Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio news. This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. Catch us live weekdays at seven am Eastern on Apple car Play or Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business App. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
Lizzie Saunders joins us, patiently awaiting here as we look at this news out of the United Kingdom. Lizzie Saunders, My radars up when someone says buy the dip.
How dip are the software stocks this morning?
Well, as you know, Tom and Paul, I'm not an analyst. I don't cover the software stocks, you know. I think it's a little bit more existential what they're dealing with versus some of the other stocks or groups of stocks that have been hit. As you have this sort of AI related money swirling around, everybody is looking for both the shiny new object the dull new object, who is a beneficiary who is getting disrupted, And I think that type of backdrop will continue. We haven't really seen the
retail trader come back in a significant way. I think they've been supportive of lower less downside in some of these areas, but they're not proving to be the big by the dip crowd life was the case in the past couple of years, Paul.
The pricing years like October of last year. Yeah, I mean, I don't even think it's a correction.
Now, not yet correct me if I'm wrong, zag Liz. We have seen in this marketplace really since kind of late October early November, a rotation maybe out of some of the growth names, some of the tech names, into some of the more value maybe small and mid cap here. Give us your thoughts on that.
So I think the broadening out trade definitely has legs. The initial juice provided to the small cap space was in advance of what ended up being a short lived easingcam pain on the part of the FED. But then I think more of the fundamental side kicked in. It wasn't just about rate cuts, because the trajectory for earnings broadly in the Russell two thousand looks quite a bit
sharper than it does for the SMP five hundred. That said, what's been interesting is last year in the small cap rally, it was heavily driven down the quality spectrum, non profitable stocks within the Russell two thousand having twice the performance profitable stocks for full year calendar twenty twenty five. That's been turned on its head and now it's the profitable components within the Russell two thousand that are handily outperforming
the nonprofitable. And that was something we were saying, you want to fade the unprofitable and lean into the profitable, and that certainly kicked into gear this year.
Luzanne, we're probably I don't know about eighty percent away through earnings for the SMPE five hundred. What have you seen, what have you heard about guidance that gives you your as to where this market could go this year?
Yeah, So in the aggregate, the earnings growth rate is quite a bit higher than what was expected at the start of the year. We're up at around thirteen percent and change, and that's the blended growth rate, which includes everybody that has reported and the few companies that have yet to report, and that was mid single digits at
the start of earning season. I guess the difference, though, relative to the past four quarters or so, is that the beat rate both on top line and bottom line has been weaker relative to the four quarter average relative to the longer term Since mid nineteen nineties, average so that's what's been distinct about this backdrop is overall higher earnings growth, but a lower beat rate and a bit more subdued forward looking forecasts.
So, Lizianne, we're thinking about this market here, valuation it seems to have faded a little bit in terms of concerns for market participants. I'm not sure I'm hearing as much concerned about valuation for this market these days. How do you think about that?
Well, maybe that's because in the aftermath of the so called Liberation Day tariff announcements and then obviously the subsequent ninety day delay, obviously that move on April ninth began what was an unbelievable surge. But what was interesting is you then stopped the valuation expansion in around August of last year, and valuations have been relatively flat, yet at the same time you've had that rising earnings growth trajectory.
So it was almost like the market pause and said, Okay, we need earnings now to start to do more of the heavy lifting. We're sort of past that automatic valuation expansion, and earnings indeed have begun to do more of the heavy lifting. So you've eased some of that valuation concern by virtue of the shoppiness we've seen in the equity market. Yet at the same time, earnings can a power hire Lizzie.
I've done normal, Rubini, I think as long as I've known you. And he dropped a bombshell yesterday. Doctor Rubini made clear he looks at the productivity and technology of America and models a closer to four percent economy than a two percent economy. Could we miss here an exceptional moment for American growth is that modeled in?
Not only do I think that it's not modeled in, but I think it's really a key ingredient in light of the very weak labor force growth that we're seeing courtesy of the crackdown on immigration. You know, we know the formula that goes into what GDP. When GDP is released, it's everything from government and private sector and consumption and the relationship between imports and exports, and business investment residential investment. But at its base level, the calculation for economic growth
is productivity times labor force growth. We don't have the labor force growth piece, but we certainly have had the productivity piece, and that has been a beneficial offset and environment where we have very constrained labor force growth. It also tells you that if that productivity miracle, if we want to call it, that, fades it all absent any pickup in labor force growth, then we probably have a bigger problem from a GDP perspective. But that's certainly not been the case.
