French luxury group Kering jumped as much as 14% in Paris trading, the biggest intraday move in almost six years, after better-than-expected fourth-quarter sales at its Gucci unit. The UBS Luxury basket (UBXELUX) rose nearly 2%, driven largely by hopes of a turnaround at the luxury house.

Fourth quarter sales showed revenue fell about 10%, slightly better than the Bloomberg Consensus estimate of a 10.4% decline. It was Kering’s smallest decline in two years, reinforcing Wall Street analysts’ view that trends are stabilizing and the pathway to recovery may be near. This matters because Gucci still accounts for about 60% of Kering’s profits, so even a marginal improvement carries outsized weight.

RBC analyst Piral Dadhania told clients results “confirmed modest further improvements,” and the focus now shifts to “the extent to which Kering can engineer a return to growth in a still fairly challenging luxury environment.”

At UBS, analyst Justinus Steinhorst told clients that Kering’s results “boosted hopes of a turnaround,” lifting the UBXELUX basket.

Here’s more from Steinhorst:

The UBS Luxury basket {UBXELUX} is up 1.9% on Kering results after Q4 sales fell less than anticipated, boosting hopes of a turnaround. Positioning exacerbating the move, Kering scored as a 2 sigma crowded short. The Luxury basket scores as a 0.5 sigma crowded short down from neutral at the start of the year.

Jefferies analyst James Grzinic said the results were likely “fractionally” better than the buy side expected. He added the latest numbers “confirm gradually reducing pressures at a time of more supportive industry conditions.”

Deutsche Bank analyst Adam Cochrane said the earnings should be enough to remind investors of the “direction of travel,” citing a decent sequential improvement from Q3 to Q4.

Cochrane highlighted management’s expectation of returning to growth and improving margins, though there was no explicit commentary on the 2026 outlook. He added that valuation already prices in sales and margin recovery, but still leaves some potential upside in the stock.

Here’s the earnings snapshot of the fourth quarter (courtesy of Bloomberg):

Comparable revenue -3%, estimate -4.77% (Bloomberg Consensus)

• Gucci revenue on a comparable basis -10%, estimate -10.4%

• Yves Saint Laurent revenue on a comparable basis 0%, estimate -2.58%

• Bottega Veneta revenue on a comparable basis +3%, estimate +0.64%

• Other Houses revenue on a comparable basis +3%, estimate -2.35%

• Eyewear & corporate revenue on a comparable basis +2%, estimate +3.34%

Revenue EU3.91 billion, -9.1% y/y

• Gucci revenue EU1.62 billion, -16% y/y, estimate EU1.61 billion

• Yves Saint Laurent revenue EU735 million, -4.5% y/y, estimate EU710 million

• Bottega Veneta revenue EU467 million, -2.7% y/y, estimate EU458.3 million

• Other Houses revenue EU789 million, -3.5% y/y, estimate EU766.2 million

• Eyewear & corporate revenue EU329 million, -2.7% y/y, estimate EU377.9 million

2025 Results:

Recurring operating income EU1.63 billion, -33% y/y, estimate EU1.68 billion

• Gucci recurring operating income EU966 million, -40% y/y, estimate EU911 million

• Yves Saint Laurent recurring operating income EU529 million, -11% y/y, estimate EU504.5 million

• Bottega Veneta recurring operating income EU267 million, +4.7% y/y, estimate EU257.8 million

• Other Houses recurring operating loss EU112 million vs. loss EU9 million y/y, estimate loss EU83.2 million

Recurring operating margin 11.1% vs. 14.5% y/y, estimate 12.1%

Dividend per share EU3, estimate EU3.71

Kering shares in Paris jumped as much as 14%, the biggest intraday since March 2020. Luxury rivals also got a boost.

CEO Luca de Meo took over at Kering in September and plans to unveil his strategic plan for the luxury group in April. He has already reshaped Gucci’s leadership and announced a $4.8 billion sale of Kering’s beauty business to L’Oréal SA to reduce debt.

Trust in institutions shapes how societies function—from whether people follow public health guidance to whether they believe election results. Yet confidence in governments and the media has diverged sharply across countries.

