Business
Marshall Rose, Who Helped Revive Two New York Institutions, Dies at 88
Marshall Rose, a real estate developer who was instrumental in reviving the New York Public Library on Fifth Avenue and transforming the adjacent Bryant Park from a mecca for drug dealers into a verdant Midtown oasis, died on Saturday at his home in Manhattan. He was 88.
The cause was complications of Parkinson’s disease, his stepdaughter, Chloe Malle, said.
As chairman of the library’s board of trustees from 1990 to 1995, Mr. Rose, along with his predecessor, Andrew Heiskell, and Vartan Gregorian, the library’s longtime president, engineered the resurgence of the Beaux-Arts landmark on Fifth Avenue and the derelict greensward just to its west.
Mr. Rose returned as chairman in 1997 for another two years after Elizabeth F. Rohatyn resigned to join her husband, Felix G. Rohatyn, the newly appointed ambassador to France, in Paris.
Mr. Rose played pivotal roles in the creation of the Science, Industry and Business Library in the former B. Altman emporium on Madison Avenue (it closed in 2016, after two decades, and was folded into a more high-tech incarnation of the Mid-Manhattan Library) and in the decision to construct vital new stacks for books, instead of a disruptive parking garage, under Bryant Park.
During his tenure as chairman, the library effected the dazzling renovation of the Deborah, Jonathan F.P., Samuel Priest and Adam R. Rose Main Reading Room in the research library on Fifth Avenue. The project was financed with a gift in honor of their children from Frederick P. Rose, who oversaw the renovation, and his wife, Sandra Priest Rose, members of a venerable New York real estate family unrelated to Marshall Rose.
After presiding over the Arlen Realty and Development Corporation and its E.J. Korvette discount-chain subsidiary in the early 1970s, Mr. Rose in 1978 founded the Georgetown Company, which in 1999 developed the Easton Town Center mall in Columbus, Ohio, with Leslie H. Wexner, the billionaire retailer.
Mr. Rose’s company built and managed shopping centers, apartments and commercial properties in Los Angeles, Chicago, Boston and Washington; renovated Madison Square Garden when it was owned by Gulf and Western Industries in the early 1990s; and oversaw the development of the architect Frank Gehry’s beehive-like headquarters of Barry Diller’s IAC/InterActive Corporation in the West Chelsea section of Manhattan, completed in 2007.
As a philanthropist, Mr. Rose helped establish three charter high schools funded by the Robin Hood Foundation, one in the South Bronx and two in Brooklyn.
Many websites that published Mr. Rose’s obituary referred to him in their headlines as the husband of the actress Candice Bergen, whom he married in 2000. But he was better known in New York as a civic leader.
He could be demanding; he could also be relentlessly loyal to friends. His advice on real estate and finance was highly valued.
When Donald J. Trump offered to complete the stalled renovation of Wollman Rink in Central Park in 1986, the Trump Organization consulted Richard Ravitch’s HRH Construction on Mr. Rose’s recommendation. Mr. Rose also advised Central Synagogue on the lucrative sale of the air rights over its temple on Lexington Avenue to a nearby development site in 2017.
“He was a model of civic virtue and commitment,” Gordon J. Davis, a former parks commissioner and president of Lincoln Center for the Performing Arts and a life trustee of the library, said in an interview. “Marshall was a central and indispensable figure in what happened with the New York Public Library from 1981 until today.” (His commitment endured even in death; the family encouraged contributions in his memory to the library.)
“Vartan Gregorian, Andrew Heiskell and Marshall Rose,” Mr. Davis added, “not only restored Bryant Park, they were the driving force that rescued the New York Public Library and made it into the extraordinary institution of learning and diversity for all New Yorkers that it is today.”
Daniel Biederman, the founding president of the Bryant Park Restoration Corporation, said that Mr. Rose’s “real estate know-how was critical.”
Marshall Rose was born on Jan. 2, 1937, in Brooklyn, to Jack Rose, an English-born furrier who also worked in real estate, and Jean (Klein) Rose.
Raised in the Brighton Beach section of the borough, he attended Lincoln High School in Brooklyn and then earned a bachelor’s degree in economics from City College.
After graduating from New York University School of Law, he briefly practiced law and for a short time worked on real estate matters for the investment bank Lazard Freres, before deciding that he wanted to develop property.
“I asked him if he ever attended a school reunion,” his friend Elihu Rose (Frederick Rose’s brother) recalled in the eulogy he delivered on Wednesday at Central Synagogue. “He said no, because he thought that most of his classmates would have been in jail. And from that social start, he ended up by being an intimate friend of Brooke Astor, the undisputed grande dame of New York’s social life.”