Lizzene signers with a far too short interview. Thank you so much for the conversation this morning. Lazanne wrapped around the moment that we're having in London. Lizen Saunders always in Forever with Charles Schwab.
Stay with us.
More from Bloomberg Surveillance coming up after this.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Surveillance podcast. Catch us Live in an American Revolution on YouTube.
At Brown University and just definitive on our American history. Here Wendy a remarkable set of sentences with Helene Cooper in The New York Times this morning. It really struck me for a president ran for office promising to keep the United States out of wars. Comma, mister Trump is now considering what would be at least the seventh American military attack in another country in the past year. In his second on Iran, et cetera, et cetera, Professor Schiller, how did we get here?
Well, I mean, I think Iran in the United States has been a complicated problem, as you know, for what fifty years now, just about fifty years a little under. And I think it's impossible to be the world's superpower and stay out of international conflict. It's just impossible. You inherit this edifice if you are President Trumpy at it in his first term as well well, and Biden and Obama and George W. Bush, and you know, it's very hard to unpack that or dismantle that edifice. And that
edifice is frankly the beacon of freedom. It can challenge that if they want, but you know, we are a country that, since World War Two, enforces the international order, and even though Trump is pulling out of international organizations, we are.
Still that country.
And it's just simply impossible to avoid because the United States is so embedded in the global order that if Iran poses any kind of threat to our allies or to us, then we have to act, and that is that's the job. So I think the promises he made were I'm not going to do this, willy nilly, I'm not going to go in search of monsters to destroy as John Quincy Adams as you know, you know I've talked about that has said one hundred and fifty years ago,
but more than one hundred five years ago. But he has an edifice that is still the world's supreme power and defender, and it's just impossible to walk away from that if you're the president of the United States.
Given President Trump's you know, he's focusing on international affairs, and I guess that's typical of a second term president here. How concerned is the administration? Is the Republican Party with his low approval ratings here, well, you know that's sort.
Of the big criticism that people like Marjorie Taylor Green, former representative in the House who just left, made about MAGA and about what Trump created. And so I was going to you know, I was going to go into office with I'm Donald Trump. I'm going to get rid of the rhinos. I'm going to get rid of this sort of Republican impetus to go to war, even though Democrats start as many wars as Republicans in the last
one hundred years. But nonetheless, you know, I'm going to get rid of all that, I'm going to focus on the United States, and she what she's saying is that he's betrayed that promise and that he's deflecting.
But I don't think.
I think that's just more complicated than that. Because of our global interest, because we are globalized, because our economy rests on the stability of the rest of the world, we can't just sit things out. And I think that's the thing that possibly the base that voted for Donald Trump, you know, didn't want to hear or doesn't want to accept. But certainly as president, that's what he has to do, because he makes an argument that it's in his interest.
Is this deflection, it'd be a very expensive, risky deflection from the economy, from affordability, from ice tactics. You know, you can do other things if you're Donald Trump, to deflect. You don't have to start a war with the wrong president.
Trump has done I think a pretty good job of kind of framing the allied relationships that the United States has enjoyed or fosters into World War two. Is that going to come back and bite him here to the extent he does take some drastic moves here in our end, does he have the support of allies.
Well, you know, Paul and Tom, this is a really important question. We saw the first golf for war, and we saw the second go for war, and we realized that United States went in a international community the first time, but really with Britain, i mean, on its own the second time, and it left us a twenty year commitment to war. So it becomes more expensive and more risky to do it by yourself. But you know, Trump had
legitimate points about NATO. We can all agree they weren't paying their fair share of NATO and the United States was carrying the burden and that was true. And I think you have to get the president credit for saying, look, you have to stand up for yourself. We're not going to be able always able to shoulder the burdens as.
We speak, Paul, should we talk economics? We can just do that.
Let's digress from geopolitics for a moment. We do it with Wendy Schiller and greet all of you across the nation. Wendy, I'm reading the Morgan.
One volume on William McKinley.
I'm ignorant on the period of the Gilded Age, and I'm getting out I'm trying to get forward to Grover Cleveland, Alexander and Professor Schiller. What I see with McKinley is he walked back his massive protectionist tendencies. Are we seeing that with this president that he's doing a so called buffalo pivot in his own Trumpian way?
