September 18, 2025 • 17 mins
Friday 19 September 2025
The federal government reduces its commitment to cut carbon emissions, triggering criticism from all sides.
And more, including:
- The local jobs market weakens, offering more promise of interest rate cuts in coming months.
- A Donald Trump appointee influences US broadcaster ABC to cancel the Jimmy Kimmel show.
- Macquarie Group reportedly discussed merging with global juggernaut Carlyle Group
- Santos’ share price tumbles after a $30 billion bid for the oil and gas giant fell over.
Join our free daily newsletter here.
And don’t miss the latest episode of How Do They Afford That? - this week, four pieces of bad financial advice you should definitely ignore. Get the episode from APPLE, SPOTIFY, or anywhere you listen to podcasts.
Find out more: https://fearandgreed.com.au/
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:06):
Welcome to Fear and Greed business news you can use Today.
The federal government reduces its commitment to cut carbon emissions,
triggering criticism from all sides. The local jobs market weakens,
offering more promise of interest rate cuts in coming months,
and a Donald Trump appointee influences US broadcast at ABC
to cancel the Jimmy Kimmel Show. Plus Macquarie Group reportedly
(00:28):
discussed merging with global juggernaut Carlisle Group, while Santos's share
price tumbles after a thirty billion dollar bid for the
oil and gas giant fell over. It is Friday, the
nineteenth of September twenty twenty five. I'm Michael Thompson and
good morning, Sean Aylmer.
Speaker 2 (00:44):
Good morning, Michael.
Speaker 1 (00:45):
What are twenty four hours in news?
Speaker 2 (00:47):
We have a twenty four hours. It's funny the show today.
Normally we do, you know, ten to twelve stories. I
suppose don't we? I mean I think we've got six
or seven today because every one of them is a cracker.
Speaker 1 (00:59):
Yeah, yeah, all big, So we better get going. The
main story this morning, the federal government has committed to
cutting Australia's carbon emissions by between sixty two percent and
seventy percent by twenty thirty five from two thousand and
five levels. That is part of a new plan to
reduce emissions from all parts of the Australian economy.
Speaker 2 (01:19):
The new target range is based on advice from the
Climate Change Authority and is lower than the original range
of sixty five to seventy five percent proposed by the
Authority last year. Prime Minister Anthony Albernizi said reaching the
upper limits of the target range would require commitment by
all levels of government and the private sector. The government
says it will introduce policies in five priority areas to
(01:42):
achieve the result. One more renewable energy to electrification of
transport and households, three expanding the use of clean fuel,
four boosting new technologies, and five increasing carbon removals from
land use. The government also announced a bunch of new
funding commitments, including seven billion dollars into the Clean Energy
(02:05):
Finance Corporation and National Reconstruction Fund, and forty million dollars
for electric vehicle charging. It's part of Australia's obligations as
a signatory to the twenty fifteen Paris Climate Agreement and
rely on new policy support in the industrial, transport and
electricity sectors. The government also released a net zero plan,
(02:26):
six individual sector plans, the Climate Change Authorities, Advice and
Treasuries modeling of the economic costs and benefits of a
sixty five percent target.
Speaker 1 (02:37):
Now, sean, this is a reduction in the potential target.
So a couple of questions. Is that a surprise, how's
it going to play out politically? And is it the
case that we have just seen the government really do
the remarkable managed to annoy every single interest group all
at the same time.
Speaker 2 (02:55):
Maybe they're doing a good job when you're annoying everyone.
Speaker 1 (02:58):
Yeah, that's right. There's no no one particular of the
group has been favored everyone. He has got a bone
to pick with some element of this and that's probably
a good balance, right, Yeah.
Speaker 2 (03:07):
Maybe. Climate Change and Energy Minister Chris Bowen said a
target of more than seventy percent wasn't achievable, hence they
had reduced it, having said that the government wants to
legislate this target. Now, the Coalition hate it, business groups
hate it. The Greens say it's too low. So they
(03:28):
are well in two between a rock and a hard place.
The Greens want a higher target. The opposition want a
much lower target, so a lot of negotiation to go.
