Pool cue size is crucial for optimal performance and comfort. Length, weight, and balance are key factors to consider. Cues come in standard (57-59″) and non-standard sizes, with specialized options for height and playstyle. This guide helps you choose the perfect fit.

Understanding the Importance of Proper Cue Size

Proper cue size is essential for comfort, accuracy, and consistency in pool. A cue that is too long or too short can lead to discomfort and affect your technique, potentially causing fatigue or discomfort during extended play. Incorrect sizing may also result in inconsistent shots, as it can alter your stroke and alignment. Choosing the right size ensures better control, allowing for smoother, more precise movements. Additionally, it reduces the risk of developing bad habits in your gameplay. A well-fitted cue enhances your overall performance, making it easier to enjoy the game and improve your skills over time. Proper sizing is the foundation of a enjoyable and effective playing experience.

Overview of Pool Cue Length and Weight

Pool cue length and weight are critical factors that influence gameplay. Standard cues typically range from 57 to 59 inches in length, with 58 inches being the most common. Weight usually falls between 18 to 21 ounces, impacting control and power. Lighter cues (18-19 oz) suit finesse players, while heavier ones (20-21 oz) are ideal for break shots. Proper length ensures comfortable handling, while appropriate weight enhances accuracy. Balancing these elements is key to optimizing performance. Players should consider their height, arm length, and playing style when selecting a cue. The right combination of length and weight can significantly improve consistency and overall playing experience.

Standard Pool Cue Lengths

Standard pool cues typically range from 57 to 59 inches, with 58 inches being the most common length, suitable for players between 50 and 62 inches tall.

57-58 Inch Cues: The Most Common Choice

The 57-58 inch pool cues are the most popular choice, offering a perfect balance of comfort and control for players of average height (50-62″). This length provides excellent maneuverability and is versatile enough for various playing styles. Many players, including taller individuals, find this size comfortable due to its universal design. The 58-inch cue, in particular, is widely regarded as the standard for its adaptability and performance. It suits both recreational and competitive play, making it a preferred option for most billiard enthusiasts. This size ensures a natural stroke and consistent accuracy, making it an ideal starting point for anyone selecting a pool cue.

59 Inch Cues: For Taller Players

59-inch pool cues are designed for taller players, typically those above 64″, offering extra length for better reach and control. This size is less common than the standard 57-58″ cues but provides a noticeable advantage for players with longer arms or heights. The additional length allows for a more comfortable shooting stance and reduced strain. While some taller players still use 58″ cues, the 59″ option minimizes awkward bending and enhances accuracy. It’s ideal for maintaining proper form during shots. However, extensions or custom cues are often recommended for extreme heights. The 59″ cue strikes a balance between standard and specialized lengths, ensuring taller players can play effortlessly without compromising performance or comfort.

Non-Standard Pool Cue Lengths

Non-standard cues cater to specific needs, offering shorter or longer options. They include 48-52″ cues for shorter players and tight spaces, and “shorty” cues (24-47″) for children or compact play.

48-52 Inch Cues: Ideal for Shorter Players or Tight Spaces

48-52 inch cues are designed for shorter players or situations requiring compact play. These cues are lightweight and easy to maneuver, making them perfect for tight spaces or younger players. They provide excellent control and accuracy while maintaining a professional feel. Ideal for heights under 58″, these cues are a great alternative to standard lengths. They are also affordable and come in various styles, ensuring a comfortable fit for all players needing a shorter stick. Whether for practice or competition, 48-52 inch cues offer versatility and adaptability, making them a popular choice for those with specific size requirements.

24-47 Inch Cues: Shorty Cues for Children or Compact Play

24-47 inch cues, often called “shorty cues,” are designed for children or situations requiring compact play. These cues are significantly shorter than standard lengths, making them ideal for tight spaces or younger players. They are lightweight and easy to handle, providing a practical solution for smaller individuals or environments with limited room. Shorty cues are available in one-piece or two-piece designs, offering convenience and portability. They are a great option for teaching children how to play pool, as they are easier to manage and allow for proper technique development. Additionally, they are affordable and durable, making them a popular choice for both kids and adults in tight spaces.

Jump Cues: Specialized Cues for Trick Shots

Jump cues are highly specialized tools designed for executing trick shots and jumping balls. Typically shorter, around 40 inches, these cues are lighter and more compact, making them ideal for advanced players. Their shorter length and lightweight design allow for precise control and the ability to strike the ball at specific angles. Jump cues often feature a harder tip to minimize deflection and ensure consistent contact. While they excel in trick shots, they may not be suitable for regular play due to their unique design. These cues are a must-have for skilled players looking to master complex techniques and are also useful in tight spaces where standard cues are impractical.

Pool Cue Weight Guide

Pool cues typically weigh between 18-21 ounces. Lighter cues (18-19 oz) suit finesse players, while heavier cues (20-21 oz) offer more power. Custom options are available for advanced players.

Standard Weight Range: 18-21 Ounces

The standard weight range for pool cues is between 18 and 21 ounces, offering a balance between control and power. Lighter cues (18-19 oz) are ideal for finesse players, enabling precise shots with less force. Heavier cues (20-21 oz) suit players who prefer a more powerful stroke, making them great for break shots. The weight distribution also affects how the cue feels during play, allowing players to choose what suits their style best. This range ensures versatility, accommodating both casual and competitive players.

Lighter Cues (18-19 Ounces): Benefits for Finesse Players

Lighter pool cues, weighing 18-19 ounces, are designed for finesse players who prioritize precision and control. These cues allow for smoother, more accurate shots, making them ideal for players who rely on spin and precise ball placement. The reduced weight minimizes fatigue during extended play and enables quicker wrist action for delicate shots. However, lighter cues may lack the power needed for strong break shots, making them less suitable for aggressive players. Overall, they are a great choice for those who value accuracy and a lighter feel, enhancing their ability to execute complex, strategic plays with ease and consistency.