Well, here's where I think this is a great example. This is where elections matter, and that the Founders put midterm elections in And you know that was supposedly a check on the House, really mostly because everybody in the House is up for reelectionary two years, but it's really a check also on partisanship and on the part of the share party between the President and Congress. This is a check on the president. He realizes that the last two years of his presidency will be quite unpleasant if
the Democrats take both the House and the Senate. And what he's hearing from his party is the Senate's in play, and that's because of his economic policies and to some extent, tariffs, and he hasn't brought manufacturing back and these are overwhelming everything else he's doing. So I think that's where the urgency is coming in terms of tariffs, and of course Grover Cleveland and Donald Trump share a very important commonality. Right,
they won, they lost, and they won again. McKinley. The McKinley Bill, you know of eighteen eighty nine, as you well know, was the largest ARFF protection is built ProTouch in our history. And of course by the time becomes president certainly realizes that's not the way to run the rodeo. So I think this is what's happening. At the same time, you know, things aren't kicking up the economy, and he's hearing that he could lose the Senate, which will make life very difficult for Donald Trump.
Quickly or it's off your remit, but I know you're sneaking to the class with the late great William Poole or other great economists at Brown University. Kevin Hasset with an uproar yesterday folks criticizing sharply the New York Fed academics over who pays the bill? Professor Schiller enlightened us. Do we pay the tariff bill or does some company over in Vietnam pay it?
Well, I mean, this is the thing about diffuse costs versus concentrated costs.
This is the whole crux.
Of the interception between the economy and US politics. When the calls are diffuse, it is harder to sort of get voters to pay attention when they're concentrated. I need a particular part to make another thing in the United States, and that part now costs twenty five percent more. That hurts concentrated industries. And we are economy that is so broad and diverse and service oriented now that voters and most people don't feel it as acutely as concentrated industries.
But the problem for the Republicans is that some of those concentrated industries are in states that have key elections this year, so that's where this intersection happens. But it's always the battle between diffuse costs and concentrated costs, particularly when it comes to trade politics.
So how aggressive can the Democrats be here in his midterm elections?
Well, Paul, the Democrats can find a way to lose an election they're supposed to win. We've seen that before in the past. You know, they have to get their act together and agree on their messaging.
And now they've.
Got a couple of things. One is overreach, but they have to move away from you know, democracies failing democracy is failing. They're winning special elections all over the place, so in some ways democracy is not failing them. Right now, they have to go zero in on core issues healthcare, affordability, and individual security from the intrusion of the federal government,
three issues. Bill Clinton always said you need three, so George Bush had three George w So they have to get their act together and decide this can't be a diverse, dispersed campaign for the Democrats. They have to zero in on a couple of issues.
Professor Schuler, thank you so much for the brief this morning, much needed on our geopolitics. The economist Wendy Schuller of Brown At University.
Stay with us.
More from Bloomberg Surveillance coming up after this.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Surveillance podcast. Catch us live weekday afternoons from seven to ten am Eastern Listen on Apple Karplay and Android Otto with the Bloomberg Business app, or watch us live on YouTube.
This is a joy with substantial physics out of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology part of it, and then he got into the totally cool and still cool physics program at Boston University. A really unknown magisterial program. Then he wandered out to JPL to put men on Mars or whatever. We could do the whole thing on space here, George, but with PGUM. Let's do it with George Patterson here on where we are right now. The leverage of nineteen
ninety eight, some people knew it was there. I've had the honor of talking to Myron shuls two three times. Do we have visible leverage now within the system or do we have a discrete hidden leverage within the system that we don't understand.
We spent a lot of time, First of all, thank you for being here, a great opportunity.
We spent a lot of time.
Worrying where like the hidden risks are.
In the economy.
There's really there's really no obvious excesses, right, There's no obvious areas where you know, we worry that capital is misallocated, particularly relative to like the people that can afford to take the risks, so we don't see those types of hidden leverage scenarios.
You guys are Belton suspenders.
I'm gonna I'm I'm front Paul sween here, this is his question, but I'm stealing.
It private credit. You gotta be kidding me. They want to put it my ira.
Listen, listen there. Private credit, like all private assets, has a place in portfolios. It's what's important for everyone really is to design a portfolio that meets your needs. There are substantial return opportunities, but you need to understand what you're getting involved. You need to understand the limitations, the upside and also the downside.
Did that sound like the general counsel of people they memorize it? That was brilliant, exactly, George.
You think about twenty twenty five performance, US equities did really well, but rest of the world did a lot better. How do you think about US versus rest of the world?
Here?
