Warner Bros. Rejects Paramount’s Hostile Bid

Ed Elson unpacks the news that Warner Bros. Discovery’s board is encouraging shareholders to reject the Paramount bid with Rohan Goswami, Business Reporter at Semafor. Then Alice Han, Host of the China Decode Podcast and China economist at Greenmantle, joins to discuss the top issues for China in 2025 and the year ahead. Finally, Ed shares his reflections on the year and what he’s focused on for 2026. Check out our latest Prof G Markets newsletter Follow Prof G Markets on Instagram Follow Ed on Instagram and X Follow Scott on Instagram Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Speaker names marked ? are inferred from speaking time and the show’s known hosts — they are not voice-verified.

• 0:00Speaker 00

  The new LinkedIn Hiring Pro can't undo your last hire. The human postponer. They were the master of one phrase. I'll circle back on that. But three months later, you are the one doing all their work and wondering how big that circle is. But LinkedIn Hiring Pro can take the hiring load off your plate. By automating the hiring busywork from the initial job post to scheduling interviews. Hire right the first time with LinkedIn Hiring Pro. Post a free job today at LinkedIn.com/quality.

• 0:31Speaker 01

  This episode is brought to you by Welch's Fruit Snacks. Back to school season can be tough on parents. But choosing a snack you and your kids can both get behind doesn't have to be. Stock up on Welch's Fruit Snacks. Made with whole fruit and now made with no artificial dyes. It's a snack kids already love and one you can feel good about giving them. Go back to school with Welch's Fruit Snacks. Now made with no artificial dyes.

• 0:59Speaker 02

  This episode is brought to you by Subaru. You know that place your mind always wanders to? The lake, the mountains, the homes of the people you love most? The completely redesigned 2026 Subaru Outback is built to help you get there. With legendary capabilities, standard symmetrical all wheel drive and the confidence to go further. The 2026 Subaru Outback. Love never looked so good. Visit Subaru.com/Outback to learn more.

• 1:24Ed Elson?

  Today's number, 42. That's how many gallons of soda the average American drinks every year. That is nearly nine cans every week. It is the highest in the world. However, the White House has warned not to let that distract you from the real reason Americans are fat. Seed oils.

• 1:46Speaker 04

  Money markets mad. If money is evil, then that building is hell.

• 1:56Ed Elson?

  Welcome to Profty Markets. I'm Ed Elson. It is December 18th. Let's check in on yesterday's market vitals.

• 2:04Ed Elson?

  The major indices declined as tech weighed down the market. Oracle shares dropped more than 5% after private credit firm Blue Owl backed out of funding a major data center. That news took down all the other AI stocks too, with Nvidia falling nearly 4%. Meanwhile, Bitcoin took a tumble and finally silver hit a record high, passing $66 for the first time.

• 2:30Ed Elson?

  Okay, what else is happening? Warner Brothers Discovery has urged shareholders to reject Paramount's $108 billion hostile bid. The board emphasized that the $83 billion Netflix deal offers more certainty and also a cleaner path to closing for shareholders. They also pointed to significant financing, regulatory and execution risks with Paramount, and they formally laid out their reasoning in a detailed filing to shareholders on Wednesday morning. Okay, here to break down this bid and why they said no to Paramount, we are speaking with Rohan Goswami, business reporter at Semaphore. Rohan, thank you for joining us on Profy Markets.

• 3:12Rohan Goswami?

  Ed, my pleasure. It's been a crazy two weeks.

• 3:15Ed Elson?

  Crazy two weeks. Yeah, we want to, we want to get your thoughts on it. I mean, we, we have this rejection or Warner Brothers is urging shareholders to reject Paramount's bid of $108 billion. They say go with the Netflix deal, which is actually less money, $83 billion. I guess the big question to start off is why?

• 3:37Rohan Goswami?