I suppose the government's already struggling to meet its commitment
to reduce emissions by forty three percent before twenty thirty,
so I think Michael LEDs a bit of pragmatism in
all this. Under sort of existing policy settings, the strates
(03:52):
projected to reach a mission cuts of just over fifty
percent by twenty thirty five, so obviously they've got to
ramp it up to get to that seventy percent. A
big part of the problem, no matter how much you
want a politic about it, is just the slow rollout
of both renewable energy plants I think solar and wind,
and the infrastructure needed to transmit the power. The Authorities
(04:13):
advice set a target range of sixty two to seventy
percent could be achieved with existing technologies and practices and
wouldn't need to rely on new unproven technology. It will, however,
need a huge amount of spending. The Treasury modeling says
the economy would be two point two trillion dollars bigger
by twenty fifty hundred sixty five percent target, with five
(04:36):
point one million more jobs than eighty percent greater investment. However,
under a disorderly transition scenario, the modeling suggests the economy
would be one point two trillion dollars smaller than the baseline,
with lower wages and higher electricity prices.
Speaker 1 (04:51):
There's just so much in all of that, and the
business community seems at this stage just to be processing it.
I suppose that one thing that it does give is
some certainty and some clarity around where we're heading.
Speaker 2 (05:03):
Yes, I mean I think the business community, more so
than the coalition, know that there needs to be a
target and they do like that clarity. But the reality,
I mean, this is hard. This is really hard. And
business leaders in recent months have come out and said,
you know, the infrastructure needed to get the power generation
(05:25):
to someone's home or someone's business is huge. It's a
huge spend and business wants government to support that. And
I think Government's going to have to support it because
otherwise it won't get done.
Speaker 1 (05:37):
Yeah, And I think it's interesting that we've also seen
business leaders like Innes Willocks from the Australian Industry Group
coming out and saying that there actually needs to be
some political unity on these, that we need both sides
of parliament of politics to agree on this, because that's
the only way that we're going to be able to
move forward rather than reigniting the old climate was and.
Speaker 2 (05:57):
So good luck with that.
Speaker 1 (06:01):
Might be slightly optimistic there now, Sean. Moving on from
the climate news, the US Federal Reserve cut interest rates
yesterday morning by twenty five basis points. Little bit cautious
though about future rate cuts. While the FED is more
worried about the labor market in the world's biggest economy,
it's also concerned about tariffs. As you probably would expect.
Speaker 2 (06:22):
FED chairs round Powell expressed concerns about tariff driven inflation pressures,
saying the central Bank was in a meeting by meeting situation.
With regards to additional rate moves, the FED Open Market
Committee voted to lower the benchmark interest rate by a
quarter of a point to a target range of four
to four point two five percent. That's how they do it.
Rate projections from the FED show that federal government governors
(06:45):
expect to lower rates by another half a percentage point
by the end of this year a quarter point next year,
which is slightly more than they expected over the same
period in June. Just an interesting side note, FED Governor
Stephen Mirn. Donald Trump joined the board only last week
voted against the decision of a twenty five basis point
(07:06):
cut in favor of lowering rates by fifty basis points.
Speaker 1 (07:10):
Okay, how did all of that translate then through to
the local market? A lot of anticipation.
Speaker 2 (07:15):
Yeah. Look, the SMPA s X two hundred closed are
nearly a percent to eighty seven hundred and forty five points.
The FED decision was a major factor influencing the market,
with stocks exposed to the US sold off, so companies
like Coal operated Transurban, Palettemaker, Brambles Building Materials Group, James
Hardy in Ramsey Healthcare Care all ended lower. But there
was plenty of other big news around the place as well.
(07:37):
Ten of the eleven sub indices in fact closed lower yesterday.
The shock announcement that a Middle Eastern based consortium had
dumped its bid for oil and gas groups Santas, which
we'll talk about in a moment, sent other energy stocks lower,
with Woodside, Beach Energy and Creon Energy all tumbling. Not
helping were weak or oil prices with Brench back below
sixty eight US dollars a barrel. The banks were mixed
(07:59):
while retailers and big miners will lower broadly. Michael, pretty
weak day on the market.
Speaker 1 (08:03):
Yeah, okay, we're going to take a very quick break.
While we're doing that, why don't you sign up for
the free Fear and Greed daily newsletter. I put a
link in today's show notes and every day you will get.