In 1965, Mr. Rose married Jill Kupin, who became president of the International Center of Photography in 1989. She died in 1996. In 2000, he married Ms. Bergen, best known as the star of the hit CBS-TV comedy “Murphy Brown” from 1988 to 1998 and 2018 to 2019. (In her 2015 memoir, “A Fine Romance,” Ms. Bergen said Mr. Rose was clueless about popular culture: “He’d never seen ‘Seinfeld,’ for example, and had barely heard of ‘Murphy Brown.’”)
In addition to Ms. Malle and Ms. Bergen, he is survived by two children from his first marriage, Wendi and Andrew Rose; and six grandchildren.
The Roses lived on Fifth Avenue and had a home on Lily Pond Lane in East Hampton.
At the library, Mr. Rose helped guide the renovation of the Schomburg Center for Research in Black Culture in Harlem and the Library for the Performing Arts at Lincoln Center. He served briefly as the chairman of the Lincoln Center Constituent Development Corporation, but quit in 2001 after the Metropolitan Opera, New York City Opera and other institutions squabbled over a master plan for renovations.
In 2019, the library dedicated a new plaza and entrance on West 40th Street in Mr. Rose’s honor.
“He was an unstoppable force of nature when it came to protecting and building what the public needed from its library,” said Anthony Marx, who in 2011 succeeded Paul LeClerc as the library’s president.
Mr. Biederman recalled that Mr. Rose’s predecessor as board chairman, Mr. Heiskell, once acknowledged that Mr. Rose had not been a major donor to the library, but said that he had contributed significantly with his mind, which placed him ahead of some other supposed benefactors.
“About 1 percent of the people who give, give anonymously,” Mr. Rose told The New York Times in 1997. “It sometimes seems that all the people who don’t give claim to be in that 1 percent.”
Business
Video: The Web of Companies Owned by Elon Musk
new video loaded: The Web of Companies Owned by Elon Musk

By Kirsten Grind, Melanie Bencosme, James Surdam and Sean Havey
February 27, 2026
Business
Commentary: How Trump helped foreign markets outperform U.S. stocks during his first year in office
Trump has crowed about the gains in the U.S. stock market during his term, but in 2025 investors saw more opportunity in the rest of the world.
If you’re a stock market investor you might be feeling pretty good about how your portfolio of U.S. equities fared in the first year of President Trump’s term.
All the major market indices seemed to be firing on all cylinders, with the Standard & Poor’s 500 index gaining 17.9% through the full year.
But if you’re the type of investor who looks for things to regret, pay no attention to the rest of the world’s stock markets. That’s because overseas markets did better than the U.S. market in 2025 — a lot better. The MSCI World ex-USA index — that is, all the stock markets except the U.S. — gained more than 32% last year, nearly double the percentage gains of U.S. markets.
That’s a major departure from recent trends. Since 2013, the MSCI US index had bested the non-U.S. index every year except 2017 and 2022, sometimes by a wide margin — in 2024, for instance, the U.S. index gained 24.6%, while non-U.S. markets gained only 4.7%.
The Trump trade is dead. Long live the anti-Trump trade.
— Katie Martin, Financial Times
Broken down into individual country markets (also by MSCI indices), in 2025 the U.S. ranked 21st out of 23 developed markets, with only New Zealand and Denmark doing worse. Leading the pack were Austria and Spain, with 86% gains, but superior records were turned in by Finland, Ireland and Hong Kong, with gains of 50% or more; and the Netherlands, Norway, Britain and Japan, with gains of 40% or more.
Investment analysts cite several factors to explain this trend. Judging by traditional metrics such as price/earnings multiples, the U.S. markets have been much more expensive than those in the rest of the world. Indeed, they’re historically expensive. The Standard & Poor’s 500 index traded in 2025 at about 23 times expected corporate earnings; the historical average is 18 times earnings.
Investment managers also have become nervous about the concentration of market gains within the U.S. technology sector, especially in companies associated with artificial intelligence R&D. Fears that AI is an investment bubble that could take down the S&P’s highest fliers have investors looking elsewhere for returns.
But one factor recurs in almost all the market analyses tracking relative performance by U.S. and non-U.S. markets: Donald Trump.
Investors started 2025 with optimism about Trump’s influence on trading opportunities, given his apparent commitment to deregulation and his braggadocio about America’s dominant position in the world and his determination to preserve, even increase it.
