Business

Robinhood to delist tokens for Solana, Cardano, and Polygon after SEC suits name them as securities

Dan Gallagher, Robinhoods chief legal officer, testified before the House Agriculture Committee on Tuesday that the stock trading app was actively reviewing tokens the Securities and Exchange Commission deemed were securities in lawsuits against Binance and Coinbase.

On Friday, Robinhood, which recently expanded into crypto, said in an update on its website that it will delist Solanas SOL, Cardanos ADA, and Polygons MATIC beginning June 27 at 6:59 p.m. ET. Users will be able to buy and sell the tokens up until the end of June. However, come then, any existing tokens in a users wallet will be sold for market value.

Earlier this week the SEC sued crypto companies Binance and Coinbase and alleged that a number of cryptocurrencies are unregistered securities. This includes Solana (SOL), Polygon (MATIC), and Cardano (ADA), which are currently supported on the Robinhood Crypto platform, the company wrote in a message to its users. This introduced a cloud of uncertainty around these assets and, as a result, our team has decided to end support for them.

A spokesperson for Polygon Labs did not immediately return a request for comment. Neither did the Solana or Cardano Foundation, but in a statement issued to Fortune yesterday, a spokesperson for the Solana Foundation said it strongly believes that SOL is not a security.

Prices of those tokens didnt move significantly after Robinhood notified its users on Friday morning. However, since the SEC singled out Solana, Polygon, and Cardano earlier this week, their prices have plummeted. SOL was down approximately 12% from Monday to Thursday afternoon. MATIC was also down about 12%, and ADA dropped 5%. The three tokens are in the top 10 in total market capitalization among all cryptocurrencies, according to CoinMarketCap.

The sudden pivot in the fortunes of Solana, Polygon, and Cardano follow the SECs two blockbuster lawsuits on Monday and Tuesday. In its suit against Binance, SEC Chair Gary Gensler said: Through 13 charges, we allege that Zhao and Binance entities engaged in an extensive web of deception, conflicts of interest, lack of disclosure, and calculated evasion of the law.

In less aggressive language, Gensler also said that Coinbase did not comply with U.S. securities law. Coinbases alleged failures deprive investors of critical protections, including rulebooks that prevent fraud and manipulation, proper disclosure, safeguards against conflicts of interest, and routine inspection by the SEC, he said in a statement.

Central to both lawsuits are the agencys allegations that 13 tokens, which include SOL, ADA, and MATIC, are securities. The others singled out were SAND, AXS, CHZ, FLOW, ICP, NEAR, VGX, DASH, and NEXO.

Meta CEO disses Apples VR demo as a person sitting on a couch by themself

Social media CEO Mark Zuckerberg, who changed the name of his company to pursue his metaverse dreams, is defending his companys approach to virtual reality after Apples blockbuster announcement earlier this week.

On Monday, Apple revealed the Vision Pro, its first foray into what the company called spatial computing. The $3,500 headset will overlay apps on the surrounding environment, allowing users to interact with content and programs over a three-dimensional space.

The announcement threatens to overshadow Metas own virtual reality reveal: the Meta Quest 3, which the social media company unveiled last week. Metas headset is priced at a more affordable $500, and, like the Vision Pro, also features mixed reality (where images are displayed over a real-world environment).

At an all-hands meeting on Thursday, Zuckerberg said that Apples reveal really shows the difference in the values and the vision that our companies bring to this, reports The Verge. Metas vision for its virtual reality offerings is fundamentally social, he said, noting that his companys demonstration showed people interacting in new ways and feeling closer.

Yet every demo that [Apple] showed was a person sitting on a couch by themself, Zuckerberg said. That could be the vision of the future of computing, but like, its not the one that I want.

Meta did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Metaverse

Metas CEO was one of the loudest proponents of the metaverse, or the idea that the real and digital worlds will become increasingly connected through new technologies like virtual reality. Zuckerberg even changed the companys name from Facebook to Meta Platforms in late 2021.

Yet the companys metaverse efforts havent caught fire. Horizon Worlds, the companys flagship virtual world, had fewer than 200,000 monthly active users by October 2022, according to the Wall Street Journal.

In April, Meta reported that the Reality Labs unit, which develops its metaverse efforts including virtual reality, lost $3.99 billion in the most recent quarter. The company warned the division was likely to lose even more money this year.

Zuckerberg referred on Thursday to his companys earlier investment in virtual reality, noting that Apples headset did not feature any developments that Metas teams teams havent already explored and thought of.

