September 19, 2025 • 29 mins
US interest rate cuts, the war on inflation almost won, a new emissions target from the government, the $30 billion Santos deal collapsing, and Trump's visit with the King - there's no shortage of huge stories for this week's competition.
Sean Aylmer and Michael Thompson go head to head on the top business stories of the week, with Adam Lang picking a winner in a fierce debate.
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):
This is the weekend edition of Fear and Greed business
news you can use. I'm Michael Thompson and good morning Sean. Aylmer.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
Good morning, Michael, Sean.
Speaker 1 (00:14):
Our weekend show is all about the two of us,
each nominating what we think is the biggest business story
of the week, the most remarkable story, a mystery category
that changes every week, and then our favorite business story.
But they're all our favorites. Really. We love all of
our stories. And every week we are joined by a
judge to pick a winner, because this is a competition
and there must be a winner. Occasionally he is declared
(00:36):
to a drawer, and no one likes that. Our judge
is our Fear and Greed colleague, Adam Lang Adam, good morning.
Speaker 3 (00:41):
Good morning Michael. And just like good business and competition,
it's releasing the animal spirits on the weekend edition.
Speaker 1 (00:50):
Do you release the animal spirit when you're in the boardroom, Adam?
Speaker 3 (00:54):
Sometimes I don't have to keep it down.
Speaker 1 (00:59):
Today, kitten. Anyway, what are you looking for today, Adam?
When you're judging these stories.
Speaker 3 (01:09):
I just think of that judge. I am not a cat.
Topicality and timeliness obviously, economic impact, playing a little bit
to my subjective bias, and of course Michael's strong suit
of melodrama.
Speaker 1 (01:24):
Okay, we can do that. Let's do this sean biggest
story of the week, go for it.
Speaker 2 (01:30):
Well, Adam, you said topicality, you said economic impact, you
said your bias. What else could be the biggest story
under those criteria? Then the economy. Three big things happened
this week in the US. We got an interest rate
cut for the first time in more than six months.
(01:51):
We probably Joan Powell has been under all sorts of
pressure from Donald Trump to cut raids. He did it
this week.
Speaker 3 (01:58):
Number two.
Speaker 2 (01:59):
Sarah Hunter, chief economist at the Reserve Bank. She came
out and basically said, we've defeated inflation. They've never defeated
inflation as such, because it's just something that keeps on giving. However,
she said, we're pretty much there and the employment market
is about right. Isn't that good news? I mean, we
(02:21):
almost have the Goldilocks economy. She also said that the
house that the you know, I can't I was going
to say house of living crisis. That's interesting.
Speaker 3 (02:31):
It is cost of living is it's cost of living,
but the cost is the house.
Speaker 2 (02:38):
So it could just switch house of living in anyway,
the cost of living crisis, well it's been alleviated. There's
a good word. So people aren't feeling the cost of
living crisis as much. Before point number three, we had
the labor market figures come out. Unemployment four two point
two percent is still pretty good. But we lost jobs
last month. In fact, over the first four months of
(03:00):
the year, the economy created eighty thousand jobs. The next
four months just twenty four thousand jobs. You piece all
that together, you put it into the economic mix master,
you'd switch it on, you put the lid on it.
What do you get? You probably get rate cuts later
in the year. So for everyone out there, home loans,
(03:22):
credit card debts, savings, I reckon rates the game for
later in the year, probably November. In fact, the market's
priced a ninety percent chance of a cut in November.
So what a cracking week for the economy. Biggest story
we had chief economists, we had labor fourth figures, we
had us interest rates. Just keeps giving beat that, Mickey T.
(03:45):
I do just have one small question the economics mixed master.
I don't know any mixed misters.
Speaker 1 (03:53):
No, No, I just don't know. Typically they don't have lids.
Perhaps you're referring to an economics blender. Maybe maybe I
just thought it just a minor point of order, because
you know blenders have lids. Mixed master tends to just
be like a wide bowl.
Speaker 3 (04:08):
You were right.
Speaker 2 (04:08):
I hate to say it, but I think you were right.
Did you a blender when you were growing up or
even the when you've got at home. You know how
you put the lid on the blender and then there's
a small round bit in the middle that you've got
to put another little cap on. I don't know what
they use that forcu no one ever uses it right good.
Inevitably you lose that small round bit. So whenever I
(04:31):
use the blender, I've always got to put my hand
on top of it to stop it spewing out. Similar story.
Speaker 3 (04:37):
If you stop the economy boiling over, ye, to.
Speaker 2 (04:41):
Stop rates coming out one way, the employment market coming
out the other.
Speaker 1 (04:44):
May Sarah Hunter's popping out the other part. Biggest story
of the week, Adam, this is one for you. In fact,
you know what, it's one for all of us because
this affects everything person in this country. The Albanezer government
has finally put a number on twenty thirty five, a
(05:05):
sixty two to seventy percent cut in emissions. It is ambitious,
but not too ambitious, a balancing act between the Climate
change Authority pushing for more, business groups pushing for less,
the Coalition saying they're dead against it, the Green saying
it's nowhere near enough. That just somewhere in the middle
is the government at the moment with the target that
(05:27):
it says is responsible, practical and achievable with proven tech,
and that anything higher, anything higher, was going to be
essentially unattainable. Critics do say that it's a bit weak
two weak, particularly environmental groups. Either way, it does come
with a seven billion dollar funding boost, a plan for renewables, EVS,
(05:48):
carbon removal. It is adam the biggest story of the
week because this target defines Australia's economic future. There is
certainty for business, yes, in having this target, but there
are billions and billions and billions of dollars on the
(06:08):
line here two brillion dollars, billions and trillions apparently also
trillions two trillion dollars to the economy by twenty fifty
if successful. There's a goal to legislate the target, and
then there's the almighty challenge of actually getting there, and
as part of that, a realization that the transition to
(06:30):
greener energy and a greener economy is harder than previously hoped.
This is the biggest story of the week because this
is a story that will continue to impact us for
years and years and years to come.
Speaker 3 (06:44):
Adam, right, very difficult monthly inflation numbers. Chief economist Sarah
Hunter declaring, we're pretty much there, but like you said, Sean,
probably not a decision until November, until we get those
next quarterly figures. I think in this case this week,
(07:06):
the announcement on greenhouse or carbon emissions by twenty thirty
five has to win because of its longer term and
probably deeper impacts on the Australian economy. So it's a
real grapple. Close on the points, but Michael just wins.
