"It's just becoming an unstable environment to raise a child in," said Ian Jacob, owner of a construction materials company who is leaving Hong Kong with his wife and 10-year-old daughter after 15 years, according to the Straits Times.

"We watched as the situation got worse and worse," he said of the political unrest which has unfolded over the past year.

With classes suspended again amid the coronavirus outbreak, the prospect of more home schooling for their 10-year-old daughter pushed them to take refuge in Auckland, New Zealand.

Mr Jacob said they'll be moving back there for good once the school year ends in Hong Kong. -Straits Times

According to the Times, expats who have been thinking about leaving the politically unstable city have a sense of urgency due to the coroavirus, which has officially killed over 2,000 people and infected over 75,000.

Meanwhile, Hong Kong Chief Executive Carrie Lam has been oddly criticized for closing schools until mid-March due to the coronavirus threat, unlike Singapore.

Critics accuse Chief Executive Carrie Lam's government of mishandling the latest crisis compared with Singapore, which has kept schools open.

An exodus by expats like Mr Jacob could further damage an economy already reeling from the unrest and the virus, with visitor numbers plunging and unemployment rising.

Hong Kong residents who come from elsewhere play outsized roles in finance, law and other service industries that make the city a global business capital. -Straits Times

There are just under 700,000 foreigners and mainland Chinese living in Hong Kong, accounting for nearly 9.5% of the population according to the 2016 census. Half of all expats ion the Special Administrative Region are from the Philippines and Indonesia - the primary source of domestic help. Additionally, there are around 35,000 Britons and 14,800 Americans.

And while the Times can't say exactly how many people are considering leaving, "there is growing anecdotal evidence of a shift in sentiment among expats," as evidenced by relocation companies which have experienced a spike in inquiries about moving, along with predictions that the ongoing political crisis will only "worsen in the days and weeks ahead," as the city deals with the virus - according toa February 11 report from risk consultants Steve Vickers and Associates.

Links International Relocation Ltd had a 45 per cent increase in inquiries about moves in the second week of February compared with a year earlier, said Mr Patrick O'Donnell, the company's Hong Kong-based managing director.

...

Typically the peak season for overseas moves is in June, yet springtime already is starting to look busy, said Mr Timothy Tao, Hong Kong-based director of business development with relocation company Asia Tigers Group. Inquiries have jumped in the past month, he said.

"People are telling us: How soon can you pack us up?" Mr Tao said. -Straits Times

Meanwhile, worried workers have been panic buying groceries - emptying out shelves, and working from home. This has left restaurants struggling.

According to a February 12 letter from the British and French chambers of commerce, Hong Kong is at economic risk if a mass exodus occurs, and could threaten the city's global status.

"If the specific needs of international schools cannot be rapidly addressed, this will very likely trigger decisions of families (not just expatriates) to leave Hong Kong in the coming weeks," wrote Rebecca Silli and Peter Burnett, chairs of the French and British chambers.

"This would also have dramatic consequences on the international schools' financial position, even to the point of putting at risk the continued operation of some."

Some families have opted to temporarily relocate until the political situation in Hong Kong settles down.

Insurance industry executive Ruth Lu, who has children ages 7 and 11, has rented a house with a pool on the Thai island of Koh Samui while schools are closed.

"We don't even need to wear masks," she said.

A native of China's Jiangsu Province who has lived in Hong Kong for more than 20 years, Ms Lu has no immediate plans to move but the unrest has soured her on the city.

"It's not the old Hong Kong like when I first arrived," she said.

Others, such as several bankers interviewed by Bloomberg, said they had moved abroad with their families until the outbreak has subsided. 

Approximately 75% of the families at the prestigious private Chinese International School with over 1,530 students, have provided their whereabouts - with 20% of them reporting to be outside Hong Kong, according to headmaster Sean Lynch.

The US State Department, meanwhile, has warned Americans about travel to Hong Kong - advising increased caution, while allowing non-essential State Department employees and their families to evacuate.

Jho Low

Malaysian authorities have reportedly told the Kuala Lumpur International airport to monitor for Low in case he tries to flee back to Malaysia to escape the virus. Though we suspect that Low wouldn't be dumb enough to leave China, considering there's an Interpol red notice with his name on it.