Virtual reality is not the only area where Metas earlier efforts have risked getting leapfrogged by a competitor. The social media company has invested billions into new A.I. technologies, but has hesitated to release them for broader use for fear of disseminating untrue information, according to the New York Times. Yet the release of OpenAIs ChatGPT has allowed other tech companies, like Microsoft and Alphabet, to take over the conversation for A.I.

Embarrassingly, Meta was not invited to a White House discussion on A.I. earlier this year, with an administration spokesperson saying at the time that it wanted to focus on companies currently leading in the space.

Meta announced a few generative A.I. tools in its all-hands meeting on Thursday, including chatbots for Whatsapp and Messenger, and photo-editing tools for Instagram, according to Bloomberg.

The social media is in the middle of what its CEO calls a Year of Efficiency, a cost-cutting initiative. The social media company has cut 21,000 jobs since last November.

On the offensive

Yet in one area, Meta is going on the offensive against a competitor.

Also on Thursday, the company revealed to employees that it was working on a competitor to Twitter, reports the Verge. The competing social media company is beset by content moderation controversies under new owner Elon Musk,

Some celebrities are already interested in the app, internally called Project 92, said Chris Cox, Metas chief product officer, during the all-hands meeting. Weve been hearing from creators and public figures who are interested in having a platform that is sanely run, he said.

Republican House Speaker McCarthy wants a new commission to tackle U.S. debt

House Speaker Kevin McCarthy is studying the history books and considering the appointment of a mix of lawmakers and business leaders as he lays the groundwork for a new commission to tackle the nations growing debt.

McCarthy is fresh off his biggest political victory since becoming speaker in January. He got the White House to negotiate on a bill that suspends the debt ceiling into January 2025 while also producing a projected $1.5 trillion in deficit savings over the coming decade. But the legislation only focused on a sliver of the federal spending that occurs each year and excluded programs such as Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid that account for the majority of government spending and are the biggest drivers of the debt.

McCarthy has embraced the idea of establishing a new fiscal commission to find additional deficit reduction. While similar commissions have notched success in the past, the most recent ones failed to muster enough support for Congress to take up their recommendations. The speaker has asked Rep. Garret Graves, R-La., to work with him on the issue, which follows Graves work as one of the lead debt ceiling negotiators in talks with the White House.

Im studying different angles to see what would best work, some with members. And should I bring in some people from the outside so you have some modern people in the business world that have taken companies and looked at them in a way to streamline and modernize for efficiencies? McCarthy said. I think that combination would work well, but right now Im spending a lot of time on how to put that together.

Many analysts say it will take a combination of spending cuts and tax hikes to meaningfully change the countrys financial trajectory. But therein lies the problem: Many Republicans wont entertain tax increases of any kind, and many Democrats wont consider benefit cuts.

McCarthy refused to accept any tax increases as part of the debt ceiling talks. And when asked if he had any such red lines for the debt commission, McCarthy said he currently is focused on getting the structure of the commission right, but added that the revenue coming into government coffers, about 19.2% of gross domestic product last year, is at the high end of the 50-year average.

Democrats are treading warily. Im not sure what he envisions, but I look forward to having that discussion, said Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y. I have no idea what the contours of the commission would even look like, so its hard for me to comment up or down at this point.

The landmines confronting the commission are legion. Even if McCarthy can get something through the House, the commissions clout would be diminished without Senate participation and White House buy-in. And any findings from the effort could come during a presidential election year an unfavorable political climate for a proposal that is likely to ask for some sacrifice from the voting public.

McCarthy said one thing he could do as speaker would be to bring up recommendations from the debt commission one at a time rather than in one fell swoop.

I could do it kind of like in a BRAC, McCarthy said, referring to the various Base Realignment and Closure rounds initiated by the Defense Department to reduce excess infrastructure. I could bring it directly to the floor, no amendments, you vote it up or vote it down and see what passed, see what doesnt.

You can do section by section so people dont get hung up on everything, he said.

Rep. Steve Womack, R-Ark., said he likes the idea of a commission.

We need to get as much of the politics out of it as we can and just give us the facts, Womack said. And the facts are that 70% of this whole federal budget is on autopilot right now.

Womack said he isnt calling for Congress to cut a lot of these programs, but we do have to make these programs sustainable in the future.

On the Senate side, Sen. John Thune, the No. 2-ranking Republican, gave the commission concept his endorsement, saying we got to start taking this stuff on.