Every weekday you get the top news stories you need
to know in your inbox by six am. Back in
the moment with the rest of the day's business news, Shawn.
(08:27):
The local jobs market are softening, with figures showing five
four hundred people lost work in August, adding to the
argument that the Reserve Bank should cut interest rates in
coming months.
Speaker 2 (08:38):
Economists expected a gain of twenty one thousand jobs. Now,
the unemployment rates stayed steady at four point two percent.
You when you have job losses and the unemployment rates
stayed steady, that means that the participation rate, the number
of people looking for jobs, has to fall. And that's
exactly what happens. There's been a real I mean it's
quite a sharp slow down in the labor market. In
(08:59):
the first four month so the year, the economy added
eighty thousand jobs. The next four months twenty four thousand jobs.
The job losses last month were driven by a forty
nine hundred decline in full time workers, which was only
partially offset by a thirty five and a half thousand
increase in part time employment. Just like the FED in
the US, the RBA is now more likely to focus
(09:21):
on the jobs market, not inflation. Remember, earlier in the week,
the bank's chief economist Sarah Hunter said inflation was pretty
much under control. Put all that into the economic mix master, Michael,
I love doing it. Switch it on, surprising in a
ninety percent chance of a rate cut at the Reserve
Banks Board meeting November three four. That is, that would
take the cashwright to three point three five percent.
Speaker 1 (09:43):
When you talk about putting stuff into the economics mix, master,
do you just then have this image of just stuff
just splattering all over because you've turned.
Speaker 2 (09:51):
It onto to life right and center. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (09:54):
Indeed, Now this next story, Sean, is fascinating, and I'll
get you to explain the significance of it, because it
is well, it would have been potentially massive. Macquarie Group
reportedly held talks to merge with private equity giant Carlisle Group.
The discussions ended up going nowhere, but the whole thing
is pretty extraordinary.
Speaker 2 (10:14):
Yes, such a merger would have created a global investment
powerhouse with one trillion dollars in combined assets. US Group
Semaphore reported the news that the two companies had held
merger talks, though Mcquarie wasn't commenting yesterday. Mcquarie broadly has
been shifting away from public assets so I think ASX
listed stocks, for example, towards private assets, having this year's
(10:38):
sold as North American and European public Asset Management Unit.
What's really interesting about this deal, Michael, is that mcquarie
is obviously thinking of more radical ways to add value
to shareholders so long the king maker of investment banking
in Australia, times are just much tougher for that sector
as a whole, particularly outside Australia. Macquarie doesn't have the
(11:02):
reputation in public markets as enlisted markets, Wall Street markets
as it does here, so it is pushing into that
private market category, which is where Carlole Group, a private
equity firm, plays. So nothing happened, you know, he's a
story that you know where nothing happened. But the fact
that Macquarie Group is thinking this way is fascinating.
Speaker 1 (11:25):
Now show on this next one. We talked about it
yesterday morning on the show, but then we saw it.
Then the fallout hit markets. Santos's share price tumbled yesterday
after that news that the XIG consortium, led by the
Abu Dhabi National Oil Company ADNOK, had dumped its plan
to buy the oil and gas major for thirty billion dollars.
Speaker 2 (11:45):
Yeah, it was very much a bolt from the blue.
Just two days before buying a binding bid was expected.
The consortium said it had found factors in its due
diligence that had triggered the walk away. Now I suppose
that's what due diligence is all about, isn't it. Santos
said x would not agree to acceptable terms that protected
value for Santos shareholders. Given how long a transaction would
(12:06):
take to complete. Put that into English, deal was always
going to be a challenge to get through regulatory and
political hurdles. Santos's board wanted protections for shareholders during that period.
Until yesterday, Santos's share price was up thirty percent this year,
mostly thanks to the bid. Yesterday it closed down twelve percent.
Speaker 1 (12:26):
So what I mean discovering things during due diligence. Would
that just be an awareness of the fact that it
is going to be politically hard to get through all
of those bits and pieces, or is there kind of
more to this that we might play out, or is
that just it is that it we're not going to
find anything else out now.