"Previously, we did receive intelligence that he was active in Wuhan," Inspector-General of Police Abdul Hamid Bador said in Kuala Lumpur on Wednesday, without saying when Low was reported to be in the Chinese city. "I have told Kuala Lumpur International Airport to monitor if he comes back with Covid-19."

Low is the shady financier and former Hollywood producer who allegedly masterminded the pillaging of billions of dollars from 1MDB, a Malaysian sovereign wealth fund financed by several bond offerings underwritten by Goldman Sachs (the storied investment bank has reportedly agreed on a settlement with the DoJ, but still faces legal scrutiny in Malaysia).

Low also faces criminal charges in the US, where hundreds of millions of dollars in assets purchased by him with his ill-gotten gains - including jewelry, a yacht, proceeds from the movie 'The Wolf of Wall Street' etc. - have been seized.

Of course, if Low was ever caught, we imagine he'd have some interesting things to say about the senior Goldman execs with whom he met, including former CEO turned twitter armchair political analyst Lloyd Blankfein.

But like they say: It's best to hide where noone goes.

All that was probably enough to destabilize the regime on its own. Though it has quieted down somewhat, the public outrage is still simmering as Iran's rolling economic crisis continues.

Now, on top of all that, Tehran has confirmed to the AP that authorities have confirmed two cases of the coronavirus in Iran. That means the virus has now infiltrated two of the world's most isolated states - Iran and North Korea. Many outsiders believe North Korea has confirmed at least one case of the virus, but that it has withheld this information from the international community to avoid inciting a panic.

Like North Korea, Iran's battered economy, crippled by years of American sanctions, is hardly equipped to deal with the outbreak. According to Iranian media, the cases were confirmed in the central province of Qom. More patients are being tested as an unknown number of suspected cases have been isolated, according to the AP.

Last night in New York, we reported that Japanese health authorities were preparing to release the first batch of 500 passengers and crew who had reportedly tested negative for the virus (though that doesn't completely rule out the possibility that a few of them might still develop symptoms caused by COVID-19).

On Wednesday morning in the US (so Wednesday night in Japan), health officials revealed that 79 more people onboard had tested positive for the virus, taking the total number of infected aboard the ship to 621, the AP reports.

As we've noted several times, the notion that thousands of people are about to be released while hundreds of cases of the virus are still being confirmed seems like insanity. While most of the patients will face two more weeks of quarantine when they return home, how are they planning on getting there? There's been no word of an official government transport. By allowing them to travel home, Japan is breaking the quarantine.

Seems like a particularly stupid thing to do when the Tokyo Olympics are coming up this summer.

After the virus death toll on the mainland hit 2,000 last night, Johns Hopkins reports that the number of confirmed cases and deaths haven't moved since then: By their count, total confirmed stood at 75,201 while deaths stood at 2,012.

Johns Hopkins

Last night, the CDC warned that Japan's quarantine of the 'Diamond Princess' "may not have been sufficient" to prevent transmission among individuals on the ship.

In other slightly more positive cruise-ship related news, the Guardian reports that A total of 781 guests who disembarked from the Westerdam cruise ship in Cambodia have tested negative for Covid-19, Holland America, the ship’s operator, said.

As Beijing tries to reassure its population, half of which is under lockdown, that everything is going to be okay, Reuters reports that China’s central bank and its finance ministry won't send any officials to a G-20 finance ministers and central bank governors meeting in Riyadh due to the Coronavirus outbreak.

Meanwhile, in Wuhan, the twin nightmares of the 'war time' lockdown coupled with the ravages of the virus continue to work their wonders.

"Yesterday morning he was still able to speak...It’s all because of their delay!...How can I get through this without my dad?" A young girl cries on the street of #Wuhan over the death of her father. pic.twitter.com/O9xHB2q2GC

— NTD News (@news_ntd) February 19, 2020

The yuan strengthened early Wednesday following reports that China is weighing measures including direct cash infusions and mergers to bail out the airline industry and others. Earlier, the state directed Chinese banks to offer emergency loans to troubled companies. The South Korean government and central bank announced a similar plan earlier this week.

As we reported earlier, Beijing expelled 3 WSJ reporters on Wednesday over an opinion column published by the paper that Beijing decried as 'racist'.

Remember, next time you hear somebody talking about the outbreak 'slowing down', take a look at this:

One major Europe-US consideration is the Trump administration’s decisions on nuclear strategy which have an enormous impact that will be likely to shape international relations indefinitely.

