Essence Fest leads a summer of events for Black entrepreneurs galvanized by economic uncertainty
"Essence Fest is like my Black Friday," said Rochelle Ivory, owner of beauty brand On the Edge Baby Hair. "It is my biggest sales weekend of the year. It's where I make all the capital I reinvest in my business."
Essence Fest kicks off on Friday, with roughly 500,000 people attending the event in New Orleans. It generates around $1 billion in economic activity, according to organizers.
"It's the cannot-miss event for us," said Brittney Adams, owner of eyewear brand Focus and Frame. She said this year Essence Fest is even more important because she's seen Black consumers pulling back on spending.
"I would say the uncertainty of just the economic and political climate — that's giving people a little bit of hesitancy. Should they save the money? Should they buy the things they want?" Adams said.
Ivory said her sales are down roughly 30% year over year, but she's hopeful people come to New Orleans looking to spend their time and money in the festival marketplace.
"This could make or break some of us," she said. "It's one of the few places where Black women, Black founders can really come together and be seen."
The Global Black Economic Forum aims to bring visibility and create solutions for Black business owners at Essence Fest. This year speakers include Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown-Jackson and Maryland Gov. Wes Moore. Last year, then-Vice President Kamala Harris spoke.
"We intentionally curate a space that allows leaders to preserve, build and reimagine how we can collectively increase economic opportunity to thrive," said Alphonso David, CEO of the GBEF.
While many Black Americans express economic anxiety, the data is less clear.
In the first quarter of this year, according to Federal Reserve data, the median weekly salary for Black workers was $1,192 a 5% increase year over year. Black unemployment stood at 6% in the most recent jobs report, a historically low number, but still higher than the national average of 4.2%.
However, the data doesn't appear to fully reflect the sentiment for many Black Americans who are concerned about the political, cultural and economic shifts that have taken place since President Donald Trump's election.
"Never let a good crisis go to waste," said John Hope Bryant, founder and CEO of Operation Hope, one of the nation's largest non-profits focused on financial education and empowerment.
Bryant said he sees the concerns of Black Americans as an opportunity in the second half of 2025.
"This president has done something that hasn't been done since the 1960s, which is unify Black America. Wealth was created in the early 20th century because Blacks were forced to work together. But instead of Black Lives Matter, let's make Black capitalist matter," he said.
Pastor Jamal Bryant of New Birth Missionary Baptist Church has galvanized Black consumers with an organized boycott of Target that began in February in response to the retailer's decision to roll back diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives.
Bryant said he is in discussions with Target but is ready to organize a longer-term boycott if the retailer does not fulfill the promises it made to the Black community after the killing of George Floyd. He is urging Black Americans to use the estimated $2.1 trillion dollars in spending power forecast by 2026 to drive economic and political change.
"I would dare say that 'pocketbook protests' are a revolutionary activity," said Bryant.
"I think we have to be very selective in light of the 'Big Ugly Bill' that just passed and how it will adversely affect our community," he said, referencing Trump's megabill that passed through Congress this week.
Invest Fest, an event that blends commerce and culture created by financially focused media company Earn Your Leisure kicks off in Atlanta in August.
Co-CEOs Rashad Bilal and Troy Millings said the event will remain focused on financial literacy, but this year they are emphasizing the urgent need for education and entrepreneurship in technology.
"It's definitely now or never, the time is now," said Bilal.
"The important thing this year is the way technology is going to disrupt a lot of career paths and the businesses, and we have to prepare for that, which is why AI is at the forefront of the conversation, crypto is at the forefront of the conversations, real estate as always and entrepreneurship," said Millings.
New this year is a partnership with venture capital firm Open Opportunity and a pitch competition where an entrepreneur can win $125,000 in funding to scale their business.
"We need more businesses that can reach $100 million valuation to a $1 billion valuation, get on the stock market. The pathway to that 9 times out of 10 is technology," Bilal said.
The National Black MBA Association Conference in Houston in September will have a similar tone. The event is known for its career fair where the nation's largest companies recruit as well as for networking and vibrant social activities.
This year, interim CEO Orlando Ashford is working to establish artificial intelligence education and financial literacy as pillars of the event.
"Doing business as usual is not an option," Ashford told CNBC. "AI is something I literally refer to as a tsunami of change that's on its way. All of us will be forced to pivot in some ways as it relates to AI. Those of us that are out in front, that embrace it and leverage it actually can turn it into a tremendous and powerful opportunity. Those that wait and ignore it will be overtaken by the wave."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
40 minutes ago
- New York Post
Immigrants' deportation to South Sudan briefly blocked after Supreme Court cleared the way
A federal judge on Friday briefly halted deportations of eight immigrants to war-torn South Sudan, sending the case to another judge, in Boston, the day after the Supreme Court greenlighted their removal. District Judge Randolph Moss sent the case north from Washington after an extraordinary Fourth of July hearing on Friday afternoon. He concluded that the judge best equipped to deal with the issues was Brian Murphy, the one whose rulings led to the initial halt of the Trump administration's effort to begin deportations to the eastern African country. District Judge Randolph Moss ruled on Friday to halt the deportations of eight migrants to South Sudan. AP He extended his order halting the deportation until 4:30 p.m. Eastern time, but it was unclear whether Murphy would act on the federal holiday to further limit the removal. Moss said new claims by the immigrants' lawyers deserved a hearing. The administration has been trying to deport the immigrants for weeks. None are from South Sudan, which is enmeshed in civil war and where the U.S government advises no one should travel before making their own funeral arrangements. The case has been sent to another judge after the Supreme Court ruled that the Trump administration could deport the eight immigrants convicted of violent crimes back to South Sudan. AP The government flew them to the U.S. Naval Base at Djibouti but couldn't move them further because Murphy had ruled no immigrant could be sent to a new country without a chance to have a court hearing. The Supreme Court vacated that decision last month, then Thursday night issued a new order clarifying that that meant the immigrants could be moved to South Sudan. Lawyers for the immigrants, who hail from Laos, Mexico, Myanmar, Vietnam and other countries, filed an emergency request to halt their removal later that night.
