Xorte logo

News Markets Groups

USA | Europe | Asia | World| Stocks | Commodities



Add a new RSS channel

 
 


Keywords

2026-02-04 20:08:01| Fast Company

Rent can eat up an entire paycheck at the start of the month, so a growing number of renters are turning to a financial product that promises relief by letting them split the bill for a price. So-called rent now, pay later services have emerged over the past few years as housing costs climb and paychecks grow less predictable, particularly for lower-income and gig-economy workers. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, rents have jumped nearly 28% in past five years. Companies such as Flex, Livble, and, more recently, Affirm, say breaking rent into multiple payments can help renters manage cash flow. But consumer advocates warn the products typically function like short-term loans, layering fees onto already strained budgets and, in some cases, carrying triple-digit effective interest rates raising questions about whether they ease financial pressure or deepen it. Kellen Johnson, 44, started using Flex to split up his rent payments about two years ago. Instead of paying the whole $1,850 of his rent on the first of the month, Johnson would pay $1,350 on that date, and $500 on the 15th. For the service, Flex collected a $14.99 monthly subscription fee, as well as 1% of the total rent, which for Johnson was $18.50, bringing his monthly charges for the app to more than $33. Johnson said he was willing to pay the extra costs in part because he worked as an independently contracted delivery person for Amazon at the time, and his paychecks could vary. It was an expense that I was incurring, but I went ahead as it was more convenient, said Johnson, who now works as a driver for senior citizens in Sacramento, California. Roughly 109 million Americans, or about 42.5 million households, are renters in the United States. The Census Bureau estimated in 2024 that a large share of those households pay 30% or more of their monthly income on rent. The bureau considers such households to be cost burdened, meaning rent consumes so much of their income that they have less ability to plan for future expenses or build wealth. Rent now, pay later services generally operate the same way: The company pays the landlord the full rent when due, and the renter repays the company in two or more installments over the course of the month. Because rent can be such a large expense, the companies argue that spreading payments out can give renters more cash on hand. Many of these services come with fees. The fees can be structured differently but should be generally thought of as cost of credit, consumer advocates warn. In Johnsons case, he was paying $33.49 for a two-week loan of $500, for an effective annual percentage rate of 172%, when expressed using standard consumer-lending calculations. Renters should be skeptical of any financing providers that have partnered with a landlord, and be skeptical of anything that sells itself as no fees or no interest, said Mike Pierce, executive director of Protect Borrowers. Pierce previously worked at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and co-authored a report that was released this week on the industry. Launched in 2019, Flex is one of the largest companies focused on splitting rent payments. The company says its 1.5 million customers now send about $2 billion a month in rent through its system, and several of the countrys largest landlords accept Flex as a payment option. Flex says most of its customers are lower-income renters with weaker credit profiles. The company reports a median credit score of 604 among its users and says about one in three customers works more than one job to make ends meet. A Flex spokesman says the average customer uses the service three to four times a year. Johnson used it every month. Livble does not charge a subscription, but charges renters a fee ranging from $30 to $40, according to the companys help page. Depending on how long the renter defers part of the payment, Livbles fees can translate into effective annual percentage rates of roughly 104% to 139%. The buy now, pay later company Affirm said this month that it is piloting a program allowing some customers to split rent into two payments. The program is being tested in partnership with Esusu, a company that reports rent payments to credit bureaus to help consumers build credit. An Affirm spokesman said the company is not charging renters interest or fees to use the product, but may charge landlords fees. As another financing option, landlords are increasingly accepting credit cards for rent payments. Bilt, a credit card startup, built its brand around targeting renters when it launched, and some tenants also use credit cards to accumulate rewards or points. But paying rent by credit card can also be costly. Landlords typically pass the processing fees on to tenants. Depending on the card issuer and payment network, these fees can range from about 2.5% to 3.5% of the rent. For a renter paying $1,500 a month, that translates to roughly $37.50 to $52.50 in fees a monthly cost comparable to what services like Livble and Flex charge. Economists and renters advocates argue that none of these financing options address the fundamental issue of affordability in the rental market. If credit cards, or flexible rent payment options become more widely used, they worry rents could rise further as landlords start factoring in a potential renters weekly cash flow as opposed to the rental market in the area the building is located in. Merchants already pass along credit card processing costs to customers in the form of higher prices, and advocates worry that the rental market could adopt similar patterns. For example, Livble is owned by RealPage, which last year settled allegations that its algorithm allowed landlords to collude and push rents higher. By Ken Sweet and Cora Lewis, The Associated Press Economics Writer Christopher Rugaber contributed.