Exactly, in all honesty, like, many of the best opportunities I would say are probably outside the US. The US has again strong performance, but when you look at both emerging marks and even just European equities, Japanese equities, twenty five was a great year to be outside. And one of the great things about diversification is that it's one of the few free lunches that you can really have
in the world of investments. You can diverse by your portfolio, you can take lower risk, and it really doesn't cost you anything to do that.
So, I mean a lot of the performance in twenty twenty five outside of the US was the weakening US dollar. I'm not sure we can count on that again. So to the extent that you're I don't know, overweight rest of world or non US, what do you have to believe there?
Well, part of it's just where do you think that where do you think the growth is going to be like for an emerging With regard to emerging markets, you know, I think terriffs have largely come in a little bit lighter than expected. You know, if you look at manufacturing in the US, it's not coming back. I'm not quite sure there's really an appetite for manufacturing jobs. So a lot of that is still going to happen in emerging markets. A lot of a lot of wealth created is still
going to happen there. I think the fact that there are less headwinds with regards to you know, tariffs and different policies really just sets it up. I mean, we've had great performance in emerging market I think we could be at the beginning of a cycle where we see continued performance there.
George Patterson with US, we're going to get to the claims report here in a moment, let me squeeze one more, and I want to come back and talk about some physics envy as we can. You're definitive on this. Are the classic curves, the Gaussian curve, the log normal curve, talleebs plus on distribution.
Are they acting normal? Now? Well, the dynamics.
Listen, you know those are nice analytical forms that you learn in school, but the real world is not like that.
How distant is our real.
World from those analytical forms.
Listen, things tend to be quiet for a while and then you get much larger tails. So I think, literally, whenever we fit distributions, whenever I give internal seminars, I'm always telling my telling the young researchers. Don't assume normality, you know, you estimate something that has wider tails.
So when you bring your Hinckley picnic boat down the Hudson to Pigium is an amy your boat suddenly.
Not quite I'm not quite. I'm not quite at the Hinckley level.
Yeah, well we'll see.
Well you're all use Percelli's I mean, he's got it as well.
We've got a ton. It's a Seattle slew of data pulse, sweeting.
Yeah, we've got the initial job, exclaims Tom.
Look at that. It's a latch monatathon number.
It is.
It's a two hundred and six thousand. The consensus was two hundred and twenty five thousand, Tom, And last period was revised a little bit higher to two twenty nine thousand higher, so much less much lower rate here this period.
Here interesting to see here on the tenure yield, get a higher yield. I guess they're looking in that as a more buoyant economy. Four point one zero percent future is a negative twenty six right now, and the Vicks extends out from a twenty level out to twenty one point five zero. Okay, I want to talk a bit quiet here. We're gonna go looktle bit physics, folks. There are things called cross moments, which are a four box
description of the dynamics of the market. Fancy people like you, George Patterson, talk about the slew rates, the rate you know, on a Newtonian basis, the rates of change. Are you worried about suddenly second derivative, suddenly first derivative, Suddenly slew rates we can't handle.
Listen, we do worry when we do portfolio construction, we go way beyond mean variants, right, we look at higher moments. A lot of times it's more cokurtosis and co skewness. Oh boy, I know it's probably a little bit early in the morning for some of those.
Well they cured mine at New York Pressbyterian continue.
But you do. Like the challenge is is that markets are oftentimes, you know, very quiet, and then you get these large moves, and in order to get to think about how to positions for some of these large moves, you need to be able to deal with how things work in extremes. And that's that's really some of the approaches that we use is looking at things beyond just you know, kind of textbook portfolio construction that you might learn in an MBA program. It's really how do you
think about robust portfolio design? How do you think about downside protection because a lot of times you might not want to own some assets that really give you the type of tail protection that you're going to get.
So put all that together, sitting here early in twenty twenty six, what's my allocation here? Stocks, bonds, US, non us, what is and has it changed for you guys.
So it has changed, and part of it is really the long term outlook. So you know, one of the great things about bonds now with yields where they are is you're getting paid. So you know, if you look at equities, US equities are slightly expensive. US has been a phenomenal growth market, but if you look out in like five to ten years, US equities are relatively expensive,
so you get paid. You can get a lot of diversification by having some bond return, particularly when you're looking at you know, a an kind of institutional credit bond portfolio in the five percent. Also looking outside the US, that's where we see opportunities. All of our macro indicators indicate smooth sailing ahead.
Well, I like to you, he's kneeled right into where I was going. Smooth sailing.
The wonderful kent Osben had a book years ago, Iceberg Risk. He's done all sorts of work, folks, credit sweets and Goldman sex.