  Well, it depends on how you slice it, right? So yeah, Netflix's total number, $83 billion, it's, it's lower, but that's because they're only interested in part of the company, the, the best part of the company, most would say, uh, which is the streaming and studios business. That's HBO Max, that's the movie studios. They don't want the linear TV networks, that's CNN and really a grab bag of pretty terrible cable channels. Uh, but Paramount does, and that's why Paramount's been able to claim that they have the higher bid. Where things get a little fuzzy, and this is what, as we've reported, as others have reported, has worried Warner Brothers the entire time, is how they're valuing that business and how they're paying for that business, uh, which is unusual, right? We think of, of Oracle, we think, well, maybe not lately, but we generally think pretty high-flying stock, certainly an incredibly wealthy family, and yet, as the American public

• 4:21Rohan Goswami?

  knows, uh, they're tapping a lot of unusual sources of financing here, right? We're talking about sovereign wealth funds, Apollo's in the mix on the debt, Bank of America, Citi, you know, a big consortium of lenders and sponsors, uh, which kind of raises the question, how stable is their financing? And as it turns out, yesterday's news, Jared Kushner's affinity pulling out, the answer may be not very.

• 4:44Ed Elson?

  Yeah. Why is Jared Kushner pulling out? That seemed to be an important element that a lot of people were interested in, especially because of his. Relationship with the president, who is his father-in-law. Do we know why he pulled out?

• 4:59Rohan Goswami?

  So they've publicly said, right, this is from a spokesperson for affinity, that they believe in the bid, they think Paramount can can take this all the way. But they've also said, right, quote, "The dynamics of this investment have changed since October, which is when this bidding war sort of kicked off." But what's funny is if you take a close look at the actual situation, nothing has changed at all, right? This offer that Paramount made is the exact same offer. That's to say, this offer that Paramount made publicly is the same offer it made privately to Warner directly before they sort of tried to go hostile. So nothing has changed, except for one or two pretty crucial things. One, Kushner's fund is already facing some scrutiny in Serbia over, you know, a local project there, allegations of corruption.

• 5:41Rohan Goswami?

  But two, the president has made it pretty clear that the Ellison's are not exactly flavor of the month for him. He's taken aim at CBS, at 60 Minutes, and yesterday, just two hours before Kushner pulled out, he publicly said, you know, "If this is how my friends treat me," referring to the Ellison's, the owners of CBS, "then these guys aren't really my friends." And that was a big blow, and certainly in how investors think of this bid, some investors I've spoken to, I should say, because the Ellison's have privately, to investors, publicly, you know, in making their case to market, tried to imply that they're, you know, they enjoy preferred access to this administration, that they are this administration's preferred bidder, which of course, as we know, really matters in M and A today.

• 6:24Rohan Goswami?

  And, and, you know, Trump's backtrack, certainly Trump's criticism, Kushner's backing out, both those two things happening so quickly, you know, with these guys, nothing is coincidental, right? Everything, everything is designed to send a message here.

• 6:36Ed Elson?

  So if I were to get this right, Trump doesn't like the way CBS is talking about him. CBS, which is now owned by David Ellison, who is the son of Larry Ellison. He complains about that, which presumably leads to Jared Kushner deciding that he needs to be in Donald Trump's good graces, which leads to him backing out of the deal, which leads to Warner Brothers looking at the financing picture of the bid that came from David Ellison, saying, "You don't have the money, you don't have the financing together." It all does seem kind of downstream of the president. If we, if we are to make all of those connections, and if they are indeed true, would you say

• 7:21Ed Elson?

  that? Trump is kind of pushing how this went?

• 7:25Rohan Goswami?

  Kind of. I would say that it's it's hard to draw a straight line between Kushner's backing out and because Trump made that post.

• 7:33Ed Elson?

  Fair enough.

• 7:33Rohan Goswami?

  But I think certainly the timing of those two things happening so quickly is not coincidental, right? Kushner could have chose to not publicize this or to wait a day, a week, more than that, to very clearly send the message these two things aren't connected. What is clear, what is very clear, is that Warner's board was worried about how stable this Ellison coalition was from the jump, right? They looked at Netflix, which is a blue-chip stock. It's got a, you know, the stock has obviously done fantastically since it went public. And they looked at this bid, which is, yeah, a mix of cash and stock, biased towards cash, but with a really healthy, growthy stock, like Netflix, there isn't that much risk, versus three sovereign wealth

• 8:14Rohan Goswami?

