecosystem to absorb the impact. Not Snap, so its stock went from touching $83 to trading today around $6. A drop of more than 90% from its highs, in less than five years. However, Snap has 946 million active monthly users, grows 12% in year-over-year revenue and has one of the youngest audiences on all platforms. The most coveted demographic for fashion and entertainment brands. It has cutting-edge augmented reality technology and also has Snapchat+, your paid subscription, which is growing well. That is the contradiction that a thousand layoffs do not resolve: Cutting costs improves margins, but alone does not truly monetize a platform with almost a billion users when its audience is young and difficult to convert, and its competitors have ten times more resources. There is also an activist fund in the capital, Irenic Capital Management with 2.5%, which has been pushing for months exactly in this direction: cuts. And now what. Spiegel speaks at memo to concentrate investments where monetization already works. That is, give up on markets that are difficult to grow and profitable (Spain has every chance to be one of them) and focus on more powerful ones, presumably in the style of the United States or the United Kingdom. Give up growth in search of sustainability. Snap has been trying to solve an equation that others have solved at their expense for 15 years. These layoffs are bought time to keep trying. Featured image | Shutter Speed In Xataka | Snapchat introduced its own version of ChatGPT in its app. Nothing has gone, nothing good

Amazon Web Services is such a profitable business that its CEO is already thinking about something more ambitious: competing with NVIDIA

by

Andy Jassy is the CEO of Amazon and an advocate of artificial intelligence to the point that he expects AI to transform the company’s workforce in the coming years. It makes sense that he is the captain of a liner that has turned to the AI ​​business, since before succeeding Bezos, he came from leading Amazon Web Services. And in his last letter annual to shareholders, Jassy leaves several notes that give us clues about the future of the company. It plans to compete against NVIDIA and SpaceX. And they have 200 billion dollars to invest. The photo. The company is going like a rocket. amazon hill 2025 at 717,000 million dollars, exceeding by 12% the 638,000 million of the previous year. Operating income increased by 17% to 80,000 million and, for its part, AWS cloud business it also worked well, achieving 24% year-on-year in the last quarter. They have done so, according to Jassy, ​​without being able to meet the demands of some clients due to the current situation of the data centers, but even so, they are more than happy. Burning pasta. And those good vibes are going to reach Amazon to invest some 200,000 million dollars in the coming months. The CEO has commented that “they are not going to invest that amount in 2026 following a hunch,” also pointing out that they are not going to be conservative in their bets and that what they are looking for is to lead the artificial intelligence business. HE wait that 50,000 of those millions will end up in the pockets of an OpenAI that will need a boost after the NVIDIA “sit-in”he Sora’s closure and Disney’s withdrawal of investment. Those 200 billion will be concentrated on AI infrastructure, a bet on the future that can add pressure to margins in the short term, but from which they expect a lot.or when the business starts operating. For its part, OpenAI is going to invest 100 billion in AWS over the next eight years. The chickens that enter by those that leave, like almost everything in this AI market. business engine. What business? Well… the one with the chips. Amazon is one of the companies (like Goal, tesla or one’s own OpenAI) that buys from NVIDIA, but that also you are developing your own solution. There are three proper names: Graviton, Trainium and Nitro, training and inference chips (depending on the case) whose business is growing at triple digits year-on-year. Specifically Trainium, which is the chip used to train some of the company’s models, can “save tens of billions of dollars a year.” But it’s not just about saving money by having the chip made at home and do not depend on NVIDIA prices and market competition: it is about not depend on NVIDIA itself at all. The NVIDIA Garden. We have already explained on more than one occasion how NVIDIA is the engine of the artificial intelligence business. Not only do they have the hardware that powers the data centers of the main AI players, but they have the money to invest in both established companies and, above all, in the startups that can define the future of the sector. And Jassy aims, directly, to become a hardware rival, one that competes with NVIDIA, AMD and even with the reborn Intel. According to the CEO, if Amazon were to sell its chip on the open market, it could represent a market of about $50 billion annually, more than double its current chip market. It would still be well below some of its rivals, but it could sell its hardware in conjunction with its AWS software. It would be by selling that “complete AI package” where Amazon would be strong against its rivals. Amazon’s Starlink. Wanting to step on the hose of the strong hardware trio is not the only field in which Jassy wants to play. We already know that Bezos, founder of Amazon, has its space businessbut in parallel, the own Amazon is deploying its Kuiper project. It is its own constellation of satellites in low orbit for broadband Internet that aims to be direct competition to SpaceX and Elon Musk’s Starlink. The deployment began in 2025 with a modest 27 satellites, but this 2026 They want to launch another 3,200. In the end, as all mega-companies want, Amazon seeks to be ubiquitous and permeate absolutely every millimeter of the business. Now, although its capacity in AWS is indisputable, competing against NVIDIA is a big deal. Jensen Huang’s company is TSMC’s first customer -the great global factory-, has deployed very aggressively and intelligently in the AI ​​segment, creating a network that is difficult to replicate and, in addition, has ensured itself to be the main customer of Samsung and SK Hynixthe companies leading high bandwidth memory without which AI cannot take off. Image | Amazon (edited) In Xataka | If you think the internet was much better before AI, congratulations: they have created an extension for you

