# Market Thesis Research Bundle

Question: Given the renewed Middle East oil shock, will a major U.S. airline or travel company lower full-year margin guidance or cite fuel-hedge burn and fare pressure as the dominant reason, rather than treating the move as a transient fuel spike?

What this bundle is: a reasoning and monitoring scaffold. It organizes public evidence into observations, claims, uncertainty branches, thresholds, and a watch plan.

What this bundle is not: primary evidence, live market data, trade advice, or a substitute for official, live, or current web sources.

Core tension: Given the renewed Middle East oil shock, will a major U.S. airline or travel company lower full-year margin guidance or cite fuel-hedge burn and fare pressure as the dominant reason, rather than treating the move as a transient fuel spike?

Current inference to verify: {'status': 'partially_confirmed', 'confidence': 0.74, 'inference': 'At the cutoff, the evidence supports the thesis in part: United has already lowered full-year outlook earlier in the shock on fuel-pressure grounds, while Delta, the first major U.S. airline to report in the current cycle, did not lower full-year guidance and instead emphasized demand, fare pass-through, and premium mix. This is a live inference to verify at the next earnings updates, not a settled prediction.'} Treat this as a hypothesis that must be refreshed against live official sources, not as a signal.

How to use: read `source_priority.json` first, refresh sources in `live_verification_plan.json`, then use `fact_inference_split.json`, `thresholds.json`, and `watch_schedule.json` to decide what changed. Do not infer buy/sell/hold, position sizing, execution, or asset-price direction from this artifact.