  funds at the time, Jared Kushner, two banks, and Apollo, plus them, so it's nine partners, excuse me, eight partners in total. And they said, well, okay, this is like a pretty unsteady group of guys. They don't historically all get along. Do we want to deal with eight counterparties? Or do we want to deal with one? So I think Warner's board was already worried about this before the Trump of it all, before Kushner pulled out. Now, certainly, I do think that their thinking has been affirmed and validated by Kushner pulling out. This announcement, you know, investors and all of us who have been covering this, expected this announcement to come this week or at the latest, next Monday. That's the statutory limit. They have 10 days to respond, so that deadline was going to be next Monday. Now, they came out a little early, but they've also been thinking about this basically nonstop since last Monday,

• 8:59Rohan Goswami?

  right? When Ellison went public. They've had plenty of time to meet, to discuss, to confer. My understanding is that they were always leaning towards rejection because this bid, again, is the same bid that they reviewed a month ago and rejected, or three weeks ago, and rejected. So they already knew what was up here. They already had the same problems. The problems didn't go away. If anything, they got worse.

• 9:17Ed Elson?

  Just thinking about looking towards what may happen in the future. Is it possible that Paramount just comes back with a bigger pile of cash? And would that fix the problems if they just said, look, we understand you don't necessarily believe that we have our shit together, to put it lightly, but here's more money?

• 9:39Rohan Goswami?

  Yeah, that would certainly go a long way to solving the question, right? I mean, with any asset, it's how much a buyer is willing to pay. But they're also going to have to do something to show the money is more stable. And what I mean by that is a general expectation that the Ellison family would have to step up more. Now, they're only contributing right now around 12 billion of that 108 billion check. Right? So that's barely 10%, right? It's not like they're really doing this with their chest here. So there is a sense, you know, when I talk to people close to Warner and certainly media executives, they want to see more from the Ellison's, they want more investment, they want less foreign money. Those foreign funds are putting in $24 billion. Right? So they're accounting for a full, nearly a quarter of this check.

• 10:21Rohan Goswami?

  And putting aside sort of the CFIUS issues or the national security issues, that's a lot of money in this deal.

• 10:26Ed Elson?

  Yeah.

• 10:27Rohan Goswami?

  Now, certainly, the Ellison's are less rich than they were a week ago or a month ago, but they're still the second wealthiest family in the US after the Waltons. There's no question if they want to go and step up a little bit, and there's an expectation from Warner, I think that they should, that they can. So more money and better money is the answer if Paramount wants a chance at winning this out.

• 10:45Ed Elson?

  Yeah, Larry's money. That's how you win.

• 10:49Rohan Goswami?

  You know, my dad loves me, but not as much as Larry loves David.

• 10:55Ed Elson?

  Yes. Just before you go, how do you think this all shakes out? If you had to make predictions, what do you think we're looking at, let's say, six months from now?

• 11:06Rohan Goswami?

  I mean, if I'm a betting man, honestly, I put my money on Netflix. They've done a great job in DC, right? You saw Trump make very moderated comments, again, for this president, about the antitrust issues, saying he was going to have to look at the case and actually look at the facts. So Ted Sarandos, who's the co-CEO of Netflix, has done a fantastic job messaging this. My understanding is, at least from the investors I speak to, that Netflix is going to be making its case to those investors. In the coming days, weeks, months, right? As it tries to close this deal. There's an issue in Europe, right? Of course, there's always an issue in Europe. Europe's not exactly friendly to big tech these days. But there's also a sense from some antitrust experts that I speak to that they're not willing to risk angering the president

• 11:47Rohan Goswami?

  or this administration by ruling against a merger that the US blesses. So really, if Netflix can convince the DOJ to bless this deal, can convince the president to get behind this deal, then they've got it. And that's really frustrating for actors and directors and producers. But the money talks and they've done a great job in DC winning people over already.

• 12:08Ed Elson?

  All right. Rohan Gasswamy, business reporter at Semaphore. Rohan, thank you. She's very informative. Appreciate your time.

• 12:15Rohan Goswami?

  Ed, a pleasure. Thank you.

• 12:19Ed Elson?

