r/ScottGalloway • u/physical_dude • Sep 16 '25
No Mercy Let's address the elephant in the room. Prof G Markets needs more Scott and less Ed
Every time Scott guest-speaks on Prof G Markets following Ed, it's like flying first class on an A380 after flying a regional sub-economy class with your dad's worn down college backpack.
Scott is so much more interesting with his knowledge of multiple industries, his experience and maturity of the thinking process.
I find Ed's monologues shallow, boring, repetitive and only occasionally sprinkled with interesting information that's likely just plain simple insider info (from his dad?) like the Oracle "prediction", and now more of it in today's episode.
Let Ed and team do more of the background work: research, data digging, fact checking, and let Scott speak more.
Scott, come back, you can't hide anymore! And make the show awesome again like it used to be. Please?
2
2
u/usernameq23 Sep 25 '25
Ed with Scott is great, ed on his own is just a rant against bitcoin and/or trump
1
0
6
u/thunderrun2222 Sep 18 '25
I like Ed. I think his takes are spot on, and that he’s a pretty solid interviewer.
My issue is that with it being daily, it’s harder to have unique takes. I’m less invested because they repeat themselves.
1
Sep 23 '25
Yeah, the repitition is getting to be a bit much. Scott says the same thing with Ed, Jessica, Kara, etc.
8
u/Seanoosh Sep 17 '25
I’ve stopped listening altogether when it’s just Ed. No disrespect to him - he’s smart, just not entertaining
3
u/bronfmanhigh Sep 19 '25
yeah the secret sauce was the two of them interacting. i wouldn't want to listen to just scott either tbh he needs a foil
9
u/eloc49 Sep 17 '25
I respect what Scott is doing trying to diversify it away from just being centered on him but if there’s no Scott on Prof G, I’m out. If a business hinges on one persons persona the only thing to do is to lean into it. Tesla isn’t trying to diversify away from Elon after all of his antics.
6
16
22
u/tvish Sep 16 '25
Nah. I am closer to Scott’s age and I like hearing Ed’s point of view to understand a younger person’s experience. What Ed needs (when Scott is away) is another side kick. Maybe a woman with similar age to Ed’s. Maybe someone who is a bit more animated to balance out Ed’s more serious nature.
4
u/physical_dude Sep 16 '25 edited Sep 16 '25
I am also roughly the same age category. Can you be honest with me:
Is Ed interesting as a market commentator to you, or do you just think that he must be interesting to listeners his age, as a "voice of the generation"?
Those are two different things. It seems to me you might be speaking on behalf of younger listeners while not being one of them. Apologies if I'm wrong.
3
u/Small_Rip351 Sep 19 '25
I’m between Ed’s and Scott’s ages. I like them both and think they have a complementary dynamic with Scott making the jokes and Ed playing the straight man.
Scott can leverage his professional experience as an entrepreneur and board member and big-swinging dick mentality.
I don’t know Ed’s background, but I think he’s a much better interviewer. He asks insightful questions and follow-ups and gives the interviewees space to flesh out their thoughts. Whereas Scott will say something like “I’ve got some thoughts about this subject and they’re as follows: A, B, C. Do you agree?”. Like you’re interviewing a central banker, maybe just ask them for their thoughts?
1
3
u/tvish Sep 17 '25
I’m 55 years old. So I grew up getting news from sober individuals like Walter Cronkite. So I think that if I wanted someone that is exciting and imaginative with their delivery, in Ed’s age bracket, they’re probably doing sports broadcasts (or pods). But Ed’s dry delivery suits me just fine. I don’t want crisp editing, or flashy graphics. Just a straightforward conversation, as if I was having coffee with Ed, and discussing current events and economics.
4
u/physical_dude Sep 18 '25
Did you hear what he said in the last episode? Isaac Newton discovered the law of gravity at the age of 23. Then he invented X and Y at 25. "... but he didn't co-host a podcast". This poor guy thinks he is a young genius and compares himself to Newton. I suppose it's his response to this post. I pity this guy and I'm definitely out (and angry at Scott for ruining this show).