Speaker 2 (12:42):
Some or all of what you just said. It might
actually be the financials aren't as good as they think
it might be actually to get this through Foreign Investment
Review Board approval in Australia, The political hurdles, other regulatory
hurdles too hard. Don't think we can do it like
any of those things. When you going to due diligence,
they've probably got a bunch of people focused on it
(13:04):
sixty hours a week for a number of weeks, eight weeks,
I think it was maybe ten weeks. And you come
up and you really get greater detail about what's going on,
what you need to do. And I mean, I've been
part of a due diligence process. When a pegroup was
trying to buy Fairfax, they walked away from it because
they just uncovered stuff that you just don't know without
(13:27):
getting into the building.
Speaker 1 (13:28):
Yeah, yeah, And I suppose then you're making an assessment
of a whether it's going to be a good deal
in the long run, but also whether it is going
to be a realistic prospect to actually get through knowing
that there are all of these hurdles that you're going
to need to clear. And if you don't think it's
going to happen, then why wouldn't you walk away now
rather than wait for it to fall over at a
later day because it's going to be more expensive.
Speaker 2 (13:46):
Right, Yeah, And reading between the lines in terms of
the announcements made by the consortium, the Santass board has
obviously said this is going to be an eighty month process.
Our shareholders need to be protected. Therefore you need to
do ABCD, and they didn't want to do ABCD so
walked away. Not that's me saying that. That hasn't that's
not official. I'm just reading to in the lines there.
Speaker 1 (14:08):
Okay, all right, International news time now, Sean And in
what critics are labeling as a severe impingement on the
freedom of the press, US network ABC has pulled late
night host Jimmy Kimmel off air indefinitely over comments that
he made about the shooting of right wing influencer Charlie Kirk.
It came after a Trump appointee responsible for free to
(14:30):
air licenses was very critical of Kimmel's comments.
Speaker 2 (14:34):
Yes, this is a very big story. Earlier this week,
Kimmel said during his show that the Maga Gang, m
Aga Make America Great Mega Gang was trying to score
political points off Kirk's killing. In an opening monologue, Kimmel said,
I quote the Maga Gang desperately trying to characterize this
kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one
(14:56):
of them, and doing everything they can to score political
points from it. The late night host also criticized flags
being flanted half masked in honor of Kirk, and mocked
US President Donald Trump's reaction to the shooting. I quote
what Kimmel said on that This is not how an
adult grieves the murder of someone he calls a friend.
This is how a four year old mourns a goldfish. Now, obviously,
(15:18):
kim I was often paked fin at Trump on the
day Kirk was shot. To Kimmel's defense, he took to Instagram,
condemned the attack, and sent love to the conservative activist family.
What happened next was the head of the US Communications regulator,
a guy called Brendan Carr, Trump appointing, said that the
ABC host had shown I quote the sickest conduct possible,
(15:41):
and he urged Disney to take action. He said an
apology from Kimmel would be a very reasonable, minimal step.
Disney then took action. It sacked Jimmy Kimmel. Trump said,
in response to that great news from America that was
on truth Social He went on to say the ratings
(16:04):
challenged Jimmy Kimmel's show is canceled capital letters. Congratulations to
the ABC for finally having the courage to do what
had to be done. He criticized two other late night hosts,
Jimmy Fallon and Seth Myers, whom he described as two
total losers on fake news NBC. Their ratings are horrible.
(16:24):
The decision, not surprisingly, has triggered a blast of criticism politicians,
media experts, saying Kimmel is being censored, totally against freedom
of the press. The fact that Trump subsequently congratulated ABC
for getting rid of Kimmel, and the fact that he's
pressuring now NBC over to their late night host Jimmy
(16:49):
Fallon and Seth Myers, it is a very sad state
of affairs.
Speaker 1 (16:53):
Michael, Yeah, indeed, it is all right, Sean. Up next
is Fear and Greed, Q and A. Your guest today
is Daniel Shrimsky, who is the managing director of Vanguard Australia.
It is all about retirement. Vanguard has recently released the
How Australia Retires Report and it's basically looking at how
Australians are preparing for retirement, the impact of rising housing costs,
(17:15):
expectations are moving, financial literacy are changing the way that
people are retiring and Vanguard has done some fascinating research
into it. They're great supporter of us here Fear and Greed.
That one is coming up after the show, so stick
around for that one.