Category: E-Commerce

 

LATEST NEWS

2026-02-04 19:45:00| Fast Company

Amazon is rolling out a new feature in hopes of retainingor perhaps attractingnew Prime members. The tech giant announced Wednesday that Alexa+, its AI-powered assistant, is now available for free to all Prime members. Last March, Amazon began offering an early access preview for the new voice assistant that saw an inspiring response, with tens of millions of customers requesting access, according to a statement. The company has revamped its legacy Alexa product to handle more complex interactionsoffering examples of how users can engage in deep conversations with Alexa+ that may be ongoing over the course of potentially several days, as the technology can remember context, said Daniel Rausch, Amazons vice president of Alexa and Echo, in the statement. Homeowners are also pairing Alexa+ with their Ring cameras to identify unusual patterns around their homes, he said. People are engaging in two to three times more conversations with Alexa+ than they were previously, Rausch told CNBC. Every week in a customers journey, engagement goes up, and that is really the sign of a hit product, basically.  USERS ARENT SOLD ON ALEXA+ Despite Rauschs cheerful assessment of the product, reviews elsewhere are more tempered.  One Redditor posted Alexa+ is a mess on an Alexa subreddit four months ago, lamenting several of the technologys shortcomings, including that it feels like a huge downgrade from regular Alexa. The post garnered more than 240 responses, with other Redditors sharing similar frustrations. Still other Redditors shared near-daily complaints about lag times or the quality of responses on that subreddit. One task that Alexa+ may not be programmed to assist with is one thats been on the mind of many Prime members lately. In the U.S., searches for how to cancel Amazon Prime have surged 110% in the past month, reaching the highest level since December 2017, according to Google Trends.  AMAZON PRIME FREEBIES Since launching Amazon Prime in 2005, the company has steadily added new features for membersincluding Alexa, which debuted with the first Echo device in 2014. While still available on such devices, Alexa is now available as an app and at Alexa.com.  Full access to Alexa+ is available for free only to Prime members, though the company will allow nonmembers to test the new Alexa+ chat functionality at Alexa.com for free. Unlimited access to Alexa+ for people who dont want to pay the $139 annual Prime membership will cost $19.99 per month. AMAZON SELL-OFF The Alexa+ news alone wasnt enough to lift Amazon stock, as fears of an AI bubble have fueled a broader sell-off for tech stocks in recent days. Shares of Amazon have tumbled nearly 4% during the last five trading sessions.  Of course, there are other factors at playthe company announced last week that it is slashing 16,000 jobs and will announce earnings on Thursday after the market closes.


Category: E-Commerce

 

