The company reported a fiscal third-quarter loss of $50.5 million, or 22 cents a share, compared with a loss of $24.5 million, or 11 cents a share, in the year-ago period. Adjusted net income, which excludes stock-based compensation and other items, was 17 cents a share, compared with 8 cents a share in the year-ago period.

Revenue rose to $380.1 million from $232.5 million in the year-ago quarter. Annual recurring revenue, a software-as-a-service metric that shows how much revenue the company can expect based on subscriptions, increased 67% to $1.51 billion for the quarter.

Analysts surveyed by FactSet had forecast CrowdStrike to report earnings of 10 cents a share on revenue of $363.6 million, based on the company’s outlook of 8 cents to 10 cents a share on revenue of $358 million to $365.3 million. Analysts also had estimated ARR at $1.47 billion.

“Our outstanding results this quarter demonstrate the flywheel effect of our platform and reflect continued strong customer adoption for our core products in addition to the growing success of our newer product initiatives including identity protection, log management and cloud,” said George Kurtz, CrowdStrike co-founder and chief executive, in a statement.

CrowdStrike expects adjusted fiscal fourth-quarter earnings of 19 cents to 21 cents a share on revenue of $406.5 million to $412.3 million, while analysts forecast earnings of 16 cents a share on revenue of $400 million, according to FactSet.

For the year, the company raised its forecast to a range of 57 cents to 59 cents a share on revenue of about $1.43 billion, up from a previous forecast of 43 cents to 49 cents on revenue of $1.39 billion to 1.41 billion. Wall Street expects 46 cents a share on revenue of $1.4 billion.

As of Wednesday’s close, the stock is up more than 36% over the past 12 months, compared with a 23% rise on both the S&P 500 index 
SPX
and the tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite Index 
COMP,
  and a 17% gain by the ETFMG Prime Cyber Security ETF 
HACK.

The beach is untouched and wild. From my terrace I can almost hear the millions of grains of sand being sucked out by the ocean’s heaving backwash. Then, like a great exhale, another huge wave comes crashing to shore, spitting ocean spray.

My phone buzzes. A message from my rental manager welcomes me back and tells me that the final payment is in my account. In the 10 weeks I’ve been away, my condo has accumulated $10,000, covering my entire year’s mortgage, plus taxes and HOA fees. And now, here I am, getting the $1,000-a-week experience for free.

Even after nearly two decades of buying overseas real estate, I wonder how the heck this is even possible…and why more people aren’t doing this. With one purchase I have an asset that pays for itself, that appreciates in value, that I can use as a home, and that makes money when I’m not using it.

Today, I own property in six countries, I have residence or citizenship in five. I spend my time traveling between my international bases. I never have to endure cold, or heat…I time my travels to make the most of perfect weather.

Investing in overseas real estate means you can have the life you want and live in and own homes that make money.

Like I say, I have been investing in real estate overseas for close to two decades, because when you look overseas, there is always opportunity somewhere.

I don’t look for any old international opportunity. I’m focused on the very best ones. The ones that give the biggest upside for the lowest risk. Because if you are willing to look beyond your home borders, you really can have your cake and eat it.

In today’s high-inflationary world, this is the ultimate no-brainer. With real estate you can preserve your savings, and even grow them, by investing in an asset that rises with inflation. And, if you do it right, you can even own an asset that rises in value faster than inflation.

People will always need shelter. The land, and building materials, have a tangible value. You can raise rental rates in line with inflation.

According to data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, from 1967 to 2021 the price of housing has gone up 4.16% per year, versus an overall inflation rate of 3.93%. So, if you bought a $100,000 home in 1967, it would be worth $901,165 today. This doesn’t account for any rental income you could have also collected, and over 54 years that would be a significant amount.

Take a global view, investing in real estate overseas, and you can also benefit from record low interest rates. Buying a property in Portugal for example, maybe you get a fixed-rate, long-term mortgage at 1.5%. On a €250,000 property and a 20% deposit, this means your monthly payments would be €554.

If inflation is here for the long-term, too—and unless governments stop accumulating debt, long-term inflation is probably a safe bet—then your €554 monthly payment essentially shrinks in value over time. By that, I mean €554 today buys you a lot more than €554 10 years from now. Meanwhile, your property might have appreciated to €300,000 and you’re collecting €2,000 per month in rent (a 250% return on your monthly mortgage payment).

This might seem like a fantastic hypothetical, but it’s not. Mortgage rates are at record lows and in places like Portugal, it’s actually possible for you, even as a foreigner, to pay a rate of less than 1%.

That brings us to the main stumbling block that prevents most folks from ever taking advantage of an overseas real estate opportunity: Where to begin…

There’s no easy way to find a profitable real estate opportunity. If there was, everyone would surely be doing it. I personally spend six months of the year on the road, scouting for deals. My team and I spend millions of dollars each year on travel and research. This is what gives us the edge and allows us to identify opportunities ahead of mainstream real estate buyers. I’m talking about the kind of deals that create double-your-money gain. The kind that make you wonder how the heck it was even possible.

Of the hundreds of destinations my team and I have visited, and the thousands of deals I’ve assessed, right now there are three places that stand head and shoulders above the rest in terms of the profits they can deliver. Let’s dive in:

Portugal’s Algarve

Perhaps more than anywhere else in the world, my team and I have been putting boots on the ground on Portugal’s Algarve. A region that’s nearly unparalleled in Europe in terms of the returns it can offer savvy real estate investors.

