top canadian casino sites
Starting Jan. 1, older adults on Medicare will spend no more than $2,000 a year on prescription drugs when a new price cap on out-of-pocket payments from the Inflation Reduction Act goes into effect. Experts say the change is expected to provide major relief for cancer patients who often struggle to afford their medications due to the high cost of cancer drugs. Diana DiVito, of Canonsburg, Pennsylvania, recalls the shock she felt after she got her first co-payment for the cancer drug Imbruvica in 2016. The 83-year-old was diagnosed with chronic lymphocytic leukemia, a type of blood cancer that begins in the bone marrow, in 2005. She underwent treatment, including chemotherapy, and went into remission. When she had a recurrence, she started taking Imbruvica. By 2021, DiVito had spent $56,000 out-of-pocket on the daily pill. “The co-pays blew me away,” said DiVito, who added she’s been on limited income since her husband died in 2023. “It started out the first year was $8,500 out of pocket, and then it went up about $1,000 every year after that.” The new price cap will apply to all prescription drugs under Medicare Part D; it won’t apply to drugs given to patients in the hospital or other health care settings, such as chemotherapy or anesthesia. Medicare recipients will also have the new option of spreading their payments out over the course of the year , rather than paying a large co-payment all at once. Before the change, people on Medicare typically had to spend $7,000 or more out of pocket on their prescription drugs before they qualified for so-called catastrophic coverage, when insurance kicks in and covers most of the drug’s cost. Under this coverage, patients are charged a small co-payment or a percentage of a drug’s cost, usually 5%. Typically, DiVito would hit catastrophic coverage almost immediately after her plan reset each January. While that helped with costs for most of the year, it meant the first few prescriptions she filled were financially painful. Anticipating the cap next month, DiVito said she has much less stress and is spending a little more freely. “I’m being a little more generous with my grandchildren this Christmas,” she said. The Inflation Reduction Act’s $2,000 price cap comes after years of public outcry about the soaring cost of prescription drugs , including cancer medications, in the United States. The law introduced the cap gradually, starting with a cap of $3,250 on out-of-pocket spending on prescription drugs in 2024. More than 65 million people, mainly older adults, are enrolled in Medicare. A study published in September in JAMA Network Open found that annual out-of-pocket costs for cancer medications averaged $11,284 for Medicare Part D beneficiaries in 2023. (Part D refers to coverage for prescription drugs.) A separate report from the nonprofit group AARP found that 3.2 million Medicare recipients are expected to see savings from the out-of-pocket cap in 2025. By 2029, the number is expected to increase to 4.1 million enrollees. The report didn’t break down savings for people with certain conditions, such as cancer. However, research shows about 60% of cancer cases occur in adults 65 and older. On average, 1.4 million enrollees who reach the out-of-pocket cap from 2025 to 2029 are estimated to see annual savings of $1,000 or more, the AARP report found, and just over 420,000 will see savings of more than $3,000. Mary and Jim Scott of Oregon are among the Medicare enrollees expecting to see savings next year. In 2023, the couple’s out-of-pocket prescription drug expenses skyrocketed to $8,000, up from their previous annual average of $240. It was a difficult year during which Jim, 83, faced multiple serious health issues, including congestive heart failure, an acute kidney injury and bladder cancer. The new cap won’t apply to drugs given in a health care setting (these are covered under Medicare Part B), meaning Jim will still be responsible for the costs of chemotherapy not covered by his insurance. Still, Mary, 73, said the change offers a sense of relief after more than a year of struggling with the soaring costs of cancer care, making it easier for the couple to stay afloat and focus on what matters most: Jim’s health, their grandchildren, their dog and their garden. “We’re not planning any amazing trips. We’re still needing to live our low-key lives,” Mary said. “But by the end of the summer, maybe we’ll be able to put up some new siding on the house and do a few things that we’ve deferred.” Juliette Cubanski, deputy director of the Medicare policy program at KFF, a nonprofit group that researches health policy issues, noted that in the nearly 20 years since Medicare Part D was introduced, there has never been an annual cap on out-of-pocket costs. She co-wrote an analysis that found about 1.5 million people on Medicare had out-of-pocket prescription drug costs exceeding $2,000 in 2021 and would have benefited from the cap. Of the 1.5 million, about 200,000 Medicare enrollees spent $5,000 or more for their prescriptions that year. “So, for people who need really expensive drugs or who take a lot of medications where the monthly cost adds up, they may have had to pay several thousands of dollars out of pocket each year,” she said. Many people on Medicare are retired and live on fixed incomes, Cubanski said, meaning people often go deep into debt or even bankrupt. Arthur Caplan, the head of the division of medical ethics at NYU Langone Medical Center in New York City, said that’s especially true for cancer patients: A survey from the American Cancer Society’s Cancer Action Network published in May found that nearly half of cancer patients have medical debt, despite most being insured. “We have many emerging treatments for cancer,” Caplan