Speaker 2 (07:19):
Hold on, Adam, Hold on, Adam, hold on point of order. Yes,
you just said monthly inflation right, it was a monthly employment.
Were you even listening to me? I mean, how can
you give it to Michael when you didn't even listen
to me.
Speaker 1 (07:32):
I don't think that's a reflection on Adam. I think
it was a reflection on the speak, I'm out a mistake.
I actually saw Adam just briefly fall asleep.
Speaker 3 (07:43):
It No, I'd love to say that was at fault,
but it wasn't that. I just made a mistake.
Speaker 2 (07:49):
I went and got myself a cup of tea when
Michael was talking, because.
Speaker 1 (07:53):
And he came back to defeat. Huh.
Speaker 3 (07:56):
I like your commentary both of you yesterday in the
morning edition of the Business News when you were talking
about basically everyone was unhappy with the announcement by the government,
but probably they're all unhappy equally, and so that means
it could be a good decision.
Speaker 2 (08:14):
Yeah, good call. Yeah, excellent analysis there. Right a Michael,
what about the most remarkable story? You're up one nill.
You've taken an early lead. It's a four hundred meter race.
One hundred meters gone.
Speaker 3 (08:25):
You're leading, Michael is Gout in this analogy.
Speaker 2 (08:29):
Well, let's do a two hundred meter race in because
it's a two hundred meter runner. Fifty right, You've taken
the front, now Gout. Gout is famous for his final
fifty meters, So let's just wait and see go on
most remarkable story.
Speaker 1 (08:45):
God, did you guys say that I waffle on this
show too much.
Speaker 3 (08:50):
It's a lovely picture, isn't it, Adam Yep.
Speaker 1 (08:54):
This week Super Retail sacked at CEO Anthony Herity he
allegedly misled the board about an alleged relationship with his
HR chief. Now, this story has been a saga, It
has been going on for some time, but it came
to a head significantly this week. It started last year
(09:15):
when super Retail announced it was expecting legal action from
two other staffers whistleblowers essentially about what was happening. The
relationship between Herety and the HR boss was investigated internally.
Turns out that maybe not everything at the time was disclosed,
and that is largely why he was then let go
this week, because he disclosed new information to the board.
(09:36):
And here is the remarkable bit, the reason why this
story is so remarkable, and in fact is the most
remarkable story of the week. It is becoming a pattern.
It is a trend that we are seeing here. We've
seen it at Wisetech with Richard White's alleged relationship with
women at the company. We have seen it at Mineral
Resources with Chris Ellison's alleged involvement in a tax evasion scheme.
(09:59):
CEO is not being completely open, not disclosing everything that
needs to be disclosed. Adam, I don't need to tell you.
Governance matters, doesn't it. And for super retail listed company
running Rebel Sport BCF super cheap governance matters instead ended
(10:19):
up with subpoenas, lawsuits and now are very expensive, very
unpleasant corporate drama. The remarkable part about this isn't so
much the relationship. It is the failure of transparency at
the very top. And that is all I'm going to
say about this matter.
Speaker 2 (10:37):
Over to you, Sean, I reckon, you just about convinced
yourself that's not very remarkable by saying this is happening
all the time.
Speaker 1 (10:43):
Therefore it's I mean, it is a trend. And as
we say in economics, Sean, the trend is your friend.
And oh god, I love saying that back to you.
Oh that gives me a great degree of satisfaction. Speaking
of satisfaction, satisfy a Sean, what have you got? What
is your Well?
Speaker 2 (11:02):
Look, I hope this isn't a trend. But some of
the banks were one of the banks ane zed up
to their old tricks. In fact, the banking industry's old tricks.
This week we found out it's going to pay a
record fine of two hundred and forty million dollars to
settle a case brought by the corporate regulator in which
the bank admitted to incorrectly reporting bond trading data to
the federal government. The thing is, there was more to it.
(11:26):
It's not just the bond trading. There were the other
big issues. Where that mean the penalties added up to
two hundred and forty was the fact that ains A's
retail division, we found out failed to refund fees charged
to thousands of dead customers. It didn't respond to family
members dealing with deceased the states in a timely manner.
(11:46):
It's also fine for making false and misleading statements on
savings interest rates where it didn't pay the correct rate
just tens of thousands of customers. It didn't respond to
hundreds of customers hardship notices in some case for more
than two years. The thing is, we had a beaning
Royal commission six years ago. I thought that we're beyond this.
(12:08):
I thought we'd moved on now. The bond trading case
has been a real problem for ain Z for a
long time. They didn't try and manipulate the market, and
they came out. Paul O'Sullivan, the chairman, came out and said, well,
then the good thing is that they didn't really find
that we actually had tried to do that. We just
sort of stuffed up our comms. That's true, But what
about all the other stuff, what about all the stuff
(12:28):
that we went through a banking Royal commission to make
sure banks didn't do that anymore? Sudden we find out
it's happening. Still remarkable a dem Ski.
Speaker 3 (12:39):
Yes, Sean wins. I think that is remarkable. Also, an
incredible week really, all two weeks for Anne's out in
terms of employment changes, the transition of the bank, massive story.
So I think that story in particular on the asset
finals remarkable. It's been so long standing, tunes, It's over
(13:01):
so many years that this has been happening.
Speaker 2 (13:04):
Yeah, so I.
Speaker 3 (13:05):
Think Sean has to win on this one. I did
enjoy both of your discussion on what you called, I
think the gold standard of relationship disclosure. BHP's Mike Henry
and the CEO of Canadian National Railways over there potast
projects where they almost didn't seek permission perhaps, but we're
very forthright in their disclosure to the boards and colleague
(13:26):
of green light for the relationship to continue. I thought
that was marvelous.
Speaker 2 (13:30):
So great story at its finest.
Speaker 1 (13:34):
It is one all, one all. We are going to
take a quick break and come back with the mystery
category of the week, and it's a good mystery category
this week.
Speaker 3 (13:44):
We'll do that in a moment.
Speaker 1 (13:52):
All right, Sean, it is one all. Would you like
to elaborate on your gap Gout analogy?
Speaker 3 (13:57):
Here? Yeah, were at one hundred.
Speaker 2 (14:00):
He's pulled you out the hundred. He's pulled up to
the pack. If you've been watching you sort of at
the athletics Championships, Gout Gaup, he's kind of in touch
with the leaders. At this point, you're in touch with
the leader. We're using you as Gout Gout. I'm going
to be the Jamaican runner who inevitably ends up winning.
So you are in touch with the leader at the moment.
