I’m wondering that myself. Schiff has always appeared to be much more orthodox, (besting Bob Murphy on the real standing of the economy leading up to the collapse..see here and here). Not to mention he actually talks about the Austrian School and identifies as Austrian [1]…whereas neither Faber nor Rogers will come even close. The best I’ve heard is that Rogers said he was “sympathetic” to Austrian economics, or that he “doesn’t identify with any school of thought but would say he’s closest to that one”. And even that was hearsay.
So how about it…where are these assessments coming from?