I think that makes all the sense in the world. Lets get the best experts in the room and figure out whats the best way to fix these issues, make these programs sustainable and see if we cant do something to address deficits and debt in a meaningful way, Thune said.

But Sen. Ron Wyden, the Democratic chair of the Senate Finance Committee, said he sees it as a way for Republicans to pursue ideological trophies.

Everything Ive heard about it, its a prescription for trouble, Wyden said, adding, Theyre looking at a glide path to reduce benefits.

The most recent efforts to reduce deficits through the recommendations of a commission ended in failure.

In 2010, there was the Simpson-Bowles commission, led by co-chairs Alan Simpson and Erskine Bowles. They drafted a plan that mixed painful cuts to safety-net programs with big tax increases even while cutting top rates on individuals and corporations to 28% from 35%. It also would have hiked Social Securitys retirement age and scaled back popular tax deductions for health insurance and mortgage interest.

The committees recommendations gained the support of most of its members, but fell three votes short of the 14-vote threshold required to send the package to Congress for an up-or-down vote.

Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, a member of the Simpson-Bowles panel, said the commission failed because a better mechanism was needed to ensure the recommendations were voted on by Congress. He said he continues to believe a commission is the best way to tee up for Congress the tough political decisions on the $31 trillion-plus debt.

Following Simpson-Bowles, Congress approved legislation the next year that established a Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction. But the so-called supercommittee failed after two months of work to produce a deficit-cutting plan of at least $1.2 trillion.

Part of the legislation establishing the supercommittee also put into place a backup plan the enactment of across-the-board cuts to both defense and non-defense programs should it fail. Those cuts eventually began in March 2013. But subsequent Congresses routinely blunted the impact of the automatic cuts by upping the limits on discretionary spending.

The CEO behind the success of Lululemon and Reebok: A reckoning is coming as Gen Zers hold retailers accountable for single-use plastics

My business career has always revolved around anticipating consumer trends, whether it was the rise of yoga at Lululemon or aerobics (which allowed us to take the small yoga apparel business to a billion-dollar international public enterprise during my tenure from 2005 to 2008), or running and tennis at Reebok in the 1990s (where we grew sales from $13 million to $3.5 billion in sales). I find shifts in consumer behavior intriguingbecause they are going to happen with or without me.

The issues around sustainability and overconsumption of single-use plastics were first introduced to me by my family after I left my role at Lululemon. My wifes daughter is incredibly passionate about this space. In the past few years, she has opened my eyes to the magnitude of environmental issues that future generations will face.

Thinking back to my time at Lululemon, I began recognizing how the high volume of single-use plastic waste generated by consumer brands negatively impacts the planet over time. One example is the plastic bags used to cover garments during shipping at Lululemon. These bags served no purpose other than to keep dust off the apparel during shippingand were ultimately discarded upon arrival to the stores. Unfortunately, this is a universal story, as almost every major retailer rely on single-use plastic bags, containers, and other disposable items as a key part of their supply chain.

As global leaders continue negotiations around the future of plastics in Paris this month, its an important moment in time to discuss what it will take to see action and address the barriers business leaders face. Its more important now than ever to give credence to the unwavering demands of younger generations and shift our perspective on what we can do to change the status quo.

Reframing our understanding of consumer expectations

As a generation coming of age in the midst of a global pandemic and climate crisis, Gen Z has emerged as a demographic that is deeply committed to principles such as sustainability and social responsibility. These digital natives are the most sophisticated and critical generation of consumers to date. They are also the most diverse generation, according to Pew Research.

Gen Zers are reshaping the market by insisting on working at, buying from, and engaging with businesses that place sustainability at the forefront of their operations. An inherently skeptical group, Gen Zers are sensitive to inauthentic brand messaging. Data from McKinsey shows that 88% are doubtful of businesses eco-friendly claims.

Reflecting on my background in the sports industry, where consumer desires shape product development, I see parallels between the demands of Gen Z and the expectations from athletes and consumers we worked with at Reebok. Just as athletes sought improved performance, injury reduction, and customized experiences, todays consumers, especially Gen Z, demand more than incremental product improvements when it comes to issues like single-use plastics.

A similar paradigm shift during my tenure at Reebok, was when we introduced the Pump shoe, which incorporated a valve that was initially developed for NASA spacecraft. This was not a marketing gimmick: It took considerable time, effort, and investment from all parties involved to find a solution for the perfect pump, but it was well worth it. We listened to the voices of the generation who were saying: We dont want the next iteration on an existing product, we want something new that fits our values.

