RAVENNA, Italy — Brazilian football legend Ronaldinho returned to professional football Thursday, Aug. 20, more than a decade after his last competitive match, as he was formally presented as the new number 10 for Ravenna FC, an Italian third-division club, in a beachside ceremony that drew thousands of fans.

The 46-year-old former Ballon d’Or winner attended an induction ceremony in Ravenna, meeting with local supporters as the club officially unveiled him as part of its roster for the 2026-27 season. Ravenna declared the day “Ronaldinho Day” to mark the occasion, and approximately 6,000 fans gathered near the venue on the Adriatic coast, waving flags and cheering as Ronaldinho made his appearance.

According to Colombia One, Ronaldinho will also become a shareholder in the club, combining an investment role with his commitment to potentially contribute on the field. Ravenna club president Ignazio Cipriani, who is part of the family behind the well-known Cipriani restaurant brand, first announced the surprise signing in June, describing the move as part of a broader effort to raise the club’s profile as it competes to climb through Italy’s football pyramid.

Ravenna vice-president Ariedo Braida initially suggested Ronaldinho’s role would be limited strictly to marketing activities rather than actual playing time. “Ronaldinho will do a marketing event with us but will not play for Ravenna in Serie C next season. Also because he’s 46, I wish he could still play,” Braida said at the time, according to Goal.com. He later softened that stance considerably in comments to the Italian news agency ANSA. “Ronaldinho is a timeless champion. He has signed with Ravenna and, for a club like ours, it’s an extraordinary coup. Over the next few days, there will be an event to unveil this extraordinary character. Will he play? We’ll see, but it’s not ruled out,” Braida said.

Speaking to fans and media during Thursday’s presentation ceremony, Ronaldinho struck a similarly open-ended tone regarding his own playing future. When asked about his physical condition, he smiled and replied simply, “I’m fine.” Pressed on when he might actually take the field in a competitive match, he deferred the decision to club leadership. “It depends on the chairman and the manager. I don’t know,” Ronaldinho said.

Ronaldinho also addressed the collaborative spirit behind his decision to join the project, framing the move as rooted primarily in personal friendship rather than a calculated football decision. “I’m very happy to be here with my friends, but let’s wait and see if things go well with the team,” he said, according to Goal.com’s coverage of the beachside ceremony.

Cipriani, for his part, has expressed hope that Ronaldinho’s involvement extends beyond ceremonial appearances. He revealed that he dreams of Ronaldinho scoring his final career goal while wearing a Ravenna shirt, a sentiment Ronaldinho appeared to embrace when the possibility was raised directly. “Wouldn’t that be even better? I came here because we are friends. Now, let’s see how the team does. I came here to help the team,” Ronaldinho said. In earlier comments following the initial June announcement, Cipriani offered a personal reflection on what the signing means to him. “[Ronaldinho] was my idol growing up,” Cipriani said at a presentation event held in Miami in June. “I hope his involvement inspires a new generation of supporters to fall in love with Ravenna.”

Ronaldinho’s career stands among the most decorated in the history of Brazilian football. He was a key contributor to Brazil’s victory at the 2002 World Cup, held jointly by South Korea and Japan, and won the Ballon d’Or in 2005 while at the peak of his powers with FC Barcelona, where he also won two La Liga titles and the 2006 UEFA Champions League. His European career additionally included spells with Paris Saint-Germain and AC Milan, the latter from 2008 to 2011, meaning his move to Ravenna marks his second spell playing club football in Italy. Following his time in Europe, Ronaldinho returned to Brazil, playing for clubs including Grêmio and Flamengo before his final professional appearance came with Fluminense in 2015.

In the more than a decade since that last competitive match, Ronaldinho had largely stepped away from formal club football, instead appearing in exhibition matches and legends events around the world rather than pursuing another competitive playing contract. His decision to sign with Ravenna in June therefore came as a significant surprise within the football world, described by Fox Sports as “one of the most unexpected moves in recent football history.”

Ravenna’s first Serie C match of the new season will be an away fixture against Reggiana on Aug. 24, though Ronaldinho is not expected to feature in that opening match, according to Colombia One. It also remains undecided how many matches he might ultimately participate in over the course of the season, with his specific role continuing to be evaluated by the club’s coaching staff under manager Andrea Mandorlini.

Cipriani has emphasized that the broader purpose behind bringing Ronaldinho to the club extends well beyond any individual playing appearances he might make. “This was an operation to bring the whole city closer to the team,” Cipriani said, according to Goal.com’s coverage of the June announcement. “To create a fan base with lots of joy and excitement for this new season.” Following the club’s June announcement of the signing, a special-edition Ravenna FC collaboration jersey featuring Ronaldinho’s involvement sold out rapidly amid the global attention generated by his high-profile arrival.