Heavier Cues (20-21 Ounces): Power for Break Shots

Heavier pool cues, weighing 20-21 ounces, are ideal for players who prioritize power and strength in their shots. These cues deliver more force, making them perfect for break shots and aggressive playstyles. The added weight provides a solid strike, transferring maximum energy to the balls. However, heavier cues can be less precise for finesse shots and may require more control to handle effectively. They are often preferred by experienced players who need the extra power to dominate the table. While they may not suit all players, heavier cues are a great choice for those who value raw strength and impact in their gameplay.

Custom Weight Options for Advanced Players

Advanced players seeking precision and personalization can opt for custom weight options in their pool cues. These cues are tailored to individual preferences, allowing for weights outside the standard 18-21 ounce range. Custom weights enhance playstyle specificity, offering unique benefits such as refined control or increased power. Players can choose lighter or heavier cues based on their technique and game strategy. Customization ensures optimal performance, making each cue a perfect fit for its user. This flexibility is especially valuable for experienced players aiming to refine their skills and achieve consistency in competitive settings. Custom weight cues offer a personalized edge, elevating gameplay to new heights.

Balance Point in Pool Cues

The balance point in a pool cue significantly impacts its feel and performance. It determines weight distribution, affecting control and power. Proper balance enhances accuracy and stroke consistency, essential for skilled gameplay.

Front-Balanced Cues: More Weight in the Tip

Front-balanced cues feature more weight concentrated in the tip, offering enhanced sensitivity and control. This design is ideal for players who prefer precision and spin manipulation, allowing for more accurate and deliberate shots. The added weight in the tip provides improved feedback, making it easier to gauge shot strength and direction. However, this balance requires a controlled stroke to avoid overcompensation. Players who prioritize finesse and strategy often favor front-balanced cues, as they enable a more precise connection with the ball. This balance type is particularly beneficial for players who rely on spin shots and soft cushions to outmaneuver opponents.

Rear-Balanced Cues: More Weight in the Butt

Rear-balanced cues have more weight concentrated in the butt, offering a lighter feel in the front hand. This design is ideal for players who prefer ease of control and powerful shots. The additional weight in the butt provides more force for break shots and allows for a smoother, more consistent stroke. These cues are great for players who enjoy shooting with authority and prefer a comfortable grip. However, they may lack some precision for spin shots due to the weight distribution. Rear-balanced cues are perfect for those with a power-oriented style or for players who need extra strength in their shots.

Evenly Balanced Cues: A Middle Ground

Evenly balanced cues offer a perfect blend of control and power, making them a versatile choice for players of all skill levels. With weight evenly distributed throughout, these cues provide a consistent feel, allowing for smooth strokes and accurate shots. They are ideal for players who prefer a balanced approach, neither favoring the tip nor the butt. This design supports both finesse and power shots, catering to a wide range of playing styles. Evenly balanced cues are a great option for those seeking adaptability and ease of use, ensuring a comfortable and reliable performance during games.

Pool Cue Tip Size Guide

Pool cue tips range from 9-14mm, with 12-13mm being standard. This size offers a balance between control and power, making it ideal for most players.

Standard Tip Size: 12-13mm

The standard tip size for pool cues is 12-13mm, offering a balance between precision and power. This size is versatile, suitable for most players, and works well for various shots.

Smaller Tips (9-11mm): Precision for Spin Shots

Smaller tips, ranging from 9-11mm, are ideal for players seeking enhanced precision and control, particularly for spin shots; These tips allow for better manipulation of the cue ball, making them favored by experienced players who rely on finesse and accuracy in their gameplay.

Larger Tips (14mm+): Power for Breaks

Larger tips, measuring 14mm or more, are designed for players who prioritize power over precision. These tips provide a bigger contact area with the cue ball, making them ideal for break shots where maximum force is required. The increased surface contact allows for better energy transfer, resulting in more powerful strikes. However, larger tips may compromise accuracy and control, making them less suitable for delicate spin shots. Players with a strong stroke and those who focus on breaking clusters will benefit most from this tip size. The larger surface area also helps in maintaining consistent contact, ensuring reliable performance during high-impact shots. Ultimately, larger tips are a great choice for those seeking raw power in their gameplay.

Choosing the Right Cue for Your Height

Your height significantly impacts cue selection. Taller players (above 64″) may need longer cues or extensions, while shorter players (under 58″) benefit from shorter lengths for better control and comfort.

Pool Cue Size Chart: A Starting Point

A pool cue size chart provides a helpful starting point for selecting the right cue length based on your height. For players between 58″ and 64″, a standard 57-59″ cue is ideal. Taller players (above 64″) may prefer a longer cue or an extension for added reach. Shorter players (under 58″) often find 48-52″ cues more comfortable. The chart suggests:

• 58-64″: Standard 58″ cue with 19-20 oz weight.
• Above 64″: Longer cues or extensions for better reach.
• Under 58″: 48-52″ cues for easier handling.

While this chart is a guide, personal preference and playstyle should also influence your choice. Testing different cues is recommended for the best fit.

Taller Players (Above 64″)

Taller players often face challenges with standard cue lengths. For those above 64″, a longer cue or an extension is recommended to maintain comfort and accuracy. A 60-62″ cue can provide better reach, while extensions (3-12″) offer flexibility without buying a custom cue. Heavier cues (20-21 oz) may suit taller players, as they provide more power for break shots. Rear-balanced cues are ideal, offering better control and stability. Testing longer cues or extensions is crucial to find the perfect fit. Balancing reach, weight, and personal comfort ensures an optimal playing experience for taller individuals.

