The global agricultural landscape is witnessing a series of significant shifts that are reshaping export dynamics and supply chains. America’s abundant harvests are playing a crucial role in balancing the shortfall from the Black Sea region, effectively stabilising corn prices worldwide. However, geopolitical tensions are also exerting their influence, with Russia managing to capture a substantial market share in the wheat trade despite facing sanctions. On the weather front, erratic conditions, ranging from extreme weather events to droughts in key producing regions such as the US, Brazil, and Argentina, are casting a shadow over grain crop yields. Yet, challenges persist on the production cost front, with rising fertiliser prices impacting corn cultivation.
Extreme weather, fertilizer prices and geopolitics are significantly transforming the global agricultural commodity market. Edward Nikulin, weather model expert at Mind Money, explains how each of these factors affects the price of wheat and corn.
As Q3 2025 begins, global grain markets are supported by strong harvests in the EU, India, Brazil, and the U.S., offsetting losses from drought and war. As I mentioned in my Preface, Russia remains a key wheat exporter despite sanctions. Demand looks healthy, but prices stay subdued due to cautious buying and high input costs. As always, futures remain sensitive to weather and policy risks.
Wheat: Global Supply Recovering
Global wheat production is on track for a strong year in 2025, rebounding from last season’s weather-hit output. The International Grains Council now forecasts world wheat output at 808 million tonnes, up slightly from earlier estimates and at a record high. This optimism is underpinned by bumper harvests from several key producers. In the European Union, soft wheat production is projected around 128 million tonnes for 2025/26, a 15% surge from last year’s drought-affected crop. India is also contributing to global abundance with a record wheat harvest of roughly 115–117 million tonnes, thanks to higher plantings and favourable temperature conditions. Even Russia and Ukraine benefited from a mild winter and adequate spring moisture, setting the stage for another large Black Sea wheat crop. All in all, Russia’s wheat exports remain solid, with Russian cash wheat offered around $225/tonne, underscoring its competitive edge on the global market.
Not all grain producers experienced a smooth season, though. Thus, China’s wheat belt faced severe spring drought and heat, with some crops being halved. Though the 2025 output may be the lowest in seven years, strong irrigation and reserves could limit the impact. China’s imports remain muted. In India, the heat and dryness had a minimal impact on a record crop but highlighted the ongoing weather risks.
In the United States, the winter wheat harvest has experienced significant fluctuations in weather conditions. Early in the season, the Central and Southern Plains endured severe heat and drought, only to be drenched by heavy rains and floods in late May. In Kansas, Oklahoma and Texas – heartlands of Hard Red Winter wheat – downpours turned fields muddy and even caused localised flooding, delaying the harvest in many areas. Canada experienced improved moisture in June, which stabilised its wheat prospects, and farmers there expanded wheat acreage slightly. By late June, only about 20% of Kansas’s wheat had been harvested (versus nearly half by the same time last year) as farmers waited for fields to dry. Argentina is recovering from a drought-hit cycle last year; recent dry weather improved planting conditions, and the government extended reduced export taxes to encourage wheat sowing.
Wheat trade flows are shifting, as I mentioned above, with Russian exports remaining strong, supplying North Africa and the Middle East despite sanctions. At the same time, the Black Sea conflict limits Ukraine’s exports. Ample global supply and low prices benefit traditional importers, but China’s muted buying, due to large reserves, removes a key source of demand. Overall, global wheat demand is at record highs, although growth can be characterised as steady rather than rapid.
In June 2025, wheat futures prices experienced notable volatility, fluctuating between approximately $524 and $574 per bushel. The month began with relatively stable prices near $535, but by June 7–9, prices began to rise gradually amid concerns about adverse weather conditions in the U.S. Plains and parts of Europe. This upward trend accelerated sharply in mid-June, peaking around $574 per bushel on June 20. The rally was driven by mounting speculation and reports of excessive rainfall delaying the wheat harvest in southern U.S. states along with heat stress affecting crops in parts of Central Europe. From June 23 onward, wheat futures steadily declined, hitting a local low of about $520 per bushel by June 27. In the final days of the month, prices showed signs of stabilisation and modest recovery, closing at around $532.23 per bushel on July 1.
Corn: Big Harvests and Healthy Demand Growth
The corn market faces strong global production but ongoing weather risks. Brazil’s 2024/25 crop is set to hit a record 128–150 million tonnes, with good growing conditions despite late harvest delays. Argentina is recovering from last year’s drought, and U.S. output is also expected to be high, with 91 million acres planted and favorable early-season weather. NDVI data shows strong crop health in the U.S., Brazil, and Argentina. However, parts of Eastern Europe and Central Asia show weaker crop vigor, and dryness in the U.S. western Corn Belt remains a concern. July–August weather will be critical for final yields.
Strong global corn demand is keeping pace with rising production. U.S. exports have surged, led by buyers such as China and Mexico, which have tightened domestic stocks to around 1.8 billion bushels. Ethanol output is also supporting demand. Globally, corn use is growing for feed and industrial purposes. China may import more if domestic prices rise, while South Africa and India expect solid crops, which will boost local supply. The global supply-demand balance has improved, with major exporters rebuilding stocks.
In June 2025, corn futures prices trended steadily downward, reflecting strong global supply expectations and ongoing bearish sentiment in the market. The month began with prices near $449 per bushel, but after a brief spike, the market quickly began to retreat. Throughout the first half of the month, prices hovered between $435 and $445. Starting around June 20, prices began a sharper descent, driven by improving crop conditions in the U.S. Corn Belt and aggressive selling by speculative funds. By June 25, corn futures hit a monthly low near $410 per bushel. This decline was further exacerbated by fund positioning, as managed money held one of the largest net short positions in nearly a year. Toward the end of the month, the market attempted a modest recovery, briefly rising above $420, but gains were quickly capped, and the contract closed at $414.05 per bushel on July 1.
Edward Nikulin, a weather model expert at Mind Money, is a proficient quantitative researcher and data scientist with more than 8 years of experience in market modeling, systematic trading, and AI-driven analytics. He is the author of the weather model for proprietary trading strategies of Mind Money.