This has been examined by President Macron of France whose recent speech on Defence and Deterrence Strategy has not received the attention it merits in the US media. He delivered his talk at the military’s War College on February 7, and opened by making the point that he was the first president to speak there since Charles de Gaulle “announced on 3 November 1959, sixty years ago, the creation of what he then called the force de frappe”. The force de frappe is literally the nuclear ‘Strike Force’ (now less combatively referred to as ‘deterrence’) and is comparatively modest, consisting only of some 300 weapons, as assessed by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute in 2019.

Of course the word ‘modest’ in reference to nuclear weapons’ arsenals is somewhat misleading, if only because 300 of them (or Israel’s 100 or so; China’s 290; Pakistan’s 200 or India’s 180) could destroy the world. But it is used in comparison to the arsenals of the nuclear super-powers, the US and Russia, which each have over 6,000.

Macron said that “Russian-American bilateral treaties relate to a chapter of history – that of the Cold War – but also to a reality that is still relevant today, that of the considerable size of arsenals still being held by Moscow and Washington, without a possible comparison with those of other nuclear-weapon-States. In this respect, it is critical that the New Start Treaty be extended beyond 2021.”

And there he put his finger on the button.

The New Start Treaty — the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty agreed between the US and Russia — was signed in 2010 and if Trump fails to take action it will expire in February 2021. Its main “Measures for the Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms”, according to an April 2019 report by the US Congressional Research Service “limits each side to no more than 800 deployed and nondeployed land-based intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) and submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM) launchers and deployed and nondeployed heavy bombers equipped to carry nuclear armaments… The treaty also limits each side to no more than 1,550 deployed warheads; those are the actual number of warheads on deployed ICBMs and SLBMs, and one warhead for each deployed heavy bomber.”

The accord could be described as modest but exceptionally important, and has been acknowledged as such by Russia whose deputy foreign minister, Sergey Ryabkov, stated on February 11 that the country has “confirmed its readiness at the highest level to extend this treaty without any preconditions and, moreover, to do it urgently.”

But in spite of the fact that Russian readiness “was officially brought to the notice of the American side by a diplomatic note at the end of last year” there has been no positive reaction from Washington, which is disturbing, to put it mildly.

Macron was right in observing that “there can be no defence and security project of European citizens without political vision seeking to advance gradual rebuilding of confidence with Russia” and he has made it clear that for the moment there is little prospect of true détente (to use the old Cold War term) because the “divide between us is growing and dialogue is weakening precisely at a time when the number of security issues that need to be addressed with Moscow are increasing.”

But Trump does not appear to be prepared to talk with Russia about any security problems. As noted by Defense News on February 10, his fiscal 2021 budget details a massive increase in expenditure on nuclear weapons, which is not the signal that Washington should be sending to China and Russia. The $28.9 billion to be spent on nuclear modernisation includes over 4 billion for Columbia Class submarines, almost 3 billion on B-21 bombers, and a billion for the Trident missile life-extension programme. All of these are notably offensive “mutually assured destruction” style decisions, and by no stretch of the imagination can be described as confidence-building or indicative of desire to embrace the Start Treaty — which could be agreed by a simple presidential signature. There is no requirement for any legislative procedure.

The Washington Post, no champion of Russia, and indeed a fervent critic of Russian policies about almost everything, observed on February 10 in an editorial that “Putin wants to extend arms control. What’s Trump waiting for?” The paper referred to the New Start Treaty in supportive terms and notes that it “provides for intrusive verification and ensures stability in nuclear arsenals. If New Start lapses, both countries will be free to deploy more nuclear warheads and build new generations of weapons and delivery systems” — which has been heralded in the US by the Pentagon’s programmes.

At a meeting of the US-Nato military alliance in Brussels on February 12-13, however, there was no mention of Washington’s impending expansion of nuclear weapons’ capabilities, but much focus on criticising Russia and supporting Ukraine while attempting to justify Nato’s movement further away from Europe to “enhance Nato Mission Iraq” which is madness.

Macron has a wider and more pragmatic view of international affairs and wants Europe to devise “an international arms control agenda” because “the end of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, the uncertainties about the future of the New Start Treaty and the crisis of the conventional arms control regime in Europe have led to the possibility of a return of pure unhindered military and nuclear competition by 2021, which has not been seen since the end of the 1960s.”

