Posted on

Travel Companions: How to Share Expenses

5 min read

Travel Companions: How to Share ExpensesNo matter how well you know someone, you usually learn a lot more once you’ve traveled with them. We are all different in this activity, from people who prefer aisle seats over window seats, to Airbnb renters or hotel enthusiasts, to the outdoorsy versus museum aficionados.

Friendship compatibility does not always translate to travel compatibility. Therefore, before you load up the car or board public transportation, it will help to communicate preferences, establish a few ground rules, and, perhaps most importantly, decide how to share expenses.

There are plenty of advantages to traveling with another person or a group of people, even if you tend to be a loner. For example, sharing expenses for accommodations, a car rental, or even a bottle of wine over dinner can cut your vacation budget substantially. However, if you don’t have a plan for what expenses to share and how to track them, you may return home short-changed, resentful, and with one less person in your life.

Ground Rules

It’s important to gauge upfront if everyone is on the same page as to how much money they want to spend on the trip, and even establish a maximum budget so no one gets trapped into paying more than they can afford. This means determining the level of accommodations (e.g., luxury versus budget-friendly) to shop for, whether or not you want the option to cook meals as opposed to eating out all the time, and the main activities the group plans to engage in (e.g., free hiking versus expensive snow skiing). Establish what types of expenses will be shared, such as group meals, housing and car rental, and what will be paid for individually, such as airfare, solo outings and souvenirs.

Choose Your Tracking Method

There are two approaches for sharing the expenses of travel: Wing it or track it. Winging implies a more casual tactic. For example, one person picks up the hotel room tab, another pays for the rental car, another pays for meals. Perhaps you rotate or take turns picking up comparable bills. The goal is to generally spread expenses evenly across all payers, but winging it may lead to one (or more) travelers paying more while the other(s) pay less. If everyone agrees their outlays may differ, then this tactic will probably work just fine.

Tracking Tools

The second approach is to track all shared expenses with some degree of accuracy. This is easier if all expenses are shared evenly, but more complex if expenses need to be broken down into who ordered a salad and who ordered the filet mignon.

Fortunately, there is a plethora of electronic technologies and digital tools designed to make it easier to track travel expenses and ensure no one overpays – right down to the penny.

PayPal, Venmo, Zelle – These services make it easy to send or request money using apps. They may require travelers to keep receipts and calculate individual tabs, then settle up at the end of the day or the end of the trip. This tactic can be a little unwieldy, and may require manual tracking to ensure no one is paying too much or too little along the way. All travelers should sign up for at least one compatible money transfer app; they are generally free to use.

Splitwise – This app enables participants in a travel group to enter the expenses they paid by adding the names of the participants and breaking down the individual amounts each person contributed to each bill. The app tracks expenses by person, then tallies up who owes money at the end. Splitwise calculates who owes whom. Travelers can then settle balances using their preferred payment method, such as PayPal, Venmo, Zelle, bank transfer, cash, or another supported payment service. Splitwise is just one brand name of many apps that work similarly, including Tricount and Revolut.

Cino – This app works a bit differently in that each traveler links it to their personal credit or debit card, and the group Cino card is loaded into Apple Pay or Google Pay. Then all participants share a virtual card to pay for expenses, which divides each payment at the point of purchase among the participants for that expense. When one person pays for an expense, everyone’s share is automatically charged to each member’s connected credit or debit account. Note that Cino does not break down invoices by line item to track exactly who ate what; it follows a split ratio (e.g., 50%-50%) as determined up front by the group.

Artificial Intelligence – Travelers may want to give AI a try, where as they start with a prompt asking the service to track and split group expenses, then enter the names of participants and related expenses to the prompt on an ongoing basis. AI tools can organize, categorize, and calculate shared expenses that users enter manually. Some AI assistants may also summarize spending trends or generate settlement calculations, but they generally do not automatically track purchases unless integrated with financial apps.

Given today’s higher prices, group travel is becoming more prevalent as a way to share the cost of vacation. According to a 2025 Zeta Global survey, 40 percent of travelers are going on trips with family while 21 percent opt to vacation with friends. Today’s new digital tools make it easy to track and share expenses so that you don’t strain relationships with travel companions.