‘Avatar’ is one of the most profitable films in history. And yet Disney is considering killing the saga

by

James Cameron’s trilogy has generated 6.7 billion dollars at the box office. Despite this, the future of the two remaining sequels is up in the air, Disney is considering making the following films cheaper, and the theme park attraction that was announced with all honors a few months ago may never be built. The numbers. The figures for ‘Avatar: Fire and Ash’, the third installment of the franchise, are objectively colossal: 404 million grosses in the domestic market, 1,085 million in the rest of the world, third highest-grossing title of 2025. A success for any current Hollywood franchise, but at this point we are all clear that James Cameron’s saga is not a typical product. The low. The first way of reduce enthusiasm is by comparing the collection with its precedents. The first installment, from 2009, is still the highest grossing film in history, with 2,920 million dollars. The second, ‘The Sense of Water’, is the third with 2,340 million. Compared to those figures, ‘Fire and Ashes’ is no less than a billion short. It remains a good business (350 million, plus 150 in marketing), but It’s not even the highest-grossing movie of 2025since it was beaten by ‘Zootopia 2’, also from Disney, and by ‘Ne Zha 2‘. The Wrap has made an in-depth analysis of the topic and highlights the opinion of Paul Dergarabedian, head of market trends at Comscore. The analyst states that “‘Fire and Ashes’ grossed half that of the first film. And the ticket prices in 2009 were not those of 2025.” In March, during the Saturn Awards, Cameron collected trophies for Best Director, Best Screenplay and Best Science Fiction Film for the third ‘Avatar’ and recognized that “To be perfectly clear, we have not even made a decision to move forward at this time.” Short and cheap. The Wrap is also the medium that I spoke with insiders from Disney who confirm that internal conversations are being held to make the next deliveries “shorter and cheaper.” The release dates of the fourth and fifth films (December 2029 and December 2031), and the answer to how to reduce costs without extirpating the identity of ‘Avatar’ is not easy to elucidate. Why are they so expensive? Some details of the process that illustrate why “cheaper” can be a complication: for example, the production involves at least two complete shoots: one motion capture with actors and another, mostly digital, to define the staging, the camera movements and all the elements of the computer-generated universe. According to Cameron acknowledged.making the fourth and fifth deliveries together (as he did with the second and third) would mean an investment of around 800 million without changes in the method. More expenses: Costume designer Deborah Scott, Oscar-nominated for her work on the third installment, illustrates the scale of the problem. Each suit is designed, manufactured in the physical world, and then digitally “translated” with the help of animators and technicians. This process is multiplied in each film by hundreds of characters, creatures and environments. Cameron has publicly committed to do not use AI and always support the human work behind the film, which also prevents lowering prices in this way. What has gone wrong? Why hasn’t the third ‘Avatar’ reached the 2 billion of the previous installments? Cameron’s team affirms, according to the same medium, that Disney launched the film in a very similar way to ‘The Sense of Water’, three years earlier, but with more margin: there was more time between the trailers and the premiere, which allowed some expectation to be generated. Added to this are commercial obstacles such as the fact that it is the longest film in the saga (197 minutes) and that there has been a certain lack of merchandising and other parallel actions. It all adds up to making it a film that could have performed better. California über alles. The uncertainty extends beyond the movies: Disney had announced the construction of an ‘Avatar’ themed area at Disney California Adventure, designed to complement the popular Pandora land that has existed since 2017 in Animal Kingdom (Florida). Construction was scheduled to begin in 2026 but the scheduled closure of the ‘Monsters Inc. Mike & Sulley to the Rescue’ attraction, necessary to begin work, has been postponed until 2027. One year late, for now. Disney parks expert Jim Shull told The Wrap that the franchise “as a cultural force is exhausted. No one is demanding to see more. If ‘Avatar 3’ had been a massive hit and people were clamoring for the fourth and fifth installments, that would change the equation. But there’s not much demand.” And he proposes a much more obvious alternative: expanding the ‘Zootopia’ areas, in line with the success of the ‘Zootopia: Hot Pursuit’ attraction at Shanghai Disneyland. In addition, there are logistical issues: the ‘Avatar’ water attraction required a complicated and expensive water treatment plant of its own. In Xataka | China saves ‘Avatar 3’: a good part of its billion in revenue comes from the only market that still goes to the movies