  After the break, an update on China. If you're enjoying the show, give Prof G Markets a follow.

• 12:30Speaker 06

  Flowing ad budget on metrics that look great till the CFO sees them. That's bull spend and marketers are calling it out in Dashboard Confessions.

• 12:40Speaker 07

  I remember telling my boss, "It'll be good for the brand," when leads were slow. Yeah, it wasn't.

• 12:47Speaker 06

  Cut the bull spend. LinkedIn lets you target by company, job title, and more. Advertise on LinkedIn. Spend $250 on your first campaign and get a $250 credit. Go to LinkedIn.com/campaign. Terms and conditions apply.

• 13:01Speaker 01

  This episode is brought to you by Welch's Fruit Snacks. Back to school season can be tough on parents. But choosing a snack you and your kids can both get behind doesn't have to be. Stock up on Welch's Fruit Snacks. Made with whole fruit and now made with no artificial dyes. It's a snack kids already love and one you can feel good about giving them. Go back to school with Welch's Fruit Snacks. Now made with no artificial dyes.

• 13:30Speaker 02

  This episode is brought to you by Subaru. You know that place your mind always wanders to? The lake, the mountains, the homes of the people you love most? The completely redesigned 2026 Subaru Outback is built to help you get there with legendary capabilities, standard symmetrical all wheel drive and the confidence to go further. The 2026 Subaru Outback. Love never looked so good. Visit Subaru.com/Outback to learn more.

• 13:59Ed Elson?

  We're back with Prof G Markets. 2025 was a turbulent year for China. The world's second largest economy showed signs of a slowdown with softer retail sales, weaker industrial output, also rising unemployment. At the same time, fixed asset investment has cratered in one of the steepest drops in the country's history, and yet Chinese exports are surging as the country becomes the dominant trading partner for much of the global south. Meanwhile, as the trade war between the US and China begins to thaw, the AI wars are just getting started. Chinese AI companies are churning out cheap, efficient, open weight models that are beating American LLMs on many metrics. And also their humanoid robots aren't just conceptual, their robots are actually running

• 14:44Ed Elson?

  half marathons. All told, 2025 was such a dynamic year for China that Prof G Media decided to create an entirely new show just to cover the country. So as we wrap up the year, we thought it was a good time to hear from one of our favorite guests, the host of the China Decode podcast, Alice Hahn. Alice is also China economist at Greenmantle. Alice, thank you for joining us. Good to see you.

• 15:09Alice Han?

  Thanks so much, Ed. Great to be here.

• 15:11Ed Elson?

  So we wanted to bring you on just to get a summary of what's going on in China. I guess let's just start with 2025. What were the big themes in 2025? And how would you summarize China's situation right now?

• 15:27Alice Han?

  I think if we were to look back at 2025, I think the top line issue is China's record trade surplus. It is now exceeding $1 trillion in the first 11 months of this year. It's looking on track to, I think, reach 1.2 trillion by the end of this year. That is a record level of surplus from China, but from any other nation in the history of the world. And it is at a time in which China defied the odds of the tariff wars, the trade wars with the US. Obviously, we saw a lot of front loading at play. But certainly, I think when we look back to 2025, it's very clear that China doubled down on its export-led growth and as a result, exported much more to the rest of the world with huge implications, not just for Europe, but for the rest of the world, including Europe,

• 16:10Alice Han?

  Southeast Asia, Latin America. I think that is a top line issue. We can go into the other specifics. I would say it's trade surplus. Number two, I think. Is the fact in the second half of the year that we have seen weak fixed asset investment. And as I've mentioned previously, I think this is partly the anti-involusion drive. It's partly a crackdown on inefficient investment in the system. But I think that this is going to be an ongoing theme and question going into 2026. Will China try to append or reverse some of its fixed asset investment reliant growth and move towards consumption, which is what it's saying time and time again, it wants to do to rebalance the economy? Or will it again in 2026 rely on fixed asset investment? I think 2025

• 16:52Alice Han?

  has launched that question out in the air. Will China pivot away from this old model?

• 16:56Ed Elson?