Speaker 1 (14:21):
Michael, Okay, all right, this is okay, I'm okay in
this position. Let's go into our mystery category and Adams,
the mystery category this week is a story that wasn't
a story. Okay, sounds mysterious. Luckily, Sean is here to
(14:41):
tell you his and that we'll make it all crystal clear.
Speaker 2 (14:44):
Yes, the story that wasn't a story. The story, according
to an overseas media outlet that everyone picked up on,
was that Macquarie Group had held talks to merge with
private equity giant Carlole Group, although the discussions ended up
going nowhere. If it had happened, you would have ended
up with a global investment powerhouse with about one trillion
(15:07):
dollars in combined assets. Now mcquarie wasn't competing on it,
but it's broadly shifting away from public assets towards private
assets at the moment. This year it's sold its North
American and European public asset management. What's interesting about this
is it just shows how hard mcquarie are working to
(15:28):
build shareholder returns. This is Australia's pre eminent investment bank,
has been for twenty years, the Millionaires Factory, all that stuff. Well,
times are just a lot tougher. The fact that they're
even entertaining talks with Carlisle Group, which you know, a
massive company, although in terms of its price, so what
it trades relative to earnings, it's actually less than mcquarie.
(15:51):
Maybe this is a merger. I'm not sure that actually
adds a lot of value to McQuary, at least in
the short term. But the fact that they're talking about it,
they're entertaining the idea of merging with the global player,
just shows you the predicament that Macquarie's in. So this
is a story that's not a story, but it is
a story because you know, kind of read between the lines.
It is a cracking story. But nothing happened. And as
(16:14):
my former editor Glen Burge used to say, never put
on the front page a story that says something didn't happen.
And he's right. So this didn't happen. But the story
behind the story. Remember this TV shap behind the news
when you were growing up.
Speaker 1 (16:28):
It speaks around, is it really Yeah, kids still watch
it in school.
Speaker 2 (16:34):
Well this is the BTN.
Speaker 3 (16:35):
Category for adults.
Speaker 4 (16:36):
Yeah, adult BTN. Here we go, Oh, Michael, go on, okay, Adam.
Speaker 1 (16:49):
The biggest story that didn't happen, the story that wasn't
a story behind the news, the thirty billion dollar takeover
of Santos. For months, it looked like Abu Dhabi's Adnock,
the national oil company, was about to pull off one
of the biggest cash deals, if not the biggest in
ASX history, and then nothing. The bidder walked away two
(17:17):
days before deadline, two days out of the blue, just
said nope, not doing this. And it had come after two
increased offers in order to get them in the building.
Then eleven weeks of due diligence and Adnock apparently didn't
like what it found. Santos said the consortium wouldn't agree
(17:39):
to terms the protected value for Santa's shareholders given how
long a transaction was going to take to complete, and
the whole thing collapsed. A major, major, major shock here.
The share price tumbled, but down what about twelve percent
after the things The news broke of this late at night, Right,
(17:59):
it just came everyone was asleep. Everyone was just sound asleep.
Speaker 2 (18:02):
No, that is not true, Michael, because we had a
discussion at ten thirty at night.
Speaker 3 (18:10):
Have you seen this?
Speaker 2 (18:11):
And said, have you seen this? And we were getting
ready for the show, and I said, this is really
late for you to be up because you know whatever
time we record. Yep, you said, can I say it?
Speaker 1 (18:23):
Go for it?
Speaker 2 (18:24):
You said, I'm naked and getting into the shower. And
that was the last thing I needed to hear or
think about.
Speaker 1 (18:31):
Yeah, more regrettable that you'd called me on FaceTime.
Speaker 2 (18:38):
Anyway, So we were the story for me and hopefully
it ruins it for Adam.
Speaker 3 (18:42):
But this was the behind the news story.
Speaker 1 (18:44):
Indeed why I said it was adult btn very very nude. Anyway,
the whole thing collapsed on. The deal collapsed, major, major shock,
share price tumbled. The interesting thing here is that now
in recent years, Santos has essentially had three big suitors
circle kick the tires walk off for various reasons. This story,
(19:06):
this was supposed to reshape the energy sector, not just now,
but for millennia to come, and it just didn't happen,
and we are all shocked.
Speaker 3 (19:21):
Adam, Okay, So at this point it is so close
at the one hundred and fifty meter mark, it's impossible
to tell who's going to win. But Michael wins that
story because that was the bigger deal this week. I
did love the mcquarie Carlisle group story, but to your point,
(19:41):
shown the story that didn't happen, albeit some time ago.
Neither of them happened, but that was longer ago. Great
story and we only found out about it. But in
this instance, I have to have I have to put
Santos BHP deal off. And I just wonder, after eleven
weeks of due diligence, is it a negotiating tactic, like, sorry,
is this story over?
Speaker 2 (20:02):
I don't know, well, I was saying, I mean, if
you read between the lines, Santos know that for this
deal to get ahead, it's got political barnacles all over,
and it's got regulatory barnacles all over, and it sounds
like they want to make shareholders don't get left in
the lurch. So this could go on for twelve months
and suddenly ad Not runs away and Santos has been
treading water for two years by that point, and it
(20:24):
just sounds like the board said, no, we can't afford
for that to happen. Whether there's a poison pill in
there where the you know, whatever it was.
Speaker 3 (20:30):
It's distracting for everybody, right, yeah.
Speaker 2 (20:32):
Yeah, And this is very much reading between the lines.
So I'd be surprised if they're in there for that
long and walked away as a negotiating point, particularly when
they've already.
Speaker 3 (20:40):
Up the price toward right fair point.
Speaker 1 (20:43):
So I've just edged in front. You have taken the lead,
all right, favorite story? Am I going first on this one?
Speaker 2 (20:50):
Then yeah, there you go.
Speaker 1 (20:52):
Okay, all right, okay, I'll do that, Adam. I need
to alert you to something that has happened. My favorite
story is that King Charles has just saved Orcus and
that matters for Australia. I don't know, you're You're likely
in coming days and minutes to hear stories that don't
(21:16):
really affect Australia very much. This story does affect Australia
in a hugely significant way. Donald Trump was given a
guard of honor this week a state banquet at Windsor Castle.
He was visiting the UK, second visit in just a
few months. He loves the place, truly loves the place.
(21:36):
King Charles delivered a very dignified, and you've got to say,
a very royal speech. There's not much melodrama. He would
if King Charles was a competitor here, he would get
like maybe one point for melodrama. But he doesn't need
it because the melodrama happens around him. Right, Yes, I know,
but where is the dramatic pauses? Where is the triple butt?