The most profitable action of the AI ​​revolution in Spain is not a software company. It is a construction company

by

We know Florentino Pérez ample by hire galactics and for his business successes, but a priori we would not easily relate him to the rise of AI. And by not doing so we would make a serious mistake, because the manager managed to see before anyone else that this was a huge opportunity… and he is taking advantage of it almost without us realizing it. what has happened. ACS is a construction company that doesn’t seem particularly fascinating. You lay bricks, asphalt and cement, but in 2025 the data tells a fascinating story. The company obtained a net profit of 950 million euros, 15% more than the previous year, and the engine of that growth was its American subsidiary, Turnerwhose contribution to the group’s results grew by 66.6% to 549 million euros. Turner doesn’t build flats or highways. Build data centers. And therein lies the crux of the matter. AI needs big construction companies. The transformation has not happened all at once. ACS has been betting on this niche for years with a simple but powerful thesis: AI requires enormous amounts of hardware, and that hardware needs equally huge buildings with cooling, energy and security. And ACS is dedicated to precisely that: to build large buildings. In Xataka Amazon is building an empire in Aragon: it has just paid 1.5 million to expand the electrical network to its fifth data center Florentino triumphs in the US. Turner arrived earlier and stronger. In 2025, ACS won several large-scale data center contracts, including the construction of a 902-megawatt center in Wisconsin as part of the Stargate program, and a stake in the $10 billion, one-megawatt Meta campus in Indiana. Those are conventional projects. They are cities whose inhabitants are servants for this new era of AI. Go for it all. As they point out in five daysdata centers generated more than 9 billion euros in sales during 2025, and ACS has already delivered more than 9 GW of capacity all over the world. That figure is extraordinary, especially considering that in all of Spain the installed capacity barely reaches 7 GW. The Spanish company that talks the least about AI has been silently one of its great beneficiaries for years. Very much in the style of Florentino Pérez, who usually maintains a relatively low profile and succeeds without making too much noise. Stocks on the rise. The market took a while to see it, but it has reacted forcefully. ACS shares have soared 115% in the last twelve months. Today they are close to 110 euros and mark historical highs while the construction sector advances (“only”) 20%. Group sales they reached 49,848 million euros, with the US and Canada contributing 63% of the total. ACS is in practice more of a North American technological infrastructure company than a Spanish construction company. It is listed on the Ibex and is chaired by one of the great football personalities, yes, but its current driving force is not here, but in the US and in the AI ​​fever. Build and Own. ACS is not limited to executing other people’s contracts: it also wants to be the owner of what it builds. In January 2026, the company completed an alliance with Global Infrastructure Partners, BlackRock subsidiaryto create a 50/50 joint venture to develop a global data center platform with an initial capacity of 1.7 GW. Already before had bought Dornanan Irish engineering company specialized in this type of infrastructure, for 436 million euros. ACS doesn’t just want to build AI data centers: it wants to own a piece of that infrastructure. The dollar as a great risk. One of the big problems with this project is the US currency. With more than 60% of its income in North America, each fall of the dollar against the euro is a setback for the Spanish multinational. The devaluation of the dollar is already greater than 10% after the last twelve months, and that has prevented Turner’s growth from being even greater. According to Renta 4 analysts, the “currency effect” subtracted more than five percentage points from the growth of net profit. And investors warn. Analysts themselves consider that the AI ​​market has already discounted a good part of future growth. At Bloomberg, the consensus is to maintain the stock with an average target price of 88 euros, which would imply a fall of 20% compared to current levels. This is what usually happens with good economic stories: when everyone knows them, they are no longer an opportunity. But at ACS they are optimistic. Although experts are cautious, at ACS they expect that spending on infrastructure quadruples from now to 2034. In fact, they expect that the benefits of 2026 will go even further than those of 2025 and exceed 1,000 million euros. If it achieves this, Florentino’s company will have completed one of the quietest and most profitable industrial transformations in the recent history of our country. {“videoId”:”x86aas4″,”autoplay”:false,”title”:”60% of the INTERNET passes through HERE: This is the LARGEST Data Processing Center in SPAIN”, “tag”:””, “duration”:”266″} Turner is ahead. According to Data Center MagazineTurner accumulated a backlog – a portfolio of confirmed orders – of $39 billion as of August 2025. It is the dominant construction company in this segment globally, although of course it has direct competitors such as DPR Construction, Holder, Skanska or AECOM. However, none have achieved the same concentration of contracts with the hyperscalers (Meta, Amazon and Microsoft). Turner has been building its reputation as a builder of this type of facility for more than a decade, and it is very difficult to replicate that advantage quickly. The irony of ACS and Spain. There is a geographical paradox in this success story: Spain and Europe have years debating on digital sovereignty, technological dependence and the need to build own infrastructure for not to be left out of the AI ​​revolution. While this debate is taking place, the Spanish company that is most building this infrastructure is doing so almost exclusively outside of Spain. As … Read more