Average Height Players (58-64″)

Players of average height (58-64″) typically find a standard 57-58″ cue to be ideal. This length provides a comfortable playing experience, allowing for proper stance and stroke mechanics. A cue weighing 19-20 ounces is often recommended, as it offers a balanced feel for most players. Lighter cues (18-19 oz) can enhance finesse shots, while heavier ones (20-21 oz) deliver more power for breaks. Evenly balanced cues are a popular choice, offering a mix of control and stability. Testing different cues within this range helps determine the best fit, ensuring optimal performance and comfort during gameplay.

Shorter Players (Under 58″)

For shorter players (under 58″), cues between 48-52 inches are ideal. These shorter cues provide better control and easier handling, especially in tight spaces. They are also suitable for children or those with shorter arm spans. A lighter cue weight of 18-19 ounces is recommended, offering precision for finesse shots. This combination allows for improved accuracy and a more comfortable playing experience, making it easier to develop skills and enjoy the game without the discomfort of a cue that’s too long or heavy. Additionally, shorty cues as short as 24 inches are available for extreme compact play, though they may require more practice to master effectively. Testing different lengths and weights is crucial to find the perfect fit, ensuring optimal performance and comfort during gameplay. Many shorter cues come with adjustable features, allowing for customization to individual preferences, and are often more affordable than standard cues, making them a great option for beginners or those looking for versatility in their equipment.

Specialized Pool Cues

Specialized cues cater to unique needs, such as two-piece and one-piece designs, jump cues for trick shots, and shorty cues for compact play. Custom options and extensions offer tailored solutions for specific styles and preferences, ensuring optimal performance in various scenarios.

Two-Piece vs. One-Piece Cues

When choosing between two-piece and one-piece cues, consider convenience, performance, and maintenance. Two-piece cues are the most common, featuring a joint that connects the butt and shaft, allowing easy transport and storage. They are ideal for players who travel frequently or prefer versatility. However, the joint can slightly affect the cue’s feel and performance. One-piece cues, while less common in pool, offer a solid, consistent hit but are heavier and harder to transport. For maintenance, two-piece cues require periodic joint tightening and lubrication to ensure smooth play. Ultimately, your choice depends on personal preference, portability needs, and the type of game you play most often.

Adjustable and Extendable Cues

Adjustable and extendable cues offer versatility for players needing flexibility in length. These cues can be extended from a standard size (e.g., 58″) to longer lengths (61″, 64″, or even 70″), making them ideal for taller players or those requiring extra reach. Extensions often screw into or slide over the butt end, providing 3-12″ of additional grip. They are a cost-effective alternative to custom cues and allow players to adapt to different scenarios without purchasing multiple cues. While they may slightly affect balance or feel, adjustable cues are a practical solution for players who need a cue that grows with their needs or fits various playing conditions. They are especially popular among taller players or those who play in tight spaces.

Custom Cues for Specific Needs

Custom cues are tailored to meet individual preferences and playing styles. They offer precise adjustments in length, weight, balance, and tip size, ensuring optimal performance. Players with unique requirements, such as specific weight distributions or tip diameters, can benefit from custom designs. Advanced players often opt for custom cues to enhance their control and power. These cues are typically made from high-quality materials, providing durability and a personalized feel. While more expensive than standard options, custom cues deliver unparalleled comfort and accuracy, making them a worthwhile investment for serious enthusiasts. They allow players to achieve their full potential by matching their specific needs perfectly.

Choosing the right pool cue size is essential for performance and comfort. Always test different cues before buying, and consider factors like height, balance, and weight. Happy shooting!

Testing Different Cues Before Buying

Testing different cues before buying is crucial to ensure the best fit for your height, style, and comfort. Visit a local billiard shop to feel and play with various cues. Pay attention to balance, weight, and length. A cue that feels natural in your hands will enhance your performance. Try front, rear, and evenly balanced cues to see what suits you best. Lighter cues (18-19 oz) are great for finesse, while heavier ones (20-21 oz) offer more power. Don’t rush—this step ensures you find a cue that becomes an extension of your game. Testing is the key to making the right choice for your skill level and playing style.

Maintaining Your Pool Cue

Proper maintenance ensures your pool cue lasts longer and performs optimally. Regularly clean the cue with a soft cloth to remove dirt and oils. Avoid exposing it to extreme temperatures or moisture, as this can warp the wood. Store the cue in a protective case when not in use to prevent scratches and damage. Inspect the tip for wear and replace it if necessary. Use professional cue care products to maintain the finish and prevent cracking. Avoid harsh chemicals, as they can damage the materials. Checking for loose joints and ensuring proper alignment is also crucial. A well-maintained cue enhances your game and preserves its value over time.

The post pool cue size guide appeared first on Every Task, Every Guide: The Instruction Portal
.

At President Trump’s direction, Congress is considering proposals to exempt tips from taxable income. After Trump floated this gimmick on the campaign trail, Republican and Democratic elected officials alike have embraced the idea. The House Republican budget bill (H.R. 1) includes a “no tax on tips” provision that gives the illusion of helping lower-income workers—while the rest of the legislation hands huge giveaways to the rich at the expense of the working class. The Senate recently passed a standalone version of no tax on tips that similarly provides the false impression of aiding workers while giving employers excuses to incentivize tipped work and keep base wages low.

