Please, folks, let’s not start panicking about long-term Treasury bond yields. In the last couple of weeks I’ve seen more ink spilled about the 30-year Treasury than I have in probably the last 10 years. 

The bellwether Treasury is the 10-year, which has been trading steadily in a range of 4 percent to 5 percent and no one’s been screaming about that. 

Yet here’s the key point. The 30-year Treasury bond yield has gone up about 35 basis points in recent weeks almost entirely because of plenty of new economic statistics that show a faster, more powerful growth rate — especially in manufacturing and construction, along with advanced technologies. 

It’s not about inflation. Yet the news headlines have been screaming inflation with no good analysis because they just love to keep whacking away at President Trump. 

Take a look at any of the Treasury rate increases, however, and you will see it’s all from the real yield, not the inflation component. 

The inflation component, which is the CPI breakeven compensation for inflation, hasn’t gone up all year. On the 30-year CPI breakeven, the expected inflation component has hovered just above 2.0 percent all year to date.

Another example, the market rate for 10-year Treasuries has increased about 50 basis points so far this year. 

And virtually all of it is from an increase in the real yield from Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities of 50 basis points. The expected inflation rate from the breakevens has increased by less than 5 basis points. 

The consumer price index break-even component that implies inflation has basically been flat. The same is true for the 30-year Treasury bond. 

What is happening however, is that market rates have been driven up by stronger 4 percent-type economic growth and are normalizing after all those 0-type rates from the financial crisis and Covid and very bad Federal Reserve policy that Kevin Warsh is going to fix. 

Actually, for context, a 4 percent-plus Treasury yield is more like the President Clinton/Speaker Newt Gingrich days of strong growth from lower capital gains taxes and welfare reform. 

The economy was booming then. The Treasury rate’s around 6 percent.  So right now, we’re just normalizing. And there is an enormous boom. Mr. Trump today at the White House spoke of the boom from one big beautiful bill:

“We’ve gained so much in the last 16 months like nobody can believe, actually. And not only that, but we have more money being invested in the United States than any country at any time in history. Money is coming in by the trillions.” 

He added that “our nation’s economic dominance drives trillions of dollars in investments, creates millions of jobs, and expands access, credit and capital so that every citizen has a chance to achieve what we now hear a lot about the American dream.”

The American dream is alive and well. So I’ll just put a cap on this by saying, first of all, ignore the headlines. Second of all, interest rates in the bond market are not exploding. 

And what increase there has been is because of a stronger than expected economy. And we are normalizing. And there’s nothing to panic over, even though the press loves to whack away at Mr. Trump on almost every topic under the sun. 

Casino and resort operator Bally’s issued a warning that it may struggle to keep up with its debt burden over the next year, and there is “substantial doubt” about its ability to remain a going concern.

The company made the disclosure in its second quarter earnings report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

In the filing, Bally’s said the company is “pursuing a number of financing alternatives to enhance its liquidity, including asset monetization, an equity sale, and debt financings.”

“While the company is actively engaged in discussions on several financing alternatives, the conditions and events raise substantial doubt about the company’s ability to continue as a going concern,” Bally’s said in the filing.

FANATICS EXPANDS FURTHER INTO SPORTS AND BEYOND WITH FANATICS MARKETS PREDICTION TRADING PLATFORM

Bally’s warned in the filing there is substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern. (John J. Kim/Chicago Tribune/Tribune News Service via Getty Images)

The company said it executed a term sheet in July for a loan that would fund the continued development of the Bally’s Bronx project and other corporate purposes, though the term sheet is non-binding, and the two sides are working toward a binding agreement.

“These plans have not been finalized, are subject to market conditions and the actions of third parties, are not within the company’s control and there can be no assurance that the plans will be successfully implemented,” Bally’s explained, adding that those plans don’t alleviate substantial doubt about its ability to remain a going concern.

Companies are required to include a going concern warning in its financial filings when auditors see that the company faces the risk of failing or being forced into bankruptcy within the next year.

LAS VEGAS OPENS FIRST CASINO IN 2 YEARS ON $780 MILLION PROPERTY CATERING MORE TO LOCALS THAN TOURISTS

Bally’s filing noted several factors that may influence its outlook and performance, including unexpected costs from its construction projects, risks from rapid growth, the impact of digitization of gaming on casino operators and the company’s expansion into digital gaming, as well as regulatory compliance costs and other matters.

As of the end of June, Bally’s owned and operated 20 casinos globally, including some in the United Kingdom and in 11 U.S. states, as well as a golf course in New York and horse racetracks in Colorado and Wyoming.

It also operates the Bally Bet Sportsbook & Casino, an iCasino and sportsbook licensed in 14 North American jurisdictions, and it holds a majority interest in Bally’s Intralot.

TROPICANA LAS VEGAS CEASING OPERATIONS THIS SPRING TO MAKE WAY FOR NEW BALLPARK

Bally’s operates a number of casinos and hotels around the U.S. and in the United Kingdom. (Ethan Miller/Getty Images)

The company has rights to developable land in Las Vegas at the former site of the Tropicana Las Vegas and has a license to build a full-scale casino and resort in The Bronx, New York. 

It’s also developing Bally’s Chicago, an integrated resort in the Windy City, though it recently paused construction on some portions of the project amid the uncertainty.