This visualization, via Visual Capitalist’s Niccolo Conte, shows whether people trust the media or the government more, based on responses from nearly 34,000 people across dozens of countries.

The data comes from the 2026 Edelman Trust Barometer. Respondents were asked whether they trust the government and the media to “do what is right.”

High Government Trust in the Middle East and Asia

Countries such as Saudi Arabia, the UAE, China, and Singapore show higher trust in government than in media.

Saudi Arabia tops the list, with an 89% government trust score compared to 66% for media—a 23-point gap.

Media Trusted More in Many Western Democracies

In much of Europe and the Americas, trust tilts toward the media rather than the government.

Countries like France, Spain, the U.S., and the UK all show higher media trust scores, even though overall trust levels are relatively low.

France stands out at the bottom of the ranking, with just 30% trusting the government versus 40% trusting the media.

Large Trust Gaps Signal Institutional Tension

Kenya shows the largest pro-media gap, with media trusted by 70% compared to just 47% for government.

Conversely, Sweden, Japan, and South Korea lean more toward government trust, though with lower absolute scores than high-trust countries in Asia or the Middle East. Ireland is the lone country where trust in media and government is equal.

If you enjoyed today’s post, check out Trump Trade Shake-Up: Which Countries Are Winning Vs. Losing? on Voronoi, the new app from Visual Capitalist.

Via Remix News,

France and Europe have four years to prepare for war, said Fabien Mandon, chief of the defense staff of the French Armed Forces, who cited Russia as Europe’s biggest threat.

His speech at a major naval conference outlined that France, as well as its allies, must take into account that this war will break out in the near future and that the French military must be ready by 2030.

“Today, we are preparing for war,” he said, according to BreakingDefense.

During his speech at the naval conference, Mandon stated that France is not prepared for war and the country had “an insufficient number of ships and armaments.”

He stated the nation needs “more missiles with greater range and lethality.” 

Mandon recently made headlines for stating that Europeans and the French must be ready to lose children in a war, stating:

“You have to accept that you will lose your children,” which is necessary to defeat Russia during a November speech at the National Congress of French Mayors.

His words caused national shock, while the representatives of the parliamentary parties protested sharply in connection with his comment.

As in November, he named Russia as the main source of the threat of war.

Read more here…

How does the cost of living vary across countries in 2026?

To find out, this graphic, via Visual Capitalist’s Dorothy Neufeld, visualizes Numbeo’s Global Cost of Living Index, which measures the price of everyday expenses, including rent, relative to New York City (baseline of 100).

If a country has an index score of 80, prices are 20% lower than in New York. Scores above 100 indicate higher everyday costs.

While inflation has eased in many regions, the cost of living remains a major global challenge. Across 28 countries, home prices have risen more than 50% since 2020, and grocery costs have risen sharply in countries such as Mexico, Germany, and Malaysia, continuing to strain household budgets worldwide.

Global Cost of Living by Country

Below, we show the cost of living index for 155 countries or territories in 2026, highlighting stark differences in everyday costs around the world.

Bermuda has the highest cost of living worldwide, a British Overseas Territory synonymous with high-end real estate, luxury tourism, and offshore wealth.

Many of the world’s most expensive places, in terms of cost of living, are islands and often tax shelters or financial centers. The U.S. Virgin Islands, Jersey, and Cayman Islands all make the top 10 in the cost of living index. High concentrations of wealth, combined with heavy reliance on imports, push up prices across these island economies.

Switzerland ranks third overall, with Zurich named the world’s most expensive city in 2026. Beyond a strong Swiss franc, high wages and elevated living standards significantly drive up costs.

Singapore has the highest cost of living in Asia, placing fifth worldwide. Limited land availability has fueled high real estate prices, while the country’s reliance on imports—around 90% of its food—adds further cost pressures.

The U.S. ranks 19th globally, with a cost of living index score of 56.3. By comparison, the global median index score in 2026 stands at 30.8.

To learn more about this topic, check out this graphic on the world’s most unaffordable housing markets.

Submitted by Thomas Kolbe

Friedrich Merz finally has a positive headline. In December, industrial orders surged. But behind the costly statistical recovery lies nothing more than the buildup of a debt-financed defense sector.