said. “They are hugely expensive.” Cubanski said that even for those who don’t spend more than $2,000 a year, the cap is still important. “The unfortunate truth is we’re all one scary diagnosis away from needing an expensive drug,” she said. George Valentine, 73, of Philadelphia, said he was at his annual physical in 2002 when his doctor noticed something unusual in his test results. Further testing revealed he had chronic lymphocytic leukemia. The medications he needed came with a hefty price tag — around $14,000 a month. While he was working in the information technology industry, this wasn’t a major issue because his job-based health insurance included an out-of-pocket maximum, which he hit every year. However, when Valentine retired in 2019, he discovered a significant gap in Medicare’s coverage. Unlike his previous insurance, Medicare had no out-of-pocket spending limit, leaving him responsible for 5% of his medication costs after reaching the catastrophic coverage phase. “Five percent of $14,000 is a lot of money,” he said. “I would get to the catastrophic phase by February in any given year, and for the rest of the year I had this burden of $700 or around there every month and it never ended.” Valentine, now an advocate for the PAN Foundation, a patient financial assistance group for people with life-threatening chronic conditions, said he would prefer the out-of-pocket cap in the New Year to be “zero.” Still, he added, with the $2,000 cap he can now at least sleep at night. “All that matters is when I hit $2,000, I’m done,” he said. This story first appeared on NBCNews.com. More from NBC News:Cyber Resiliency in the AI Era: Building the Unbreakable ShieldNFL on Netflix: Christmas Day games are a 1st for streaming giant
How Finnish youth learn to spot disinformationKenya is moving forward with plans to secure a Sh193 billion ($1.5 billion) loan from the United Arab Emirates (UAE). This is despite the International Monetary Fund (IMF) urging caution due to concerns that this could exacerbate the country’s debt situation. To address these concerns, sources cited by Bloomberg indicate that the Abu Dhabi loan will be disbursed to Kenya in tranches, ensuring compliance with borrowing limits set under the four-year IMF programme that concludes in April, reported Bloomberg. Kenya is expected to access about Sh91 billion ($700 million) at the beginning of next year, with the remainder to be disbursed later, although timelines are subject to change, reported Bloomberg. President William Ruto’s government reckons that the loan will provide a crucial buffer against a budget crisis, particularly as the Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA) has consistently missed its revenue targets. Kenya has also secured a Sh26 billion ($200 million) loan from the African Development Bank (AfDB) and is in discussions with the World Bank for a new loan of Sh97 billion ($750 million), a separate report from Reuters said. Director General of the Ministry of Finance’s Public Debt Management Office Raphael Owino, was quoted by Reuters as saying, “The World Bank is coming on board, riding on the back of IMF receipts. The AfDB is already on board.” Despite the IMF’s calls for reduced borrowing, President Ruto faces challenges following the withdrawal of the Finance Bill 2024 in response to Gen Z protests against perceived punitive tax measures. ALSO READ: 'Broke' government living large: Ruto adds Sh3tr to public debt The National Treasury is now attempting to reintroduce some proposals through the Tax Laws (Amendment) Bill, projected to yield only Sh174 billion instead of the earlier target of Sh346 billion. The success of these proposals remains uncertain amid ongoing resistance to increased taxes. The IMF had earlier warned of a difficult path ahead for Kenya as it disbursed $606 million (Sh78.1 billion) to support the government’s budgetary needs. Earlier this month, IMF Mission Chief for Kenya Haimanot Teferra, highlighted that if the terms of the UAE loan are more favourable than existing costly loans, it could be beneficial. Teferra cautioned that borrowing at high rates to finance the budget could worsen the situation. “We need to carefully consider how the funds are utilised, their terms, and how they affect Kenya’s current debt dynamics,” Teferra remarked. Stay informed. Subscribe to our newsletter The IMF also revealed this week that its Deputy Managing Director Nigel Clarke is scheduled to visit Kenya next month as the Bretton Woods institution continues to pressure the government to expand the tax base and implement reforms to curb its borrowing appetite, given the limited capacity for new loans. Clarke’s visit on December 9 and 10 will involve meetings with government officials and key stakeholders, said the IMF. Director of the IMF Communications Department Julie Kozack noted that Kenya’s government faces a complex balancing act between urgent spending needs in social programmes, health, and education while managing rising public debt and increasing domestic revenue. She reiterated that the UAE loan discussions with Kenya or any new borrowing should align with a comprehensive fiscal strategy to mitigate debt vulnerabilities amid ongoing fiscal challenges. While discussing the recent reviews of Kenya’s performance, IMF First Deputy Managing Director Gita Gopinath remarked earlier: “Fiscal performance has significantly fallen short of targets, leading to increased debt vulnerabilities. The IMF has noted that a “credible fiscal consolidation strategy remains essential for addressing these vulnerabilities while safeguarding social and development spending.” “Reforms to enhance the efficiency, equity, and transparency of the tax regime are critical to garnering political and societal support.”