Macron is concerned that dialogue is being rejected in favour of nuclear sabre-rattling, but unfortunately cannot rely for support from the only other nuclear weapons-capable country in Europe, the United Kingdom, which is squandering billions on its nuclear programme that its National Audit Office reported is facing “delays of between one and six years, with costs increasing by £1.3 bn.” In spite of this shambles the UK’s nuclear policy will not alter, because prime minister Johnson has approved expenditure on replacing the existing Trident nuclear missiles, and the independent Forces Network records that he voted for “a series of proposed spending cuts and changes to the welfare system in favour of spending on new nuclear weapons.”

Further, Britain is heavily influenced by Washington in its nuclear posture, as made clear by US Admiral Charles Richard whose testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee on February 13 included the statement that the new W-93 nuclear warhead will “support a parallel Replacement Warhead Program in the United Kingdom whose nuclear deterrent plays an absolutely vital role in Nato’s overall defence posture.”

It seems that in Europe Emmanuel Macron is a lonely voice in attempting to encourage Trump to renew the Arms Reduction Treaty and that his only significant supporter in moving towards dialogue with Russia is Angela Merkel, who has almost as many domestic political problems as he has. It is hoped that more nations will pay attention to Macron’s wise pronouncement that “there can be no defence and security project for European citizens without a political vision that seeks to progressively restore trust with Russia.”

If there is no movement towards dialogue with the intention of establishing a latter-day détente, and if Trump refuses to extend New Start, then the nuclear dominance option, as already being embraced by Washington, will further destabilise our already shaky world.

But I argued that financial crises, at least, are more like hurricanes: they are the predictable result of built-up economic and financial vulnerabilities and policy mistakes.

There are times when we should expect the system to reach a tipping point – the “Minsky Moment” – when a boom and a bubble turn into a crash and a bust. Such events are not about the “unknown unknowns,” but rather the “known unknowns.”

Beyond the usual economic and policy risks that most financial analysts worry about, a number of potentially seismic white swans are visible on the horizon this year. Any of them could trigger severe economic, financial, political, and geopolitical disturbances unlike anything since the 2008 crisis.

For starters, the United States is locked in an escalating strategic rivalry with at least four implicitly aligned revisionist powers: China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea. These countries all have an interest in challenging the US-led global order, and 2020 could be a critical year for them, owing to the US presidential election and the potential change in US global policies that could follow.

Under President Donald Trump, the US is trying to contain or even trigger regime change in these  four countries through economic sanctions and other means. Similarly, the four revisionists want to undercut American hard and soft power abroad by destabilizing the US from within through asymmetric warfare. If the US election descends into partisan rancor, chaos, disputed vote tallies, and accusations of “rigged” elections, so much the better for America’s rivals. A breakdown of the US political system would weaken American power abroad.

Moreover, some countries have a particular interest in removing Trump. The acute threat that he poses to the Iranian regime gives it every reason to escalate the conflict with the US in the coming months – even if it means risking a full-scale war – on the chance that the ensuing spike in oil prices would crash the US stock market, trigger a recession, and sink Trump’s re-election prospects. Yes, the consensus view is that the targeted killing of Qassem Suleimani has deterred Iran, but that argument misunderstands the regime’s perverse incentives. War between US and Iran is likely this year; the current calm is the one before the proverbial storm.

As for US-China relations, the recent “phase one” deal is a temporary Band-Aid. The bilateral cold war over technology, data, investment, currency, and finance is already escalating sharply. The COVID-19 outbreak has reinforced the position of those in the US arguing for containment, and lent further momentum to the broader trend of Sino-American “decoupling.” More immediately, the epidemic is likely to be more severe than currently expected, and the  disruption to the Chinese economy will have spillover effects on global supply chains – including pharma inputs, of which China is a critical supplier – and business confidence, all of which will likely be more severe than financial markets’ current complacency suggests.

Although the Sino-American cold war is by definition a low-intensity conflict, a sharp escalation is likely this year. To some Chinese leaders, it cannot be a coincidence that their country is simultaneously experiencing a massive swine flu outbreak, a severe bird flu, a coronavirus epidemic, political unrest in Hong Kong, the re-election of Taiwan’s pro-independence president, and stepped-up US naval operations in the East and South China Seas. Regardless of whether China has only itself to blame for some of these crises, the view in Beijing is veering toward the conspiratorial.