Going against the status quo

Gen Z gravitates toward brands that make sustainability central to how they do business. They will not hesitate to call out a company publicly or stop buying its products if they perceive a lack of authenticity.

An overarching issue in the conversation around single-use plastics is the ecosystem the industry is built on. This includes the resources, infrastructure, and factory setupsall centered on providing cheap, single-use items that generate profit at scale.

The good news is there are brands and institutions tackling the issue of single-use plastics. With formal discussions around plastic pollution currently being held at the UNs Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee, it is clear global leaders are responding to the challenge. Companies like Better for All (Geosphere), Sun and Swell, VEJA, Kaneka BioPolymers, and Blueland (an eco-friendly kitchen cleaning tablet from which customers dissolve in water to avoid single-use cleaning products) aim to change the game for single-use plastics.

By addressing Gen Zs environmental concerns, businesses, and governments are not just driving change, they are inspiring a shift in consumer behavior towards more conscious and responsible choices.

The consumer shift towards sustainability and away from harmful single-use plastics is imminent. Business leaders can either respond to it or be left behind. In fact, my own transition as a business executive from sports and fitness into sustainability was a natural progression dictated by evolving consumer expectations.

Gen Zers, armed with their influence over older and younger generations alike, are compelling us to imagine a world where sustainability isnt just an afterthought but a fundamental aspect of design. Just as with Reeboks Pump shoe integrating NASAs valve, the resources to meet these demands do exist. The onus is on society to harness them effectively.

Bob Meers is the CEO of Geosphere LLC (Better for All). Meers previously served as CEO of Lululemon Athletica, Inc., president and CEO of Syratech Corp, and president and CEO of Reebok International.

The opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Fortune.

More must-read commentary published by Fortune:

Twitter co-founder Evan Williams says Elon Musks purchase of the company made him sad. Hes brilliant. But no ones brilliant on everything

Twitter co-founder Evan Williams seems pretty upset with how things are panning out at the company under new owner Elon Musk.

In his first interview since Musk took Twitter private in a landmark $44 billion deal, Williams told Bloombergs The Circuit with Emily Chang program that he originally believed the notion of Musk taking over Twitter was interesting and fun.

However, he revealed that by the time the deal closed, his stance had changed, and he was in fact sad when the purchase actually went through.

After attempting to pull out of the acquisition, citing concerns over the number of botor fakeaccounts on the platform, Musk, the worlds wealthiest person, eventually decidedunder legal pressureto buy the company.

Williams, who was Twitter CEO between 2008 and 2010, is no longer a Twitter shareholder, but as one of the companys first stakeholders has been closely watching the drama around the Musk-led Twitter unfold.

I dont think hes dialed it in quite right yet, Williams said of Musk in the interview, which aired Thursday night. I think hes brilliant. But no ones brilliant on everything.

Musk under fire

Musk, who said he wanted to buy Twitter so that he could make the social network a platform for free speech, has come under fire for how he has been running the company since the deal closed late last year.

Under his stewardship, Twitter has faced accusations of becoming a far-right social network, seen its value plummet by two-thirds thanks largely to fleeing advertisers, and lost four in five workers either through mass layoffs or voluntary resignations. The site itself has suffered a slew of technical problems, including during the recent launch of divisive Florida Governor Ron DeSantiss presidential campaign.

This week saw Musk step down as CEO of Twitter to be replaced by Linda Yaccarino, the former advertising chief at media giant NBCUniversal, as the company seeks to rebuild revenue lost to the sites advertiser exodus. Many of the companys top advertisers turned their back on the platform due to its new moderation policies sparking concerns that a Musk-owned Twitter would see their ads appearing alongside controversial, divisive or harmful content.

In Thursdays interview, Williams said moderating content on a platform like Twitter is like hosting a party, with people posting inappropriate content ruining the vibe.

While he said there was a chance Musk could still turn Twitter into a good party, the platforms brand may be irreversibly damaged.

I think brand recovery is much harder and now the brand is very linked to Elon, Williams said.

Advertisers werent alone in fleeing Twitter post-Musks acquisition, with users of the social network leaving the platform in droves in protest over the way the site was changing, and new competitors scooping them up.

Williams predicted on Thursday that Twitter could be headed toward a similar fate to Myspace or Yahoo, both of which were immensely popular in their early years but saw their brand power dwindle as poor leadership saw users turn to other, more relevant, platforms.

He said Twitters tumultuous seven months under Musk had made him question whether he and his co-foundersJack Dorsey, Biz Stone and Noah Glasshad made the right call in creating the platform altogether.