It’s not difficult to construct an argument to suggest that 2025 could be the year when eCommerce and gaming cease running parallel with each other and finally collide in a way that could easily be seismic in the way that it redefines both industries.
Although these are two distinct worlds, with one centered on buying, and the other on playing, it’s becoming abundantly clear that they are becoming increasingly intertwined.
If you run a platform where you need access to the best social gaming merchant account, you will probably have witnessed a certain level of fusion already. In a nutshell, as digital economies mature and gamers demand more immersive, monetizable experiences, that adjustment in mindset suggests we’re on the brink of a serious shift.
When you stop to think about it, the signs are already here. Virtual storefronts, in-game purchases, NFTs, gamified shopping, and the rise of platforms that blend commerce and entertainment, are all classic pointers to one inevitable conclusion. We’re witnessing a convergence that’s accelerating at pace.
The question is what’s driving the shift, and what will the landscape look like when eCommerce and gaming become fully intertwined?
Gamer and consumer becoming one
In essence, what we are seeing is the gamer is now the consumer, and the consumer is the gamer. Gaming isn’t just mainstream, it’s a powerful and dominant force.
Just consider the numbers for 2024. That was the landmark year where the value of the global gaming market broke through the $200 billion barrier. That’s a number that means it dwarfs film and music combined.
But there is a catch. Current day gamers are also high-value consumers. That means they’re digitally native, comfortable with microtransactions, and tend to be loyal to brands that engage them meaningfully.
This is a trend that retailers are taking note of. For that reason, in 2025, we’re likely to see more brands embedding themselves inside games, not just as ads, but as part of the experience. Think branded items that offer gameplay value, exclusive drops tied to real-world purchases, or even entire shopping experiences built into virtual spaces.
Virtual storefronts expected to go to the next level
Online stores are a familiar aspect of the retail landscape, and have been for years. But this year is ushering in a new breed of so-called virtual storefronts. These are immersive, interactive spaces inside games, and operate on metaverse-like platforms.
Roblox and Fortnite are already testing this with branded events and digital fashion. But as VR and AR mature and platforms like Unreal Engine 5 make photorealistic experiences more accessible, virtual shopping could definitely hit its stride.
Imagine a scenario where you walk into a Nike flagship store inside your favorite massive multiplayer online game (MMO), trying on a virtual sneaker skin, then having the real pair shipped to your door. That’s the reality of what’s possible, right now.
Gamification of eCommerce is set to take off in a big way
Gamification in online retail isn’t a new phenomenon, but it’s often surface-level, with things like loyalty points, spin-to-win discounts, amongst other things. However, 2025 could be a real game-changer. You can now expect a deeper, more meaningful integration of game mechanics into eCommerce.
This means unique motivations such as experience points for shopping, leaderboards tied to exclusive product drops, plus challenges and quests that unlock limited-edition items.
Retailers won’t just be selling, they’ll also be engaging customers in dynamic, replayable systems that drive return visits and social sharing.
Add the power of AI into the mix and every customer journey could feel like a personalized game.
Streamers and influencers are transformed into retail channels
2025 could prove to be the tipping point where influencers won’t just sell merch, they’ll be the storefront too.
Streaming platforms are increasingly adding “live shopping” tools, and creators are quickly learning how to monetize their audiences in real time. A good example of this potential would be a Fortnite player dropping into a sponsored branded island, with a pop-up shop tied to what they’re wearing.
The trust economy around creators will almost inevitably drive more peer-to-peer sales.
AI-Powered commerce inside games
Going back to the aforementioned influence of Artificial intelligence. It’s important to understand that this is the silent engine behind this whole shift.
AI has the ability to enable hyper-personalized in-game shopping. It will also drive conversational commerce, which is voice-activated shopping inside virtual worlds. In that scenario, if you want to buy an upgrade, you just have to say it.
Whatever you want, your AI companion can place the order.
Many industry insiders are saying that AI will optimize pricing, predict trends, and power recommendation engines in a far more nuanced way than anything we’ve seen in eCommerce to this point.
New Revenue Models and Economic Ecosystems
As games continue to evolve into platforms, they are no longer not just products. With that in mind, developers are exploring new revenue streams, and In-game commerce is set to be one of the biggest.
We’re witnessing the rise of game worlds as commercial hubs. These will be places where third-party sellers can set up shop, and where users can create and monetize assets. This creates a platform where the game acts as a social layer for commerce.
You will see that games like Star Atlas, Sandbox, and Otherside are already building these worlds. 2025 could prove to be the pivotal moment when mainstream titles start doing the same.
The big picture points to a redefinition of both industries
In 2025, eCommerce won’t just be about convenience, it will also have a clear focus on engagement, immersion, and identity. Gaming will no longer just be about entertainment, it will be much more than that. It will be a marketplace, a showroom, a social network, and a full-fledged economy with a very bright future ahead.
Everything points to these changes being way more than a trend. It’s a permanent shift in how people interact with brands, how they perceive value, and how they spend time and money in digital spaces.
2025 is likely to become a year of evolution for eCommerce and gaming. It has all the hallmarks of the beginning of a dramatic convergence. We’re not talking about product placement or digital gimmicks. We’re talking about thriving new economies, new behaviors, and entirely new expectations.
At approximately 2:10 Iran Standard Time (IRST) on June 22, 2025, U.S. B-2 Spirit bombers dropped one dozen 13,600kg GBU-57 (bunker buster) bombs on Iran’s nuclear enrichment facilities. Tomahawk cruise missiles were launched earlier from a submarine, striking Iran’s nuclear technology center, a decision of enormous consequential risk, not only for the Middle East and America but for the world at risk of a tenth member joining the nuclear club. Could the bombing stop Iran’s nuclear intentions or brazen its leader to move faster to the finish? The answers are under debate.
Nuclear weapons anywhere and in the control of anyone are a threat to everywhere and everyone on our planet. Existence of even a single nuclear weapon is a continuing danger for humanity as a whole.