(21:58):
Like things like this give some lessons on the melodrama Michael,
that's all right anyway. In delivering this speech, this speech,
the King reminded it was just if you've watched it,
it only goes for a couple of minutes. It is
just amazing. The King reminds Trump, who's sitting right next
to him, of Britain and America's alliance in two World Wars,
(22:23):
links it all directly back to the need to keep
supporting Ukraine in the fight against Russia, and then vitally,
crucially importantly significantly drops in orcus why like why it
doesn't need to be in there. This is not really
the occasion.
Speaker 2 (22:41):
He's our king to Michael, he's our king too exactly.
Speaker 1 (22:45):
He did it anyway, He did it anyway, and he
said his words were, our submarine partnership with Australia sets
the benchmark for innovative and vital collaboration. That is just
extraordinary and so incredibly pointed, right. I mean, the Royals
don't say, they never say anything without having additional meaning
(23:07):
behind what they are saying. You've got a reigning monarch
in front of Donald Trump, in front of the world media,
putting his personal weight and pressure behind a deal that
Australia has staked three hundred and sixty eight billion dollars
and the future of our defense on and suddenly we
(23:27):
have the King advocating for us there when the President
is right next to him. It is just extraordinary, And
of course it's at a very good time. The Pentagon
Review of Orcust dragging on, skeptics inside the White House
getting a little bit kind of antsy about this whole thing,
and Albanezy heading to the US knowing that he's got
(23:49):
to make the case for it all over again. Suddenly
the Prime Minister's got the King of England on his side,
and we know that Donald Trump is partial to a
little bit of the royal treatment, is wowed by that
kind of thing.
Speaker 2 (24:03):
And you have beaten the Geebas out of that story.
I've got to say, I reckon, No, no, no, I haven't.
I absolutely haven't did this. But there this has saved Ucas.
Speaker 1 (24:13):
That is it. That is it, and that affects Australogy
and it is just extreme.
Speaker 2 (24:18):
It has judged the story as you find fit, Adam.
But don't judge it as the King saving orcus for Australia.
That would be disappointing if you judge it the way
did you notice the seating arrangements at dinner? So Donald
Trump was there on his left, King Charles the Third,
our wacky King. We like the man on his right,
(24:40):
Kate will Middleton, m M. Why would you put her
next to Donald Trump? She's not next in line for
the throw? She's why.
Speaker 1 (24:53):
I suppose it's a good tactic, isn't it, Pond? She's
very charming. That's the thing it is. It is. It
is a charm offensive right, like they are just they
are there to get to make the points they need to.
How many times you reckon? She mentioned Ucus in their little.
Speaker 3 (25:10):
Is nice?
Speaker 1 (25:11):
What do you think of submarines? That kind of thing? Anyway,
going on.
Speaker 2 (25:15):
Too long, I've just got this shocking story involved Donald
Trump again. It's my least favorite story really, and it's
Jimmy Kimmel slash New York Times slash the ABC's John Lines.
The worst case of political pressure on journalism came with
(25:40):
Jimmy Kimmel. So basically, ABC cut the Jimmy Kimmel Late
night show after he's opening monologue early in the week.
It's very critical of Donald Trump. He also talked about
the mag again desperately trying to characterize this kid who
murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them,
and do everything they can to score political points from it.
(26:03):
It was very heart I mean it was a heart monologue,
no doubt about it. But nothing over the top. I
don't think anyone thought. Suddenly the guy who actually hands
out the licenses for Freda Wear broadcasting in the US
came out. His name is Brendan Carr, a Trump appointee.
He said it was the sickest conduct possible. He urged
(26:23):
his need to take action. He said an apology from
Kimball would be a very reasonable, minimal step. What do
they do they sacked him, Well, they suspended the Jimmy
Kimmel Show. We also had John Lyons, ABC journalist asking
Donald Trump a very reasonable question about his business interest
giving him his president. Donald Trump roused on him, said, well,
you're in trouble. I'm going to tell Anthony Alberneze about that.
(26:44):
We also had Donald Trump suing The New York Times
for allegedly being a democratic mouthpiece for fifteen billion dollars.
Democracy only works when you have freedom of the press,
and three incredibly egregious examples of political pressure being applied
to the media to stop them from doing their job.
(27:07):
He's probably my least favorite story of the week, but
it's the most notable story of the week.
Speaker 3 (27:13):
Dempsky, Okay, didn't King Charles play his role? I thought
it was inspirational, Like just I think the pomp and
ceremony is ridiculous. But talk about playing the person. He
played Trump beautifully and he did his job.
Speaker 2 (27:32):
So long as Trump doesn't in the next couple of
weeks come out and start talking about like render made.
He went and sucked up to Donald Trump and then
Donald Trump just ignored.
Speaker 3 (27:41):
It all and that didn't work.
Speaker 2 (27:43):
No, the King really is putting himself out there doing this.
Speaker 1 (27:46):
Yeah, but but Trump does. He is really susceptible to
the royal stuff like he loves and he loves the
idea of having a king. I would argue he likes
the idea of being of being a king.
Speaker 3 (28:00):
Player of the week, King Charles. But this is really
tough because sewn for all the reasons you mentioned, Jimmy
Kimmel sacked. New York Times sued Australian journalist John Lyons rebuked.
So in both parts of the Northern Hemisphere we had
different stories going on both involving Trump, so I had
to call it a dead heat on this. They were
(28:21):
both brilliant stories, favorite maybe most notable of the week,
but certainly massive stories, so well played both.
Speaker 2 (28:31):
I think Gout Gout has done it. Think we're going
to have to I think we're going to have to
go to the timer, to the tape at the official
timing to make sure because they took the tape. It
was really close. We think Gout Gout has it, but
over to the judges to get in.
Speaker 3 (28:48):
The flow motion replay. Ye, so even on the last story.
So on the story, Karen, it's one and a half,
Sean two and a half. Michael gotgat on ninety one points,
Michael ninety two points by the thinnest of margins battle
(29:11):
point zero one seconds.
Speaker 2 (29:13):
Gout has done it.
Speaker 1 (29:15):
I will take it.
Speaker 3 (29:15):
Come back next week.
Speaker 1 (29:16):
Great judgment. Thank you, Adam, Thank you, Michael, Thank you, Sean,
Thank you very much. Sean.
Speaker 2 (29:21):
Thanks Michael.
