Return to Transcripts main page
Quest Means Business
Judge Finds Fault with Interim U.S. Attorney's Appointment; Rubio Touts Tremendous Progress In Peace Talks; Trump Hails Very Good Phone Call with Xi Jinping; Bitcoin Up Slightly As Volatility Spooks Investors; British Industry Group Warns Of "Death By A Thousand Taxes"; J.D. Vance Under Pressure Over Ties To Palantir Co-Founder; Thanksgiving Dinner Will Cost Five Percent Less This Year. Aired 4-5p ET
Aired November 24, 2025 - 16:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[16:00:15]
RICHARD QUEST, CNN INTERNATIONAL HOST, "QUEST MEANS BUSINESS": Closing bell ringing on Wall Street. Up day on the market. Interesting day. Start to a
new week. We've been up for the whole session. Not off, just off the top a little bit. A bit of a wobble at the beginning, but really nothing to ride
home about.
We will get to all the details and the underlying causes throughout the hour. Oh yes! One, two, three.
Thank you, sir. Those are the markets and the main events we will talk about.
A federal judge has dismissed the case against New York Attorney General and the former FBI Director. We will explain why and how.
Signs of optimism for peace in Ukraine after the weekend of talks in Geneva. There are big issues that remain, of course. And I speak to the
chief executive of Patagonia on why he is telling consumers to prioritize quality, not quantity, this holiday season.
Together, we start a new week and I am live in New York. It is Monday, November the 24th. I am Richard Quest and I mean business.
Good evening.
Case dismissed. A U.S. judge has thrown out the indictments against two perceived enemies of President Trump. They are, of course, James Comey, the
former FBI Director and New York Attorney General Letitia James.
Now, the reasons: President Trump handpicked Lindsey Halligan, a former White House adviser for the role. A federal judge ruled that her
appointment as interim was invalid and that all actions taken by her were unlawful exercises of Executive Power.
Joey Jackson is our legal analyst, explains more as I understand it. He can only appoint for 120 days, and then thereafter, there has to be a process,
either a Senate confirmation or -- but here is what I want to know, how did they ever think they were going to get away with it after the appointment?
JOEY JACKSON, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: So listen, Richard, we are seeing an instance where we have an executive who is really pushing the bounds of
executive authority. And in some respects, the United States Supreme Court is allowing him to do so. And so I think that we are seeing in this
administration a lot of norms being busted as it relates to all aspects of administration, whether it is the firing of executive federal employees,
whether it is his immigration program, where they're rounding up people on the streets who have masks, whether its sending in the National Guard into
cities, whether it is -- I can go on and on, so it relates to this here.
And so to your question, I think it is a President who feels that he wants to firmly use his executive authority to do what he wants, and there are
guardrails in our system of justice. One of those guardrails are the courts.
Another guardrail is Congress. Congress doesn't seem to be doing anything, but what the President wants to do say for Epstein, I will give him credit
there, where Congress really moved forward and voted to release the files, another story for another day. But he, of course, gave them permission to
do so. And so this is a guardrail here. And I think what the court said was, no, you cannot do this. It exceeds the authority, executive authority,
and as a result of her appointment being invalid, anything she did was invalid. Hence the dismissal of both indictments as to Comey and as to
Letitia James.
QUEST: Now, we've been -- they clearly cannot just come back and re-indict because the statute of limitations in the case of Comey has -- but if the
appeal, let's just say the -- excuse me, let's just say an appeal was successful and her appointment was considered to be okay, then all of this
fruit of the tree stuff wouldn't flow, could that indictment then still stand again?
JACKSON: Yes. So that's a great point. So I will say this, Richard, there may be a path in which they can, under federal law if an indictment is
dismissed. You have six months to go and to get another indictment. And so, yes, they're on thin grounds as it relates to Comey, because there was only
a few days left before the statute of limitations, which is five years for the offenses of lying that he was accused of, statute of limitations exists
so that you have finality. Hey, are you going to move forward or not? And there has to be a certain time.
However, I think an argument could be made that they still had those days that were existing. The indictment was dismissed under law. We have six
months to move forward, and that's what we are going to do, so they could seek another indictment. I would argue if I am on the government, if they
had a validly appointed United States Attorney who was affirmed by the Senate.
To the other question, I think what they will do is they will appeal this all the way up to the Supreme Court so that the Supreme Court can make the
determination as to what we started out and what you noted, which is 120 days and very quickly, Richard, look, the bottom line is that you have 120
days to occupy a seat without Senate confirmation.
[16:05:13]
If you don't have Senate confirmation, then the district court gets to appoint you. You cannot then appoint somebody else again, which is what
happened here. But if you get someone who is duly appointed and authorized, I would argue, and the government is going to argue, that they can now go
and seek indictments anew against both Comey, the FBI director, former -- and Letitia James, the current New York State Attorney General.