As Ravenna prepares to open its Serie C campaign this week, questions surrounding exactly when and how often Ronaldinho might actually appear in competitive matches remain unresolved, with both the player and club leadership indicating that any playing time will ultimately depend on decisions made collaboratively between Cipriani and the team’s coaching staff as the season progresses.

More than a month after Travis Kelce and Taylor Swift married at Madison Square Garden, conflicting accounts from wedding guests have continued to fuel public debate over whether attendees were required to sign non-disclosure agreements ahead of the high-profile ceremony.

Sports writer and NFL rules analyst Dean Blandino, who attended the wedding, directly disputed reports that guests had been required to sign confidentiality paperwork to attend the event. “There’s a lot of rumors. Nobody signed the NDAs. There wasn’t any,” Blandino said, speaking to the Haymaker Network.

Blandino’s account stands in contrast to other reporting on the event’s security and privacy measures. Talk show host Graham Norton had earlier joked publicly about signing multiple NDAs in order to attend the wedding, while Jonathan Thomas confirmed on “The Compound and Friends” podcast that the digital wedding invitation itself required multifactor authentication along with a non-disclosure agreement processed through DocuSign. Multiple earlier reports had also referenced invitations carrying digital watermarks, a security measure typically used to help identify the source of any unauthorized leaks.

Taken together, the varying accounts suggest that while Blandino personally was not asked to sign a confidentiality agreement, other high-profile guests and individuals invited to the wedding may have gone through a more formal NDA process, potentially depending on their specific role at the event or their level of access to the ceremony and its surroundings. According to reporting on the arrangement, any NDAs that were signed reportedly did not include specific financial penalties or fines for violations, suggesting the documents functioned primarily as a formal request for discretion rather than a legally enforceable deterrent with defined consequences.

The wedding itself took place at Madison Square Garden in New York, where Kelce and Swift exchanged vows during a 20-minute ceremony officiated by comedian Adam Sandler in front of more than 1,000 guests. The event brought together family, friends, teammates and media personalities connected to both Kelce’s NFL career and Swift’s music career.

Kelce has spoken publicly and warmly about the wedding in the weeks since. During a recent press interaction at training camp, he described the night as one of the most meaningful of his life. “(The) wedding was the best night of my life,” Kelce said. “I appreciate everyone who came out and celebrated and had fun with us. It was a crazy night, it was full of a lot of celebrations.”

That public reflection from Kelce, however, has drawn some pointed criticism from at least one guest who felt uncomfortable with the apparent double standard between the couple’s own willingness to discuss the event publicly and the secrecy expectations placed on attendees. Speaking anonymously, one guest expressed frustration over that dynamic, according to comments reported by Rob Shuter. “So the bride and groom are allowed to talk about it, but we aren’t?” the guest said, according to Shuter’s reporting. “It feels like there’s always one rule for Taylor and another for everyone else.”

Not every guest has shared that frustration publicly, and some have defended the couple’s approach to managing privacy around their wedding. Even so, the anonymous account suggests that at least some attendees have felt caught in an uncomfortable position, effectively expected to avoid discussing details of an event that Kelce himself has continued to reference positively in interviews since the ceremony took place.

The intense continued interest in the wedding, more than a month after it occurred, reflects the broader scale of public fascination surrounding Kelce and Swift’s relationship, one of the most closely followed celebrity pairings in recent years given Swift’s global music career and Kelce’s prominent profile as an NFL tight end. Speculation and reporting about the event’s security measures, guest list and privacy protocols has continued to circulate across entertainment and sports media in the weeks following the ceremony, even as neither Kelce nor Swift has directly addressed the specific NDA rumors themselves.

Whether Kelce and Swift’s broader effort to maintain privacy around specific details of their wedding stemmed from a desire to control the narrative surrounding such a heavily publicized event, or simply reflected a wish to keep certain personal, intimate details of their celebration away from the intense media scrutiny that regularly follows both of their public lives, remains a matter of speculation given that neither the couple nor their representatives have issued a detailed public statement addressing the conflicting accounts from guests regarding non-disclosure agreements.

As of this report, no official confirmation has emerged clarifying definitively whether NDAs were universally required for all wedding attendees, selectively required for certain guests based on their role or access level, or not formally required at all beyond informal requests for discretion. The continued public interest in parsing these conflicting guest accounts, weeks after the wedding itself concluded, underscores just how significant a cultural moment the Swift-Kelce nuptials have remained within both sports and entertainment media coverage throughout the summer.