  One word that I didn't hear in there, which I'm kind of surprised I didn't, is AI. I feel like when we have the China conversation on this podcast, it's mostly revolving around, is China beating us on AI? Or are they not? Where do we stand in terms of AI at the end of 2025? We obviously had DeepSeek at the beginning. That was way at the beginning. That was in January. Here we are almost a year later. Where do things stand?

• 17:22Alice Han?

  Well, the reason I didn't mention that, Ed, was because I think this is a multi-year progress. Certainly, DeepSeek at the beginning of the year was a clarion call. It was a bit of a Sputnik moment in the realm of AI, but I think it goes beyond 2025. I'm excited to see the LLMs that come out of China in 2026, the areas in which robotics will severely and strongly advance in China vis a vis the rest of the world, and the way in which China is using AI in all aspects of the economy and everyday life. I do take your point, Ed, that this is a significant story. But I think it is a story that will take many years to advance and progress. And I am excited to see what happens out of China. I think in

• 18:04Alice Han?

  the next five-year plan, which is again why I think the next five years will be critical, AI will be front and center. There will, I think, will be a consolidation around an AI plus initiative in the economy from the government and in all aspects of governance, economy, society, even ideology. So I take your point, Ed, but I think this is going to be many years in the making.

• 18:26Ed Elson?

  The other photo, I mean, I think the most important photo of the year, to me at least, was the image of Putin and Modi, the Prime Minister of India, Narendra Modi, and Xi Jinping, standing together in Beijing, laughing together, which was an image that we hadn't really seen in a long time. And it was contrasted to what we were seeing in the US, where we were basically flipping off most of our allies, really, kind of saying, screw you to everyone, it seemed like. And then we had this thesis that we were kind of driving our allies into the arms of China, and basically driving everyone into the arms

• 19:08Ed Elson?

  of China. That was the moment. That was the image. Where do we stand on that front at this point? To what extent has China formed partnerships and alliances with everyone else at America's expense?

• 19:24Alice Han?

  I would be very cautious about this narrative. In many respects, it reminds me of 2017, when Xi Jinping made that famous speech at Davos. And people had this feeling in the first Trump administration that this is Paxynica, it's the end of US supremacy, and China is ascendant, not just ascendant, but is the dominant superpower. Fast forward two or three years after that, and China was really, you know, pilloried by the West, not just by Americans, by Australians, by Europeans, as a security threat, as a trade-related threat. And I think that it's very hard to shake off that shadow of your China when you're running, again, back to my point, massive trade surpluses, record trade surpluses. So I think one article that I'll point to is Emmanuel Macron's great article in the

• 20:06Alice Han?

  FT, that Europe needs to stand up to this, even though it's going to be structurally very difficult. It's going to be hard for the rest of the world, including India and Russia, I would say, that are finding themselves Uh benefiting strategically from a closer relationship to China in the short term. Because ultimately, these countries are, you know, encountering a superpower that is dominating on trade. It's dominating on national security. So I would say that they're convenient bedfellows for now, certainly in the case of Russia. I think it's a longer term convenient setup. Uh but in the case of India, I would not be surprised if it pivots next year. Uh because of this, because India understands where its bread is being buttered. Uh its relationship with America is critical and China is not just a strategic adversary,

• 20:50Alice Han?

  but uh from a geopolitical border related standpoint, uh uh you know, an adversary of a high degree of order. So I would say that this is going to be an interesting question in 2026. I myself believe that China may have peaked geopolitically uh this year.

• 21:07Ed Elson?

  Hmm.

• 21:07Alice Han?

  Uh and that there will be, I think, a narrative that paints China, particularly in the trade, in a more negative light because again, we cannot escape the fact that China is running these massive trade surpluses with the rest of the world.

• 21:20Ed Elson?

  I think it's really interesting, this idea that the the trade surplus. Everyone's beginning to recognize, and perhaps this is to Trump's credit. I mean, Trump was one of the first ones to say that this was a problem, the trade deficit that we had with China. Now, as you point out, Macron is saying the same thing. I mean, I I I believe it was that article where he said the relationship with China is unbearable.

• 21:44Alice Han?

  Yeah.

• 21:45Ed Elson?