Speaker 1 (29:22):
Make sure you're following the podcast and head to Fearangreed
dot com dot are you to sign up for our
free daily newsletter. O'm Michael Thompson. That was Fear and Greed.
Speaker 3 (29:29):
Its a great weekend.
This is the weekend edition of Fear and Greed business
news you can use. I'm Michael Thompson and good morning Sean. Aylmer.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
Good morning, Michael, Sean.
Speaker 1 (00:14):
Our weekend show is all about the two of us,
each nominating what we think is the biggest business story
of the week, the most remarkable story, a mystery category
that changes every week, and then our favorite business story.
But they're all our favorites. Really. We love all of
our stories. And every week we are joined by a
judge to pick a winner, because this is a competition
and there must be a winner. Occasionally he is declared
(00:36):
to a drawer, and no one likes that. Our judge
is our Fear and Greed colleague, Adam Lang Adam, good morning.
Speaker 3 (00:41):
Good morning Michael. And just like good business and competition,
it's releasing the animal spirits on the weekend edition.
Speaker 1 (00:50):
Do you release the animal spirit when you're in the boardroom, Adam?
Speaker 3 (00:54):
Sometimes I don't have to keep it down.
Speaker 1 (00:59):
Today, kitten. Anyway, what are you looking for today, Adam?
When you're judging these stories.
Speaker 3 (01:09):
I just think of that judge. I am not a cat.
Topicality and timeliness obviously, economic impact, playing a little bit
to my subjective bias, and of course Michael's strong suit
of melodrama.
Speaker 1 (01:24):
Okay, we can do that. Let's do this sean biggest
story of the week, go for it.
Speaker 2 (01:30):
Well, Adam, you said topicality, you said economic impact, you
said your bias. What else could be the biggest story
under those criteria? Then the economy. Three big things happened
this week in the US. We got an interest rate
cut for the first time in more than six months.
(01:51):
We probably Joan Powell has been under all sorts of
pressure from Donald Trump to cut raids. He did it
this week.
Speaker 3 (01:58):
Number two.
Speaker 2 (01:59):
Sarah Hunter, chief economist at the Reserve Bank. She came
out and basically said, we've defeated inflation. They've never defeated
inflation as such, because it's just something that keeps on giving. However,
she said, we're pretty much there and the employment market
is about right. Isn't that good news? I mean, we
(02:21):
almost have the Goldilocks economy. She also said that the
house that the you know, I can't I was going
to say house of living crisis. That's interesting.
Speaker 3 (02:31):
It is cost of living is it's cost of living,
but the cost is the house.
Speaker 2 (02:38):
So it could just switch house of living in anyway,
the cost of living crisis, well it's been alleviated. There's
a good word. So people aren't feeling the cost of
living crisis as much. Before point number three, we had
the labor market figures come out. Unemployment four two point
two percent is still pretty good. But we lost jobs
last month. In fact, over the first four months of
(03:00):
the year, the economy created eighty thousand jobs. The next
four months just twenty four thousand jobs. You piece all
that together, you put it into the economic mix master,
you'd switch it on, you put the lid on it.
What do you get? You probably get rate cuts later
in the year. So for everyone out there, home loans,
(03:22):
credit card debts, savings, I reckon rates the game for
later in the year, probably November. In fact, the market's
priced a ninety percent chance of a cut in November.
So what a cracking week for the economy. Biggest story
we had chief economists, we had labor fourth figures, we
had us interest rates. Just keeps giving beat that, Mickey T.
(03:45):
I do just have one small question the economics mixed master.
I don't know any mixed misters.
Speaker 1 (03:53):
No, No, I just don't know. Typically they don't have lids.
Perhaps you're referring to an economics blender. Maybe maybe I
just thought it just a minor point of order, because
you know blenders have lids. Mixed master tends to just
be like a wide bowl.
Speaker 3 (04:08):
You were right.
Speaker 2 (04:08):
I hate to say it, but I think you were right.
Did you a blender when you were growing up or
even the when you've got at home. You know how
you put the lid on the blender and then there's
a small round bit in the middle that you've got
to put another little cap on. I don't know what
they use that forcu no one ever uses it right good.
Inevitably you lose that small round bit. So whenever I
(04:31):
use the blender, I've always got to put my hand
on top of it to stop it spewing out. Similar story.
Speaker 3 (04:37):
If you stop the economy boiling over, ye, to.
Speaker 2 (04:41):
Stop rates coming out one way, the employment market coming
out the other.
Speaker 1 (04:44):
May Sarah Hunter's popping out the other part. Biggest story
of the week, Adam, this is one for you. In fact,
you know what, it's one for all of us because
this affects everything person in this country. The Albanezer government
has finally put a number on twenty thirty five, a
(05:05):
sixty two to seventy percent cut in emissions. It is ambitious,
but not too ambitious, a balancing act between the Climate
change Authority pushing for more, business groups pushing for less,
the Coalition saying they're dead against it, the Green saying
it's nowhere near enough. That just somewhere in the middle
is the government at the moment with the target that
(05:27):
it says is responsible, practical and achievable with proven tech,
and that anything higher, anything higher, was going to be
essentially unattainable. Critics do say that it's a bit weak
two weak, particularly environmental groups. Either way, it does come
with a seven billion dollar funding boost, a plan for renewables, EVS,
(05:48):
carbon removal. It is adam the biggest story of the
week because this target defines Australia's economic future. There is
certainty for business, yes, in having this target, but there
are billions and billions and billions of dollars on the
(06:08):
line here two brillion dollars, billions and trillions apparently also
trillions two trillion dollars to the economy by twenty fifty
if successful. There's a goal to legislate the target, and
then there's the almighty challenge of actually getting there, and
as part of that, a realization that the transition to
(06:30):
greener energy and a greener economy is harder than previously hoped.
This is the biggest story of the week because this
is a story that will continue to impact us for
years and years and years to come.
Speaker 3 (06:44):
Adam, right, very difficult monthly inflation numbers. Chief economist Sarah
Hunter declaring, we're pretty much there, but like you said, Sean,
probably not a decision until November, until we get those
next quarterly figures. I think in this case this week,
(07:06):
the announcement on greenhouse or carbon emissions by twenty thirty
five has to win because of its longer term and
probably deeper impacts on the Australian economy. So it's a
real grapple. Close on the points, but Michael just wins.
Speaker 2 (07:19):
Hold on, Adam, Hold on, Adam, hold on point of order. Yes,
you just said monthly inflation right, it was a monthly employment.
Were you even listening to me? I mean, how can
you give it to Michael when you didn't even listen
to me.