– Ambassador Anwarul K. Chowdhury UN Under-Secretary-General (2002-7)
Donald Trump’s logistics problem is that he sees every negotiation as a simple real estate business deal
How should one address the events of the past few days, weeks, and months of Middle East confrontations, in particular the U.S. bombing of Iran, labeled “Operation Midnight Hammer”, that supposedly aimed at ending that country’s ongoing nuclear weapon advancement? I neither support nor condone the bombing. The issue for me is that Donald Trump’s logistics problem is that he sees every negotiation as a simple real estate business deal, even floating notions of a risky Iran regime change. If his fanciful notions of regime change or instability transpire, the outcome could be better or, more likely, worse, because Iran has a tightly controlled government. Even if Trump follows his other fantasy ideas – his deal to lift some sanctions and access to Iran’s frozen assets and offer billions in investments for non-enrichment nuclear programs – it will not work without vigilant monitoring of the International Atomic Energy Agency.
For most of my articles on war, I have been treating the field abstractly, trying to avoid specific wars, unless they stand as contextual examples. I attempt to filter the political components of war from the core understanding of what makes, continues, and ends a war. The difficulty is that, in essence, all wars are political, yet possibly advanced by primordial body-brain waves of amino acid entanglements, drawn to the grip of the animalistic fight. Watch lion cubs play by fierce wrestling with their siblings. Like the human child throwing sand at another in the sandbox, lions play for their future call in the wild. War is no different than invented brutal gladiator sports, with cheerleaders for or against a side. It is the unfortunate part we play as being human.
When a columnist such as I writes about a war in progress, the difficulty is keeping up with the news. So, here I am, hearing the pings on my laptop that loudly call attention to the breaking CNN news that Iran fired missiles aimed at U.S. bases in Qatar and Iraq. A few hours later, there is an announcement of a ceasefire between Iran and Israel. Trump announced that Iran and Israel “fully agreed” to a “Complete and Total CEASEFIRE,” and yet, minutes later, Israel claims that Iran broke the ceasefire by launching missiles targeting Be’er Sheva, the fourth-most-populous metropolitan area of Israel. Now, it seems that the Iran / Israel ceasefire is holding with cautious hope, though Tehran asserts it will not give up its nuclear program. Following that, there was a U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) report leak contradicting Trump, confessing that the bombing had not halted Iran’s nuclear program but rather set it back only a few months. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has no reports of off-site radiation. Rafael Grossi, Director General of the IAEA, says Iran’s highly enriched uranium is likely to have been packed in concealed containers and moved to an undisclosed location before the bombings.[1] On June 26, Trump denied that, writing on his Truth Social, “The cars and small trucks at the site were those of concrete workers trying to cover up the top of the shafts. Nothing was taken out of the facility. Would take too long, too dangerous, and very heavy and hard to move!” [2] One day later, Grossi claims in an interview with Margaret Brennan on CBS Face The Nation, “The capacities they have are there. They can have, you know, in a matter of months, I would say, a few cascades of centrifuges spinning and producing enriched uranium, or less than that. But as I said, frankly speaking, one cannot claim that everything has disappeared and there is nothing there.” [3]
So, it is likely that Iran’s nuclear equipment and facilities were not completely destroyed and that its stocks of highly enriched uranium are in storage somewhere not touched by the U.S. bombings. Even the DIA agrees. Next came other reports from a different U.S. intelligence agency suggesting that the impact was severe. How are we to understand any of this when, minute by minute, we encounter contradictions? And so, with pressured truths or impulsive vagaries hitting the news while avoiding evidence, I wait for more information that comes slowly in mini-paragraphs that tell almost nothing. Even the most seasoned experts on those matters have antipodal opinions. In time, we will learn the truth surrounding the effects of the U.S. bombing and whether the shaky ceasefire will hold or break as most ceasefires do. Though the extent of the damage question is debatable, the newest classified briefings acknowledge that the U.S. strikes did not eliminate all of the Iranian nuclear materials; however, it walked back Trump boasting, “spectacular military success,” and that complete and total obliteration was never part of the mission.
When reported facts change by the hour, it is almost impossible to compile accurate and reliable information and relay objective commentary
Reporters report current events factually, and so do columnists. The difference is that a columnist is a specialist with connections to higher levels of issue-focused expertise and analysis. Their journalism consists of commentaries that relay explanations, opinions, and interpretations from layers of professional specialized intelligence writings and years of anticipatory assessments. War is complicated. We have competent expert reporters who gather, translate, and compress the stories they hear and learn to provide objective observation about newsworthy events, but it is not their job to predict the consequences of any actions that could go wrong in an ongoing war. Predicting is a job for primary experts; mine is to comprehend, compound, and clarify those expert points of view. When reported facts change by the hour, it is almost impossible to compile accurate and reliable information and relay objective commentary, especially when the only direct sources are coming from government agencies that lock their assessments of events in classified information. In this case, two agencies have classified information that is contradictory.
“Suggestion, folks: it is the middle of the night in Iran. We have no battle damage assessment. We have a tweet. We will know more things soon and likely not know things for a while longer. Asking questions is fair, but answers fleeting. Hot takes exciting but not diagnostic.”[4]
Richard Nephew, Senior Research Scholar at Columbia University at the Center on Global Energy Policy
Nephew’s Foreign Affairs January 2025 article “A Last Chance for Iran” reckons there are serious risks in trading negotiations for bombings. It probes what could happen if a future attack on Iran’s nuclear subterranean tunnels is not successful. That a bombing did happen, it is difficult to believe a president who claims the U.S. bombing was a “spectacular military success” and “completely and totally obliterated” Iran’s nuclear enrichment facilities after Donald Trump made 30,573 false or misleading claims as president, according to The Washington Post.[5] There are substantial risks, both for a diplomatic agreement and a military strike that might cause a long war with a country that has significant military resources, including proxy combatants who will do Iran’s terrorist bidding without the loss of Iranian lives.
Americans show the usual split on the question of whether to bomb Iran; 56 percent of Americans disapprove.[6] They are asking what happens next, where will this new war go, and how long will it last. None of those questions have clear answers. For sure, we know that there will at least be a shake-up of the Middle East that could result in indefinitely long chaos, a substantial upheaval of U.S. markets (from shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, Gulf of Oman, the Arabian Sea, or quite possibly the Gulf of Aden to disrupt the global supply chain), and likely the balance between U.S. congregational and executive powers (given the division of American voters before the 2026 elections). What would happen if the bombings were neither spectacular nor a complete and total obliteration of Iranian nuclear enrichment facilities but simply delayed its nuclearization for at most another year? If that turns out to be the case, it will answer the question – was Donald Trump’s decision to start a war a mistake when there was still a window of diplomacy?