That hasn’t been the case for months.
”The Trump trade is dead. Long live the anti-Trump trade,” Katie Martin of the Financial Times wrote this week. “Wherever you look in financial markets, you see signs that global investors are going out of their way to avoid Donald Trump’s America.”
Two Trump policy initiatives are commonly cited by wary investment experts. One, of course, is Trump’s on-and-off tariffs, which have left investors with little ability to assess international trade flows. The Supreme Court’s invalidation of most Trump tariffs and the bellicosity of his response, which included the immediate imposition of new 10% tariffs across the board and the threat to increase them to 15%, have done nothing to settle investors’ nerves.
Then there’s Trump’s driving down the value of the dollar through his agitation for lower interest rates, among other policies. For overseas investors, a weaker dollar makes U.S. assets more expensive relative to the outside world.
It would be one thing if trade flows and the dollar’s value reflected economic conditions that investors could themselves parse in creating a picture of investment opportunities. That’s not the case just now. “The current uncertainty is entirely man-made (largely by one orange-hued man in particular) but could well continue at least until the US mid-term elections in November,” Sam Burns of Mill Street Research wrote on Dec. 29.
Trump hasn’t been shy about trumpeting U.S. stock market gains as emblems of his policy wisdom. “The stock market has set 53 all-time record highs since the election,” he said in his State of the Union address Tuesday. “Think of that, one year, boosting pensions, 401(k)s and retirement accounts for the millions and the millions of Americans.”
Trump asserted: “Since I took office, the typical 401(k) balance is up by at least $30,000. That’s a lot of money. … Because the stock market has done so well, setting all those records, your 401(k)s are way up.”
Trump’s figure doesn’t conform to findings by retirement professionals such as the 401(k) overseers at Bank of America. They reported that the average account balance grew by only about $13,000 in 2025. I asked the White House for the source of Trump’s claim, but haven’t heard back.
Interpreting stock market returns as snapshots of the economy is a mug’s game. Despite that, at her recent appearance before a House committee, Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi tried to deflect questions about her handling of the Jeffrey Epstein records by crowing about it.
“The Dow is over 50,000 right now, she declared. “Americans’ 401(k)s and retirement savings are booming. That’s what we should be talking about.”
I predicted that the administration would use the Dow industrial average’s break above 50,000 to assert that “the overall economy is firing on all cylinders, thanks to his policies.” The Dow reached that mark on Feb. 6. But Feb. 11, the day of Bondi’s testimony, was the last day the index closed above 50,000. On Thursday, it closed at 49,499.50, or about 1.4% below its Feb. 10 peak close of 50,188.14.
To use a metric suggested by economist Justin Wolfers of the University of Michigan, if you invested $48,488 in the Dow on the day Trump took office last year, when the Dow closed at 48,448 points, you would have had $50,000 on Feb. 6. That’s a gain of about 3.2%. But if you had invested the same amount in the global stock market not including the U.S. (based on the MSCI World ex-USA index), on that same day you would have had nearly $60,000. That’s a gain of nearly 24%.
Broader market indices tell essentially the same story. From Jan. 17, 2025, the last day before Trump’s inauguration, through Thursday’s close, the MSCI US stock index gained a cumulative 16.3%. But the world index minus the U.S. gained nearly 42%.
The gulf between U.S. and non-U.S. performance has continued into the current year. The S&P 500 has gained about 0.74% this year through Wednesday, while the MSCI World ex-USA index has gained about 8.9%. That’s “the best start for a calendar year for global stocks relative to the S&P 500 going back to at least 1996,” Morningstar reports.
It wouldn’t be unusual for the discrepancy between the U.S. and global markets to shrink or even reverse itself over the course of this year.
That’s what happened in 2017, when overseas markets as tracked by MSCI beat the U.S. by more than three percentage points, and 2022, when global markets lost money but U.S. markets underperformed the rest of the world by more than five percentage points.
Economic conditions change, and often the stock markets march to their own drummers. The one thing less likely to change is that Trump is set to remain president until Jan. 20, 2029. Make your investment bets accordingly.
Business
How the S&P 500 Stock Index Became So Skewed to Tech and A.I.
Nvidia, the chipmaker that became the world’s most valuable public company two years ago, was alone worth more than $4.75 trillion as of Thursday morning. Its value, or market capitalization, is more than double the combined worth of all the companies in the energy sector, including oil giants like Exxon Mobil and Chevron.