If the Trump administration and its allies in Congress genuinely wanted to help tipped and lower-paid workers, there are far better options they could pursue, like raising the federal minimum wage. To illustrate this, we compare the estimated impact of no tax on tips with the Raise the Wage Act of 2025, a bill that would raise the federal minimum wage from $7.25 to $17 an hour by 2030 and gradually phase out the tipped minimum wage. Here is an overview of how the two plans compare.

How many workers would be affected? How long would benefits last?

No tax on tips: Between 2.5 and 5.2 million tipped workers would receive an income tax deduction over the next four years, but benefits would end after 2028.1

The Raise the Wage Act: Nearly 23 million workers, including 2.8 million tipped workers, would earn higher wages with no end date—meaning affected workers would continue to benefit indefinitely.

How much would these workers benefit annually? How would benefits differ based on income?

No tax on tips: Eligible tipped workers would receive an average annual tax cut of $1,700 for the four years it would be in effect. However, the benefits would heavily skew toward higher-income tipped workers. Among all tipped workers, the top 20% would receive an average tax cut of $5,768 while those in the bottom 20% would only get $74 on average. The average for the bottom quintile is small in large part because two-thirds of those workers have incomes so low that they do not pay federal income taxes and thus will not see any tax benefit.2

The Raise the Wage Act: Affected workers who work year-round would receive an average wage increase of $3,200 per year. After taxes, the net pay increase would be marginally smaller but still significantly larger than what a worker would receive on average with a tax deduction on tips.3 In stark contrast to “no tax on tips,” which excludes workers with the lowest incomes, the largest benefits of the Raise the Wage Act would go to the lowest-paid workers.

Who pays for these benefits?

No tax on tips: The public writ large would pay. House Republican lawmakers are already proposing massive cuts to social programs, such as Medicaid and food stamps that benefit millions of people (including tipped workers), to offset foregone revenue from no tax on tips and large tax cuts for the rich. The Republican plan would also dramatically increase the federal debt, which could substantially raise borrowing costs for households and businesses in the future.

The Raise the Wage Act: Employers of low-wage workers would pay for these wage increases, absorbing the higher labor costs over time through a variety of channels. Importantly, the Raise the Wage Act not only increases the federal minimum wage but also phases out the tipped minimum wage, a system that has provided employers of tipped workers an enormous—and highly problematic—public subsidy for decades.

While no tax on tips would benefit only the small share of workers who receive tips as a portion of their compensation, the Raise the Wage Act would benefit all low-wage workers in the U.S., including 4.2 million people with incomes below the poverty line. Over the next 10 years, the Raise the Wage Act would have a total benefit to affected workers of $700 billion, compared with about $39 billion from “no tax on tips” in the House bill (see Figure A).

Figure A

As we at EPI and others have noted, no tax on tips is problematic for a variety of other reasons, aside from its paltry and poorly targeted benefits. The measure that passed in the House caps eligibility to workers in certain tipped occupations earning less than $160,000 in annual income. This will mitigate tax avoidance by the highest earners, but it does not fix other problems, including the fact that ending taxation of tips would likely expand employer use of tipped work—a system already rife with discrimination and worker abuse. No tax on tips would also undercut efforts to raise worker compensation while depleting tax revenue for public services. By subsidizing the use of tipping in the federal tax code, no tax on tips would further cement a system that lets employers off the hook from paying their workers a fair wage—in this case, forcing taxpayers to foot the bill. In contrast, the Raise the Wage Act gives workers a durable wage increase paid for by those who should be paying—their employers.

Beyond raising the minimum wage, there are several other effective and more equitable policies to support working families—including expanding the Earned Income Tax Credit and Child Tax Credit, providing workers with paid sick leave and paid family and medical leave, and supporting workers’ rights to form and join unions. But Trump and congressional Republicans, while claiming to support workers, have not pursued these policies. Instead, they have relentlessly attacked workers, and pushed an enormous tax cut for the wealthy—paid for by cutting essential social programs for low-income people and children and adding trillions to the public debt. As many as 16 million people would lose their health insurance under the House budget bill.

The Raise the Wage Act is by no means an outlier or a radical exercise in messaging—it’s cosponsored by majorities of House and Senate Democrats. If even a few Republicans were willing to support it, it could easily have the votes to pass. No tax on tips, on the other hand, remains a deceptive ploy that would provide few benefits to workers and fail to offset the harm the Republican budget bill would impose on millions of workers and families.

1. According to Yale Budget Lab’s estimates, about 6.3 million tax units claim tipped income, though only about 4 million workers work in tipped occupations. Since 37% of workers in tipped occupations earn so little that they do not pay federal income taxes and thus would not benefit from the plan, the lower bound of this estimate is 2,520,000 (0.63 times 4 million). The upper bound takes the average share of tax units with a tax cut by quintile (Yale Budget Lab Figure 5) and multiplies it by the total number of tax units with tipped income (83.3% of 6.3 million is 5.2 million).

2. See Yale Budget Lab “No Tax on Tips”: Budgetary, Distributional, and Tax Avoidance Considerations, Figures 5 and 6. 1st quintile is 0.336*220=$74. 5th quintile is 0.991*5820=$5,768.

3. For example, the marginal federal income tax rate on all taxable income between $11,600 and $47,150 is 12%. For the average tipped worker, assuming they use the standard deduction and have no other sources of income, their total taxable income likely falls in this range. Thus, a $3,200 increase in wages—without accounting for any tax credits— would net a roughly $2,800 increase in annual post-tax income, $1,100 more than the average net income increase under no tax on tips.

What is happening?

The Trump administration is taking a reckless approach to deregulation. In his first day in office, Trump ordered a regulatory freeze, barring departments and agencies from issuing any new regulations and pushing back pending regulations until they could be reviewed by a Trump administration appointee. The administration has issued several additional deregulatory orders, including rescission of Biden administration actions that sought to modernize the regulatory process.