While Mia Thornton has been filled with little beyond contradictions and Restylane throughout her seasons on the Potomac franchise, her penchant for inconsistent storytelling has for the most part been outweighed only by her propensity for entertainment. When you make good television and are willing to roll with the punches, many are willing to forgive the odd transgression or two. This season, however, Mia is pushing the boundaries of what both viewers and her fellow castmates find to be acceptable, and this week their frustrations with her decision-making finally began to spill onto the TV. On its face, Mia’s current position is absurd. She has made a hill out of demanding that the cast hold Karen accountable at every opportunity. At the same time, her personal life is a walking Maury episode and the longer she keeps up the charade, the more her fellow Housewives look at her sideways. The scene at the GNA wellness event — which has now rebranded into ClassPass with branded tees — is a perfect example of this friction. Mia takes advantage of Karen’s being MIA to slip in as many jabs as possible about Karen’s alcohol habits and pending legal issues, only for her to take the women aside and reveal to them details about the on-camera fight we saw last week. If Mia is going to (correctly) claim that Gordon had no right to disclose her personal health information regarding an alleged abortion, then it is equally irresponsible for Mia to claim that every hostile interaction they have is Gordan “in mania.” Perhaps it is, but Gordon is not sharing that information willingly, nor is it necessarily evident on-camera. According to Mia, Mister Incognito offered to pull back from the situation as she figured out how to co-parent healthily, an option that briefly had me relieved that functioning brain cells were reentering the conversation. Still, that plan lasted about as long as my last “social media break.” Watching the fracas from afar, Gizelle Bryant’s gears are finally starting to turn. The green-eyed bandit may live for onscreen drama, but even she finds this whole scenario tactless, and bringing Mia down to size also puts her in better standing for any future conflicts with Karen. Gizelle finds herself in an interesting position this season. She usually drives so much of the story, but this time around, she is taking a back seat and trying to figure out which horse she plans to hitch on for the rest of the season. With Mia’s recent antics, she has decidedly taken her out of the running. The issues continue at Wendy’s birthday party, where Gizelle finally confronts Mia about the inconsistencies in her story. Gordon and Incognito can barely stand each other and he’s a massive trigger, yet Mia is on Instagram posting videos and photo shoots of them all getting along — what is really going on here, and how do her children benefit? To be fair to Mia, I do think that people are assuming Gordon doesn’t know how to manipulate cameras as well. Gordon, after all, was the first person to bring up the drama with Inc and allegations about paternity on-camera, not Mia, and he certainly seems to time his temper tantrums to when he already knows he has a call time to film for the show. But Mia could just as soon choose not to document this part of her life so sloppily and extensively for the time being. It doesn’t seem to be doing anyone any good, and the sensationalism of the drama isn’t reaping the returns she may have expected by bringing this to all of our screens — both the fans and the wives seem disenchanted by it all. Perhaps Mia is so focused on maximizing the entertainment value of her personal life because she looks at someone like Ashley and is terrified of the possibility of that being her future. Ashley and Mia have a lot in common when it comes to their life experiences: rough, working-class upbringing before becoming “self-made,” then thinking that they would be able to cling to their marriages as a life raft to class migration. Both of them have tragically come to realize that marrying an older man is not a honeymoon, and they are seeking to figure out what comes next. Ashley seems to have never prepared for this possibility, and we are watching her try to wring a coin out of every opportunity possible: she is booking drag-king shows, shilling GNA screen tees and QR codes, and even trying to persuade her cast to give her nonexistent musical career some pity streams. Mia must have heard 30 seconds of the torture ritual known as “Healing and Thriving” and simply gone into a fugue state, deciding that as messy as it may get, there was no way she wasn’t going to secure her future both with a man and on the cameras. I might understand that impulse, but I certainly do not have to respect it. Unfortunately, it seems that her castmates don’t either. Ashley has tried to keep her personal life separate from the show to her detriment and is now forced to carve out a lane and share more of her life than she is comfortable doing. When you have two kids at home and a mortgage to pay for, you can no longer afford