The chipmaker’s market cap has swelled so much recently, it is now 20 percent greater than the sum of all of the companies in the materials, utilities and real estate sectors combined.
What unifies these giant tech companies is artificial intelligence. Nvidia makes the hardware that powers it; Microsoft, Apple and others have been making big bets on products that people can use in their everyday lives.
But as worries grow over lavish spending on A.I., as well as the technology’s potential to disrupt large swaths of the economy, the outsize influence that these companies exert over markets has raised alarms. They can mask underlying risks in other parts of the index. And if a handful of these giants falter, it could mean widespread damage to investors’ portfolios and retirement funds in ways that could ripple more broadly across the economy.
The dynamic has drawn comparisons to past crises, notably the dot-com bubble. Tech companies also made up a large share of the stock index then — though not as much as today, and many were not nearly as profitable, if they made money at all.
How the current moment compares with past pre-crisis moments
To understand how abnormal and worrisome this moment might be, The New York Times analyzed data from S&P Dow Jones Indices that compiled the market values of the companies in the S&P 500 in December 1999 and August 2007. Each date was chosen roughly three months before a downturn to capture the weighted breakdown of the index before crises fully took hold and values fell.
The companies that make up the index have periodically cycled in and out, and the sectors were reclassified over the last two decades. But even after factoring in those changes, the picture that emerges is a market that is becoming increasingly one-sided.
In December 1999, the tech sector made up 26 percent of the total.
In August 2007, just before the Great Recession, it was only 14 percent.
Today, tech is worth a third of the market, as other vital sectors, such as energy and those that include manufacturing, have shrunk.
Since then, the huge growth of the internet, social media and other technologies propelled the economy.
Now, never has so much of the market been concentrated in so few companies. The top 10 make up almost 40 percent of the S&P 500.
How much of the S&P 500 is occupied by the top 10 companies
With greater concentration of wealth comes greater risk. When so much money has accumulated in just a handful of companies, stock trading can be more volatile and susceptible to large swings. One day after Nvidia posted a huge profit for its most recent quarter, its stock price paradoxically fell by 5.5 percent. So far in 2026, more than a fifth of the stocks in the S&P 500 have moved by 20 percent or more. Companies and industries that are seen as particularly prone to disruption by A.I. have been hard hit.
The volatility can be compounded as everyone reorients their businesses around A.I, or in response to it.
The artificial intelligence boom has touched every corner of the economy. As data centers proliferate to support massive computation, the utilities sector has seen huge growth, fueled by the energy demands of the grid. In 2025, companies like NextEra and Exelon saw their valuations surge.
The industrials sector, too, has undergone a notable shift. General Electric was its undisputed heavyweight in 1999 and 2007, but the recent explosion in data center construction has evened out growth in the sector. GE still leads today, but Caterpillar is a very close second. Caterpillar, which is often associated with construction, has seen a spike in sales of its turbines and power-generation equipment, which are used in data centers.
One large difference between the big tech companies now and their counterparts during the dot-com boom is that many now earn money. A lot of the well-known names in the late 1990s, including Pets.com, had soaring valuations and little revenue, which meant that when the bubble popped, many companies quickly collapsed.
Nvidia, Apple, Alphabet and others generate hundreds of billions of dollars in revenue each year.
And many of the biggest players in artificial intelligence these days are private companies. OpenAI, Anthropic and SpaceX are expected to go public later this year, which could further tilt the market dynamic toward tech and A.I.
Methodology
Sector values reflect the GICS code classification system of companies in the S&P 500. As changes to the GICS system took place from 1999 to now, The New York Times reclassified all companies in the index in 1999 and 2007 with current sector values. All monetary figures from 1999 and 2007 have been adjusted for inflation.
-
World2 days agoExclusive: DeepSeek withholds latest AI model from US chipmakers including Nvidia, sources say
-
Massachusetts2 days agoMother and daughter injured in Taunton house explosion
-
Montana1 week ago2026 MHSA Montana Wrestling State Championship Brackets And Results – FloWrestling
-
Oklahoma1 week agoWildfires rage in Oklahoma as thousands urged to evacuate a small city
-
Louisiana5 days agoWildfire near Gum Swamp Road in Livingston Parish now under control; more than 200 acres burned
-
Denver, CO2 days ago10 acres charred, 5 injured in Thornton grass fire, evacuation orders lifted
-
Technology6 days agoYouTube TV billing scam emails are hitting inboxes
-
Technology6 days agoStellantis is in a crisis of its own making