US B-2 Spirit bomber. Photo by USAF Public Domain
This new war could have been planned with intelligence. Or, it could have been an overnight inspiration of a few powerful figures, politicians, or hawk lobbyists who emotionally believe in a deterrent mantra, peace through strength, because they also believe their forces are ready with enough intelligence to foresee five steps ahead – yet cannot, because all wars go through surprising hoops.
Operation Midnight Hammer Public Domain
In reading expert opinions in journals and news sources from Foreign Affairs to United Nations reports, my thoughts wander through the wilderness of expert judgments on recent bombing repercussions that we cannot predict. In war, consequences surface in unexpected directions. While few paths lead to favorable outcomes, more lead us to darkness. When I came across Robin Wright’s article in The Atlantic, “Can Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and Iran’s Theocracy, Survive This War?” I chose to believe that we are walking down the wrong path. [7] I hope to be wrong. She had met Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of Iran, in 1987, and found him to be, in her words, “[Lacking] charisma, worldliness, and intellectual depth. He mumbled his way through inflammatory rhetoric.” [8]
In war, consequences surface in unexpected directions. While few paths lead to favorable outcomes, more lead us to darkness.
Wright sees the issue as if Iran is locked in a culture of “military prowess”, and doubts that Khamenei and the Islamic theocracy will survive a serious military onslaught. That leaves us with the dilemma of whether we are on the right path forward with either war or diplomacy when Khamenei aims for Iranian dominance of the Middle East. Will it rebuild its nuclear weapons project? The answers are not known. We can listen to the opinions of the most seasoned experts. Ellie Geranmayeh, deputy head of the Middle East and North Africa program at the European Council on Foreign Relations, tells us, “Khamenei as a leader may not survive this war—either because he is taken out of the scene through an assassination or because the war ends with such a disastrous outcome for the country that he will be forced to step down, … [and] likely prefer being taken down as a martyr rather than going down in history as the Iranian leader who capitulated with a gun to his head.” Geranmayeh claims that Iran is hinting it will suspend future cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and inspections regarding its nuclear program. Iran believes that a nuclear deterrent is the best way for it to protect itself because it cannot win a war with its conventional weapons. So, last January, its government threatened to withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) to avoid oversight of nuclear weapons development while it continues to produce weapons-grade highly enriched uranium.
Others say that blocking Iran’s nuclear weapon advancement cannot be achieved by military means. Only peace and diplomacy can stop Iran from developing a nuclear weapon. That view comes from Jennifer Kavanaugh, Senior Fellow and Director of Military Analysis at Defense Priorities, and Rosemary Kelanic, Director of the Middle East Program at Defense Priorities, insisting that U.S. airpower alone cannot fully destroy uranium stockpiles deep under nuclear sites. Besides, there is speculation that Iran’s centrifuges are transportable and hidden. And still others say that almost certainly Iran will seek retribution and that the United States could suddenly become entangled in deeply wide escalations with unavoidable risky consequences. All it takes is one U.S. soldier killed.
The preeminent question is: What are the plans for a military counterattack after Iran’s reprisals? Since there are no guarantees of eliminating all nuclear material, Iran could eventually build and swiftly use a nuclear weapon in either revenge or control over the Middle East. According to Nephew, Iran already has the essential elements of bomb-making material that could be assembled quickly. “That is why the 2015 nuclear deal,” broken by Trump in his first term in office, “or the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) focused on preventing nuclear material acquisition rather than on weaponization equipment or missiles.”[9]
Some experts, including Nephew, believe there are still options for a diplomatic solution. But Trump’s impatience and worldview are a barrier that confronts negotiations that often take years to click. Experts in fields surrounding foreign policy and affairs may offer productive advice, yet they are not time travelers returning from the future with oracular intelligence.
So, here I am, confused in head- and tail-winds of vacillating opinions, while understanding that the Middle East is not an area to risk consequences that can involve a world that depends on supply routes and avoidance of terror.
Joseph Mazuris an Emeritus Professor of Mathematics at Emerson College’s Marlboro Institute for Liberal Arts & Interdisciplinary Studies. He is a recipient of fellowships from the Guggenheim, Bogliasco, and Rockefeller Foundations, and the author of eight acclaimed popular nonfiction books. His latest book is The Clock Mirage: Our Myth of Measured Time (Yale).
At Uber, the adoption of generative AI is not just a matter of strategy or innovation—it’s a reflection of culture. For Andrea Monllau, Senior Manager of Americas Strategy for Uber, the shift to embracing Gen AI has been as much about people as it has been about platforms. Speaking from her perspective as both a strategist and a champion for transformation, Monllau in her interview with me describes a workplace where curiosity is encouraged, expertise is shared, and experimentation is the norm.
Uber’s relative youth and deep tech roots have made it fertile ground for early Gen AI adoption. “We were born in the era of data and technology,” Monllau notes. That gives Uber an edge over legacy organizations still wrestling with digital transformation. Across the company, teams are not just exploring Gen AI—they are actively embedding it into their workflows. Within the Places team, which oversees workplace strategy and corporate real estate, Gen AI isn’t just a shiny new tool. It’s a foundational component of how work is evolving.
Prompting Parties and Peer Support
The story of Gen AI at Uber isn’t one of top-down mandates or rigid programs. Instead, it’s one of grassroots learning and community-driven innovation. Team members are not only using tools like ChatGPT and Gemini—they’re coaching each other in how to use them better.
“We call them prompting parties,” says Monllau, with a smile. These informal sessions are designed for collective problem-solving. Someone might share a prompt that didn’t deliver the desired outcome, and others will jump in to tweak and improve it. This shared iteration helps people move from frustration to fluency.
As the team’s skills have grown, so has the ambition of their projects. Colleagues are building their own chatbots, then sharing them with others. “I created this chatbot, here’s what it does—if it’s useful, feel free to use it,” Monllau explains. The community has moved beyond sharing successes to co-creating solutions. It’s not about doing the work for someone else—it’s about showing them how, and empowering them to grow.