I m F. He's like a horse in the quant area. It's Jack and he's out in the bow.
Of the Titanic, and they're two statisticians and they just they just got it all figured out.
The ability to get.
Hit by an iceberg and the Titanic isn't there, And Kent Osman says, that's iceberg risk.
How are those icebergs looking right now?
Hey, George Fatters, Listen, you always have to be pay attention and be nimble because you never know when something can emerge. Again, We've had a lot of economic data. Some of it's a little weaker, some of it's a little stronger, but it's it's been surprisingly boring in all honesty. In terms of inflation seems to be relatively and contained. I know we've had some conversations yesterday day about FED speakers that are concerned about it. But again, the market
seems to be fine with it. Unemployment seems to be good, growth seems.
To be good.
So there's nothing that's really breaking out to the upside or the downside.
Are you? Are you in speaking terms with Greg Peters? Yes, of course. Always How do you help Greg Peters? I mean, you know he's he's got some heavy lifting to do.
Listen. Bond bond investors are by their nature have a different personality, right because with bond investors you're always you're always worried about the downside. Right, I spend a lot of time focusing on equities, which is all about hopes and dreams.
That nails the market right there. You should think, you know, I like that. Bloomberg Surveillance hopes and dreams.
George Patterson brilliants, just serious quand jobs, CIO connotative solutions that p Jim can't say enough.
About the rigor of the PGM shot. Stay with us.
More from Bloomberg Surveillance coming up after this.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Surveillance podcast. Catch us Live weekday afternoons from seven to ten am Eastern Listen on Apple, Karplay and Android Otto with the Bloomberg Business app, or watch us live on YouTube.
Lucy White and Ellen Milligan off the desk at Queen Victoria Street this morning. The headline is sobering to anybody of the history of the United Kingdom and the fabric of the people. Former Prince Andrew arrested on suspicion of misconduct. We are advantaged to have Michelle Hussain with Bloomberg.
She was with US ages ago.
She was I think twelve years old when she's dark and at the door, and then a sterling career at the BBC and wonderful acclaim on understanding this Disunited Kingdom. Maybe like no one else, it helps with a affiliation with Pakistan, to be an outsiders, a family. She has a resonance with the people of Britain like no one. I just the shock of it all and whyn't you to speak to an American audience? How do the people of the United Kingdom react to this arrest this morning?
That takes us back to the arrest of Charles the First in the seventeenth century.
You know your history and Tom morning, Tom morning, Paul. You know I can tell you first of all the reaction in this newsroom. Then this is the kind of moment where you don't just do a sharp intake of breath with as you see the news come through, Like you know, people are standing up at their desk just wanting to make eye contact and talk about the enormity
of what's happened. So it was in the morning, our time that the news first came that one of the police forces in the UK, the one that works in around the London area, in the words of their statement, had arrested a man in his sixties on suspicion of misconduct in public office. It was soon apparent that this
man was the former Prince Andrew. But the key point being the idea that a member of the royal family has been arrested is in police custody, is answering questions, and that police searches of two properties the police statement told us were underway Norfolk and Berkshire. Now that means royal residences estates around Windsor and Sandringham at Norfolk, which is where Prince Andrew. Former Prince Andrew's effectively in an
internal exile. So there's the enormity of that. And then it's clear from the police statement that what they're actually investigating is the period when Andrew was a UK trade envoy and what the Epstein files now appear to show about the passing of information to Jeffrey and.
I know the Telegraph has an extended discussion about Icelandic material stuff off our radar in America, Michelle. The reality for alexis christaf for is Paul Sweeney and Tom Key is our knowledge is Colin Firth and Helena Bonham Carter in the King's Speech a few years ago discuss the resonance of this with the next royal family, with the Prince of Princess of Wales, the King ill with cancer
doing better. In all that explain the generational dynamics here of the royal family with this shocking arrest.
This is not only uncharted territory for the royal family, but it is such an immense moment because even though back in November the King acted very significantly in the wake of the publication of Virginia Guphrase posthumous memoir, even though we acted at that point to remove his Royal Highness title from Andrew, to remove prince which is his birthright as the son of the late monarch, and also to remove him from where he was living on the royal estate in Windsor, and to send him to a
much more private place where he would essentially be out of the public gaze entirely in Norfolk. Even though they have done all of that, the real danger and risk, and what they'll all be contemplating and digesting today is the fact that in public, as has already happened a couple of times to the King, people may be peckling them, calling out. Certainly, it's hard to imagine a future interview in which this doesn't come up. Prince Andrew actually is
just done at BBC. Prince William has just done a BBC interview in which nothing of the sort was discussed. But even though they've taken steps to distance themselves from Andrew Mountbatten Windsor, this will no doubt be a really
difficult moment. You know, public support for the monarchy is widespread in this country, but it does rather depend on an unspoken assumption that everyone is going to behave really well, and when you're in this kind of territory, it obviously has implications for the institution more widely than one individual.