Maybe we just had the wrong idea with Twitter, and now its time to move on to some other idea, he said. The idea of social media is probably the thing Im questioning the most right now.

Dorsey criticism

Dorsey himself has also criticized the way Musk has steered Twitter since buying the company in late Octoberdespite being an early supporter of the Tesla founder running the firm.

Last month, Dorsey argued that Twitter had gone south since Musk took over, adding that Musk should have walked away from the acquisition.

A year earlier, he said that Elon is the singular solution I trust when it came to finding a buyer for Twitter.

This is the right path, Dorsey said at the time of accepting Musks proposed acquisition. I believe it with all my heart.

On Thursday, Williams said he was not mad at Jack, but said he believed his former business partner made a mistake trusting Musk.

Im guessing its not going the way he was hoping, Williams said.

Twitter did not respond to Fortunes request for comment on the Bloomberg interview with Williams.

Coca-Cola is targeting gamers with new drink

Coca-Cola is tapping into the lucrative gamer market with the launch of a new limited-edition flavor, Coca-Cola Ultimate.

Created in partnership with Riot Games League of Legends, a multiplayer online battle arena game, the new flavor of Coke in meant to encapsulate the thrill of gaming and taste like experience points.

Although what that actually tastes like in real-life remains under wraps.

Consumers will be able to grab a bottle and find out for themselves starting next week, with Ultimate landing on shelves on June 12 in the United States and Canada, and days sooner in other parts of the world.

Behind the strategy

The flavors are not designed to become permanent offerings, Coca-Colas CEO James Quincey explained during the Redburn CEO conference in November.

The soda category has been experiencing sluggish growth for a few years now.

So despite havings slashed its portfolio to focus on its core brands, including Coke, Coca-Cola still has a lot of work to do to build buzz around its flagship productand launching limited edition flavors is a tried and tested strategy for the brand.

While specific sales figures or financial performance related to previous flavors have been not publicly disclosed, the tactic always generates much noise online and in the press.

So Ultimate should be no different.

Whats more, much like its previous limited edition lines that have leveraged partnerships with popular artists to tap into a specific consumer segmentjust a few months ago it released a Coca-Cola Movement flavor with Grammy award-winning singer RosalìaUltimate forays into the lucrative world of gaming.

Gaming is big business

Gaming is a billion-dollar industryand brands want in.

Even if gamers arent enticed to taste the flavor of experience points (which are earned by League of Legends players based on how much time they spend playing the game), Coca-Cola is appealing to the market in various other ways, including a series of exclusive digital experiences.

By scanning the QR code on the relevant Coke bottles and cans, consumers will be transported to the Coca-Cola Creations Hub where theyll find the Ultimate Emote Generator, an Instagram filter allowing players to view themselves in the style of a League emote.

Plus, some new challenges will be added to League of Legends and players will be able to earn free game rewards.

Whether gamers become long-term fans of Coca-Cola off the back of the marketing campaign is yet to be seen, but similar collaborations have worked for brands in the past.

The energy drink company Red Bull has a similar partnership with the popular game Fortnite to host exclusive in-game events and tournaments.

Most recently, the announcement that MrSavage, an 18-year-old Norwegian gaming influencer, is set to join Redbull as one of their eSports athletes sent fans wild.

Meanwhile, Nike, PlayStation, and the rapper Travis Scott teamed up for the release of a limited edition sneaker back in 2020.

Scott shared a black-and-white video to his then 34.4 million followers on Instagram promoting the extremely exclusive shoe (with just 24 pairs produced) and three years later people are still trying to get their hands on them, with the design fetching thousands in the second-hand market.

The big city winners and losers of the Fortune 500: Why Houston, Atlanta and Dallas are (almost) beating New York and Chicago

In the late 1950s, when the Fortune 500 was still just a wee babe, the big cities that dominated the index were pretty obvious: New York and Chicago reigned supreme. But now, the era of high inflation and remote work has American cities singing a different tune. As with the housing market, so with the corporate headquarters sweepstakes: The southeast and southwest are hot in more ways than their climate, and the expensive coasts are passé. And then theres Chicago.

During the inflationary age, CEOs are cutting costs in most places (if not always in their own salaries). A major way to budget these days is to relocate headquarters, as some big names in tech and finance move from Silicon Valley and the Big Apple to less pricey areas. In general, large companies arent afraid to ship out of town and set up shop elsewhere.

Looking back at the geographic description of Fortune 500 companies over the past three years, we found that some cities are gaining speed, while others are losing steam. And looking back to the late 1950s, we see a sea change in American business.