2026-02-04 19:00:05| Fast Company

For a show that lasts roughly 13 minutes, the Super Bowl halftime performance has fueled decades of conversation. Sometimes the spark comes from a single moment as it did when Janet Jackson and Justin Timberlakes infamous wardrobe malfunction triggered a broadcast reckoning. Other times, it arrives through imagery and intent, from Jennifer Lopezs 2020 caged children staging that critiqued U.S. immigration policies to children at the U.S.-Mexico border to Kendrick Lamars carefully layered Black storytelling, delivered as Donald Trump watched from his seat inside the Caesars Superdome in New Orleans. The halftime show magnifies everything fashion choices, choreography, symbolism and invites interpretation on a scale few artists ever experience. That history forms the backdrop as Bad Bunny prepares to take the halftime stage, a moment that places Latin identity at the center of Americas most-watched television event. The conversation building around his performance extends beyond music, touching on language, culture and how much room one of the worlds biggest stars will have for symbolism and social commentary  including past critiques of Trump within a show long shaped by tight NFL oversight. With that context, here is a look at some of the most talked about halftime moments. Timberlake and Jackson’s wardrobe malfunction The most enduring halftime controversy unfolded during the 2004 Super Bowl in Houston, when Jackson performed alongside Timberlake. In the closing seconds of Rock Your Body, Timberlake tugged at Jacksons costume, briefly revealing her right breast, adorned with a decorative shield. Timberlake later described the moment as an unintended wardrobe malfunction, a phrase that quickly entered pop-culture shorthand. The reaction was immediate and far-reaching. The incident prompted FCC scrutiny, congressional attention and a reevaluation of live television standards. CBS, which aired the game, was fined $550,000 by the Federal Communications Commission, a penalty later overturned, and broadcasters expanded the use of delays for live events. The professional fallout, however, was uneven. Jackson was disinvited from the Grammy Awards telecast the following week and largely retreated from the public spotlight, while Timberlakes career continued uninterrupted. Years later, Timberlake said the two had reconciled, but the disparity in their treatment wasn’t forgotten. When the NFL announced Timberlakes return to the halftime stage in 2018, the decision reignited debate. Critics pointed to what they viewed as a racial and gender double standard, arguing that Jackson, a Black woman, bore the brunt of the consequences while Timberlake, a white man, emerged largely unscathed. Online, hashtags such as #JusticeForJanet resurfaced, reframing the moment through a broader cultural lens. Formation: Beyoncé and political symbolism When Beyoncé performed Formation in 2016, the halftime show became a moment of cultural declaration. Set in the Bay Area, the performance leaned heavily into Black history and identity. Dancers appeared in Black Pantherinspired attire, raised clenched fists and formed symbolic shapes on the field as Beyoncé delivered lyrics celebrating Black features and pride. The imagery echoed decades of Black activism, from civil rights-era protest to modern calls for social justice. The performance drew widespread acclaim for its clarity and artistry while also sparking criticism from conservative commentators and some law enforcement groups who accused it of promoting anti-police sentiment. With an audience of more than 110 million viewers, the debate quickly moved beyond the stadium. Several moments stood out. Dancers briefly formed an X, interpreted by some as a reference to Malcolm X, while raised fists recalled the 1968 Olympic protest by Tommie Smith and John Carlos. The visuals aligned directly with the message of Formation, which centers Black identity and self-definition. Believe in Love: Coldplay and evolving visibility Coldplay was the halftime show headliner in 2016, bringing out Beyoncé and Bruno Mars for a performance built around themes of unity, inclusion and joy. The set featured a rainbow-colored stage, vibrant dancers and a crowd mosaic that spelled out Believe in Love. A pride flag was visible near frontman Chris Martin, and the shows closing imagery emphasized togetherness. While many viewers praised the message as affirming and timely, some conservative groups criticized the presentation for embracing LGBTQ+ symbolism. The reaction reflected broader cultural conversations around representation and visibility in mainstream entertainment. When Kendrick Lamar’s symbolism becomes the story Last year, Kendrick Lamar treated the halftime stage as a controlled narrative space, using choreography, costuming and staging to explore themes of identity, power and perception. His performance unfolded with cinematic precision, opening as dancers spilled out of a Buick GNX in choreographed fashion before Lamar took command of the field. Dancers dressed in red, white and blue framed the performance, while Samuel L. Jackson appeared as an Uncle Sam figure who interrupted the action with pointed commentary, labeling the spectacle too loud and urging Lamar to play the game. The exchange underscored the tension between expression and expectation that has come to define modern halftime shows. While the performance stayed within league parameters, it still sparked debate among commentators who scrutinized the imagery and tone. The response reinforced how the halftime show, even without overt rule-breaking, can function as visual storytelling that invites interpretation at a scale unmatched in other live events. Other defiant moments on a global stage The NFL has long maintained guardrails around the halftime show, particularly when performances edge toward political commentary. Still, some artists have chosen to test and at times ignore those limits. Ahead of Jennifer Lopez’s performance with Shakira in 2020, the NFL raied concerns about a segment widely interpreted as referencing children held in immigration detention facilities. The league asked Lopez to cut a segment featuring children in cages, a critique of U.S. immigration policies. But she refused and moved forward with the imagery, using visual symbolism rather than explicit messaging. The 2022 show featured a hip-hop celebration with a robust lineup of Dr. Dre, Snoop Dogg, Mary J. Blige, 50 Cent, Eminem and Kendrick Lamar. But as Eminem’s performance of Lose Yourself concluded, the rapper dramatically took a knee, lowering his head in a gesture widely interpreted as a tribute to Colin Kaepernick, whose decision to kneel during the national anthem in 2016 to protest police brutality sparked a nationwide cultural reckoning. Kaepernicks protest was later echoed by other players, and he would soon find himself out of the league. Reports ahead of the game suggested the NFL had discouraged the gesture, though the league disputed that account. We watched all elements of the show during multiple rehearsals this week and were aware that Eminem was going to do that, NFL spokesman Brian McCarthy said at the time. During Madonna’s halftime set in 2012, M.I.A. flashed a middle finger toward the camera, a split-second gesture that immediately drew regulatory attention and replay-heavy coverage. The action prompted an immediate fine and a legal dispute with the NFL. The sides later reached a settlement, ending a multimillion-dollar case over the incident. By Jonathan Landrum Jr., AP entertainment writer


Category: E-Commerce

 

Latest from this category

04.02Pizza Hut will close 250 underperforming locations in 2026 as list of struggling restaurants grows
04.02Inside the Minneapolis restaurant that stopped charging for food until ICE leaves the city
04.02Doritos, Lays, Cheetos, and more popular snacks are getting a major discount ahead of the Super Bowl
04.02Some renters should be wary of rent now, pay later services. Heres why
04.02Amazon wants Alexa+ to be the reason you keep Prime
04.02Wardrobe malfunctions to caged kids: A look at the most controversial Super Bowl halftime moments
04.02Trumps border czar pulls 700 immigration officers out of Minnesota
04.02Tracking Jeffrey Epsteins influence on the cutting edge of tech research
E-Commerce »

All news

04.02Stocks Modestly Lower into Final Hour on Sector Rotation, Escalating Iran Tensions, Crypto Plunge, Tech/Defense Sector Weakness
04.02Batavia building to be renovated, with TIF assistance, for Aurora-based software companys new headquarters
04.02Bipartisan SCAM Act would require online platforms to crack down on fraudulent ads
04.02Afternoon Market Internals
04.02Tomorrow's Earnings/Economic Releases of Note; Market Movers
04.02Bull Radar
04.02Bear Radar
04.02Pizza Hut will close 250 underperforming locations in 2026 as list of struggling restaurants grows
More »
Privacy policy . Copyright . Contact form .