QUEST: So a final thought and somewhat off topic, but if I am James Comey, I am very grateful at one level that this has gone. But it doesn't go to
the gravamen of the case. It is a technicality, an important one and if I am Jim Comey, I am saying, well, thank you very much, but I really would
like to have won this on its merits, not a technicality.
I will still take it, though.
JACKSON: So what I would say to that, Richard, technicalities are important. And this technicality wasn't so technical because we have laws
that need to be followed, and when you don't follow them --
QUEST: But you know what I mean.
JACKSON: I do. But I would also say to that that this was one of plenty of other technicalities we didn't even get, and the judge in in the decision
as it relates to either Comey or James, didn't address the other technicalities in terms of the grand jury and her being the only one to
sign it, and the fact that it was only presented to the foreperson and the grand jurors didn't see it, and it is a vindictive prosecution and she was
appointed right after Trump tweets and two days later, Bondi goes and she says, you know, she appoints her to ultimately do this.
So there are plenty of things that we didn't talk about. This is one of a variety of technicalities that the court couldn't even reach. So the reason
I mentioned that to you is because there is so much smell of stench around this case that even if it were prosecuted, re-indicted et cetera, I think
there are other technicalities, Richard, that we could be talking about before we even get to the merits of whether or not he lied or did not.
QUEST: Thank you. I am grateful, as always. Send the bill to the usual place.
JACKSON: Thank you.
QUEST: Now, meanwhile, the wrangling continues over the U.S. plan to end the war in Ukraine. The Kremlin rejected a European counterproposal to call
the plan unconstructive. U.S. and Ukrainian negotiators held talks this weekend in Geneva. Secretary of State -- U.S. Secretary of State Marco
Rubio said afterwards that the two sides made tremendous progress. The E.U.'s foreign policy chief, Kaja Kallas, told CNN that Russia will need to
make concessions to achieve peace.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KAJA KALLAS, EUROPEAN UNION'S Foreign Policy Chief: We welcome all the efforts to achieve this peace, but we shouldn't take the focus off who
doesn't want the peace, which is Russia? I mean, we haven't heard of Russia making any concessions or any concessions to be asked from Russia because,
you know, we should be discussing on how Russia would not invade again and how Russia would stop this war and not what Ukraine could or should give
up, because there is one victim and one aggressor in this war.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
QUEST: With me, Ambassador Kurt Volker, former U.S. Ambassador to NATO and former U.S. Special Representative for Ukraine negotiations. We don't know
what is in the revised versions, but we do know the nonstarters, particularly, for example, a refusal to allow European force in Ukraine.
The question of NATO membership and the size of the military.
So I am wondering, bearing in mind that Moscow has already rejected it, it is getting sticky.
KURT VOLKER, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO NATO: Well, it has been sticky for a few years now, Richard and it remains that way. What happened in the past
week was really rather remarkable. You had the. U.S. put forward a plan that was essentially the Russian proposal. Of course, that's rejected by
Ukraine, by Europeans.
Marco Rubio is dispatched to clean up the mess and come up with something reasonable again. And of course, Moscow will reject anything reasonable
because from the beginning their objective is to attack Ukraine, eliminate the government, eliminate Ukraine as a sovereign, independent state and a
reasonable plan would not give them that, so of course, they reject that. That means we are back where we were before this past week, which is how do
you get Russia to actually end the war, and that requires more pressure on Russia economically and militarily.
QUEST: So let's put the plans aside, because we can have no knowledge of exactly who or what or where, when or why. What we can discuss is when you
think President Trump is going to use any of this as an excuse to walk away.
VOLKER: Well, you know, if he did just walk away, provide no more U.S. military support, no more intelligence, no more finances, Ukraine would
still fight on. Europeans would still help Ukraine, and this would still continue.
[16:10:05]
But it would be an embarrassment for President Trump on the scale of the embarrassment for Joe Biden from walking away from Afghanistan.
QUEST: So in that case, to an extent, the President is stuck in it and lumbered in it, and he doesn't -- he says he just wants peace, peace,
peace. And I do not for one second deny or question his bona fides on that.
I don't see, unless he is prepared to get tougher with Putin a way forward, because Putin is clearly not going to accept anything less.
VOLKER: Yes, I completely agree with you and the reality is that it is getting tougher for Putin. Their economy is in a very weak condition. They
have high inflation, high interest rates, no growth. They have problems with access to components and materials, including for their military
industry and the military effort is going very badly for Russia.
They lose thousands and thousands of lives and gain almost no territory. They are succeeding at killing civilians, but that's not making a strategic
difference in the war. So piling on to that pressure on Putin is the best way to get Putin to end it.
QUEST: How much more can Europe is -- well, it can afford to do a lot more. How much more do you think Europe is prepared to do?