Posted on

Understanding the Exchange Ratio

3 min read

Understanding the Exchange RatioWith more than $57 trillion in mergers and acquisitions, according to the Institute for Mergers, Acquisitions & Alliances, understanding how the Exchange Ratio works is essential for businesses and investors to maximize these processes.

The ratio assesses how many shares the company that’s purchasing the takeover company must issue per share of the takeover business. Transactions that use shares for part or whole of the payment are able to leverage this integral benchmark. It’s important to keep in mind that the exchange ratio may provide parties helpful insight on transactions involving all or part equity, but it won’t be beneficial for all cash deals.

The formula to calculate the ratio is as follows:  

Exchange Ratio = Offer Price for Target’s Shares / Acquirer’s Share Price

Looking at the acquiring firm’s and the target or acquired firm’s share prices illustrates the exchange ratio. If the target firm has 30,000 shares outstanding and trades at $34.60, and the acquiring firm offers to pay a 20 percent takeover, it results in a share price of $41.52 per share. The acquiring firm’s share price currently trades at $23.50.

Putting the formula into practice, it’s as follows:

= $41.52 / $23.50

= 1.77

Based on the resulting Exchange Ratio of 1.77, the acquiring firm must issue 1.77 shares of its equity for each share of the target firm it wants to acquire.

For transactions with different proportions of cash and stock, the percentage of stock is what’s factored into the exchange ratio. Deals conducted with 100 percent stock provide the most value to an exchange ratio.   

Real World Example

If an acquiring business offers the acquisition target two of its shares for a single share of the acquired company, the deal can take the following circumstances. Before the deal announcement, the purchasing company’s shares might be trading at $20, with the target company’s shares trading at $30. With a 2-to-1 exchange ratio, the purchaser is bidding $40 for the seller’s share at $30.

After the deal announcement, there’s usually a valuation difference between buyer and seller due to the time value of money and risks. Risks include potentially being blocked by regulators, shareholder rejection or changing economic conditions. One important consideration is that merger arbitration may occur by investors when they try to get ahead of a deal ultimately completing before the uncertainty is removed.

If the deal ultimately closes, and investors get two buyer shares in exchange for one seller share and the acquiring company’s share increases to $37 from $30, investors who bet against the buyer’s stock via short-selling will be rewarded a difference of $3 per share (2 shares from the acquiring company 2 X $20 = $40 minus the $37 single share price of the target company). Investors who close out their short position will see the difference from the seller’s price for a profit. This tactic is frequently executed by opportunistic investors who have no direct interest in owning the equity, but only for a trade.

While each deal is different, understanding the process is essential to break down the internal details for all interested merger and acquisition parties. 

Posted on

Personal Versus Enterprise Goodwill: What You’re Really Selling

4 min read

Personal Versus Enterprise GoodwillPicture two heating-and-cooling companies at opposite ends of the same town. Same revenue, same trucks, same crew. The first one runs on its owner, a guy who spent 20 years building a name, and people call the office because they want him on the roof. The second runs on a brand, a dispatch system, and a phone number folks have had memorized since the ’90s. On paper, the two look like twins. But put them up for sale, and they fetch very different prices – and the reason is goodwill, the chunk of value that has nothing to do with the trucks and everything to do with why the phone keeps ringing.

The Value That Stays

That second company has what valuators call enterprise goodwill. It lives in the business itself: the location people drive past, the name they already trust, the systems that keep running through the two weeks when the founder goes to Cabo. Whoever buys the place inherits all of it, and that is what a buyer pays up for. They are not wagering on one person’s stamina. They are buying an operation that keeps producing after the seller is a memory.

The Value That Walks Out the Door

The first company has personal goodwill, where owners talk themselves into a number the market will not pay. When the clients are loyal to the owner, the referrals come because of the owner, and the day he retires, half the revenue walks out behind him; you cannot deed that over the way you hand across the keys to a van. A business built on one person almost always sells for less, because the buyer is left guessing how much of it actually survives the handoff.

It can be salvaged. A tight employment agreement and a non-compete can keep the seller out of the market long enough for relationships to take root with the new owner. In a lot of these deals, choreographing that single transfer is the whole negotiation.