that working more hours is profitable

by

Germany gained a reputation for being one of the most efficient labor markets with very high productivity. However, the successive crises of recent years they have shown their seams exposing their weaknesses. The Government of Friedrich Merz wants to change the rules so that people are compensated for working more hours and stop depending on social assistance. Today, many Germans prefer to have a shorter working day, because if they work morethey lose benefits and end up earning the same or less. Work more to earn less. In Germany, if someone with a low income receives a social benefit and accepts more hours of work, the authorities subtract that extra amount from their support salary. For example, someone who collects a subsidy (a Minimum Vital Income, for example), accepts a minijob (a part-time job of up to 600 euros per month that does not contribute to Social Security), the worker is left in a situation similar to the one he would have if he only collected the benefit without working. This discourages the effort to get a full-time job, because the net money at the end of the month barely changes or even goes down. The commission of experts of the Ministry of Labor explains this phenomenon in his latest reportand proposes reducing the impact of income on aid so that working more always pays off financially. Chancellor Merz was pronounced regarding the content of this report highlighting that “this report is the basis for all the additional reforms that we will carry out together in the coming years.” Objective: promote full-time work. The Government proposes several concrete ideas to promote full-time work and reduce the negative impact of mini-jobs, which do not generate sufficient contributions for pensions or insurance and hinder the full-time job creation. One of the proposals is to eliminate the exemptions for this type of precarious employment and raise those for jobs close to full-time to avoid “erroneous incentives.” “We want work to be worth it,” stood out Bärbel Bas, Federal Minister of Labor. Without justified reason, there is no part-time work. The conservatives of the CDU, party of Chancellor Merz, they propose reduce the cases in which companies must accept requests for reduction of working hours. Currently, any employee with more than six months’ seniority in a company with more than 15 workers can request reduced working hours without giving any reason and the company must accept it as long as there are no operational reasons that prevent it. It is what has been called “lifestyle” reduction“. The Government raises the possibility of limiting this reduction only to justifiable cases, such as childcare or training, eliminating free use that slows down productivity. The challenge of family conciliation. According to data According to the Federal Statistical Office and Eurostat, Germany has one of the shortest working hours in Europe and one of the highest rates of part time employment. In 2024, 29% of the active population worked like this, but among womenthis day model reaches 50.3%, compared to 13.4% of men. That is to say, although many mothers would like to work full-time, the lack of daycare or support to care for children forces them to choose mini-jobs of about 18 hours a week on average. This problem aggravates the labor shortage qualified, because it leaves almost half of employed women out of the full-time labor market. The reform aims to facilitate conciliation with more flexibility, but without reducing the pressure for more and more employees to go to work full time. In Xataka | Germany believes it has found the most German possible solution to its productivity problems: work more Image | Unsplash (Maheshkumar Painam, Spencer Davis)