VOLKER: Well, that's a very good question, Richard, because there are so many things that are obvious that Europe could and should do that they
still have not pulled the trigger on yet. For instance, seizing those frozen Russian assets, $300 billion worth sitting in Europe that could be
used to fund Ukraine's defenses, could be used to fund Ukraine's budget and not put the burden on European taxpayers. That would be an obvious one.
This coalition of the willing that people have talked about, let's flesh that out and maybe it can be deployed before there is a ceasefire to at
least provide some measure of training and equipping of Ukrainians even now. There is more that we can do on air defense for Ukraine collectively,
as NATO. We could be integrating an intelligence picture. We could help -- be helping them integrate the weapons systems that they've got. There is a
lot more that could be done, but we just have been so slow and so cautious along the way.
QUEST: I am grateful for your time tonight, sir. Thank you for joining us. Thank you.
VOLKER: Thank you.
QUEST: President Trump says he has discussed the situation in Ukraine with China's leader, Xi Jinping. Mr. Trump posted that the two spoke about trade
and stopping the flow of fentanyl. He says that Xi invited him to visit Beijing in April, and the Chinese leader will visit Washington later in the
year.
Kristen Holmes is at The White House. Well, this is another turn up for the books that came out of nowhere that the two of them have been speaking. So,
make of it what you will for us, please.
KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, I mean, it sounds as though they are just reiterating the commitment that they made to
each other in South Korea and that both sides are actually implementing what they said they would when they had that meeting in South Korea, that
rather brief meeting, actually, when they decided to move forward with these various components of a preliminary trade deal.
The real readout here is kind of vague. I mean, The White House didn't give us any details specifically. President Trump just reiterated what we had
already heard from South Korea. We already knew he was going to be planning to go to China in April, but there is one big question on the table and I
asked the Press Secretary, Karoline Leavitt, about this specifically when it comes to Ukraine, was President Trump trying to get help from the
Chinese leader?
One thing to remember here is that the Chinese leader does have a relationship with Vladimir Putin. We know, of course, President Trump
thinks he has a relationship with Vladimir Putin, but he has been proven wrong time and time again, and we also know when it comes to the Chinese
leader, the Chinese in general, by an enormous amount of oil from Russia, those tariffs had gone into place in November at the beginning of the
month.
And so that part of this conversation at all, how that is working. It is very clear that both leaders want to be moving the countries in the right
direction. One of the things we've been reporting is that it has been, you know, almost whiplash relationship between these two enormous superpowers
since President Trump took office in this ongoing trade war, these threats back and forth, and it was impacting both global economies and this was
something that they wanted to put to an end, which was the whole reason they had to sit down in South Korea.
So they are clearly trying here to continue down this path to keep people at ease, that all of these things are still in the right place, or at least
right where they should be at this moment.
I am grateful for you this evening. Thank you very much. Kristen Holmes at The White House. You're briefed.
Now, Black Friday is around the corner, a crucial time for many businesses. After the break, I will be joined by the chief executive of the clothing
company Patagonia. He will explain why his company isn't a fan of all these Black Friday discounts and all this sort of stuff. And we will be reviewing
the amount of money that they've been giving to good causes and the nature of the company.
He looks like he is ready, willing and with us, and we will be talking to him after the break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:17:47]
QUEST: Well, leaders at the COP30 Summit struck a new climate deal after more than two weeks of fraught negotiations. It calls for a tripling of
funding meant to help countries adapt to the increasingly severe climate effects. It has drawn criticism for failing to address fossil fuels.
Sustainability and climate crisis are at the core concern for the clothing brand, Patagonia. Ahead of this year's Black Friday, Patagonia is urging
consumers to take the buy once, buy well and mend clothing. The approach avoid frivolous spending.
Ryan Gellert is the CEO of Patagonia. Good evening, sir. I am grateful for you joining us.
I have one -- before we talk about exactly climate change. I've got one of your best sellers, which you kindly sent to us, which is -- you know, it
comes with a repair patch, its own little thing of repair patch, and this, that and the other, and gives me the details of how it is made. You name
it.
It is -- it does look and it does feel different. But I wonder, is this really what -- do consumers care? I guess what it really comes down to on a
Black Friday? Do they look at the sticker price first or all the other stuff?
RYAN GELLERT, CEO, PATAGONIA. Yes. Well, first of all, Richard, really nice to be here with you today. I think consumers and customers do care quite a
bit. I think our customers I know care very much about the health of the planet. And so we try to do everything we can to minimize our footprint as
a business. We do that imperfectly, but for our 52-year history, do it with a lot of intentionality and a lot of different ways and that includes
donating money to grassroots organizations working to protect nature and fight the climate and ecological crisis.
So, yes, in short, I think customers do very much care.
QUEST: You don't -- you're not a great fan of the great discounts on Black Friday and all this sort of artificial buy now before it is too late, are
you?