Shares in Bally’s stock have declined over 35.9% over the past five trading days since the warning.

The company’s stock is down just 4.9% over the last year, but has fallen more than 46.8% since the start of 2026.

GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO BY CLICKING HERE

Bally’s shares are down 0.79% during Wednesday’s trading session.

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are facing renewed scrutiny over their ability to translate their global name recognition into paying audiences, after their latest documentary project underperformed significantly at the box office, according to public relations experts who have weighed in on the film’s disappointing run.

“Cookie Queens,” a documentary on which the Duke and Duchess of Sussex serve as executive producers, follows four Girl Scouts competing to become the season’s top cookie seller. The film debuted in theaters two weeks ago but has struggled commercially, with reports indicating it was outperformed at the box office by a compilation of viral cat videos released around the same time.

PR expert Mayah Riaz cautioned against interpreting the film’s weak box office performance as a direct referendum on Harry and Meghan’s broader public standing, telling The News International that the situation is more nuanced than it might initially appear. “I would be careful about viewing the box office result as a straightforward verdict on Harry and Meghan themselves,” Riaz said. She noted that the documentary’s subject matter inherently limited its commercial ceiling. “Cookie Queens is a niche documentary about Girl Scouts and their cookie-selling competition, so it was never going to have the natural commercial pull of a major mainstream film,” Riaz said, adding that the film’s “relatively limited theatrical release” made direct comparisons to conventional blockbuster releases difficult to draw.

Despite that context, Riaz identified what she described as a more significant underlying concern for the couple’s broader media strategy. “There is a bigger PR issue here,” she said, explaining that much of Harry and Meghan’s public profile has been built around generating conversation rather than necessarily driving audience engagement with any single project. “Harry and Meghan have built a huge amount of their profile around being talked about,” Riaz said, but she drew a clear distinction between that visibility and genuine commercial demand. “There is an important difference between generating headlines and generating audiences,” she said.

Riaz went on to argue that the couple’s ability to dominate news coverage does not automatically translate into consumer engagement with their creative output. “Their names can still dominate the news cycle,” she said, “but that doesn’t mean people will spend money or time consuming every project they attach themselves to.” She offered a pointed observation about the paradox facing the Sussexes’ current media strategy, suggesting that their recent efforts to present more conventional, less controversial content may be working against their ability to generate genuine public interest. “In fact, I think the irony is that the less controversial the project becomes, the harder it can be for them to generate genuine curiosity,” Riaz said.

Royal commentator Kinsey Schofield offered a similar assessment of the documentary’s underwhelming reception, telling Fox News Digital that the Sussexes can no longer rely on their names alone to guarantee a project’s commercial success. “Harry and Meghan remain extraordinarily effective at generating headlines, but headlines and paying customers are two very different things,” Schofield said. She suggested that the earlier period in which the couple’s involvement alone was sufficient to drive significant public curiosity toward a project has passed. Schofield noted that the days are gone “when simply attaching their names to something guaranteed enormous curiosity.”

The commentary surrounding “Cookie Queens” adds to an ongoing broader conversation about the commercial performance and public reception of Harry and Meghan’s various media ventures since the couple stepped back from their roles as senior working royals in 2020 and relocated to the United States. The Sussexes have built an extensive media and business portfolio in the years since their departure, including documentary series, podcasts and books, some produced through content agreements with major streaming platforms, alongside various lifestyle and commercial ventures under Meghan’s Sussex-branded lines of products.

Reaction to the couple’s various projects has historically been mixed, with some earlier releases, including their widely watched Netflix documentary series, drawing significant viewership numbers upon release even as critical reception often remained divided. “Cookie Queens,” by contrast, appears to represent one of the more modest commercial outings in the couple’s expanding media portfolio, both in terms of its limited theatrical distribution and its niche subject matter centered on a youth-oriented fundraising competition rather than material more directly tied to the couple’s own personal narrative or royal experiences.

The broader questions raised by PR experts regarding the durability of the couple’s public draw arrive amid continued speculation about the state of Harry and Meghan’s relationship with the wider royal family, as well as ongoing coverage of their evolving media and business ventures in the years since their departure from official royal duties. Neither Prince Harry nor Meghan Markle has publicly responded to the specific commentary regarding “Cookie Queens” or the broader questions raised about their ability to convert headline attention into paying audiences for their creative projects.

As the couple continues developing additional media and commercial ventures, the reception to “Cookie Queens” is likely to serve as one data point among several that industry observers and entertainment commentators will continue watching closely, particularly as questions persist about whether the substantial public attention the Sussexes continue to generate translates reliably into the kind of sustained commercial engagement typically associated with successful entertainment properties. Representatives for Harry and Meghan have not issued a public statement addressing the box office performance of “Cookie Queens” or the broader commentary from PR experts regarding the couple’s audience-building strategy.

This article was written by

Follow

Analyst’s Disclosure: I/we have no stock, option or similar derivative position in any of the companies mentioned, and no plans to initiate any such positions within the next 72 hours. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Seeking Alpha’s Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. No recommendation or advice is being given as to whether any investment is suitable for a particular investor. Any views or opinions expressed above may not reflect those of Seeking Alpha as a whole. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank. Our analysts are third party authors that include both professional investors and individual investors who may not be licensed or certified by any institute or regulatory body.

This article was written by

Follow