But open aggression is not really an option at this point, given the asymmetry of conventional power. China’s immediate response to US containment efforts will likely take the form of cyberwarfare. There are several obvious targets. Chinese hackers (and their Russian, North Korean, and Iranian counterparts) could interfere in the US election by flooding Americans with misinformation and deep fakes. With the US electorate already so polarized, it is not difficult to imagine armed partisans taking to the streets to challenge the results, leading to serious violence and chaos.

Revisionist powers could also attack the US and Western financial systems – including the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (SWIFT) platform. Already, European Central Bank President Christine Lagarde has warned that a cyberattack on European financial markets could cost $645 billion. And security officials have expressed similar concerns about the US, where an even wider range of telecommunication infrastructure is potentially vulnerable.

By next year, the US-China conflict could have escalated from a cold war to a near-hot one. A Chinese regime and economy severely damaged by the COVID-19 crisis and facing restless masses will need an external scapegoat, and will likely set its sights on Taiwan, Hong Kong, Vietnam, and US naval positions in the East and South China Seas; confrontation could creep into escalating military accidents. It could also pursue the financial “nuclear option” of dumping its holdings of US Treasury bonds if escalation does take place. Because US assets comprise such a large share of China’s (and, to a lesser extent, Russia’s) foreign reserves, the Chinese are increasingly worried that such assets could be frozen through US sanctions (like those already used against Iran and North Korea).

Of course, dumping US Treasuries would impede China’s economic growth if dollar assets were sold and converted back into renminbi (which would appreciate). But China could diversify its reserves by converting them into another liquid asset that is less vulnerable to US primary or secondary sanctions, namely gold. Indeed, both China and Russia have been stockpiling gold reserves (overtly and covertly), which explains the 30% spike in gold prices since early 2019.

In a sell-off scenario, the capital gains on gold would compensate for any loss incurred from dumping US Treasuries, whose yields would spike as their market price and value fell. So far, China and Russia’s shift into gold has occurred slowly, leaving Treasury yields unaffected. But if this diversification strategy accelerates, as is likely, it could trigger a shock in the US Treasuries market, possibly leading to a sharp economic slowdown in the US.

The US, of course, will not sit idly by while coming under asymmetric attack. It has already been increasing the pressure on these countries with sanctions and other forms of trade and financial warfare, not to mention its own world-beating cyberwarfare capabilities. US cyberattacks against the four rivals will continue to intensify this year, raising the risk of the first-ever cyber world war and massive economic, financial, and political disorder.

Looking beyond the risk of severe geopolitical escalations in 2020, there are additional medium-term risks associated with climate change, which could trigger costly environmental disasters. Climate change is not just a lumbering giant that will cause economic and financial havoc decades from now. It is a threat in the here and now, as demonstrated by the growing frequency and severity of extreme weather events.

In addition to climate change, there is evidence that separate, deeper seismic events are underway, leading to rapid global movements in magnetic polarity and accelerating ocean currents.. Any one of these developments could augur an environmental white swan event, as could climatic “tipping points” such as the collapse of major ice sheets in Antarctica or Greenland in the next few years. We already know that underwater volcanic activity is increasing; what if that trend translates into rapid marine acidification and the depletion of global fish stocks upon which billions of people rely?

As of early 2020, this is where we stand:

• 
  

  the US and Iran have already had a military confrontation that will likely soon escalate;

  
  


• 
  

  China is in the grip of a viral outbreak that could become a global pandemic;

  
  


• 
  

  cyberwarfare is ongoing;

  
  


• 
  

  major holders of US Treasuries are pursuing diversification strategies;

  
  


• 
  

  the Democratic presidential primary is exposing rifts in the opposition to Trump and already casting doubt on vote-counting processes;

  
  


• 
  

  rivalries between the US and four revisionist powers are escalating;

  
  


• 
  

  and the real-world costs of climate change and other environmental trends are mounting.

  
  

This list is hardly exhaustive, but it points to what one can reasonably expect for 2020. Financial markets, meanwhile, remain blissfully in denial of the risks, convinced that a calm if not happy year awaits major economies and global markets.