It took some lead time, but the Chancellor now finally has a success story. For December 2025, Germany’s Federal Statistics Office reported a 7.6% month-on-month jump in industrial orders. November had already provided a first boost with a rise of over 5%—right in the midst of a severe economic crisis.

Industrial production, meanwhile, fell 1.9% in December, sliding back into negative territory—a fact largely lost in the media’s cheerleading. That the once-proud German automotive industry saw a 6.3% drop in orders also barely registered amid the general sigh of relief.

But once you dissect the data and strip out large orders, a very different picture emerges. The apparent surge in orders shrinks to a mere 0.9%.

What happened? Experience shows that this comes from “Other Vehicle Manufacturing,” which jumped roughly 9.5%. This category is dominated by defense equipment. In short: the federal government’s debt-financed special fund has found its way into German military production.

Or put differently: the government can now take a public victory lap after plunging citizens into massive debt to generate a short-term statistical effect in the super-election year 2026. Nobody wants to appear a total failure.

What is celebrated as an economic turnaround is in reality a statistical masking of the transition from market-based order to a debt-fueled administrative economy.

The military buildup is basically the last gasp of a policy that, in stubborn Keynesian mode, keeps trying to replace the gaps in Germany’s industrial economy with a “managed economy.” This strategy ties up resources and personnel, diverting exactly the capital needed for real investment under better conditions.

Goods are produced that no one demands on the market. A few pockets get richer. It’s classic client politics in the Berlin–Brussels style. Nothing new in the West, really.

The Real Situation

The real state of the German economy is shown in construction. The HCOB Germany Construction PMI, a monthly leading indicator, fell in January to 44.7 points. Values below 50 signal contraction.

After a brief uptick in December to 50.3, mostly due to energy network investments, the German construction sector plunged back into recession in January—mirroring the entire Eurozone.

For four years now, this central economic sector has been essentially frozen. Investments are held back; new projects, especially commercial ones, are nowhere to be found. The sector remains in prolonged stagnation.

Excessive energy costs, Kafkaesque regulation from Brussels and Berlin, and stifling interventions like rent caps are the recipe for a recession set in stone.

Expect billion-euro programs for subsidized public housing soon, purely to create a statistical illusion of recovery.

System-Compatible Criticism

The federal government can finally breathe. Expensive for taxpayers, but apparently worth it politically. Applying Keynesianism to the defense industry is among the dumbest of political moves. Driving a nation deeper into debt to produce goods that either rust or are used destructively is maximal political nihilism—bordering on madness.

The fact that the state-friendly media celebrates this “recovery” implies two things: complete media submission to government goals, and statistical validation to continue reshaping German society into a green, militarized command economy.

Silence from German business leadership confirms that politics has morally inoculated this strategy. The perpetuated narrative of an imminent Russian invasion now legitimizes the defense buildup.

Similarly, under the Green Deal, years of effort have embedded the fairy tale of saving the world via CO₂ reduction deep in public consciousness, with most voters still supporting the course. Criticism now appears climate-hostile, irresponsible, and anti-scientific.

Compliance is no longer enforced through coercion, but through reshaping business rationality. Every new regulation or CO₂ levy creates companies that survive only within the state’s subsidy architecture.

Result: media-friendly, calibrated language dominates discussions of “bureaucracy relief.” It is system-compatible fine-tuning, subtly orchestrated by Brussels. No one risks reputational loss in this highly repressive media environment.

Business has learned to couch criticism to avoid upsetting the Kaiser while remaining eligible for support. We see conditioned obsequiousness leading us steadily toward a new socialism.

* * * 

About the author: Thomas Kolbe, a German graduate economist, has worked for over 25 years as a journalist and media producer for clients from various industries and business associations. As a publicist, he focuses on economic processes and observes geopolitical events from the perspective of the capital markets. His publications follow a philosophy that focuses on the individual and their right to self-determination.

Europe is widely known for its generous work-life balance policies, and paid time off is a major part of that reputation.

Across the continent, employees are legally entitled to a combination of paid vacation days and public holidays, with totals varying widely by country.

This map, via Visual Capitalist’s Niccolo Conte, shows the minimum total number of paid leave days in Europe in 2025.