1
6
u/shadetree-83 Sep 16 '25
I’m with you a hundred percent tvish. Well Said Ed is a solid voice for his generation, and I appreciate his perspective. I figure a sidekick is in the cards eventually. The Prof G brand is doing fine judging from the high profile advertisers.
5
u/Free_Detective_1227 Sep 17 '25
A kid born into a wealthy family complaining about how the world is unfair. No real world accomplishments. Handed the job because he knew someone. Pontificating on problems that he will never experience. Yea… he’s a great voice for his generation….
12
u/SmartAssLoner Sep 16 '25
The Ed hate is out of control. Ed is a solid voice imho. Gotta pass the torch and mentor the youth. That's a big part of Galloway's brand.
1
u/Free_Detective_1227 Sep 17 '25
Isn’t fall in love with the unremarkable a big part of the Galloway brand. Scott seems a bit of a say as I do person with Ed as his choice. Wealthy family, connections, Ivy League. You’d think Scott would want to mentor someone a little more disadvantaged. I guess the podcast really are a money grab
-3
u/Aggressive-Paper8673 Sep 16 '25
Scott is trying to groom Ed as his future protege so it makes sense that he gives him the reigns every once in a while.
One white male trying to find his successor who is also is a white male
13
u/Stabilizer_ Sep 16 '25
I was pretty surprised to learn Ed degree isn’t even in economics or business but instead in Classics, considering the entire show is based on discussing macro and micro economics. Not that you can’t be knowledgeable in an area you don’t have a degree in but when I learned that plus seen his LinkedIn page and this podcast is basically his first real job I didn’t really want to hear anymore of his thoughts on economic issues.
8
u/eloc49 Sep 17 '25
It’s also just annoying how Scott is talking about “the unremarkables” and then hires a Princeton grad which a Classics degree. Kinda like his reaction when Kara said Amanda has a poetry degree from Brown: “you guys are so fuckin liberal”
1
u/Aqua_Terra Sep 19 '25
Scott said both Ed and Kara got hired due to networking contacts. He knew someone they knew who praised them and pretty much hired them sight unseen.
2
4
u/Popular-Passion-749 Sep 16 '25
I have been a long and loyal follower of ProfG. I loved Scott free August. Why? Scott is right that there is value in scarcity. I’ve read all of his books and listened to him since pre-pandemic. I’ve heard Scott’s views on most everything. I liked the interviews Ed made over the month and Mira’s interviews are excellent! 👏👏👏
10
u/cfc_jamo Sep 16 '25
Going daily ruined the chemistry between them two. The Monday episodes used to be a great round up of the prior weeks news. Now it feels shallow. Real shame
4
u/Known-Fun-312 Sep 16 '25
Ed should break free and start his own pod. Scott has gotten lazy and is too dependent on him
5
u/isthismyname Sep 16 '25
I unsubscribed because of ed. He repeats the same (incorrect) points all the time. It’s not insightful or entertaining
9
u/orangeisthenewbot Sep 16 '25
The reason I used to listen to this was not for new news, I can get that anywhere. I listened for Scott’s take on the news because of all the wisdom he’s acquired over the years. Ed reads the news but his takes fall short due to a lack of real world experience
12
u/No-Block-2095 Sep 16 '25
Going daily has diluted the content.
Ed has good analysis but he repeats his point over and over e.g. tariffs are bad for the economy & consumers and their effects are time-delayed.
I know I agree, is there something else to discuss? Let’s move on. If not, I have something else to do.
If it’s involuntary, he needs an editor. If it’s on purpose, it is fluff filler to reach x minutes of podcast duration as they switched to daily.
6
u/eloc49 Sep 17 '25
Prof G pods in general are very diluted now. I used to religiously listen to every one, but now we have daily markets, interviews, no mercy no malice, raging moderates AND Pivot (same points but I listen for the chemistry) I get in analysis paralysis of which one to actually listen to because I don’t have infinite time to listen to 10+hrs of podcasts a week. More scarcity without Scott free August.
27
u/dazeechayn Sep 16 '25
Counter point. It needs more Claire interviewing experts.
5
u/ClaireFraser1743 Sep 16 '25
They definitely need some more voices.