GELLERT: Certainly not a fan of trying to create that scarcity model. You know, I think we very famously took out a full page ad in "The New York
Times" on Black Friday in 2011. The headline of which was don't buy this jacket, which was really just talking about the environmental impact of
buying things that you don't need.
[16:20:09]
I think the reality is a healthy planet needs a better model than one that is trying to convince people to buy things that candidly, they don't need,
one that is more focused on buying quality over quantity.
QUEST: All the profits from the Patagonia sales, they are all in some shape or form put to good use, whether it is through the parent trust or it is
through the holding trust or a variety. It is quite complicated as I tried to look, but essentially the money does get dispersed to environmental and
other sustainable issues.
GELLERT: Yes, I can actually simplify it. Since 2002, actually since the mid-80s, but formally through an independent organization that we co-
founded called One Percent for the Planet in 2002, we give one percent of our revenue to small grassroots environmental organizations. So we've done
that since the mid-80s, do that still today.
What is new as of three-plus years ago is we have a new ownership model where at the end of every year, we reinvest some of our profits and the
rest of them we grant over to a group of 501 (C) (4)s hold fast collective, who donate all of that money.
QUEST: The whole thing relies and I don't -- I am not being flippant when I say this. You'll understand this, but the whole thing relies on everybody
involved at Patagonia wanting to do good in a sense, which is the difference, say to a for profit corporation where you incentivize through
pay shares, options and the like.
So how do you, as a company, incentivize?
GELLERT: Yes, I mean, I think first of all, I think you sort of distinguish us a little bit incorrectly. We are unapologetically a for-profit company,
always have been and remain even after our ownership restructuring. And so we are committed to making the very best product in the marketplace for all
the sport communities that we serve. Full stop. Period.
What is different about Patagonia is we also focus on and invest a tremendous amount of time and money in minimizing our footprint. And then
again, as of three years ago, we've got an ownership model where none of the profits go to the owners, the profits go to fighting the climate and
ecological crisis and that's the model.
But you know, you rightfully said our employees are all bought in on trying to, you know, just understanding that there is no business to be done on a
dead planet and that we are equally committed across the company to protecting wild places around the world. That's what brings us together.
QUEST: Right. Let's talk tariffs. Interesting view that you have. I mean, tariffs obviously has an effect, has an effect for everyone. But you
believe it is the uncertainty. It is the general -- I mean, you know, I could put a price on whatever -- I think -- I don't know where this this
particular garment was made. I am sure if I look carefully -- oh, made in Bangladesh. So there will be a tariff on whatever, they come from --
Bangladesh tariff is there.
But you're saying that that number is not the relevant number. It is more like the uncertainty that the tariffs have created. Tell me more.
GELLERT: Well, I would say this look, the tariffs have had a profound impact financially on us as a business. They dropped in on April 2nd. They
were sky high and then they moved around practically every week since conversationally if not practically. And then now they're headed to the
Supreme Court and who knows where they go next.
So I think the only thing I like less than cutting a bill for 40 something dollars million in unplanned expenses is the complete unpredictability and
the haphazard way these things have been rolled out.
QUEST: The one question, and I am comfortable asking you because I sort of -- the nature of the company, most CEOs now are scared of their own shadow
when it comes to wanting to talk about the administration, tariffs. I cannot tell you the number of top CEOs that either shy away or become just
dumbfounded when you try and get them on the hook.
You have no qualms about arguably facing the retribution that could follow.
GELLERT: I mean, I would say that I am not looking to pick a fight, but when we look, first of all, I lean on science. We are a company whose
mission statement is we are in business to save our home planet. I look at this administration I've never even imagined a whole of government attack
on clean air, clean water, clean soil in wild places like what we are seeing from this administration.
Look at just last week and attempts to water down and weaken the Endangered Species Act, the Clean Water Act, while opening up offshore oil and gas
drilling, basically all around the united states, including up in the Northern Arctic, north of Alaska, so those are the facts, and I think
that's incredibly distressing.
So, yes, I've got no problem talking about those things.
QUEST: I wish you well, sir. Ryan, we will talk again. I am very grateful that you've given us time tonight. Thank you very much indeed. Appreciate
it.
GELLERT: Appreciate it. Thank you.
QUEST: Thank you, thank you.
And staying with our business agenda tonight. Shares in Novo Nordisk fell very sharply after the trial into the Alzheimer's disease yielded
disappointing results. Here are the numbers. You'll see the shares ended down nearly six percent.
[16:25:19]
The drugmaker had hoped that the semaglutide, the active ingredient in Ozempic and Wegovy could be used to slow the progression of Alzheimer's. A
planned extension of the trial is now canceled after the drug failed to have an effect on disease progression.
Elaine Chen is National Biotech Reporter at STAT.
It is disappointing. Look, you've got two things here. Youve got the disappointing of the result, which, you know, for those who suffer from it,
and then you have the market reaction from it on both sides. It is a shame.