It is proof that “buying to rent” in Spain is today very profitable

by

For years, renting in Spain represented more than just a quick, flexible and (relatively) commitment-free way to find housing. It was also the springboard for those who wanted to take the leap and become owners of their own home, the ‘anteroom’ through which one passed while gathering the stability and sufficient level of savings to buy an apartment. Not anymore. In the crazy market of 2026 rent has become a kind of limbo from which many families are unable to leavetrapped in an apparent contradiction: renting is much more expensive than getting a mortgage, but also more ‘accessible’. And that makes buying to rent increasingly attractive. What has happened? That the roles that until not so long ago seemed established in the Spanish real estate market are becoming blurred. We mentioned it before. For a long time, renting was more than just a quick and flexible way to find housing. It also served as a springboard for those who wanted to become owners. You rented, you saved and (after visiting the bank) you bought. The problem is that after price escalation of recent years and the deep imbalance between supply and demand, right now renting is much more expensive than mortgage. And there are signs that suggest that gap it is becoming entrenchedmaking it increasingly difficult for those who now live as tenants to take the leap, sign a loan and become owners of their own homes. CCAA Mortgage installment (4th Q 2025) Vari. Quarterly % Salary fee/cost Andalusia €709.5 -1.2% 34.6% Aragon €603.4 -7.6% 27% Asturias €632.3 +10.7% 27.9% Balearics €1,298.3 -7.8% 55% Canary Islands €740.8 +8.1% 38.6% Cantabria €660.3 +5.4% 31.5% Castile-La Mancha €554.8 +0.8% 26.9% Castile and León €540.9 +1.3% 25.7% Catalonia €866.5 +1.4% 34.1% Valencian C. €647.2 +4.3% 30.6% Estremadura €452.5 +2.2% 23.4% Galicia €635.7 +5% 30.6% Madrid €1,250.3 +2.7% 43.7% Murcia Region €504.4 -2.2% 24.8% Navarre €701.8 -0.4% 28% the Basque Country €838.4 +3% 31.8% Rioja €523.1 +1.8% 24.2% SPAIN €796.6 +1.3% 33.8% What does the data say? It is not easy to take a general ‘photograph’ of what is happening in Spain because the real estate market varies greatly from one region to another. Even between nearby cities. All in all, there are some interesting clues. In 2018 it was already possible to find ‘top’ areas in which rents exceeded mortgage payments. Today that is the general trend in most of the country. In 2022 an iAhorro study estimated that the monthly cost of a mortgage loan was 394 euros less than that of renting a home. In the middle of last year the same entity published another report which already placed this gap at €430, the difference between the average of rents (1,153) and loans (722). Those responsible for the study they warned at that time that the burdens of those who live on rent and those who do so with mortgages were following opposite directions. Tenants suffered the consequences of a broken market in which prices do not stop growing. In the second case (that of bank loans), iAhorro detected a decrease in payments, favored by the rate drop. Are there more current indicators? Yes. The SER has just published a new comparison which shows that, with ups and downs, that gap remains unchanged. According to the data it manages, the average cost of a mortgage was €796 per month at the end of 2025, while that of rent is around €1,184. That is, the gap between the two is around 400 euros. If we take as a reference the average for all of 2025 for mortgages (€769), the difference is even greater, €415. What does that mean? That on average people who live in a home they own and pay a mortgage to the bank spend about €4,800 less per year (12 monthly payments) than those who live in rented homes. The difference is even greater in highly stressed markets, such as the Balearic Islands or Catalonia. CCAA Average Rental Price 2025 Balearic Islands €1,643 Madrid €1,584 Catalonia €1,439 the Basque Country €1.1331 Canary Islands €1,113 Valencian C. €1,033 Navarre €1,028 Andalusia €933 Cantabria €811 Asturias €789 Aragon €778 Murcia €775 Galicia €766 Castile and León €734 Rioja €730 Castile-La Mancha €707 Estremadura €582 Spain €1,184 Where do the figures come from? The credit information is provided by the College of Registrars, which in its latest real estate statistics provides data on mortgage payments for the last quarter of 2025. What do your tables show? That at the end of last year the monthly payment in Spain stood at 796.6 euros, 1.3% more than the previous quarter. That is the average indicator at the state level, but things change when we analyze each region of Spain. The cheapest is Murcia, where the fee barely exceeds 500 euros. The most expensive are, by far, the Balearic Islands (1,298.3 euros) and Madrid (1,250.3). Lease data is based on Insurance rental observatorywhich indicates that in 2025 the average house price stood at €1,184. Once again, this is a state indicator that hides deep differences between autonomous communities. For example, the 1,643 euros paid on average by tenants in the Balearic Islands, 1,584 by those from Madrid or 1,439 by Catalans have little to do with the 707 in Castilla-La Mancha or 582 in Extremadura. Why this gap? Because although statistics show that both mortgages and rentals have become more expensive in the last year, the latter have done so more quickly. According to the College of Registrars, credit fees have increased 4.2%. In the case of income, Rental Insurance estimates an increase of almost 6%although there are other reports (this one from Idealista) which ensure that the interannual variation has been greater and exceeds 8%. The result is that tenants are forced to spend more time each time most of your income to housing, surpassing even 40%far above what is recommended. Why don’t they mortgage themselves? Because although right now it is more convenient to pay a bank than a landlord, not everyone … Read more