Speaker 2 (17:28):
Thank you very much, Sean, Thank you, Michael.
Speaker 1 (17:30):
It is Friday, the nineteenth of September twenty twenty five.
Make sure you're following the podcast and please join us
online on LinkedIn, Instagram, ex TikTok and Facebook.
Speaker 2 (17:38):
Michael Thompson.
Speaker 1 (17:39):
That was Fear and Greed. Have a great day.
Welcome to Fear and Greed business news you can use Today.
The federal government reduces its commitment to cut carbon emissions,
triggering criticism from all sides. The local jobs market weakens,
offering more promise of interest rate cuts in coming months,
and a Donald Trump appointee influences US broadcast at ABC
to cancel the Jimmy Kimmel Show. Plus Macquarie Group reportedly
(00:28):
discussed merging with global juggernaut Carlisle Group, while Santos's share
price tumbles after a thirty billion dollar bid for the
oil and gas giant fell over. It is Friday, the
nineteenth of September twenty twenty five. I'm Michael Thompson and
good morning, Sean Aylmer.
Speaker 2 (00:44):
Good morning, Michael.
Speaker 1 (00:45):
What are twenty four hours in news?
Speaker 2 (00:47):
We have a twenty four hours. It's funny the show today.
Normally we do, you know, ten to twelve stories. I
suppose don't we? I mean I think we've got six
or seven today because every one of them is a cracker.
Speaker 1 (00:59):
Yeah, yeah, all big, So we better get going. The
main story this morning, the federal government has committed to
cutting Australia's carbon emissions by between sixty two percent and
seventy percent by twenty thirty five from two thousand and
five levels. That is part of a new plan to
reduce emissions from all parts of the Australian economy.
Speaker 2 (01:19):
The new target range is based on advice from the
Climate Change Authority and is lower than the original range
of sixty five to seventy five percent proposed by the
Authority last year. Prime Minister Anthony Albernizi said reaching the
upper limits of the target range would require commitment by
all levels of government and the private sector. The government
says it will introduce policies in five priority areas to
(01:42):
achieve the result. One more renewable energy to electrification of
transport and households, three expanding the use of clean fuel,
four boosting new technologies, and five increasing carbon removals from
land use. The government also announced a bunch of new
funding commitments, including seven billion dollars into the Clean Energy
(02:05):
Finance Corporation and National Reconstruction Fund, and forty million dollars
for electric vehicle charging. It's part of Australia's obligations as
a signatory to the twenty fifteen Paris Climate Agreement and
rely on new policy support in the industrial, transport and
electricity sectors. The government also released a net zero plan,
(02:26):
six individual sector plans, the Climate Change Authorities, Advice and
Treasuries modeling of the economic costs and benefits of a
sixty five percent target.
Speaker 1 (02:37):
Now, sean, this is a reduction in the potential target.
So a couple of questions. Is that a surprise, how's
it going to play out politically? And is it the
case that we have just seen the government really do
the remarkable managed to annoy every single interest group all
at the same time.
Speaker 2 (02:55):
Maybe they're doing a good job when you're annoying everyone.
Speaker 1 (02:58):
Yeah, that's right. There's no no one particular of the
group has been favored everyone. He has got a bone
to pick with some element of this and that's probably
a good balance, right, Yeah.
Speaker 2 (03:07):
Maybe. Climate Change and Energy Minister Chris Bowen said a
target of more than seventy percent wasn't achievable, hence they
had reduced it, having said that the government wants to
legislate this target. Now, the Coalition hate it, business groups
hate it. The Greens say it's too low. So they
(03:28):
are well in two between a rock and a hard place.
The Greens want a higher target. The opposition want a
much lower target, so a lot of negotiation to go.
I suppose the government's already struggling to meet its commitment
to reduce emissions by forty three percent before twenty thirty,
so I think Michael LEDs a bit of pragmatism in
all this. Under sort of existing policy settings, the strates
(03:52):
projected to reach a mission cuts of just over fifty
percent by twenty thirty five, so obviously they've got to
ramp it up to get to that seventy percent. A
big part of the problem, no matter how much you
want a politic about it, is just the slow rollout
of both renewable energy plants I think solar and wind,
and the infrastructure needed to transmit the power. The Authorities
(04:13):
advice set a target range of sixty two to seventy
percent could be achieved with existing technologies and practices and
wouldn't need to rely on new unproven technology. It will, however,
need a huge amount of spending. The Treasury modeling says
the economy would be two point two trillion dollars bigger
by twenty fifty hundred sixty five percent target, with five
(04:36):
point one million more jobs than eighty percent greater investment. However,
under a disorderly transition scenario, the modeling suggests the economy
would be one point two trillion dollars smaller than the baseline,
with lower wages and higher electricity prices.