These deregulatory executive orders include, among several others:

• EO 14148: Initial Rescissions of Harmful Executive Orders and Actions
• EO 14192: Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation
• EO 14219: Ensuring Lawful Governance and Implementing the President’s “Department of Government Efficiency” Deregulatory Initiative
• EO 14294: Fighting Overcriminalization in Federal Regulations

EO 14129’s directive to cut 10 regulations for every new regulation added signals a disdain for regulation as a concept, rather than an appreciation for government efficiency.

Trump is also changing how several institutions responsible for developing and enforcing regulations function, either by reinterpreting their purpose to be deregulatory (as in the cases of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration [OSHA], Food and Drug Administration [FDA], and Environmental Protection Agency [EPA]), or hobbling the effectiveness of entities like the National Labor Relations Board, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and Consumer Financial Protection Bureau). This uncritical hostility toward regulation removes guidelines and guardrails that keep U.S. workers and their families safe. The economy is more vulnerable to downturns and public health crises without the protections provided by health and safety regulations.

Why is this happening?

The Trump administration has made its economic policy priorities clear: cut taxes for the rich, make it cheaper to do business, and reduce the scope of government and corporate accountability to workers and their families, especially to poor communities and communities of color. Health and safety regulations prevent employers from engaging in cost-cutting behavior at the expense of workers and communities. Reckless deregulation serves the purpose of reducing costs for employers—even when those regulations protect workers and their families—because regulatory compliance can be costly.

Regulation ensures that workers and their families are shielded from the harms stemming from unrestricted market activity. Policymakers regulate in the wake of crises and tragedies to protect future generations and ensure history does not repeat itself. The Trump administration deregulates recklessly because it dismisses history and does not care about the consequences of bad policy for queer communities, communities of color, or the non-rich, so long as the cost of doing business falls. Inadequate regulation creates the conditions for abuse—and when vulnerability and opportunity for abuse meet, we inevitably see harm. 

Why does that matter for public health and worker safety?

Responsible regulations impose costs on harmful business practices, without which there would be little incentive for employers to prioritize worker and public safety over profit. The FDA requiring milk to meet quality standards before it can be sold in stores imposes a cost on dairy farmers, who must operate their farms adhering to safety standards that result in a higher quality product. Reducing FDA staff such that milk quality testing is no longer feasible reduces the scope for regulatory compliance and corporate accountability to consumers, and raises the possibility of exposure to pathogens including bird flu.

OSHA and EPA regulations ensure that employers will be held accountable when they expose workers and their communities to harmful substances. These regulations require coal mines to protect workers from exposure to black lung disease by providing protective equipment and ensuring their operations are minimally damaging to the surrounding community’s water sources through wastewater management. Removing these health and safety regulations and dismantling the institutions that enforce them certainly makes it cheaper to operate the coal mine, but only through imposing a larger public health cost on miners and their communities. Reckless deregulation may save corporations money and “cut government spending” but delivers the opposite of efficiency.

Why does that matter for racial health disparities?

Black and brown workers and their communities will face the worst consequences of Trump’s reckless deregulatory crusade. Their historical lack of access to wealth and political power means that, without the protections that health and safety regulations provide, they remain vulnerable to irresponsible business practices and policy.1 Laws and regulations prohibiting discrimination in health care and allowing lawsuits based on disparate impact are critical in the battle to close racial health gaps; the Trump administration is dismantling this legal framework through executive orders, setting back that effort toward equity.

Occupational segregation means that minoritized workers are also more likely to be employed doing dangerous work with higher fatality rates and for which health and safety regulations can save lives. In 2023, Black and Hispanic workers died on the job at rates of 3.6 and 4.4 per 100,000 workers, respectively—higher than the rate for workers overall (3.5 per 100,000 workers), and considerably higher than the rates for White and Asian workers (3.2 and 1.6 per 100,000 workers).

Black and Hispanic workers are more likely to die due to heat-related illness on the job compared with white workers, for example. The Trump administration’s regulatory freeze puts a pause on OSHA’s proposed rulemaking on “Heat Injury and Illness Prevention in Outdoor and Indoor Work Settings,” meaning that there are still no federal heat standards for workers. This rule would have required OSHA-compliant employers to develop and evaluate plans to protect workers from heat-related injuries and illnesses.

Losing environmental protections means exposing Black and brown communities to pollution, and further removing means to hold corporations accountable for the pollution they cause. Black and brown communities are disproportionately exposed to toxic waste; when given the funds to properly collect data and enforce policy, institutions like EPA provide the necessary regulatory framework for moving toward environmental justice and ultimately addressing the health disparities that arise from environmental racism. In the face of clearly visible racial inequities, the lack of rules and regulations to address those inequities essentially maintains structural racism.

What will it mean economically for workers and their families?

Reckless deregulation benefits employers and the wealthy at the cost of exposing the rest of the economy to greater risk and inefficiency. Short-term profits and cost savings from deregulation have historically set the stage for devastating economic consequences for workers and their families. Profit-seeking deregulation in banking set the stage for the 2008 financial crisis that tanked the world economy. Predatory payday lenders, exorbitant credit card late fees, and discrimination in lending all represent significant costs to U.S. households.

The greater health risks that come with removing health and safety regulations will cost workers and their families economically. While the Trump administration is removing COVID-19 vaccine mandates from schools, new, more contagious strains of the disease are appearing across the United States. The COVID-19 pandemic is estimated to have cost the United States $14 trillion due to reduced economic output and worsened health and premature death. Ironically, one area where the Trump FDA is pursuing more stringent regulation is in vaccine access. Using the regulatory system to pursue ideological crusades is dangerous and inefficient.