Now, the numbers out of Europe - where they can't just turn around and place the blame on the coronavirus, are looking equally as awful and are sounding a much bigger alarm about the global automotive industry. 

New car registrations fell 7.5% on the year to 956,779 vehicles. The data is ex-UK, which is no longer a part of the EU. 

The ACEA data, broken down by manufacturer, shows ugly numbers for names like Renault, Daimler and FCA. Names like Toyota and BMW were able to slightly buck the trend:

• 
  

  VW Group sales drop 0.1% y/y; ytd down 0.1%

  
  


• 
  

  PSA Group sales drop 14% y/y; ytd down 14%

  
  


• 
  

  Renault Group sales drop 16.4% y/y; ytd down 16.4%

  
  


• 
  

  Ford sales drop 18.6% y/y; ytd down 18.6%

  
  


• 
  

  FCA Group sales drop 6.4% y/y; ytd down 6.4%

  
  


• 
  

  BMW Group sales rise 3.8% y/y; ytd up 3.8%

  
  


• 
  

  Daimler sales drop 10.1% y/y; ytd down 10.1%

  
  


• 
  

  Hyundai Group sales drop 3.9% y/y; ytd down 3.9%

  
  


• 
  

  Toyota Group sales rise 10.1% y/y; ytd up 10.1%

  
  


• 
  

  Nissan sales drop 0.5% y/y; ytd down 0.5%

  
  

The drop is sales is being attributed to tax changes in some member states that prompted consumers to make their purchases in December, instead of January, according to Marketwatch. Of course, we continue to attribute the drop to a global economy that is in steep decline, led by a decade of failed central bank policies that are rearing their head to remind consumers that more debt and more money printing simply isn't the answer.

The European Automobile Manufacturers Association said: "Major taxation changes announced by some EU member states for 2020 pulled registrations forward into December 2019, explaining this January drop."

“Other contributing factors included weakening global economic conditions and uncertainty caused by the U.K.’s departure from the European Union,” the association continued.

Sales of ICE vehicles fell off in some markets in January, as the EU continues to try and encourage consumers to switch to EVs by using subsidies and lopping fines on manufacturers. Sweden and France, for example, both offer incentives to buyers for EVs, in addition to monitoring output from manufacturers. Perhaps their respective governments should take a look at whether their micromanagment of the market isn't contributing to the problem, instead of solving it. 

The future doesn't look promising for the EU either: the ACEA forecast in January that the industry is likely to contract by 2% in 2020. 

Sweden, France, Germany and Spain all posted the ugliest numbers, with Sweden plunging 18%, France falling 13.4%, Germany falling 7.3% and Spain falling 7.6%. 

European car sales -7.4%

- France: -13.4%

- Germany: -7.3%

- Spain: -7.6% #autos

— Joumanna Bercetche (@CNBCJou) February 18, 2020

New numbers will be released on March 18, which will be the first full set of data since the coronavirus outbreak. We will be keeping a close eye on those numbers to see if "taxation" winds up getting the blame for a beleaguered global economy yet again. 

Ski resort officials decided on Friday to use two helicopters to transport more than 50 tons of snow from higher elevations to lower slopes to keep beginner trails and the ski school open for February and March, the busiest time of year for ski resorts in France.

Bastien Ho, of green group Europe Écologie Les Verts, told local media the decision by the ski resort to replenish its slopes with snow via helicopters is a "world that is upside down." 

"Instead of adapting to global warming we're going to end up with a double problem: something that costs a lot of energy, that contributes heavily to global warming and that in addition is only for an elite group of people who can afford it," Ho said. 

Hervé Pouanu, the director of the local council in France's southwest, told French media that the move wasn't "very eco-friendly," but it will avoid the ski resort from slashing 50 to 80 jobs for the remainder of the season. 

"We have no intention of doing it again," Pouanu said. "We didn't have a choice this time." 

Unseasonably warm temperatures in the Midi-Pyrénées region have left resorts facing uncertainty about their future as declining snowfall levels have resulted in fewer visitors.

Météo-France, the French national meteorological service, said January temperatures were some of the warmest in over a century, devastating ski resorts across the country. 

Below is a status report of Luchon-Superbagnères ski resort as of Monday morning. It appears most of the mountain remains closed. 

Greta Thunberg's Twitter has so far been silent on the issue. Maybe she's too busy preparing for her new TV show on the BBC.