Michelle. King Charles has issued a statement here this morning. King Charles has said that quote law must take its course in King Charles is saying that he will not comment further on this matter. What are next steps here? Not that we have any guidebook here, but what do you think are next steps from the authorities?
Well and interesting, the King had already indicated that if this did become a police matter, that he would do nothing to stand in the way of an indication. So the statement follows on from that tone that was set earlier.
I think it's worth reminding ourselves what this investigation is about the kind of rule that the former Prince Andrew had as a UK trade envoy, the idea that as you try and flag the fly the flag for British business around the world, that you have a Prince as he was then as a calling card with pulling power to get foreign businessman into the room when he went on a foreign trip. That was essentially the job he did, and it was that there were questions in the media.
He got the nickname at that time Air Miles Andy because people weren't sure quite the value to the taxpayer that was being delivered by him flying around the world in that way. But it's that aspect of his previous role in the public eye that is at the heart of this particular investigation because there are emails in the Epstein files which appeared to show that he received, for example, an official report on a visit overseas and he forwarded
it to Jeffrey Epstein within minutes. So trade envoys are supposed to be under a duty of confidentiality. So that is the specifics of what the police are looking into. But of course we don't know where this investigation goes, and it is a pr nightmare. It is reputationally personally on every level. You can see the implication for the royal family. So it's not just a development, it's a real moment in the UK.
It is Michelle, do we know what rights former Prince Andrew has is simply the rights of the average or common English citizen. Is there anything different here in terms of the type of treatment he'll receive? Do we know anything?
I think it's pretty clear from this development and from the police statement is no different to the way that that any other investigation would be portrayed, although they do say we recognize the significant public interest in this case and we will be issuing updates when appropriate. Now, one aspect of this for the police is that in his time as a member of the royal family and I would think even now, Andrew would always have had personal
protection officers serving police officers with him. So the police are also fielding those accusations of you know what, what did those officers see or not see, or what should they have seen or what should they have said? Given the allegations that have surrounded him for some years now, He's always denied any wrongdoing in relation to his association with financier and convicted p Dephiro Jeffrey Epstein, but next steps will be what we learned from this police investigation
in due course. And I should also say that he is entitled to a fair trial if that is what it comes to. I'm going to stress there are no charges at this point. This is a police investigation, but everyone will also be conscious those rights.
Michelle.
One final question to get on to your busy day across America. This morning in our London officers, Michelle Husain joins us here and the arrest of the former Prince Andrew. I went to and Michelle, you know this encyclopedic I have to use artificial intelligence and I typed in what does Prince Williams twenty twenty six look like? And it goes through the awards in Mumbai coming up later this year, the royal warrants in the spring of this year. Things
I don't understand. And down at the bottom very quietly is I think what Americans understand. Prince George will be twelve in twenty twenty six. Michelle is saying the continuity of the Royal family is they move forward with all of this scandal out there.
You know one thing that they will be thinking that was the right thing to do before this moment, and I guess in the context they will be proud of at this moment is the fact that his titles, his position as the Duke of York, all of that was removed back in November. So I think they will be probably taking some heart from the fact that as an institution, as the monarchy, as the royal family, as the soul which King Charles is, that that action was taken a
couple of months ago now. But yes, you know, out and about in the public eye in the ukl squere they will have to be prepared for this coming up in ways that they would not want. The royal schedules, the protocol, the interactions that exist with the press where they exist. They'd like these to be as carefully controlled and on message as they could possibly be. And this kind of situation adds a degree of unpredictability.
And Jeffardy, Michelle, thank you so much. It is the Michelle Hussein Show. Look for that.
This is the Bloomberg Surveillance podcast, available on Apple, Spotify and anywhere else you get your podcasts. Listen live each weekday seven to ten am Easter and on Bloomberg dot Com, the iHeartRadio app. Tune in and the Bloomberg Business App. You can also watch us live every weekday on YouTube and always on the Bloomberg terminal