Speaker 1 (07:32):
I don't think that's a reflection on Adam. I think
it was a reflection on the speak, I'm out a mistake.
I actually saw Adam just briefly fall asleep.
Speaker 3 (07:43):
It No, I'd love to say that was at fault,
but it wasn't that. I just made a mistake.
Speaker 2 (07:49):
I went and got myself a cup of tea when
Michael was talking, because.
Speaker 1 (07:53):
And he came back to defeat. Huh.
Speaker 3 (07:56):
I like your commentary both of you yesterday in the
morning edition of the Business News when you were talking
about basically everyone was unhappy with the announcement by the government,
but probably they're all unhappy equally, and so that means
it could be a good decision.
Speaker 2 (08:14):
Yeah, good call. Yeah, excellent analysis there. Right a Michael,
what about the most remarkable story? You're up one nill.
You've taken an early lead. It's a four hundred meter race.
One hundred meters gone.
Speaker 3 (08:25):
You're leading, Michael is Gout in this analogy.
Speaker 2 (08:29):
Well, let's do a two hundred meter race in because
it's a two hundred meter runner. Fifty right, You've taken
the front, now Gout. Gout is famous for his final
fifty meters, So let's just wait and see go on
most remarkable story.
Speaker 1 (08:45):
God, did you guys say that I waffle on this
show too much.
Speaker 3 (08:50):
It's a lovely picture, isn't it, Adam Yep.
Speaker 1 (08:54):
This week Super Retail sacked at CEO Anthony Herity he
allegedly misled the board about an alleged relationship with his
HR chief. Now, this story has been a saga, It
has been going on for some time, but it came
to a head significantly this week. It started last year
(09:15):
when super Retail announced it was expecting legal action from
two other staffers whistleblowers essentially about what was happening. The
relationship between Herety and the HR boss was investigated internally.
Turns out that maybe not everything at the time was disclosed,
and that is largely why he was then let go
this week, because he disclosed new information to the board.
(09:36):
And here is the remarkable bit, the reason why this
story is so remarkable, and in fact is the most
remarkable story of the week. It is becoming a pattern.
It is a trend that we are seeing here. We've
seen it at Wisetech with Richard White's alleged relationship with
women at the company. We have seen it at Mineral
Resources with Chris Ellison's alleged involvement in a tax evasion scheme.
(09:59):
CEO is not being completely open, not disclosing everything that
needs to be disclosed. Adam, I don't need to tell you.
Governance matters, doesn't it. And for super retail listed company
running Rebel Sport BCF super cheap governance matters instead ended
(10:19):
up with subpoenas, lawsuits and now are very expensive, very
unpleasant corporate drama. The remarkable part about this isn't so
much the relationship. It is the failure of transparency at
the very top. And that is all I'm going to
say about this matter.
Speaker 2 (10:37):
Over to you, Sean, I reckon, you just about convinced
yourself that's not very remarkable by saying this is happening
all the time.
Speaker 1 (10:43):
Therefore it's I mean, it is a trend. And as
we say in economics, Sean, the trend is your friend.
And oh god, I love saying that back to you.
Oh that gives me a great degree of satisfaction. Speaking
of satisfaction, satisfy a Sean, what have you got? What
is your Well?
Speaker 2 (11:02):
Look, I hope this isn't a trend. But some of
the banks were one of the banks ane zed up
to their old tricks. In fact, the banking industry's old tricks.
This week we found out it's going to pay a
record fine of two hundred and forty million dollars to
settle a case brought by the corporate regulator in which
the bank admitted to incorrectly reporting bond trading data to
the federal government. The thing is, there was more to it.
(11:26):
It's not just the bond trading. There were the other
big issues. Where that mean the penalties added up to
two hundred and forty was the fact that ains A's
retail division, we found out failed to refund fees charged
to thousands of dead customers. It didn't respond to family
members dealing with deceased the states in a timely manner.
(11:46):
It's also fine for making false and misleading statements on
savings interest rates where it didn't pay the correct rate
just tens of thousands of customers. It didn't respond to
hundreds of customers hardship notices in some case for more
than two years. The thing is, we had a beaning
Royal commission six years ago. I thought that we're beyond this.
(12:08):
I thought we'd moved on now. The bond trading case
has been a real problem for ain Z for a
long time. They didn't try and manipulate the market, and
they came out. Paul O'Sullivan, the chairman, came out and said, well,
then the good thing is that they didn't really find
that we actually had tried to do that. We just
sort of stuffed up our comms. That's true, But what
about all the other stuff, what about all the stuff
(12:28):
that we went through a banking Royal commission to make
sure banks didn't do that anymore? Sudden we find out
it's happening. Still remarkable a dem Ski.
Speaker 3 (12:39):
Yes, Sean wins. I think that is remarkable. Also, an
incredible week really, all two weeks for Anne's out in
terms of employment changes, the transition of the bank, massive story.
So I think that story in particular on the asset
finals remarkable. It's been so long standing, tunes, It's over
(13:01):
so many years that this has been happening.
Speaker 2 (13:04):
Yeah, so I.
Speaker 3 (13:05):
Think Sean has to win on this one. I did
enjoy both of your discussion on what you called, I
think the gold standard of relationship disclosure. BHP's Mike Henry
and the CEO of Canadian National Railways over there potast
projects where they almost didn't seek permission perhaps, but we're
very forthright in their disclosure to the boards and colleague
(13:26):
of green light for the relationship to continue. I thought
that was marvelous.
Speaker 2 (13:30):
So great story at its finest.
Speaker 1 (13:34):
It is one all, one all. We are going to
take a quick break and come back with the mystery
category of the week, and it's a good mystery category
this week.
Speaker 3 (13:44):
We'll do that in a moment.
Speaker 1 (13:52):
All right, Sean, it is one all. Would you like
to elaborate on your gap Gout analogy?
Speaker 3 (13:57):
Here? Yeah, were at one hundred.
Speaker 2 (14:00):
He's pulled you out the hundred. He's pulled up to
the pack. If you've been watching you sort of at
the athletics Championships, Gout Gaup, he's kind of in touch
with the leaders. At this point, you're in touch with
the leader. We're using you as Gout Gout. I'm going
to be the Jamaican runner who inevitably ends up winning.
So you are in touch with the leader at the moment.
Speaker 1 (14:21):
Michael, Okay, all right, this is okay, I'm okay in
this position. Let's go into our mystery category and Adams,
the mystery category this week is a story that wasn't
a story. Okay, sounds mysterious. Luckily, Sean is here to
(14:41):
tell you his and that we'll make it all crystal clear.