ELAINE CHEN, NATIONAL BIOTECH REPORTER, STAT: It is very disappointing.
In Alzheimer's disease, there has long been a slew of investigational drugs that have failed, so it is always disappointing to see another study
failure on Novo Nordisk, and to be fair, they had actually communicated to everyone, this is a very uncertain trial. It is risky. We don't know if
chances of success are high at all.
So they were actually trying to set expectations low, and yet, it is clear that investors were still quite disappointed.
QUEST: The pharma industry comes in for such criticism for the large profits that it makes, and there is a certain validity to those criticisms.
But this does show there is huge risk involved on some of these, you know, these drugs that they take.
CHEN: Yes, this was an interesting choice by Novo Nordisk, because there is very little data about whether Ozempic, this class of treatments could
actually help Alzheimer's and for the company's part, they said we saw some early data just looking at real world evidence, we decided, you know, we
had to go investigate this.
So for their part, they were willing to take a big risk with this. I think there is debate around whether the way they designed the trial and how they
went about it was the best way, but it does show that, you know, like it does take a lot of time and money to run these studies.
QUEST: Where is now in pharma, the smart money going?
CHEN: I do think, you know, the drugs similar to Ozempic and Wegovy, you know, the newer ones that are in development that either may lead to more
weight loss or may be more tolerable for patients to take. I think there is still a lot of money going there. I think the obesity trade has not ended
yet, so I think that's still a very hot area.
QUEST: Right. But that's sort of me too and me too, plus, isn't it? That's just advancing something. The really expensive stuff is all the oncology.
And I was hearing this morning about, you know, the child at the Royal Manchester Hospital who has been cured of Hunter's disease. It was a case,
but, you know, all of these which are individualized either stem cells or require vast resources to be deployed, oncological medications. That is
going to -- cancers, the likes.
That is going to be the big ground, individualized medicine, which is incredibly expensive.
CHEN: I think that is where there is still a lot of development happening. Unfortunately, those types of medicines, individualized therapies, gene
therapies, the commercialization has been very difficult because it takes so much money to discover and then study those molecules.
And so actually currently it feels like the drugs for these big diseases, like obesity, like heart disease are kind of back in vogue now in terms of
-- from an investment perspective.
QUEST: I guess, do we need to have those big blockbusters to pay for the research and all the other stuff into the other stuff.
CHEN: I think that's a good point. I think that we do need to find a way to figure out how to pay for the gene therapies for the rare diseases. Yes.
QUEST: I am grateful for you joining us tonight. What a fascinating subject. Thank you for joining us tonight.
Now, in a moment, I will check on the crypto markets after the break. The rout threatens to spill over into the broader market. I will explain more.
QUEST MEANS BUSINESS. You and I have a new week ahead of us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:32:38]
QUEST: Hello, I'm Richard Quest, together, we've got more QUEST MEANS BUSINESS.
Crypto is under pressure, and we'll discuss how that weakness is spilling into the broader markets and the American shoppers heading to grocery
stores ahead of Thanksgiving. The Butterball CEO on everything you ever wanted to know about a turkey, including how to cook it. And it's only
after the headlines, because here at CNN, the headlines always come first.
U.S. Federal judge has dismissed indictments against the former FBI Director James Comey and the New York Attorney General Letitia James. The
judge found the appointment of the interim U.S. attorney was invalid. The White House said this will not be the final word on the matter, and intend
to appeal.
Russia is pushing back against the European counter proposal to a peace plan in Ukraine. The Kremlin's called the version unconstructive after U.S.
and Ukrainian officials met in Geneva. A member of the Ukrainian delegation said President Trump's -- presidents Trump and Zelenskyy will have to
resolve the most difficult of issues.
A pioneer of reggae music has passed away after a six decade career. The wife of the Jamaican singer Jimmy Cliff says he had a seizure followed by
pneumonia. Cliff reached worldwide success with hits like, The Harder They Come and Wonderful World, beautiful. He was 81 years old.
A small recovery for Bitcoin after hitting low levels. It's lower since April, that took place last week. This is where it is at the moment, 89,000
give or take, up a bit.
Crypto tokens have lost more than a trillion dollars in market value since their October peak according to Deutsche. Investors fear the spills could
go into the broader market.
Allison Morrow is with me. Alison, first of all, why the weakness in crypto?
ALLISON MORROW, CNN BUSINESS SENIOR WRITER: Why the weakness in crypto is a great question. It's a lot of what we're seeing in the broader market.
There's concern about the Fed interest rate cuts, just a general risk off sentiment on A.I., on tech stocks, on crypto.
So, generally, investors are looking for safety. And crypto is, as you know, a very volatile asset. So, that's the big thing. But there are some
uniquely crypto reasons that crypto is falling, and a lot of that has to do with a lot of leverage in the system, and people are having margin calls,
and they're having to call their brokerages and close their positions.