  Um so, I mean, I I I guess where is this all headed from a trade deficit perspective? Because it seems that China has decided that this is the way they're going to have influence. They're going to, I guess, flood other markets with their own products. Make every other market reliant on China for, I mostly goods, probably not services.

• 22:12Ed Elson?

  Where does this go next?

• 22:14Alice Han?

  Again, I I think this is the number one question of 2026.

• 22:18Ed Elson?

  Yeah.

• 22:18Alice Han?

  When we dissect the five year plan, which will be unveiled in early March, it will be important to note the degree to which China is paying attention to being a quote unquote manufacturing superpower, especially in the high tech leading edge end of things. My own sense is that because consumer demand remains somewhat uh weak. And stagnating, it's going to be hard for me to see a massive write down or slowdown in export led growth. And as a result, I think that China in many respects will have to double down on this manufacturing export side of things, even although it is saying that it wants to rebalance the economy and understands the geopolitical implications of overcapacity.

• 23:00Alice Han?

  I think there is a recognition at the highest levels of government in China that overcapacity isn't just an economic issue, but it's a geopolitical issue. To your point, Ed, other countries are waking up to this. So I am more in the skeptical camp where I look at China's growth model. And I, and I think as long as they continue to target high growth, which I think they will, five, around five percent next year, they are going to be locked in this trap where they have to rely on this addiction towards export led growth. But again, we'll have to see in early March, A, what is going to be the growth target? And B, what are they going to unveil in the five year plan that shows either a doubling

• 23:40Alice Han?

  down on manufacturing or maybe a pivot towards really consumer led growth. But I'm more in the sort of skeptics camp when it comes to this.

• 23:48Ed Elson?

  When you think about the relationship with the US and China, I'd be interested to hear what your maybe one or two word characterization of that relationship has been in 2025. And then the question is, what will it be in 2026? If I had to hazard a guess, it would be not great in 2025, perhaps worse in 2026. What is your view on, on, on what our relationship with China will look like?

• 24:14Alice Han?

  The way that I think about this relationship is that it's a decoupling neither side can afford. What we've seen is that hard decoupling, whether it's through tariffs, you know, the blunt instrument of tariffs, or it's through some of these export restrictions, be it rare earths or semiconductors. Can be to some extent mutually assured destruction. And so I think we've come from the precipice on both sides, both on the tariffs and trade war side and on the export controls rare earth side of things, whereby I don't think the escalation in 2026 will necessarily be in those domains. But certainly, I think it may be in the domain on the margin of export restrictions and controls.

• 24:54Alice Han?

  The Trump administration has shown itself to be, I think, slightly more dovish than Biden and Trump 1.0 on some of these chips. We, you know, we have to mention the black wells, for instance, as well as the H20 years earlier this year. That, I think, in in practice will actually mean more, I think, control of the supply chains. The reason I say that is because I think China has an incentive to maybe welcome some of these degraded black wells, but also control the amount that goes in.

• 25:24Ed Elson?

  Right.

• 25:24Alice Han?

  On the same token, flip side, rather, the Americans have an incentive to control where those chips go to. They don't want them to go to dual use technologies or military grade equipment. So even although there is a dovish tilt, I think, in this administration and 2.0 version of Trump, my my guess in 2026 is that there will exercise some of these export restrictions or controls to, again, control some of the supply chains of these either critical minerals or critical technologies like semiconductors. We haven't gone into the domain yet of AI. I could foresee that being a political issue in 2026, whereby the Trump administration says, you know, we need to restrict not just government agencies, but, you know, tech companies that are dealing with national security

• 26:08Alice Han?

  from using Chinese LLMs because it's a national security risk. I could foresee that being part of the rhetoric and debate in 2026. But I think we have moved away from tariffs as a blunt instrument, largely because Besen, as the prime minister, as as the chief economic advisor, is pushing Trump away from using that instrument. So I think the real lever is going to be these export restrictions and controls.

• 26:31Ed Elson?

  Okay. Alice Hahn, host of the China Decode podcast, China economist at Green Mantle. Alice, really appreciate your time.

• 26:40Alice Han?

  Thanks so much, Ed.

• 26:44Ed Elson?