to be skittish about whether or not your ex cheated on you as you try to mediate a settlement. It may make you cringe to hear your family freely tell you that they always thought that walking canker sore was a controlling turd, but you will grin and bear it because you have no other option; your livelihood is dependent on people wanting to hear your story after years of closing that part of your life off to the cameras. Even as a veteran, Ashley is uncomfortable with the Faustian bargain she has made for success in reality TV, which is why she attempts to deflect by stirring up messes in everyone else’s lives. Mia has no such scruples, and for better or worse, what we are seeing on our screens is a consequence of that lack of restraint. In current events, Ashley Darby has finally filed for divorce . Hopefully, the negotiations will take less than the next five seasons because I certainly can’t take much more of this journey. • Karen went to her first court date dressed like Sister Mary Clarence and seemingly got a continuance to September (which, if I recall, was part of her recent attempts to get the arrest thrown out, which failed). I, like most of you in the comments, really wish she would go the plea-deal route so that she could speak about this openly and move toward embracing her complicity, but it seems that we have a long way to go until we get there and it likely won’t be this season. • While Karen and Mia’s civil war is starting to wear out its welcome, this episode was filled with bits of high comedy. Their stilted non-hug at Wendy’s birthday event was top-tier, as was Gizelle gleefully telling Karen, “I am so happy you’re free and amongst us.” • Wendy’s 40th birthday looked lovely (save for the plastic gold top hats for the servers), and I am happy that Eddie’s family made it. I was genuinely in tears when I realized that Wendy chose to celebrate her 40th on Ashley’s actual birthday. Watching Ms. Darby try to find passive-aggressive ways to remind the guests that it was her birthday as well, including sporting a tacky lace frock, seemed like a bit straight out of Curb Your Enthusiasm . • Speaking of the birthday dinner, TJ chiding Stacey felt like a bit much. I consistently come away wondering if TJ even likes Stacey, and I think Ashley is right to express concern and skepticism. • It is fascinating to see just how much of the episode is predicated on Karen’s presence or absence. If Karen is there, we have to gossip among ourselves and see which cast member is going to take up the mantle of trying to hold Karen accountable this time; if she skips an event, it is gossip and speculation as to why or for what reason. • Vivien watch: Our flailing “friend of” made the cameras in one scene again this season. Vivien, we speak your name. By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms and Privacy Notice and to receive email correspondence from us.
After a sprawling hacking campaign exposed the communications of an unknown number of Americans, U.S. cybersecurity officials are advising people to use encryption in their communications. To safeguard against the risks highlighted by the campaign, which originated in China, federal cybersecurity authorities released an extensive list of security recommendations for U.S. telecom companies — such as Verizon and AT&T — that were targeted. The advice includes one tip we can all put into practice with our phones: “Ensure that traffic is end-to-end encrypted to the maximum extent possible.” End-to-end encryption, also known as E2EE, means that messages are scrambled so that only the sender and recipient can see them. If anyone else intercepts the message, all they will see is garble that can't be unscrambled without the key. Law enforcement officials had until now resisted this type of encryption because it means the technology companies themselves won't be able to look at the messages, nor respond to law enforcement requests to turn the data over. Here's a look at various ways ordinary consumers can use end-to-end encryption: Texting Officials said the hackers targeted the metadata of a large number of customers, including information on the dates, times and recipients of calls and texts. They also managed to see the content from texts from a much smaller number of victims. If you're an iPhone user, information in text messages that you send to someone else who also has an iPhone will be encrypted end-to-end. Just look for the blue text bubbles, which indicate that they are encrypted iMessages. The same goes for Android users sending texts through Google Messages. There will be a lock next to the timestamp on each message to indicate the encryption is on. But there's a weakness. When iPhone and Android users text each other, the messages are encrypted only using Rich Communication Services, an industry standard for instant messaging that replaces the older SMS and MMS standards. Apple has noted that RCS messages “aren’t end-to-end encrypted, which means they’re not protected from a third party reading them while they’re sent between