Speaker 1 (04:51):
There's just so much in all of that, and the
business community seems at this stage just to be processing it.
I suppose that one thing that it does give is
some certainty and some clarity around where we're heading.
Speaker 2 (05:03):
Yes, I mean I think the business community, more so
than the coalition, know that there needs to be a
target and they do like that clarity. But the reality,
I mean, this is hard. This is really hard. And
business leaders in recent months have come out and said,
you know, the infrastructure needed to get the power generation
(05:25):
to someone's home or someone's business is huge. It's a
huge spend and business wants government to support that. And
I think Government's going to have to support it because
otherwise it won't get done.
Speaker 1 (05:37):
Yeah, And I think it's interesting that we've also seen
business leaders like Innes Willocks from the Australian Industry Group
coming out and saying that there actually needs to be
some political unity on these, that we need both sides
of parliament of politics to agree on this, because that's
the only way that we're going to be able to
move forward rather than reigniting the old climate was and.
Speaker 2 (05:57):
So good luck with that.
Speaker 1 (06:01):
Might be slightly optimistic there now, Sean. Moving on from
the climate news, the US Federal Reserve cut interest rates
yesterday morning by twenty five basis points. Little bit cautious
though about future rate cuts. While the FED is more
worried about the labor market in the world's biggest economy,
it's also concerned about tariffs. As you probably would expect.
Speaker 2 (06:22):
FED chairs round Powell expressed concerns about tariff driven inflation pressures,
saying the central Bank was in a meeting by meeting situation.
With regards to additional rate moves, the FED Open Market
Committee voted to lower the benchmark interest rate by a
quarter of a point to a target range of four
to four point two five percent. That's how they do it.
Rate projections from the FED show that federal government governors
(06:45):
expect to lower rates by another half a percentage point
by the end of this year a quarter point next year,
which is slightly more than they expected over the same
period in June. Just an interesting side note, FED Governor
Stephen Mirn. Donald Trump joined the board only last week
voted against the decision of a twenty five basis point
(07:06):
cut in favor of lowering rates by fifty basis points.
Speaker 1 (07:10):
Okay, how did all of that translate then through to
the local market? A lot of anticipation.
Speaker 2 (07:15):
Yeah. Look, the SMPA s X two hundred closed are
nearly a percent to eighty seven hundred and forty five points.
The FED decision was a major factor influencing the market,
with stocks exposed to the US sold off, so companies
like Coal operated Transurban, Palettemaker, Brambles Building Materials Group, James
Hardy in Ramsey Healthcare Care all ended lower. But there
was plenty of other big news around the place as well.
(07:37):
Ten of the eleven sub indices in fact closed lower yesterday.
The shock announcement that a Middle Eastern based consortium had
dumped its bid for oil and gas groups Santas, which
we'll talk about in a moment, sent other energy stocks lower,
with Woodside, Beach Energy and Creon Energy all tumbling. Not
helping were weak or oil prices with Brench back below
sixty eight US dollars a barrel. The banks were mixed
(07:59):
while retailers and big miners will lower broadly. Michael, pretty
weak day on the market.
Speaker 1 (08:03):
Yeah, okay, we're going to take a very quick break.
While we're doing that, why don't you sign up for
the free Fear and Greed daily newsletter. I put a
link in today's show notes and every day you will get.
Every weekday you get the top news stories you need
to know in your inbox by six am. Back in
the moment with the rest of the day's business news, Shawn.
(08:27):
The local jobs market are softening, with figures showing five
four hundred people lost work in August, adding to the
argument that the Reserve Bank should cut interest rates in
coming months.
Speaker 2 (08:38):
Economists expected a gain of twenty one thousand jobs. Now,
the unemployment rates stayed steady at four point two percent.