Peer mentorship is central to this ethos. Monllau describes turning to colleagues with deeper technical knowledge and deliberately inviting others into those conversations. “If I don’t know something, I don’t ask privately. I ask publicly. Because if I have the question, someone else probably does too.” This intentional vulnerability fosters psychological safety and speeds collective learning.
Making Adoption Inevitable
When it came to rolling out Gen AI more broadly, Monllau and her team leaned into two messages: the opportunity and the inevitability. The opportunity is clear—greater efficiency, faster analysis, and more time for creative, strategic thinking. But the inevitability is just as compelling. “If you were an accountant when Excel came out and you didn’t use it, you got left behind,” Monllau says. Gen AI, she believes, is that level of disruption.
To get everyone on board, Uber deployed enterprise-wide trainings that mixed technical demos with practical use cases. “We blocked time on calendars and said, this training is highly encouraged—make sure you take it.” These sessions provided the groundwork for individual teams to begin experimenting and sharing on their own.
The goal wasn’t perfection—it was participation. People were encouraged to speak openly about their experiments, no matter how small. When someone used Gen AI in a new way, they were celebrated. These stories helped normalize the technology and built momentum across the team.
Navigating Risks and Building Trust
Of course, Gen AI isn’t without its risks. Bias, hallucinations, and data security are real concerns. Uber addresses these through a combination of policy and practice. The company classifies data into different levels, with strict rules about what can be shared with AI platforms.
But the biggest safeguard, Monllau says, is human judgment. “AI is a support tool—it helps you accelerate, but it doesn’t replace you.” Teams use Gen AI to generate initial drafts or compile scenario data, but they still come together to analyze and decide. “We believe there isn’t one answer to anything. AI offers a perspective, not a conclusion.”
That collaborative mindset applies to managing bias as well. By sharing outputs, challenging assumptions, and reviewing results together, Uber’s teams keep human insight at the center of AI use. It’s a model of augmented intelligence rather than artificial replacement.
The Road Ahead for Gen AI at Uber
Looking forward, Monllau sees Gen AI accelerating the pace of work and elevating the type of work humans do. “We’ll automate repetitive tasks and use AI to get us to the first draft faster. Then we come together to do the thinking, the fun part.” For corporate real estate—a traditionally conservative sector—this shift could be transformative.
She’s particularly excited about how Gen AI is attracting new players to the space. “We’re seeing entrants from outside the traditional real estate world—people with tech backgrounds, new ideas. That’s healthy. It challenges us to move beyond the old-school way of doing things.”
Even as the tools evolve, Monllau emphasizes that the heart of Uber’s success with Gen AI lies in its culture. A culture where asking questions is safe, sharing knowledge is expected, and no one is left behind. “This is new for everyone,” she says. “We should be helping each other.”
In a world racing toward digital transformation, Uber’s approach stands out. It’s not just about deploying technology. It’s about building communities of learning around that technology—where every chatbot, every prompt, and every question is part of a shared journey forward.
President Donald Trump scored a key legislative victory today after the House approved his sweeping tax and spending overhaul, setting the stage for a high-profile signing ceremony at the White House on Independence Day.
The bill, which includes broad tax relief and significant increases in defense funding, passed after weeks of intense lobbying by Republican leaders who worked to unite their fractured ranks behind Trump’s ambitious second-term agenda.
Calling it his “big, beautiful bill,” Trump is expected to sign the legislation Thursday at 5 p.m. ET as part of Fourth of July festivities at the White House.
“This is a huge win for American workers, families and our national strength,” Trump said in a brief statement, crediting GOP lawmakers for delivering a long-promised overhaul.
The multi-trillion-dollar package includes deep reductions to federal safety net programs, marking the largest such cuts in decades. These reductions helped offset new spending on national security and expanded tax breaks for businesses and high earners.
Democrats fiercely opposed the bill. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries set a new modern record for the longest House floor speech, using his unlimited “magic minute” to speak for hours against the measure in an effort to delay its passage.
Despite the resistance, the Republican-led House advanced the bill late Wednesday, giving Trump the first major policy win of his second term and setting up a contentious battle over its long-term economic and social impact.
Urban development is entering a new era, driven by the rising influence of private equity infrastructure funds and the transformative power of tokenization. As cities expand and modernize, the demand for sustainable, large-scale infrastructure is growing rapidly. Traditionally, these long-term projects were funded by institutional investors with high entry barriers and low liquidity.
Tokenization is transforming the landscape by enabling fractional ownership, enhancing visibility, and enabling investors to trade digital tokens backed by real-world infrastructure assets. This innovation is making private equity infrastructure funds more accessible and flexible while aligning with the long timelines of urban development.
In this blog, we examine how tokenized infrastructure funds are transforming investment models and facilitating the development of smarter, more resilient cities.
Infrastructure Investing: The Traditional Model
Historically, private equity infrastructure funds required substantial capital commitments and had limited liquidity. They invested in transportation, energy, utilities, and communication networks, offering stable but long-term returns. While suited for pension funds and large institutions, this model restricted access to a broader pool of investors. Moreover, the rigid structure of traditional funds often made them less adaptable to changing economic conditions or investor preferences.
Tokenization now introduces a more dynamic investment structure. By digitizing ownership into tokens, these funds can maintain their long-term focus while offering more flexible investor participation. This is especially important for infrastructure, where the timeline from planning to completion can span decades. Investors benefit from increased liquidity without compromising the stability that infrastructure assets typically provide.
How Tokenization Works in Infrastructure Funds
Tokenization involves using blockchain technology to convert asset ownership into digital tokens. In private equity infrastructure funds, this means that investors can own a fractional stake in a fund or a specific asset, which is recorded securely on a distributed ledger. Each token can represent a legally recognized stake when structured with the appropriate legal wrapper, and smart contracts help automate compliance, payouts, and reporting.
This innovation enables multiple benefits. First, it lowers the investment threshold, allowing more participants to engage with infrastructure as an asset class. Second, it introduces the potential for secondary markets, improving liquidity for what has historically been an illiquid investment. Third, it increases clarity, with real-time visibility into asset performance and ownership.