The Algarve has perfect weather, with 300 days of sunshine a year, amazing beaches, and world-class golf. It’s easy to get there, the cost of living is low, the food is great, and it’s safe and peaceful.

On Portugal’s Algarve, development started in the center and spread west.

Importantly, the Algarve attracts a huge mix of markets. It’s what I call an “internationalized destination” that draws Northern Europeans, North Americans, and even folks from as far away as Asia. As a conservative real estate buyer, I buy in internationalized destinations because they are far more resilient to crisis. It’s a place where, no matter what happens, people always come.

For instance, a contact on the Algarve tells me that in the beach town of Lagos in 2020 the average occupancy for well set up, well located, and well-managed properties was around 35 weeks. And last year, despite the lockdown, I hear some property owners were still pulling in gross yields of 7%. Given what was going on in the world, that’s impressive.

My contact rents his own villa on the Algarve each summer. As lockdowns spread rapidly around the world in 2020, he had most of his reservations cancel, but it took him less than a week to replace every single one with new bookings. Then, just this summer he pulled in approximately $44,000 in just two months renting out his home.

When travel bounces back in full force, a rental in an internationalized destination like this will be the first to see a fresh surge in demand.

The short-term rental market in the Algarve is anchored by a red-hot, 10-week peak season. You can add the two weeks at Easter and schools’ (in northern Europe) spring and fall breaks as high season. (The Algarve is very popular as a family destination.) March and September-October are good months to rent to golfers, young couples, and retirees. In recent years, even the previously dead winter months are attracting more visitors.

Buy well in the Algarve, and you can lock in both high yields, and strong appreciation—a two-punch play that I love.

On top of this, in Portugal right now you can get exceptionally cheap bank financing. With a low interest rate mortgage, you can be into opportunities here for very little. In fact, right now, foreigners can borrow as much as 80% in Portugal, at rates of as low as 0.9% or even less.

For instance, in the Central Algarve, I partnered with my contact and used cheap bank financing to buy a luxury condo in a high-end resort community—a bank foreclosure that had been grossly undervalued.

We bought the condo for €410,000, with 100% financing at extremely low rates. That means after closing costs, plus the cost of renovation and furnishings, we were only into the deal for about €55,000. And this summer, we were renting the condo for €3,500 a week.

That gives us wild cash-on-cash rental yields (the mortgage is only €1,400 a month). And I’ve since seen the same unit type listed for over double that at €830,000.

The opportunity on the Central Algarve is to lock down something undervalued, old, or unloved, then polish up, establish a rental stream and sell it. With the right property, you could easily be looking at six-figure gains or more.

However, the Central Algarve is the most established part of the region. Therefore, opportunities here are thinner on the ground, and take a little digging to find. The more immediate opportunity is to look to the Western Algarve. This is where you have the booming town of Lagos, set on a hill overlooking a modern marina. It’s arguably the most historic town on the Algarve. This was home to Henry the Navigator and the adventurers of the Age of Discovery.

It’s a pretty and happening place, compact, low-rise, and walkable. From spots all over town, you can catch breath-taking views of the Bay of Light, fringed by miles of golden sand, with the town of Portimao on the other side.

This is where I’ve uncovered some of the most exciting opportunities on the Algarve in recent years. Best-in-class property is in incredibly hot demand. Demand is surging, supply is scarce, and there are constraints that put serious limitations on availability. By getting in early on the right condos, in the right locations, you can do very well.

For instance, one member of my Real Estate Trend Alert (RETA) group bought two condos as investment properties about five years ago for approximately €430,000 each. They rented them both, bringing in an average of about €30,000 (a 7% gross yield) a year each and recently sold one for €650,000. Those are some serious gains.

And, when you figure we can borrow up to 80% of the purchase price at sub 0.9% rates, the return on cash invested is exceptional.

Last year, I recommended condos in the Adega building in central Lagos to members of my Real Estate Trend Alert group. I got word just recently that a buyer got a soft offer on their condo in Adega that could hand them €160,000 in profits.

And the opportunity looks set to continue as scarcity becomes an ever-growing issue. And thanks to RETA’s group buying power and local connections, we still have a window here to own something rare and profitable ahead of the supply squeeze.

Panama

Panama was the first place I ever invested overseas. That was 2004, and the window of opportunity was brief, but worth serious upside to anyone who got in before it closed.

Today, a second wave is creating an even stronger opportunity than the one I found when I first invested. And that’s one of the most important reasons to invest in international real estate. You get to follow big “once in a lifetime” transformations and play them far more often than once in your life.

Specifically, I’ve identified two opportunities with the potential to double your money. One of those is again in Panama City, the other is the finest white-sand beach within an easy drive of the city—a beach that’s only become accessible in recent years. Get in on either of those two opportunities and you could ride two waves of development that are bringing strong profit to smart real estate buyers.

There are two big opportunities in Panama City now: buy ahead of a new wave of growth in Panama City…and buy ahead of a Path of Progress on the Pacific Riviera to the south of the city.

Panama’s strategic location for shipping and trade drives its growth. It lies between North and South America with the Panama Canal connecting the Pacific and Atlantic oceans.