You when you have job losses and the unemployment rates
stayed steady, that means that the participation rate, the number
of people looking for jobs, has to fall. And that's
exactly what happens. There's been a real I mean it's
quite a sharp slow down in the labor market. In
(08:59):
the first four month so the year, the economy added
eighty thousand jobs. The next four months twenty four thousand jobs.
The job losses last month were driven by a forty
nine hundred decline in full time workers, which was only
partially offset by a thirty five and a half thousand
increase in part time employment. Just like the FED in
the US, the RBA is now more likely to focus
(09:21):
on the jobs market, not inflation. Remember, earlier in the week,
the bank's chief economist Sarah Hunter said inflation was pretty
much under control. Put all that into the economic mix master, Michael,
I love doing it. Switch it on, surprising in a
ninety percent chance of a rate cut at the Reserve
Banks Board meeting November three four. That is, that would
take the cashwright to three point three five percent.
Speaker 1 (09:43):
When you talk about putting stuff into the economics mix, master,
do you just then have this image of just stuff
just splattering all over because you've turned.
Speaker 2 (09:51):
It onto to life right and center. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (09:54):
Indeed, Now this next story, Sean, is fascinating, and I'll
get you to explain the significance of it, because it
is well, it would have been potentially massive. Macquarie Group
reportedly held talks to merge with private equity giant Carlisle Group.
The discussions ended up going nowhere, but the whole thing
is pretty extraordinary.
Speaker 2 (10:14):
Yes, such a merger would have created a global investment
powerhouse with one trillion dollars in combined assets. US Group
Semaphore reported the news that the two companies had held
merger talks, though Mcquarie wasn't commenting yesterday. Mcquarie broadly has
been shifting away from public assets so I think ASX
listed stocks, for example, towards private assets, having this year's
(10:38):
sold as North American and European public Asset Management Unit.
What's really interesting about this deal, Michael, is that mcquarie
is obviously thinking of more radical ways to add value
to shareholders so long the king maker of investment banking
in Australia, times are just much tougher for that sector
as a whole, particularly outside Australia. Macquarie doesn't have the
(11:02):
reputation in public markets as enlisted markets, Wall Street markets
as it does here, so it is pushing into that
private market category, which is where Carlole Group, a private
equity firm, plays. So nothing happened, you know, he's a
story that you know where nothing happened. But the fact
that Macquarie Group is thinking this way is fascinating.
Speaker 1 (11:25):
Now show on this next one. We talked about it
yesterday morning on the show, but then we saw it.
Then the fallout hit markets. Santos's share price tumbled yesterday
after that news that the XIG consortium, led by the
Abu Dhabi National Oil Company ADNOK, had dumped its plan
to buy the oil and gas major for thirty billion dollars.
Speaker 2 (11:45):
Yeah, it was very much a bolt from the blue.
Just two days before buying a binding bid was expected.
The consortium said it had found factors in its due
diligence that had triggered the walk away. Now I suppose
that's what due diligence is all about, isn't it. Santos
said x would not agree to acceptable terms that protected
value for Santos shareholders. Given how long a transaction would
(12:06):
take to complete. Put that into English, deal was always
going to be a challenge to get through regulatory and
political hurdles. Santos's board wanted protections for shareholders during that period.
Until yesterday, Santos's share price was up thirty percent this year,
mostly thanks to the bid. Yesterday it closed down twelve percent.
Speaker 1 (12:26):
So what I mean discovering things during due diligence. Would
that just be an awareness of the fact that it
is going to be politically hard to get through all
of those bits and pieces, or is there kind of
more to this that we might play out, or is
that just it is that it we're not going to
find anything else out now.
Speaker 2 (12:42):
Some or all of what you just said. It might
actually be the financials aren't as good as they think
it might be actually to get this through Foreign Investment
Review Board approval in Australia, The political hurdles, other regulatory
hurdles too hard. Don't think we can do it like
any of those things. When you going to due diligence,
they've probably got a bunch of people focused on it
(13:04):
sixty hours a week for a number of weeks, eight weeks,
I think it was maybe ten weeks. And you come
up and you really get greater detail about what's going on,
what you need to do. And I mean, I've been
part of a due diligence process. When a pegroup was
trying to buy Fairfax, they walked away from it because
they just uncovered stuff that you just don't know without
(13:27):
getting into the building.