For fund managers, tokenization simplifies capital raising, streamlines administrative processes, and can even support global investor participation while complying with local regulations.
Enabling Smarter Urban Development
The infrastructure needs of modern cities extend beyond roads and bridges. They include digital connectivity, renewable energy, water management, and climate-resilient construction. Private equity infrastructure funds play a crucial role in funding these critical areas, aligning long-term investment capital with urban transformation goals.
Tokenized funds enhance this alignment. By increasing accessibility and capital flow, tokenized private equity infrastructure funds enable more projects to move forward without relying excessively on public funding. Urban planners and developers benefit from diversified capital sources, while investors gain exposure to projects that have a real-world impact.
These funds also often incorporate ESG frameworks into their investment strategy, ensuring that urban growth is not only fast and efficient but also environmentally responsible and socially inclusive.
Increasing Liquidity in a Traditionally Illiquid Market
One of the most significant limitations of traditional private equity infrastructure funds has been the lack of liquidity. Investors commit capital for many years, with few options to exit early. This can deter potential participants who seek more flexibility or need capital in the short to medium term.
Tokenization changes this by enabling ownership units to be digitally issued and transferred more efficiently within compliant platforms. The secondary market introduces optionality and flexibility without undermining the fund’s long-term strategy. Investors can buy and sell their stakes more freely, while fund managers still maintain control over asset performance and governance.
Increased liquidity also improves pricing transparency and enhances portfolio diversification opportunities for those looking to balance long- and short-term investment horizons.
Bridging Infrastructure and Innovation
Smart cities require smart capital. As urban systems become more connected and data-driven, infrastructure investment must also evolve. Tokenized private equity infrastructure funds bring the necessary innovation to match the digital needs of urban development.
Blockchain technology used in tokenization supports better data management, investor reporting, and regulatory compliance. It creates an ecosystem where each stakeholder, from fund managers to regulators, can access consistent, verified information. This enhances trust and operational efficiency, making infrastructure investing more clear and agile.
Moreover, tokenization opens the door to new investor classes, including family offices, high-net-worth individuals, and eventually even retail investors, further expanding the capital available for urban transformation.
Regulatory and Institutional Momentum
As tokenization gains traction, regulators are beginning to shape policies around digital asset ownership, smart contracts, and investor protections. This is a necessary step to ensure that tokenized private equity infrastructure funds operate within safe, compliant frameworks.
Institutional interest is also growing. As regulatory clarity improves, more established fund managers are experimenting with tokenized fund structures, validating the model and setting industry benchmarks. These developments will help scale adoption and bring tokenized infrastructure investing closer to mainstream capital markets.
With the support of both the private and public sectors, tokenization is on track to become a core component of how infrastructure is financed, developed, and owned.
Infrastructure Investing for a Digital Future
The future of urban development lies at the intersection of capital, technology, and sustainability. Private equity infrastructure funds have long provided the financial strength needed to build cities, and tokenization is now unlocking a new dimension of accessibility, visibility, and liquidity. This combination is making infrastructure investing more inclusive, efficient, and aligned with the modern challenges of urban development.
As tokenized fund models evolve, they will empower investors to engage with long-term projects more flexibly while cities gain access to the capital needed for resilient and inclusive growth. For those looking to unlock the power of tokenization in infrastructure investing, platforms like rootVX are helping make high-quality, real-world assets more accessible through secure, digital ownership structures.
President Donald Trump said Wednesday the United States has reached a trade agreement with Vietnam, just days before his self-imposed July 9 deadline for new tariff actions.
In a post on Truth Social, Trump said the U.S. would impose a 20 percent tariff on Vietnamese imports and a 40 percent levy on products routed through Vietnam from other countries. In return, Trump claimed Hanoi agreed to give the U.S. “total access” to its domestic markets, allowing American goods to enter tariff-free.
“This is a big win for the U.S.,” Trump wrote. “We now have ZERO tariffs going into Vietnam, while theirs go up.”
Vietnamese officials have yet to publicly confirm the deal, though state media reported that President Trump and Communist Party General Secretary Tô Lâm spoke by phone to finalize what was described as a “framework” agreement. Vietnam reportedly asked Washington to recognize it as a market economy and to lift export controls on sensitive technologies.
Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick clarified that the 40 percent tariff targets transshipping — when other countries route goods through Vietnam to bypass trade restrictions.
The announcement comes as the White House races to lock in deals before Trump’s 90-day pause on tariff hikes expires next week. The administration has warned that without new agreements, rates could jump to as high as 50 percent.
U.S. imports from Vietnam have surged in recent years, hitting $137 billion in 2024, according to Commerce Department data. The trade deficit with Vietnam also widened to $123 billion, ranking as the third-largest gap behind China and Mexico.
Investors reacted positively. Shares of Nike and Columbia Sportswear, which rely heavily on Vietnamese suppliers, rose 4.2 percent and 1.3 percent, respectively. The S&P 500 climbed 0.38 percent by mid-afternoon, reaching another record, while the Nasdaq added 0.82 percent.
Despite the upbeat tone from Washington, key details of the agreement remain unclear. The White House has yet to publish the full terms, and questions linger over how the new tariffs will interact with those already in place.
Deputy Treasury Secretary Michael Faulkender said a formal press release is still being finalized.
In the world of cybersecurity and advisory services, staying ahead of technological change is not just an advantage, it is a necessity. Milton Bartley, CEO of ImageQuest, a Nashville-based security services firm specializing in regulated industries like community banks and wealth management companies, has taken a proactive approach to the disruptive force of generative AI. In a candid conversation, Bartley shared how he has navigated internal adoption, client resistance, and a rapidly evolving regulatory landscape—one lunch at a time.
Planting the Seeds of Curiosity
When generative AI burst into public consciousness, Bartley and his team at ImageQuest were already well into their experimentation phase. “We became early adopters two and a half years ago,” he recalled. Rather than waiting for a perfect moment, Bartley and his CIO sought out business use cases where they could either pilot or fully integrate AI. Their efforts were not without internal hurdles. While some employees eagerly embraced the possibilities, others were hesitant.