Speaker 2 (14:44):
Yes, the story that wasn't a story. The story, according
to an overseas media outlet that everyone picked up on,
was that Macquarie Group had held talks to merge with
private equity giant Carlole Group, although the discussions ended up
going nowhere. If it had happened, you would have ended
up with a global investment powerhouse with about one trillion
(15:07):
dollars in combined assets. Now mcquarie wasn't competing on it,
but it's broadly shifting away from public assets towards private
assets at the moment. This year it's sold its North
American and European public asset management. What's interesting about this
is it just shows how hard mcquarie are working to
(15:28):
build shareholder returns. This is Australia's pre eminent investment bank,
has been for twenty years, the Millionaires Factory, all that stuff. Well,
times are just a lot tougher. The fact that they're
even entertaining talks with Carlisle Group, which you know, a
massive company, although in terms of its price, so what
it trades relative to earnings, it's actually less than mcquarie.
(15:51):
Maybe this is a merger. I'm not sure that actually
adds a lot of value to McQuary, at least in
the short term. But the fact that they're talking about it,
they're entertaining the idea of merging with the global player,
just shows you the predicament that Macquarie's in. So this
is a story that's not a story, but it is
a story because you know, kind of read between the lines.
It is a cracking story. But nothing happened. And as
(16:14):
my former editor Glen Burge used to say, never put
on the front page a story that says something didn't happen.
And he's right. So this didn't happen. But the story
behind the story. Remember this TV shap behind the news
when you were growing up.
Speaker 1 (16:28):
It speaks around, is it really Yeah, kids still watch
it in school.
Speaker 2 (16:34):
Well this is the BTN.
Speaker 3 (16:35):
Category for adults.
Speaker 4 (16:36):
Yeah, adult BTN. Here we go, Oh, Michael, go on, okay, Adam.
Speaker 1 (16:49):
The biggest story that didn't happen, the story that wasn't
a story behind the news, the thirty billion dollar takeover
of Santos. For months, it looked like Abu Dhabi's Adnock,
the national oil company, was about to pull off one
of the biggest cash deals, if not the biggest in
ASX history, and then nothing. The bidder walked away two
(17:17):
days before deadline, two days out of the blue, just
said nope, not doing this. And it had come after two
increased offers in order to get them in the building.
Then eleven weeks of due diligence and Adnock apparently didn't
like what it found. Santos said the consortium wouldn't agree
(17:39):
to terms the protected value for Santa's shareholders given how
long a transaction was going to take to complete, and
the whole thing collapsed. A major, major, major shock here.
The share price tumbled, but down what about twelve percent
after the things The news broke of this late at night, Right,
(17:59):
it just came everyone was asleep. Everyone was just sound asleep.
Speaker 2 (18:02):
No, that is not true, Michael, because we had a
discussion at ten thirty at night.
Speaker 3 (18:10):
Have you seen this?
Speaker 2 (18:11):
And said, have you seen this? And we were getting
ready for the show, and I said, this is really
late for you to be up because you know whatever
time we record. Yep, you said, can I say it?
Speaker 1 (18:23):
Go for it?
Speaker 2 (18:24):
You said, I'm naked and getting into the shower. And
that was the last thing I needed to hear or
think about.
Speaker 1 (18:31):
Yeah, more regrettable that you'd called me on FaceTime.
Speaker 2 (18:38):
Anyway, So we were the story for me and hopefully
it ruins it for Adam.
Speaker 3 (18:42):
But this was the behind the news story.
Speaker 1 (18:44):
Indeed why I said it was adult btn very very nude. Anyway,
the whole thing collapsed on. The deal collapsed, major, major shock,
share price tumbled. The interesting thing here is that now
in recent years, Santos has essentially had three big suitors
circle kick the tires walk off for various reasons. This story,
(19:06):
this was supposed to reshape the energy sector, not just now,
but for millennia to come, and it just didn't happen,
and we are all shocked.
Speaker 3 (19:21):
Adam, Okay, So at this point it is so close
at the one hundred and fifty meter mark, it's impossible
to tell who's going to win. But Michael wins that
story because that was the bigger deal this week. I
did love the mcquarie Carlisle group story, but to your point,
(19:41):
shown the story that didn't happen, albeit some time ago.
Neither of them happened, but that was longer ago. Great
story and we only found out about it. But in
this instance, I have to have I have to put
Santos BHP deal off. And I just wonder, after eleven
weeks of due diligence, is it a negotiating tactic, like, sorry,
is this story over?
Speaker 2 (20:02):
I don't know, well, I was saying, I mean, if
you read between the lines, Santos know that for this
deal to get ahead, it's got political barnacles all over,
and it's got regulatory barnacles all over, and it sounds
like they want to make shareholders don't get left in
the lurch. So this could go on for twelve months
and suddenly ad Not runs away and Santos has been
treading water for two years by that point, and it
(20:24):
just sounds like the board said, no, we can't afford
for that to happen. Whether there's a poison pill in
there where the you know, whatever it was.
Speaker 3 (20:30):
It's distracting for everybody, right, yeah.
Speaker 2 (20:32):
Yeah, And this is very much reading between the lines.
So I'd be surprised if they're in there for that
long and walked away as a negotiating point, particularly when
they've already.
Speaker 3 (20:40):
Up the price toward right fair point.
Speaker 1 (20:43):
So I've just edged in front. You have taken the lead,
all right, favorite story? Am I going first on this one?
Speaker 2 (20:50):
Then yeah, there you go.
Speaker 1 (20:52):
Okay, all right, okay, I'll do that, Adam. I need
to alert you to something that has happened. My favorite
story is that King Charles has just saved Orcus and
that matters for Australia. I don't know, you're You're likely
in coming days and minutes to hear stories that don't
(21:16):
really affect Australia very much. This story does affect Australia
in a hugely significant way. Donald Trump was given a
guard of honor this week a state banquet at Windsor Castle.
He was visiting the UK, second visit in just a
few months. He loves the place, truly loves the place.
(21:36):
King Charles delivered a very dignified, and you've got to say,
a very royal speech. There's not much melodrama. He would
if King Charles was a competitor here, he would get
like maybe one point for melodrama. But he doesn't need
it because the melodrama happens around him. Right, Yes, I know,
but where is the dramatic pauses? Where is the triple butt?