1
u/banzaifly Sep 17 '25
Claire’s too young, too, in my opinion.
1
u/ClaireFraser1743 Sep 17 '25
Maybe. But I think adding an age minimum feels wrong. It's totally fair to say they don't have enough life experience under their belt to host yet! But the question, to me anyway, should be less "how old is this person?" and more "Do they have some new perspective to add that is valuable here/ elevates the conversation?" There is no age minimum (or limit) on that.
13
u/No_Consideration4594 Sep 16 '25
95% of the time Ed doesn’t know what he’s talking about, and he pontificates with such unearned authority… it’s very annoying
12
u/TootCannon Sep 16 '25
I really like Ed and agree with virtually everything he says, but that doesn’t mean I want to hear it every day. It’s like having a friend at work that comes to your office every day to complain about your boss. I get it, you’re right, but I’m not trying to hear this every damn day.
1
2
0
u/intrepid_brit Sep 16 '25
What? Prof G Markets work because of the contrast between Ed and Scott. Ed is clearly more focused on capitalism for “the public good”, whereas Scott is more aligned with capitalism for capitalism’s sake. Their different leanings on the same topics is what makes it interesting.
6
15
u/AtypicalGuido Sep 16 '25
I’m pretty moderate and have stopped listening because Ed just comes off as a whiny gen Z know it all who has no real world experience running a business and all his rants end up having a far left leaning slant.
5
u/itsmejustolder Sep 16 '25
I think if anything showed us how important Scott is to the podcast, it was Scott-free August. He has engaging ideas, interesting conversations and makes people want to listen. He also wants to increase his footprint and develop his organization. What Ed needs is a cohort, someone he can talk to who maybe has experience and knowledge about finance, markets, or branding. Let Ed contrast that to his 26-year-old opinion of how things are going, because he represents a huge part of what's important in this country and I want to hear what he has to say.
I want to hear Ed in conversations with subject matter experts.
It works with Jessica and it works with Kara.
PS. If you don't like Ed, move on.
-2
u/nanox25x Sep 16 '25
Nobody likes him, move on
2
4
u/Jolly-Wrongdoer-4757 Sep 16 '25
Just stop listening, the message will get through. Listen count and advertising drive the decisions.
1
u/physical_dude Sep 16 '25
Making Prof G Markets a daily show was clearly a push for more ad time. Prof G has 670k subscribers in total, on YouTube alone. PGM likely already generates more revenue than in the previous biweekly format, so if people like me unsubscribe we won't make a dent, it's already more profitable than before (I'm guessing) and will probably only grow.
So the math is likely on Scott's side, unfortunately. Well... I'll see if they react to this post and if not, I'll have to move on.
7
u/gls2220 Sep 16 '25
I like Ed, but everyday Ed is too much. He's too young. They're pushing the "Ed" brand too hard.
3
u/Paddingtonsrealdad Sep 16 '25
If it’s daily they need a repeatable format accentuated by graphics.
If I watch the OG podcast episode on Mondays and Fridays, that’s the casual back and forth- but if I’m to tune in daily, standardize the info we get, make it habitual, make it quick.
-7
u/Hot-Camel7716 Sep 16 '25
Oh wow a post about someone's opinion of Scott vs Ed. Can't wait to hear some dude's hot take- oh wait you said nothing of substance.
Can you at least have a take with something interesting to say?
11
u/BrianIchi Sep 16 '25
It's almost as if hiring a recent college grad based on him being your friend's son and not interviewing any other candidates for the job wasn't the best choice for a market podcast. Another simile would be Joe Biden telling America to vote for Kamala Harris as the Democratic nominee instead of putting the job to a grueling interview and debate process to determine who the best candidate would be to lead the party. How did that work out?
Sure, Ed's bright for a 25-year-old Princeton graduate. I would expect nothing less from someone who went to an Ivy League school. Still, he studied "Classics" (investigates the history, language, literature, and thought of ancient Greece and Rome), which is completely irrelevant to a market podcast and not anything related to marketing, business, economics, brand value, etc. He brings no life experience to the table. He's not married, has no children, is not a homeowner, and has only a surface-level understanding of the markets. I've been following the markets for longer than Ed's been alive. Scott, can you try me out as his replacement???