devices.” Samsung, which sells Android smartphones, has also hinted at the issue in a footnote at the bottom of a press release last month on RCS, saying, “Encryption only available for Android to Android communication.” Chat apps To avoid getting caught out when trading texts, experts recommend using encrypted messaging apps. Privacy advocates are big fans of Signal, which applies end-to-end encryption to all messages and voice calls. The independent nonprofit group behind the app promises never to sell, rent or lease customer data and has made its source code publicly available so that it can be audited by anyone to examine it “for security and correctness.” Signal's encryption protocol is so reputable that it has been integrated into rival WhatsApp, so users will enjoy the same level of security protection as Signal, which has a much smaller user base. End-to-end encryption is also the default mode for Facebook Messenger, which like WhatsApp is owned by Meta Platforms. What about Telegram? Telegram is an app that can be used for one-on-one conversations, group chats and broadcast “channels" but contrary to popular perception, it doesn't turn on end-to-end encryption by default. Users have to switch on the option. And it doesn’t work with group chats. Cybersecurity experts have warned people against using Telegram for private communications and pointed out that only its opt-in ‘secret chat’ feature is encrypted from end-to-end. The app also has a reputation for being a haven for scammers and criminal activity, highlighted by founder and CEO Pavel Durov's arrest in France. Making calls Instead of using your phone to make calls through a wireless cellular network, you can make voice calls with Signal and WhatsApp. Both apps encrypt calls with the same technology that they use to encrypt messages. There are other options. If you have an iPhone you can use Facetime for calls, while Android owners can use the Google Fi service, which are both end-to-end encrypted. The only catch with all these options is that, as with using the chat services to send messages, the person on the other end will also have to have the app installed. WhatsApp and Signal users can customize their privacy preferences in the settings, including hiding an IP address during calls to prevent your general location from being guessed. Stay up-to-date on what's happening Receive the latest in local entertainment news in your inbox weekly!
Trump vows to pursue executions after Biden commutes most of federal death rowMilitary Probe: ‘You Can Move Backward In CBN But You Cannot Do Same In Security’ – Shehu Sani Knocks TinubuCarter, who died Sunday at the age of 100, defied the furor of US conservatives to negotiate the handover of the Panama Canal to Panamanian control, suspended aid to multiple authoritarian governments in the region, and even attempted to normalize relations with Cuba. Carter's resolve to chart a course toward democracy and diplomacy, however, was severely tested in Central America and Cuba, where he was forced to balance his human rights priorities with pressure from adversaries to combat the spread of communism amid the Cold War standoff with the Soviet Union. "Latin America was fundamental and his global policy was oriented toward human rights, democratic values and multilateral cooperation," political analyst Michael Shifter of the Inter-American Dialogue, a think tank in Washington, told AFP. During his 1977-1981 administration, which was sandwiched between the Republican presidencies of Gerald Ford and Ronald Reagan, the Democrat sought to take a step back from US alignment with right-wing dictatorships in Latin America. An important symbol of Carter's approach was the signing of two treaties in 1977 to officially turn over the Panama Canal in 1999. "Jimmy Carter understood that if he did not return the canal to Panama, the relationship between the United States and Panama could lead to a new crisis in a country where Washington could not afford the luxury of instability," said Luis Guillermo Solis, a political scientist and former president of Costa Rica. Carter called the decision, which was wildly unpopular back home, "the most difficult political challenge I ever had," as he accepted Panama's highest honor in 2016. He also hailed the move as "a notable achievement of moving toward democracy and freedom." During his term, Carter opted not to support Nicaraguan strongman Anastasio Somoza, who was subsequently overthrown by the leftist Sandinista Front in 1979. But in El Salvador, the American president had to "make a very uncomfortable pact with the government," said Shifter. To prevent communists from taking power, Carter resumed US military assistance for a junta which then became more radical, engaging in civilian massacres and plunging El Salvador into a long civil war. Carter took a critical approach to South American dictatorships in Argentina, Chile, Uruguay and Paraguay, suspending arms deliveries and imposing sanctions in some cases. But his efforts "did not achieve any progress in terms of democratization," said