The data for this visualization comes from World Population Review.

Europe’s Most Generous Leave Policies

Several countries stand out for offering more than 40 days of paid leave annually. Andorra tops the ranking with 45 days, including 31 paid vacation days and 14 paid public holidays.

Countries such as France, Luxembourg, Malta, and Russia also provide more than 40 days of total paid leave.

The regional average sits at 33 days, and many countries fall close to this level. Nations such as Czechia, Hungary, Croatia, Slovenia, and Belarus offer between 32 and 34 days of paid leave per year.

Lower Leave Totals at Europe’s Edges

At the lower end of the spectrum, San Marino offers the fewest paid leave days at just 10, followed by Jersey, Moldova, and Montenegro, all of which fall well below the European average.

Meanwhile, countries like Germany, Belgium, and Ireland sit near the middle, offering around 30 days of total paid leave—still higher than many non-European economies.

If you enjoyed today’s post, check out The Rise of Senior Populations by Region on Voronoi, the new app from Visual Capitalist.

Authored by Andrew Korybko,

It’s possible that the US – whether under Trump 2.0 or whichever administration, including a possible Democrat one, comes afterwards – might agree to transfer its tactical nukes to Estonia in parallel with a possible British F-35A deployment to the latter’s base there.

The Daily Mail cited Pentagon funding proposals to report in late December that the US plans to once again store tactical nukes in the UK upon renovating Lakenheath Airbase. The project is expected to cost $264 million and be completed by 2031. They added that “The U.K. will receive its (12 F-35A) jets at the end of this decade and it will be the first time it has had an air-launched tactical nuclear weapon since 1998. While it will own the jets, the U.S. will retain ownership of the nuclear weapons they come with.”

Although they also wrote that “[this] represents confirmation that American nuclear weapons will return to Britain for the first time since President Barack Obama withdrew them 17 years ago”, that was assumed in June after two announcements. The Ministry of Defense revealed that London will purchase 12 F-35As from the US and join NATO’s dual-capable nuclear aircraft mission. The Defense Minister then confirmed in November that the US would retain control over the nuclear weapons involved.

What makes the Daily Mail’s report significant is that it was published amidst the ongoing Russian-US talks over Ukraine as Putin’s Special Envoy Kirill Dmitriev met with Trump’s Special Envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner in Miami that weekend to discuss this. The signal being sent was that any grand deal with Russia for reforming the European security architecture after their proxy war ends won’t result in the US hanging its NATO allies out to dry as proven by its planned nuclear deployment to the UK.

Some of its troops in Europe might be redeployed to the Western Hemisphere or the Asia-Pacific, which are respectively the new National Security Strategy’s first and second priorities, but this isn’t akin to “selling Europe out” to Russia or agreeing to “a new Yalta”. The purpose would solely be to help alleviate some of Russia’s concerns for better managing their security dilemma all while reassuring NATO allies of its reliability through a continued presence on the mainland and the resumed nuclear one in the UK.

Readers should also remember that the US already stores nuclear weapons in Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, and Turkiye so once again storing them in the UK shouldn’t be seen as too provocative by Russia since it’s geographically more distant from its borders than all of the aforesaid NATO countries. Nevertheless, resuming the UK’s role in the US’ nuclear-sharing program comes with additional risks due to London’s military presence at Estonia’s Tapa Army Base, whose government wants to host its F-35As.

The Estonian Defense Minister first floated this in July, the strategic significance of which was analyzed here at the time, and then reaffirmed his interest in September. It’s therefore possible that the US – whether under Trump 2.0 or whichever administration, including a possible Democrat one, comes afterwards – might agree to transfer its tactical nukes to Estonia in parallel with a possible British F-35A deployment there. The UK would then function as the tip of the US’ nuclear spear against Russia.

To be clear, these plans remain in the realm of speculation for now, but they also can’t be ruled out. If a fellow MAGA ally such as Vice President JD Vance succeeds Trump, then this likely won’t happen unless in the far-fetched event of ties with Russia deteriorating for whatever reason, but a Democrat successor might flirt with this or actually go through with it precisely to provoke a crisis. Russia is accordingly expected to closely monitor this deployment due to its potentially outsized strategic significance.