New York City, which once dominated, is still the king, but sits on an ever-smaller throne. The northeast in general has been dethroned, as New York, Chicago, Detroit, Pittsburgh and Cleveland accounted for nearly half of the Fortune 500 in 1957. While its true the earliest form of the index only tracked industrials, the landscape is vastly different today, and the south is, well, hot.

Without mincing words, here are the winners and the capital L losers in 2023.

Courtesty of Nick Rapp

Dont mess with Texas

Even though New York City remains the top city for Fortune 500 companies (housing 44), the state of Texas is rising. As Fortunes Paolo Confino reports, the lone star state has the greatest number of Fortune 500 companies of any state for the second year in a row: and they account for $2.6 trillion in revenue and $226.5 billion in profit.

Houston has the title of second most popular headquarters city for Fortune 500 firms, the Gretchen Wieners, if you will., with 22 of them headquartered in the city, though not nearly the levels of Regina George/New York.

Unsurprisingly, energy is the name of the game in Texas, as 26 of the 55 companies that call the state home are from this industry, including the big man on campus, ExxonMobil.

What makes Texas, or Houston for that matter, so appealing for corporations? Mostly the low cost of living and lack of taxes on businesses. Even Exxon has tightened its belt in the inflationary age, though, shedding its God Pod and consolidating its upper managements formerly exclusive luxury suite into its preexisting Houston campus.

Atlanta and Dallas are next up

If American Idol has taught us anything, its that being second place can be a blessing in disguise. Its no secret that when people and companies move because a place is affordable, they often make a ripple effect that ends up negating the very pull of the city in the first place. Once youve heard of a bargain city, its likely already hiking up in prices and no longer that sweet of a deal. Of course, companies have bigger wallets to scrape from, but for homeowners, Houston is starting to feel pricier.

In come our second and third place winners, Atlanta and Dallas, respectively. Atlanta was a fourth place city just three years ago, and while just going from 14 to 15 companies, it has gained a spot. Atlanta started making its ascent during the 90s, when it hosted 12 companies. While the southern city might offer more of a bargain for CEOs, their presence hasnt always correlated with economic growth for locals. The city has the widest income inequality based on race in the U.S., according to Atlanta Wealth Building Initiative. And Fortune 500 companies arent really helping the matter.

So far, the substantial corporate presence in the cityCoca Cola, CNN, and Delta are all headquartered therehasnt trickled much down to generate a thriving Black middle or working class, wrote Fortunes Ellen McGirt, Neither has the presence of relative newcomers looking to leverage the waiting pool of Black talent, many of whom have become increasingly unwilling to relocate to white tech corridors like Silicon Valley or the Pacific Northwest.

Dallas consistently ranks as the fifth most populous place for Fortune 500 companies to call home. Just because theyre at the same standing doesnt mean that the home of the Cowboys isnt growing. In three years, its gone from hosting nine to 11 companies and has gradually taken the place of Philadelphia, which was fifth in 1995, when Dallas was ninth.

A look backand a nod to the losers

For a look back at the Fortune 500 over time, we considered not only 1957 as a representative year of the early days of the index, but also 1995, when services and financial firms were added to the 500.

In the 1950s, New York dominated as home to 136 out of the 500 companies, while Chicago was home to 47, Pittsburgh 22, and Detroit and Cleveland had 18 and 16, respectively. Of course, Pittsburgh, Detroit and Cleveland fell out of the top five, although Pennsylvanias steel city is clinging to a four-way tie for seventh place. Still, Pittsburghs number of Fortune 500 companies has shrunk by more than 60%.

In 1995, New York and Chicago remained at the top but now with only 49 and 17 companies, much closer to their current, shrunken state. Houston had crept up by this point, taking third place with 16 companies.

Over the last three years, New York City has been consistently first place, and looks to hold that crown for some time to come, having double the number of second-placed Houston. That being said, NYC is an infamously difficult place to afford, even for companies. And some headquarters arent simply worth the price, as downtown still remains a bit empty on most days of the week due to remote work. The ongoing commercial real estate crisis (or apocalypse) poses a long-term headwind to New Yorks top spot.

Chicago, meanwhile, continues to wane, being bumped from third to fourth place as Atlanta ascends. Over the past three years, the windy city has declined from 15 to 13 companies. Compared to their prominent spots in the 1957 list, theyve each declined by over 70%, quite a fall. For now, the bargains for corporate headquarters lie south.