Since before I ever set foot in Panama, it’s been rapidly transforming from a sleepy outpost to a regional powerhouse. And boy is it booming. It’s truly global now, attracting wealthy and well-heeled folks from all over the world.

The city has always been a thriving hub of trade, starting with its role in the Spanish Empire’s silver route. But it was during World War II when prosperity hit unprecedented levels as U.S. military personnel and their families took up residence. Entire neighborhoods of the city are like something straight from the U.S., with big, modern malls, and movie theaters where you can catch a movie in English and use the dollars in your pocket—Panama uses the U.S. dollar.

Panama’s success is largely down to following the Singapore model. Like Singapore, Panama created a wealth fund and poured money into infrastructure. Generous tax breaks and easy visa requirements for those setting up a business or hiring employees mirror the Singapore model. Today, Panama is the biggest recipient of foreign direct investment in Central America. And, it’s attracting more and more multinationals looking for a friendly regional base.

In 2019 the World Bank declared that over the past decade Panama has been one of the fastest-growing economies in the world. In fact, Panama is now ranked as a high-income nation by the World Bank. The strong economic growth has added more folks to the upper-middle-class bracket over the last 10 years. And Panama’s safety and stability is a big draw for wealthy Latins, too, who feel comfortable flaunting their designer bling and Lamborghinis.

Panama City has seen a surge of demand in recent years from a growing, upwardly mobile, population. Yet, the city has a shortage of developable land. On one side, it is hemmed in by the Pacific Ocean, and on the other it is constrained by large parcels of protected land and watershed for the Panama Canal.

There’s very little room for urban sprawl. And this will put huge upward pressure on existing real estate prices.

A “Big Squeeze” is coming, but thanks to my contacts in Panama, I have a window to lock down the kind of real estate that the well-heeled folk coming to Panama want.

The kind of place you could rent long term to young entrepreneurs, older retirees, and executives working for a big multinational in the business districts close by. And where you could see rapid appreciation as demand continues to rise against supply in Panama City.

The second opportunity is to meet the same market demand by owning something truly special within a short commute of the city. Playa Caracol is on the Pacific Riviera, the 50-mile or so stretch of coastline west of Panama City. It’s the closest beach to the city on this Riviera of its caliber, in fact, the nicest beach by far within an hour of the city. And it’s set to be even easier to reach thanks to the mammoth Path of Progress.

Millions of dollars of development and infrastructure have poured in. But because of an anomaly in this huge Path of Progress, Caracol was a secret to a few in-the-know insiders.

Now, one of Panama’s preeminent developers is taking on the challenge. He and his group have been behind some extraordinary communities around Panama City. Ocean Reef, for example, is ultra-prime real estate on man-made islands in the Bay of Panama, right in the heart of the city, yet surrounded by ocean.

In Playa Caracol this developer has already delivered well over 300 units. And because of his long history with my Real Estate Trend Alert group, members had the opportunity to buy here at remarkable pricing.

For instance, in September 2019 I brought RETA members a deal on condos there. They could buy best-in-class condos fronting a white-sand beach with a mountain backdrop for $184,300, which I figure will be worth $299,000 within five years.

It wasn’t the first time I found a killer deal here. In 2017, I was able to bring RETA members an opportunity to buy beachfront condos in Playa Caracol at RETA-only prices starting at $199,000. By late 2019, a similar-sized condo farther back from the beach with only a side view listed for $299,000…that’s $100,000 in paper gains in just two years.

In fact, I believe so strongly in this developer’s vision that I bought here too—getting in on an exclusive RETA deal at Caracol in November 2020.

What we can lock down ahead of the Path of Progress and ahead of Panama City’s next wave of growth, is already on track to become one of the most premium addresses on the Pacific Riviera. It’s where the chic spend their weekends…well-heeled families come to relax and unwind. It’s this desirability that will drive real estate values in the community up as it gets built out.

Mexico’s Riviera Maya

The Riviera Maya is an 80-mile stretch of pristine Caribbean coastline on Mexico’s Yucatán Peninsula that goes from Cancún in the north to Tulum in the south.

It’s a treasure throve of white-sand beaches, glistening turquoise water, and dense jungle that’s bursting with wildlife. It’s also a place that attracts millions of international visitors each year, making it one of the most powerful destinations I know for rental plays.

I first visited in 2004. Cancún was developed. Playa del Carmen still a quiet sleepy beach town. I continued south, took a one-lane road that turned to dirt then stopped when I saw turquoise water sparkle. I walked through an empty palapa restaurant. Then, my jaw hit the floor. Miles of the most pristine white sands I had seen opened up in either direction. It was empty. The beach. The restaurant… welcome to Tulum.

I’ve spent the 17 years since staying ahead of the juggernaut Path of Progress as it rolled south along the stunning Caribbean coast, transforming Playa del Carmen into a booming resort city, and the tiny town of Tulum is an ultra-chic destination that attracts New York fashionistas and Hollywood elites.

The Riviera Maya is what I call “the convenient Caribbean,” every bit as beautiful as any island, but a lot easier to get to for millions of people.

Indeed, the Riviera Maya has been drawing people from right across the world for a while. These folks come for the weather, the beaches…the amazing range of cool stuff you can do. And now they are coming in much greater numbers because they can.