Bartley described the adoption curve within ImageQuest as “a typical bell curve,” with 10 percent of employees leading the charge, 10 percent resisting, and 80 percent in various stages of curiosity and caution. Recognizing the need to shape this middle ground, ImageQuest introduced a monthly, voluntary lunchtime gathering where staff could share ideas, successes, and questions about using AI in their work. These sessions, sometimes formal lunch-and-learns and sometimes casual meetups, became a cornerstone of building a culture of innovation without the pressure of mandates.
“We really believe that the best ideas come from the people who do the work,” Bartley emphasized. This grassroots approach fueled a spirit of exploration and demystified AI for employees who might otherwise have stayed on the sidelines.
Creating Structure Without Stifling Innovation
Early enthusiasm at ImageQuest needed to be channeled carefully. Bartley recounted how his CIO, a longtime user of automation technologies, would sometimes move too fast, implementing solutions before getting buy-in from other stakeholders. Recognizing this, Bartley introduced lightweight governance measures to ensure excitement did not outpace thoughtful risk management.
The cornerstone of this governance was a simple but robust AI policy added to ImageQuest’s broader technology use policies. Rather than restricting innovation with heavy-handed rules, the policy provided a flexible framework: employees could freely use approved tools as long as they avoided uploading sensitive client or company data without explicit permission.
In addition, Bartley established an internal AI committee, initially composed of five or six employees, to evaluate use cases, guide internal deployments, and explore how to assist clients with their AI journeys. Over time, the committee’s role evolved, but it remained a critical engine for responsible and effective innovation.
Notably, Bartley’s approach always balanced technical safeguards with human factors. “We didn’t want to slow down momentum with bureaucracy,” he explained, “but we needed everyone to understand the guardrails we had to operate within.”
Translating Innovation to Client Success
While ImageQuest employees warmed to AI through deliberate exposure and structured freedom, clients—particularly highly regulated banks—presented a different challenge. Bartley categorized client reactions into three broad groups: the cautious followers, the fearful avoiders, and the thoughtful pragmatists.
The cautious followers preferred to wait for peer institutions to adopt AI before moving forward. Fearful avoiders, overwhelmed by a lack of internal expertise and regulatory uncertainty, opted for blanket rejection. Thoughtful pragmatists, meanwhile, worked with ImageQuest to identify safe, high-value opportunities for AI deployment that posed little or no regulatory risk.
Bartley offered practical examples of how ImageQuest guided clients to safe use cases. For instance, banks could leverage AI to modernize standard operating procedures and job descriptions—tasks that steer clear of sensitive client data and regulatory scrutiny. On ImageQuest’s own side, the team developed AI-driven workflows that dramatically reduced administrative burdens. A prime example was the vendor management process. Rather than manually combing through hundreds of pages in SOC reports, AI agents now identify specific compliance indicators instantly, allowing human analysts to focus their expertise on validation rather than tedious search tasks.
“It’s about taking a ten-mile journey and giving people a head start, so they can focus their energy on the last mile where their real value lies,” Bartley said.
This philosophy not only preserves job security but enhances it, reframing AI not as a replacement for employees but as a force multiplier for their skills.
Looking Ahead: A Future of Agents and Acceleration
As generative AI matures and agentic AI rises on the horizon, Bartley sees a future shaped by rapid, transformative change. He described the trend as happening “slowly, then suddenly,” noting how AI is already embedded into the core offerings of major banking software providers.
Looking forward, Bartley predicts that agentic AI—the next generation where AI agents independently complete tasks without human initiation—will be the true inflection point. “We’re going to wake up one morning, maybe six weeks from now, and agentic AI will just be here,” he said with a mix of excitement and inevitability.
Despite the pace of change, Bartley remains grounded in his approach. Rather than pursuing flashier, high-risk applications, he continues to prioritize incremental efficiency gains that build client trust and internal competence. The emphasis is on actionable, practical AI—not the hype.
At ImageQuest, creating a culture of Gen AI curiosity is not about chasing the next big thing. It is about patiently nurturing an environment where employees and clients alike feel empowered to explore, innovate, and ask tough questions. And sometimes, all it takes to spark that culture is a casual lunch conversation and a willingness to listen.
In a world eager for instant transformation, Bartley’s model of steady, thoughtful adoption stands out. It offers a reminder that sometimes, the most profound change begins with simply making space for curiosity—and then letting it grow.
Diamonds have long been considered the ultimate symbol of love, luxury, and commitment. But as technology evolves, so do the options available to consumers. Today, one of the most discussed alternatives to mined diamonds is lab grown diamonds. From ethics to pricing, and from environmental impact to appearance, the debate between lab grown and real diamonds is more relevant than ever. In this article, we’ll explore the key differences to help you make an informed decision—especially if you’re considering lab grown engagement rings.
What Are Lab Grown Diamonds?
Lab grown diamonds, also known as synthetic or man-made diamonds, are created in controlled laboratory environments using advanced technological processes that mimic the natural diamond formation process. These diamonds have the same physical, chemical, and optical properties as natural diamonds. Two primary methods are used to create lab diamonds: High Pressure High Temperature (HPHT) and Chemical Vapor Deposition (CVD).
What Are Real Diamonds?
Real diamonds, often referred to as natural or mined diamonds, are formed over billions of years under intense heat and pressure deep within the Earth’s mantle. They are extracted through mining, a process that has been both lauded for its economic contributions and criticized for its environmental and ethical implications.
Visual and Structural Differences
To the naked eye, lab grown and real diamonds are virtually indistinguishable. Even trained gemologists often need specialized equipment to tell them apart. Both types of diamonds rate 10 on the Mohs scale of hardness, making them equally durable and suitable for everyday wear, including in lab grown diamond engagement rings.
Price Comparison
One of the most significant differences between the two lies in pricing. Lab grown diamonds typically cost 30–50% less than their mined counterparts. This price advantage is primarily due to lower production costs and a more streamlined supply chain. For consumers, this means they can afford a larger or higher-quality diamond for the same budget—making lab grown engagement rings an attractive option.