[16:35:10]
QUEST: Right. But the actual cryptos themselves, the stable coins, the various blockchains, there's no question as to that stability.
MORROW: I think there is actual cryptos themselves, the stable coins, the various blockchains that there's no question as to that stability.
I think there is question to that stability. I've seen some analyst reports say, well, this will probably bottom out around 80,000 and then we'll have
a rebound. Because if you look at the long line of crypto, or Bitcoin in particular, it just goes up. There are these boom and bust cycles, but
ultimately it goes up a lot of times.
QUEST: Sorry, forgive me. When I say I meant stability, I don't -- I wasn't referring to the price. I'm talking about the actual systemic nature of the
thing. They're not going to disappear. They're not going to collapse. They're not -- there's no question of the whole thing going poof and
disappearing.
MORROW: I would say that's probably true. But I think with crypto, there is no kind of underlying asset. There is no kind of natural floor like you
would have with gold.
So, there could -- you know, these kinds of things do tend to snowball. And you know, if I had a crystal ball, I would let you know what the price is
going to be tomorrow.
QUEST: If you had a crystal ball, neither of us will be here.
The fact is, though the wider market, interestingly, last week we were talking on this program, there seems to be a consensus building that even
if A.I. is a bubble, there's a rationality to the bubble, and therefore, all right, we take it with swings and roundabouts. Something's going to
survive, something will succeed, etcetera, etcetera.
But if crypto is starting to infect the wider market, where does that leave us?
MORROW: I think it's an interesting question, because it's actually a bit of mainstream money is starting to infect crypto, and crypto is being
treated like the adults that it always wanted to be treated, as, you know, like when crypto becomes volatile, adult mainstream investors are saying, I
don't want to be a part of this. I don't have this iron stomach, this like religious fervor around Bitcoin, so I'm going to -- I'm going to sell, I'm
going to close out, I'm done. This was a fun ride.
But I do think there is that risk that it could spill over into more mainstream markets.
QUEST: Grateful for you. Thank you. Good to see you tonight. Thank you.
Death by thousand taxes. That is the warning from the group of British industrial leaders who fear this week's U.K. budget could end up piling up
costs on to British firms.
The British Chancellor of the Exchequer, the finance minister, is expected to announce a new round of tax hikes as well as extra spending on benefits.
The CBI, the Confederation of British Industry, says the priority needs to be growth. Anna Cooban reports.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ANNA COOBAN, CNN BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS REPORTER: I'm here among the great and good of British business. At the start of a very important week,
business leaders are talking shop. They're mingling, and most importantly, they are stating their case to the government.
This is because on Wednesday, we'll see Rachel Reeves, the U.K. finance minister, announce her autumn budget, basically her plans for tax and
spending. And it comes at a tricky time for the U.K. economy and the ruling Labor government itself.
So, here, at the annual conference of the Confederation of British Industry, we're all here trying to read the tea leaves.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They don't punish businesses again like they did last year.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Business has probably paid enough.
JAMES BURCHELL, CO-FOUNDER, TELLON CAPITAL: From our industry perspective, constructors and contractors, whether they're large or small, have been
hugely impacted.
STEVE EGERTON, CEO, RHINO PRODUCTS: Some stability, preferably not further tax increases. But obviously they've got to raise this, fill the black hole
30 billion or whatever they keep saying.
COOBAN: The U.K. economy faces a litany of challenges, weak growth, anemic productivity, and a source of companies that have been telling government
that they've suffered from high energy bills, as well as business tax rises that happened in last year's autumn budget.
RUPERT SOAMES, CHAIR, CBI: The chances tax increases was a 24 billion pound a year increase on tax last year, it was effectively using business as the
piggy bank. The fact is that they're constrained, and they're constrained because during the election campaign, they said they wouldn't touch the
main rates, be it of income tax or VAT, and that's like sort of leaving a bazooka at home. But it is not the same government as it was 12 months ago.
COOBAN: Now, investors are also watching eagerly to see what the government does to tackle its high level of borrowing. And Rachel Reeves faces the
unenviable task of trying to fill a massive hole in the U.K.'s finances, which some economists put at around 30 billion pounds, or close to $40
billion.
So, just how will the U.K. finance minister try to drum up multiple billions of pounds without alienating voters, as well as vital British
industry.
Anna Cooban, CNN, London.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
QUEST: In a moment, the problem with Palantir, while the U.S. Vice President is under fire over his links to the software firm.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:43:11]
QUEST: The Vice President of the United States J.D. Vance is facing political backlash over his perceived ties to Palantir. Some within the
Trump coalition fear Palantir's data analytics could be used for mass surveillance. The administration's awarded dozens of contracts to the tech
firm. The vice president's linked Palantir through his relationship with Peter Thiel, the company's co-founder. Mr. Thiel gave Vance one of the
first major jobs and donated $50 million towards his Senate campaign.
