Aggregator
Laura Dern and ‘White Lotus’ co-stars spotted filming for first time after actress replaces Helena Bonham Carter
New urine test could diagnose autism in children: study
Dana White denies America 250 UFC fight at White House will be ‘political’
Jennifer Lopez wows at ‘Office Romance’ premiere in optical illusion gown with wild cutouts
Jennifer Lopez wows at ‘Office Romance’ premiere in optical illusion gown with wild cutouts
Terrifying scene as Guardians minor leaguer struck in head by line drive
Jets trade special teamer Irv Charles to Seahawks
$6M NYC condo to be forfeited by court order in the multibillion-dollar 1MDB sovereign wealth fraud
Energy Drinks Become Latest Casualty As Fuel Shock Shifts Consumer Behavior
The national average price for 87-octane gasoline at the pump has remained above the politically sensitive $4-per-gallon threshold for 57 days and counting, as the U.S.-Iran conflict continues to disrupt energy flows through the Strait of Hormuz chokepoint.
That price shock at the pump has already translated into visible shifts in consumer behavior at gas stations and convenience stores, an emerging trend we first outlined in mid-April (see here and here).
Adding to the consumer story of elevated gas prices pressuring discretionary spending behaviors is new data from NielsenIQ via Goldman.
This chart shows that U.S. energy drink category growth across NielsenIQ-tracked channels, including xAOC, convenience, and Amazon, tracked on a 4-week year-over-year basis, slowed sharply into May 2026.
The latest reading appears to be in the mid-single-digit range, down from the stronger double-digit growth rates seen throughout much of 2025 and early 2026.
It's important to note that energy drinks remain among the healthier beverage categories, but the sharp growth slowdown occurred around the time gasoline prices at the pump surged.
Bonnie Herzog, managing director and senior consumer analyst at Goldman Sachs, did not specify why the category abruptly lost momentum early this year through spring.
However, our prior notes on consumer stress at the pump in mid-April - including Goldman data showing that a majority of convenience stores reported drivers buying less fuel and trading down in-store - only suggest that higher gasoline prices may be a major contributing factor behind the slowdown in energy drinks.
If consumers are already dialing back fuel purchases and discretionary purchases at convenience stores, it makes sense that premium impulse categories like energy drinks are also under pressure.
Professional subscribers can read the full NielsenIQ via Goldman here at our new Marketdesk.ai portal
Tyler Durden Wed, 05/27/2026 - 12:40Americans demand ban on dynamic pricing — while a baffling portion prefer real-time price fluctuations: survey
Washington State McDonald’s franchisee to pay $1,000 each in class action settlement
Fox reporter finds Memorial Day morons who don’t even know what holiday is for: ‘America’s birthday?’
Tourist’s trip turns into a nightmare after simple act of kindness leaves her in the ICU
Jamie Dimon says JPMorgan wants to go shopping — and has $20 billion to spend
Doing The Math: UC Faculty Urges Return To Standardized Testing After Shocking Decline In Skills
Years ago, I wrote a column denouncing the decision of the University of California system to drop standardized testing in the cause of greater racial diversity. Now, hundreds of UC mathematics faculty have called for a return to such testing after reports showing a thirtyfold increase in students with math skills below high school level.
As written earlier, the University of California system was an early supporter of this disastrous move.
It was heralded as a way to preserve diversity after voters in California repeatedly rejected race-based admissions and the Supreme Court appeared ready to bar such practices (commonly proven with reference to standardized test differentials among applicants).
Now, many professors in the California system have come to the same conclusion as some of us who denounced the move years ago. They have witnessed the drop in academic skills and abilities among incoming students.
These tests not only have the most significant predictive value for performance but also play an important role in the advancement of minority students. Former University of California President Janet Napolitano, however, overrode those conclusions.
Napolitano responded to such criticism with a Standardized Testing Task Force in 2019. Many people expected the task force to recommend the cessation of standardized testing. The task force did find that 59 percent of high school graduates were Latino, African-American or Native American but only 37 percent were admitted as UC freshman students.
The Task Force did not find standardized testing to be unreliable or call for its abandonment, however.
Instead, its final report concluded that “At UC, test scores are currently better predictors of first-year GPA than high school grade point average (HSGPA), and about as good at predicting first-year retention, [University] GPA, and graduation.”
Not only that, it found: “Further, the amount of variance in student outcomes explained by test scores has increased since 2007 … Test scores are predictive for all demographic groups and disciplines … In fact, test scores are better predictors of success for students who are Underrepresented Minority Students (URMs), who are first generation, or whose families are low-income.”
In other words, test scores remain the best indicator for continued performance in college.
That clearly was not the result Napolitano or some others wanted.
So, she simply announced a cessation of the use of such scores in admissions.
The system would go to a “test-blind” system until it developed its own test.
Ending standardized testing had an obvious secondary purpose: to frustrate new legal challenges to the use of race in college admissions.
Last November, Californians rejected a resolution to restore affirmative action in college admissions.
We have also seen the dismal decline in standards at elite universities like Harvard, where faculty have been compelled to teach high school-level math classes to students.
Various schools have now reversed this ridiculous move pushed by faculty and administrators in the cause of racial diversity. The proponents of the change, such as Napolitano, have said little after they decimated the academic integrity and standing of their schools.
The UC faculty cited the UC San Diego Senate–Administration Workgroup on Admissions report, which found that 70 percent of these students are performing below a middle-school level.
Like Harvard, faculty are now teaching high-school-level math.
The declining performance reflects the failure of our public schools, which have also lowered graduation standards. The top-spending public school districts are also some of the worst-performing districts.
Instead of addressing the failure to educate kids in these communities, the push was to eliminate testing itself. As I wrote in 2021, “The deficiencies will remain — but the ability to expose them will be gone.” Those deficiencies are not evident in applications and admissions, but they are clearly manifesting themselves in classes.
Tyler Durden Wed, 05/27/2026 - 12:20