  Well, today is December 18th, which means that this is our final episode of Prof G Markets Daily in 2025. We have our regular interview coming out tomorrow. That's with Professor Wolfers. Fascinating conversation as always. Then on Monday, Scott, Claire and I will be answering your questions in our annual Ask Me Anything episode. And then we will be done for the year. We'll be back in your feeds on January 5th, where we will be discussing Scott's prediction for the year. So before we end, just a quick reflection on the year from me and

• 27:21Ed Elson?

  some thoughts going into 2026. So 2025 has been kind of a crazy year. And I'm just going to summarize for you everything that has happened, everything that we've we've covered over the course of the year. So we obviously started with Trump returning to the presidency. Pretty soon after that, we witnessed Liberation Day, which brought about one of the largest stock market drawdowns in US history. I don't know if you remember. Then we obviously had Taco, where many of the tariffs were reversed. And then we saw the stock market rip back up. We've also seen the explosion of AI. We've seen companies like OpenAI and Anthropic creating

• 28:03Ed Elson?

  even better tools. We also saw the explosion of AI in China with companies like DeepSeek that threatened to oust our AI companies. Then we saw the development of the AI bubble. And we watched as these circular deals went from kind of questionable to extremely concerning. We were talking about that. And then suddenly, the whole world started to talk about that. And we are still monitoring how that story will play out. We also saw this incredible convergence between Silicon Valley and Washington. We watched as all of the tech billionaires sat basically in a row and clapped for the president during his inauguration. We saw Elon

• 28:43Ed Elson?

  Musk get into politics, which ended as we predicted quite badly. I mean, we saw Doge and the chaos surrounding that agency. And then the fact that Doge shut down. And then we saw his fight with the president, where he accused Trump of being in the Epstein files. Then we also had the Epstein files, which indeed Trump was in. We saw his letter to Epstein, we saw his pictures of Epstein. And now here we are at the end of the year, we're still waiting for the rest of the files to come out, and that is only scratching the surface. In sum, this has been a really wild year. And as I reflect here, I think one of the more difficult tasks over the

• 29:24Ed Elson?

  course of the year, especially as the host of a news show, has been figuring out what actually matters in the world and what doesn't really matter at all. Because this is the big problem in 2025. It's not that people are underinformed right now. No one's underinformed. In fact, 80% of our waking hours today are spent actively consuming information. That's up from around 40%, 50 years ago. So the problem today isn't that people don't know enough. The problem is that people today don't know which things to care about, which things to actually pay attention to. We don't know what matters

• 30:06Ed Elson?

  and what doesn't. Between FIFA giving out peace prizes and the White House coming up with ballroom plans, it's not clear what news is even worthy of our time. And that's something that I've been thinking about this year. So looking ahead to 2026, when I think about what we will be focused on, we're going to be focused, laser focused on separating the signal from the noise. We already tried to do that. But in 2026, we are going to double down on that effort. Because while I can't tell you exactly what will happen next year, what I can tell you is that next year, there will be a ton of

• 30:51Ed Elson?

  distractions. There will be a lot of noise. And the only way for us to have a productive and valuable show here, and also the only way to even live a productive and valuable life, is to figure out a way to tune out the noise. It is to figure out what doesn't matter, and then to ruthlessly ignore it.

• 31:12Ed Elson?

  And so that's what we're going to do next year. We're going to obsessively cover what matters and ruthlessly abandon what doesn't matter. And my hope is that every time you tune in, you will know, unlike many other programs, that we are not peddling meaningless crap. We are only interested in that which means something, that which has an actual impact in business and in life. So here is to 2026. It's been an interesting year. Next year will be even better and I look forward to exploring it with you. Okay, that's it for today. This episode was produced by Claire Miller, edited by Joel Patterson and engineered by

• 31:57Ed Elson?

  Benjamin Spencer. Our associate producer is Alison Weiss. Our research team is Dan Shalane, Isabella Kinsel, Chris Noddy and Mia Silverio. And our technical director is Drew Burrows. Thank you for listening to Prof G Markets from Prof G Media. If you liked what you heard, give us a follow. I'm Ed Elson and tune in tomorrow for our conversation with Justin Wolfers.