What can we do about it?

The Trump administration is engaged in a reckless crusade against health and safety regulations that will worsen our public health, cost us economically, and ultimately make the country more vulnerable to the next economic downturn and public health crisis. This is happening because the administration is more concerned with providing tax breaks for the wealthy and allowing corporations to irresponsibly cut costs than with protecting U.S. workers and their families. The consequences of this deregulatory crusade will fall heaviest on Black, brown, and poor workers and communities, because they are most in need of the protections that health and safety regulations provide. But make no mistake: The entire economy will suffer in the event of a recession or pandemic brought on by our collective exposure to more risk.

We need a responsible approach to regulation that takes seriously the need for guidelines and guardrails around doing business and implementing policy. A responsible regulatory framework would center equity-enhancing regulations and support the institutions charged with enforcing those regulations. The Trump administration is targeting and dismantling those very institutions. Protecting workers and their families means repairing our damaged regulatory system, being protective of existing responsible health and safety regulations, and being proactive about establishing new regulations where necessary to safeguard against future crises. Trump’s irrational hostility towards regulation benefits the few at the cost of putting us all at greater risk.

1. The subprime mortgage crisis is clear example of this; in the lead-up to the 2008 financial crisis, Black families were targeted with subprime mortgage loans even when they could afford conventional ones because 1) Black families did not have access to mortgages at the same rate as white families and so were eager to own a home when offered a chance (vulnerability), and 2) there were weak regulations on the kinds of mortgages that could be offered to prospective homebuyers and that could be bought and sold in financial markets (conditions for abuse).

Sammy Hudes of the Canadian Press reports BCE cuts quarterly dividend, signs fiber deal with PSP Investments:

BCE Inc. cut its quarterly dividend payment to shareholders and announced a partnership deal with the Public Sector Pension Investment Board to help accelerate the development of fibre infrastructure in the U.S.

BCE chief executive Mirko Bibic said Thursday the dividend cut comes as the company faces intense price competition against a backdrop of macroeconomic and geopolitical instability.

The company said it will now pay a quarterly dividend of 43.75 cents per share, down from 99.75 cents per share. The decision cuts BCE’s annualized dividend to $1.75 per common share from $3.99.

“As we debated this, deliberated at the board, certainly having taken and having listened to the perspectives of investors over the last few months, we decided that resetting the dividend ... was the most responsible way to address our capital allocation strategy,” Bibic said in an interview.

“Essentially the new dividend level allows us to de-lever and invest for growth.”

Inflation and the prospect of a global recession are weighing on consumer confidence, the company said, while reductions in BCE’s share price have resulted in higher capital costs. BCE’s board also considered factors such as an “unsupportive regulatory environment given recent CRTC decisions” and a slowdown in immigration to Canada.

Bibic said there have been “significant changes” in the economic and operating environments since the fall of 2024 that the company needs to address.

While last quarter began with wireless prices stabilizing, the latter half of that period saw more fluctuations. That, along with the “overall macro environment” affected Bell’s ability to boost subscriptions, Bibic said.

BCE had a net loss of 9,598 postpaid mobile phone subscribers in its first quarter, compared with 45,247 net activations during the same period a year earlier.

The company cited a “less active market,” slowing population growth due to federal immigration policies, and its own focus on “higher-value subscriber loadings.” Bibic said there were 25,000 net new customers on the main Bell brand in the quarter, which was down 9,000 year-over-year.

The company said customer churn — a measure of subscribers who cancelled their service — was stable at 1.21 per cent. BCE’s mobile phone average revenue per user was $57.08, down 1.8 per cent from the prior year.

The dividend cut came as BCE reported net earnings attributable to common shareholders of $630 million or 68 cents per diluted share for its first quarter, up from $402 million or 44 cents per diluted share a year earlier.

On an adjusted basis, BCE says it earned 69 cents per share in its latest quarter, down from an adjusted profit of 72 cents per share in the same quarter last year.

Operating revenue totalled $5.93 billion, down from $6.01 billion a year ago.

Meanwhile, Bibic told analysts on a conference call that BCE’s previously announced deal to buy U.S. fibre internet provider Ziply Fiber for about $5 billion in cash is expected to close in the second half of 2025.

Under a plan announced Thursday, Ziply Fiber will become a long-term partner to Network FiberCo, jointly owned by PSP Investments and BCE, as the exclusive internet service provider to locations passed by Network FiberCo.

BCE through Ziply Fiber will hold a 49 per cent equity stake in Network FiberCo, while PSP Investments will own 51 per cent. PSP Investments has agreed to a potential commitment in excess of US$1.5 billion.

“We anticipate that more institutional investors will now consider investing in BCE to diversify their Canadian telecom positions, which should provide support and counterbalance the selling pressure from dividend seekers selling over the coming weeks,” said Desjardins analyst Jerome Dubreuil in a note.

Network FiberCo will be focused on “last-mile fibre deployment” outside of Ziply incumbent service areas in the Pacific Northwest, enabling Ziply to potentially reach up to eight million total fibre passings.

Bibic said that would make BCE the third-largest fibre internet provider in North America, essentially doubling the number of locations where it already serves fibre customers in Canada.

“There’s clearly long-term growth potential in this critical space,” Bibic said.

Earlier this year, BCE said it would scale back plans for the build of its fibre internet footprint in Canada, as a response to regulatory rules implemented by the CRTC surrounding internet resell access.