It Comes Up in Divorce, Too

The same split shows up in divorce, usually not the way people expect. State law varies, but courts tend to treat enterprise goodwill as a divisible marital asset while setting personal goodwill aside, on the logic that it is really the spouse’s future earning power rather than property to carve up. Arizona is one of the states that has swept professional goodwill into the marital estate anyway, in the right case. Wherever it gets heard, someone has to draw that boundary, and a lot of money rides on where the line lands.

Putting a Dollar On It

So how do you put a dollar figure on something this slippery? One of the cleaner tools is the With and Without Method. You build two futures for the company and discount each one back to today. In the first, the key owner stays. In the second, he walks and starts competing down the street. The cash flow that bleeds out of that second version is the value the first one was quietly protecting.

Go back to our first owner and say his presence is worth a formal non-compete. With him locked in, free cash flow runs $10 million a year. With him loose and competing, it slips to $7.5 million. Discount each stream at 7.5 percent over eight years, and the protected version is worth about $58.6 million in today’s dollars against roughly $43.9 million without. That gap, near $14.6 million, is the price tag on the non-compete.

A real engagement would not leave it that clean. I would model how fast the business rebuilds the revenue it lost and weigh the result for how likely the owner is to actually go compete. But the bones of it are exactly that.

What to Take Away

Here is the part worth holding onto. Get this distinction wrong, and you can leave seven figures on the table at a closing or in front of a judge. The line between personal and enterprise goodwill does not draw itself. If you are eyeing an exit, weighing an offer, or fighting over a number in a dispute, get someone to mark it before the other side marks it for you.

Posted on

Securing Funding for Border Patrol, Homeland Security and Small Businesses

3 min read

Securing Funding for Border Patrol, Homeland Security and Small BusinessesSecure America Act (S 2) – The Secure America Act is a federal budget reconciliation bill that funds homeland security. It was introduced by Sen. Lindsay Graham (R-SC) on May 20. The bill allocates $22.6 billion to Customs and Border Protection; $3.5 billion for border security technology improvements; $38.5 billion to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE); and

$5 billion to the Department of Homeland Security. The act was passed in the Senate on June 5, in the House on June 9, and was signed into law by the president on June 10.

Investing in All of America Act of 2025 (HR 2066) – Introduced on March 11, 2025, by Rep. Daniel Meuser (R-PA), this legislation revises how private capital is defined and adjusts Small Business Investment Company (SBIC) leverage limits. The net result is that it increases the amount of long-term capital available to American small businesses. The bill passed in the House on Dec. 1, 2025, in the Senate on April 15, and was enacted on May 19.

FIRE Act (HR 6387) – Introduced by Gabe Evans (R-CO) on Dec. 3, 2025, this bill addresses a current quandary between federal air quality enforcement and state-level wildfire prevention. In an effort to curb wildfires, some states conduct controlled burns. However, these prescribed burns do not always comply with national air quality standards. The act would amend the current Clean Air Act to exclude state wildfire mitigation activities from air quality compliance calculations. The fix remains controversial because some lawmakers see it as a gateway to weakening the nation’s air quality standards. The FIRE Act passed in the House on April 22 and is now in the Senate for consideration.

Combating Organized Retail Crime Act of 2025 (HR 2853) – This legislation focuses on the customs enforcement side of ICE. It would authorize a unit that coordinates law enforcement for organized crime involving the shipping and sale of illegally obtained goods and counterfeit products via online and physical marketplaces. The bipartisan bill was introduced by David Joyce (R-OH) on April 10, passed in the House on May 12, and is under consideration in the Senate.

Defending American Property Abroad Act of 2026 (HR 7084) – This law enables the president to prohibit vessels from entering any port, harbor, or marine terminal in a Western Hemisphere country that commandeered property owned by a U.S. citizen or corporation. Failure to abide could trigger a total ban from U.S. waters. The injunction can be lifted once the property is returned by the offending country with acceptable compensation or some other resolution. The bill does include exemptions for legitimate maritime emergencies. This largely bipartisan bill was introduced by Rep. August Pfluger (R-TX) on Jan. 15. It passed the House on March 27 and is currently under consideration in the Senate.