Since the pandemic, the Riviera Maya’s ease of access and proximity to the U.S. and Canada has been crucial. It has made it the perfect destination for a growing mass of people who now take their work with them anywhere. Longer-stay folks have every amenity they need, including international schools for their kids, gourmet supermarkets, and so on.

As towns like Tulum grow, owning real estate that is rare, discreet, and exclusive sets you up beautifully for explosive rental demand and for rapid potential for gains.

From my contacts in the rental industry in Tulum, I’m told a two-bedroom condo will run you $1,750 to $2,000 per month. A house could go up to $2,000 to $3,000. And remote workers are more than willing to pay those prices. Even better, it’s not just one type of person coming here. Older people, younger people, families, groups of friends…all want to be in Tulum—and that variety makes the rental market that much stronger.

Members of my Real Estate Trend Alert group have done exceptionally well here.

Condos that RETA members secured for $208,440 are now listed at $311,000—a six-figure lift. And a condo that was available for the RETA-only price of $166,860 is now at $239,000…a gain of $72,000.

Our group secured our profits by getting in at RETA-only pricing from $154,500 for a two-bedroom condo. As we do and say in real estate, we made our money buying. I myself bought one of these entry priced condos and sold my unit in early 2020 for $225,000.

In February last year, RETA members could buy two-bed homes in Edena, Tulum, for $149,000. A few months later, in October, homes were listing for $199,000.

Like I say, few places on my beat have been as profitable as the Riviera Maya. There is strong rental demand from multiple markets pretty much year-round. A big international mix of people, lots of fun things to do, good food…stunning white-sand beaches.

Like the Algarve and Panama, the Riviera Maya is an internationalized place. A place where—with the right real estate—even in bad times you still do OK. Buy well, and you can own a true money-maker, an overseas home, and an asset that protects and grows your wealth for years to come.

This story originally ran in International Living.

Analysts on average expected losses of 6 cents a share on sales of $306 million, with $284 million in product sales, according to FactSet. Shares jumped more than 13% in after-hours trading immediately following the release of the results.

Because Snowflake is a young software company, investors tend to focus on other metrics besides profitability, including net revenue-retention rate, which measures how much existing customers are spending on the volume-priced offering, and remaining performance obligations, which measures the amount of spending that has been agreed to under contracts but not yet recognized.

Snowflake reported a net revenue-retention rate of 173% as of the end of the quarter on Oct. 31, and a remaining performance obligation of $1.8 billion, up 94% from last year and roughly in line with the average analyst estimate of $1.82 billion. Snowflake also reported that the number of customers rose to 5,416 from 3,554 a year ago, and 148 of those customers have spent more than $1 million with the company in the past 12 months.

For the fourth quarter, Snowflake executives expect product revenue of $345 million to $350 million, while analysts on average were projecting $316 million. For the full year, Snowflake management now projects roughly $1.13 billion in sales, after previously stating $1.06 billion to $1.07 billion.

Snowflake became one of the most highly valued public tech companies after its 2020 initial public offering because of its potential to battle Oracle Corp.
ORCL,
-1.09%
with database software that is native to the cloud. The company — previously based in San Francisco but which now claims not to have a headquarters as employees work remotely — attracted big-name investors including Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway Inc.
BRK.A,
-0.29%

BRK.B,
-0.61%,
and investment analysts continue to praise the company’s opportunity.

See also: Five things to know about Snowflake and its record IPO

“As data plays an increasingly essential role to enterprises in all industries and geographies, we believe Snowflake will see durable growth with enhanced visibility due to their irreplaceable role in the IT stack,” Truist Securities analysts wrote in November, while maintaining a buy rating and $350 price target but mentioning the likelihood of updating their model after Wednesday’s report.

Snowflake stock surged higher than prices realized in the heady early days after its IPO in mid-November, closing higher than $400 for the first and, so far, only time on Nov. 16. Shares have crumbled since, however, including a 14.7% decline in the past two sessions amid a market rout that leaves Snowflake stock up 10.5% so far this year, while the S&P 500 index
SPX,
-1.18%
has gained 21.6%.

Splunk reported a third-quarter loss of $343.3 million, or $2.14 a share, compared with a loss of $201.5 million, or $1.26 a share, in the year-ago period. The adjusted loss, which excludes stock-based compensation expenses and other items, was 37 cents a share, compared with a loss of 7 cents a share in the year-ago period.

Revenue rose to $664.8 million from $558.6 million in the year-ago quarter. Analysts surveyed by FactSet had forecast a loss of 52 cents a share on revenue of $646.5 million.

Annual recurring revenue, a software-as-a-service metric that shows how much revenue the company can expect based on subscriptions, rose 37% for the quarter to $2.83 billion, while analysts had forecast $2.82 billion.

“Q3 marked a significant milestone for Splunk as it was our first billion-dollar cloud ARR quarter, with cloud accounting for a record 68% of our software bookings,” said Graham Smith, Splunk’s chairman and interim chief executive, in a statement.

Splunk expects fourth-quarter revenue between $740 million and $790 million and total ARR of $3.09 billion to $3.14 billion, while analysts had forecast revenue of $828.3 million and ARR of $3.12 billion.

Splunk forecast revenue of $2.51 billion to $2.56 billion for the end of fiscal 2022 ending in January, and total ARR of about $3.9 billion in fiscal 2023 ending in Jan. 2023. Analysts expect fiscal 2022 revenue of $2.58 billion, and fiscal 2023 ARR of $4.07 billion.