(21:58):
Like things like this give some lessons on the melodrama Michael,
that's all right anyway. In delivering this speech, this speech,
the King reminded it was just if you've watched it,
it only goes for a couple of minutes. It is
just amazing. The King reminds Trump, who's sitting right next
to him, of Britain and America's alliance in two World Wars,
(22:23):
links it all directly back to the need to keep
supporting Ukraine in the fight against Russia, and then vitally,
crucially importantly significantly drops in orcus why like why it
doesn't need to be in there. This is not really
the occasion.
Speaker 2 (22:41):
He's our king to Michael, he's our king too exactly.
Speaker 1 (22:45):
He did it anyway, He did it anyway, and he
said his words were, our submarine partnership with Australia sets
the benchmark for innovative and vital collaboration. That is just
extraordinary and so incredibly pointed, right. I mean, the Royals
don't say, they never say anything without having additional meaning
(23:07):
behind what they are saying. You've got a reigning monarch
in front of Donald Trump, in front of the world media,
putting his personal weight and pressure behind a deal that
Australia has staked three hundred and sixty eight billion dollars
and the future of our defense on and suddenly we
(23:27):
have the King advocating for us there when the President
is right next to him. It is just extraordinary, And
of course it's at a very good time. The Pentagon
Review of Orcust dragging on, skeptics inside the White House
getting a little bit kind of antsy about this whole thing,
and Albanezy heading to the US knowing that he's got
(23:49):
to make the case for it all over again. Suddenly
the Prime Minister's got the King of England on his side,
and we know that Donald Trump is partial to a
little bit of the royal treatment, is wowed by that
kind of thing.
Speaker 2 (24:03):
And you have beaten the Geebas out of that story.
I've got to say, I reckon, No, no, no, I haven't.
I absolutely haven't did this. But there this has saved Ucas.
Speaker 1 (24:13):
That is it. That is it, and that affects Australogy
and it is just extreme.
Speaker 2 (24:18):
It has judged the story as you find fit, Adam.
But don't judge it as the King saving orcus for Australia.
That would be disappointing if you judge it the way
did you notice the seating arrangements at dinner? So Donald
Trump was there on his left, King Charles the Third,
our wacky King. We like the man on his right,
(24:40):
Kate will Middleton, m M. Why would you put her
next to Donald Trump? She's not next in line for
the throw? She's why.
Speaker 1 (24:53):
I suppose it's a good tactic, isn't it, Pond? She's
very charming. That's the thing it is. It is. It
is a charm offensive right, like they are just they
are there to get to make the points they need to.
How many times you reckon? She mentioned Ucus in their little.
Speaker 3 (25:10):
Is nice?
Speaker 1 (25:11):
What do you think of submarines? That kind of thing? Anyway,
going on.
Speaker 2 (25:15):
Too long, I've just got this shocking story involved Donald
Trump again. It's my least favorite story really, and it's
Jimmy Kimmel slash New York Times slash the ABC's John Lines.
The worst case of political pressure on journalism came with
(25:40):
Jimmy Kimmel. So basically, ABC cut the Jimmy Kimmel Late
night show after he's opening monologue early in the week.
It's very critical of Donald Trump. He also talked about
the mag again desperately trying to characterize this kid who
murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them,
and do everything they can to score political points from it.
(26:03):
It was very heart I mean it was a heart monologue,
no doubt about it. But nothing over the top. I
don't think anyone thought. Suddenly the guy who actually hands
out the licenses for Freda Wear broadcasting in the US
came out. His name is Brendan Carr, a Trump appointee.
He said it was the sickest conduct possible. He urged
(26:23):
his need to take action. He said an apology from
Kimball would be a very reasonable, minimal step. What do
they do they sacked him, Well, they suspended the Jimmy
Kimmel Show. We also had John Lyons, ABC journalist asking
Donald Trump a very reasonable question about his business interest
giving him his president. Donald Trump roused on him, said, well,
you're in trouble. I'm going to tell Anthony Alberneze about that.
(26:44):
We also had Donald Trump suing The New York Times
for allegedly being a democratic mouthpiece for fifteen billion dollars.
Democracy only works when you have freedom of the press,
and three incredibly egregious examples of political pressure being applied
to the media to stop them from doing their job.
(27:07):
He's probably my least favorite story of the week, but
it's the most notable story of the week.
Speaker 3 (27:13):
Dempsky, Okay, didn't King Charles play his role? I thought
it was inspirational, Like just I think the pomp and
ceremony is ridiculous. But talk about playing the person. He
played Trump beautifully and he did his job.
Speaker 2 (27:32):
So long as Trump doesn't in the next couple of
weeks come out and start talking about like render made.
He went and sucked up to Donald Trump and then
Donald Trump just ignored.
Speaker 3 (27:41):
It all and that didn't work.
Speaker 2 (27:43):
No, the King really is putting himself out there doing this.
Speaker 1 (27:46):
Yeah, but but Trump does. He is really susceptible to
the royal stuff like he loves and he loves the
idea of having a king. I would argue he likes
the idea of being of being a king.
Speaker 3 (28:00):
Player of the week, King Charles. But this is really
tough because sewn for all the reasons you mentioned, Jimmy
Kimmel sacked. New York Times sued Australian journalist John Lyons rebuked.
So in both parts of the Northern Hemisphere we had
different stories going on both involving Trump, so I had
to call it a dead heat on this. They were
(28:21):
both brilliant stories, favorite maybe most notable of the week,
but certainly massive stories, so well played both.
Speaker 2 (28:31):
I think Gout Gout has done it. Think we're going
to have to I think we're going to have to
go to the timer, to the tape at the official
timing to make sure because they took the tape. It
was really close. We think Gout Gout has it, but
over to the judges to get in.
Speaker 3 (28:48):
The flow motion replay. Ye, so even on the last story.
So on the story, Karen, it's one and a half,
Sean two and a half. Michael gotgat on ninety one points,
Michael ninety two points by the thinnest of margins battle
(29:11):
point zero one seconds.
Speaker 2 (29:13):
Gout has done it.
Speaker 1 (29:15):
I will take it.
Speaker 3 (29:15):
Come back next week.
Speaker 1 (29:16):
Great judgment. Thank you, Adam, Thank you, Michael, Thank you, Sean,
Thank you very much. Sean.
Speaker 2 (29:21):
Thanks Michael.
Speaker 1 (29:22):
Make sure you're following the podcast and head to Fearangreed
dot com dot are you to sign up for our
free daily newsletter. O'm Michael Thompson. That was Fear and Greed.
Speaker 3 (29:29):
Its a great weekend.
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.