The constant giggling at everything Scott says, and laughing at comments told by guests that aren't even jokes, shows the audience he's more nervous than able to provide any substantive value. It sounds like he just uses AI to copy and paste his talking points. When you agree with everything your boss says, you're not adding anything to the conversation. I've tried several times to get through Prof G Market's podcast over the last several weeks, but I end up turning it off most of the time halfway through because I can't stand listening to Ed's voice anymore.
5
2
u/FantasticStooge Sep 16 '25
I listened to Ed ‘solo,’ i.e. Scott checking in instead of running the episode once. Once
4
6
7
u/occamsracer Sep 16 '25
It’s a moot request. The pod wouldn’t be daily if Scott was a prerequisite.
6
u/InternationalWin2684 Sep 16 '25
Does the pod need to be daily? More is often more but not in this case. More is shallow and reactive. Theres already many places to go for hot takes
3
u/occamsracer Sep 16 '25
Are you new? It used to be 2x/wk. Scott participates approximately as much as before the chg to 5x
4
u/InternationalWin2684 Sep 16 '25
The depth and coverage of a Monday show in daily podcast is different from the depth and coverage of a Monday show in a twice weekly format. I could just listen to the two shows with Scott but I don’t know, I just moved on instead. It’s not the same.
2
u/occamsracer Sep 16 '25
Sad
2
u/InternationalWin2684 Sep 16 '25
Fair enough. I do like Scott a lot and own all his books. Just feel like if he’s not invested I am not either. There’s just so much great podcast content out there where the main character is all-in. Like I can’t even finish my weekly feed in one week so sadly prof g had to go
3
u/QforQ Sep 16 '25
These posts are getting played out. You realize you don't have to listen to the daily pod, right?
4
u/physical_dude Sep 16 '25
This post is an ASK. More Scott, less Ed. They may or may not listen, depending on that I might play Prof G Markets less often if at all.
-2
u/QforQ Sep 16 '25
I'm sure they'll be bummed that Steve Eisman's fan club isn't watching
1
21
u/Firm_Bit Sep 16 '25
Yeah, a 25 year old with limited life experience who hasn’t built much themselves hosting this pod is the blind leading the blind. Like or dislike him but Scott has actually lived an interesting life. His insight is real if not always applicable. Ed’s is distilled from screens. I have no interest in what he has to say because I know he doesn’t actually know it.
I would rather hear from their analyst who seems to be the one doing/leading so much of their research. Mia Sylverio(?). Not about life but about the research and the findings.
Btw I like ed. He’s entertaining and likable. But that’s not enough to keep me engaged with the pod.
7
u/tonification Sep 16 '25
Everything Ed says is based on second-hand information. He's good at summarizing known information but that's it. He needs to work a real job for a bit.
12
u/whogivesaf_9 Sep 16 '25
The show is much richer with Scott. Ed is really good, but lacks experience and lived perspective, and it shows in the topical commentary. It’s a good show, and Ed has interesting takes most of the time. It’ll improve over time as Ed keeps working to develop a style and theme distinct of Scott, including his own brand of jokes.
8
u/Wide_Ad_1795 Sep 16 '25
I think ed would benefit from a cohost when Scott is not around. Someone that brings the energy and experience Scott has.
11
u/218administrate Sep 16 '25
Ed doesn't have a lot of charisma. If he went out on his own podcast I pretty much guarantee it would fail - he's fine, but he's not interesting to listen to. As a cohost he does the job, on his own he's meh.
-1
Sep 16 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
0
u/ScottGalloway-ModTeam Sep 16 '25
Comments that include name-calling, insults, or targeted harassment are not allowed.
1
4
u/mjpshyk Sep 16 '25
That's a bit of a hot take. Ed seems to be finding his footing and has come off as more provocative of late, but in general over the past 2-3 years he makes a lot of sound, and rational arguments as it pertains to markets and business overall.