Steve Contomo, who is on the story for us. Palantir is one of those interesting companies. When you ask people what it does, sort of people
will get very quiet and sort of say, they're not quite sure what it does, but it does it very well.
STEVE CONTOMO, CNN SENIOR REPORTER: That's right. They call themselves a software company, and they sort of reject this idea that they collect data
on people, or that they're involved in mass surveillance. But there is a persistent fear among many in the U.S., including within Donald Trump's
coalition, that the reliance on them in Donald Trump's government is a cause for concern, and is it could potentially lead to a survey, or they
are being used by so many agencies within the Trump administration, they have a contract with the Army worth over $10 billion over the next decade.
They have deals with the Department of Homeland Security on immigration issues. They worked with DOGE. They have IRS contracts Veteran Affairs, and
they are helping these government agencies handle these massive, massive data sets and help them clean up the information that's coming into them,
into these agencies.
But the concern is that there are so many different agencies that are using it, that they're going to have access to data on so many Americans and
could potentially create profiles of people and use some sort of predictive analytics to figure out who's going to commit crimes or be at risk. Those
are the fears.
[16:45:14]
And then J.D. Vance because of his (AUDIO GAP) party.
QUEST: Right. I lost you just for a split second. So, forgive me, I didn't hear the end of the answer.
But how damaging is it in a sense? Is it one of these things that, you know, conspiracy theorists get all hot under the collar about, but actually
goes nowhere?
CONTOMO: I think it's indicative of a friction we're seeing within Trump's coalition, particularly as it relates to his alliance with big tech
companies, there are a lot of people within the MAGA movement, Steve Bannon, Roger Stone, as well as some of the sort of libertarian voices he
relied on, like Joe Rogan, who are increasingly concerned about the steps that Trump is taking As it relates to artificial intelligence, data centers
and the overall reliance on some of these tech billionaires to fund his political operations.
And it's always been sort of an uneasy coalition and alliance between these groups, but now that Trump is a lame duck president, you are starting to
see that friction materialize more and more.
And J.D. Vance is someone who has been tasked with, sort of keeping the tent together, but also very much, someone who would benefit from that
coalition staying intact is bearing some of the brunt of that fight.
QUEST: I'm grateful for you, sir. Thank you very much. Now, it's QUEST MEANS BUSINESS tonight, so when we return, a rare spot of good news for
American shoppers facing the affordability crisis. I'm going to be talking to the Chief Executive of Butterball. There you are, sir. Good to see you.
We'll be talking to you in just a moment about the price of poultry ahead of Thanksgiving, and maybe even give us a tip or two on how to cook the
birds, so to speak. QUEST MEANS BUSINESS after the break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
QUEST: U.S. shoppers, as you know, coping with the affordability crisis, have something to be thankful for this season, those costs of typical
Thanksgiving dinner down five percent, the total cost is down five percent, $55.00 to feed a table of 10, according to the American Farm Federation,
it's the lowest since 2021.
[16:50:12]
Largely to the price of turkeys which has fallen a whopping 16 percent over the last year. Not all good news, though some of the trimmings. So, for
example, a sweet potato that is up 37 percent, frozen peas up 17.2 percent and put them in the same category. Oh, I've ne -- do you know, I think
cruel and unusual punishment, celery. I don't never know dreadful thing. Celery anyway, good. It's up 61 percent but unfortunately, carrots are also
up 61 percent. So, it's a mixed bag, if you will.
In the outs of the Thanksgiving dinner, Jay Jandrain is the CEO of Butterball, one of the country's largest poultry producers. Even run a
hotline for cooking emergencies throughout the holiday season, the Turkey Talk-Line. Jay's with me now. Jay, why -- what was the moving force that
brought down prices over the last year?
JAY JANDRAIN, PRESIDENT AND CEO, BUTTERBALL: Well, we're really seeing the effort from our retail partners that are working to try to find ways to get
people in the door and get them into their stores. So, they've been very aggressive with their feature pricing. We're seeing some really good deals
out there. Our product, butter ball product, is less than what we've seen last year, and in some cases, lower than what it's been the last five
years, with some retailers.
So, obviously, you know, we're happy to be a part of that. They're making sure that they put the star of the table on sale, and it's getting people
in the door.
QUEST: How much -- when you look at a turkey, where does most of the cost go? Is it -- I mean, is it the food? Is it the feed for feeding it? Is it
the -- what in the chain of it? Where is it?
JANDRAIN: Yes, most of the cost is in the feed. That represents the majority of the cost that we have for our turkeys. The processing is
certainly there as well the labor to go into that, the packaging, of course, but the majority of it is the cost of feed. And we've been
fortunate, this past year, we've actually seen a relatively manageable feed cost going into our feed programs, both the corn and soybean meal. That may
change a little bit as we look into next year, but so far, it's been -- it's been pretty good for us people to manage that cost and keep the cost
consistent.