“Rather than earning interest many American families end up paying large banks for the privilege of holding their money,” he added. “The main way banks have flipped the script from paying depositors to charging them is through deposit account service charges like overdraft fees.”

The CFPB report said that banks charged U.S. customers $15.47 billion in overdraft and non-sufficient funds fees in 2019, the most recent data available. Three banks — JPMorgan Chase
JPM,
-0.59%,
Wells Fargo
WFC,
-1.19%
and Bank of America
BAC,
-1.42%
— accounted for 44% reported that year by banks with more than $1 billion in assets, the agency said.

JPMorgan, Wells Fargo and Bank of America did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Though overdraft charges don’t represent a massive share of overall bank revenue — a recent Motley Fool analysis estimated they account for about 5% of large-bank sales — they can be extremely burdensome for customers. Previous research from the CFPB showed that 9% of bank account holders have more than 10 overdrafts annually and pay nearly 80% of overdraft fees.

Chopra said that bank overdraft fees are a relic of a time when consumers relied on paper checks to pay their bills through the mail, and that decades ago bank regulators allowed banks to charge overdraft fees as a means of not inconveniencing consumers who put their checks in the mail too early.

“But over the years, with the advance of debit cards, these overdraft fees became big money makers,” Chopra said. “They became reliable, bread and butter sources of revenue for many retail banks.”

The regulator added that modern technology should make it simple for banks to simply reject attempted purchases when funds aren’t available, and that in a healthy, competitive market, overdraft fees would be far lower than the average $34 per violation charged today.

Chopra promised to take action against banks that violate the law and that CFPB examiners will prioritize the examinations of banks rely heavily on overdraft fees.

“Despite the findings in our research that banks are still dependent on overdraft, we know that banks understand they need to kick this addiction,” Chopra said.

Last year, the CFPB settled with TD Bank
TD,
-0.46%,
ordering it to pay restitution and civil penalties of more than $100 million for engaging in deceptive practices with regards to overdraft fees. TD Bank settled without admitting or denying the accusations.

Capital One Financial Corp.
COF,
-1.54%,
the nation’s sixth largest retail bank, announced Wednesday that it will “completely eliminate all overdraft fees and non-sufficient fund fees for its consumer banking customers” and provide free overdraft protection.

But complications with her parents’ health insurance at the time delayed Vial from filling her birth control prescription for over a week.

“I was in a long-term, committed relationship, and it was in that window that I got pregnant,” Vial said. “I was never told there was a risk of pregnancy — and because of PCOS, I didn’t menstruate, so I showed no obvious signs. I was completely unaware that I was pregnant.”

Seeking abortion care would wind up costing Vial thousands of dollars in total.

The most conservative U.S. Supreme Court in decades heard oral arguments Wednesday on Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization — a Mississippi abortion law that would ban nearly all abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy — and conservative justices signaled they were open to upholding the restrictions. The case will determine whether states can ban abortions before “viability,” meaning the point at which a fetus can survive outside the womb, typically around 24 weeks.

Lower courts had blocked the ban from taking effect based on Supreme Court precedent that states can’t prevent people from terminating a pregnancy before viability. The state of Mississippi is asking the court to overturn Roe v. Wade and let individual states decide the legality of abortion.

Abortion-rights supporters fear that overturning or weakening the nearly 50-year-old precedent could increase the financial burden for people seeking abortion care and rock the foundation of reproductive rights in the U.S. Meanwhile, anti-abortion advocates are looking to their “post-Roe strategy” and spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on federal lobbying in the third financial quarter, according to OpenSecrets. The Susan B. Anthony List, an anti-abortion group, did not return a MarketWatch request for comment on this story.

“Mississippi’s law, if upheld, brings us much closer to where we ought to be,” Marjorie Dannenfelser, the president of the Susan B. Anthony List, said in prepared remarks Wednesday outside of the Supreme Court. “This is America’s chance to step back from the brink of madness after all these long years. To turn the page on Roe’s onerous chapter and begin a more humane era — one where every child and every mother is safe under the mantle of the law.”

‘It was incredibly isolating’

Vial considers herself fortunate. Coping with an unplanned pregnancy and still being able to access care for a later abortion would have been more challenging today, she believes. 

Restrictive abortion laws have proliferated in recent years in the South and Rust Belt, and many people are already unable to access abortion care. For example, a Texas law also currently before the Supreme Court banned abortions after cardiac activity can be detected in the embryo — as early as six weeks, at which point many people are unaware they’re pregnant. Supporters of these measures call them “heartbeat bills,” a term many healthcare professionals call inaccurate. 

“I chose to advocate for abortion access because when I was going through my experience, it was incredibly isolating,” said Vial, a program coordinator for WeTestify, an advocacy organization dedicated to the leadership and representation of people who have abortions. “You hear a lot of stories about women not knowing they were pregnant until they are in labor. I just happened to find out within the window that I could access care.”

But the journey wasn’t easy. Even though Vial resided in Oregon — a state whose policy has been supportive of abortion rights — she sought an abortion before the state’s 2017 Reproductive Health Equity Act, which expanded access by requiring private insurers to cover abortion care at no out-of-pocket cost, went into effect. The fact that abortions later in pregnancy are still controversial and stigmatized added to the difficulty.