Via Middle East Eye

The Israeli government on Sunday approved sweeping changes to land registration and civil control in the occupied West Bank, a move Palestinians say breaches the Oslo Accords and advances de facto annexation.

Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and Defense Minister Israel Katz said the changes would “dramatically” alter West Bank policy, paving the way for expanded settlements and land seizure. In a joint statement, they said the measures would remove legal barriers on Israeli settlers and accelerate settlement development.

Katz said the aim was to give settlers equal “legal and civil rights”, while Smotrich said the move would “normalize life in the West Bank” and vowed to “continue to kill the idea of a Palestinian state.”

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said the policy was designed to deepen annexation of the West Bank and violated agreements signed with Israel, including the Oslo Accords, according to the Wafa news agency.

Rawhi Fattouh, chairman of the Palestinian National Council, described the decisions as “racist and dangerous”, accusing Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government of imposing new colonial realities on the ground.

Several Palestinian factions, including Hamas and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, also condemned the move.

The Oslo Accords, signed in 1993 and 1995 between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), established limited Palestinian self-rule in parts of the West Bank and Gaza, dividing the West Bank into Areas A, B, and C as a temporary framework for a future Palestinian state – a goal that has never been realized.

Muayyad Shaaban, head of the Palestinian Commission Against the Wall and Settlements, said the Israeli decisions represent a dangerous escalation that undermines international law and adds to crimes against Palestinians.

The Palestinian National Initiative said the measures drive the final nail into the Oslo Accords and open the door to large-scale land seizures benefiting Israeli settlers. 

The Yesha Council, which represents Israeli settlements, celebrated the decision, saying it “entrenches Israeli sovereignty on the ground.”

Peace Now, an NGO monitoring settlement expansion, said Netanyahu has effectively chosen to “topple the Palestinian Authority” and “impose de facto annexation”, warning the moves go far beyond Area C and break barriers to massive land theft across the West Bank.

What are the changes? 

Under the new Israeli measures, the military would be able to enforce regulations on so-called unlicensed buildings in Areas A and B, citing heritage and archaeological sites, allowing for the confiscation of Palestinian land and demolition of structures.

The changes would also lift secrecy on West Bank land registries, enabling settlers to identify Palestinian landowners and purchase land directly. Exposing ownership records could make it easier for settlers to forge claims over Palestinian land, a tactic widely documented and likely to accelerate land seizures across the occupied territory.

The measures also ease the sale of Palestinian land to Israelis and overturn a Jordanian-era law prohibiting transfers to non-Palestinians. 

Planning, licensing, and construction powers in Hebron would be transferred from the Palestinian municipality to the Israeli army, expanding control over building permits, development, resources, and security. An independent local authority will also be established for the Israeli settlement in Hebron.

The Hebron municipality condemned the move as “illegitimate and dangerous”. Under the 1997 Hebron Protocol, the city was divided into Hebron 1, under Palestinian control, and Hebron 2, under Israeli authority, covering southern and eastern sections.

The new policy also affects the Ibrahimi Mosque in Hebron, a site holy to Muslims, Jews, and Christians.

The Palestinian presidency warned that any violation of Islamic or Christian holy sites, including the mosque, is unacceptable. In January, Israel barred the mosque’s Palestinian directors and seized planning rights over part of the site, violating longstanding arrangements.

The policy comes amid rising settler attacks and access restrictions on Palestinian holy sites since October 2023, including Al-Aqsa Mosque in occupied East Jerusalem and Joseph’s Tomb in Nablus.

Authored by David Manney via PJ Media,

The Warning That Never Changes

Remember Adam Schiff? The California Democratic senator returned to familiar ground, while sounding another dire warning about President Donald Trump and the upcoming midterm elections.

Schiff insists Trump plans on subverting the midterms by suppressing votes and overturning results if Republicans lose.