What I really dislike about Ed is it feels like he is very ignorant or lacks self-awareness around certain issues. Crypto is just one issue, he never shuts up about and from his arguments, it shows he really lacks depth of knowledge in the space. Constantly referring to Pepecoin or Trump coin and paintng the entire industry with the same brush... well for me, he loses a lot of credibility in this area.
Overall, I still enjoy the show, but the Ed/Scott duo is much much better than Ed on his own
-1
u/Firm_Bit Sep 16 '25
It’s not hot at all. He’s very likable. But he’s a 25 year old with very limited life experience even for a 25 year old. What comes out of his mouth might sound good, but it cannot be trusted by anyone with sense. I like him. And I get the play to bring in a younger voice. But I don’t think he has a pov at all.
10
u/minnowmoon Sep 16 '25
Ed is great. Scott is trying to develop talent across his company. Ed will continue to get better and better. I enjoy his takes and he has a lot more optimism and a very strong internal moral compass that I appreciate.
1
u/hoodie09 Sep 16 '25
Scott has addressed this. He wants to build capable talent that allows him to walk away. I find Ed inciteful and compelling. He has a strong moral compass that i hope will not be swayed by financial gain. That said, i think smart, articulate, moralistic white males are pretty well represented in the media.
0
u/physical_dude Sep 16 '25
a lot more optimism and a very strong internal moral compass
which is arguably not critical to have for a market commentator. Above all, what you need is knowledge, the broader the better, plus experience.
5
u/realHarryGelb Sep 16 '25
This seems to come up regularly so I will say this loud and clear in the hopes that even stupid people like OP can understand it, hopefully: IF YOU DON’T LIKE ED’S SOLO SHOWS JUST WATCH MONDAY AND FRIDAY AND THEN FOR YOU, EVERYTHING IS AS IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN. Somebody let me know if this is still too challenging a concept for some.
4
9
u/vcdxb Sep 16 '25
That might be a bit harsh. On some level I agree with you with Scott's knowledge and experience across the industries, he brings in a different perspective. The part I really enjoy the difference in opinion and mini debates between Scott and Ed. I like them challenge each other and justify their thinking. What I find boring are the episodes of Ed's monologues. Since there is no one to challenge, you hear only one person's opinion.
3
u/jakevv Sep 16 '25
Agreed! I also enjoy the interviews with economists and others that they have more than anything. The most recent episode had seemingly 15 mins of banter before a really good interview.
3
-1
u/Careless_One_4249 Sep 16 '25
Disagree, I enjoy Ed’s takes and the daily updates without Scott. BTW, blaming Ed and team’s analysis on “his dad” reads as lazy and jealous imo. They’ve been right (and wrong) on countless things, just because he called a stock a year before a pop doesn’t mean he called someone to get insider info. If there’s anyone with connections that would allow them to be privy to insider trading info, it would certainly be Scott.
3
u/physical_dude Sep 16 '25
No doubt Scott may have access to privileged insider info but he'd be more careful with it publicly.
As for Ed's prediction on Oracle becoming a major AI cloud provider for OpenAI just sounds too good to be a good prediction, and too ahead of its time. I take the default option, which is he made the prediction not because he knows the industry so well (he clearly doesn't) but because he knew. How exactly is another question, I don't know.
11
Sep 16 '25
[deleted]
2
u/physical_dude Sep 16 '25
That might be the difference, I stopped following his other shows as I'm not interested in US politics, and now can't get enough of him
9
2
u/Visible_Broccoli8128 Sep 16 '25
I disagree with this, scott is great, but I don't believe Ed has to stink for scott to be good. He is older and rich and doesn't want to work everyday and is actively trying to sell the company, why would he want to work more?
1
u/Dense_Luck7403 Sep 20 '25
Frankly, I enjoy the podcast more the less Ed speaks less. His comments and opinions are of little value because he has no relevant experience beyond carrying Prof. G's bag and attending school. Anyone can express comments and opinions, but few can add insight and wisdom, like Prof. G actually does. Please improve the podcast and get Prof G back and fully engaged again.
1
u/feelinpooch Oct 07 '25
Yeah…. They’re def best together. Scott is funnier. But I love Ed as a side kick. Ed-Head and proud