Bibic said Thursday the company will continue to advocate to the telecom regulator and new federal government when it comes to competition policy. He reiterated that BCE’s largest competitors should not have the ability to resell fibre services through Bell’s network.

“We’re continuing to build fibre, we’re just doing it at a slower pace than we anticipated,” he said in an interview.

“Large players should invest in their own networks. That increases competition and it increases network resiliency, and it’s the best way to ensure that all Canadians, including rural, are connected.”

Earlier today, BCE and PSP Investments issued a press release announcing a strategic partnership to create Network FiberCo:

MONTRÉAL, May 8, 2025 – BCE Inc. (TSX: BCE) (NYSE: BCE), Canada’s largest communications company1, and Public Sector Pension Investment Board (PSP Investments), one of Canada’s largest pension investors, today announced the formation of Network FiberCo, a long-term strategic partnership to accelerate the development of fibre infrastructure through Ziply Fiber, in underserved markets in the United States. 

As a premier wholesale network provider, Network FiberCo will be focused on last-mile fibre deployment outside of Ziply Fiber’s incumbent service areas, enabling Ziply Fiber to potentially reach up to 8 million total fibre passings.  

PSP Investments has agreed to a potential commitment in excess of US$1.5 billion.

Leadership Perspectives 

“Today’s announcement represents a pivotal step in BCE’s fibre growth strategy. By bringing PSP Investments’ financial resources and acumen to Ziply Fiber, we are creating a scalable, capital-efficient platform to fund U.S. fibre footprint expansion. This strategic partnership will improve free cash flow generation and strengthen EBITDA accretion over the long term, reinforcing our commitment to delivering long-term value for shareholders while maintaining financial discipline.” 

• Mirko Bibic, President and CEO, BCE and Bell Canada 
  

“PSP Investments is pleased to partner with BCE, a long-standing Canadian champion of innovation and connectivity, to support the development of fibre infrastructure in Ziply Fiber’s target markets, which benefit from secular tailwinds. This commitment by PSP Investments will generate inflation linked and downside protected returns, which will contribute to fulfilling our mission to support the retirement of people who protect and serve Canada. PSP Investments has been an investor in Ziply Fiber, and this partnership, leveraging our global infrastructure experience, aligns perfectly with our strategy and strengthens our diversified portfolio.” 

• Deborah Orida, President and Chief Executive Officer, PSP Investments 
  

“This strategic partnership aligns perfectly with Ziply Fiber’s mission to improve connectivity in the communities we serve. We’re combining our operational expertise with BCE’s scale and PSP Investments’ financial strength to accelerate fibre deployment, enhance customer experiences, and drive sustainable growth.” 

• Harold Zeitz, CEO, Ziply Fiber 
  

Key Highlights of the Strategic Partnership 

• Ownership Structure: BCE through Ziply Fiber will hold a 49% equity stake in Network FiberCo, with PSP Investments owning 51% through its High Inflation Correlated Infrastructure Portfolio (HICI), contingent on closing of BCE’s acquisition of Ziply Fiber.  

• Fibre Expansion Goals: Network FiberCo will develop approximately 1 million fibre passings in Ziply Fiber’s existing states and will target development of up to 5 million additional passings, which will enable Ziply Fiber to reach up to 8 million total fibre passings. 

• Optimized Capital Efficiency: Network FiberCo will have its own non-recourse debt financing, which is anticipated to be the majority of its capital over time. BCE and PSP Investments will proportionately fund equity required by Network FiberCo to support fibre expansion. 

• Complementary Skill Set: The operational capabilities of BCE combined with PSP Investments’ significant infrastructure investing experience will enable Network FiberCo to capture the substantial growth anticipated and deliver the target fibre passing for Ziply Fiber.  
  

Strategic Rationale 

The U.S. fibre broadband market represents a transformative growth opportunity, with penetration rates well below Canada’s and efficient construction costs enabling large-scale deployment. Network FiberCo’s scalable platform supports both organic fibre expansion and potential acquisitions while enhancing returns through its capital-efficient structure. 

Driving Sustainable Growth 

BCE’s proposed acquisition of Ziply Fiber marks a strategic entry into the U.S. broadband market, securing a leading management team and operating platform with significant long-term growth potential. This disciplined reinvestment unlocks value through an expanded and diversified fibre footprint while benefiting from economies of scale.  

Ziply Fiber has achieved significant fibre broadband subscriber growth and adjusted EBITDA growth in 2024, validating the strategic rationale and demonstrating its ability to generate meaningful and sustainable long-term cash flow. 

Ownership and Operations 

Upon, and contingent on, close of the previously announced acquisition of Ziply Fiber, BCE will assume 100% ownership of Ziply Fiber’s existing operations. Ziply Fiber, as a BCE subsidiary, will continue to operate its existing network and execute its in-footprint fibre-to-the-home build strategy. Ziply Fiber will become a long-term partner to Network FiberCo, jointly owned by PSP Investments and BCE, as the exclusive Internet service provider to locations passed by Network FiberCo.

Additional Transaction Details 

The transaction is expected to close in the second half of 2025, subject to customary closing conditions and the closing of BCE’s previously announced acquisition of Ziply Fiber.  

Analyst Call Details 

BCE will hold a conference call with the financial community at 8:00 AM ET today, May 8, 2025 to discuss its Q1 2025 results and speak to the Network FiberCo strategic partnership. Media are welcome to participate on a listen-only basis. To participate, please dial toll-free 1-844-933-2401 or 647-724-5455. A replay will be available until midnight on June 8, 2025 by dialing 1-877-454-9859 or 647-483-1416 and entering passcode 7485404. A live audio webcast of the conference call will be available on BCE's website at BCE Q1-2025 conference call.   