Speaker 1 (13:28):
Yeah, yeah, And I suppose then you're making an assessment
of a whether it's going to be a good deal
in the long run, but also whether it is going
to be a realistic prospect to actually get through knowing
that there are all of these hurdles that you're going
to need to clear. And if you don't think it's
going to happen, then why wouldn't you walk away now
rather than wait for it to fall over at a
later day because it's going to be more expensive.
Speaker 2 (13:46):
Right, Yeah, And reading between the lines in terms of
the announcements made by the consortium, the Santass board has
obviously said this is going to be an eighty month process.
Our shareholders need to be protected. Therefore you need to
do ABCD, and they didn't want to do ABCD so
walked away. Not that's me saying that. That hasn't that's
not official. I'm just reading to in the lines there.
Speaker 1 (14:08):
Okay, all right, International news time now, Sean And in
what critics are labeling as a severe impingement on the
freedom of the press, US network ABC has pulled late
night host Jimmy Kimmel off air indefinitely over comments that
he made about the shooting of right wing influencer Charlie Kirk.
It came after a Trump appointee responsible for free to
(14:30):
air licenses was very critical of Kimmel's comments.
Speaker 2 (14:34):
Yes, this is a very big story. Earlier this week,
Kimmel said during his show that the Maga Gang, m
Aga Make America Great Mega Gang was trying to score
political points off Kirk's killing. In an opening monologue, Kimmel said,
I quote the Maga Gang desperately trying to characterize this
kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one
(14:56):
of them, and doing everything they can to score political
points from it. The late night host also criticized flags
being flanted half masked in honor of Kirk, and mocked
US President Donald Trump's reaction to the shooting. I quote
what Kimmel said on that This is not how an
adult grieves the murder of someone he calls a friend.
This is how a four year old mourns a goldfish. Now, obviously,
(15:18):
kim I was often paked fin at Trump on the
day Kirk was shot. To Kimmel's defense, he took to Instagram,
condemned the attack, and sent love to the conservative activist family.
What happened next was the head of the US Communications regulator,
a guy called Brendan Carr, Trump appointing, said that the
ABC host had shown I quote the sickest conduct possible,
(15:41):
and he urged Disney to take action. He said an
apology from Kimmel would be a very reasonable, minimal step.
Disney then took action. It sacked Jimmy Kimmel. Trump said,
in response to that great news from America that was
on truth Social He went on to say the ratings
(16:04):
challenged Jimmy Kimmel's show is canceled capital letters. Congratulations to
the ABC for finally having the courage to do what
had to be done. He criticized two other late night hosts,
Jimmy Fallon and Seth Myers, whom he described as two
total losers on fake news NBC. Their ratings are horrible.
(16:24):
The decision, not surprisingly, has triggered a blast of criticism politicians,
media experts, saying Kimmel is being censored, totally against freedom
of the press. The fact that Trump subsequently congratulated ABC
for getting rid of Kimmel, and the fact that he's
pressuring now NBC over to their late night host Jimmy
(16:49):
Fallon and Seth Myers, it is a very sad state
of affairs.
Speaker 1 (16:53):
Michael, Yeah, indeed, it is all right, Sean. Up next
is Fear and Greed, Q and A. Your guest today
is Daniel Shrimsky, who is the managing director of Vanguard Australia.
It is all about retirement. Vanguard has recently released the
How Australia Retires Report and it's basically looking at how
Australians are preparing for retirement, the impact of rising housing costs,
(17:15):
expectations are moving, financial literacy are changing the way that
people are retiring and Vanguard has done some fascinating research
into it. They're great supporter of us here Fear and Greed.
That one is coming up after the show, so stick
around for that one.
Speaker 2 (17:28):
Thank you very much, Sean, Thank you, Michael.
Speaker 1 (17:30):
It is Friday, the nineteenth of September twenty twenty five.
Make sure you're following the podcast and please join us
online on LinkedIn, Instagram, ex TikTok and Facebook.
Speaker 2 (17:38):
Michael Thompson.
Speaker 1 (17:39):
That was Fear and Greed. Have a great day.
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.