Wall Street Journal
an hour ago
- Wall Street Journal
I Won't Doubt Justice Barrett Again
A few months ago I ran into Justice Neil Gorsuch and lamented some of his colleagues' recent opinions. I criticized Justice Amy Coney Barrett and Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson in particular, both of whom had recently ruled against the Trump administration. Justice Gorsuch was characteristically gracious and spoke of how each was entitled to his own opinions. I once was what your editorial 'The Supreme Court Kills 'Universal' Injunctions' (June 28) refers to as a 'MAGA loudmouth.' After reading Justice Barrett's superb opinion in Trump v. CASA, I am a repentant MAGA loudmouth. She is a star—and I regret ever doubting it.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Judges are finding workarounds to Trump's big Supreme Court win
If the Supreme Court's near-ban on nationwide injunctions was the earth-shattering victory President Donald Trump claimed, no one seems to have told his courtroom opponents. While the absence of that tool is clearly a sea change for the judiciary, early results indicate that judges see other paths to impose sweeping restrictions on government actions they deem unlawful. And those options remain viable in many major pending lawsuits against the administration. Since the high court's ruling last Friday, U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss issued an extraordinary rejection of the president's effort to ban asylum for most southern border-crossers, a ruling with nationwide effect. Moss, an Obama appointee, emphasized that his decision was not one of the now-verboten injunctions. Instead, it relied on two alternative routes the Supreme Court acknowledged remained available for those challenging Trump's policies: class actions, which allow large groups to band together and sue over a common problem, and the Administrative Procedure Act, a federal law that permits courts to "set aside" federal agency actions that violate the law, including rules, regulations and memos laying out new procedures. The ruling by Moss drew intense outrage from the Trump administration, which accused the judge of going 'rogue' and violating the Supreme Court's intentions. Hours later, U.S. District Judge John Bates, a George W. Bush appointee, ordered federal health officials to restore hundreds of web pages containing gender-related data that officials took down pursuant to a Trump executive order cracking down on 'gender ideology.' He described the move as an example of federal officials 'acting first and thinking later.' Despite the nationwide implications of his ruling, Bates emphasized that the APA allows courts to effectively undo unjustified agency action, adding that even the Justice Department did 'not argue that more tailored relief is even possible here, let alone appropriate.' The judge also left open the possibility that officials could go back to the drawing board and find a lawful way to restrict content related to so-called 'gender ideology.' And in Massachusetts, Reagan-appointed U.S. District Judge William Young was careful to emphasize that his expansive ruling restoring health research grants — cut following the same executive order cited by Bates — was nonetheless tailored only to provide relief to the organizations that sued. Like Bates, Young's ruling relied on the APA. 'Public officials, in their haste to appease the Executive, simply moved too fast and broke things,' Young wrote. In short, the Supreme Court's ruling on nationwide injunctions may be the tectonic shift that wasn't. Despite the extraordinary potential to reshape the judiciary, its immediate impact — particularly in the innumerable challenges to Trump's effort to single-handedly slash and reshape the federal government — may be limited. It's early, to be sure. The long-term implications of the justices' decision could wind up dramatically changing the legal landscape for generations. But while the injunction ban cascades across the landscape of cases challenging Trump's agenda, the president's adversaries seem undeterred. So far it simply appears to have led them to refocus their complaints and arguments on class actions and 'setting aside' agency actions, rather than 'universal injunctions.' And at least in the early-going, judges seem prepared to oblige. Moreover, even if the Supreme Court thinks these alternative routes should also be narrowed, litigating those separate issues could take months or years to resolve. Several other judges have asked for input from the Trump administration and its adversaries about how to apply the high court's ruling to their ongoing cases, and it's unclear where they will land. Among them: — The judges overseeing at least four cases stemming from Trump's effort to deny birthright citizenship to children of undocumented immigrants, which triggered the Supreme Court's injunction ruling in the first place, must now decide whether the nationwide blocks they granted still apply. The Supreme Court emphasized that nationwide relief may still be appropriate in cases filed by the states, and other plaintiffs have quickly refashioned their complaints as class action lawsuits that could still result in something akin to a nationwide injunction. — The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals is reexamining a nationwide ruling requiring the Trump administration to continue processing refugee admissions. The Trump administration says the ruling is far too broad in light of the Supreme Court's restrictions. But the plaintiffs include several organizations that aid refugees and argue that they can only be provided meaningful relief with a remedy that applies nationally. — The 9th Circuit is similarly evaluating a nationwide ruling stoppingTrump's ban on transgender people serving in the military. The Supreme Court already blocked the decision by U.S. District Judge Benjamin Settle, a George W. Bush appointee, from taking immediate effect, but now the parties are debating whether it must be significantly narrowed so that it applies only to the particular military service members who sued. Those plaintiffs say the answer is a firm no: 'A more limited injunction would undermine the effectiveness of Plaintiffs' military service by forcing them to serve only as 'exceptions to a policy that officially declares them categorically unfit.'' — U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy, a Biden appointee, wants advice by next week on how to apply the Supreme Court's injunction ruling toa pending case related to the Pentagon's slashing of funding for research. The Justice Department today also cited the injunction ruling in a letter urging the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals to significantly narrow a ruling blocking the administration from largely shuttering the U.S. Agency for International Development. Like this content? Consider signing up for POLITICO's West Wing Playbook: Remaking Government newsletter.