Ethical and Environmental Impact
Ethics play a major role in the growing popularity of lab grown diamonds. Traditional diamond mining has been linked to human rights violations, including child labor and conflict financing in certain regions. Lab grown diamonds, on the other hand, offer a conflict-free alternative. Environmentally, lab grown diamonds also tend to have a smaller carbon footprint and require less water and land disruption, though they do consume significant energy depending on the production method.
Value and Resale
When it comes to long-term value, mined diamonds traditionally retain better resale value due to their rarity and established market. Lab grown diamonds are newer to the market and do not yet have the same resale infrastructure or demand, which can affect their perceived investment value. However, if the primary purpose is emotional or aesthetic—such as in engagement rings—the resale factor may be less important.
Certification and Grading
Both lab grown and mined diamonds can be certified by reputable gemological institutes such as the Gemological Institute of America (GIA) or the International Gemological Institute (IGI). Certificates detail the diamond’s cut, clarity, color, and carat weight, providing assurance of quality regardless of origin.
Market Trends and Popularity
The popularity of lab grown engagement rings has surged in recent years, especially among younger, more environmentally conscious buyers. Millennials and Gen Z are often more concerned with sustainability and ethical sourcing than previous generations, and lab grown diamonds align well with these values.
Misconceptions
There’s a common misconception that lab grown diamonds are “fake.” This is not true. Unlike diamond simulants like cubic zirconia or moissanite, lab grown diamonds are real diamonds. The only difference is their origin. They sparkle just as brightly and are just as durable.
Making the Right Choice
Choosing between a lab grown and a real diamond comes down to personal values, budget, and priorities. If you’re looking for a more affordable, ethically sourced, and environmentally friendly option, lab grown engagement rings offer a compelling alternative. If you value rarity, tradition, and potential long-term value, you might lean toward a mined diamond.
There’s a certain mindset that gets many CEOs to the top. It’s built on grit, vision, and the ability to push through uncertainty. This mindset often fuels the early stages of a company. It gets the funding, builds the team, launches the product. It’s the drive that says, “If I don’t do it, no one will.”
But at a certain point, the very mindset that helped you build the business starts to hold you back.
You might start to feel restless. Frustrated. Like your days are filled with decisions but empty of meaning. You keep pushing harder, but progress feels more draining than energizing. The wins don’t land the same way they used to.
This is often the result of a subtle but powerful shift: your leadership has outgrown your operating mindset. The instincts that once served you well — total control, constant problem-solving, making every call yourself — are no longer what the business needs. More importantly, they are no longer what you need.
There is a particular kind of stuckness that comes when your internal habits lag behind your external role. You may have already learned how to delegate tasks. Maybe you’ve built a leadership team, handed off departments, and stopped managing every small detail. But even after delegation, the old mindset can linger.
You might still carry emotional responsibility for every outcome. You might still jump in to fix things that aren’t yours to fix. You might still feel like you’re the only one who can see the full picture. True delegation is not just about distributing work. It is about trusting others with ownership and learning to lead without gripping everything so tightly. Letting go is not a one-time event. It is a practice that deepens over time, and it often starts with letting go of how you think you’re supposed to lead.
You may still be functioning like the startup founder who wore every hat, even though you now lead a team of fifty. You may still be bracing for chaos, even though the company is more stable. You may still be equating your worth with productivity, even though your real value lies in vision and clarity.
It’s easy to stay trapped in that mindset because it worked. For a long time, it worked brilliantly. But now, it’s costing you. It’s costing your energy, your ability to delegate, your relationship with your team. And perhaps most importantly, it’s costing your sense of connection to the work you once loved.
This is the moment many CEOs and founders begin to question themselves. Why isn’t this working anymore? Why does leadership feel heavier, not lighter? Why does success feel lonelier the higher I go?
What you’re feeling is not failure. It’s a normal byproduct of growth. It’s the moment when something deeper is being asked of you.
You’ve likely outpaced the version of yourself who started this. And now, it’s time to catch up to the leader your role requires today. That doesn’t mean becoming someone new. It means stripping away the noise and habits that no longer serve you, so you can lead with greater presence, precision, and purpose.
This is where CEO coaching services can be transformational. Coaching is not about fixing something that’s broken. It’s about helping you slow down enough to hear what wants to evolve. It gives you a space to explore the patterns that keep repeating themselves and to consider new ways of leading that are more aligned with who you’ve become.
Most CEOs don’t need more strategy. They need more reflection. They need a place to ask the questions they don’t feel safe asking anywhere else. They need support in learning how to lead from a different place. One that is less reactive and more intentional. One that is less about holding it all and more about building systems that hold everyone, including themselves.
Letting go of the mindset that built your company does not mean abandoning what made you great. It means building on it. It means evolving into the kind of leader who is not just effective, but whole.
Growth at this level is quieter. It is more about how you think than what you do. But it is also where some of the most powerful shifts begin.
It may feel counterintuitive at first. You’ve spent years mastering efficiency, solving problems quickly, and keeping things moving forward. Slowing down to reflect can feel like a luxury or even a risk. But the truth is, learning to pause with intention is one of the most strategic things you can do. It allows you to access clarity instead of reacting from habit, and it helps you reconnect with the deeper purpose that brought you here in the first place.
If you are feeling stuck, you are likely ready to level up and grow.
By Terence Tse
CFOs are evolving into AI-driven transformation orchestrators, balancing finance, technology, and strategy while upskilling teams, managing risks, and driving measurable business value.
A key insight from this year’s AI for CFOs event, organized...
The World Financial Review uses cookies to improve site functionality, provide you with a better browsing experience, and to enable our partners to advertise to you. Detailed information on the use of cookies on this Site, and how you can decline them, is provided in our Privacy Policy and Terms and Conditions. By clicking on the accept button and using this Site, you consent to our Privacy Policy and Terms and Conditions. ACCEPT
Privacy & Cookies Policy
Privacy Overview
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
Edward Nikulin, a weather model expert at Mind Money, is a proficient quantitative researcher and data scientist with more than 8 years of experience in market modeling, systematic trading, and AI-driven analytics. He is the author of the weather model for proprietary trading strategies of Mind Money.
Joseph Mazur
Dr. Gleb Tsipursky