Argentine political scientist Rosendo Fraga. The American president also tried to normalize relations with Cuba 15 years after the missile crisis. He relaxed sanctions that had been in force since 1962, supported secret talks and enabled limited diplomatic representation in both countries. "With him, for the first time, the possibility of dialogue rather than confrontation as a framework for political relations opened up," Jesus Arboleya, a former Cuban diplomat, told AFP. But in 1980, a mass exodus of 125,000 Cubans to the United States, with Fidel Castro's blessing, created an unexpected crisis. It "hurt Carter politically with the swarm of unexpected immigrants," said Jennifer McCoy, a professor of political science at Georgia State University. Castro continued to support Soviet-backed African governments and even deployed troops against Washington's wishes, finally putting an end to the normalization process. However, more than 20 years later, Carter made a historic visit to Havana as ex-president, at the time becoming the highest-profile American politician to set foot on Cuban soil since 1959. During the 2002 visit, "he made a bold call for the US to lift its embargo, but he also called on Castro to embrace democratic opening," said McCoy, who was part of the US delegation for the trip, during which Castro encouraged Carter to throw out the ceremonial first pitch at a Cuban All-Star baseball game. "Castro was sitting in the front row and we were afraid he would rise to give a long rebuttal to Carter's speech. But he didn't. He just said, 'Let's go to the ball game.'" In the years following Carter's presidency, Ronald Reagan (1981-1989) would go on to resume a full-frontal confrontation with Cuba. Decades later, Barack Obama (2009-2017) opened a new phase of measured normalization, which Donald Trump (2017-2021) brought to an end. US President Joe Biden promised to review US policy toward Cuba, but hardened his stance after Havana cracked down on anti-government protests in 2021. "Carter showed that engagement and diplomacy are more fruitful than isolation," McCoy said. bur-lp-rd-jb/lbc/mlr/bfm/sst/bbk
Top war-crimes court issues arrest warrants for Netanyahu and others in Israel-Hamas fightingBest Currys Boxing Day deals - 8 incredible offers you don't want to missRalph-Beyer puts up 20, Sacred Heart defeats Manhattanville 100-60
Wishing For A Christmas Truce In UkraineThe Wests Tigers join venture could be headed for a split amid reports the Balmain faction of the club are exploring a merger with NRL expansion bid team South Island Kea. Watch every ball of Australia v India LIVE & ad-break free during play in 4K on Kayo | New to Kayo? Get your first month for just $1. Limited time offer > WWOS’ The Mole reported the Kiwi South Island Kea franchise have opened secret talks with Balmain in a bid to strengthen their chances of becoming the NRL’s 19th team. It comes after revelations of a divide between the Wests and Balmain factions of the Wests Tigers’ joint venture, which could lead to the two parties splitting. Kea bosses reportedly contacted their Balmain counterparts last week to discuss a possible partnership. The Christchurch based Kea bid, are hoping to become the 19th NRL team and believe joining forces with Balmain, a foundation club from 1908 will boost their chances. That would mean Western Suburbs Magpies would return as a stand alone club in the NRL, pending rugby league HQ’s approval, which is a move several influential board members at Concord have been pushing for. MORE NRL NEWS PRESSURE GAUGE: Latrell’s $1m payback bid; big heat on four coaches HONOUR ROLL: Extraordinary honour roll of Australian Schoolboys representatives 25 FOR ‘25 BOLD PREDICTIONS: Broncos surge snares Dally M; wooden spoon shock Recent reports of leaked texts and emails show the animosity between the Wests and Balmain factions of the club and the massive divide could make their future as a joint venture untenable. Still, many senior Balmain officials want to remain in the merger with Wests, but that is seeming more unlikely by the day. Should the Wests Tigers fall apart, the Balmain club will consider joining up with the Kea as it appears their only way of staying in the NRL. The Kea-Balmain joint venture proposal would see the clubs divide their games between their home stadium in Christchurch and Balmain’s spiritual home ground of Leichhardt Oval. NRL officials rejected the Kea bid several months ago, opting to add Papua New Guinea as the 18th team, with the Western Bears also bidding to become the 19th team. The South Island Kea are following the Bears model of joining forces with a foundation club in North Sydney, to link with Balmain. A merger with Balmain could improve the South Island Kea’s chances of joining the NRL, given the history associated with the foundation club and their fan base and brand value. The Wests Tigers have been a joint venture since 1999 and won their maiden premiership in 2005, with current coach Benji Marshall in the team.NO. 7 TENNESSEE 78, TENNESSEE-MARTIN 35