Schiff said, “I think he fully intends to try to subvert the elections. He will do everything he can to suppress the vote. And if he loses the vote, and I think the Republicans do now expect they’ll get a real drubbing in the midterms. He’s prepared to try to take some kind of action to overturn the result, and we really shouldn’t question that. We saw him try to the point of insurrection to overturn the 2020 election. We see him now taking these extraordinary steps with an election that was five years ago. He’s basically telling us he intends to interfere in the upcoming election. He hasn’t brought prices down. There’s chaos and killing in American streets by ICE agents. The public has turned against him in every election we’ve had since his election.”

As if a vault of evidence sits ready to open, Schiff presents the claims with grave certainty.

Just not today.

Because the script is familiar and he shares it in a safe space, Schiff points backward, not forward, again leaning on 2020, repeating “insurrection,” while warning that future elections are in danger, prices remain high, chaos rules the streets, and federal law enforcement morphs into a roaming band of villains in Schiff’s telling.

He throws charges around with dramatic flair—I’m surprised he hasn’t hurt his neck—yet none of those charges arrive with verifiable proof.

Fear as a Political Habit

As he’s proven over the course of years, Schiff doesn’t warn; he escalates, while claiming Trump fully intends to interfere in elections and urging a massive turnout to overwhelm imagined schemes. He talks of suppressed votes, seized machines, and intimidation at polling places, all framed as imminent threats, not tested facts.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.J.) is working the same script, promising Democrats will stop a stolen election before it happens.

Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.), vice chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, is working to generate legitimacy by repeating claims about election interference already underway.

The left is using a consistent pattern: State the outcome first, and fill in the justification later.

     Related: Trump Lays Out Why the SAVE Act Is Key for Midterm Elections

It doesn’t matter that Democrats are selling fiction: none of the statements offer any confirmed actions, court findings, or official orders. Instead, their message relies on repetition and urgency; fear works better when people feel rushed.

A Record That Undermines the Message

Schiff’s credibility isn’t an overnight sensation; when he was chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, he repeatedly claimed to have evidence of Russian collusion. He kept referring to proof that was hiding in plain sight, with evidence visible to anyone willing to believe.

Of course, he forgot the pixie dust, so nothing he said actually took off.

Investigations closed over the years, while promised revelations never appeared. A special counsel report dismantled the narrative Schiff sold, and he was later censured for misleading statements tied to the Russia investigation.

Schiff’s censure didn’t erase the past; it highlighted it.

As if that wasn’t enough, Schiff also promoted a dossier filled with unverified claims while reading it into the congressional record, blocked witnesses who might challenge his storyline, and later released summaries full of errors.

Each episode chipped away at trust, not because the public demanded perfection, but because Schiff demanded belief without delivery.

Leaks, Claims, and Lingering Doubt

Accusations followed Schiff around like a smell; allegations surfaced that classified information leaked during the Russia probe with Schiff’s approval. A whistleblower later lost credibility, yet the episode added another layer of doubt. An inspector general’s report found that Schiff’s memo on surveillance contained several false statements. Republicans accused him of shaping the evidence rather than presenting it clearly.

Partisan interpretation wasn’t required for any of those moments; records spoke clearly enough. Schiff argued the process, while outcomes contradicted his assurance.

The public noticed.

Why Fewer People Listen Now

Schiff acts like a neckless chicken who predicts catastrophe every time clouds gather. After enough false alarms, people stop checking the sky. His latest claims about Trump follow his script, just updated with new dates and familiar villains.

While Trump governs with visible policies and measurable results, Schiff governs with warnings. Elections belong to us, voters, not press conferences.

When accusations continually arrive without receipts, skepticism becomes common sense.

Like Wimpy promising a hamburger payment on Tuesday, Schiff keeps promising proof tomorrow, but tomorrow keeps missing deadlines.

Final Thoughts

The fact that ABC News rolled Schiff out tells me how desperate the left is to change the message. Very few Democrats speak with credibility, and that number is rapidly falling. With this in mind, is there any other reason Schiff is allowed in front of a microphone?

Wanting urgency, Schiff earns fatigue, with accusations echoing loudly inside partisan spaces. Yet, outside those walls, the echoes fade fast.

PJ Media VIP backs writers who challenge narratives built on repetition instead of facts. Join today for exclusive analysis, fewer ads, and direct support for independent commentary. Use this link to save 60% and help keep sharp voices in the fight.