This article was written by

Follow

Analyst’s Disclosure: I/we have a beneficial long position in the shares of B,NEM, HL, KGC either through stock ownership, options, or other derivatives. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Seeking Alpha’s Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. No recommendation or advice is being given as to whether any investment is suitable for a particular investor. Any views or opinions expressed above may not reflect those of Seeking Alpha as a whole. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank. Our analysts are third party authors that include both professional investors and individual investors who may not be licensed or certified by any institute or regulatory body.

This article was written by

Follow

Analyst’s Disclosure: I/we have a beneficial long position in the shares of FUTU either through stock ownership, options, or other derivatives. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Seeking Alpha’s Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. No recommendation or advice is being given as to whether any investment is suitable for a particular investor. Any views or opinions expressed above may not reflect those of Seeking Alpha as a whole. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank. Our analysts are third party authors that include both professional investors and individual investors who may not be licensed or certified by any institute or regulatory body.

The Walt Disney Company is eliminating health insurance coverage for the spouses of more than 200,000 employees starting in 2027, a significant benefits change that arrives even as the entertainment giant reports record box office performance and expanding profits across its film, streaming and theme park businesses.

According to a report first published by Puck and subsequently confirmed by Disney, employees will no longer be able to enroll a spouse or domestic partner on the company’s healthcare plan if that spouse has access to insurance coverage through their own employer, regardless of the cost or comprehensiveness of that alternative coverage. The change was communicated through an internal memo from Eric Chaisson, Disney’s executive vice president of Total Rewards and Employee Services, as part of a broader benefits overhaul the company is calling “Total Rewards.”

Disney confirmed the policy shift in a statement addressing the change. “Making measured adjustments to our employee benefits in response to rising healthcare costs nationwide,” the company said, according to IBTimes UK, adding that it remained committed to providing employees with “a comprehensive package of high-quality coverage and other benefits that support their total health and well-being.” An internal memo obtained by Puck offered a similarly measured explanation for the decision, stating that Disney is “navigating a number of factors, including rising healthcare costs, evolving company needs, and shifts across the industry.”

The policy change does not extend to dental or vision benefits for employees’ spouses, according to IBTimes UK, and will not affect spouses who are unemployed or whose jobs do not offer any form of medical insurance coverage. However, for spouses who do have access to workplace coverage, even coverage that is significantly more expensive or less comprehensive than Disney’s own plan, that access will now automatically disqualify them from Disney’s healthcare plan starting in 2027.

Industry experts have described Disney’s approach as unusually aggressive compared with how most large employers typically manage rising healthcare costs. Joshua Lavine, chief executive of insurance advisory firm Capitol Benefits, characterized the move as a significant departure from common industry practice. “We’ve seen employers reducing their contribution toward the spouse’s coverage, but not eliminating the coverage option for those people,” Lavine told Yahoo Finance. He warned that the change could create particular hardship for families managing ongoing medical needs. “There are so many options for employers right now to make coverage available to employees that this is really the extreme, nothing-else-can-work solution,” Lavine said, offering an alternative approach he believes would have been less disruptive. “A better solution is to reduce, or if you have to, eliminate the employer contribution for spouses.”

The financial impact of the change is expected to fall most heavily on Disney’s lower-paid workforce. According to reporting cited by Inside the Magic and confirmed across multiple outlets, the policy will disproportionately affect lower-paid, hourly cast members who have historically relied on Disney’s relatively comprehensive healthcare benefits, forcing many affected families onto alternative employer plans that may carry higher deductibles, steeper premiums or narrower provider networks.

Disney’s decision arrives during what the company has itself described as a particularly strong financial period. According to The A.V. Club, Disney’s co-produced “Spider-Man: Brand New Day” has already crossed $2 billion at the global box office, joining “Toy Story 5” among the year’s top three highest-grossing films. In a letter to shareholders this month, Disney reported that revenues are up company-wide and that the “Toy Story” franchise alone has generated an estimated $16 billion in cumulative revenue for the company. The company has also continued touting expansion plans across its resorts, theme parks and cruise ship business, built on the continued strength of its family-oriented entertainment brand.

The benefits change comes under the leadership of Disney’s relatively new chief executive, Josh D’Amaro, who took over the company’s top role following Bob Iger’s departure. D’Amaro previously served as head of Disney’s Parks, Experiences and Products segment, a role in which he oversaw a significant workforce reduction of 28,000 employees at that division amid pandemic-era park closures, according to a separate report from TipRanks documenting that earlier decision. At the time, D’Amaro described that reduction as a difficult necessity. “We have made the very difficult decision to begin the process of reducing our workforce at our Parks, Experiences and Products segment at all levels, having kept non-working Cast Members on furlough since April, while paying healthcare benefits,” D’Amaro said at the time, according to TipRanks.