‘Baby Shark’ is the most successful song in YouTube history. It is also the least profitable of all

by

It has already gone somewhat out of fashion, at least in terms of omnipresence at children’s parties, birthdays and meetings with children, but in those transition years between the birth of YouTube and the current flood of children’s content generated by AIs and insane algorithms on the platform, ‘Baby Shark‘It was a monumental success. One that, however, did not make its creators millionaires, unlike what many of us came to believe. Baby Shark, the legend. The infectious original song, since its publication on YouTube in June 2016, has accumulated an average of more than 4.7 million daily views. Now it’s at 16.4 billion views. Success transcends borders: available in 25 different languages, the United States leads as the main market in number of views, while Brazil holds the record in number of “likes.” In 2020, it dethroned ‘Despacito’ as the most viewed content on YouTube. And the distance continues to grow: ‘Despacito’ remains at 8.86 billion views, and ‘Baby Shark’ already doubles it. As The Wall Street Journal saysto get an idea of ​​the dimensions of the achievement: the amount is approximately equivalent to the sum of Taylor Swift’s ten most popular music videos on the platform. There is no money. Despite the records, Pinkfong, the South Korean company that created the song, barely generated $67 million in 2024. The reason: child privacy restrictions drastically limit its advertising monetization. In September 2019, Google agreed to pay 170 million dollars to resolve accusations of systematic violations of the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA). The US Federal Trade Commission determined that the platform had collected cookies and IP addresses from children under 13 years of age to serve you personalized advertisingwithout obtaining parental consent. The sanction (136 million for the FTC, 34 million for the State of New York) represented the largest fine imposed until then for violations of this type. The investigation revealed that YouTube advertised itself among toy brands such as Mattel and Hasbro as a leader in reaching children ages 6 to 11. Changes for Baby Shark. This fine led to YouTube banning personalized advertising in “Made for Kids” content as of January 2020. Additionally, it disabled features such as comments, subscription notifications, playlists, and live chat. The economic impact was notable: Children’s content creators reduced their production by 18% and views fell by 20%. Profits plummeted between 60% and 90% compared to content with personalized advertising. Others affected. Other big names in children’s entertainment also saw stars with YouTube’s decision. Cocomelonwhich has two of the ten videos confirmed significant revenue losses after the removal of personalized advertising. Chris Williams, co-founder of pocket.watch (a digital studio specialized in children’s content), said that the main channels in the sector, such as the Indian ChuChu TV, had experienced drops between 50% and 60% in their advertising revenue since January 2020. To survive. Faced with monetization restrictions, Pinkfong has built a diversified business model where YouTube advertising represents only a fraction of its revenue. According to data from the first half of 202568% of its sales now come from content distribution (YouTube, but also Netflix and live shows), while merchandising contributes 15%, licensing 10%, and the remaining segment corresponds to video games and other digital products. This allowed the company to achieve a profit of approximately 13 million dollars in 2024 on total revenues of 67 million. Of course, its CEO has already spoken of integrating artificial intelligence and data analysis in content creation. No more viral bombs. In Xataka | Baby Shark (doo doo doo doo doo doo): when a children’s song also sweeps the stock market

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.