The medical school that Vial initially sought out for care wasn’t openly advertising abortion services. Given her medical history and the fact that she was toward the end of her second trimester, accessing abortion care required a majority board approval from the university’s natal department.

“I was only able to get two of the five doctors to approve my procedure, so they referred me to a clinic in New Mexico,” Vial said. “I was only a week away from the gestational limit — so I had a week to figure out how I was going to pay for everything.”  

The average cost nationwide of a surgical abortion at 10 weeks was $508 in 2014, according to one nationwide study on abortion costs, though the cost could range from $75 to $2,500. Early medication abortion at 10 weeks cost $535 on average and could range from $75 to $1,633.

But abortion costs also vary across states, providers and other factors, and can increase significantly as a pregnancy progresses. According to the Guttmacher Institute, a reproductive-health think tank that supports abortion rights, an abortion at 20 weeks’ gestation can cost almost 2.5 times as much as an abortion at 10 weeks. 

For Vial, who had her abortion at 26 weeks, the surgical procedure came with a $10,500 price tag. Additional medical expenses, airfare to Albuquerque and lodging would drive up costs another $3,550. (Abortions at or later than 21 weeks are uncommon and make up just 1% of all abortions in the U.S., according to KFF, a healthcare think tank.)

“I had just started working a new job and I ended up taking three weeks off work, so I lost a paycheck and a half,” Vial added. “I was able to get help from my local abortion funds [in Oregon] and a loan from a family friend. I was very fortunate to have that kind of wealth in my proximity, because without it, I wouldn’t have been able to access my abortion.”

Increasingly restrictive abortion policies pose an economic impediment to many women. And roughly half of women who have abortions live below the federal poverty level, making it even more financially arduous for them to cover basic expenses while traveling to receive care. 

Restrictive abortion policies can be costly for the economy too, research suggests: The Institute for Women’s Policy Research, a Washington D.C.-based nonprofit, estimates that state-level abortion restrictions cost the country $105 billion a year by decreasing labor-force participation and earnings among women ages 15 to 44, and increasing time off and turnover. In Mississippi, that means about $1 billion in annual economic loss. 

Between 1973 and this past October, states enacted more than 1,300 abortion restrictions, according to Guttmacher. While 16 states have demonstrated support for abortion rights, 29 have policies considered “hostile” and five are in the middle ground. 

Barriers to abortion access have led to a surge of women forced to travel across state lines to access care, and some clinics are preparing for an even larger increase in out-of-state patients in the wake of the Supreme Court hearing. If Roe were to be weakened or reversed, some 26 states would be “certain or likely” to quickly prohibit abortion, according to one Guttmacher analysis — meaning any of the estimated 36 million women of reproductive age in those states seeking an abortion would need to travel longer distances for out-of-state care. 

Read more: Nearly half of women who have abortions live below the federal poverty level 

“Over the last couple of years we’ve seen an increase in out-of-state patients coming for care, but just in the last couple of months, we’ve seen a 30% increase in out-of-state patients,” Kristen Schultz, the vice president of operations and strategy at Planned Parenthood of Illinois, told MarketWatch. “We’ve certainly had an increase in patients directly from Texas, but in September we saw patients from 12 different states.”

‘I was naive and thought it would be easier’

Shortly after moving to Dallas, Texas from Pakistan in 2013, Maleeha Aziz, 28, found out she was pregnant. 

“At 20 years old, I didn’t want to be a parent. I was fairly new here and didn’t know how abortions worked,” Aziz said. “I was naive and thought it would be easier — I didn’t think I would have to travel to Colorado Springs.”

After a family member referred her, Aziz ended up going to a “crisis pregnancy center” — a type of facility that typically offers resources and tests, but works to dissuade people from seeking abortions — instead of an abortion clinic.

“I don’t think my cousin knew at the time, but they claimed to do free sonograms,” Aziz said. “I didn’t have enough money, or insurance, so I needed a place that would give me an ultrasound because I didn’t know how pregnant I was.”

Due to an existing medical condition, a surgical abortion or any invasive procedure wasn’t an option for Aziz — leaving medication abortion the only choice on the table. After being misinformed by the clinic that medication abortions were banned in Texas, she had to act quickly. (Just weeks after signing into law the near-total abortion ban, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican, signed a separate bill into law narrowing the window for access to abortion-inducing medication. That law goes into effect Thursday.)

“I found out that I was nine weeks [pregnant] and I got out of there,” Aziz said. “I had a complete meltdown and started crying because I needed to go somewhere to have a medication abortion.”

Abortion pills, along with additional medication, would run Aziz around $860, while lodging and travel combined would add another $714 to the bill. 

With financial assistance from her family, Aziz was able to get her abortion pills and travel costs fully covered. Her total cost, after accounting for lost wages, came out to $2,414. But Aziz noted that the true total cost of her abortion also included the costs for her partner to travel with her, because her pregnancy made her too sick to travel alone.

“A support person is a necessity for many people,” Aziz said.

Aziz, who currently works as a community organizer at the Texas Equal Access Fund, which provides funding to low-income Texans seeking abortions, testified before Congress in September that Texas’s ban on abortion after six weeks’ gestation had created a “logistical nightmare.” She called the Hyde Amendment, which prohibits federal funding for most abortions and which abortion-rights supporters say disproportionately impacts low-income people and people of color, “classist” and “racist.” 