Posted on

Beyond Passwords: Why Recent 24B Records Leak is Wake-Up Call for Stronger Authentication

4 min read

24B Records Leak, Beyond PasswordsThe recent discovery of a publicly available Elasticsearch cluster, a group of interconnected search servers, containing 24 billion exposed records, is among the largest-scale data breaches, highlighting the troubling reality that passwords have become a weak link in modern digital security.

For years, one of the responses to cyberthreats has been to create stronger passwords, implement password rotation policies, and deploy password managers. Despite all these efforts, credential-related attacks continue to dominate the threat landscape.

The latest threat is a reminder that the problem is not simply password hygiene – but the password itself.

The Weaknesses of Password-Based Security

Passwords were designed for a simpler era of computing. Today, passwords are used to protect everything from corporate networks and cloud applications to banking platforms and healthcare systems. Even with the evolution in computing, the basic principle of passwords remains unchanged. That is, access is granted on a secret that can be stolen, guessed, reused, or shared.

The 24 billion record leak demonstrates the scale of this vulnerability. This means cybercriminals now possess records of usernames, email addresses, login URLs and passwords that can be weaponized against organizations.

The password challenge is made worse by human behavior. Users often reuse passwords across multiple accounts, use predictable combinations, or rely on slight variations of existing credentials. This means a breach affecting one platform can easily become a gateway to many others.

Unfortunately, organizations continue to invest heavily in securing networks, endpoints and applications while still relying on an authentication mechanism that is failing to withstand today’s threat environment.

Why Traditional Defenses Are No Longer Adequate

The greatest danger that arises from a big password leak is credential stuffing attacks. In these attacks, cybercriminals systematically test stolen username and password combinations across thousands of websites and applications using automated tools. Since users frequently reuse credentials, attackers can achieve high success rates with minimal effort. The credential stuffing attacks model allows threat actors to compromise accounts without exploiting software vulnerabilities or bypassing sophisticated security controls.

Even password managers, although valuable, are not the best solution. They help users generate and store stronger credentials, but are not immune to phishing attacks, session hijacking, malware-based credential theft, or social engineering attacks.

Multi-factor authentication (MFA) improves security. However, attackers have increasingly taken advantage of MFA fatigue attacks, SIM-swapping, and real-time phishing proxies.

Simply put, organizations are investing significant resources to protect a flawed authentication model.

Passwordless Authentication: The Next Evolution of Identity Security

The business impact of credential compromise has far-reaching consequences. The solution today is not the use of stronger passwords – but instead, reducing dependence on them altogether.

Passwordless authentication promises more secure methods that are resistant to phishing, credential theft, and reuse attacks. Several technologies are emerging as a replacement for traditional credentials.

  1. Passkeys
    A passkey is a fast identity online (FIDO) authentication credential where, instead of typing a secret word, a user device confirms who they are using built-in security. An example is when you log in to a Google account, and your phone simply asks for your fingerprint or face scan.
  2. Biometric Authentication
    This adds another layer of convenience and security. It includes fingerprint scans, facial recognition, and other biometric identifiers. These allow users to authenticate using characteristics that are unique to them rather than information they must remember.
  3. Hardware Security Keys
    This provides another powerful option. It involves the use of physical devices such as YubiKeys or Google Titan Security Keys that authenticate users through public-key cryptography. Because the private key never leaves the device, it provides strong protection against phishing and credential theft and is widely considered among the most effective defenses against account compromise.

Despite the advantages of these passwordless methods, adoption remains low. Many organizations continue to operate legacy systems designed around traditional username and password models. It is worth noting that the integration of modern authentication frameworks does require significant planning and investment. However, it should be considered as an evolution that requires strategic commitment rather than a quick fix.

Final Thoughts

The recent exposure of 24 billion records is more than another headline-grabbing cybersecurity incident. It is evidence that the password-centric model of digital security is no longer secure. This should prompt organizations still using the traditional password methods to adopt passwordless authentication.

As technology advances, new security challenges will arise, including the emergence of quantum computing and the need for quantum-resistant cryptography. These developments reinforce the lesson that security cannot remain static. The goal is not to predict every future threat, but to build security architectures that evolve with technology.