About BCE 

BCE is Canada’s largest communications company1, providing advanced Bell broadband wireless, Internet, TV, media and business communication services. To learn more, please visit Bell.ca or BCE.ca. 

Through Bell for Better, we are investing to create a better today and a better tomorrow by supporting the social and economic prosperity of our communities. This includes the Bell Let's Talk initiative, which promotes Canadian mental health with national awareness and anti-stigma campaigns like Bell Let's Talk Day and significant Bell funding of community care and access, research and workplace leadership initiatives throughout the country. To learn more, please visit Bell Let’s Talk. 

About PSP Investments 

The Public Sector Pension Investment Board (PSP Investments) is one of Canada's largest pension investors with C$264.9 billion of net assets under management as of 31 March 2024. It manages a diversified global portfolio composed of investments in capital markets, private equity, real estate, infrastructure, natural resources, and credit investments. Established in 1999, PSP Investments manages and invests amounts transferred to it by the Government of Canada for the pension plans of the federal public service, the Canadian Forces, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and the Reserve Force. Headquartered in Ottawa, PSP Investments has its principal business office in Montréal and offices in New York, London and Hong Kong. For more information, visit investpsp.com or follow us on LinkedIn. 

Earlier today, Charles Bonhomme, Senior Advisor External Communications and Media Relations, sent me a few background points on this deal:

• This strategic partnership with BCE, a long-standing Canadian champion of innovation and connectivity, will enable PSP to capitalize on the transformative growth opportunity presented by Ziply Fiber’s target broadband markets.
• Aligned with PSP’s investment strategy, this partnership will generate inflation-linked, and downside protected returns, helping PSP Investments to meet its mission to support the retirement of people who protect and serve Canada. 
• PSP Investments brings significant global infrastructure investing experience to this partnership, and combined with BCE’s operational capabilities, forms a complimentary skillset that will enable Network FibreCo to capture the substantial growth anticipated and deliver the target fibre passing for Ziply Fiber.
• Investing in high-quality, essential infrastructure like transportation, communications, and energy is a core part of our strategy. We look for reliable assets that generate steady returns, and this partnership aligns perfectly with our strategy and strengthens our diversified portfolio.
• PSP Investments has been an investor in Ziply Fiber, and this strategic partnership supports the development of fibre infrastructure in Ziply Fiber’s target markets, while achieving our mandate.

Recall that BCI, CPP Investments and PSP Investments exited Ziply Fiber back in November 2024 when BCE acquired it.

At the time, I provided a background on Ziply Fiber and explained how the syndicate put in US$2.45 billion in total (including debt) and sold Ziply to BCE for US$3.6 billion (CAD $5 billion) five years later for a decent return.

In this latest deal, BCE and PSP Investments announced the formation of Network FiberCo, a long-term strategic partnership to accelerate the development of fibre infrastructure through Ziply Fiber, in underserved markets in the United States.  

On LinkedIn, PSP Investments posted these comments from CEO Deborah Orida:

She notes how this commitment by PSP will generate inflation linked downside protected returns and that they have been an investor in Ziply Fiber and therefore know the company well.

The press release states PSP Investments has agreed to a potential commitment in excess of US$1.5 billion. 

That's a significant commitment and I think it's a wise one as Network FiberCo will help Ziply Fiber accelerate its growth in US broadband markets it is serving.

Keep in mind, both the US and Canada are experiencing strong growth in fiber-to-the home-adoption, driven by increased demand for faster internet speeds and the need to modernize infrastructure.

Think about how often you stream movies or shows from Netflix, Disney or another provider and think about how all that demand for streaming gets through to households.

That is why Ziply Fiber is growing very rapidly, providing fast fiber speeds to meet this growing demand.

A lot of analysts criticized BCE's acquisition stating it was too risky but I think they did the right long -term move here and now with PSP Investments as its strategic partner in Network FiberCo, they will provide the needed support for Ziply Fiber to accelerate its growth. 

Again, this mega deal shows how Canada's large pension funds can work with large strategic corporations to help them grow and the telecom sector is a great area because it requires a massive amount of capital.

What does BCE get? A strategic partner in PSP that will provide significant and stable capital and strong knowledge of the communications infrastructure space. It can use its balance sheet more effectively with PSP as a partner to accelerate the growth of this strategic asset in the US.

And despite the big cut in the dividend, BCE shares had a strong day:

That tells me most investors were expecting the cut and are happy about it.

Now, I realize a lot of investors, especially retired seniors, aren't happy to hear the dividend has been chopped in half (14% to 6%) but BCE CEO Mirko Bibic said the new dividend will allow them to "de-lever and invest for growth."

With the decline in immigration and the stock way off its 5-year high, I don't think BCE has much of a choice because growth will be hard to come by.

As far as PSP Investments, I foresee more strategic partnerships with large corporations in areas like this where they can realize stable inflation-linked, downside-protected returns and commit significant capital.

This deal definitely fits in their mandate and in a slowing economy, it makes a lot of sense.

Below, Mirko Bibic, president and chief executive officer of BCE and Bell Canada, joins BNN Bloomberg to discuss Q1 2025 earnings results.

Bibic discusses the joint venture with PSP to accelerate last mile fiber at Ziply Fiber and explains why this will drive subscription revenue and EBITDA growth at Ziply and increase free cash flow profile at Bell by over a billion dollars over next three years.

Also, Dan Rohinton, portfolio manager at iA Global Asset Management, shares his analysis of BCE Inc. earnings results and the decision to cut its dividend. 

Listen to his comments on how PSP has bought in for the majority of the fiber buildout with this new joint venture and how it stands to gain significantly on this deal.