“No one should have to put their trauma on display just to get legislators to realize the depravity of the law that they passed,” said Aziz, who is also an abortion storyteller with We Testify. “I wanted to truly highlight what costs are associated with having to travel out of state, and I wanted to paint them a picture through my experience.” 

The consequences of being denied an abortion

The economic costs of restrictive abortion policies are not limited to women who have to travel for abortion care. Women who are denied a wanted abortion also face greater odds of their financial well-being being negatively affected.

A 2020 paper using data from the Turnaway Study, which tracks the impacts of unwanted pregnancy on women’s lives, found that abortion denial increased women’s amount of past-due debt by 78%, or about $1,750. The incidence of negative “public records” such as bankruptcy, evictions and tax liens on their credit reports increased by 81%. 

The Turnaway Study has also concluded that women who are turned away from abortion services experience long-term negative socioeconomic effects, and have four times greater odds of having their incomes fall below the federal poverty level.

“When we follow people over time, we’ve seen big economic differences,” Diana Greene Foster, a professor and demographer who leads the Turnaway Study, told MarketWatch. “Women who were denied abortions were more likely to report that they didn’t have enough money to pay for basic living needs like food, housing and transportation, and they were less likely to have full-time employment.” 

Brittany Mostiller, who was unable to afford an abortion 14 years ago, knows firsthand the economic impact of being denied the procedure. Carrying her third pregnancy to term created a financial and emotional hole from which she would spend years digging herself out.

“I already had young children and I was living with my sister in a two-bedroom apartment,” Mostiller said. “Once I found out the procedure would cost $600, I knew immediately that I could not raise that money — and I wasn’t willing to reach out to any family, because I didn’t want to be shamed for it.” 

As a single mom, struggling to make ends meet became the norm. Meanwhile, managing postpartum depression “was really hard, because I had to love and care for a child that I didn’t want when I was struggling to love myself,” Mostiller said.

Now a mother of four, Mostiller, 37, is a leadership coordinator for the National Network of Abortion Funds. She uses her experience to help educate women and raise donations for local abortion funds throughout Chicago, where she feels the need has never been more urgent.

“We have seen an uptick in people traveling, but it’s not new,” Mostiller said. “A lot of folks have been living in a post-Roe reality for a long time, but there are certainly more who are now going across state lines to get the care they need.”

The individual received two doses of Moderna Inc.’s
MRNA,
-10.91%
COVID-19 vaccine and has not received a booster dose, according to Dr. Grant Colfax, San Francisco’s director of public health. 

All close contacts have tested negative so far.

“This is not a surprise,” Colfax said during a press briefing on Wednesday. “We knew that omicron was going to be here. We thought it was already here. We just haven’t detected it yet. So this is cause for concern but [it] is also certainly not a cause for us to panic. We are prepared here in the city for this.”

The individual left South Africa on Nov. 21, landed on Nov. 22, and got tested on Nov. 25 after developing mild symptoms, California Gov. Gavin Newsom said during a separate news conference. The test came back positive on Nov. 28 and was then sent off for sequencing. The individual, who lives in San Francisco, is between the ages of 18 and 49 years old.

“The individuals they have come into contact with have not tested positive yet to our knowledge,” Newsom said.

Omicron last week was classified as a “variant of concern” by the World Health Organization, setting off a string of action, including border closures and new testing requirements for international travelers entering the U.S.

There are five SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern, including the delta variant, which was behind the summer surge in cases over the summer. 

At this time, there are very few known facts about the omicron variant; however, the number of mutations and the location of mutations indicate it may be more transmissible and it may affect someone’s immune response. Fauci said this week he expects that more information about the variant will be available within the next two to four weeks. 

“Although some preliminary information from South Africa suggests no unusual symptoms associated with the variant, we do not know and it is too early to tell,” Fauci said Tuesday.

Health officials continue to urge people to get vaccinated, get a booster, and wear masks in public indoor settings.

“We’ve said it over and over again, and it deserves repeating. If you’re not vaccinated, get vaccinated. Get boosted if you are vaccinated,” Fauci said. “Continue to use the mitigation methods; namely masks, avoiding crowds and poorly ventilated spaces. Choose outdoors rather than indoors. Keep your distance; wash your hands; test and isolate if appropriate.”

These proposals, the roundtable has argued publicly for months, would be bad for business and the broader U.S. economy. How so? They would discourage investment at home and give an advantage to rivals abroad, making American companies less competitive.

“They could produce a product more cheaply overseas and import it to the United States more cheaply than we can,” produce it here, Bolten said about foreign rivals.

It’s a time-old argument of the private sector, of course, but not an unreasonable one given a fiercely competitive global economy.

The president’s nearly $2 trillion “Build Back Better” plan would be paid in large part by higher taxes on big companies. The Roundtable estimates the plan includes some $800 billion in new levies on corporations.

Read: U.S. entering holiday season in ‘very strong shape,’ Biden says in remarks on supply chain

There are two provisions that businesses particularly dislike. One called GILTI — Democrats choose the acronym for a reason — would put a 15% minimum tax on profits that companies earn abroad.