QUEST: And if we look at the overall, the economy and how it affects because farmers have been badly hit, in many cases, then you look at
soybeans, and you look at the whole issue with Argentina, you look at -- I mean, wherever, tariffs, in terms of certain things coming in, exports
versus imports, the farmer has be all farmers have been pretty badly hit. Now, as somebody like yourself, the economic -- the general economy in the
U.S., how would you describe it as you look at it from your seat?
JANDRAIN: We certainly hear from our customers the challenges they've got with food inflation and other costs that are -- that are going up. You
know, fortunately for this holiday, with what is happening in the -- with what they're actually seeing at the retail market, there's a bit of a break
for them.
So, it's great that this most important meal of the year really is that a really at a discount. When you look at it, there's probably the most
economical meal the consumer can have this year. And so, we're certainly fortunate to be a part of that.
And from a -- from a farmer's standpoint, you know, our product, our Butterball turkeys that we grow, really gives some stability the farmers,
the row cropping, the corn, the soybeans that a lot of these farmers also produce, certainly can be very, very very volatile. With the backing of a
company like Butterball, they're able to mitigate some of the highs and lows there and have a much more dependable return when they're growing
turkeys for us.
QUEST: How long does it take you to supply chain up the number of Turkeys you need for Thanksgiving? I mean, just thinking about, you know, the
number of turkeys for this week versus the number you need on an average week in March. I mean, it must be quite a bit of planning for this.
JANDRAIN: It is. We actually start producing our turkeys for Thanksgiving right after the previous year's Thanksgiving. So, we're producing frozen
turkeys all year round. Certainly, we have a lot of other products that we sell throughout the year, but the frozen whole bird, or the whole bird in
general, for the holidays, represents about a third of our business, and the rest of it is goes into products like ground turkey, deli meats, turkey
sausage, things like that that consumer can get throughout the year.
QUEST: Now I'm just going to call up my dear good friend, Chat, ChatGPT tonight, because that's the one I'm using, because I asked Chat, you know,
what's the single most question that people ask ChatGPT anyway? And apparently it is, how long do I cook the turkey? And is it safe?
Apparently, it's acting one million one ways. How many minutes, stuffed or unstuffed, partly frozen. What do I do? Temperature is actually, well, you
get the idea.
[16:55:05]
So, give us -- you're the expert. How many minutes per pound? How many -- what's the answer?
JANDRAIN: Well, it's certainly going to vary depending on the temperature your turkey going in, the size of the turkey. We try not to stick to a time
that can get you in trouble. We want to make sure that people cook their Turkey to 170 degrees internally. If you're cooking a Butterball Turkey,
you don't have to worry about over cooking it. It's still going to be tender and juicy.
But if you have any other specific questions, we encourage folks to call or text our Turkey Talk-Line. Those folks are the experts. They've been doing
it for 44 years, and they're there to help anybody in the last minute if they need it. They're staffed Thanksgiving morning so they can help out any
jam.
QUEST: Good grief, magnificent. As you know, sir. Well, obviously, for me, Turkey day tends to be Christmas day of being British, and I'm sure you're
familiar in the Commonwealth and the rest of. I'm grateful for your time tonight, sir. Thank you very much. Have a good thanksgiving. Enjoy. Thank
you, sir.
The markets. Let me show you second straight session of rallies, growing hope for December rate cut. The Dow gained 203 points. The S&P was also
higher, and the Nasdaq got saw the best of the day. We -- there you are. There's the markets. Merck at the top, B&G at the bottom. We will take a
Profitable Moment after the break. QUEST MEANS BUSINESS.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
QUEST: Tonight's profitable moment, the U.S. consumer is such an important part of the American economy, two thirds of the economy. When the consumer
gets tired, well, then you know you're in trouble, which is why tonight, it's been fascinating. We've had different versions of the U.S. consumer
story.
So, you've got Patagonia, where you heard from the CEO, basically telling you only buy things that, you know, make sense, and don't just buy them for
the sake of them, and don't wait for discounts. Buy what you need and buy quality.
And then you had, interestingly, the Butterball CEO, very similar message, in a sense, quality always in terms of the turkey you buy. And factor in
the fact we heard you what the price of peas are going to cost and sweet potatoes, and you start to see we are entering that moment of the year
where it's going to be very easy for us all to do the oh, consumerism gone wild, Thanksgiving, Christmas, all the various festivals at this time of
the year, is there no end to consumerism?
[17:00:02]
Yes, there may be no end to it, but we will be watching carefully for the trends to see exactly what people are buying, how they're responding. Is
the consumer, whether in the U.S. or elsewhere, are they tired? We'll certainly be watching in the weeks ahead.
And that's QUEST MEANS BUSINESS for this Monday. I'm Richard Quest in New York, whatever you're up to in the hours ahead, I hope it's profitable.
Let's get together again tomorrow.
END