Disney’s move to restrict spousal healthcare coverage reflects a broader trend among large U.S. employers confronting significant increases in healthcare costs heading into 2027. According to IBTimes UK, citing insurance brokerage Aon, employer healthcare expenses are projected to rise by roughly 9.5% next year, with other estimates cited by Disney Fanatic putting the increase as high as 11.1%. IBTimes UK further reported that nearly half of large employers surveyed by consulting firm Mercer are considering changes to their medical plans that could shift additional out-of-pocket costs onto employees, suggesting Disney’s decision, while notably aggressive in its scope, reflects a broader industry response to mounting healthcare expenses rather than an isolated company-specific choice.

To help offset the impact of the benefits reduction, Disney is introducing several new perks alongside the spousal coverage change. According to Inside the Magic, the company plans to launch a new Employee Stock Purchase Plan in 2027, pending regulatory approvals, and will double the number of counseling sessions available to employees through its Employee Assistance Program. Critics of the policy change, however, have characterized those additions as a limited counterbalance to the potential financial burden facing affected families. Disney Fanatic described the option to purchase company stock as “a hollow consolation prize” for cast member families potentially facing thousands of dollars in new medical deductibles under alternative coverage plans.

Disney has not publicly disclosed how much money the new restriction on spousal coverage is projected to save the company, nor has it specified exactly how many employees’ spouses will ultimately be affected by the change once it takes effect in 2027. The company has also indicated that most of its medical plans will change for the coming year, requiring nearly all employees to actively select new coverage options and re-enroll their dependents, rather than allowing existing coverage selections to automatically carry over as they have in previous enrollment cycles.

Representatives for Paramount Skydance and California Attorney General Rob Bonta’s office are expected to meet Monday to discuss a potential resolution to the lawsuit seeking to block Paramount’s $110 billion acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery, according to reports.

The talks come as the transaction remains on hold under a court agreement and the companies face a March 2027 antitrust trial unless the dispute is resolved sooner.

Variety first reported Friday that the two sides were expected to meet, citing sources familiar with the situation. The discussions are expected to focus on whether there is a path toward resolving the states’ antitrust case.

FOX Business has reached out to Paramount and Bonta’s office for comment.

Bonta led a coalition of 12 state attorneys general in filing the lawsuit in July, alleging the combination would reduce competition in theatrical film distribution and basic cable programming.

MOVIE THEATER GROUP REVERSES COURSE, URGES CALIFORNIA AG TO SETTLE $110B PARAMOUNT-WARNER BROS LAWSUIT

California Attorney General Rob Bonta believes Paramount’s planned takeover of Warner Bros. Discovery is simply “an illegal merger.”  (AaronP/Bauer-Griffin/GC Images / Getty Images)

The states argue the merger would combine two of Hollywood’s five major film distributors and give the combined company roughly 27% of the wide-release theatrical film market. They also allege it would control more than 30% of anticipated top-grossing theatrical films and about 27% of the market for licensing basic cable channels.

Paramount and Warner Bros. Discovery have rejected the states’ view of the transaction, arguing the combination would strengthen competition in a rapidly changing media industry.

An aerial view of the sun rising beyond the water tower at Paramount Studios on Oct. 30, 2025, in Los Angeles, California.  (Mario Tama/Getty Images / Getty Images)

Bonta signaled openness to a possible resolution in a CNBC interview Thursday but said any settlement would require “robust structural remedies.”

“We do prefer to resolve cases in the boardroom instead of the courtroom,” Bonta told CNBC, while saying the states remain focused on the markets outlined in their complaint.

MARC STAD ASSUMES CONTROLLING STAKE IN TIMBERWOLVES, LYNX; ALEX RODRIGUEZ REMAINS WNBA FRANCHISE’S GOVERNOR

Under a July 24 court stipulation, Paramount and Warner Bros. Discovery agreed not to close the deal or begin integrating their operations until five days after a ruling on the merits or June 1, 2027, whichever comes first.

California Attorney General Rob Bonta. (Sarah Reingewirtz/MediaNews Group/Los Angeles Daily News via Getty Images / Getty Images)

U.S. District Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguín has scheduled a 12-day trial beginning March 2, 2027. In an Aug. 4 scheduling order, the judge also encouraged the parties to identify potential magistrate judges to oversee a settlement conference.

Paramount agreed in February to acquire Warner Bros. Discovery for $31 per share in cash, valuing the transaction at roughly $110 billion including debt. Under the merger agreement, Warner Bros. Discovery shareholders begin accruing additional consideration if the transaction remains unclosed after Sept. 30.

CLICK HERE TO GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO

The companies have said the combination would create a stronger global media competitor while maintaining both film studios and producing at least 30 theatrical films annually.