The second would be the corporate equivalent of the alternative minimum tax on individuals. Companies effectively would not be able to reduce their taxes below a certain threshold regardless of how much they invested.

Altogether, these corporate tax increases could end up being twice as large as the tax cuts businesses received in 2017 under then-President Trump, Bolten contends.

The roundtable has been working behind the scenes with lawmakers and buying lots of ads in the Washington region to get its point across to the public. “We are spending a comparable amount,” Bolten said.

Read: Fed’s Beige Book finds ‘widespread’ price hikes in November

Bolten doubled down on the roundtable’s opposition during the group’s first in-person meeting with reporters since the start of the pandemic at its posh office overlooking the city waterfront.

Under polite but skeptical questioning, Bolten acknowledged the roundtable is operating on a “narrow playing field” in a “peculiar political environment.”

By that he meant an usually small number of senators are open to the group’s arguments compared to prior issues on which the roundtable has weighed in. Bolten should know. He once dealt frequently with Congress as the chief of staff to President George W. Bush.

The fate of Biden’s expensive gambit, he suggested to no one’s surprise, rests on a pair of Democratic senators, Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona. Both have balked at some of the proposed taxes and spending plans.

Manchin has been the most resistant to Biden’s Build Back Better plan and the roundtable had him as a guest at one of their events earlier in the year. He could end up deciding if the bill lives or dies in a Senate split 50-50 between Democrats and Republicans.

Bolten was not entirely critical of the Biden White House. The roundtable supported the recently passed $1 trillion law to upgrade the U.S. infrastructure. And it supports White House efforts to beef up the IRS to crack down on tax cheats.

The roundtable also backed the administration’s effort to levels the playing field on taxes through talks with other wealthy nations that are part of the Organization for Economic Development.

Yet Bolten was skeptical that other nations would give up any tax advantages over the United States. The U.S. should not give them any further advantage, he said, especially with the nation recovering from the pandemic and inflation soaring.

“Bad tax policy exacerbates economic risk,” he said.

The stock’s $30.33 price drop reduced the Dow Jones Industrial Average’s
DJIA,
-0.43%
price by about 200 points, while the Dow was down 91 points, or 0.3%, in afternoon trading.

While Salesforce exceeded expectations with its headline numbers in its most recent quarter, the company disappointed with its fiscal fourth-quarter forecast.

“Overall, not the quarter investors hoped for and while guidance is likely quite conservative next quarter, especially on margins, expectations were strong after the analyst day,” wrote Bernstein analyst Mark Moerdler, who has a market perform rating and $295 price target on shares. Overall, he dubbed Salesforce’s latest quarter “lackluster.”

A key issue coming out of Salesforce’s report was the company’s margin performance, as Salesforce posted 19.8% operating margins in the most recent quarter. While that number topped expectations, Moerdler thought it seemed “low considering the savings the company had built-up from no travel during the pandemic and cost rationalizations (e.g. real estate) last year.”

Needham analyst Scott Berg, who rates the stock a hold, called the margin results “mildly disappointing versus recent >20% performance.”

The most recent quarter was the first to include a full quarter of results from Salesforce’s Slack acquisition, and Bernstein’s Moerdler expects that the company will have to make another big acquisition soon, perhaps in fiscal 2023.

“Commentary this quarter from management indicated that it could take several quarters to integrate acquisitions and we believe this will reignite the question of whether a large acquisition occurs sooner than many believed coming out of the investor day,” he wrote. “We believe that the company will need to make increasingly large acquisitions in order to boost growth and that sustained margin improvements will not be as strong as many were hoping for.”

Of course, big acquisitions bring their own risks, and Salesforce acknowledged during its earnings call that the company has seen “headwinds” with MuleSoft, which it bought in 2018 in a deal that assigned MuleSoft an enterprise value of $6.5 billion.

“When a business is growing as quickly as MuleSoft is, there are scaling challenges you can face, and we experienced some of those challenges this quarter,” Chief Financial Officer Amy Weaver said on the call.

Monness, Crespi, Hardt & Co. analyst Brian White described the call as having a “mixed” tone given upside at Slack but some difficulties with MuleSoft.

“Although Salesforce tried to put a happy face on last night’s results, we sensed less excitement relative to past calls and we believe the company would have been wise to leave its guidance unchanged at its Investor Day in late September,” he wrote.

See more about Salesforce’s investor day

Salesforce also announced late Tuesday that Bret Taylor, formerly the company’s president and chief operating officer, would be stepping into a co-CEO role, but Monness analyst White appeared uncertain about the move.

“We believe it is prudent to tread with caution in his new role as we question the sustainability of a split CEO structure,” he wrote in his note to clients. White has a buy rating and $328 price target on the stock.

The analysts who cover Salesforce are a generally bullish bunch, with 42 of the 49 analysts tracked by FactSet sporting buy-equivalent ratings on the stock. Among that crowd, Salesforce found defenders following its report.

“Stepping back, we believe the [stock’s] reaction was overblown,” wrote RBC Capital Markets analyst Rishi Jaluria. “We continue to like CRM as a core SaaS [software-as-a-service] holding, given market leadership in key software areas, positioning to consolidate IT spend, and many growth drivers.”

Jaluria rates the stock at overweight with a $325 target.

Shares of Salesforce have declined 5.1% over the past three months as the Dow has fallen 2.6%.